In this issue of the Peace Line magazine, we went to Dr. Ali Akbar Mahdi, a sociology professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, to seek his opinions on the obstacles to development in Iran. Dr. Mahdi has published over a hundred articles and critiques in both Persian and English in various specialized and non-specialized publications on sociology, the Middle East, and Iran. He has also published three books in English, including “Sociology in Iran,” “Youth in the Middle East,” and “Culture and Traditions of Iran.” He has also published two books in Persian, “Iranian Culture, Civil Society, and the Concern for Democracy” and “In the Sociology of the Iranian Family.”
Dr. Mehdi believes that “human rights have a direct relationship with economic development. In any society, the right to work and social security become meaningful when the economic foundation of the society has sufficient growth for entrepreneurship and providing necessary economic and social securities for a dignified and healthy life.”
He considers dependence on oil as one of the biggest problems of Iran’s economy and says that one necessary way to eliminate barriers to economic development in Iran is to increase production.
Mr. Doctor Mehdi; Sociologists refer to the examination of power structure problems as obstacles to political development. In your opinion, what are the main obstacles to political development in a society like Iran?
Political development means the expansion of power structures in a way that allows different political groups in society to share power and contribute to the public participation of individuals in determining their own destiny, and also leads to its increase. Of course, this requires the establishment and expansion of necessary institutions that are related to political growth. Political development in Iran has its own conditions and can have its own specific forms in other countries. Even in a monarchy, you can have political development as long as there are public institutions such as parliament and independent judicial powers that can regulate power structures in a more participatory manner.
In Iran, today, this very issue exists. The existing structure of the Islamic Republic is based on both republicanism and Islam. The structure of republicanism in the Islamic Republic is essentially held hostage by its Islamic dimension, and if this structure of republicanism can expand and push back the Islamic structure and confine it to a smaller sphere, it will inevitably lead to political development. The extent and degree of this development depends on what expectations different groups have from it, or what their goal is in achieving it. For example, the reformists who are currently in power in Iran, or some of them who are recognized in the government, believe that they can expand the republican dimension of Iranian society and counter the monopolists and fundamentalists who have an interest in increasing the Islamic dimension of the system, and help promote republicanism and political development.
However, in general, the reality is that the structure of the Islamic Republic is a non-democratic structure that contains elements of democracy within itself. The democratic elements in this system are caught in the grip of religious and ideological elements that have a hierarchical structure and are absolutist. Many of its rules and regulations are not subject to negotiation, exchange, or compromise, which is customary in society. These laws are based on divine laws and are firmly rooted in them. Even representatives who are supposedly democratically elected by the people do not have the power to change these laws and any law passed by the parliament (we do not care how this parliament is elected and what structural problems it has), must go to the Guardian Council. The Guardian Council, based on laws that are not open to discussion or negotiation – at least for the parliament – determines whether these laws can be enacted and whether any development can occur.
In any case, a society in which political development can be achieved is a society that can have a strong government. This government allows for the rotation of power and gives political elites the opportunity to work. Independent legal institutions, separation of political powers in a way that each power can act as a brake on the motivations and ambitions of the other, and having a transformative and dynamic constitution that can establish, maintain, and continuously preserve citizens’ rights are necessary requirements. Additionally, political capability in national interests and safeguarding the country’s borders, maintaining public order, and, in other words, national sovereignty, as well as the transformation of the government into an impartial entity in political disputes between parties and political factions, are elements and factors that can help with political development in any situation.
Unfortunately, in the structure of the Islamic Republic, many of these elements that I mentioned either do not exist, or if they do exist, they are being implemented in a very incomplete and imperfect manner.
The three factors that are mentioned as absolute power reproduction factors are: concentration of power resources, social divisions (different ethnicities), and political culture. Do you also acknowledge the primacy of these factors or do you consider other factors to be involved as well? If possible, please explain these factors and how they function.
