At the Washington Post, Anthony Shadid writes about the diverging forms of governance in Iran and Iraq, both of which have large Shi’a Muslim populations:
More than a debate over semantics or the sometimes arcane details of a cleric’s role, the precise relationship between the clergy and the state goes to the heart of politics in Iraq and Iran, both with Shiite majorities but with different ethnicities and languages. Though unelected, clerics in each country enjoy a standing unparalleled elsewhere in the Middle East. Sistani played perhaps the most decisive role in politics of any Iraqi leader in the years after the U.S.-led invasion overthrew Hussein in 2003. In theory at least, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader of Iran, wields power that is sanctioned by God, though discontent over the official results of last month’s election has challenged his authority.
In reality, however, the two systems are radically different, manifesting in many ways a division that has shaped Shiite Islam for centuries. The division has been especially pronounced since 1970, when Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the eventual leader of the Iranian revolution, first elaborated the idea of clerical rule in a series of lectures during his tenure in Najaf.
Read the full article here.