Iran Politicians Question Possibility Of Reforms
Some of Iran's hardliners including President Ebrahim Raisi and Expediency Council Member Gholamali Haddad-Adel have talked about the need to reform.
Some of Iran's hardliners including President Ebrahim Raisi and Expediency Council Member Gholamali Haddad-Adel have talked about the need to reform.
At the same time, a pragmatist politician says Iran's Constitution has made governments duty-bound to pave the way for political freedom.
Knowing that his call for reform will sound strange, Raisi said that "Wanting to bring about reforms does not mean retreating from our previous positions." It appears that Haddad-Adel also had the same concern as Raisi. According to Ebtekar newspaper, he said: "We shall not retreat."
However, Haddad-Adel made it clear that the Iranian parliament (Majles) and the likeminded government have already started a reform aiming to return to the early years of the Islamic revolution in the 1980s; something unlikely to be accepted by Iranian women and youths who have been demanding a regime change during the past two months.
Raisi has even gone as far as saying that those in his government who do not want reform should leave the cabinet at once. But he used a different term for reform: "Tahavol" which means evolution or change, rather than ‘eslahat’, which clearly means reforms.
The president’s critics have said ironically that the first one who needs to leave the government for his inability to accept change is Raisi himself. However, his idea of reform appears to be more progressive than Haddad Adel's as Raisi has said that "using women's potentials is part of the reforms" he has in mind.
Iran's traditional reformists however doubt whether the Islamic Republic is prepared for reforms. Former reformist lawmaker Naser Ghavami has reiterated in his recent interviews that contrary to the suggestion made by former reformist President Mohammad Khatami it is unlikely that the Islamic Republic would want to reform itself.
Ghavami pointed out that some of those in parliament who have talked about the need for reforms are the same individuals who called for the execution of detained protesters. "What kind of a reform is that?" he asked.
Ghavami also doubted whether young Iranians who have been taking to the streets would accept the kind of reforms Iran's so-called reformists have in mind. He pointed out that the regime did not allow even its own reformist president to pursue reforms in early 2000s. "They even did not allow him to amend the election law," he said.
Meanwhile, the Secretary General of Former Lawmakers Association, a well-known reformist figure Yadollah Eslami has said that "Official policies in Iran cannot convincingly respond to protesters' demands." He added that "Iranians are determined to follow the lifestyle of their choice, and nothing can stop them from following their demands." Eslami further reiterated: "Iranian society will by no means return to the situation before the death of Mahsa Amini," the young Kurdish woman who was murdered in custody in mid-September triggering the current uprising.
He added that the death of 10-year-old Kian Pirfalak has boosted the people's determination to follow their demand for change. He pointed out that all the problems Iranians are currently facing are the outcome of bad governance. This comes, he said, while all those who speak for the government continue to beat on the drums of despotism and totalitarianism.
In another development, pragmatist politician Farzaneh Torkan said in an interview with Mostaghel newspaper: "The people insist that they want an open political atmosphere and the freedom to elect whoever they want as the country's key officials."
Torkan reiterated that "a majority of Iranians had no candidate to elect in the latest Parliamentary [2020] and Presidential elections [2021]. It was obvious that such a situation would lead to profound and widespread dissatisfaction."
Torkan added that Iranian women are highly educated but their political demands have been ignored by hardliners for many years. "If those demands were met, we would not be witnessing the current protests," she said, adding that "the only way out of the current crisis is to give the right response to people's demands, but unfair accusations by hardliners and linking the protests to foreigners are not helpful."
He argued in a report in the reformist Etemad newspaper November 17 that before the uprising started in mid-September, the state television, as well as all news agencies were already exclusively trumpeting the government's unilateral ideas. He added that other than some relatively independent newspapers and websites other news outlets also belong to the government.
Journalists were facing many restrictions including an extremely limited access to Internet content and slow connections. Nearly all social media platforms were filtered and made inaccessible, Arkanzadeh noted, adding that the scene changed dramatically after the start of protests in September.
