In Iran many Foreign Policy decisions are made long in advance by committee. This can be a blessing. It produces a clear strategy for the country rather than the “this happens – we react” approach so often followed in the West. But Iran has nudged a clear hardliner into the presidency. This arguably because they had been faced with Donald Trump’s hardline and felt they needed to match it. But that boat has sailed and Iran’s present policy seems out of step with current reality now that we have a Biden presidency in the USA. Or is there another reason? Some argue that a hardliner has been put in place because there is an expectation that the Supreme Leader will die within the next year or two and they want everyone singing from the same hymnbook when they appoint a new supreme leader. Or maybe both factors are relevant. In the following article NCF staffer Gwendoline Choi examines the issue:
The 2021 Presidential Elections: substantial or a sham?
If you’re looking for an example of responsive politics, just turn to Iran. For better or for worse, Iran’s presidential elections have been by and large centred around Iranian-US relations. Case in point – the notorious hardliner Ebrahim Raisi’s success in the recent elections held on June 18th, ostensibly the perfect leader to respond to US’ ‘maximum pressure campaign’ with force.
The ultraconservative Raisi’s landslide victory of 17.8 million votes dwarfed those of his fellow candidates, five of whom were conservative hardliners. The academic and economist Abdolnaser Hemmati was the election’s sole moderate voice, receiving only 10% of the votes. However, Raisi’s success was a result of a process many consider a sham – and that the Ayatollah’s protégé’s decisive victory was only guaranteed once his strongest competitors were removed. In May, the Guardian Council revealed their seven approved presidential candidates from the ruling establishment, disqualifying over 600 applicants. Raisi, an anti-corruption “Principlist” who has long been mentioned as a potential successor to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was clearly the chosen front-runner. This glimpse into the deep state’s priorities for Iran show that revenge against the US is their real concern – not the people.
It is unsurprising that the populace were far from impressed – this artificial selection left them with no presidential candidate with an understanding of the problems faced by ordinary people. With promises from eight years ago unrealised, the turnout for what many considered to be an engineered election of approved puppets predictably reached a historic low of 49%, with the spoiled ballots tripling from the last election. Indeed, spoiled ballots outnumbered the vote for any other candidate bar Raisi. Citizens were clear about how they saw the election: if they voted, they would be punishing America… and themselves. This apathy is far from reassuring, as the government has long held up Iran’s voter turnout as support for theocracy.
Ebrahim Raisi
Ebrahim Raisi’s first address to the public as president-elect confirmed his conservative stance: he believes that the focus should be on the dignity and prestige of the Iranian nation, alluding in part to the US’ cripplingly heavy sanctions imposed in 2018 by President Trump. Far from a surprise when you consider that Raisi is a true Khamenei loyalist, the closest mirror to Khamenei’s policies since the Supreme Leader was President himself. Thus, his ‘triumph’ is perhaps more indicative of the state’s attitudes towards the US than it is of the will of the people. A hardliner both domestically and in foreign policy, he is known for his harsh crackdowns on dissent and strict adherence to Sharia law. He is expected to continue anti-American resistance, most likely through strengthening ties to China, Russia and Iraq. However, you wouldn’t be amiss to assume that a dynamic political agenda attuned to global shifts and currents should be, well, responsive. And the Iranian elections seem to suggest the opposite.
Iran-US relations: a curious counterreaction
Just as the Guardian Council’s engineering of the Iranian elections have come to an end, Joe Biden has taken the stage. A slightly softer, more diplomatic man than his predecessor, Biden would have been the ideal partner for a more moderate Iranian president, a gateway into negotiating for the lifting of sanctions to benefit Iran’s population. There could have been a possibility of reprieve in sanctions, desperately needed given that 75% of Iran’s population live under the poverty line, in return for cooperating with Biden’s goal of expanding the nuclear deal. This is a nuclear deal which the new US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken has been clear about wanting ‘longer and stronger’, which would have potentially been a promising negotiation ground for a moderate candidate like Abdolnaser Hemmati.
However, the entrance of Raisi onto the international stage, a jurist associated with crimes against humanity who is personally sanctioned by the US, speaks of a mistimed mismatch. The nuclear deal is considered to be a ‘stinking corpse’ and a ‘national humiliation’ by Iranian conservatives like Raisi and the deep state, far from an avenue for a reprieve for their people. Under Raisi, a man accused of a ‘death commission’ responsible for over 4000 lives including minors, many consider a new deal impossible in good faith – including Raisi himself, who claims it is ‘not negotiable’. As ongoing talks in Vienna demonstrate, Raisi’s stance has antagonised Biden – now neither party is willing to make the first move.
Thus, Iran’s counterreaction falls short of serving the people – instead of responding to the international situation with speed and pragmatism, Iran’s meddling has fed the Ayatollah’s desire for revenge, pride and ‘dignity’. Only time will tell what Raisi’s policies will be. Given his previous commitments, segregation of sexes and a focus on the agricultural sector may be expected, in addition to a tough stance on corruption. Fewer freedoms for individuals and the press are anticipated as religious governance is to be strengthened. But from my perspective, it appears to be a case of a failed counter-response, a hardliner voted in too late.
Image credit: Mostafa Meraji. This image is free to use under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license.
