Iran Elections

Posted: June 15, 2009

Iranian officials declared Mahmoud Ahmadinejad the official winner of the presidential election on June 13, but opponents insist the vote was rigged.

Iran's Interior Ministry said Ahmadinejad won 62.6 percent of the vote, with the reformist candidate and lead challenger, Mir Hussein Moussavi, taking just under 34 percent. Turnout was a record 85 percent, according to the Interior Ministry.

The Interior Ministry banned political rallies, but tens of thousands of opponents continued to march in the streets in protest of what they say is a fraudulent election. Riot police over the weekend battled protesters and detained opposition supporters, according to numerous reports.

Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei reportedly asked the Guardian Council to examine opposition complaints of widespread electoral irregularities.

USIP's Asieh Mir assesses the developments and answers your questions about the Iranian election on USIP's Facebook discussion board! She and other specialists at USIP on June 25 will talk about the elections and its implications for U.S.-Iranian relations. USIP also will release Negotiating with Iran: Wrestling with Ghosts of History by John Limbert.

• Who are the protesters? What are they calling for?
• Is it illegal to protest?
• What would be evidence that the vote was rigged?
• Is there any legal avenue to review the election results? What can Moussavi and his supporters do to have the results verified?
• Could officials annul the declared outcome?
• How much support does Moussavi have – and from who?
• How are Moussavi's policies different from those of Ahmadinejad?
• What happens next?
• What do you make of the record turnout?
• What does this mean for the future of Iran's democracy?
• Do you think this is a coup? If so, what should be done?
• What does this mean for U.S. relations going forward?

Who are the protesters? What are they calling for?

Hours after the election, the interior ministry announced Ahmadinejad as the winner. While all of the polling indicated that the reformist candidate Moussavi was far ahead of Ahmadinejad. But the official election results state that Ahmadinejad won by a wide margin. People are understandably angry, knowing that despite the large turnout and support for Moussavi, Ahmadinejad was still declared the winner of the election.

People in the street are protesting the election results and asking for a recount.

Given the authoritarian nature of the Islamic regime, the primary avenue for political participation in Iran is the ballot. But, now, their vote has been denied.

Is it illegal to protest?

Gatherings are not allowed without permission from the Interior Ministry, according to the constitution. Furthermore, the Interior Ministry and the supreme leader of Iran on Monday explicitly prohibited gatherings in the street.

Iran has not had any protests of this size since the Islamic Revolution in 1979 revolution. So, this is a very significant moment.

What would be evidence that the vote was rigged?

There is mounting evidence indicating that Ahmadinejad's government used fraudulent tactics in this election.

First, the Interior Ministry decreased the number of eligible voters from 49 million to 46 million. They got rid of many experienced and trusted members of the election body, and replaced them with Ahmadinejad loyalists.

They also started to announce the result of election in some districts while the polls were not officially closed.

Because the electoral system in Iran is not computerized, it is highly unlikely that the Interior Ministry could have counted 42 million votes in such a short amount of time.

Furthermore, the supreme leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei , did not follow the constitutional process in announcing election results. According to the constitution, when the election results are tallied, the Guardian Council has to approve the results, the supreme leader has to corroborate the results and finally announce the winner.

Yet, Khamenei was the first to congratulate Ahmadinejad.

Is there any legal avenue to review the election results? What can Moussavi and his supporters do to have the results verified?

Legally, either the Guardian Council or the supreme leader can ask for a recount if they desire one.

Khamenei has reportedly called for an inquiry into accusations of election irregularities.

Moussavi can lodge a formal complaint with the Interior Ministry or the judiciary. However, that seems useless at the moment. To date, Moussavi has written a letter to the supreme leader asking him to reconsider the election result. He also wrote a letter to the powerful religious establishment asking them to mediate to resolve the problem.

Could officials annul the declared outcome?

Legally yes, but this is unlikely unless the civil unrest continue and cripple the country or there is more bloodshed. Unfortunately, there is a fact we need to see. The riot police became highly dependent on Ahmadinejad's policies, so it is unlikely that they will go easy on the protesters. Given the lack that Ahmadinejad is disconnecting communication between reformist and people are, I am not sure how far people can continue to show their protest.

How much support does Moussavi have – and from who?

At the leadership level, Moussavi has the support of two former presidents, Mohammad Khatami and Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani , who are very influential. Moussavi also has the support of many in the middle and upper classes, as well as some members of the religious establishment.

For example, a moderate clerical body, the Association of Combatant Clergy, issued a statement on June 14 saying the vote was rigged and called for it to be annulled.

Some military commanders – especially the older generation who supported him when Moussavi was prime minister in the 1980s during the Iran-Iraq war – back him as well.

How are Moussavi's policies different from those of Ahmadinejad?

Moussavi's plans for both domestic and foreign policy were fundamentally different from Ahmadinejad's. Regarding domestic policy, he advocates a more democratic agenda, including social freedom, human rights and women's rights. In contrast, Ahmadinejad's record with social freedoms and rights during the past four years has been deplorable.

