Let’s Have a Referendum. Not!

Why are we still debating the return of Pahlavi?


Share/Save/Bookmark

Let’s Have a Referendum.  Not!
by LalehGillani
04-Dec-2008
 

I am still a new kid in this Iranian.com block, still testing the waters, still holding my tongue. And it is in true Iranian fashion that I author these words humbly, paying reverence to the veterans and seasoned writers first and for most. Although I am no longer a youngster by any stretch of the imagination, I am a child of the revolution; a kid robbed of a “normal” childhood and forced to grow up fast in the chaotic streets of Tehran.

There were no tea parties for me, no doll-houses, no juvenile role plays, no casual strolls down our alley, no blushing at the sight of a first crush. I wasn’t groomed in the art of traditional Persian cooking or Gillani dress making. Instead, I threaded my way through childhood by re-enacting war games of political rallies. I passed out subversive pamphlets to my playmates and spray-painted the outhouse with militant slogans. I pretended to assemble Molotov cocktails and burned tires to counteract the effects of the make-believe tear gas.

And later on, when my father exiled me to the countryside to be rehabilitated under the watchful eyes of his oldest sister, I decorated the family farmhouse with red revolutionary cries and before long returned to Tehran resembling a guerilla who had just stepped out of Iran’s northern jungles. By my adolescent years, after the war with Iraq was already in progress, I hosted family send-offs to the front-line and catered funerals.

In fewer words, my childhood was plagued by politics, and as a result, my adult life is peppered with persistent whys:

-- Why aren’t we free?
-- Why are we still debating the return of Pahlavi?
-- Why aren’t we united to reclaim the legacy of our uprising?
-- And on a lighter note, why can’t I call Khamenei a moron on TV?

In 1944, when Mosaddeq together with nineteen other Iranian patriots founded Jebhe Melli, the modern struggle of Iranians for democracy was born. Today, that struggle is sixty four years old. Numerous lives have been sacrificed at altar of freedom, and thirty years have passed since the last revolution, but our political activities are still confused, still calling for a referendum to determine the future of our nation.

Our motherland has said no to the Pahlavi dynasty, has rejected the dark ages of mullahs, has dismissed the advances of Mojahedin-e Khalq to tryout another flavor of Islam, and still awaits the revelation of a new, coherent proposal from the radical left.

As a child of the revolution, I have earned the right to say on behalf of my motherland, “What part of no don’t you understand, gentlemen?” And as an Iranian woman who is anything but a “silenced, mute, and answerless mother,” [see eroonman's "The Little Prince"] I submit to you the fruit of my labor: Generations of patriots and freedom fighters raised by Persian mothers since the dawn of our civilization. Unite them to change our future!

A referendum in the current environment of Iran is a joke at its best and a fraud at its worst. Upon whom will we bestow our trust to conduct and monitor such a referendum? Corrupted civil servants eager to sell their services to the highest bidder? How about a mishmash of various political groups, each with a different agenda and allegiance? Even better, we can forgo the headache and aggravation altogether and turn the whole referendum over to an international monitoring group. Wait! When was the last time we trusted foreigners to do right by us? Does anyone still remember the outcome?

What our nation needs is not another half-baked referendum but a group of founding leaders who by the courage of their convictions are driven to spell out our rights as the citizens of an ancient civilization:

-- We pay homage to no foreign power;
-- We reserve the right to defend ourselves against any and all foreign intruders;
-- We wish to rip the riches of our land to feed our poor;
-- We hunger for peace to build a better future for our children;
-- We bestow power to a republic encompassing all ethnic groups within our borders;
-- We grant temporary power only to elected public servants;
-- We reserve the legal right to dismiss public officials and prosecute them for abuse of such power;
-- We possess the inherent and non-alienable rights to freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion, freedom to bear arms, freedom to assemble, and freedom to demonstrate.

Once these collective principles are recognized by Iranian political factions, the road for democracy is paved; if denied or bent to suit one’s own interests, we have with all likelihood another tyranny on our hands.

The seeds of freedom are sown by bold patriots whose unwavering principles embrace a nation together until democracy takes roots. Our rights as the citizens of an ancient civilization must not be up for debate or subject to the outcome of any referendum. We need not another referendum! We need unity under the Derafshe Kaviani, a 5,000 year old symbol of Persian resistance towards oppression, a banner risen by a common man to topple tyranny.

Will you heed his glorious call to unity?]=


Share/Save/Bookmark

more from LalehGillani
 
default

You Must be Joking...

by Anonymous Wow! (not verified) on

The author says:

You call them mistakes; I call them murders. Under the Pahlavi Dynasty, there were political prisoners held in the dungeons of SAVAK. Several members of my family were amongst them. I still have relatives who bear the scars of torture from that era. Please don’t insult my intelligence by repeating SAVAK’s propaganda to legitimatize murder. Talk to my aunt who still mourns her only son…

Wake up and smell the roses. This is NOT 1979. Yes, shah was NOT perfect, but neither were iranians, and those in prisons were far more imperfect than the shah. The evidence is in front of us that 95+% of those in Savak's prisons are alive and well in leadership positions in iran, and are among the worst of iranians, the same people who are easily killing and destroying iran today at the head of IRI. The remaining few who were imprisoned by mistake, were just gullible people and likes of them exist in ANY country. Do you think there are no innocent people imprisoned in the west (or even tortured - have you been listening to daily news?)? We KNOW that the true innocents were so few. We should defend them, but not at the expense of throwing out the baby with the bath water.
.
Author says:

We had no freedom of press, freedom of speech, freedom to assemble, freedom to demonstrate, or any legal means by which to change that system. Revolution and armed uprising were our only option.

Is this a joke? Get out of your ivory tower and see the realities of the world. The revolutionaries did not care an iota for iran and iranians. Study each and everyone of them's curriculum vitae that is so transparent today. They revolted because they saw a softness in the system and used it to the fullest, first by deceit and then by arms, to take over a country FOR themselves, NOT for the people. They were thugs with thuggish ideas. Do you really think that islamists (khomeini and his gang) or leftists (rajavi and his gang) or so-called intellectuals (yazdi and his likes) cared about iran and iranians; the same people who were defending murder of iranian generals without the due process in the first week that they were in charge. Do you really think that they cared about innocents being imprisoned or tortured or killed? Which one of those revolutionaries raised a voice to defend likes of Hoveyda (without due process) to masses of imprisoned iranian students.

We had all sorts of freedom. What fraction of iranians wanted the kind of freedom that you are talking about and for what purpose? Where are they now? We had every freedom except for those few who wanted to do what islamists did, scream fire in a theater and cry wolf, to create chaos and take over the country. For a country who had single digit literacy (when reza shah came to power), had no idea what the outside world looked like, these were secondary issues. Even today, people are not complaining as much about your kind of freedom as about not being able to make a living while those innocent "prisoners" of shah's regime mismanaging and looting the country.

You are looking for something that does NOT exist. Even if it existed, there are so many thugs in iran that would NOT allow a perfect regime, or anything remotely close to it, to survive in iran for a single day. We saw that when Bakhtiar came to power; we already tasted that recipe.

We have not seen anything close to progressiveness that shah brought to iran in the last 30 years, and I am afraid that we will not see anyone close to the goodness of the late shah ruling iran in another 30 years. Thugs will defend their interests at all cost.

But what if we LET people decide about pahlavis, rather than YOU and ME deciding for them the same way what Khomeini decided their fate. Isn't that the democracy that you are preaching, or is it only a democracy as long as it agrees with YOU?


farrokhzad

Ms. Gilani, answer my question

by farrokhzad on

I asked earlier about rights. What rights do Iranians have? Are these rights earned or god given? 

I get the feeling that you take it for granted that Iranians have some rights other than what thay had before or what they've got now. And that their government, be it IRI or monarchy, OWES them certain things? Is this true?  

If so, explain where these rights came from? Explain if they fought and won them, were vigilant to keep them, or someone, a god or a king, bestowed it upon them. 

I get the feeling that when it comes to democracy or equality, everyone in the world thinks it is their god given right. I disagree.  


David ET

Please read first before thinking of what to answer

by David ET on

I am glad that we are having this conversation. That was my intention when I initiated the SOLUTIONS and when I wrote the LETTER to Reza Pahlavi or brought up the issue of REFERENDUM. We Iranians must take the time to address and discuss what is best for the future of Iran and I think such discussions among The People will help bring us all together.

Some step out of bounds by making mischaracterizations of what was said but then we are adults and can patiently handle such falsifications or even angry words here and there for the higher cause...that is just part of the process 

In fact , I believe if we really take a deep look within, most of us have more in common than the lines that we think divide us. Most of us want the same things for Iran, Iranians and ourselves  but we each think of different ways to achieve them and those principals that we want are in fact more fundamental than the tactics and strategies of how to achieve those goals.  Therefore I disagree that Unity is for charlatan. Unity is the presently self-denied possibility, based on the same principals that we all seek .

The important question is, in future Iran how can we assure ALL SECTORS can securely and freely participate so that the best ideas and solutions prosper and how can we assure that if we do make mistakes along the way (and we will), we can revise them peacefully and through democratic means than through more suffering or bloodshed. I personally see a democratic republic as the only path that can assure this because any permanent family or ideology by nature will sooner or later not allow changes that could jeopardize its own existence and survival.

The revolutions by The People did NOT happen in a vacuum. Shah and Pahlavi family are directly responsible for most of the environment that caused the uprising. It was the dictatorship and fear that we Iranians lived under that gradually lead to the events of 1978 and 79. Any other view of revolution as an isolated incident lacks the proper logical, social or historical explanations. 

How can you convince me and majority of Iranians that Shah's regime was not an political dictatorship of extreme kind?!: I lived it, I saw it, I felt it and I experienced it and no I was not a revolutionary, Islamist, Marxist or anything. Just a young person simply wanting to read, see, learn and someday participate. I was just a high school and later university student who lived under the extreme dictatorship and saw friends simply being taken away for only reading books and some for absolutely no reasons at all and this was in 1975-79 period. I heard and saw these innocent young KIDS cry in the dorm for things that was done to them and for things they had never done! We lived in fear. I sometimes had to run through batons just to get to classroom or get out of them. I was engineering student in two universities of Pahlavi in Shiraz and Tehran University and experienced the dictatorship and fear in both. I was an 18 year old whose student card for no reason was taken away and had to go to SAVAK to be questioned adn threatened, just to get my card back so I can go back to classes. I have physically and emotionally moved beyond those days long time ago but PLEASE don’t tell me that Pahlavi family were abused by Iranians and shed crocodile tears for them!!!! It was them who abused the trust that Iranians put in to them and in to the shah that they actually loved! I also remember when Reza Pahlavi was born, and that was a very happy day for Iranians after years of waiting and 3 wives. I also remember the crowning ceremonies and how we were all happily glued to televisions . That too was a happy day for Iranians. I remember everyone was decorating their streets and alleys with colorful papers and light bulbs at their own cost. I remember the 2500 year festivities and how beautiful the streets were  . People loved their shah but it was an abusive relationship on his part. That is what I called treason by dictionary terminology  "A betrayal of trust or confidence. " and then monarchist get angry with me because I just say it like is. How else can you call what Shah did to his people? It was like an abusive marriage that The People put up with after 1953 for 26 years, until they just could not take it anymore and please and don't tell me Shah had no choices but to imprison, mime or even execute and even not allow simplest books be be read or published. Of course in the vacuum of political educations any charlatan can sell his ideas but that is NOT people's fault. It is the fault of those who did not allow political education and involvement . Shutting off the alternatives only makes them more appealing from a distance as bad as those alternatives might be (and you are not allowed to know that!)  

As for taking us to the 20th century , yes Pahlavi's did that but that let's not go too far with it either, so did turkey (and they didn't even have oil) and many others did around the world in the same time period. Shift from Feudalism to Capitalism was just an economic necessity for an oil producing ancient country such as Iran and the west.  Today Tehran is filled with highways , high-rises, modern bridges, cell phones, most number of bloggers etc.. and this happened under Islamic republic so does that make them a good regime?!!!!  

Lack of democracy, freedom and human rights is at the core of the failures of both Pahlavi and Islamic Republic and if we continue to sacrifice our freedom of choice and jump to grab the next piece of meat that is thrown at us , I assure you we will remain where we are ONE WAY or ANOTHER.

Laleh is right: Permanency creates corruption and I add that in order to maintain that permanency, they will take away your freedom and violate your human rights, sooner or later!

As for the results of the revolution 30 years ago, I DO sympathize with some of you but as much as I try and understand your conclusions and for reversion to the failed Royalty , I can not agree with your desperate call .

"Ghalat Kardam mentality" will not get us anywhere and even worse than that, "the desperate give me ANYTHING but this" mentality that some of you are promoting is exactly the mistake that was made 30 years ago. On one hand you call that a mistake but the other hand you are proposing the same mistake again!!!

Iranians have been under dictatorships of Shahs for  2000 years and also have been under the influence of Islam and Mullahs for 1400 years and since the days of Safavid's in to Ghajar dynasty they have been jumping and arguing between one or another, not realizing that both prescriptions that Iranians have become so accustomed to are bad for them and their only salvation is to release themselves of the chains of both of of our R idols : Religion and Royalty.

The missing part of Farokhzad's story of the girl who was promised to become a movie star and ended in the whorehouse is that in fact he is suggesting the girl to go back to another guy who also abused her in the past!  Unless the girl steps out of the two relationships that she had been conditioned and accustomed to (shah or Mullah) and starts to believe in herself (We the People) instead of promises of the two guys  (permanent Royal or religious symbolism) , she is facing the same  prescriptiosn for repeat of the same abuses . Standing on her own feet may be difficult but it is the only way that s/he can guarantee that she will not end up abused by the two guys who always have promised the best of things before they trap her and then do the worst to her .

I continue to repeat the most important FIRST LINE of our SOLUTION and that is to BELIEVE IN OURSELVES and nobody else , no Shah , no Mullah, no foreign power....NOBODY! 

I also have a question for Monarchists and those who think they may deserve a chance: Would you have still routed for Pahlavi's if Reza Pahlavi did not believe in constitutional monarchy? and if no, what guarantee do you have that he will not turn to a dictator? And even if he doesn't during his rule, what if he gets assassinated or after his death when another Pahlavi takes over  who is a dictator? My point is aren't you really just trying to give RP a chance and if so what's wrong with trying to make him a president than a Shah if you belive in him? If it is about Reza , he can have more power as a president and if its not about Reza, then who?!! How can I be assured that the next member of this permanently placed family will respect my freedom?

NO! I am not worried about few luxury cars and palaces, a crown and nice clothes. In the big picture I don't care about a reasonable expenditure on those symbols either. It is the power and the relationships that will slowly accumulate over time within the royal family in a constitutional democracy that scares me and many others, especially in a developing country such as Iran that has not experienced democracy much and the same logic applies to Religious hierarchies, but in a 4 year presidency with checks and balances it is harder to create such dictatorships.

and YES Iranians live in the Middle East and majority of our people are shia and ..... NO we are not British and Belgian, so please lets not even go there!


LalehGillani

Mistakes or Murders?

by LalehGillani on

“There were plenty of wrong things with that regime, but not to the point of committing a suicidal revolution.”

You call them mistakes; I call them murders. Under the Pahlavi Dynasty, there were political prisoners held in the dungeons of SAVAK. I still have relatives who bear the scars of torture from that era. Please don’t insult my intelligence by repeating SAVAK’s propaganda to legitimatize murder.

We had no freedom of press, freedom of speech, freedom to assemble, freedom to demonstrate, or any legal means by which to change that system. Revolution and armed uprising were our only option.


LalehGillani

What About Islam?

by LalehGillani on

“But you miss an important point: Islam. You think it will disappear from Iranian politics?”

Islam will never disappear from Iran and our politics. However, mullahs have done an outstanding job of putting on display its true nature. In other words, they have done to Islam what the Dark Ages of Inquisition did for Christianity.

I applaud you for pointing out that the religious right will reorganize and run for parliamentary seats. Yes, they will. Following a bloody revolution that will topple the mullahs, whatever is left of the radical religious right will bid its time to crawl back into power. We ought not to underestimate their resolve.

After the defeat of Hitler, the Nazi Party and their ideology became illegal in German. In the same fashion, in our future constitution, our legal scholars and experts must devise ample safeguards to protect us from various flavors of Islam. For the details of such a plan, I respectfully defer to them.


default

RIP Islam

by Anonymous Fereydoon (not verified) on

Iranian Monarchy was the only defender of iran. Without it there would have been no iran.

Islam, on the other hand brought iran nothing but destruction and backwardness from the day that it set foot in Iran. Any ideology based on islam did exactly the same. The evidence has been in front of us for the past 30 years. No Iranian Monarch did as much damage to iran, iranians, and iranian culture in his/her entire regime that IRI did in a single year.

However, for IRI to survive, and for its supporters to be able to continue to feed on Iranian wealth, the ONLY way is to belittle anything iranian and deny the superiority of Monarchy over anything Islamic. That is well expected for islamists to defend occupation of "our" country by "their" arab brothers and arab ideology of evil Islam and devil islamic republic.

Iranian Monarchy was never continuous: it has been defeated many times, for much longer than 30 years, by Alexander, by arabs (Omar), by Changiz, by Tatar, and by second coming of arabs (khomeini). Each and every time, the aggressors were eventually repelled. This time too, the arab aggressor and their islam and their 1979 islamic occupation of iran by arabs and their traitor supporters will be repelled and replaced by an "iranian" system of government whose roots are from Iran and who are protectors of iranian culture.

Iran Hargez Nakhaahad Mord,
Islam and IRI Bezoodi Khaahad Mord.

The only way for arabs and their supporters to rule iran is to belittle iran and anything iranian, and deny iranian achievements. Otherwise Islam has NO merit to stand on its own ugly feet by itself, let alone to compete with iranian achievements. The traitor supporters of IRI who belittle Iran so that Islam and IRI can rule and destroy iran will be thrown out.

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNTgwdJA-Cw&feature...

The arab religion and arab way of living belongs to arabia.


default

You dont like the Pahlavis,

by Ali S. (not verified) on

You dont like the Pahlavis, simply because you didnt live in Iran during those days to really understand how the country was when they were on the throne. And also you dont have any education, you havent read about all the things and contributions they did for our country. Ok, iam not saying that they didnt do any mistakes, they did, but at the same time what government doesnt make any mistakes? Or do you by any chance mean that human beings are perfect? Everyone makes mistakes, so do you!
Some of the so called "projects" that these mullas have worked on where projects from the Pahlavi time and initiated 35 years ago!

Instead of talking so much why dont you act? Dont dit there and critisize the Pahlavis and their supporters, do something! At least they are doing something to bring a change!

I wonder why iranians forget good deeds so fast and easily...


Darius Kadivar

Dear David E.T.

by Darius Kadivar on

 

My reaction is not one intended to deny or belittle an opinion that differs from mine be it yours or Mrs. Laleh Gillani. It is simply a natural and Fatalistic observation on the recurrent incapacity of members of our community in offering constructive conflict resolution proposals aimed at reaching a common platform for eventual cooperation and Unity.

You cannot on one hand come up with a Blue Print For Unity aimed at rallying people with different political or ideological aspirations and virtually simultaneously impose what the final outcome of such a Unity should imply particularly if aims some form of National Reconciliation around a set of common values.  That’s NOT “Conflict Management” (as you seemed to imply initially through your different Road Map blogs for Unity ) but on the contrary simply another “Conflict Creation” behavior added to the existing pile of  unresolved conflicts that has maimed us for the past 30 years.  

How else do you want to put two people with staunch ideological preferences or working methods to cooperate on a given assignment ( THAT IS REGIME CHANGE )  if you give an ultimatum to one and a pat on a shoulder to the other ? I am sorry, but I don’t see the logic ?

  What you have simply done is outline the values of a Secular Republican Party or government of your choice. There is absolutely Nothing Wrong with that, but then don’t call it a Platform for Unity. How else can you then expect a Monarchist, an Anarchist, a Communist, a Reformist, an Atheist or even a Religious community member  who does not like the Regime in Iran accept to cooperate with you if you ask him to give up on his ideals as a precondition to Unity ?  May I remind you that the French Resistance  gathered people of ALL political and social backgrounds who shared a common goal: France Liberation from the VICHY Government and German Occupation. They had communist members, socialist members, Right Wing and Left Wing coalitions, as well as monarchists ( dreaming of restoration who believed that the Republic was responsible for the Capitulation to Foreign occupation), secular republicans ( at Odds with Pétain’s conception of the French Republic and Constitution), religious Orthodox belonging to different churches ( Protestants, Catholics, Jewish, Muslims,  etc… ),  Military and civil servants ( who felt that the Pétain government had betrayed the Republic) and anyone who opposed the Regime of Pétain, rightly equated to a Treacherous government that had slept with the common Enemy: Nazi Germany. Now can you claim that the French Restistance was a Political Party  ? Certainly Not but rather a Movement. I know very well that the term “Resistance” is high jacked by nearly ALL political parties today in exile, who like to claim to be the Only Resistance Organization to the Islamic Republic. This is anything but the truth but it flatters their ego and all for the wrong reasons and any honest or sincere person would know that such a behavior is Not what a Resistance movement is all about. Resistance is a subversive behavior shaped by extraordinary circumstances that opposes a people ( and not just a party) to a given establishment. From this point of view “Revolutionaries” can coherently call themselves “Resistants” but the contrary is not always the case since as I mentioned above people who belonged to the Resistance were equally Secular Republicans, Christian Democrats ( that is Not Secular), Monarchists or anyother ideological  group.  So what gathered all these different tendencies under a single banner ( The Resistance) and ultimately under a single Leadership ( De Gaulle) ?  The Freedom of their country.  In the case of Iran, I do not consider the current leadership in “absolute terms” as being synonymous as Pétain’s collaborative Regime with that of a Foreign or Alien leadership since they are Iranians and that from an international geo political point of view our country is not occupied by foreign forces (God Forbid). However Like Pétain’s Regime it is a Criminal one that Iranians at large (with the rare exception of the country’s Reformists and IRI apologists and Lobbies ) believe should be replaced by preferably a Secular Democratic One.  

So pragmatically from this “shared” point of view, what is or can be the Purpose of a Platform or Blue Print for Unity other than Regime Change ?

Those who associate Regime change ( something we have all wished for at least ONCE in the past 30 years was not born with George W. BUSH and the War on Terror ! ) With Military Attack are simply distorting the word to other purposes one being reducing ANY OPPOSITION to the IRI to OBLIVION !

So Let's Leave that type of simplistic interpretation to the term and intentions of REGIME CHANGE  to the likes of IRI lobbyists and IRI Apologists like Soraya Ulrich or Hamid Debashi.

Given the fact that You are a Democrat and I don't think that you harbor anyother motive than seeing a Free and Democratic and Secular Government in Iran that Respects Human and Individual rights it appears to me that you contradict yourself when drafting  a blueprint for UNITY Aimed at precisely this goal by.suggesting what the "Form" of the future regime has to be and that is a Secular Republic rather than leaving the Choice on the "Form" and Not "Nature" ( which we all agree HAS TO BE DEMOCRATIC) to the Validation of an Election. For a Referandum IS A DEMOCRATIC ELECTORAL PROCESS. By adopting this attitude I am simply reminding you that It is presumptuous and untimely for someone who is drafting a proposition for UNITY. I did not Draft such a proposition so there is no contradiction in me expressing my preferences for a Constitutional Monarchy. If I had to draft such a proposition I would not bother to mention a Constitutional Monarchy as a PRE REQUISITE to UNITY. In that case why not create my own Constitutional Party all the more useless that it already exists and doesn't need my endorsement. Nothing stops you to say you wish for Iran a Republic and will do everything in your capacity to make that option come true in terms of debate or political struggle and/or campaigning but That cannot be a pre-requisite in a Draft aimed at Uniting beyond your own constituency or political Family. 

Otherwise Why should we even bother to draft a Blue Print for Unity in the first place ? That is why a Referendum makes sense for it leaves an equal chance to both Republicans and Monarchist ( In analogy to Democrats VS Republicans as in a PRESIDENTIAL REPUBLIC or Conservative VS Progressive in a CONSTITUTIONAL MONARCHY ) as well as to other parties to either rally behind the Party that has the biggest chances of winning or on the contrary suggest their own political philosophy of choice.

From this Point of View then indeed The Outcome of such a choice would be “permanent” in terms of Nation Building, NOT  in Terms of Political Democratic Life and Practice!

Indeed Because Given that if the "Constitutional Monarchy" wins it will have to include the right to the existence of a Republican Party ( which is the case in Spain and England and in all Constitutional Monarchies in the West who can rightly claim to be democratic) and Vice Versa if a "Republican State" becomes the Choice of the Majority then it will also have to agree with the existence of a Constitutional Party (Allowed in France, only they have never truly won seats in Parliament).

Up to each to win seats in the Parliament and claim their legitimacy through democratic means in the future.  So when we are speaking about a Political Outcome in terms of Nation Building, this has nothing to do with the Pre Requisite Conditions for Unity in order to achieve a given common goal which is : REGIME CHANGE.  This is why a Blue Print for Unity CANNOT be anything but A DRAFT to Conflict Management. It CANNOT impose a given ideology on anyone before Submitting that choice to the Nation as a Whole and through Elections. That is Why after a Regime Change it is Only Logical to Suggest a Referendum given the political and historical realities of our country and the debates that will arise whether in favor of a Republic, a Restoration or Federal Government in a free and democratic atmosphere. People have to be given to chance to choose what they want for their future and that of their children and not be imposed one without their full awareness and free choice.  You mentioned the issue of Emotion. Well Let me remind you that ALL ELECTIONS ARE EMOTIONAL ! When it comes to Casting your Vote in the Ballot Box you don’t do it for the Love of your neighbor but your OWN Interests and Preferences.  What we can best hope for is SERENITY and EQUAL OPPURTUNITIES ( Time, Media Coverage, TV publicity, etc … ) FOR DEBATE is given to ALL PARTIES or groups to EXPRESS THEMSELVES FREELY and as Long as they Respect Civil Peace and subscribe to the Pre Requisite Democratic Conditions and values ( much of which you rightly even brought up in your Road Map). That is why I believe that your comments were misleading when calling on Unity with the Precondition of accepting a Secular Republic which in effect leads to division rather than coalition with those you intend to rally to your cause. And I very much doubt that it is in the interest of Unity to marginalize a constituency or encourage dissidence amongst democrats who simply differ in choice on the “FORM” and not “PRINCIPLES” of the Future System of Government.    Without entering into a detailed comparative historical study between Iran and another country and time span, I nevertheless think that what comes immediately to mind in our contemporary World History when speaking of a constructive movement towards Unity in the form of civil resistance or civil disobedience, that of Poland’s Solidarnosc is probably the most realistic and pragmatic form I can think of ( Same thing for Tchekoslovakia with Dubthcek and Vaclav Havel reform attempts which ultimately led to direct opposition to the regime and soviet occupation).  As you know Solidarnosc in Poland and the leadership of such a movement fell upon one of its founders Lech Walesa while a Moral support was given to him by a Respected Community member who happened to be the Pope of the Catholic Church of Rome: Pope Jean Paul II. The Fall of the Regime of Jaruzelski however did not lead to a Religious Theocracy nor a Constitutional (Religious) Monarchy ( Given that the Pope is actually considered as a Monarch) for that matter despite the fact that Solidarnosc also included sympathizers of both systems. Ultimately what was chosen was a Secular Republic and ironically the Flag became the Royal Flag of Poland with An Eagle and Crown.  So I do not see an incompatibility in having someone like Reza Pahlavi a former Crown Prince support or make an Appeal to Unity towards his compatriots based on mutual respect between all political groups or parties just like the Pope did in Poland ( which does not mean RP is a “Religious” Leader or “Authority” like the Pope was but simply a Secular Moral Supporter for Freedom and Democracy in his country who happens like the Pope to be a Public figure with a Historical heritage or background that gives him that leverage). After the Fall of Communism the Polish could have well designated the Pope as Prime Minister or President had he not been a Pope. Had he been or Royal Heritage he might as well have been named Constitutional King if Poland was faced with such a historical Dilemma in the aftermath of the Collapse of Communism. It just happened that UNLIKE Iran, Poland already had a long Republican History (Second Polish Republic)  before WWII  with roots dating back to the same era as the American Revolution  and continued to be one ( albeit undemocratic ) under the Soviet Imposed Communist Republic. So instead of the having the Pope lead such a mouvment ( call it peaceful revolution or civil disobedience or even reform) that honor and responsibility fell upon Lech Walesa and it was only within the Democratic Framework ( Constitution) and System of Government ( Republic) established AFTER  the fall of Communism,  that he became President ( given that the option of a Monarchy was not even an issue in Poland since the 18th Century). As a Result the Solidarnosc Movement ( a Syndicate initially) naturally turned into a Political Party amongst other existing parties. But Solidarnosc UNLIKE What You Propose did Not become THE STATE but Simply a Party within an Amended Parliamentarian System which was established and happened to become known as the 3rd Republic .  I am not going to draw an exact parallel between Poland and Iran for as you know History never repeats itself nor are the social, cultural and historical issues identical from one country to another. However the political dilemma’s do often follow similar patterns and from this perspective they deserve attention.  Beyond that, do I or more adequately political leaders or thinkers have all the adequate answers to all the issues facing us as a nation today ? I don’t think so. Reza Pahlavi is one amongst many others in the public eye who has suggested something that seems to me to be one with some coherence in regard to Regime Change and which he outlined in his book Winds of Change. Now I am not a demagogue and I don’t claim that we need to follow that book like the BIBLE or KORAN or TOZIHOL MASSAEL. I think that Iranians and Iranian Society have matured enough today in distinguishing a political program from an established Constitution ( which Winds of Change IS NOT). Unless of course and it is your right that you believe in reform of the existing Theocratic Regime into a Perfect Secular Democracy. That I believe was already on Khatami’s Agenda as that of the so called Reformists and as you know they are bidding for a second chance today .Why Not ? I just don’t believe that is possible and as far as I have read your own blogs, neither do you nor as you can read from the articles and ideas of many notable Iranian activists does someone like Akbar Ganji who says openly that the Theocracy cannot change in the lines of what the reformists have been suggesting for many years with no result. Maybe Ganji  is wrong but if so then why should we even bother with UNITY ?  I believe that if we are suggesting and hoping for Unity today it is with a very clear aim that was wrongly presented by many IRI lobbyists or IRI apologists as Warmongering Treason due to the American Neo con’s Rhetoric and various military threats and challenges in the region. If there is ANYTHING Treacherous it is those who want to HIGH JACK OUR PATRIOTISM in the name of neutrality. How Can we Be Neutral or UN EMOTIONAL when all the current regime has accomplished in more than 30 years has been of the most ABJECT & CRIMINAL  NATURE be it with Medieval Laws which you are just as aware of as me or through its recurrent Political ASSASSINATIONS, TORTURE AND SUPPRESSION OF DISSIDENCE. And then there are still people who ask us as IRANIANS to take part in negotiating with this regime and its henchmen ? NEVER ! UNITY Only Makes Sense if we call for REGIME CHANGE and if people in the current system wish to join such a coalition to overthrow that regime ( Peacefully if Possible but on the other hand no one said it was going to be a Boy Scout Passtime and expect them not to defend themselves if aggressed or threatened by Revolutionary guards ) they will be most welcome, otherwise I do not see what we have in common.  So it all boils down to finding common ground amongst Democrats Regardless of our own preferences and initiate a movement and NOT a Party with a common Objective: REGIME CHANGE ( WITHOUT MILITARY INTERVENTION).  HOW ? I DON’T KNOW ;0)  for I am not a political leader nor aim at being one but all I can hope for is that such a movement if supported by the Diaspora and its intelligentsia as well as Iranians inside can eventually lead to the resurgence of personalities who have both the will, and popular support as well as vision to lead us towards that goal very much like Solidarnosc in Poland.  Until then I think that anyone who claims to want to Unite or aims some form of leadership cannot afford rejecting a given constituency only because of his or her preferences. As Such I do not think that Reza Pahlavi has ever rejected the idea of a Secular Republic nor has he even suggested wanting to be President if the People chose a Republic as form of Government. He has simply Suggested that he is willing to be a Catalyst for Change.  You may think he is wrong or think what gives him that privilege and not anybody else ?  You want my Sincere Answer ? NOTHING. ;0) It just happens HE IS AROUND with the name and what is associated to it symbolically and historically. I welcome and encourage anyone from Akbar Ganji to Yourself who drafted the UNITY blueprint or Any Left Over Qajar Prince to fill in the Vacuum if they think they can do that. If you can achieve it all the better, I am even willing to endorse it but then what are you guys waiting for. DO IT !  All I am Saying it that RP and his constituency represent an Opportunity that should not be neglected if it proves constructive all the more that it will definitively be a unique and historical Opportunity that would resonate with the aspirations of the Constitutional Revolution of 1906 that has shaped and strongly defined what Iranians for generations have been aspiring to and that is A SEPERATION OF POWERS: LEGILATIVE and EXECUTIVE.   Does that mean we should follow him Blindly like we did with Khomeiny ?  Certainly Not because contrary to that Revolution based on nothing but blind demands for Change, we are speaking for Change based on a Clear and Transparent Constitution. All the Islamic Revolution offered as a Program and Blue Print was the TOZIOL MASSAEL and Death to This or Death to That.  We are Asking for a Clear and Transparent Constitution and the challenge we are facing is one that equally faced by  American Constitutionalists ( if you are a Secular Republican in System terms I mean not Party ) like  Thomas Pain, to Benjamin Franklin or Thomas Jefferson is Drafting the American Constitution or The Bill of Rights. Whose Revolution Was PRIOR to the FRENCH Revolution and in that Supported by France King Louis XVI  AND BY European Constitutionalist ( in the Mashrooteh Sense) then your Challenge will be similar to those in Great Britain After Cromwell or Spain After Franco who drafted a Constitutional Monarchy ( King or Queen REIGNS but does NOT RULE)  as we see them today in these countries.  But the STRUGGLE TO GET TO EITHER ONE I Humbly believe Requires UNITY on ESSENTIAL VALUES AND PRINCIPLES. Not the ULTIMATE SHAPE ! The Other Scenario is to walk alone or support the Reform Mouvement in Iran and the likes of Shirine Ebadi ( The Only Respectable One with no Blood on Her hands ) or Ibrahim Yazdi ( Mr. Green Card), Rafsanjani ( Who owns half the country) or  Khatami and Co.  

In the END depending on one’s conscience it is a question of CHOICE and TRUST !

Don't Know if I was More Clear nor do I claim I have the Answer but the Least we can do as Democrats is not to be Ambiguous !  

My Humble Opinion.in this HEALTHY AND WORTHWILE DEBATE which I think is worth pursuing on such a public and democratic platform which the Iranian.com has become.

In the meantime and looking forward to pursuing it in the future with you and other on this thread or elsewhere, Have a Nice Weekend !

Best,

DK


Q

RIP Iranian Mondarchy (540BC - 1979AD)

by Q on

it's history, and so are nearly all its supporters.

I applaud your article it is in fact honest and refreshing. Too many people want to always say the popular (in their own narrow circles) thing rather than the true thing. But you miss an important point: Islam. You think it will disappear from Iranian politics?

People who think there will be dramatic change toward "western" seculocracy if the IRI falls are dreaming. Such a scenario cannot even be contemplated because the manner in which most exiled hotheads "advocate" the "eradication" of current Iranian government will ensure that even if executed, we will never get past the issue of "legitimacy" for any successor regime.

But let's say, by some miracle, tomorrow morning we wake up and Iran has a full-proof, robust and cultured parliamentary democracy like France with proportional party representation and no restrictions on elections. If this were to happen over night by some miracle, what will be the result?

There will be multiple religious parties organized immediately, and these parties will form a coalition that will win the majority of seats or at the very least such a large minority that nothing can be done without their approval. Anyone who is under the illusion that Islam will disappear (even so-called "political" Islam) in a post IRI Iran is truly insane, does not understand reality, or is simply a closet fascist who has no concept of actual democracy, or all 3.

If you don't think the same (significant) portion of the population that is keeping the current government in power, can't play a western democratic game, you haven't been paying attention to Pakistan/Turkey/Lebanon or Palestine. Islam is a powerful tool to rally people in times of uncertainty. Islam is popular. Islam knowns how to organize much better than anybody else in the middle east, and Islam will win.

There will be a coalition that will be Islamic oriented that will easily control any kind of parliamentary republican Iran. This coalition will have members that are so fundamentalist, they make the current IRI look like Sweden. Iranian politics will go through years of gridlock and uncertainty at best, and break apart, at worst.

what's the lesson? Radical change won't work. There can only be a gradual reform from this point on.


default

Majid

by KavehV (not verified) on

You're trivializing the concept of monarchy and don’t see the benefits of a cultural-figure monarch, but many of your countrymen do.

If you want a more autocratic monarch, that would be fine with me.
If you want a secular republic, that would be fine with me, as well.

But they have to be protected from future Islamists, somehow.
In any form of post-IRI regime, we DO need an ANTI-ISLAM institution, because there will be one hell-of-a post-Islam hang-over for many decades and need to ensure that another bloody Islamic rampage will NEVER EVER happen again!
Monarchy, especially the first Pahlavi, was an effective counter weight to the reactionary Shia-Islam that has plagued the nation for centuries. The second Pahlavi has been effective in promoting his country as a civilized place and established solid relations with many countries and their institutions. This, they have done well!

BTW, you do get your SAVAK, or SAVAMA for free with any autocratic system of your choice.


farrokhzad

ay Kaveh jan

by farrokhzad on

"there's a HAPPY median you know! and that's WE, US, well being of Iranian people, with no fear of Savak or Savama."

No SAVAK? No SAVAMA? OK. Then who is going to protect us from WE? 

Are you really naive enough to think absolute, utopian freedomas are possible? You guys keep holding on to dreams of an absolute Jeffersonian democracy while people suffer. you are holding out for heaven and won't settle for anything else (while you live outside Iran).

This is not a game.  This is for keeps. People are suffering and the country is dissintegrating. Shouldn't we grab whatever is possible for us?

(ghaach-e zeen o' bechasb, savaari peeshkeshet!) 


default

Question: Why are we still debating the return of Pahlavi?

by Amir Khosrow Sheibany (not verified) on

One Possible Answer: Because it was not "OUR uprising", as you put it.


Half the population of Iran were not even born when the Taazi regime presented their referendum. 75% of the population today, myself included, were too young to have a say in the 'uprising' as you put it or the referendum that soon followed.


On the term uprising' I would like to respectfully remind you that "Enghelab Nakardeen". And as such, as to the 'legacy of your uprising' as you put it... Thank you.... But no thank you. I for one will stick with the institution of Shahanshahi within a modern 26th century framework.


And on a lighter note, why can’t you call Khamenei a moron on TV? Hmmm. Let me think about that one, and I will get back to you later.


Majid

KavehV

by Majid on

"If he becomes a monarch again, his role should be not more than greeting foreign figures, conduct charity work for various causes and travel as an Iranian cultural emissary, a cultural figure. They were good at this in the past and should be able to continue."

In other words....BOENO POR NADA, GOOD FOR NOTHING!

Then just why do we have to HAVE such a "figure" to begin with?

Oh....every great nation has one, even "Bees and ants have a king and Queen" why not us?

Between "Zel ollah OR Aayat ollah" there's a HAPPY median you know! and that's WE, US, well being of Iranian people, with no fear of Savak or Savama.

ps. "They were good at this in the past and should be able to continue."

 In what past? When?


default

Please keep the Mullahs in Power!

by Nokteh (not verified) on

Folks, no need for anyone to return, we deserve whatever we have, we have sacrificed so much to keep them in power whether it was during the blessed revolution or the war with Iraq or the good omen of their coming to power during the past 30 years through multiple natural disasters, proliferation of drugs amogst the youth, social anarchy, economic banckruptcy just to name a few. Please be proud of what we have achieved and keep them in power. I am not joking, if we have put up with this .... for 30 years that means we can handle it and we don't deserve anything better, otherwise they would have been gone long time ago.


default

Javid Asst Shahanshahi Iran

by AvestA (not verified) on

Durood Aha in joyed Shahrex work well done - i am a believer of Shahanshahi for Iran and i also fundamentally believe that the enemy number [1] in Iran is Islam and I well fait it with my belad.


default

Whichway?

by Zedeh Engelab (not verified) on

اینک ز بعد سی‌ سال هر کس ز خویش پرسان

`ما انقلاب کردیم، یا انقلاب ما را؟`


farrokhzad

Dear David

by farrokhzad on

I'd like to address two complicated points you mentioned in your post here.

1- you said:, "Let's face it the only ones who bring pictures to demonstration are Royalists and Mojahed's! You call that unity?!"

I don't see a contradiction here.  Unity does not prohibit preference for leadership or policy. Unity is based on a common denominator. The larger that common denominator, the stronger unity. In hard times, such as what we are experiencing in Iran, common denominators become very small or disappear, and preference becomes absolutist, as you have observed.   This type of preference is different from Maryam Rajavi's idea of unity which is "everyone can have any type of government they wish so long as it is the type I dictate". Even Ms. Gilani, with her obvious good intentions, fails to see the irony in her rejection of a referandum as somehow "undemocratic" just because she prescribes it so. Refrandums can be improved or safeguarded, but they can not be rejected outright. We must work to include different preferences into a democratic system, even if it means backing off of our own possible absolutist preferences.  we have to work to find a common denominator, any one, and grow it a tiny bit as a start.

2-  you said, "everyone is equal and we do not accept some prince or his family be treated better or have more rights than others."

This is one of oldest divisions among mankind, and the basis of a great philosophical debate, long predating racism, sexism, and all other bigotry:  the idea of man being ruled by man. Xenephon in Cyropaedia (about our own beloved Persian king Cyrus), says, "It is easier, given his nature, for a human to rule all other kinds of animals than to rule his own kind". It is not natural for you and I to accept a prince as better than ourselves (dogs do it willingly and have smoother running societies). I felt that way for a long time too.  I must confess, for the longest time, it was my biggest gripe about monarchy. But, with time, realizing the value of a symbol in our culture, realizing Pahlavis are good, patriotic Iranians, realizing the utter lack of options, I am more inclined to give one man lots of money, fancy clothes, and a good life if it means a peaceful night's sleep for millions of my countrymen. It's a long discussion, for sure, but it has its own merits. 


farrokhzad

Afarin Jamshid

by farrokhzad on

For having the courage to say you made a mistake. It's a beginiing to our [re]awakening.

WE, the people of Iran, put these monsters in power.  They didn't have to fight for it. All the had to was fool us with their promises.  They knew our vanity would trip us.  They told us to get rid of the Shah because " we deserved better than this"! And when they took power, they took everything we had. We, the people of Iran, submitted. Now, many like Ms. Gilani, cry foul! Nonesense. She says "as a child of revolution", she has "earned the right ...". NO! As a child of revolution she has earned NOTHING! She/we have LOST everything.  "az maast ke bar maast". Now we have to fight doubly hard, give more blood & tears, and, maybe in our life we'll get back to what we had under the shah. Maybe we'll go farther this time. But nothing will happen in a state of denial. 

Anyone can take a pretty girl out of a village by promising to make her a movie star. But, when she ends up in a whorehouse, she must realize her mistakes. What the pimp promised her was not her right. It was bait. She should be so lucky just to make it back to her old village life in one piece.  Maybe her daughter can become a star by working hard. Bute her chance is past. 


jamshid

Re: David ET

by jamshid on

I was one of those who said NO to Monarchy 30 years ago. I not only loudly said NO to monarchy, I even participated in its overthrow. I celebrated the victory of the revolution. I praised it. It was the victory of the people over a tyrant.

Today, I know I made a mistake. I was wrong. I repent my actions and I am sorry for my participation and my role in that revolution, no matter how small that role was.

And I am not the only one who feels this way.

I believe that those who led the revolution, some of them intentionally, and some others unintentially, deceived me and others by taking advantage of our youth and therefore our naivity and trust.

The revolution was ILLEGITIMATE because it was based on lies, deceits, falsifications, exageration and spread of false rumors. The majority of the people were drawn into the streets because they were enticed by falsehoods such as there being 300,000 political prisoners, 600,000 people killed by the regime, false and exagerated accounts of torture, "destruction" of Iran's industries by the Pahlavis, and their looting of Iran's riches by "tens of billions" of dollars. The list of lies goes on.

Many people who were naturally against the IRI ideology,groups such as jebheye melli and the left, played along to the tune of these lies unaware of what their deceit will ultimately bring to Iran.

In the abscence of these illegitimate lies and falsifications, and in the presence of the truth, even if that truth was still against the regime, I and millions of other street demonstrators would be in a better position to make wiser judgements and decisions. We would have never chanted slogans against the Pahlavi or monarchy. We would have never participated in a political mass suicide. Instead, we would have followed the lines of constitutional monarchists such as Bakhtiar.

In their haste to overthrow the regime, and buried deep in complexes and hatred against the pahalvis, people in those days with similar views than yourself failed to alarm the people of Iran for the incoming disaster that was awaiting the entire nation.

Their failure to alert the people does not legitimize this revolution. The naivitiy of our youth in those days does not legitimize the revolution. The lies and deceits fed to the people or Iran in order to turn them against the regime does not legitimize the revolution. Hatred of the Pahlavis does not legitimize the revolution.

It does not legitimize the "NO" vote either.  

Anything that is based on lies and deceit is illegitimate. Now, I want to add that all these is by no means equivalent to saying that there was nothing wrong with the previous regime. There were plenty of wrong things with that regime, but not to the point of commiting a suicidal revolution.

The question is, In your democracy, do people like me have the right to recall their vote? Or are they going to be accused of wanting "more" rights than others?

You wrote, "the only ones who bring pictures to demonstration are Royalists and Mojahed's..."

Wasn't it you that have the picture of Obama as an Avatar for your Obama campaign? Bakthiar always had a picture of Mossadegh on his desk when interviewed. Was he wrong too? Is carrying or not carrying a picture synonymous to being democratic or dictatorial? Is it important at all?

You wrote, "I believe that everyone is equal and we do not accept some prince or his family be treated better or have more rights than others. That is our right and the one who wants to force that on others is you..."

I sincerely believe in the same, i.e., in equality. But what makes you think that monarchists want a return to a dictatorship? The majority of the monarchists I have met want freedom and a democratic parliamentary government, just as much as you and I do. They agree with me and criticize the Shah for his mistakes and for surpessing freedom during his reign.

I don't believe in monarchy in principle, but I don't mind it in a traditional role. There are many examples of such monarchies in the world. And I am not alone in this way of thinking.

Dear David, read your own comments again and ask yourself isn't it you who is forcing a republic onto others? There are many like me who may prefer a republic, but have nothing against monarchy either. I find nothing wrong with a republic nor with a constitutional monarchy based on a democratic parliamentary government.

You worry about the permanent position of a "prince". What about the "permanent" position of president Hosni Mobarak or Saddam? Or the dictator rulers of pakistan?

It is not the form of the government that matters, it is its content and what it stands for that counts most. It seems that you are too focused on the form. This is unlike you who calls others for unity.

You must forget the past (as yourself had said many times) and instead focus on the future. If you do, then you'll be able to tolerate the majority of monarchists who share many of your own views, and still at the same time continue not tolerating a minority of fanatic monarchists who prefer the old ways.


farrokhzad

rights

by farrokhzad on

"There will come a moment in the future of our nation that a thug wishes to challenge the current monarch. Will our rights be safe in his hands? "

I have simple question: What rights do we Iranians have ?   Are these rights earned, or god given? What you listed in your post are dreams, not recognized rights. I don't recall anyone having bestowed it on us, nor are we fighting to get those rights. We just wish we had those rights, and, seems to me, expect someone else to give it to us, as if it were an inalienable right. It's not.  

Now, if you mean "let us aspire to unite, fight together, and win thos rights", then I agree with you. In that case, it's a step by step, brick by brick, process that requires tolerance of differing opinions, sacrifice of our own (not others) blood and money, some international support, and a long time.  There is no quick, easy way.


default

Sowing Seeds Of Division!

by Killjoy (not verified) on

Ms. Gilani's sloganeering somehow reminds me of Khomeini's messages to Iranians before '79. Please read the following excerpt and compare its contents to what Khomeini said, then. At least Khomeini was smart enough not to let many in the opposition figure out his grand plans for Iran.

"What our nation needs is not another half-baked referendum but a group of founding leaders who by the courage of their convictions are driven to spell out our rights as the citizens of an ancient civilization:

-- We pay homage to no foreign power;
-- We reserve the right to defend ourselves against any and all foreign intruders;
-- We wish to rip the riches of our land to feed our poor;
-- We hunger for peace to build a better future for our children;
-- We bestow power to a republic encompassing all ethnic groups within our borders;
-- We grant temporary power only to elected public servants;
-- We reserve the legal right to dismiss public officials and prosecute them for abuse of such power;
-- We possess the inherent and non-alienable rights to freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion, freedom to bear arms, freedom to assemble, and freedom to demonstrate.

Once these collective principles are recognized by Iranian political factions, the road for democracy is paved; if denied or bent to suit one’s own interests, we have with all likelihood another tyranny on our hands.

The seeds of freedom are sown by bold patriots whose unwavering principles embrace a nation together until democracy takes roots."

A question for Ms. Gilani:

Could you please name the Iranian political factions/organizations you have in mind?


Shahrex

NO, I DO NOT WANT UNITY!

by Shahrex on

I agree with the central idea in your article but i am not going to put my signature on it, i am sure we would not agree on many parts, and our agreements in many cases would not be based on the same intentions and would last different lengths of time.

As a matter of fact i have the courage to say that the populist recipie for unity is a prostituted recipie written and rewritten too frequently across the line of history by many despots, charlatans,naive political dreamers, diplomats and decievers.

As you have noticed, here and there we have a collage of personalities, intentions, beliefs, intelligensce versus non-intelligence, beliefs/disbeliefs, religiousity/secularism, amnesia, paranoia, masochism and sadism.

Some are megalo, some write open letters to Reagan, Obama, some write it to The late Shah but forget to write the right destination adress, instead they post it to his son. Some claim they need Referandum, still they reject rhe very same referandum they themselves applauded for 30 years ago, choosing the most criminal and reactionary system, voting against Shah, still worst, against the most brilliant political leader in our modern history, against Dr Shapoor Bakhtiar, and favoring the criminal Ayatollah Khomeini, a sick pervert political masturbator, not just as their temporary leader, but as their OWNER!

They want referandum because they have not the guts to fight, they had the political adventurism and revelutionary romanticism to destroy our countrywhen in best we needed just reforms, but now when we need a revolution they are shamelessly pacifists, coward democrats, talking about reforms, elections, referandums,...

Some have more common with Ayatollahs than they are ready to confirm (Mujahedeens islamic revisionists, and the so called secular and progressive iberals who do not even dare to criticize the facist and reactionary essence and nature of Islam), some are nostalgic leftists who applaude the financial recession aiting for the resurrection of the next worst political ideology/religion namely Marxism.

Some are the Shah-parasts, who have forgotten the late shah's share of the crime committed against the historical monarchy institution, some are Mosaddegh-Parast, forgetting his part in the social turmoil and disaster, some are the so called nationalists who when needed, froze out Shapoor Bakhtiar, and kissed the feets of the despot, Khomeini.

None of the 98% majority( Synonyme to Anonimosity according to one of one of the most active megalos here) has begged pardon for their faults and crimes, all of them believe they did right, and still believe they are right.

None of those who have written their open letters, petitions, velvet revolution manifestos, declarations, petitions, formula for freedom, and mapped the maps for the path to democracy has identified the real problem, none of them has identified the real dilemma, posed the right questions, but all of them have the right answer!

None of them hs critically blamed the anti-culture of Islam, they do not want to lose the vote of majority, none of them dares to say that this country needs not just freedom in it's vague and passive form, but freedom from the cultural, psychological, traditional and institutional slavery to ISLAM.

This country suffers from an identity crisis, it suffers from political and historical schizophrenia, it is torn between it's illusion of the past and it's dominated and dominating islamic pasychosis, it has lost it's past in now and it's present in past.

Look around yourself, in Iran, 95% pretend to be against the system, but when it comes to Islam, still 95% are looking for the true and pure kind of Islam, and none of them can define it, none of them know what the pure islam is, I know that the pure and Trye islam is exactly what Ayatollah Khalkhali, Khomeini, Khamenei and Ahmadinejad are practicing, but do you know? do all these bloggers know?

Look around yourself abroad, almost 90% of these so called intellectuals, refuggees, oppositional elements and individuals, never miss the opportunity to visit their beloved but occupied country for leisure and business!

Look at the answers you have gotten to your call, these are examples of the best yu can find, and still you see, they can not perform better!

Some are boasting that they helped Obama to win the election (They do  forget that Ayatollahs in Iran were as helpful), and in the light of that they are arrogant enough to mapp the road to freedom through unity, democracy, referandum , peaceful demonstrations (looks like exactly the same thing ayatollah Khomeini did, if you look at his writings here and listen and read khomeini's speeches and his tactics before the revolution you will be surprised how similar they are!), they are happy that Obama will help them back to NEGOTIATION with pressuure on human right aspects (New Carter!).

I could continue to write pages after pages, and without repeating mysself about the pathological blend of this stange coctail of semi-intellectuals giving one another verbal and written spa/massage here and there, but that would make them feel more important than they are!

As long as we do not fight against Islamism, as long as we do not strive for an explosive toppling of this criminal system, as long as we do not have the courage and determination to get rid of not just this regime, but this oppressive ideology, as long as we believe that evolution and reform, and peaceful change under this system is possible,  we do not deserve better.

We do not need referandum (we had it for just 30 years ago), and if exactly the same revolutionary now ask for a new referandum, then i just wonder if they really know what they want!

Revolutions in thired world can be cured not by reforms but by counter-revolution.

