Politics - is an indefatigable choice of two evils.
John Morley
The radical regime and the temporal Iran – are, at first glance, two different organisms that cannot get along together in the same society, two different political systems that are not able to function in one country, two opposite views on life. And any system (political, economic, philosophical, finally!) seems to be doomed to collapse under the condition of coexistence of these opposites. However, as the basic law of dialectics says, "the kernels of dialectics" - the world has no such phenomena, which are located outside the process of the endless development, the process of appearance some opposing points inside any integrity, their transformation into each other, regardless of contradictory relations between them (Philosophical Dictionary, 1998). Iran that is under study in this article is a striking example of this mutual penetration and simultaneous coexistence.
The first organism, or if you want to call it the system is the ultra-conservative radicals, headed by President Ahmadinejad and the spiritual leader Ali Khamenei; the second organism (which makes the existence of the first one full, complete and doesn’t allow it to decay) – is a liberal-reformist forces. As in any competitive environment, they compete for supremacy, feeding each other with different kinds of speeches, statements and even arrests. In general, they supplement each other, creating a single shell of the Islamic country. Conservatives seek to preserve Islamic values and not to allow the penetration of Western ideology in the society. In turn, the reformers favor modernization of the society and serve to mitigate the conservative course of both domestic and foreign policy. At the same time, it is necessary to pay tribute to the political system existing in Iran today - oddly enough, it allows to exist and to support competitive (!) environment.
The victory of Ahmadinejad in the presidential elections in June 2009 meant the return of the country to the first years of the Islamic Revolution, as the current president sticks to the strict Islamic fundamentalism and has the support of the highest religious and political elite. Voting results of presidential elections exacerbated the political situation in the country. In the streets of Tehran were mass actions of discontent, the people demanded the revision of the counting of votes. The rise of people’s anger testified that the population of Iran wants to see other ways of socio-political functioning and tends to the modernization of the government, and also it is likely that extreme radicalism and aggressiveness of the government exhausted its relevance.
The main opponent in the presidential race was a reformer Mir-Hossein Mousavi, the leader of the opposition called “Greens”. This movement became a mouthpiece of those sections of the population who demanded changes. Quite naturally, with the modernization of society and the world in the whole, Iran also has a tendency to secularization. This means that the regime began to evolve simultaneously with the changing situation in the world. Perhaps after thirty years theocracy rotted from the inside and weakened, and the Iranian authorities came to the idea to tighten the policy and to return the country to the origins of the Islamic revolution, by bringing a conservative to power. But the memories are too fresh and the fear of the Iranian people is too clear, they remember a time of international isolation imposed by the West, and the crumbling economy of the country, which was in a state of disorder and anarchy. At that time the country leaders initially paid more attention to the political issues than the economic ones. An important role was played by the Iran-Iraq war, which caused the impoverishment of the country, the unemployment drew rapidly. Industry, after losing communication with foreign partners, could not develop and advance. Supreme clergy understood that the regime was exhausted; reforms and changes are needed for the further development and stability in the country. In addition, the clergy, perhaps, having decided to rest from a radical course, dared to pass the baton to the more liberal leaders such as Rafsanjani and Khatami. During their governing the country came out of stagnation with the help of the economic reforms, restructurings and other transformations. At that time conservatives gained power, skillfully manipulating ideas of the Islamic revolution, which allowed coming back to power with a new radical scenario.
Just as the Japanese tsunami the wave of revolution covered the entire Middle East. These events disturbed not only the Arab region, but the whole world. Impressed by the events happened in Egypt and Tunisia, supporters of the Iranian opposition held a mass protests in Tehran. The demonstrators, who chanted anti-government slogans, as a result were dispersed, and its leaders were arrested. According to the words of the head of the Centre of Modern Iran Rajab Safarov: "...Street protests since the beginning were organized by forces outside - I mean the United States, Israel and their European allies. It is not a secret that the West wanted to remove Ahmadinejad from power. The slogans of solidarity with the Egyptians were just a cover in order agents of Western intelligence services provoked the population of Tehran on street protests. It should be noted that this time they did very elaborate work» (http://www.trud.ru). Also we should note the fact that anti-government demonstrations caused the lightning discontent from the conservative powers that provoked more radicalization of the socio-spiritual policy of the society. The recent departure of the most authoritative reformer and former Iranian President Hashemi Rafsanjani from a position of a head of the Council of Experts of one of the highest authorities of Iran is the evidence for this. It was in his powers to elect, control and dismiss the supreme leader. The star of Hashemi Rafsanjani was on the political horizon from the beginning of establishment of the regime of the Islamic revolution in Iran. He was one of the main opponents of hard-line government, repeatedly criticized the policies of Ahmadinejad and did not recognize the election results in 2009. Ayatollah Hashemi Rafsanjani was a supporter of a dialogue with the West, which was at absolute variance with the ideology of the Islamic revolution and anti-American mood in the society. According to the ex-president and now the ex-chairman of the Council of Experts, his departure was connected with the pressure on his family by the Conservatives. Unfortunately, Iran's ruling elite is not ready to have a dissident who poses a threat to the authority of the ruling government and who openly sympathizes the political opposition. Moderate conservative Ayatollah Mohammad Reza Mahdavi Kani replaced Hashemi Rafsanjani as chairman of the Council of Experts. So, sensing a serious threat from the opposition and anti-government mood in the country, the supreme authority decided to make radical personnel rearrangements that would strengthen the power of the radicals in the country.
But the domestic political struggle of influential groups in the highest state covey, which pursues its own goals, sidelined the solution of the problems in the society. The country is in economic decline with the majority of the population who are young people that are unable to find a job according to their specialty and this causes the process of mass outflow of personnel from the country. Iran's government should come down from the pedestal to the level of ordinary citizen and should be ready for an open dialogue with the younger generation by providing demanded higher education, jobs, thus contributing to the meaningful contribution to the transformation and development of the society, because the future of the Islamic Republic of Iran depends only on the educated youth. With the international tendencies of modernization of the world, the younger generation strays more and more away from the domestic policy of the country, they need a stable atmosphere in the society, whether it’s conservative or liberal power.
The same as China, Iran has a great opportunity to show the world a qualitatively new country: a prosperous and technologically advanced country with the rule of religion.
