George W. and Mahmood,
Unlikely Soul Mates?
Jim Lobe
WASHINGTON, Jun 28 (IPS) - Despite the growing likelihood of confrontation
between their two countries, U.S. President George W. Bush and Iranian
President-elect Mahmood Ahmedinejad share a number of remarkable similarities.
Juan Cole, a prominent blogger and Middle East historian at the University of
Michigan, noted last week that the two men's campaign tactics suggest that they
are "soul mates," particularly in their populist appeal, their
criticism of a government of which they are a part, and their reliance on
right-wing religious forces for their electoral success.
But even in terms of personal history, their lack of interest or concern about
the outside world, and their Manichaean outlooks in which friends and enemies
and good and evil are clearly delineated, the two men share a great deal in
common.
Of course, there are key differences as well. Unlike Bush, who was born into
great wealth and prominence, Ahmedinejad's origins were quite modest; his father
was a blacksmith.
Similarly, Bush enjoys far greater power than the Iranian president-elect, who
will have to cope with the far greater influence, particularly in foreign
relations, exercised by the supreme religious leader, Ali Khameini, who,
however, has warmly welcomed Ahmedinejad's victory, notably as a direct rebuff
to Bush himself.
Indeed, a number of analysts have noted that in his last-minute denunciation of
the election and implied endorsement of a student-led boycott, Bush probably
boosted both total turnout in the election's first round (about 63 percent of
eligible voters, according to official accounts) and the performance of
hard-line forces led by Ahmedinejad.
Teheran's conservative intelligence minister, Ali Yunesi, publicly thanked Bush
for his remarks, which were repeatedly broadcast by state television during
election day. Bush's statement against the elections was even used by
Ahmadinejad to denounce his rival in the run-off, former President Ali Hashemi
Rafsanjani, who had said Teheran should explore a dialogue with Washington.
"You only have to look at (Bush's) comments" to understand that he
"seeks hostility" against Iran, Ahmadinejad told reporters in
precisely the kind of statement designed to foreclose the possibility of
dialogue that one would expect from hard-liners in the Bush administration
regarding Iran, North Korea, or pre-war Iraq.
Cole identified several similarities in the political tactics of both Bush and
Ahmadinejad. Like Bush, Ahmadinejad never personally attacked his political
rivals, but at the same time did little to discourage his supporters from
spreading lies and using other smear tactics against his foes during the
election campaign.
Both men campaigned successfully as champions of the "common people"
even though they were supported by extremely wealthy interests -- in
Ahmadinejad's case, according to Cole, by "billionaire clerical hardliners
who have done little for ordinary folks"; in Bush's by "the white-tie
corporate crowd."
Similarly, both men attacked their own governing establishments even though they
had served as integral parts of them. As a rightwinger and loyalist to Khameini,
Ahmadinejad complained about state corruption, and "his anti-government
rhetoric struck a chord with many Iranians and helped him get elected,"
according to Cole. Similarly, Bush constantly "represents himself as an
outsider to Washington and a critic of the government."
Finally, Ahmadinejad benefited from the support of mosque preachers all over the
country as well as by members of a religious militia, the Basij, which also has
a national network of grassroots volunteers who turned out the vote,
particularly in rural and poorer provinces. Similarly, "Bush depends
heavily on the support of evangelical and fundamentalist churches" who have
become "foot soldiers for the Republican Party."
Another Iran specialist, Columbia University professor Gary Sick, agreed that
comparing the two men may be useful "not because (they) or their nations
are particularly alike, but rather to explain what is gong on politically and
what it may mean."
Like Cole, Sick, who served as the top Iran expert to former President Jimmy
Carter, stressed the importance of a "large constituency composed of people
who place special value on religious and traditional values" in the two
men's political success. Both also appeared to benefit from the support of much
of the military establishment.
Like Bush, Ahmadinejad "wears his religion on his sleeve," according
to Sick, who also noted that the president-elect apparently has never traveled
outside his own country and has no personal foreign-policy experience, just as
Bush had none before his 2000 election. Bush's first public post, of course, was
governor of Texas; Ahmadinejad served most recently as mayor of Teheran.
Despite their religious piety and appeal to traditional values, both men see
themselves as problem-solvers and managers. While Bush has a masters degree in
Business Administration from Harvard University and tries to run his
administration on a corporate model, Ahmadinejad has a doctorate in engineering
from one of Iran's elite schools and is given high marks, even by his critics,
for his management of the mayor's office.
Their nationalism and somewhat contemptuous dismissal of the concerns of other
nations also bear similarities. Just as Bush rejected the Kyoto Protocol to curb
global warming because "we will not do anything that harms our economy
(and) because first things first are the people who live in America; that's my
priority," so Ahmadinejad during the campaign suggested that Iran would not
compromise on issues of national interest except on its own terms.
Speaking of western demands that Iran curb its nuclear programme, he said,
"We will discuss in a rational way and if they accept our legitimate right
(to enrich uranium), we will co-operate. Otherwise, nothing will force the
Iranians to comply with their demands."
Both clearly believe that nothing good can come from the other. Bush made that
clear in his pre-election statements, not to mention his designation of Iran as
a charter member of the "Axis of Evil."
"Iran is ruled by men who suppress liberty at home and spread terror across
the world," Bush said on the eve of the first round of this month's
elections. "Power is in the hands of an unelected few who have retained
power through an electoral process that ignores the basic requirements of
democracy."
"The U.S. administration cut off ties unilaterally to lay waste to the
Islamic Republic," said Ahmadinejad during the campaign. "They want to
restore them today for the same reason."
(END/2005)
Copyright © 2005 IPS-Inter Press Service. All rights reserved.