Sistani and Khamenei: The Kid Glove and the Iron Fist

Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei speaks at the Hussayniyeh of Imam Khomeini in Tehran, Iran, August 13, 2018. Official Khamenei website/Handout via REUTERS
Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei speaks at the Hussayniyeh of Imam Khomeini in Tehran, Iran, August 13, 2018. Official Khamenei website/Handout via REUTERS
TT

Sistani and Khamenei: The Kid Glove and the Iron Fist

Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei speaks at the Hussayniyeh of Imam Khomeini in Tehran, Iran, August 13, 2018. Official Khamenei website/Handout via REUTERS
Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei speaks at the Hussayniyeh of Imam Khomeini in Tehran, Iran, August 13, 2018. Official Khamenei website/Handout via REUTERS

With the latest nationwide protests in Iran -the second in less than a year- dominating the headlines, other significant developments there may not attract the attention they deserve.

One such development concerns the Shiite clergy facing what could be the biggest challenge it has faced since its formation in the 16th century.

Because many members of the ruling elite in the Islamic Republic wear clerical clothes, complete with black or white turbans, and sport mandatory beards, outside observers often assume that the Shiite clergy as an institution rules Iran. A closer look, however, may show that such a view is more due to an optic illusion than to reality.

According to best estimates, Iran, India, and Iraq, which together account for almost 80 percent of all Shiites, are home to some 400,000 clerics, most of them Iranians or boasting some Iranian background. And, yet, only a fraction is involved with the Islamic Republic in Tehran.

The Islamic Republic employs an estimated 25,000 clerics in Iran and finances a further 10,000 clerics in Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, Afghanistan, India, Pakistan, and several other African and Asian countries. In Iran, the largest corps of mullahs on government payroll is made of the 3600 Friday Prayer Leaders’ network, all appointed by “Supreme Guide” Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Also appointed and financed by Khamenei is a nine-ayatollah “Council of Fatwa” in Qom that includes such prominent figures as Ayatollah Nasser Makarem Shirazi. The Islamic Republic also controls and finances the “Howzeh Elmieh “ (Scientific Circle) in Qom, head by Ayatollah Muhammad Yazdi.

And, yet, the bulk of the clergy in Iran has managed to maintain much of its traditional independence from political power.

According to estimates by Hassan Khalkhali, a prominent researcher of clerical issues, as far as the number of followers (muqalledin) is concerned state-appointed clerics represent no more than 10 percent of the “flock”.

More than 90 percent of Iranians who still pay “khoms” and “sahm e Imam”, that is to say, informal taxes to clerics, direct their money at mullahs as far away from the state as possible in Iran’s present circumstances.

According to sources in Qom, Grand Ayatollah Ali Muhammad Sistani, a prominent Iranian cleric living in Najaf, Iraq, and acknowledged as the current “Marja’a Taqlid” (Source of Emulation) receives more than half of all “donations” made in Iran, in turn re-cycling them through over 150 business enterprises and charities.

All this means that the late Ayatollah Ruhallah Khomeini dream of a fusion of religion and state in Iran has not been achieved. The Islamic Republic he found has quickly reverted to the original Safavid model in which the Shiite clergy played a prominent role while ultimate political power rested with the ruler.

Under Khomeini and Khamenei, the role of the ruler is played by a cleric who, nevertheless, is unable to claim supremacy in religious matters.

Being one of the top 20 ayatollahs then in circulation in his time, Khomeini was “Marja’a taqlid” for many believers in parts of Iran but never achieved the supremacy that grand ayatollahs such as Abol-Hassan Isfahani or Muhammad Hussein Borujerdi had reached in their respective eras.

Today, Khamenei’s status as a pretender to “marjaiyah” is even more dubious.

According to Kazem Assar, a leading authority on Shiite clerical matters, the “Marj’a” should fulfill five conditions.

The first is that he should be a descendant of Fatimah, daughter of the Prophet. The second is that he should be of Iranian background and nationality. The third is that he should be fluent in both Persian and Arabic. Fourth, the would-be “Marja’a” should have published a “risalah” (dissertation) attesting to his scholarship. Finally, he should be recognized, at least implicitly, by a number of grand ayatollahs as primus inter pares (first among equals).

Khamenei fulfills the first three conditions, but is nowhere near achieving the last two.

His entourage spread rumors that he has put final touches to his “risalah’ which will be out soon. People close to Khamenei’s circle say his “risalah” is ready, but afraid of possible criticism, he keeps postponing full publication. The same fear has prevented him from publishing collections of his poems composed over more than half a century but known only to a handful of confidants.

