Skip to main content

Iranians go to the polls

There will be few countries in the world who will not be watching the outcome of tomorrow's presidential election with keen interest.  Al Arabiya reports:

"As the West, Arab Gulf states, Russia and China intently watch the Islamic Republic of Iran’s 2013 presidential elections – to be held in less than two weeks on June 14 – speculations have been raised surrounding Iran’s prospective president and the current six candidates who have are running for the 2013 election.

The question asked is who will be the winning candidate to inherit the presidency for the next four years, possibly eight? Who would be the political figure to manage Iran’s domestic policies, foreign policies, nuclear program, regional ambitions, and Tehran’s stance towards Assad’s regime? And finally, what characteristics will this prospective candidate bear?

First of all, it is crucial to note that the Islamic Republic of Iran’s political spectrum significantly shrunk after the Guardian Council whittled down the 686 registered presidential candidates to a mere eight, before two candidates dropped out earlier this week. More fundamentally, this political spectrum was heavily impacted when the most powerful candidates from the reformist and moderate camps were banned from running. The approved presidential candidates are carefully handpicked by the country’s Guardian Council, the members of which are appointed by the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali

Secondly, it is also worth noting that scholars who study the Islamic Republic of Iran’s political structure are cognizant of that fact that Iran’s presidential elections are marked with unpredictability. The last two presidents, Muhammad Khatami and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, are two prominent examples of this character of unpredictability, as both presidents confronted the Supreme Leader and his establishments during their presidency.
Among the other candidates, there are two that hold the greatest odds in securing the conservative vote: Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and Saeed Jalili.

This has served as a challenge to the hardliners, Iran's Revolutionary Guards, and the Supreme Leader. As a result, the conservative ruling clerics became determined to remove the risk by banning the politically-undesirable candidates from the outset through their veto power and constitutionally-mandated authority of the Guardian Council members. This guarantees that the next president of Iran would possess the qualities favored by the hardliners, Iran's Revolutionary Guards, and the Supreme Leader’s establishments."


Popular posts from this blog

"Wake Up"

The message is loud and clear....and as you watch this, remember that it was on Israeli TV - not some anti-semitic or anti-Israel program somewhere in the world.

Look where Steve Jobs' father came from.....

MPS isn't a great fan of Thomas Friedman, who writes for The New York Times.

His latest column "Connecting Trump’s Dots" excoriates Trump - and he makes out a strong case.   Not that that is all that hard! 

At the conclusion of his column Friedman writes....

"Trump wants to partner with Vladimir Putin to defeat ISIS in Syria — a worthy goal. But Putin hasn’t been trying to defeat ISIS. He’s been trying to defeat democracy in Syria to keep the genocidal pro-Russian dictator there in power.

Will that be our goal, too? And who are Putin’s allies in Syria? Iran, Hezbollah and Shiite mercenaries from Pakistan and Afghanistan. Will they be our allies, too? No. We will enlist Iraqi and Syrian Sunnis to help us, says Trump. Really? But he just barred them from entering the U.S. How cooperative will they be?

And whom else might this ban keep out? Remember Steve Jobs? His biological father was Abdulfattah “John” Jandali. He came to America as a student in the 1950s and studied at…

Trump gives Aussies the flick!

There is simply no stopping Trump - and to think he will be in office for another 4 years!   The latest outrage is discussed by Roger Cohen in his op-ed piece "United States to Australia: Get Lost"  in The New York Times.

"Let’s imagine for a moment Rex Tillerson, the newly installed secretary of state, awakening to this tweet from President Trump about an important American ally:

“Do you believe it? The Obama administration agreed to take thousands of illegal immigrants from Australia. Why? I will study this dumb deal!”

First, the “illegal immigrants” are in fact desperate people fleeing conflict whose status as refugees has in most cases been officially recognized. Second, as refugees, they have the right, under the Geneva Conventions, of which the United States is a signatory, to be treated “without discrimination as to race, religion or country of origin.” Third, the “thousands” are in fact about 1,250 of the 2,500 men, women and children who, for more than three years…