Daily Times

The results of Friday (21 February) elections of the Iranian parliament (Majlis) show that “Principlists” (conservatives or hardliners) have won two thirds of seats in a house of 290. The “reformists” (or moderates) could get only 17 seats. The “Priciplists” have won all the 30 seats of Tehran previously held by the reformists. Reportedly, more than7000 potential candidates had been disqualified, most of them reformists and moderates, including 90 sitting members of Majlis. According to daily Guardian “turnout stood at 42.5%, the first time it dipped below 50% since the 1979 revolution; in Tehran it was just 25%”.

The Supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei blamed Iran’s enemies for exaggerating the threat of coronavirus, causing low turnout. However, the conservative daily Kayhan described the result of the Majlis elections as “rebuff for those that had pushed for greater engagement with the West, which brought more pressures and sanctions on Iran”.

The Iranian media further states that as many as 14 senior figures in former president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s administration have been elected. The former mayor of Tehran, Muhammad Bagher Qalibaf, an Iran-Iraq war veteran and former commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC), has also been elected which according to daily Kayhan makes him a strong candidate for the office of speaker of the Majlis. It is being predicted now that President Hassan Rouhani may face a tough parliament in the last year of his two-term presidency. Presidential elections are due next year. Since a president can be elected twice under the constitution, it would be difficult for the reformists to put up a strong candidate for the presidency. This is likely to pave the way for a conservative candidate to win the next elections.

The emerging situation in the region where Iran, Turkey and Russia are on one side and the US, GCC and Israel on the other, simmering tensions would continue to mire the region

Meanwhile, Iranian conservatives have been pushing the argument that after withdrawal by the US of nuclear deal called Joint Comprehensive Programme of Action (JAPOA), Iran should not only resume its nuclear activities but also withdraw from the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). However, President Rouhani still hopes to save the nuclear deal. During his meeting with the Dutch Foreign Minister, Stef Blok, on 22 February in Tehran, President Rouhani said that Iran has not closed the doors to talks with the European Union on possible ways to save the nuclear deal (JCPOA). He said that “nuclear deal served the interests of the region and the world…. and the US move harms all nations, even the US people”.

President Rouhani’s olive branch may be a last ditch effort to save the nuclear deal as he has been urging upon the western powers, especially the three European states party to JCPOA (UK, France and Germany), to fulfill their part of the deal and do normal business with Iran as has been done by China and Russia, the two other signatories of JCPOA. So far the European signatories have been trying to keep Iran in good humour by praising Iran’s compliance of the JCPOA. However, the Europeans are well aware that they cannot annoy President Trump; they cannot sacrifice their $ 600 billion trade with the US against Iran’s $ 23 billion.

The success of hardliners is likely to have far reaching impact on the Middle Eastern politics. While the Trump administration argued that JCPOA did not offer a foolproof mechanism for the Middle Eastern peace, Iran was using the nuclear deal as a leverage to promote its expansionist agenda in the region, especially the Gulf States. Similarly, major Gulf countries led by Saudi Arabia remain uncomfortable with the nuclear deal arguing that without addressing their concerns about Iran’s interference in their internal affairs, a durable peace in the region would remain elusive.

For the Trump administration, the Gulf States dissatisfaction provided a much-needed opportunity to withdraw from the nuclear deal. This would also address Israel’s concerns which already had rejected the JCPOA, especially insisting that without addressing Iran’s missile programme JCPOA would not bring about desirable peace in the region. Therefore, Gulf States grudges against Iran’s meddling in their affairs and Israel’s objection over Iran’s missile programme coincided with President Trump’s own desire of selling arms to the Gulf states created a right mix for the latter to withdrawal from the JCPOA.

Since Saudi Arabia has already snapped diplomatic ties in early 2016 over the burning of its embassy in Tehran, the situation remains precarious despite mediatory efforts by Pakistan to bring Iran and Saudi Arabia on the negotiating table. The killings of IRGC’s Al-Quds force commander General Soleimani and Iran’s carefully orchestrated retaliation against the US base in western Iraq are contributory factors discouraging rapprochement between the antagonists. While the parties in the fray may be not allow things going out of control for the time being, they are aware of the dangers of a stalemate which may spark a major conflict with unintended consequences.

In such a scenario, winning of conservatives in the Iranian parliament must have been a foregone conclusion. How a conservative victory in the parliamentary election can be translated into fulfilling the revolutionary objectives inside the country and beyond, especially when Tehran has been put on notice by the US after killing Gen Soleimani which would be a major test for the theocratic order. In the coming weeks and months, a host of challenges would be confronting the leadership in Iran.

First, under severe US sanctions the Iranian economy has already gone into recession. 2019 economic indicators show a dismal picture of the economy with 12% unemployment, 36% inflation and minus (-) 9.46% real GDP growth that may slip further if the US sanctions continue (Source: statista.com). Deteriorating economic conditions in the country may cause internal unrest which the US officials expect may push the country to chaos and ultimately to regime change.

Second, the emerging situation in the region where Iran, Turkey and Russia are on one side and the US, GCC and Israel on the other, simmering tensions would continue to mire the region. However, resource wise Iran and Saudi Arabia would be the worst sufferers. With continuous sanctions, Iran would be hard pressed to sustain its Middle East policy unless Turkey, China and Russia openly support Iran and defy American sanctions. Third, on the ideological front, Iran has created a niche in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon as well as Palestinian Hamas which Israel considers as a direct thereat to its security. But the Iranian manoeuvre is not without a cost; it has to bear an expenditure of US dollar 10-12 billion per annum to sustain its presence and influence in these countries. There are reports that moderates in Iran have been questioning the rationale of such a wasteful expenditure at the cost of Iranian people. Fourth, Iran would be keenly watching the US-Taliban peace agreement slated for 29th February. For quite sometime Iran has been keeping a low profile on Afghanistan because of its engagements in Iraq and Syria. However, this may change if the US creates more hurdles for Iran in the Middle East and tighten its sanctions further.

Finally, the conservatives to reassert their authority in the country have capitalized the killing of Gen Soleimani. Whether its Majlis elections or presidential elections next year they seem poised to adopt a tough stance on the nuclear deal (JCPOA) and Iran’s Middle East policy. We should be prepared for tough season in the months ahead.

The writer is a former ambassador