The Real Face of Islam

Time Tehran correspondent Azadeh Moaveni talked with influential cleric Taha Hashemi, editor of the conservative newspaper Entekhab, on the eve a presidential election distinguished mostly by the absence of rivalry. Considered a leading light among Iran's "new religious thinkers" — a nascent movement of conservatives distancing themselves from the extremist right-wing — Hashemi is close to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. He discussed his relationship with President Mohammed Khatami and the peculiarities of the presidential campaign. Exceprts:

TIME: What exactly is the "new religious thinking" all about?

Hashemi: In the history of Islamic thought, it has always been a movement that avers that Islam can answer the demands and needs of people at any moment in history, and is in no way intrinsically resistant to development or change. Instead, it's a religion that is compatible with democracy and political growth. One message is that certain manifestations of political Islam, like the Talebean in Afghanistan, depict Islam poorly, as a regressive force in politics. Another message is that the secularist movement's attitude toward Islam, which opposes religion in general and shares the skepticism of secularists in the West about Christianity, is also off. The point is that both these directions are inappropriate, and don't fit our society and people. While if the transparent, real face of Islam is introduced, it is completely acceptable.

TIME: President Mohammed Khatami said on television recently that Iranian society before the revolution was more receptive to new trends in religious thought. Do you agree with him?

Hashemi: Perhaps he said this because under the monarchy, religious groups had more distance from politics and enjoyed a kind of freer space. Now those who talk about religion in a way that doesn't fit with other's interpretation are immediately opposed. This isn't right, because there's no need for rows since Islam tolerates diverse thinking and debate. The Shah's regime wasn't very sensitive to religious disputes, and was in fact pleased by them, because it meant the clerics would bicker amongst themselves and leave politics and government alone.

TIME: How does this new trend fit into Iran's factional politics?

Hashemi: It's not about political tactics, but about pushing the true face of religion. Because if these closed perceptions continue, the secular trend here will be more successful. When in 1997 millions of people voted for Khatami, they did this in the context of the Islamic Republic, which means people feel this system is capable of addressing their issues. Rather than a political tactic, it's about placing borders along a spectrum. We're all a part of a religious government, and the development of two or three political parties can be productive, and encourage people to vote for coherent plans instead of personalities. But more than a few parties won't solve any problems, especially if they are running about spouting idealistic things that are not fesasible.

TIME: Why is there no prominent conservative candidate participating in this election?

Hashemi: Well, the conservatives feel because that because of the past, they won't get many votes. When a party is defeated, it should go back and identify its structural problems, figure out the strengths of its rival, and incorporate them back into its own strategy. But because the Right didn't do this, it feared being defeated again. This is natural, and also with Khatami running it would've been political suicide.

TIME: But if the Right accepts the democratic process, isn't it still obligated to run a serious campaign?

Hashemi: If the Right had investigated its loss and rebuilt itself for the next time around, it could have come back with newer slogans and a new face. This would have been excellent. But it didn't because it's a front, not a party, and this means people can behave based on whims.

TIME: Why doesn't Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei come out in support of President Khatami, since in 1997 election he backed his rival, Ali Akbar Nateq-Nouri?

Hashemi: Last time, Nateq-Nouri's supporters tried to make it look like he had Ayatollah Khamenei's endorsement. But it's not the Leader's place, as a cleric and supreme leader, to support a particular candidate against another.

TIME: Do Ayatollah Khamenei and President Khatami's views on freedom differ?

Hashemi: I've known both of them for a long time. Khamenei is part of the intellectual, progressive clergy, and if there are two or three clerics in this country who really grasp young people and their issues, Khamenei is definitely one of them. Now Khatami has spent time in the West, he's educated, a philosopher. They should and do have a lot in common, and when they have differences, this is a natural part of their work. They're very close, and I don't see great differences dividing them.

TIME: Has the incredible tension of the past four years strained their relationship at all?

Hashemi: They have a good relationship. But sometimes you need to separate Khatami the person from Khatami the President, and Khamenei the person from Khamenei the Supreme Leader. For example, at my newspaper perhaps I'll have disagreements with my editor over work, but in non-work settings we're great friends and very close.

TIME: But at certain times isn't real discord inevitable, like when the judiciary puts close friends and allies of the President in prison?

Hashemi: The Leader cannot interfere in the various branches of the state. Sometimes it's possible that the President expects the leader to do something, as he can harmonize things. But for example, during last year's parliamentary elections, the Guardian Council was set to annul the Tehran vote, and the Leader intervened. Either people didn't see this, or then on the other hand expected him to interfere everywhere.

TIME: Couldn't the Leader play a useful role, though, as a balancer between reformists and conservatives?

Hashemi: Under the law this isn't his responsibility, nor would he really want to enter the fray himself. Pulling the leader into the middle of something that needs to be resolved isn't necessarily in the country's interests.

TIME: How do you see the prospects of ties with the U.S. in President Khatami's second term?

Hashemi: The key to solving the problem is in the hands of the U.S. The U.S. talks about all these foreign policy conditions, but Iran has done more than enough, while the U.S. really hasn't taken a single step forward. If one day Secretary of State Albright made a positive remark, the day after Vice President Al Gore would ruin it would a negative one. The U.S. needs this relationship more than Iran does, and needs to take fundamental steps to build trust.

TIME: What could the U.S. specifically do to build Iran's trust?

Hashemi: Well, our assets that have been frozen since the revolution could be freed. The ban on oil companies investing in Iran could be lifted, along with the ban on the transfer of technology. See, the U.S. can't make a pretense of wanting to improve ties, when at the same time Congress is busy resisting.