The Islamic Republic and the expansion of the government in Iran - 1

(1357 – 1372)

The summary of the article

In my view, it is necessary to deal with the consequences and outcomes of the Islamic revolution. Of course, over time, to be more comprehensive, the transparent effects of the Islamic revolution are exposed to the judgment to all. However, this affair would not inform the generation of the Islamic Revolution in the context of recognizing at least part of the outcome of the revolution and what it was about.
According to the author’s opinion, the Islamic revolution has had vast changes at the level of the government and the political power as well. The requirements and the circumstances of the revolution, including the collapse of the revolutionary coalition, fighting against the counter-revolution streams and the war, have prepared the ground for the concentration of the political power and increasing the power of the state to the point. The revolutionary ideology also emphasized the essential role of government in promoting social justice and equality at the heart of the state's impact. The teachings of the ideological revolution, the need to support and obey the government as a "religious duty" and hence the legitimacy of the government has approved the construction in a more cogent and strong way.
The current research paper examines the extension of the government in political, administrative realms and other issues after the revolution.

Introduction

The investigation and analysis of the causes and context of the revolution have absorbed much of the debate devoted to the sociology and theories of revolution. The political views of the ancient philosophers, especially Aristotle, the most recent sociological theories of the last decades of the phenomenon of revolution are provided altogether and whatever the mind of thinkers and sociologists have focused on, to date, has been research and exploration in regard to the "factors" involved in the revolution. In this category, the issue of "The Revolution," as it should be, especially in comparison with the discourse that revolves round the concept of revolution, is not considered in detail. Many are of the opinion that the outcome of a revolution cannot be possibly known and analyzed in the short term. A revolution is such as a tangled riddle which is complex and opens up gradually and only with the passage of time, the consequences and symptoms of such a revolution are elucidated. Therefore, some scholars believe that the Great French Revolution still persists and is not over yet.
On the other hand, some researchers insist that the question of revolution was essentially an argument which lacks in the name of efficiency and effectiveness and is not relevant. According to the idea held by this group, to spend the historical sequence, we cannot make changes that occur in a society after the revolution and not all the events can be attributed to the revolution. So from this perspective that changes our whole conception of revolution as we know the consequences in the society before the revolution, we therefore cannot view this as a political event in the name of revolution in a way which is referable. One of the challenges of dealing with the problem of revolution is dealing with grave issues within the ideological and moral debate. From the perspective of the conservative experts, a revolution erupts as a result of violence and the common feelings of the masses and therefore it has quite negative consequences. Revolutionary results of such a revolution are the current economic decline and the collapse, poverty and dictatorship which ends up in the vast repression of political and social freedoms. On the other hand, the supporters of the revolution, and particularly the Marxists are of the opinion that revolution is of indispensable nature and it is the only way to understand the history of evolution and transformation of the capitalist system and such a social event is glorified by the Marxists.
Despite the difficulties and the problems enumerated, in my view, to deal with the consequences of the Islamic Revolution is among the essential tasks. Of course, over time, a more comprehensive way to clear the consequences of the Islamic revolution and making it exposed to the public judgment would be achieved, but this is not a generation that grew in the context of the Islamic Revolution and the outcomes and achievements of the revolution and this might stop them from the cognition of these changes. In addition, in the short term, we can at least partly gain the result of knowledge about the revolution. On the other hand, the Islamic Republic is not apart from the other political and social transformations of the contemporary history of Iran. In fact, the Islamic revolution is in the continuity of the Constitutional Revolution, the oil nationalization movement and the uprising of June, and is largely considered to be the result and outcome of these movements. What was said should not to be considered as a rejection of the Islamic Revolution features and the specific results of such a revolution. The ideological judgments about the revolution must be cleared as all the issues associated with political science as an ideological position. Certainly, if the research study is based on objective data and the measurable indicators for all to be discernible, to the same extent, it can be said that it is safe from opposing the ideological abyss of arbitration.

