Centrist In Iran Pessimistic About Solving Political Impasse
A leading centrist politician in Tehran says governance and politics in Iran have reached a deadlock and the people need to take the lead to help themselves.
A leading centrist politician in Tehran says governance and politics in Iran have reached a deadlock and the people need to take the lead to help themselves.
Hossein Marashi, who is the Secretary General of the Executives of Construction, the leading centrist group, told a local website on Tuesday, "I have no hope in Iranian politicians. The elites in the society should come forward with determination and make their point, and whatever they need to do. I have hope that the people will change the scene."
This was an unprecedented pessimistic comment by a seasoned pragmatic politician who has always been an optimist.
Nonetheless, Marashi dismissed the idea of boycotting the upcoming parliamentary elections in March 2024. Some reformist politicians have suggested the idea as a reaction to hardliners barring moderate and reformist candidates from running for office in two previous votes.
Speaking about Faezeh Hashemi, a political heavyweight and one of the relatively popular politicians of the Executives of Construction Party who has spoken about the need to boycott the elections, Marashi said: "She should have waited for the party's final verdict about taking part in the election."
Marashi reiterated: "If the people do not come to the scene and do not take the lead in the management of politics, and lash out at politicians, no positive change is likely to occur in their life."
However, he did not say how people can bring about political change when the slightest gesture of protests or dissent is met with force and arrests.
However, the centrist politician oddly said, "We are waiting to see what way out the reformists will show to end this political impasse,” By putting the onus on those who have been pushed out of office by the hard core of the regime, Marashi added that the Reform Front has a great responsibility in coming up with a solution and we are waiting to see what they are going to do.
He acknowledged that the reformist faction is currently overwhelmed by despair as a result of the Guardian Council's "arbitrary supervision" which bars many politicians from running for the parliament or the presidency. He argued that any boycott of the elections will play into the hands of those who want to monopolize power.
At the same time, conservative politician Mohammad Javad Bahonar spoke about the issue from another perspective. He said that as a result of the Guardian Council's selective treatment of election candidates, a majority of the members of parliament are so unprepared that they are not even familiar with their responsibilities as lawmakers. He also charged that many conservative lawmakers do not understand the country's situation.
However, as Marashi pointed out, "Politics is a battlefield where we should confront institutions that exert influence beyond the scope of their official authority. But political competition is not like going to a party. It is like dealing blows and at the same time being prepared to receive blows." He reiterated that reformists and moderates should be prepared for a fierce competition while everyone should accept that we need to revise the procedures in the interest of Iran's future.
Meanwhile, Marashi advised that hardliners should note that Iran is a diverse society and not everyone is a regime supporter who accepts its ideology by 100 percent. "This is a diverse society. There are Sunnis, there are those who have distanced themselves from religion and religious government, and there are those who believe in a different ideology. We need to do away with the monopolistic approach of a certain group of regime's supporters."
Former chief of the Iranian parliament's national security and foreign policy committee Heshmatollah Falahatpisheh said Wednesday that “What exists between Iran and the United States now is similar to the 'red telephone line' that existed between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War.”
He added, “I proposed a similar suggestion in the parliament to establish a direct hotline of communication between Iran and the United States to manage the tensions.”
Established in 1963, the Moscow–Washington hotline links the Pentagon with the Kremlin. Although the hotline was never a telephone line, and no red phones were used, in popular culture it is known as the "red telephone.”
His remarks come after recent reports that the two sides were striving to reach an unofficial unwritten agreement to prevent escalation. However, many US lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have called on the Biden administration to come clean about its dealings with the Iranian regime, particularly after the US special envoy Robert Malley was dismissed last month, with Congress in the dark.
Falahatpisheh said that in a situation when reviving the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) seems practically unattainable, this kind of communication is the best possible outcome Iran and the United States could achieved.
“What is referred to as the 'unwritten agreement' is essentially the formation of this hotline for communication. Iran and the United States have not reached a formal agreement, but they are managing the existing tensions in their relationship,” he said.
