UPDATE: WHILE AMERICA SLEPT, MASOUD PEZESHKIAN BECAME PRESIDENT -ELECT OF THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC
Explain. Unlike the usual situation in the so-called free and democratic United States of America, Iranian voters, on Friday, July 5, will have a choice of president. They can choose what the Western media calls a “moderate” or what the Western media terms a “hardliner”.
On June 28, 2024, six candidates were in the running for the second-highest political position in the Islamic Republic. Only two, “reformist-backed” Masoud Pezeshkian and “hardliner” Saeed Jalili, garnered the greatest number of votes, but not enough for an outright win. Pezeshkian, a prominent politician, medical doctor and former health minister, picked up about 40%-42% of the polls while Jalili, former nuclear arms negotiator and long-time member of the foreign ministry garnered approximately 38%-39% of the 24.5 million votes cast. (Al Jazeera).
Masoud Pezeshkian
Saeed Jalili
Since then, there has been inordinate handwringing over a low voter turnout, with about 40% of the 61 million people eligible to cast ballots actually turning up at the polling stations.
What’s the Choice? Filtered through Western and Iranian news sources, Pezeshkian, as Al Jazeera noted, “has promised to lift sanctions by restoring the country’s comatose 2015 nuclear deal with world powers and to bridge the widening gap between the people and the establishment.” Additionally, according to Trita Parsi, an Iranian analyst here in Washington, D.C., the ‘moderates” seem to espouse more personal and political freedom. This apparently translates into less control over women’s headgear and a greater ability to question governmental actions. (Even though Iran has a robust print and electronic 4th Estate.)
Jalili, as Al-Jazeera commented, is “a senior member of the Supreme National Security Council, has promised to bring inflation down to single digits and boost economic growth to a whopping 8 percent, along with fighting corruption and mismanagement. He advocates a harsher stance against the West and its allies.” The site went on to assert that he is “tied with years-long nuclear negotiations in the late 2000s and early 2010s that ultimately led to Iran’s isolation on the global stage and the imposition of United Nations Security Council sanctions.”
COMMENT. When I attended Georgetown University’s Foreign Service School, I once took a course from an expert on Latin America. Besides noting that the favorite pastime of the region was bull-fighting, but that most Americans thought it was “revolting”, Professor Brill observed that voter turnout was a quick gauge of a country’s stability. A relatively low turnout indicated that the populace was reasonably satisfied with the economy and its government. A very high turnout showed that there was or could be great instability in the body politic.
So, in my view, I don’t believe that only 40% of the population going to the polls demonstrates that Iran will collapse.
What is concerning is not that the country has a choice between some sort of reformer and a long-time civil servant with a background in foreign affairs. What is bothersome is the great pressure to tar Pezeshkian with the failed policies of former President Rouhani, who accepted the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Jalili’s people seem to claim that Rouhani deliberately accepted the trade-off of reduced sanctions for fewer centrifuges, all the while knowing that this would be a failure.
I don’t believe that anyone in Iran has Extra-Sensory Perception and thus could read the “minds” of Barack Obama, Donald J. Trump, or their Zionist advisors. After all, the best definition of diplomacy is “the conduct of relations between states based on tact and common sense”. Pezeshkian appears willing to re-engage with the West—but, obviously, will be more careful this time around. He knows full well that the United States and its European poodles don’t have tact, don’t have common sense, and don’t have the interests of Iran in mind.
Additionally, I hope that candidate Jalili has the same viewpoint and that his supporters are engaged more in posturing and electoral hyperbole than anything.
In my view, aside from electoral activities, Iran should continue with its unofficial, beneath the table international politics, i.e., bringing open-minded Americans and others to the country, showing them the real Islamic Republic and its incredibly hospitable, knowledgeable, and open-minded people.
Nader Talebzadeh
Moreover, Iran would be well-served to locate and use individuals like Nader Talebzadeh (https://open.substack.com/pub/jmichaelspringmann/p/let-us-mourn-the-death-of-a-magnificent?r=omh21&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web). Before his untimely death, he ws instrumental in linking Americans and Europeans to a wide variety of conferences, exchanging ideas and information that benefitted all involved. Put men like Nader into influential advisory positions, helping to educate insiders and outsiders in country and abroad, about Iran, its interests and needs, as well as with other countries, along with their interests and needs. After all, there are no permanent alliances, only permanent interests.
J. Michael Springmann is an attorney, author, political commentator, and former diplomat, with postings to Germany, India, and Saudi Arabia. He previously authored, Visas for Al Qaeda: CIA Handouts That Rocked the World: An Insider’s View, recounting how the U.S. created and used Islamic Terrorism. Additionally, he penned Goodbye, Europe? Hello, Chaos? Merkel’s Migrant Bomb, an analysis of the alien wave sweeping the Continent. He currently practices law in the Washington D.C. Area. Internationally recognized as a knowledgeable pundit, he is a frequent commentator on Arab, Iranian, and Russian news programs.
Blacklisted by the US news media, he is also on the Ukraine’s “Enemies List”, having questioned, inter alia, that country’s refusal to honor the Minsk Accords and for stating that its government is Nazified.