Iran : Why Keep On Analysing a "Dysfunctional" Government?
Wednesday, November 25, 2009 at 7:29 
An EA reader intervened yesterday, "I am not sure why we are consumed and analyze every word (official or unofficial) by every member of this dysfunctional government."It's a fair point that made me think. The obvious response is "well, that's what I do", whether the government in the analytic crosshairs is in Tehran or Washington or London. But, after 5 1/2 months of watching and trying to assess the state of play inside Iran's corridors of power, the inevitable question is whether that attention makes any difference.
The Latest from Iran (25 November): Reading the Signals
Iran: While the President’s Away…..The Contest Inside Tehran’s Establishment
Iran: Economics, Missing Money, and Ahmadinejad v. Parliament
So here's my answer, beyond that of academia or journalism: if this Government had established legitimacy amongst most Iranians, we could probably pack up and go home, at least on the issue of whether there would be significant change within the Islamic Republic.
In my opinion, however, it hasn't. That's not only the case with respect to the Green movement and its well of silent supporters, it's also the case within the Iranian establishment. It's precisely because a lot of those "every words" point to dysfunction, in the sense of establishing and maintaining power, that they deserve attention.
Ironically, where this government continues to function, haphazardly but still with consequences, is in the attempt to crush the challenge from outside. The arrests of students, the continued display of the "foreign intrigue" banner, and the disruption of communications both point to a regime which is far from impotent and one which is far from settled.
Perhaps more importantly, even the swinging of the fist brings further tensions. So Iran's ministries fight over whether to maintain indefinite punishment or offer a sign of "legal" process, compromising on the prison sentences plus heavy bail for reformist leaders.
Meanwhile, with legitimacy far from established, the President faces challenges that walk hand-in-hand with "dysfunction". This morning, we are already picking up on a running battle between Ali Reza Zamani, the member of Parliament who decided to offer "revelations" about possible manipulations of the election and to trash the National Unity Plan, and the former Tehran Prosecutor General Saeed Mortazavi. Seems that Zamani is arguing that the Kahrizak Prison scandal is due to Mortazavi's policy of shipping troublemakers to a facility which would become notorious for detainee abuse. And Mortazavi, perceiving --- with some justification --- that someone beyond Zamani may be lining him up as the "scapegoat" for post-election injustices --- is responding that he is not responsible. The bigger question is whether he tries to name those who he thinks are to blame.
Because Mortazavi is still nominally a Deputy Prosecutor General in Iran's judiciary. That's a judiciary which is in a running battle with the Revolutionary Guard over who administers justice in Iran. It's a judiciary headed by Sadegh Larijani, who is also the brother of Speaker of Parliament Ali Larijani. The same Ali Larijani who now appears to be making another run at curbing, if not toppling, President Ahmadinejad. The Ali Larijani who may or may not represent the Supreme Leader in his statements but who definitely is now offering political cover to former President Hashemi Rafsanjani. The same Hashemi Rafsanjani who may now be calculating his own re-emergence on the political scene, whether or not that is linked to a National Unity Plan.
Another reader writes, "Those mixed messages....It's gotta wear ya down after a while." I appreciate the concern but the danger is not that I'm worn down --- I'll keep on keeping on.
The issue instead is whether the Iranian Government is being worn down by months of not only mixed messages but of scheming, bickering, and of course facing the unending challenge on the streets and in the universities. That's not to say that, if dysfunction turns to crumbling, it will be a Green victory. Take your choice: the Revolutionary Guard moving into the political turmoil to lead from the front, rather than stand alongside the President. A show of "unity" which brings a Larijani or a Rafsanjani to centre stage. A Supreme Leader making new alliances to maintain his own hold on velayat-e-faqih.
So it's a range of possibilities rather than a certainty, either that President Ahmadinejad's legitimacy has been secured or that his demise has been confirmed. Those possibilities lie not only in the dramatic shows of resistance but inside the mixed signals that rise up from the supposed seats of power in Iran.
And so I keep on analysing....
Reader Comments (7)
Thank you Scott for this great analysis !
Keep analysing, you ARE making a difference. And you are getting under the skin of the regime.( Is that really Khamenei on twitter today?)
I've been hearing this refrain for 25 years -- e.g., why read what they say, we already know so and so and so forth, because we get it filtered for us via "other sources." I don't accept now, and never have, the premise of such questions. Vested interests of course do not want us to "hear" anything said by this or that political figure within the IRI's political process -- it's never been easy.
All too often even thoughtful policy types choose not to listen to anything coming from Iran, in favor of pre-canned conclusions from "other sources." Once Hillary Clinton bought the line that Iran supposedly "rejected" the IAEA deal, then eyes go quite shut as to the considerable nuances still present, of concerns raised not just by hardliners, but especially by the reformist opposition. (the side we're instructed by various players in the US to get on the "side of history" and back)
Curious too that we're getting precious little attention via "other sources" to Mottaki's interview with The Hindu last week, nor the very interesting statements made via the new for min. spokesperson. (e.g., re Iran wanting "100% guarantees" to implement the IAEA deal) If one were only following "hackman" et. al., you'd have no idea.
Ah, but it's so much easier for those on the outside (especially with this or that opposition group) to simply brand IRI as "opaque" or "dysfunctional." Great short-hand. (It's also ironic too, as some of the very same "sources" can flip to the refrain of IRI as "totalitarian" -- which would be something other than riven by factions.... )
As a thought, might we say the same thing about disarray presently so evident in Washington? Current administration "boldly" declares it doesn't wish to see more settlements in Israel, but they continue anyway, and as the various "usual suspects" in Washington duke it out, statements of concern get transmogrified into well, we're seeing "progress" (in theory), and ain't it grand that they're offering to reduce settlements, if, if, if..... Same ole' song & dance, the tail still wags the dog. Gee, and Abbas now says the US government is doing nothing real. (dysfunctional anyone?)
Bottom line, we do follow the actual substance of the very lively and serious debates inside Iran not as evidence of "dysfunction" but because the debates, the consensus views that very often from them, are indicative of policy views and preferences that very much will "matter" to the outside world.
Keep up the great work Scott. Dont be discouraged by the people who think they know better than everyone what this regime is about.
Scott,
“I am not sure why we are consumed and analyze every word (official or unofficial) by every member of this dysfunctional government.”
I wrote the above words. Perhaps I did not make myself clear and I would like to try again.
I wrote those words in reference to nuclear issue ONLY. I was challenging our preoccupation with nuclear issue at the expense of horrific carnage that is unfolding in Iran right now.
As members of human race we cannot underestimate the danger of nuclear capability in the hands of legally insane people like those in Iran regime. Similarly, we should not underestimate the clear and present danger millions of Iranians are faced with right now. I, therefore, challenge us to scrutinize and analyze other crimes of this dysfunctional government with more intensity.
I respect your work and appreciate the attention you are giving to democracy movement in Iran immensely. Your blog is monitored by Iran pathetic government. It would be great if they see their scheme to divert world’s attention from their atrocities against defenseless people in Iran via their daily rambling on nuclear front is not working. In my humble view this can be accomplished by dismissing daily disjointed remarks of IRI brain-dead people on nuclear negotiation. I, however, recognize this is your blog and I am only one of your readers.
Megan,
Thank you for clarifying. My post yesterday was prompted not by irritation but by the important challenge put in your original post. As always, your comment was valuable and thought-provoking.
My own position is that Ahmadinejad and others in regime are trying to get a nuclear deal to establish legitimacy, sweeping aside any challenge based on concern over internal developments. Indeed, I think that is a much greater danger than nuclear weapons capability, as I am sceptical that Iran is close to that goal (presuming the regime is pursuing it.) So, by no means, would I ever pursue a nuclear-first analysis ignoring the other issues that you rightly raise and continue to raise.
Scott
Megan,
Thank you for the clarification. I for one view it as proposterous to question why someone writes about "dysfunctional government." It was so proposterous I was left with the thought something was read into the post that was not intended. I 100% agree with your frustration over the focus on the "nuke" issue. If only the the leaders in the West would get it through their heads that the only real solution is by returning the power to the people of Iran. Dealing with the coup leaders at best may delay the issue not solve it.
Thx
Bill