Omid Memarian
o.memarian@roozonline.com
As a journalist and a political analyst, Mahmud Shamsolvaezin is a known figure in Iranian affairs. In an exclusive interview he told Rooz that if Iran was assailed even to the smallest degree, he would hold the rhetoric of Ahmadinejad’s administration responsible for it which has succeeded in providing the necessary means for harming the national interests of Iran. Here are the excerpts of the interview.
It should be noted that President Ahmadinejad recently complained about the critics of his government and called them goats.
Rooz Online (R): Since coming to power about two years ago, President Ahmadinejad has used different words to belittle the critics of his administration and policies. Where is this language coming from?
Mahmud Shamsolvaezin (MS): The rhetoric and language that Mr. Ahmadinejad uses, whether addressing his critics or even his closest associates in the government, are not the words of a statesman. They resemble those of a man in the street who has arrived at the President’s house on Pasteur avenue by accident. So his language, whether domestically or internationally, is that of the street. The other issue is that Mr. Ahmadinejad has never understood the meaning of opponent, critic or adversary and therefore he uses this type of language to address them or when he refers to them. Furthermore, Mr. Ahmadinejad has suffered from an inferiority complex since the day he walked into the executive office. And precisely because of these, he has never been accepted by any political, social or cultural member of the country’s elite. This is true not only at the international scene, but also domestically, because the violent and harsh language that he uses and his lack of a character. Mr. Ahmadinejad of course is aware of the opinion of the Iranian elite and critics regarding him and therefore he strives to make himself present and known by attacking them.
R: But his supporters inside the administration believe that his ascent to the presidency has been successful, both inside and outside Iran. Particularly outside the country where he spends a lot of his energy . . . .
MS: He lacks any elite or leadership quality that would attract the public towards him. And contrary to the international stage, his words have very few listeners in the Iranian political domain. This is the reason why I heard his use of the word “goat” for his critics from you. In other words, as a journalist I should be aware of his statements and rhetoric since he is the president, but I have ruled him out. I am only a journalist, but you can imagine how the political elite and public opinion makers view him. So his words do not resonate with the Iranian public. At the international level, his words have had an impact. But only to be used by the United States and its allies to exert grater pressure on Iran aimed at extracting concessions from it.
R: Mr. Khatami and Mr. Ahmadinejad have both been the focus of international attention. What similarities and differences do you see in them?
MS: I have found one similarity and one difference. The similarity is that one week before the presidential elections, neither knew that he would be elected president. The differences however are many. Despite getting into office with 22 million votes and the extraordinary position that he enjoyed among the Iranian elite and also the respect that he enjoyed at the international level, Mr. Khatami did not take himself seriously. Because of this, he failed to meet the expectations of his domestic audience and international elite. Mr. Ahmadinejad on the other hand, lacks any standing among the Iranian or international elite, but strives to present himself as someone important and thus takes himself very seriously. Which is why his rhetoric is so harsh and violent.
R: What is the reason for his choice of words and what may their consequences be for Iran?
MS: I think Mr. Ahmadinejad and his aides have concluded that this is the one and only presidential term he will have, regardless of what the choice of the Iranian regime may be. Polls indicate that his popularity is less than 27 percent, even among those who voted for him. He is thus striving to revive his initial popularity that he gained through his numerous promises such as bringing petrodollars directly to the public. The consequences of this rhetoric can be very dangerous for Iran’s national interest. The language that he uses regarding Israel and Iran’s nuclear issue has already cost Iran’s national interests without bringing any benefits to the Iranian people. Under these circumstances, we should be expecting more negative consequences. In any case, if Iran is hit even with the smallest blows, I would hold the rhetoric used by Ahmadinejad’s government to be responsible for it.
R: Is there a strong possibility for this?
MS: The possibility is rising by the day.
R: Do you think more pressure will also be exerted on domestic critics too?
MS: I don’t think under the current domestic circumstances anything else can happen because Mr. Ahmadinejad’s words are not taken seriously by the elite. Nobody is concerned about his possible responses. This is because it is not he who is running the show, but others who are managing the confrontations.
