Power has its own dynamics and contradictions. Power politics divides, but it has its own grey areas too. Sometimes it really becomes difficult to give a moral judgment yet one has to take a stand and also make a compromise and even work together. When last year Barak Obama and Hillary Clinton were locked in a bitter tussle over the Democratic Party leadership, the latter publicly said: “Shame on you Barak Obama.” Today she is his Secretary of State.
Similarly the earlier political history of Islam has a lesson for Shias, Sunnis and people belonging to all other schools of thought. At times companions of Prophet Muhammad (may Allah bless and greet him) took different stands in good faith. They even fought for their cause fully believing that they were on the right track. Yes, they fought because most of them strongly believed that there is no place for silence and hypocrisy in Islam. If you think you are right you are required to stop the wrong with force. However, it is also true that there were some vested interests which always played dirty games. In retrospect one can dare suggest that the vested interests did manage to win and soon Khilafat was replaced by monarchy and subsequently a great divide occurred.
There is every scope for difference of opinion in an Islamic state, which is not a monolithic structure as it is often being made out. People can air their views, and even take to streets and protest if they feel that there is something seriously wrong with the system. However, what happened over 1,400 years ago should once again work as an example for all of us and one must be vigilant of the fifth columnists within our rank and file who always want to hijack a movement.
On the basis of what is actually coming out from Iran, one can definitely say that everything is not hunky-dory. Yes, one cannot say with certainty what has actually gone wrong and why. Though the western media is one-sided in its propaganda, the developments in Iran reflect how much democratic it is. For about a week people were allowed to come out, speak and shout slogans. They targeted about 700 official buildings and attacked vehicles and property. Reports also said that eight members of the Basij militia were killed by the rioters. Yes, the government did use force and several persons were later killed. Neda, a woman in her mid-20s was among them, though the authorities later conceded that hers was the case of a mistaken identity.
The charges of irregularities in the election raised by the main contender and former prime minister (1981-89) Mir-Hossein Mousavi may sound acceptable, but the margin is so wide, almost double, that even the bitterest critic of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, cannot surely acknowledge that Mousavi was going to win the election. The third contender, Mohsen Rezaei, who got just 1.75 per cent votes, withdrew his complaint from the Guardian Council on June 24 on the plea that “political, social and security situation has entered a sensitive and decisive phase, which is more important than the election.”
In that way Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, who got almost 65 per cent votes against Mousavi, who secured just half of it, seems to be the clear winner. Yet several leading personalities like Ayatollah Khatmi, Hojatul Islam Hashmi Rafsanjani and Ayatollah Montezri have strong reservations and appear critical of what is happening in the country. The western media calls those taking part in the protest demonstration as liberals. Mousavi, who had been the prime minister during the Iran-Iraq War days, said on June 20 after the protestors clashed with the police: “We are not against the Islamic system and its laws but against lies and deviations and just want to reform it.” Even on June 24 he appealed to his supporters to maintain ‘self-restraint’ while demonstrating to avoid further bloodshed.
Who knows better than the Iranian leaders, especially the dissidents, as to what are the long-lasting consequences of differences between Hazrat Ali and Amir Mauwiyya and Hazrat Ali and Hazrat Aisha in those heydays of Islam. The case of Imam Husain and Yazid can never be brought here as the matter was very clear. Yes Hazrat Ali’s stand is fully vindicated. In spite of this fact it was very difficult for some of the companions to take a clear decision in good faith. Once again the vested interests and the forces inimical to Islam did play the part in creating confusion and chaos between the two sides, both of whom were sincere to core.
It is much easier to look back at those events from the experience of the hindsight and pass judgment. But many of them on the spot had to take decision at the spur of the moment. Those who opposed Hazrat Ali cannot be equated with all those who opposed Imam Husain. So there is no scope for unequivocal criticism of the former. However, the case of those who opposed Imam Husain and fought and killed him is quite different.
One can only pray that the problems are sorted out at the earliest. But the Iranians and Muslims elsewhere in the world need to rethink and understand whether they have gone overboard in condemning one group or the other.
The case of Mousavi is not that of the Left-leaning Mujahideen-e-Khalq or Tudeh Party, who did try to sabotage the Islamic Revolution. He was the Prime Minister for eight most eventful years and claimed to be close to Ayatollah Khomeini. However, he had a running dispute with the then President Ali Khamenei, who is now the spiritual leader of the country. Though they worked together during and after the Revolution and hail from northwest part of the country and are even relatives, they strongly differ on several issues, especially related to the foreign policy. Twenty years later the issue is same. So it is not actually Mousavi versus Ahmadinejad, but between Mousavi and Khamenei. He does not like the way Iran is being run now.
What actually happens is that in the surge of public support sometimes a leader gets carried away and takes a different path. Before he or she looks back, it is impossible to retreat as he or she becomes the hostage of circumstances. With substantial urban and educated class support and international media behind him. Mousavi has reason to feel bold. Yet he needs to remain cautious as there are many in the world who are elated by the turmoil there. Ousted King Raza Shah’s son made a fantastic appeal to Israel to support anti-government movement in Iran, but warned it from attacking that country as it would jeopardise the whole plan.