See, in the current political structure in Iran, the absolute power is mostly derived from our past political culture and the long-standing institutions of absolute power that have existed. We are, in any case, the heirs of a long-standing monarchy in our history and this institution has never been separated from our society. Despite the fact that we have a republic today, at the head of this republic sits a person called the Supreme Leader who, in addition to similarities, may even have more power than previous kings and there is no force in society that can limit him. In the past, during various periods of political tension between power centers in Iran, religion itself was at least one of the necessary brakes or checks on the power of the ruling government or state and if it did not cooperate, it would be in conflict with it and try to question this absolute power and not give its legitimacy to the government as a religion, weakening it. This is essentially what happened during the Pahlavi era. The Pahl
There is no doubt that political culture is effective. Political culture is intertwined with the habits, attitudes, and characteristics of the people and society. If this culture is not democratic and is driven by authoritarian motives or unequal distribution of power and decision-making, it will continue to reproduce itself. Since Iranian society is a patriarchal society, the behavior of patriarchs has been repeated in our families in the form of small kings, and in our culture, older and white-bearded individuals have always played a prominent role. This culture repeats itself at different levels, whether in ethnicity, family, or locality. When this structure was broken by the revolution, it reappeared in a different form, with a new cover as the Supreme Leader and as someone who can be the collective mind of society and has the ability to create balance in society.
And as for the third factor that you mentioned, social diversity in Iran… See, today we have many multi-ethnic and multi-cultural societies in the world, which are also democratic, and on the contrary, we also have societies that are mono-cultural, but have authoritarian structures or still have them. If you look at Saudi Arabia, it is almost a society that is uniform in terms of population and ethnicity. All countries in the Persian Gulf region – except for the issue of immigrants – their citizens are almost uniform in terms of ethnicity and Arab. But we also have Japan, which in the past operated based on absolute power and today is a democratic society; considering that the structure of the empire still exists in that society, but it practically has a dynamic and transforming democracy and political structure.
Therefore, social fragmentation does not necessarily mean it should be carried out with absolute power. In our non-democratic and imperfect society, in a cultural structure where minorities, ethnic groups, and cultural diversity are terrifying for them and there is no necessary trust towards them; inherently, absolute power judges and the main ruler for suppressing any kind of diverse and specific desires that could potentially disrupt the centralization and stability of society, and different ethnicities are considered a negative thing.
Perhaps in the cultural and historical context of some societies, it has become a pattern that the people of our society cannot stand on their own feet without a dictator at the helm. I knew a person who used to say before the fall of Saddam Hussein that Iraq would collapse without him. We Iraqis know ourselves, we have the issue of Shia and Sunni, the issue of Arab and non-Arab, and our society cannot stand on its own feet. He believed that their political culture had not changed and therefore they always wanted someone with absolute power who could keep everyone in their place and establish order; otherwise, people would tear each other apart! This person had forgotten that firstly, this culture has always existed there, and secondly, a democratic political structure has never been established there. In this very Iraq that we are currently witnessing, Kurdish groups have been able to create a relative order with a better situation for themselves. In any case, there are many political contradictions and diversity of political parties in that
You said to add other factors: two more, in my opinion, should be considered in relation to the issue of Iran and absolute power. One is the economic aspects of absolute power. Unfortunately, the presence of oil and the oil government in Iran have greatly helped in the absolutization of political power. On the other hand, there is also the issue of religion. The religious culture is a hierarchical culture and power within the religious culture – especially the Shiite religious culture – is very hierarchical and decision-making is top-down; so that a mujtahid is at the top and the followers are at the bottom and the decisions made from the top are separate from the general authority of the secular society. This culture inherently generates a form of absolutism and this is evident in the government after the revolution and you can see what role it has played in the absolutization of power in society. This is also one of the factors that should be mentioned.
Some sociologists consider economic development as a prerequisite for political development. What is your opinion on this? To what extent is economic development necessary for eliminating absolute power and obstacles to political development?
