علی اصغر کاظمی :خلاصه شرح حال

مشاهیر ایران و جهان

کاربر میهمان به پرتال راسخون خوش آمدید ورود به محيط کاربري فراموشی رمز عبور عضویت

 Links to other sites for profile: 1 ; 2 ; 3 ; 4

 

مشاهیر ایران و جهان / کاظمی، علی اصغر

عضویت •

راهنمای سایت •

کتابخانه •

معرفی مشاهیر

کاظمی، علی اصغر

( ملیت: ایرانی قرن: 14 )

سيد علي اصغر كاظمي در6 بهمن 1319 در يك خانواده مذهبي در محله قديمي سرآسياب دولاب تهران متولد شد. قبل از آغاز سن دبستان ابتدايي در مكتب خواندن قرآن را فرا گرفت. دوره ابتدايي را در دبستان صابر در همان محله و دوره متوسط را تا كلاس نهم در دبيرستان ابوريحان در خيابان دلگشا (دروازه دولاب) طي كرد. سپس در سال 1335 وارد دبيرستان نظام تهران شد و در سال 1338ديپلم رياضي را اخذ نمود. در همان سال از طريق كنكور نيروي دريائي با اخذ رتبه اول براي طي دوره آكادمي دريائي به كشور فرانسه اعزام شد.

در سال 1342 با درجه افسري وارد خدمت نيروي دريائي شد و تا سال 1370 در سمت هاي مختلف انجام وظيفه كرد. در طول خدمت در نيروي دريائي فرصت يافت مدارج مختلف علمي و آكادميك را در رشته هاي مديريت و حقوق بين الملل در كشورامريكا طي كند. پس از بازنشستگي به عنوان هيات علمي مدارج دانشگاهي را تا مرتبه استادي طي نمود. هم اكنون نيز مشغول تدريس در واحد علوم و تحقيقات دانشگاه آزاد اسلامي مي باشد.

گروه : علوم انسانی

رشته : علوم سياسي

گرايش : حقوق و روابط بين الملل

والدين و انساب : پدر سيدعلي اصغر كاظمي حاج سيد كاظم كاظمي دولابي فرزند حاج سيد باقر از سادات اصيل ، متدين و خير سر آسياب دولاب بود كه املاك و مستغلات معتنابهي را وقف اهل بيت براي صرف مساجد و تكايا نمود.

خاطرات کودکي : سيدعلي اصغر كاظمي از دوران كودكي خود اينطور ياد مي كند كه : «من فرزند دوم خانواده هستم يك برادر بزرگتر،دو خواهر و سه برادر كوچكتر دارم.دوران كودكي ما در تهران قديم مانند ديگران بسيار ساده بود. وجود باغها و مزارع سر سبز اطراف محله ما نوعي انس با طبيعت و ذوق هنري را در من پرورش داد. در اولين سالهاي آشنائي با قلم مبادرت به سرودن شعر كردم كه شديداً مورد تمجيد اطرافيان بويژه مادر بزرگم كه زني اهل فضل بود قرار گرفت. از همان كودكي به نقاشي،خطاطي و موسيقي علاقمند بودم. بسياري از اشعار حافظ را كه معاني آن را به خوبي فهم نمي كردم از بر داشتم وبا كودكان ديگر مشاعره مي كردم. علاقه به مطالعه و نگارش از همان اوان كودكي در من ايجاد شد. در مدرسه همواره شاگرد ممتاز بودم و مورد تشويق قرار مي گرفتم. دروس مدرسه هيچگاه كنجكاوي مرا اغناء نمي كرد و در هر فرصتي مطالعه مي كردم. البته طبيعي است كه اين مطالعات چندان جهت دار و هدفمند نبود. بعدها هنگامي كه به كشور فرانسه رفتم سعي كردم در جوار موضوعات تخصصي به مطالعات خود جهت بدهم. هنوز هم در عصر انقلاب اطلاعات با بهره گيري از ابزارهاي نوين از هر فرصتي براي افزايش دانش عمومي استفاده مي كنم. »

اوضاع اجتماعي و شرايط زندگي : پدر و مادر سيدعلي اصغر كاظمي به دليل اعتقادات مذهبي هيچگاه با رفتن وي به خارج از كشور براي تحصيل و خدمت در نظام موافق نبودند. در اصل هدف او از پيوستن به نيروي دريائي تحصيل در خارج از كشور بود. اما حرفه تخصصي او مانع از ادامه تحصيل در ساير رشته هاي دانشگاهي نشد.

تحصيلات رسمي و حرفه اي : مدارج تحصيلي سيد علي اصغر كاظمي به شرح زير مي باشد:  

 

فارغ التحصیل آکادمی افسری نیروی دریایی فرانسه 1338-  1342-

Ecole du Commissaiat de la Marine Nationale Francaise

 از مدرسه تحصیلات تکمیلی نیروی دریایی امریکا MS درجه کارشناسی ارشد  -

United States Naval Post-Graduate School  , Monterey California USA

درجه کارشناسی ارشد MA در امنیت بین الملل از مدرسه حقوق و دیپلماسی فلچر دانشگاه تافتس وابسته به دانشگاه هاروارد1977 -

The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy Medford Massachusetts USA

ودکترا PhD  در حقوق ودیپلماسی از مدرسه فلچر1979 MALD درجه کارشناسی ارشد 

 

فعاليتهاي ضمن تحصيل : بيشتر فعاليت سيد علي اصغر كاظمي در تخصص حرفه اي نيروي دريائي بوده كه در جوار آن به تحصيل و پژوهش نيز پرداخته است.استادان و مربيان : از ميان استادان سيد علي اصغر كاظمي كه وي به خوبي از آنها ياد مي كند به شرح زير است كه همه داراي تاليفات متعدد هستند: دريا دار دكتر ژاك فريهJacques Ferrier رئيس دانشكده كميسرياي دريائي فرانسه    Pfaltgraff .Robert L  استاد راهنماي رساله دكتري  مركز مطالعات سياست خارجي- كمبر يج ماساچوست پرفسور دانيل نايهارت Daniel Nyhart از دانشگاه MiTاستاد مشاور رساله دكتري پرفسور جفري كمپ Geoffrey Kemp استاد راهنماي رساله كارشناسي ارشد،فعلا رئيس بنياد نيكسون امريكا پرفسور لوتيز سون Luis Sohn از دانشكده حقوق دانشگاه هاروارد پرفسور لئو گروس Leo Gross استاد حقوق بين الملل پرفسور آلفرد روبينAlfred Rubin استاد حقوق بين الملل

هم دوره اي ها و همکاران : سيدعلي اصغر كاظمي از دوستان و هم دوره ايهايش به خوبي ياد مي كند مي گويد كه يكي از آنها بعدها رئيس جمهور ماداگاسكار ، و يك از همكلاسي هندي اش معاون دبير كل سازمان ملل و يكي ديگر فرمانده ناوگان دريائي ايالت متحده امريكا در جنگ دوم خليج فارس بود.

همسر و فرزندان : سيدعلي اصغر كاظمي در سال 1349 هنگامي كه در ايالات متحده امريكا تحصيل مي كرد به صورت غيابي ازدواج كرد. همسرش خانم طيبه محرر كه از بستگان آنهاست فارغ التحصيل رشته حقوق قضائي از دانشگاه تهران است. حاصل ازدواج شان دو فرزند پسر است كه هر دو پزشك هستند. فرزند بزرگتر كاميار فارغ التحصيل دانشگاه تهران و متخصص جراحي چشم از دانشگاه شيراز است. فرزند كوچكتر فرزاد دندانپزشك دانش آموخته دانشگاه شهيد بهشتي است. كاميار متاهل و داراي دو فرزند دختر و پسر است. همسرش نيز پزشك متخصص جراحي زنان مي باشد. فرزاد مجرد است و عاشق موسيقي است.

مشاغل و سمتهاي مورد تصدي : سيدعلي اصغر كاظمي علاوه بر تصدي مشاغل رسمي طي 32 سال (70-1338) خدمت در نيروي دريائي و ستاد مشترك ارتش فعاليتهائي به شرح زير داشته است: عضو و مشاور حقوقي هيات نمايندگي ايران در اجلاس هاي مختلف كنفراس سازمان ملل درباره حقوق درياها عضو و حقوقدان كميته برآورد خسارات جنگ تحميلي ،دفتر حقوقي وزارت امور خارجه عضو و مشاور حقوقي هيات نمايندگي جمهوري اسلامي براي اجراي قطع نامه 598 و استقرار آتش بس عضو و مشاور حقوقي هيات اعزامي براي مذاكرات صلح ايران و عراق زير نظر دبير كل سازمان ملل متحد عضو كميته آتش بس و اجراي قطعنامه 598 عضو پيوسته كميته تخصصي شوراي عالي برنامه ريزي وزارت فرهنگ و آموزش عالي (گروه علوم سياسي و روابط بين الملل)

فعاليتهاي آموزشي : سيد علي اصغر كاظمي در زمينه آموزشي فعاليتهايي را داشته است كه به شرح زير مي باشد: استاد دانشگاه دفاع ملي ارتش جمهوري اسلامي تدريس به صورت پاره وقت در دانشگاه هاي مختلف كشور استاد تمام وقت دانشكده حقوق و علوم سياسي واحد علوم و تحقيقات دانشگاه آزاد

مراکزي که فرد از بانيان آن به شمار مي آيد : سيد علي اصغر كاظمي از بانيان مراكز زير مي باشد: - مركز مطالعات خليج فارس در نيروي دريايي كه بعد به وزارت خارجه منتقل شد - مركز مطالعات استراتژيك در ستاد مشترك ارتش جمهوري اسلامي - دانشكده حقوق و علوم سياسي واحد علوم و تحقيقات دانشگاه آزاد اسلامي

ساير فعاليتها و برنامه هاي روزمره : از جمله كارهاي روزمره سيد علي اصغر كاظمي نقاشي و موسيقي كلاسيك ايراني ( رديف هاي سنتي ) با سازهاي ويلن ، تار و سه تار مي باشد.

