The fight for Iran's future is far from over

Times Online (U.K.) ^ | June 30, 2009 | Amir Taheri

[Schnucki]

As the post-election crisis in Iran enters its third week, one thing is clear: the oxymoron that was the Islamic Republic is already dead.

If the radical faction led by Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader, wins the power struggle, Iran will drop its “republican” pretensions to become an Islamic emirate or an imamate. But if the opposition wins, the theocratic aspect of the regime will end, allowing Iran to become a normal republic in which power belongs to the people.

For 30 years, Iran has suffered from a split personality: trying to remain faithful to the late Ayatollah Khomeini’s ersatz version of Islam while pretending to have a people-based system of government.

The moment of truth for the death of the Islamic Republic came when Ayatollah Khamenei broke with tradition and declared Mahmoud Ahmadinejad the victor in the election even before the polls had closed. Over the past two weeks he has ignored demands for a rerun of the controversial election or even a complete recount of the votes, insisting that Mr Ahmadinejad is President not because the people elected him but because the Supreme Leader says so.

Over the past 30 years the Islamic Republic has organised 30 elections at various levels, from local to presidential. In every case the Supreme Leader merely endorsed the results once they had been established and announced by the Government. That kept alive the fictitious claim that the Islamic part of the system recognised the republican element. This time, however, that separation disappeared, as Ayatollah Khamenei not only announced the results but also stated publicly that he had wanted Mr Ahmadinejad to win.

The government-controlled media have highlighted the change in the nature of the regime. They now refer to Ayatollah Khamenei’s speech endorsing Mr Ahmadinejad’s re-election as “Fasl el-Khitab”, a theological term

[DB]

Funny, Obama couldn't bring himself to “meddle” when people were dying in the streets trying to throw off their slave masters. But he had absolutely no problem with meddling when it came to Honduras...

[Islaminaction]

That is just not true. Mousavi does not want to get rid of the Islamic part of the govt.

[agere_contra]

The article doesn’t even mention Mousavi?

Mousavi is an opportunist. He will follow where the power leads. He is at the moment (willing or no) a battering ram being used by the Iranian people in an attempt to remove the Basiji (the much-hated religious militia).

[lynn4303]

I have to disagree with this article. It is over and was never going anywhere because Iran has the will and the means to make it go away and will use them. If they have to murder 10,000 people in the street they will. They also know they can do that and no one will stop them. They know because we have stood by at Tiannaman square and Obama has not interfered. When he jumped into the Honduran mess it demonstrated that his actions towards Iran's demonstrations were not just inaction and incompetent, but deliberate. He has tacitly gave them the go ahead. With what has happened in South America and Iran, I fear we are now on the side of the bad guys. Someone in the future is going to name us in an axis of evil.

[Islaminaction]

His name does not have to be mentioned he is the opposition leader. A few thousand people out of 70 million is no battering ram.

Mousavi says he only wants to rattle the country’s Islamic rulers, not take them down. In messages posted on his Web site in recent days, he groped for some common ground in a nation increasingly polarized.

Mousavi then called the feared Revolutionary Guard and their volunteer militia corps, the Basij, “our brothers” and “protectors of our revolution and regime.”