Choosing Iran's Next Leader
Does Mir Hossain Mousavi have a genuine chance to defeat Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Friday's elections? Or is he simply the latest beneficiary of the predilection of reporters and pundits to make a wishful-embrace of electoral challengers in dictatorial nations?
At O&G, we are closely watching the first round of Iran's presidential election because of the potential game-changing impact on natural gas politics in Europe: At once, a less populist leadership in Tehran could help lower the diplomatic temperature, thus opening the door to genuine talks with Washington, and possibly a deal that, among other benefits, ultimately unfetters the development of Iran's sanctions-crippled natural gas fields.
A string of reports over the last 10 days or two weeks has built up much expectation around Mousavi, a 67-year-old ethnic Azeri intellectual who served as a revolution-enabling prime minister two decades ago.
In The New York Times today, Robert Worth describes a "screaming, honking bacchanal" at night in Tehran surrounding Mousavi's campaign, and a poll suggesting a 54%-39% edge over Ahmadinejad.
The key moment that has electrified observers is last Wednesday's televised debate between Ahmadinejad and Mousavi. Reports are drubbing Ahmadinejad for attacking Mousavi's wife, Zahra Rahnavard, who is campaigning for her husband and held a high-profile news conference at which she demanded an apology from Ahmadinejad. CNN reports that some have dubbed Rahnavard "Iran's Michelle Obama." At the Impudent Observer, Fred Stopsky wonders whether Rahnavard is "the secret weapon to unseat Ahmadinejad."
Much of the reporting of the debate itself reflected surprise verging on delight at Mousavi's willingness to mix it up with Ahmadinejad. Yet -- injecting caution here -- the Financial Times' Najmeh Bozorgmehr seemed to see something different. Bozorgmehr focused on how Ahmadinejad "went on the offensive," and suggested that, while Mousavi did much attacking himself, he spent most of the 90 minutes parrying, not thrusting. In another report today, Bozorgmehr points out that Ahmadinejad himself is enjoying raucous support in rural areas, in large part because of his deftness at the universally practiced tactic of pork-barrel politics.
As suggested above, such pre-election public anointments are far from unusual. Apart from what occurs in the West, I've witnessed similar dynamics in the Philippines, in Pakistan, in Georgia, and in Russia. Often the candidates do actually win. But not always, and even when they do win, they don't always usher in finer times.
The clear-eyed Karim Sadjadpour at the Carnegie Endowment writes that Iranian elections are still "unfree, unfair and unpredictable." Sadjadpour says that Iran's true center of power -- surrounding Ayatollah Ali Khamenei -- could be on the cusp of one of the country's occasional political self-corrections because of Ahmadinejad's "economic mismanagement and foreign policy adventurism." But he adds that, until now, such corrections have occurred after two presidential terms. Ahmadinejad has served just one.
At O&G, we are closely watching the first round of Iran's presidential election because of the potential game-changing impact on natural gas politics in Europe: At once, a less populist leadership in Tehran could help lower the diplomatic temperature, thus opening the door to genuine talks with Washington, and possibly a deal that, among other benefits, ultimately unfetters the development of Iran's sanctions-crippled natural gas fields.
A string of reports over the last 10 days or two weeks has built up much expectation around Mousavi, a 67-year-old ethnic Azeri intellectual who served as a revolution-enabling prime minister two decades ago.
In The New York Times today, Robert Worth describes a "screaming, honking bacchanal" at night in Tehran surrounding Mousavi's campaign, and a poll suggesting a 54%-39% edge over Ahmadinejad.
The key moment that has electrified observers is last Wednesday's televised debate between Ahmadinejad and Mousavi. Reports are drubbing Ahmadinejad for attacking Mousavi's wife, Zahra Rahnavard, who is campaigning for her husband and held a high-profile news conference at which she demanded an apology from Ahmadinejad. CNN reports that some have dubbed Rahnavard "Iran's Michelle Obama." At the Impudent Observer, Fred Stopsky wonders whether Rahnavard is "the secret weapon to unseat Ahmadinejad."
Much of the reporting of the debate itself reflected surprise verging on delight at Mousavi's willingness to mix it up with Ahmadinejad. Yet -- injecting caution here -- the Financial Times' Najmeh Bozorgmehr seemed to see something different. Bozorgmehr focused on how Ahmadinejad "went on the offensive," and suggested that, while Mousavi did much attacking himself, he spent most of the 90 minutes parrying, not thrusting. In another report today, Bozorgmehr points out that Ahmadinejad himself is enjoying raucous support in rural areas, in large part because of his deftness at the universally practiced tactic of pork-barrel politics.
As suggested above, such pre-election public anointments are far from unusual. Apart from what occurs in the West, I've witnessed similar dynamics in the Philippines, in Pakistan, in Georgia, and in Russia. Often the candidates do actually win. But not always, and even when they do win, they don't always usher in finer times.
The clear-eyed Karim Sadjadpour at the Carnegie Endowment writes that Iranian elections are still "unfree, unfair and unpredictable." Sadjadpour says that Iran's true center of power -- surrounding Ayatollah Ali Khamenei -- could be on the cusp of one of the country's occasional political self-corrections because of Ahmadinejad's "economic mismanagement and foreign policy adventurism." But he adds that, until now, such corrections have occurred after two presidential terms. Ahmadinejad has served just one.
Labels: ahmadinejad, iranian elections, mousavi
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home