Iran: Rafsanjani, Ahmadinejad, and the Multi-Sided Chess Match

The Latest from Iran (25 September): Catching Up

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

Yesterday EA's Mr Smith sent me a challenging analysis of the significance of this week's Assembly of Experts meetings and Hashemi Rafsanjani's latest manoeuvres:

"Basically the much-anticipated Assembly of Experts meeting ended up according to plan. There were some grievances on the current state of affairs --- Rafsanjani and others, such as Ayatollah Dastgheib, did emit warnings regarding the government --- but all in all it was far from being a threat to Ayatollah Khamenei. Of course, we have to wait and see what the proposal from the eminent politicians cited by Rafsanjani is going to be about. The photos published from the customary meeting between the AoE and Khamenei relay an atmosphere of cordiality. All accusations are vague and quite frankly not new."

I agree with Mr Smith that one outcome of the Assembly meeting is the clearest of indications that Rafsanjani is now aligning with the Supreme Leader, but that is far from a new development. Rafsanjani's Friday Prayer speech on 17 July did pose challenges to Khamenei, but throughout August and September, the former President has manoeuvred for position by declaring his firm support for the Supreme Leader and "unity".

Put bluntly, if this were an issue of a straightforward chess match of Rafsanjani v. Khamenei, this could be a case of Hashemi offering an honourable draw and moving to the next match alongside, rather than against the Supreme Leader. If that match was against the reformists, then one of the persistent questions of this crisis would have been settled: having raised prospects so high two months ago with his effective declaration that he was with the Green movement's opposition to the current system, Rafsanjani would have walked away from the struggle.

But, as EA readers corrected me many weeks ago, this is not a two-player chess match. There are several sides to the board: the reformists occupy one, and so does the President and his allies. And, after all the head-scratching I've done this week, this feels like a different alignment of players:

Rafsanjani does want to be alongside Khamenei, but the ultimate opponent is Ahmadinejad. To be successful in that contest, it is to Rafsanjani's advantage to keep the other players in the match

Let's put the chess analogy another way: it is the President who has been trying to reduce this conflict to a straight-up, two-sided battle. Mahmoud v. the Greens. The system v. the illegitimate opposition. "Iran" v. the foreigners. Every statement he has made since the 12 June election, beginning with his denigration of the opposition as "dust" points to that simplification.

But, ironically, it was others within the Establishment and not the Green movement who complicated that plan. When the conservative and principlist politicians rebelled against the abuse of detainees and, more specifically, Ahmadinejad's leadership of his Cabinet, another player was at the chessboard. When the Supreme Leader made his limited but clear steps to criticise the President, including the closure of Kahrizak Prison and his insistence on the removal of First Vice President Rahim-Mashai, he had put his own set of pieces in play.

So Ahmadinejad and the Revolutionary Guard have not only had to fight their initial contest with the Green movement, they have to get back to that us v. them showdown. They succeeded, for now, in retiring the conservatives/principlists, but the Supreme Leader posed a trickier chess problem. Move too quickly in a challenge against Khamenei and the entire system of velayat-e-faqih (supreme clerical authority) becomes an issue. And, even if the President may wish to curb that system in practice, he probably does not want to appear to be doing so, for then the symbolic basis of the Islamic Republic since 1979 is exposed.

I have no doubt that Rafsanjani knows this. So this past week, indeed over the past weeks, he made a calculation and decisions to keep the board multi-sided. He did not need to make a high-profile appearance at Qods Day because the Green movement stayed in play with their own momentum of protest. Instead, he could concentrate on keeping the Supreme Leader in the game as an actor who could move against the President as well as the reformists.

And there's more. I think another player is now at the table. If there was a concrete step in the Assembly's general declaration, it was that the criticisms of marjas (the most senior Shi'a clerics) must be heeded, not only in principle but in practice. This does not mean immediate concessions to a Government opponent such as Ayatollah Montazeri who, for all his symbolic resonance with many Iranians, is on the fringe of the main contest. It does mean a recognition and response to the challenges put by other Grand Ayatollahs, including some who have long been seen as "conservative".

Consider two incidents. Less than two months ago, Ahmadinejad's supporters on the Assembly of Experts tried to reduce the chessboard by taking Rafsanjani out of play, with the blundering letter that claimed to be in the name of the Assembly and called for the former President's removal as chairman. Earlier this week it was Rafsanjani demonstrating that he was very much there and very much commanding the attention both of the Government and of its opponents.

