Close observers of Iran probably suspected that this would come eventually:
More than one-third of Iran's Parliament resigned Sunday to protest a sweeping ban on candidates running in the parliamentary election later this month. The defiant move threatened to plunge Iran's political system into chaos.One by one, angry lawmakers who have held a three-week sit-in at the huge Parliament building, marched up to the podium and handed their resignations to the speaker. In an emotional statement read aloud during the session of Parliament on Sunday and broadcast live across the nation on Iranian radio, the members who resigned accused powerful conservatives of seeking to impose a religious dictatorship like that of the Taliban, who were overthrown by American-led forces in Afghanistan.
"We cannot continue to be present in a Parliament that is not capable of defending the rights of the people and that is unable to prevent elections in which the people cannot choose their representatives," the statement said.
Jason of Maroonblog worries that the mass resignation could be the catalyst for civil war - goodness knows that the Iranian people have been desperately struggling against their theocratic government for years. But can Tehran's terrorist-grooming mullahs possibly be expected to peacefully facilitate their own extraction from power? Read Michael Ledeen, and the mere suggestion of negotiation with Iran's terror apparatus is both dangerous and ahistorically foolish. According to a report, student protests - even peaceful demonstrations - have already been banned by the regime.
I increasingly doubt that Iran can be brought to democracy peacefully; when last year's July 9th protests were violently and brutally dispersed, the mullahs proved their disregard for the sanctity of life - let alone rational dialogue. But those who fear for Iran's democrats in the event of sustained, armed conflict should know that the President of the United States has pledged, in so many words, support for Iranian self-government. His sentiments are still reflected by policy. If it is civil war to which this turmoil leads, the man who marked Iran's Islamofascists as part of an Axis of Evil won't leave the country to the same fate as 1956 Hungary.
PARSING MY LAST LINE: One motivation for Bush's likely action is philanthropic. The other is strategic, as Iran's mullahs are contributing to terrorism and political unrest in Iraq. As Michael Ledeen puts it, "We will never get a firm grip on Iraq until the regime is changed in Tehran." He's right. Democracy is our greatest weapon against terror and oppression.