He also receives flattering messages from ayatollahs he pays in Qom and elsewhere but is never acknowledged as “first among equals.” This last point has caused him some problems.

For example, he cannot travel to Najaf, Iraq, the “holiest” city of Shi’ism because if he goes there he cannot do without seeing Sistani and the two or three other grand ayatollahs resident there. However, it is unlikely that Sistani and possibly the other grand ayatollahs would agree to go to wherever Khamenei is staying in Najaf because that would mean acknowledging him as their superior.

In contrast, if Khamenei goes to Sistani’s house, for example, it would mean relinquishing his claim of being the leader of Shi’ism or, as the Constitution of his republic claims, of the “Islamic Ummah” as a whole.

Similar considerations have prevented Sistani from traveling to Iran.

Before Khomeini seized power in 1979, Sistani used to travel to Iran every year for pilgrimages to Qom and his own native city of Mashhad. He had to end that tradition because if he went to Iran he would have to call on Khomeini or Khamenei, thus acknowledging them as superiors. At the same time if he ignored them, and they did not come to call on him, that could signal a major clerical schism.

Meanwhile, a new generation of clerics is emerging in Qom and Najaf that, provided religion remains a key factor in society, are likely to put as much blue water between themselves and Khomeini’s world vision as possible. For example, Grand Ayatollah Muhammad Jawad Alavi Borujerdi who, while maintaining polite relations with Khamenei, is slowly tracing a completely different path for the community.

The top four grand ayatollahs in Najaf and the nine officially sanctioned ones in Qom are in their 80s. And Khamenei himself is knocking on the door of his ninth decade. All of which means the current Shiite clerical hierarchy cannot be regarded as a long-term structure.

The creation of the Islamic Republic was an “innovation” (bed’ah) bound to be rejected by Shiite religious tradition. It was an attempt at the fusion of political and religious powers, something anathema to the original Safavid model. In the past four decades, it has divided Shiism into two realities: one religious, the other political, trying to co-exist but not without difficulty.

As a political reality, Shiism is today headed by Khamenei controls a major country and, despite current cash-flow problems, significant financial and economic resources. That reality can buy political support in many centers while also financing parallel armies and mercenary parties in Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, Gaza and elsewhere. Yet, it cannot win authority on religious grounds. Even in Lebanon where the Islamic Republic has spent over $ 20 billion in the past decades, the overwhelming majority of Shiites look to Najaf and Qom, not Tehran, for religious guidance.

The way Sistani and Khamenei have reacted to the current political turmoil in Iraq and Iran highlights the politico-theological schizophrenia hat inflicts Shiism today. Sistani takes the side of the protesters, counseling kid-gloves treatment by the authorities, because he aims to maintain links with the community. Khamenei counsels the iron fist method because he wants to prolong the political status quo.



What Is the Significance of the Golan Heights?

Israeli military vehicles on their way into the Syrian side of the border, between Israel and Syria, near the Druze village of Majdal Shams, in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, 16 December 2024. (EPA)
Israeli military vehicles on their way into the Syrian side of the border, between Israel and Syria, near the Druze village of Majdal Shams, in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, 16 December 2024. (EPA)
TT

What Is the Significance of the Golan Heights?

Israeli military vehicles on their way into the Syrian side of the border, between Israel and Syria, near the Druze village of Majdal Shams, in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, 16 December 2024. (EPA)
Israeli military vehicles on their way into the Syrian side of the border, between Israel and Syria, near the Druze village of Majdal Shams, in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, 16 December 2024. (EPA)

The Israeli government decided on Sunday to double its population on the occupied Golan Heights while saying threats from Syria remained despite the moderate tone of opposition leaders who ousted President Bashar al-Assad. Israel captured most of the strategic plateau from Syria in the 1967 Six-Day War and annexed it in 1981.

After Assad fled Syria on Dec. 8, Israeli troops moved into a demilitarized zone inside Syria, including the Syrian side of strategic Mount Hermon, which overlooks Damascus, where its forces took over an abandoned Syrian military post.

Israel called the incursion a temporary measure to ensure border security.

Following is a quick guide to the hilly, 1,200-square-kilometre (460 square-mile) Golan Heights, a fertile and strategic plateau that overlooks Israel's Galilee region as well as Lebanon, and borders Jordan.

WHY IS THE AREA CONTENTIOUS?