The definition of the concepts

The purpose of government is "the human community that successfully claims the monopoly of physical violence within a certain territory as a legitimate right to be their own”. The state, in the broad sense, includes a broad and complex set of institutions, organizations and large enterprises that are implementing the governmental policies and regulations. Governmental agencies or the state-owned agencies are connected in different ways to shape the government managers and the heads of government who are determined, also their costs from the national budget, or from other sources stipulated by the state which are further funded; and finally, in many cases, these institutions gain funding and credits from various government and receive concessions and, in particular, tax exemptions and other sorts of benefit.
The meaning of "the expansion of the state" is increasing the government's power and presence and its influence in various spheres of political, economic and cultural life. That means more broad areas that the government pays them, they need the governmental involvement and the role in the development of the governmental agencies, and the government meet this requirement.
The theoretical framework: the effect of the revolution and the war on the government
Revolution, by transforming the socio-political structures and institutions of the society, puts new structures in place and creates a new political order. After a successful social revolution, the government that is formed is far stronger and more authoritarian than governments that have been destroyed by the revolution. The revolutionary government, in politics, to turn the political focus and to establish order and stability in the turbulent post-revolutionary society requires organizations to expand its coercion. The leaders of the new regime, to consolidate the nascent revolutionary mode and to fight the counter-revolutionary and to mobilize the military and militant revolutionary masses and create their new venture need to adopt such policies. As Huntington says:
"Revolutions put powerful governments in place of the weak predecessor states. These powerful governments on the effect of the concentration of power and, more importantly, because of the power in the political system may arise [...] and their true historical functions in a revolution are the restoration and strengthening of power. "
According to Huntington, the result of a successful revolution is not out of the three modes: a revival of the traditional structures of authority, or the military dictatorship and the rule of force which leads to or creates the new structures of authority. "
Robert Gere is of the opinion that the post-revolutionary governments generally tend to become police states and rely on such a force. Most of the contemporary revolutionary struggles in the last century, both of the left-wing and the right-wing originated governments that are based on police. Therefore, Gere concluded that those revolutionary governments in the aftermath of the revolution are met with internal resistance, to become police states to rely on. In general terms, the revolutionary government and the focus on control and the spread of political and social development of the forces of repression are needed to prevent more conflicts and contain the centrifugal forces, hence achieve their complete dominance. All of revolutions immediately after the consolidation of the authority of government try to focus on the administrative concentration [...] and the revolutionary government with the elimination of the civil society and the development of a mass society in terms of social structure, and by increasing the force instead of tolerance, rule out the possibility of revolutionary mobilization which might possibly arise. The revolutionary government is present everywhere, whether to mobilize the forces to forces or to suppress the counter-revolution and promote revolutionary values.
Often the revolutionary governments have a tendency for vast intervention in the economy and the other national policies and the state economic enterprises and institutions which are quickly implemented. After the revolution, the government control over the economic resources and means of production will increase and the government wishes to achieve social justice and redistribution of income and wealth and all the other areas in which the government is concerned. In many cases, the occurrence of the revolution paves the way for the regime serious changes in landholdings and territorial relations. The revolutionary government interferes in the economy and the implementation of new laws and regulations to deal with the situation, which, in turn, leads to the creation of a legitimate vehicle to government, government intervention in the economy, provides grounds for such an increase. One of the results of the revolution is taking the properties from the elites and the expropriation of property and assets related to the previous regime and transferring them to the state or the people.
Revolution creates a new political culture and promotes new values and norms. This new political culture originates from the ideology and goals of the revolution. Often former cultural institutions are liquidated or treated and will be replaced by new institutions. Cultural activities within the framework of rules and regulations will be new and new criteria for monitoring the cultural activities such as publishing books and literary and artistic activities will be established and run. If the revolutionary government is unable to inject a new culture and new values to shape the foundations of a new political culture, the legitimacy and stability of the political system in the long run cannot be guaranteed in any ways. Thus, the revolutionary government, along with political and economic activity, makes new efforts in the areas of cultural and intellectual sphere which begin to form political and social beliefs of the people in line with the goals and ideals of the revolution and the legitimacy of the new government's conduct in the minds of the masses will be thus stabilized.
Wars, like revolutions, might increase the state power. Many of the revolutions of the last century have been accompanied by a foreign war. With the exception of Zambia, all successful mass revolutions after the 1970 have been followed by some kind of war and military conflict. The major items are in this case” Cambodia, Vietnam, Nicaragua and Iran.” The governments involved in the war need to mobilize the vast resources (human, natural and financial resources). This requires increased government intervention in the various areas of social and economic spheres. Some researchers believe that in Europe, the government's efforts to build troops and war funding are the most important factor in the stability of the financial pressures which have been a factor in this case. The comparison done by Michael C. Desch which is conducted between Britain and Prussia perfectly shows the role of the wars in increasing the government intervention. He believes that in the nineteenth century, the British relied on their navy and there would be no need for a government intervention in the country to earn and collect taxes for military purposes. For the costs by the British Navy are provided by Multi-port customs revenues.
While Prussia relied on ground forces and the army and therefore an authoritarian system of government was formed so that, in this way, the military expenses could be supplied. War and the threats of international organizations on the one hand and the military and police forces to be reinforced and expanded and, on the other hand, the establishment of new organizations and military and paramilitary forces were made necessary. As "Gere" says in this regard:
"Among the consequences of particular frequency in conflict, whether internal or external, is the creation of the professional organizations ready to fight the Battles for the future development. The frequent involvement in violent conflict leads the political elite to encourage the use of violence, and properties if its use is associated with success. The elite in a tense and violent process, have gained political power and to maintain their power and to deal with competitors, the use of violence is a priority for them.
The existing studies in this regard, including the studies done by "Gere" and "Dash" show that in the United States and the United Kingdom during the twentieth century, there is a direct relation between war and about the involvement of government in society in those countries. In both countries, during World War I and II, the scope of government intervention is very extended. The important point which is interesting is that although by the end of the war, the intervention has declined, but has never returned to the pre-war levels.
So in conclusion, one can say that the revolution and the war might have a major impact on increasing the power of the state in various social and economic fields. Both the centralization of political power and the mobilization of resources (whether financial or human) in society leads to more government involvement in the economy and the development of organizations to provide repression and coercion.
The government, politics and security after the Islamic Revolution of Iran
After the victory of the Islamic Revolution, several factors led to increase the role of government in society. In fact, the main cause was the revolution itself and its requirements. Like any other revolutionary political struggle, a struggle for political power was going on. In fact, the most important and most immediate of the target groups during the conflict was the achievement of political power. The political power of the market to achieve the goals and ideals of the revolution and the revolutionaries and also creating changes in the economic and social structures were also among other elements that were considered.
The Islamic Revolution was the result of a broad coalition of disparate social forces. In the fight against the Shah's regime at least "five major forces have been identified: the clergy, the intellectuals, the middle class and working class market. The presence of diverse social forces in the revolutionary coalition, in the form of events and developments after the revolution played an important role in this regard. With the Revolution, the gap between the revolutionary forces, which until then had no opportunity to be demonstrated evidently because of the common enemy was then demonstrated. The dispute centered in management style, the type of government, the management, the question of war, revolution, and matters such as the jurisdiction of the state. The radical revolutionary forces which were mainly present in the People's Mujahedin Organization, the Islamic Republic Party, and the Islamic Revolution Mojahedin Organization attended opposed the moderate Bazargan’s government policies. They demanded serious and fundamental reforms in all the spheres of political, economic and social realms of the country. The dispute eventually led to the resignation of Bazargan.