It depends on the circumstances of each society; that is, in response to this pattern that political development is more important or economic development, my answer is that economic development without political development does not help the complete growth of society. Coordinated and extensive growth is essentially growth that exists in all aspects of society, not just one aspect. However, on the other hand, the issue of priority or precedence of economic development over political development depends on the economic conditions and specific circumstances of a society. In a society where there is a lot of poverty and very limited resources, economic development is essentially a necessity that needs to be addressed before political development. In other words, a society that does not have schools, a society that has not yet been able to provide job opportunities, a society that does not have enough resources; the first condition for creating equal conditions and even creating political development there is that individuals have sufficient access to education and the necessary health and economic facilities, so that a public welfare can be created and
In more specific terms, in the language of sociologists, a society that has not yet developed a middle class needs one in order to fill political structures and make political demands. This middle class is the driving force for progress and development in any society; it desires a share of power and, as it grows, it desires an even greater share. However, until this middle class emerges in a society, the pace and intensity of political development will not reach its full potential, and if it does, it will be more top-down rather than bottom-up until pressure is created from the bottom.
Many societies in the Middle East, including our own in Iran during the Pahlavi era, were examples of attempting to create development from the top down in society, with a political development that was only authoritarian. Authoritarian political development had brought all seemingly democratic institutions, while they were actually hollow from within. When the middle class emerged in Iran, they demanded political participation from the Pahlavi government, but were not willing to truly involve the middle class in those structures; even if they showed the same individuals in those structures, they did not give them the necessary power.
We have this same problem to some extent in the Islamic Republic today. There are some democratic institutions such as elections and parliament, but they do not have complete control. These institutions essentially have a superficial legal aspect and a real aspect… These are actually issues that harm the political structure of society and, in other words, the economic foundation of society plays a very determining role in whether we will achieve political development or not.
As you mentioned at the beginning of your talks, one of the main factors of political development is participation and competition. For example, according to labor laws, workers can have one of three labor organizations: Islamic councils, trade unions, and workers’ representatives or the Supreme Assembly of Representatives that has been formed. In addition, there are two labor political organizations such as Islamic associations and workers’ houses. However, in practice, whenever workers want to form their own independent organizations, they face suppression tools, such as the single company union or the workers of Haft Tapeh who have arrested some members of their board of directors. Therefore, although the tools and even laws exist on paper, the division of power and balance of power is not in favor of the majority of society and independent groups from the government. What do you think is the solution to this problem?
The problem is that we do not have a democratic structure in power. In order to become a representative, besides the initial conditions that must be present in any democratic structure, for example, you must be a follower of the Supreme Leader and also a prayer leader; these are not democratic conditions. They are dependent on a power and an absolute power in society, and if you do not want to be a follower and if you do not want to give in to the authority of that power, you will either be eliminated or if you have a presence in some dimensions of the power structure, such as labor institutions, guilds, etc., you will be like a handless scissors; meaning, you are apparently there, but when it comes to decisions that can challenge the power equations of society, you will face limitations.
The Islamic Republic government, in the face of many seemingly civil institutions that existed in society, has come and established their parallel Islamic institutions, while on the other hand, the existing institutions in civil society have not been able to take shape in a democratic environment. They must register with the government. If they want to hold protests or implement their own programs, they must go and obtain permission from the government. Well, this is not a civil institution anymore. A civil institution means a neighborhood, a group of professionals, or a part of society with a specific culture or interests, coming together to pursue their work. But in Iran, everything must be registered; registration is only necessary when ownership is involved or when the rights of others are at stake. In Iran, even the head of such an organization must be checked by the government and obtain a kind of license regarding their loyalty or submission to the government, and they are almost neutralized. These issues practically make the democratic society in Iran meaningless, and participation
The spread of poverty, especially in recent years in Iran, including the massive influx of children into the child labor scene, is a sign of the deep economic class differences in Iranian society. You may know that we have more than three million children who have dropped out of school. Although recent sanctions have exacerbated the situation, what are the mechanisms for removing barriers to economic development in a country like Iran, which relies solely on its oil-based economy?