آرا و گرايشهاي خاص : از نظرات سيد علي اصغر كاظمي مي توان به : « همواره به فرزندان و شاگردانم مي گويم كه نسل ما در تاريخ ايران منحصر به فرد است، چرا كه ما هم «چراغ نفتي » را تجربه كرده ايم وهم ماهواره و اينترنت را . قطعاً در هيچ دوره اي چنين تحولي شگرف در زندگي گذشتگان رخ نداده و در آينده هم بعيد است اتفاق بيفتد. ما سهمي در اين تحول نداشته ايم ولي اميدوارم آيندگان دين خود را به ملت و كشور ايران آنطور كه شايسته است ادا كنند. كساني كه با آثار متنوع اين قلم آشنا هستند معتقدند كه تقريباً همه آنها با درون مايه اخلاقي و انتقادي نوشته شده اند. تا آنجا كه به خود من مربوط است هيچ عمدي در اين كار نبوده است و شايد اين ويژگي ناشي از ساختار بينشي و ذهني من باشد كه در محيط اوليه خانواده شكل گرفته است. نگاه انتقادي من به برخي مسائل تخصصي نظامي و انعكاس آن به رده هاي بالاتر گاهي موجب دردسرهاي جدي شده است .»

جوائز و نشانها : دريافت نشان دانش به خاطر فعاليتهاي علمي در سال 1353 ( قبل از انقلاب) برنده دوازدهمين دوره جايزه كتاب سال 1374 جمهوري اسلامي برنده پنجمين دوره جايزه اول كتاب دفاع مقدس

چگونگي عرضه آثار : سيد علي اصغر كاظمي مقالات حقوقي ، سياسي و بين المللي متعددي را در مجلات و نشريات مختلف داخل و خارج كشور به چاپ رسانده است كه ليست گزيده برخي از مقالات در سايت علمي معرفي شده موجود است.

:آثار و کتابهای چاپ شده :

-( ابعاد حقوقي حاكميت ايران در خليج فارس (دفتر مطالعات بين المللي وزارت خارجه 1368-

- ابعاد حقوقي دورنماي صلح بين ايران و عراق( تهران : دفتر نشر فرهنگ اسلامي 1377) برنده پنجمين دوره جايزه سال دفاع مقدس

- اخلاق و سياست : نظريه سياسي در عمل ( تهران : نشر قومس، 1376) - بحران جامعه (مدرن ( تهران : دفتر نشر فرهنگ اسلامي 1377

-( بحران نوگرايي و فرهنگ سياسي در ايران معاصر( تهران : نشر قومس، 1376

-( پايان سياست و واپسين اسطوره ( تهران : نشر قومس، 1381

-( جهاني شدن فرهنگ و سياست ( تهران : نشر قومس، 1380

ديپلماسي نوين در عصر دگرگوني در روابط بين الملل ( تهران : دفتر مطالعات وزارت خارجه1365

- روابط بين الملل در تئوري و عمل ( تهران : نشر قومس، 1374) برنده دوازدهمين دوره جايزه كتاب سال

-( روش و بينش در سياست ( تهران : موسسه چاپ و انتشارات وزارت امور خارجه 1374

- زنجيره تنازعي در سياست وروابط بين الملل. (نشر قومس 1370

-( سياست سنجي ( تهران : موسسه چاپ و انتشارات وزارت امور خارجه 1374

-( مديريت بحرانهاي بين المللي ( تهران : دفتر مطالعات بين المللي وزارت خارجه 1366

- (مديريت سياسي و خط مشي دولتي ( تهران : دفتر نشر فرهنگ اسلامي 1379

- نظريه همگرايي در روابط بين الملل ( تهران : نشر قومس، 1370

-( زنجيره تنازعي در سياست و روابط بين الملل ( تهران : نشر قومس، 1371)

-( نقش قدرت در جامعه و روابط بين الملل ( تهران : نشر قومس، 1369

-( هفت ستون سياست( تهران : دفتر نشر فرهنگ اسلامي 1379

فعالیتها: •تدریس حقوق، علوم سیاسی • محقق

نظر شما

* با عنایت به اینکه نظرات و پیشنهادات شما کاربران گرامی در بهبود پایگاه تاثیر کاملا موثری ایفا می کند لذا

پربیننده ترین مشاهیر

• هرسینى كرمانشاهى، محمد.. (5357)
• حسن زاده آملی، حسن (2041)
• حافظ، شمس‏الدین محمد (1913)
• احمدی نژاد، محمود (1901)
• بهجت، محمدتقی (1861)
• مصباح یزدی، محمد تقی (1308)
• خمینی، روح‏اللَّه (1248)
• مطهری، مرتضی (1203)
• آئینه‏وند، صادق (1071)
• رحمانی خلیلی، ابوالقاسم (1033) )
• کاشانی، غیاث الدین جمشید (934)
• خویی، ابوالقاسم (781)
• شهریار، محمدحسین (781

خواهشمند است ما را از نطرات ارزنده ی خود محروم نفرمایید .

* نظر شما پش از بررسی و بازبینی توسط گروه مدیریت برای نمایش در سایت قرار داده می شود .

*

نام و نام خانوادگی

*

پست الکترونیکی

*

نظرات شما

نظرات کاربران

آمار مشاهیر

21812 شخصیت

:تعداد مشاهیر

81 گروه

:تعداد گروهها

صفحه اصلی مقالات اخبار و اطلاع رسانی کتابخانه موضوعی مجموعه تصاویر دریافت نرم افزار معرفی پایگاه ها بانک صوت و فیلم کارت پستال
نقشه سایت ارتباط با ما درباره ما عضویت ورود به محیط کاربری
تمامی حقوق این پایگاه متعلق به پرتال فرهنگی و اطلاع رسانی راسخون می باشد. استفاده از مطالب این پایگاه فقط با ذکر منبع مجاز می باشد.

Iran, Islam, and Secular Social Sciences

 

 

Iran, Islam, and Secular Social Sciences

Ali Asghar Kazemi

October 2009

_________________

Introduction

In our previous commentary on the problem of Iran’s recent social turmoil after the presidential elections of June 12, 2009, we alluded to the issue of “Social Sciences” that  has caused widespread alarm among conservative hard-liners.

In that article  the emphasis was made essentially on the question of religion in general and Islam in particular as an ideological dynamic, influencing the function of  society in the domain of human actions and interactions. It was argued that religion has to do with human mind, ideas, the belief system, values, attitudes, and behavior. While politics as an interdisciplinary branch of social sciences deals essentially with the pursuit of power and to some extent the distribution of values in society. Thus, the marriage of the two may inhibit man from his choice between the rational and the spiritual. This is indeed a major dilemma on the way of an ordinary citizen who wants to remain aloof of the impact of official creeds, unless he lets himself dragged by the formalistic rituals of  the dominant religion.

Secular Approach to Social Sciences

As we know, social sciences are not “science” as we understand in the field of hard or pure sciences, such as physics, chemistry, astronomy etc. They form a body of knowledge accumulated during times from the antiquity to the present that comprises everything that relate to the study of human beings in their individual and collective interaction. This even encompass the subject of religion in its entirety as well as philosophy, history, psychology, sociology, economics, politics and the likes, that in one way or the other entail man’s life in his natural and artificial environments.

Once our knowledge of the spiritual and material world was limited to a range of dogma inherited from holly books as well as classical philosophers and scientists’ traditions. Some of these were later endorsed by the Christian church through sanctifying Aristotelian teachings, which had to be accepted blindfolded, and no one was permitted to pose question on their truth. Renaissance changed the methodical knowledge of the world by scientific inquiry and the domain of metaphysics became restricted to the inner-self in the Christian world. Amazing discoveries, inventions and innovations in all fields of sciences are the propitious outcomes of this period.

Of course, the Christian world had to pay dreadful price for this transition. Beside the horrifying experience of persecution and harassment of scientists and intellectuals, protracted wars among sects and nations ended up with some sort of balance between the Church and the State or the temporal and spiritual powers. The hundred years war of fifteenth century resulted continuous conflicts over the distribution of power between religious and temporal sectors, church and the state or popes and the kings. In the seventeenth century the same issues provoked the thirty years war. The resurgence of secularism replaced the medieval theocratic paradigm and ushered the age of enlightenment.

Religion and Secular Conception of Power

The secular consideration of power began its reappearance with Machiavelli’s doctrine of pragmatism in political theory. The basis of this doctrine was to answer the question of what needs to be done by a ruler to remain in power. That is to say that the necessity of political life often required the breaking of moral law. [1] Machiavelli’s princes, unlike Plato’s philosopher-kings, ruled because they were shrewd in manipulating power. Thus, power became devoid of virtue. For Machiavelli, good and evil were traits of all human beings and a successful ruler had to be “part lion and part fox.” [2]

Bertrand Russell wrote that faith, ideology and religion as a whole are undisputed elements in forming the power of a state.[3] Indeed ideas influence the development and use of command over power and violence. In cases were nations are not fully developed from a political-democratic standpoint and party politics as well as other social institutions lack the necessary appeal to unite people in the pursuit of their objectives , religion can fill the gaps. Translated into ideology when put into motion, religion may assume a determinant role in a society, provided it is properly used.[4] It can also weaken a state, and deteriorate its internal and external relations if its potential power is not directed toward constructive path and is used in the pursuit of evil objectives.

