Massoumeh Ebtekar

Massoumeh Ebtekar is going to make the history books--on several counts.

The latest twist in the unusual life of the 38-year-old mother of two was her appointment last fall as Iran’s first female vice president. The job makes her the highest-ranking woman in government since Iran’s 1979 revolution--and among the top job holders in the Islamic world.

Always a trailblazer, Ebtekar’s lengthy resume is filled with titles that will be her legacy in Iran: editor of Kayhan International newspaper and Farzaneh magazine, doctorate in immunology and medical professor, co-founder of the Center for Women’s Studies and Research. But for the outside world, Ebtekar may best be remembered as the angry 19-year-old who, as “Mary,” went before TV cameras as spokesperson for the students who seized the U.S. embassy and took 52 Americans hostage for 444 days.

It was not Ebtekar’s first brush with Americans. She grew up in Philadelphia. Her English is still slightly American accented.

Her background is one reason many hostages still remember her with bitterness. “I recall her as someone who should have known better,” said Bruce Laingen, the ranking U.S. hostage. “Having lived in the U.S. for six years; having seen who we are as a people, and then to say the things she said about the hostages, particularly her constant iteration that we should be put on trial, I deplored it then and regret today that she has been given this important position,”

Mike Metrinko recalled the final TV interviews Ebtekar did with the hostages, the day before they left. “She wanted us to say how well we were treated,” he said.

What has happened to her in the intervening years reflects the passage of both time and events in the Islamic republic. Ebtekar, who went back to school after the crisis ended and spent many years as an academic, is now in charge of environmental issues. Today she is angry about pollution in Iran’s major cities and the dangers facing the Caspian Sea as the world scrambles to develop its vast energy resources.

She still has brushes with Western culture, however--not all of them negative. In a 1994 issue of Farzaneh, an intellectual quarterly for women, she wrote a study of the Virgin Mary, which ran under the subtitle, “The Chosen Woman.” At the threshold of the 21st century, she concluded, the Virgin Mary’s attributes of faith, purity, moral and social commitment made her a “flawless personality that deserves to be considered as a model for the bewildered human race.”

Question: The stereotype of Iranian women is the hejab, or Islamic dress, which signifies to many in the outside world repression and constraints. How has the revolution affected the lives of women in tangible ways we can measure?

Answer: To properly respond to this question, I have to go to the early stages of the revolution, when Imam Khomeini was trying to propose a clear strategy for the Muslim woman. [Despite] the opposition among both politicians and religious circles, he was very serious about integrating women in different spheres of social, political, educational and economic activities. He took every opportunity to make clear that he does not want the woman to go back into isolation.

He wants the woman not to comply necessarily to Western standards but . . . he says there is no obstacle for women’s advancement in Islam. This strategy has opened the way for religious families to send girls to school in rural areas, in tribal areas. And today, 19 years later, we see emerging elites of expert Iranian women who have had a university education.

It’s very different from the stereotypes which are projected in the West. It’s very different from many of the existing models in the Islamic world even. And it’s different from the model of the modern woman, the modern feminist or neo-feminist. But it is in its own sense quite modern [and] dynamic. This lifestyle maintains a balance between social and family roles. The family is not sacrificed. It is regarded as a sacred stronghold.

Q: How has the status of women changed since the monarchy ended?

A: In 1996, we had a national census, and the results show that women have taken great strides in literacy. In 1978, women were 22% behind men. In 1996, the gap has decreased to only 9%. But overall literacy has increased from about 60% to more than 85%, [which means] women have moved faster than men.

In education, around 97% of Iranian girls have access to elementary enrollment. At universities, between 25% and 30% are women. And there’s no limitation in terms of fields. Ranging from engineering and sciences to humanities and medical sciences, we have between 10% and 45% women--10% in engineering, then going to humanities and medical sciences, women reach about 45%. And in medical schools, where I teach, about 25% of the faculty are women, too.

Q: Parliament has passed the initial vote [of three votes] on two bills--one on gender separation of medical services, and the other banning published pictures of women without proper Islamic dress. Twenty years after the revolution, in the current climate of liberalization, they seem unusual measures. Why now?

A: The idea of separating women and men goes back to the fact women feel more comfortable if they’re treated and attended by women. But the problem is that, in reality, do we have enough services to divide everything on the basis of gender? I think that will determine how things ultimately turn out.

Q: So there is a pragmatic streak in the revolution?

A: The minister of health wants to make sure that the women receive the necessary services if this happens. I’m not sure that we have these facilities in remote areas or that women won’t somehow be discriminated against since there is no doctor to attend them.

