Hamid Ahrari is a prominent nationalist-religious [melli-mazhabi] figure who tells Rooz in an interview that although the reformists have lost much of their footing in the power structure, they remain able to change the power structure in Iran due to rising public dissatisfaction in large cities and its considerable potential to empower social movements.
Rooz (R): Iran tried very hard to negotiate with the Bush Administration during Mr. Ahmadinejad’s tenure. Is that still possible in the Islamic Republic of Iran? Why?
Hamid Ahrari (HA): That is possible in the Islamic Republic, but it is not definite. Our thirty-year experience shows that when there is a lot of noise, the honey moon is near. Evidence shows that the Iranian neo-cons are more willing to negotiate than the American Democrats.
R: Do you believe that pressures on Iran would diminish under the Obama Administration?
HA: Yes, the American foreign policy has undergone a serious shift. Military pressures have been replaced by smart economic pressures. America’s attention has shifted from hot war to cold war and the West’s propaganda and public relations reach has increased. It became apparent during the Manama and Sharm el-Sheikh conferences that America has been somewhat able to replace the Arab-Israeli dichotomy in the Middle East with the Arab-Iranian rift in recent years.
R: How would Democrats and the Obama Administration approach sanctions toward Iran and which of their goals are attainable?
HA: The Democrats, it seems, lean toward four levers to pressure Tehran into compromise: 1- Increasing economic pressures to diminish Tehran’s financial and investment power; 2- Controlling Tehran’s financial and logistical relations with the Hezbollah and Hamas by limiting banking access; 3- Controlling the Islamic Republic’s arms deals and enticing Russia into taking part in imposing financial and military sanctions on Iran; 4- Increasing media pressure. Among these levers, White House advisors think that economic levers are the most important. Increasing economic pressure drives up price of goods and may even bring out the unemployed, teachers, university students, urban poor and even the bazaaris onto the streets. It is only enough if the crises spill out onto the streets. Then the legitimacy of international levers of pressure would be enhanced.
R: What is the possibility of a domestic and foreign policy change in the Islamic Republic? Is it possible for the regime to bow down to another reform era?
HA: Democracy is the best option to exit crisis and isolation. Although the reformists have lost much of their footing in the power structure, they remain able to change the power structure in Iran due to rising public dissatisfaction in large cities and its considerable potential to empower social movements. The Islamic Republic is set up in such way that the real institutions of power do not undergo significant changes as a result of elections. However, future changes in power structure are not fully under the control of the autocrats. Increasing pressure on civil society organizations and political activists point to the rising impact of social movements on the Islamic Republic’s power structure. This impact can multiply in the future.
