A family ‘protection’ bill is stopped at the Majlis because of pressure from civil and women’s rights activists; Elite students who were denied admissions to universities but get support from the Majlis because of their resistance; and, Merchants and bazaaris in the large cities force the government to retreat on its taxation plans. These are some of the most news-making events in Iran recently that demonstrate that the country’s civil society is moving ahead in its strength and new achievements.
The elements that constitute Iran’s civil society, social groups or societies that are not affiliated with the government or a political entity, are grouped on the basis of their position or location between the government on one end and the public on the other. A significant group of political scientists believe that civil society is one of the key requirements for attaining and advancing democracy. From this perspective, civil society is made up of independent public spheres in which civil institutions and associations can take shape and protect the interests of their members.
With this said, under conditions where the key government revenue is derived from natural resources such as oil or gas, and not from taxation and work of the citizens, the creation and functioning of civil institutions and social organization is not easy. By its nature such a government is not tolerant of democratization or a strong civil society, and in fact even acts as a barrier in its development and the independent life civil society associations. If there is a belief in civil society at the ruling level, that is among those who have an effective role in the running of the country, then the story is different.
The Majlis, media, parties, guilds, syndicate unions, etc are considered to be the traditional channels between a civil society and the government. These channels in the press, NGOs, and political parties to some extent played even a more important role in Iran during the reform period between the late 1990s and up to 2005. But since Ahmadinejad came to power, the role and effectiveness of these institutions have changed for the worse, and unfortunately, they are more dismal than the initial days of Khatami’s administration in late 1990s.
So under these new circumstances and conditions for civil society institutions, developments like those mentioned in the first paragraph here are joyous occasions. Iran’s civil society has defended its rights through resistance against government plans and programs. In other words, it has exhibited itself and shown its power to the ruling power structure which has the characteristic of being authoritarian and demonstrates many undemocratic traits.
These victories at a time when pessimism and hopelessness have taken over even many ardent activists and pro-democracy political advocates is both instructive and welcoming. These events can show to political activists that perseverance and patience, mixed with hope and faith can result in achievements and results, even though small, achievements that cannot be attained without cost or sacrifice. By closing large city bazaars for a few days, merchants have paid the minimum of their dues for such victories. But are political activists too willing to make sacrifices - based on critical analysis - to reach better platforms for attaining democratic values and norms?
