One of the strangest features of contemporary Iranian politics must surely be the reality that despite the concerted and successful effort to narrow the range of candidates allowed to run for various political offices, competition among individuals and groups has not only remained unabated, it has intensified. The elite jockeying that has taken place in the past few months, leading to the upcoming March 14 Majlis elections, is a good example of the competitive intensity that had come to characterize Iranian politics.
On January 3, 2008, Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah ‘Ali Khamene’i once again sought to remind domestic and foreign audiences about his stature in Tehran. Stating that “cutting off relations with the US” was one of the “principal policies” of the Iranian government, but that he would be the “first person to endorse these relations” if it benefited the Iranian people, Khamene’i secured news headlines.[1]
Pakistan has had so few national elections in its 60-year history that every exercise to elect the national Parliament is exceptional. These relatively rare events are not only a mechanism for effecting a change of government but are also a means for putting the political process back on the rails and redefining the provisions of the 1973 constitution, which has been shredded by four periods of martial law. General (retired) Pervez Musharraf has declared martial law twice, ironically once against his own government.
Pakistan faces a paradox. Most political observers believe that Pakistan urgently needs free, fair, and transparent elections, but none is convinced that the elections would usher in an era of participatory governance, internal harmony, and stability in the country.
