Ironically, the link between Esmaeilion and Maryam Rajavi is none other than James Cotler, the chief of the Israeli lobby in Canada. (Al Mayadeen English; Illustrated by Arwa Makki)
Between monarchists, separatists, terrorists, and liberals, it’s a wonder the Iranian opposition ever managed to stay under one roof. However there is one thing they all do have in common: their ties to the MEK cult and the Israeli lobby.
Iran’s opposition is officially fragmented, although it was a hopeless case to begin with. How are you supposed to bring together people attempting to topple a revolutionary Iran, with each vying for leadership of the opposition? Masih Alinejad, Hamed Esmaeilion, Abdullah Mohtadi, Reza Pahlavi, and Shirin Ebadi, all have extremely divergent worldviews and do not accept each other as representatives of the opposition, much less so as leaders.
They had all been brought together by a common goal: To topple the Iranian administration; but even that, along with Western-Israeli support, was not enough to keep them bound.
The fragmentation
Between Masih Alinejad, who has overt ties with the US administration and is an employee of the US State Department-funded VOA TV channel, Reza Pahlavi, who also has friendly ties with “Israel” and advocates for the return of monarchical rule to Iran, Abdullah Mohtadi, whose Komala party advocates for secession from Iran, Shirin Ebadi, a Nobel Peace Prize winner who seems to be very proficient at the fine art of public speaking, with a special focus on demanding that sanctions be placed on Iran while also doubling as a human rights advocate (if you can see the hypocrisy then you’re one of the lucky ones), and Hamed Esmaeilioun, who has only recently come to the spotlight… It’s a wonder these people got together.
As all of these figures held anti-Iran rallies in the West, sometimes each on their own, sometimes together, their supporters were busy bashing each other’s leaders online, revealing the extent to which these people cannot stand to be together. To them, Alinejad was an opportunist, lying traitor who only cared about filling her own pockets; Pahlavi was a fool out to restore the tyrannical rule of his father; Mohtadi was a traitor separatist; Ebadi was an old woman who can’t get anyone to hear her out; and Esmaeilion was pro-Iran until just recently, meaning he has no credibility.
Of course, we can’t forget the great role played by the MEK cult in all of this, but their methods and cult status have made these opposition figures take a sizeable step away from them, adding to this the fact that the MEK is disliked by almost all Iranians because they sided with Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s, and the fact that they killed more than 12,000 Iranians during that period.
Please note that I said step away from the MEK, not cut off ties. I’ll get to that later.
In terms of mobilization, two clear contenders come out as those who have shown the most ability to mobilize people, however small that actual number may be, and have the greatest online influence: Esmaeilion and Pahlavi, with Esmaeilion being the clear winner in terms of charisma.
As I said earlier, there is no question as to the ties of the Iranian opposition’s main figures with Western government, mainly “Israel.”
Now when I say main figures, I am of course leaving out Abdullah Mohtadi, who does not represent a sizeable portion of the Iranian opposition in any way shape or form, and is only considered a main figure because his Komala party has great potential for violence, which can be employed on Iranian soil. I am also leaving out Shirin Ebadi, because she has a near-negligible capacity for mobilization, and is only present on account of seniority.
This leaves us with Reza Pahlavi, Masih Alinejad, and Hamed Esmaeilion.
The ties with “Israel’ and clear regarding Masih Alinejad, as she is already employed by the US government, and has overtly demanded Western leaders to place additional sanctions on Iran, and is well-acquainted with the leader of the Israeli lobby in Canada, whom we’ll get to in a bit. Reza Pahlavi has also gone to “Israel” and met with Netanyahu, not to mention that his supporters do not shy away from their support for “Israel.”
But Hamed Esmaeilion is a newcomer to the scene, and many believe that his views are more in line with what the mainstream Iranian opposition believes. Those who are pro-West, do not wish for a return of monarchy to Iran, and do not want to be associated with the MEK.
Moreover, Masih Alinejad is more powerful with the young female demographic, and has proven incapable of mobilizing men. Pahlavi has been tried and tested for a long time, and his methods have proven ineffective at engendering any sort of change.
Mythmaking
Myths, imaginary or conceptual as they may be, always leave a profound impact on reality, be it how we see ourselves, or how societies view themselves and their contributions to history. Even states have their own founding myths in the crafting of national identity that, in turn, influence how people view themselves. Enter the Iranian opposition and their attempts at crafting individual myths around their main figures.
On January 8, 2020, a few days after the martyrdom of Major General Qasem Soleimani, as Iran and the US were an inch away from an all-out war, and a few hours after Iran pummeled the US Ain Al-Asad base in Iraq with ballistic missiles, Iranian forces were on high alert as they expected a counterattack. It was at this moment that Ukrainian International Airlines Flight 752 was fired on by an Iranian soldier who mistook it for an enemy object. 176 people lost their lives that day in what was a national tragedy.
Among the passengers of that flight were the wife and daughter of Hamed Esmaeilion, who was a well-known novelist in Iran, and who until shortly after the downing of the flight had no noteworthy political ambitions or stances to speak of. From that point on, Esmaeilion would be marketed as a spokesperson for the families of the victims of flight PS752, and even started a website to commemorate the victims and “hold the Islamic Republic accountable” for their deaths, and thus, a new Hamed Esmaeilion was born.
On the left, a picture we can all associate with on a human level, one of pain, grief and hurt. On the right…the Godfather? (Al Mayadeen English; Illustrated by Zeinab Elhajj)
I’m not here to speak of why Esmaeilion would take such a confrontational stance against Iran, as such tremendous grief is enough to break and change a man, however, it is interesting to see, if only passingly, the process through which Esmaeilion was shaped and molded into this leadership role. The platforms he was granted access to, the support he garnered, and his evolution in that time, the myth being created around him likening him to Iranian heroes of folklore like Kaveh the Blacksmith.
Perhaps there is some sort of irony here that Kaveh was leading the national resistance against the Zahak, a foreign ruler. Maybe they introduced revisions in the modern version where Kaveh and the foreign ruler oppressing his homeland hug and make nice?
A picture of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau participating in an anti-Iran demonstration in Ottawa. Trudeau and Esmaeilion have met on many occasions.
Esmaeilion’s transformation is reminiscent of that of his colleague Masih Alinejad, who was earlier made into an icon for the Iranian opposition in 2015, evolving from a well-known journalist and part of the Iranian opposition to one with a leading role in fostering anti-establishment sentiment in Iran, particularly among women.
Esmaeilion was a good option because he was someone that those of the Iranian opposition, or even perhaps regular Iranians in the grey area, could sympathize and connect with. He was someone whose story would help establish an emotional connection with others, whom they could feel with. An everyday man, an accomplished man, who was molded by grief and loss.
This is how soft power is played, through emotions and catchy slogans, not cold hard facts and figures.
If you question Esmaeilion, then you question his pain, and if you question the pain of the victim, then you’re on par with those who killed his family.
It’s all meant to make it look like this man is single-handedly pulling off all this weight. A modest man, with modest capabilities, with nothing but his drive and belief in a better future driving him. But reality is far from this.
Esmaeilion’s ties to ‘Israel’ and the MEK
Iranian London-based journalist Ali Alizadeh has already done importawnt work on the subject of Esmaeilion’s allegiances, his transformation, and his ties to the Israeli lobby and the MEK.
Alizadeh goes into the subject in depth in one of his Jedaal episodes, showing the clear link between Esmaeilion and Maryam Rajavi, the leader of the MEK cult. Ironically, the link between him and Rajavi is actually Irwin Cotler, coupled with Esmaeilion’s good friend Kaveh Shahrooz.
Cotler is the former president of the Canadian Jewish Congress, former Canadian Justice minister, board member of the “Israel” Council on Foreign Relations, and was this year the recipient of the Israeli Presidential Medal of Honor. In short, Cotler is the Israeli lobby’s top-dog in Canada.
The podcast is in Farsi, of course, but here’s the gist of it.
Esmaeilion knows Irwin Cotler very well, as he was invited by Cotler to take part in a seminar entitled “Justice and Accountability: Remedies for those murdered in the bombing of flight PS752 by the regime in Iran,” organized by Cotler’s Raoul Wallenberg Centre for Human Rights, and both of them run in the same circles.
Esmaeilion had also, in the early months of the protests, tweeted the link to a petition, asking people to sign it on change.org to push G7 leaders to expel Iranian diplomats from their countries. The petition was created by Shahrooz.
Shahrooz’s mentor is none other than the aforementioned Cotler, as he himself says in this tweet.
Shahrooz had also used Esmaeilion’s clout among the victims of the plane crash to organize a protest in the names of the victims of the plane crash, later using the protest as a platform from which to make political overtures, in effect duping those who attended into participating in an event they had not signed up for.
All in the same circles
Naturally, Shahrooz follows the Israeli lobby’s agenda and follows Cotler in his work to ‘defend justice and the oppressed around the globe’. You cannot make this up, I swear.
Then, when one Twitter user points all of these facts out, as well as his mentor’s known MEK ties, Shahrooz goes into an incomprehensible and complete denial as if he had nothing to do with any of this.
Back to the earlier Antifa tweet. Shahrooz mentions another name: Terry Glavin. It’s interesting that Glavin had written an article in 2009 saying that if the Canadian opposition wishes to succeed, they would have to work to lift the “terror” designation of the MEK, called the terrorist designation against them “bogus”, and dubbing them “Tehran’s Worst Nightmare.”
Although the surviving copy of this article is on a now-defunct website, fear not, Glavin is not short of work on the importance of the MEK, extoling their virtues to no end and attacking those calling them terrorist, just like another article written the next year. It’s also convenient that this article was written after he accepted an invitation from the MEK to attend their Paris conference.
The timing and convenience are just stupendous.
One piece of news published by “The Jerusalem Post” also reveals Irwin Cotler’s lobbying for the MEK, alongside famed “Israel” lobbyist Alan Dershowitz!
Famed attorney Alan Dershowitz, former Canadian Justice Minister Irwin Cotler, Nobel laureate Elie Wiesel have become three prominent Jewish activists joining with others in a bid to remove a group with a blood-soaked history from the State Department’s list of foreign terrorist organizations…
On the record, the people involved insist there is no Israel element to what they say is a humanitarian endeavor to remove the movement’s followers from danger.
“I don’t see any Israel issue at all,” Dershowitz told JTA in an interview, instead casting it in terms of Hillel’s dictum, “If I am only for myself, who am I?”
Off the record, however, figures close to the campaign use another ancient Middle Eastern dictum to describe the involvement of supporters of Israel: “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.”
The MEK has been implicated in the murder of thousands of Iranians, which is why so many figures are attempting to distance themselves from it. If anything, most Iranians (whether pro- or anti-Islamic Republic) are united in their hatred of the MEK and their agenda. But they’re a cult, and cults are effective when it comes to commanding the loyalty of their adherents and at getting results, particularly when the stakes are high.
Between the Iranian opposition’s main figures all vying for leadership, Reza Pahlavi’s attempts to assert control over them under the Alliance for Democracy and Freedom in Iran (ADFI), and their completely divergent worldviews and irreconcilable approaches, it was only a matter of time before they’d fragment and wither away. That’s not to say that there is no longer an ‘Iranian opposition’, but that the once seemingly united position they held was no longer sustainable.
In fact, it was never sustainable, which is why Esmaeilion left them a month into the ADFI’s establishment.
The story’s actually quite simple from there. “Israel,” the MEK, and the Iranian opposition’s figures all run within the same circles, and it is unfathomable for anyone in the Iranian opposition to gain prominence without being involved with either of the two, or both.
And then, despite all this, some people can actually say with a straight face that the Iranian opposition abroad has no ties to the Israeli lobby.
For more than 40 years, a harsh embargo has been imposed on Iran. Yet, Iran was able to self-sustain and overcome the sanctions. Nonetheless, Western attempts to disrupt Iran did not cease, and external interventions to tear the country apart are relentless. one year later after the tragic death of Mahsa Amini, Iran is still standing tall, against all odds, and Western agenda has miserably failed.
In remembrance of the August 28, 1953, coup Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian says coups, sanctions, and soft power are how the West deals with progressive movements around the world.
Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian says that Western governments are pushing hard to suppress the progression of independent nations.
“Influence, coup d’état, economic sanctions, hard and soft warfare are all tools that arrogant powers (The West) use to suppress the will of independent countries,” Amir-Abdollahian said in a post on X on Saturday.
The post came in remembrance of the 70th anniversary of the 1953 military coup carried out by American and British intelligence apparatuses to topple Iran’s democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh.
The top Iranian diplomat pointed to the event as a marker of the behavior of colonial powers who deal with progressive revolutions around the world along the same line, no matter what the politics of those who come to power may be.
بازخوانی کودتای ۲۸ مرداد نشان میدهد که واکنش استعمار قدیم و نوین به گرایشات آزادیخواهانه و استقلالطلبانه ملتها از یک مدل ثابت پیروی میکند و ارتباطی با کیفت دولتهای مستقر ندارد. نفوذ، کودتا، تحریم اقتصادی، جنگ سخت و نرم، ابزار نظام سلطه برای سرکوب اراده کشورهای مستقل است.
— H.Amirabdollahian امیرعبداللهیان (@Amirabdolahian) August 19, 2023
The American CIA and the British MI6 worked toward empowering the monarchial rule of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi in 1953 after Mossadegh rose to power in Iran.
By issuing a decree to nationalize the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, in which Britain owned the majority shares, Mosaddegh emerged as a significant threat to British and US interests in West Asia.
The then Prime Minister was convicted of treason by a court martial following the August coup and was placed in solitary confinement for three years as he eventually died under house arrest in exile in 1967.
Former foreign secretary David Owen told The Guardian on Tuesday that the time has come for the UK to officially recognize its role in deposing the democratically elected Iranian prime minister Mohammad Mossadegh in 1953.
The US revealed information on its role in the toppling of Mossadegh when it released declassified documents 10 years ago that revealed the UK partook in the operation.
While the US was more concerned with fears that Mossadegh was a socialist, the UK was unsettled by the nationalization of the British oil company in Iran.
The joint US-UK operation was initially codenamed “Operation Boot” but was later renamed “Ajax.”
David Owen, who was British foreign secretary from 1977 to 1979, told The Guardian: “There are good reasons for acknowledging the UK’s role with the US in 1953 in overthrowing democratic developments.”
Shrouded with corruption, Shah’s regime later fell apart in 1979, and the Iranian revolution brought about the establishment of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
“I made it clear to the Shah that his form of rule had to make way for democratic reforms, but I wish I had known of his serious illness and could have pressed him much earlier in 1978 to stay in Switzerland for medical treatment and let a more democratic government emerge in Iran,” he added.
Amidst ongoing regional diplomatic activity, the major missing piece in the diplomatic jigsaw is the normalization between Cairo and Tehran; can they set aside differences, end decades of tensions, and write a new chapter in West Asia-North Africa relations?
Forty-four years after severing relations, amid an uptick of diplomatic activities across the region, Egypt and Iran are finally taking cautious steps towards rapprochement. For decades, the two countries have followed divergent paths on foreign policy.
Yet, recent developments in West Asia, following reconciliations between several countries, have prompted talk of a potential breakthrough.
These developments include Saudi Arabia and Iran’s Beijing-brokered rapprochement, Syria’s return to the Arab League, Riyadh’s resumption of ties with Damascus, a thaw in Turkiye’s relations with Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Egypt, in addition to the onset of direct talks with the Ansarallah-led government in Yemen.
‘Silence from Egypt is a position’
The prospect of a rapprochement between Iran and Egypt has stirred different responses from the two nations. Tehran has openly expressed its willingness to mend ties with Cairo, even from the highest levels of authority.
In contrast, Egypt’s silence has been deafening – literally. In mid-May, Egyptian media quoted one source saying, “The ongoing official silence from Egypt is a position.” This steadfast silence by the Egyptian government is reminiscent of its stance towards Turkiye.
That lull was eventually broken when Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi and his Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip Erdogan unexpectedly shook hands in Doha during the FIFA World Cup in Qatar.
This surprising gesture raises the question: Could an Iranian-Egyptian handshake be on the horizon as well? The diplomatic landscape seems to be shifting, leaving room for speculation and optimism over a potential reconciliation between these two geostrategic regional states.
On 14 May, Fada Hossein Maleki, a member of the Iranian parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, revealed that negotiations between Iran and Egypt were underway in Iraq, with the intention of re-establishing relations between and reopening embassies.
But the most important Iranian announcement was made by the Islamic Republic’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei himself, who welcomed the restoration of relations with Egypt during his meeting on 29 May with the Sultan of Oman Haitham bin Tariq, whose country traditionally plays the role of regional mediator.
Shadi Ibrahim, a researcher in international relations and security studies at Istanbul University, informs The Cradle that the differences between Tehran and Cairo differ from Egyptian-Turkish disputes, as the issues with Iran “are primarily external and not internal, unlike Ankara, which Cairo sees as a competitor for influence and wealth in the region.”
According to Ibrahim, Egyptian-Iranian rapprochement was not initially on Cairo’s agenda due to these external reasons that date back to the Iranian revolution. However, with Arab Persian Gulf capitals – that sought to isolate Iran since 1979 – now mending ties at breakneck speed with Tehran, the process of reconciliation with Egypt is now also beginning to take shape.
A chequered history
Historically, the relationship between Egypt and Iran has experienced alternating phases of close alliance and intense hostility. A connection between the two regional states was solidified in 1939 when then-Iranian Crown Prince Mohammad Reza Pahlavi married Princess Fawzia, the daughter of King Fuad I of Egypt and Sudan. However, their subsequent divorce in 1945 led to a crisis between the two nations when her brother, King Farouk of Egypt, insisted on the divorce and refused Princess Fawzia’s return to Iran.
As relations thawed, the Free Officers Revolution overthrew King Farouk in July 1952, and Egypt raised the banner of Arab nationalism and confrontation against Israel. Given pre-revolutionary Iran’s recognition of Israel in 1960, relations deteriorated once again and remained uneasy until the death of President Gamal Abdel Nasser in 1970.
Under the leadership of Nasser’s successor, President Anwar Sadat, Egypt, and Iran experienced a resurgence in ties. However, the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran, led by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, shattered the progress as it toppled the pro-western and pro-Israel Shah, who subsequently sought refuge in Egypt, where he remained until his death in 1980.
Iran’s revolution stood in hostile opposition toward the Zionist occupation state – just as Egypt was finalizing its Camp David peace treaty with Tel Aviv. The same reasons that drove Abdel Nasser to sever ties with Iran in 1960 were echoed in Khomeini’s decision to do the same with Egypt in 1979.
Decades of frozen relations between Egypt and Iran finally started to warm up with the January 2011 uprising that toppled President Hosni Mubarak. In a significant step, Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi visited Tehran in April 2012, marking the first visit by an Egyptian president to Iran in three decades.
This was followed by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s visit to Cairo in February 2013, signifying a new chapter in their relationship and the announcement of embassy reopenings.
However, the subsequent Sisi-led and Saudi/Emirati-backed coup against Morsi and his Muslim Brotherhood-dominated government in July of the same year halted the progress of relations with Tehran, albeit with a reduced level of hostility. Egypt, thereafter, adopted a strategy of “neither hostility nor friendship.”
Post-Camp David
Since the 1978 signing of the Camp David Accords, Cairo has aligned itself with US policy against Iran. Any shifts in relations between the two regional states today “come in the context of bilateral polarization and the competition of regional powers among themselves,” political analyst Abd al-Rahman Adel tells The Cradle.
In recent years, Egypt’s status has diminished in light of regional changes, which shifted the balance of power to favor wealthy Persian Gulf sheikhdoms. This transformed Cairo from an “active power” into a “state affiliated with the new forces in the region.”
During this period, the polarization between Persian Gulf Arab states and Iran – as well as among the Gulf states themselves – ignited unrest and conflict. An economically strained Egypt, reliant on the Gulf’s largesse, positioned itself as a reliable ally in its geopolitical struggle against Iran, aiming to achieve a sense of balance, particularly in Yemen.
Though with time, “these countries discovered that Egypt’s role was modest and its participation was limited, contrary to expectations,” Ibrahim explains to The Cradle. Aid to Egypt from the Gulf was severely curtailed as a result.
Impact of Saudi-Iran normalization
The rise of new global powers like Russia and China coincides with the declining US status in West Asia and Washington’s shift of focus to the Ukraine war and China’s backyard. Then in March, a significant development occurred with implications for Egyptian-Iranian relations.
Tehran and Riyadh agreed to normalize their relations in Beijing, China, after seven years of estrangement. This breakthrough served as a green light for countries in the wider region, including Egypt, to engage in dialogues with Iran. Prior to that, in August 2022, Kuwait and the UAE had agreed to restore full diplomatic relations with the Islamic Republic.
In February of last year, Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian announced that a new page had opened in Iran’s relations with the countries of the region, saying “our hand is open to our neighbors,” and stressing that “strengthening relations with neighbors, especially Arab countries, is a key priority in Iranian politics.”
In May, Amir-Abdollahian expressed hope that Tehran and Cairo will resume relations, stating: “We have always welcomed the development of relations between Tehran and Cairo,” adding, “The heads of our missions – interests sections – in Tehran and Cairo have good meetings. There is good access to the authorities of both countries.”
Iraqi mediation efforts
Multiple sources claim that Iraq has been hosting talks between representatives from Iran and Egypt since March, with Iraq’s Prime Minister Muhammad Shia al-Sudani leading mediation efforts. Despite all the positive speculation, however, Iraqi sources say that the communication has not yet led to understandings to start normalizing relations. Sources point out that Cairo is still not enthusiastic about normalizing ties for reasons that have not yet been disclosed.
Iraqi political sources tell The Cradle that Sudani aims to establish himself as a key interlocutor between Iran and Arab countries, as his predecessor Mustafa al-Kadhimi sought to do. While the Iraqi president has informed Riyadh of his intention to mediate between Cairo and Tehran, the Saudis have reportedly not shown much enthusiasm.
The sources emphasize that Cairo is unlikely to take serious steps toward improving relations with Iran until the relationship between Tehran and Riyadh reaches a more favorable level.
It is expected that Egyptian President Sisi would require clear support from his Saudi and Emirati patrons – Mohammed bin Salman and Mohammed bin Zayed – before restituting Egyptian-Iranian relations.
Simultaneously, the Sultanate of Oman is playing an important role in facilitating negotiations between Cairo and Tehran. Iranian president Ebrahim Raisi disclosed that Omani Sultan Haitham bin Tarik had conveyed a message from Cairo expressing its desire to improve relations. However, Arab diplomatic sources indicate that Oman’s efforts are still in their infancy, and have not yet resulted in significant progress.
Limited gains; minimal impact on Israel
Researcher Ibrahim believes that the restoration of relations between Egypt and Iran may not lead to much more than “the economic benefit of the Egyptian regime and breaking the isolation imposed on Iran.” In any case, this economic openness is likely to remain limited, with little room for substantial growth and expansion, particularly in light of Israel’s presence along the borders.
Ibrahim and Adel agree that “the Egyptian-Iranian rapprochement will be on a limited scale and will not in any way harm the Egyptian partnership with Israel, nor will it contradict American policy.”
According to Shadi, “Iran will benefit more from these relations.” Transforming relations from negative to positive, even if it is limited to the economic or religious tourism sector, “may represent a step towards a greater role in the future in issues important to Iran, such as the conflict with Israel.”
However, Shadi points out that Cairo is well aware of this, and “will not allow Tehran to compete with it in the Palestinian file.” Cairo benefits here from its geographical location and the fact that Egyptian lands are the only passage to the world for the Iranian-backed Palestinian resistance factions in Gaza. This reality reinforces Egypt’s position and ensures that it remains a pivotal, albeit passive player in the Palestinian context.
As the situation continues to unfold, it is unclear how Egypt’s relationship with Iran will develop and whether it will lead to a broader transformation in regional dynamics or primarily serve as a limited and pragmatic engagement.
The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of The Cradle.
The head of the political bureau of Hamas, Ismail Haniyeh, and the leader of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), Ziad al-Nakhala, on 4 June met with Egyptian intelligence officials in Cairo to discuss the truce between the Israeli government and the Palestinian resistance in the Gaza Strip.
According to sources familiar with the talks that spoke with UK-based Qatari news outlet Al-Araby Al-Jadeed, the resistance leaders reviewed “highly sensitive files” during talks described as “the first of their kind regarding the situation in the Gaza Strip.”
The new truce arrangements would reportedly include a “broader role for Cairo in terms of presence in Gaza,” something that requires the approval of the resistance groups.
A fragile ceasefire has been in effect in the besieged Gaza Strip since mid-May. The deal was reached after five days of battle that saw the PIJ fire hundreds of rockets into Israeli settlements in response to the targeted assassination of the group’s leaders.
Egyptian security officials are reportedly discussing the Gaza crisis with their Iranian counterparts.
Last week, Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi ordered the foreign ministry to actively pursue the resumption of diplomatic relations with Egypt.
Raisi’s order was given one day after Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei told Oman’s Sultan Haitham bin Tariq in Tehran that the Islamic Republic has “no objection” to normalization with Egypt.
In 1979, following the success of the Iranian revolution, Tehran severed diplomatic relations with Egypt over the signing of the Camp David Accords the year earlier, which saw Cairo and Tel Aviv end decades of hostility between them.
Relations were further damaged in 1980 when Egyptian President Anwar Sadat hosted Iran’s former Shah, the western-backed Mohammed Reza Pahlavi. Following this was Egyptian support for Saddam Hussein in the Iran-Iraq war.
The talks between Palestinian resistance leaders and Egyptian intelligence came one day after an Egyptian soldier ambushed and killed three Israeli border guards.
The unprecedented attack spiked fears among Israeli commentators that the attack was part of a “multi-front war” being waged by resistance forces in Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon, and supported by Iran, which “weakens Israeli deterrence.”
The Islamic Republic of Iran marks the death anniversary of the Leader of the victorious Revolution Imam Khomeini who passed away on June 3, 1989, after an 11-day hospitalization.
Imam Khamenei
Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei delivered a speech at a ceremony held to commemorate the 34th passing anniversary of Imam Khomeini (RA) at his Mausoleum in the south of Tehran on Sunday, where tens of thousands were taking part.
At the start of his speech, the Leader of the Islamic Revolution described the founder of the Islamic Republic Imam Khomeini as a role model in rising up for justice and initiating a revolution.
The Leader referred to the noble characteristic of Imam Khomeini (RA), saying that he brought changes to Iran, Islam, and to the world.
Ayatollah Khamenei clarified that in Iran, the late Imam broke the imperial political structure and replaced it with a democracy; in Islam, the issue of Palestine became the first issue of the Islamic world; and at the world level, Imam revived the conditions for paying attention to spirituality even in non-Muslim countries.
Stressing the need for preserving the three developments founded by Imam Khomeini, Ayatollah Khamenei emphasized that those changes have still stubborn enemies that try to stop them.
Referring to the animosity of Global Arrogance (Major Western powers) towards the Iranian nation, the Leader stressed that the enemies want to pull Iran back to the pre-revolution era, when the Pahlavi regime was dependent on them.
Ayatollah Khamenei also urged the nation for keeping faith and hope in order to preserve national independence and national interests.
Referring to last year’s West-provoked riots in Iran, Ayatollah Khamenei noted that the planning of last fall’s riots was done in the think tanks at the Western countries.
He added that the riots were instigated and sponsored by the Western security agencies.
The Leader went on to say that the enemies planned last year’s riots with the wishful thinking that the Islamic Republic of Iran would be defeated but they again failed to know the reality about Iranian nation.
Ayatollah Khamenei added that the enemies are seeking to disappoint the Iranian youths with the government by highlighting the country’s problems and and instead by underestimating the achievements in the country.
He pointed to the great achievements in the field of technology in Iran, as an instance and stressed that there are various and promising developments in the country that signal a bright future.
He also urged the officials and organizations to strengthen the faith and hope among the Iranian nation.
At the end of his speech, the Leader of the Islamic Revolution urged for a massive turnout to the polling stations at parliamentary elections slated to be held at the end of this year of 1402 in the Iranian calendar to disappoint the enemies once again.
Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei
President Raisi
Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi has underscored that the Islamic Republic is prepared to reestablish relationship with those countries who have expressed readiness to restore ties with Iran, but Tehran will stand against those who want to confront the Iranian nation.
President Raisi made the remarks in a ceremony on the occasion of the 34th anniversary of Imam Khomeini’s passing away in Tehran on Saturday night, noting that the late Imam’s way of thinking is popular in today’s world.
He went on to say that as Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei has underlined transformation is inevitable in today Iran. Imam Khomeini also created a political change in a volatile region, he added.
“We have time and again announced that we” are ready to establish ties with the countries, who have expressed their readiness, but “we will resist in front of the states, who want to stand against us”, he noted.
Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi
In early May, the Headquarters for Commemorating Imam Khomeini (RA) invited all groups of Iranians to participate in ceremonies marking the anniversary of Imam Khomeini’s passing away.
In a statement, the headquarters urged individuals, institutions, organizations, political parties, academics, thinkers, scholars, athletes, and people from all walks of life to attend the programs on the sad occasion.
It also said that with the easing of the coronavirus pandemic, the headquarters is well-prepared to hold the programs more magnificently throughout the country this year.
Imam Khomeini
Rouhullah Khomeini was born on the 24th of September 1902. His father was Agha Mustafa Mujtahid Kamareh’i. Rouhullah was the grandson of Seyyed Ahmad and the great-grandson of Deen Ali Shah. Rouhullah lost his father when he was four months old.
After learning Qur’an at home Rouhullah went to school at the age of seven. He started to take lessons from Mullah Abul Qasim. He then went to Sheikh Ja’far’s Maktabkhaneh.
Imam Khomeini’s early life coincided with many events in Iran. In Khomein unjust rulers were in charge and the country was unsafe. Life was very difficult for people and with the coming of World War II matters became even worse. Diseases broke out, poverty spread and there were severe droughts.
When Hajj Abdul Karim Ha’eri Yazdi entered Arak he established a School of Theology, which quickly caught up with Isfahan’s Theology School and which at the time was the best in the country. Therefore, Rouhullah decided to join this newly established Theology School and so went to Arak, which is 60 kilometers away from Khomein. There, Imam Khomeini studied for one year under the guidance of the great scholars, Sheikh Mohammad Ali Borojerdi and Agha Sheikh Golpayegani.
Imam Khomeini did not stay long in Arak because Haj Sheikh Abdul Karim Ha’erri Yazdi left Arak for good and went to stay in Qom. Four months after the departure of Abdul Karim, Imam Khomeini also went to Qom and settled down there.
Under Sheikh Ha’erri’s supervision, he specialized in particular areas of Islamic studies.
Imam Khomeini got married at the age of 27. He married the daughter of Mirza Mohammad Thaqafi in 1929. Thaqafi was one of the scholars of Tehran. Imam Khomeini had seven children. Two sons and five daughters, his son’s names were Mustafa and Ahmad. His daughter’s names were Seddiqa-Khanoom, Farideh, Fahimeh, Sa’eedeh, and Latifeh. His last two daughters died during their childhood.
In 1928 Imam Khomeini started to write many books that can be divided into seven different fields namely philosophy and mysticism, theology, principles of jurisprudence, ethics, commentary on the Quran, literature, and poetry, as well as politics and leadership.
This week, the latest software designed for books written by Imam Khomeini (RA) was unveiled in Tehran.
He is regarded as the iconic leader of the Iranian nation in the 1970s against the centuries-old monarchical tyranny. He engineered Iran’s 1979 Islamic Revolution which led to the overthrow of the US-backed Shah of Iran.
Like in previous years, Muslims have stormed to the Imam’s mausoleum, south of Tehran, to renew allegiance to his ideals. The late leader is also commemorated by Muslims in varied countries as he inspired many other revolutions all across the world.
Imam Khomeini passed away on June 3, 1989, at the age of 87.
As part of the historic, Chinese-led Iran Saudi Arabia détente deal, multiple outlets have reported that Riyadh has agreed to stop funding or “tone down critical coverage of Iran” in Iran International, a high-profile English and Persian language outlet. Tehran accuses Iran International of supporting terrorism and engineering the 2022 anti-government protests. Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, meanwhile, lauded the network as “a force to spread the truth and…the hope of freedom.”
Many were angered at the news. “Press freedom matters. It’s outrageous that Iran International is having their budget cut as a result of the Saudi-Iran normalization,” wrote Israeli-American journalist Emily Schrader.
Press freedom matters. It’s outrageous that @iranintl is having their budget cut as a result of the Saudi-Iran normalization. The fact IR would even make such a demand tells you everything you need to know about this terrorist Islamic Republic. #iranrevolution#pressfreedompic.twitter.com/NqpNgbjtW4
Yet this casual acceptance of the idea that Iran International is little more than a front for the Saudi monarchy will have been groundbreaking news to millions of Iranians who rely on the channel and believe it to be an independent, trustworthy organization.
For their part, the outlet has strenuously challenged the notion. Speaking with MintPress, Adam Baillie, a producer and media liaison for Iran International, stated that they are “an entirely independent TV news channel with no state or political affiliation either within or outside Iran.” Baillie also pointed MintPress to a recent comment from a Saudi official stating that “we continue to assert that it is not a Saudi media outlet and has nothing to do with Saudi Arabia. It is a private investment.”
