I am publishing a report form one of my contacts who actually has, shall we say, "inside access" to the ongoing events in Tehran. I have asked him to explain to me what the real context of these events actually is, and I am deeply grateful for his reply. He also told me that he would be available to answer any questions his analysis might raise. So please, if you have any questions or comments, do post your questions in the comments section below.
The Saker
-------
The situation in Iran
by "Ya_Baqiyatullah"
As the situation regarding the Presidential elections escalate in Iran, there is a little glimmer of hope at the end of the tunnel in the form of Wilayatul Faqee, Ayatollah Ali Khamenai. The last few days has seen mass protests, riots on the streets of Tehran and other major cities, victory rally by the supporters of Ahmedinijad and rumours along with accusations in the Media sources across the World. The situation on the ground has never been correctly presented to the world and bias has ruled in reporting and manipulating to ensure a certain message is delievered regarding Iran.
Anyone who has followed these elections closely would accept the result without questioning or believing in the conspiracies of fraud and stolen elections, simply because of the conduct of Ahmedinijad in his campaign compared to that of Mousavi. World Media laid the claims of mishandling the economy at Ahmedinijad and in the process blinded themselves to the other policies of the President to the people of the nation. Ahmedinijad has improved the standard of living for the lower and working class people by the redistribution through the wealth programme. An example of such would be the case of the Association of Women Weavers who boast a figure of 2.7 million women working for them. As they were unable to afford insurance for such a sizeable association Ahmedinijad stepped in to provide the insurance from the Government in order to ensure that the Association continues to exist. In return, he has secured majority of votes from those 2.7 million women.
Iran has a rural population which amounts to 65% or so of the total population, most of these people love Ahmedinijad simply because of what he has bought for the rural areas in his first term in the office. During his campaign he focused on the rural people making them the heart of his campaign, not only that during his campaign he visited all provinces where as Mousavi limited himself to the big cities and banked on being the President by winning these cities. The flaw is evident; one campaigning on two fronts effectively the rural population as well as the big cities while Mousavi only focusing on the big cities. This was the deciding factor in the elections and something that is reflected in the provincial results released by the Interior ministry last night.
On another note, the differences between the candidates themselves is something which would have caught the eye of the public. Ahmedinijad is a person who lives simply, conducts himself without extravagance and is honest in his profession in every manner. Where as Mousavi is someone who is from the upper circles of the society and is seen as a part of the corrupt political elite. This may well have played a deciding role in the elections given that the public has seen Ahmedinijad take on the corruption issue in his first term in the office and the results have been showing after arrests of several officials in the Government. Once the election results became evident, this point became the central focus on the corrupt elite. Ahmedinijad has vowed to ensure that justice prevails in this corruption scandal and this has upset alot of people in high positions especially the likes of Rafsanjani and Karroubi.
If one recalls back to the televised debates and especially the one between Mousavi and Ahmedinijad, they would notice the aftermath raised the eyebrows of certain key influencial figures after the outburst of Ahmedinijad regarding Rafsanjani and others. The aftermath involved Rafsanjani writing to the Wilayatul Faqee, Ayatollah Ali Khamenai and asking him to deal with Ahmedinijad's outburst in the televised debates or expect street riots . Further to that, after the casting of the vote by Rafsanjani's wife on the day of elections made a claim that if there is no cheating then Mousavi will become the President and if there is cheating then expect mass protests. This is a result of a long battle between Ahmedinijad and Rafsanjani, while the former has indirectly attacked Rafsanjani for corruption it was first time that he has openly said this as noted in the televised debate. The corruption surrounding Rafsanjani is well known amongst the Iranian public; as recent as last year a member of the ministry of Intelligence went public exposing Rafsanjani and stating all the cases of corruption against him. The response from Rafsanjani was imprisonment for this personnel on the charge of failing to pay a bill. Not only that, Dr. Hassan Abbasi who is a well known conservative strategic analyst and an advisor to the Wilayatul Faqee gave a very powerful speech a few years ago exposing Rafsanjani and his corruption empire by mentioning names. The influence of Rafsanjani saw him fired from his position and arrested.
