The neocon position – which I used to hold uncritically – is that Iran is a theo-totalitarian state in which all elections are a sham designed merely to perpetuate the Islamist terror-state. The neocons are absolutely right to remind us of the inherently undemocratic nature of a theo-democracy, in which candidates are vetted by mullahs and ultimate power resides with the Supreme Leader. But the notion that this is frozen in place for ever seems too pessimistic to me. What the current campaign shows is that the cultural and social impact of elections can be as potent as their political salience. And I've long believed that Iranian culture is more fertile ground for democracy than Arab culture. Here's a 
Very roughly, the bigger the turnout the more competitive the election. That's how democracy comes to countries – not through force of arms but by cultural and generational evolution. The difficult task is marshalling that progress while not allowing the mullahs to use it as a cover for nuclear bombs. I think it's worth trying – especially given the appalling consequences of a strike on Iran's nuclear program, which would instantly reverse this small democratic wedge we begin to see against the regime.
The Dish 