[AUT] Ahmadinejad's 'election' in Iran; incitement to religious hatred; tragedy in Iraq; US and Iranian election

["i����i" "kom��nizmi" <isci_komunizmi@xxxxxxxxx>]

WPI Briefing 184

Weekly of the Worker-communist Party of Iran


Editors: Fariborz Pooya and Maryam Namazie

July 5, 2005

www.wpiran.org



In this issue:

* Islamic Republic of Iran: The sham election and the
right faction?s velvet coup d?etat

* Landslide victory or velvet coup d?etat? Interview
with Hamid Taqvaee on Ahmadinejad?s presidential
?election? in Iran

* No hero of Iranian workers, Bahram Soroush

* Read Latest News Updates on Iran by Siyaves Azeri on
www.wpiran.org/english.htm

* Visit TV International English site to see programme
of week of July 3, 2005 on www.anternasional.tv in
which Maryam Namazie interviews Bahram Soroush on
dangers of UK incitement to religious hatred bill;
Azar Majedi on the tragedy of Iraq and Fariborz Pooya
on the US and Iranian election.



* Islamic Republic of Iran:

The sham election and the right faction?s velvet coup
d?etat



The ?election? of Ahmadinejad brings a scandalous end
to the Islamic Republic of Iran?s sham presidential
election - scandalous, not for the vast majority of
the people of Iran who opposed and exposed it, but
rather for the regime in its entirety and those who
advocated participation in any way, shape or form.



Ahmadinejad?s ?election? represents the regime?s
inability and desperation vis-?à-vis the growing
revolutionary movement in Iran. The most reactionary
core of the regime brought him to power based on an
accurate assessment that Rafsanjani could not push
back the popular movement and lessen the government?s
crisis but under the futile illusion that its
Hezbollah candidate could. This is a coup d?etat-like
act by the extreme faction of the right but of the
most foolish kind. It is coup d?etat-like since it is
a sudden measure by the regime?s Hezbollah faction to
concentrate power in its own hands and to shift to an
open and naked repression of the protesting
population. It is foolish because the objective
political situation will not allow this faction to do
so and will to the contrary, shape a backlash against
it. If the right faction and the policy of naked, open
and direct suppression without recourse to ?reform?
and ?evolutionary change? had any chance of
intimidating society, there would have been no need
for the 2nd Khordad or so-called reformist faction in
the first place. Today this bulwark has been
discredited and lost all value, further weakening the
regime?s ability to coerce.  They know this full well,
but have no other choice. The velvet coup d?etat of
the regime?s Hezbollahs, which took place with ballot
rigging rather than the rolling in of tanks and the
use of guns, is an act of desperation rather than a
show of force.



For some time now, the factional infighting has been
part and parcel of the regime, with the regime being
unable to bring order to its own ranks. By pushing
through their Hezbollah unknown past other well-known
candidates, there will be deeper divisions and splits
within the regime?s ranks. Yet, even if the regime was
able to resolve the factional infighting to bring all
its gangs to submit to Ahmadinejad, society would not
tolerate him. This is certain. The governmental crisis
did not begin with the election and will not end with
it either; rather it will deepen and become more
pronounced.  A president who is called a fascist and
Taliban by his rivals and has been ?elected? via
blatant and scandalous ballot rigging plainly
illustrates the illegitimacy of the Islamic regime in
its totality. The ?election? that was to bring
legitimacy was in fact exposed by the population as a
fraud and huge lie. Ahmadinejad, too, who has been
pulled out of the ballot box, has no legitimacy even
amongst the ranks of the regime itself. With this joke
of an election, the regime will become more isolated,
despised, dispersed and weakened vis-?à-vis a people
who are eager for liberation and approaching victory.



The other result of the ?election? was the swelling of
the ranks in support of the revolution and the
increased legitimacy for radical and revolutionary
policies vis-?à-vis the totality of the Islamic system
and all its so-called reformist and
nationalist-Islamic opposition. It became evident to
all that while the Islamic regime is in power,
elections and referendums are but empty and futile
exercises and that the reform of the Islamic regime is
absurd.  With this ?election?, the last illusions and
hopes of improving the situation in any way other than
via revolution and radical change were lost and the
left and radical perspective gained ground amongst the
people. The ?election? and its pitiful results have
created the condition for strengthening and advancing
revolutionary ideas and the Worker-communist Party of
Iran as the political vanguard party on a massive
social scale.



The Worker-communist Party of Iran calls on the
working class and the people of Iran to bring about
revolution against the Islamic Republic of Iran and
for a free, equal and humane society.



Freedom, Equality and Workers? Rule!

Long Live Revolution!

For a Socialist Republic!



Worker-communist Party of Iran

25 June 2005



* Landslide victory or velvet coup d?etat?

Interview with Hamid Taqvaee on Ahmadinejad?s
presidential ?election? in Iran



Maryam Namazie: Ahmadinejad, the right-wing candidate
of the repressive security forces, the pasdaran and
the Baseej won what the media is calling a landslide
presidential election victory; his so-called election
has been dubbed a surprise political upset in Iran.
What has happened exactly?