Rafsanjani was the man who funded the campaign of Mousavi and many of the policies that Mousavi had wished to implement show a direct involvement of Rafsanjani in it. For instance, Mousavi wanted to remove the power of the Baseej and Revolutionary Guards from the Wilayatul Faqee and giving it to the Governors. This implies a clear strategy to alienate the Wilayatul Faqee from any power and provide a platform for Rafsanjani to use his influence in the Baseej and make them loyal to him. Rafsanjani has also called for a reform of the system of Governance going from the concept of one Supreme Leader to where a Council is created to govern. Knowing very well that people would not vote for him to be the next Wilayatul Faqee, he is taking this oppurtunity to ensure his position is solidified.
The responsibility of the riots and the aftermath of the elections lies on the shoulder of Rafsanjani. He has instigated this simply to achieve one of the two outcomes from the Wilayatul Faqee, Ayatollah Ali Khamenai and that is either a recount is ordered and Mousavi is declared the winner or that Ahmedinijad is ordered to stop the corruption investigation. The choas also gives upper hand to Rafsanjani to ensure some of the key aides of Ahmedinijad can be arrested on bogus charge or removed through a smear campaign. The hang noose is tightening on the necks of Rafsanjani and co and the only way out is through destablizing the country to ensure that the Wilayatul Faqee steps in and gives in to their demands.
Karroubi, Mousavi, Khatami and Rafsanjani all have enjoyed their freedom for so long and now the tide has turned against them. Karroubi declaring that he does not recognise Ahmedinijad as the winner of the elections was always going to be the case especially after he was exposed on the televised debate to the public. Mousavi was seen as a proxy of Rafsanjani and it has been confirmed such is the case given the aftermath of the elections. Khatami has adopted a position of silence so far but his thoughts were well known especially after every poster, every image of Mousavi campaign had his face on it too. Rafsanjani controls all the strings and will use every trick in the book to save his neck. His daughter has already left the country before the charges of money laundering, extortian and large amounts of illegal campaign contributions could be levelled against her.
Yes, the Islamic Republic stands on a fringe given that it has now become a duel between the Supreme authority of the country who is Wilayatul Faqee, Ayatollah Ali Khamenai and Rafsanjani, who is a disciple of the great Ayatollah Khomeini and the former President with a lot of influence in the country. While people may question as to how Rafsanjani has become so powerful and why Ayatollah Khamenai did not act earlier? The answer is simple the time was not right before to remove him for the power he carries could completely destabilise the country. Today, there is destabilisation but on a small scale. Had the action to counter Rafsanjani and co had been done before it would have probably been a completely failure as all the important positions of the Government were occupied or under the influence of the corrupt elite. The riots are being carried out by those who wish to further the agenda of the corrupt elite while the majority of the people see otherwise and have therefore voted for a president whom they know will uproot the corrupt elite.
The Western Media beat the drums of election rigging and stolen but the reality on the ground is much different. Looking beyond the apparent confusion unveils a reality which the Western powers do not wish to accept as this would surely signal the end of any hope that they had of a reformist liberal Iran. The only tactic they could employ is to take cause confusion by attacking the conservative camp as it has been seen on many occasions since the day of elections and before. First, a report defaming Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi for supposedly issuing a fatwa of authorising rigging followed up by a false report that the Interior Ministry congratulated Mousavi on winning the elections before changing their minds and opting for Ahmedinijad. BBC went a step further today saying that the mass rally in Tehran by the Reformists were called off because Baseej were authorised to use live rounds on the protestors before making a U-turn and saying that the rally went ahead with shots fired. Both of these reports represent bias; the rally had to be authorised by the Interior Ministry and that authorisation was not given however Mousavi continued ahead with the planned rally. Baseej has not been deployed yet on the streets, they have been given orders to mobilise in case the situation gets out of hand. On another note, the Western Media sources have mentioned the Wilayatul Faqee, Ayatollah Ali Khamenai stating that the Guardian Council should probe into the claims of fraud in relation to the elections. This is not quite right, while Ayatollah Ali Khamenai has endorsed the results he has asked the Guardian Council to consider the complaints of Mousavi and Rezaei. Infact, Rezaei himself has accepted the results of the election but he has raised certain issues which have been passed to the Guardian Council. One has to ask, whether this manipulative reporting would still be the way of the Western Media had a reformist been in the position of power?
Three days from today, the Wilayatul Faqee Ayatollah Ali Khamenai will address the Iranian nation at the Friday Prayers in Tehran University. Many hope that his address will bring stability and peace to the country after the riots and also mark the end of the corrupt elite. The glimmer of hope is the Wilayatul Faqee and many in Iran over this week will be anxiously awaiting to see what he decrees for they know that his word will be final.
