> > Meanwhile, had there never been an invasion of Iraq, there would most
> > likely be a democratic uprising in Iran right now
>
> Michael, could you please elaborate on this?
To make a long story short: the progressive forces in Iran control the legislature and the executive branch, but not the judiciary. But unfortunately, thanks to Khomeini's Doctrine of the Jurisprudent, the Judiciary trumps the other two branches. (BTW, as a footnote, Khomeini was almost alone among senior Shia clerics in following this doctrine. None of the senior clerics in Iraq follow it.)
Despite being elected by 80% majorities, and despite having an overwhelming majority in the parliament, President Khatami has therefore been stymied. His followers get thrown in jail, newspapers get closed when they support him and criticize the judiciary, etc.
His threat all along would be that if he couldn't realize his program he would resign. But he's been very slow to carry it out, (1) because it's not his nature which is concilitaroy and gradualist, and (2) because it has a very high probability of igniting a revolutionary situation. And one in which his side could lose. The judiciary is not at all shy about calling about out bands of bully boys to beat up students.
But most observers of Iranian affairs came to the conclusion that he was finally after many years, prepared to do it. He introduced two crucial bills into the parliament. The first would remove the judiciary's ability to vet candidates, and the second would make their decisions subject to his final review -- a radical change to Khomenei's constitution. He said that if they Council of Guardian refused to pass them, he would resign. It seemed almost a certainty that they would fail to pass them, and thus the stage was set. This started in earnest last summer and the whole legislative process took until now to wind through to its final course.
But rather than this being a period of building progressive forces for an inevitable showdown (in which, to judge by their votes, 80% of the populace is on his side, if only they could be mobilized), the attack on Iraq threw this all off track. The accusation that the progressives weakening the state in time of crisis when it was surrounded by its enemies and were doing western bidding had a lot of bite. And the fear that any situation of unrest would be used by the US to intervene was enormous, and added to the original fear that reactionaries would win in test of wills that got violent.
The result is that the first bill about vetting faced its final rejection last month and the second bill got rejected last week. But the resignation and mass agitation that was supposed to follow has in the meantim become an option no one feels they can take. It's all been strangled at birth thanks to the forces of liberation.
Michael