Peyvast

I commend those who are speaking out against the situation in Gaza from humanitarian standpoint

But I do have issue with those who are simply trying to make their political point by taking advantage of the humanitarian disaster.

I also have no issue with people picking and choosing their battles, I do that all the time since we cant take them all and at the end the the efforts add up if we each take a cause or two. 

But again I have issue when some are for human rights in one place but then side with violators in another place!!

In short I have issue with using humans lives as a shield (on the ground or in blogs) for political advancement and also have issue with hypocrisy and inconsistency that somehow some are more human than others. Depending on which side some are politically, ideologically or religiously , then their care for humanity’s right changes !

Some obvious Examples are US, Israel, Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamic Republic in Iran and some other examples are some people among us!

PART III

Part IV: CONCLUSION

Religious Hierarchy’s attempts to rule people directly or jointly with Royals and the Rich are nothing new to the human history.

Even predating Islam the corruptions and abuses of Zoroastrian priests in harmony with the last of Sasanid Royals lead to the fall of the Iranian civilization by the religiously empowered Bedouin Arabs next door.

Ever since the Arab occupation of Iran and the rule of Arab Caliphs of Bani–Umayyad and Bani-Abbas, the freedom seeking Iranian nationalists have been fighting in all fronts with the alien culture that had been

forced upon them. Some nationalists saved the Persian Language and history from full integration in to Arabic by focusing on Iranian literature and history and some engaged in direct battles with the occupiers and some even entered their government to gain influence while majority of Iranians tried to simply passed their culture, traditions, history, literature and language from one generation to another.

Although Arab occupation ended after 200 years but their influence continued to remain by their advocates: The Mullahs.

The Shahs and Mullahs of Iran have often complemented each other by supporting and justifying their controls and powers over the people. Such cooperation reached its peak when the Safavid Dynasty took control of Iran and officially changed the religion of Iran to Shia version of Islam.

Taking the lead from the democratic and nationalist movements of Europe in the 19th century Iranians began to demand a curb on royal authority and the establishment of the rule of law as well as their concern over the foreign, and especially Russian influence. The Iranian revolution of 1906 lead to formation of the new constitution and the first elected parliament was the results of this movement. However the initial constitution which was quickly drafted was not complete enough.

Shortly after its draft, moderate Mozafaredin shah died and his son Mohammad Ali Shah who opposed the constitutional movement with the help of Russian-officered Brigade bombed the parliament building and arrested many of the elected deputies. However the democratic movement was too young and strong to be easily defeated and he was unable to keep the parliament closed, but instead the Royalists and Religious Clergy used their influence in drafting the remainder of the constitution in 1907 to their benefit. In the 1907 additions to constitution, the Royals and Religious inserted more power and control than was initially intended to. The Anglo-Russian powers also played an important role in opposition to the democratic constitutional movement in Iran

The battle for more power between The People, The Shahs and the Clergy essentially continued in to Pahlavi dynasty in one form or another until 1953 when the government of popularly elected Prime Minister Mossadegh who had challenged the extreme powers of Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi was toppled with the help of the United Stated Central Intelligence Agency.

The conspiracies of USA, the Soviet backed communist Tudeh party and the Islamic Clergy eventually lead to the fall of the last freely elected democratic government in Iran 55 years ago and to date this event continues to remain in the collective memory of Iranians.

Another milestone in the recent Iranian history was the opposition of Ayatollah Khomeini to the constitutional referendum of 1963 and progressive reforms by the late Shah (white revolution) in compliance with the initiatives of US president John F. Kennedy whom during the same time period promoted similar reforms in other developing countries such as those in Latin America.

The extremist clergy and the Islamists who were now being faced with modernizations such as land reforms (ending Feudalism) and equal rights for women, once again felt threatened and after events and riots of 1964 and with the exile of Ayatollah Khomeini to Iraq the foundation of the Islamic Revolution of 1979 was planted.

After 1953 Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi continuously violated the 1906/1907 monarchist constitution and at the same time, having deeper Shia’ religious convictions that his father, he maintained a ceremonial constitutional role for the more moderate mullahs. But such role was not enough for the clergy and they gradually strengthened their network of mullahs in mosques around the country.

This was also in line with the new US green belt policy of promoting Islamisation of Middle East in order to block their primary enemy of the time: The Soviet Union and communism.

