A prisoner of politics?

LONDON — The release of Iranian-American journalist Roxana Saberi from Evin Prison in Tehran was a signal that Iran’s presidential election campaign is moving into high gear.

Iranian hardliners had her imprisoned earlier this year on charges of spying because they wanted to sabotage moves toward détente with the United States.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad intervened with the courts to get her freed because he is running for re-election and thinks he will win more votes by appearing to respond to President Barack Obama’s desire to break the ice with Iran.

Of course, most Americans missed this context. The evening news on one major television network reported the release of Saberi in less than 10 seconds, with no explanation.

The American news media generally does a poor job covering Iranian politics these days. They don’t send reporters there very often, so they don’t have a very clear idea of what is happening in a country that has nevertheless played a major role in American foreign policy for three decades. For the American public, Iran is a riddle, almost as incomprehensible as the game of cricket. Few Americans are even aware that Iran is facing a crucial election.

The rules of Iranian elections may seem odd to foreigners. Only candidates approved by a council of clergymen can run, but Iranian politics are — within the strict limits permitted —  a real contest. And next month’s Iranian presidential election offers voters a choice between candidates who want to open up Iran to the world, and an incumbent who takes pride in defying the international community.

There are dozens of candidates, ranging from reformers to conservatives, but only three have a chance of beating the incumbent. They have policy differences among themselves, but all three agree that Ahmadinejad has mismanaged the economy and contributed to the deterioration of Iran’s relations with the West. The three contenders include:

• Mehdi Karoubi, a 72-year-old clergyman and former president of the parliament, calls himself a “dogmatic reformer” and wants to promote reforms within the limits allowed by “Islam and the constitution of the Islamic Republic.”
• Mir Hossein Moussavi, 57, prime minister during the 1980-1988 war with Iraq, is a “pragmatic conservative” who wants to change “Iran’s extremist image.” His wife accompanies him on the campaign trail — a novel touch apparently aimed at the important female and youth vote.
• Moshen Rezai, 54, former head of the Revolutionary Guards, accuses Ahmadinejad of leading Iran “to the brink of disaster” with his “provocative speeches on (Iran’s) nuclear program and the holocaust.” He says “the United States needs Iran’s cooperation these days” (in Iraq and elsewhere), and Iran “should exploit that need to promote its own interests.”

Ahmadinejad, a populist politician with the common touch, is disliked and even despised by reformers, intellectuals and most of Iran’s middle class. But he still has a chance of winning because of widespread support among the poor to whom he constantly promises government aid and subsidies.

In a nutshell, the campaign is shaping up as a contest between reformers and a hardliner. But of course nothing is that simple in Iran. Ahmadinejad may be enemy of the reformers, but he also says he wants dialogue with the United States (though only on his own terms). He plays the anti-American card when it is useful, but he also wants to get re-elected, and reform is now in the wind.

The election will be a barometer of Iran’s readiness to bury the hatchet with America. The most contentious issue between the two countries is of course Iran’s nuclear energy program, which the West (and above all Israel) suspects is a cover for developing nuclear weapons.

Back in 2003, after the American invasion of Iraq, reformers in the Iranian government offered to reach a compromise on the nuclear program as part of a grand bargain that would settle most of the issues with the United States. The offer, which was passed to Washington through back channels, was ignored by the Bush administration.

Some experts on Iran believe the reformers are still ready to use the nuclear program as a bargaining chip. The Obama administration apparently hopes that is true, and is at least ready to test Iran’s intentions by opening negotiations — but not until after the June election. The administration wants to avoid any move that could boost Ahmadinejad’s chances of re-election.

There are many other issues that will be affected by the outcome of the Iranian election — including Iraq, Afghanistan, and Iranian support for Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza. But you don’t get much nuance or context in American media reports on Iran, if indeed local television stations or newspapers report anything at all.

That’s a pity, because the public has a right and even a need to know as much as possible about the challenges and opportunities now facing the United States if it is to judge how well the Obama administration is handling them. An under-informed, even misinformed, American public cheered the Bush administration’s invasion of Iraq. With new problems facing America at a time when its policies are being questioned at home and abroad, the American public is even less informed now than it was when America launched the two Middle East wars it is still trying to conclude with honor.

Tom Fenton is GlobalPost’s media critic based in London. He was a foreign correspondent for the Baltimore Sun and CBS News for more than four decades and  has been reporting from and about Iran since the 1960s.

More on Iran:

Iran reaches out to Mexico

In Iran, a new take on 1979