DOCSLIB.ORG

View PDF Datastream

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
View PDF Datastream BUJMES ◆ VOL 1 ◆ № 1 56 COMMUNISTS, ISLAMISTS, AND THE MAKINGS OF A MOVEMENT The Tudeh Party and the Complex Political Underpinnings of the Iranian Revolution Sara Alavi Edited by Zahra Asghar, Ryan Saadeh early 40 years after the Iranian Revolution of 1979, Western media N outlets, academic papers, and government officials alike continue to refer to the end of the Pahlavi dynasty as the “Islamic” Revolution. In an age of travel bans and rampant xenophobic rhetoric, the “Islamic” Revolution is often wielded as evidence of Iran’s supposed “threat” to Western ideals. The oversimplification of the political and social under- pinnings of the Iranian Revolution is one of many examples of orien- talist rhetoric that homogenizes Southwest Asia/North Africa. Moreover, the implication that authoritarian elements of the Iranian government are fundamental to the Islamic faith allows Western powers to further demonize Islam as a whole. Far from simply being an Islamic revolution, the Revolution of 1979 was incited by a variety of sociopolitical factors that indicate the wide range of political beliefs held by the Iranian people. From communists to constitutionalists, feminists to various religious groups, those involved in the revolutionary effort were not driven exclu- sively by Islam so much as by a myriad of criticisms for which they envi- sioned one solution: an end to Reza Shah Pahlavi’s rule. Anti-monarchical fervor did not begin with Ayatollah Khomeini, but was a hallmark of the 57 BUJMES ◆ VOL 1 ◆ № 1 100 years leading up to the revolution. Much of this popular disdain for the Qajar and Pahlavi dynasties was rooted in the fight for Iranian autonomy as the Soviet Union and Great Britain wrestled for greater control over Iran and its resources. Iranians scornfully witnessed the concessions between Western powers and their leaders that limited their control over oil resources and spurred action to counter the influence these powers had on Iranian politics. A six-year Constitutional Revolution beginning in 1905 that rallied Iranians against the Qajar dynasty’s corruption and Russian concessions led to the establishment of a parliament to share the Shah’s power, but a British-backed coup in 1925 put the Pahlavi dynasty in power and delegitimized the power of this parliament.1 The pattern of the Iranian people pushing for more power in the government and being undermined by Western intervention continued throughout the 20th century. During World War II, British and Soviet troops occupied Iran and forced the shah to abdicate because of con- cerns with his sympathetic views towards Germany, putting his son Mohammad Reza Pahlavi in power in his place.2 In the post-war period of relative liberalism, the democratically elected parliament reasserted its influence and Mohammad Mossadegh was elected prime minister in 1951. Mossadegh and the rest of the parliament worked to nationalize Iranian oil, which had long been under the control of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company because of concessions with Great Britain.3 As a result, the United States and Britain worked together to overthrow the democratically elected Mossadegh in the 1953 coup which consolidated the Shah’s power until the revolution in 1979. With the Iranian monarchy safeguarding Western powers’ oil interests and evidence of blatant interference with 1 Stephen Zunes, “The Iranian Revolution (1977-1979),” International Center on Nonviolent Conflict (2009). https://www.nonviolent-conflict.org/iranian-revolution-1977-1979/. 2 Zunes, “The Iranian Revolution.” 3 Ervand Abrahamian, “The 1953 Coup in Iran,” Science & Society, no. 2 (2001): 182–215, www.jstor.org/stable/40403895. 58 COMMUNISTS, ISLAMISTS, AND THE MAKINGS OF A MOVEMENT the democratic process in Iran, anti-imperialism became an even more important driving factor of the anti-Shah movement. The United States’ involvement did not end there, nor did it cease to influence the day-to-day lives of Iranians as they grew increasingly frus- trated with the Shah’s authoritarian reign. With funding and arms from the United States, the Shah built an immensely strong army and secret police that terrorized any opposition with murder, imprisonment, and exile.4 Among the suppressed opposition was the Tudeh “masses” party which established the protection of democracy from fascism and imperialism as the cornerstone of their movement from their first