In the aftermath of the unlawful attack carried out by the United States and Israel against our homeland and Islamic nation, the question of whether a referendum should be convened has reverberated across Iran’s public sphere. On one side of the debate stand those who extol the necessity of a referendum, even extending its reach to the establishment of a constituent assembly - an ambition that seems to disregard the lived experiences and hard-won achievements of half a century of Iranian national struggle. On the other side are voices vehemently opposed to any invocation of a referendum, denouncing it as subversive and destabilizing, and calling for its suppression with equal urgency.
The authors of this work seek neither the radicalism of the former nor the rigid intransigence of the latter. Rather, we aim to chart a moderate and balanced course, akin to a stream flowing between two mountains - turning neither left nor right. As a first step, we pose the following questions: How have referendums been employed in the experience of other nations? What forms can they take? By exploring these inquiries, we open the way to subsequent discussions that will illuminate which matters, under present circumstances, ought not to be submitted to a referendum, and conversely, which issues may legitimately be placed before the collective will of the Iranian people. It is our hope that this exploration will shed light upon the path ahead, bringing us closer to truth through the exercise of collective reason and deliberation - by the aid and grace of God Almighty.