Iran: A snub for the West 
 
 
 




Tuesday, 16 June 2009 
http://www.antiimperialista.org/content/view/6177/50/
 

Ahmajinedad wasn’t the candidate of the establishment, but of the lower classes 

1.    From an anti-imperialist point of view, the overwhelming victory of 
Ahmadinejad in the elections is positive, because the incumbent and 
president-elect stands for confrontation with the U.S.-led new order for the 
“Near East”.

2.    Even the Western media had to admit that it is the poor who strongly 
support the president. His allegations of corruption promptly gained him the 
epithet “populist” in the West—an indirect admission that he enjoys broad 
support from below.

3.    The capitalist establishment around Rafsanjani (number two of the regime 
and chairperson of the Assembly of Experts) and a broad coalition of Islamic 
forces from the “left” to the “right” actually didn’t support Ahmadinejad, but 
his contender Mousavi. Ayatollah Khamenei (number one and successor to 
Khomeini), after the elections sided with the victor; however that doesn’t mean 
that Ahmadinejad was his favourite candidate, because Ahmadinejad’s fiery 
attacks against the ruling elite gave everyone in the establishment the creeps. 
Khamenei’s decision was made to reinforce the stability of the system.

4.    We cannot rule out electoral fraud. Fraud happens in almost any elections 
in the Third World and even in the West, when opposing interests clash—and not 
only then. The West overlooks such imperfections if the “right” candidate wins. 
Only when this is not the case, they scream bloody murder. There are strong 
political indications that Ahmadinejad actually won by a large margin: First, 
he doesn’t control the state apparatus, but at most one faction within it. In a 
certain sense he is not part of the establishment. Reversing the results of the 
elections would have required a sort of coup. That in turn would have required 
the full support of the state apparatus, or Ahmadinejad would have had to take 
preventive action against those parts that oppose him. That didn’t happen. 
Under the conditions of a complicated factional relations and conflicts within 
the ruling elite the alleged giant fraud is very unlikely.

5.    The extremely high turnout of over 80 percent is a sign of the strength 
and the stability of the political system of the Islamic Republic despite the 
strong factional fights. Such heavy polls are absolutely unheard of in the 
West. This high voter turnout is as much a slap in the face of Western double 
standards as Ahmadinejad’s victory, because the West on one hand denigrates 
Iran as a dictatorship and on the other hand legitimises and supports the worst 
dictatorships in the region, and particularly as in elections in the West there 
is no real opposition and only the various candidates of the elite compete, 
while the elections in Iran actually were about deciding the course.

6.    It is not clear whether Moussavi’s broad coalition is going to give up or 
not as the rift is very deep. It is obvious that important sectors of the 
middle class hope for a political liberalisation and cultural latitude, and 
these are legitimate demands; however, the current opposition organically mixes 
them with concessions to the West and an expressly capitalist line of the 
economic elites. It is this combination that is unacceptable and eventually is 
the millstone around the necks of those who actually demand more political 
freedom. Uncompromising anti-imperialism is the prerequisite for any democratic 
movement. The middle-class mainstream—despite some “leftist rhetoric”—is in 
every respect moving towards adaptation to the West. 

7.    Our joy over the success of Ahmadinejad does not mean that we overlook 
the deep-seated problems of Iran and its regime. The lack of democratic and 
cultural freedoms also means oppression of national and religious minorities. 
Ahmadinejad transferred some wealth to the lower classes, but he was not able 
to relieve the economic difficulties and the structural poverty. He has nothing 
to offer to deviate from the capitalist path of (under)development on the 
fringes of the global economic regime of free trade. In addition there is the 
dreadful game his regime plays in Iraq, where Teheran has been supporting the 
U.S.-led occupation and the creation of a paradoxical U.S.-Iranian joint 
“protectorate.” When confronting the U.S., Iranian foreign policy often 
supports anti-imperialist forces (e.g. Hizbullah and Hamas), but its 
fundamental line is regional hegemony with a sectarian element. Because of 
this, the interests of the masses in pursuing a
 social revolution in the framework of a global anti-imperialist project often 
fall by the wayside.

A more detailed analysis of the election results should follow.

Anti-Imperialist Camp
14 June 2009






Satrio Arismunandar 
Executive Producer
News Division, Trans TV, Lantai 3
Jl. Kapten P. Tendean Kav. 12 - 14 A, Jakarta 12790 
Phone: 7917-7000, 7918-4544 ext. 4034,  Fax: 79184558, 79184627
 
http://satrioarismunandar6.blogspot.com
http://satrioarismunandar.multiply.com  
 
Verba volant scripta manent...
(yang terucap akan lenyap, yang tertulis akan abadi...)



      

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Kirim email ke