Ahmadinejad

The Iranian presidential election of 2009 and its tumultuous aftermath was an important starting point for a new wave of visual artists and their artwork in Iran and the rest of the MENA countries. During these democratic movements, the role of visual artists and their artwork drew a great deal of attention for those interested in the study of resistance art and political unrest. Stemming from fundamental political ideas ― freedom, liberty of speech, equality ― artists/activists used a variety of visual elements to illustrate their deep sense of national identity. This collection is one of the first attempts to show how, during the Iran post-election crisis of 2009, resistance artists expressed the messages of the nation in their artwork.

The government of Iran in the post-revolutionary period may have religious leaders in central positions, but it is far from being a pure  theocracy. This paper pursues this topic in the spirit of Michel Foucault’s widely explored notion of governmentality. Foucault’s concept is broad, but generally
covers the ways that government adopts a cultural ideology for carrying out its duties, a structural framework for implementing this ideology, and a rationality associated with that framework From an anthropological standpoint, it is expected that different forms of governmentality will be observed in different societies, with different cultural underpinnings resulting in unique institutions. Iranian governmental institutions are unique to Iran, emphasizing legitimacy as a mark of authority, and martyrdom as the symbolic proof of legitimacy.

"This Chaillot Paper examines recent domestic developments in the Islamic Republic of Iran. The volume presents an in-depth assessment of the farreaching changes that the Iranian state and Iranian society have undergone since the 1979 revolution, with a particular focus on the social and political
turmoil of the past five years.
It is clear that in many ways the Islamic Republic is in the throes of a transition where many of its fundamental tenets are being called into question. Profound and ongoing internal transformations in Iranian society already affect the country’s foreign policy posture, as some of its domestic and external issues converge and will most likely continue to do so. Pertinent examples are the nuclear issue and the socio-political upheaval in neighbouring Arab countries.
Edited by Rouzbeh Parsi, the volume features contributions from five authors who are all specialists in various aspects of Iranian politics and society. Each author explores some of the most crucial variables of the Iranian body politic. Their focus on distinct dimensions of Iranian society and culture casts light on
the changes afoot in contemporary Iran and how the political elite controlling the state respond to these challenges.

Table of Contents

Introduction: Iran at a critical juncture, Rouzbeh Parsi

Factional politics and the Islamic State, Farideh Farhi

Challenges facing the Iranian economy, Evaleila Pesaran

Gendered citizenship and the women’s movement in Iran, Azadeh Kian

Student movements in the Islamic Republic: shaping Iran’s politics through the campus, Paola Rivetti"

Washington politicians and the press have cultivated, among Americans, the impression that Iran is a “theocracy” with no democratic institutions. Ignorance grew during the Bush
administration as the conflict in Iraq escalated, and the administration continuously looked to blame Iran for US failures. Larry Diamond, a scholar at the Hoover Institution who
advised the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq (CPA), told the Inter Press Service that the Mahdi Army of young cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, and other Shi`a militias (which, at the moment are giving Coalition forces a very hard time in Iraq) were being armed and financed by Iran with the aim of imposing “another Iranian-style theocracy.” Diamond’s comments were reiterated by another Coalition provisional authority advisor, Michael Rubin. Th e
story was echoed by influential New York Times conservative columnists William Safire and David Brooks, further compounding the misinformation and continued to be a running theme in the US press on into the Obama administration, particularly in the New York Times as reflected in the reporting of Michael R. Gordon. Th e claim is simply untrue. No official body in Iran is supporting al-Sadr and the idea that al-Sadr could ever dream of imposing an “Iranian-style theocracy” is absurd. Nevertheless, the impression that Iran has nothing even resembling democratic institutions makes the neoconservative claims more believable to many Americans, who know nothing of Iran and who are fearful of Islamic attacks on Western culture.

An accurate picture of Iranian electoral institutions helps in assessing both their strengths and weaknesses, and puts aside the notion that Iran is some kind of theocratic dictatorship. Consequently, I present here a sketch of the Iranian electoral procedure, the main governmental institutional bodies in Iran, and some of the underlying dynamics of political life in Iran today.

Scholars speak of a fine intertwining between doctrinal and political factors in the performance of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Given the recent upsurge of Mahdism in Iran, this paper proposes to view the process from these two angles.

The paper seeks to trace the evolution of Iranian political thought in terms of its relationship to the Imam Mahdi doctrine, as well as the role of this doctrine in the emergence of the Islamic Republic. Thereafter, the paper will follow the Mahdist elements in the discourse of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and the links between these Mahdist statements and the movement that has been ongoing in Iran since the flaring of the recent Arab revolutions.