Showing posts with label Ya_Baqiyatullah. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ya_Baqiyatullah. Show all posts
Monday, June 15, 2009
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Understanding the SOFA
by Ya Baqiyatullah
Five years after the invasion of Iraq by the Allied Forces, the people of Iraq find themselves at a crossroad; to accept the SOFA and legalize an occupation or reject it and live indefinitely under the shadows of the US forces. The Iraqi people, after being promised so much in the name of liberation are now left in a dilemma in which either choice will adds to their sufferings.
An indicator of the mainstream Iraqi opinion can be found amongst the religious figures who have opposed deal. The highest ranking cleric in Iraq, Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Sistani has openly objected to this and has imposed certain conditions for it to be accepted by the Iraqi Government. He has called for any deal to safeguard: the common interest of the Iraqi people, national sovereignty, national consensus, and obtain a parliamentary approval.
This sort of objection is not surprising given the history. Previously the US had concluded similar deals in Japan and South Korea, both of which allowed the US troops to be stationed there until now. Moreover, this deal is not detrimental for the Iraqis but also for the rest of the neighboring countries. Having permanent military bases in the region could become a catalyst to launch an attack on neighboring countries such as Iran and Syria. This is part of the reason as to why there has been strong objection from the two leading Shia clerics; Ayatollah Sistani and Ayatollah Sayyed Kazem Haeri with the latter going as far as issuing a fatwa to make it impermissible to vote in the favour of such a deal. Both these clerics consider it a moral and religious obligation to prevent this deal from taking place as it would only endanger the Shias further, not to mention many more innocents too.
The implications of the second part of the SOFA are equally dangerous as the first part and present a more serious issue for the Iraqi people. The fact that US is calling for immunity for its citizens from prosecution in Iraq sends out a strong message as to how ‘mutual’ this agreement really is. In the past it is well known that US has put this condition on a number of their deals with other government most notably the one concluded by the Shah in Iran, prior to the 1979 Revolution, which was met with fierce opposition by Ayatollah Khomeini.
Giving immunity will not only cover up the acts such as the abuse of the Abu Gharib Prisoners and the deaths by Blackwater but it would also give a free pass for many to operate corruptly with the country. It is well known that the Bush Government has turned a blind eye to the corruptions with the Iraqi Government as well as any sort of legal accountability by their own citizens and contractors. Any lack of immunity will only discourage any transparency as to what is occurring in Iraq. A blank check should not be given to anyone, be they the Iraqi Government or foreign forces.
The course of the occupation has led Iraq to rely on foreign aid, namely from the United States. Any suggestion of leaving the country after a Government was in place became a distant memory due to several factors such as insurgency, the militias and sectarian violence all which contributed to the stay of the US in the region. The question that must be posed, was the occupation strategy by the Pentagon the necessary way to remove Saddam? Or did other interests lie at heart when the decision was made regarding the removal of Saddam Hussein? One has to remember that Saddam was a person backed and supported by the US hence to remove him without an occupation would have been a very viable possibility however, the greed of oil was something which was too good to be missed too and sadly, the greed won the day.
Dependency of the Iraqi nation is not the sole reason for the US to remain in Iraq. Given the rhetoric between Tehran and Washington, the cycle of threats has taken a new level with US going as far as funding the terrorists groups such as PEJAK and PKK to infiltrate Iran and going as far as declassifying MKO as a terrorist organisation, MKO are guilty of a number of terrorist activities in Iran after the revolution. All these actions indicate that the US plan in Iraq was much more than the removal of Saddam to begin with.
The United Nations mandate runs out in December 2008 so that begs the question, which road is the best for the Iraqi nation; the SOFA which ensures permanent military bases and immunity in Iraq leaving the people of Iraq under a legalized occupation or an Iraq without SOFA under the occupation of US troops for indefinite or a possible third solution that brings about the true liberation which was promised to the Iraqis?
The solution to this mess that has been caused in Iraq by the US troops is recognition that the solution firstly lies internally and then more importantly on the regional level. They are interlinked and the resolution of one would lead to the other. The settlement should not be dictated by any foreign power regardless of their influence in the region. No other region of the world would tolerate such interference in the region so the same measure should apply here. Consideration should be undertaken in regards to the legitimate interests of the powers in the area but the future of the area should not be held hostage to their exclusive interests, such as the export of oil.