In the first presidential election, Abolhassan Bani-Sadr won the elections and took power. He initially suffered a relentless conflict with religious forces, known as the "Hezbollah". The Islamic Republican Party, led by Shahid Beheshti and some of his close allies and had been established, in this way had a major role in the opposition to Bani Sadr. Although the Republican Party did not win the presidential election, it was in control of the Revolutionary Command Council and the Judicial Branch. "The opposition party were scattered in numbers and the party was organized for a violent conflict and the control of economic resources in their hand. In addition, the party took advantage of the high dignity of Imam Khomeini and his particular interpretation of Islam which was used properly. "The Hezbollah party forces and the other forces of Hezbollah "in the parliamentary election that was held on the Persian date Esfand 1358 won the majority of the seats and were allocated and managed in spite of Bani Sadr’s opposition and, then, Shahid Rajaee was chosen as the prime minister.
With the victory of the Revolution, the movement of large groups and counter-revolutionary forces against the Islamic Republic had begun. The Kurdish "Democratic Party of Kurdistan" and the "Komala Party" with the exploitation of ethnic differences, language and religious differences in the region, had managed to mobilize the population and were demanding autonomy. Also, other armed and left groups were formed in the Turkmen areas and in Gonbad desert and they stimulated of the peasantry and by taking the lands from the owners began to divide them among landless peasants. The government initially tried to resolve the crisis through dialogue, but failed and eventually were forced by Iranian Revolutionary Guards of the Islamic Revolution and the military forces to suppress counter-revolution forces.
With the onset of the war which was imposed in August 1359, the differences between "Hezbollah" and Bani Sadr were culminated. Bani Sadr, the first commander in chief was deposed after a parliamentary vote on his political incompetence which was approved by the Imam and he was ousted from the presidency. The Hezbollah forces had achieved a great victory and by their coming to power, the government achieved more assimilation and integration. Bani Sadr was the main supporter of the Mujahaddin Khalgh Organization that had an armed uprising against the Islamic Republic. In this period, the counter-revolutionary forces began their assassinations and bombings of the offices of the Republic Party and the Prime Minister's building, Ayatollah Beheshti and Mohammad Ali Rajai and a large number of the elite revolutionary people were murdered and a wave of terror, anxiety and panic was spread throughout the country. However, with the help of the military force, the Revolutionary Guards and the Basij forces and after numerous clashes with counter-revolutionary forces their members were identified, arrested and suppressed. Some of the counter-revolutionary leaders have fled abroad and the leftist and nationalist parties withdrew from the political scene. In this way, the unchallenged rule of Hezbollah forces by the end of 1360 led to a relative political stability in the country.
To show the dominant role of the state in the field of politics after the revolution, the political yield alone is not enough, but it is necessary to consider the growth and development of civil society as the sphere of politics, the sphere of interaction between government and civil society. It is necessary, therefore, that whenever the role of government in society increases, the field will be narrowed to the activities of civil society and vice versa. So we have to see to what extent the civil society after the revolution and outside the scope of the government – have had political participation and opportunity for growth and spread and to what extent they have become "organized" and "institutionalized".
The Islamic revolution that has won the broad masses of the people, has also made the opportunity for political participation in the self-determination, however, that participation is run by the mass character of the revolutionary process. It was expected with the provision of the constitution and rules for the activity of political parties and groups, civil society organizations and the growth and development of our society be more visible. However, political developments did not come to that point after the revolution, the mass political participation became the dominant political participation. Two important principles of the constitution that would have paved the way for political and social participation of people who are organized were not realized based on principle (26) which emphasizes the freedom of political parties and groups and the (100), which corresponds to the formation of the city councils and village councils. Some parties and political groups which were organized and a history of activity in the years before the revolution- including MEK, the Fadaiyan Mass Party, and the Tudeh Party opposed the revolution to overthrow the government and experienced crackdown by the government. On the other hand, the political parties and groups such as the National Front which were moderate parties were more passive and later withdrew from the political scene. The Freedom Movement of Iran in the decade of 1360 was very limited in their activities. The acceptance of the constitution of the Islamic Republic is trying to play the role of an active internal opposition. Nevertheless, for various reasons, including ideological differences, the Islamic Republic's freedom movement as an opposition within the system was not recognized.