While the exact source of its funding remains murky, Iran International clearly has some serious money behind it. Bursting onto the scene in 2017 and broadcasting from London, from day one it presented a highly-polished product to viewers. And reportedly offering salaries of double the going rate, it was able to poach many of the most famous and influential journalists in the field from its rivals, quickly building up a large audience. It did this all despite not running commercial advertising.
By not doing so, the channel is leaving significant money on the table. According to a survey by Netherlands-based GAMAAN, it is the most watched and among the most influential networks inside the Islamic Republic, as well as within the Iranian diaspora, and is regularly cited by Western media, including the BBC, The Guardian, Fox News and CNN.
Navid Zarrinnal, an Iranian Studies scholar from Stanford University, told MintPress that the network is near ubiquitous in some parts of Tehran, stating that,
Being in Iran all the time, I see many families have a satellite dish. And Iran International is one of the main things they watch. A lot of people tune in because they see it as presenting the contrarian perspective to the state (which is actually the Western representation of Iran).”
FANNING THE FLAMES OF PROTEST
While many Iranians insist Iran International is an unbiased source of information, even many Western outlets have dropped that pretense. For example, last week, The Economist – hardly a bastion of pro-Tehran sympathy – described Iran International as little more than an outlet dedicated to “air[ing] relentless criticism of the Iranian regime.”
This criticism helped bring worldwide attention to the Islamic Republic in September after the death in custody of 22-year-old woman Mahsa Amini. Although demonstrations were originally peaceful, they were quickly overtaken by much more violent altercations, particularly in the northwestern Kurdish region, leaving hundreds dead.
In the heat of the moment, Iran International was one of the primary sources of information for Iranians and foreigners alike, and the network consistently encouraged the world to believe police beat Amini to death. It regularly used the word “murder,” even in headlines, to describe her death. It also insinuated that the government was on its last legs, claiming that leaders were getting ready to flee to Venezuela.
Baillie told MintPress that while Iran International had covered the protests closely, it did not pick a side, stating,
We have not supported or promoted protests in Iran: we report news which, in the case of the current situation in Iran necessarily means covering a very wide range of events and the actors involved in them.”
Seyed Mohammad Marandi, Professor of English Literature and Orientalism at the University of Tehran and an advisor to the Iranian nuclear negotiations team, disagreed, telling MintPress that, “Iran International is very well-funded… It promotes violence in Iran.” During the protests, he claimed,
It and its guests called on people to attack and kill the police. It has said many times that murdering police officers is the morally correct thing to do. And [British media regulator] OFCOM, of course, does nothing about it. So that shows the hypocrisy of the British government.”
Zarrinnal took a slightly different position, explaining that the station also played a role in setting the agenda for international media, thereby influencing the worldwide coverage of events, stating,
What Iran International did many times was make a claim that was not substantiated; it was just an analyst who might say something. But they presented it as a factual claim. And then that claim gets cited in Western media, so it just got bigger and bigger…So it forms perceptions, not only in Iran, but also across the diaspora and internationally.”
One example of this is the debunked story that the Iranian government had announced that it would publicly execute 15,000 protestors in an orgy of violence. Iranian lawmakers called on the judiciary to issue harsh sentences to the protestors. Iran International suggested that this meant the death sentence. From there, however, like a worldwide game of telephone, the story morphed into the viral hoax that the government had already sentenced thousands to death – a notion promoted by the likes of Newsweek, celebrities such as Sophie Turner and Viola Davis, and even Canadian prime minister, Justin Trudeau.
THE SAUDI CONNECTION
The Iranian government has long demonized Iran International as a Saudi mouthpiece. Yet there is evidence suggesting there could be some merit to the charge. In 2018, The Guardian published an investigation, purportedly based on interviews with the network’s staff, claiming that Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) himself is the driving force behind its rise and that a Saudi firm closely associated with the ruler injected a cool quarter-billion dollars into its set up.
This money was kept secret, even from senior staff, many of whom were reportedly very unhappy with who was paying their generous salaries. “I was told that not even one Saudi rial is in the funding. If I knew it came from Saudi, I would not have joined the station,” one source told The Guardian, adding, “I can say that Iran International TV has turned into a platform … for ethnic partisanship and sectarianism.”
The same source went on to allege that many at the network have figured out the truth but cannot resign for fear of incurring repayments on their contracts or because their visas to continue living in London are dependent on Iran International’s sponsorship.
While Saudi money might be beyond the pale for some journalists, it is clear that top Iran International staff do not mind working for foreign, state-backed entities. News editor Shahed Alavi, for example, formerly worked for Voice of America, while presenter Niusha Saremi left a job at Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty to join the company’s ranks. Both Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty are funded by the U.S. national security state and are part of what The New York Timescalled a “worldwide propaganda network built by the CIA.”
Iran International has also recruited heavily from the British state broadcaster, the BBC. In 2018, for instance, Sima Sabet left a longtime position as a presenter on the BBC World Service for a similar post at Iran International, while Nader Soltanpour quit BBC Persian to become the face of the new network. Just as with Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, the BBC enjoys an intimate relationship with the British national security state.
NETANYAHU’S FAVORITE STATION
The network airs a wide range of ideas and opinions, so much so that it could be said to be difficult to pin its ideology down. However, the one overarching and unmissable connecting theme of its coverage is hostility to the current political setup in Iran – one that has persisted since the revolution of 1979 that deposed Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi. It consistently highlights human rights problems in the country, especially those regarding the treatment of women and the LGBTQ+ communities. While Iran (like every country) does have issues with women’s rights, if it is truly being funded by Saudi Arabia, it is ironic that arguably the most oppressive government in modern history has suddenly found women’s and minority rights to be their cause célèbre.
Undoubtedly, though, Iran International has raised the profile of Prince Reza Pahlavi, the son of the last shah, frequently interviewing him and presenting him as the next ruler of Iran. Last year, for example, it claimed that Pahlavi is the most popular figure in the country and that the large majority of Iranians supported regime change. Thus, Iran International finds itself calling for more democracy in Iran while simultaneously promoting the monarchy.
Pahlavi is far from the most controversial character it has promoted, however. The channel came in for widespread criticism for platforming the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK), live broadcasting its rallies. The MEK is a Saudi-funded armed cult that has taken credit for a number of bombings and was previously designated a terrorist organization by the United States and European Union.
Another brush with terrorism came in 2018, when those responsible for the Ahvaz Attack, which killed 25 people and injured dozens more, claimed responsibility for the event via Iran International. Not long afterward, the network interviewed a guest who praised the attack, describing those hit as legitimate targets. The United Nations Security Council labeled the mass shooting event as a “heinous and cowardly terrorist attack.”
Yet while Iranian government-funded outlets like Press TV are banned in the West, British authorities cleared Iran International to keep broadcasting. Zarrinnal noted that, although Iranian media is far from exemplary, Iranians are actually exposed to a much wider range of opinions in media than in supposedly democratic countries.
“What is interesting to me is that you have easy access to anti-government perspectives. So you can just buy a satellite, turn on the TV, and you have anti-revolution perspectives you can consume easily. But here in the U.S., because they control the means of media production and distribution, you don’t really have access to these alternative perspectives,” he said, noting the blacklisting of foreign media such as RT or Press TV.
In addition to BBC Persian or Voice of America, Iranians can tune into the Saudi-funded MBC Persia network or read The Independent Persian, a Saudi-backed Persian-language outlet that shares the same branding as the British newspaper, The Independent, but is fully Saudi-operated.
Arguably the most controversial character that Iran International has supported, however, is Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In an extended interview earlier this month, the network presented him as a voice for peace in the Middle East and a champion of the Iranian people, pitching him such softball questions as “what is your favorite Persian dish” and asking if he has many Iranian friends.
As much as the network was pro-Netanyahu, the far-right prime minister was even more effusive in his praise of them. “Iran International has gone international; it has become a force to spread the truth and to spread the hope of freedom. And I encourage you to continue that, both inside Iran and outside,” Netanyahu said.
PROPAGANDA BLITZ
While Saudi Arabia is doubtless trying to influence the Iranian public, those efforts pale into comparison with its attempts to co-opt Western media. In 2018, the Saudi Sovereign Wealth Fund injected $200 million into Penske media, owner of many influential titles such as Variety and Rolling Stone, and has been buying influence in Hollywood and the entertainment industry.
Vice Media, which brands itself as an edgy counterculture organization, has also signed a lucrative contract with Saudi Arabia, producing multiple documentaries touting the supposed social progress being made under the MBS dictatorship. The company has opened an office in Riyadh and organized a $20 million youth music festival in the kingdom, although it attempted to hide this fact by keeping its name off all contracts and asking employees to sign non-disclosure agreements.
Before the deal, Vice’s presentation of the country had been relatively adversarial. But, as media critic Adam Johnson has detailed, its critical coverage of Saudi Arabia dropped to zero overnight after they signed the funding agreements. It is unlikely that this will change in the near future; earlier this year, Vice agreed to an extensive content production partnership with Saudi-owned MBC Group.
Vice is far from the only big organization in bed with the Saudis, however. In 2018, American Media Inc., owners of titles such as Us Weekly, OK! and Men’s Journal, published a 97-page propaganda magazine extolling the virtues of the revolutionary visionary MBS and how he is transforming the country into a modern, 21st-century utopia. 200,000 copies were printed and distributed in stores across the country. Despite the fact that it carried zero advertising, American Media insisted that they received no Saudi money for doing so. Before publishing, however, they reached out to the Department of Justice to inquire whether they needed to register as an agent of a foreign power, undermining this claim.
CNN has also published a great deal of suspiciously positive content about the repressive Middle Eastern state. In 2020, it claimed that “freedom was blossoming” across the nation and that Saudi Arabia had “changed beyond recognition” for the good. Other CNN articles describe it as a “tourist destination to watch” thanks to MBS’ “epic efforts.” CNN did not respond to a request for information about these articles and their relationship with the Gulf kingdom.
The idea that Saudi Arabia has been transformed into an enlightened, progressive kingdom jars with reality. According to Human Rights Watch, the country is one of the most repressive and authoritarian in the world, where women are effectively the property of their male relatives and often need permission to work, travel or receive healthcare. Millions of immigrants are kept under slave-like conditions, and being gay is punishable by death. There is no freedom of religion. Children regularly receive corporal or even capital punishment; last week, a court upheld the decision to execute two young men for crimes committed while they were minors.
Likewise, the Saudis have been very active in the United Kingdom, paying millions to high-priced British public relations firms to soften their image. What Reporters Without Borders have called “checkbook diplomacy” has extended into the U.K. parliament, with dozens of MPs receiving trips and other gifts totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars. The Tony Blair Institute, the pet project of the controversial former prime minister, has also received millions in funding from Riyadh.
Saudi companies widely accused of being front groups for the government have bought major chunks (between 25% and 50%) of influential newspapers, The Independent and The Evening Standard. Other big British outlets, including The Guardian, The Financial Times and The Daily Telegraph, have taken Saudi money. Guardian readers, for example, have opened their newspapers to be greeted with large, half-page messages telling them that “He [MBS] is bringing change to Saudi Arabia” or that “He is empowering Saudi women.”
One reason the media has done close to zero investigations into the British war on Yemen is because Saudi Arabia buys 40% of UK arms—and our esteemed press corps take their priorities direct from the state.
In less than six years of operations, Iran International has managed to build up a significant national and global following. Yet it has done so with the help of a pliant British state and through enormous injections of highly suspicious money – cash which is roundly assumed to be linked to the Saudi monarchy. This does not mean that they receive orders on the content or editorial direction from anyone. But if it is the case that it is secretly funded by the Saudi state, it is hard to see it as anything other than an elaborate influence operation to promote regime change in Tehran. Yet if the recent thaw in relations between the two nations turns into something more substantive, Iran International’s future could be as murky as its sources of income.
Iran’s Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was very arrogant and insolent. He enjoyed all of the Iranian wealth and resources while neglecting the conditions the people have been living through, until he fled the country and Imam Ruhollah Mousavi Khomeini returned.
The explosion of protests in Iran that began in September were not about the Islamic Republic’s “hijab law” specifically, but about the abuses and excesses of the so-called morality police – the Gasht-e-Ershad (also known simply as Ershad, or in English, the ‘guidance patrol’) – against regular Iranian women who were considered to be immodestly garbed.
Public disgruntlement was triggered by the widely-publicized death of Mahsa Amini, who was apprehended by the Ershad and died while in their custody.
Although subsequent video footage released by Iranian police authorities showed that Amini had collapsed herself – likely due to her personal health history, as her official autopsy indicates, and not from alleged “beatings” – Iranians argued that the stress of it all may have triggered that collapse.
In the weeks ahead, protests morphed into riots, and people were killed, both civilians and security forces. Whether the two sides shot at each other, or other, external provocateurs were at play, is not the subject of this commentary.
The question is more where these recent events will take Iran, and whether public sentiment on the hijab will be addressed by the country’s governing bodies – and how.
Iran’s very diffused decision-making centers
Iran is by no means the ‘caricature dictatorship’ often portrayed in western mainstream media. While Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei remains the final authority on strategic matters, it is a privilege he rarely exercises to counter domestic critics.
As opposed as he was to Iranian nuclear talks with western powers, Khamenei fully permitted the government of former President Hassan Rouhani to proceed with its negotiation agenda, in its desire to normalize economic relations and end Iran’s then-isolation.
There is probably no figure in Iran who has gone on the record as vehemently as Khamenei, warning that the west is never, ever to be trusted, and that Iran’s greatest power lies in its economic self-sufficiency and complete independence from western-dominated global networks.
And yet Khamenei sat back and allowed the Rouhani administration to pursue a policy that completely contradicted his deepest national convictions.
The Supreme Leader’s actions, however, speak to the very real diffusion inherent in Iranian decision-making processes today. There is no single authority in the state. Decisions are either made collaboratively or in heated and often very public disputes that play out in the Iranian media, in parliamentary debates, or behind closed doors.
In essence, Iran has three main power centers today: First, the Supreme Leader and his various state revolutionary organs that include the army, the police force, the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), and the millions-strong volunteer Basij forces.
Second, Iran’s government and its state institutions that include the elected president, his cabinet, the country’s ministries, and parliament.
And third, the hawza (seminary) of Qom, Iran’s religious center, which consists of thousands of Shia scholars, authorities, and influencers who impact the interpretation of religion, actions, and behaviors for the Islamic Republic.
All three power centers impact state policy in varying ways, and their fortunes have all ebbed and flowed at different times. Within each of these centers exists a vast network of supporters, institutions, media, economic interests, and influential personalities. They, as in other democratic societies, vie for their perspectives to be taken into account and put into action.
To imagine for a second that a single person or decision-making body can issue a directive on an issue as complex and symbolic as the hijab, is to be absolutely clueless about the intricacy, contradictions, and diversity within the Islamic Republic’s body politic.
A view from the ground
During a two-week visit to Tehran in late November, I noticed significant differences on the ground than in my many previous visits, which stopped in January 2020 due to Covid travel restrictions.
During my last visit to the Iranian capital in 2020, one would occasionally see Iranian women sitting without their hijabs in restaurants. Today, however, the ladies were walking on streets, in malls, at the airport, in traditional bazaars, universities and parks, both uptown and downtown, without the customary head-covering.
What is of utmost importance in the current heated discourse on the Iranian hijab is that this ‘uncovering’ trend did not start in September with the protests. This critical detail goes entirely unmentioned in the western media narrative.
Many Iranian women – in the intervening three years since my last visit – had dropped the headscarf, and the scenes in my photos above have been the norm for years. Did the pandemic help relax the social norms during these years? Nobody I asked had a clear answer. “It just became normal,” was a common refrain.
Today, you can see Iranian ladies – young and old – without a hijab, with a headscarf, and with the more traditional floor-length chador walking together on the same streets; everybody doing their own thing and minding their own business.
It is a fascinating development, because by law in Iran, hijab is mandatory. And yet nobody forcibly implements this law until the Ershad pops back onto the scene.
This is important, because the Ershad is not always there, at all times. While they have been a functioning body since 2006, Iranian authorities appear to only mobilize them at specific intervals: perhaps Qom is getting restless over morality issues, or conservatives are vying for influence over reformists, or there are geopolitical tensions on the country’s borders.
The point is that the Ershad has never been a constant on the streets of Iran, but usually a result of something happening politically somewhere in the country.
Authorities gather to discuss the hijab
Nonetheless, three months of protests and riots later, the issue of the hijab appears to be coming to a head among the Islamic Republic’s competing power centers.
In my personal experience, Iran’s security branches like the IRGC – which operate under Khamenei’s authority – are the least belligerent on the hijab issue. They are focused on foreign infiltration, sabotage, anti-terror operations, and warfare, not on the nitty-gritty of daily life and behaviors.
The hijab is a ‘symbol’ of the Islamic Republic, and symbols – as we have seen in countless hybrid wars conducted in West Asia and beyond – are the first and easiest targets for external provocateurs.
Whether it is changing the colors of the national flag to symbolize opposition, or crafting ditties to replace the national anthem, or encouraging women to whip off their headscarves and videotape it – these are the low-hanging fruit of hybrid warfare.
In a January 2018 interview by a private Iranian publication that has a closed distribution and whose readers are specifically security officials and ‘principalists,’ I was asked about the use of these tools in Syria and Iran. My response, with some length-related edits, is below:
“Symbolic slogans, banners and props are a staple of western-styled ‘color revolutions.’ Iran saw the full impact of these tools in the ‘Green’ movement during the 2009 elections. The use of visual tools (a picture is worth a thousand words) to sum up a theme or aspiration that is instantly understandable to a wide audience – this is basic marketing. People do this in elections all the time, but now these concepts are being effectively utilized in information warfare at a geopolitical level.
The use of the green colonial-era flag in Syria was an easy way to quickly draw a larger number of the Syrian population into the ‘opposition’ tent. Basically anyone who had a grievance with the government – whether political, economic, social, religious – was urged to identify with the protest movement under the banner of this new flag. Syrian activists began to mobilize masses by ‘naming’ Friday protests, using language that sought to craft the opposition’s direction and to slowly Islamize it.
Slogans and props are easy propaganda tricks to employ to draw ‘uncommitted’ members of the population into embracing an anti-government position. Identity tools are an essential component of regime-change operations. You have to delegitimize the existing national symbols in order to craft new ones.
In Iran, the image of the young woman without her hijab swiftly became one of the symbols of the protests on social media. Ironically, the hijab could potentially be viewed as an ‘identity prop’ for the 1979 Islamic Revolution – an easily identifiable symbol which immediately identified a distinct political or religious outlook. As a result, in foreign-backed propaganda assaults on Iran, the hijab will almost always be a target to delegitimize or mock.” (Emphasis mine)
The interview was published alongside a photo of me without a hijab. A few weeks later, I received a message from a top Iranian analyst who is reportedly closely affiliated with the IRGC’s Quds Force. He sent a screenshot of my comments on the hijab, and asked if I had written this. To my surprise, he told me that he fully agreed with my assessment.
On another occasion, Iranian IRGC-backed publication Javan requested an interview along with a translation of one of my Syria articles for a special-issue magazine on the regional Axis of Resistance. Again, they published a photo of myself without the hijab.
Hijab and the state
Simply put, the hijab isn’t a priority issue for Iran’s security sector. They have more important fish to fry. But it is a vital subject for the theologians inside and outside Qom.
And perhaps also for the millions of Iranian women who choose to don it, and don’t want to be bullied out of it, as were their grandmothers in 1936 when then-monarch Reza Shah Pahlavi outlawed the traditional Islamic head covering.
“With the ban on hijab, many women stayed inside their homes for years or left home only in the dark or hidden inside carriages to avoid confrontation with the police who would if necessary use force to unveil them. Even older Christian and Jewish women found the ban on headscarves hard to comply with,” writes Maryam Sinaee – ironically, for Saudi-backed publication Iran International, which runs 24/7 propaganda for Iranian oppositionists nowadays.
These matters aside, Iran’s security leaders have an unusually strong case to put to the clergy today: ‘The hijab, which we respect, has entered the national security realm. Foreign-backed agendas have weaponized the hijab to promote regime-change operations.’ This is not a position the clergy can argue given recent events.
It is probably why Iranian authorities are reportedly considering a host of options to take the threat off the table, including, potentially, the suspension or dissolution of the Ershad, to be replaced by a general program to teach and advise about Islamic modesty across the country, for both men and women.
The Ershad – established under the administration of former Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad – are off the streets now, and have been for many weeks. And the three main Iranian centers of authority are deep in conversation about how to calm residual tensions and address this social grievance among segments of the population.
Interestingly, this development somewhat mirrors that of arch-rival Saudi Arabia across the Persian Gulf, where the “mutawa,” or Saudi religious police, were stripped of their once-unchecked powers and privileges in 2016 by royal decree. Since then, it has become more common to see women publically unveiled and not wearing the traditional black abaya over their regular clothes, despite there never having been a Saudi written law mandating it.
Qom – and many others – will never agree to retract the hijab law. After all, its over-zealous enforcement by the few was what the argument was originally about. Like many laws without teeth that remain on the books of countries everywhere, Iran’s hijab law may experience a similar fate.
But while we can expect a gentler Iranian hand in regard to the hijab, it will be also be accompanied by a merciless de-fanging of those who sought to use this symbol of piety to undermine the state.
Iranians marked the US embassy takeover anniversary with huge nationwide rallies.
Aban 13 [November 4] is the National Day of Fighting Global Arrogance in Iran, on which Iranians gather in rallies to commemorate the day.
On Aban13, 1358 A.H. [Nov 4, 1979], Iranian students took over the US embassy in Tehran. On the same day the previous year, a group of Iranian high school and university students had been killed by the security forces of the Shah regime in a protest demonstration.
Leader of the Islamic Revolution His Eminence Imam Sayyed Ali Khamenei delivered a speech on the occasion of 33rd demise anniversary of founder of the Islamic Revolution Imam Khomeini [RA].
Every year, a commemoration ceremony is held in Imam Khomeini’s Mausoleum in southern Tehran province with the participation of Imam Khamenei, senior state and military officials as well as thousands of people from different walks of life.
This year’s ceremony is held at the Mausoleum after a two-year break due to the restrictions caused by coronavirus.
At the beginning of his speech, Imam Khamenei greeted all brothers and sisters taking part in the commemoration held in Tehran and some 900 other Iranian cities.
“Imam Khomeini is the soul of the Islamic Republic,” Imam Khamenei stressed, noting that the young generation has to know Imam Khomeini well as he can show them the best way how to rule the country in the future.
“Imam Khomeini led the greatest revolution in the history of revolutions,” Imam Khamenei said.
His Eminence also touched upon the most famous revolutions in the world such as the French and Russian revolutions and noted that after those two big revolutions, the most brutal tyrannical regimes ruled France and USSR which killed too many of their people.
However, Imam Khamenei said, Imam Khomeini led a revolution that turned the tyrannical regime of Shah to an Islamic Republic which is based on people’s votes.
The Leader went on to point out that Imam Khomeini introduced spirituality and morality to governance and said that the Imam separated the Islamic Republic from the capitalist-based liberal democracy and dictatorial-centered communism, and proposed a new model with the Islamic Republic.
Imam Khamenei said in the Islamic Republic that Imam Khomeini founded, both religion and people’s votes, both economic justice and people’s free economic activities are taken into account.
“We will strengthen the country’s knowledge and economy, as well as the defense and security of the country. Both national unity and integration must be observed, while the diversity of different views and tendencies are respected,” His Eminence underlined.
“We neither oppress nor we accept oppression,” Imam Khamenei underscored.
As Imam Khamenei emphasized that Imam Khomeini derived his thoughts from the Islamic teachings and proposed a modern and noble model of the Islamic Republic, he told people and officials that whenever they rely on their will they are going to achieve victory, and whenever they become lazy then they will fail.
“Imam Khomeini combined interest and knowledge together; he was knowledgeable and a brave man, and he was honest with his God and the people alike,” Imam Khamenei said.
Imam Khomeini used to pay attention to time, was confident in Allah and a believer in the divine promise; the infrastructure in all of the late Imam’s activities was worshipping Allah, and the aim behind worshipping Allah is spreading righteousness and justice, Imam Khamenei noted, underlining that Imam Khomeini was observing such characteristics.
“Imam Khomeini’s movement was significant on the level of being frank, outspoken, and permanently addressing the people; one of the Imam’s prominent features was trusting the people since day one,” His Eminence stressed.
Imam Khomeini led the people to the fields, took them out of despair, and in certain phases taught the people what the arenas of struggle are, Sayyed Ali Khamenei added.
He also hailed the people who didn’t abandon the Islamic Revolution, which was achieved in the Islamic Republic, in which they supported it in a general referendum.
The late Imam Khomeini -Founder of the Islamic Republic and Father of the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran- passed away 33 years ago at the age of 86.
Imam Khomeini, who steered the popular uprising in Iran culminating in the fall of former regime of Shah, passed away on June 3, 1989.
He is known as one of the most influential leaders who inspired many other revolutions all across the world.
According to state-run IRNA News Agency, the occasion is marked on the 14th day of Khordad, the third month of the Iranian calendar year, and was set to be commemorated in 900 Iranian cities.
Related Videos
On the anniversary of his passing, Imam Khomeini is still a living thought and approach in the hearts of Iranians
Imam Khomeini is the late leader of the Islamic Revolutionary movement which took place at the turn of the decade of 1970s. The revolution was marked by the mobilization of common people against the tyrant puppet regime of the Shah. The revolution sought to reinstall the Islamic values which were being targeted in the reign of the Shah. It was an era of brutal suppression of voices, attacks on religious institutions, the rigorous introduction of obscenity in the discourse, and a frantic rampant rise of capitalism in the country, which made life for the common people physically, spiritually, and economically painful.
Imam Khomeini rose against this oppression and became the voice of people against the Shah. He managed to hold on to his identity as an Imam, an Ayatollah, and a religious leader while leading the charge against the product and system installed in his country through international, especially American conspiracy. He spent a long time in Paris and engaged himself in writing and theorizing about the nature of the state and the rights of people in the political system of the country.
Imam Khomeini’s writings were circulated with great effort through religious institutions which remained constantly under scrutinizing gaze of the Shah. The ideas caused a tremor and a tumult in the conscience of the masses. As the situation in the country became charged, Imam Khomeini returned to the land with the promise of revolution. On 14th February 1979, through a referendum that got passed with a massive majority of above 90% votes in favor, the spirit of Islam was reinstated in Iran.
This revolution was celebrated not only the by Iranian people but also globally by Muslims and other leading intellectuals like Michel Foucault who called the revolution a ‘Spiritual Revolution.’ The revolution is a landmark in the history of mankind worth celebrating and worthy of consideration as a serious subject from which plans might take birth and insights on ongoing crises might be collected. The model of the Iranian revolution is organic and simple. It is similar to the French and Russian Revolution in the sense that it includes the last man in the crowd but also different as it doesn’t lose its cultural identity in the process. It is a double victory; cultural as well as political.
This global nature of the revolution was recalled and remembered by many throughout the world including India. People in India, under the banner head of the Hussaini movement took part in various activities like nationwide poster campaigns, social media trends, webinar, and global Twitter trends.
The idea of Imam Khomeini as a global leader was forwarded to the general audience. His values as a man of morals, virtue, dignity, and steadfastness of purpose were discussed and popularized. The trends and the webinar reached a large number of audiences and made many people acknowledge the work of Imam Khomeini in the field of revolutionary politics and ideology of resistance.
* Hussain Saim is a literature student in Aligarh Muslim University, India
The global nature of the Islamic Revolution, with its late founder Imam Ruhollah Khomeini, is being recalled and remembered by many throughout the world including Kashmir.
People in Kashmir under the banner head of the Hussaini movement took part in various activities like nationwide poster campaigns, social media trends, webinar, and global Twitter trends.
The idea of Imam Khomeini as a global leader was forwarded to the general audience. His values as a man of morals, virtue, dignity, and steadfastness of purpose were discussed and popularized.
The trends and the webinars reached a large number of audiences and made many people acknowledge the work of Imam Khomeini in the field of revolutionary politics and ideology of resistance.
مثلما انبثقت معادلة الحكم في كلّ من تركيا وإيران بشكلها الحداثي من خاصرة الحرب العالمية الأولى، على قاعدة حكم العسكر باعتباره عمود الدولة كما جسّدها كمال أتاتورك في الأولى، ورضا خان في الثانية، فإنّ باكستان الدولة الجديدة الولادة كما نعرفها الآن هي الأخرى انبثقت معادلة الحكم فيها، من خاصرة الحرب العالمية الثانية على قاعدة انّ العسكر هم عمود الخيمة في الدولة، وانْ كان سياق الولادة في باكستان قد نشأ في سياق مختلف، إلا انّ القاسم المشترك بين أنظمة الحكم الحداثوية الشرقية الآنفة الذكر، هو ظهور العسكر بمثابة عمود الخيمة في النظام السياسي، لا يستقيم أمر استقراره إلا به، ولن يتغيّر الا بتغيّره.
وبعيداً عن الدخول في إشكالية استقلال باكستان «الإسلامية» بقيادة مؤسسها محمد علي جناح وهو أمر مقدّر ومحترم في وجدان الرأي العام الباكستاني والإسلامي، إلا انّ ما يهمّنا التوقف عنده هنا هو أمر آخر تماماً…
ألا وهو نشوء نخبة باكستانية «مدنية» متعلمة، واكبت حقبة الاستقلال وحكم العسكر محمّلة بنسبة عالية من مفاهيم التعايش السلمي مع ثقافة الغرب ونوع من الودّ والعطف تجاه نياته المعلنة بخصوص حقّ تقرير المصير للشعوب وما شابه من مقولات سُمّيت باختصار بالديمقراطية…!
عمران خان هو واحد من هذا الجنس الإصلاحي الهادئ واللطيف الذي نشأ في حضن هذه التركيبة.
قبله كان محمد مصدق إيران، الذي صدّق هو الآخر ثقافة الغرب الديمقراطية ووثق بها، وأراد بدافع حب الوطن، التخلص بمحبة ووداد، من هيمنة بريطانيا العظمى ومن سلطة شركة النفط البريطانية وتأميم النفط الإيراني متجرّئاً على حكم الشاه ومعادلة العسكر، مستعيناً بصدق نيات واشنطن «الإصلاحية»، التي سرعان ما كذبت عفويّته السياسية هذه وعاجلته بانقلاب عسكري أعاد تلميذها النجيب الى الحكم أيّ الشاه محمد رضا بهلوي وهيمنة الاستعمار الغربي على كلّ مقدرات إيران بقوة أكبر وقسوة أشدّ.
هذا هو ما حصل بالضبط لعمران خان المثقف الإصلاحي في اليومين الماضيين، عندما ظنّ أنّ بإمكانه التخلص «بمحبة» وبديمقراطية «عذرية» من عصابة المتشدّدين الوهابيين المرتبطين بسفارات البترودولار وأميركا الشيطان الأكبر، مستعيناً بأميركا «الديمقراطية» و«الودودة»، التي سرعان ما كذبته وتركته طريداً شريداً يئنّ من خذلان من سمّاهم بمؤسسات الدولة له، الذين هم ليسوا سوى المعادلة نفسها التي أتت به إلى السلطة.
نعم فقد ظن عمران خان في لحظة وعي ويقظة استثنائية وظروف إقليمية ودولية تحوّلية متسارعة انّ بإمكانه تغيير شكل وبنية النظام السياسي الحاكم في الباكستان منذ نشوء الدولة ـ بكلّ هدوء ولطف و«مودة» المثقف الإصلاحي لتحقيق حلمه الورديّ!
هو لم ينتبه في الواقع أنّ عمله هذا يعني في ما يعني تأميم القنبلة «الإسلامية»، كما قام مصدق بتأميم النفط في خمسينيات القرن الماضي..!
وهذا أمر مستحيل دون الصدام مع عمود خيمة النظام أيّ الجيش، ودون ممارسة أيّ عنف ثوري ودون إراقة دماء..!
ايّ إجراء عملية ولادة قيصرية لباكستان، لا هو يملك أدواتها الليزرية ولا يريد استخدام أدوات جراحية فيها..!
مستنداً الى مواكبة اللحظة الإقليمية والدولية المتحوّلة غير المكتملة وغير الناضجة داخل مجتمعه أصلاً…!
وكما أحبط مصدق إيران من قبله، أحبط عمران خان أيضاً لفقدانهما أدوات التغيير وكذلك منهجيته…!
فالعالم المتحكم بموقع ودور باكستان اليوم الخارجي، ورغم كلّ التحوّلات العالمية الإيجابية المحيطة، لا يزال عالم الذئاب وفي باكستان نفسها أيضاً يبدو انّ معدل موازين القوى الداخلية لا تسمح بعد بأحلام أمثال عمران خان من دون ثورة حقيقية وجذرية!
