After serving his full eight years incumbency, the rhetorical President of Islamic republic of Iran shook hand in farewell. He was replaced a well-known soberly moderate religious scholar Hassan Rohani who, against earlier expectation and calculation, came to power to through an acceptable presidential election. With ban of moderate and reformists candidates by “guardian council”, a highly power monitoring body with 12 members, six of whom are religious scholars directly appointed or dismissed by Iranian supreme leader Ayatullah Ali Khamenei and six others are lawyers who are introduced by chief of the legislation and approved by parliament. So, it is highly possible that candidates without the support of Supreme leader hardly find the chance to try his luck for the presidential position. Anyhow this council disqualified Mr. Hashimi Rafsanjani, a veteran politician, former president and a popular moderate much tilted to reformist wing.
His rejection sparked serious criticism from his supporters within and out of the Islamic republic. The only reason later on disclosed was his physical weakness which was certainly baseless.
On other hand, the favorite candidate of Mr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad faced similar destiny. Asfandiyar Rahim Mashaei, the former deputy to President Ahmadinejad and later on his chief of the staff was also rejected by the guardian council. Mr. Ahmadinejad told that he will criticize the decision but seemingly the council is far powerful to be challenged particularly it has the support of Supreme leader. Indeed, the disqualification of Rahim Mashaei was not much unexpected. Being a close friend of Ahmadinejad was a strong reason for the decision.
However, President Ahmadinejad was close to the supreme leader and he had his support. Even during the second presidential election in 2008 when millions marched to streets, asking for their votes and claiming widespread fraud in the election, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei openly interfered to the issue in his support. Mr. Khamenei went against reformist leaders rejecting any destiny changer fraud in election. His support immensely strengthened the conservative wing and vice versa pressure ramped up against reformist leaders which finally led to under house arrest. But the problem of Ahmadinejad with Iranian Supreme Leader started during the end of his first presidential term further strengthened during his second presidential round. Seemingly, Rahim Mashaei was a controversial figure in his government. He had widespread oppositions within the conservative wing as once because of him a conservative MP openly put the issue of summoning of Ahmadinejad to parliament which was unprecedented event in the political history of Islamic republic.
The gap further enlarged as Mr. President discharged the minister of intelligence, Haidar Muslihi, on whose favor Ayatollah Ali Khamenei reinstated him that seriously tensed the relation between leader and his devotee. This situation terribly weakened the status of Ahamdinejad. Many from within the conservative wings branded his team as perverted movement. So, this opposition was enough for Esfandiyar Rahim Mashaei to be disqualified by the Guardian Council.
The story between the system and reformists is different. The reformists’ leaders are under the house arrest like Mir Hussain Mosavi and Mahdi Karoobi. The disqualification of Hashimi Rafsanjani showed that the system feared even the moderate who are committed to system’s principles but only push for comparatively opener society.
Thus, however many deem Hasan Rohani as reformists, but I really doubt in spite of believe that he is far better the core establishment of the system. However, he has registered visibly attractive activities in his political profile when he was the chief nuclear negotiator, but he was not popular as reformist leader. When both Mahdi Karoobi and Mir Hussein Mosavi along with their supporters marched to streets, asking for their rights and which later on ended up to their house arrest, many key figures directly or indirectly voiced out their criticism, but Mr. President Rohani does not have anything to be branded as his support to reformist wing. He only once appeared as the representative of reformist wing when reformists’ and moderate leaders voiced out their support for him that actually shot him to presidential position somehow within a short period. He recently took an oath and started his job as the new president of Iran and from the very start has given signal to negotiate with western countries that during incumbency of former president imposed back-breaking sanctions.
Many in the west now push politicians to strike deal with new government, hoping that reformist and moderate wing keeps away from the belligerent policies that conservative follows. Last month, many democratic and republican representatives in lower house of the parliament signed a letter which called the government to open a direct negotiating door with Tehran.
These all show that he is largely accepted as the representative of reformists. Such a favorable concept of him made even the supreme leader to open mouth in severe criticisms of reformist leaders who are currently under house arrest. He told that they should apologize for claiming fraud in presidential election in 2008.
Now the question is this that does he represent reformists or conservatives? In the first case, no doubt, he has come to power by the votes of middle class, viewed as supporters of reformist wing. So, in order not frustrate those who voted for him, he should take bold steps to end to the house arrest of his colleagues which also can send a strong message to supporters of diplomacy in the west. On the other hand, if he continues working under the auspicious power of supreme leader because of his old and tight bondage, there would a visible reform in domestic sphere. But in foreign sphere it looks really difficult to guess because indeed it is not clear that what would be the ultimate position of supreme leader. Have sanctions pressed him enough to change his mind for the sake saving the Islamic system or he still support resisting policy against what he call as arrogance of imperialists.