Does the New York Times Know Who Rules Iran?


Iran, as Condi often notes, is run by unelected clerics.
President Ahmedinajad is not one of them

The election of President Mahmoud Ahmedinajad in Iran was the best thing that ever happened to the “real men go to Tehran” crowd in Washington. Here was a real live Iranian leader with the title of President who rattled sabers whenever he could, hinted at quitting the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty, talked of wiping out Israel, and ferociously denounced any moves from Tehran towards accomodation and compromise with the West. A made-to-order bogeyman, whose florid rhetoric grabs headlines week after week and has, no doubt, helped sway American public opinion to the point where nearly half of the population believes Iran’s nuclear program is a threat that may have to be dealt with militarily.

In reality, of course, President Ahmedinajad does not actually run Iran, and is in no position to make the relevant decisions about Iran’s nuclear program, its relations with the West, Israel, or any other matter of national security and foreign policy. Executive power, and control over those decisions, remains in the hands of the unelected clerics, foremost among them the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khameini (pictured above). While propagandists for going to war are always going to overlook such niceties, you’d think the New York Times would know better. After all, throughout the presidency of Mohammed Khatami, it constantly made clear to its readers that while Khatami held the highest democratically elected office in the land, executive authority remained in the hands of the conservative clerics who stymied Khatami’s reform agenda. Nobody seems to have told the Times, and much of the rest of the Western media, that Ahmedinajad has no more power in Iran than Khatami had.

Today, for example, the Times reports that “Mr. Ahmadinejad vaguely suggested Monday, as he has before, that he would consider pulling his country out of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty if membership was no longer in Iran’s interests.” Well, no, that can’t be true, because Ahmedinajad does not have the authority to make a decision of that order. And that’s just one example of what has become a trend throughout the Western media, of reporting Ahmedinajad’s bluster as if it reflected Iran’s policies.


Ahmedinajad mugs for attention

The distinction between Ahmedinajad and the Supreme Leader is far from academic. Firstly, it’s important to understand that Khameini controls all foreign policy and security decisions, and he tends to make those in consultation with the National Security Council, a body of about 12 people on which Ahmedinajad has a seat but so do some of his key rivals. The Council is headed by Ali Larijani, who is handling the nuclear negotiations with the West and also the prospective talks with the U.S. on Iraq — Larijani reports not to Ahmedinajad, but to Khameini, and he actually ran against Ahmedinajad in the last election. Larijani projects a message quite different from Ahmedinajad on solving the nuclear issue, for example. On most matters that Ahmedinajad rants about — even Israel — more careful observers of the regime, such as the Economist’s Christophe de Ballaigue, conclude that the regime’s positions are far more nuanced and open to engagement than the president’s rhetoric would suggest.

The pragmatic conservatives who are closest to Khameini are alarmed by the impact of Ahmedinajad’s ranting on Iran’s diplomatic position, but this is hardly suprising, since part of the President’s agenda has been to sabotage the efforts by pragamatic conservatives such as Rafsanjani to reintegrate Iran with the world economy. Rafsanjani was the Supreme Leader’s candidate in the election that brought Ahmedinajad to power, and he remains the President’s arch enemy. For Rafsanjani and by extension Khameini, resolving the nuclear issue with the West is of critical importance because their priority is not to hold conferences on Holocaust denial, but to jon the World Trade Organization. Khameini has reportedly offered the U.S. comprehensive talks on all matters of concern to Washington

Ahmedinajad represents an element of the security forces hostile to the clerical leadership and the business interests represented by Rafsanjani. And the President has maneuvered on the nuclear issue to sabotage efforts to negotiate a compromise.

Indeed, Ahmedinajad, when he recently announced Iran’s “breakthrough” enrichment of a vial full of uranium gas in a laboratory setting, chose his words carefully: Iran would not compromise, he said. “Nobody has the right to compromise.” That’s not what you say when you’re the one making the decisions; they’re words directed at those who are in a position to compromise or not. So what we’re seeing here is a complex and increasingly bitter power struggle being played out within the arcane Iranian political system, in which the nuclear issue is one theater of conflict.

When the Western media treates Ahmedinajad’s his words as the policy of the Iranian regime, it suits the president’s agenda in Tehran just as much as its suits the agenda of the hawks who want to attack Iran. But it’s a misrepresentation of reality — and one that could ultimately have tragic results. The Mullahs have themselves to blame for sending such dangerously mixed messages to the outside world. But the media also has a responsibility to do whatever it can to convey the reality of Iran’s decision making.








This entry was posted in Situation Report. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Does the New York Times Know Who Rules Iran?

  1. Ahmedinajad is a perfect foil for the neocons: a certified nutcase who confirms everyone’s worst fears about the Iranian regime. Never mind that, to borrow Bush’s terminology, he’s hardly “the decider,” as Tony explains persuasively.

    But Ahmedinajad is also one clever man. His nationalist rhetoric on nuclear energy seems to be working. He’s managed to get both his people behind him (on that particular issue) and America stuck into a corner.

    Now, to outclass the Bush administration in the diplomacy arena is hardly a remarkable feat, but what Bush doesn’t see is that, behind his headline-catching theatrics,
    Ahmedinajad is playing chess (a game his ancestors invented) while luring Bush into a losing gambit.

  2. Jorge from Blm says:

    I’m not a foreign policy expert (although to my credit I felt instinctively that Saddam Hussein did not possess WMD). But it seems to me that there are two strategies playing off each other in Iran.

    First, the clerics want someone to rattle the saber to see how far Iran can go (in terms of developing a nuclear arsenal).

    The other is Ahmedinajad realizing that he is being “used” (and therefore very disposable) by the clerics. So while he is doing the saber rattling, he is also keeping one eye on the clerics who can rub him out.

    The U.S. needs to send a strong message to the clerics – not Ahmedinajad – that it will not tolerate a nuclear armed Iran.

    That is happening behind the scenes. But those are just words so far. We have our heads so deep up Iraq’s domestic problems that we can’t really do much but use words at this time. And the clerics know this, so they allow Ahmedinajad to continue to rant – perhaps to their own peril (see Ahmendinajad’s eye on the clerics).

    The Iranian strategy likely includes creating instability in Iraq, so as to keep the U.S. preoccupied.

    The U.S. knows this; which is why it is strongly pressuring the Iranian-like Shite to get their act together or face the Sunnis by themselves – and we saw how that has worked out for the Shite in the past.

    The Shite have the numbers, but they do not possess the wherewithal (sp?) to suppress the Sunnis without the U.S.’s help.

    So the U.S. is telling the Shite, “Get your act together or we’re out of here.”

    Once Iran’s clerics see that their Shite bretheren are collaborating with the U.S., they will pull back Ahmedinajad.

    The question then will be: Did they wait too long?

  3. Pingback: News bytes » | Antony Loewenstein

  4. hi guys i cannot wait 4 the expendables the movie to come out! It’s going to be awsum!

  5. The U.S. knows this; which is why it is strongly pressuring the Iranian-like Shite to get their act together or face the Sunnis by themselves – and we saw how that has worked out for the Shite in the past.

  6. Cheap class 10 memory card here !!

  7. With havin so much content do you ever run into any problems of plagorism or copyright
    infringement? My site has a lot of exclusive content I’ve either written myself or outsourced but it looks like a lot of it is popping it up all over the internet without my permission. Do
    you know any techniques to help reduce content from being ripped off?
    I’d genuinely appreciate it.

    Here is my blog … android app store android applications

  8. Jenna says:

    Hi it’s me, I am also visiting this website daily,
    this web site is genuinely fastidious and the visitors are really sharing pleasant thoughts.

  9. Elhadj says:

    I’m not a foreign poicly expert (although to my credit I felt instinctively that Saddam Hussein did not possess WMD). But it seems to me that there are two strategies playing off each other in Iran.First, the clerics want someone to rattle the saber to see how far Iran can go (in terms of developing a nuclear arsenal).The other is Ahmedinajad realizing that he is being used (and therefore very disposable) by the clerics. So while he is doing the saber rattling, he is also keeping one eye on the clerics who can rub him out.The U.S. needs to send a strong message to the clerics not Ahmedinajad that it will not tolerate a nuclear armed Iran.That is happening behind the scenes. But those are just words so far. We have our heads so deep up Iraq’s domestic problems that we can’t really do much but use words at this time. And the clerics know this, so they allow Ahmedinajad to continue to rant perhaps to their own peril (see Ahmendinajad’s eye on the clerics).The Iranian strategy likely includes creating instability in Iraq, so as to keep the U.S. preoccupied.The U.S. knows this; which is why it is strongly pressuring the Iranian-like Shite to get their act together or face the Sunnis by themselves and we saw how that has worked out for the Shite in the past.The Shite have the numbers, but they do not possess the wherewithal (sp?) to suppress the Sunnis without the U.S.’s help.So the U.S. is telling the Shite, Get your act together or we’re out of here. Once Iran’s clerics see that their Shite bretheren are collaborating with the U.S., they will pull back Ahmedinajad.The question then will be: Did they wait too long?

  10. Anny says:

    Ahmedinajad is a perfect foil for the ncoeons: a certified nutcase who confirms everyone’s worst fears about the Iranian regime. Never mind that, to borrow Bush’s terminology, he’s hardly the decider, as Tony explains persuasively.But Ahmedinajad is also one clever man. His nationalist rhetoric on nuclear energy seems to be working. He’s managed to get both his people behind him (on that particular issue) and America stuck into a corner.Now, to outclass the Bush administration in the diplomacy arena is hardly a remarkable feat, but what Bush doesn’t see is that, behind his headline-catching theatrics,Ahmedinajad is playing chess (a game his ancestors invented) while luring Bush into a losing gambit.

  11. It’s actually very complex in this active life to listen news on TV,
    thus I simply use world wide web for that reason, and take the hottest
    information.

  12. sirdoyle says:

    This is very fascinating, You’re a very professional blogger.

    I have joined your rss feed and look forward to searching
    forr more of your magnificent post. Also, I’ve shared yoyr web
    site in my social networks

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *