Tehran, YJC. Haqshenas has analyzed the conditions of the lack of unity among the Principalist side in the recent election.
Member of the
Central Council of National Trust Party Mohammadjavad Haqshenas said in an
interview with Mosalas Online that a number of factors were involved in the
disagreements among the Principalists.
Q: Why do
you think the Principalists did not reach consensus in the 9th parliamentary
and 11th presidential elections?
A: There are
a number of reasons. First, there has grown some gap in the Principalist discourse
and there is no single discourse under the name. In a way, the different
discourses that have grown among Principalists have fundamental differences
with the main one. Phenomena such as the Resistance Front formed around Mesbah
Yazdi and followed by figures such as Rouhollah Hosseinian, Qasem Ravanbakhsh,
and Hamid Rasaei have formed discourses which were formerly subject to the
contemporary Principalist discourse. But today it seems that they would like to
show an independent identity with independent definition.
Q: What do
you think was the role of Ayatollahs Mahdavi Kani and Yazdi?
A: I think
that they were not united in these elections. These days Ayatollah Yazdi says that
they have had serious disagreements on endorsing a candidate in the Society of
Teachers, which is one of the old clerical organizations. The Society of Teachers
has had 35 members, but their sessions were held with only 19. In the end one
of the candidates had 8 and the other 5 votes. This shows that even in a
prestigious organization such as this there is much incongruity between what
society expects of it and what goes on in reality.
Q: Did
Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi play any role in the disagreements between Ayatollah
Mahdavi Kani and Ayatollah Yazdi?
A: I believe
that Mr. Mesbah expects the existing organizations to strictly follow him. Mr.
Mesbah considers his position to other organizations as one of guidance,
therefore he will not get involved in organizational work where he would pursue
agreements and outcome.
Q: Would Principalists
have reached consensus if Ayatollahs Yazdi and Mahdavi Kani had endorsed a
certain candidate?
A: No.
considering the social status of the Principalists, even if all of these
figures endorsed one candidate nothing more than what has come today would have
happens.
Q: Why not?
A: Society’s
lack of trust. In fact the Principalist record in the past 8 years has made
society distrust this current.
Q: What do you think of
Velayati’s running for presidency as a Principalist candidate?
A: I see his
presence positive. For his record and his staying in the course of the
campaigns and his independence he proved that one can hope for traces of principalism
within the current.
Q: You say
that Mr. Velayati’s insistence showed his independence. But in the election
days a news website claimed that Mr. Hashemi in a phone call obliged him not to
step down so that things would go somehow in favor of Rouhani. Do you agree
with that?
A: I have
heard nothing of such a call. As far as I know Mr. Velayati’s staff members across
country as well as others close to him would get very upset about his
resignation, because it was agreed beforehand that the members of the 2+1
coalition would follow the rule of the Two Societies, therefore Mr. Velahati
and his supporters expected the rival to resign. On the other side, Mr.
Velayati showed in the debates that he cares for national interests more than
group interests.
Q: But polls said that
Qalibaf enjoyed greater favor than Velayati.
A: Look,
there were two criteria. Mr. Qalibaf would bring up the polls, but Velayati
would see the rule of the Two Societies as the basis. That is why they couldn’t
reach an agreement.”
Q: do you
think that his votes would have gone into Velayati’s box if Qalibaf had stepped
down?
A: I believe
that if all candidates had resigned and one of these two had remained still
nothing would have happened, because the other side’s percentage of votes is a
good indicator of their status. Of course for Mr. Velayati to have resigned in
favor of Qalibaf would not have meant that his votes would have gone to
Qalibaf. Voters think for themselves. They do not follow the prescriptions of
others. In fact if Velayati had resigned, his votes would have gone to Rouhani,
Rezaei, and Qalibaf. That is because Qalibaf’s votes were not much different
form Velayati’s in number.
Q: So this
means that if Velayati had resigned Principalists would still have reached no
consensus.
A: No, such
a consensus with so much effect on the election would not have occurred.