Iranians delivered a surprise (and very welcome) result in last week’s presidential election when they voted – by a massive margin – for the only moderate candidate in the race, Hassan Rouhani.
Rouhani’s election could present a new opportunity for international cooperation over Iran’s nuclear programme and Syria
Rouhani, a mild-manned cleric and former nuclear negotiator who served as the secretary of Iran’s supreme National Security Council for 16 years, received 50.7 per cent of the vote in the six-way race, thus avoiding a runoff to replace outgoing hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Rouhani’s nearest rival was the conservative mayor of Tehran, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, who got only 17 per cent of the vote. So this was a huge victory for Rouhani, who advocates greater personal freedoms and a more conciliatory approach to the world.
It is also good news for all those Iranian moderates who are absolutely fed up with the status quo, and whose hopes were quashed in the 2009 presidential election – which according to most analysts was rigged.
Following the flawed 2009 election, Iran witnessed mass protests and demonstrations on a scale unseen since the 1979 Islamic revolution that toppled the Shah. The protests were brutally suppressed, a number of demonstrators were shot dead by the security forces, many others were arrested and tortured, and two were actually hanged for taking part in the protests.
The opposition Green movement candidate, Mir Hossein Mousavi, who should have been declared President, was placed under house arrest and remains so today. The release of Mousavi and making amends for the crackdown on the peaceful demonstrators in 2009 are among some of the challenges facing Rouhani when he assumes the presidency.
Even though Rouhani was by far the best of the candidates who ran for President, only time will tell how he will perform in office and how far he will be allowed to pursue his agenda. Iran’s Guardian Council, which is the real source of power in the country, had already banned many other candidates from running in the poll because they were considered to be too reformist or liberal.
It is important to keep in mind that in Iran a presidential election is a contest between candidates who profess absolute loyalty to the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has the final say in policy, especially foreign, defence and security matters, and others who are considered slightly more reformist. How ‘reformist’, and how ‘moderate’ these candidates turn out in practice is another issue.
However, on this occasion it is likely that the conservative establishment that runs the country was genuinely taken aback by the scale of Rouhani’s victory. The fact that the hardline vote was divided among the other candidates, and no one candidate was backed by Ali Khamenei, no doubt contributed to Rouhani’s win.
Furthermore, Iranians who want change, and there are millions who do, did not want a repeat performance of the 2009 election where the moderate candidate was robbed of his victory, and therefore turned up in large numbers to vote for Rouhani. His huge win shows that Iranians have had enough of extremist policies, of economic mismanagement and of antagonising the international community.
Rouhani’s election could present a new opportunity for international cooperation over Iran’s nuclear programme and Syria, where Tehran backs the regime of Bashar al-Assad.
Hizbollah, the Lebanese Shi’ite militia which has sent soldiers to Syria to fight alongside Assad’s forces, is funded and largely directed by Iran, and as President, Rouhani could influence Hizbollah to reconsider its intervention in Syria.
As chief nuclear negotiator between 2003 and 2005, Rouhani had halted the enrichment of uranium and co-operated well with the International Atomic Energy Organisation, so his election could present a window of opportunity in nuclear diplomacy.
The Iranian economy has suffered as a result of international sanctions, and Rouhani knows that cooperating with the global community over Tehran’s nuclear programme will lead to a lifting of these sanctions and a better quality of life for ordinary citizens, something the electorate voted for in this presidential election.
It is true that Rouhani will not be the final decision maker on Iran’s nuclear programme; the person with that responsibility, unfortunately, is Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. However, his influence could lead (hopefully) to more flexibility on the part of the Iranian government when negotiating its nuclear programme.
I do not expect an overnight radical change in Iranian nuclear policy and I am fully aware of the constraints under which Rouhani will be operating. However, his presidency does present a new opportunity for Iran, with regard to both its relations with the international community as well as much needed political and economic reform.
Europe and America, on the other hand, have to perform a fine balancing act with regard to Iran and its new President. They must do whatever they can to strengthen the country’s moderates (including Rouhani) without giving the impression of undue interference in Iran’s internal affairs and they must be willing to lift sanctions on Iran should Tehran genuinely co-operate over its nuclear programme.
Washington and Brussels will also have to make it clear that should Iran continue to be intransigent over its nuclear programme that can only mean the imposition of further sanctions. The military option, of course, which is not desirable, is a possibility which should never be taken off the table. And Israel’s security, indeed its very existence, which is threatened by a nuclear-armed Iran, needs to be taken into consideration at all times.
Iran cannot be considered a democracy, nor does it practise pluralism or respect for many basic human rights. However, this new President does present an opportunity for a change for the better.
The fact that Rouhani is part of the system does not necessarily mean he is powerless to bring about change. After all, both Mikhail Gorbachev in the Soviet Union and Frederick de Klerk in South Africa came from the ruling parties, and just look at what they brought about.
We will have to wait and see.