Engineer Mousavi’s Plan to Save Iran
In his recent statement titled ‘To Save Iran’, Mir Hossein Mousavi explicitly mentioned moving beyond the Islamic Republic system and called for establishing a new political system through the formation of a Constituent Assembly with representatives from every ethnicity and political and ideological orientation.
Mousavi’s proposed solution includes three steps: holding a referendum on the current constitution, forming a Constituent Assembly in a free and fair election after gaining a majority ‘yes’ vote in the initial referendum, and conducting a second and final referendum to approve or reject the constitution drafted by the Constituent Assembly.
These positions mark a turning point in the political evolution of the last Prime Minister of the Islamic Republic, who, as the first senior official of the regime, has called for a complete change. Thus, Mousavi, aligning with the political developments of society and the deadlock created by the regime in the path of reform, has in his own way strengthened the revolutionary transition.
Mousavi’s influence mainly lies in the gray areas of society, the social base of the regime that has become doubtful, and the body of military, law enforcement, and intelligence forces. This can both expand the internal erosion of the regime and help reduce costs or ensure a smooth transition to a new political system during the peak of a revolutionary movement and the occurrence of a revolution.
The basis of Mousavi’s reformist positions was set after the brutal suppression of November 2019, during which he warned the government to make amends without hesitation, or else it would face a fate similar to that of Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi’s government after September 8.
The explicit statement about changing the Islamic Republic and forming a Constituent Assembly to change the constitution also serves as a capacity for the formation and strengthening of political forces within the country to respond to existing demands in the field of struggle and the demands of various civil society forces. Mir Hossein, as before, has not considered a special individual position for himself as a leader and has emphasized collective movement and the participation of everyone in the transition from the Islamic Republic to democracy.
The Change in Mir Hossein Mousavi’s Tone
In this letter, Engineer Mousavi has kept his heartfelt and ideological intentions silent. Although since 2009 he has always emphasized adherence to the collective opinions of the movement and has not sought hegemony for his beliefs, in his previous positions he would make references to Ayatollah Khomeini and his religious views, which he has not done this time.
One of the major points of Mousavi’s letter is the special emphasis on the role of women and their political participation in the present and future. He has considered women the most important part of the ‘Woman, Life, Freedom’ movement. This stance is noteworthy given the heavy and insulting attacks by the Islamic Republic newspaper on women who protested against compulsory hijab in March 1979, indicating a positive change.
Taking such a stance has not been easy for Mousavi and will also incur costs. However, he emphasizes the necessity of saving Iran, considering the numerous mega-challenges, and sees the revolutionary solution as the remedy. Part of his letter’s audience includes reformists and those who still defend conservative approaches within the existing power structure. Mousavi, with a correct understanding and clear expression, has also moved beyond structural reforms.
At the same time, he warns that the course of the struggle should be such that the mistakes of the past forty-four years are not repeated. Based on his experience, he is concerned that the path of changes might go in a wrong direction that would again cause future generations to be blamed. Therefore, in Mousavi’s view, laying the tracks for fundamental changes requires not only negative aspects but also attention to the positive aspects by learning from past experiences.
Of course, like any political activist, Mousavi has both supporters and opponents. The reality is that his social position is not the same as it was in 2009, but at the same time, he possesses potential for renewed influence and appeal. If he can gather a group of political and civil activists around him within the country or form a coalition around him, then his role could change the equations.
The Difference Between Mir Hossein and Other Opponents
Mousavi’s advantage is his presence inside the country and his 13-year house arrest, which gives him legitimacy to play a coordinating role. His challenges and problems are his past in the governance of the 1980s, which opponents criticize him for. Although this is often exaggerated, he has political and ethical responsibilities regarding the major problems of the 1980s.
However, Mousavi took a different path in the 1990s and 2000s and has made amends for some of his mistakes. If he can achieve success in facilitating the transition from the Islamic Republic to democracy by consolidating forces within the country and weakening the repressive apparatus, he can move beyond his past.
Successful experiences in transitioning to democracy remind us that in some cases, reconsidering officials of the established government have become the main players in the transition period. A fair evaluation of Mousavi’s record should take into account all periods of his political activity before and after the February 1979 revolution.
Speculating about Mir Hossein Mousavi’s future is difficult and involves unknown variables. Some of these are his next actions, and others are the community’s reaction, which initially had a surprisingly positive response. Ultimately, it remains to be seen how opposition forces and civil society will respond.
In the final analysis, Mousavi is neither seeking individual leadership nor does the current state of Iranian society allow for it. However, at this juncture, he has focused his efforts and those of his aligned forces on the revolutionary transition project and has enhanced its potential. This development, which did not happen overnight, has further distinguished Mousavi from moderate reformists led by Seyyed Mohammad Khatami and even progressive reformists like Mostafa Tajzadeh.
Mousavi has shown that, from his perspective, reform or revolution are not ideological concepts with fixed value but can be effective under different circumstances. Without prejudice and in a rational path, with a commitment to the country’s and people’s welfare, he has reached the conclusion over a 13-year process that there is no way but to create a new political system and set aside the fundamental concepts and institutions of power in the Islamic Republic.
He knows that this path is also fraught with difficulties, and in the text of the letter, he clearly states that there are ambiguities and uncertainties about the implementation of his proposed plan. However, with faith in the nation and its ability, once it gains self-confidence, he believes it will overcome its doubts. In his opinion, cooperation to save Iran is an effective solution for resolving ambiguities.
In the new political scene of Iran, the actions of political activists, including Mir Hossein Mousavi, can change the political power dynamics. However, whether these changes will be lasting or just a temporary wave depends on other variables that cannot be accurately speculated upon at this time.