Iran at the Crossroads

Mohammed Reza Khatami

Mohammed Reza Khatami is member of the Iranian legislative body, the Islamic Consultative Assembly, and the leader of the Islamic Iran Participation Front, the main reformist group in Iran. He was interviewed by IslamOnline’s Amal Hamada in Tehran, on December 25th, 2003.

IslamOnline: Ever since 1997, the terms “reform” and “reformists” have come to the forefront of the political arena inside and outside Iran. Do you think that the reform movement was brought to existence with the election of President Khatami, with whom the movement has been identified? Or was it the right time for reform anyway, even without the presence of someone like Khatami?

Mohammed Reza Khatami: The term reform was not used until three years after the election of Mr. Khatami. He was elected because the people wanted him, as they felt he would fulfill the needs of society and different classes. No one, including Khatami himself, expected Khatami to win. His objective was to run for election to get 4-5 million votes. He wanted to set up a base of popularity for the future. This calculation proved to be wrong; instead, twenty millions voted for him, most of whom had different agendas from those anticipated.

Consequently, the reformists were born premature; this is why some people are not happy with the reformists’ performance. What Mr. Khatami did was reveal the issues of concern for the people. This movement will eventually consolidate.  

IOL: How do you explain the high level of political participation and involvement of the Iranian people in politics?

MK: Politics constitutes a crucial component in Iranians’ lives. In three years, 100 years will have passed since the constitutional revolution occurred. This revolution was unprecedented in the region. During these years, we have had 6-7 important political movements.

Also, the number of university students has increased in the last ten years; so there is an increasing number of people who have access to knowledge.

Second, everything in our country – like the oil and the economy, for example – belongs to the state. This makes the people in need for the government, not vice versa. People in their daily lives are dependant on the government.

Third, at the beginning of the revolution, revolutionaries believed that as they were able to change the regime of the Shah, they were able to participate.

The war with Iraq also helped in uniting the people.

Fourth, after the war, the government used religion in politics, and this provoked people to come again and take things in their hands. All issues of daily life were related to politics; hijab, social affairs, even emotions were political issues.

IOL: There is coordination among different factions of reformists concerning whether to participate in or boycott the next parliamentary elections, but there is a feeling that you, reformists, are going to lose the elections. Otherwise, why have you decided to boycott the elections? Does not the decision to boycott the elections give the conservatives a sense of power that is not necessarily true? What about the proposal to mobilize 18-20 millions to cast blank ballots?

MK: Reformists don’t believe that they are unable to find a tolerable solution for their problems. The main issue when they decide to participate is how they can benefit from participation, and how the conservatives can legitimize their presence if everybody participates. If the reformists do not participate, they have to think of further steps. What are the consequences of not participating? In countries like ours, where democracy is not institutionalized, participation gives us a sense of security. If there is a minimal advantage in participation, we should participate.

If structural power rests with the conservatives, the rest will be eliminated. They will hinder the activities of every reformist. Therefore, during the last few months, discussions have brought some hope, to a certain degree.

As for the issue of casting blank ballots, it is impossible to mobilize such a number in parliamentary elections, especially in small cities. It is tribal connections, not political preferences, that influence people’s choices. Most of the members of parliament (220 MPs) are from small cities and villages, and it is impossible to do this. But for the presidential election, it is possible to cast a big number of blank ballots.

IOL: Will the next parliament witness a cold war or an open war between the two parties – the reformists and the conservatives?

MK: The sixth Majlis was able to stop all harassment. The conservatives are unable to act the way they used to. In the sixth Majlis we were able to ratify bills allowing activities of civil society and NGOs, to some extent. But the problem is that one year after the parliamentary elections, we will have the presidential election, and that is more important. If the conservatives win the presidential election, this will be a backlash; and if the reformists win it, conservatives will be frustrated and will try to use more power against reformists.

As for the performance of the sixth Majlis, reformists were able to stop the conservatives: during the last year, no newspapers were closed, and the parliament was able to act wisely on the nuclear file and convince the leader to sign the extra protocol. On the economic level, the reformists have done a basic job and they will continue: billions of dollars of foreign investment have entered Iran , with the risk of investment reduced, the exchange rate has been stabilized, the process of privatization is on course, and we have succeeded in downsizing the government. Contrary to what is known, this Majlis was very successful, but the outcome will appear in the future. 

IOL: If you win the elections, but the structure of power remains to be the same, what are your plans as to how to deal with the difficult problems of Iran , especially the economic ones?

MK: If you look at the list of conservative candidates, you will notice that the prominent figures are not running for the next parliamentary elections. The question is why. There are new faces among conservatives. They know that it is time for change. If they can do the job (handle the problems of society), they are welcomed. Now the conservatives know that they lost their traditional power, and the new generation of conservatives are getting closer to reform and are more realistic. The core of power in the system is getting weaker and weaker, and time is on the reformists’ side. Yet, if the reformists lose these elections, it will be hard to tell the people to wait for 5 years to see a change.

IOL: It is fascinating to see that the youth and the victims of war are holding important positions. Does this create pressure on the government to respond to the immediate needs of the people and ignore the strategic needs of development?

MK: This generational evolution was not planned. The revolution at the beginning encouraged people to have more kids to increase its sense of security. But this created problems for Iran afterwards.

The main problem is that the economy is oil-based. As long as we have this problem, the government will continue to lack strategic planning for development. The government is paying for everything to buy time. The reformists have a say on that. There have been proposals that oil money should be used to bribe people; however, Mr. Khatami refused and he created a special fund for infrastructure purposes and long-term planning for investment.

IOL: In your opinion, what are the most urgent problems facing Iranian women? And what is the position of the reformists on these problems?

MK: For the time being, the problems facing women and men are the same. Women have the advantage of not going to jail for political reasons.

As for the challenges, they are mostly cultural ones relating to the male-dominant culture; however, this should be addressed gradually.

Secondly, concerning the right of women to challenge issues of the civil law of the Shah, with its discrimination against women, there have been more problems, even after the revolution.

Thirdly, thanks to the increasing awareness of women, they managed to participate in the power structure. But this participation is not existent at the grassroots level. And the most important problem is unemployment, especially the creation of jobs for higher educated people. For now, the definition of jobs suitable for women is very strict (there are fields that are closed for women), and it is important to challenge this problem, otherwise the system will explode.

Finally, we have to change the approach of our minds, culture and society towards women.

IOL: How do you see the Iranian future in light of the US presence on the eastern and western borders of Iran ?

MK: I do not expect the US to interfere in Iran ’s affairs. If they are pro-democracy, they should help us (reformists) rather than interfere; otherwise conditions in Iran will deteriorate. In other words, if the US interferes, it will push the extremists, not the conservatives, to the front.

We should understand the US ’ concerns, and they should put some pressure regarding human rights, but they shouldn’t interfere. Nevertheless, because they are biased, we think that they have other goals that are not related to human rights. Foreign policy is about national interest, not ideology: When our interests are met, we have normal relations, and if we have conflicting interests, we will have a dialogue. But if our interests are threatened, then we will resist.

IOL: There has been much said about charity foundations and their financial status. How are the reformists in the parliament planning to deal with this problem?

MK: The real problem is with the companies that belong to different ministries. They contribute to two thirds of the budget. These companies are not supervised by the Majlis and we have a plan to privatize them. As for charity foundations, they are affiliated to the leader, and no body can question him, nor his affiliates. This is a political issue, not an economic one. Next year’s parliamentary elections are about “good governance,” which is about accountability. Charity foundations are not accountable before any one except the leader. And they have political preferences; they help their supporters. For example, the main source of support for the conservatives is the Basij. During the last council elections, it was the Basij who stepped in and voted for the conservatives.