Monday
Sep212009
Iran: More on Rafsanjani and Khamenei's End-of-Ramadan Speech
Monday, September 21, 2009 at 18:48
The Latest from Iran (21 September): Distractions
Iran: Khamenei Scrambles for Position
The Latest from Iran (20 September): Khamenei’s End-of-Ramadan Speech
Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis
Complementing our reading of the dynamic between the Supreme Leader and Hashemi Rafsanjani, Pedestrian summarises the post of blogger Agh Bahman. Bahman also adds useful thoughts on the positions of Imam Khomeini's grandson, Seyed Hassan Khomeini, and Mohammad Khatami:
Everyone has been criticizing Rafsanjani and Hassan Khomeini for showing up at the Fetr prayer yesterday, and I just didn’t think the criticism was founded. We’ve had very few “real” politicians in our recent history, people willing to bend and compromise and adapt to circumstances. And I think Hashemi Rafsanjani, for all his shortcomings, is of this rare breed. Agh Bahman captures it perfectly (this is a summary of his post):
What got the most attention in yesterday’s prayer was the presence of Rafsanjani and Hassan Khomeini, and after them, Nateq Nouri in line behind the leader and beside Ahmadinejad. Many went so far as to interpret this as Rafsanjani’s betrayal of the people’s movement. When I got up and heard the news, I too was surprised. But when I thought a little more, my opinion changed completely. If you felt like me, read this, maybe your opinion will change too.
The Fetr prayer is one of the few state events which practically all high officials attend. Personally, I don’t remember any other even in which all officials participate. I think not showing up at Fetr prayer is like saying you don’t want to pray behind the leader. Did Rafsanjani do anything in the past three months that meant this remotely, so that now, showing up in the prayer is surprising?
In the past three months, Rafsanjani did not attend two events which he was expected to attend: the two inauguration ceremonies. Both of these events had to do with Ahmadinejad and giving legitimacy to his government and this Rafsanjani did not want to do. Notice, just a few days after those ceremonies, he went to the goodbye and welcoming ceremonies for Shahroudi and Sadeq Larijani, the previous and current head of the judiciary. Probably one reason for his attendance was to show his respect to Shahroudi, but in any case, the judiciary head is appointed by the leader, and if Rafsanjani had reached a point where he wasn’t willing to pray behind the leader, he shouldn’t have showed up there either. And of course, Rafsanjani did not attend the two Friday prayers led by the leader, which was natural. From what I remember, unless Rafsanjani was prayer leader, he never attended the prayer no matter who was leading. [notice, Rafsanjani sees himself, or at least used to see himself, as man #2. So just as the leader is not willing to pray behind anyone, and thus never shows up, neither does Rafsanjani].
Of course Rafsanjani did something else yesterday which didn’t get anyone’s attention and that was his absence in the leader’s meeting with the officials which takes place every year after the Fetr prayers in the leader’s beyt [the religious center adjacent to the leader’s home I think, or since “beyt” means “home” in Arabic, it’s supposed to be adjacent to his home, as was Khomeini’s, even if it isn’t.] From the photos we have of yesterday’s meeting, only the heads of the three branches of government are sitting behind the leader and Rafsanjani is very noticeably absent.
I went and found the photos from previous years. In the last four years, Rafsanjani was only missing in 2005. He was there last year and the year before that. I think by not going, he’s sending a message to the leader that he’s only willing to participate in events so far as he is formally obligated and no more. For instance, in a few days when the annual meeting of the Assembly of Experts with the leader takes place, I think Rafsanjani will go, and will sit beside the leader.
And now for Seyed Hassan Khomeini
I think Hasan Khomeini has a similar circumstance [as Rafsanjani]. He was in the first line of prayer every year at Fetr. In the past three months, he’s done nothing and said nothing which would mean that he’s turning his back on the leader. Khomeini showed his complaint out in the opinion on two occasions: not showing up at the inauguration, and not going to meet with Ahmadinejad in Imam Khoemini’s masoleum. Again, both these acts showed his disregard for Ahmdinejad and the legitimacy of his government.
And in fact, after the prayer, Khomeini did something that would obviously show his position: he went to see the family of Mohsen Mirdamadi (the chief officer of the Participation Front who is prison, and whose son was taken into custody just a few days ago) and Javad Emam (a recently released member of the Mojahedin party).
The Great Absence: Khatami
I think the biggest news from the prayer was not the presence of Rafsanjani or Khomeini, but the absence of Khatami. Khatami too was first in line every year, and his absence sends a very clear signal: that he no longer accepts the leadership of this leader. Karoubi and Mousavi have been very vocal and have gone very far, and anyways, they were never seen in the first line of prayer these past few years. We can guess that they were absent for the same reasons as Khatami, but since Khatami was always first in line, his absence is much more noticed.
I should also add that I think one of the people to whom the leader’s words were address was Khatami. He said that confessions against other people in court was not credible. In court, a lot was said against Khatami. Against Karoubi and Mousavi too, but most was said about Khatami. I think the leader intended to appease Khatami with those words.
Iran: Khamenei Scrambles for Position
The Latest from Iran (20 September): Khamenei’s End-of-Ramadan Speech
Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis
Complementing our reading of the dynamic between the Supreme Leader and Hashemi Rafsanjani, Pedestrian summarises the post of blogger Agh Bahman. Bahman also adds useful thoughts on the positions of Imam Khomeini's grandson, Seyed Hassan Khomeini, and Mohammad Khatami:Everyone has been criticizing Rafsanjani and Hassan Khomeini for showing up at the Fetr prayer yesterday, and I just didn’t think the criticism was founded. We’ve had very few “real” politicians in our recent history, people willing to bend and compromise and adapt to circumstances. And I think Hashemi Rafsanjani, for all his shortcomings, is of this rare breed. Agh Bahman captures it perfectly (this is a summary of his post):
What got the most attention in yesterday’s prayer was the presence of Rafsanjani and Hassan Khomeini, and after them, Nateq Nouri in line behind the leader and beside Ahmadinejad. Many went so far as to interpret this as Rafsanjani’s betrayal of the people’s movement. When I got up and heard the news, I too was surprised. But when I thought a little more, my opinion changed completely. If you felt like me, read this, maybe your opinion will change too.
The Fetr prayer is one of the few state events which practically all high officials attend. Personally, I don’t remember any other even in which all officials participate. I think not showing up at Fetr prayer is like saying you don’t want to pray behind the leader. Did Rafsanjani do anything in the past three months that meant this remotely, so that now, showing up in the prayer is surprising?
In the past three months, Rafsanjani did not attend two events which he was expected to attend: the two inauguration ceremonies. Both of these events had to do with Ahmadinejad and giving legitimacy to his government and this Rafsanjani did not want to do. Notice, just a few days after those ceremonies, he went to the goodbye and welcoming ceremonies for Shahroudi and Sadeq Larijani, the previous and current head of the judiciary. Probably one reason for his attendance was to show his respect to Shahroudi, but in any case, the judiciary head is appointed by the leader, and if Rafsanjani had reached a point where he wasn’t willing to pray behind the leader, he shouldn’t have showed up there either. And of course, Rafsanjani did not attend the two Friday prayers led by the leader, which was natural. From what I remember, unless Rafsanjani was prayer leader, he never attended the prayer no matter who was leading. [notice, Rafsanjani sees himself, or at least used to see himself, as man #2. So just as the leader is not willing to pray behind anyone, and thus never shows up, neither does Rafsanjani].
Of course Rafsanjani did something else yesterday which didn’t get anyone’s attention and that was his absence in the leader’s meeting with the officials which takes place every year after the Fetr prayers in the leader’s beyt [the religious center adjacent to the leader’s home I think, or since “beyt” means “home” in Arabic, it’s supposed to be adjacent to his home, as was Khomeini’s, even if it isn’t.] From the photos we have of yesterday’s meeting, only the heads of the three branches of government are sitting behind the leader and Rafsanjani is very noticeably absent.
I went and found the photos from previous years. In the last four years, Rafsanjani was only missing in 2005. He was there last year and the year before that. I think by not going, he’s sending a message to the leader that he’s only willing to participate in events so far as he is formally obligated and no more. For instance, in a few days when the annual meeting of the Assembly of Experts with the leader takes place, I think Rafsanjani will go, and will sit beside the leader.
And now for Seyed Hassan Khomeini
I think Hasan Khomeini has a similar circumstance [as Rafsanjani]. He was in the first line of prayer every year at Fetr. In the past three months, he’s done nothing and said nothing which would mean that he’s turning his back on the leader. Khomeini showed his complaint out in the opinion on two occasions: not showing up at the inauguration, and not going to meet with Ahmadinejad in Imam Khoemini’s masoleum. Again, both these acts showed his disregard for Ahmdinejad and the legitimacy of his government.
And in fact, after the prayer, Khomeini did something that would obviously show his position: he went to see the family of Mohsen Mirdamadi (the chief officer of the Participation Front who is prison, and whose son was taken into custody just a few days ago) and Javad Emam (a recently released member of the Mojahedin party).
The Great Absence: Khatami
I think the biggest news from the prayer was not the presence of Rafsanjani or Khomeini, but the absence of Khatami. Khatami too was first in line every year, and his absence sends a very clear signal: that he no longer accepts the leadership of this leader. Karoubi and Mousavi have been very vocal and have gone very far, and anyways, they were never seen in the first line of prayer these past few years. We can guess that they were absent for the same reasons as Khatami, but since Khatami was always first in line, his absence is much more noticed.
