Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Jazz
So basically, the election of Mousavi is the potential bridge to detente with Obama in office.
|
The election of Mousavi would represent the people choosing the more progressive of the several choices the clerics offered them. Don't you think that will speak in volumes to the international community? Don't you see? It's not Mousavi himself, but what he represents that I'm hopeful about. It's his platform that the people are supporting, and that platform is one of progressive reform.
To be honest, it's a lot like Obama. He's a centrist, but his election win represents a positive change in the voting public that is generally seen internationally as a move away from Bush policy and toward more reasonable policy. Even while Obama is supporting indefinite detention and is maintaining the debt problem, America is already in a better international position as far as our foreign policy is concerned.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Jazz
If Ahmaninejad was a puppet, Mousavi will be too because they will be beholden to the exact same group that approved their nominations. If Ahmaninejad was acting at the behest of the clerics (and I'm pretty sure that he was NOT), then what is going to influence Mousavi? How would his election possibly be any different?
|
It's not a behest kind of thing, it's more of a "pressure from above" thing. This election is different because it may not be won by someone running on a platform of being isolationist and strictly anti-West.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Jazz
"The clerics" is a misnomer. It's one cleric who really matter, Khamenei. He appoints the Council of Guardians. He is the real seat of power in Iran, especially if you've read their constitution. Any movement is going to come from his office, not the President's. Like I said, the President's office is a bright shiny thing that distracts from the real movements on the Iranian landscape.
|
Khamenei and the Guardians aren't the only center of power. The Majlis carry power and influence as well. Anyway, if we're under the assumption that Mousavi is being allowed to run by the Supreme Leader an Guardians, they're willing to allow a more progressive face represent them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Jazz
The Supreme Leader appoints the Council of Guardians. All 12 of them, who are all mullahs or clerics. At election time, the Council, among it's other duties, reviews each potential candidate for acceptability to religious (and political) doctrine and submits the names to the people for election. The Supreme Leader is the Commander-In-Chief of the armed forces and appoints all judges. He approves all cabinet appointments. He shares responsibility for foreign policy.
|
I read the wiki on the Iranian government back in 2004 or 2005, and I've since looked at it now and again. None of this is the issue, though. The issue is whether or not a Mousavi win would represent a shift in policy in Iran from Ahmaninejad's hard-liner isolationism. I know the chances are small, but they are still present.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Jazz
Will, I think that you're trying to apply democratic ideals to a theocracy, and that's just not possible. The Iranian system works very differently than pretty much any other system in the world. I think you need to do your own research if you're going to understand what this election is going to mean in real terms.
|
It's not that simple. The Iranian government isn't democratic by any stretch, but the people do freely vote and those votes can be seen. Moreover, the candidates that are allowed to run represent the interest of the real power seat in Iran. Unless you're suggesting that Mousavi's platform is completely false (I don't think you're suggesting that), you must admit that his calls to end the isolationist policies of Ahmaninejad could represent a real change in policy.
Something just occurred to me. A democratic theocracy can be neither, but Iran is going though social changes that could represent an eventual move away from theocracy (not now, but eve eventually). When that slow transition starts, you're going to see an Iran where both elements of theocracy and democracy are present. It's not directly linked with the thread topic, but thinking about theocratic democracies lead me to an interesting thought.