Moussavi's foreign policy stance almost completely opposes Ahmadinejad's policies. For example, Moussavi disparaged Ahmadinejad's denial of the Holocaust, calling it the "wrong policy." Moussavi has dismissed such denials, highlighting that Jews who escaped Europe and fled to Iran have "their graves…still kept intact in Tehran." Moussavi also expressed his willingness to negotiate with Obama's administration based on "mutual respect and mutual interest."

Lastly, Moussavi introduced a détente policy that will help to build trust with the international community.

There is clearly a drastic divergence between these two on domestic and foreign policies.

What happens next?

It is hard to say. It depends on many factors. First, it depends on the internal dynamics of Iranian politics. The leadership in Iran is not a unified one.

If the religious leaders, such as the great Ayatollahs, or if the Expediency Council – which has "supervisory" powers over all branches of government -- take a strong stand against the election results, that would pressure Khamanei to modify his call of the election.

This is unlikely, but certainly not impossible. It also depends on how much people are ready to fight back. Ahmadinejad's brutal and suppressive tactics make uprisings extremely difficult.

It also depends on how the international community responds.

For instance, an aggressive approach toward Iran will destroy the democratic movement that continues to challenge the regime. Any military action against Iran will rally all Iranians – even Ahmadinejad's opponents – around the regime in defense of their land. Any assertive action could undermine the democratic movement and spark extremism in the region.

What do you make of the record turnout?

Considering the authoritarian nature of the Islamic regime, the primary avenue for political participation in Iran is through the ballot box.

Many Iranians boycotted the last presidential election, which resulted in Ahmadijad's victory. Consequently, Iranians learned to take advantage of their right to vote, and people from all walks of life participated in this election in order to remove Ahmadinejad from power.

The younger generation was particularly active in this election. Young Iranians are well educated, technologically savvy, and know what they want. And, Moussavi is extremely popular with this generation. His gatherings were jam-packed with young men and women, who would cheer loudly when he spoke about rights and democracy.

With approximately 700,000 Iranian bloggers and 24 million Internet users, they create a new cyber-culture that pushes for democracy. The websites and blogs demonstrate that this generation wants to redefine their lives beyond the conservative principles enforced by the Islamic regime for the past three decades.

Iranians of this younger generation want to revisit the revolutionary principles with a new lens of an open society. They want the original goals of the 1979 Revolution: they want freedom, they want democracy, and cultural and national independence – but they don’t want it imposed by the Iranian government or other countries.

They want their own version of democracy.

This puts pressure on the politicians to address the concerns and accommodate the needs of a new generation.

What does this mean for the future of Iran’s democracy?

Since the Islamic Revolution, the regime always prided itself on having so-called free and fair elections. And, they have been relatively fair in the past. That’s why people came to the voting booths in the first place. We’ve never had massive fraud like this in the elections. It’s so obvious and huge, that nobody can believe it. Other reformist candidates invited people to support Moussavi in order to defeat Ahmadinejad; they believed that they could change the government through the election.

Before the election day itself, the quality – and the liveliness -- of the campaign was a good sign for Iran’s democracy. Reformist candidates took new and more liberal positions on many issues that previously had been off-limits from public debate, such as equality between men and women, the absurdity of moral police and the compulsory hejab, or Islamic dress code.

For the first time, the campaign included debate over Iran’s foreign policy, which has always been under the control of the supreme leader.

The democratic movement, which surfaced by the 1998 elections, gained further momentum since this presidential campaign heated up.

The democratic movement is now stronger than before because people are showing a strong determination to see their vote counted. They poured into street and demanded a recount of the vote.

The cooperation, participation and coalition-building among the political parties through this election cycle indicate a great deal of political maturity.

So, it is an especially hard blow to Iranian democracy to have such electoral improprieties. Without an honest review of these electoral results, people will have no legitimate avenue to participate politically and they will be pushed to take more radical means.

Do you think this is a coup? If so, what should be done?

This is obviously a coup. Ahmadinejad and his supporters staged a coup and are now suppressing people. If that continues then the international community needs to take action.

In other cases, the international community would normally take the position of condemning an illegitimate election and regime. This is the least expected from international community. We need a collective action to face the illegitimate government of Iran. One way is to open the door for Iranian citizens to travel abroad, but not grant visas to Amadinejad and members of his illegitimate government. I believe this a first step in putting pressure on him and his administration.

What does this mean for U.S. relations going forward?

If Ahmadinejad stays in office and the people cannot force the government to recount the votes, then we will see a very uncertain and unsteady way forward between the U.S. and Iran. For one thing, if Ahmadinejad stays in power, we will continue to have a tough negotiation process with Iran over the nuclear issues.

President Barack Obama has taken a smart position so far in saying he has doubts about the election results rather condemning the election outright. He's allowing the internal dynamics to evolve in Iran, rather than taking a firmer position which could jeopardize the democratic movement.

But, this is a quickly changing situation. We have to continue to watch what unfolds.