But what can Khatami really do? Farah Naqvi NEW DELHI: Recently, an Iranian friend came visiting. A professor at a leading European university, he's taken a year's sabbatical from his job and chosen to spend the time re-visiting his homeland (ostensibly on a research project). What made his homeward journey possible was Khatami's election in 1997. Post '97, many of the estimated 3.5 million Iranians who fled in 1979 had started returning. President Khatami made Iran seem liveable. At least negotiable. I saw it myself in 1998 - elegant head scarves, Parisian clothes, and fashionable matt lipsticks adorned the faces of many Iranian women. I managed with a sari pallu, which slipped ever so often, but there was no dread in the slippage. I even showed a bit of hair! Conversation naturally turned to the state of things in Iran. So what's it like now? He narrated an incident. A few months ago he (harmless and liberal) was picked up by right-wing vigilantes for loitering near them on the street. Kept locked up (he doesn't know where). Interrogated (he doesn't know by whom). And, finally, released after two days (he doesn't know why). With hindsight he thinks it's because his research project is supported by intellectuals reportedly close to President Khatami. It's as unclear as that. And as undemocratic. Who's who? What's the law?. How can you do that? It's been the state of things in Iran for the last couple of years. Backlash against Khatami's reforms people say. And the backlashers seem to be getting away with it. Banning over 40 reformist papers and magazines, jailing journalists and activists, impeaching reformers, setting vigilantes lose on university campuses, (and letting my innocent friend get picked up). The point is that all this has happened while President Khatami has been in power. Elected in 1997 with a landslide victory (70 per cent of the votes), he has been unable to defend reform for four years. This time he's won by an even higher proportion. But what can he really do? His aides have called the election a referendum for reform. Khatami himself has said many times reform is the will of the people. Freedom is as necessary as water. The fact is that people did show their will in the February 2000 elections when reformists took control of the Iranian parliament. But something happened to this people's mandate when this wonderful reformist parliament started debating a crucial Press Reform bill. Iran's current supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, intervened on behalf of the theocratic conservative forces, and actually instructed the parliament to stop debating the bill. They dutifully stopped. They were constitutionally bound. That's the problem. The Islamic constitution gives supreme power to Khamenei as prime representative of the Velayat-e-Faqih the rule of the clerics. He's basically the Shiite spiritual boss on earth until the 12th Shiite Imam turns up to save the faithful (that's the theological basis). So much for the will of the people. And that is the very basis of Iran's Islamic revolution that has to be questioned - the relationship of state to civil society. The revolutionary regime seems to feel it knows what's best for Iranians. President Khatami says the people do. But is this just liberal-speak? Let's not forget that President Khatami may be a charming, smiling, modern cleric, but he's still a cleric. Rafsanjani, you might recall, was also hailed as a liberal when he first took charge. What does it mean to be a liberal leader from a conservative ethos? Much like our very own liberal PM who remains a card carrying member of a khaki-wearing RSS. Can President Khatami actually challenge the very basis of Iran's unique Shiite theocracy? Can he challenge the supreme leader? Can he liberal-do as he liberal-speaks? Let's celebrate his victory cautiously. (The writer is a free-lance television journalist who has travelled to Iran to cover culture and reform)
For reprint rights:Times Syndication Service