Musings of the Sundarman

Ahmedenijad vs. Rafsanjani: The future of Iran

Few people know that Ahmedenijad and Rafsanjani are both products of the 1979 revolution that overthrew the Shah, widely seen as a puppet of the west, specifically the United States.

Fewer remember that Rafsanjani was President of Iran for eight years, from 1989-1997. During that time, the United States twice imposed economic sanctions on the Republic. Rafsanjani is a billionaire and is reported by Forbes to be among the wealthiest men in the world. His son Mehdi Hashemi Rafsanjani is the CEO of the state-owned company Gaz Iran (an oil giant). Rafsanjani has a powerful network of supporters in high places in the muslim republic. He is said to have amassed great wealth through arms deals made after the 1979 revolution, through import/export of goods vast landholdings and ownership of a vast network of 300 universities, individual campuses of the Islamic Azad University. Rafsanjani has preached the mantra of reform within Iran, and of a market economy. However, he is still a traditionalist in that he believes in political authoritarianism and religious tradition. In the context of the current situation in Iran, Rafsanjani is allied with moderate clerics and controls vast resources derived from his wealth, his universities and his newpapers. He is Chairman of the Assembly of Experts (charged with electing, monitoring and dismissing the Supreme Leader of Iran).

In the 2005 elections, Rafsanjani lost to Mahmoud Ahmedenijad in a run-off. Ahmedenijad makes for an interesting character study. Few know that he is a Phd in Tansportation and Planning, that he was a staunch fighter in the Iran-Iraq war, and is said to have participated in the interrogations of some of the American hostages during the presidency of Jimmy Carter. He held a variety of government posts after the Iran-Iraq war and pursued high education after this, securing his doctorate in 1997. Since defeating Rafsanjani in a run-off poll by 62% of the vote in 2005, he has portrayed the pious, honest politician seeking to redistribute wealth in Iran, standing up to the West and pursuing nuclear weapons. He continued to live in his home in Teheran which he had occupied as a student and then Professor, refused to use a presidential plane, using a cargo plane instead, and having expensive persian carpets removed from the Presidential Palace and moved to a museum.

The battle between these men actually represents a divide in Iran between the old clerical elite, who have amassed wealth and power in the last 30 years and a new wave of clerics who seek to gain this power (and perhaps some wealth of their own as well). Ahmedenijad is not part of the establishment, and is actually rebelling against it, claiming it is corrupt and inefficient.

The third actor on this stage is Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of Iran. He is decidedly more powerful than Ahmedenijad and Rafsanjani in some ways, being the supreme commander of the armed forces. He also appoints the heads of many critical departments - commanders of the armed forces, the director of the national TV network, heads of major Islamic foundations and the judiciary, including the chief judge, the chief prosecutor and special tribunals.

At this time, Khamenei has thrown both Rafsanjani and Ahmedenijad a bone. There is a "review" of the elections currently underway. This appeases Rafsanjani. However, Khamenei has declared that the protests are illegal and has blunted the impact of the secularists in the context of the post-election turmoil. This allows Ahmedenijad not to lose face.

Iran's nuclear program is nowhere near creating a weapon, in my opinion. They have, and will continue to use the threat of developing a weapon to keep the west at bay, however. Iran uses the threat of the bomb, along with Hezbollah, to control its local geopolitical environment. It has the large US presence in Iraq on one border and Israel with its nukes rather close by.

At this stage, the United States would be wise to recognize the real struggle for power within Iran (unlike what is presented to us by the media). Obama needs to craft an Iran policy that understands the true nature of what is occurring in Iran - a power struggle between an established, wealthy (and some say corrupt) clerical elite, and a new wave of "reformers" that seek to destabilize them, or at least to grab some of their power.