Raymond Barrett

Sunday Business Post
By Raymond Barrett

Conspiracy theories are never far away when Middle Eastern politics are being analysed, and there seems little prospect of either side in the current impasse in Iran accepting the other’s view.

Following last week’s disputed presidential election, hundreds of thousands took to the streets across Iran in support of Mir Hossein Mousavi, the defeated candidate representing the country’s burgeoning reform movement.

Yesterday, police warned they would deal firmly with any protest rallies, which they cited as illegal. Despite this, a planned protest in Tehran was set to go ahead yesterday afternoon, after Mousavi called on his supporters to take to the streets.

Mousavi’s supporters have disparaged the official results – which gave victory to the conservative incumbent, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, by a 2:1 margin – and have demanded that fresh elections be held.

During a tumultuous five days of demonstrations, nearly a dozen protesters were killed by basij militia men closely linked to the Iranian Revolutionary Guards and the country’s ruling clerics. The protests have clearly startled the clerics who wield ultimate power in this Islamic republic of over 70 million people. Not since the Iranian revolution 30 years ago has Tehran seen such mass public dissent.

One side got a significant boost from Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, last Friday when, during prayers in Tehran, he dismissed opposition claims of electoral fraud and issued a ‘cease and desist’ warning to opposition leaders.

In his sermon, Ali Khamenei said that ‘‘street challenge is not acceptable’’ and insisted that ‘‘the Islamic republic would not cheat and would not betray the vote of the people’’.

There still remains two diametrically opposed groups facing off across the country, both of whom believe they are in sole possession of the truth. But after Friday’s sermon, it is clear that Ahmadinejad is in possession of the one vote that matters most.

In the aftermath of the election, opposition newspapers, SMS services, radio stations and internet access have all been targeted by the government in a bid to stifle communication between opposition groups.

The government has also arrested dozens of leading opposition activists in a bid to quell the protests.

While there is no doubting the intensity of the opposition and the scale of the ‘Green Movement’ – members of Iran’s football team sported green wristbands during a World Cup qualifying match in a show of solidarity – there is still no definitive proof that the election was rigged.

There have also been rallies in favour of Ahmadinejad, who enjoys strong support in the rural areas. Conservatives have also blamed ‘outside forces’ for stirring up the opposition.

But a number of questions have been raised regarding the poll results. Ranj Alaaldin, a Middle East specialist at the London School of Economics, told The Sunday Business Post last week that the electoral process seemed tainted.

‘‘There are serious discrepancies which suggest this wasn’t a free and fair election,” Alaaldin said. ‘‘What baffles many is how results from 40 million ballots could come within hours, rather than the customary three days.”

However, the counterclaims of culpability within Iran have been mirrored outside the country as well. Polling results published in the Washington Post revealed a 2:1 split in favour of Ahmadinejad, though others have dismissed the data as unreliable, given that more than half of the respondents failed to express a preference.

Since the overthrow of the Shah in 1979, Iran’s opaque electoral history has always been difficult to predict.

Regional experts were shocked by Ahmadinejad’s first victory in 2005, when he comprehensively defeated influential former president Ali Rafsanjani – who, this time round, backed Mousavi.

In many ways, Rafsanjani’s looming presence in the shadows of Iranian politics makes it even more difficult to separate truth from fiction.

Rafsanjani is a multi-millionaire and is seen by many of Iran’s rural poor as sitting atop an oligarchy of urban wealth, education and privilege.

During a televised debate with Mousavi in the run-up to the election, Ahmadinejad launched a stinging attack on Rafsanjani to score points against Mousavi, accusing the former president of corruption.

While the protests over the presidential election are unprecedented, there seems little chance of any far-reaching structural change within Iran. Ultimate power lies not with the president, but with Ali Khamenei, and Ahmadinejad is his preferred candidate.

‘‘Key individuals behind the protests, like Mousavi and former president Rafsanjani, are all products of the Islamic revolution, men who are the system rather than men fighting it,” said Alaaldin.

Alaaldin also said that Iran was ‘‘witnessing a major concerted effort that demands more civil liberties, engagement with the west, economic opportunities, human, civil and women’s rights and, worryingly for the clerical elite, demands targeted at the non democratic institutions like the office of the Supreme Leader’’.