He underlined that “The establishment of this hot line does not imply anything specific except that the two countries have direct and indirect (mostly secretive) interactions with each other at any given time, discussing tensions and preventing crises from escalating.” He made it clear that “there is no written agreement taking shape.”
The Biden administration says that it continues contacts with Tehran, but no nuclear or prisoner release agreement is imminent.
According to Falahatpisheh, Washington’s lax enforcement of sanctions on Iran's oil exports and Tehran’s tendency to avoid tensions in the Persian Gulf are the outcomes of such a mechanism to manage differences.
But some events could be seen as contradicting this scenario. The US military announced in early July that it intervened to prevent Iranian naval vessels from seizing two commercial ships in the Persian Gulf.
Pentagon announced on Monday that it was sending more warplanes and an additional warship to the region, mainly to provide maritime security.
Meanwhile, US lawmakers are intensifying efforts to restrict the Biden administration in its interactions with the Iranian regime.
On Monday, Michael McCaul (R-TX), the chairman of the US House foreign affairs committee, threatened a subpoena if the administration does not brief Congress on the circumstances of Rob Malley’s dismissal, noting that the State Department has been less than candid with his security clearance investigation.
However, the administration still sounds reluctant to divulge any information as White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre dodged questions about the investigation on Tuesday.
Moreover, on the backdrop of a flurry of Congressional initiatives and letters to the administration, eight Republican Senators wrote to Secretary of State Antony Blinken and the Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen, demanding more serious enforcement of US sanctions on Iran.
The senators raised the issue of China’s increasing oil imports from Iran, while US sanctions prohibit third parties from buying Iranian oil and oil products. “Despite sanctions, the People's Republic of China (PRC) has purchased roughly $47 billion in Iranian oil since President Biden took office,” the letter says.
Despite the push by lawmakers, Washington has made a change in the way Iraq pays Iran for electricity. According to an exclusive report by Reuters, the Biden administration on Tuesday moved to let Iraq pay Iran for electricity via non-Iraqi banks.
Russia's undermined Iran's territorial integrity by signing a joint Persian Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) statement last week, suggesting that the ownership of the islands should be reviewed by the International Court of Justice. This action sparked a huge outcry in Iran and among diaspora Iranians, with some considering Russia's move as treason.
The Raisi administration-owned daily newspaper, Iran, on July 13 accused media outlets that condemned Russia's humiliating stance of creating unnecessary controversy. The newspaper also charged that the anti-Russian articles in the Iranian media were written under the order of the United States.
Maryam Shokrani, a journalist in Tehran who had been threatened a few months earlier by intelligence agents, expressed her views in Threads, stating, "Its name is 'Iran' newspaper, but it supports Russia. That is the same Russia that not only does not recognize Iran's ownership of the three islands, but also uses the terms 'The Gulf' and 'The Arabian Gulf' in its official accounts instead of the Persian Gulf."
The three islands were under British control but on November 30, 1971, a day after British forces left the region and just two days before the UAE was to become an official federation, Mohammad Reza Shah sent the Iranian navy to secure all three. Iranian forces remain on the islands, with only Abu Musa having a civilian population which is less than two thousand. But the United Arab Emirates has been contesting Iran’s sovereignty.
On Monday, ultraconservative daily Kayhan's editor Hossein Shariatmadari wrote in a commentary that those, including many former diplomats who have criticized Tehran's pro-Russia and pro-China foreign policy, are demanding too much from the government.
Kayhan defended the government's relative inaction in response to Russia's behavior and added that Iran could not possibly declare war against Russia or sever its ties with Moscow. Shariatmadari's article, particularly his attacks on the country's reformists who criticized Russia, was perceived as siding with Moscow by Iranian media both in and out of Iran.
Shariatmadari accused Russia's critics of selling out their country to the United States and said that the former diplomats who have criticized Russia are suffering from a feeling of inferiority in front of the United States. Meanwhile, he accused former Foreign Minister Javad Zarif of having been prepared to start negotiations with the UAE over the islands' ownership.