meeting in 1941.5 Under the guidance of Iraj Iskandari, the Tudeh’s first secretary general, the party began as a liberal entity but quickly shifted left so that the first party congress convened in 1944 with a clear Marxist majority.6 Their ideology was especially attractive to the intelligentsia and those in favor of labor rights, and they had reached approximately 400,000 associates by the time of oil nationalization.7 At this time, their connection with the working class was quite strong, and they had the political capacity to pressure the government to suit their platform.8 However, the Tudeh’s influence did not last long. Crude torture and spy infiltration, likely assisted by the anti-communist CIA, allowed the Shah’s regime to unearth the entire Tudeh underground in 1953, leading to their disbandment.9 With their organizational base in ruins, the few remaining party leaders 4 Zunes, “The Iranian Revolution.” 5 Ervand Abrahamian, Tortured Confessions: Prisons and Public Recantations in Modern Iran (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999), 77. 6 Abrahamian, Tortured Confessions, 78. 7 Fred Halliday, “The Tudeh Party in Iranian Politics: Background Notes,” MERIP Reports, no. 86 (1980). www.jstor.org/stable/3012300/. 8 Maziar Behrooz, Rebels With a Cause: The Failure of the Left in Iran (London: I.B. Tauris & Co Ltd., 1999), 149. 9 Abrahamian, Tortured Confessions, 89. 59 BUJMES ◆ VOL 1 ◆ № 1 who escaped death or jail opted to flee to Eastern Europe.10 Thus, between 1957 and 1976, leaders in exile relied on radio stations and journals to craft an anti-Shah platform. The Tudeh’s reliance on radio and journals has strong parallels to the cassette tapes Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini smuggled into the country following the anti-Shah and anti-United States statements that lead to his exile in 1963.11 Although Khomeini did not reveal the true extent of his religious conservatism as he galvanized the Iranian population to revolt, his platform was distinctly more conservative than the progres- sive, left-wing ideology of the Tudeh party. Due to the intensely religious and undemocratic outcome of the revolution, it is easy to overlook the distinctly leftist groups that played a part in its execution. However, these influences are necessary to consider in order to more fully understand the needs of the Iranian people and the desires they had (and continue to have) for their government. The story of the Tudeh party speaks volumes to the diversity of political thought in Iran, even though many equally diverse groups had to sacrifice aspects of their ideologies to work together for their true intentions: the removal of the shah and, in many cases, relief from Western imperialism. In contrast to Khomeini, the Tudeh struggled to establish a firm stance while Khomeini’s platform of seemingly-moderate Islam and outspoken anti-monarchical and anti-Western ideas resonated more effectively with Iranians from all walks of life. One setback that separated the Tudeh from Khomeini’s platform was their allegiance to the Soviet Union, which supported their political efforts. Despite acting in staunch opposition to British oil interests, the Tudeh advocated for Soviet oil concessions in the late 1940’s.12 This hypocritical stance raised questions about the Tudeh 10 Mohsen Milani, The Making of Iran’s Islamic Revolution: From Monarchy to Islamic Republic (Boulder: Westview Press, 1994), 76. 11 Farhang Jahanpour, “Iran: The Rise and Fall of the Tudeh Party,” The World Today 40, no. 4 (1984): 154, www.jstor.org/stable/40395600. 12 Milani, The Making of Iran’s Islamic Revolution, 76. 60 COMMUNISTS, ISLAMISTS, AND THE MAKINGS OF A MOVEMENT Party’s true allegiance to progressive politics and the Iranian people. This issue was especially pressing at the time of the revolution because much of the anti-Shah sentiment was rooted in the condemnation of foreign involvement in Iranian politics. Consequently, the Tudeh’s prioritization of Soviet interests distanced itself from the major rhetoric driving political unrest and thus reduced their hold on the Iranian revolutionary effort. Additionally, because the Soviet brand of Marxism did not explicitly pro- mote violence, the Tudeh refrained from taking direct action against the Shah.13 As a result, the Tudeh struggled to maintain superior influence in the leftist realm, let alone in the larger Iranian community. The Soviet Union aided the Tudeh party in rising from the ashes of their pre-1953 reputation, but the relationship’s hypocritical elements kept the Tudeh from garnering support from the Iranian people. The Tudeh’s struggle to establish a movement within the revolutionary effort was also tied to their eventual lack of connection to the social groups which they claimed to represent. Despite their theoretical emphasis on the importance of the working class in societal upheaval, the working class support that the Tudeh boasted of in the 1940s did not last.14 The highly educated and worldly discourse that defined the Tudeh Party’s positions was no longer rooted in working class realities and thus was unable to make a concrete impact on the people. The working class was especially difficult to reach at this time because they benefited the most from the Shah’s attempts at liberalization; in fear of Marxist agitation, the Shah paid special attention to pleasing them, thus working class individuals were the last to join the revolution.15 Moreover, the Tudeh’s Soviet-based ideology often raised issues that were irrelevant to the masses,16 while even relevant concepts such as trade unions were too difficult to enact 13 Behrooz, Rebels With a Cause, 83.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • IRAN April 2000
    COUNTRY ASSESSMENT - IRAN April 2000 Country Information and Policy Unit I. SCOPE OF DOCUMENT 1.1 This assessment has been produced by the Country Information & Policy Unit, Immigration & Nationality Directorate, Home Office, from information obtained from a variety of sources. 1.2 The assessment has been prepared for background purposes for those involved in the asylum determination process. The information it contains is not exhaustive, nor is it intended to catalogue all human rights violations. It concentrates on the issues most commonly raised in asylum claims made in the United Kingdom. 1.3 The assessment is sourced throughout. It is intended to be used by caseworkers as a signpost to the source material, which has been made available to them. The vast majority of the source material is readily available in the public domain. 1.4 It is intended to revise the assessment on a 6-monthly basis while the country remains within the top 35 asylum producing countries in the United Kingdom. 1.5 The assessment will be placed on the Internet (http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/ind/cipu1.htm). An electronic copy of the assessment has been made available to the following organisations: Amnesty International UK Immigration Advisory Service Immigration Appellate Authority Immigration Law Practitioners' Association Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants JUSTICE Medical Foundation for the care of Victims of Torture Refugee Council Refugee Legal Centre UN High Commissioner for Refugees CONTENTS I SCOPE OF DOCUMENT 1.1 - 1.6 II GEOGRAPHY 2.1 - 2.2
    [Show full text]
  • The Iranian Revolution, Past, Present and Future
    The Iranian Revolution Past, Present and Future Dr. Zayar Copyright © Iran Chamber Society The Iranian Revolution Past, Present and Future Content: Chapter 1 - The Historical Background Chapter 2 - Notes on the History of Iran Chapter 3 - The Communist Party of Iran Chapter 4 - The February Revolution of 1979 Chapter 5 - The Basis of Islamic Fundamentalism Chapter 6 - The Economics of Counter-revolution Chapter 7 - Iranian Perspectives Copyright © Iran Chamber Society 2 The Iranian Revolution Past, Present and Future Chapter 1 The Historical Background Iran is one of the world’s oldest countries. Its history dates back almost 5000 years. It is situated at a strategic juncture in the Middle East region of South West Asia. Evidence of man’s presence as far back as the Lower Palaeolithic period on the Iranian plateau has been found in the Kerman Shah Valley. And time and again in the course of this long history, Iran has found itself invaded and occupied by foreign powers. Some reference to Iranian history is therefore indispensable for a proper understanding of its subsequent development. The first major civilisation in what is now Iran was that of the Elamites, who might have settled in South Western Iran as early as 3000 B.C. In 1500 B.C. Aryan tribes began migrating to Iran from the Volga River north of the Caspian Sea and from Central Asia. Eventually two major tribes of Aryans, the Persian and Medes, settled in Iran. One group settled in the North West and founded the kingdom of Media. The other group lived in South Iran in an area that the Greeks later called Persis—from which the name Persia is derived.
