14 June 2009 : Reuters
By Alastair Lyon
Political turmoil engulfed Tehran on Saturday after a disputed presidential vote won by hardline incumbent Mahmoud Ahmadinejad - an outcome that could snarl US President Barack Obama's effort to engage Iran. Moderate challenger Mirhossein Mousavi cried foul even before the official results showed Ahmadinejad taking an unbeatable two-to-one lead with most votes counted in Friday's high-turnout election, confounding predictions of a tight race.
The result, after a bitter campaign that electrified Iranians, dismayed those who had hoped a win for Mousavi would improve ties with the West, which fears the Islamic Republic's nuclear program is a cover for bomb-making. Iran denies this. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, not the president, has ultimate control of Iran's nuclear and foreign policies, but defeat for Ahmadinejad could have heralded a less antagonistic approach to the United States and much of the rest of the world.
I don't think anyone anticipated this level of fraudulence," said Karim Sadjadpour, an analyst at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington "This was a selection, not an election. At least authoritarian regimes like Syria and Egypt have no democratic pretences. In retrospect it appears this entire campaign was a show: Ayatollah Khamenei wasn't ever going to let Ahmadinejad lose.
Iran's election commission said Ahmadinejad had won 62.6 percent of the vote, with Mousavi on 33.75 percent. Mousavi listed several irregularities, alleging that many people had been unable to vote and ballot papers were lacking. Ahmadinejad on Friday ruled out fraud because representatives of candidates would witness the vote at 45,000 polling stations. Ahmadinejad focused relentlessly on mobilizing his support in rural areas and the urban poor. Even before campaigning formally began, he had crisscrossed Iran promising to bring economic development to deprived areas and fight corruption.
While his combative political style upset many moderate Iranians, his strong anti-Western rhetoric and determination to pursue Iran's disputed nuclear program appealed to others. Trita Parsi, president of the Washington-based National Iranian American Council, said he was "in disbelief" at the officially reported margin of Ahmadinejad's victory. "It is difficult to feel comfortable that this occurred without any cheating," he said, adding that Iran could slump into paralysis if Mousavi continued to contest the result and won support from top figures within the clerical establishment.
He said this would complicate Obama's attempt to reach out diplomatically to Iran when the US president has already said he wants an indication of progress by the end of the year. "It will be more difficult to deal with Ahmadinejad because he has been discredited at home," Parsi said. "Obama may not be able to deal with anyone because there is paralysis in Iran. It will cause the Obama administration to lose very precious time," he added, noting there was already pressure from the US Congress, Israel and some Gulf Arab states to apply a tough timeline for the engagement strategy. "Their patience for how long Obama can pursue this is strictly limited," Parsi said.
Speaking before results emerged, Obama said he was excited by the debate in Iran, the world's fifth biggest oil exporter, and hoped it would help the two countries engage "in new ways". The United States has had no ties with Iran since shortly after the 1979 Islamic revolution but Obama has offered a new US approach to Iran, saying he would extend a hand of peace if the Islamic Republic "unclench its fist".
Mark Fitzpatrick, senior fellow for non-proliferation at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, said: "I am surprised at the regime's audacity in declaring such a large margin for Ahmadinejad, given that in the run-up, the momentum seemed to be in the other direction". He said he was not optimistic about any US-Iran detente. "The hardliners in the regime seem to have exercised all their levers of power to keep Ahmadinejad in place. Undoubtedly, a key reasons was concern about losing control of the country through policies such as willingness to engage with the US.
Elliott Abrams, former senior Bush administration official now with the Council on Foreign Relations, said the "apparent victory and the apparent fraud" had dealt a severe blow to Obama's strategy and it was time to consider fresh sanctions. "The one hope might be that if a new Ahmadinejad government is viewed as illegitimate by many Iranians, that government might be anxious to avoid further economic distress. "In that context, sanctions that bite might be a powerful tool and might push the regime into a serious negotiation." Abrams, a strong supporter of Israel, said millions of Iranian voters might view the election result as "bizarre and unlikely", perhaps setting the stage for major protests and a challenge to the legitimacy of the entire Iranian system. - Reuters
