Group of Thought: Doctor Hamid Reza Jalai Pour Professor of University, in a conversation that Iran Year (Mehrawa Kharazmi) He has done with him, examining the concept of national consensus and its role in solving the problems and challenges facing Iran. By examining the performance of the medical government and its challenges, Jalai Pour concludes that national consensus is an interactive and gradual approach to dealing with the country’s problems. In this interview, he discusses four hard-line fundamentalist approaches, reform-adherence approaches, transformational approach, and overthrowing approach to community problems. The university professor believes that the approach of consensus, despite the challenges, is still defensible and trackable. He also deals with the role of the people, parties and sovereignty in the formation of national consensus as a fundamental strategy, concluding that national consensus requires cooperation and interaction between the three sectors. Jalayipour also emphasizes that the hardliners need to be controlled, and emphasizing the importance of lifting sanctions, emphasizing the change in broadcasting policies. This dialogue is below:
****
The doctors said I am not looking for a fight, I seek a consensus with the components of government and community
Where did the consensus come from? Is it like reform from within society or from within the system of governance? What were its necessities and implications?
Commonness is an interactive and gradual approach to dealing with the country’s problems. The continuation of the continuation of the reform is with a difference. Reforms were and still is a gradual approach. But in the reforms of the goals of political development and development, the pursuit of political action was assumed. It was said that if the free elections were not held, we would not participate in the elections. If, in terms of the consensus approach, the free elections of the fruit of political development. So a consensus runs in the elections. To get closer to the free elections later, he is trying to lift the sanctions to move one step in the renovation of the economy. This consensus approach was also activated in part of the reformist year. For example, more than 100 actor and humanities researcher signed two stomach statements and invited people to participate in the elections. These four people in the current parliament are the product of the electoral partnership. The consensus did not wait and sat down to see what was going on. Rather, they participated in the elections. Later, in the presidential election, doctors spoke to a constant consensus as a reformist candidate and a conscientious person. The doctors said I am not looking for a fight, I am looking for a consensus on the components of government and society to solve the work of the people better. So the consensus came out of the intellectual circles within the civil society and the diverse currents of the reformists, and the candidate won the election against the networked candidate.
The role of people, parties, and sovereignty in the formation of consensus
Was a social backing or political or bureaucratic and why?
I said that the consensus also had social support. To the extent that at the height of the election stagnation, 5 % of the population, 5 million Iranian citizens, voted for a conscientious reformist candidate. There was also a political backing, and the reformist front, composed of four organizations, defended physicians in the election. There was also a role in this consensus of governance. That is, if a rule, like the election, eliminated all rival candidates, the elections would no longer be competitive and the reformists could not have a candidate.
Abuse of medical government
If we assume each of the above, that is, for example, a faithful social support, or the reason for the political, or how does it work for the power of consensus in any case? How does it support the government’s action and what is looking for?
It is clear how the faithful government did. It was opened in the field. The law of chastity and hijab was suspended, the pressure on professors and students at universities was a little stopped, the artistic production of theater, cinema and concerts facilitated a little. The government did not welcome the war, and ultimately it was a little prevented from purely in the offices. More than 5 of these can be mentioned. But the medical government also did unlucky.
First From the first day of the work, the Iranian government entered the “quasi -war” conditions with Israel – the United States, and the martyr Ismail Haniya, a diplomatic Iranian guest, was assassinated in Tehran. Or it was attacked by the Iranian embassy in Syria. Fortunately, the government responded to the Israeli regime, and the medical government did not seek to exacerbate the war and play for Ping Pee.
Secondly In the US, Trump has voted for Netanyahu’s associate like Biden and seeks to escalate.
Third When the generation Netanyahu won the victory in Lebanon and Syria, the overthrow of the satellites, with the help of Israeli money satellites, encouraged the destruction of the government.
Fourth Nimaries, like the silences and the work and water, which resulted in two decades of recession and sanctions, showed themselves in people’s lives.
Khamsa The shadow and the government’s government, relying on the possibilities of the government, ignored both the quasi -war conditions and the tributes, which were their own two decades’ policies, and exacerbated the destruction against the vain. So there are conditions in which you are concerned about consensus.
Assuming that, like some political and social activists, we have ended the consensus after impeachment and delicate dismissal. What is essentially replaced by Iran’s current political and social situation? Which theory or political approach?
What ended? Unless the consensus is a movie that is over. The country is in a quasi -war condition. There are also numbers. Although there are threats against the country for now. Under these circumstances, the government and civil society are also active in the country. Incidentally, there must still be difficulties with a consensus approach to supporting Iran. There are now four approaches to dealing with society’s problems. It seems to be defensible and trackable approach:
The first approach The same approach is extremist fundamentalists who say nothing, povertyIt must be “resistance” against the enemy (global arrogance) and its abuse. They do not lose anything to the destruction of the medical government.
