For many years, the relationship between the U.S. and Iran has been mired in a lack of trust and understanding. Based on historical events and a track record of U.S. interventions in Iran, the Iranian government believes that the U.S. is trying to force its way on their nation and the region, while the U.S. sees Iran working counter to its interests. Since 1979, there has been no formal relationship, with no diplomatic ties between the two governments. An atmosphere of mistrust has prevailed ever since. Americans are told that Iran is a dangerous enemy, and we all remember the famous George Bush speech identifying Iran as a part of the “axis of evil."
Most Americans are misled by government and media reports, and therefore do not understand the Iranian economic, social, or political system. Iran has been described as a radical Muslim, terrorist state. Over the past 30 years, various Iranian government leaders have been characterized as “madmen.” Some have been accused of making threats and planning attacks. The leaders have been compared to dictators or fanatics. Based on innuendo, the U.S. has imposed sanctions and described Iranian leaders as extremists.
On the surface, the U.S. pretends to promote democracy, but its objective is clearly to curb Iran’s nuclear ambitions and to align Iran’s economy and foreign policy with U.S. interests.
In reality, U.S. policy supports, at any cost, regimes that support U.S business and regional interests, even governments that are obvious dictatorships, such as Saudi Arabia. Any system with policies that do not benefit U.S. interest is dismissed and attacked as nondemocratic. The case of Muslim countries is even more problematic because of the total lack of understanding of these societies by U.S. policy makers. From Africa to Latin America to the Middle East, there are numerous historical examples that show an unwavering adherence to U.S. policy that is based on lack of understanding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Photo provided by author. |
|
|
|
|
Since the Islamic Revolution of 1979, Iranian civil society has been dominated by a continuous debate. On the one hand, there are those Iranians who support “political freedom,” defined as the extension of individual freedom in the context of a free market economy from Africa to Latin America to the Middle East--in other words, a Western- style economic and political system. On the other hand, there are those who believe in “social justice,” focusing on economic development and a fair distribution of resources. Contrary to mainstream beliefs, these so-called “liberals” and “conservatives” generally do not have a serious religious difference in their views, but rather political, social, and economic differences in their views. This divide has been the root cause of many disagreements and political unrest. The challenge for Iran is to form a system that combines the best elements of these views to create an organic system that provides answers to the demands of the very politically intelligent population of Iran, while retaining the political and economic independence that Iran has fought so hard to achieve.
The demonstrators since the recent presidential elections have some very legitimate grievances that need to be addressed. The current system can solve these problems, but failing to understand this creates a dangerous vacuum where the West could intervene and undermine the independence achieved by Iran since the Revolution.
So, what is the reality? Who holds power in Iran? Does the Supreme Leader have the ultimate power? Does the president? What principles form the foundation of the Islamic Republic? Many Americans do not get accurate information about who holds power in Iran and how policies are proposed and implemented. This makes understanding and untangling the recent political debate in Iran very difficult.
The Islamic Republic is not simply a theocracy or a theological dictatorship, which is the line of the mainstream media and political analysis in the U.S. A closer look at the structures of the Iranian political system shows a complex interaction of various secular, religious, political, and scholarly institutions that maintain an impressive level of checks and balances no less sophisticated than that of the most democratic nation states. The only difference between Western democracies and Iran is that Iran seeks its political pluralism in the Islamic political tradition. The constitution of the “Islamic Republic” is based on maintaining an Islamic democratic society that ensures the distribution of power. This makes the structure and functioning of the Iranian government very complex. A brief look at the structure of the Iranian government makes the complexities evident.
As in the U.S., there are three branches of government, the legislative, executive, and judicial, with some differences in responsibilities.
The Legislative Branch consists of a National Assembly, known as the Majlis. The Majlis approves the country’s budget and international treaties. It has 290 members who are directly elected by popular vote to a four-year term. The Parliament must approve Cabinet-level ministers and also has the power to summon and impeach ministers, and the president.
