Democracy and the Supreme Leader

An editorial in yesterday’s Kayhan, an influential pro-government newspaper, accused Mir Hossein Mousavi of being a foreign agent.
The writer, Hossein Shariatmadari, an adviser to the Supreme Leader, Ali Khomeini ,who appointed him as editor of the newspaper, further accused him of leading a corrupt movement that has been implementing a foreign mission in order to encourage unlawful activities, kill innocent people, create a rebellion, plunder public property and weaken the power of the Islamic system…His aim is to escape from definite punishment for the murder of innocent individuals, inciting riots and rebellions, hiring some thugs and ruffians to attack the lives, property and honor of the people, clear collaboration with foreigners, performing the role of the fifth column inside the country, and scores of other undeniable crimes.
Finally, he recommended that Mousavi and his most prominent supporter, former reformist president Mohammad Khatami, be tried in an open court in front of the eyes of the oppressed people who demand that the blood of their loved ones should be avenged.
The regime seems to be preparing the nation for his arrest and prosecution (the indictment is a long one and includes treason), for he has steadfastly refused to accept Ahmadinejad’s victory in last month’s presidential election.
On his website, he wrote the following:
a majority of the people, including me, do not accept (the government's) political legitimacy. It is our historical responsibility to continue our protests and not to abandon our efforts to preserve the nation's rights. A ruling system that relied on people's trust for 30 years cannot replace this with security forces overnight.
Mousavi is demanding that basic rights, such as freedom of the press and the right to demonstrate be preserved. He is also calling for the release of all those detained since last month’s election.
As such, he intends to create a political party in order to promote these ideals and defend the right of all Iranians…
Yet, since the founding of the regime, did they ever possess the democratic rights he is now so keen to restore and protect?
Mousavi had written earlier that it’s not yet too late. It is our historical responsibility to continue our protests to defend the rights of the people . . . and prevent the blood spilt by hundreds of thousands of martyrs from leading to a police state.
In essence, he has opted to continue recognizing the regime, but oppose its leaders politically, by becoming the leader of a loyal opposition.
Is that concept possible within the context of an Islamic republic?
Will Ahmadinejad and the Supreme Leader allow Mousavi and his supporters to exist politically, if they remain defiantly in the opposition?
In other words, in today’s Iran, is a political reform movement, and an opposition one, possible?
Mousavi’s strategy demonstrates his belief that reform and clerical rule, democracy and the paramount authority of the Supreme Leader are compatible.
Yet, if that is so, why did the regime rig the election?
If the existence of an opposition loyal to the regime of the Islamic Republic was tolerated and legal, then why was it not allowed to win an election?
It seems clear that the most conservative wing of the regime does not believe in democracy (an invention manufactured in the West designed to morally and politically corrupt Islamic societies) and simply will not countenance any of its most essential attributes, such as free and fair elections.
The fundamentalists around the Supreme Leader cling to the notion that their authority and legitimacy, are divine in origin, and thus cannot possibly be called into question, and certainly not by an election.
The regime’s founder, Ayatollah Khomeini, believed that establishing an Islamic government was God’s will, until the day the 12th Imam would return to Earth in order to establish his reign of justice. According to this doctrine, velayat-e faqih, or, rule of the Islamic jurist, the clerics would govern under the guidance of the Supreme Leader.
That is why, in this system, the Supreme Leader’s word is law. Even moderate clerics wholeheartedly believe this:
following the Supreme Leader's commands is a religious obligation, declared Ayatollah Hashemzadeh Harisi, who is close to the reformers. The Supreme Leader having endorsed the election results, that should have been the end of the matter!
Mousavi’s election and a reformist agenda which would have entailed improving relations with the West, and Obama’s America, in particular, were perceived as an existential threat to the regime itself by the Supreme Leader and his most important supporters, the security apparatus.
To guarantee its continued existence, a coup was engineered, and Ahmadinejad’s victory assured.
As Imam Ali, the first successor to the Prophet Mohammad, reportedly said, a tyrant is better than trouble, and Mousavi could have brought plenty, for a more progressive and democratic government would have threatened the supremacy of the fundamentalists.
It was also in the interests of the ideological guardians of the revolution, the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC), and the Basij militia to back the Supreme Leader.
If they have staunchly supported Ahmadinejad, and brutally cleared the streets of Tehran of all demonstrators, it is because they have prospered under his administration.
Thanks to the president, they have become a major economic force in the country. They control over 100 companies, particularly in the energy, real estate and construction sectors.
According to a Rand report, the IRGC’s growing economic might has increased its sense of political privilege and entitlement.
They are also highly influential politically: 18 out of 21 cabinet ministers are former members, as is Ahmadinejad himself.
They clearly had a vested interest in ensuring that he won, and that the status quo was maintained.
As such, to think that Ahmadinejad, the Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei and their key supporters, the security forces will allow an opposition to develop and thrive may simply be fanciful.
On the contrary, many Mousavi supporters and moderates of all shades have been arrested, some 2000, according to the International Federation for Human Rights, based in Paris, and hundreds more are unaccounted for.
Through ill treatment, and various forms of abuse and torture, the security apparatus has obtained confessions, supporting the regime’s insistence that the demonstrators and Mousavi supporters are part of a plot hatched abroad to overthrow the Islamic Republic.
Trials and convictions are most likely in the offing.
If that is the case, can the elimination of all political opposition be far behind?
They hope with this scenario (the foreign-based plot) they can expunge them completely from the political process. They don’t want them to come back as part of a political party, Hadi Ghaemi, of the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran, told the New York Times..
Hence, Mr. Mousavi’s strategy may be doomed to fail.
It seems unlikely the regime will allow him to pursue his political activities if he does not relent, and cease denouncing the election results.
He is facing quite a dilemma: resist and face prosecution, jail and maybe death, or concede and face irrelevance, political oblivion and the scorn of all those who believed in him, and took to the streets of Tehran and elsewhere…
Preservation of an Islamic Republic is more essential than any religious duty, once observed the Republic’s founder, Ayatollah Khomeini.
Yet, in what guise?
The advice seems to suggest that the end-preserving the regime-justifies the means, repression.
But does the Islamic Republic exist?
It remains Islamic in inspiration, and is led by a Supreme Leader who embodies God’s will on Earth.
But what of the Republic?
It was slain on June 12th.
Interestingly, however, influential clerics within the establishment have recognized this fact, and do not approve!
The Association of Researchers and Teachers of Qum ,founded, no less, by Ayatollah Khomeini himself, condemned the election results yesterday.
Remarkably, the group also attacked the Guardian Council, a key institution, for having certified the results, and implicitly, the Supreme Leader himself for having done the same:
the voice of people seeking justice was marred by violence which unfortunately left several dead and wounded and hundreds arrested, they said. How can one accept the legitimacy of the election just because the Guardians Council says so? Can one say that the government born out of these infringements is a legitimate one?
In another daring broadside, the Association compared those killed while demonstrating in the streets last month (officially 20) to those who died during the Revolution in 1979, and the brutal Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s, and who are considered martyrs by the regime. It demanded that the dignity that was earned with the blood of tens of thousands of martyrs be respected.
Are not Ahmadinejad and his patron being accused of having sullied, if not betrayed the Islamic Republic?
A key group of clerics, the pillars of the regime, have significantly weakened and undermined the Supreme Leader’s authority by denouncing Ahmadenijad’s bogus election, thus conforting Mousavi’s position.
Will it embolden other clerics to follow suit?
The foundations of the Islamic Republic of Iran are shaking.
May Mousavi and his brave supporters make the most of it…

(the photograph is one of a seminary in Qom)
　
　
　
.