We have spoken with Ebrahim Yazdi, Secretary General of the Liberation Front of Iran ‎‎(“Nehzat-e Azadiy-e Iran”) about the upcoming presidential election. In Dr. Yazdi’s ‎view, “The time to evaluate the institution of Supreme Leader has arrived.” The ‎interview appears below.‎

Rooz (R): Recently, we have heard different stances from members of the Liberation ‎Front regarding the tenth presidential election: from supporting Mr. Khatami to ‎discussing changes to the Constitution. What is the Liberation Front’s stance on this ‎issue? ‎

Ebrahim Yazdi (EY): The Liberation Front’s stance has not changed. Our stance ‎continues to be the same thing that we have repeatedly announced. However, we ‎distinguish two issues from one another: presence in the election versus participating in ‎the election. ‎

R: How are these two things different? ‎

EY: Presence in the election means that, during the election season, political parties use ‎the opportunity to communicate their messages to the public. That is the reason why we ‎continue to announce conditions for holding free, fair and healthy elections at every ‎chance; or discuss the cause or causes that prevented the reform movement from being ‎fully successful. These all are instances of being present in the election and raising ‎public awareness. ‎

R: And what about participating? ‎

EY: Participating in the election means that, as a political party, we finally have to tell ‎people whether we would participate in the election or not. If not, why not and if yes, for ‎whom we would vote. This is the meaning of participation and we have not yet made a ‎final announcement in this regard, because we have not yet made a final decision about it. ‎However, regarding the election, we have said time and again that the reformists must ‎reach consensus over one candidate from the beginning. Secondly, in the analyses that ‎we have provided, we have determined that the reformist movement is an undeniable ‎socio-political reality, but one of the most important reasons for the reform movement’s ‎failure, despite being backed by these two factors, was lack of leadership. No political ‎party or group took charge or could have taken charge of this leadership. ‎

R: Who could have? Mr. Khatami? ‎

EY: Mr. Khatami was the reformist president, but he did not acknowledge, or perform, ‎or lacked the capacity to perform his role as the leader of the reform movement. If ‎elected again, he must change his strategy this time around. During the previous election ‎too, when friends of Mr. Moeen invited us to support him, we put six conditions forward, ‎one of which was the creation of a democracy and human rights front. We meant to ‎create a front composed of reformists inside and outside government, which, ‎unfortunately, did not take place. ‎

R: Is Mr. Khatami able to create such a coalition? ‎

EY: Though we believe that Mr. Khatami has especial conditions for running in the ‎election, more important than his running is the method of his coming. Mr. Khatami is at ‎a position where he can expand such a coalition.‎

R: Mr. Yazdi! You have spoken repeatedly about revising the Constitution and ‎eliminating the supreme leadership, while Mr. Khatami speaks about implementing the ‎existing Constitution. How can these two be made consistent? ‎

EY: We have never said that the current Constitution must be revised. In that interview, ‎I noted that 30 years have passed since the passage of the second version of the 1358 ‎Constitution and we now have 30 years of experience with supreme leadership. The time ‎to evaluate the institution of Supreme Leader has arrived. We say that if changes are to ‎be made, first everyone (including conservatives) must admit the necessity for such ‎changes.‎