Iran: Today's Rafsanjani Watch --- Clarity or Confusion?

Here are more quotes for thought --- be they thoughts of ambiguity, intrigue, or confusion --- from Hashemi Rafsanjani.

First, the background. Earlier this week Faezeh Hashemi, Rafsanjani's daughter, put out a spirited defence of her father's position as standing with the Iranian opposition. That defence has been recycled in Aftab News:

Under the present circumstances, any compromise is out of the question without taking into account people's rights and the damage inflicted on them. I ask everyone to be patient and let Mr Rafsanjani go ahead with his own method. Since the Green Movement and Mr. Rafsanjani share their demands, he could be a member of the Green Movement of the Iranian people.

Now the tricky part of "patience" with Mr Rafsanjani. Here is his latest statement, posted on his website:

The Constitutional Revolution [of the early 20th Century] may repeat itself and this is a real threat. The odds are that certain people are conspiring against the Islamic Republic in the name of supporting Islam, revolution and the system.

OK, so there should not be a Constitutional Revolution? And who are the "certain people" conspiring --- are they the officials of the Republic or those protesting against those officials?

About all that can be said firmly is that Rafsanjani is giving public backing to the Supreme Leader: "Without his intervention and in the absence of enough backing from all individuals and groups, we cannot be hopeful of any conclusion."

But even that leads to questions than answers: is Rafsanjani saying that he is happy to ally with the Supreme Leader, whatever may occur? Or is he giving the Supreme Leader a poke, "For goodness sake, Khamenei, do something about this situation?"

Comments

[Bijan]

Scott -

What is your sense, from your contacts in Iran, as to how much the Greens follow/monitor/put hope on statements from Rafsanjani? It seems, at least in our EA "family (if I may be some humble to use that term to describe the EA team and its readers as such) have a level of patience with Rafsanjani given his string of comments the past few months which keep him very much from leaning towards one side or the other. Do you contacts take a similar read? Is it their sense the foot soldiers, if you will, take the same level of skepticism for lack of a better word?

Regards,

[Thomas]

Going with the chess analogy, on 22 Bahman the King moved out of check and then the Green Knight moved two squares back and one over to reassess the situation.

Rafsanjani has always been a practical man and won't go down without a fight, so I would say he is telling Khamenei to do something to ease the crisis. Their lifelong work of building the IRI can come crashing down with no decision (economy crashes by summer/fall) or wrong decision (violence leads to civil war).

Khamenei's decision making throughout this crisis has been languid. The report by Karim Sadjadpour of Vladmir Putin's meeting with him in Oct 2007 and he was not up to date on a year old Russian nuclear proposal is a red flag. He has the apperance of an ancient King manipulated by his favored courtiers. So while he has the nominal power of Supreme Leader, the courtiers usurped the important ones.

It will be interesting to see how Rafsanjani, Qalibaf, and Rezaee interact regarding this crisis in the future.

[Scott Lucas]

Bijan,

Others in the "family" may have more insight than me, but my perception is that most in the opposition are aware that Rafsanjani is a master political tactician whose primary interest is Rafsanjani. At the same time, he is one of the key players in Iranian politics, perhaps the only one who can "bend" Khamenei at this point. So it would be a big victory if Rafsanjani sided with them.

I think a look back at the optimism around Rafsanjani's 17 July Friday Prayers and the subsequent disappointment when he pulled back from the challenge to the Government is a pretty good indicator of this complex but necessary approach to Rafsanjani's politics.

S.

[Megan]

Bijan, Scott, and all interested EA readers,

In an interview Hassan Shariatmadari, son of late Ayatollah Shariatmadari, describes Rafsanjani, Mousavi, Karroubi, and Khatami’s roles in the Green Movement and more importantly their approach with Khamenei and the regime. I found his analysis very insightful and very precise. Specifically, he explains Rafsanjani and Mousavi’s dilemma. You may want to listen and judge for yourself. It is a worthwhile piece to listen to.

Scott, please let me know if you need translation. I also think you may want to interview Hassan Shariatmadari yourself. I find him treasure-throve of IR politics both past and present.

Here is the audio file http://www.epersianradio.com/archivesaeed.aspx. Please click on “Ba Hammihana 3-1-10 MON” to open the audio file; the revenant exchange is at minute 48.

[Bijan]

Thanks for sharing your insight Scott. I have learned over time as have many others that he is a master politician as you state and he carefully words every statement he makes in order to maintain his politcal balance. To your point regarding his statements in July, this in was part of the thought behind my question, was how much have people lost faith in him as being a part of or at least a supporter within the establishment of the green movement. I remember the excitement and hope that Rafsanjani would make a clear statement, and many felt he did at this time, however comments subsequent have been more and more guarded. Then the statements today as discussed in your analysis. I suppose that is the enigma that is Rafsanjani.

Thank you Megan for the link.

[Megan]

Sorry for the typo? I meant relevant and not revenant

Bijan, Scott, and all interested EA readers,

In an interview Hassan Shariatmadari, son of late Ayatollah Shariatmadari, describes Rafsanjani, Mousavi, Karroubi, and Khatami’s roles in the Green Movement and more importantly their approach with Khamenei and the regime. I found his analysis very insightful and very precise. Specifically, he explains Rafsanjani and Mousavi’s dilemma. You may want to listen and judge for yourself. It is a worthwhile piece to listen to.

Scott, please let me know if you need translation. I also think you may want to interview Hassan Shariatmadari yourself. I find him treasure-throve of IR politics both past and present.