فالذين وقفوا ويقفون بوجه حلم عمران خان هم الجيش وصنيعته «طالبان باكستان» والأوليغارشية السياسية المرتبطة بالسفارات الوهابية والغربية وفي مقدّمها السفارة الأميركية والمخابرات الأميركية «سي أي آي»، والتي لا تزال هي من تمتلك مفتاح او «كود» أو «زر» القنبلة الباكستانية «الإسلامية» التي سمح لها أصلاً لتكون صنواً للقنبلة الهندية وليس أكثر!
ألا يتذكّر عمران خان كيف تمّ وأد طموحات ذو الفقار علي بوتو في سبعينيات القرن الماضي أيضاً، وكيف تمّت محاكمته وإعدامه..!؟
نعم ما حصل في اليومين الماضيين يمكن اعتباره محطة نوعيّة مهمة في سياق مسار التحوّل والتغيير في باكستان، ونحن نشاهد لأول مرة غضب الشارع الباكستاني المسلم، ونزعته الاستقلالية والتحررية، بل وحتى الثورية المطالبة بطرد النفوذ الغربي، وقد انتقلت من الشارع الى صالونات الطبقة الحاكمة متمثلة بتململ عمران خان وغضبه…!
لكن منسوب التحوّل والتغيير المجتمعيّ العام لم يصبح بعد كافياً على ما يبدو بعد لتأميم القنبلة «الإسلامية»…!
القضية بحاجة ربما الى «شمرة عصا» إضافيّة، كما يقول المثل، بل خطوة احتجاجية جذرية «خمينيّة» من جنس الباكستان تطيح بالعفن والتأكسد المتراكم فوق صدور شعب محمد علي جناح منذ الحرب العالمية الثانية…!
خصوم عمران خان في المقابل لن يتمكنوا بعد اليوم من إقفال الباب على التغيير المقبل بقوة على باكستان…!
لعله لا بدّ لعمران خان الانتظار قليلاً ليرى ونرى سوياً مخاض أوكرانيا، وحرب بوتين المفتوحة على إمبراطورية الكذب..!
أخيراً وليس آخراً فإنّ طريق الحرير الجديد الذي يريد الباكستانيون ان ينعموا به من بوابة الصين، صار حديدياً، وبالتالي صار لا بدّ لكلّ من يريد أن يساهم فيه، ان يكون صاحب قبضة فولاذيّة..!
«لسنا عبيداً عندكم»
خطوة في الاتجاه الصحيح.
لكنها ليست كافية.
حتى تمسك زر التغيير وتصبح *قائداً أعظم* جديداً لا بدّ ان تغزوهم قبل أن يغزوك، لأنهم يعدّون لك الأسوأ.
خذ العبرة ممن سبقوك، لا مكان للموقف الرمادي في القضايا الكبرى.
اللحظة «خمينيّة « يا عمران خان بكلّ امتياز! وإلا ذهبت تحت أقدام الفيلة.
خرج الإيرانيون، أمس، إلى سطوح منازلهم من أجل التكبير، عملاً بتقليد يعود إلى أيام الكفاح الثوري الشاقّ، لكنّ التكبير لم يكن إلاّ فعلاً واحداً من تشكيلة واسعة من الأدوات المستخدَمة لكسر احتكار الشاه للسلطة.
الثورة في إيران.. كيف تحوّلت السطوح وأجهزة التسجيل إلى أسلحة شعبية؟
إن كانت الثورات القومية، في أوروبا وآسيا والقارتين الأميركيتين، خرجت من قوالب مطابع شبيهة بتلك التي ابتكرها يوهان غوتنبرغ، فإنّ القرن العشرين حمل للسلالات الملكية تهديداً أسوأ من الطباعة، تمثّلَ بالإذاعات وأجهزة البث والتسجيل والاستماع، والتي أعادت إلى المخيال العام قدرته على ابتكار الجماعة ضمن حدود وسيادة بيّنة.
يمكن تحديد استراتيجيات الجماعة الثورية في إيران في أواخر العقد السابع من القرن العشرين ضمن نقاط بسيطة ومبسترة، كالإضرابات العامة والاحتجاجات الشعبية وتعطيل البازار، أو حتى الاشتباك مع قوات الشرطة الرسمية والسرية (السافاك). لكن الثورة، في طرفيها غير المتعادلَي القوى، تأخذ – كما هي العادة – أشكالاً وأساليب أشدّ دقةً وأعمق تجذُّراً في الثقافة السائدة ونمط العلاقات والتراتبيات الاجتماعية القائمة، بما في ذلك تلك الهوامش المهمَلة. وهذا ما يعبّر عنهعالِم الإنسان والسياسة جيمس سكوت، بكياسة، في قوله إنّ أي علاقة بين النخب المسيطرة والمحكومين هي “نضال مادي إلى حد كبير، يواصل فيه الطرفان البحث باستمرار عن نقاط الضعف واستغلال المنافع الصغيرة”.
تُظهر الثورة في إيران تحوّل الحق في الكلام وواجب الاستماع إلى ميدان لنزاعات السلطة. الشاه وحده من يستحق التحدث باسم الشعب، والآخرون مجرّد شهود، عليهم واجب الإصغاء. هكذا، أصبح “السافاك” لا مجرد سلطة قهرية تحاكم نيّات الفعل فقط، وإنما نيّات الكلام أيضاً، مهرقة في ذلك دماء المعارضين، وإن كانوا على تماس مع القداسة الدينية، وهذا ما عبّر عنه اقتحام جنود الشاه للمدرسة الفيضية في قم، بعد أيام من إلقاء السيد روح الله الخميني خطاباً نارياً هناك ضد الشاه، بحيث ارتُكبت مجزرة راح ضحيتها العشرات من الطلبة، قبل أن يصطف الجنود من جديد حاملين شعارهم البائد “الخلود للملك”.
مارست سلطات الشاه مختلف أنواع القمع، من التعذيب وتلف الأعضاء حتى الاعتقال والنفي، داخلياً وخارجياً، لكن قنوات الثورة لم تغلَق أبداً، وإن تعرّضت لضربات موجعة، كما في حالة نفي زعيمها الخميني إلى النجف العراقية، ثم إلى نوفل لوشاتو الفرنسية، حيث كان على الخميني أن يرضخ لانقطاعه عن الاتصال المباشر بقاعدته الجماهيرة، وانفصاله عن المؤسسة الحوزوية في قم، والتي تحوّلت في الستينيات والسبعينيات إلى جبهة متقدّمة في وجه الشاه.
لكنّ الخميني وأنصاره، الذين اندمج بعضهم في شبكات سرية، استطاعوا أن يبتكروا حِيَلهم الجديدة، وفق تعبير سكوت، لمقاومة السلطات، بما في ذلك تحويل المراسيم الدينية، كصلاة الجمعة والإحياءات الحسينية، ووسائل الاتصال الجماهيرية العلمانية، إلى أدوات لنشر البيانات المحرّضة والخطابات الدينية، التي تحثّ على مواجهة الشاه ونظامه، والالتحاق بصفوف الثورة.
يقدّم الفيلسوف الفرنسي ميشيل فوكو، في مقالات ضمن تغطيته الصحافية للثورة الإيرانية، وصفاً للتفاعلات الاجتماعية التي أعادت تشكيلها الثورة ضمن مصهرها الخاص، فيكتب، في مقالٍ بعنوان “في انتظار عودة الإمام”، قائلاً “غُرست أمام المنازل أغصان كبيرة من الأشجار، توقَدُ عليها عند حلول الظلام مصابيح بيضاء وحمراء وخضراء: إنّها أفراح “الفِتْية” الذين قُتلوا لتوِّهم. وفي النهار، كان الملالي (رجال الدين) يتحدثون بعنف في المساجد ضد الشاه والأميركيين، وضد الغرب وماديته. ويَدْعون، باسم القرآن والسنّة، إلى الكفاح ضد هذا النظام بأسره. فإذا ضاقت المساجد بروادها، ولم تتسع للجمهور، وُضِعت مكبرات الصوت في الشارع. فكانت القرية بأسرها، والحي بأسره، يردّدان تلك الأصوات المفزعة… وسُجِّل كثير من تلك الخطب الدينية، وانتشرت أشرطتها في كل إيران. وأسمعني إياها في طهران كاتب أبعد ما يكون عن رجال الدين، ولم يكن ذلك يُشعره بالحياء ولا بالحرج ولا بالتردد أو الخوف”.
توضح ملاحظات فوكو الآنفة أشكالاً متعدّدة للاحتجاج جرى اعتمادها من جانب الثوريين، والتي تبدأ باستذكار ضحايا الثورة وفِتْيتها، لا على مدار اليوم وحده، بل في الليل أيضاً، وتمتد إلى الاستفادة من المكان الديني، الذي كان في السابق مقتصراً على ممارسة الطقوس الروحانية الجماعية، في عملية إنتاج “روحانية سياسية” (وفق تعبير فوكو) تُنتج شكلاً جديداً للحكم، ولا تنتهي بالطبع عند إشارة فوكو إلى توحّد الجماعة الثورية من خلال السماع، ليسمع الأهالي الخطابات بصورة جماعية وعامة، وليصبح الكاتب العلماني جزءاً من الصيرورة الثورية، وإن كان في مقدمتها رجالُ دين.
يمكن رسم خريطة صوتية للثورة الإيرانية، تضم أناشيد محمد كلريز مثلاً، جنباً إلى جنب نداءات المحتجّين الموجَّهة إلى القوات العسكرية كي لا يطلق إخوتهم الرصاص، وهدير الجماهير الهادرة في شوارع طهران وقم وأصفهان وغيرها من المحافظات، والتكبيرات الصادرة في جنح الليل من على سطوح المنازل، بعد حظر السلطات للتجوّل، والأشرطة الموزَّعة سراً لتُسمَع في خلوات المنازل.
تُعَدُّ الثورة الإيرانية أحد أبرز النماذج عن تحوّل أشرطة الكاسيت إلى أدوات ثورية، بالمعنى الحرفي للكلمة. ففي عام 1978، عندما كان الخميني منفياً في ضواحي باريس، كانت وسائله للاتصال بمواطنيه تقلَّصت، لتصير مقتصرةً على التواصل عبر ممثلين، ومن خلال استخدام أشرطة الكاسيت، بحيث كان يقوم شخص، لديه علاقة ما بشركة الهاتف، بإجراء مكالمة جماعية في إيران، ثم تدار الخطبة عبر خط الهاتف، ليقوم الثوريون بتسجيلها مباشرةً، ثم يتابعون تسجيلها عبر عشرات آلاف المراكز السرية، لتوزَّع لاحقاً بكثافة في مختلف المحافظات.
هذه الشبكة الواسعة والعفوية، إلى حدّ كبير، نجحت في إحداث اختراق في أنظمة الرقابة الملكية، وسرت من دون رادارات السافاك، وبتوزيع شبكي لا رأس له كي يُطاحَ، وهذا ما منح الثورة زخماً شعبياً يصعب وقفه أو صدّه.
احتفل الإيرانيون، اليوم، بحلول الذكرى الـ43 للثورة. الشوارع امتلأت بالجماهير والمواكب السيّارة، بعد ليلة من التكبير فوق السطوح، عملاً بتقليد شرّعته الثورة. الثورة انتصرت، لكن الإيرانيين لا يرون أن كل أهدافها تحققت، وخصوصاً مع استمرار عزلتهم المفروضة بفعل العقوبات. وعلى الرغم من ذلك، فإن إيران تحقق عدة اختراقات في كسر جدران العزلة، وهم يعرفون أنّ أدوات فرض الاعتراف يمكن أن تبدأ بتكبيرات السطوح، وعبر أجهزة التسجيل، وتتقدّم صعوداً نحو ترسانة كاملة من أساليب المعارضة الجديدة.
Tehran – Iranians are celebrating the 42nd anniversary of the seizure of the US embassy in Tehran by Iranian students and the closure of the American spy den, which acted as a central nervous system for espionage, and interference.
The leader of the Islamic Revolution, Imam Khomeini described this event as the second revolution. This day also coincides with the anniversary of Imam Khomeini’s exile from the country in 1964 and the beginning of the Islamic renaissance in Iran. Imam Khomeini led the revolution and returned to the country in 1979. The revolution of the Iranian people triumphed under his leadership.
This day also commemorates the martyrdom of dozens of Iranian school and university students who perished at the hands of the Shah’s regime during a march in front of the University of Tehran.
This year’s anniversary of the closure of the American spy den in Tehran coincides with another blow dealt to the US in international waters when the Islamic Revolutionary Guard prevented American pirates from stealing Iranian oil.
On this occasion, Al-Ahed news website sat down with a member of the Presidency of Iran’s Assembly of Experts, His Eminence Ayatollah Sheikh Abbas Al-Kaabi, who confirmed that the discourse of the Islamic Revolution presented a model for civilized jihad in the face of arrogance. This discourse, which was initiated by the honorable Imam Khomeini and continued by the Grand His Eminence Imam Sayyed Ali Khamenei is based on several elements:
1st element: Transforming weaknesses of the nation into strengths at all levels – cultural, economic, political, social, scientific, technical, defense and military
2nd element: Turning enemy threats into opportunities for development and civilization at all levels
3rd element: The cognitive view of power as a means of creating civilization not creating and producing power in order to dominate other human beings
4th element: Emphasis on the value system that starts from monotheism, justice, and human dignity and continues to consolidate the principles of ethics, development, science, religious governance of the people, and effective political participation in the light of values and morals
5th element: Removing the obstacles by combating tyrants, aggressors, corrupters, and the arrogant
6th element: Interaction with the Islamic awakening movement, restoration of nation-building and rooting the culture of resistance and the creation of civilization
7th element: The establishment of principles and values and the preservation of Islamic belief and knowledge in order to create an Islamic way of living that is compatible with Islamic values within the Islamic nation
8th element: The fight against backwardness and moving towards scientific development among the sons of the Islamic nation
9th element: Combating strife within the nation and emphasizing the strategy of unity among its sons
10th element: Focusing on the scientific and religious reference for the people of the nation in line with the requirements of the age and time
11th element: Knowledge and subordination to the righteous and intellectual leadership to create victory after victory in the face of global arrogance
12th element: Creating a new general structure for the nation and overthrowing structures, organizations, and administrative frameworks of global arrogance in international relations
13th element: Supporting independence, freedom, and movement towards achieving justice and development for Islamic peoples and countries in the face of hegemony, influence, and penetration of global arrogance
14th element: Focusing on interreligious and intercultural dialogue in the framework of monotheism, justice, and human dignity
Ayatollah Al-Kaabi concluded by saying: These 14 elements need the rise and resistance of the sons of the nation against the global arrogance system at all levels.
The discourse of the Islamic Revolution in the light of the ideas of Imam Khomeini and Imam Khamenei today created glory for the nation as well as an uprising and a movement of resistance against global arrogance. Today, we are stronger than ever, and global arrogance and its puppets in the region are weaker than ever. We are living in an era of great victories and the nation’s children pioneering resistance against global arrogance.
Chief Commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guard [IRG], Major General Hossein Salami, labelled the US as the manufacturer of dictatorships all over the world, while stressing that Iran represents the haven of peace in the region.
In remarks during the commemoration ceremony of the National Day of Fight against Global Arrogance, which was held in front of the former US embassy in Tehran, now referred to as the Den of Espionage, on Thursday, Salami said “The Americans are used to being defeated at the hands of the Iranian nation, but, they have yet to learn the lesson.”
Aban 13, which is reminiscent of November 4, 1979, is the day when Iranian students stood against the United States’ arrogance and hegemonic power, and seized the US Embassy in Tehran.
“Today is a day of victory for the Iranian nation and overcoming the greatest empire in history,” Salami said.
He stated that on November 4, 1979, when the United States was at the peak of its political, military and economic power and the Iranian nation had not created the great structures of its current power at the beginning of a glorious Islamic Revolution, a glorious Islamic revolution was formed under the leadership of the late Imam Khomeini.
“This courage and endurance in the atmosphere of that day in the world is one of the most amazing historical facts both for humanity and for the Iranian nation,” Salami underscored.
Addressing the revolutionary people of Tehran who participated in the massive rally, Major General Salami said that today is a great day for the Iranian nation.
Referring to the anniversary of the seizure of the former US Embassy in Iran in 1979, Salami added that on this day, the United States, which was the greatest empire in history, was defeated.
“The Americans are used defeats at the hands of the Iranian people, he added that however, they have not yet embraced a lesson,” he added.
Salami also slammed the US hegemonic moves to provoke wars in the world, saying that more than 40 major wars in 40 parts of the world are the outcome of the US politics in the world.
“The US has engaged in a war with many countries in Europe, Africa, South America, the far East, West Asia, and Russia,” Salami said, and “the US waged wars that have left more an 8 million dead in the world.”
He also noted that 750 US military bases in the world have each tried to establish pervasive political domination in the world with a circle of political influence.
The Iranian military commemorated the anniversary of the US embassy takeover by students as a symbol of the nation’s resistance against global arrogance and American hegemony, saying the developments unfolding today in the region and elsewhere in the world foretell America’s decline.
The General Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces marked the National Day of the Fight against Global Arrogance, which falls on November 4, in a statement released on Wednesday.
The occasion is a symbol of the Iranian people’s “oppression-fighting, freedom-seeking, resistance and perseverance” against the greed and hegemonic policies of the criminal US regime, the statement read.
Forty two years ago on this day, Iranian students took over the American embassy in Tehran, also known in Iran as the “Den of Espionage,” less than a year after the Islamic Revolution toppled the US-backed Pahlavi dictatorship in 1979.
On the eve of the anniversary, Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guard [IRG] released detailed footage of its successful seizing of an American vessel that had stolen a shipment of Iranian oil in the strategic Sea of Oman.
“Now, after over four decades of the Islamic Republic’s blessed existence, we are still witnessing repeated hostilities and inhumane conspiracies of the American terrorist regime and the fake Zionist regime against the people and the [government] of the Islamic Republic,” the Armed Forces’ statement read.
It then enumerated the crimes perpetrated by the “terrorist-nurturing” US regime and its allies against Iran, including the draconian sanctions, attempts to hamper Iran’s nuclear progress, the assassination of the country’s nuclear scientists, the assassination of Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani, and the destabilization of the country by different means, such as the latest cyber-attack on gas stations.
In spite of the aforementioned hurdles, the statement went on to say, the Iranian people and government have managed to unmask the decline of the United States’ fake and evil grandeur throughout the world.
Each year, Iranians commemorate the National Day of the Fight against Global Arrogance by staging rallies across the country. Last year’s events were canceled due to an increase in COVID-19 infections, but people can attend this year’s events while observing health protocols. IRG Chief Major General Hossein Salami is expected to address the main event in Tehran.
The Israeli occupation has attempted to destabilize Iraq since the sixties. How is the Israeli Occupation trying to infiltrate Iraqi society?
Iraqi Society has been a target for pro-normalization Propaganda in Past years
On the 24th of the current month, a conference was held in Erbil, the capital city of the Iraqi Kurdistan region. The conference of “Peace and Reclamation,” called for the normalization of relations with the Israeli occupation under the shady slogans of peace and establishing civil society organizations.
The conference, organized by theNew York-based Center for Peace Communications (CPC), was called “an illegal gathering” by the Iraqi government. The CPC is an organization that openly calls for the normalization of relations between the Arab states and “Israel”.
For a foreign observer, the story might look like it started here, and one might think, isolating the Iraqis from their national and cultural context, that this reaction is just a mere prejudice from the Iraqis in the face of something they ignore or never have experienced. But is it the case?
A History of Sabotage
Despite Iraq not sharing a direct border with Occupied Palestine, the country was a target for countless Israeli aggressions during the last century. Even before the foundation of the Israeli entity in 1948, contact has been made as early as the thirties through the Jewish agency with some Kurdish groups in northern Iraq. In the forties and fifties, simple contact was transformed into real military espionage committed by Kumran Ali Bedir-Khan a Kurdish leader with close ties to “Israel”.
These espionage attempts continued throughout the sixties as well until the rebellion started in autumn 1961 in northern Iraqi regions. Eventually, a larger scale training and supply operation to the insurgents in the north was launched following Kurdish leaders from the Kurdish democratic party (KDP) meeting with Israeli officials during that year.
Israeli attempts to destabilize the country go back to at least the sixties when the Israelis intervened with the help of the SAVAK, the former Shah of Iran intelligence Agency, to assist the militants of the KDP led by Moustafa Barazani. The insurgents agreed on this supply training Israeli operation in 1963 following their initial hesitation. There were reports about unidentified arms cache in the region, and Mossad agents never found any difficulty accessing the northern zones in Iraq to fuel the insurgency.
In August 1965, the Israelis provided a training course code-named Marvad (carpet) for Peshmerga (the military force of Barazani at that time). Israeli-backed militias not only destabilized the region and attacked Iraqi military personnel and installations, but also civilian infrastructures. Attacking the Kirkuk oil field which produced a large portion of Iraq’s Oil at that time was one of these attacks.
Mustafa Barzani accompanied by Israeli Occupation President Zalman Shazar in the Occupied Lands,1968
Following the Shah of Iran signing the 1975 Algier agreement with Iraq, Israelis objected to the Shah and called it a “betrayal to the Kurds.” This abandonment led to the KDP’s demise and a subsequent de-escalation of the violence in the north, although contacts with “Israel” were maintained afterward.
The first official acknowledgment of the Israeli occupation’s aid to the insurgency dates to September 29 1980 when Prime Minister Menachem Begin disclosed that “Israel” had supported the Kurds (KDP) “during their uprising against the Iraqis in 1965–1975.” Begin added that “Israel” had sent instructors and arms but not military units.
Israeli Field Hospital Helping the insurgency in Northern Iraq between 1963-1973
In 2004, the Israeli media reported on meetings between Masud Barzani (who would become president of the KRG in 2005 ), Jalal Talabani (who would become president of Iraq in 2005 and serve in that office until 2014), and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. Relations continued to flourish as the PUK became entangled with this illegal normalization according toIraqi Legal code 111 of 1969 in its 201st article.
As a part of its “Peripherical alliance” strategy, the Israeli occupation tried to sow division in the societies surrounding it. It tried to ally itself with every ethnic or religious minority in the Arab world as well as surrounding states like Turkey or the Shah’s Persia. The objective of this article is not to bash Kurds as ethnicity in any way. For instance, many Kurdish factions resisted colonialism and Zionism such as the PKK who fought the Israeli occupation in 1982. Kurdish factions in general, have been a target of Israeli subversive actions, due to the complexity of the Kurdish national cause that the Israelis tried to exploit.
For the first time, this time publically at least, the normalization efforts have been extended to wider sectors of the Iraqi society outside of the “Periphery doctrine.” These efforts have intensified with the recent normalization wave that included UAE, Bahrain, and other countries like Morocco. New faces have appeared on the scene in parallel with such normalization such as Wisam al-Hardan’s The head of the Awakening Groups and Sahar al-Tai, among having called to normalize with “Isreal” following the previously mentioned states’ model. “The UAE and Saudi Arabia are backing these efforts” according to Iraqi Popular Mobilisation forces.
Haaretz Israeli newspaper mentioned another level of normalization that is happening mainly on social media. Besides the older Facebook and Twitter page “Israel in Arabic” that was launched in 2011, another Facebook page was created in 2018 called “Isreal Speaks in Iraqi (dialect)” to target Iraqi society specifically. The article says that many operate under the cover of linking Iraqi jews to their heritage and introducing “Israel” to the Iraqis.
The article mentions the page admin stating that the 2003 war opened up new channels of communication with Iraqis, this communication has been made easier with the signing of the normalization deals with UAE and other countries. Iraqis with second passports are being brought to Israel with the pretext of “tourism” since 2018, which the organizer claims to be independently done from her work for the occupation government as an administrator of the page. The page publically calls for normalization and launches polls to investigate the views of the general audience.
The stumbling project
The Iraqi government and various political parties expressed their firm rejection of the “illegal” meetings that were held by some tribal figures in the city of Erbil in the Kurdistan Region, which called for the normalization with “Israel.” Arrest warrants have been issued against the participants of the “Peace and Reclamation” conference in Erbil. One of the main speakers of the conference Wissam al-Hardan has been suspended from his post as the head of the “awakening movement”.
After an illegal meeting took place in Erbil discussing normalising ties with Israel, dozens of signs have appeared overnight in Iraq rejecting normalising ties with the Zionist entity. Iraq against normalisation 🇮🇶 pic.twitter.com/Abj9Ankrmy
In the light of these reactions, a general popular rage is engulfing Iraqi Streets while activists on social mediacalled for all participants to be held accountable for the crimes committed according to Iraqi law. Iraqis haven’t forgotten not only the injustice of the Israeli occupation against their Palestinian and Arab brethren but the role Israelis played in insinuating and calling for both major wars launched by the US against their country in 2003. A war whose devastating effects are still evident today.
منذ الاحتلال البريطاني للعراق خلال الحرب العالمية الأولى التي انتهت عام 1918 لم تتوقف المحاولات الغربية لاحتواء العراق وخاصة لفصله عن امتداده الطبيعي إلى بلاد الشام حيث التبادل التاريخي والمعرفي والاقتصادي كان معروفاً بين مملكة إيبلا وبلاد الرافدين. وتشهد الرقم التاريخية والتطور الزراعي على التفاعل والتكامل والانسجام الحضاري والحياتي بين سورية والعراق على مرّ التاريخ إلى أن بدأت بالسعي لإلحاق العراق بسياساتها وربطه بمعاهدات متعددة في عشرينيات وثلاثينيات القرن الماضي وصولاً إلى حلف بغداد عام 1955 والذي كان يضم بالإضافة إلى المملكة المتحدة كلاً من العراق وتركيا وإيران الشاه وباكستان.
لقد كان الهدف الأول لهذا الحلف هو محاولة وقف نفوذ الاتحاد السوفييتي الذي كان قد وطّد ووسّع علاقته في تلك الفترة مع سورية ومصر. ومع أن الولايات المتحدة هي صاحبة فكرة إنشاء هذا الحلف ووعدت بتقديم الدعم الاقتصادي والعسكري للأعضاء إلا أنها لم تشارك فيه بشكل مباشر وإنما وكّلت بريطانيا للقيام بذلك، ولكن العراق انسحب من الحلف بعد ثورة 14 تموز 1958 التي أطاحت بالنظام الملكي الهاشمي وأعلنت الجمهورية واستقلّ العراق لأول مرة من النفوذ البريطاني، وانتقل مركز الحلف بعد ذلك من بغداد إلى أنقرة، وأقام العراق علاقات دبلوماسية واقتصادية وعسكرية مع الاتحاد السوفييتي، وبذلك أخفق هذا الحلف في وقف توسع نفوذ الاتحاد السوفييتي الذي وطّد علاقاته مع الدول العربية في تلك الفترة. ومع اندلاع الثورة الإيرانية عام 1979 أطلقت رصاصة الرحمة على حلف بغداد الذي اعتُبر من أضعف الأحلاف التي نشأت خلال الحرب الباردة.
ولكن محاولات احتواء العراق لم تتوقف وأسوأ تجلياتها على مرّ العقود الماضية كان نشوب الحرب العراقية الإيرانية بعد انتصار الثورة الإيرانية وبذل الجهود المستمرّة والمستميتة لفصل العراق عن عمقه العربي السوري، ومنع حتى إقامة أي علاقة وتواصل بين هذين البلدين المنسجمين تاريخياً وديموغرافياً وجغرافياً وحضارياً لأن التكامل والتفاعل بين سورية والعراق سيؤسس من دون شك لبنة عربية متينة قد تشكل قاعدة ومنطلقاً للعلاقات العربية السليمة والمجزية لكلّ المنخرطين فيها، ولذلك فقد كانت الحدود العراقية السورية دوماً أحد الأهداف الغربية وقد حرصت الدول الاستعمارية الغربية على خلق كافة الحجج والذرائع والمؤامرات لإبقاء هذه الحدود مغلقة في فترات طويلة من تاريخ البلدين.
إذ رغم كل الدعم الذي قدمه الغرب للعصابات الإرهابية منذ 2011 في حربها على سورية ورغم انشغاله في حرب إرهابية تدميرية في الداخل السوري فإن نظر الغرب لم يحد عن هذه الحدود وسعى إلى ضمان بقاء الإرهاب قربها كي يمنع فتحها والتواصل الحقيقي بين الشعبين السوري والعراقي لأن هذا التواصل سيعود بالفائدة الجمّة على البلدين انتماءً وثقافة وعروبة وحضارة واقتصاداً وتكاملاً حقيقياً. ولا شك أن كل الذرائع للإبقاء على هذه الحدود مغلقة تتلخص بأهداف الإدارة الأميركية القديمة الجديدة والتي تريد أن يكون العراق قاعدة للدول المنضوية تحت لواء الغرب وسدّاً في وجه روسيا والصين وإيران وفي وجه دخول الصين خاصة إلى منطقة الشرق الأوسط ومنع قيام أي مسعى وحدوي بين البلدين.
الغرب يعتبر العراق بوابة لنفوذه في الشرق الأوسط، ولا شك أن العراق بعمقه الحضاري ومؤهلات شعبه وثرواته الظاهرة والباطنة يشكّل عمقاً وحدوياً عروبياً وأن فصله عن سورية وإلهاءه بتحالفات غير قابلة للحياة وأثبتت فشلها على مرّ التاريخ يظهران أهمية العراق الحقيقية وإدراك الغرب لهذه الأهمية ومحاولاته تجيير كل مقدرات العراق لصالحه ونهب ثرواته وإلهاء شعبه بالخلافات الطائفية. من هذا المنظور يمكن أن نفهم كل محاولات التدمير والتهميش والاحتلال والحصار والعقوبات للعراق وشعبه على مدى العقود الماضية، وأن كل ما أثير من تهم له من أسلحة دمار شامل إلى غيرها كانت غطاءً بائساً لتنفيذ تلك الأهداف.
ولكن وبعد قرن ونيّف من أساليب وطموحات وطروحات الغرب هذه أصبح من البدهي أن يدرك أصحاب الشأن حقيقة ما يقال ومجافاته للواقع والهدف المراد منه؛ إذ لم يعد مقبولاً اليوم أن يشعر البعض بسعادة غامرة لأن مسؤولاً غربياً قرر أن يحضر مؤتمراً في بغداد وكأنّ هذا الحضور يشكل منّة أو قيمة مضافة في حين يهدف إلى تحقيق ما عجزوا عن تحقيقه من قبل من التواطؤ ضد نسيج العراق العربي وتواصله مع أهله وجيرانه واختراع تحالفات له لا مستقبل لها ولا تسمن ولا تغني من جوع بل تتركه فريسة لمن يتشدّق بحضارة بغداد، في حين تحلّ قواه العسكرية الطاغية قوة غاشمة على أرض العراق الطاهرة؛ تحتل الأرض وتنهب الخيرات وتدعم الإرهاب وتغزو الأسواق بمنتجاتها العثمانية وتروّج للطائفية وترسل الإرهابيين من الإخوان المسلمين في بلد تاريخه العيش المشترك والغنى الحضاري والتمازج الثقافي.
السؤال الذي يشغل بالي دائماً: لماذا لا نثق نحن العرب بقيمة ما لدينا؟ ولماذا لا نعرف أحياناً أهمية ما لدينا حتى يتم تسليط الضوء عليه من قبل الخصوم والأعداء؛ فنسعى حينذاك جاهدين إلى الاحتفاظ به أو تحريره من عدوانهم دافعين أغلى الأثمان في سبيل ذلك؟ لماذا لا نقتنع أن التكالب الغربي على بلداننا ومؤامراتهم ضدنا والتحالفات التي خلقوها لتمزيق صفوفنا وبناء الحواجز بين شعوبنا تعني أن لدينا ما هو ثمين وما يريدون الحصول عليه أو تدميره إذا لم يتمكنوا من انتزاعه منا؟ لماذا نحتاج إلى اعتراف الآخرين بأن موقعنا الجغرافي وثرواتنا الطبيعية والبشرية وعمقنا الحضاري وعيشنا المشترك عبر التاريخ يشكلون قيمة استثنائية لا يمتلكها الآخرون ويتوجب علينا الحفاظ عليها والاعتزاز بها من دون الحاجة إلى من يعترف لنا بذلك ومن دون الحاجة إلى شهادة من الخصوم والأعداء التاريخيين الذين ما زالوا يحطون من قدر بلادنا إلى أن يستولوا على مقدراتنا ويدمروها.
فهل تحتاج بغداد التاريخ إلى محتل عثماني ومتواطئ غربي كي تعرف قيمتها ومكانتها؟ وهل كانوا ليأتوا إليها لولا إدراكهم العميق لهذه القيمة؟ وهل يجوز أن تمتثل لما يريدون علماً أنهم برهنوا للمرة الألف أنهم يريدون للعراق التبعية فقط والوقوف في وجه التنين القادم من الشرق وأن تكون بغداد والقاهرة وعمّان سنداً لهم في وجه هذا التنين؟ إلى متى ستبقى المرجعية الغربية تذرّ الرماد في العيون ويبقى المستعمر الغربي متمادياً في نشر أوهامه عبر الأجيال أنه الأذكى والأقوى والأعرف؟ متى سيشكل العرب مرجعيتهم الخاصة بهم والمنطلقة من تقديرهم لذاتهم وتاريخهم وإمكاناتهم الاستثنائية ويمضون في التحالفات التي يختارونها هم بإرادتهم الحرة ولصالح شعوبهم وبلدانهم من دون ضغوطات أو إملاءات أو تهديدات من أحد؟ متى يكون الرأي حراً لا يتحكم به سوى الشأن الوطني والمصلحة العربية العليا؟
The list of candidates for the 1400 Islamic Republic of Iran Presidential Election has shocked and surprised only those analysts and reporters whose investigative skills have been rendered dull perhaps by covidus lifeosis (abnormal life caused by covid) or by sourcepenia crediblerrhexis (ruptured credibility due to an abnormal reduction in the number of informed sources) or by some other malady of unknown etiology. Had the baffled and the bewildered had their fingers on the right non-digitized social and political pulses inside Iran, especially those of the past twelve years, it is likely they would not have found the list shocking.
As a general personal rule, I do not get into peripheral details of political factions, personalities, and transient political lather, froth, and intrigues peculiar to election times and their aftermaths with audiences either inside or outside Iran. I often use the opportunity, however, to remind people of the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, relevant bodies and laws with respect to a specific election, and the degree to which given organs, oversight bodies, hopefuls, and candidates follow or deviate from those laws based on proven and credible public sources and records. When the Saker kindly asked me to write about the rationale behind the most recent finalized list of presidential candidates, I thought I could do something similar for this blog.
I am going to briefly discuss with you what I would, more or less, present inside Iran when I am invited to talk and hope the discussion proves useful in making sense of what is happening right now and what to expect in the future. I will focus this essay on three key areas: 1) The role and conduct of the Guardian Council as a review & decision-making body with respect to elections and candidates based on the constitution of the Islamic Republic; 2) Overview of “Who is Who” in the Iranian political scene as various political groups, factions, and personalities emerge and how these personalities and groups treating the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran with their words and deeds; and 3) The importance of the outcome of this year’s election for the Iranians, the people of the region, and the Resistance using an important official document released by the Leader, Ayatullah Khamenei, on the 40th anniversary of the Islamic Republic in 1397 [2019], titled “Gaam_e Dovvom_e Enghlaab,” or The 2nd Phase of the Revolution.[1]
1. The Guardian Council and the Final List of Candidates for Presidential Election 1400
The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran entrusts the Guardian Council with three major responsibilities: a) Oversight of all laws, legislations, and rules to make sure they are in accordance with the constitution AND fiqh according to Shi’a Islam; b) Interpretation of the Constitution where and when such interpretation is needed; and c) Oversight over all elections and their components including the qualifications and records of the applicants and their approval as candidates.[2] In a nutshell, the Council is obligated to use the tools and the authority given to it by law to guard and protect the Constitution and when an interpretation is needed, to make sure that interpretation is in accordance with Shi’a Islam fiqh.
As far as the presidential candidates are concerned, if someone openly and publicly expresses his rejection of the Constitution or its key components, for example, and there is solid proof of that, or if he acts in violation of key components of the Constitution and there is solid proof of that, or if he breaks the law and has a file in the legal system, then he should not expect to be approved as a candidate to run for the position of the president, which is the 2nd most important position in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran. This is regardless of how popular that person may imagine himself to be. Should the person of that caliber be approved, then the Guardian Council must be held accountable for breach of duties. This is not some revolutionary idea or practice. It is a wise and reasonable expectation of a body with responsibilities of that nature in any system of governance anywhere in the world.
Related to the approved list, a key question we must ask is this: Does the Guardian Council apply its evaluation and assessment of the applicants in a fair and unbiased manner, or does it appear that some applicants are being treated as more equal than others?
To answer the above question, I explain the structure of the Council and we could take a look at a few records of their past decisions.
The Guardian Council consists of 12 members. Six members must be “faqih adil wa jame’ushumul,” or well-rounded, just and pious religious jurist with proven records in fiqh and in justice. These members are selected and appointed by Wali Faqih, or the Supreme Leader, in consultation with Majlis Khobregan Rahbari, or the Assembly of the Experts in Leadership which is an 88- member assembly directly elected by the people. The other six members must be just, pious, and knowledgeable legal experts with proven records in their expertise. These members are nominated by the head of the judiciary and approved by a majority vote by the members of Majlis Shoraye Islami, or the Iranian Parliament. So, six legal experts and six religious experts are responsible for safeguarding the laws of the Constitution and the laws of the Religion (Shi’a Islam).
Perhaps the nearest similar body to the Guardian Council in terms of function is the United States Supreme Court. Of course, I am using the term “similar function” extremely loosely here since the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Guardian Council is in charge of guarding and protecting a constitution that has defense of the oppressed in the world as one of its important principles and the US Supreme Court is in charge of guarding and protecting whatever it is guarding and protecting to ensure the Global Arrogance can continue to arrogate, aggress, and wreak havoc upon the defenseless.
At least 7 out of 12 votes are required for an applicant to be approved as a presidential candidate. Once the list is submitted and published by the Ministry of Interior, it is considered final. According to the law, however, the Supreme Leader can use what is called “Hokm_e Rahbari,” or the Leader’s Decree, to make a change to that list. In the past 40+ years, only once did this happen. During the 1384 [2005] presidential election, when the list was published, Ayatullah Khamenei sent a letter the Council and asked them to add two additional names to the list of candidates for that year’s election. The text of that letter is as follows:
“Ayatullay Jannati, the Secretary General of the Guardian Council,
With salaam and greetings. Thank you for the great efforts of the esteemed Council and the important task of determining the competencies of the presidential candidates for the 9th presidential election. With due observance of the law in this order, it is desirable for people with diverse political preferences to have the occasion as well as the opportunity for their great test in the election. Therefore, you should consider the announcement of the gentlemen, Dr. Mostafa Mueen and Engineer Mehralizadeh as candidates.
Wasalaam Alaykum.
Sayyed Ali Khamenei,
1384/3/2.”[3]
The phrase “great test” in the Leader’s statement carries with it a significant message. From the perspective of our responsibilities before God, these positions of power, regardless of the position and level, are tests through which the strength of our characters and purity of our beliefs get authenticated.
The two candidates added to the list by the Leader belonged to the reformist camp. The augmented list now reflected a more representative list of the most notable political factions of that time. Some analysts later speculated that this addition led to a split in votes for Hashemi Rafsanjani and an ultimate victory for Mahmoud Ahamadinejad who was supported by the principlist camp during that election. Their speculation was based on an assumption that those who voted for Mueen and Mehralizadeh (the reformist camp) would have voted for Rafsanjani (the technocrat liberal economy camp).
Perhaps a parallel to this phenomenon could be drawn with the 1992 US presidential election when Ross Perot entered the race as an independent candidate and that led to a split in votes for Bush Sr. and handed a victory to Bill Clinton.
I find the claims regarding a split in Rafsanjani’s vote unsubstantiated though. I think a widespread sense of “anyone but Rafsanjani” at that time was much stronger than what some of those analysts are willing to admit.
At any rate, in subsequent elections and since then, every time the Guardian Council released the final list, given personalities sent letters to the Leader and asked him to add specific people to the list. However, the Leader never intervened again. Those who sent letters to the Leader, I think, do not really “get” why the Leader used his Hokm_e Rahbari authority that once and why he is unlikely to use it unless there are exceptional circumstances.
Despite what foreign media and their echo chambers inside Iran propagate, I think the Guardian Council’s decision-making calculus has been ameliorated in favor of a more diversified and less conservative list in reviewing applications by the Council. I also think that one-time mandate by the Leader had something to do with this change. There has been a few names in the 1388 (2009), 1392 (2013), and 1396 (2017) list of candidates that should not have been there had the Council’s vetting been more by the letter of the law.
2. “Who is Who” in the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Current Political Scene
If we use the Pareto principle and apply the general 80-20 rule to the socio-political scene in Iran and assume that 80% of the general voting population is influenced by the 20% political elites, then we could divvy up the 20% so-called elites into six somewhat loose categories based on what we see of the present political currents. I constructed the table below to give an overall sense of various groups and notable personalities in three areas of social, economic, and foreign policy stance. I based this categorization on what each group’s actual records show and not what they theoretically claim. The candidacy of the names in green was approved by the Guardian Council. The names that are crossed are known personalities that did not make it to the final list.
Each member of the Guardian Council casts its vote in writing and it is “Gheyre Alani”. That means, the Council members discuss each candidate’s application among themselves but cast a secret vote. So, none of the members knows who exactly voted “yes” or who voted “no” for a given application. In cases when an applicant did not make it to the list and he wants to know why, the Council reveals the content of the discussion to him and him only. However, if the applicant wishes for the discussion to be made public, then he must submit a written request to the Council and the specific discussions will be revealed. So far, I could not find any records of any candidates having submitted any such written request.
Since we do not have any credible report from the Council’s discussions, I will briefly review some of the publicly available records on two of the notable personalities who did not make the list. We examine potential reasons for why these two candidates did not earn at least 7 out of 12 votes. I would like to reiterate that these are my assessments and I have absolutely no access nor am I privy to the records of undisclosed discussions by the Guardian Council. The two applicants are Ali Larijani and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Ali Larijani. He is a well-known figure in the Principlist camp and most recently served as the head of the Majlis Shoraye Islami, or the Parliament. His brother, Ayatullah Amoli Larijani, who was the head of the Judiciary is also one of the 12 members of the Guardian Council. It appears Ayatullah Larijani was not able to persuade enough other members of the Council in favor of his brother. After the final list had been released, Ayatullah Larijani made the following public statement:
“Since the beginning of my participation in the Guardian Council in 1380 [2001] nearly 20 years has passed. In all this time, I have defended the Guardian Council even during the years I was in the Judiciary. But I had never found the decision of the Council so much indefensible whether in approval or in lack of approval for qualifications. This chaos is to a large degree related to the interference by security organs through false reports that exert undue influence on the decision of the members of the Guardian Council.”[4]
Ugh. I find the fact that Ayatullah Larijani participated in the discussion and did not recuse himself due to conflict of interest disturbing. But let us assume he has reached a level of Taqwa that he can keep his bias on a tight leash and explore if his displeasure with fellow council members is warranted.
One factual, publicly available, and verifiable information is this: Fatemeh Ardeshir Larijani is Ali Larijani’s daughter, (Ayatullah Amoli Larijani’s niece). In 2010, she relocated to the United States and has been living and working there for the past 10 years. Whether she is a citizen, permanent resident, or on an H1 visa or what not is not an issue. It is also a fact that Ali Larijani, her father, the rejected candidate, has served as a key member of the Supreme Council on National Security, the head of the parliament, and in many other important high profile positions for decades. The relation between Fatemeh Larijani and her family and relatives is intact, quite close, and ongoing.
Here is another fact: Many times, Iran’s nuclear programs, generals, and scientists have been openly, publicly, and shamelessly sabotaged, threatened, and assassinated respectively under direct order from top officials in the United States of America. The role the United States played in bringing the Iranian society to a brink of collapse in 2009 is quite public and azharu mina-Shams (more evident than the sun).
This is where things get even worse: In certain instances, security breaches led to significant damages to critical infrastructures as well as to the assassination of key scientists and top commanders in Iran. Disturbingly, some of the intelligence leaks (let us suppose inadvertently) were traced to close family members of top ranking officials with access to classified information as discovered by members of the Intelligence Ministry.
Here is one of the core concerns: should the Guardian Council wait until leaks linked to this particular person and this particular candidate actually occur and another disaster to happen in order to take a stance and say enough is enough? If Larijanies and the likes of them want to be free to do as they wish as private citizens, then so be it. They must relinquish their sensitive positions and do as they wish according to the law. But if they aim to occupy extremely critical positions of authority and responsibility in the country, then they must know there are constraints for themselves and their family members. It is not just about them. It has something to do with life, death, security, and the fate of a nation. Why should a whole nation pay the price for the self-indulgences of a few families?
In 2018, some families of Americans who had been detained in Iran on espionage charges, wrote letters to Trump administration to deny US visas to the children of top-ranking officials in the Iranian government. An excerpt from an NBC report at the time reads:
“The families have provided the administration and several lawmakers with a list of Iranian nationals living in the U.S. alleged to be the children or relatives of senior Iranian officials, including President Hassan Rouhani himself… The daughter of the powerful speaker of the Iranian parliament, Ali Larijani, is also on the list. She is a resident in internal medicine at an Ohio hospital, according to medical directories. The nephew of President Hassan Rouhani attended college in New York City and now works there, according to LinkedIn. The nephew’s father was the former top adviser to Rouhani, who stepped down after coming under fire from hardline opponents of the Iranian president.” [5]
Double ugh. It is not surprising that the Guardian Council did not place Ali Larijani on the final approved list for presidential candidates. It is surprising that the Council members grew a spine.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Among all post-war presidents of the Islamic Republic of Iran, from the construction era to present, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad may be viewed, without a doubt, as the most active and the most productive president in terms of construction, social justice programs, and public service during his 1st term of as the president of the Islamic Republic of Iran. His excellent record of public service continued well into the 2nd year of his 2nd term. I do not believe any fair and unbiased person would deny this.
With respect to Iran’s foreign policy and anti-imperial and anti-Zionist stance as well, one can name very few politicians that demonstrated the same level of boldness and courage as him. For sure, he pulled no punches.
Half way through his second term and beyond his time as president, however, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s priorities, statements, and conduct changed. The areas in which he was the strongest dimmed and areas in which he had weaknesses became more prominent. I do not wish to go into details of the political games into which he was drawn and questionable conducts of some of his closest associates from whom he failed to distance himself and a combination of factors that resulted in his political fall. Whatever the condition of his environment and associates, ultimately, he was the one who made the choice and he was the one who presented his application for the position of president.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had an excellent team of hardworking and honest ministers working with him. Many of those excellent workers and ministers, however, have long distanced themselves from him and have expressed unwillingness to work with him again for various reasons. A domineering and overbearing quality to his relationship with those who worked with him seem to be among those reasons. An attitude of “either my way exactly as I say or highway,” with various ministers and organs in the executive branch, with members of Majlis, with the Judiciary, with the Leader, and with many others and of a clear disregard for the law is not exactly an appropriate attitude for a wise chief executive officer of a country, an Islamic Republic at that.
Muhammad Vahdati, the former head of the Center for Studies of the Ministry of Interior, has spoken at length about what may have happened. I would like to quote for you here excerpts from his statements that I found illuminating:
“Of course, those public service works were the product of a team work that was done by a system consisting of the administration, the ministers, the governors who themselves now, those very same hardworking ministers and governors, more than 90 percent of them have distanced themselves from Mr. Ahmadinejad’s current position. Now, here is the question, a person who was once an eyesore for the arrogant powers such as the US and Israel, why is he marked and regarded today as a prey and a beacon of hope for those very arrogant powers? And why do the enemies sense that they must invest in him and that he could deal such hard blows to the system that the US Americans themselves are incapable of doing?”[6]
What Dr. Vahdati is alluding to is a series of interviews with Ahmadinejad conducted by Western/Saudi-financed media outlets and aired by their lie factories regarding the war in Syria. About three months ago, in a televised interview with the Lebanese TV Channel, Al-Jadid[7], Ahmadinejad lumped together the Resistance fighters and Russia in Syria with the ISIS, Jubhatu-Nusrah, and other West-Zionist backed fighters. He said they must all leave Syria as none of them are helping the Syrian people. He also made other noteworthy remarks of similar nature that one could usually hear from Zionist-controlled media.
I seek refuge in God Himself when He seeks to test us.
Here, I would like to bring a bit more of Dr. Vahdati’s interview from the archive of the Ministry of Interior since it sheds some light not only regarding Ahmadinejad’s attitude and conduct but also on social and historical context that ushered him into the office of the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran about 15 years ago. He states:
“But the reasons for his [Ahmadinejad’s] fall: the first one is his pride. Pride knocks down a human being. It is one of those types of sins that God will punish in this very world. Even if he is a believer, even if he is a warrior of God fighting in the warfront. If one becomes afflicted with pride, God will very quickly pinch his ear. Who do you think Satan was? An angel very high up in God’s Presence. Who had worshiped God as much as Satan?! Several thousand years of worship. But its pride and arrogance caused it to be rejected and become Satan, the Outcast.”