This paper argues that the buoyant and increasing Mahdist movement in the Iranian arena these days is but an extension of a doctrinal debate that has accompanied Twelver Shia political thought since its birth. The paper also assumes the existence of varying viewpoints regarding Mahdism among the powerful actors in the Islamic Republic, and that Ahmadinejad's Mahdist rhetoric is a tool that he uses to push his agenda forward, both at home and abroad.

The domestic political scene of Iran has been turbulent during the past year as the country entered an election cycle ahead of the parliamentary elections on 2 March 2012. A power struggle has surfaced amongst the conservative ‘principalists’, reinforced by the reformists' call to boycott the elections.

'A Separation? The Principalist Divide and the Parliamentary Elections in Iran', written by TESEV Foreign Policy Programme researcher Enis Erdem Aydın hopes to shed light on this struggle which will be decisive in the making of the ninth parliament and also in the 2013 presidential race.

The article aims to unravel the shifting alliances between the principalist factions, the scope of the rift between Ahmadinejad and Khamenei and the link between Iranian domestic and foreign policy.

For such purpose it will entertain three cases where such power struggle is most observed: The embezzlement scandal involving Iran's leading banks and government officials, the change in the presidential system debate invoked by the Supreme Leader and the raid on two compounds of the British Embassy in Tehran.

It concludes by entertaining current debates in the aftermath of candidate registration.

سخنان آیت‌الله خامنه‌ای در دیدار با فرماندهان سپاه صریح و شفاف بود. او تاکید کرد که نظریه «تبدیل انقلاب به جمهوری اسلامی» ناممکن است چرا که دومی باید مظهر و استمرار اولی باشد. این جدال با آغاز شکل‌گیری نظام کنونی زاده شد و خواست جدی غالب نیروهای سیاسی در آنزمان برآمدن یک «دولت انقلابی» بود. مهدی بازرگان نخستین نمونه دولتمردی بود که انتظار داشت با شکل‌گیری قانون اساسی و تعیین ساز و کار امور، بساط رفتارهای انقلابی برچیده شود. برخلاف توقع او، تندترین تحرک انقلابی درست در زمانی رخ داد که او مسئول قانونی کشور بود؛ دانشجویان پیرو خط امام با اشغال سفارت آمریکا و بحران گروگان‌گیری «انقلاب دوم» را رقم زدند و کابینه‌ او را زمین‌گیر کردند.

تحاول الورقة رصْد تطور الفكر السياسي الإيراني في علاقته بعقيدة الإمام المهدي، ثم دورهذه العقيدة في قيام نظام الجمهورية الإسلامية الإيرانية، لتنتقل بعد هذه المعالجة إلى تتبع تجليّات المهدوية في خطاب الرئيس محمود أحمدي نجاد، وارتباط ذلك بالحراك الذي تعرفه إيران منذ انطلاق الثورات العربية الأخيرة.

وتفترض الورقة البحثية أنّ الحراك المهدوي المتفاعل في الساحة الإيرانية هذه الأيام هو امتداد لنقاش مذهبي صاحب تطور الفكر السياسي الإثني عشري، كما تفترض وجود وجهات نظر متباينة لموضوع المهدوية عند الفاعلين في نظام الجمهورية الإسلامية، وأنّ خطاب أحمدي نجاد
المهدوي هو وسيلة اعتمدها لتحقيق برنامجه داخليًّا وخارجيًّا.
The paper seeks to trace the evolution of Iranian political thought in terms of its relationship to the Imam Mahdi doctrine, as well as the role of this doctrine in the emergence of the Islamic Republic. Thereafter, the paper will follow the Mahdist elements in the discourse of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and the links between these Mahdist statements and the movement that has been ongoing in Iran since the flaring of the recent Arab revolutions.

This paper argues that the buoyant and increasing Mahdist movement in the Iranian arena these days is but an extension of a doctrinal debate that has accompanied Twelver Shia political thought since its birth. The paper also assumes the existence of varying viewpoints regarding Mahdism among the powerful actors in the Islamic Republic, and that Ahmadinejad's Mahdist rhetoric is a tool that he uses to push his agenda forward, both at home and abroad.

Iran has been in the forefront of international interest during the last years due to its nuclear program and strategic position for the Middle Eastern affairs. However, Iran’s internal political arena is equally turbulent to its international relations. After the 2009 elections and the crush of the Green Movement a new power struggle has emerged within the Iranian regime. President Ahmadinejad’s attempt to create a loyal elite around him was met with a fierce response from Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s side which stripped him off his power, attacked his associates and might even cancel the position of president itself. The outcome of this “internal war” is crucial for both regional and global politics.

Durante su reciente gira por América Latina el mandatario iraní visitó Venezuela, Nicaragua, Ecuador y Cuba sosteniendo reuniones con sus homólogos, quienes brindaron apoyo absoluto a Irán frente a las presiones internacionales para detener su programa nuclear