Data show that except for fluctuations at certain times, Iran’s economy has not had an acceptable performance since the Islamic Revolution.
Despite having huge resources, from human capital to oil, gas and other natural resources, our country has failed to achieve sustainable growth, and the well-being of Iranians has not improved commensurate with these resources and capacities. This will logically lead to the conclusion that the economy’s poor performance is rooted in misguided policies and an ineffective system of planning, which have led to the squandering of a large part of the national wealth.
Of course, the problem with policymaking and planning is not limited to the economic arena, but also includes almost all social and cultural sectors, the result of which is dissatisfaction across broad social classes, Mousa Ghaninejad, the prominent Iranian economist, prefaced his article for the Persian economic daily Donya-e-Eqtesad with this note. A translation of the text follows:
Prioritizing ‘Commitment’ Over ‘Expertise’
Let’s look at recent protests that have lasted in Iran for almost two months now. These protests have fueled the flames of mistrust and uncertainty in the society, reducing new investments and the outflow of capital from businesses and markets which, in addition to the extensive restrictions imposed on the internet and social media, have hard-hit the economy, especially startups.
The root cause of dissatisfaction and recent protests is actually the same problem that has gave rise to misguided policies and ineffective planning system. It is nothing but prioritizing “commitment” over “expertise” in the country’s management system.
Over the decades, this bias has created a vetting process that has mostly marginalized efficient individuals and preferred incompetent insiders. The persistence of this vetting process for more than four decades has practically grounded the country's planning system.
All Iranians have witnessed this worrying trend in their lives. Just look at the quality of education and the resumé of high-ranking government officials and how their successors were appointed to understand the setback we have suffered over time.
The young, inexperienced and newly-appointed manager of a television network ignores public opinion, discontinues the most popular TV program of the last 20 years and does not give any explanation regarding the questions and doubts of millions of fans of this program. This shows how such approaches make a mockery of public opinion and national interests.
Officials don’t pay attention to the fact that such actions give rise to protests which are to blame on the same discriminatory approach of dividing people into insiders and outsiders.
The terrible economic conditions facing Iran at present are the product of this approach: appointing the so-called “committed” and inefficient directors. A look at the resumés of managers of some key government organizations as well as banks and large state-owned companies shows how weak they have become over time and to what extent “commitment” has outweighed “expertise”.
It is interesting that unlike “expertise”, there is no specific and measurable criterion for “commitment”; what is used as a touchstone is nothing but the level of loyalty to the senior administrative authority, which is clearly a subjective and unquantifiable matter.
The problems created by this vetting system are really shocking when it comes to the wastage of the country’s economic resources and the high volume of financial corruption.
The manager of a large state-owned bank flees to Canada with thousands of billions of embezzled rials only a few months after receiving an accolade for being a committed manager. By abusing this vetting system, the so-called trust fund kids and “superior genes” are being appointed to high government offices and superior economic positions, while the young elites who have stellar resumes are forced to migrate.
A government official with his wife appears in public, of course, overseas without her observing the Islamic hijab. She is not charged under the pretext that how she is dressed is a personal matter, but a girl from a provincial city travels to Tehran and is charged with not wearing her scarf properly and the rest is history.
Relationship Between Youth, Authorities Tarnished
Discriminations like this enrages the youth. If the above assessment is correct, the way out of the current situation is not to ignore the demands of protesters, minimize its scope and try to end it with security and policing measures.
The initiative of the government spokesperson to attend universities and talk face-to-face with all students, including protesters, is very important; it can work provided the tone of the spokesperson as the representative of the government and the ruling political power is respectful and empathetic, and not patronizing and sarcastic.
Perhaps it is more important to accept the reasonable demands of students and youth in certain cases, which will act as the first step toward fixing the tarnished relationship between a section of the youth and those in power.
The government and its supporting political groups should acknowledge that the current youth movement is not and cannot be a subversive political move. Of course, this does not mean that the subversives and staunch enemies of Iran won’t take advantage of the current tense situation; it means that these two groups should be separated and treated differently.
The slogan “No to Islamic Republic”, which we sometimes hear, should not worry those in power.
Nearly half of the British people is against the monarchy for various reasons; they are vocal about it, but this is not viewed as a threat to the UK’s political system.
We need to accept that a part of people in our country are against the existing political system because they are being asked to participate in politics only at the time of elections.
Our country is facing serious issues, most of which stem from the discriminatory division of society. Such an approach has no place in Islamic values and traditions, especially Shia Islam, and is basically derived from a kind of communist ideology that divides the society into members and supporters of the party as “insiders” and the rest as “outsiders”. The first group controls the fate of the whole society.
The way out of the current situation is to accept some reasonable demands of the protesters to reduce the scope of tension and reform the discriminatory approach, which requires allowing a serious theoretical dialogue in the society and removing the barriers to sustainable understanding.