Secularism in the Christian World

In the turn of twentieth century it was the general feeling of most learned social scientists that everywhere in the world, religion was in the decline. The argument stemmed from the fact that religion was “opposed by powerful forces.”[5]Some even argued that religion was under the most serious threat that it had ever been in the past centuries.[6] The magnitude of the threat was even compared to the advent of Reformation in Europe but the change was characterized as an anti-religious trend rather than a crisis within the sphere of religion.

Humanism, which was commonly an alternative to theism, developed in Europe chiefly from a belief in the science and an exaggeration of human power and freedom. It was an intellectual movement that opposed the “religious institution.” In the nineteenth century the reaction to religious norms and institution was negative and the emerging idea antagonistic.

The main trend away from religion during the past centuries is considered as the growing sense of secularism[7]which Christianism had put in the doctrinal concept of church and state separation. This was probably an inevitable and necessary complement of the processes of social and political adjustment after the scientific discoveries and revolution in the field of industry and technology.

An immediate consequence of the industrial development was the emergence of a new social class called urban industrial proletariat, which led to the rise of socialism and Marxism as an ideological means for social adjustment. Among these latter ideologies, some did not negate religion and were ready to coexist and cooperate with it and others, which were antagonistic to any religious institutions. Marxism-Communism and its derivatives are examples of the latter type.

Secularism requires that all matters pertaining to man-to-man relationship be determined by representatives of the people, while relationship between men and God be determined by religion.[8]  This position, however, was not endorsed by those who believed that all aspects of life without exception be governed by religious principles formulated many centuries ago and whose interpretation is solely in the hands of the ruling clergies.

The issue of secular state as opposed to a state governed by religious principles has become a fundamental problem of many traditional countries with diverse ethnic and religious background. Religion, in fact, serves both as a divisive and uniting factor in various countries. Practice of secularism also is not easy in territories of multiple religions such as e.g. India. This country has been subject to territorial partition and numerous turmoil because of religion. The peculiar aspect of Indian secularism is that religion and politics get mixed up taking advantage of the democratic system, while the evolution of a common civil law is blocked in the name of minorities’ right in a secular state.[9]

Islam and Secularism

The Islamic conception of religion and its evolution rests upon principles different from Christianity as regards social, economic, legal, political and the way of life in general. Hence a comparative study on the impact and influence of religion in social and political affairs may be obscured by the fact that for example, Christianity and Islam are evolved from and founded upon different conception of religion. Thus a discussion on the subject of secularization of political power can naturally not be based on similar sets of assumption and elements contributing to it. The Islamic conception of religion is more or less what religion has been through most of the course of human history.[10] The secularization process in the Islamic world, thus, shall be viewed and judged against its own distinct evolution.

In this sense, secularization is defined as the process by which political and social activities, explicitly controlled by the religious institution, come under the power of non-religious or temporal body. The definition, however, does not explain the whole conception as interpreted in Christianism and Islam, two major monotheist religions of the world.

It has been suggested that, for example, secularization in the Middle East has had the effect of substituting the European conception of religion by the Islamic doctrine.[11] There may have been such understanding in times among Moslem scholars, but this does not seem to be representative of a general belief. This was the fact and apprehension of a minority fundamentalist Moslems who opposed to that conception and nowadays seems to reemerge throughout the region.

Conclusions

While secularism is considered as the main characteristic of Western conception of religion, in the world of Islam no elaborate and widely endorsed philosophical expression of the subject can be found. Thus, various attempts by rulers or intellectuals to establish a secular system of government, political institution and social tradition in predominantly Islamic nations have not proved to be fruitful and practically possible. Kamalism movement in Turkey, Nasserism in Egypt, Pahlavism in Iran and other cases are typical example of such failure, which in the long run worked even against the very viability of the political system. In most cases cited above, the trend was not merely a process of secularization but it was viewed by conservatives as an all-out offensive against the religious institutions which otherwise meant an anti-religion movement. This has given rise to some misunderstandings that still persist in our own country and elsewhere in the region. Islamic fundamentalism is a direct consequence of this misapprehension.

The contrast between the secularization attempts and processes, particularity in the Christian world and Islamic community will be further discussed in our future commentaries. [12]

---

Ali Asghar Kazemi is professor of Law and International Relations in Tehran, Iran. See: www.aakazemi.blogspot.com

* Students, researchers, academic institutions, media or any party interested in using all or parts of this article are welcomed to do so with the condition of giving full attribution to the author and Strategic Discourse. ©All Copy Rights Reserved.

Notes

[1] . See e.g. David E. Apter, Introduction to Political Analysis. (Prentice Hall of India, New Delhi, 1981, p.77.

[2] .see: Friedrich Meinecke, Machiavellism. (New Haven: Yale University press. 1962), Quoted in David E Apter, Ibid.P.78.

[3].CF. Bertrand Russell, Power, A New Social Analysis, (New York: Norton, 1938), PP.145-156.

[4]. This is especially true in the case of the Third world states where political parties as key organizations for uniting people of different and rather immature opinion can not perform social and political results. A party, said, Edmund Burke, is a group of men united to promote, the common good in accordance with a principle upon which they are agreed. In the Third World the most widely accepted principles belong to religious teachings.

[5] .CF. Montgomery Watt, “Religion and Anti-Religion”, in: A.J.Arberry ed. Religion in the Middle East, (London: Cambridge University Press .1969), vol. 2. PP.605-639 at 605.

[6]. Idem.

[7].The process of secularization is sometimes distinguished from the idea of secularism, which is defined as an attitude of mind or set of beliefs with its focus in the assertion that there is nothing beyond this world. In this respect scientific materialism, humanism, naturalism and positivism are all considered forms of secularism. See Ibid. 609-610.

[8] .K. Subramanyam, “Norms and Interests,” in Strategic Analysis, Institute for Defence Studies and Analysis, New Delhi, February, 1985.p.1035.

[9] .Idem.

[10]. CF. Montgomery Watt, Religion and Anti -Religion. Op. cit. p. 609; see also: Hamilton A.R. Gibb. Religion and politics in Christianism and Islam. (Persian translation) passim; Modern Trend in Islam. (Chicago:1947)

[11].CF.Ibid.p.609.

[12].see my earlier writings on the subject in: Ali Asghar Kazemi, Religion and Politics...    Monograph, Tehran 1985.

Iran: Roots of the Post-Elections Crisis

 

Iran: Roots of the Post-Elections Crisis

Ali Asghar Kazemi

October 2009

_____________

“A new world society is gradually emerging.It is growing quietly, imperceptibly in the minds and hearts of men. The tumult and the excitement, the anger and the violence, the perplexity of spirit and the ambiguities of expressing are the pangs of he birth of something new. We of this generation are called upon to work for this new order with all the strength and capacity for suffering we possess.

                                                         S. Radhakrishnan[1]

______________

Introduction

Thirty years after the advent of the revolution, that brought an Islamic regime in Iran, religious leaders are still looking for ways and means to transform the society into a rigid bloc of faithful and zealous citizens who fully submit to the official principles and precepts put forward by them. While during the past three decades every effort has been made to disseminate religious teachings at all levels of public education, from the kindergartens to the universities, seemingly the result has been frustrating.

The post-presidential elections public turmoil, that brought the country to the brink of a real social revolution, was another vivid indication that the whole scheme of “Islamization” of the society was an ineffective and futile social investment. Since, the effort merely counter-produced and youngsters who were brought up with Islamic rigorous teachings after the revolution simply did not show interest to them and much less to obey them blindfolded. Indeed, this phenomenon should not surprise anybody who has a little familiarity with the very rudimentary concepts of the philosophy of education and social sciences.

 

Misconception about Social Sciences

With a view to cure this incongruity, the Islamic system recently came to the conclusion that the problem emanate from the dominance of the Western “social sciences” books and materials taught by Western educated and/or oriented teachers and professors in the higher education structure. To that end, a new round of purge has been initiated at different levels of educational institutions and expert committees are being set up once again to remedy the problem once for all!

How far this conclusion about Western “social science” is logical? Can the Islamic regime succeed in its new effort to eradicate the roots of restlessness among students and educated people against the system by simply changing the contents of textbooks? Where should we look for proper answer to the problem?

 

Problem of Religion and Politics[2]

From the beginning of human history, man has been guided by two strands inextricably woven in his very nature, the rational and the spiritual. These forces have influenced human destiny in varied patterns and in different periods when one or the other may have been more prominent.[3] Religion has been the great force for the disciplining of man’s nature, though it has also worked against his fate by denying the domain of reason.[4]

Religion has to do with human mind, ideas, the belief system, values, attitudes and behavior. Politics as an interdisciplinary branch of social sciences, deals essentially with the pursuit of power through “the art of influencing, manipulating, or controlling [groups] so as to advance the purposes of some against the opposition of others”[5] The struggle over conflicting ideas, values and interests directed by religious beliefs have existed throughout history. Great religions such as Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity and last but not least Islam have at one time or other claimed to have answers for all problems of the society. But, history bears good witness that almost in all cases, religion married to temporal power, became imbued with a formalism which deprived it of its moral and spiritual values.[6]

Some religions such as Hinduism and Buddhism have sought to base their beliefs on tangible elements and hold that the two sides of human nature, the rational and the spiritual, should work together.[7] Western religions have been long engaged in the struggle to come to term with the spirit of reason.[8] In later periods, scientific developments overshadowed faith in traditional beliefs. The process led to the intellectual questioning of the metaphysical view of the world and the revival of animistic science in the period of Renaissance.

Since the Renaissance two divergent lines of thought have prevailed in the philosophical perspective. One deeply committed to the notion that the real world is external to the observer, and the other, that belonged to cultures which escaped the early impact of Newtonian thinking retained the view that the real world is completely internal to the observer.[9]

 

Where to put the blame?