The neighboring states of Iraq which are threatened by the changes in Iraq need to be addressed and treated in any lasting deal for Iraq and the area. Countries like Iran and Turkey need to be introduced in a new security measure which would take into account their concerns, fears and interests. Furthermore, any deal must secure the sovereignty of the region, what happens inside Iraq has repercussions on the lives of millions inside and outside the country. The best hope for the Iraqi people for now, is to reach a deal that provides clear guidelines for foreign troops, and attempts at best to respect an already fragile new nation.
Five years after the invasion of Iraq by the Allied Forces, the people of Iraq find themselves at a crossroad; to accept the SOFA and legalize an occupation or reject it and live indefinitely under the shadows of the US forces. The Iraqi people, after being promised so much in the name of liberation are now left in a dilemma in which either choice will adds to their sufferings.
An indicator of the mainstream Iraqi opinion can be found amongst the religious figures who have opposed deal. The highest ranking cleric in Iraq, Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Sistani has openly objected to this and has imposed certain conditions for it to be accepted by the Iraqi Government. He has called for any deal to safeguard: the common interest of the Iraqi people, national sovereignty, national consensus, and obtain a parliamentary approval.
This sort of objection is not surprising given the history. Previously the US had concluded similar deals in Japan and South Korea, both of which allowed the US troops to be stationed there until now. Moreover, this deal is not detrimental for the Iraqis but also for the rest of the neighboring countries. Having permanent military bases in the region could become a catalyst to launch an attack on neighboring countries such as Iran and Syria. This is part of the reason as to why there has been strong objection from the two leading Shia clerics; Ayatollah Sistani and Ayatollah Sayyed Kazem Haeri with the latter going as far as issuing a fatwa to make it impermissible to vote in the favour of such a deal. Both these clerics consider it a moral and religious obligation to prevent this deal from taking place as it would only endanger the Shias further, not to mention many more innocents too.
The implications of the second part of the SOFA are equally dangerous as the first part and present a more serious issue for the Iraqi people. The fact that US is calling for immunity for its citizens from prosecution in Iraq sends out a strong message as to how ‘mutual’ this agreement really is. In the past it is well known that US has put this condition on a number of their deals with other government most notably the one concluded by the Shah in Iran, prior to the 1979 Revolution, which was met with fierce opposition by Ayatollah Khomeini.
Giving immunity will not only cover up the acts such as the abuse of the Abu Gharib Prisoners and the deaths by Blackwater but it would also give a free pass for many to operate corruptly with the country. It is well known that the Bush Government has turned a blind eye to the corruptions with the Iraqi Government as well as any sort of legal accountability by their own citizens and contractors. Any lack of immunity will only discourage any transparency as to what is occurring in Iraq. A blank check should not be given to anyone, be they the Iraqi Government or foreign forces.
The course of the occupation has led Iraq to rely on foreign aid, namely from the United States. Any suggestion of leaving the country after a Government was in place became a distant memory due to several factors such as insurgency, the militias and sectarian violence all which contributed to the stay of the US in the region. The question that must be posed, was the occupation strategy by the Pentagon the necessary way to remove Saddam? Or did other interests lie at heart when the decision was made regarding the removal of Saddam Hussein? One has to remember that Saddam was a person backed and supported by the US hence to remove him without an occupation would have been a very viable possibility however, the greed of oil was something which was too good to be missed too and sadly, the greed won the day.
Dependency of the Iraqi nation is not the sole reason for the US to remain in Iraq. Given the rhetoric between Tehran and Washington, the cycle of threats has taken a new level with US going as far as funding the terrorists groups such as PEJAK and PKK to infiltrate Iran and going as far as declassifying MKO as a terrorist organisation, MKO are guilty of a number of terrorist activities in Iran after the revolution. All these actions indicate that the US plan in Iraq was much more than the removal of Saddam to begin with.
The United Nations mandate runs out in December 2008 so that begs the question, which road is the best for the Iraqi nation; the SOFA which ensures permanent military bases and immunity in Iraq leaving the people of Iraq under a legalized occupation or an Iraq without SOFA under the occupation of US troops for indefinite or a possible third solution that brings about the true liberation which was promised to the Iraqis?
The solution to this mess that has been caused in Iraq by the US troops is recognition that the solution firstly lies internally and then more importantly on the regional level. They are interlinked and the resolution of one would lead to the other. The settlement should not be dictated by any foreign power regardless of their influence in the region. No other region of the world would tolerate such interference in the region so the same measure should apply here. Consideration should be undertaken in regards to the legitimate interests of the powers in the area but the future of the area should not be held hostage to their exclusive interests, such as the export of oil.
The neighboring states of Iraq which are threatened by the changes in Iraq need to be addressed and treated in any lasting deal for Iraq and the area. Countries like Iran and Turkey need to be introduced in a new security measure which would take into account their concerns, fears and interests. Furthermore, any deal must secure the sovereignty of the region, what happens inside Iraq has repercussions on the lives of millions inside and outside the country. The best hope for the Iraqi people for now, is to reach a deal that provides clear guidelines for foreign troops, and attempts at best to respect an already fragile new nation.
Friday, November 7, 2008
Iran's Modern History: Beyond the Legacy
It is with great joy that I am publishing the first article in a series on a topic which is practically *never* seen anywhere: the Shia point of view on the events in the larger Middle-East. This is something of a pet project of mine every since I got involved, more than a decade ago already and quite by chance (the Middle-East never was my formal area of expertise), in the analysis of events in Lebanon: the more I looked into the Hezbollah phenomenon and then, later, into the developments in Iran, the more I began to be convinced that the Shia represented a *qualitatively* different force quite unlike any other regional actor.
The deeper I dug, the more the usual "garden variety" explanations (training, money, weapons, circumstances, etc.) for the truly phenomenal force of the Shias fell aside. I then did what I was trained to do: I dug deeper following Arthur Conan Doyle's advice "when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth". After a decade long "digging spree" I came to the only possible conclusion: it is the Shia spirituality, the Shia ethos, which sets them aside from all their adversaries. The next step was then very simple: to understand Hezbollah and Iran one must at least have a basic understanding of the Shia faith , history, culture and worldview.
Look at this paradox: all the pundits and "experts" are pontificating about Iran and Hezbollah offering their "great insights" and yet not only are all these pundits and "experts" never Shia themselves, but they mostly completely ignore the Shia mind, the Shia soul and the Shia world view. Go to your local library and check the books about Iran. They are either written by highly secular Americanized Iranian immigrants or by Jews. They are never, *ever* written by a pious Shia or an Iranian living in Iran.
Anyway - let me get off my soap box and simply conclude here that I am deeply grateful to "Ya_Baqiyatullah" (a pseudo, obviously) for finally agreeing to my numerous requests to write a series of articles for my blog. "Ya_Baqiyatullah" is neither Lebanese nor Iranian - he is from Pakistan - but he has travelled (very recently) to Iran and he plans on attending the famous seminaries in the holy city of Qom. He knows what he is writing about.
His first article today is somewhat of a "general" introduction to the series to follow which will gradually become more and more focused on specific topics (the next one, which I will publish next week will address the SOFA the US is trying to impose on Iraq).
"Ya_Baqiyatullah" has told me that he will be available for Q&As in the comment sections so I urge you all the use this opportunity to interact with him, challenge his views and share your critical comments with all of us.
The Saker
-------
Iran's Modern History: Beyond the Legacy
by Ya_Baqiyatullah
Since the revolution of 1979, we find that Iran as a country has been under immense pressure to bow to the demands of International heavyweights. These demands only intensified in recent years due to a propaganda cycle generated by the United States and Israel regarding the Iranian nuclear program. Despite 29 years of sanctions, threats, and war one has to ask what is the motivation that has kept the Iranian nation so steadfast and firm on their path despite these countless obstacles?
The answer to the above question lies in different aspects of the Iranian History. One has to explore the history of this nation deeply to see why they are so firm on this path regardless of the struggle they are facing. Iran is a stronghold of Shia Learning, and one of the most talked about and important subjects regarding the Shia faith is the tragedy of Karbala. The story of Al-Husayn [a], the grandson of the Prophet [p], and his revolution against the oppressive forces of Yazeed may sound like a simplistic battle between good and evil, but beyond the apparent, there is much more which is applicable to the lives of many Shias around the world today; be it in Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq or Pakistan. This tragedy is a source of inspiration for all and most importantly it was the foundation for the revolution of Ayatollah Khomeini.
