Socialize

FacebookTwitterRSS

Subscribe to RSS by Email

Iran at the Intersection

by Moign Khawaja

June 21, 2009

So our mainstream press and the media is rife with reports, some of them based on speculations rather than facts, about the situation in Iran and how it is handled by the authorities in Tehran. Is this important country in the Middle East going through a political turmoil? Is the rift between the educated urban middle class and the rural working class widening? Are we going to witness a counter-revolution in Iran spearheaded by secular elements of the society that will take on the conservative religious regime? How deep is the impact of foreign intervention in the internal affairs of Iran given the fact that it is surrounded by the US-led troops on both its eastern and western flanks? Questions like these and many others linger on the mind of millions of people inside and outside Iran.

Mir Hossein Mousavi waves to the crowd at a rally in Tehran (Getty Images)

I’ve been in contact with a few Iranians for quite a long time but our discussions centered on food and culture rather than news and politics. “There is nothing new to report Mr. Journalist,” Afshan always told me when I tried to initiate a political conversation. “I know you’re a very curious creature so I’ll let you know as soon as there is some development,” said the 23 year old female student studying petrochemicals at the University of Tehran.

Saeed is my other friend in Iran. He also studies at the University of Tehran doing a diploma in bio-engineering. “I study during the day but in the evening I work in a restaurant. It’s hard work. I know I have to work hard  in order to continue my studies and support my family,” the 25 year old said when asked about his routine.

Fascinating Frontier

To me Iran is one of the most fascinating countries in the world. From its diverse geography to magnificent history and from its rich culture to tempting cuisine, the country captures my attention and makes me learn more and more about one of the oldest civilizations of the world that rivaled the Romans and the Greeks. The fact that my grandmother spoke fluent Persian, as it was the language of Indian aristocracy, only fueled my interest and brought me closer to Iranian affairs.

Recent elections in Iran reignited my curiosity. My friends Afshan and Saeed sensed my new level of interest and gave me exclusive information about their political views and the type of activity they’re engaged in. Afshan passionately rallied for the reformist candidate and was certain about his win. Saeed, though admitting he had no time for politics, voted for current Iranian President Ahmedinejad. The zeal and vigor of my friends was something I  have seldom come across in my life. “This is the election that will change the future of Iran,” both of them insisted. I wondered how wrong they could ever be.

The polling in Iran was brisk and the turnout was very high. People turned out in droves to vote for their candidate.  Afshan and Saeed also flocked to the polling booths with their friends and family. Peaceful by nature, they both described the voting experience as exhilarating and waited impatiently for the results.

Changing Weather

I woke up to a bright sunny day with clear blue skies and gentle breeze blowing. It reminded me of the lovely days I had in Iran years ago. With pleasant memories of that trip on my mind, I switched on the television to get some news regarding the Iranian elections. Pretty confusing news was coming from the Iranian capital. News about protests and discontentment in the streets of Tehran dominated the headlines. Some media outlets talked about a counter-revolution brewing in the country on the same lines of 1979 Islamic revolution instigated by Imam Khomeini and his associates.

I rushed to close my bedroom window as warm sunshine was suddenly replaced by heavy thunderstorms. “Typical English weather,” I said and shrugged off the grim weather prospects only to notice that the political weather of Iran also changed abruptly. The hot spell of political campaigning came to an end when peaceful voting took place across the country. People waited for the election results anxiously, the same way they await the first rain of the summer. There were dark, thick clouds in the sky. No one knew if a political thunderstorm was on its way. Uncertainty made everyone anxious in the streets across the country.

It didn’t take me long to figure out that my friends in Iran were anxious. After a soft formal introduction, my friends began to tell their experiences and views. “I truly respect Mir Hussein Mousavi and find his policies interesting but I do not think they’re enough to steer our country out of severe problems we are facing today,” said Saeed in a very reconciliatory tone in the very beginning of our conversation. Afshan, on the other hand, was all set to explode.

“We need more than respect. We need more than recognition. We need justice. We need equality. We need to be treated as equal citizens of Iran and to be seen as part of the state rather than enemy of state,” charged the young Tehran woman adding that the state is taking measures to push people like her against the wall. “Where is impartiality when the state media gives more coverage to rallies held by the sitting president? Is it fair to block the voice of Mr. Mousavi and ban his newspaper? How can you let a candidate run an election while his campaigners’ movements are monitored and restricted?” Afshan asked in an upset tone.

Saeed began his defense by admitting that some unfair measures were adopted by the state machinery but it is not fair to say that Ahmedinejad benefited from them. “The president is the son of a blacksmith. He is an honest man who has lived a modest life. His popularity does not hinge on media and the Internet. His ground support comes from regions that lack modern communications. He has not prospered on Twitter, Youtube and Facebook. He lives in the hearts of millions of Iranian people,” Saeed said resolutely. He vehemently denied that Mr. Ahmedinejad is the candidate of the establishment.

“He is running against the tide. Many elements in the establishment do not like him, e.g. Mr. Rafsanjani. The West does not like him because he wants to restore our national pride and rejects imperial hegemony. The so-called ‘reformists’ do not like him because he wants to empower the powerless people of Iran.”

New Clear Policies

So what are the thorny issues that divide this nation of around 80 million souls that are frustrating the people on the streets of Tehran and have become the object of fascination for its Western rivals? Supporters of the current Iranian president are upbeat about his sound economic policies on the domestic front and his brave foreign policies on the external front. I asked Saeed to explain them.

