Mousavi, hero or villain?


Mousavi, hero or villain?
by arash Irandoost

On April 29, 2010, Ms. Shohreh Aghdashloo (Iranian Actress) wrote a short tribute for the 2010 Time 100 praising Mir Hossein Mousavi, Islamic republic’s presidential candidate for “bringing hope to all generations of Iranians but especially to our youth.”

Either, Ms. Aghdashloo is out of touch with political situation in Iran by believing that Mir Hossein Mousavi could have been the one to bring freedom and democracy to Iran, or she is simply being disingenuous. Her comparison of Mr. Mousavi known as the Butcher of Beirut to Dr. Martin Luther King is indeed an affront to the world community and African Americans. Dr. King, At 33, was pressing the case of civil rights, at 34, galvanized the nation with his "I Have a Dream" speech, at 35, won the Nobel Peace Prize. At 39, he was assassinated, but left a legacy of hope and inspiration.

Ms. Aghdashloo and her so-called Green allies will be hard pressed to name any of Mousavi’s “heroic” accomplishments. They simply do not exist.

A group of Iranians aided by the American left and liberal media have been trying to portray Mousavi as the true leader of the Iranian opposition or the so-called green movement. This assertion has long lost traction among the Iranians. As I described in my previous article “The Many Shades of Iran’s Green Movement” Iranian demonstrators had bypassed Mousavi and used him as the pretext to show their disgust with the Islamic Republic including the man himself Mir Hossein Mousavi who abandoned demonstrators once he realized the very survival of Islamic Republic is at stake. Mousavi’s role as the leader of the Green Movement officially came to an end when he formed a new social front called the “the Green Path of Hope.”

Ms. Aghdashloo naively or intentionally ignores Mr. Mousavi’s past and proceeds to compare him with Dr. Martin Luther King in lockstep with another Mousavi comrade Mohsen Makhmalbaaf who lived in Iran till recently and knows Mousavi only too well and deceptively compares him to Gandhi to cover up Mousavi’s anti-American and pro Marxist proclivity.

References to Mousavi as a “reformer” a “moderate” and more recently a “hero” are designed to mislead. The characterizations are outright fabrications. Before Green leaders are allowed to continue their deceptive practices and cheer Mousavi and call him a hero, they must be reminded of Mr. Mousavi’s bloody past.

Mousavi provided financial support to Mr. Khomeini during his exile and was nicely rewarded as Iran’s Prime Minister during most of the 1980s a time when the IRI fanatics were ruthlessly wiping out internal opposition groups and waging a terrorist campaign against the United States. Indeed, Mousavi literally has Iranian and American blood on his hands.

As Iran’s prime minister, he was a hard-liner closely allied with then-president Ali Khamenei, the current Supreme leader, and a firm radical as the Economist described him in 1988. His reserved tone masks a dark history of religious fanaticism, support for terrorism, and perpetuation of dictatorship. Mousavi’s years as prime minister were marked by many controversial policies—support for the fatwa against Salman Rushdie, a place on Hizbullah's leadership council, a defense of the taking of American hostages. Mousavi was intimately involved in the creation of Shiite militia Hezbollah in 1982 and during his term as the prime minister almost certainly had a hand in the planning of the Iranian backed truck bombing attacks on the U.S. embassy in April 1983 and the Marine Barracks in October of the same year. Mousavi directly worked with Imad Mughniyah, the man personally responsible all of the Iranian-planned terrorist attacks carried out by Hezbollah.

Mr. Mousavi has consistently favored state controls over the economy rather than the free-market policies and Iran’s business class does not like him. Mousavi neither likes nor trusts Americans. He opposed warming relations with the U.S. Mousavi, like all other IRI leaders, is opposed to suspending the country’s nuclear-enrichment program.

Mousavi's more refined tone and sharper intellect distance him from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Seduced young generation of Iranians are not privy to his radicalism and apologies for terror and bloodshed. But his ideology, faithfulness to the Islamic revolution, economic policies, and his anti-Americanism are akin to Ahmadinejad’s. Mousavi, for obvious political reasons might have signaled a change in tone, but never a change in ideology and policies. As they say: A pig with lipstick is still is a pig.

None of this is to exonerate the other Islamic Republic’s leaders. Mahmud Ahmadinejad served in the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, the Iranian paramilitary force responsible for most of the terrorism against the U.S. Mehdi Karroubi, like Mousavi, was deeply involved in Lebanon in the '80s and was a patron of Mughniyah's.

The Green outside but Red inside” watermelon, greeners” prefer to forget Mousavis past for very obvious reasons. Mousavi and his so called Green allies, perhaps cognizant that his past history would surface eventually, are applying a little proactive balm on his reputation. But at the very least, it should be a reminder to misguided and delusional Ms. Aghdashloo that when it comes to political leaders, there are simply no good choices within the Islamic Republic.

People like Mousavi, Karuubi, and Khatami are deeply loyal to the ideals of Khomeini and were themselves leaders of the 1979 revolution that resulted in the creation of the current political system. They think that the current constitution has enough tools in it to allow the system to reform itself. But that is foolhardy, since 31 years of Islamic Republics blatant lies, ineptitude, corruption, torture, rapes and killings should serve as a clear sign that Islamic Republic can not be reformed and regime change is the only viable option!

Even if Mousavi had come into office following the June 12 presidential election as Ms. Aghdashloo and her so called green allies hoped for, he would not have challenged the political order. Mr. Mousavi advocates “the full execution of the constitution and a return to the Islamic Republic's original ethics (Khomeinism). He demands “Islamic republic, not a word less; not a word more." I will leave it up to readers to interpret what that truly means.

Those who have blindly joined the so-called Green Movement are strongly advised to examine Mousavi’s past before they continue to prop him up as a hero. Types of Aghdashloo are advised to seek a more long-term solution and throw their support behind the people of Iran. Having lived through the Islamic republic tricksters, they have come to believe that Islamic Republic and democracy are not compatible. There is no room for public in Islamic Republic. Iranians will eventually choose leaders outside of it. It is just a matter of time!


more from arash Irandoost

Islamic Republic is not in its infancy (to Abarmard)

by Mehrban on

Contrary to what you try to portray, IRR is not in its infancy, 30 years of destruction of a nation is quite a long time in modern days.  Nazis were in power for 12 years and it took Germany 12 years after WWII to rise to be a world economic power.  Your complacency in view of the abuses of this regime only serves to prolong it.  

This comment is outside of a discussion about Mousavi.  


Just what is it

by Cost-of-Progress on

that makes seemingly educated and smart people like some posters here actually believe that anything good can come out of this theocracy no matter who is the........................ p e r e z i d e nt? What good have we seen in the past 31 years that makes us hopeful that the next (zaboonam laal) 31 years will be even better?

I suspect most of it is religious upbringing. BUT why do we have to have the clerical regime to feel we're independent of the influences of the big bad imperialist west...IN WHICH WE LIVE?





Dear Abarmard

by minadadvar on

Great analysis.  I am not pro-Mousavi.  But, I strongly support his followers/Green Movement.  GM started over a decade ago.  Mousavi was an opportunity.  Smart move by GM.

Did I get it right?  Sometimes, I rush too much.  I hope,  I understood you correctly.



Think of Mousavi this way

by Abarmard on

Forget about Mousavi for a moment. Assume that you are an individual who believes in something great. The great thing had been initiated and you are happy. The route, as you find out, is not as simplistic and singular. Many voices and thoughts come and go and you can hear yelling and screaming around you. Those voices that are harsher get heard easier when noise level is at its maximum.
Assume that you can be a positive influence. Assume that you still believe that you can matter and fix what has gone wrong. Assume that you can't control everything and everyone, especially in that situation. But you do have some control.  In the Islamic Republic, exist many great figures that care greatly about Iran and freedom. One must know that ideologies have different interpretations, similar to religion or history.

Back to our scenario: if you understand the situation well, then ask yourself whether you would remain in contact to change the country for better, based on those limited influence, or just go away for good and say that you can't be a part of this "mistake".
In the case of Mr. Mousavi, he remained when he assumed that he could be a positive influence, based on his ideology. He disappeared from the political scene when he realized how "chaotic" politics can get (or as some call it "dirty").
During Khatami presidency, Mr. Mousavi was asked to run for office. When Ahmadinejad was elected more reformists were excited that someone honest, purist and idealist who cared a great deal for freedom and Islam during the Islamic Revolution can move our country forward. Thirty years and suddenly a blossom of opportunities and freedom, based on Islamic Republic's constitution of course, was what reformists thought. He was the right man to run against Ahmadinejad.
Mousavi realized that once again he might have some limited influence for what he originally believed the Islamic Republic should look like. He took the challenge and the rest is history. Once one is in the position of power, they tend to see their direction and those who agree with them rather than the entire picture. Who do you believe? People? There are many voices and they can be confusing.
Keep in mind that the Islamic Republic is still in its youth and has not fully matured. This doesn’t mean that a matured regime would be any better but for some, perhaps Mr. Mousavi, the opportunities to redirect the regime towards the right path still exists.