On the second issue of pictures, I think the existing law is sufficient. This is a policy of the revolution that women are not used in any form of advertising and commercials. I personally feel this is a very progressive idea. This is one of the merits of the Islamic revolution. We never allowed anybody, under any circumstances, to use a woman’s body and face for commercial purposes. So the law is there. The thing is that some factions or some conservatives think that this law is not enough and they think that an additional bill has to be passed.

Q: What legislation has already passed to change the status of women?

A: We have had a lot of legislation on family rights, such as the right of the woman at the time of divorce to ask for compensation in terms of the work that she has done in her husband’s house or the issue of dowry on demand, with the woman being able to ask for [it back] on the basis of the current rates of inflation.

For example, if a husband asks for a divorce, a woman has a right to ask for [the dowry back] on the basis of the current inflation rate. If it turns out to be something astronomical, then he might think twice before starting to divorce.

Q: Let me ask about women in politics. It’s striking that women have been elected to Parliament from the start of the revolution and the number has grown, from four to 15 out of 270. At the same time, you and Mrs. Shojaie [the Cabinet-level advisor on women’s affairs] were appointed by the president. There have been no women in Cabinet confirmed by Parliament.

A: It’s a gradual trend. In terms of the Majlis, the striking point is that we now have women from the provinces, because for years we had women of Tehran, a more open and progressive city, usually being elected . . . .

At the level of the Cabinet, I think that as a first step President Khatami has done the best that he could. He had women candidates for the ministries and he was very sincere about considering them. And he always made the point that he has no gender bias in choosing his ministers or his vice presidents.

But in terms of the ministers, maybe the concern that we have was that the ministerial position needs a lot of executive experience. And maybe he, when putting the men candidates and the women on an equal basis and considering them and weighing their capabilities and their credits, their merits and their experience, maybe he decided that it was too early to appoint a woman as a minister. But that was the most important point, just having them there as candidates and giving the woman an opportunity to be chosen.

Since he was serious about providing a role for the women in Cabinet and making sure that they’re in on decision-making, he decided to choose a woman among his vice presidents. It’s not only a political gesture. Giving women the opportunities to sit at the level of the Cabinet, to speak out, to show that they can speak, they can undertake responsibilities at that level is a response to the trend we were speaking about: the evolution in terms of education, health, their advancement and sacrifices during these years of the revolution.

Q: How many vice presidents are there? And do you feel you are an equal?

A: Six vice-presidents. And I feel I’m equal among them. This department of environment oversees all other sectors of government in terms of environmental policy. We have legal authority to close down facilities or industries or anything which does not abide by environmental regulations.

I have not sensed any negative feeling in terms of being a woman sitting on the Cabinet not able to get my ideas through. On the contrary, they’ve been very understanding, very supportive. I’ve heard many, not only in the Cabinet, saying, “Now that we have a woman on the team, we have to help her. We have to make sure that she succeeds. Everybody should support her.” I’m sure that negative attitudes still exist. But it doesn’t come out that easily anymore because the general understanding is that the woman should be in society.

Q: Does your role in the revolution and your position now reflect the changes in Iran? And can time or a change in the political environment heal wounds?

A: The spirit of 1979, of independence and dignity and the principles of the Islamic revolution, are still standing very strongly in 1998. But change is inevitable. It’s part of life. It’s part of what God has created. Our religious perspective about life, about society, about politics, it carries a dynamism to be able to meet evolving circumstances and times.

Q: As someone associated with the U.S. embassy takeover, do you ever foresee a time when Iran and the United States will again have relations?

A: We have no problem at all with any country that considers us as an independent nation with our own viewpoints, our independence. But if there is still the feeling that there is one superior power in the world and everybody has to more or less submit to that power, that’s something that has to change.

Q: But today, you’re working as vice president for someone who is advocating cultural exchanges.

A: In a sense, [the embassy seizure] was a cultural exchange, too, because we had the opportunity to speak out, to say what we felt, because there was no opportunity in the media at that time. It was very difficult to get across that the Iranian nation is not a bunch of fanatics. We had that during the revolution: They are backwards, all of them are militants, all of them are terrorists. I think it was an opportunity for the world to reflect on the values of the revolution and for the American people to go back and reflect and see what has happened in terms of relations the Americans had with the Middle East.

Q: But do you personally welcome cultural exchanges?

A: Of course. At the level of people this is a must. We’ve had American scholars coming. We’ve had Iranian scholars, Iranian students going. But we have to strengthen that. We have to open ways to actually exchange experiences, viewpoints about ideas. There are many areas that we have in common with the rest of the world, with the American people and many grounds for dialogue, people between people.