Earlier this month Iran celebrated the 30th anniversary of the return of the exiled Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and the Islamic revolution that followed. It has been described as one of the greatest and most important revolutions in history, one that changed the face and very core of a nation and its people, and sent waves throughout the world that resonate till date. On a religious-political front the revolution resulted in the creation of a theocratic nation as well as making political Islam a force to be reckoned with the world over.

Three decades ago change came quickly and with surprise to many, overthrowing the lavish and opulent Pahlavi Regime with a religious force that was, and still is, determined to stay. This year to mark that monumentous event, the Iranian government celebrated by launching an �€˜indigenous�€™ satellite, borne into space on a rocket of their own making (though they owe much of their initial technology to the North Koreans).

Now, thirty years later, is equally important for the country as they gear up for an election, one that will determine their place in the changing world order. Whoever wins this coming June will need to usher in a new model of governance and geo-political relationships �€“ because though the world, and the immediate region around them has new players to deal with, it is the country that is demanding change from within. Current President Ahmadinejad and others who are planning on running for office should remember and incorporate the positive aspects of the revolution. The candidates and the Ayatollah cannot ignore the voices of dissent and deepening division between the political system and the common man, as they have for several years. It is this ignorance that once caused a regime to loose its kingdom.

Religion was used as the cornerstone of the revolution and was advertised as the panacea to all the ills that the Iranian people were suffering. They used the simple slogans of home grown ideals and cultural independence through the creation of an �€˜indigenous�€™ and �€˜authentic�€™ Islamic model of modernity and progress. The clerics advocated a nation reborn, one that would not be based on western thought and philosophy, but on Islamic values coupled with Persian contemplation. The Shah was seen as a Western puppet who had sold the country�€™s oil for the benefit of extravagant elite echelons of society. It was this basic tenant that appealed to people across all spheres and brought together a wide montage of leftists, communists, women, students, rich, poor and Islamists to usher in a new era of expression.

It is especially noteworthy as to the extent to which women across all political and social spectrums, from rural and urban settings, attended the rallies called for by Khomeini and other religious leaders of the time. They became revolutionaries and went beyond the conservative role of a wife or a mother. These women were not only a few select women from the urban sections of society who had been involved in earlier women�€™s movements; they were also women from the countryside and remote villages who had the backing of their men.

It was a massive movement, with thousands of women walking the streets and protesting, one that was unprecedented not only in Iran but in the region as well. Recognising the strength of this group the Islamists placed gender policies at the core of their program, where family values was the key to development and change. The women began rejecting the mass �€˜Westernization�€™ that had been introduced during the Shah�€™s regime and embraced a new Shia model of womanhood.

Much changed after the revolution, for within days of the new republic, there were mass arrests, execution and chaos; women were banned from the workplace and the veil was reinstated. The freedom and independence that was promised did not come as was expected, and today the country is still suffering the effects of a movement that began thirty years ago. There was the devastating war with Iraq that began in 1980, the crippling sanctions by the west, and the loss of thousands of Iranians in the form of flight of intellectual capital.

Yet for all that might be wrong with Iran and its leaders, one cannot and should not ignore what the country has achieved and what the Islamic republic has done for its people. Today over 70% of the women in the countryside are completely literate with a basic high school diploma, as compared to fewer than 5% during the reign of the Shah; and over two-thirds of women use modern birth control, according to a study done by the Brookings Institute. The government has set up basic health care and housing facilities in far flung dusty villages around the country, and most houses in small towns sport satellite TV dishes, and are connected to the world.

The youth in Iran is especially motivated, and despite the government restrictions on freedom of expression, the country houses over 700,000 bloggers. Students at the universities are active proponents of democracy; they are slowly gaining momentum, not unlike during the late 1970s and have become a powerful voice and an electorate that the leaders should listen to and negotiate with. The youth are no strangers to the movements by their peers around the world, and are demanding a society where mobility and growth is not restricted.

While the people are proud of their technological achievements and bountiful resources, including the world�€™s second largest reserves of both oil and natural gas, everyday they are struggling with increasing inflation and isolation from the world. As a people they are no strangers to questioning their situation, and now more than ever they ask why they suffer low wages and high unemployment. While external sanction might be partly to blame (and the West is an easy target in grand statements by the politicians), they cannot help question how their next leader is going to deal with a newly welcoming outside world, and the dangers of an economic paralysis at home. These are the urgent questions that will need to be answered before this coming June, where even the hardliners might be forced to employ a more pragmatic stand when dealing with this generation of voters. For even the revolutionary imam himself, after eight years of war chose to �€œdrink the cup of poison�€™, and make peace with Iran�€™s most loathed neighbour, Saddam Hussein.

Ahmadinejad, Khatami, and all other hopeful candidates running for election this coming June would do well to learn from their past, and take the best lessons from their glorious revolution. Not the lessons of broken promises and imposed restrictions, but promises of a true change that the next generation of Iranians can rally around. The manner in which the Ayatollah effectively brought together a nation that had become divided on political and social lines, a movement that brought a poor religious village woman to stand alongside a western educated rich city girl is something that the campaigners in Tehran should not forget.