Rouhani Must Move Towards Meeting the Demands of the Voters

Gholamhossein Karbaschi, Tehran’s former Mayor and one of the most prominent and influential members of the Executives of Construction Party (Karagozaaran-e Saazandegi), is a key political figure in today’s Iran, held in high esteem as a strong executive. Many believe he will hold an influential post in Hassan Rouhani’s cabinet, but in an interview with Iranwire, he says he’s not interested in high-level positions. He spoke about a wide range of issues Iran will face in the months ahead, from negotiations over its nuclear program, demands of President-election Rouhani, and political and civil freedoms, and what Rouhani’s election might portend for the United States.

How would you characterize the impediments facing Mr. Rouhani’s cabinet, and the Iran they inherit?

Some may interpret this to be the worst economic, social, and political conditions of Iranian history! We face conditions that are so bad, none of their creators wish to accept their share of responsibility for them, and in fact each of those individuals is trying to surpass the others in criticizing these conditions. It is not necessary to repeat the economic statistics and numbers, and the situation with foreign and national policies, as many of these points were raised during official and public debates.

Although Mr. Rouhani has occupied many different positions over the past three decades, he has never held executive posts and is not especially well known around Iran. What are his best attributes as a leader? In terms of style, which past president might he resemble?

I believe he is very much like Mr. Rafsanjani in 1989, when he went from the position of Speaker of the Parliament to presidency. Mr. Hashemi lacked operational experience as well, but he had a lot of information about the country’s conditions, its operational mechanisms, problems, impediments, opportunities, and facilities. Both political factions considered the Rafsanjani of those days, like today’s Rouhani, one of their own and they were hopeful about him. Like Mr. Rafsanjani did in those days, Rouhani wants to use both factions for managing the country through moderation. But those days, our foreign relations with the world were not as bad as they are today. The economy had not gone through the current crises, the society’s post-war consumption expectations were more reasonable than today, etc.

Are the growing threats around the nuclear program taken seriously? Mr. Rouhani is a pragmatist, and Rafsanjani mentioned explicitly during the election that Iran faces serious threats. Is this comprehended in a realistic way?

Mr. Rouhani is one of those rare Iranian politicians who is aware of the depth of the challenges facing the nuclear program, and has written the most comprehensive and documented text published in this area. Last year his book was comprehensively introduced in the Mehrnameh Magazine, and he provided detailed explanations about this in an interview. His became one of the bestselling books of the year, and has been used as a reference by many analysts and academics. The breadth of his knowledge will bring along his sensitivity about the issue and it cannot be taken lightly.

What does this mean? Does he have the ability to negotiate effectively both outside and inside the country, and to influence and elucidate within the different layers of the regime in order to achieve results?

Even if in the past there were individuals who made light of the situation through emotional slogans, ignoring warnings from caring individuals such as Mr. Rafsanjani, who warned that things could get difficult if the case were to be sent to Security Council, individuals who called the UN resolutions “torn pieces of paper.” Today everyone, including those individuals, recognize this as the main reason for the comprehensive economic crisis facing the country and the people’s lives. Fortunately, Mr. Rouhani knows this crisis and its effect on the country’s various issues, and is emphatic about it. It was only two or three days ago when I and a group of friends went to see him, after he had conducted several meetings with those involved in the country’s current affairs. He said that during the election race, some took issue with what they called “a dark portrayal” of things. Now that I am hearing more exact and official information, I realize that we were only providing “a bright portrayal” of things!

What do you mean? Exactly what instances did he have in mind?

In my opinion, among the people inside the country who know how to approach this issue and achieve effective results, the most acceptable individual is Mr. Rouhani. Fortunately, as these challenges have emerged in different aspects of the country and on different levels, the public opinion is prepared. He talked about economic, political and social dimensions and he specifically spoke about certain economic circumstances.

After the election, many individuals and groups expressed myriad demands, inspired by Mr. Rouhani’s campaign slogans. Do you think expressing civil, social, and political demands before Mr. Rouhani’s inauguration is a positive step, one that some say can provide the requisite social pressure for change? Or do you think that perhaps these demands could be beyond his abilities and in the short- or even long-run cause disappointment among the voters or even those who didn’t vote, but who have expectations of him as president?