What you are referring to is indicative of an unfair distribution of wealth, the spread of extreme poverty, increasing deprivation, and the weakening of economic opportunities for workers and lower classes of society. Therefore, one necessary solution to eliminate the obstacles to economic development in Iran is to increase production. Unfortunately, the shadow of the oil economy has been our biggest problem that must be addressed. Dependence on oil and oil revenue has essentially allowed the government to expand itself and impose itself on society. The government has even imposed itself on the private economic sector.
In order to reduce dependence on oil, economic monopolies in society must be lifted and healthy competition must be established so that these measures can lead to increased production in society, especially in non-oil production. If non-oil production is to grow and monopolies are to be eliminated, there must be transparency in the economic structure of Iran. The economic structure of Iran must be based on clear laws, rules, and regulations that everyone knows and can enter the economic field and compete based on them.
In the end, fair distribution of wealth and involving workers in the production of goods and in the development of society and motivation, not through coercion but through public participation in society and creating a culture of collaboration that puts the overall structure of society and the overall products of society in the hands of the community, rather than in the hands of monopolies and private sectors, can help economic development to grow in Iran.
You spoke about the importance of economic development in a country; that people should at least have access to public welfare in order to be able to then think about their own political issues. Considering the economic challenges and the spread of poverty in Iran, what do you know about the factors and ways to overcome this problem?
I am not an economist, but based on general information that I have, I recognize the economy of Iran as a sick economy and I can list seven components that solving them will help improve the economic situation. One: Iran’s economy is overly dependent on oil. Two: In recent years, the government has played a more destructive role than a positive one. In explaining this destruction, I must emphasize the mismanagement of the government, which has been one of the biggest problems and obstacles to economic development in Iran. Overall, government management has been more reliant on political motivations than development-oriented and national motivations. Given the complex political and economic structure of the Islamic Republic, non-responsible institutions, both publicly and covertly, have benefited from various government facilities for group goals, hindering the structure of production, trade, and free competition in the Iranian economy. Three: Lack of a long-term plan for national development, away from ideological goals and sectarian and factional interests. Four: Lack of effective and
In your opinion, have previous governments in Iran, especially the ninth and tenth governments under the leadership of Mr. Ahmadinejad, taken effective steps towards economic development? What were the dominant thoughts behind their economic plans and what criticisms do you have towards them? I ask this question because inflation and recession have been significantly evident in the country in recent years…
Unfortunately, the ninth and tenth governments were operating in a specific political atmosphere that severely hindered the necessary attention to sustainable national development. This government even dissolved the Planning Organization, which is one of the most important tools for coordinating between government facilities, resources, and planning for national development, in order to freely impose its political goals on an economy dependent on oil and massive income. These goals, which we have seen the disastrous consequences of in the cover-ups that occurred during these two periods, are becoming more familiar to us day by day through new information that comes to light. Unfortunately, these two periods, which coincided with the highest oil income in the history of Iran, were also accompanied by the biggest embezzlements in the history of Iran. In addition to the problems I mentioned in the previous question, we must also mention the growth of liquidity during Mr. Ahmadinejad’s tenure, which was one of the main causes of inflation. Reduction in production, growth of unemployment, brain drain and
As a final question, do you believe that economic development leads to the development of human rights in Iran? What is the relationship between these two concepts?
From a philosophical and theoretical perspective, human rights have a direct relationship with economic development. In any society, the right to work and social security become meaningful when the economic foundation of the society has sufficient growth for entrepreneurship and the necessary economic and social securities for a dignified and healthy life. A sick economy does not have the necessary resources to maintain and improve the economic well-being of individuals, nor the ability to create conditions that lead to such goals. On the other hand, it should be noted that the economic dimensions of human rights are inherently linked to the economic structures of society, and the provision or lack thereof of economic rights is not related to the ideology governing those structures. The motivation of a capitalist economy is primarily towards the growth of productive forces and the satisfaction of personal and private desires. In contrast, the motivation of a socialist economy is to even produce for the common good, let alone the motivation for investment and entrepreneurship. The former prioritizes individual rights over collective rights, while the latter prioritizes
With gratitude for the opportunity you have provided us with to reach a peace agreement…