His first speech against the Shah was given on the 15th of Kordad which coincided with the day of Ashura. It was the perfect starting point to a revolution which would change the world for years to come. In one of his speeches, the great Ayatollah had stated ‘They call us a nation of tears, but with these tears we have overthrown an empire’ – this statement in itself shows how important the tragedy of Ashura was in success of the revolution of Ayatollah Khomeini.
Iran, a country like many others, bears a past of oppression and tyranny, but the fragrance of freedom and the aroma of independence can be noticed in the masses who laid their lives to make this revolution a living present. An 8 year war which Saddam Hussein had initiated against the Iranians and was backed by several Western governments did not deter the Iranian nation from their path. One only has to look as far as Beshte Zehra, the Garden of Zehra, which is a graveyard for the martyrs of this nation who fought in the war against the Saddam and those who were killed in the revolution. The belief in martyrdom over a life of humiliation stems from the tragedy of Karbala. These people understood the essence of martyrdom and were ready to give all they had for their country but most importantly to safeguard the religion. One of the shining examples of this is MostafaChamaran, the defense minister under Ayatollah Khomeini. Defense ministers are known for their tactics and strategies in war and in survival of the country but this man had not limited himself to just giving orders. He practiced what he himself ordered others and fought alongside many of the young soldiers in the Iranian army and embraced martyrdom on the war front.
In the recent years we find that the Iranian nation has successfully progressed in many fields, most notably in the discipline of science. Iran being a nuclear entity is something which threatens most of the Western powers and especially the Israeli regime. Since the turn in the presidency, we find that the Western powers have left no leaf unturned in their agenda to slow down Iran’s advancement. After having visited Iran many times and speaking to the people there, the general attitude is way different than that is portrayed by the media in the Western countries. Many Iranians are unfazed by the talk of war and people believe it is simply hype created by the media with little substance. They fear nothing, simply because they believe they are only seeking their right by being nuclear. Many, if not most of the Iranians actually believe that the Government is doing well given the current situation. There will always be a small minority who would play down the Government regardless of their work in the betterment of the country. These individuals even if given the luxuries they demand would be impossible to please, hence to listening to them is futile.
The reason as to why Iran has remained so strong despite the sanctions and threats is due to the differences in their ideologies in comparison with other states and even other people to an extent. When the focal point of one’s every action is influenced by religion then one will evolve to be steadfast and be able to take the challenges head on Iran, from past to present, has done this quite openly, most notable example was the war by Saddam. It is a nation in their majorities who are vigilant and have faith in Almighty alone. They do not seek the luxuries nor do they seek a way of living which will cause them to delve into greed or diver them away from their purpose of life. For them religion is everything and in the examples above that have been mentioned that has been the common denominator: Islam!
"Ya_Baqiyatullah" is a 23 year old Pakistani Shia Muslim who has spent a few summers in Iran studying and in the near future will be moving to Iran for studying full time in the Seminary in Qum. He has been living in UK for nearly a decade after spending much of his early years in Pakistan.
The deeper I dug, the more the usual "garden variety" explanations (training, money, weapons, circumstances, etc.) for the truly phenomenal force of the Shias fell aside. I then did what I was trained to do: I dug deeper following Arthur Conan Doyle's advice "when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth". After a decade long "digging spree" I came to the only possible conclusion: it is the Shia spirituality, the Shia ethos, which sets them aside from all their adversaries. The next step was then very simple: to understand Hezbollah and Iran one must at least have a basic understanding of the Shia faith , history, culture and worldview.
Look at this paradox: all the pundits and "experts" are pontificating about Iran and Hezbollah offering their "great insights" and yet not only are all these pundits and "experts" never Shia themselves, but they mostly completely ignore the Shia mind, the Shia soul and the Shia world view. Go to your local library and check the books about Iran. They are either written by highly secular Americanized Iranian immigrants or by Jews. They are never, *ever* written by a pious Shia or an Iranian living in Iran.
Anyway - let me get off my soap box and simply conclude here that I am deeply grateful to "Ya_Baqiyatullah" (a pseudo, obviously) for finally agreeing to my numerous requests to write a series of articles for my blog. "Ya_Baqiyatullah" is neither Lebanese nor Iranian - he is from Pakistan - but he has travelled (very recently) to Iran and he plans on attending the famous seminaries in the holy city of Qom. He knows what he is writing about.
His first article today is somewhat of a "general" introduction to the series to follow which will gradually become more and more focused on specific topics (the next one, which I will publish next week will address the SOFA the US is trying to impose on Iraq).