    [Show full text]
  • Iran, Country Information
    Iran, Country Information COUNTRY ASSESSMENT - IRAN April 2003 Country Information and Policy Unit I SCOPE OF DOCUMENT II GEOGRAPHY III HISTORY IV STATE STRUCTURES VA HUMAN RIGHTS - OVERVIEW VB HUMAN RIGHTS - SPECIFIC GROUPS VC HUMAN RIGHTS - OTHER ISSUES ANNEX A - CHRONOLOGY ANNEX B - POLITICAL ORGANISATIONS ANNEX C - PROMINENT PEOPLE ANNEX D - REFERENCES TO SOURCE MATERIAL 1. SCOPE OF DOCUMENT 1.1. This assessment has been produced by the Country Information and Policy Unit, Immigration and Nationality Directorate, Home Office, from information obtained from a wide variety of recognised sources. The document does not contain any Home Office opinion or policy. 1.2. The assessment has been prepared for background purposes for those involved in the asylum/human rights determination process. The information it contains is not exhaustive. It concentrates on the issues most commonly raised in asylum/human rights claims made in the United Kingdom. 1.3. The assessment is sourced throughout. It is intended to be used by caseworkers as a signpost to the source material, which has been made available to them. The vast majority of the source material is readily available in the public domain. 1.4. It is intended to revise the assessment on a six-monthly basis while the country remains within the top 35 asylum-seeker producing countries in the United Kingdom. 2. GEOGRAPHY 2.1. The Islamic Republic of Iran Persia until 1935 lies in western Asia, and is bounded on the north by the file:///V|/vll/country/uk_cntry_assess/apr2003/0403_Iran.htm[10/21/2014 9:57:59 AM] Iran, Country Information Caspian Sea, Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan, by Turkey and Iraq to the west, by the Persian Arabian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman to the south, and by Pakistan and Afghanistan to the east.
    [Show full text]
  • The Jurist State and the Dilemma of the Institutionalization of Parties in Iran
    JOURNAL FOR IRANIAN STUDIES Specialized Studies A Peer-Reviewed Quarterly Periodical Journal Year 1. issue 3- June, 2017 ISSUED BY Arabian Gulf Centre for Iranian Studies www.arabiangcis.org The Jurist State and the Dilemma of the Institutionalization of Parties in Iran Mohammed Bashandi Specialist researcher in political sciences ran had been familiar with the failings of political parties and organizations before the Iranian revolution of 1979. IUnder the Shah’s regime, the religious, nationalist, and Marxist parties faced intense pressure from the country’s authorities, forcing them to work underground.1 The situation hardly changed after the revolution, following the defeat of the liberal and then the socialist movements in the wake of the uprising, with nonreligious parties ultimately failing to attain any parliamentary representation; this became effectively impossible after the new constitution imposed regulations against political parties’ work. 8 Journal for Iranian Studies º Year 1,issue 3 ,June. 2017 The Jurist State and the Dilemma of the Institutionalization of Parties in Iran Iran’s current theocratic political system is founded on the theory of the Jurist Leadership [Wilayat-Faqih], which rests on three pillars. First is the religious pillar represented by the Supreme Leader and the senior clerics who rule the country. Second is the security pillar in the form of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) and the security services, which are affiliated with the Supreme Leader.2 The third is the political pillar embodied by the elected political institutions; this is the weakest of the three in terms of influence in political decision-making, which is negligible unlike the absolute power of the unelected organs of state.
    [Show full text]
  • One Revolution Or Two? the Iranian Revolution and the Islamic Republic
    ONE REVOLUTION OR TWO? THE IRANIAN REVOLUTION AND THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC By Val Moghadam Introduction The bicentennial of the French Revolution happens to coincide with the tenth anniversary of the Iranian Revolution. While the first has been widely regarded as the quintessential social and transformative revolution, the sec- ond is problematical both theoretically and politically. Whereas the October Revolution was in many ways the vanguard revolution par excellence, the Iranian Revolution appears retrograde. In the Marxist view, revolution is an essential part of the forward march of history, a progressive step creating new social-productive relations as well as a new political system, consciousness and values. In this context, how might events in Iran be termed 'revolutionary'? Precisely what kind of a revolution transpired between 1977 and 1979 (and afterward)? Surely clerical rule cannot be regarded as progressive? In what sense, then, can we regard the Iranian Revolution as a step forward in the struggle for emancipation of the Iranian working classes? Clearly the Iranian Revolution presents itself as an anomaly. The major revolutions that have been observed and theorized are catego- rized by Marxists as bourgeois or socialist revolutions.1 This is determined by the revolution's ideology, leadership, programme, class base and orientation, and by changes in the social structure following the change of regime. Fur- ther, there is a relationship between modernity and revolution, as discussed by Marx and Engels in The Communist Manifesto, suggested by Marshall Berman in his engaging All That Is Solid Melts Into Air, and elaborated by Perry Anderson in a recent essay .2 Some academic theorists of revolution and social change (Banington Moore, Theda Skocpol, Charles Tilly, Ellen Kay Trimberger, Susan Eckstein, taking their cue from Marx) have stressed the modernizing role played by revolutions.
    [Show full text]
  • Background Paper on Refugees and Asylum Seekers from Iran
    NATIONS UNIES UNITED NATIONS HAUT COMMISSARIAT HIGH COMMISSIONER POUR LES REFUGIES FOR REFUGEES BACKGROUND PAPER ON REFUGEES AND ASYLUM SEEKERS FROM IRAN UNHCR CENTRE FOR DOCUMENTATION ON REFUGEES GENEVA, OCTOBER 1995 THIS INFORMATION PAPER WAS PREPARED IN THE COUNTRY INFORMATION UNIT OF THE CENTRE FOR DOCUMENTATION ON REFUGEES ON THE BASIS OF PUBLICLY AVAILABLE INFORMATION, ANALYSIS AND COMMENT, AND IN COLLABORATION WITH THE UNHCR STATISTICS UNIT. ALL SOURCES ARE CITED. THIS PAPER IS NOT, AND DOES NOT PURPORT TO BE, FULLY EXHAUSTIVE WITH REGARD TO CONDITIONS IN THE COUNTRY SURVEYED, OR CONCLUSIVE AS TO THE MERITS OF ANY PARTICULAR CLAIM TO REFUGEE STATUS OR ASYLUM. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Asylum Seekers in Europe 3 1.1 Introduction 3 1.2 Overall Trends in Asylum Applications 3 1.3 Trends in Convention Status Recognition 4 1.4 Trends in Non-Convention Recognitions 4 1.5 Iranian Refugees and Asylum Seekers 4 1.6 Trends in Iranian Convention Status Recognitions 5 1.7 Trends in Iranians Allowed to Remain for Humanitarian Reasons 5 2. Iranians in Neighboring Countries 6 3. Internal Situation in Iran 6 3.1 Recent Developments 6 3.2 Iranian Security Forces 8 3.3 Political Parties 10 4. Human Rights Concerns 13 4.1 International and National Legal Framework 13 4.2 General Respect for Human Rights 14 4.3 The Situation of Ethnic Minorities 18 4.4 The Situation of Religious Minorities 21 4.5 The Situation of Women 25 Bibliography 27 2 1. REFUGEES AND ASYLUM SEEKERS IN EUROPE 1.1 Introduction This section provides a statistical overview of refugees and asylum-seekers in Western Europe1 in general and of refugees and asylum-seekers from Iran in particular.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    Notes INTRODUCTION 1. Kasravi's Tarikh-e Mashruteh-e Iran (History of the Iranian Constitution), 1961, offers the best detailed analysis of the 1906 revolution. Despite other numerous publications on the same subject, there is still dispute over the precise causes of this revolution, especially in view of the 1979 revolution, which has coloured the opinion of some analysts in Iran. 2. The Bolshevik Revolution and the eventual departure of the Russian troops together with the occupation of the north by the British forces paved the way for the imposition of the 1919 Agreement. With Lord Curzon as foreign secre­ tary, the stage was set for the launching of Curzon's most cherished political ambitions which was 'the regeneration of Persia under British tutelage as one of the friendly countries' (Wright, 1985, p. 205). Therefore, the Anglo-Persian treaty of 1919, which had been the subject of secret negotiations with Vusugh al-Dowleh, Sarem al-Dowleh and Nosrat al-Dowleh, was made public on 19 August 1919. The terms of the agreement, even though disguised, clearly showed that the country was becoming a British protectorate. According to the agreement, the Persian government was giving Britain a special position in return for a loan of £2 million at 7 per cent (Annual Register, 1919, p. 255~ Ahmad Shah, in the meantime, was rewarded by a long-awaited tour of Europe after he had fulfilled his obligation by keeping the pro-British trium­ virate of ministers in their posts to complete the necessary negotiations. However, the treaty had to be ratified by the Majlis.
