He's about as 'unpopular' as Hugo Chavez... Ahmadinejad 'has 70% approval rating' http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,,1801867,00.html The popularity of Iran's controversial leader, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is surging almost a year after he unexpectedly won closely contested presidential elections, Iranian officials and western diplomats said on Tuesday. Attributing his success to his populist style and fortnightly meet-the-people tours of the country, the sources said, as matters stand, Mr Ahmadinejad was the clear favourite to win a second term in 2009. The perception that the president was standing up to the US over the nuclear issue was also boosting his standing. "He's more popular now than a year ago. He's on the rise," said Nasser Hadian-Jazy, a professor of political science at Tehran University. "I guess he has a 70% approval rating right now. He portrays himself as a simple man doing an honest job. He's comfortable communicating with ordinary people." While there are no reliable national opinion polls in Iran, western diplomats acknowledged that support for Mr Ahmadinejad is growing, defying widespread predictions after last June's election that he would not last more than three months. "An indication of his power is the way he has whipped up public opinion on the nuclear energy issue," a western diplomat said. "If there was an election today, he would win." It was possible that Mr Ahmadinejad could become a liability to the government if Iran were taken to the UN security council, he added. "But I think in that situation, he gets stronger." Vahid Karimi, of the government-affiliated Institute for Political and International Studies, said: "Certainly his popularity is increasing. People like what he says. It's not so much because he stands up to the west but because he's not corrupt. This is very important." Independent Iranian sources said many people were surprised that Mr Ahmadinejad had not turned out to be as socially conservative as many expected. His attacks on the privileges enjoyed by some among Iran's ruling clerical elite and his recent unsuccessful attempt to allow women to attend football matches had made a big impact. Mr Ahmadinejad's rising political fortunes run counter to American attempts to isolate Iran, which it brands a rogue state. US officials have described the Iranian president as a threat to world peace and claim that he faces a popular insurrection at home. Professor Hadian-Jazy said Mr Ahmadinejad was initially surprised by the furore that greeted his outspoken criticism of Israel and apparent denial of the Holocaust. "Coming from his background it was not uncommon to say that stuff. He never thought that as president it would be different. But once he got the reaction, he realised it could establish him as a strong leader among Muslims. It was a calculated move." Palestinian rights are strongly supported by Iran. But the president's anti-Israeli statements made an even bigger impact in the Arab world, said Sayed Mohammad Adeli, Iran's former ambassador to Britain and head of the Econotrend thinktank. "They see Ahmadinejad's resistance as admirable. He has become a hero of the people on the street." Mohammad Atrianfar, founder of the leading reformist newspaper Shargh and an ally of Hashemi Rafsanjani, the president's rival, said Mr Ahmadinejad would not have it all his own way. "The reform movement is alive, despite last year's defeat," he said, although he added it would take some time to regroup. Meanwhile, the government was mishandling economic policy, and that could be its undoing. "The present economy, due to the rate of oil prices, is in a good situation. But the management of the state sector is very bad. I can compare him to a wicked child who has inherited a large amount of money and goes on a spending spree. He has taken horrid and rushed decisions." Mr Atrianfar said that windfall oil revenue was being squandered through state handouts to impoverished provinces and commodity subsidies. But there was insufficient investment in long-term projects and infrastructure, foreign investment was falling, and the country was suffering capital flight and a brain drain.
And like Chavez he can portray himself as being threatened by the U.S. That will only help people to rally around him. The U.S. might be better ignoring him, while supporting as much as possible reformists within Iraq. As long as he is that popular there isn't too much that can be done. Having a foreign enemy to focus on will keep people from focusing on their own situation. It is a tough call because at the same time, we can't just let him do what he wants regarding nuclear weapons.
He is indeed a great leader for Iran. He already has the Westerners making concessions to his country. He's like the GW of the Middle East.
i skimmed the article. who did the polling? i remember hearing the same sorts of claims about saddam, and they were total crap.
I wouldn't exactly equate Saddam's regime with Iran, which has a democratic foundation. However, the article does mention that Western diplomats are aware of Ahmedinjadi's growing popularity in Iran. Moreover, an opposition member/journalist seems to agree with the fact that he's popular amongst his people. No way to prove it either way, but I haven't come across anything that refutes it. If you have, please post it.
So he barely won the election and now that the Great Satan is a threat his popularity is going up. What does No Worries say a lot? Water is wet. Although it should be pointed out that there have been mass protests against his administration from several different groups about different issues.
