Election time in Iran
February 25, 2016 3:57 PM   Subscribe

Iran goes to the polls on Friday to elect members to two bodies: Parliament and the Assembly of Experts. Moderate President Hassan Rouhani is not facing a ballot test directly, but his agenda - in particular, last summer's landmark nuclear deal, and the economic benefits that were supposed to follow - will be. Moderates face an uphill battle, however, since the Guardian Council disqualified almost half of the more than 12,000 candidates who signed up to participate in these elections, many — if not most — of them reformists. The Assembly of Experts chooses the next Supreme Leader, and considering the age of the current supreme leader, this contest may determine the fate of the country for the foreseeable future.

In the lead-up to the election, Rouhani repeatedly challenged the role which the Guardian Council has taken in parliamentary elections since 1992, the first election after Ayatollah Khamenei became Supreme Leader - what does "supervise" mean, anyway? - but Khamenei has continued to back the role of the Guardian Council in disqualifying candidates.

Meanwhile, Iran remains a major player in the Syrian civil war. US Secretary of State John Kerry has told a congressional committee that Iran has withdrawn a “significant number” of its Revolutionary Guards troops from the Syrian battlefield, but confirming what's happening on the ground remains in the domain of hints and rumors.

However, despite its limitations, many Iranians remain optimistic about the process. “The nature of the election is not everything,” says a Rouhani loyalist.
“No, we don’t have a full democracy – but we do have some elements. We have participation – and it’s rarely under 50%. And we have limited competition – and cut-throat competition too. They don’t have that in North Korea. No, it’s not free but that doesn’t mean you don’t have to vote. We know that the presidential election was not free either – but we voted for Rouhani – and only he could do the nuclear deal.”
posted by clawsoon (22 comments total) 22 users marked this as a favorite
 
It's times like this that I look at a post like this, then look at the USAelectionfilter posts with a link and an half and umpteen million comments, and really wish Metafilter was a bit more international in its outlook. There's a lot of interesting stuff to discuss here.

1. lengthy post with lots to discuss
2. cynical response that adds nothing


Iran's much like China in that its authoritarian political superstructure tends to make outsiders shrug and sneer at what little democratic accountability and activity exists. But for the people who live there, these are very real and important freedoms, and potentially the basis for much, much more. It wasn't that long ago that much of the West was dominated by governments whose view of popular participation was similiarly circumscribed (Wilhelmine Germany, for example) but where struggles in parliaments and councils had very real consequences for the lives and freedoms of the people who lived there.

Anyway, thanks, clawsoon. Well done.
posted by AdamCSnider at 7:53 PM on February 25, 2016 [16 favorites]


Echoing your thoughts here Adam, and thanks for the post clawsoon.

It sounds like this could be quite significant for the reform movement in Iran. Given that Iran's progressives were key in getting the sanctions lifted, and given Iran's influence in the middle east, the outcome of these elections could have a tangible consequence on a lot of other aspects of the world. Fewer refugees fleeing Syria, for one (progressives win -> further engagement with the west -> collaboration vs Daesh).
posted by Arandia at 9:30 PM on February 25, 2016 [1 favorite]


Yeah Iranian politics is fascinating. The prospect of theocracy is something we Westerners like to invoke, but in Iran you can actually examine what makes theocracy work. Clerics don't just magically get along because they all share a religion, and secular institutions don't just vanish. It's really cool to read about.
posted by um at 9:43 PM on February 25, 2016 [1 favorite]


Indeed.

You hear so much about Iran being a 'rogue' state, theocracy, nukes etc. And then when you look - ya, sure, they're pretty far from any paragon of democracy. But things could certainly be a lot worse, and the elections certainly have a history of producing presidents not completely aligned with the theocrats.

It also throws Saudi Arabia in really sharp relief.
posted by Arandia at 10:02 PM on February 25, 2016 [4 favorites]


This is also why I really, really hope the West keep their hands to themselves and let the Iranians figure things out on their own. The nuclear deal is a great example on how we can get along, and what happened in Iraq should (but sadly doesn't) serve as a very stark warning on how any kind of military intervention will play out.
posted by Harald74 at 11:29 PM on February 25, 2016 [2 favorites]


What's Farsi for "vote #1 quidnunc kid" - ? Asking for a friend.
posted by the quidnunc kid at 12:47 AM on February 26, 2016 [3 favorites]


The methods of gatekeeping are very interesting, because they exist everywhere.
In the UK the recent leader of the Labour party candidates had to be nominated by MPs and those MPs were selected for election mainly by the previous power structure.