The Executive Branch consists of the President and the Council of Ministers. The president is elected directly by the public for a four-year term, for a maximum of two consecutive terms. The main role of the president is to set domestic economic policy. Although he has influence over the foreign policy, unlike the U.S. president he does not have power to declare war and does not control the armed forces. The president is the highest-ranking government official after the Supreme Leader. He appoints and supervises the Council of Ministers, which is subject to confirmation by the Parliament. He coordinates government decisions, and proposes policies to be considered and approved by the Parliament before being enacted. Presidential candidates do not need party affiliation and can run as individuals as long as they are approved by the Guardian Council. Therefore a large number of individuals declare their candidacy in each election period. Currently, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad holds the office. He was elected in 2005 in a runoff election where he defeated former President Rafsanjani, and recently was reelected in 2009.
The Judicial Branch oversees the legal matters in the country. The chair of the Supreme Court is appointed by the Supreme Leader, who is required to have achieved the highest level of jurisprudence, theological training, and expertise. Therefore, he plays a very important role in the judiciary branch of the government.
In addition to the three branches, there are other institutions and positions that have a role in the government of Iran.
Currently, the Supreme Leader is Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who succeeded revolutionary leader Imam Khomeini. According to the constitution, the Supreme Leader is responsible for overseeing the overall national and foreign policies and is expected to resolve disputes as they arise. The Supreme Leader has the legitimacy to approve any war activity. In Islamic tradition, war is justified only as a way of defending a people’s homeland or security—not as a tool to achieve expansionist political goals. Therefore, in the constitution, declaration of war is kept separate from the political establishment. Since the establishment of the Islamic Republic, Iran has not declared war on any nation. The defense budget is less than 4 percent of the total budget (compared to over 50 percent for the U.S.). However, the power of the Supreme Leader is not unchecked. He is appointed and approved by the Assembly of Experts, whose 86 religious scholar members are directly elected by the public for an eight-year term. The most important function of this assembly is to appoint the Supreme Leader, to reconfirm him periodically, to monitor his performance, and remove him if necessary. Former President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani is the current head of this assembly.
Two other important decision making bodies in the Iranian government are the Council of Guardians and the Expediency Council. The Council of Guardians includes six legal experts nominated by the judiciary and approved by the Parliament, and six members appointed by the Supreme Leader. This council reviews and approves all candidates who run for any political office. Another important role of this council is to review and ensure that laws adhere to the constitution and to Islamic principles. Ayatollah Janati is the current chair of this council. The Expediency Council is considered to be an advisory board to the Supreme Leader, and has a mediating role between the Parliament and the Council of Guardians in matters of dispute over the constitutionality of laws. This council is made up of both political experts and religious scholars, Members include the heads of the three government branches, the clerical members of the Guardian Council, and other members appointed for five-year terms by the Supreme Leader. In addition, cabinet members and parliamentary leaders serve in the council when issues under their jurisdiction are considered.
Why is it important to know who rules Iran and how the government functions?
If we wish to improve our relations with the Middle East as a whole, and Iran in particular, we need to understand its internal power structure and institutions. We need to dispose of the stereotype of a tyrannical, dictatorial, fundamentalist regime, and instead take a more realistic and nuanced view of the complexities of Iran’s state apparatus.
Iran is an important power in the region, in the context of broader Muslim communities around the world, and even in relationship to non-Muslim countries in other parts of the world, such as Venezuela. Washington's missionary zeal to promote Western style democratic change and its market-style liberalism and pro-Israel policies, in addition to the ongoing U.S. occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, and cooperation with Israel in the occupation of Palestine are unpopular with the population of these nations. It is precisely the patronizing attitude of the U.S. that is primarily making Islamic societies fall back on their Islamic traditions of government. In the same way that U.S. interventions in Iran produced the Islamic Republic in 1979, continuous U.S. incursions and interventions in the wider Islamic world are making Islamist ideologies popular among Islamic societies.
Iran is striving to increase its influence in the region, especially within Muslim communities in the Middle East and Central Asia. We need to recognize the importance of Iran and of the wider Islamic world, and begin to treat their governments and people with the respect that comes from understanding not only their history, but also their current standing in global politics.
Nasrin Jewell is a professor of Economics at the University of St. Catherine, St. Paul, Minnesota. She has also taught interdisciplinary courses such as “Search for Justice in Central America,” “Islam and Economic Development,” and “Search for Justice in the Middle East” and has conducted scholarship in Spain, Venezuela, Iran and Ecuador. |
