HOW HE SEES IT Iranians will reject tyranny of clerics

By JOHN C. BERSIA
ORLANDO SENTINEL
Deep in the bowels of Iran in the 1970s stirred a force that only its furtive, revolutionary originators understood. That movement rose up and swept away one of the world's most reviled, entrenched and presumably well-defended despots: the Shah of Iran.
So it would appear that the vanguard of the now-famous revolution, the clerics who presently oversee Iran with crusty firmness, would understand the dangers that lurk in mocking the people's will. Last week's parliamentary elections, after years of generally free and fair votes, were a sham. The clerics knew it. The thousands of reformist candidates and others who were summarily excluded from participating knew it. The masses of Iranians knew it. The whole world knew it.
Although the clerics may smirk for now, believing that they have reasserted control over a restive nation, the opposite could quite easily unfold. Iranians have merely suffered the latest indignity from the oppressive regime -- and it is hoped the last.
National outrage
Of course, it is difficult, if not impossible, to predict the catalyst would reignite the national outrage of a quarter-century ago and spur Iranians to protest, with the idea of installing a government that would truly serve their interests.
Political change ideally should occur in a peaceful, systematic, democratic fashion. Unfortunately, the clerics will not permit it. They allowed a modicum of democracy to assuage popular discontent; now they fear that their gambit may have inspired even more rebelliousness.
That outcome should provoke no surprise. The current Iranian system -- a reasonably democratic, popularly elected government that must twist and turn to the whims of an undemocratic, unelected, unpopular clerical establishment -- recalls some of the historical wrongs that the original revolution sought to correct.
For the clerics, who once badmouthed the Shah, to ignore their own excesses, mismanagement and corruption smacks of hypocrisy and duplicity. Those are the real reasons that Iran has not progressed. The nation cannot hope to take advantage of the 21st century's opportunities with the clerics' heels firmly dug into the sand and the past.
Some Iranians express disappointment in their elected government, especially President Mohammad Khatami, for not standing taller, for proceeding with an unfair election and for allowing the clerics to block reforms that would have helped Iran. However, they should reserve their most vehement criticism for the clerics, in whom the bulk of power resides.
The clerics' lurch toward expanding control will only speed their fall from grace. Although some analysts claim that Iranians lack the stomach to confront the clerics, that they have lost hope for reform, I disagree. I have every expectation that Iranians, who have had to stifle their creative, entrepreneurial and pluralistic energies, will rise to the challenge.
As in 1978-79, crowds will fill the streets, gunfire will ring out, buildings will burn and, most unfortunately, people will die. In the end, though, the ossified leadership will crumble, and Iranians will have another opportunity to set themselves on a course of their own choosing.
Assuming a democratic outcome -- which is what most Iranians desire, along with economic liberalization, stronger ties to the West and less governmental intrusion into their daily lives -- an Iran minus the clerics' influence would complement U.S. interests in various ways. It would:
U Terminate a transnational, ideological, revolutionary influence, inspired by the late Ayatollah Khomeini, that for years sought to destabilize the Persian Gulf.
UCreate an environment in Iran that condemns and shuns terrorists, instead of the wink-and-welcome approach that Tehran has used.
U Usher in a new relationship with the United States -- a reprise of the pre-Khomeini closeness, minus the Shah's ugliness.
U Support nation-building in Iraq and Afghanistan, which flank Iran. Instead of an adversarial regime seemingly intent on complicating the stabilization of those nations, America would have a new partner.
The next move, with last week's farcical elections as their cue, belongs to the Iranian people.
XBersia, who won a Pulitzer Prize in editorial writing for the Orlando Sentinel in 2000, is also the special assistant to the president for global perspectives and a professor at the University of Central Florida.