|
“Dialog of Referendum” to undermine the “Civil
Disobedience” in By Mohammad Parvin
(02/21/05) The Islamic Regime
of Iran knows well that it is not wanted by the majority of the Iranian
people. It is true that it has survived for twenty six years by repression
and help of the interest driven Iranians and western power. But, in spite
of all these obstacles, the freedom-loving Iranians have resisted and have
not allowed this brutal regime to stabilize. The Iranian people are still
resisting, and that is why we are witnessing daily imprisonments, tortures
and executions by the Islamic Regime. This regime knows better than
anybody else that is hated by the people and will never yield to a
referendum request expressed by some of the so-called “reformists.”
Of course,
referendum can be used as a challenge to the Islamic Regime of Iran (IRI)
and all those who consider any legitimacy for it. When we claim that IRI has no
legitimacy and does not represent the majority of Iranians, we can qualify
our claim by challenging those who think otherwise to an internationally
monitored referendum. To
avoid any misunderstanding, we also need to emphasize that IRI will never
dare to accept such challenge. At this stage, referendum is just a tactic
and nothing more.
The type of referendum that is
introduced by Sazgara, et al, is not of this nature. Sazgara, the main
architects of the referendum, was a close ally of Khomeini and an advocate
of the 1979 Islamic Revolution. He was one of the
founders of the Islamic regime's Elite guard , and a former candidate
of the Islamic presidency. In recent years he has turned to a critic of
the hardliners and was arrested in June 2003, during a wave of student
unrest in At first, he and
others proposed the “referendum”
as a means of changing the Iranian constitution. It was argued that
this referendum would be an alternative to violent actions. When the obvious question
was raised as to how this bloody regime would yield to the will of the
people expressed by internet clicking, the architects of this referendum
and other supporters resorted to contradicting arguments and finally ended
up saying that we just want to have a “dialog about
referendum.” Proposing a
referendum, as a practical alternative to violent action and reducing it
to dialog, has the dangerous potential of diverting the attentions from
the real alternative, which is civil disobedience. In fact, such diversion
could be the only outcome of this referendum. Considering the
above argument, it should not be surprising that the main architects of
this deadly project are people like Sazgara, Maleki, and those from the
Unity Consolidation Office (the real name is Office for Consolidation
among students and shia’ clerics). At best, and even if we assume that
they have been “reformed”, what they are seeking is a watered-down Islamic
regime. They have
articulated their wish for transformation of present theocracy to a “good”
one in many writings and interviews as I have referenced in my recent
Persian articles. And, as to the
supporters of referendum outside Fortunately, the
supporters of referendum have been left isolated and people inside
Contrary to what
some people have suggested, I don’t believe that President George Bush
should endorse this referendum to demonstrate his sincerity about real
change in ·
Acknowledge the fact that the freedom-loving
Iranians want a secular democratic regime and are against the entirety of
the Islamic Regime, its constitution, and any form or shape of the
interference of religion in state. ·
Impose a smart sanction against the Islamic
Regime of Iran. This sanction should be a real one and not of the type
that would exclude 200 American companies such as Halliburton and General
Electric. A sanction
that does not have any loopholes and does not allow Halliburton or GE to
stay in ·
Reduce the diplomatic relations with the
Islamic Regime to the lowest possible level. ·
Apply the U.S. Anti Terrorism Act
indiscriminately and do not allow the IRI lobby groups such as AIC and
individuals like Senator Biden to legitimize a terrorist
regime. If the
As Gene Sharp, the
pre-eminent authority on strategic nonviolent struggle articulated in an
interview that I had with him last week, referendum, at best, falls within
the category of negotiation.
And negotiation can never persuade this monstrous regime to
abdicate its power. So let us start from where we all know the referendum
will stop and stage a real fight. It is a hard one but Iranians can do
it. Mohammad Parvin is an
adjunct professor at the Original Source: http://www.americandaily.com/article/6886 MEHR Tel: (310)
377-4590 E-mail: mehr@mehr.org |
