Courcy’s Intelligence Brief

*** A TURKISH READING ON IRAN'S ELECTION.  Sources in Ankara who watch Iran closely say that the recent general election in Iran provided Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei with the backing he needs for a war with Israel. As one Turkish academic puts it: “Iranians have chosen those who would respond in the harshest manner to intimidation by the West.” The view in Ankara is that Israeli and US threats have played into the hands of the hardliners.

Khamenei loyalists took 75% of the 290 parliamentary seats, and the key turnout figure, however secured, was sufficient at just under 65% to claim a popular mandate. In the 2000 election the turnout was as high as 67%, but after falling to just 51% in 2004 it was up again to 61% in 2008. Despite multiple irregularities, there probably has been a genuine rallying of public support behind the Supreme Leader at a time of external threat.

The Supreme Leader has always officially had the final word on foreign policy, but at least some of his overwhelming power had leaked towards President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Now, with loyalists in control of parliament, Khamenei’s supremacy is once again assured. Previous parliamentary elections held towards the end of a second presidential term, as is the case on this occasion, have provided important pointers to the following presidential election. The parliamentary elections in 1996 and 2004 both accurately forecast the emergence of new forces at the end of Rafsanjani’s presidency in 1997 (which was followed by that of Mohammad Khatami) and in turn at the end of Khatami’s in 2005, which was followed by the election of Ahmadinejad. On this occasion, the reformists had been hoping that a low turnout in the large cities would give them the leverage to win the case for allowing a wide range of candidates to contest the 2013 presidential election. They have failed in that goal.

*** RUSSIA MAKES ITS EXCUSES TO THE ARABS.  On 10 March, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov spoke to a meeting of Arab League foreign ministers in Cairo and tried to explain Russia’s hostility to outside intervention in Syria. He based his defence on international law, saying: “Russia has invariably stood for the strict observance of international law, the UN Charter, and the principles of respect for sovereignty, territorial integrity, and non-interference in the internal affairs of states, and unconditionally against military intervention contrary to the provisions of the UN Charter.” He added: “We are not defending regimes, we are defending international law.”

Not surprisingly, Lavrov seemed to view stronger support for the Palestinian cause as the way back to favour with his predominantly Sunni Arab audience. He emphasized “the need to prevent the Palestinian question being ‘lost’ in the Arab ‘spring, autumn, or winter’”.