Rouhani runs into obstacles
TEHRAN — Hassan Rouhani's presidency in Iran is involved in its first hurdle, with members of the country's conservative-dominated parliament questioning whether some top cabinet nominees have supported Iran's foes.
Public hearings that began this week have turned bitterly contentious, with hard-line lawmakers singling out for particular criticism Rouhani's picks for oil minister and foreign minister.
Some observers have dismissed the challenge as little more than political theatrics from hard-liners who feel marginalized since Rouhani, a moderate cleric and former nuclear negotiator, won Iran's June 14 presidential election. Most of Rouhani's nominees are expected to be confirmed.
The opposition has turned hostile, with some lawmakers suggesting that Rouhani's choices reflect a greater sympathy for opponents of the previous Iranian government than he showed during his election campaign.
“Are the Rouhani before and after election different people?” Attaollah Hakimi, an ultra-conservative lawmaker, railed in a televised session on Monday. “Why do you want to revive the sedition movement?” He was referring to the 2009 protests that followed the re-election of former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
The intensity of the hearings points to the difficulty that Rouhani may face in bridging the divide between conservatives, with whom he has long worked as a member of the country's Supreme National Security Council, and reformists who overwhelmingly supported his candidacy.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.