Non Resident Voting

Could this be the beginning of the end for the Islamic Republic? If it ever does fall it could start a tumultuous time for Iran. The next government would not be likely to practice so much control over remote areas and on Iran's borders, where many of the nation's various minority groups reside and have already formed their own nations across the border. At least one or two of these groups (as far as I know) have been looking for the opportunity to separate.

The Islamic Republic is responsible for mismanagement and corruption in the country, but maintenance of security is not at all that bad.

After living under strict order of the Islamic Republic, many citizens are not accustomed to a more open society. On a larger scale, in the resulting power vacuum and possibly weak law enforcement, the case of the disintegration of Soviet Union could be repeated in Iran. As they are close to countries such as Afghanistan, drug trafficking could be the most common activity. Also rich and developing neighbors such as Khaliji Arab states and Turkey will encourage new fields of activity such as human trafficking.

I don't have time to read the article now, but I wouldn't be surprised to see those who live abroad boycott the election altogether. The sham of 2009 presidential election is still too raw for most of us to go and cast a ballot. But is there another peaceful way to change anything? Thankfully, this time moderates and reformists joined forces and I plan to vote for them. Boycotting the election neither helps us, nor is an original message to the regime. The know full well that most of Iranians are sick of them. No need to forsake this bit of right as well and dooming ourselves to another 4 years of a hardliner. I hope everyone comes to the same conclusion, but I wouldn't stake my life on it. Our people are disappointed in our election system. We will know the result on Saturday hopefully. I've been waiting for change for so long.

We did it, and that's the best we could do peacefully. I'm quite relieved. I hope things get better with world now that a moderate is our president.

That is remarkable. Considering all of the resources the government devoted to suppressing the vote, it was a democratic victory. However, now we have to see how the mullahs will react.

Coincidentally, the fella elected is a mullah, but he is a very advanced version of a mullah. The fun part is, the rest of them were not, but they were either military veterans or had strong ties with the military like Ahmadinejad. He is the lesser of the evils available to us, still not a bad choice. We could've done a lot worse. And that's a done deal hopefully. Our supreme leader needed almost a democratic election to wash away the stain of 2009 election if that's possible at all.

I just googled him and apparently he went to uni here in Glasgow not that far from my house.

Afs,

Don't know anything about this guy but I thought of you when I saw they elected a "moderate" and was wondering your opinion. Hopefully it's a big improvement over "rat face. (That still makes me laugh)


TIS

He claims that he has attended University of Glasgow under another surname, but the university has not affirmed this yet. So I can't confirm this part.

Hi TIS

Oh yes, that's an upgrade for sure. Too bad for all the comedians though.

He is more like Khatami, the previous president before rat face. Unfortunately at the time he was in Office, Bush was in office and a great opportunity to settle misunderstandings and mistrusts between our two countries was lost. I'm hoping this is the time that they finally sit down and have a talk.

It was actually Glasgow Caledonian University my older sister used to go there.

I stand corrected.

Despite the election results, keep in mind '79. The failure of the military to support the Shah resulted in what - a democratic Iran? The faux democracies in Egypt and Turkey have shown and are showing their true substance: it comes down to their respective militaries.

People didn't want Shah back then. Had military acted, it would've been a coup. What happened in Iran in 79 is what's happening in Arab countries now, that so called Arab spring. Majority of people are misguided and want religion in power. After three and half a decade, we're gradually ready for a more secular regime on our own accord. But what happened in Turkey, was a king who made sure military wouldn't let religion take power. Who knows what majority of people want and if that doesn't eventually happen? Just as Europe went through renaissance to become more secular, this is the way. Every nation has to feel the grips of their religion on their daily lives to fully appreciate a secular government for which they have fought on their own.

All that said, our military can do a coup after these results. They have strongly religious and financially corrupt elements within them to withstand the change that people want.

Photos of people celebrating election results in the streets:

http://www.kosuf.com/archive/544.php

I saw short clips of the crowds celebrating on the news last night. Sounds like most people are satisfied with the choice.

Btw, how often are there elections in Iran? It seems like not that long ago since the last one.




TIS

It was long overdue, and this one is not Ahmadinejad or anyone from his party, so that's all anyone needed. There is a presidential election every four years. The last one was in 2009. The one that some were killed while demonstrating. We all believe they rigged that election, so that rat face gets another term, but there was no way people would be voting for him again. We have a majority who would vote reformist, and back then people were very mad at his choices.

Congratulations Afs!

I saw a 4 minute clip of the celebrations, really amazing to see all those happy faces of all ages, wish them all the best and I hope things will get better.

Thanks DZ! It's very kind of you.

