web analytics
January 30, 2015 / 10 Shevat, 5775
 
At a Glance
InDepth
Sponsored Post


Home » InDepth » Op-Eds »

Is Rohani a Moderate Game-Changer or a Diversion?

Rohani’s election positions the regime to cater – superficially – to reform-minded voters in Iran, while improving Iran’s prospects in international negotiations.
The media outlets hailing the election of Hassan Rohani, the “moderate,” are the same outlets that consider the Tea Parties in America to be “radical.”

The media outlets hailing the election of Hassan Rohani, the “moderate,” are the same outlets that consider the Tea Parties in America to be “radical.”
Photo Credit: Press TV

A reader at The Optimistic Conservative pointed out that the media outlets hailing the election of Hassan Rohani, a so-called “moderate,” as the next president of Iran are the same outlets that consider the Tea Parties in America to be “radical.”

Given that most of these media outlets would agree that the clerical mullahs of Iran’s Guardian Council are radicals, the task for the Tea Parties seems clear: simply proclaim some among their membership to be “moderate.”  Send the moderate members to talk to the media and negotiate political issues.  The moderate Tea Partiers need never make a concession or give any ground; their only requirement is to serve as the self-proclaimed moderates of the Tea Party movement.  A few tweets would help too.  The media outlets should greet the Tea Party moderates with acclaim and be excited to see them elected to public office.

Election of a ringer?

If it works for the Iranian government, it should certainly work for the Tea Parties.  The fertile TOC comments section provided a preview for another significant point, which is that the clerical council effectively positioned Rohani as a “moderate,” in the hope that doing so would give him an electoral victory with a reform-hungry people.  What I said on the topic was this:

We could even suggest that Khamenei suffered [Rohani] to be talked up as a reformer in order to pacify the people with his win.

At The Tower, Avi Issacharoff quotes Dr. Soli Shahvar of Haifa University:

“[Rohani] never called himself a reformist … But he uses rhetoric that is less blustery than that of Ahmedinejad, and speaks more moderately, including on the subject of nuclear negotiations.” Shahvar’s conclusion with respect to Rouhani’s win is unambiguous. “I interpret his election in one way only: The regime wanted him to win. If they had wanted one of the conservatives to win, they would have gotten four of the five conservatives to drop out of the race, paving the way for [eventual runner-up, Tehran Mayor Mohammad-Bagher] Ghalibaf to win. But they didn’t do that. Moreover, it was the regime that approved the candidacy of Rouhani [sic] alongside only seven others. This is striking evidence that Khamenei wanted Rouhani to win, both internally and externally.”

Shahvar goes on to basically outline my theory from the comments at the link above:

“Victory for a candidate who is perceived as more moderate yet still has the confidence of Khamenei, serves the regime in the best way. Externally, Iran today is in a very difficult situation with regard to sanctions and its international standing. A conservative president would only have increased Tehran’s isolation in the world. A victory for someone from the ‘moderate stream,’ however, will immediately bring certain countries in the international community to call for ‘giving a chance to dialogue with the Iranian moderates.’ They will ask for more time in order to encourage this stream, and it will take pressure off the regime. And so we see that in the non-disqualification of Rouhani and especially in the non-dropping-out of four of the five conservative candidates there is more than just an indication that this is the result the regime desired.”

(See here for a separate, very worthwhile summary of Rohani’s victory.)

Rohani’s election positions the regime to cater – superficially – to reform-minded voters in Iran, while improving Iran’s prospects in international negotiations.  There is no doubt that the international media will provide governments with a cover story about Rohani and “reform” in Iran.  They are already doing it.  With Rohani depicted as a moderate and a reformer, nations like Germany, India, Japan, and Brazil – nations which have been conflicted on the sanctions against Iran, and have trod a convoluted course to both honor and circumvent them – will see a handy justification for modifying their stances.

Sanctions roll-back?

