The main distinction between the competing camps is obvious: hardliners take comfort in blaming foreigners for everything; reformists, by and large, do not.  And here is the good news: the latter tradition is seizing the political ascendancy. How can that be said with such confidence? After all, Iranian elections are not exactly models of democracy. Everyone who wants to stand must be vetted by the Guardian Council, a committee of 12 old men who do their best to weed out reformists. The first condition is that every contender must support the revolution of 1979 and the concept of the Islamic Republic.  Imagine if all the candidates in a British election had to be Conservatives and you will understand the limited choice. But if the rivals happen to be Liam Fox and David Cameron, that would still represent a genuine decision with real consequences.  And the same is true in Iran. For all the system’s flaws, national policy can and does alter because of elections. Put simply, Iran is one of a handful of countries in the Middle East where political change – albeit within tightly drawn limits – can be achieved through the ballot box.  Iranians walks past electoral posters for the upcoming parliamentary elections in the city of Qom Photo: AFP  The elections that have just passed provide a vital glimpse of the nation’s political future. Alongside the parliamentary poll, a simultaneous election also took place for a separate body called the Assembly of Experts.  This committee of 88 elderly men is normally supine and irrelevant. It has only one function: to choose the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic. The holder of this post sits at the apex of the country’s power structure, controlling the armed forces and the intelligence agencies, along with the Revolutionary Guard Corps.  In the final analysis, the Supreme Leader is the man who sets the direction of Iran.  But the incumbent, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is 76 and endured prostate surgery in 2014. So the new members of the Assembly – who were elected for eight years – are highly likely to choose his successor.  The Rouhani-Rafsanjani gameplan is presumably to install a Supreme Leader in their own image. If they succeed, Iran would become a profoundly different country.  The Rouhani-Rafsanjani gameplan is presumably to install a Supreme Leader in their own image. If they succeed, Iran would become a profoundly different country.  Some unusual contenders spotted the opportunity to join. Oddly enough, the man who already holds the highest elected office, President Hassan Rouhani, decided to become a member of the Assembly as well. He won his seat with ease, achieving third place in Tehran province with 2.2 million votes.  In first place, meanwhile, was a former president, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, who won 2.3 million votes. Various followers of either Mr Rouhani or Mr Rafsanjani took at least 50 of the Assembly’s 88 seats.  Quietly, these two politicians have positioned themselves to influence – or even control – the choice of the next Supreme Leader. Both Mr Rouhani and Mr Rafsanjani are from the pragmatic tradition of Iranian politics. Neither is a genuine reformer, still less a moderate in our terms. But nor are they hardliners; indeed both men are openly reviled by that particular tradition.  The Rouhani-Rafsanjani gameplan is presumably to install a Supreme Leader in their own image. If they succeed, Iran would become a profoundly different country – which is why the elections that have just taken place were so critical.
Iran's authoritarian regime allowed little choice in the recent election - but   the outcome will still change the country