“Ahmedinejad has done a great job for our country and has successfully restored the glory of Iran which was somehow overshadowed by our former reformist president Mr. Khatami. He has adopted a brave stance on the nuclear policy and has refused to bow before the bully ‘America’ and its allies. I strongly believe that he is the right person when it comes to foreign policy and national interests of the country,” Saeed’s defense of Mr. Ahmedinejad continued.

Print Friendly
Moign Khawaja specializes in politics, current affairs and world conflicts. He also takes deep interest in society especially religious and cultural festivals. He has MA degrees in Journalism and International Affairs. Read more articles by .
http://outernationalist.net/


4 Responses to Iran at the Intersection

  1. Sadun Kal

    June 27, 2009 at 10:08 am

    All this is rather unfortunate. In the end it’s just a question of whether or not they should bow down to imperialism I suppose. It looks like Afshan is a bit naive about the West’s intentions, but her desires are also reasonable. Nevertheless how free can the women of a land be if the land itself is being oppressed by foreign powers? As a Turk, I feel that the independence of a land should come before individual freedoms. Otherwise eventually even the freest of women will either have nothing left to eat, the land being economically raped by the West, or they’ll have to become the west and sell out their own people.

    Ahmedinejad may not be perfect, but at least he’s willing to fight for his people’s future. Mousavi on the other hand seems to be rather unaware of the threat the West poses to Iran. But that’s just my fairly uneducated opinion. If they could combine the good sides of both candidates, pro-secular-freedom + pro-sovereignty then it would be the perfect candidate I guess, pretty much like Turkey’s benevolent dictator Atatürk. (Since his death we became more and more dependent on the west, at present this dependence reached a ridiculous degree.) Such people are rather rare though, so under these circumstances I’m having a hard time opposing Ahmedinejad. In today’s world, guys like him (+Chavez, Mugabe etc.) help balance things a bit, in my opinion.

  2. Moign Khawaja

    June 27, 2009 at 12:06 pm

    Dear Sadun,

    Thanks for your comment. I appreciate your effort to understand the dynamics of Iranian society and take women like Afshan’s aspirations into consideration. Its a truth that today’s women of Iran are craving for freedoms and equality. They’re right behind Mousavi and form the backbone of the reform movement.

    Ahmedinezhad is not the ideal figure in Iran and neither of the others are but he still represents a majority of the Iranian people. A 62% majority can be disputed but there is no denial to the fact that his support in rural Iran is solid. Foreign media has attended massive rallies and opinion polls before elections conducted by them showed Ahmedinezhad is leading them.

    What would you say about the suppression of other thoughts in a democracy? E.g. the suppression of Islam in Ataturk’s Turkey or suppression of secularism in Khomeini’s Iran? Is extremism of democracy not akin to extremism of religion?

  3. Sadun Kal

    June 29, 2009 at 2:19 pm

    I personally am not a full believer in the thing called democracy. At least not as it is being currently operated today. Why don’t we allow 5 year olds to vote? Because they are not old enough to have an educated opinion. That’s fine. But the assumption I consider harmful is that as soon as people reach a certain age, usually 18 in this case, people know enough about the reality. This is obviously irrational. If some people never have the time or motivation to educate themselves on relevant issues, then we can safely assume that they’ll go to the grave as ignorant as an educated 5 year old. Democratic system is fatally flawed in that regard. So I guess I’d prefer a benevolent dictatorship rather than risking to destroy ourselves while trying to be “democratic”. At least until the nice dictators succeed at educating the entire population.

    Suppression of Islam in Ataturk’s Turkey had nothing to do with democracy; Atatürk (his real name is Mustafa Kemal, and he was a fairly educated guy) concluded that religion slows humanity down, rightfully I belive, and he decided to get rid of its strong effect on society with significant success at the time. The hypocrisy is that nobody, still today, dare to say that what happened wasn’t democratic. Because of the bad image of dictatorships and the ridiculously innocent image of democracy people go to extreme lengths to distort the reality of things. And even Mustafa Kemal wanted to make the country more democratic but he kept delaying a real democracy until he believed the nation was ready for it. Unfortunately it never was ready, despite his decision, and today we’re still suffering from that “democracy”. Secularism slowly began to lose the competition soon after multiple parties were allowed. That was partially because of the strength of religious convictions, but also because of the sneaky western separatists I suppose.

    I don’t really know much about Khomeini’s Iran and the suppression of secularism . I guess it can be considered an example for the fatal flaw of democracy? For if people who do not seriously value anything but what’s written in a 1500 year book can be accepted as leaders, they surely won’t be able to make the best decisions for their people. At the time he may have also looked like the best option though, I have no clue.

  4. Moign Khawaja

    July 1, 2009 at 11:12 pm

    Your comments regarding democracy are truly interesting and reflect reality and rationale. I think the bottom line of a successful lies on several factors rather than just democracy and universal suffrage and can be a mixture of autocracy, theocracy and democracy. We have seen horrible crimes against humanity committed by both autocratic dictators (e.g. Adolf Hitler, Saddam Hussein) as well as democratically elected presidents (e.g. Harry Truman, Richard Nixon, George W Bush). I also think that history decides the fate of any given system of governance and sovereignty.