Hamid Taqvaee: I think the so-called election of
Ahmadinejad is a desperate attempt by the most
reactionary and right-wing faction of the Islamic
regime in Iran to intimidate the population at large
and suppress the people?s opposition movement. The
?election? is more like a coup d?etat - a velvet coup
? which took place via ?election? rigging and fraud
rather than via military means. By putting forth
someone like Ahmadinejad, the right-wing is under the
illusion that it can survive the widespread mass
opposition movement.



However, this ?election? clearly revealed that the
Islamic Republic cannot address the problems it faces,
nor unify its own ranks and lessen its factional
infighting. That is the real result of the ?election?;
it will provide a new base for the deepening of the
regime?s crisis, which it has already failed to
resolve.



Maryam Namazie: In past interviews you stated that the
result of the so-called election in Iran is usually
based on the balance of power, which faction has the
upper hand and on behind the scene discussions between
the various factions. In this situation, does this
mean the right has the upper hand or that the usual
process was not followed?



Hamid Taqvaee: As I said, it is not the right-wing as
a whole, but its most reactionary core that has the
upper hand - the upper hand in the sense that they
could control the ?election? process. They in fact
?elected? their own candidate. In this sense, they had
the upper hand but only in this sense. They do not
have the upper hand politically, which is why I call
it some sort of coup. The result was a surprise for
the other candidates and even for the other segments
of the right-wing faction. It was not a decision based
on their factional compromises or agreements.
Rafsanjani actually thought he would be ?elected? as
president and most of the regime?s factions supported
him.



The people, however, did not care a whit about this
?election and showed as much right from the start that
they were against it. The as far as the various
factions of the regime are concerned, most thought
Rafsanjani would be selected as he had the west?s
support, was experienced and was the one with
seniority in the Islamic Republic. This all convinced
many of the regime?s factions that Rafsanjani would be
the one who would be pulled out of the ballot box and
become president.  This is not what happened. One
segment of the right-wing faction put forth its own
relatively unknown candidate, because it could control
the process. Fro their perspective, this person is
supposed to unify the regime?s factions and suppress
the popular movement in Iran. As I said, though, this
is an illusion. There is no way a person like
Ahmadinejad could unify the regime behind him; he too
will be unable to deal with the crisis that the regime
is facing.



Maryam Namazie: You did mention the fact that they
look to him not only to unify the factions but also to
suppress the revolutionary movement that is widespread
and escalating in Iran. Why is it not possible for him
to do so?



Hamid Taqvaee: Actually, that is the whole story. If
they could, they would not have needed a ?reformist?
movement in the first place.  I mean, Khatami?s
?election? to the presidency eight years ago was proof
enough that they could not control the situation and
needed a buffer in order to suppress the popular
movement. Now the hardcore of the regime which had
always been pro-naked suppression is on its own with
no buffer and that is the basic reason that this
system cannot survive. It needed a reformist wing to
persuade the people that there was hope for changes
without a revolution allowing the regime to survive.
Now they are face to face with the revolutionary
movement and no buffer whatsoever. The armed forces
are also not unified and easily controllable. The core
of their crisis is that they cannot suppress the
people?s movement against the regime.



Maryam Namazie: How will this extreme right-wing
faction in control of the government - naked and bare
without any sort of buffer like the reformist faction
to protect it - effect the revolutionary movement in
Iran?



 Hamid Taqvaee: In the short-term, I think, they might
be able to intimidate people, mostly psychologically;
this would have a negative impact but would be very
short lived.  And very soon, there would be backlash
against the extreme right-wing on a massive scale and
the regime would be in a much worse situation than
ever before. The thing is that this faction cannot
unify its own ranks and that is their main problem;
now the regime is facing a much deeper crisis and it
is much weaker as we predicted. Right now Rafsanjani,
the so-called reformists and others are not pleased
with what has happened even if they too do not want to
see people?s intervention in the situation nor will
they openly challenge them. They have their own
objections to the presidency of Ahmadinejad. It seems
on the surface that they are unified and that the
winner is representing the right-wing faction of the
regime, but actually the right-wing is in a very weak
position. The whole of society and even their own
friends are against them; they are in a much worse
situation now.



Maryam Namazie: Ahmadinejad has promised he is going
to build an exemplary and powerful Islamic society;
what is interesting is that for the last two decades
and more they have promoted themselves as a powerful
Islamic society. Doesn?t it seem contradictory that
they all agree that it is still not an Islamic
society?



Hamid Taqvaee: It is just propaganda; they have been
saying this for 26 years now. It is true that Iran is
not an Islamic society but a society against Islam and
Islamic government. But he has to say something. He is
not a major politician; he does not even have support
within the rank of the government. He has just been
put forward as a puppet for the extreme right wing
core of the regime in order to advance their policies.
The situation now is different from before ? there is
no reformist vs. conservative division in the
government any longer. This has come to the end with
the results of this ?election?. What we have now is
various gangs fighting for a share of power.