The second approach This is the same approach of reform – consensus; Means with the possibilities of state and fashion societyNey, despite all the problems and disadvantages, should try to reduce the problems of the country and get out of the quasi -war conditions. In foreign policy, sanctions must be sought. Third approach It is the evolutionary approach to say that reform is useless and that structural changes should be pursued. This approach is not practical either. Because First The government does not undergo structural changes in these circumstances. Secondly For “structural changes must take some fundamental changes” to make structural changes due to the consequences. But in the current situation, there are no fundamental changes in the country. There is dissatisfaction in society, but in society it is not possible to massive democracy. Because democratic collective movement requires the existence of a cultural middle class. Whereas Iran’s cultural middle class is afraid of state -of -the -art conditions, although the cultural middle class is essentially suffering from livelihoods.
The fourth approach, The approach is the overthrow of the people, an approach that believes in overthrowing the Israeli -America war. This approach is also sterile. First The overthrow of the people is a small force that has only the media and the propaganda horn. Secondly Is it the external power of the brain that wants to throw himself into the water and fire for them to win the overthrow and spend for them, its forces and allies in the region? Therefore, the hostile and overthrow of all the hopes of the sanctions are to exacerbate the sanctions so that the Iranians will be tired and protest and the country becomes unrestrained so that the enemy can bring its own Sunnis out of these. So this is the fourth approach to open the doors of hell on Iran.
Basically, what do you know about the government’s performance in six months? Was it low or too much? Could it be more?
I answered this question earlier. The work could have been better offered, but given the quasi -war conditions that prevailed from the country, and given the two opposition forces that the medical government has, that is, the purifiers or the shadow government of the inside and the overthrow of the cyberspace, these conditions have not worked badly.
IRIB should not harass people. News policies must change
Given the form and determination of the political construction that was the culmination of the thirteenth government. How do you basically see the path to the political and social sphere? Is the political game easy with difficult?
In the past forty -five years in Iran, politics has usually been and will be difficult. In my opinion, the passage of current problems and disadvantages still needs the cooperation of the government and civil society forces. The way to salvation is not to overthrow. By the way First The most important task of the government is to move towards lifting sanctions with a balanced diplomacy. Second That the political structure must not undermine the pure, and that the policies of the Voice of Sima must change. Iran is faced with unhappy society. Solving people’s problems goes back to the economy, and in the current sanctions, the government is not open. In such circumstances, IRIB and those who are responsible should not hurt the people.
The state does not delay its coordination with the nettles. They only think of power, not the people and the preservation of the country
Now, after 6 months, there were a few achievements; Security for social, a few steps to normalize political, preventing the increasing crisis in foreign policy, removing two platforms, non -communication of chastity and hijab law, and perhaps most importantly, the presence of Mr. Zafarandi and Midri in the government that symbolize. But the impeachment was also delicate. However, when you look at the political realm and the expectations of society, what will be the result of these actions and reactions? Does that mean the path to consensus in the next year?
Mr. Zarif and Hemmati left the government but serve Iran in civil society. The government will also take advantage of the two expensive experiences. Although there are more problems next year. Therefore, the government must act stronger and do not delay itself in harmony with radicals and nettles. Radicals are neither concerned about reducing the suffering of the people, nor even the concern of preserving the country. They only want power and survive in crisis and sanctions. Who are the extremist sanctions and foreign policy? The same purity.
Twitter is definitely not all Iranian politics, because a small percentage of Iranian people are on Twitter and only 5 % of them have political work and activity. Twitter activists, both fundamentalists, reformists, are all seeking radicalization and maximizing the political. Alongside these, how do people look at the consensus and reactions that are going on in the political arena between its actors? What are they looking for and what do they want from the political arena?
People are struggling with your livelihoods. Under these quasi -war conditions, pursuing a radicalism approach in policies makes things worse. Deserved to be all efforts to lift sanctions; Whether with a name or with a shame. Continuing sanctions will make Iran weaker. The national power has three pillars of military, economic and people’s satisfaction. In Iran, the two dimensions of the national economic power and the satisfaction of the people are not good.
The challenges continue and these challenges must be protected from Iran and Iran.
Waiting is the means, not the purpose, not the way, not the destination. What are we looking for in consensus? The normalization that Mr. Hajjarian put forward in year 6? Does it mean that at least we become an ordinary country at all levels?
I first mentioned that “consensus” is an interactive and gradual approach to dealing with the country’s problems. We have no other way than to seek to solve the problems of the people with the same approach. The approach of radicals, transformations, and overthrow of the people is not essentially the solution. It is true that normalization (normalization) was also a way to get Iran out of the Ahmadinejad period’s quasi -security conditions, which came out to some extent, and at that time the telegram social network found up to 5 million members, and the brigade was obtained. At the same time, Trump left the brokerage and exacerbated the sanctions. These challenges continue and these challenges must be protected from Iran and Iran.
1
منبع: www.khabaronline.ir