When Socrates was executed for religious heresy, it was not merely an act of religious fanaticism, such as later became common, but rather a serious response of society to subversion. The early Christianity was attacked by the Roman government not only out of religious exclusivism in modern sense but because it was seen as revolutionary and subversive, a threat to the organization of society. The Christians incurred the supposed guilt of an unnatural and unpardonable offense. They dissolved the sacred ties of custom and education and violated the religious institution of their realm.[10]

Once it was believed that only religious and metaphysical limitations could restrain rulers and power-holders from committing acts of violence and suppression. This may still prove a valid argument, only if we can make a definite distinction between religious ideology and the actual process of politics. But when the frontiers between the two realms fades away and one identifies its very existence with the other, then, the moral and metaphysical constrains to power-holders become irrelevant. In such circumstances, religion fails to its duty. With the alienation of power-blinded men from moral restraints, aggressive behavior and suicidal tendencies occur.[11]

In today’s world, where hope and peril run side by side, among great and vital issues of our time are those which involved the suppression of the evil which drive societies toward wars, hostilities and terrorism. How then the whirlwind of revolutionary social forces can be directed towards a safe and constructive path?

Considering the fact that constitutional foundation of world order and international law have proven inefficacious for the maintenance of peace and assurance of democratic process, the problems remain to be tackled with in future are the minimum moral and spiritual requirements in order to preserve peace, security and human dignity in a tormented world.

In the absence of a superior authority over and above nation-states, claiming sovereignty and political independence, power with legitimacy is the necessary instrument of governments. Without these latter, political order could neither be established nor maintained and guard society against anarchy. Power without legitimacy spawns tyranny and violence, corrupts the mighty and crushes freedom.[12]

In a general sense, individual quest for power has the effect of leading a ruler to act against the will of the people.[13] But when religion becomes politicized and gets involved in the competition for power, it has the effect of encouraging its followers to act against the accepted norms of civilized nations. As a result, domestic power struggles spill over into the international system. The immediate implication of such behavior is to impose its will and ideology on another state(s).

Religion can help people to establish harmony in their souls, to illuminate human spirit, and to liberate nations from despotism and tyranny. But surely it cannot supplant politics, in the sense it is understood in our contemporary world system, dominated by sovereign nation- states, national interests and competition for power. Religion, says Radhakrishnan, “is the direct apprehension of the Supreme. It is in the attaining of a state of illumination. While the reality is omnipresent, human being is able to apprehend it directly in his own inmost being.”[14] When statesmen attempt to measure -or make semblance to do- political events and social phenomena of the real world by religious standards, they are merely submerged in their illusion.

 

Future of Religions

Religious belief and faith of any kind have always posed dilemma for humanity. Like a two-edged sword, religion has been hard for men to live without, and almost equally hard to coexist with. Just the same, when man is passionately submerged in his religious obsessions, he is tempted to preach it to others. If they prove deaf to his preaching, he is often tempted to impose it by fire and sword. [15]

Religious wars of the past are now over, but the legacy of intolerance, persecution and slaughtering of man by man on ideological and religious grounds is still with mankind. Religion has become scapegoat for obstipated “old leaders clinging too long to power in a world they no longer understand,”[16] and for power hungry younger generation deeply indoctrinated in myths and delusions. The world no longer represents the long cherished compassionate and fraternal ideals of Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.

Encountering realities of this tormented world is a difficult task of the new leaders of our time who are not trained to overcome the lust of power. Religion has the potential ability to free politicians from the evil forces that enslave their spirit. But politics cannot help an obstinate religious to straighten his conduct or to regain his purity. No institutional or legal patterns, no revolutionary theologies, and no chastisement of the other world can make a society to become a safe place to live, unless the people set out to rid of spiritual poverty. In this respect, it is rightly argued that “the quality of our life is the evidence of our religion.” [17] Indeed, religion in this context is not incompatible with politics, neither is it in competition with it in the pursuit of secular power, but it is its mentor.

Religions will lose their redemptive power, if societies are not prepared to accept their human and spiritual principles. People need not to adore saints and their illusions; they have to seek redemption through faith and reason which lead to the path of salvation.

Conclusions

From the dawn of human history to our present time, prophets, philosophers, thinkers, academics and social scientists, disregard of their beliefs and native origins, have helped men to understand their social environment and to overcome the evil of tyranny and despotism in their communities. They should be respected and be given credits for their achievements. Western social and political sciences are not in dissonance with the essence of religions and spiritual needs of human beings. On the contrary, they teach us how to comprehend and deal with evil propensity of political leaders who use religious principles to promote their power and greed despite the will of the people. /

__________

Ali Asghar Kazemi is professor of Law and International Relations in Tehran, Iran. See: www.aakazemi.blogspot.com

* Students, researchers, academic institutions, media or any party interested in using all or parts of this article are welcomed to do so with the condition of giving full attribution to the author and Strategic Discourse. ©All Copy Rights Reserved.

---

 

Notes

[1] Religion in a Changing World, (London: George Allen & Unwin, Ltd, 1967) p. 15.

[2] Parts of this article are readapted here from my earlier writings in : Ali Asghar Kazemi, Religion and Politics …, Monograph , Tehran, 1985.

[3]. CF. S. Radhakrishnan, Religion in a Changing World (London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd. 1967), p. 18.

[4]. Ibid. p.9.

[5] Quincy Wright, The Study of International Relations, ( New York: Appleton Century Crofts, 1965), p.130

[6]. CF. Jacques Pirenne, Tides of History, op. cit. p. 407.

[7]. Ibid. p. 34.

[8]. Ibid. p. 35.

[9]. Henry Kissinger, American Foreign Policy (New York: W.W. Norton & Company. Inc. 1974), p.48.

[10]. CF. Edward Gibbon, the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, I, (New York: Modern Library), p. 448.

[11]. CF. R. Strausz- Hupe and Stefan T. Possony, International Religions (New York, 1954) p. 11. Quoted in Robert L. Pfaltzgraff and James E. Dougherty, Contending Theories of International Relations ( New York : J. b. Lippincott Co. , 1971 ) p. 91..

[12]. Robert Strausz-Huoe, Power and Community (New York: Frederick A. Praeger, 1956), p.3.

[13]. This is for example the case of Iran in the pre-revolution period as well as during the past years when the essence of religion gradually changed in the pursuit of political power. 

[14]. Religion in a Changing World, op. cit. p. 102.

[15].CF. Charles Yost, The Insecurity of Nations- International Relations of the Twentieth Century, op. cit., p. 212.

[16]. Idem.

[17]. Ibid. p. 110.

Rise of “New Nationalism” in Iran

 

Rise of “New Nationalism” in Iran

Ali Asghar Kazemi

October 2009

_______________

The “Green Movement” that emerged in the midst of presidential campaign 2009 in Iran, gained momentum after the unconvinced defeat of reformist candidates and became a genuine and strong opposition front challenging the very foundation of the Islamic regime. The more the hardliners pressed upon the movement with the intention to wipe out once for all its driving force, the more it tended towards radical nationalistic slogans and acquired anti-regime propensity.

While the Islamic government does not mind the resurgence of the people’s nationalistic fervor upon which it could embark in case its survival is threatened by foreign threats, nonetheless, it seems determined to confront with all force the growing danger of the “Green Movement” to its internal security. Recent horrific clashes with masses protesting in the streets in the post-elections manifestations are vivid indication that the hard-liners would not allow the demonstrations for reform turn into a real revolution.

How far the Islamic regime is capable to contain the movement or benefit from the revival Iranian nationalism without being victim itself of this reawakening phenomenon?

                                            ________

Political scientists agree that high level of political participation in a developing societies where the governments lags behind people expectations for higher level of institutionalization of democratic values, accountability and truthfulness, lead to social frustration and political instability. Samuel Huntington calls this phenomenon praetorianism, or the growth of political decay which paves the way for increasing repression, societal closure and growing military involvement in politics. In other words, social mobilization in an authoritarian environment with low economic productivity and efficiency leads to social frustration. This process increases the level of participation and in the final stage it ends up to political instability. In such circumstances, increasing demands for stability and order in a society gives justification for men of arms to step in by using coercive power for the containment of the crisis. Maintaining a coercive system in power requires large scale military and secret police establishment which in turn create economic burden and hardship for people; leading to social unrest and instability and the process continues in escalating cycles.

The foremost dilemma for the community in crisis situations is to avoid its own disintegration by maintaining social unity and solidarity outside the purview of official institutions. For this purpose, the society is guided to organize around a motto, symbol or emblems that give it a new identity to cope with the oppressive forces. Growing discontent with the incumbent regime, which seeks to promote and enforce its own ideology despite the will of citizens, will instigate the nonconformists to go their own way and look for alternative ways to counter the official values. Thus, the emergence of “Green Movement” with nationalistic overtone in the post-election Iran can be characterized as a growing force in quarrel with the regime.

Historically, the Persian nationalism has been expressed and articulated through the adoption of the Shiite doctrine that fundamentally distinguishes Iranian Moslems from the other creeds in the broad spectrum of the religion of Islam. It has served as a strong unifying force against Persian enemies and rivals in the past centuries. But, with the ascendance into power of the clergies after the 1979 revolution in Iran, the political thrust of the religion gradually diminished and people became dismayed of the poor performance of politico-religious institutions.

Upon several unsuccessful democratic attempts to perform necessary changes in the system by reformist Moslems in order to make it more responsive to the needs of the modern society, the last presidential elections of June 12, 2009 brought to an end the efforts by a series of repressive actions which led the post-elections crisis. After that, the green color which was merely the identity sign for one candidate (Mir Hossein Moussavi) became the emblem of a movement which is now standing as a challenging opposition front with new goals confronting the incumbent regime.

The truth of the matter is that the new nationalistic movement in Iran stems from a different environment that is dissimilar from the past. Since: 1) it is primarily a reaction against an ideology that has become unbearable for many even among religious figures; 2) it is an antithesis of a political system that came into power in a very particular point of time and circumstances that is no longer responsive to the actual expectations of the people; 3) it is a self-propelled movement with no official platform and has no particular leadership inside or outside Iran; 4) it is a “positive nationalism,” meaning that it is not against the current trend of the international society but it strongly objects the existing domestic divergence from that trend and wants to rehabilitate the true Iranian identity and status in the present world; 5) it is omnipresent and it uses all old patriotic and revolutionary slogans of the past as a tactical challenge against the ruling system; 6) It is a secular, forward-looking and peace-loving movement that denies all sorts of segregation, subjugation, arms races and interventions in the internal affairs of other countries and wants to live in peace with all people and nations.

While the new movement is against foreign interventions of all kinds and sanctions that are aimed at the well-being of ordinary people, it has been accused by the regime for collaborating with the enemies of Islam and Iran in order to discredit its efforts. It is also against all government policies that entail such actions against the nation. Supporters of the movement have already paid a dire price for their endeavor and seem to be prepared to keep on their lawful and democratic attempts for changes. Most enlightened people, academics, intellectuals as well as average citizens of all walks seem to support their cause.

The “new nationalism,” manifested in the form of “Green Movement,” can become a constructive democratic force in Iran if properly managed by their leaders and followers. They should be given the opportunity to exercise their lawful citizen rights in expressing themselves towards a democratic, united, developed, peaceful, and prestigious Iran. /

__________

Ali Asghar Kazemi is professor of Law and International Relations in Tehran, Iran. See: www.aakazemi.blogspot.com

* Students, researchers, academic institutions, media or any party interested in using all or parts of this article are welcomed to do so with the condition of giving full attribution to the author and Strategic Discourse. ©All Copy Rights Reserved.

Strategic Implications of Nobel Peace Prize for Obama

 

Strategic Implications of Nobel Peace Prize for Obama

A. A. Kazemi

October 10, 2009

_______

Whatever the true intention and justification behind the decision of the Committee of Nobel Peace Prize to give this prestigious award to Barack Obama, the event should be optimistically taken as a heavenly grace for peace and order in the Middle East in general and Iran in Particular. Though previous politician winners of the prize failed to achieve much in this respect, there is hope that at this critical point of time, when Iran is under increasing pressure and military threats from outside, President Obama would feel very reluctant to opt for a harsh and hostile strategy against the Islamic regime for its nuclear ambitions.

The mere fact that the Nobel Peace prize is awarded to a powerful figure like the incumbent president of the United States, would prevent him, from a psychological point of view, to keep extreme policy options, such as use of hard power on the table against Iran. This would also mean that he might not endorse any preemptive strike against strategic targets inside Iran by Israel, should diplomatic negotiations fail to achieve constructive results. This is of course a very important achievement of the award.

Therefore, it is safe to suggest that the Islamic regime should be happy about the event and ought to seize the opportunity not to aggravate the situation by broadcasting negative analyses about the decision of the Committee of Peace Prize in the state radio and television. It should either keep silent or praise the event and embark on the occasion by putting full effort on the diplomatic endeavor underway with the 5+1 powers.

This will further encourage the American President to support peaceful means for the settlement of the nuclear issue with Islamic regime and abstain from endorsing any harsh measure that could put at risk Iran’s national interests and security in the region./

_________

Ali Asghar Kazemi is professor of Law and International Relations in Tehran, Iran. See: www.aakazemi.blogspot.com

* Students, researchers, academic institutions, media or any party interested in using all or parts of this article are welcomed to do so with the condition of giving full attribution to the author and Strategic Discourse. All Copy Rights reserved.

Struggling onTwo Fronts for Survival

Struggling on Two Fronts for Survival

A. A. Kazemi
October 2, 2009
___________

Iranian hard-line conservatives are caught in an appalling stalemate in the post-election period. On the one hand, they are facing growing opposition at home in the wake of the unconvinced presidential elections that truly polarized the nation on the credibility and legitimacy of the new government. On the other hand, they are under increasing international pressure for their deceiving maneuvers on the question of nuclear activities. Recent revelations about new enrichment site came as an unambiguous indication that despite its recurrent negation, the Islamic regime is aimed at acceding to a nuclear power status.

Since the mass uprising of 1979 that ended up into the collapse of the monarchic regime, the events which followed the presidential elections of June 12, 2009 will be remembered as a new keystone in contemporary history of Iran. Threatened from abroad for its nuclear ambitions and vulnerable inside for its horrendous performance, the Islamic regime is helplessly fighting in two fronts for its survival.

How far the Islamic hard-liners are capable to carry on successfully the fight in two decisive battlegrounds? What are the plausible outcomes of this concurrent struggle in domestic and international fronts?

                                                      _____

Two days after the announcement of the results of presidential elections in Iran, people were still dizzy of the shock they received by the unexpected outcome. Street riots in big cities by disappointed public refreshed memories of the heated days of the 1979 revolution which uprooted the monarchic regime in Iran. Protesters with green emblems, symbol of reformist presidential candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi, rushed to the streets to claim their votes, allegedly stolen by the regime in favor of the controversial hard-line incumbent president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Reformists’ peaceful demonstrations turned out to bloody protest rally that took an unknown number killed, hundreds injured and according to officials about 4000 arrested around the country.

The Islamic government tried to manage the crisis which escalated by hours due to the alleged manipulation of ballot boxes. Despite earnest attempt of the government to justify the results of the elections through faked data, people and observers did not believe the statistics and firmly maintained that the regime has cheated and deceived the nation by manipulating their votes in favor of Ahmadinejad. The reformist candidates requested the abrogation of the results and renewal of the elections.

The Post-election crisis consequences in Iran unveiled the persistent appalling repression of the Islamic conservatives against opposition groups who accused the regime for fraud and manipulation of votes in favor of the incumbent president. The newly re-reappointed president, Ahmadinejad, took the oath of office in a tense atmosphere of security and strict precautions while protesters were demonstrating and shouting against him outside the parliament. Abroad, exiled Iranians throughout the world took to the streets in support of their compatriots and shouted the same slogans against the religious regime in Iran.

For the first time in thirty years, since the birth of the Islamic regime, the whole world witnessed with bafflement and disgust what truly was going on in Iran and the amount of support claimed by the regime. The international media coverage of the unfortunate events pressed foreign governments to take position in condemning the Islamic leaders for their brutal reaction against peaceful public manifestation. People around the world too expressed deep sympathy with popular uprising in Iran.

About four months after the turmoil, the crisis has now receded at least on the surface, but it is not sure that it has ended for good. At this very critical moment, Western powers (5+1) who had given severe notice to the Islamic regime for its alleged doubtful nuclear activities became outraged of a new secret nuclear site near the religious city of Qom (Fardou). American President Obama, along with French President Sarkosy and British Prime Minister Gordon, Brown accused the Islamic leaders for their deceiving behavior and warned the regime against the undesired consequences of its defiance. Meanwhile, Israel, anxious for its security, publicized much about its plans for preemptive strikes against strategic targets including nuclear sites inside Iran.

The Islamic leaders caught in a delicate condition at a very inopportune moment, took a series of actions in order to contain the escalating situation:

· With respect to the revelation of the new nuclear site, they prepared and sent a letter to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) regarding the establishment of the new nuclear enrichment location, planned to go into operation next year. This has been done a week before the Geneva Talk 2 of the 5+1 and the Iranian delegation and after the disclosure of the so-called “clandestine project” by the American intelligence.

· Ahmadinejad decided once again to attend the UN General Assembly session; which turned out to be a complete failure, while his pompous speech did not attract any attention. Meanwhile, widespread demonstrations against his presence in New York created nightmare for him and his entourage.

· The Islamic Parliament adopted a quasi-unanimous resolution in support of Iran’s nuclear endeavor as a warning to the 5+1 second round of talks scheduled for October 1^st. 2009 in Geneva, Switzerland.

· With a view to deter “opponents” and “ill-wishers” and to overshadow the effect of the nuclear concealment, the Islamic regime has set up a new military exercise in which a number of medium range missiles were tested. This was perhaps to persuade the Americans that in case of Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear sites, the Persian Gulf waterways and littoral states would be at risk of retaliatory attacks.

· With respect to domestic affairs, the regime decided to release a number of reformist leaders and journalists from the jail and terminate the arbitrary arrests and humiliating trial of the so-called “green movement” protestors. It also promised to prosecute officials who had ordered and performed atrocious deeds against dissidents.

· On the level of the supreme leadership, the Assembly of Experts endorsed the incumbent leader once again and invited the whole nation for unity and solidarity.

Despite all these precautionary measures, while the Islamic regime ardently needs the support of the nation to carry out its aggressive diplomacy in nuclear talks with the 5+1, new turmoil in campuses around the country will eventually ignite anew popular unrests. Thus far, the commencement of the new academic year and dispersed ceremonies here and there has given the students fresh opportunity to resume their protests against the president and his government. It appears that hard-liners are now caught in a terrible dilemma as how to tackle simultaneously with two crucial fronts endangering their very survival.

In the domestic front, they are like riding on a tiger; they can’t continue on and are afraid to get off. It seems that the use of violence against angry demonstrators can no longer deter “Green Movement” supporters to relinquish their cause. Repressive measures to curb the popular unrest by the government will further diminish the legitimacy of the regime and provoke dissidents to widen their demands.