Several journalists were arrested to intimidate others. Access to the Internet was however possible through using virtual private networks (VPN). The arrests of journalists and incriminating accusations against them nearly put an end to journalism in Iran, although the state television and government-owned media outlets continued their unilateral reporting with renewed vigor.
As professional domestic media were rendered ineffective, people were inevitably pushed toward foreign-based Persian media and using VPNs to access social media and news and information from the independent sources.
In the meantime, the elderly who were not able to use the VPNs, were deprived of news and information. Arkanzadeh wrote that two months after the uprising, statements made by the country's officials and even military commanders such as the IRGC Commander in Esfahan blamed foreign and social media for the ongoing unrest. This could lead to imposing even more restrictions on the media.
In the meantime, despite a show of openness on the state TV at the beginning of the protest movement, allowing debates between hitherto neglected proreform figures, the television is back to its old routine of debates between very hardliner and ultra-hardliner figures.
This, says Arkanzadeh, is likely to further push viewers to social media and foreign-based Persian TV stations where there is no censorship and what they broadcast is in sharp contrast to what is aired on national television.
According to sociologist Taqi Azad Armaki, "the state television in Iran is currently not even under the control of the government. Instead of being impartial, it supports the government's side of the argument about the current upheaval. So instead of calming down the situation, it fans the fire of the ongoing bipolar situation."
Amid these changes, in a series of eight tweets on November 17, US Special Envoy for Iran Robert Malley wrote that the United States the previous day sanctioned senior leaders and key staff of Iran's state television. Naming interrogator-reporters Ameneh Sadat Zabihpour and Ali Rezvani and State TV Chief Peyman Jebelli as three of those individuals, Malley added: "These individuals personify the Islamic Republic’s efforts to intimidate journalists and spread disinformation." Malley further noted that the "IRIB regularly airs forced confessions of journalists, dual nationals, activists and political prisoners."
Mentioning the reporters' role in incriminating Iranian reports such as Rouhollah Zam and religious minorities such as Bahais though their fabricated reports, Malley added that Jebelli was sanctioned "for his role in Iran’s censorship activities," and noted that the "IRIB broadcasts the forced confessions at his direction."
Protesters have so far almost completely ignored President Ebrahim Raisi -- whose government has failed to deliver on most of his campaign promises including improvement of people’s livelihoods. They are not asking the president to improve the economy or build public housing. The slogans they chant in the streets, in universities, and from their windows and rooftops are addressed to someone else.
Often containing derogatory expressions and profanities, protesters chant against Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei whom they hold responsible for all their grievances including Raisi’s presidency.
Protests have intensified and become more frequent in most major cities, spreading to smaller towns across the country, even to some remote and generally quiet areas. This is a sign that what is taking place resembles more a revolution than demand for reforms.
Anti-government protests in many small cities and towns, often considered traditional and conservative, where everyone knows everyone else, were very rare if not non-existent in the past but the recent protests seem to show that people in these places have overcome their fear of retribution from the establishment and probably consider the days of the Islamic Republic numbered.
Protesters in Tehran chant, "Our target is the whole regime"
Reports of extensive protests in Murmuri, a small town of less than 4,000 in Ilam Province and Evaz, a town of 14,000 in Fars Province, for instance, surprised many Iranians who had not even heard the names of these places before. Videos posted on social media November 15 showed a large crowd of men and women, who had flouted their hijab, chanting together “Mullah should be banished!” in Evaz. In Abadeh, a town of around 50,000 last week they chanted “This is the last message: Our target is [to topple] the whole system!”.
The Islamic Republic, and its leadership, have nearly wiped out all opposition political groups including those who never wanted anything more than reforms, hugely limited the media, and even marginalized many insiders such as former presidents -- reformist Mohammad Khatami, hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and moderate Hassan Rouhani – and former parliament speaker Ali Larijani, a conservative.
Nevertheless, for protesters, these former regime insiders, including Khatami who was once the most popular political figure in Iran, are not an alternative. The situation has led many to look outside Iran, among the diaspora, for figures who could at least lead the period of transition to a secular, democratic system.
Several names have been suggested as leaders or members of an interim government in the post-Islamic Republic era by both protesters in Iran and the huge diaspora that has supported the movement with regular weekly rallies in major world cities.