The french revolution did die, without resurrection of Monarchy because it happened in France which then in comparison to all other countries, was already a developed country, still it underwent metamorphosis, became Imperial, and colonial.

The Russian Revolution had more similarities with the Islamic revolution, it was more progressive in Ideas and plans, but it still was an ideological revolution, the russian people are still paying for that catastrophy, Gorbatjews and yelstins will never happen to appear in the islamic Republic of Iran, these are not the same people, the same culture, the same spirits, Iran is much poorer than Russia then and now, and islam is much worse than Stalinism in it's worst form. The same applies to China and Maoism, both China and Russia have undergone profond reforms and peaceful revolution like transformations, and none of them is democracy yet.

Islam is beyond reforms, Islam is beyond negotiations, poltical Islam is a murderous system of government, having it roots in the very origins of Islam and it's traditions, and as long as we apply the wrong medicin against this disease the prospects of survival are not good.

We do not need unity between antagonists, we do not need  quantity, we need quqlity, we do not necessarily need democracy, we need progressive ideas, progressive plans, we need meritocracy, we need another REVOLUTION!


default

Well, Majid, I am tempted to

by KavehV (not verified) on

Well, Majid, I am tempted to make another blanket statement about Iranians. The family (Pahlavis) has been abused, threatened and millions called for their death and abandonment, among many other things, and now so many are "Talabkar" that why he/they have not done anything ? Would you have preferred that he mass an army of mercenaries on Iraqi border and conduct raids into Iran ?

If he becomes a monarch again, his role should be not more than greeting foreign figures, conduct charity work for various causes and travel as an Iranian cultural emissary, a cultural figure. They were good at this in the past and should be able to continue. All other political/economic issues should be dealt with by a multiparty system of government and a premiere at the head of the government. Leadership, political, economic and judicial issues are the burden of the elected government only.


Majid

SO................

by Majid on

So, if the only HOPE for monarchy in Iran didn't do a "thing" in the past 30 years other than a letter once in a while to tell people of Iran:  go ahead , unroll the red carpet and come to Potomac and get me, why don't they just rest their case? Or they are more monarch than the man himself?

Coffee smells good!

ps. Other monarchs ? you've got to be kidding if you think Ghajaars do count in any equation, that would be the most tasteless joke!


default

"saltanat talab" ? OR "Pahlavi talab"?

by KavehV (not verified) on

For all practical purposes what are the other choices for saltanat talabs ? If not Pahlavi, the only other choice is a Ghajar prince. Or, you can come up with a process of selecting a noble prince/king among the current population.

Besides all of this, Pahlavis have an advantage over all other choices. They were the ones who opened up Iran to the world and presented themselves as the emissaries of the proud Iranian culture. Even today, to great extent, they enjoy the same credibility among many different western and eastern establishments. As a Royal family and emissaries of Iranian culture, they have done a lot of work in the past (50's - 70's), and seem far ahead of any other option. They seem to be the natural choice over other monarchs to me.


Majid

A simple and legitimate question.

by Majid on

I did ask this question in another blog which no one answered.

You, the people who believe in monarchy, are you willing to support a non-Pahlavi for a monarchy system IF we're convinced that that's the best system for our country? or it has to be carried out by a Pahlavi?

In other words are you a "saltanat talab" ? OR "Pahlavi talab"?

Anybody? 


default

Monarchy won't return;

by Kurdish Warrior (not verified) on

many of us tasted, experienced it so it's NO to that....However i do believe that RP should be given a role for future Iran....Iran has only one option to save itself from destruction and that is to become Secular Federal Republic once regime is toppled.


default

Arrogant voice of 1979 again.

by Anonymous Hassan (not verified) on

Governments cannot develop in isolation, specially in modern days. Governments are from people and deserving of the people that they rule upon. Arrogant!

Apparently someone, once again, forgot what WE, THE know-it-all IRANIANS, did to ourselves and overlooked the last 30 years of disaster as a direct outcome of our arrogance. We proved to be less deserving of even the flawed shah. It is so bitter, but a fact nonetheless, that we the people were more flawed than shah ever was. We did not even have the courage to face the result of our arrogance; we, the intellectuals, the left, the right, and even the islamists, were living peacefully under the shah's regime, then brought a disaster upon iranians within, and ran away on the first opportunity that we got, and yet did not lose an iota of our guts or our arrogance.

We did not care for the shah and arrogantly thought that he was not good enough for us, only to replace him with a 1400 year old mulla from deserts of arabia, and like a 30-million strong herd of sheep, 98% of us lined up to unquestionably put the destiny of our country into a the hands of a bunch medieval mullas. Yeah, shah was not good enough for us, despite all the best days that he and his father brought to iran; but apparently mullas were, to tell us what to wear, what to say, what to do, when we voted for them.

We deserve what we have, we got what we asked for. Just imagine where we would be had that awful pahlavi regime survived; we could not be worse than P. gulf states, or turkey, or taiwan, or s. korea, or indonesia, or malaysia, or brazil, or... or all others which were at best at the same level of progress as we were then in 1979. We walked so proudly then in front of likes of chinese and indians that we were better, we were more educated, and well traveled, and had higher living standard; and now we must beg and bribe china and india to help us deter aggressions to our land.

Keh as maast keh bar maast.

Arrogance mixed with lack of wisdom and being uninformed and unrealistic brought us where we are today, and we still did not learn a bit.


David ET

Dear Dariush

by David ET on

In response to the tone of your  comments written under the title: "Do I REALLY need to ANSWER this AGAIN ? ..."

I said: "Everyone has the right to express their views as to what they want (or don't want just) as you and I do :-) "

Now I am not sure where you got the impression that I said you stopped me "from Expressing" my views or how I put "words in" your "Mouth" by saying that? I think you are reading more in to what I write.

Also I have no idea where you getting the idea that I am "Denying Monarchists the Right to Their Opinion and have the nerve of speaking about UNITY JUST FOR REPUBLICANS ! "

Show me one of the points in the solutions that excludes anyone who believes in those principals.

//iranian.com/main/blog/david-et/solutions-iran-road-map

I have repeated myself again and again and it seems like you simply avoid my repeated  comments such as "A free democratic Iran would allow everyone to participate. No one is excluded from unity except by own free choice . "

The problem as I see is that no one is excluding you or anyone but some want to have more right than others or won't unite?!!

I guess with such logic then Maryam Rajavi also wants to unite as long as she is the president and if you do not agree, then Mojahed's should also get "disappointed" that you are denying Mojahed's "the Right to Their Opinion"!

and Royalists want to unite as long as Reza is King and the list continues.

Let's face it the only ones who bring pictures to demonstration are Royalists and Mojahed's! You call that unity?!

You are disappointed that I and those such as I believe that everyone is equal and we do not accept some prince or his family be treated better or have more rights than others.

That is our right and the one who wants to force that on others is you.

Equality is a human right and is nothing to complain about if one promotes it.

On the other hand , inequality and preferential treatment (Shah, Imam or whatever) is not a right that you have the right to force upon others because of blood, religion, royalty, color, gender , etc. etc.

Want Reza? vote for him, want his brother, his son, his uncle, vote for them too, 8 years each they can rule one after another IF people want them in a free and democratic Iran? That is their right... but don't tell me that I should accept them as my "whatever" permanently! and then say I am denying your right to do force them on me!!!!

If so then bring back Ghajars, Zands and all too and let them fight this Royalty among themselves first !

They each came and are gone. Don't be disappointed with history and facts. Just accept it and move on!


LalehGillani

What powers will a constitutional monarch have?

by LalehGillani on

I honestly don’t know. That question must be asked of His Majesty, Reza Pahlavi. Regardless of what His reply is, our duty as patriots is not only towards the present time but also the future.

There will come a moment in the future of our nation that a thug wishes to challenge the current monarch. Iran’s history is peppered with such characters. What then? Will our rights be safe in his hands? Must we take such a risk or simply form a republic to avoid it altogether?