The title to this piece isn't meant to be funny or ironic: it's a genuine question. According to the Times of Israel, Ahmanedinejad and his presumed successor Esfandiar Rahim Mashaei intend to “effectively dismantle the theocratic structure" of Iran.
While there are no guarantees for anything (Mashaei has to be approved by the Ayatollahs as a candidate, he's relatively unknown, he has to face an election which he may be unable to fix - vide Ahmanedinejad's re-election, widely seen as rigged - and the Ayatollahs may campaign against him), would his election and a dimunition of clerical power be a goos or bad thing? What this comes down to is: who is pushing the drive to Iranian nuclear weapons?
If it's the Ayatollahs, then a lessening of their powers can hardly be a bad thing. If, however, it's the politicians who are driving the bomb forward, then weakening the power of the restraining hand is hardly a good idea, form anyone's perspective, except the extremist politicians, of course. There have been suggestions in the immediate past that, in fact, it's the Ayatollahs who are holding the politicos back. This might, of course, be because they don't want to see the holy places of Iran damaged, or even destroyed, in the effort to stop Iran getting the bomb.
Me? I have no idea. So, as always, make up your own mind, by reading the whole article.
By: Brian Goldfarb
2 hours ago
2 comments:
When did you ever hear of a pol willingly giving up his power and position, especially a religious one? Uh, well, other than the Pope. ;-)
Does, he asked sacreligiously, count?
Post a Comment