Well, that about wraps it up for democracy in Iran

[Loonman]

http://www.suntimes.com/output/otherviews/cst-edt-ref27.html

Excerpted:
The regime, of course, retains control of the armed forces, courts and other such institutions. In addition, it established structures allowing it to veto the desires of the popularly elected representatives. The Council of Guardians, appointed by the hard-line spiritual leader, has been the real agency controlling legislation.

Another important factor is the regime's control of the agenda and definition of politics. It was agreed that Iran would remain an Islamic republic following a certain general line. Like Arab regimes, it used the great scapegoats of the United States and Israel as the cause of all evils and the rationale for retaining its dictatorship.

Second, the regime used the limited degree of democracy as a safety valve. Dozens of independent newspapers were created, for example, and criticized the regime -- which let them print their views, then closed them down and threw the editors in jail. A little while later, they were allowed to reopen under different names. But people had a margin of freedom in their daily lives that made them tolerable. This was also enough to let most of the world -- governments (especially European ones), academics, media -- conclude that there was an important degree of progress in Iran.

Don't press the regime too hard, they said, or this will hurt the moderates. Wait patiently and things will change.

Then comes the 2004 election. The regime has tired of the game. This time it bans 2,000 proposed parliamentary candidates -- 80 of them people already serving in parliament. This is very regrettable, says the supreme leader, but the election must go on as scheduled. Few reform supporters are left on the ballot.

The opposition tries to fight back, but picks a very bad method: boycott. More than 130 deputies in the 290-seat parliament resign, while another 679 candidates who are permitted to run pull out of the race. Many members of parliament write a letter to the supreme leader complaining: ''You lead a system in which legitimate freedoms and the rights of the people are being trampled on in the name of Islam.''

Copyright 2004, Digital Chicago Inc.

[Wetzelbill]

1. Yes it does

[bryant69]

2. Well that will make it easeir on President Bush

If he chooses to invade after the election.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[mmm]

3. Khatami is an excellent president and a good man.

Bush should have supported him.

[karabekian]

6. except he had no power to reform and was a yes man to mullahs

the mullahs had veto power over every thing. He was just a lackey'

[Ernesto]

4. Thank the chimp for this one

The axis of evil speech gave the hardliners the green light in a country that was obviously leaning towards democratic reforms.... Isn't it great that our cheap little punk of a pResidential pretender screwed up the affairs of a country on the other side of the world because of his selfish political strategy back home?..... It's a good thing that he's "not a divider".

[tom_paine]

5. Yeh, he's uniting the world under Totalitarianism or against it

So he IS a uniter, after a sort...