"Ya_Baqiyatullah" has told me that he will be available for Q&As in the comment sections so I urge you all the use this opportunity to interact with him, challenge his views and share your critical comments with all of us.
The Saker
-------
Iran's Modern History: Beyond the Legacy
by Ya_Baqiyatullah
Since the revolution of 1979, we find that Iran as a country has been under immense pressure to bow to the demands of International heavyweights. These demands only intensified in recent years due to a propaganda cycle generated by the United States and Israel regarding the Iranian nuclear program. Despite 29 years of sanctions, threats, and war one has to ask what is the motivation that has kept the Iranian nation so steadfast and firm on their path despite these countless obstacles?
The answer to the above question lies in different aspects of the Iranian History. One has to explore the history of this nation deeply to see why they are so firm on this path regardless of the struggle they are facing. Iran is a stronghold of Shia Learning, and one of the most talked about and important subjects regarding the Shia faith is the tragedy of Karbala. The story of Al-Husayn [a], the grandson of the Prophet [p], and his revolution against the oppressive forces of Yazeed may sound like a simplistic battle between good and evil, but beyond the apparent, there is much more which is applicable to the lives of many Shias around the world today; be it in Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq or Pakistan. This tragedy is a source of inspiration for all and most importantly it was the foundation for the revolution of Ayatollah Khomeini.
His first speech against the Shah was given on the 15th of Kordad which coincided with the day of Ashura. It was the perfect starting point to a revolution which would change the world for years to come. In one of his speeches, the great Ayatollah had stated ‘They call us a nation of tears, but with these tears we have overthrown an empire’ – this statement in itself shows how important the tragedy of Ashura was in success of the revolution of Ayatollah Khomeini.
Iran, a country like many others, bears a past of oppression and tyranny, but the fragrance of freedom and the aroma of independence can be noticed in the masses who laid their lives to make this revolution a living present. An 8 year war which Saddam Hussein had initiated against the Iranians and was backed by several Western governments did not deter the Iranian nation from their path. One only has to look as far as Beshte Zehra, the Garden of Zehra, which is a graveyard for the martyrs of this nation who fought in the war against the Saddam and those who were killed in the revolution. The belief in martyrdom over a life of humiliation stems from the tragedy of Karbala. These people understood the essence of martyrdom and were ready to give all they had for their country but most importantly to safeguard the religion. One of the shining examples of this is MostafaChamaran, the defense minister under Ayatollah Khomeini. Defense ministers are known for their tactics and strategies in war and in survival of the country but this man had not limited himself to just giving orders. He practiced what he himself ordered others and fought alongside many of the young soldiers in the Iranian army and embraced martyrdom on the war front.
In the recent years we find that the Iranian nation has successfully progressed in many fields, most notably in the discipline of science. Iran being a nuclear entity is something which threatens most of the Western powers and especially the Israeli regime. Since the turn in the presidency, we find that the Western powers have left no leaf unturned in their agenda to slow down Iran’s advancement. After having visited Iran many times and speaking to the people there, the general attitude is way different than that is portrayed by the media in the Western countries. Many Iranians are unfazed by the talk of war and people believe it is simply hype created by the media with little substance. They fear nothing, simply because they believe they are only seeking their right by being nuclear. Many, if not most of the Iranians actually believe that the Government is doing well given the current situation. There will always be a small minority who would play down the Government regardless of their work in the betterment of the country. These individuals even if given the luxuries they demand would be impossible to please, hence to listening to them is futile.
The reason as to why Iran has remained so strong despite the sanctions and threats is due to the differences in their ideologies in comparison with other states and even other people to an extent. When the focal point of one’s every action is influenced by religion then one will evolve to be steadfast and be able to take the challenges head on Iran, from past to present, has done this quite openly, most notable example was the war by Saddam. It is a nation in their majorities who are vigilant and have faith in Almighty alone. They do not seek the luxuries nor do they seek a way of living which will cause them to delve into greed or diver them away from their purpose of life. For them religion is everything and in the examples above that have been mentioned that has been the common denominator: Islam!
"Ya_Baqiyatullah" is a 23 year old Pakistani Shia Muslim who has spent a few summers in Iran studying and in the near future will be moving to Iran for studying full time in the Seminary in Qum. He has been living in UK for nearly a decade after spending much of his early years in Pakistan.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
