|
By William O. Beeman
New American Media
Friday, Jun 26, 2009
Iran’s most visible leaders, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and
Spiritual Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamene’i are on the brink of losing
their respective offices in the wake of the controversial presidential
election in Iran June 12.
Should this happen, many sectors of the American punditocracy will be
thoroughly embarrassed. Having built these two figures up to mythic
status, they will now have to face Iran as it really is, not as they
would like to style it. It is, and has been for many years, not a
calcified theocracy controlled by old mullahs. It is rather a nation on
the brink of change as a new generation assumes power, and as the
influence of women in the society rockets to the forefront.
Ayatollah Khamene’i has now been denounced by name in the streets — an
unprecedented event. Furthermore, it is rumored that his rival, former
President Ayatollah Ali Akbar Rafsanjani, head of the Expediency
Council, which mediates between the powerful Guardian Council and the
Iranian Parliament, and the Assembly of Experts, which oversees the
authority of the Spiritual Leader, is lobbying the bodies he heads to
replace the Spiritual Leader.
Mr. Ahmadinejad has been accused of rigging the election along with the
son of Ayatollah Khamene’i, Mojtaba, and key members of the
Revolutionary Guard and the Basij strike force. Statistical analyses of
the official vote published in the Washington Post a few days after the
election suggest that the numbers are artificial. Documents from the
Ministry of the Interior showing the “real” vote tall--in which Mr.
Moussavi was the clear winner--are in wide circulation.
However, it is now clear that the presidential election has become
irrelevant in Iranian political life going forward. The Iranian
president is relatively powerless in any case. What is more important
is that the people feel that they have been violated by the power elite
of the country and are now bent on changing the very foundation of
their government.
If sea change is truly in the works in Iran, how will it proceed?
People can only imagine what they can imagine. In Iran today both the
people and the establishment have only one model for social and
governmental change, and that is the original Islamic revolution of
1978-79. Because both sides are working with the same vocabulary of
symbolism, they are groping to command those potent images that will
galvanize public support in their favor.
The master vocabulary of revolution in Iran is the historical martyrdom
of Imam Hossein, grandson of the Prophet Mohammad, who was killed on
the plains of Karbala in present day Iraq in 680. Imam Hossein is the
central figure in Shi’a Islam, and his death is commemorated
perpetually in Iranian life.
President Ahmadinejad’s chief rival, Mir Hossein Moussavi, co-opted the
symbolism of the Karbala tragedy early on. For his campaign, he adopted
the color green, the color most associated with Islam itself, with
descendants of the Prophet, and with the martyrdom of Imam Hossein.
After the election, he declared himself “ready for martyrdom,” and his
supporters appeared in the streets shouting “Ya Hossein,” echoing the
cries shouted by groups of mourners in the annual commemoration of Imam
Hoseein’s death. As a religious cry, it could not be faulted by the
police and security forces. They have also taken to shouting “Allahu
Akbar—God is Great,” which is both a symbolic cry in favor of change,
but also a subtle reminder that change--even revolutionary change--is
always in the hands of God.
Not to be outdone, the clerical establishment countered the idea of
martyrdom in the election with the Iranian soldier-martyrs of the
Iran-Iraq war.
The original revolution fed on occasions for public assembly, notably
the three-, seven-, and 40-day mourning ceremonies for the dead. This
created a cycle of martyrdom as protesters against the Pahlavi
government assembled, were killed by the Shah’s forces, and were in
turn mourned in an ongoing fashion. The entire Revolution took more
than a year to complete before the Shah finally gave up and left. The
world can expect a long and drawn-out process of resistance in this
action as well—a point made by Dr. Gary Sick of Columbia University in
an article printed on The Daily Beast. Dr. Sick served as a military
intelligence officer during the earlier Revolution
The original revolution was led by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini from his
exile in France. He used the technology of the day--long distance
telephone and tape cassettes--to spread his revolutionary message.
In today’s resistance a remarkably appropriate figure may be poised to
likewise lead from abroad--Nobel Prize Winner Shirin Ebadi who finds
herself in Europe at this time. The technology of today--the Internet
and the cell phone may be the organizing force that drives this current
force for change.
Those who think that change will bring an end to Islamic influence in
Iran are dead wrong. Neither side in the current conflict has denounced
the Islamic Republic. However the current opposition wants to change
the basis for Islamic government. At the core is the controversial
doctrine of the Velayat-e Faqih, the Rule of the Chief Jurisprudent, in
which the Spiritual Leader rules in place of the Hidden 12th Imam of
Shi’a Islam, who has been in hiding since the 9th Century.
Only Ayatollah Khomeini and his followers supported this doctrine. All
other Shi’a Grand Ayatollahs rejected it, or had serious reservations.
Chief among the objectors today is Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, who is
Iranian, and serves as the chief religious authority in Najaf, Iraq.
Ayatollah Sistani has more followers than any other Shi’a leader.
Ayatollah Rafsanjani would reportedly replace Ayatollah Khamene’i with
a triumvirate of knowledgeable clerics, of which he might be one. There
is currently no willing successor to Ayatollah Khamene’i, so this
problem was going to have to be addressed in the future anyway.
It is likely that the Guardian Council, which vets political candidates
and approves laws passed by parliament, would also have its powers
curtailed.
Iran watchers are looking carefully to see how successful the
opposition organization has become and whether it will be able to
sustain itself and develop a potent ideology and leadership for the
long haul. It will also be important to see how the cycle of
demonstrations, strikes and confrontations plays itself out over time.
One thing is certain, change has once again begun in Iran, and however
it plays out, it will leave the nation in a very different state than
it is in today.
William O. Beeman is professor and chair of the Department of
Anthropology at the University of Minnesota. He has conducted research
on Iran for more than 30 years, and lived through the Revolution of
1978-79. He is the author of "The “Great Satan” vs. the “Mad Mullahs”:
How the United States and Iran Demonize Each Other."
New American Media
Print This
|