By Liu Qiang

The intensified tension sparked by rallies and demonstrations in Iran in the wake of the country's presidential election on June 12 has once again captured worldwide attention.

It is not a pro-democracy movement or a "color revolution", but a sign of awareness and increasing political participation by young Iranian people, who form a larger part of the Islamic nation's population.

The announcement of a recount of 10 percent of the votes, and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei throwing his weight behind re-elected President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad – which has helped ease somewhat the ongoing confrontation between different factions – has not ended the battle between conservative and reformist parties in Iran.

Ahmadinejad's re-election came as no surprise to most people. What is surprising is the eruption of large-scale protests and social turbulence following the election. The key reason for supporters of opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi taking to the streets is that they have suffered a serious psychological blow in the landslide defeat giving rise to doubts over the election's fairness.

The Iranian nuclear issue, along with hard-line President Ahmadinejad's occasional tough remarks on numerous international and historical issues, has compromised the country's international image. The years-long UN sanctions blocked the oil-rich Gulf nation from pulling out of its economic crisis.

The comparatively relaxed socio-political environment in the era of the former President Seyyed Mohammad Khatami and the retrogression under President Ahmadinejad have made many Iranian voters believe that a new leadership with a reformist spirit will change their country's direction for better. This is the main reason many young Iranians have chosen to stand firmly with Mousavi, a former prime minister who has launched a self-proclaimed "Green Wave" movement.

Thus, it is not strange that their psychological disappointment at Mousavi's defeat emerged as an impulse to take to the streets, to protest against electoral irregularities.

The recount is not expected to change the result of the presidential election, given that Ahmadinejad won an overwhelming 62.63 percent of the vote against Mousavi, who secured only 32.5 percent votes. But the protests and rallies, in the form of confrontation between voters from different political factions, suggest a new trend of reformist forces rising.

The support from moderate-conservative Rafsanjani – who heads the cleric-run Assembly of Experts that can remove the supreme leader, and chairs the Expediency Council (arbitrates disputes between parliament and the un-elected Guardian Council) – along with help from former president Khatami, are clear indications of the rise of reformist forces in the last four years. However, the reformists have been unable to alter their disadvantageous position in this confrontation with conservatives, despite the great boost to their influence under Khatami's rule.

The reformists' latest offensive has also offered an opportunity to Western countries for meddling in Iran's internal affairs.

Iranian officials, including its Supreme Leader, have lashed out against the US-led bloc of Western countries for "interference" in the country's electoral affairs and instigation of social unrest. It is known that the US has controlled political pattern in the Middle East region after many years of political penetration and military presence. For Washington, Teheran has become the last stronghold that is yet to have a regime change.

Therefore, it would not like to let slip this chance to realize its long-expected regime change. This is reflected in the Republicans' harsh criticism of President Barack Obama's "weak voice" on the Iranian situation.

The problem is that Western countries do not have sufficient excuse to use democracy and human rights as issues to intervene in Iran's internal politics; and these tools, if used, may find it difficult to produce the expected result. In the eyes of Iranians, democracy and human rights are not issues as they are made out to be.

On the contrary, Western accusations are likely to be used by the country's conservative forces as chips to maintain their advantage over other factions. This may explain why President Obama has chosen to keep low profile on political developments in Iran.

The failure of the US to swing Iran's political process during the Islamic Revolution favors Washington adopting a sound and cautious approach in handling the present situation in Iran. Any reckless action would inevitably result in further tensions between Washington and Teheran, and creation of larger obstacles for resolving the more intractable nuclear issue.

The balance of political forces in the latest developments in Iran indicates that the situation will return to normal as protests abate gradually.

Despite winning the presidential election, the conservatives are expected to lose popularity to the reformists in the long term. This process may sow the seeds for the reformists to emerge stronger in future parliamentary and presidential elections.

The rapid rise of reformist forces will strengthen the vigil of the conservatives against an opposition build-up.

The author is director of the Institute of International Relations under the Jiangsu Provincial Academy of Social Sciences.

(China Daily June 23, 2009)