[Alys Brown]
In the wake of the recent election, the Islamic Republic of Iran seems to have come to a crossroads: continue in a trend of hard-line Islamic values or a more moderate, or even liberal, path? Since 1979, when Iran was shaken by revolution and an Islamic Republic was established, strict moral and social values have been enforced through law. However, after the leader of the Revolution, Ayatollah Khomeini died in 1989 there appeared to be a trend towards reform and liberalisation. In 2000 the reformists won a decisive victory in the elections, however the trend towards increased liberalisation under reformists politicians was challenged in 2005 by the election of Ahmadinejad, the Conservative mayor of Iran as President. Ahmadinejad’s victory was seen by many to be a response to the reformists’ perceived lack of response to the increasingly hostile rhetoric of the USA and economic difficulties.
In such politically sensitive conditions the recent election to the majlis (Iranian parliament) was inevitably viewed as very important to the current regime’s success and, inevitably, they used every option open to them to ensure a win. Hundreds of the Reformist candidates were disqualified as being ‘un-Islamic’ by the Guardian Council which vets candidates. Critics of the regime have argued that bias was evident since many of the disqualifications seem to have been leaders and well-known figures while unknown figures and less deserving reformists were allowed to stand. Furthermore, some reformist candidates were prevented from holding public rallies and their newspapers are regularly closed down. Unsurprisingly in these circumstances, the conservatives won a two-thirds majority. They did especially well in Tehran itself. However, there are still a significant minority of reformists in the majlis and they did managed to increase their seats slightly.
Moreover, victory over the reformists does not necessarily mean an easy ride for the hard-line regime; many of the conservatives that have been elected are critics of Ahmadinejad, they represent a more moderate right to his extreme right policies. One clear example is Ali Larijani, who resigned from his position as Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator in October 2007 following disagreements with the president. He won a landslide victory of 76% in the religious city of Qom against candidates close to the president. There is every possibility that given Larijani’s no powerful position he will be offered the position of the speaker of the majlis which would give him a power-base to undermine Ahmadinejad’s power and even mount a presidential challenge. The reformist mayor of Tehran, Mohamed Qalibaf, is also thought to nurse presidential ambitions.
Furthermore, past-President Rafsanjani has been seen to address student gatherings on the need for greater democracy and the pointlessness of censorship. While this is a dramatic departure from his past policies, it shows the efforts of regime heavyweights to canvas amongst reform-minded young people, possibly showing that there is a chance of success for a new generation of reformists in future elections. In the now-looming 2009 presidential elections, conservative candidates such as Larijani and Qalibaf may well be challenged by reformists such Ayatollah Khomeini’s grandson who would find being a descendent of the Revolution’s leader distinctly to his advantage.
However, is this continued hope of a reformist victory merely the West clutching at straws? Certainly at a time when American is becoming more and more hostile to Iran, the attitudes of those in power there are increasingly important for international peace and security. And Iran’s attitude to America is reliant on the politicians that its citizens elect. While no Iranian politician is pro-American, more reformist candidates are seen to constitute less of a threat due to their less hard-line policies on issues from international trade to nuclear capabilities. However, many analysts argue that what the elections show is that the hardliners are still firmly in the driving seat. While the results of the election are uncontested, its meaning for the future is still heavily debated. Only time will tell if Iran has turned a corner or not, and what that will mean for everyone else.