But Rafsanjani was absent when the Assembly's statement was read, right? Absolutely, but my initial brow-raising concern, that he had suffered a setback, was replaced by another possibility. Rafsanjani needs his position as chair of the Assembly, but he is not solely reliant upon its members for his influence. Stepping away from the proceedings, he could indicate that he had achieved his main purpose and was now moving to the next steps of his alignment with Khamenei and others.

For consider the second incident. Before Qods Day, Speaker of the House Ali Larijani, apparently carrying messages from Ayatollah Khamenei, met Grand Ayatollahs and other senior clerics. The content of those discussions has not been leaked, but it now appears that Larijani's mission was not to warn the marjas but to seek an accommodation with them. And, if that is the case, who is the accommodation against?

A two-sided chess analogy might say the "Green movement". But some of those marjas are now supportive of the Green movement. And it is those marjas whom Rafsanjani said, only days after the Larijani meeting, are important in this ongoing political battle.

There's an important caveat in this analysis: just because Rafsanjani wants Khamenei in this match, able to move against as well as with Ahmadinejad, does not mean that this is a Supreme Leader on a string. And yesterday, as Khamenei addressed the Assembly, he tacked back to the "sophistication and extensiveness in planning by the enemy in the current situation". Coming weeks after the Supreme Leader had played down the notion of a "velvet revolution" in the post-election conflict, this appears to be Khamenei's own re-alignment with Government propaganda against the Green movement:

The Islamic system has a 30-years experience in confronting different challenges, but, in view of the development in the system and the complexity of its achievements, its opponents' conspiracies and plots have also become more complex. Thus, its diverse aspects must be identified in order to overcome them....

In their soft war, the opponents of the system have made use of an overwhelming amount of propaganda and telecommunications tools to attack the beliefs, the power of discernment, the motivation, and the foundations and pillars of a system and the country.

Khamenei praised the election --- again --- with "a high and unprecedented vote is one of our great strengths". He praised Iran's "solid infrastructure and the country's preparedness for a leap forward, significant scientific progress, the system's 30-year experience, an energetic, educated and self-confident young generation, and the [20-year strategic] plan defining the movement of the country towards its horizons until 2026".

What he did not do, however, was single out the President for exaltation. And that, as Hashemi Rafsanjani listened, leaves open the question: who has aligned with whom against whom?

A rule: the more players in the chess match, the more difficult the situation is for Ahmadinejad, even if he tries to walk away from that match with his "international" appearances. And, to me, it looks like this chessboard expanded, rather than contracted, this week.

The Latest from Iran (24 September): New York is Long Gone

1600 GMT: Leading the Media by the Nose. Continuing on our theme of the Great New York Diversion, considered in this morning's analysis, Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has declared in an interview with the Washington Post and Newsweek that he wants talks between Iranian and US experts to allay fears about his country’s nuclear programme: “Why not just let them sit and talk and see what kind of capacity they can build? I think it is a good thing to happen."

Ahmadinejad also said Iran would offer to purchase enriched uranium from the US for medical purposes when Tehran sits down with the "5+1" powers in Turkey  on October 1.

No one in the "Western" media, least of all the Washington Post and Newsweek, seems to have
realised that one of the President's motives for the talks might be the legitimacy that it gives his Government in the current internal crisis.

0900 GMT: Playing "Doctor" in the Cabinet. More fuss over the Minister of Science, whose claims to hold a doctorate from a British university, have come under scrutiny (see previous EA entries). Nature News reports, "Iranian researchers say they are dismayed and angered that a 2009 paper coauthored by Kamran Daneshjou, Iran’s science minister, appears to have plagiarized a 2002 paper published by South Korean researchers."

0645 GMT: Both sides in the post-election conflict are playing up their preferred version of yesterrday's events in New York. Government supporters are hailing President Ahmadinejad's speech to the United Nations, which did not begin until 4 a.m. Tehran time (and also noting tat he refrained from mentioning the Holocaust). The Green movement is effusive over the demonstrations outside the UN and more gatherings planned for today.

But for us, the important political developments are occurring in Iran. There will be more decoding of the signals from the Assembly of Experts, where Hashemi Rafsanjani's opening statement was followed by his non-appearance as the Assembly agreed and presented its final statement. We've attempted to analyse events in the US and in Iran, focusing on the legitimacy of the President, in a separate entry, as well as a quick look at Russia's latest diplomatic manieuvre on Iran's nuclear programme.