In the US you have the super delegates? is it? Who are unbeholden to the electorate, not to mention the challenge of getting on the Ballot.
I suppose the difference is that there are (functionally) two parties at play so it's not a single body acting as gatekeeper as it is in Iran, but there's still a lot of similarity. Entrenched power structures keeping power by choosing whose allowed to be on the ballot.
posted by Just this guy, y'know at 3:02 AM on February 26, 2016 [1 favorite]


برای کویدنونک کید شماره ۱ رای بده!
posted by Gordafarin at 4:14 AM on February 26, 2016 [4 favorites]


Here is a summary of the major factions running in the election. A comment below the story adds some detail about the disqualifications: "Going by a report in The Express, initially only 1% of the 3,000 Reform candidates were approved. On appeal, about 1,400 were approved to run in the election, and over 1,500 were still denied a spot."

Here is a summary of the factions running in the election with a bit more detail.

Slate has a couple of interesting articles on current Iranian politics in general. Is the Iranian Regime Bound to Collapse? mentions that
now more than 60 percent of university-educated people in Iran are women. ... The women in Iran are also really underemployed. There are not as many jobs for university-educated women as there are for illiterate men; it’s an interesting dynamic. I think if you spent time there, you kind of can’t help but feel that there’s pressure that’s been created.
Anne Applebaum, also writing in Slate, reminds us that
the level of repression inside the country has actually grown since the “moderate” Rouhani was elected in 2013. The number of death sentences has risen. In 2014, Iran carried out the largest number of executions anywhere in the world except for China. ... Women who don’t wear veils are still liable to arrest and sentencing. The penalties for apostasy, adultery, and homosexuality are still high, up to and including capital punishment. Cultural dissidents are also under pressure, even more so since the sanctions-lifting deal was announced.
That combination - large numbers of university-education women forced to wear the veil - will create some very interesting dynamics over the next couple of decades.
posted by clawsoon at 8:21 AM on February 26, 2016 [3 favorites]


And you also need to know the colours of the election:
Turquoise signifies the Universal Coalition of Reformists, whose slate is dubbed the List of Hope. Bright yellow is the color of hard-liners in the Grand Coalition of Principlists, so-named for their rigid interpretation of revolutionary doctrine. Indigo indicates an array of middle-of-the-road conservatives allied in the Voice of the Nation. ... Independents pick their own poster hues, adding the odd accent to the standard election rainbow. Pity the color-blind voter.
posted by clawsoon at 8:25 AM on February 26, 2016


Not to keep spamming my own post, but... :-) ...here's another great article by Robin Wright in the New Yorker: Iran's Revolutionary Grandchildren
posted by clawsoon at 8:49 AM on February 26, 2016


The BBC, which has a Persian-language arm, has been digging into the social media side of the Iranian election:

Punchy politics on social media as Iranians go to polls

Why are Iranians lip synching to political speeches?

As Iranians go to the polls, young people tell the BBC what they want for their future

It also has news that voting has been extended for two hours due to high turnout.

As the BBC itself reports, hardliners in Iran hate the continuing influence of BBC Iran. From the first article:
Other stickers reference the 1953 coup that saw the democratically elected Iranian Prime Minister, Mohammad Mossadeq, toppled with the help of the US and UK. The BBC's role is often highlighted.
posted by clawsoon at 9:04 AM on February 26, 2016


Just this guy, y'know: I'd argue that there are significant, essential, differences between the gatekeeping you describe vs. the gatekeeping taking place in China or Iran. In the USA the gatekeeping is purely a matter of inside party politics, and a politician can run for office without being associated with either major party.

They don't often win, but there's nothing preventing them from running either by inventing their own party, or simply running as independent. For example, in Texas during the 2012 elections there were candidates from 13 parties listed on the ballot for president, and another three people running write in campaigns. I expect to see about that many this year.

In China and Iran the gatekeepers function to keep people out of the elections at all.

Not to reinforce the narrative that elections in either nation are a sham and irrelevant. Iran, despite the efforts of the Guardian Council, has achieved significant reform. I suspect we'll see some back and forth if the Guardian Council sees unpalatable reform this election and eliminates more candidates next election. But I suspect things will slowly improve in Iran and eventually even result in the Guardian Council being eliminated or rendered irrelevant.

Trying to allow just a little democracy while truly keeping things formally under the rule of an oligarchy is difficult, democracy has a habit of growing once its permitted at all. We're seeing a similar slow movement towards genuinely free elections in China.

That said, the role of gatekeepers in nations like the US and UK does deserve closer examination, though its off topic for this discussion. I'm learning quite a bit about Iranian politics here and I'd rather not derail into yet more US/UK politics.
posted by sotonohito at 9:07 AM on February 26, 2016 [1 favorite]


What age is the demographic bulge in Iran these days? Are we the past the point where we are expecting youth to disrupt things, or actually in the middle of it?
posted by Artw at 9:23 AM on February 26, 2016


The bulge is right now around 20-35.
posted by clawsoon at 10:21 AM on February 26, 2016 [1 favorite]


sotonohito: Trying to allow just a little democracy while truly keeping things formally under the rule of an oligarchy is difficult, democracy has a habit of growing once its permitted at all. We're seeing a similar slow movement towards genuinely free elections in China.