[rquoter] "He's more popular now than a year ago. He's on the rise," said Nasser Hadian-Jazy, a professor of political science at Tehran University. "I guess he has a 70% approval rating right now. He portrays himself as a simple man doing an honest job. He's comfortable communicating with ordinary people." [/rquoter] The title (by the original author, not tigermission1) is deceptive because it implies that someone is claiming an exact figure, not taking a guess. The 70% number is totally irrelevant, but the idea that his popularity is both strong and growing is worth examination. It would help if it wasn't someone who had a stake in the results either way making the determination. I believe Saddam had a 99% aproval rating, which was bumped to 100% before we invaded Iraq. I believe he used the old Soviet style polling, where you get a piece of paper with your name on it and one checkbox for Saddam. You can either vote for him, or recieve a visit from the state secret police asking (perhaps not so politely) why you didn't vote for him.
How do you know any poll is 'unbiased' or 'accurate'? Do you have any familiarity with the various polling organizations in Iran? Again, if anyone can provide some sort of data/poll that would refute this, I would be interested in it. Frankly, I don't think it's unthinkable that he would be enjoying more popularity in light of the fact that Iranians now have a common threat to rally against; it wouldn't be the first time, this is seemingly how politics always works. Moreover, I think it's misleading and inaccurate to compare Iranian politics to the days of Saddam, Iranians have historically enjoyed much more political freedom than Iraqis had under Saddam's regime, there is very little if any similarities between the two.
Exactly, not sure why some posters here seem to be surprised, there is precedence for this. Of course, no one claimed he had 100% popularity, and protests are commonplace in Iran, nothing new there.
A political figure in the middle east polls well after telling the US to shove it and throwing money at the populace? What's next, the sun setting in the west?
There is nothing to refute. Do you not understand the difference between "I guess his approval rating is 70%" and "His aproval rating is 70%."?
Ahmadinejad is another example of a president playing to domestic consumption while sticking his tough out at the world. Reminds me of someone named GWB and how the world was amazed he got re-elected in 2004 despite obvious realities. The world also strongly disliked Reagan yet he triumphed in a landslide in '84. None of this about Ahmadinejad surprises me at all. Here is a radical notion: Maybe he isn't as irresponsible as he seems. Maybe his pronouncements about Israel and the U.S. are just statements to boost his popularity in Iran and in the region (among the Shias). What if this guy's long term plan is to neutralize much of the power of the Mullahs? To me, he seems to be independent enough to have that ultimate goal. And the fact of the matter is Ahmadinejad is the only person with any hope of pulling Iran out of the grip of the Mullahs. Just a thought. Maybe I'm just dreaming.
Actually a valid point...As much as I despise this guy as fanatical, he can only come perhaps close to Kim on the self perceived trigger-happy destruction-if-it-means-risk-everything type...In addition, he is greatly educated moreso than most other "evil" leaders around the world...
North Korea is a very unique situation. Kim knows that if/when the world finds out how bad things really are in Korea and the atrocities that he's committed, he is TOAST! The only thing propping up his regime is the nuke threat and China's fear of having millions of North Koreans flooding their border. His country is a fiefdom with 20+ million slaves (I exaggerate some). It's conceivable Kim could launch the bomb because he thinks he has nothing to lose. Iran is completely different. It has everything to lose by doing something stupid like using a nuclear bomb. I have no doubt whatsoever once they get the bomb it will be used solely for the purpose of moving them up the global "food chain" (see their rivals India & Pakistan). They will not allow it to fall into the hands of terrorists either. Iran wants to be thought of as a responsible and respected nation. But it sees itself as a leader who should not answer to anyone, especially the U.S. Think about Vietnam. It took a ~30 years but now they and the U.S. have a very good relationship. IMO, the same exact thing will happen to Iran and the U.S. if things don't get out of hand. Time is on our side. If a military strike is launched (by the U.S. or Israel) against their nuclear program, all bets are off. My personal opinion is the world will have to accept a nuclear Iran. I doubt they will negotiate away their rights for pursuing the bomb. Qualifier: I'm not an Iran apologist at all but when examining the Muslim countries in the Middle East, Iran has the most upside potential. In 10+ years, they could be more important than Turkey. I have no confidence in ANY of the major Arab countries. Some of the small ones like Kuwait and Qatar will be major U.S. allies indefinitely.
Approval ratings mean crap in a nation without a free press, freedom of assembly and an equal chance for opposition candidates to participate in the election process. I'm all for a healthy dissent of the mother country but you same usual suspects have got to open your eyes. Iran is not a beacon of freedom, it is a theocratic autocracy hiding behind a veil of democracy and xenophobia. If you think Karl Rove and the boys are scheming to control US politics then you should be scared ****less of the Mullahs. You might be muslim and think. great, they are promoting Islam, then you are exactly the same guy as the fundementalist christians who want to create a christian nation. I have a little more regard for Cesar Chavez and I understand he is in the middle of a power play with Venezuala's traditional oligarchs but I hold him with a lot of skepticism until he steps down and supports free press and elections. Until then he has potential tinhorn written all over him.