Before we leave the circus of Ahmadinejad in New York, a tribute to the most absurd story to accompany the trip. The American CBS News saw significance in "Iran Warns Men not to Sell Women's Undies".

Iran: English Text of Letters between Mousavi and Montazeri (13 and 22 September)

Thanks to Pedestrian, who has posted at www.sidewalklyrics.com:

Mousavi Letter to Montazeri

In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful

To the honourable Marja, the grand Ayatollah Montazeri,

Greetings,

Following the events of the past few months, I released the following attached statement. We have always felt a need to work and cooperate with with the honourable marjas and devoted clerics and this encouraged me to send a copy to you, in order to ask for your guidance.

The first goal of this statement is [to send out the message] that if people feel anger and discontent, they should not direct these negative feelings that fill their hearts, toward religion. This [keeping people from such feelings] is the responsibility of all of those who have been deeply influenced by Islam and especially the clerical elite. They must not allow different social groups, especially the youth who compose the majority of our population, be fooled by the shallow, incorrect and selective interpretations of religion and to distance themselves from Islam based on sudden bursts of emotion.


State media persistently tries to portray us as the source behind the recent unrest. This is while the behaviour of officials, not only in the election, but from years before, has created a mountain of straw that was set ablaze by the recent blunders. The wind of arrogance that was blown through this mountain created bigger and bigger fires each and every day. I personally take the side of a people whose rights have been trampled by Illegal, unIslamic and unjustified actions. By referring to undisputed documents, I am certain that without a doubt, there has been systematic fraud in the recent election. At the same time, it would not have been difficult to stay silent for another 20 years if I didn’t feel an imminent threat to the system in the wave of anger of the people.

However, if one [leader] keeps silent and yields, people will not refrain from their movement as they have never refrained in the past. Instead, after a brief period of confusion the movement would start anew. Their movement will have started again, this time blind with no one from devotees of the establishment to rely upon. Then maybe others who have their eyes set upon our nation would have stepped in to take advantage of this movement with their own intentions and to feed their own greed.

Another goal of this statement, along with my other statements and activities, is to keep the people’s movement in the framework of the establishment so that it wouldn’t go astray down the dangerous path of bringing down the structure [of the establishment.] If this danger is turned into reality, it could easily make another Afghanistan or Iraq out of Iran. We cannot forget our duty to stop such dangers from occurring just to make some ignorant people happy. Similarly, we can not invite people to keep calm if we can not prove to them that we stand and speak up for their well deserved rights on their behalf.

In his treatise titled Olfat, the late Molla Mohsen Feyz Kashani writes that the final aim of most sharia laws are to create friendship and belonging in society. The result of this friendship and belonging is what modern sciences call social networks – a means to restrain ruling systems and to keep them from repeating mistakes, and a method to create a society infused with life and a platform to gently hold on to ignited emotions and talents and to keep them from going down the hills of destruction. In this statement, a strengthening of these networks has been suggested. According to the words of Feyz, this network could be perceived as the exemplar of Islam, although those who are grossly unfair portray it as an exemplar of the CIA.

And finally, in this statement, suggestions on how to solve this current crisis are made which I hope will be given attention.

With regards,
Mir Hossein Mousavi
September 13th, 2009
——————————

Response of the Grand Ayatollah Montazeri:

In the name of God, the Merciful and the Compassionate,

Dear Mr. Mir Hossein Mousavi,
May God support your success,

First, please accept my greetings. I received your letter dated 12/09/2009 [sic] and reviewed the attachments. You are a man of great character and your commitment to the ethical and religious values and goals of the revolution are obvious to all. The tremendous services of your government during the imposed war, and your constant support of the departed Imam Khomeini (May the love and mercy of God be upon him) are clear to everyone. During the recent presidential election and the subsequent confrontations and atrocities, you became the focus of numerous classes of people and gifted individuals. This was, in fact, a test imposed on you by the great God and by our vigilant people. You have indeed passed it. So far, and to the best of your capacity, you have defended the desecrated rights of those people [whose high turnout and participation in the election] was a great source of pride for our country. As such, you deserve acknowledgement and gratitude.