On the international level, the Islamic regime is now considered as an unreliable party in the upcoming negotiations. Since, it has virtually lost the confidence of all 5+1 powers, including Russia and China, after the surprising revelation about the new nuclear enrichment site. Western powers seem now prepared to go for “paralyzing sanctions” against Iran, should the Islamic regime continue to defy UN Security Council demands on the nuclear issue. In a worst case scenario, Israel might be tempted to launch preemptive strikes against strategic targets inside Iran before “risking its total annihilation.” This could of course escalate hostilities throughout the Middle East and the larger world. Therefore, containing Iran’s nuclear ambitions has become a vital objective on the agenda of the world powers.

Let’s hope that decision-makers in Tehran come to their sense and opt for peaceful settlement of the ongoing dispute before things get out of control. We shall wait and see how the case will develop in the coming days and weeks. /

__________

Ali Asghar Kazemi is professor of Law and International Relations in Tehran, Iran. See: www.aakazemi.blogspot.com

* Students, researchers, academic institutions, media or any party interested in using all or parts of this article are welcomed to do so with the condition of giving full attribution to the author and Strategic Discourse. All Copy Rights reserved.

Iran’s National Security and the Nuclear Gamble

 

Iran’s National Security and the Nuclear Gamble

A. A. Kazemi

September 27, 2009

________________

Recent revelations by US president Obama about Iran’s new secret nuclear site in the vicinity of the religious city of Qom came as a new shock to the already soured relations of the Islamic regime with the West. The timing of this disclosure was quite cleverly calculated by Washington. This came while the United Nations General Assembly was in its regular yearly session and the newly reappointed Iranian president Ahmadinejad was visiting the United States, leaving behind the post-election crisis at home.

How far the new divulgation is susceptible to cause structural trouble for the Islamic Republic, which is now in its deepest political hurdle at home and lowest credibility at the international level? Can Iran continue to gamble on its nuclear undertaking and defy the upcoming fourth resolution on the agenda of the 5+1 powers for the UN Security Council?

*

The surprise revelations about Iran’s new secret nuclear establishment could be construed as another vibrant indication as to why the Islamic Republic consumed so much of its political credibility and legitimacy in order to keep an odd figure like Ahmadinejad in office. Perhaps, in the eyes of the Islamic leaders, only he and not any other personality from the opposition camp (reformists) could continue to handle such a bizarre messy business!

There is no doubt that Iran is now caught in a thorny trap laid meticulously by the new American democrat president. I had predicted the matter not long ago on Feb. 3, 2009 in an article titled “US Democrats are Pushing Iran to the Corner.” According to the Americans, they had knowledge about the new secret site during the presidential campaign and eventually Mr. Obama had a good grip of the intelligence before assuming the office. Thus, we can presume that when he extended his hands towards Iran for diplomatic negotiations, he knew an awful lot about what was going on behind the scene. There is even possibility that the Americans have yet much wider knowledge about other eventual secret undertakings and dealings of the Islamic regime, but they don’t intend to disclose them for the time being.

As I stated in my previous comments, Americans have set a broad range of policy alternatives to tackle with Iran as a whole, including nuclear activities. To that end, they are believed to be ready to use all available leverages comprising the use of hard power. The expected outcome would eventually make the situation much tougher for Iran’s defying stance pushing it to the corner in a manner to commit itself to some sort of bitter concessions on various pending issues including the nuclear project.

It is adequate to review here my earlier guess about the new American approach which could be shaped around the following facts and criteria:

· Any viable solution to the Middle East problems including Israeli-Palestinian issue as well as Iraq and Afghanistan depend on settling Iran-US perennial quarrel;

· The Islamic regime’s ties with radical movements in the Middle East and its defiance to this date to comply with the UN Security Council demands with respect to the nuclear enrichment issue are serious barriers to the settlement of all other issues in the region;

· The United States alone cannot force Iran to adopt a cooperative stance merely by using hard power, especially after the awful quagmire created by the US military interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq;

· Iranian leaders are more vulnerable to soft power effects such as diplomatic pressure and sanctions than military engagement, since this latter would consolidate all people behind the regime against the invader;

· Gradual pressure through legitimate instruments may push the regime to the corner in such a way that it would finally surrender to the will of the international community.

Apparently, American partners and allies like UK, Germany, France and Israel had been informed about the new Iran’s secret nuclear project and the US president has informed Russian president of the fact in his recent meeting with him in New York. Now Russia and China, whose tactical support of Iran so far instigated this country to continue to defy UN Security Council resolutions, are in a rather grim situation. They can no longer continue to prop up Iran’s intransigence on the nuclear issue.

Iranian authorities claim that they have complied with the IAEA regulations by announcing the matter to the Agency prior to the operational use of the site. Yet, the emerging situation could give a good basis of justification to the United States to take advantage of the new revelations for reaching a solid consensus in the UN Security Council in adopting harsh sanctions against Iran. Though the Islamic leaders maintain that they don’t fear UN sanctions, there is no doubt that the country is susceptible to suffer severely in the wake of post-election social turbulence and declining position of hard-liners in the country.

The West has given Iran another chance “to come clean” on the matter until this coming December. Therefore, time is running out for the Islamic regime and its future course of actions has severely diminished to a few: either to go along with the 5+1 demands and avoid serious sanctions ahead; or insist on its previous stance and run the risks of incurring “paralyzing sanctions” and/or a sudden preemptive strike on its strategic targets by Israel.

In all circumstance, given that the post-elections crises of confidence and legitimacy have not been wholly contained and resolved, the Islamic regime is at risk to encounter serious troubles at home susceptible to cause structural changes in the country. /

_____________

Ali Asghar Kazemi is professor of Law and International Relations in Tehran, Iran. See: www.aakazemi.blogspot.com

* Students, researchers, academic institutions, media or any party interested in using all or parts of this article are welcomed to do so with the condition of giving full attribution to the author and Strategic Discourse. All Copy Rights reserved.

Iran’s Post- Election Political Environment

Iran’s Post- Election Political Environment

A. A. Kazemi

September 25, 2009

________________________________

« Il y’ a beaucoup de choses que ne valent pas la peine d’être dites, et il y’a beaucoup de gens qui ne valent pas que les autres choses leur soient dites, cela fait beaucoup de silence ! »

« There are many things that are not worthy to be said and there are many people whom are not worthy that the other things be said to them, this makes a lot of silence!”

_____________

Silence is Gold

Indeed, “silence is gold” at a time when public uprising swabs intellectual discourse. The last time I published an article was exactly on June 13, 2009, just the day after the presidential elections in Iran. The comment was a short review on the amazing result of the election and its plausible consequence for the country afterward. The title of the article bears good witness that we had to expect something unusual after the announcement of the results: “ Iran’s Elections 2009: The End of Hope for Peaceful Democratic Reforms.” I don’t intend here to imply that I had foreseen the social commotion that followed the election, but it is fair to say that there was some truth in the conclusions of the comment about the astonishing results which could spark the long-accumulated revulsion about political repression in Iran.

During the past months, I went into a “voluntary silence” for which I praise myself. There are many reasons for that: First, I had no reliable information about what truly happened during the elections and whether there was a material and substantive breach of law or fraud in the process; Second, thanks to the internet and international media, the whole world witnessed with bafflement and disgust the events after the election in Iran and there was no need to analyze or repeat the uncertain account of the facts in the heat of their unexpected development; and Finally, fear of being accused of a one-sided partisanship of the so-called “Green Movement,” that emerged in a dubious circumstances on the political landscape of Iran, pressed me to keep quiet for a while until the clouds of uncertainty pass away .

Walking in the Dark

When one has no coherent and reliable information about a developing situation, intelligent analysis is difficult and there is always the risk of falling in the trap of faked data, propaganda and disinformation. This whole state of affairs pushed me to abstain from “walking in the dark” by repeating the story of either rival parties (conservative hard-liners or reformists” or lamenting on the abhorring situation that our society and our people went through during the period of social turmoil and political crisis after the presidential election.

Now that things are apparently quieter and the crisis has been contained at least on the surface, the time is opportune to ponder upon the ramifications of the post-election events. Therefore, I intend to resume my occasional comments on the critical national and international issues related to our country.

A note of appreciation

During the past months, many friends, colleagues and students have expressed concern and inquietude regarding my situation and whereabouts, for which I am grateful. The post-election social uprising in Iran coincided with the summer vacation which was indeed a heavenly gift for me. I took the opportunity to retreat from the unpredictable social environment of Tehran to my homestead out of town with no internet and other means of communications, such as cell phone. Upon my return, I realized the amount of mails and messages which I missed during my absence.

New Academic Year and Fresh Expectations

My voluntary solitude away from overly heated political atmosphere in the capital provided me with the chance to go back to the nature and reflect upon things that never come to mind in normal conditions. Now that the new academic year has started, although there are still many question marks about what really happened during the presidential election in Iran and the unfortunate events aftermath, I hope to be able to share these solitary reflections with friends in my future commentaries and articles. /

________________

Ali Asghar Kazemi is professor of Law and International Relations in Tehran, Iran. See: www.aakazemi.blogspot.com

* Students, researchers, academic institutions, media or any party interested in using all or parts of this article are welcomed to do so with the condition of giving full attribution to the author and Strategic Discourse. All Copy Rights reserved.

Iran’s Elections 2009...