I think that you can’t tell a group of people who have voted for someone with motivation and expectations for him to solve the problems that they should not bring up their expectations. A democracy’s aim is to meet the collective demands and expectations, and the individual who gets the votes must move towards meeting those demands. But some competitors may wish to divert attention from the voters’ main general demands by raising issues that would ultimately lead to the people’s disappointment about their choice, and to question Mr. Rouhani’s effectiveness. We must watch out for these actions so that some, especially those with a forum, would not deceive in the name of the voters and the public. Of course, I am very optimistic about the people’s general understanding and feel that our society today understands the issues unbelievably well.

How can you distinguish between a demand aimed at diverting attention from the main issues, and a legitimate demand?

There are a lot of ways to find out, but the simplest one is to see who is making or representing a demand. What the supporters and the voters bring up is usually quite real and rational.

In the discussions you have had with Mr. Rouhani, other than economic issues, was there an emphasis on subjects such as civil and political freedom, or issues such as the situation with political prisoners?

Generally, I can say he has serious hope and determination to solve all these issues. After mentioning many of these problems, his main emphasis was that he was very hopeful and optimistic. By the way, your question reminds of something, which I have mentioned before in another interview, and that is when I was in the Evin Prison at the beginning of Mr. Khatami’s term in office, I asked Mr. Atrianfar what was Khatami’s view and reaction to my imprisonment. He said, Mr. Khatami is so busy and is dealing with so many pressing issues that this problem of yours is not even among his top 100 concerns, which I acknowledged as being correct.

For me, the significance was that when the reformists won the election, and when the problems the country and the people faced were being resolved, those tolls became tolerable. Of course today’s conditions are different, but we must be cognitive that all those who are tolerating these types of difficulties, have done it for the good of the country and the people, and I don’t think their own demand is for the resolution of their confinement and house arrest. But, this is a serious demand by the voters, even by Rouhani’s own Principlist constituency, the resolution of which could even help with the elimination of past grievances. Instead of dwelling in the past, everyone must think of the future.

So, does that mean that he has considered the issue of those under house arrest? Has he had any negotiations in this area?

He has definitely considered it, but I don’t know whether he has had any negotiations or not.

The new round of US sanctions will become effective in July. The US Congress is pursuing new sanctions against Iran, regardless of the new developments in Iran. Of course, it will take months, as long as September, for these sanctions to be approved and implemented. It appears that the Obama administration is watching the Iran developments carefully, waiting for positive signs to solve the problems, but radical American politicians are considering other ways. What consequences do you think this approach will have for Mr. Rouhani and his government, and how is it viewed in Tehran?                                                                  

These are all different parts of the situation Mr. Rouhani will inherit from the previous administration, and they must plan for these and find ways to handle and resolve them. I believe that the rational and wise behavior of the Rouhani government is an opportunity the American people could use. Considering the serious problems the US faces in the region and inside America, if things are done wisely, even the US radicals cannot ignore this opportunity. Even in the trouble-ridden region of Middle East, wise conduct can work in favor of everyone’s security and problem resolution, something that cannot be disregarded by the decision makers.

A wise politician who considers his people’s national interests, or who does not wield irrational and empty threats against others, will take advantage of all of the other side’s conditions and opportunities. I mean that we can manage much of the radicalism in favor of our country and nation.

Can Mr. Rouhani be an opportunity for the US?

Iran can offer its advice to resolve the issues in Afghanistan, a problem that is getting more serious these days, also in Iraq where things have turned into a crisis, in Syria, and Lebanon, something that Iran distinctively achieved before, in the early days of the US presence in Afghanistan and Iraq, among other things.

The view in the US is that the election of Mr. Rouhani is not a change in and of itself, and that Iran must still take a concrete action or step. Considering what he has told you, are Mr. Rouhani and those who provide advice to him, prepared to take a practical step beyond the generalities discussed so far?

The Americans must have reviewed Mr. Rouhani’s resume and background. His characteristics and those of his colleagues have not been empty words and slogans.

Could we expect to see you in executive positions in the Rouhani administration?

No. I am not prepared or interested in executive positions.