I should also add that I think one of the people to whom the leader’s words were address was Khatami. He said that confessions against other people in court was not credible. In court, a lot was said against Khatami. Against Karoubi and Mousavi too, but most was said about Khatami. I think the leader intended to appease Khatami with those words.
Reader Comments (13)
I find this to be a somewhat weak analyses specially at the end, Who is Khatami for the S.L to appease!? Hashemi (and his sons) yes but Khatami !!!
By marching with the government crowd on Quds Day, canceling his Friday Prayers the week before, and a number of other signs, Rafsanjani seems to be backing away from the reformists, though writers like this one find compelling tidbits that make one hope.
I'd like to go further. It's impossible to know what Rafsanjani's planning or which side he's joined other than his own, but he's doing exactly what he would have to do if he were totally committed to reform.
The greenest thing Rafsanjani could do is bring the relatively conservative members of the Assembly of Experts to consider taking some power from the Supreme Leader. To impress these people with his seriousness, I don't think he would march with the greens or publicly defy the Supreme Leader. I think he would come to Assembly as a loyal servant of the establishment, bearing the sad news that the Supreme Leader needs to be reigned in.
I think it's impossible to know, but my fingers are cramping from crossing them.
Afshin, I personally am not sure about the Khatami appeasement either - but the rest of the analysis were similar to my stream of thought. The problem is that despite everything I read, I still have a hard time understanding the S.L. So no one's argument has been able to convince me. How much of the old power structure does he see as important to hold and keep on his side?
Bendix, the reality on the ground in Iran is much more vicious than we could ever imagine outside. Even with all the analysis and news of rape, etc, etc that gets out. In this current situation, I would imagine it is far from possible for Rafsanjani to "bring the relatively conservative members of the Assembly of Experts to consider taking some power from the Supreme Leader." The only strategy I see is for them (Rafsanjani and Co. those who still hold high positions in the system but who walk on very shaky ground b/c of their break from Ahmadi and Co) to bend and bend and bend ... and see if the other side is willing to bend an inch in return. Of course, while attempting to negotiate in the process.
They may not win, they may indeed lose, but we've never had a history of compromises in our politics. It's always been all or nothing. Whether it fails or not, it could all teach us some important lessons.
For once i don't agree with Afshin, i'd rather say it makes much sense
-at least to understand what was at stake here behind mere formalism of
religious-codified events and their etiquette.
Amazing at how those players in the game must be extra cautious and vocal
at the same time ! Speak out their mind and let people know it all, without
saying any extra line of speech on decisive scenes (like at annual Fetr prayer,
with the " 3 branches of government" leaders... SL ahead )
Like H.Khomeney " as usual" assisting the ceremony, and going straight
afterwards visiting Mirdamadi and J.Emam, late victims of AN and his clique
(after the fathers, the dissenter's-children-taken-in-hostage strategy); and
prior to that, the visit to A. Beheshti just released from extra brutal arrest.
It's really speaking volumes, knowing the ugly pression imposed on Emam and
his family since his release from jail (cf abduction and mistreatment of daughter
which they had to deny publicly on state TV only a few days ago,-declaring that daughter had suffered 'illusions' ...).
So after all, yes it's logical somehow, not to decline praying in companyof SL/AN
on due dates and supporting opponents or victims of AN thugs teams as well,
at least for those two (major iconic and so far unmolested) figures (though in
the case of Rafsanjani, his support to AN 's opponents is more on the homepathic
-or even cryptic- side if anything, seen from afar. But then he seems so much
the 'mystery man'... The Assembly of Experts will be interesting one would guess...) .
What looks more daring i'd think is Khatami's effective absence -is it really to
challenge SL authority about the exact calculation of Ramadan's end ?
At this level, it's as much chess game than acrobatics...! Let's hope that
tomorrow Ass. of Expert will be conclusive and strengthen some
counter-powers of sort...
I think the SL is throwing the line of compromise, while all the time being very vague on purpose. Look at when he has wanted something such as appointment of the AN Cabinet or the selection of AN or the removal of Mashbi.. He has been to the point and clear, yet on the compromises thrown to Rafsanjani, he is purposefully vague. Two reasons for this:
1) He is trying to look like he is compromising, without actually compromising at all and all the while leaving AN to further attack the opponents, namely Rafsanjani, Karoubi, Khatami, Mousavi etc.
2) He wants a compromise, but is unable to bring the Guards to the table to give him this compromise.
