Iran’s Supreme Leader remains the regime’s ultimate authority but controversy surrounding the country’s June 12 presidential election has raised new questions about the role and power of the head of state.
Last updated June 17, 2009 8:00 am (EST)
Facebook X LinkedIn Email Backgrounder Current political and economic issues succinctly explained.This publication is now archived.
No incumbent has lost a presidential election in post-Revolution Iran, and despite allegations of vote rigging and fraud in the wake of the June 2009 race, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has so far avoided the historical distinction as the first. But some observers had speculated the sitting president would face a tough reelection bid, and news of Ahmadinejad’s land-slide victory (AP) brought hundreds of thousands of opposition supporters into the streets of Tehran demanding a new vote. As a result, many experts believe that public support for Iran’s unique form of government-a mix of clerical rule and elected leadership-has been eroded (NewsHour).
More From Our Experts Daily News BriefYet amid the unrest are more fundamental questions about the broader significance of the Iranian office of president. While Iran’s president has considerable latitude in domestic matters, and is the most visible member of Iran’s inner circle on the world stage, his power remains secondary to the Supreme Leader. A number of analysts and Iranians, particularly those from urban areas who support opposition candidates seen as reformers, believe this arrangement undermines the electoral process, and in recent years U.S. officials have regularly dismissed Iran’s elections as unfair. But despite the president’s lack of absolute authority in Iran, some experts suggest the political leaning of the office holder can shape, albeit subtly, the direction of regime policies. This arrangement partly explains the outpouring of emotions follow the vote of June 12.
Officially the highest elected office in the Islamic Republic of Iran’s bureaucracy, the president remains subordinate to the Supreme Leader, who serves as the final arbiter on foreign policy, media, nuclear-related decisions, and military and national security. The president, meanwhile, carries out the "functions of the executive" as outlined in Iran’s constitution, duties that range from appointing ambassadors and cabinet ministers to planning and executing the national budget. Article 113 of the constitution stipulates that executive power is subservient to "the office of Leadership." Ali Alfoneh, a visiting research fellow at the Washington-based American Enterprise Institute, argues (PDF) this arrangement fosters the myth that Iran’s electorate has a role in the preserving Iranian sovereignty. "This is false," he says. Karim Sadjadpour, an Iran expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, writes in a June 2009 election scene setter that the country’s current leader, Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei, has consolidated power over the Revolutionary Guard Corps, the Guardian Council (which vets presidential candidates; see below), and the parliament. And while Ahmadinejad has repeatedly defended Iran’s right to pursue peaceful nuclear technologies, final decisions on uranium enrichment and the overall direction of the program lie with Khamenei.
The office of the president is generally seen as more powerful today than when it was established three decades ago. In the early years of the Islamic Republic, presidential powers were limited, with the regime’s constitutional framers taking care not to give the office excessive strength for fear of a possible coup. The country’s first president, Abol Hassan Bani Sadr, ran into immediate disagreement on policy between his office and Prime Minister Mohammad Ali Rajai. Mohsen Milani, an expert on Iran’s presidency at the University of South Florida, writes in the British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies that Bani Sadr "tried to create an imperial presidency, to make his office independent and powerful." He failed, was marginalized by supporters of the regime, and in 1981 fled to France amid calls for his execution (NYT). Rajai succeeded Bani Sadr, but served just two weeks in office before being assassinated (no one claimed responsibility). The election of Ali Khamenei as Iran’s third president in 1981 restored order to the executive, but Khamenei (now Iran’s Supreme Leader) operated in the shadow of Ayatollah Khomeini and "remained a weak and uncontroversial president," Milani notes. During Khamenei’s presidency, Prime Minister Mir-Hossein Mousavi, a top challenger for the June 2009 presidency whose supporters believe was the victim of vote rigging, was credited with displaying strong leadership, especially on economic matters.
The president remains subordinate to the Supreme Leader, who serves as the final arbiter on foreign policy, media, nuclear-related decisions, and military and national security.
Daily News BriefAfter the elimination of the post of prime minister in 1989, executive duties were consolidated in the office of the presidency. Presidential powers have ebbed and flowed since, depending on the office holder. In an interview with CFR.org, Milani said Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani was an effective president due to his personal relationships and political charisma, a dynamic that was lost in 1997 with the election of Mohammad Khatami. "Khatami didn’t have that kind of relationship with the Supreme Leader" that Rafsanjani did, says Milani, and "during that period the presidency wasn’t that powerful." Ahmadinejad, meanwhile, restored the type of political influence commanded by Rafsanjani, Milani says, "and the Supreme Leader has started to give [Ahmadinejad] some room to maneuver, especially on domestic issues." Suzanne Maloney, a senior fellow and Iran expert at the Brookings Institution, says Ahmadinejad’s "notorious personality" also contributed to the wide interest in the 2009 Iranian presidential race. "By inserting himself in all of Iran’s most contentious debates and by asserting himself both on the domestic and international stage, Ahmadinejad has emerged as the focal point of Iran’s contemporary political landscape," she writes.
Even without the Supreme Leader’s explicit consent, Iran’s constitution does provide the president considerable autonomy; he unquestionably holds the second-most powerful office in Iran. Among the office’s duties is the ability to appoint provincial governors, ambassadors, and cabinet members-key posts in Iran’s government that hold significant sway in shaping the Supreme Leader’s thinking. Kenneth Katzman, a specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs at the non-partisan Congressional Research Service, writes (PDF) in a May 2009 report that "the presidency is a coveted and intensely fought over position which provides vast opportunities for the president to empower and enrich his political base." Beyond political appointments the constitution also grants the president responsibility for "national planning, and budget and state employment affairs." Amir Taheri, author of The Persian Night: Iran Under the Khomeinist Revolution, writes in the National Review that "by controlling the resources of the state, including the all-important oil revenues, and appointing thousands of high-ranking functionaries in a highly centralized system of government," the president is uniquely positioned to influence the direction of the regime.
Carnegie’s Sadjadpour describes the balance of power this way: "When visualizing how decisions are made in Tehran, I picture fifteen bearded men sitting around a long table, with [Supreme Leader Ayatollah] Khamenei seated at the head," he writes. "While Ahmadinejad is president, all of these men will share a similar anti-imperialist, revolutionary Islamist disposition. But the election of a more moderate president could change the makeup of who sits at that table. Their impact won’t be enormous, but it would not be negligible."
