Despite the growing likelihood of confrontation between
their two countries, U.S. President George W. Bush and Iranian President-elect
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad share a number of remarkable similarities.
Juan Cole, a prominent blogger and Middle East historian at the University
of Michigan, noted last week that the two men's campaign tactics suggest that
they are "soul mates," particularly in their populist appeal, their
criticism of a government of which they are a part, and their reliance on right-wing
religious forces for their electoral success.
But even in terms of personal history, their lack of interest or concern about
the outside world, and their Manichaean outlooks in which friends and enemies
and good and evil are clearly delineated, the two men share a great deal in
common.
Of course, there are key differences as well. Unlike Bush, who was born into
great wealth and prominence, Ahmadinejad's origins were quite modest; his father
was a blacksmith.
Similarly, Bush enjoys far greater power than the Iranian president-elect,
who will have to cope with the far greater influence, particularly in foreign
relations, exercised by the supreme religious leader, Ali Khamenei, who, however,
has warmly welcomed Ahmadinejad's victory, notably as a direct rebuff to Bush
himself.
Indeed, a number of analysts have noted that in his last-minute denunciation
of the election and implied endorsement of a student-led boycott, Bush probably
boosted both total turnout in the election's first round (about 63 percent of
eligible voters, according to official accounts) and the performance of hardline
forces led by Ahmadinejad
Tehran's conservative intelligence minister, Ali Yunesi, publicly thanked
Bush for his remarks, which were repeatedly broadcast by state television during
election day. Bush's statement against the elections was even used by Ahmadinejad
to denounce his rival in the run-off, former President Ali Hashemi Rafsanjani,
who had said Tehran should explore a dialogue with Washington.
"You only have to look at [Bush's] comments" to understand that he
"seeks hostility" against Iran, Ahmadinejad told reporters in precisely
the kind of statement designed to foreclose the possibility of dialogue that
one would expect from hardliners in the Bush administration regarding Iran,
North Korea, or prewar Iraq.
Cole identified several similarities in the political tactics of both Bush
and Ahmadinejad. Like Bush, Ahmadinejad never personally attacked his political
rivals, but at the same time did little to discourage his supporters from spreading
lies and using other smear tactics against his foes during the election campaign.
Both men campaigned successfully as champions of the "common people"
even though they were supported by extremely wealthy interests in Ahmadinejad's
case, according to Cole, by "billionaire clerical hardliners who have done
little for ordinary folks"; in Bush's by "the white-tie corporate
crowd."
Similarly, both men attacked their own governing establishments even though
they had served as integral parts of them. As a right-winger and loyalist to
Khamenei, Ahmadinejad complained about state corruption, and "his anti-government
rhetoric struck a chord with many Iranians and helped him get elected,"
according to Cole. Similarly, Bush constantly "represents himself as an
outsider to Washington and a critic of the government."
Finally, Ahmadinejad benefited from the support of mosque preachers all over
the country as well as by members of a religious militia, the Basij, which also
has a national network of grassroots volunteers who turned out the vote, particularly
in rural and poorer provinces. Similarly, "Bush depends heavily on the
support of evangelical and fundamentalist churches" who have become "foot
soldiers for the Republican Party."
Another Iran specialist, Columbia University professor Gary Sick, agreed that
comparing the two men may be useful "not because [they] or their nations
are particularly alike, but rather to explain what is going on politically and
what it may mean."
Like Cole, Sick, who served as the top Iran expert to former President Jimmy
Carter, stressed the importance of a "large constituency composed of people
who place special value on religious and traditional values" in the two
men's political success. Both also appeared to benefit from the support of much
of the military establishment.
Like Bush, Ahmadinejad "wears his religion on his sleeve," according
to Sick, who also noted that the president-elect apparently has never traveled
outside his own country and has no personal foreign-policy experience, just
as Bush had none before his 2000 election. Bush's first public post, of course,
was governor of Texas; Ahmadinejad served most recently as mayor of Tehran.
Despite their religious piety and appeal to traditional values, both men see
themselves as problem-solvers and managers. While Bush has a master's degree
in business administration from Harvard University and tries to run his administration
on a corporate model, Ahmadinejad has a doctorate in engineering from one of
Iran's elite schools and is given high marks, even by his critics, for his management
of the mayor's office.
Their nationalism and somewhat contemptuous dismissal of the concerns of other
nations also bear similarities. Just as Bush rejected the Kyoto Protocol to
curb global warming because "we will not do anything that harms our economy
[and] because first things first are the people who live in America; that's
my priority," so Ahmadinejad during the campaign suggested that Iran would
not compromise on issues of national interest except on its own terms.
Speaking of Western demands that Iran curb its nuclear program, he said, "We
will discuss in a rational way and if they accept our legitimate right [to enrich
uranium], we will cooperate. Otherwise, nothing will force the Iranians to comply
with their demands."
Both clearly believe that nothing good can come from the other. Bush made that
clear in his pre-election statements, not to mention his designation of Iran
as a charter member of the "Axis of Evil."
"Iran is ruled by men who suppress liberty at home and spread terror across
the world," Bush said on the eve of the first round of this month's elections.
"Power is in the hands of an unelected few who have retained power through
an electoral process that ignores the basic requirements of democracy."
"The U.S. administration cut off ties unilaterally to lay waste to the
Islamic Republic," said Ahmadinejad during the campaign. "They want
to restore them today for the same reason."
(Inter Press Service)