Every country in the Middle East is moving in its own way toward democracy. The latest of these moves was the recent presidential election in Iran. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s victory has received mixed responses from political observers. While some welcomed it, others expressed their concern because of the existing volatile situation in the region.

Whatever may be the final shape of Iranian democracy, it must be conceded that the country has accepted the democratic way of seeking people’s wishes regarding who should run their affairs. This is true as much in the municipal and local administration as it is in the presidency of the republic. Some observers, however, feared the return of former President Hashemi Rafsanjani to the top post for a second time — not that they subscribed to his rivals’ political ideology but because they feared the prospect of the old guard returning to power which they felt would be a threat to democratic values. A change in the people in power and policies is a basic feature of the democratic process.

No one claims that Iranian democracy is flawless. There are various factors that prevent Iran’s becoming a faultless democracy. For instance, candidates, both male and female, are subjected to a strict filtering process before being allowed to run for election. This filtering amounts to a denial that all citizens are equal. The influence of money and power is another negative factor — though to a lesser degree. Outsiders have no right to intervene in these matters. It is the responsibility of the Iranian people to identify what is harmful and do what is necessary to change it.

Even before he took office, the new president had been the subject of serious allegations. The most damaging concerned his alleged role in the taking and holding of US hostages in 1979.

The charge may be untrue but even if it were true, it would not be right to condemn a president-elect for something that happened so long ago. A period of twenty-five years is long enough to bring about radical changes in an individual’s attitudes and ideals. There is no justification for digging up old files, particularly those from the early days of the revolution. Stirring up old memories may drive a president to the wall and will be good for no one and will not help the tense regional situation.

It is feared by some that Ahmadinejad’s election will boost the efforts to export the Iranian model revolution to other Muslim or Arab countries. At the same time, the seasoned politicians in the country are well aware of the folly involved in such adventures.

They know that the first attempt to export revolution was counterproductive and contributed only to increasing the miseries and disturbances in neighboring regions. Any attempt to resurrect old slogans will obviously be seen as an inability to learn from history and to understand the needs of the changing times.

The new president will require some time to set up his team and study domestic problems as well as Iran’s relations with its neighbors and the outside world.

The issues that confront the new president will not be much different from what the outgoing President Muhammad Khatami had to deal with.

It is a difficult thing to govern a country with a population well above 70 million and guarantee them their daily bread, health, education, security and other basic amenities — in addition to keeping up with rapid technological developments as well as a host of conflicting views and ideologies. Dreams and ideals alone are not enough to solve problems.

The more pessimistic of the observers believe that the new president, with his known history as a hard-liner, may cause Iran to step back from the progress it made in the period after the revolution. They fear that a hard-line approach to internal issues, such as the growing numbers of unemployed young people, and to external ones, such as the nuclear problem and the complicated situation in Iraq, will only lead the government to costly confrontations.

There are, on the contrary, observers who believe that Ahmadinejad is sufficiently skilled to steer the country clear of danger and to bring it to a safe harbor, particularly since he enjoys, the support of the supreme leader Khamenei and the country’s Parliament. This view is supported by the new president’s stress on launching schemes aimed at ending people’s poverty and improving their living conditions.

If he is sincere about these, observers maintain he will have little time to think of exporting revolution or confronting foreign powers.

— Mohamad Alrumaihi is professor of political sociology at Kuwait University.