The mystery about the Iranian elections, writes my old friend Daniel Pipes, is why the religious authorities who run the country decided to declare a massive victory for the crude and brutal Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, rather than advance the slick and deceptive Hossein Moussavi. One could read this as a personal war for power between Ayatollahs Khameini and Rafsanjani, as does M.K. Bhadrakumar at Asia Times Online this morning. But I see a deeper issue at work, namely the way in which the disintegration of Pakistan threatens the Islamic Republic of Iran. The insurgent Taliban in Pakistan claim legitimacy on the grounds that the Sunni establishment is insufficiently committed to crushing Shia heresy. Given that 15% of the world’s Shia live in Pakistan, Iran’s hope for a Shia revival cannot ignore them. If it were simply a matter of a two-sided chess game between Tehran and Washington, Moussavi would have been better suited for the Iranian chair. But Iran has to show street credibility to rough and backward men elsewhere than Washington, and the tougher image of Ahmadinejad is what it needs. That, for what it is worth, is the conjecture I advanced in today’s Asia Times.
I see the Iran election in context of last month’s Sunni bombing of a mosque on Iran’s border with Pakistan, and last Friday’s assassination of a pro-government cleric in Lahore by a suicide bomber at his mosque.
The whole article is here.
|
Natural Law Needs Revelation
Natural law theory teaches that God embedded a teleological moral order in the world, such that things…
Letters
Glenn C. Loury makes several points with which I can’t possibly disagree (“Tucker and the Right,” January…
Visiting an Armenian Archbishop in Prison
On February 3, I stood in a poorly lit meeting room in the National Security Services building…