The initiatives you suggest in the attachment will work to activate and strengthen social networks and organizations. These ideas are prudent and rational, in context with the current conditions of the country, and in accordance with the commands of the holy Quran that tell us: [1]

“O ye who believe! Persevere in patience and constancy; vie in such perseverance; strengthen each other; and fear God; that ye may prosper.”

If the authorities put aside their ignorance and consider [your recommendations] in an unbiased manner, put them to use and put a stop to this environment of policing and detainments, [your ideas] can offer a beneficial and effective path out of the current crisis – a crisis dominating the Islamic republic through their selfishness, pride, mismanagement and ambition. [Your recommendations] could be the stepping stone for a positive move towards reform within the establishment and towards protecting the system from separation, disintegration and division.

Of course you are aware that in choosing the aforementioned solutions to defend the people’s rights and to ensure the survival of the Islamic Republic, you can expect an arduous task of reform that will be resisted through countless threats and pressures from those who have created the current crisis. Please be confident that through unity, patience and endurance, God has promised to reveal the way to guide people to victory[2]. In addition, [according to the holy Quran in support of humans who struggle down this [God would send his] angels who annunciate messages of security, and strip the heart off all grief and fear. [3]

Unfortunately, many politicians, political activists and journalists were detained after the election. Against Islam and the rule of law they were pressured into false and deceitful confessions, some of which were televised via national media. It is certain and evident that a person’s implication of others under such conditions is without merit and recognition. Moreover, further confirmation exists in the holy stories[4] of the prophet and the Imams that even self-directed confessions extracted under any kind of pressure or torture (including but not limited to threats, intimidation, infliction of physical pain, confinement, and so on), are without merit.

A claim of jurisprudence that denies these lessons is a false one and opinions that negate these lessons clearly deviate [from the true foundations of Islam]. The Quranic verse and imperative [self-implication of a rational person is permitted][5] confirms that only if revealed without pressure or force, is a confession valid.

In addition, article 38 of the constitution reads: “Any form of torture to force confessions, or to obtain information is forbidden. A person should not be obligated to swear, confess or bear witness as such any action of that sort is without worth and legal value. Any defiance of what has been mentioned in this article will be punishable by law.” Based on the general application of this article and its implications, any [form] of torture to collect information or to force confessions requires punishments and confessions, and admittances extracted in such manner is without legal value and merit.

It is obvious that long-term imprisonment in solitary confinement, an act that places the accused under severe pressure to confess, is a clear example of torture. The confession of the accused – even if it’s self-implication – is neither valid nor recognized when it is a product of exerted pressure and torture, especially in its recent fearsome form and its horrifying consequences. In this situation, repeated confessions (even if announced many times in roundtable discussions and interviews) would be as worthless as the initial confession.

Moreover, it is written in Article 39 of the Constitution that “all affronts to the dignity and repute of persons arrested, detained, imprisoned, or banished in accordance with the law, whatever form they may take, are forbidden and liable to punishment.”

So, what has happened [to this country] now that prominent figures who have provided years of great civil service are desecrated and not only has nobody been punished, but the perpetrators have even been endorsed and encouraged? Moreover, the “confessions” have been recognized as credible?

What has complicated the problem and invalidated the “confessions” even further is that in the current judicial system of the country, the plaintiffs [and the prosecutors], against the politically accused defendants who are in opposition to the current government, are themselves among the interrogators of the forced confessions and come from legal institutions tied to the government. Nowhere in the world, would any sound reasoning put even the smallest amount of legal credibility and legitimacy to such confessions, and to the consequent trails; because in these trails plaintiff and the judge are one and the same, clearly against the fundamental of having a jury based on Article 168 of the constitution. Unfortunately, this article too, like many other articles has been ignored and not acted upon.

Recent course of action taken by the government, and the show trails are not only against the law and betterment of the country but also in contradiction to basic benefits of the authorities to stay in power. Instead of clamping down on people and creating the recent atrocities, if authorities had been more politically wise and listened to warnings of prominent politicians, religious leaders and had chosen an impartial committee accepted by both all sides of the conflict, then we would have never fallen into the current crisis of illegitimacy.

A government that has many classes of people unsatisfied and its intellectuals under distress is not a government going to survive. Shah’s regime could have kept its governance and would have still lasted if governance was possible by scaring, and oppressing and filling the prisons from freedom-seeker, gifted figures, and different political activists.