There can be a lot of bumps along the way, though, especially as a result of war. The long, chaotic trips that France, Russia, Germany and Italy took between the French Revolution and stable democracies might be more instructive parallels to look at than the Anglosphere.

Iran itself has been bumping toward democracy since at least 1906.
posted by clawsoon at 10:29 AM on February 26, 2016 [2 favorites]


Great post and great added links, clawsoon. From "Iran's Revolutionary Grandchildren":
When the revolutionary leader Ayatollah Khomeini died abruptly, from heart failure after surgery, in 1989, he left behind fifteen grandchildren. The fate of his heirs reflects the depth of tensions within the Islamic Republic as it marks the thirty-seventh anniversary of the Imam’s triumphant return from exile—and prepares for twin elections, on February 26th. All the Khomeini kids (eight males and seven females) are committed reformers pushing for Iran to open up at home—politically, economically, and socially—now that it has reëngaged with the world.
I agree both that the reactionaries can't keep the lid on indefinitely and that there can be a lot of bumps along the way; I wish the Iranian people the best (and I hope we can keep our own reactionaries from derailing their progress).
posted by languagehat at 11:05 AM on February 26, 2016 [2 favorites]


It would be fascinating if the Guardian Council helped the moderates mathematically by reducing the number of moderate candidates. With 12,000 candidates registered for under 300 seats, votes for ideologically similar candidates are going to get spread thin. By reducing the number of moderate candidates, voting for moderates will get concentrated on a smaller number of candidates, increasing their vote count.

Does anyone have an intimate enough knowledge of Iran's electoral system to know if the Guardian Council may have shot themselves in the foot in that way?
posted by clawsoon at 3:13 PM on February 26, 2016 [1 favorite]


Early results suggest that things are looking more positive than many had hoped. It seems to indicate something about the sort of future the Iranian people want, at least.
posted by howfar at 1:21 PM on February 27, 2016 [3 favorites]


The big gains for moderates so far are in Tehran and surrounding areas. I'm eager to find out how the rest of the nation goes.
posted by clawsoon at 7:16 AM on February 29, 2016


It's also the case that, in the Assembly of Experts election, 8 of the winning candidates in Tehran were supported by all parties, moderate and conservative. A number of news outlets are reporting that moderates won 15 of 16 Tehran seats in the Assembly of Experts, but it would be more accurate to say that:

- 8 winners had the support of all parties, both moderate and conservative.
- 5 winners had the support of only moderate parties.
- 3 winners had the support of one conservative party and two moderate parties.
- 1 winner had the support of only conservative parties.

If you're looking for a parallel to US politics, the Assembly of Experts works kind of how the Electoral College was supposed to work, with the people electing a bunch of electors who wisely work together to choose the next leader. In Iran's case, though, they choose the next Supreme Leader, who is appointed for life.

There's a decent summary of what it all means so far here:
Although moderate forces and pro-government parties have gained a lot of ground in both elections, it's too early to write-off hardliners and conservatives.

First of all, they haven't done as badly in other towns and even in some bigger cities; also, it must be remembered that these results are only valid if the Guardian Council approves them.

And secondly, they still control key unelected bodies, including the Guardian Council, the judiciary and state-owned TV, as well as the armed forces, who are not accountable to any elected bodies and are not shy of interfering in the politics and taking side with hardliners.

Even blocking some hardliners from entering the Assembly of Experts won't necessarily affect the choice of a new leader if the 76-year-old Ayatollah Khamenei dies during the eight-year term of the new assembly.

Analysts say choosing a new leader will in all likelihood be deemed too important to be left to the assembly alone and may draw in other powerbrokers including the powerful Revolutionary Guards, who are only accountable to the leader.

But the results of these elections will nevertheless bring changes to Iran's politics.
posted by clawsoon at 7:34 AM on February 29, 2016


And here is another pushback on the idea that moderates won the elections:
Countering reports of a moderate win, Saeed Ghasseminejad, a fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies specializing in Iranian politics, told TheDCNF, “in the Assembly of Experts election the hardliners (radical revolutionaries) won decisively.”

“The confusion on this issue is caused by the fact that reformists who did not have enough candidates filled their list with hardliners, who were already on the hardliners’ list, in order to defeat a handful of hardliners,” said Ghasseminejad.
I'm still trying to find full results. Some of the the results won't be in until run-off elections are held in late April.
posted by clawsoon at 9:18 AM on March 2, 2016


« Older After Thirty Years of Guilt - "My Burden Has Been...   |   One can deal with the world through puppets Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments