|
Viva la
Reformers!
Reza Bulorchi
and Nir Boms
Defying conventional
wisdom, fresh voices of freedom appear to be coming from
the Middle East as of late. Assad of Syria delivers his
plans for democratization directly to the New York
Times. Khaddafi of Libya delivers his to Newsweek,
as he claims to be an ally in the war against terrorism
and invites the world to review his nuclear arsenal.
Khatami of Iran, the "moderate" President, threatens to
resign due to an election crisis resulting from the
Guardian Council's decision to disqualify more than
3,000 candidates from the ballot of his country's
upcoming February 20 elections. Among the disqualified
candidates were 80 incumbent Parliament deputies –
including two deputy speakers. The banning of
candidates, of course, is never a positive step. But the
political crisis brewing in Iran must clearly show that
voices of freedom are indeed making headway there –
right?
Wrong. What you see
is not always what you get when it comes to the Middle
East, a region that has not yet began the process of
democratic change. The cynical Syrian abuse of the
crisis in Bam – the Syrians flew humanitarian aid into
the earthquake – devastated city only to bring back
weapons for terrorist groups-is just one example of new
cosmetics hiding the same old faces. Nevertheless,
knowing there are forces of reform in a country like
Iran is welcome news in Washington, where there are many
who would like to show that our policies in the Middle
East are already producing results. There is only one
problem: what Iranians have seen from Khatami and his
faction over the past seven years has been nothing more
than just the rhetoric of reform.
Iran's
theocracy is based on a theory of government called the
Velayat-e faqih, or absolute clerical rule.
Velayat-e faqih is at the core of the complex
structure of the Iranian political system in which
immense religious and political authority rests with the
vali-e faqih (or the Supreme Leader, currently
Ali Khamenei). The interpretation of what is or is not
an "Islamic principle" falls within the authority of the
Supreme Leader and his hand-picked Guardian Council, the
12-member body tasked with vetting candidates for their
"heart-felt" and "written" allegiance to the "Supreme
Leader."
To be sure, there are
factions within the Iranian political system, but the
conflict is more of a power grab rather than a content
debate over fundamental issues facing society, above all
secular democracy. "I have principles for my path," said
Khatami earlier last week to the Parliament deputies,
"and the most important principle for me is to conserve
the system." Indeed, the so-called reformist faction has
lost no opportunity to conserve the doctrine of
Velayat-e faqih.
In Iran, elections
serve as a veneer to mask a rigid theocracy. The mullahs
have perverted Western democracy and the parliamentary
system to ensure that those institutions would not pose
a threat to their grip on power. This hybrid of
theocratic soul and democratic gloss has created a paper
democracy in
Iran, giving
ammunition to
Tehran's advocates in Washington and
Europe
to justify "engagement" and "dialogue" with its clerics.
Khatami's
"reformists", by the way, have some interesting
associations. Among them, one will find mullah Mohammed
Mousavi-Khoeiniha, one of Khatami's deputies who was
fully behind the US Embassy take-over in Tehran in 1979.
Joining him was the recently deceased Ayatollah Sadiq
Khalkhali, the notorious hanging judge; Ali Akbar
Mohtashami, the terror master, who directed the
Hezbollah in Lebanon in the 1980s and is believed to
have coordinated the 1983 bombing of the US Marine
barrack in Beirut; the US Embassy hostage-takers; the
architects of the Ministry of Intelligence and former
commanders of the Revolutionary Guards. These and others
were baptized as "reformers" following Khatami's
presidency
And this brings us to
one of the biggest deceptions since Khatami's presidency
in 1997: the promise of rule of law and civil society.
In a system erected on the anti-democratic doctrine of
Velayat-e faqih, this is a non-starter. This
principle was incorporated into the constitution to make
it, in essence, reform-proof. In fact, the biggest
beneficiary of Khatami's mantra of "rule of law" has
been the conservatives who consistently invoke it,
casting aside the President's faction by applying the
existing election and press laws. In Iran, rule of law
means rule of Velayat-e faqih. In other words,
Islamic sharia law. The establishment never gave
Khatami's faction any real say in domestic policies. His
smile, his citing of Montesquieu and Alexis de
Tocqueville and his shallow discourses on lofty topics
such as Islam, democracy and a dialogue between
civilizations served as a diplomatic face-lift for
Tehran.
The Iranian
government is already besieged by domestic, social and
political crises, as well as by international pressure
for its sponsorship of terrorism and procurement of
nuclear weapons. And despite the brave face they keep in
public, Iran's leaders cannot escape the reality of what
has happened in its neighboring countries to the east
and the west.
The Guardian
Council's move has made one thing abundantly clear:
under the current political structure, a metamorphosis
of the Islamic Republic from within by the likes of
Khatami is an impossible task and a "reformed"
Velayat-e faqih system is a contradiction in terms.
Change - by way of genuine reform - can only come from
inside the country but outside this regime.
Secretary of State
Colin L. Powell has recently talked about Iran's
"encouraging" moves and "new attitude." This is
misplaced praise for a regime that still thrives on
domestic terror and the export of fundamentalism. We
need to see the clerical regime for what it really is: a
theocracy, intrinsically and structurally incapable of
reform. After a quarter of a century of acquiescence,
the U.S. must help the Iranian people and opposition
forces tear down the clerics' house of cards.
Reza Bulorchi is the
Executive Director of the U.S Alliance for Democratic
Iran. Nir Boms is a fellow at the Foundation for the
Defense of Democracies.
|