After weeks of silence, Iran's mainstream clerics, perhaps the most powerful constituency inside Iran, have spoken out. In a bold statement Saturday, the Association of Researchers and Teachers of Qom called President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's reelection illegitimate. The Guardian Council that oversaw the election, the association concluded, no longer had the "right to judge in this case as some of its members have lost their impartial image in the eyes of the public."
Despite what you hear about the supposed dawn of a new democratic era in Iran, what is likely to develop in the near future is a different kind of theocracy. Whatever "cracks" in the system now on public display will not weaken the Islamic Republic of Iran. It's possible the clerics might even strengthen it over the long term by resolving a key contradiction: how Islamic principles should be applied in a state that aspires to also function as a republic.
Clearly, the Iran of Ahmadinejad, Khamenei, and other like-minded figures, such as Ayatollahs Mohammad Taqi Mesbah Yazdi and Ahmad Jannati, has failed. Now, the clerical establishment in Qom, aligned with Mousavi and millions of Iranians in the opposition movement, plans to redefine what it means to be an Islamic republic. As Mousavi, himself a non-cleric, said in a statement released July 1, "Islam is a liberating religion -- liberating from superstitions and fabrications." The opposition is fighting to extinguish the Islam of constraints, repression, and violence created by Khamenei and his allies, not to overthrow the established order altogether.
Many of the influential clerics at odds with Khamenei were devoted followers of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who led the 1979 Islamic Revolution. One such ayatollah is Seyed Jalaleddin Taheri, who has also declared the election invalid. Referring to Khamenei's endorsement of Ahmadinejad, Taheri asked pointedly in early July: "Did the imam [Khomeini] believe that those who are supposed to be impartial should formally and officially support a particular candidate?" He went on: "Why does the protection of law only apply to you and your friends, and why do religion, law, and the imam only become dear when you can benefit from them. ... Where does your totalitarianism end?" In other words, is Iran a republic accountable to the people, or an Islamic state beholden to one particular interpretation of the faith?
Read Full Article »