Maryam Namazie: Ahmadinejad is portrayed as someone
who has won the hearts of the majority of the poor
religious people in Iran; this contradicts what you
say about the anti-Islamic backlash.



Hamid Taqvaee: That is just a lie, a big lie. I do not
think that he received even one percent of the votes.
Those who did vote voted for Rafsanjani; this is
obvious. Everyone knows that. Even Rafsanjani
complained of the fraud. He wrote to the supreme
spiritual leader, Khamenei, about this but nothing
happened. In the first round, too, all other
candidates such as Moin and Kahroobi said as much.
Clearly, you cannot rely on these figures. Nobody knew
who Ahmadinejad was before this ?election?. Even if a
small number of the population wanted to vote, they
would not have voted for him. There was no reason to
vote for him. I think he had the smallest number of
votes in this ?election? ? both in the first and
second rounds. It was just rigged.



Maryam Namazie: What do you think the overall
political outcome of this election would be?



Hamid Taqvaee: I think that there is no hope of any
change in Iran without revolution; illusions of
democracy or elections within the Islamic Republic
have ended. No-one believes that one can bring about
any change or reform in Iran without challenging the
whole system and toppling the Islamic regime. In this
sense the revolution has won the broadest base in
society, the reformist 2nd Khordad Islamic movement
has ended and anyone who had any illusion of achieving
anything by participating in this election or in a
referendum, now understands that the only way is
revolution. In this sense, the revolution has found a
vaster base in society. I think it showed that our
analysis and policy was correct and now most people
think like us that revolution is the only way.



The above interview was broadcast on TV International
English on June 26, 2005 and transcribed by Fariborz
Pooya.



* No hero of Iranian workers

Bahram Soroush



Robert Tait describes Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the newly
?elected? president of the Islamic regime of Iran, as
a ?devout working class hero? (The Guardian, Tues June
21st, 2005). An interview with a stallholder around a
religious shrine in South Tehran seems to have
bolstered this astonishing claim. Had he chosen to
speak to workers themselves in the industries nearby,
I?m sure he would have arrived at a different
conclusion.



Ultra-conservative Ahmadinejad is a former commander
of the regime?s paramilitary force (Pasdaran) and an
ex-leader of the vigilante Baseej militia, responsible
for the brutal suppression of political dissidents,
students and labour activists. He is also wanted for
terrorist activities abroad. Not surprisingly, he was
the favoured candidate of Iran?s paramilitary forces
and Baseej militias.



Workers in Iran stayed away from these so-called
elections in their millions. They were right not to
have faith in a show masqueraded as elections, where
only Muslim males faithful to the regime can run,
while opposition political parties and candidates are
all suppressed.



They rightly despise a regime that has imposed
unimaginable poverty on them, smashed labour
organisations, banned strikes, persecuted workers?
leaders and enforced brutal repression on the whole of
society. Mr Ahmadinejad is a top executive of such a
regime.



To call such a reviled figure a hero of Iranian
working class beggars belief; it is a monumental
insult to Iranian workers.



* Read Latest News Updates on Iran by Siyaves Azeri on
www.wpiran.org/english.htm



* Visit TV International English site to see programme
of week of July 3, 2005 on www.anternasional.tv in
which Maryam Namazie interviews Bahram Soroush on
dangers of UK incitement to religious hatred bill;
Azar Majedi on the tragedy of Iraq and Fariborz Pooya
on the US and Iranian election.



Questions raised:



Stephen Zunes says that Iranian voters were forced to
choose between two flawed candidates where the
relatively liberal contender came across as an
out-of-touch elitist and his ultra-conservative
opponent who put together a majority coalition based
upon a pseudo-populist campaign promoting a more moral
and value-centred society ? a situation that should
not be too unfamiliar to American voters. Is that what
happened and are the two comparable?



A criticism of Islam is already being deemed racism ?
Islamophobia ? and now with the incitement to
religious hatred bill in the UK, it could be a
prosecutable offence. Will it further silence critics?



Leader in the Guardian few days ago says that ?Iraq is
both a tragedy and a mystery, since the nature of what
is going on in that country is obscure to Iraqis and
outsiders alike. What is the most basic cause of the
tragedy in Iraq?



TV International English is a weekly hour-long news
analysis and commentary programme that focuses on the
Middle East and rights and freedoms from a progressive
and Left standpoint. Watch TV International English
every Sunday from 11.00 - 12.00pm Tehran time
(7.30-8.30pm London time). The programme is broadcast
on Satellite: Telstar 12, Centre Frequency: 12608 MHz,
Symbol Rate: 19279, FEC: 2/3, Polarization:
Horizontal. It can also be viewed on its website:
www.anternasional.tv/english. To see previous
programmes, click on archives. To see a segment of a
programme, first download the programme; after which
you will be able to rewind and fast forward as needed.



If you are interested in helping Maryam Namazie and TV
International English by transcribing interviews and
suggesting issues for discussion, please contact her
directly on m.namazie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx



WPI Briefing
BM Box 8927, London WC1N 3XX
Tel: +44 (0) 7719166731
Fax: +44 (0) 870 1351338

www.wpiran.org


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250