“The 2nd reason, I think, is Mr. Ahmadinejad’s inaccurate analysis of the reasons for his victory during his first presidential term. This incorrect analysis of his own situation caused his pride to be further inflated. He had this thinking that he and he alone had made this wave. So, you do know that main Principlists and other conservative camps at that time sought after more famous people. Even the Isargaran camp that Mr. Ahmadinejad was part of its main council, that council, too, went after another candidate. Well, at that time, Mr. Ahmadinejad was not very well known. He had just recently become the Mayor of Tehran. Even that opportunity was provided to him by the Principlists. He claimed that the Principlist factions did not support him. He even claimed that the Leader’s office had suggested to him to remain in Tehran’s Mayoral Office since he had just become the Mayor of Tehran. He, therefore, claimed, “I myself created this wave therefore I do not need any support from the Priciplists.” But the truth is this: Mr. Ahmadinejad did not create that wave. He rode it. Even the Leader and the Revolutionary forces had done a lot to raise awareness in those years and unravel the enemy’s complex plot. In those days, there were even talks of silent dismantling of the government. Many people did a lot to reveal the true essence and aim of the so-called Reformist movement that was being superintended by the [US] Americans.”
“It was the efforts of all these people that once again brought to the fore the revolutionary dialogue and a need for skillful management of the society. In the very first achievement of that wave, you saw in the victory of Chamran’s Team in Tehran City Council elections. But before that, a very different dialogue had dominated the scene. The atmosphere at that time was such that whoever was the most extremist and the most bellicose against the system, he would get the most attention.”
“For example, someone would say the religion and power must be separated. Another would say we must run bullets through Imam’s thoughts. Another would say religion is not only the opium of the masses but it is also the opium of rulers. Yet another would say ‘are our people monkeys to emulate?’ Mr. Abbas Abdi, for instance, was saying, ‘we could do street demonstration against God.’ And things like this.”
“Okay then, it took a lot to change those sorts of dialogues. Mr. Ahmadinejad relied on this new wave of reviving the revolutionary dialogue and began riding that wave and claimed he was more revolutionary than others. It was because now that dialogue had gained currency. On the other side, the Principlists who had gained an opportunity, they provided that opportunity to Mr. Ahmadinejad in Tehran Mayoral Office. It was under these circumstances that Ahmadinejad was able to beat his rivals in that particular arena and use the opportunity as a springboard.”
“The third factor was his grab onto power and an emergence of a serious power-seeking spirit from within him. That means, Mr. Ahmadinejad was gradually afflicted with the very same problem against which he had gone to war. His main reason to oppose Mr. Hashemi [Rafsanjani] was Mr. Hashemi’s [Rafsanjani’s] affliction with power grab and exclusivism. For instance, those around Mr. Hashemi [Rafsanjani] during his second term had been saying they should do something so that Mr. Hashemi’s [Rafsanjani’s] presidency becomes a life-long position but the Leader vigorously opposed this and said it is against the constitution. Mr. Mohajerani who was at the time the president’s [Rafsanjani’s] legal advisor was saying, ‘We need to change the constitution, to reform it, so that he could become a president for at least one more term.’”
“So, what they did to remain in power was the establishment of the Kargozaran Sazandegi and the formation of a coalition with the Leftists who had by then become isolated. Eventually, we saw those with whom the public was dissatisfied because of hardships and widening of the gap between the rich and the poor. So, those people returned with a new slogan and kept their grip on power.”
“Mr. Khatami’s administration in fact revolved around the Kargozaran as its main axis. This was a left-over administration from Mr. Hashimi’s [Rafsanjani’s] presidency. Similarly, Mr. Ahmadinejad, in the final days of his first term and the beginning of his 2nd term, had reached the conclusion that in fact the only one who can save the country is him. He believed the reformers had no religion and the Principlists did not have what it takes. Consequently, his main preoccupation was what would happen after his 2nd term was up.”
“So, we remember that the first appointment he made in his second term, he made Mashaei as his first assistant secretary. The Leader privately wrote to him that that decision is neither a prudent decision for the country nor a wise decision for himself. But in order for him to push this decision on the system, he brought forth all he had. In doing so, he set fire on his entire political capital. From 11-day Sulking to abandoning his office to picking fights with Majlis.”
“It is not necessarily a bad thing for a political current to try to bring its most powerful people to the scene in order to remain in power but Mr. Ahamadinejad’s idea was not this. He had very capable ministers in his team like Mr. Lankarani, Mr. Nikzad, Mr. Babaee, and Mr. Fattah. However, he told them if they came forward for candidacy, he would publically announce that they were not with him and he would not support them. He viewed them as the ‘system’s people.’ He wanted to bring someone to power who was his person.”
“The other factor was that ideological deviation with which Mr. Ahmadinejad became afflicted. Or, we could say his presence in power caused that disease to manifest itself. And the role the ring around him played to worsen his situation cannot be denied. Gradually, this mentality was formed in Mr. Ahamadinejad that ‘following a Wali Faqih is for the time that we have no direct access to an Infallible Imam (AS). Today, we are directly connected to the Imam (AS) and we no longer need to accept the wilayat of this faqih.’”
“So, you see we are facing two Ahmadinejads: One is the Ahmadinejad belonging to the beginning of the 9th Administration and with those worldviews and the other is the Ahmadinejad in the 10th Administration fully deviating from the frame of mind he had started his first term and, in many places, he even became defiantly oppositional with the first one.”
If I were to summarize Ahmadinejad’s situation, I must say that had he been on the approved list of the 1400 presidential candidates released by the Guardian Council, it would have been quite shocking. It would have demonstrated the Council was not living up to the responsibility of guarding the Constitution.
Just to close the file on the 20% political elites and all their protests and grievances, I would like to re-post a segment of Imam Ali’s (AS) letter to Malik Ashtar about the elites in the society that I had quoted in one of my previous articles regarding Imamat and Wilayat:
“O, Malik! Your most favored tasks must consist of the ones that are the most balanced with the truth, the most encompassing in justice, and the most comprehensive in gaining the public’s gratitude. That is because the public’s anger makes the satisfaction of a few elites useless and the anger of a few elites become null and void when countered with the satisfaction of the public. At the time of great abundance and comfort, no one is more wasteful for a governor than the elites. At the time of hardship and challenges, no one is more useless than the elites. At the time of fairness, no one is less pleased than the elites. At the time of asking and wanting, no one is more persistent than the elites. At the time of generosity, no one is more ungrateful than the elites. At the time of refusing to cater, no one is more unforgiving than the elites. At the time of calamities, no one less patient than the elites. So, the pillar of religion, the crowd of Muslims, and the most ready to fight with the enemies are in fact the public. So, your attentions and your desires must be devoted to them.”[8]
3. Election 1400 and the 2nd Phase of the Revolution
As stated in the introduction, on the 40th anniversary of the Islamic Republic of Iran in 1397 [2019], the Wali Faqih Ayatullah Khamenei released a declaration titled “Gaam_e Dovvom_e Enghlaab,” or The 2nd Phase of the Revolution directly addressing the Iranian Nation. The document is important in that it gives a concise and significant overview of the past 40 years and notable lessons, a general assessment of the present, and a clear map and direction for the future.
When the document was released two years ago, many people, organizations, and movements at all levels from local mosques to academic centers of higher education took it and said “Labbayk” (i.e. “we heard your call and we will do what we must”). Several of the candidates that submitted their application for the presidency actually stated they were doing so in order to have responded to the Leader’s call. Those interested could find the link to the entire document here. I would like to highlight segments that I think provide important cues to what is ahead in terms of the upcoming election, the qualities of the next president, and the areas where both the nation and the officials must focus.
The Ideals of the Revolution: In the introduction segment, the Leader states,
“From among all oppressed nations, very few nations undertake a revolution. And among those who rise up and have a revolution, even fewer are able to carry the work to its final phase. Except for changing the ruling system, few have been able to preserve their revolutionary ideals. With the great revolution of the Iranian nation, however, which is the most significant people-based revolution in modern era, it is the only revolution that went through a forty-year honorable period without betraying its ideals. It protected and preserved the authenticity and dignity of its slogans despite all sorts of seemingly irresistible temptations. Now, it has entered into the 2nd phase of building self, the society, and the civilization. Salutations from the bottom of my heart to this nation, to the generation that began the revolution, and to the generation that is ushering it into the grand global process of its 2nd Forty-Year.”
Therefore, the next president must not only believe in the Revolution’s ideals but help realize them for the nation inside and for the oppressed outside.
Balance and Justice in Foreign Policy: In another segment of the document, the Leader clarifies:
“The Islamic Revolution of the Iranian nation has been strong but kind and tolerant even when unjustly treated. It has never committed the excesses and deviations that brought dishonor to many other uprisings and movements in the world. In no challenge, not even with the [US] America and Sadam, did it ever fire the first shot but always and in all cases, after the enemy had attacked, it defended itself and of course executed the counter attack with force. This Revolution, from the start until today, has neither been ruthless and bloodthirsty nor cowardly and hesitant. It has stood up unambiguously and courageously against arrogant bullies and transgressors and has defended the unjustly treated and the oppressed. This revolutionary valor and affability, this truthfulness, transparency, and strength, and this global and regional domain of action on the side of the oppressed of the world, is an honor for Iran and the Iranians. May it always remain so.”
In addition, the next president must be wise and courageous at the same time. Neither should he be bellicose to pick fights nor fearful to face a challenge with strength. Being on the side of the oppressed of the world is given. Ayatullah Khamenei highlights 7 specific areas that require great attention and defines each area in a way they serve as a roadmap for those who are willing to take action. I will close the essay with a particularly uplifting segment for the region.
“Strong Iran of today, just like the beginning of the Revolution, is facing many challenges from the Arrogant Powers but with a meaningful difference. If the challenge [for Iran] in those days was to cut off the [US] America’s and foreign hands from the nation or to close the Zionist regime’s embassy in Tehran or to expose the Den of Spies [the term that refers to US embassy in Tehran], today, the challenge for the US with Iran’s presence at the borders surrounding the Zionist regime and dismantling the illegitimate influence and presence of the [US] America from West Asia, Islamic Republic’s defense of Palestinian fighters at the heart of the occupied territories, and defense of holy flag of Hizbullah and the Resistance in the entire region. If in those days, the West’s problem was preventing Iran from buying even the most primitive forms of arms for its defense, today, its challenge is to prevent the Iranian arms, military equipment, and drones reaching Hizbullah and the Resistance everywhere in the region. If in those days, the [US] America imagined it can overcome the Islamic System and the Iranian nation with the help of a few self-selling Iranian traitors, today, it is finding itself in need of a large coalition of tens of hostile yet impotent governments to fight Iran. Yet, it fails.”
[3] IRI Guardian Council News Site. “The 9th Election: Participation and Competition in Two Rounds.” News Code: 3152; Published on line on Khordad 21, 1392 [June 11, 2013]. Accessed online at: Shora-GC.ir
[4] Mehr News Agency, “Amoli Larijani’s Criticism of the results regarding approved candidates list.” Khordad 4th, 1400, @ 17:31. News Code: 5220521. Accessed online at: mehrnews.com/xVpkg
Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei says Iran is stronger than ever as the country marks the 32nd anniversary of the passing away of its revolutionary founder Imam Khomeini.
“I start the discussion from here that among the revolutionary systems and establishments that have been formed in the last one or two centuries, I do not know of any system that has been predicted as much as the Islamic Republic to collapse,” the Leader said Friday in a televised address.
“From the first day of the revolution, the ill-wishers and those who could not digest and tolerate this great phenomenon, both inside and outside the country, said that the Islamic Republic would not last for another two months, six months or a year,” the Leader said.
“It was one or two years ago when the esteemed Americans said the same thing and a high-ranking American official stated that the Islamic Republic would not see its 40th anniversary. I do not remember so many predictions of decay and collapse to have been made about any other system,” he added.
Ayatollah Khamenei was apparently referring to former US national security advisor John Bolton’s infamous prediction while addressing a terrorist MKO convention in Paris in 2017.
At the conference Bolton said, “The outcome of the president’s policy review should be to determine that the Ayatollah Khomeini’s 1979 revolution will not last until its 40th birthday. And that’s why, before 2019, we here will celebrate in Tehran.”
“But, thank God, the revolution and the system of Imam Khomeini not only did not collapse and did not stop, but became stronger day by day,” Ayatollah Khamenei said Friday.
“It did not surrender, did not give up and rather showed its independence day by day. It achieved great success and overcame obstacles.”
The Leader said despite many successive political, security, economic obstacles created for Iran, “the Islamic Republic today is more developed than 40 years ago and is ahead in all respects by the grace of God.”
“The question arises, what is the secret of this permanence? Why did the Islamic Republic not face the fate of other revolutions in spite of all this hostility? Here I announce that the glorious and proud secret of this system is two words: the Republic and Islam. The existence created from these two words has every right to remain permanent, because it includes both people and Islam.”
Every year on the anniversary of the passing away, a commemoration ceremony is held at Imam Khomeini’s mausoleum in southern Tehran, with large crowds of mourners attending.
Like last year, authorities scrapped the ceremony and other events across the country this year to prevent the spread of the coronavirus. Nevertheless, people in different cities attended local events by observing social distancing, to pay tribute to the late Imam.
Ayatollah Khamenei said Imam Khomeini’s outstanding initiative was that he created and introduced the idea of the Islamic Republic and then realized it.
“The great work of our esteemed Imam was to create this idea and theory of the Islamic Republic and to introduce it into the field of various political theories, in which there were various Eastern and Western political theories,” the Leader said, adding Imam Khomeini then took action and put his theory into practice.
“The Imam had many initiatives but the Islamic Republic is the most important initiative of the Imam,” the Leader said. “This is the same religious democracy that was recognized as the Islamic Republic.”
Addressing the youth, Ayatollah Khamenei said, “You, the youth, who have not experienced the pre-Revolution era, it is hard for you to feel that era.”
He recollected that people played no role at all in their destiny, especially during the dark tyranny of the Pahlavi dynasty.
“The Imam brought the people to the field with a leaping movement. The nation believed in itself and the Imam used the great capacity of the nation’s ability and will, and with his leadership and guidance, he was able to take it to a stage where he could do great things,” he added.
There was a time, the Leader continued, when the Islamic Republic was a sapling, and now it is a robust tree which cannot be uprooted by any storm.
Grand Ayatollah Seyyed Rouhollah Mousavi Khomeini, better known as Imam Khomeini, passed away on June 3, 1989 at the age of 87.
Plot to divide nation, eradicate religious democracy
Ayatollah Khamenei called Iran’s religious democracy a “divine gift”, but warned of plots by the enemies to undermine it.
“Thank God, after the departure of the Imam, the Iranian nation preserved this divine gift and this religious democracy,” he said.
“The enemies of Iran, who made all kinds of efforts to separate the people and make them lose belief in religious democracy, had their plot thwarted and every time they tried a new way they faced the steel barrier of the Iranian people,” the Leader said.
“It is the same today. The enemies are lying in ambush to drive a wedge between the people and the Islamic system, but they are facing the steel barrier of the Iranian people. They plotted both security and intellectual invasion, all of which failed.”
Ayatollah Khamenei said there are some people inside Iran, who either knowingly or unknowingly repeat the claims of the enemies.
“The idea that democracy does not go hand in hand with religion is also the claim of the enemies. Of course, some may say this out of negligence. They should know that this is the talk of the enemy and the enemy wants to eradicate Islam… It is a great mistake if we alienate democracy from Islamic thought and spirit.”
Press TV’s website can also be accessed at the following alternate addresses:
![Khomeini For All: Kashmir Marks Imam Khomeini’s 33rd Demise Anniversary [Photos]](https://english.alahednews.com.lb/uploaded2/media/media1654164221.7369.jpg)
![Khomeini For All: Kashmir Marks Imam Khomeini’s 33rd Demise Anniversary [Photos]](https://english.alahednews.com.lb/uploaded2/media/media1654164222.8739.jpg)
![Khomeini For All: Kashmir Marks Imam Khomeini’s 33rd Demise Anniversary [Photos]](https://english.alahednews.com.lb/uploaded2/media/media1654164228.5223.jpg)
![Khomeini For All: Kashmir Marks Imam Khomeini’s 33rd Demise Anniversary [Photos]](https://english.alahednews.com.lb/uploaded2/media/media1654164230.2379.jpg)
![Khomeini For All: Kashmir Marks Imam Khomeini’s 33rd Demise Anniversary [Photos]](https://english.alahednews.com.lb/uploaded2/media/media1654164236.3958.jpg)
![Khomeini For All: Kashmir Marks Imam Khomeini’s 33rd Demise Anniversary [Photos]](https://english.alahednews.com.lb/uploaded2/media/media1654164238.0018.jpg)
![Khomeini For All: Kashmir Marks Imam Khomeini’s 33rd Demise Anniversary [Photos]](https://english.alahednews.com.lb/uploaded2/media/media1654164244.0541.jpg)
![Khomeini For All: Kashmir Marks Imam Khomeini’s 33rd Demise Anniversary [Photos]](https://english.alahednews.com.lb/uploaded2/media/media1654164245.4611.jpg)
UPROOTED PALESTINIANS: SALAM ALQUDS ALAYKUM 