Another ultraconservative newspaper, Hamshahri, which is affiliated with the Tehran Municipality, expressed support for Russia's position and even endorsed Moscow's war against Ukraine during the past week. The daily argued that Ukraine should not have defended itself against Russia's onslaught.
Sara Massoumi, another Iranian journalist, criticized Iran newspaper's approach, stating, "It is shameful that a newspaper that still remembers the Iran-Iraq war and its chemically wounded veterans is so fascinated by Russia that it portrays the aggressor in the Ukraine war as the victim."
Meanwhile, in an article in Etemad Online website, reformist politician Esmail Gerami Moghaddam wrote that Iranian conservatives' Looking East policy is against the country's national interests. He also called for an appropriate and proportional reaction on the part of the Iranian government to Russia's behavior.
Calling on the Iranian government to adopt logical positions and carry out a balanced foreign policy, Moghaddam asked, "What makes you believe that Russia is superior to the United States so that you defend it so wholeheartedly?"
According to an exclusive report by Reuters, the Biden administration on Tuesday moved to let Iraq pay Iran for electricity via non-Iraqi banks, a US official said, a step Washington hopes may keep Tehran from forcing unpopular power cuts during the sweltering Iraqi summer.
Secretary of State Antony Blinken signed a 120-day national security waiver allowing Iraq - heavily dependent on Iranian electricity - to deposit such payments into non-Iraqi banks in third countries instead of into restricted accounts in Iraq, said the official who spoke on condition of anonymity.
Reuters, apparently quoting the official, said that funds put into the non-Iraqi banks, like those deposited into Iraqi banks, will also be restricted, still requiring US permission for Iran to get access to them and only for spending on humanitarian goods.
Tehran has in the past pushed Baghdad to secure US permission to release such funds by cutting Iranian natural gas exports to Iraq, limiting Iraq's ability to generate power, and forcing deeply unpopular electricity cuts.
Reuters said the change came at the request of the Iraqi government, apparently in the hopes that this might transfer some of the pressure that Iran has exerted on Baghdad to other countries.
But it is not clear if the change is not the result of an Iranian plan to gradually weaken the impact of US banking sanctions on its dealings with Iraq. Iran’s next move could be pressure on Iraq to ask the United States to lift all restrictions on the funds, enabling Tehran to withdraw cash dollars. The current Iraqi government has closer ties with Tehran than its predecessor.
"We have to help the Iraqis with this perennial pressure from the Iranians to access the money," the US official told Reuters.
"The Iraqis have requested, and now we have agreed, to expand the waiver," said the US official, adding that this might help ensure better compliance with the US requirement that any disbursements be for humanitarian purposes.
"It also helps the Iraqis, at least somewhat, to have an argument to make (to Iran) that they are not in control of the money that they have paid (into non-Iraqi accounts)," he added.
If this was a change resulting purely from an Iraqi-US agreement, it is not clear whether Iran might ease up on Iraq as a result. Tehran could decide it has greater leverage over Iraq than over other nations and continue to exert pressure.
Last week it was reported that Iraq was willing to barter oil with Iran instead of cash payments, which could also violate US sanctions.
Iraq exports at least four times more oil than Iran, with more than $100 billion annual revenues, but with its inefficient government and corruption it has not been able to tap its own natural gas to produce electricity.
Iran is under extensive US economic sanctions reimposed in 2018 after then-US President Donald Trump abandoned the nuclear deal that Tehran struck with major powers Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States in 2015.
Trump believed his policy of "maximum pressure" on Iran would force it to accept more stringent restrictions to its nuclear program, which the United States, European powers and Israel fear may be designed to obtain a nuclear weapon.
As a result of Trump's withdrawal from the deal and US President Joe Biden's failure to revive it, Iran could make the fissile material for one bomb in 12 days or so, according to U.S. estimates, down from a year when the accord was in force.
With exclusive reporting by Reuters