The call for a referendum on the constitution of Iran is an intriguing and provocative political move. It is nonetheless a point of discussion among intellectuals without organic connection with the Iranian public and fails to reflect the political realities of Iran.
Though a useful starting-point for a potentially broad discussion about important political and social issues, the call does not provide a practical solution. Organising referendums requires the existence of democratic institutions and specific political conditions currently lacking in Iran.
Bezhad Yaghmaian is responding to Mohsen Sazegaras proposal for a referendum on a new Iranian constitution, Irans road to democracy
See also the articles by Afshin Molavi, Kaveh Ehsani, Mansour Farhang and Farideh Farhi in our Iran debate, Democracy & Iran
For an introduction to openDemocracys debate, see David Hayess Iran between revolution and democracy
Please post your responses in our discussion forum; and if you can afford it, send openDemocracy a donation so that we can continue to facilitate dialogue among Iranians and keep it free
Iran today is a highly polarised society. On the one hand, the Islamic Republic still enjoys substantial support among certain strata of the population support that is both ideological, and, in many cases, driven by financial incentives. Despite numerous setbacks in its twenty-six years of existence, many groups within Iran remain loyal to the Islamic Republics original social and cultural project.
On the other hand, the majority of Iranians, especially women and young people, are alienated from the Islamic Republic and reject its cultural and social codes of conduct. These groups formed the backbone of the powerful movement for rights that swept through Iran after the presidential victory of Mohammad Khatami in 1997. There have also been many examples of open defiance of the government by different sections of the Iranian working class in the past few years.
All evidence indicates the numerical supremacy of the Islamic Republics opponents over its supporters. This means that a free referendum would spell the end of the Islamic Republic. Under no circumstances, therefore, will the Islamic Republic agree to respect the results of such a referendum.
To address this obstacle, the signatories of the referendum call have asked for United Nations monitoring to accompany the referendum. Going further, some have requested practical and moral support from the United States.
But after the disastrous results of the US military intervention in Iraq, and Americas failure to bring either stability or wellbeing to Afghanistan, a request for US support is a blind invitation for more of the same. In addition, an intervention of any form by the United States can only increase the ranks of the supporters of the Islamic Republic, and lead to further repression of political and social freedoms in Iran.
Given this situation, it seems that the mobilisation of the Iranian public youth, women, and workers in collective action remains perhaps the most effective solution to the current crisis in Iran. It is vital that any call for such action is grounded in the demands of the people. It must reflect their needs and their agendas for change.
Irans youth were politicised by Khatamis presidency. In political action, they saw the possibility of gaining cultural and social rights, and broader political freedom. With the failure of Khatami and the official reform movement, they have once again become depoliticised, and have retreated into the cultural sphere. They use the sphere of everyday life, rather than politics, to achieve cultural freedom from the Islamic Republic.
Social change cannot be achieved without the repoliticisation of this broad cultural movement.