Lets hope the new president has some moderting influence on the clerics who really run the country. This was a great victory for freedom, and in my opinion it shows the ruling elites were afaid to rig the election like they did the last time.

I wouldn't be so sanguine. Rowhani ran Iran's nuclear program and he insists that it will continue and that America stay out of Iran's business.

Right on DT.

Oli, I don't think Iran would forfeit the right to a peaceful nuclear program. It's become a matter of national pride and anyone talking about abandoning this issue would be labeled as unpatriotic. Kerry said that many countries did prove their nuclear program is peaceful and it's not a complicated matter. We'll see if they reach an agreement. But I wouldn't be optimistic that if they want Iran to give up the whole enrichment program that they would cooperate. Even the most moderate president that could get elected, in the utmost free system there could ever be, wouldn't back down from such a right for Iran, as a member of NPT.

BTW, GCU issued a statement yesterday. http://www.gcu.ac.uk/newsevents/news/article.php?id=59642

Agreed. Seems to me whoever is in charge of internal security is in charge of Iran. All dictatorial regimes have this in common. Never trust a regime that is willng to kill its own people. The Tehran regime was pretty ruthless about this a few years ago.

No regime interested in retaining power ever takes the hint. Their primary goal is to keep themselves in power. The current regime is feeling a bit of heat because of international sanctions, and no doubt they'll give a little here or there, but there's one thing they'll never give an inch on ... anything that threatens their control of political power.

It's a tragedy for Iranian folks, and also for folks in other countries who suffer the terrorism which the Tehran regime continues to fund.

I'm by no means going to trust them, but I'm hoping that they would take a lesson from these past four years. Wishful thinking, I know.

//

BTW, something really interesting that I didn't know, is that even prisoners, especially political prisoners were and alway have been allowed to vote. Some have voted.

Afsaneh, what do you think, is the hope in Rohani really justified? I mean, everybody had high hopes in Khatami who, in the end, couldn't do that much.
If Rohani really tries some meaningful reforms, he will have to struggle against
- the Pasdarân
- the courts
- the Guardian Council.

And possibly the parliament.
What can he really do?

In the context of living here in the past eight years, yes. We've lost unions. The house of cinema was closed down. The organization overseeing the budget was shut down. The economy is in a very bad shape, more due to lack of statesmanship within than sanctions imposed. There's a 30% official inflation rate, but actually the inflation rate is over 100%. The president has the executive power to remedy all these. Our relationship with other countries is a disgrace now. He has the power to improve that as well.

Pasdaran is under the rule of the Supreme leader. If he has given this election to the center-left, it's expected that he would keep Pasdaran in line. I'm not 100% positive, but I'm hopeful that the supreme leader sees no happy ending for himself in sight if he wants to go an as he did in the past 8 years. Executive branch also could champion the free speech by letting more newspapers into the circle of publishing, better internet access and many things that concern Iranians.

The guardian council's role outside the election is checking the laws congress passes and make sure they are not against the constitution. Their role in this matter is very little if you ask me. With this right wing congress, that's the least of president's problems.

Courts are a different branch and the executive branch has no jurisdiction over them, only the supreme leader does.

As for the foreign policy, the nuclear program of Iran and what's going on in Syria, there's a little wiggle room, and anything that can be accomplished relies heavily on how much the supreme leader wants to be lenient on these issues. For G8, maybe being hopeful is way too optimistic. For those of us living here, not so much. It impacts our lives for the better for sure.

Another question for you, Afsaneh, if you'll oblige me: Most of the oilfields in Iran are owned by the Iranian National Oil Company, but are they technically owned by the people like those in Iraq, whose 2005 Constitution states that all oil and gas is owned by “all the people of Iraq in all regions and governorates.” ? Just curious.

Sure, I'm not sure how that is in Iraq, but here government gets paid for selling the oil, and that pays for the whole budget. In our system executive power writes the budget, and congress has to pass that or make changes and then the two branch agree on the changes. So essentially not all the people get the oil revenue in a fair manner. For instance, those working for the oil ministry get higher salaries than those who work for education ministry. We don't have any other major source of revenue and depending on who is in the office, and their plans and consequently their budget, one field gets more attention than the other.

Afsaneh, if you could indulge me on something...how much manufacturing and non-pertoleum activity goes on in Iran? It seems the few petro states that have succeeded long term have done so by diversifying their commerce. I understand your country is under trade sanctions with much of the West, but eventually that will change (Persian culture is not going anywhere) as things always do.
Oil is often as much a curse as it is a blessing, and I don't really know much about Iran, so I am curious about what other interests the country puts its investments.