Hope this can clarify little facts about Mr. Mousavi. 

Darius Kadivar

My Two Cents ...

by Darius Kadivar on

My Personal feeling is that he is Innocent of the Crimes ( i.e 1988 Chain murders ) BUT accountable as someone belonging and defending the system he helped create.

Quite honestly he doesn't come across as a bloodthirsty man or even guilty of any form of DIRECT Responsability in what happened in 1988/89 in terms of chain murders.

But Can One say he was No Complice be it by Silently Endorsing the crimes to be carried out ? Only a serious and independant Investigation can answer that question ...

Otherwise Is his physical appearance and gentle tone of voice enough to judge someone's responsability or guilt ?

As Prime Minister but more importantly as someone who was and is part of the establishment which commited those crimes he is accountable to explanations and hearings.

All the more that he has refused to dissociate himself of the Regime that commited those crimes.

One can find always find excuses for let's say blood spilled during the revolution in street combats like these for which only those involved are to be blamed or accused of savagery ( on both sides-Jaleh Square massacre for instance ):

JAVIDAN: Shah's Imperial Guard dies during an attack by Khomeini guerillas (1979)

HISTORY OF VIOLENCE: Man Arrested For Being a SAVAK Agent (1979)

Even in the case of ugly Street Mob Mentality like this over which few people have control when violence takes on the streets:

pictory:(FOR REFERENDUM BASHERS) Women Punched in Face by Revolutionaries

Or for let's say Trials of former Generals of the Imperial Army loyal to an Order that has been toppled by the majority of the the population:

JAVIDAN: Generals Ayat Mohagheghi and Mehdi Rahimi

The Generals Widow By Cyrus KADIVAR

For after all Justice is the Rule of the NEW Majority and how that Majority feels it should based on a set of rules accepted by all as standard.

But can the same be said of Cold Blood Murder or Assassinations ?:

Dialogue of murder:A cautionary tale that must not be forgotten By Cyrus KADIVAR

JAVIDAN: Farokhroo Pārsā (1922-1980) 

JAVIDAN: Fereydoon Farrokhzad (1935-1992)

BOOK: EVEN AFTER ALL THIS TIME By Afschineh Latifi ( A Memoir )

Including outside Iran:

PARIS GATHERING: Shapour Bakhtiar and Soroush Katibeh memory honored in Paris (FRANCE)

ROYAL MARTYR: Prince Shahriar Shafiq Remembered

BOOK: New Revelations on Bakhtiar's Assassination

HISTORY OF VIOLENCE: First Assassination Attempt on Shapour Bakhtiar (1980)

Assassination of Shapour Bakhtiar (French TV)

I can fully understand Mohsen Moussavi or Mehdi Karoubi's Strategic calculations in not wanting to jeapordize their own future ( however Moussavi likes to be compared to Amir Kabir- he yet has to prove that he is living up to the same intellectual honesty) and also why not accept that by doing so they are trying to protect the Green Movement of being accused of foreign manipulation. But quite honestly has this attitude paid off or truly protected the Green's or other members of Iran's civil society who have been and are being imprisoned, raped, killed or forced into exile ? ...

It is the ambiguity of these SELECTED candidates Turned Heroes (or rather Celebrity Rock Stars of the Islamic Republic's Political Arena due to Circumstances that largely surpass their own petty selfs) that is being questioned as well as their intellectual and political responsability which is being put to the test.

No one wishes to Green Movement to Ebb or lose influence or ground however one can and should legitimately ask what the SELECTED Leaders hope to achieve by being Politically Neutral towards not only the Government but the entire Ideological foundations of a Regime which they helped create and which is responsible for the misery of Iranians for more than 30 years ...

Khomeini and Khamenei opinions about Mousavi in 80s

DIPLOMATIC HISTORY: Mehdi Karroubi Expelled From Mecca (1987)

And again of the Two I have always expressed my preference

SATIRE: I voted ;0) 

prior to the pseudo Elections warning everyone to at least make the choice for the least controversial of the 4 candidates than fall for another trap of endorsing such individuals with a public record of loyalty to the regime:

SATIRE: Green Ambush for Mohsen Rezaee ;0)

Watch Part of a TV debate in 1980 on anti-revolutionary elements in Iran, between Mohsen Rezaei, then head of revolutionary Guards and Banisadr, the very first president of the Islamic Republic Iran who fled the country after his failure against Rezaei and his confederates:


My Humble Opinion,