#1 Iran elections? No certain outcome.
Posted: Thu Jun 11, 2009 3:09 am
economist
[quote]Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, populist as he is, may not yet be home and dry
IF IT were not that Iran’s presidential election will determine the fate of a large, ancient nation, and perhaps also the chances of peace in a vital region of the world, the spectacle might simply be hugely entertaining. In this religion-diluted quasi-democracy, where politics tends to be expressed in ritual public chanting or sullen private apathy, the contest has evolved unexpectedly into a bare-knuckled slugging match, complete with taunting rhetoric, dirty tricks and colourful, rowdy fans. Rather than leading to a widely predicted first-round win for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the fight has thrown Iran’s ebullient, controversial president on the defensive.
Until very recently the field of challengers looked uninspiring, particularly after the abrupt withdrawal of Muhammad Khatami, a liberal reformer who won overwhelming victories to serve as president from 1997-2005. Several potentially strong conservatives also declined to run, apparently in deference to the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has subtly lent his considerable weight to the incumbent. This left two greybeards who are both centrists in the theocratic context of Iran: Mehdi Karroubi, a former speaker of parliament, and Mir Hosein Mousavi, prime minister during the Iran-Iraq war of 1980-88, as the only serious contenders for the opposition. With both standing on mildly reformist platforms, they looked likelier to split and weaken the protest vote than to oust Mr Ahmadinejad.
In early May the Council of Guardians, a body of clerics charged with ensuring the Islamist and revolutionary credentials of public officials, disqualified hundreds of candidates at a stroke, including every female applicant. The only survivors of the cull were the two mild reformists and a hardline conservative, Mohsen Rezai, who used to command the Revolutionary Guard. Considering the president’s genuine popularity among groups most likely to vote, such as the rural poor, and the bias towards him of the state-controlled broadcasts that Iranians mainly rely on, the stage looked set for a dreary campaign. But with only a week to go before polling on June 12th, and with Mr Ahmedinejad and his three challengers pairing off in a string of televised debates, the race has instead stirred up Iranians as much as any since the Islamic revolution of 1979.
This may hurt Mr Ahmadinejad and his ultra-conservatives. Since his shock triumph in the presidential polls of 2005, they have relied on a mix of backing from non-elected institutions, free-spending populism based on windfall oil profits, and a growing tendency among middle-class, city-dwelling Iranians to shun elections altogether. Now the president is suffering not merely from defections in the conservative camp, a crash in oil income, and an unprecedentedly brutal verbal pummelling from his political foes. The heated mood may inspire more of Iran’s army of fence-sitters to get out and vote.
Their voice could make all the difference. Experts reckon that as many as 10m-12m of Iran’s 46.2m registered voters reflexively back Mr Ahmadinejad, meaning that a low turnout could swing him an outright majority in the first round. But key conservative groupings, including senior clerics and parliamentary blocs, have either failed to endorse him or have done so tepidly. And although the former guardsman, Mr Rezai, is deemed a distant runner, he has chipped away at the president’s core constituency. Touting his own credentials as a patriot and fervent revolutionary, he has undermined Mr Ahmadinejad on the sensitive nuclear issue by declaring that Iran would be more respected if it adopted a less “bullying and adventuristâ€
[quote]Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, populist as he is, may not yet be home and dry
IF IT were not that Iran’s presidential election will determine the fate of a large, ancient nation, and perhaps also the chances of peace in a vital region of the world, the spectacle might simply be hugely entertaining. In this religion-diluted quasi-democracy, where politics tends to be expressed in ritual public chanting or sullen private apathy, the contest has evolved unexpectedly into a bare-knuckled slugging match, complete with taunting rhetoric, dirty tricks and colourful, rowdy fans. Rather than leading to a widely predicted first-round win for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the fight has thrown Iran’s ebullient, controversial president on the defensive.
Until very recently the field of challengers looked uninspiring, particularly after the abrupt withdrawal of Muhammad Khatami, a liberal reformer who won overwhelming victories to serve as president from 1997-2005. Several potentially strong conservatives also declined to run, apparently in deference to the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has subtly lent his considerable weight to the incumbent. This left two greybeards who are both centrists in the theocratic context of Iran: Mehdi Karroubi, a former speaker of parliament, and Mir Hosein Mousavi, prime minister during the Iran-Iraq war of 1980-88, as the only serious contenders for the opposition. With both standing on mildly reformist platforms, they looked likelier to split and weaken the protest vote than to oust Mr Ahmadinejad.
In early May the Council of Guardians, a body of clerics charged with ensuring the Islamist and revolutionary credentials of public officials, disqualified hundreds of candidates at a stroke, including every female applicant. The only survivors of the cull were the two mild reformists and a hardline conservative, Mohsen Rezai, who used to command the Revolutionary Guard. Considering the president’s genuine popularity among groups most likely to vote, such as the rural poor, and the bias towards him of the state-controlled broadcasts that Iranians mainly rely on, the stage looked set for a dreary campaign. But with only a week to go before polling on June 12th, and with Mr Ahmedinejad and his three challengers pairing off in a string of televised debates, the race has instead stirred up Iranians as much as any since the Islamic revolution of 1979.
This may hurt Mr Ahmadinejad and his ultra-conservatives. Since his shock triumph in the presidential polls of 2005, they have relied on a mix of backing from non-elected institutions, free-spending populism based on windfall oil profits, and a growing tendency among middle-class, city-dwelling Iranians to shun elections altogether. Now the president is suffering not merely from defections in the conservative camp, a crash in oil income, and an unprecedentedly brutal verbal pummelling from his political foes. The heated mood may inspire more of Iran’s army of fence-sitters to get out and vote.
Their voice could make all the difference. Experts reckon that as many as 10m-12m of Iran’s 46.2m registered voters reflexively back Mr Ahmadinejad, meaning that a low turnout could swing him an outright majority in the first round. But key conservative groupings, including senior clerics and parliamentary blocs, have either failed to endorse him or have done so tepidly. And although the former guardsman, Mr Rezai, is deemed a distant runner, he has chipped away at the president’s core constituency. Touting his own credentials as a patriot and fervent revolutionary, he has undermined Mr Ahmadinejad on the sensitive nuclear issue by declaring that Iran would be more respected if it adopted a less “bullying and adventuristâ€