Good Dawn for Iran

Iran is a sensitive nation caught in between the internal urge for modernisation and external threats. In this complex circumstance the victory of Ahmadinejad is crucial. Now he should grab the offer given by Barack Obama and play a global stateman role to sort out the long pending enemity between the two nations.

The Hindu editorial writes (15 June 2009)

All those hoping for the defeat of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Iran’s presidential elections are understandably bitter about the landslide win announced for him. But once the dust from the Tehran protests settles, the world will need to adjust to the likelihood of the controversial incumbent continuing in office for another four years. It is extremely unlikely that conclusive evidence will emerge to back up Mir Hosain Mousavi’s allegation of a stolen election. But i ndicators such as the improbably low vote for the reformist leader in his hometown of Tabriz and the deliberate shutting down of SMS services throughout the country do cast doubt on the integrity of the election. The western media and the more articulate sections of Iranian society might have been indulging in wishful thinking when they felt the voting would go overwhelmingly in Mr. Mousavi’s favour. Even so, the scale of the President’s victory is surprising and indeed suspicious, especially against the backdrop of Mr. Ahmadinejad taking only 19.48 per cent of the popular vote in the multi-cornered first round of the 2005 contest. Revolutions have their own dynamics. If indeed the election has been stolen by the clerical establishment in favour of their preferred candidate, one can expect this to be reflected in a sustained level of popular tumult across the country. Either way, one thing is certain: Mr. Ahmadinejad will be an even more polarising leader in his second term than he was in his first. And if the domestic political legitimacy of the Islamic Republic is to survive his tenure, there will have to be much greater transparency and respect for political, cultural, and media freedom and for gender justice than what the system currently allows.

The re-election of Mr. Ahmadinejad also means a larger share of the burden of compromise needed to resolve the nuclear issue will have to be borne by the United States, at least in the initial phase. President Barack Obama’s tentative efforts to reach out and craft a new approach to Tehran have been on hold pending the outcome of the Iranian election. Washington must now follow through on its proposed diplomatic initiatives. These can succeed only if the U.S. recognises that the nuclear issue is a by-product of the hostile bilateral relationship, not its cause. The nuclear question can be settled through a dialogue without unreasonable preconditions such as insisting on the suspension of uranium enrichment. On his part, the Iranian President must abandon his confrontationist attitude and inflammatory rhetoric on key issues like the Holocaust, all of which has only served to strengthen the hands of Iran’s enemies.

Every peace loving person is waiting for the good dawn in Iran