Over the last two to three weeks, I have started to move away from the second option and increasingly think that the fist is what is happening. For all the hoopla about the tension between SL / Guards I fear we have made this up to be more than it is. It may even be there for show and tell, and that they are playing a secret game of bad cop, terrible cop for us, and some tension to keep us guessing, while all the time hiding their true intention.
I think the guards are still too weak and divided for the SL to hold no sway over them. After all he could easily go public with disaffection for some of their acts and give them a major threat / scare. Increasingly it looks like that the first act of a coordinated offensive between the guards and the SL is what is taking place. This coupled with the SL knowing too well that Rafsanjani is not ready or can not yet readily go for a Leadership coupe has made them all the more bolder. In addition they know that over time, Rafsanjani will gain strength as their excesses turns more Marjah and more clergy against them, so the push to oust and weaken Rafsanjani on the one hand and offer him a compromise on the other hand...
All said it is now the Sharks move to counter. He may take a good 2 year to reply. Rafsanjani has shown that he can play the long hand during his war with
@ Pedestrian (" How much of the old power structure does he see as important
to hold and keep on his side?")))
Do you mean 'important to hold and keep on his side' for the sake of the
IRI 'system' as a whole ? or for his own sake ? (power, money, his own survival ?)
From everything i could read /hear from insiders, it looks as if the S.L.
was compelled to play many of his moves and actions under some contradictory
trends of pressions ? influences ? in order to keep maximum compromise with
all branches of power/and avoid political changes -rather than sticking to some
well defined master plan to save the system and its islamic essential values...
Plus the fact that he is seriously il, with possible imminence of a succession in
perspective, this surely must have a decisive weight on his positions/motives,
how could not it be ?... Do you think he has real strategic intents at religious
level (? ) -or long sighted political views for the country, other than keeping his
seat-preserving status quo (and let people in his favour today deal with the rest
of the IRI's complex stuff tomorrow -when he's gone) ?
Well,whereismyvote, thank you, it's enlightening -although
grim and not too encouraging for next future. 2 years
is a long time in time like these...
It is hard leading a 21st century revolution with a 20th century mindset, all the while the 21st century generations are against you.
The simple answer is this: With Hashemi, you really don't know (for sure), and that's the way he likes it.
In the Sep. 21 thread/post, I was going to agree 100% w/ Afshin that Hashemi would NEVER make a move tomorrow (Assembly meeting). I now 99% agree with that.
Why the 1%? Well, I got to thinking. If you WERE planning something at the Assembly, wouldn't you want to avoid publicising that? B/c if it got out beforehand, you're a dead man (along with sympathetic AoE members).
If Hashemi makes a move (in truth, it won't be tomorrow), it will have to be quite stealth.
Afshin is 100% correct. This analysis is weak to the point of being vulnerable to toppling over due to a strong sneeze.
Khatami's absence "sends a very clear signal: that he no longer accepts the leadership of this leader."
So the greatest insight here seems to be that Khatami is no longer on good terms with the SL. Really???
Next this analysis will reveal the little known, obscure facts that pork meat is not halal and that muslims fast during Ramadan.
Samuel, the part about Khatami was the smallest bit in Bahman's article. It was just reaffirming what we already know.
But for the part about Rafsanjani: I don't know if you're Iranian or not, but ever since R. showed up at the prayer, some of my friends have been up in hysterics, anger, sadness, pity, etc. This article was picked up and read by all of them, and I think it does a good job of summarizing R.'s most likely position (as someone said on this forum, we can never know for sure) ... the way to end this thing is to try and be as FLEXIBLE as possible, ... at least we have to TRY - for the first time in our collective history. And that's something we Iranians don't talk about much.
I think this piece did an excellent job of opening up that position a little bit. We have to take a cue from Rafsanjani.
Yseut, for the sake of the system or his own sake? Note that K. sees himself as THE WHOLE - as far as he's concerned, he is the center and core of the "nezam" (system) so they are almost one and the same.
Samuel
But I thought pork was Halal and ramadan was actually an old christian holiday that Muslims adopted--Something to do with Christ! :) Got a good laugh from your one liner at the end!
@ Pedestrian/ Yseut / Where is My Vote/ Kevina
I agree mostly with the analyses, It's not that I am saying the opposite its just that I think it is weak, incomplete, there are more aspects to the story then just the things mentioned. Also the last part of appeasing Khtami makes no sense.
I agree with Where is my vote on the fact that throwing the line of compromise saying there is room to talk BUT I dont think this is specially towards Khatami.
So yes I agree with the content to an extent but I find it weak and incomplete.
@ Kevina
I am not saying Hashemi will not make a move, just that he will not make the move to replace. He has to cook the idea and that takes time. so first we will see attacks such as today and these may end of in that ultimate move somewhere down the line in the next meetings.