Iran’s Elections 2009

The End of Hope for peaceful Democratic Reforms

Ali Asghar Kazemi

June 13, 2009

_________________________

Presidential elections of June 12, 2009 in Iran shall be remembered as the end of an era of democratic process toward political reform in a religious-revolutionary regime in Iran. For the first time in recent history, Iranians felt they are changing the course of events through peaceful means using their citizen’s rights. But, when the results were announced, they have been shocked and disheartened by the results. Despite all encouraging polls and optimistic anticipations in favor of reformist Mousavi, the incumbent hard-line president was declared victor!
What happened during the campaign for presidential elections in Iran which distinct it from the previous ones? What are the implications of this new trend for political development and democratic process in Iran? Who are the real winners and losers of this historic contest?
*
Perhaps the emergence of an odd personality such as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Iran’s political landscape paved the way for rising demand for truthfulness, honesty and accountability. As I stated elsewhere, Ahmadinejad was the product of a period of eight years of controversies between two conflicting views: that expressed by a moderate soft-spoken clergy, Mr. Khatami, who was considered as “reformist” by Western political standards; and the opposite represented by the conservative religious-revolutionary groups, who pretended to be the legitimate guardian of the Islamic regime.
As we remember, Ahmadinejad came into power after a period of crises-ridden challenge for moderation and proliferation of civil liberty in which people tasted the flavor of freedom and began a gradual march towards a modern civil society in Iran. This however, did not please the conservative traditional layers of the country and the religious system, feeling much vulnerable, was alarmed to the point that the previous open-minded president, Khatami, was coined as the “Gorbachev of Iran” risking the survival of the regime.
During his two terms in office, president Khatami failed to accomplish his promised goals due to obstacles on his way created by his opponents in the legislative body and judiciary. Feeling deceived, young and enthusiastic people who had voted for Khatami turned back to him and thus reformist movement and supporters gradually disintegrated and vanished from political scene, leaving the ground to hard-line conservatives with new attractive promises.
Almost four years after the conservative grip of absolute power, with a nation at the brink of social and economic crises, the reformists embarked for a new comeback. Upon several months of speculations, finally the former Prime Minister Mir Hossein Mousavi, backed by former president Khatami, decided to run for president with the slogan of saving the country from total collapse and insolvency. Allegedly, he had the implicit support of another powerful figure, Hashemi Rafsanjani, former speaker of the parliament, a two-term president, and incumbent chairman of the Expediency Council and head of Assembly of Experts.
With a view to overcome the bad memory of the previous presidential elections, which ended up in favor of the hard-line conservative front, purportedly through dubious circumstances and manipulations of ballot boxes, and to deal with the rumors of fraud, the Islamic regime decided to allow candidates to use the state-run Radio and Television( Seda va Sima) for their publicity. This included a time-table allocated for live debates between different contenders. This was organized mainly as a sign of free democratic process and in order to attract the most possible participation in presidential elections.
The competition was essentially among four key personalities coming from the inner circle of the Islamic regime. They were: the incumbent president, Ahmadinejad and Mohsen Rezaie (secretary of the Expediency Council) from the conservative wing on the one side and former speaker of the parliament, Mehdi Karroubi and Mir-Hossein Mousavi known as “reformists” on the other. However, when they started their debates, the differences in their positions and programs turned out to be real. Apparently, the heated debates between the president and the other three contenders on various issues, especially in the fields of economy and foreign policy, was quite decisive for those people who had not yet made their mind about candidates.
For the first time in the current history of Iran, the Islamic regime decided to tolerate such democratic exercise whose outcome was not quite known to many. The debate between the incumbent president and the former Prime Minister Mousavi ended up by rival defamation and war of words and serious accusations which put the credibility of the whole system and its major personalities into serious doubts. People watched the show with enthusiasm and bafflement and took to the street afterward chanting slogans against rival candidates.
While such debates are even rare in democratic countries, naturally in Iran, without much experience in this area, the face to face challenge went beyond rule of ethics and good conduct and in some instances encroached upon constitutional requisites. Critiques and accusations raised in the debates echoed those nourished by opposition groups during the past several years.
Upon the conclusion of several rounds of debates among and interviews of presidential contestant, polls have tilted adversely against the incumbent president. People, especially from among educated and middle class layers felt betrayed and manipulated by Ahmadinejad. Many expressed the opinion that he was neither a genuine academic, as he wished to be identified, nor a religious-revolutionary, as pretended, or even not a “petty dictator” as labeled by the Columbia University president; he was simply a pompous liar, a miserable hypocrite and an arrogant individual with megalomaniac character who could endanger the security of the country and the well-being of the people by his eccentric behavior and odd policies.
In effect, Ahmadinejad proved to be a master manipulator of populace who managed to stay in office by rhetoric, pretensions and fabrication of false statistics about inflation, unemployment and many other major economic indexes. Iranians and the country as a whole have suffered very much during his tenure in office.
When finally the results of the votes came out in early morning of June 13, surprisingly, Ahmadinejad came out as victor with a landslide difference with other contenders. Only God knows what happened to the ballot boxes and the smart people of Iran in casting their votes in the memorable elections day!
While reformists are baffled about the results of the elections, there is little hope that they could recover from the decisive defeat in the foreseeable future. In all circumstances, there was little chance for Moussavi, even if elected, to perform better than Khatami on essential issues, due to structural limitations and deficiencies of the Islamic regime. The defeat of reformists should be regarded as the end of hope for enthusiastic Iranians around the world who believed they can change the situation in Iran through peaceful democratic process.
Despite the ill-fated result of this contest for the reformists, there is no doubt that this event will boost people expectations and their demands for more transparency and accountability in future. Indeed the Islamic regime will need some time to recover from the shock of these unexpected revelations to its credibility and legitimacy.
On the other side, this paradoxical outcome will undoubtedly pave the path to further repression, poverty, insecurity and a host of other socio-political crises in Iran. From now on Iranians should be prepared for a harsher condition and a darker horizon unless some kind of miracle happens.
Iranians have been once again deceived in their earnest attempt towards shaping their destiny for a brighter future. Whatever the explanation for this strange occurrence and its plausible ramifications for Iran’s political development, the outcome of the elections can be construed as the demise of truth and reason and the triumph of deception, superstition, fanaticism and blind adventurism. /
___________________
Ali Asghar Kazemi is professor of Law and International Relations in Tehran, Iran. See: www.stradis.blogspot.com
* Students, researchers, academic institutions, media or any party interested in using all or parts of this article are welcomed to do so with the condition of giving full attribution to the author and Strategic Discourse. All Copy Rights reserved.

Who should be the Next President in Iran

 

Who should be the Next President in Iran?

Ali Asghar Kazemi

May 20, 2009

_______________

Almost three weeks away from the presidential elections in Iran, I have been asked by my students to give them some hints and advices regarding the most suitable candidate in the race. While I have my own personal views and preferences about the potential contenders, I feel very much reluctant to take side in public forum in favor of any of them at this particular point of time. Since, I believe, my duty as an academic is to shed light on the common traits of the would-be president in the present political and international environment of our country, rather than to speak in favor of any particular candidate.

In my previous comments regarding the presidential elections, I have listed a number of reasons for which people of various layers of the society may fell indifferent to participate in the process. Those considerations could still be valid as long as candidates do not explicitly clarify their positions with respect of a number of critical issues entailing the country and their concrete measures and policies to cure them. These issues encompass all sectors of the society including, social, economic, political, strategic, legal, environmental etc.

Of course, as I mentioned before, the president is not powerful enough to bring all the changes we might envisage. But, the least that he can achieve is to demonstrate his determination for change and to assure people of his resolve to cope with many socio-political malaises which inhibit the overall trend of the country towards democracy, human rights, justice and equity.

Here are some main points in my humble view to be considered in our choice of the next president for Iran:

1) Before anything, the president should be a person who is mentally sound and without prejudice of any kind. Since, once elected, he will be the president of all people disregard of their beliefs, religious preference, political tendency, economic status or social standing. As the symbol of national identity, he should represent the whole and not a fraction of nation in international scene. He should realize that from the minute he becomes president his words, behavior, attitude, manners and the overall world views become under scrutiny inside and outside the country.

2) Our country has a long history of tyranny, authoritarian rules and repression. The president should exercise to keep away from those historical syndromes by being restraint, tolerant, broadminded and forward thinking. He should avoid the temptation of using malicious instruments at hand for revenging his political opponents. These require that he should be accountable and be open to critique even if it comes from the opposition groups.

3) The president is not supposed to have full knowledge about all the sophistication and subtleties of economics, politics, military and legal matters, but, he must be intelligent and receptive enough to get the advices from the elites, intellectuals, academics, scholars and specialists in various fields. The president should be experienced and humble enough not to be mired by the power of the office or become overwhelmed and exalted by the authority bestowed to him by the nation.

4) Thus, he should avoid favoritism, discrimination and intolerance and in all instances he should think of our national interests, our prestige, history and stature of the country. He may be a fine, compassionate and generous person, but as a president, he is not allowed to give out the wealth of the country to dubious and questionable groups and movements outside the country; neither is he supposed to provide money to people for the sake of his own popularity.

5) The president should govern the country on the basis of wisdom, rationality and according to collective wills and interests. He is responsible for the security of our country, thus, he should avoid turning our potential friends into foes by taking unnecessary positions on critical issues. He should capture opportunities through appropriate policies and actions to neutralize threats; to turn our rivals into associates and to transform our enemies into friends.

The above characteristics are only few important traits of a typical president that we should look for in the next elections. Of course, it is extremely difficult to find all those features in one particular candidate, but, we have to elect the one who is relatively in a better position than the others to the best of our knowledge.