In 2019 then-President Donald Trump declared US support for Israeli sovereignty over the Golan, but the annexation has not been recognized by most countries. Syria demands Israel withdraw but Israel refuses, citing security concerns.

Syria tried to regain the Golan in the 1973 Arab-Israeli war, but was thwarted. Israel and Syria signed an armistice in 1974 and the Golan has been relatively quiet since.

In 2000 Israel and Syria held their highest-level talks over a possible return of the Golan and a peace agreement. But the negotiations collapsed and subsequent talks also failed.

Netanyahu said on Sunday that he spoke on Saturday with Trump, who returns to the White House on Jan. 20. The Israeli leader said his country had no interest in conflict with Syria.

WHY DOES ISRAEL WANT THE GOLAN?

Security. Israel said earlier in Syria's more than decade-long civil war that it demonstrated the need to keep the plateau as a buffer zone between Israeli towns and the instability of its neighbor.

Israel's government also voiced concern that Iran, a longtime ally of the Assad regime, was trying to cement its presence on Syria's side of the border in order to launch attacks on Israel. Israel frequently bombed suspected Iranian military assets in Syria in the years before Assad's fall.

Israel and Syria have both coveted the Golan's water resources and naturally fertile soil.

WHO LIVES ON THE GOLAN?

Some 31,000 Israelis have settled there, said analyst Avraham Levine of the Alma Research and Education Center specializing in Israel's security challenges on its northern border. Many work in farming, including vineyards, and tourism. The Golan is home to 24,000 Druze, an Arab minority, Levine said.

Many of the Druze adherents in Syria were long loyal to the Assad regime. Many families have members on both sides of the demarcation line. After annexing the Golan, Israel gave the Druze the option of citizenship, but most rejected it and still identify as Syrian.

WHO CONTROLS THE SYRIAN SIDE OF THE GOLAN?

Before the outbreak of Syria's civil war in 2011, there was an uneasy stand-off between Israeli and Syrian forces.

But in 2014 anti-government factions overran Quneitra province on the Syrian side. The fighters forced Assad's forces to withdraw and also turned on UN forces in the area, forcing them to pull back from some of their positions.

The area remained under opposition control until the summer of 2018, when Assad's forces returned to the largely ruined city of Quneitra and the surrounding area following a Russian-backed offensive and a deal that allowed the opposition to withdraw.

WHAT SEPARATES THE TWO SIDES ON THE GOLAN?

A United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) is stationed in camps and observation posts along the Golan, supported by military observers of the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO).

Between the Israeli and Syrian armies is a 400-square-km (155-square-mile) "Area of Separation" - often called a demilitarized zone - in which the two countries' armed forces are not permitted under the ceasefire arrangement.

The Separation of Forces Agreement of May 31, 1974, created an Alpha Line to the west of the area of separation, behind which Israeli military forces must remain, and a Bravo Line to the east behind which Syrian military forces must remain.

Extending 25 km (15 miles) beyond the "Area of Separation" on both sides is an "Area of Limitation" in which there are restrictions on the number of troops and number and kinds of weapons that both sides can have there.

There is one crossing point between the Israeli and Syrian sides, which until the Syrian civil war began was used mainly by United Nations forces, a limited number of Druze civilians and for the transport of agricultural produce.

WHAT HAS HAPPENED SINCE ASSAD'S OUSTER?

Netanyahu's government unanimously approved a more than 40-million-shekel ($11 million) plan on Sunday to encourage demographic growth in the Golan.

It said Netanyahu submitted the plan to the government "in light of the war and the new front facing Syria, and out of a desire to double the population of the Golan".

Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates condemned Israel's decision, with the UAE - which normalized relations with Israel in 2020 - describing it as a "deliberate effort to expand the occupation".

Israel has carried out hundreds of strikes on Syria's strategic weapons stockpiles and military infrastructure, it says, to prevent them from being used by opposition groups that drove Assad from power, some of which grew from movements linked to al-Qaeda.

Syria's de facto leader, Ahmad al-Sharaa, said on Saturday that Israel was using false pretexts to justify its attacks on Syria, but he was not interested in engaging in new conflicts as his country focuses on rebuilding.

Sharaa - better known as Abu Mohammed al-Golani - leads the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) group that ousted Assad on Dec. 8, ending the family's five-decade iron-fisted rule.

He said diplomatic solutions were the only way to ensure security and stability and that "uncalculated military adventures" were not wanted.

Israel Defense Minister Israel Katz said in a statement on Sunday that the latest developments in Syria increased the threat to Israel, "despite the moderate image that the rebel leaders claim to present".