MOSCOW (RIA Novosti's political commentator Pyotr Goncharov)
-- Mahmood Ahmadi Nejad's victory in the Iranian presidential election is beyond any reasonable doubt. This was a landslide victory, with the second runner hopelessly lagging behind the winner, that leaves hardly any space for speculations about vote rigging and government meddling. However, the outcome of this unchallenged victory is hard to predict.
The Iranian landslide was not just a sensation - especially for those who followed the exciting electoral campaign closely enough: The United States and the Western world in general were stunned as a politician they used to label as "scarcely known" unexpectedly left behind all rivals revered as frontrunners, and came first in a victory many commentators would later mark as "a knockdown."
The first round, however, was a far cry from victory for Mr. Nejad who just reached a certain balance with strongest rival Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, starting a close battle of broadest-ever popular support against unmatched political experience, including national leadership in the 1990s, which gave Mr. Rafsanjani a reputation of a liberal reformist.
At the same time, Mr. Nejad's first-round victory over liberals Mehdi Karroubi and Mustafa Moin had to ring first alarm bells to the country's incumbent political elites and the U.S.-led West as it showed liberal and reformist president Mohammad Khatami's effective failure to fulfill most of his promises.
Under Khatami, liberal economic reforms barely advanced, and he neither saved Iran from the U.S.-pressured international isolation nor defined the nation's clear position towards its main international critic, the U.S.A. Although on the last count Mr. Khatami should probably share the responsibility with the extremely powerful ayatollahs in the Expediency Discernment Council, where Mr. Rafsanjani, by the way, played a leading part. Anyway, in the end of his second presidency, whether deserving that or not, he found himself without grass-root support, which, considering Iran's basically low level of political awareness, was - and still is - a crucial factor.
The undermined liberal political wing was doomed to lose this election, no matter how fiercely Messrs. Karroubi and Moin cast aspersions on Mr. Khatami's policies. In what is possibly a radical change in the popular economic posture, the Iranian people have swung the country in a pendulum-like manner back to a more government-controlled economy of "Ektesod-e Touhidi", the well-known Iranian slogan of "fair distribution of wealth" - the groundwork of Mr. Nejad's political agenda and the main generator of support for his candidacy. Let the Iranians see for themselves whether this will be for the better or for the worse.
The West and, first of all, the United States, have yet to give an embrace or a thumbs down to the new president who has already clearly outlined his future policies. So far, Washington had made a quick start by dismissing the election as undemocratic and illegitimate even before the voting actually began, while other Western powers preferred to wait for the results and only then air their long-prepared frustration.
American and Western approach to a new Iranian government is likely to become even more pessimistic in the wake of Mr. Nejad's recent confirmation of Iran's "national interests as the power base of the popular government" and promise to revise all energy projects involving Iran "exclusively to the benefit of national companies." Furthermore, the new president firmly reasserted Iran's "unalienable national right" to go on with its nuclear program - so far the most troublesome international dispute around the Islamic Republic - and welcomed its full-fledged development, which could bring about another wave of criticism on Iran's nuclear dossier.
If Iran, after lengthy negotiations with the European Troika, makes the next logical though dangerous step to officially lift the self-imposed ban on uranium enrichment, this will leave hardly anything to prevent the United States from having its sweetest dream come true and putting the Iranian dossier on the table at the UN Security Council. What this move will lead to is totally unpredictable, partly due to low predictability of the current U.S. Administration. Possible outcomes might involve everything from calls for tighter international isolation to unilateral use of force - the options the U.S. has considered before.
The U.S. is already planning to introduce new sanctions against companies helping Iran develop its armament programs. Analysts say the relevant bill pending George W. Bush's signature will most likely be signed into law before the G8 summit in Scotland, doubtless in view of the election results. The U.S. has already notified the United Kingdom, Germany and France - members of the Troika, still trying to talk Iran into waiving its nuclear ambitions, - of its plans to do so.
U.S. sanctions will of course be meant to undermine Russian companies - largely because Russia is Iran's chief nuclear partner, but mainly because Moscow had said it welcomed elections in Iran as a milestone in its political life and would acknowledge the choice of millions of Iranians.
Russian analysts have repeatedly called upon the United States to keep from "exporting democracy" to Iran to change the "unelected ayatollah-dominated regime" against the normal course of history. History always takes its time, we have said. However, the Bush Administration seems to stick to its usual holier-than-thou stance - a consistency worthy of a better cause.