    [Show full text]
  • Development of American Political Parties
    Development of American Political Parties The Two-Party System Civics 11:1 Civics by George Cassutto © 2004 published by Teaching Point as part of the Expert Systems for Teachers SeriesTM What Is a Political Party? • A political party is a group of citizens who agree on major issues facing the nation. These groups work to create public policies that reflect their views. • Parties choose, or nominate, people they want to elect to public office. These candidates campaign to get elected. Parties in the US • Any American citizen may join a political party regardless of age, but most members are eighteen or older. • The United States has a two-party system. The Republicans emerged as a major party in 1860 with the election of Abraham Lincoln. The Democratic Party formed under Andrew Jackson twenty years earlier. Hamilton vs. Jefferson • Political parties first emerged when followers of Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson disagreed over major issues on the Constitution and government. • Jefferson’s group took the name Democratic- Republicans. Due to experience with Britain, they feared a powerful central government. They wanted the states to hold greater power. • Hamilton championed a strong national government with a powerful chief executive. His followers called themselves Federalists, after those who supported the Constitution. Jacksonian Democracy Reigns • In 1828, the farmers and small business owners who made up Jefferson’s party, calling themselves the Democratic Party, nominated Andrew Jackson. He stood for the common citizen, but looked out for southern and western interests. • Those who did not support Jackson formed their own party called Whigs, after a Scottish political leader.
    [Show full text]
  • POWER VERSUS CHOICE Human Rights and Parliamentary Elections in the Islamic Republic of Iran
    Iran Page 1 of 10 March 1996 Vol. 8, No. 1 (E) IRAN POWER VERSUS CHOICE Human Rights and Parliamentary Elections in the Islamic Republic of Iran SUMMARY Iranians will vote on March 8, 1996, to elect 270 members of the parliament, or Majles, in an election process that severely limits citizen participation. Parliamentary elections could represent a real contest for power in Iran's political system-but only if arbitrary bans on candidates and other constraints on political life are lifted. As the campaign period opened on March 1, the government-appointed Council of Guardians had excluded some 44 percent of the more than 5,000 candidates on the basis of discriminatory and arbitrary criteria, significantly impairing access to the political process and citizens' freedom of choice. The council vetoed candidates by calling into question such matters as their commitment to the political system, their loyalty, and their "practical adherence to Islam," or their support for the principle of rule by the pre-eminent religious jurist (velayat-e faqih). At the invitation of the Iranian government, Human Rights Watch was able to travel to Iran in early 1996 to investigate and discuss the human rights dimension of Iran's political process, and in particular the guarantees and restraints placed upon international standards of freedom of expression, association and assembly during the pre-election period. During this unprecedented three-week mission Human Rights Watch/Middle East interviewed dozens of political activists, lawyers, parliamentarians, writers, journalists, senior European diplomats and government officials in Tehran and Isfahan. Although denied permission to visit the city of Qom, where leading clerical critics of the government are imprisoned, Human Rights Watch was otherwise allowed broad access, including a private meeting with one of the longest-term political prisoners still in detention, former Deputy Prime Minister Abbas Amir Entezam.
