Scenarios of Political Regime Change in Iran

Hi, I’m Erik van Zuylen, 24 years old. I would like to present my Masters Thesis in the Political Sciences. I’ve worked on this for almost two years. It has been very well received so far, graded 8.8 out of 10. This has motivated me to make an effort to beat the ‘iron law of Masters Theses’: “the Masters Thesis shall never be read again, as soon as it’s graded”.

The study of ‘political regime change’ is one of the main fields of study in political sociology, although it has usually been framed as ‘democratization studies’. Both ‘regime change‘ and ‘democratization’ have become extremely contested concepts in recent years. The term democratization inherently assumes that political regimes will in due time move into a democratic direction. This can be seen as ‘Eurocentric’, as it perceives liberal democracy as a superior form of government, to which the ‘Third World’ needs to catch up. ‘Regime change’ has an even more bitter ring to it, as it has been one of the central concepts of the doctrine of the ‘neo-conservative’ movement, in which it plotted to overthrow different regimes around the world, including Iraq. On the other hand, there are still tens of thousands of activists around the world that fight for ‘political regime change’ in their countries, be it for an ‘Islamic’, ‘Democratic’, or ‘Socialist’ order. This is not surprising: the political regime is one of the social phenomena that is the most relevant for people around the world in their day-to-day life. Therefore, the social scientist should keep researching this subject with great urgency, while acknowledging the controversy surrounding it.

Unpredictability is one of the central features of regime change and of political macro processes in general. This is the case becausethe social world is an open system, deals with a large number of interrelated mechanisms and human agency.
One methodology that can help in this regard, thinking about change in a complex
environment, is scenario building. This analytical tool assumes the unpredictability of the
future by constructing ‘different plausible stories of possible paths to the future’. By constructing such stories, the researcher is forced to identify those
structures and agencies that he suspects to drive a certain phenomenon towards a concrete state at a future point in time. Scenario building as a discipline has primarily been developed in the business world, to develop long-term strategic plans. This practical
functionality is an important proof of the value of this methodology to understand a complex social environment.

The times for scenario building have never been better. The economic crisis that emerged last year has uncovered the great uncertainty underlying the current social, political and economic order(s) around the world. This uncertainty had already started to surface after the ‘September 11’ attacks. When starting this project around two years ago, the author concluded that we might be in the middle of a ‘critical juncture’ in world history, a historical episode in which radical changes take place, the effects of which can be felt long afterwards. In this sense it is no coincidence that the current president of the United States has got ‘change’ as one of the central themes of his presidency. Hopefully, the Social Sciences can help both academics and citizens in general to gain more understanding about the world they are living in and how it might change in the foreseeable future.

In my thesis, I have developed 4 scenario’s:

In the ‘Globalisation 2.0’ scenario, the survival of international economic structures, the
diminished economic role of fossile fuels and the peace accord between Israel and Palestine have a weakening effect on the Iranian regime in the middle-long term. The diminishing symbolic and economic power of the regime leads to a continuous shrinking of popular legitimacy. The only means to stay in power are the strong structures of ‘command’ and the ability to apply physical violence. When the death of supreme leader Khamene’i disturbs the command structure of the regime, a fundamental change can not be stopped. When the symbolic power and personal charisma of leaders like Mohammad Khatami turn out to be strong enough, a democratic structure might emerge, in which different forces agree to settle their fundamental differences by compromise and the power of the popular vote. The potentiality of this scenario has been apparent from the emergence of the reformist movement in 1997 onwards. The strong popular current that wants more political and social freedom has been effectively resisted so far by the different conservative factions, but remains an important driving force for the future.

In the ‘New Medievalist’ scenario, the overarching structures of the globalised economy and the international state system are severely weakened, due to a destructive war that disrupts the global energy supply. This leads to a breakdown of the accumulative and administrative capacity of the Iranian state. The result is a ‘Hobbesian’ situation in which different collectives struggle for wealth and power and authority is much more decentralized. Such a situation can already be observed in ‘failed states’ like Somalia and Iraq. The potentiality of this scenario can be derived from the ‘centrifugal’ tensions in Iran in the past years and the disunity within the current regime. Numerous comparable episodes have taken place in the past, when the state was weakened by war, economic crisis or political strive.

In the ‘New Mercantilist’ scenario, a greater economic role for states is combined with
increasing geopolitical tensions. The natural resources in the Middle East are the focal point of these tensions. Nuclear proliferation leads to a new system of ‘Mutual Assured
Destruction’, in which Iran plays a prominent role. The ‘neo-conservative’ faction in Iran is able to strengthen its grip on power in this situation, supported by the high energy prices and the continuous foreign threat. The potentiality of this scenario has surfaced in recent years. The credit crisis and the decline of the American hegemony might lead to the destabilization of the global economic system and the system of global governance. The transfer of wealth and power to the East puts pressure on the relatively peaceful cooperation of the last decades between political entities like China, Russia, the United States and the European Union. Within Iran, the Ahmadinejad administration has so far failed to create a stable economic situation, but has successfully strengthened the capacity for repression by agencies like the
Revolutionary Guards and the Basiji’s, even against new means of communication. It has also successfully used the increasing symbolic status of its Islamic narrative to strengthen its regional influence. This increasing symbolic status is partly caused by the continuing hopelessness of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the decreasing popularity of the authoritarian regimes in the region.

In the ‘Rise of East Asia’ scenario, the ‘Greater West Asian Crisis’ stabilizes and the
extensive state intervention initially succeeds to reignite the global economy. This success is threatened to be nullified by a combined surge in inflation and explosion of energy prices, in which the United States is the focal point again. Such a scenario is prevented by a fundamental restructuring of the world economy, led by China and India, the emerging East- Asian powers. The new hegemony is especially based on the ‘new mass production’ of ‘green’ cheap products, aimed at the ever growing urban populations around the world. For Iran, the ‘Chinese model’ is very attractive, because it enables the elite to stay in power while diminishing both domestic and foreign threats to the regime. The potentiality of this scenario becomes apparent when looking at the explosive economic growth of some ‘developing countries’ combined with the relative contraction of the United States and Europe. Many analysts have signaled that this development means a victory for capitalism, but not for the liberal democratic model.

I have made an effort to develop a perspective that is both non-determinist, critical of oppression and of the current structures of global governance. This approach might help to remove some of the dogma surrounding discussions on contemporary politics and bring it back to the core questions, like:
· What will be the effects of the current geopolitical tensions in the ‘Greater Middle East’, both for the citizens of these countries and the wider world?
· What will be the outcome of the current transformations of the global political economy?
· How can citizens relate to these issues and do they have a chance to engage in initiatives to improve their own future?

Although the thesis is carefully grounded within different fields of social scientific research, it is first and foremost a result of personal reflection, especially the scenarios. Therefore, I would be very grateful for any feedback, criticism and alternative perspectives. I’d also like to invite readers to come up with their own scenarios. My whole thesis and the whole scenarios can be read on: http://iranscenarios.wordpress.com/

Bookmark this article

•     
•     
•     
•     
•     
•     
•     
•     
•     
•     
•     
•     
•     
•     

E-mail this article to a friend

* Required Field

Your Name: *

Your E-Mail: *

Your Remark:

Friend's Name: *

Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.

Friend's E-Mail: *

Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.

Image Verification: *

 Loading ...

Close