Here is the audio file http://www.epersianradio.com/archivesaeed.aspx. Please click on “Ba Hammihana 3-1-10 MON” to open the audio file; the relevant exchange is at minute 48.

[pessimist]

an up for megan, please do a translation, if you say it's important it must be (or a summary)

[Megan]

Pessimist,

As you asked. The following is a summary of Hassan Shariatmadari interview on March 1, 2010.

Re: Rafsanjani, Shariatmadari says:

Rafsanjani would never abandon Khamenei. He knows removal of Khamenei would lead to the demise of Vlaayet-e-Faghih and Islamic Republic. That does not serve Rafsanjani’s self interest.

Rafsanjani has always played both sides. He speaks in abstract terms leaving the interpretation to his friend and his foes. For example, his recent statement was viewed as anti-Green by supports of Green Movement and as anti-regime by supports of regime. Rafsanjani’s attempt to play on both sides of the aisle in this highly charged political environment has not been conducive and has damaged him and has diminished his political clout. At this time neither side trusts him. Both sides consider him dangerous.

Rafsanjani reconciliation proposal has limited support among those within the regime who stand to lose a great deal if the system is dissolved. His reconciliation proposal has no support among Pro-democracy movement. People within Pro-democracy movement know that revised IR constitution does not provide for political freedom and any afforded by Rafsanjani proposal will be superficial and temporary. People cannot and should not count on Rafsanjani.

Re: Khatami, Shariatmadari says:

Khatami’s rhetoric is nice but he has no solution. People may want to respect him for his desire for freedom and democracy but cannot depend on him to get them there.

Re: Mousavi and Karroubi, Shariatmadari says:

Mousavi’s # 17 statement, considered by some as political mistake, and Karroubi’s declaration of recognizing Ahmadinejad government were per Rafsanjani advice and in accordance with the frame work of Rafsanjani reconciliation plan. Both Mousavi and Karroubi, however, realized they would lose support of people and immediately tried to modify their positions by follow up interviews and statements.

It is important to note that both Mousavi and Karrroubi have said that they planned to operate and govern within the frame work of Islamic Republic and wanted to adhere to IR constitution. In this regard Karroubi seems to imply that he would be flexible and do as people wished. Mousavi, however, has very clearly and repeatedly stated that he would not deviate from the framework of Islamic Republic and its constitution. Mousavi must remember that the same constitution was revised to give ultimate veto power to the Vlaayat-e-Faghih and per revised constitution SL, in this case Khamenei ,has the last word on all matters and he cannot be challenged. Mousavi, therefore, must know that under the constitution he so adamantly supports he is in great jeopardy for challenging election. Mousavi must have at least specified in his statements that he was referring to the original copy of the constitution and not its revisions.

On the question of whether Green Movement needs leadership, Shariatmadari says:

Absence of strong and identifiable political leadership has been a deficit; one that can potentially weaken or diminish the movement.

Green Movement is a rainbow coalition encompassing all factions of the Iranian society; all political groups, religious and secular groups, all ideologies, and all socioeconomic status.

It would have been highly desirable if Mousavi and Karroubi took advantage of their massive election support and assumed political leadership for all factions within this rainbow coalition focusing on universal human rights and political freedom for all. Because of the rainbow nature of this coalition, however, Mousavi and Karroubi chose not to assume leadership roles. They both stated they were not the leaders and they were part of the movement. Yet they continued to publish statements and giving interviews suggesting they were leading the movement. This created great confusion among opposition groups. If any of the opposition group stepped forward to assume political leadership such move would have fragmented the movement into many pieces and potentially rendering it ineffective. Perhaps it would have been prudent for Mousavi and Karroubi to declare that they were only interested in leading the Islamic Green and other elements of the movement in the rainbow coalition needed to decide for themselves.

Mousavi and Karroubi with their reluctance to assume political leadership for all factions of this rainbow coalition have strengthened regime’s hand. Regime intends to cut out the secular portion of the movement thereby weakening the movement.

Shariatmadari adds:

Karrroubi has been more diplomatic in his interviews. Mousavi, however, keep warning the regime that if regime did not grant political freedom and did not allow people to assemble, the movement would be led by Iranians abroad. He completely misses the fact that Iranians abroad have completely and unconditionally supported him and the movement and referring to them as boogeyman is ill-advised. He seems to be suggesting that he wants political freedom as long as they can be in control and not because it is the right thing to do. That would not serve him well and he would lose support of well informed freedom seeker Iranians living abroad.

On the question of what should Green Movement do next, Shariatmadari says:

Green Movement is truly a rainbow coalition and it needs political leadership soon; one that is able to plan and strategies otherwise the movement will become ineffective.

[An activist Green Lurker]

I have seen and talked to Shariatmadari in person, and I think his analysis is severely lacking. He is in more of a bubble than even Khamenei about the realities on the ground inside Iran.

Unfortunately - wishful thinking will not get us to our Utopian dreams.

just my 2 cents.

[Megan]

An activist Green Lurker,

It would be helpful if you point to specific assertions by Shariatmadari and help us understand why you think he is in a bubble. Furthermore, it would help if you tell us your own views on those specific questions Shariatmadari commented on. And last, how do we decided who does and who does not live in a bubble, please give us some specific example. You seem to know who is and who is not so please help us with that. Dose Trita Parsi, e.g. the one who does not live in a bubble? I recall you are one of his strong supporters http://enduringamerica.com/2009/12/28/the-latest-from-iran-28-december-taking-stock/#comments).

P.S. “An Activist Green Lurker” is a more fitting handle for you than “Somebody”. Did I get that right????