Conservatives wants him to either resign, or if he decides to seek another mandate, to get the minimum of the vote in order to remain at the mercy of the ruling conservatives.

The reformists are more divided. Some, noting that Mr. Khatami lacks punch, also wants him to get out of the race, making room for other candidates, more combative, of the caliber of former Interior minister Hojjatoleslam Abdollah Nuri, now serving a five year prison term, or Mr. Ata’ollah Mohajerani, the Islamic Culture and Guidance minister who resigned last December under pressures from the leader of the regime, Ayatollah Ali Khameneh'i.

But fewer were warning from the outset that considering the present Iranian Constitution, a mix of "water and fire", the president has no decision-making role, regardless of his personality.

Hakim Haq-Nazar, the pseudonym of one of Iran’s most respected political analysts who lives in Paris but files for the London-based weekly newspaper "Keyhan" was one of such analysts.

Given the importance of the issue and the variety of views expressed in Iranian media both inside and outside and the debate that is raging between the pros and cons of Mr. Khatami, Iran Press Service has decided to translate some of the most interesting, starting with the last article written by Haq-Nazar in "Keyhan of London" dated 4 to 10 January 2001, entitled "To Stay Or To Go?"

"Between this writer and some friends differences have erupted concerning Mr. Mohammad Khatami. I’d written that the view that says, "if Mr. Khatami escape the next presidential race he is betraying the people" is baseless. To the contrary, if he does not get out, he would have betrayed both the people and himself.

There is no doubt that there is a reformist movement in Iran. This is a deep-rooted popular movement. The great majority of the Iranian people are exacerbated from this ensemble, this system of rule and governing. When the founder of the "velayat faqih" and the one who initiated it in the Constitution denounce and negates it so clearly, saying one had imposed an oppressive, ruining governing system in the name of Islamic Republic on the Iranian people, just think what the people are suffering.*

The enthusiasm created by the people, the euphoria shown by the voters of Iran were not for the beautiful eyes and eyebrows of Mr. Khatami, but because he had presented himself as the forerunner of "reforms"

Some say the regime was in such a bad conditions that it had no choice but to accept such a show in order to buy time and get a cardboard champion instead of a real one to present to the people. It might have been so.

Some say fighting over the bounty between the two sides was so intense that they were ready for any price to have the other party out. To stop (former Speaker Hojjatoleslam Ali Akbar) Nateq-Nuri being elected and get out of affairs the team that was thirsty for his blood, (former president Ayatollah Ali Akbar) Hashemi-Rafsanjani coalesced with his old rivals (rohaniun mobarez, or militant clergymen), preparing the grounds for their common candidate (Khatami). It is possible that it was so.

Whatever the reasons, the fact is that Mr. Khatami appeared on the scene as a "reformer", starting his electoral campaign with two basic slogans of " rule of law and civil society", two rallying cry that corresponded exactly to the aspirations of the majority of the Iranian people who, attracted by them, voted massively for Mr. Khatami, placing him over the chair of Iranian presidency with 20 millions of their votes.

Naturally, no one was expecting Mr. Khatami make a revolution, topple the "valy faqi" (the leader) and change the Constitution. The very few steps Mr. Khatami took forward at the beginning made people hoping for both the future and the peaceful evolution they were waiting for.

When the belt of censorship was slightly loosen, intellectuals and writers found time for thinking, reflect the people’s demands and portray the real situation of the nation, it was a step towards "reforms".

When pressure on the universities and scholars was decreased slightly, occasions were created for researchers of social problems to debate freely in meetings and debates; it was another step towards "reforms".

When city and village council elections took place in an honourable way, it was yet another step towards "reforms".

When, after the assassination of Dariush Foruhar and his wife, Mr. Khatami insisted firmly for the identification of the murderers and forced the Information Ministry to officially acknowledge its participation in the murders, it was also a step towards "reforms", steps that warmed the people, hoping that changes are underway in the thinking and methods of the government and the system.

One would then think that in case the transformation momentum continue, that with the change of the Judiciary Chief and the Majles elections, these two bastions would also get out of the hands of the "conservatives", there would remain no obstacle in the road to "civil society" and "rule of law".

What I’m saying is that this Mr. Khatami is not the same as of 1979. He is frightened? I don’t know. He has lost patience? I don’t know. He’s fed up? I don’t know. The glitters of the office have overwhelmed him? I don’t know. He had always been like that and was pretending he is different? I don’t know. All I know is that with this "opposition", with this presentation, with this method, Mr. Khatami can not bring any change, no matter he stays in power four years or forty.

All those who helped Mr. Khatami sit on the presidency chair hoping for change, are now wounded, each booted one side, incapable of opposing the "conservatives" that I prefer the word "fundamentalist" for them, as the word "conservative" sit better to Mr. Khatami.

* This is a reference to Grand Ayatollah Hoseinali Montazeri