The more secular and modern (but not independent )governments of Middle East which were initially formed and supported by the British Empire were now being faced with the spread of political Islam supported by USA. The Islamic Clergy and Jihadist were being empowered and those in Iran were not any exceptions. At the same time an intellectual Islamic ideology, newly formed by the educated Islamists was attracting some of the hungry for change Iranian intellectuals and youth who were trying to seek a common ground between their “learned” religious upbringings and the modern ideologies of left and the right. In the intolerant dictatorship of Shah there was no room for open discussions and examinations of different options, views and ideologies and is such vacuum of political practice and education, comparing to lack of political freedom, many utopian ideas presented seemed more ideal and appealing from a distance.

Meanwhile the nationalist, democratic and secular voices within Iran were being silenced by Shah’s secret service SAVAK which was trained by CIA fearing that that any kind of freedom may lead to the rise of communism in Iran but in fact except in small groups and parties, the Iranians due to their historical background, ancient civilization and religious convictions never had much inclination towards communism and they always preferred a more open, pro“west” and democratic society.

In essence Shah and USA because of the fear of communism, China and Soviet Union had both created a monster that did not really exist in the Iranians minds and hearts. In order to fight their imaginary creation and with US support Shah continued to crush the voices of democracy seeking Iranians. In such atmosphere, the independent and more secular Iranian movements were not able nor given the opportunity to organize. In fact most democratic and secular forces had no opposition to a democratic monarchy and in such vacuum the only forces who continued to maintain a solid organization were the Mullahs.

Before his fall, in a message to the nation, late Shah of Iran, now having “heard the message” of Iranians, asked Dr Shapour Bakhtiar one of the democratic and nationalist Iranians who had previously been silenced, to become the prime minister. Trying to save the country from falling in to Chaos or in the hands of the mullahs and with deep nationalistic convictions, Dr. Bakhtiar accepted this role but by then it was 26 years too late and extremism and emotionalism already had taken over and his short lived democratic government did not last long.

The revolution of 1979 was the result of 26 years of denying Iranians of their human and political rights and although many political and social groups and individuals participated in its victory; the mullah’s network with their false promises of not getting involved in the government affairs after victory and using people’s religious fervor eventually took control.

At the heat of the victory of the revolution and in a quick shift of events the clergy in a referendum that offered no other options gained a 98% vote for an Islamic Republic and shortly after the constitution of Islamic Republic was formed.

Although the concept of supreme leader (Vali Faghih) was not addressed in the referendum but as part of clergy’s conspiracies within the forces of the revolution, they added it to the constitution and combined with all other clauses that subjected everything and everyone to the control of mullahs, under the pretext of compatibility with Islam they passed laws that helped them gradually crush all other voices.

10 years later mullahs made even more changes to the Islamic Republic constitution such as assigning the “absolute” powers the supreme leader.

Reviewing the two Monarchy and Republic constitutions one can trace their two common denominators:

1- The articles and clauses that attempted to transfer the power to The People
2- The articles and clauses that attempted to have the clergy and /or Royals control people’s destiny or decisions.

Reviewing history and the two Iranian revolutions of 1906 and 1979 and despite the Royal and Religious influences which twisted the drafts of the two resulting constitutions, one still can easily read the demands and hear the voices and cries for freedom and democracy within their texts and words and can also sense the bloods that were spilled to form such words and at the same time feel the terror and the deceit that are buried among the pages of the two documents.

The two constitutions of Iran are the witnesses to the battles of Ahura (Good) and Ahriman (Evil) in each of their clauses but most importantly one can still clearly see the evolutionary path from no constitution to constitutional monarchy and then to a republican constitution.

The next step for Iranians in their political evolution is to completely remove religion from the texts of their future constitution, which I will address in another article and another time.

ADDENDUM:

If Iranians and the world including US study the preamble of Islamic Republic Constitution more carefully, they would avoid any unrealistic reform expectations from the government of Islamic Republic of Iran and also can better understand the nature of the Islamic regime’s actions, tactics, strategies, policies and ultimate goals such as:

• [Continuation of that (Islamic) revolution both inside and outside the country]
• [prepare the way towards a united single (Islamic) world community]
• [continuation of the progressive (Islamic) struggle for the rescue of deprived and oppressed nations throughout the world]
• Use of [strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of WAR, to STRIKE TERROR into the hearts of the enemies of God and your enemies, and OTHERS BESIDE]
• [rule of the world by the oppressed, and the complete overthrow of the arrogant ones]

In summary this is a regime with the goal of expansion of its Islamic extremism thought the world and preparing it for the “rule” of a single Islamic extremist government in the “world”.  A regime that in order to “overthrow” all other powers, has no hesitancy in instigating “terror in the hearts” of anyone who stands in their way and all “others beside” them.

With such awareness, USA and Obama’s administration can go to any future negotiation table, something that Europeans, Russians and Chinese have already been doing for the past 30 years!