These include the former Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, activists Masih Alinejad, Hamed Esmaeilion, Nazanin Bonyadi, and footballer Ali Karimi all of whom live abroad. There are also other possible candidates, such as Nobel laureate Shirin Ebadi, but no one currently residing in Iran.
Thousands of people inside and outside the country, have used social media to call on these figures, whose political views are diverse, to form a coalition to lead the revolution. The hashtag “FormCoalition” created to reflect this wish is quickly gaining popularity.
“There’s no ideology behind this revolution. I think we will go to the end this time... The difference [with previous protests] is that there is great hope this time, the hope that the end of the Islamic Republic has come,” said Canada-based Esmaeilion at the Halifax International Security Forum Saturday which several others including Alinejad and Bonyadi also attended.
In a speech on Saturday, Khamenei accused the enemies of trying to slow down Iran's progress but stopped short of explaining what progress he was referring to.
Under his authoritarian rule Iran’s economy has been ruined in the past decade, with tens of millions falling into poverty. Except for some military hardware, the Islamic Republic has little to show as progress, with protesters across the country demanding regime change.
Individuals such as former parliament speaker Gholamali Haddad-Adel, a close relative of Khamenei, followed suit blaming foreign countries for the protests that have been going on since mid-September after a young woman was murdered in custody of ‘morality police’ in Tehran.
Haddad-Adel claimed during a meeting with hardliner politicians in Tehran on Saturday, [Nov. 18,] that he had evidence to prove "47 countries have an Iran desk in their government and spend budget" to monitor the Islamic Republic. Haddad Adel, however, did not mention that the Iranian government has several centers to monitor events in other countries. Those include an American Studies Center at the University of Tehran, and several Strategic Studies Centers at the Iranian Foreign Ministry and other offices that work on Iran's neighbors and countries as far asway as in South America.
Iran's neighbors and others have every reason to watch a country that threatens them. The Islamic Republic also threatens navigation and trade in the strategic Persian Gulf and Sea of Oman and only two weeks ago, regional countries and the United States were alerted about possible Iranian military action against Saudi Arabia and warned Tehran against it.
Add to that the West's long-standing concern about Tehran's support for terror groups in the region and beyond. During the past two weeks, Iran has threatened to destabilize Europe, and threatened journalists in the United Kingdom. The authorities and security and anti-terrorism experts in London have taken Tehran's threats seriously.
Haddad-Adel also claimed that the United States is destabilizing Iran because it is the only country in the world that does not surrender to domination. But Iran has signed long-term agreements with China that some former Iranian officials including former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad have described as “colonial.”
Nonetheless, there are other Iranian politicians whose remarks about foreign intervention in Iran are even more outlandish. According to Jamaran News, a proreform website in Tehran, Javad Nikbin, an Iranian lawmaker from Kashmar, a small town in Khorasan Province, claimed on November 17 that it was the United States that set fire to Tehran's Evin Prison in mid-October.
Nikbin quoted Iran's Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian as having told him about the October 16 Fire at Evin Prison in Tehran: "The night when Evin Prison was set on fire, the US Secretary of State Antony Blinken called me as soon as I arrived at my home and was taking off my jacket. The secretary said that the US has four prisoners in Evin who were supposed to be swapped with Iran's prisoners in the United States and he was worried that something could happen to them. I told him nothing had happened." A comment under the Jamaran News tweet said jokingly: "Blinken could have waited for our foreign minister to take off his jacket. It was certainly difficult for him answering the phone with his hand still in the sleeve."
Nikbin further claimed that "The United States used its men in Tehran to set fire to the prison," and claimed that "The US secretary of state knew about the fire 40 minutes before we found out about it." Nonetheless, the most interesting part of the report is that the Iranian foreign ministry denied any such conversation between the foreign minister and Nikbin, and of course a phone conversation between the Iranian and the US chief diplomats.
But even that is not the end of the story. On November 19, some Iranian newspapers published Nikbin's rather funny account of the conversation as news. The Islamic Republic needs controversial stories to distract attentions from the ongoing violent crackdown on protesters.