Therefore, within the political climate after the revolution, the essential role of the government was highlighted and the political parties and groups which have organized and were created spontaneously and came from the society and were independent of the government were not allowed emerge. It was important for several reasons: First, the new system of Islam after the revolution was immediately engaged with counter-revolutionary forces in a massive campaign. Conflict in the North and West of the country on one side and bombings and assassinations of revolutionary leaders, on the other hand, introduced a wave of panic across the country to be governed, and thus the issue of "political stability and security was becoming the first priority. The second reason was the economic blockade and war. The government had not succeeded in the internal counter-revolution and was not able to suppress the counter-forces when the war began. Pressures caused by sanctions led to a situation where the war government was faced with serious problems. In this way, all the facilities and the personnel were engaged in the management of the society and the preservation of the existing political system. Mr. Hashemi Rafsanjani, described the costs of the war in 1366 and said: "In 1366, in addition to the regular budget for the armed forces, including the army and the seventy million dollars, almost a quarter of the budget, was allocated to the war and a third to the foreign exchange facilities which were dedicated to the war.”
One of the results of the revolution and war was the new military and paramilitary creations and the expansion of the existing military organizations. "Islamic Revolutionary Committees" and "Iranian Revolutionary Guards Islamic Revolution" was one of the first institutions that were established after the revolution. "Mobilization" is also formed in July 1359. Although the IRGC and the Basij forces were formed before the war, but the war and the need to send troops to the war fronts caused the IRGC and Basij to be expanded and they added to their authority. The army forces in 1358, was 5,000 and in 1360 and in 1362 reached 50 thousand to 150 thousand people. According to the remarks mentioned by the commander of the army at that time in 1376, the number of troops (who were on official duty) Corps in 1367 was about 150 thousand people, which of course should be 150 thousand martyrs and veterans also added 200 thousand. The mobilization in the war then became a significant development. The "active" forces in the campaign in the years 1367-1366 were 500 battalion of 300 to 350 people (about 130 thousands) and such a number has been reported. The number of the years 1377 to 1376, about 200 thousand people and disabled workers (the saved forces) to mobilize up to one million people have been mentioned.
The army of the Islamic Republic after the Revolution, despite the conspiracy that took to the liquidation of the entity, managed to maintain its integrity. With tactfulness and wisdom, the leader of the revolution emphasized the need to maintain vigilance and foresight as an emphasis on the army and he said to the people: "Be sure that all military personnel were not subject to the orders of the previous regime". As associated with the IRGC and Basij forces, the army has also had a very significant role in the suppression of counter-revolution and the defense of the territorial integrity of the country. The number of the personnel in the army was about 200 thousand in 1356 to reach 656 thousand in 1366. During this decade, the number of the army personnel exceeded 200 thousand to reach about 305 thousand people. In other words, during the last ten years, more than 100 thousand people were added to the number of military personnel. (While before the revolution and during 14 years, from 1342 to 1356, the number of army personnel was increased by only 20 thousand, i.e. from 180 thousand to 200 thousand people.)
By the end of the war, important changes occurred in the country. The constitution was amended in 1368 and by the elimination of the office of the prime minister and giving the president these powers, the executive force became more political and the executive power was added. The Judicial Branch by replacing the president of the Supreme Judicial Council took a step towards more concentration. On the other hand, the government based its efforts on "economic adjustment policies" in the first program, and its determination to reduce the size of government and handing over affairs to the people was experienced at such a time. Various economic projects in the field of industrial and agricultural infrastructure were implemented. But, unfortunately, in politics, serious and significant changes were not made. New political groups and populations did not come into existence. The Association of the Combatant Clerics was divided in April 1367 from the "Society of Combatant Clerics of Tehran".