By committing to such atrocities, a system under the rule of Islam that takes pride in being Shiite creates pessimism toward Islam and announces the inability of Islam to bring about justice in a society not only on global scale but also in our own nation, among our own masses and youth. Unfortunately, decision makers at the top have turned a blind eye to these clear truths, and are content to the eulogies of their poets, and flattering of their fawners. I beseech the great God for your well-being and success on this treacherous path.

May the Grace and mercy of God be upon you,

Holy City of Qum,
Hossein-Ali Montazeri
22 September 2009

Latest Video: Full Speech of Ahmadinejad at UN General Assembly

Here is the full speech of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the UN General Assembly:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAYrFHOV2Ww&feature=related[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2J6F3Z3TqQ[/youtube] [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7P5j0EqiHms[/youtube] [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iD-6t7aSdgE[/youtube]

Iran: The (Il)Legitimacy of Ahmadinejad

He came and he's gone. From New York, that is, not from his claimed authority as President of Iran. And after all the built-up drama surrounding his appearance at the United Nations, much of it a pre-scripted sideshow posing as the main act (Israel, the Holocaust, Iran's nuclear programme), what matters is the political situation to which Mahmoud Ahmadinejad returns, not the one he has just left.

This is in no way to denigrate the protestors who turned out yesterday to show the US and the world that Ahmadinejad was not acceptable. They represent the challenge to legitimacy that is at the heart of the conflict in Iran.

The important question was always going to be how many observers recognised that challenge. After all, Iranian state media were always going to ignore the protests in favour of the presentation of Ahmadinejad as international statesman. The postures that fuel the finger-wagging of the "Western" media --- his campaign against Zionism, his questioning of the scientific basis of the Holocaust, his chiding of "imperialism" --- support that portrayal. So this morning Fars News (farsnews.ir) has several articles pointing to Ahmadinejad as the agenda-setter in New York, including one on his six-point plan for global change.

So it is depressing to see that the Los Angeles Times sets aside the issue of legitimacy for "more important" headlines such as "Russia's president pledges to help U.S. nudge Iran on nuclear issue" and "Iran's President Extols Himself and Denounces Israel". It highlights Ahmadinejad's declaration, "[The Iranian voters] entrusted me once more, by a large majority, with this heavy responsibility," and only notes several paragraphs later, "Earlier, outside the United Nations, hundreds of protesters raised green flags -- the color of the opposition movement in Iran -- and signs reading 'Free Iran' as they railed against Ahmadinejad." The New York Times opens with the "thousands of demonstrators" and Ahmadinejad "stoutly defend[ing] his legitimacy. However, it then races to the safer ground of "familiar attacks against the United States and...an oblique rant against Jews", as well as the discussions of "world powers" over Iran's nuclear programme.

Far more important than the game of charades in New York but well beyond the notice of all but Iranian media, a more complex act of political theatre was being played out in Tehran. Having made his opening statement at the Assembly of Experts, Hashemi Rafsanjani was absent from the second day of the session. That enabled the fervent Ahmadinejad supporter, Ahmad Khatami, to read out a statement and claim that Rafsanjani endorsed "every line" of it.

The statement expressed full allegiance to the Supreme Leader --- no surprises there, for the flutter of a challenge to Ayatollah Khamenei's position has now stilled, and Rafsanjani's own strategy is to show undisputed support to bring the Supreme Leader towards his position. More significant was the appreciation of
the Supreme Leader’s “wise policies” in extinguishing the “seditious flames” in recent events. That one-sided view of blame for post-election conflict is at odds with Rafsanjani's more balanced presentation, as is the explicit claim that foreign powers had conspired to overthrow the Islamic system of Iran in recent events.

Most importantly, the Assembly upheld the legitimacy of Ahmadinejad's authority, praising Ayatollah Khamenei for dismissing any notion of fraud in the election and congratulating the President on his second term. The one opening for opponents of that legitimacy, and a more-than-implicit nod to the absent Rafsanjani, was the injunction that Ahmadinejad heed the “critiques of concerned Shiite clerics” as he led the Government.

So the wheel turns once more. The New York distraction is over --- thank goodness. For less than week of Qods Day, Iranian politics has again run the gauntlet of demonstration, resistance, negotiation, and Establishment pushback.

Confrontation or compromise? The question may have been a dramatic device to frame the last 72 hours in the United States. In Iran, that question is not artifice: it is at the heart of the battle for legitimacy that has defined the most important period for the Islamic Republic since 1979.