TEHRAN- The former governor of the Central Bank of Iran (CBI), emphasizing that the economic thought of the martyred Ayatollah Khamenei can be interpreted not as a replacement for the science of economics, but as an effort to define “a comprehensive governance objective function,” believes: In this objective function, the economy holds a central position, but not all decisions are evaluated solely based on a single economic variable; rather, their effects on justice, security, independence, social capital, public culture, and the long-term interests of the country are also taken into account.
Valiollah Seif, the former head of the Central Bank, in an exclusive note for IRNA, elaborated on the economic thoughts of Ayatollah Khamenei, the martyred leader of the Islamic Revolution of Iran, which is as follows:
Sometimes, the notion arises that there is a contradiction between the economic thought of Ayatollah Khamenei and the principles of market economics; as if one is based on the negation of the other. However, this issue can be viewed from a different angle—an angle that seeks the source of the difference not in the principles of economics, but in the difference of the objective function.
Over the past two centuries, the science of economics has developed valuable tools for increasing efficiency, productivity, economic growth, and public welfare. Concepts such as competition, property rights, freedom of economic activity, competitive prices, investment, trade, innovation, and the profit motive all serve the optimal use of limited resources and the enhancement of societal welfare. These achievements are the valuable scientific capital of humanity, and the experience of various countries also shows that their proper utilization plays an important role in economic development.
However, the science of economics inherently does not judge what goals a society should pursue. Economics is a science that attempts to show which policies and tools will more efficiently achieve a given goal. From this perspective, economics is neutral regarding ends. If the goal is economic growth, it proposes a set of policies; if the goal is poverty reduction, social justice, food security, or environmental protection, it examines and evaluates the tools appropriate for each. Therefore, economics discusses “how to achieve goals” more than it speaks about “what should be desired.”
In contrast, governance is responsible for determining those very goals. The main question for the ruler is not merely how to increase GDP, but rather in which direction to guide society and how to establish a balance among various goals. National security, social justice, economic stability, decision-making independence, social cohesion, public trust, preservation of cultural identity, environmental sustainability, and the interests of future generations all fall within the responsibilities of governance. Hence, the governance objective function is naturally much broader than the economic objective function.
In this framework, the difference between economics and governance is the difference between means and ends. The science of economics teaches how to allocate resources more efficiently, but it is governance that determines for what purposes this efficiency will be employed. Therefore, economics is not the destination; rather, it is one of the most important means of reaching the destination.
It seems that the economic statements and views of Ayatollah Khamenei can also be interpreted within this same framework. What is observed in these statements is more than an independent economic theory; it is an expression of a set of governance goals and considerations that economic policies must serve to realize. In this view, economic growth, increased investment, production development, productivity enhancement, technological progress, and strengthening the private sector are not negated at all; rather, they are considered requirements for the country’s progress. However, these goals are placed alongside a set of other goals that are also essential for the governance of a society—goals such as social justice, economic independence, reducing vulnerability to external shocks, combating corruption, strengthening social capital, national cohesion, and economic security.
Accordingly, the main difference is not whether economic growth is desirable or not; rather, it is that economic growth is only one component of a society’s success. Good governance must be able to establish a balance among growth, justice, security, independence, stability, and sustainability in development. This balance is not always simple, because in practice, there are trade-offs and conflicts among some goals, and the policymaker is inevitably forced to choose the best possible combination by carefully weighing costs and benefits.
For example, importing a strategic good may be cheaper than domestic production and may seem a more favorable option from the perspective of economic efficiency. However, if that same good is critically important for food security or national security in times of crisis, governance may prefer to maintain part of the domestic production capacity, even if it costs more in the short term. In such circumstances, the disagreement is not with the science of economics; rather, it is a difference in the objective function. Economics still provides the policymaker with the tools for cost-benefit analysis, but the final decision is made according to the set of governance objectives.
This interpretation has considerable alignment with global economic developments as well. The global financial crisis, the COVID-19 pandemic, regional wars, disruptions in supply chains, technological competition, energy security, and food security have shown that even the world’s most advanced economies do not evaluate their success solely by the economic growth rate. Today, concepts such as economic resilience, supply chain security, domestic production capacity in strategic sectors, the quality of governance institutions, and public trust have gained significant importance in the literature of economics and policymaking.
From this perspective, the economic thought of Ayatollah Khamenei can be interpreted not as a replacement for the science of economics, but as an effort to define “a comprehensive governance objective function.” In this objective function, the economy holds a central position, but not all decisions are evaluated solely based on a single economic variable; rather, their effects on justice, security, independence, social capital, public culture, and the long-term interests of the country are also taken into account.
Within such a framework, market economy mechanisms also maintain their natural position. Competition, private property, competitive prices, innovation, investment, and entrepreneurship, rather than being independent values, are efficient tools for increasing productivity, economic growth, and public welfare. But like any other tool, their application must be aligned with the overarching goals of governance. The value of these mechanisms is measured not by their independence from societal goals, but by their success in realizing those goals.
Perhaps the relationship between economics and governance can be summarized in one sentence: Economics answers the question of how to create more wealth and welfare; but governance must answer the question of for what purpose and in service of which goals this wealth and welfare should be employed.
Accordingly, it can be said that the economic thought of Ayatollah Khamenei does not seek to discard the achievements of the science of economics, nor to limit the role of market mechanisms; rather, it seeks to place these achievements within the broader mission of governance. In this view, economic growth remains an undeniable necessity, but it is considered successful when it simultaneously strengthens justice, security, independence, public trust, and developmental sustainability.
Iran’s economy, too, in order to overcome the challenges ahead, needs such an approach more than ever—an approach that, on the one hand, employs all the capacities of the science of economics to increase productivity, investment, competition, and innovation, and on the other hand, puts these capacities in service of realizing the overarching goals of governance. If we consider the science of economics to be the knowledge of choosing the most efficient tools, then governance is the art of choosing and establishing balance among goals. From this perspective, economics and governance are not rivals, but complements to one another; the more scientifically and efficiently the tools of economics are employed, the greater the possibility of simultaneously achieving growth, justice, security, independence, and sustainable welfare.
Disclaimer : This story is auto aggregated by a computer programme and has not been created or edited by DOWNTHENEWS. Publisher: tehrantimes.com
