Mr. Mousavi! The Movement Demands Your Leadership!

The latest pronouncement by Mir Hossein Moussavi, leader of Iran’s Green Movement, stated the need to establish a political working group to take up the movement’s demands. This move has been interpreted by political analysts and followers of Moussavi as a call for the creation of a political party. The concept of instituting a political party at the end of a presidential election was initially pursued by Mehdi Karrubi, who founded the “Etemad Melli” party immediately after the previous presidential election. The question we take up today is: what is Moussavi’s goal in establishing a political party? What gap does Moussavi want to fill with this party?

In his last proclamation, Moussavi offered responses to these questions and announced his program.

Moussavi’s objectives in creating a party can be divided into three points. The first is to press forward specific demands that require changes in the constitution in order to be realized, like the rightful existence of independent television networks in the country. The second is to press for demands that would require the reform of statutory laws in order to be realized, like changes in election laws, laws pertaining to the media and free press, statutes pertaining to Iran’s Radio and Television (Seda va Sima) and the supervisory council that oversees this organization. Third, to pressure the regime to comply with the legal system and uphold articles of the constitution, such as article 27, which protects the people’s right to assemble freely to protest, to demand the release of political prisoners, and an end to the building of criminal files for citizens on the part of security forces. Clearly, these claims are not new and have been consistently demanded by the people of Iran and resisted by the regime. But has their disregard been due to the lack of a political party to pursue them? With which party instruments can these grievances be met?

The eight year experience of the Reform Movement has clearly shown that when reformists were in complete power of the executive and legislative branches and had created parties to deal with the above mentioned issues, they were unable to bring such changes to fruition because they refused to move outside the legal framework of the regime. Some may refer to organizational weakness and lack of leadership as the main factors behind the failure of the Reform Movement during Khatami’s presidency, which is not entirely off the mark, but we must also be aware of the regime’s structural problems and the barriers that exist within the legal framework and the foundation of the regime itself.  The barriers that the parties encounter working within the bureaucratic system of Islamic Republic cannot be overcome.

Should Moussavi’s party be established today under the name of Iran’s Green Party, or any other name, it will invariably be beset with several challenges almost immediately. This is because Moussavi, or any other person who wants to establish a political party, must first obtain permission from the Ministry of Interior. This, in and of itself, is an acceptance of the legitimacy of the Ahmadinejad government, which contradicts Moussavi’s earlier declaration that this government is illegitimate. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that Moussavi will obtain the permission he needs to establish his party. If he attempts to establish the party without permission, it would defeat the purpose. Thus, Moussavi’s only  alternative is to work with one of the existing reformist parties or use collective action in the traditional and associative sense which does not seem be an option that Moussavi is considering. Then how does this party plan to bring about these changes?

The only way the party would be successful in achieving its goals, is if it serves as an opening for obtaining power through a parliamentary or electoral struggle. However, based on the experience of the past few elections and considering the recent proclamations from Sazman-eMojahedin-e Enghelab-e Eslami(Mojahedinof the Islamic Revolution Organization) and Jebhe-ye Mosharekat (Iran Participation Front), we can no longer hope to obtain power through electoral means. Indeed, the Islamic Republic’s absolutist leadership style has shown that they do not believe in the vote of the people and the just and democratic distribution of power.   Even if we assume that through pressure from below, the leadership is forced to defend the people’s vote, which is a close to impossible assumption, how can the reformists expect to be effective when working within the existing deadlock of the country’s political regime? After all, didn’t the 6th parliament, with a powerful majority reformist coalition, set out to realize freedom of the press and media, reform electoral law, outlaw torture, and reform the Seda and Sima organization? What was the result of these efforts?

The realization of Moussavi’s demands, which are among the most crucial claims of Reformists and democracy advocates in Iran, cannot be delivered by a political party; rather, it requires national will and strong leadership free from government regulation. This is not to deny the importance of establishing a moderate political party or adhering to the rule of law, but to point out that the creation a political party alone will not expedite or guarantee the realization of these demands. To mobilize people, while still being bound to the regime’s legal framework, will eventually bring about divisions, distress, and hopelessness to Iran’s Green Movement and lead to its ultimate failure. The national will has developed in such a conspicuous and unique fashion, that the leadership should have confidence in it and defer to the will of the people when making decisions. Thus, more important than devising plans for a political party, Moussavi should place his support behind the energy of this social movement and fulfill his historic role as its leader. This is what Khatami shirked from and he never stepped up to his role as a true leader of the Reform movement. Contrary to Moussavi, when suggested he should establish a party, Dr. Mossadegh responded: “If I establish a party we shall fail.” (indirect quote) What Mossadegh meant was that he was a national leader, while a party only represents a segment of the population. Even though he had nothing in principle against parties, he disagreed with the idea of establishing one and did not see it as an appropriate mantle for the leadership of the movement.

Thus, what the Green Movement needs today is for Mir Hossien Moussavi to step up and take on a leadership position. Any other course of action will be fruitless. The work of political parties must be left to the established parties and political elite, who have the authority and influence to advance the demands of the movement.. Moussavi will not be able to move from being the leader of a mass movement to the leader of a party and retain any hope of realizing his goals. By harnessing this movement and the momentum it has created, with the help of reformist parties and forces, Moussavi can push back the government that has accused him of illegitimacy and force the leadership of the Islamic Republic to comply with the people’s vote. Someone who sees himself as the product of a populist movement should not limit himself to the framework of a party. The leader of such a large scale movement needs to have courage, ingenuity, and flexibility. Under these conditions, the limitations of functioning in the narrow context of party interests should not replace the courage necessary to lead a mass movement. Political parties are essential and must be established, but the focus, time, and energy of a Moussavi’s leadership should not be wasted in an ineffective bureaucracy. Moreover, the leadership of the movement should not limit his range of action by being accountable to a party. Finally, just as in parliament one must not adopt the manner of the ‘street,’ the resistance movement of the people on the streets must not be constrained by standards and principles in parliament. In other words, it is true that even a bad law must not be broken, but we must struggle to change it. Yet this principle is only valid when the law applies to everyone. When the government itself breaks the law, it is the right of the people to change it and the leadership of the movement cannot confine itself to a self imposed constraint.

In his last public and publicized visit with friends and followers in commemoration of the anniversary of Imam Ali’s birth, Moussavi emphasized that “I am determined and resolute to work with a group in a regular and organized fashion and I never was at ease working alone and independently.” If by this he is referring to the need to defer to  popular will in working towards change and reform, then this is exactly what is needed from Moussavi today. According to political analysts, his insistence on working in an organized group setting refers more to his desire to create a political party than his will to lead a populist movement. If this is the case, following Khatami’s strategy before him, he will break from his role as leader of the mass movement to become a party leader, and this is a regime where most reformist party leaders spend their days in a corner of a prison cell praying for their freedom and release.