The Iranian election: A contrarian view
By Max J. Castro
majcastro@gmail.com
Viewed from the West, it’s hard not to sympathize with Mir Housein Mousavi and the Iranian opposition forces that have challenged president Ahmadinejad. Ahmadinejad is a demagogue and buffoon, and not a charming one at that. His pronouncements are provocative, offensive and uninformed, with Holocaust denial but the crowning touch. His policies are not much better.
The supporters of Mousavi, on the other hand look like they represent a breath of fresh air. Young and enthusiastic, clad in bright green, they seem to hold out the hope of new and beautiful Iran ready to seize power from a theocratic, sclerotic establishment. Judging by the size and the energy of the opposition crowds, it would be easy to conclude that Mousavi would win in a landslide.
But this may well be wishful thinking, a lyrical illusion. There is no doubt that the vast majority of the educated, the young, and the cosmopolitan sectors in Tehran are fed up with the tyranny of the clerics and the antics of Ahmadinejad. Their rallies were brave, exciting, inspiring.
Yet artists, intellectuals, and the educated upper middle class do not represent a majority, especially in a developing country such as Iran. Judging by the attire, the rural masses and the urban poor were not visible in the opposition rallies.
Ahmadinejad’s rallies were also huge but much less reported. The novelty was the presence of such a massive and open opposition to the regime’s leader. That was news. The media is not to blame but it might have distorted the picture nevertheless.
It may be tough to swallow, but it’s possible that a majority of Iranians indeed voted for Ahmadinejad. The nationalist, bellicose approach has a political base, even in a country as urban an educated as the United States. Or else how to explain George W. Bush’s victory in 2004. In Iran, which has been in a non-stop verbal war with the United States for decades and has even been designated as a link in the axis of evil, the call to belligerent nationalism resonates even louder.
The evidence for the thesis I have laid out here comes from a poll conducted in May by a professional polling organization with funding by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund. The poll found Ahmadinejad leading 2-to-1 over Mousavi. The only demographic groups that favored Mousavi were students, intellectuals and high income groups.
The poll was reported by Ken Ballen and Patrick Doherty in a June 15th article in the Washington Post. According to the authors, in the same poll, 77 percent of Iranians favor better relations with the United States. How do the authors explain this paradox? “Iranians apparently see Ahmadinejad as their toughest negotiator, the person best positioned to bring home a favorable deal…”
It’s possible that this poll is simply wrong, especially since the response rate was only 50 percent. The intimidation factor cannot be ignored. But it is also possible that we are witnessing a Venezuela-like mirage in which the opposition always seems poised to win but Chavez always trounces it. The Iran that communicates through Twitter is not a majority of the nation but a fraction of its young, educated elite.
Ahmadinejad may seem like a clown and a reckless demagogue to some of his people and to the rest of the world but it is just possible that the majority of Iranian people see him in quite a different light.