We should use our constituent power not to allow demagogues and obsessive personalities to unduly ascend to the office of the president in Iran. Because, our nation merits a much higher status in the present world order and our people deserves a much better condition of life than what we experienced during the past years. Despite all the encumbrances and shortcomings we have in our political institutions and legal system, there is little doubt that we can achieve our demands and objectives in the years to come, provided we use our collective power to change the situation before it is too late. /

________________

Ali Asghar Kazemi is Professor of Law and International Relations in Tehran- Iran. For detail see:  www.aakazemi.blogspot.com

The Logic of War against Taliban and Talibanism

 

The Logic of War Against Taliban and Talibanism

Ali Asghar Kazemi

May 15, 2009

____________________

Ever since September 11, 2009 events, Taliban and Talibanism have been chased and killed by masses, yet, they are still full of zeal and causing widespread troubles in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Recent Pakistani raids on their agglomerations on the initiative of the United States bring about a number of crucial problems about the rationality of Obama’s recent policy in this respect.

While I have no fond of these fanatical groups who fight with rudimentary means the most equipped and powerful forces representing the NATO, I have serious doubts about the logic of this protracted war and the humanitarian aspects involved therein.

In this short comment I venture to examine the flagrant flaws of American policy under Obama to open new fronts against Taliban in Pakistan with the objective of eradicating this movement, which supposedly is endangering the legitimate government of a nuclear power state.

                                                           *

Indeed September 11 attack was an awful experience and humiliation for the United States and changed many precepts in international relations including prevailing conceptions on war, terror, religion, radicalism etc. We shall not attempt here to trace the dubious account of the creation and support of Afghan Mujahedeen including Taliban- since, it is now well known that they were recruited and equipped while studying in Pakistani religious schools (Madrassa) during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1980s. It is believed that Pakistan’s army intelligence is the godfather of Taliban. Surprisingly, the same forces are now tasked to carry on the new American strategy against Taliban in that country.

American invasion of Afghanistan to topple the self-invented Taliban, who had ousted Russians from their land, momentarily, satisfied Washington’s desire for revenging Al-Qaeda. But, the United States and its allies in the NATO failed to understand the nature of the threat and characteristics of their enemies. Taliban only represented a radical idea of traditional Islam and a culture that cannot be defeated by naked force.

The collapse of the Soviet empire and the decline of communism in the last decade of the 20^th century led to the resurgence of dormant ideologies imbedded with religions inspired rigid traditionalism, especially in the Middle East. The fact of the matter is that religious motivated movements have been so far able to free occupied territories and to fight against powerful countries for people liberation by using tactics which is labeled “terrorism” for simplicity. In such case the freedom fighters or liberation movements sought justification for their operations via the attainment of a legitimate cause. For example, the Algerian struggle for independence turned into terrorism, once the rebel armies were virtually beaten in the field by the French forces. It was only after recourse to such activities that French military might in Algeria came to its knees.

The Moslem Shiite Militia in South Lebanon pushed the Israelis out of their occupied land through harshest “terrorist” activities. Afghan Moslem Mujahedeen (Taliban), too fought a Superpower (USSR) through guerrilla warfare and “terrorist operations” in occupied Afghanistan. They caused the most trouble to Moscow, as did North Vietnamese to the United States.

Surprisingly, after so many years of fighting and subjugation, Taliban are now on the move anew against NATO forces in Afghanistan, considered as enemy and occupiers. Taliban have already demonstrated that they can achieve disproportionately large effects with a relatively small number and limited capacity for violence. More recently in Pakistan, they have caused widespread alarm, compelling governments with a clear preponderance of conventional military power to negotiate with them, to grant them concessions or simply to back down with humiliation.

Urban guerrilla warfare, low-level violence or mob actions directed by religious groups are dimensions of ideological conflicts and revolutionary theories which now manifest in form of domestic and international terrorism. Dissidents of tyrant leaders and dictatorial regimes find their voice heard and their cause achieved through what we call "terrorism" for sake of simplicity, but they consider it legitimate “jihad” or just struggle against the infidels and their enemies.

Religiously inspired terrors are understandably more ferocious and crueler than mere political violence’s or mob actions. When for example, martyrdom is considered as a grace and blessing of God, a Moslem extremist and dedicated believer can easily risk his life in a suicidal attack in order to do damage to his ideological opponents. The resurgence of the Islamic fundamentalist movement in the Middle-East whose participants preach total devotion and submission to the will of God, and negation of earthly materialism, is indeed a crucial development of our time which is capable of destabilizing the international system and world order.

There is no doubt that Pakistan army is powerful enough to cause extensive damage to the so-called Taliban. But, one should understand that they are only fighting a concept; a tradition and culture which happen to be more visible in that country. The collateral damages of recent offensive are unfortunately very high and in breach of the accepted norms and 1949 Geneva Conventions and related 1977 additional protocols. The consequences of this policy will be very costly for the region and for the American as well. Since, those who are familiar with tribal character and strict Moslem traditions, realize that this fratricide will only deepen the hatred and enmity among people of this country and the West for generations.

Fighting Taliban with hard power, i.e. force of guns, artillery and fighter planes will surely not solve the problem; neither in Pakistan, Afghanistan or anywhere else. Americans and their allies should realize this bitter fact that they are fighting an idea and not a group of devoted people who could regenerate itself through time and more ferociously. They must search for avenues to cope with intolerance and fanaticism in this hostile region. They should find appropriate ways and means to neutralize that idea through education, cultural change and economic development. Otherwise, the world will experience much worse condition in the future. /

__________

Ali Asghar Kazemi is Professor of Law and International Relations in Tehran-Iran.

Iran: Elections and Political Apathy

 

Iran: Elections and Political Apathy

Ali Asghar Kazemi

May 7, 2009

________________

Aristotle described man as “political animal” on the ground that human being is compelled to live in collectivities within the boundaries of a political system. But, people are by no means equally concerned with political life. In other words, some people are indifferent and others are more concerned with political matters. Among this latter group, only a few get deeply and passionately involved in pursuit of power.

In open societies with developed democratic institutions and popular governments, opportunities for political participation of citizens are available and people are encouraged to get actively involved in formulating their demands through parties and interest groups. On the contrary, in oligarchic societies, citizens tend to choose apathetic approach to political realm and become relatively inactive in deciding their socio-political fate.

Political apathy is usually regarded as a social malaise in developed societies. In countries where civil society is still lagging behind traditional and fatalistic customs, apathy is a way of life to avoid hazards of political stratum. In this case, it is merely a cure manifested as conscious decision to cope with authoritarianism, demagoguery and repression in societies where expressing political opinions and criticisms are considered beyond the realm of citizen rights.

Some writers trace this malaise within the attributes of political culture that are strengthened by the force of ideology and beliefs, and others prefer to put the blame on institutions and structures. Whatever the cause, political apathy in public or private spheres relates to some kind of indifference towards events entailing collective interests.

Iranians by nature are suspicious to politicians and political matters. This is mainly due to vicissitudes experienced in the Persians history. Iranians have learned that they should avoid standing on the way of the rulers as long as they hold power, since; they may become victim of a mischance and lose their heads. There is a dictum in Persian which says “Always avoid walking behind an ass and in front of the Sultan!” Of course the Sultan here represents the tyrant par excellence whose behavior is unpredictable.

True that Iranians were the first to launch a constitutional revolution in the Middle East almost a century ago. But, even then, they were guided by mere immature and sightless temptation than a conscious political calculation. As a result, few years later they were driven again into a new oligarchy not better than the old one. The 1979 revolution, which led to the emergence of a religious rule, failed to generate the necessary environment for the creation of a strong “civil society” needed for political development and related institutions. Foreign war, domestic crises, economic depression and other socio-political malaises are taken responsible for the deficiencies.

While political apathy is more or less common to all societies, its causes are different in developed and non-developed countries. In Iran, thirty years after the second revolution, people are still perplexed as how to behave and which way to go in the political life and whether they should get actively involved in the political stratum or just leave things to the fate and divine providence.

There are several fundamental reasons why various layers of society including intellectuals, academics and ordinary people might not get actively involved in the coming presidential elections in Iran. The following propositions may fit into one or more categories and layers of citizenry leading to political apathy:

· Some people believe that the president is not the key person to solve fundamental issues of the country;

· People don’t see much differences between candidates;

· People have not enough information about various candidates’ program;

· Some people think that they can’t elect their true candidate;

· Some people don’t think their participation is decisive in the elections;

· People don’t get the expected benefit from their involvement;

· People don’t have confidence on the integrity and reliability of the elections;

· Some people think that the outcome of the election will not change their condition;

· Some people believe whatever the outcome of the election their interests will be served;

· And finally some people are inherently indifferent to political matters.

Apart from numerous odd figures who usually register for fun, thus far, a number of serious candidates of the conservative and reformist groups have declared their intention to run for the office. They all claim to feel duty-bound to devote them-selves to the cause of the nation and Islam. They all pretend to fight corruption, to promote justice and well-being, to improve economic structure and to cope with galloping inflation. They all declare to be obedient and true follower of the supreme religious leader. Yet, once in office, they merely think of their interests and survival.

As stated in my previous comments, while reformists seems to have better chances to win the upcoming presidential elections, due to the horrendous failures of the incumbent conservative government in domestic and international affairs , it is faire to suggest that neither the conservative nor the reformist candidates or any other person in that capacity is powerful enough to make substantive changes in the structure or religious-revolutionary nature of the Islamic regime. They both pursue the same goals with different styles. They can merely act within a limited boundary determined to them either by law or by the authority of the leader. The difference is purely that of approach reflecting individual character, social background and philosophical outlook.

We shall wait and see who will come out of the ballot boxes simply for satisfying our curiosity. But, we should not expect a drastic change in the course and substance of the Islamic regime’s policies entailing most critical issues of our time. /

_____________

Ali Asghar Kazemi holds PhD. from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, Medford, Mass, USA. He is former Dean of the Faculty of Law and Political Science and professor of Law and International Relations at the IAU, Science and Research Center in Tehran, Iran. For detail see: www.aakazemi.blogspot.com