Correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t the clerics have the ultimate decision of who gets put on the ballots, at least on the national level? If ture, and I think it is, that would tip the balance of power greatly in favor the clerics.
I’m not sure John Mace, I’m sure the Council of Guardians could veto a candidate, but the ballots in the last election were full of reformers.
Iran is to all intents and purposes a democracy, but it is a completely unique kind of democracy. It certainly isn’t less democratic than say for example Turkey.
According to the Beeb:
I stand by my Turkey comparision, if you replace the “Council of Guardans” with the “Turkish Army” the two democracies are pretty analagous. They have two competing power bases, with the unelected power bases both having ultimate control but mostly eschewing politics.
Will the US attempts at destabilisation increase regional solidarity?
Even within just the Shia community?
I don’t know, but the reformists are making real headway there and Iran is starting to develop good relations with a few European countries who want to foster the new direction Iran is going. It’s also hard to see how the US could destabilize Iran as the progressive elements are in support of Iran’s current president.
Well, who the eff knows what the wonks in the admin are thinking?