    [Show full text]
  • The Islamic Republic of Iran: an Introduction
    The Islamic Republic of Iran: An introduction RESEARCH PAPER 09/92 11 December 2009 2009 was a year of anniversaries for Iran: thirty years since the Islamic Revolution of 1979 toppled the Shah, twenty-one years since the end of its devastating conflict with Iraq, and twenty years since the death of the revolution’s iconic leader, Ayatollah Khomeini. Yet, for all its historical significance, 2009 emerged as a significant year in the history of the Islamic Republic in its own right. The disputed election, which saw the re-election of the radical, neo-conservative Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as president amid widespread popular protests and accusations of vast electoral fraud, resulted in the most serious internal challenge to the regime’s authority since its foundation. 2009 was also a significant year in Iran’s foreign relations, with President Obama signalling a desire to engage the Islamic Republic in a new and constructive dialogue, particularly over its controversial nuclear programme, about which new revelations of clandestine development emerged in September 2009. In the thirty years since its establishment, the Islamic Republic of Iran has been the focus of sustained international attention. Despite the attention, however, it continues to defy easy characterisation. The Islamic Republic, with its factional politics and complex foreign relations remains enigmatic. This paper provides an introduction to the Islamic Republic, its politics, economy, foreign and defence policies, and nuclear programme. It examines the governmental structure
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking Agency and Structure in the Study of Democratic Transition: Iranian Lessons
    Rethinking Agency and Structure in the Study of Democratic Transition: Iranian Lessons Annual Meeting CPSA 2006 Mojtaba Mahdavi Department of Political Science University of Western Ontario [email protected] 1. Introduction In 1979 Islamic Revolution human agency triumphed over structural constraints to overthrow the Shah’s autocratic regime. But such a triumph was full of contradictions. The Revolution brought a new regime with a new constitution founded on the exceptionalism created by politics, personality, and perspectives of Ayatollah Khomeini. Under this polity the rule of law is not universal since the office of velayat-e faqih (guardianship of jurist) stands outside the constitution. The struggle within the Islamic Republic in Khatami’s reformist government (1997-2005) represented the efforts of the in-system reformists to bind the office of velayat-e faqih by the constitution. But the reformists failed and the conservative-hardliners consolidated their autocratic rule in June 2005. Paradoxically, the 2005 reversal turning point was coincided with the centennial anniversary of the 1905 Constitutional Revolution, a revolution that divided Iran into a pre-modern and modern era and marked Iran’s first major attempt to establish the “rule of law” (hokomat-e ghanoun) and replace arbitrary despotic rule. This paradoxical coincidence suggests Iran, after a “century of revolution”1and reform, still remains in a “painful and indefinite”2 democratic transition. This coincidence also raises a significant question as to whether contemporary Iran will complete its transition to democracy. Why would a reformist government be replaced by an extreme autocratic regime? What social and political factors inside Iran make the Islamic Republic strong and Iran’s democratic forces weak? The “chicken-or-egg” controversies in science are constant.
    [Show full text]
  • The Failure of Mehdi Bazargan How the Revolutionary Council, The
    The Failure of Mehdi Bazargan How the Revolutionary Council, the Clerical Oligarchy, and United States Foreign Policy Undermined the Liberal Democracy of Iran in 1979 by Christopher Ramsey B.A. in History, May 2012, Western Kentucky University M.A in History, August, 2016, The George Washington University A Thesis submitted to The Faculty of The Columbian College of Arts and Sciences of The George Washington University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts August 31, 2016 Thesis directed by Muriel Atkin Professor of History © Copyright 2016 by Christopher Ramsey All rights reserved ii The author wishes to dedicate this work to Kayla; my bride, my advocate, and my best friend. iii Acknowledgments The author wishes to thank the professors at the George Washington University for their guidance, wisdom, and dedication to their work, both in the classroom and in their respective fields. I arrived at GW overwhelmed by the expectations ahead of me, but left with confidence, thanks in large part to the lessons accrued in your classrooms. Doctors Adam Howard, Muriel Atkins, J. Furman Daniels III, Benjamin Hopkins, Greg Brazinsky, Shira Robinson, Shervin Malekzadeh, Marcy Norton, and Dina Khoury, as well as Ambassador James Jeffrey, thank you all. I would also like to thank my professors at Western Kentucky University, especially Doctors Carol Crowe-Carraco, Scott Girdner, Ingrid Lilly, and Juan Romero, for helping to set me on this path. I also need to thank two teachers who impacted me in my youth: Tony Kleem and the late Kim Dearborn Brickman. As one of my favorite teachers in high school, Mr.
    [Show full text]