The Iranian presidential elections that took place this past summer spawned a plethora of domestic and international attention, inspiring strong and at times, fervent reactions from local Iranians as well as Iranians residing abroad. Mona Tajali, a PhD candidate in Political Science traveled to Iran last summer to gain further insight about the campaigning strategies of the different parties and in order to be exposed to the concerns and roles of the civil society, who were also campaigning for their own voices to be heard. Much analysis and commentary has been devoted to this year’s elections. However, mainstream media has minimally mentioned women’s involvement in the election. Furthermore, little light has been shed on the progressive and active steps women from various stances have taken, in order to ensure that their own requests were heard by the presidential candidates. Below is a short list of questions and answers highlighting some of Mona’s own observations of the election process, including the involvement of women who actively projected their own concerns and worked together to create a revolutionary charter of women’s rights, the first of its kind in Iranian history. Women’s Involvement in the Elections: Bikya Masr: Did you find that a variety of women were actively participating in voicing their socio-political concerns during the pre-election campaigning? Mona Tajali: Well, about a couple of months before the election, different women’s groups joined forces and created a coalition hamgarayee to send a unified message of women’s demands to the next president. Interestingly, this coalition included different groups of women who rarely cooperated with one another, considering they do not always see eye to eye on certain issues, namely the groups of Islamist and secularist women. I was amazed to see how smoothly disagreements were put aside as this coalition focused on the commonalities among them (of which were many). Basically, since all groups wanted to see an enhanced status for women in their society and better rights, they decided to write a charter for women’s rights for the first time in Iranian history. The draft of this charter was then submitted to presidential candidates, who were expected to respond. Also, this coalition did not declare its support for any of the candidates before the elections, since their position was rather to publicize each candidate’s stand concerning women’s rights, and not campaign on their behalf. As the gender agendas of candidates became clear, (mostly the reformist candidates) this coalition used cyberspace and other communication tools to increase public awareness. Although most feminist sites were filtered by the authorities, these electronically savvy activists always found ways to get their message across. Almost all homes had proxies that enabled them to access these sites. Such characteristics illustrated a strong women’s movement, capable of pushing for reform and maintaining their public presence through extensive communication (thanks to the Internet). BM: How would you describe this diversity (e.g. conservative, liberal, educated)? Tajali: To elaborate from above, I would say that the coalition mostly consisted of liberal women, but keeping in mind, that Islamist women fall in this category as well. I define these Islamist women as those who seek to address women’s rights and enhance women’s status from within a religious framework. Thus, they are not conservative in the sense that they believe in traditional gender roles that women should be rendered to the private sphere. In contrast, these Islamist women (mostly the wives or daughters of influential clerics or politicians) are very active in the public realm, and openly campaign on behalf of themselves or their male relatives. (Although at times it does happen that, a conservative woman reaches a political position like a member of the parliament, and then supports a bill that limits women’s public presence. These are examples of the regime’s contradictions; I do not consider them as part of the women’s movement or the coalition). Also these women are highly educated in different fields. While Islamist women may be trained in Islamic seminaries or have some religious background, others (including some secularists) tend to be mostly educated in law, journalism, arts, or even the sciences. Currently the major leaders of the Iranian women’s movement are lawyer activists, journalists and university scholars. I like to emphasize women’s level of education a bit more here, since currently more than 65% of university goers in Iran are women. I see a direct link between this high level of education and the level of feminist consciousness that is currently on the rise in Iran. BM: What factors do you think affect women’s involvement? Tajali: I would say the major factor that encourages women’s involvement is the major gap that exists in laws of the state and women’s demands. For instance, most Islamist women support the Islamic regime, but become active only to oppose certain unfair laws that they blame on patriarchal misinterpretations. Thus, they strive for the reform of these discriminatory laws (like polygamy or man’s unilateral right to divorce), and not a secularist state. This is what links them to other women’s rights activists who have the same objective. BM: Did any particular female stand out in terms of her ideas, her tactics etc.? Tajali: During the time of the election, Zahra Rahnavard, the wife of the reformist candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi, played a central role in her husband’s campaign. Actually I think her public presence was so shocking to many Iranians, (in previous elections, the candidates’ wives were mostly absent) people jokingly called her “Iran’s Michelle Obama.†And just like Michelle Obama, she delivered many influential speeches in support of her husband. Some even argue that she was a much better speaker than Mousavi. I attended the anniversary celebration of the reformist movement in Iran at a football stadium which was attended by more than 12,000 people. When she came to the podium to speak, the stadium went crazy (her husband was not at the celebration). Unfortunately, Rahnavard or key women like her, who were in the public eye, did not directly emphasize women’s issues in many of their speeches. Such issues were nonetheless mentioned by the candidates or the campaign in general, but mostly in passing. I think that Rahnavard’s mere presence at the public realm was in and of itself an accomplishment. In fact, many of her female supporters considered her a role model, leading some women to support her husband, merely because of the fact that they looked up to her. This is especially importance since each candidate competes for the female voting bloc. This came to the public’s attention during 1997 when President Khatami won the presidential seat and when many people attributed his victory to the female and youth vote. In this round, I believe Rahnavard was the political tool used by the Mousavi campaign to target the female constituency. Post-Election: BM: Did you have any disappointments after the elections, more specifically in terms of press coverage, statements made by the candidates, or actions implemented by the government? Tajali: The major disappointment after the elections was, needless to say, the clampdown on civil liberties. Women’s rights (or even other basic liberties) were now placed on a backburner, as the activities of the women’s movement were disrupted because of an unstable setting. Many women’s rights activists, journalists, and bloggers were arrested or harassed after the elections, which hindered their work. Of course, a major fortunate fact was that the world was watching as everything was unraveling in Iran. The international community, such as transnational feminist movements and organization were particularly active in pressuring for the pending release of different activists and scholars. Eventually, it seemed the clampdown was undermining the regime’s legitimacy in the eyes of both the domestic public and the international community. BM: What about this election do you think sparked such strong reactions across Iran and amongst Persians living abroad? Tajali: This strong reaction was sparked when many people lost their trust in the state, and its very limited democratic structure. Thus, people who support reform were dealt a heavy blow as they were hopeful to bring about some changes within the existing limited political structures, but felt that even that was not possible. The youth and women are central to these reformist forces as they seek the basic freedoms promised by the reformists. BM: In the upcoming elections, do you predict that the youth will become even more involved in order to prevent any potential for voting miscalculations? Tajali: I honestly cannot predict what is to happen in Iran, given its many complexities. Given the powerful forces of both sides: the youth (who constitute about 70% of the total population and who are electronically savvy when it comes to Internet), and the regime (who maintain political monopoly in the hands of a few); I expect some form of a compromise between them. But as of now, the situation still remains unpredictable. Along with these questions, Mona shared another significant observation concerning the election, more specifically noting that: “Iranians do not constitute a homogeneous bunch, and they vary in terms of political ideology and belief. There is also a very clear distinction between people from the urban and rural settings. While the urban dwellers prioritized issues such as freedom of press, expression, or better relations with the west, the rural dwellers prioritized mostly the economic well-being of farmers and the state role in protecting their interests. The latter group is particularly significant as Iran is still an agricultural society.†BM