Iran can expect a rush of trade relaxations some time after Rohani takes office.  It is worth taking a moment to reflect on how robust Iran’s trade relations already are, in spite of the sanctions: economic powerhouses like Germany, China, and India have continued to do robust trade with Iran, even when that trade is clearly boosting Iran’s nuclear program (see here for more on the story, the latest in a list of such stories coming from Germany.  Here’s another one, albeit with – apparently – a happier ending).

About the Author:


If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

5 Responses to “Is Rohani a Moderate Game-Changer or a Diversion?”

  1. Dan Silagi says:

    We're going to have to wait and see if the election of Rohani makes a difference. I believe it shows the Iranian people have had enough of the theocratic tyranny which has existed since the overthrow of the Shah (before that, it was non-theocratic tyranny).

    But we have to remember that the Revolutionary Guards and the mullahs still call the shots. There will have to be a popular uprising to clean these vermin out of Iran, and that's not happening — yet. So until then, it should be business as usual between the US, Israel, and Iran — which means regime change as far as the true rulers are concerned.

  2. Gil Gilman says:

    Before reading the article: Diversion. After reading the article: Tea Party is not radical, just full of nitwit ideas, and rhetoric…well…wait a minute…isn't that what Iran is full of?

  3. Gil Gilman says:

    Before reading the article: Diversion. After reading the article: Tea Party is not radical, just full of nitwit ideas, and rhetoric…well…wait a minute…isn't that what Iran is full of?

  4. This overthrowing of the Shah thanks to the coward Jimmy Carter the worst President of US all times.

  5. This confirms what I've thought all along — most of the world's nations are terrorists and enemies of the USA, so we'll ultimately have to wage war against most of the rest of the world in order to remain a free nation!

Comments are closed.

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Current Top Story
Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz.
Sen. Cruz Asks if Obama Behind V-15 ‘Political Campaign against Netanyahu’
Latest Indepth Stories
Israeli-flag

At some point we need to stop simply defending and promoting Israel and start living in Israel

Rabbi Berel Wein

“We Jews are the only people who when we drop a book on the floor pick it up and kiss it.”

Rabbi Sholom Klass

Though Zaide was the publisher of The Jewish Press, a big newspaper,I always remember him learning

Sheldon Silver

Speaker Silver has been an extraordinary public servant since his election to the Assembly in 1975 and has been an exemplary leader of that body since 1994.

He spent the first leg of his daylong visit to the French capital at Hyper Cacher.

Drawing Congress into the Iran nuclear debate is the last thing the White House wants.

Great leaders like Miriam and like Sarah Schenirer possess the capacity to challenge the status quo that confronts them.

Obama’s foreign policy is viewed by both liberals and conservatives as deeply flawed

Many journalists are covertly blaming the Charlie Hebdo writers themselves through self-censorship.

Why does the Times relay different motivations and narratives for jihadists in Europe and Israel?

To defeat parasites-the hosts of terrorists-we need to deny them new people, potential terrorists

Combating Amalek doesn’t mean all who disagree with you is evil-rather whom to follow and to oppose

Desperate people take what they can, seizing opportunity to advance their main goal; the Arabs don’t

There was a glaring void in the President’s State of the Union speech: Israel.

More Articles from J. E. Dyer
Steven Joel Sotloff as a hostage of ISIS, before his beheading.

In his travels as a journalist in the Islamic world, Sotloff never referred to his Jewishness.

ZIM Piraeus in happier days. (Image: ShipSpotting.com user b47b56)

ZIM Piraeus isn’t Israeli-owned or flagged, incidentally, it is Greek operated.

Obama is transparent, if you read his oracular signs with the right key.

ISIS has no intention of “marching on” Baghdad. The Sunni affiliates of ISIS are going to disrupt life there.

Oslo’s moment of unchallenged American supremacy and the illusion of unforced global stasis, passed.

Could the Obamas be any more “let ‘em eat cake”?

The Obama administration wants to take over the short-term financial services industry.

The topics are “The Reagan Strategy,” and the “Iran Time Bomb.”

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/opinions/is-rohani-a-moderate-game-changer-or-a-diversion/2013/06/17/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: