The executions were met with mixed reactions. Some people praised the government for taking action against terrorists, while others expressed concern about the death penalty.

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, a widely recognized international treaty that sets standards for the protection of fundamental human rights, permits the death penalty for the most serious crimes. However, the treaty also requires that the death penalty be imposed only in accordance with the law and that it not be used against people who were under the age of 18 at the time of the crime.

In the case of the four individuals executed in Iran, they were all adults and were convicted of crimes that are considered to be among the most serious under Iranian law. As such, the executions appear to be in compliance with international law.

The armed assault that led to the executions occurred on November 16, 2022, in the Negahbani square of the Khaneh neighborhood commonly referred to as the ‘Khaneh Esfahan’ or ‘Isfahan House’ in Isfahan. The terrorists, who were members of the People’s Mojahedin terrorist organization (MEK), opened fire on innocent civilians and security personnel, killing three security defenders and injuring several others.

The assailants were quickly apprehended by the authorities, and a trial was held in the Isfahan Province Justice Administration. The defendants were represented by lawyers, and the court heard evidence from both the prosecution and the defense.

After a thorough investigation, the court found the defendants guilty of terrorism and sentenced them to death. The executions were carried out in accordance with the law.

The executions are a reminder of the serious threat posed by terrorism. Iran has been a target of terrorism for many years, and the government has taken a tough stance against those who commit terrorist acts. The executions are a sign that the government is committed to protecting its citizens from terrorism.

Who is MEK?

The People’s Mojahedin terrorist organization (MEK) is a cult-like group that has been designated as a terrorist organization by the United States, the European Union, and the United Nations. The MEK has a long history of violence, and its members have been responsible for numerous terrorist attacks, including the assassination of several Iranian officials.

The MEK is currently based in Albania, and it has been trying to rebrand itself as a peaceful political organization. However, the group’s true nature is clear from its history of violence. The MEK is a dangerous terrorist organization that poses a serious threat to Iran and the region.

The executions of the four terrorists in Iran are a just punishment for their crimes. The executions are a sign that the government is committed to protecting its citizens from terrorism, and they are a warning to other terrorists that they will be brought to justice.

The post Iran Executes Terrorists in Compliance with International Law, for the Good of Society first appeared on .

Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps condemned Tehran terrorist attacks on Wednesday in a statement and pledged retaliation for the attack.

Hinting Saudi was behind the event in which at least 12 people were killed, the IRGC statement says Tehran attacks, only a week after US U.S. president’s visit of Saudi Arabia is “meaningful”.

“This terrorist attack happened only a week after the meeting between the U.S. president (Donald Trump) and the (Saudi) backward leaders who support terrorists. The fact that Islamic State has claimed responsibility proves that they were involved in the brutal attack,” said the statement.

Brigadier General Hossein Salami, IRGC deputy commander also promised retaliation for the attack. “Let there be no doubt that we will take revenge for today’s attacks in Tehran, on terrorists, their affiliates and their supporters,” he said, as cited by the news agency Mehr.

The post Iran Guards Blames Saudi, Pledges Revenge for Tehran Attacks first appeared on .

There are conflicting reports on the number of casualties but some unofficial sources have announced 9 security forces and civilians dead in parliament shootings.

The assailants armed with two AK-47 and a handgun are still said to be inside the Parliament. It has been reported that a suicide bomber blew himself up in the parliament building.

In the other attack, three gunmen opened fire at the Mausoleum of Imam Khomeini, the founder of Islamic Republic, in southern Tehran wounding a number of people and killing one. According to Ilna, one of the assailants has been arrested, one has killed himself by taking cyanide, and the third detonated her vest. A suicide bomber’s vest found around the mausoleum has also been deactivated.

Security forces have now surrounded the two sites of the terror attacks and the situation is said to be under control, with normal traffic reported in other streets of the city.

Although ISIS has reportedly taken the responsibility of Tehran terror attack, security experts and analysts in Tehran believe the attack are carried out in a way similar to MKO’s former terrorist operations. A security source told Iran’s View that evidences show Saudi Arbia’s intelligence entities directly working along with the MKO agents in carrying out the terror attacks. Jihadi militias controlled by Saudi Arabia have been making connections with the MKO for almost a year now.

Security forces could arrest alive one of the terrorists who attempted to kill herself with cyanide. Unlike Daesh, the MKO typically uses women in carrying out its terrorist operations.

Security observers in Tehran say the terrorists have planned for other attacks as well. Security forces are fully prepared to counter any other possible attack.

Earlier in May Saudi Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman al-Saud, the kingdom’s defense minister talked of his country’s efforts to take the battle inside Iran.

“We know that the aim of the Iranian regime is to reach the focal point of Muslims [Mecca] and we will not wait until the fight is inside Saudi Arabia and we will work so that the battle is on their side, inside Iran, not in Saudi Arabia,”he said.

In 2016 Saudi Prince Turki AlFaisal attended an MKO meeting in Paris, announcing a new round of his country’s cooperation with the terrorist organization. In that meeting a number of western leaders and politicians accompanied Maryam Rajavi, the head of the MKO, including US formal official John Bolton, Newt Gingrich and Rudy Giuliani .
Saudi Foreign Minister Adel Jubeir said Iran must be punished for its interference in the region and support for terrorist organizations such as Al-Qaeda, Al Arabiya News Channel reported him as saying early Wednesday.

Updates:

Following the twin terrorist attacks in the Iranian capital, the country’s Interior Ministry has released a statement giving the details of the deadly incidents.

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei also will hold his scheduled meeting with the student unions delegations today despite the attacks in Tehran. It is expected he makes his first statements on the attacks in his today speech.

The full text of the statement released by the Iranian Interior Ministry on the Wednesday terrorist attacks on Tehran is as follows:

On Wednesday, two terrorist teams simultaneously tried to conduct blind terrorist acts in the vicinity of the Mausoleum of the founder of the Islamic Republic, Imam Khomeini, and also in Iran’s Parliament.

The first terrorist team consisted of two people who entered the Imam Khomeini Mausoleum at around 10:30 a.m. One of them blew up her vest and the second was killed in a fire exchange with security forces.

The second team was composed of four people, who concurrently with the first team, tried to enter the administrative building of the Parliament. Facing reaction from the security forces, one of them detonated his vest and the three others were killed in a shoot-out with the police forces while trying to reach the upper floors of the parliament building.

Based on reports, 12 people have been killed and 42 other injured in these two incidents.

At the moment, both events are over and everything is fully under the control of security and military forces. Further news of these events will subsequently be published.

To verify the details and exact dimensions of the two incidents, Iran’s Supreme National Security Council will hold a meeting chaired by the Interior Minister later on Wednesday.

In order to prevent the spread of false news, it is advised that all the media outlets avoid publishing unofficial news.

The post Iran Attacks: MKO, Saudi behind Parliament, Khomeini Shrine Shootings first appeared on .

Iranians voted Friday in a presidential contest that pit President Hassan Rouhani against a serious challenger, Seyyed Ebrahim Raeisi, in an unexpectedly tight race. Election polls historically misses their mark and unable to correctly predict Iran elections’ results. The results of latest US presidential election also came as a surprise to nearly everyone. Relying largely on opinion polls, election forecasters put Clinton’s chance of winning at 70%! In such circumstances, many observers are casting doubt on the accuracy of public opinion polls.

“The war of polls is scientific on the face of it, but it is commonplace in actual fact which has no realist bases and standard criteria. In Iran, too, a big difference in the results of the polls of the two parties in the elections is indicative of the fact that none of them is blessed with pragmatic and scientific tools for opinion surveys. Moreover, performance of big institutions has been discredited many times, such as the presidential elections of 2005 and 2013. In both these elections, the polls had never given a chance for the candidates who won the elections in the end. As a result, the polls should be taken into consideration in a careful manner”, says Payam Fazlinejad, having cooperated with various reformist as well as Principlist press as a writer and analyst.

Pointing to the devastating effects of the war of polls, he said, “Lack of analytical power and power measurement are risky, and leave negative effects on the decisions of the campaigns in the remaining three days to the election day because some part of their political decisions are made in these days based on the very polls and surveys which has no scientific base. The trend can result in miscalculations in campaigns of both parties either prior or subsequent to the elections. It even may turn triumph into a complete failure in the long run. The outburst of news about such matters in the last days which are on the basis of these opinion polls may work against itself only if it is mixed with miscalculations. It can be the case for all the campaigns.

In response to the question of “How close are the predictions of the reformist and Principlist elites and statesmen to what the people, in general, believe about the winner of the elections?” Fazlinejad, who has the experience of working as a senior researcher in the institution Keyhan for ten years, said, “We should learn from the experience. The US elections in 2016 proved with certainty that prediction is irrational in actual fact. I believe in Churchill’s statements which is peculiar to Iran’s political society, ’A politician needs the ability to foretell what is going to happen tomorrow, next week, next month, and next year. And to have the ability afterwards to explain why it didn’t happen’. Iran is a complex society which no one can foretell its behavior and unfortunately, no attempt has been made in order to work on its predictability. For the purpose of making the society predictable, we are supposed to work out plans for developing political psychology as well as political sociology circles, but neither elites nor statesmen actually pay attention to such fields except for the night of the elections!

In response to the question of “What do you think are the wrong measures of both parties?”, he said, “Both parties have heavily invested in the cyberspace and social networks, but took no notice of the real society from the beginning. When the political activists restrict themselves to the cyberspace, their relationship with different social strata and their issues and concerns are reduced and they lose the power of creating a big social movement. Both parties have made their best in the last two weeks to keep their supporters away from the “cyberspace restriction” in social networks. They have developed plans such as sending representatives to far-off places, small towns and villages, but leading the supporters to social networks, and the distribution of news and analyses in internet media have resulted in the energy outburst far on in time.

The post Rational People Never Foretell the Elections, Iranian Analyst first appeared on .

For Iranian reformists, the twin parliament and Assembly of Experts elections on February 26 were also a chance to blow new life to their presence in the power circle of the Islamic Republic which they lost after their rejection of the results of the 2009 presidential elections, leading to street riots and months of chaos in the capital city of Tehran.

Almost six years after those days, Reformists are cheering the election gains and are ecstatic about their unexpected wins in the ballot boxes and sweeping Principalists off parliament seats in the Tehran constituency.

However, the results in the other cities are different and both Principalists and Reformists have enough seats to be influential in the next parliament and the Assembly of Experts, but the fact that almost all of the Principalists’ prominent figures in Tehran failed to find their way into the Parliament (and in case of the Assembly of Experts, only Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati was elected ranking 16th out of the 16 seats reserved for the Tehran constituency) is a major blow to them which had the upper hand over the course of the past decade.

Though Reformists’ gain in the elections is also a result of their coalition with government supporters, known as the Moderates, as well as some moderate Principalist figures such as Ali Motahhari which led them to support coalition lists for the twin elections, the fact that Reformists could gain such a major support from the people is an undeniable reality for the political power sphere of the Islamic Republic and on the other hand this victory poses, at the same time, an opportunity and a threat for the winning Reformists.

Will Reformists seize the opportunity?

After 2009’s post-election disputes and street riots, many Reformist leaders were arrested and many of their aides who spurred the public into street riots had to flee the country; subsequently, the leadership in Iran lost its faith in the movement and to loyalty of prominent Reformist leaders. This lack of confidence in the Reformist movement and absence of its leaders and forces beside consecutive defeats in the national and local elections pushed reformist figures out of the political scene, minimizing their role.

After Hassan Rouhani won the 2013 presidential election, he tried to pave the way for the return of Reformists to the country’s political circle, while, he himself is not a Reformist and even was a serious critic of them while he served as the secretary of the Supreme National Security Council.

The full participation of the reformists in the recent elections (even Reformists’ leaders under house arrest invited their supporters to participate in the elections) and then the results of the recent twin elections and especially the landslide victory of the Reformists in Tehran showed that the movement is coming back into the political sphere of the country and will revive its status as a legitimate game-changer.

Now, it’s about time for Reformist leaders to engage in direct talks with the political leadership of the system and to iron out misunderstandings and address the existing issues with them. Overestimating their reemerging power and making the same mistake of playing the role of staunch opponents of the Islamic Republic can lead them to a process which will not have better results than they gain in recent years. But a negotiated resolution not only will recreate the confidence and trust of the Islamic Republic to them but will secure their return to highest levels of the power in the country.

Dangers of a victory

If one was to study the voting pattern of the Iranians in last three decades, they would see Iranians mostly (if not always) make pragmatist decisions and never support a particular group because of their theoretical aims and promising rhetoric. Iranians evaluate the records of an official and after providing them enough time, they would decide to whether continue their support or terminate it. Unexpected victories of the Former reformist President Mohammad Khatami in 1997 and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in 2005 presidential elections are good examples of how different choices Iranian people can make due to their experience of the incumbent officials.

For this reason, Rouhani’s government- which turned to be a facilitator for the return of Reformism – will have a critical time for the rest of its tenure. Now the Parliament is also in line with the government and in case the government fails in fulfilling its promises, Principalists cannot be blamed as being the trouble makers! While people are hoping for a better economic situation after giving Rouhani more than two years to reach a nuclear deal, possible excessive concentration of Reformists on their political causes may undermine their ability to make significant and tangible changes in the life of ordinary people and so lose their votes in future Presidential elections, after less than two years.

In the words of the senior reformist leader Mohammadreza Aref during his campaign for the 2013 Presidential election, each time both government and the parliament was controlled by one party the outcome was not satisfactory.

Another threat to the Reformists is their inability in understanding the ordinary and the lower-classes especially in the small cities. They are the sources that provided Ahmadinejad with enough vote to win two Presidential elections against the robust rivals from the Reformist and Conservative circles. Today’s threat to Reformism is to make their usual mistake of confusing Tehran and large cities’ political tendency with national sentiments and ignoring lower- classes and ordinary people for who politics is not a priority.

Next presidential elections will be the scene of a critical completion between the Moderates/ Reformists who were controlling two important sources of power for at least two years and the Principalists who were out of power for the same period. I believe it will be the incumbent government’s economic record that will determine the next winner.

The post How Iranian Reformists’ Victory Can Turn Into Defeat? first appeared on .

-*سونیا منصورربیعه

ایرانز ویو: اگر مسلمانی دیندار و پارسا بودم و قرار بود که نگاهی دقیق‌تر به وضعیت امروز اسلام و مسلمانان داشته باشم، مطمئناً به شدت نگران می­شدم. امابه حتی با وجود آنکه من مسلمان نیستم و در واقع یک زن مسیحی سکولار عرب هستم، باز هم خود را نگران خواهران و برادران مسلمانم و البته دین اسلام می‌بینم.

البته این نگرانی تنها از سر نوع‌دوستی نیست. بلکه آینده اقلیت‌ها در خاورمیانه هم تا حد زیادی به وضعیت دین اسلام، که دین اکثریت است، بستگی دارد. اسلام و مسلمانان بخشی از عقبه فرهنگی من به عنوان یک عرب مسیحی هستند. زیرا فرهنگ خاورمیانه از ادیان و فرقی شکل گرفته است که همواره همانند قطعات موزائیک در کنار هم قرار داشته‌اند. تا اینکه القاعده و مشهورترین شاخه آن، داعش متولد شد.

دوباره می‌گویم، به عنوان یک مسیحی عرب، من نه تنها قرآن خوانده‌ و در خصوص آن آمزش دیده‌ام، بلکه در مذهب اسلام و تاریخ آن نیز مطالعه کردم. من اسلام را دینی شناختم که در هنر و علم دارای استیلا و روشنگری است. من اسلام را دینی دیدم که هموراه حرکتی رو به جلو دارد. البته، همانند هر دین دیگری، در میان پیروان اسلام نیز می‌توان اندازه‌ای از افراط گرایی و حرکت به عقب را هم مشاهده کرد اما اینها همیشه، یا دست کم تا اواخر دهه 70 و اوایل دهه 80 میلادی  مسائلی جزئی بودند تا اینکه القاعده و بدنام‌ترین شاخته آن، داعش، به وجود آمدند.

از زمان واقعه 11 سپتامبر، از خودم می‌‌پرسیدم: چه بر سر اسلام آمد؟ این سوال با ظهور و شدت گرفتن کشتار فرقه ای در عراق، پس از حمله 2003 آمریکا به این کشور، و اخیرا آواره‌سازی گسترده اقلیت‌های مذهبی به دست داعش در خاورمیانه که از زمان فروپاشی امپراطوری عثمانی تاکنون بی سابقه بوده است، شدت گرفت.

برای پاسخ به این سوال باید وقایع بین سال‌های اواخر دهه 70 تا اوایل 80 میلادی را درک کرد و فهمید که مناقشات این سال‌ها چگونه به وجود آمد و چگونه به پایان رسید. چگونه پرده آهنین شوروی فرو ریخت و به قطعات کوچکتری تقسیم شد ولی امپریالیسم غربی و آمریکایی بدون چالش بر جا ماندند.

در این سال‌های سرنوشت‌ساز ما شاهد انقلابی اسلامی در ایران بودیم که در مقابل امپریالیسم غربی قد علم کرد. در حالی که جنبش اسلامی دیگری، این بار در افغانستان، مهار شد و امپریالیسم غربی توانست آن را خنثی کند.

ما همچنین شاهد تحمیل جنگ نیابتی غرب علیه  ایران بودیم که بواسطه عراق صورت گرفت و هدف آن نیز به چالش کشیدن انقلاب اسلامی نوپای ایران بود. این رویدادها که منجر به سوءفهم عمیقی در درون اسلام شدند، در پی شکل‌گیری احساسات شدید ضد امپریالیستی در خاورمیانه به وجود آمدند که طی آن مسئله فلسطین، به عنوان موضوع اصلی جهان اسلام، در پی صلح جزیی مصر و اسرائیل به حاشیه رانده شد. مناقشه فلسطین با این صلح به خاک سپرده شد و مقاومت فلسطین پشتیبانی بیشترِ دولت های عربی را از دست داد. این مسائل منجر به معاهده صلح اسلو و در نطفه خفه شدن مبارزات فلسطینیان شد. در حالی که شهرک‌های غیرقانونی اسرائیلی تا به امروز همچنان به رشد خود ادامه می‌دهند.

دهه 1980 با غلبه امپریالیسم غربی پایان یافت. اما در خاورمیانه، انقلاب اسلامی ایران هرچند بواسطه جنگ عراق تضعیف شده بود و جامعه آن زخم‌های عمیقی برداشته بود، اما بر سر راه غلبه امپریالیسم غربی قرار گرفت. پس از پایان جنگ ایران و عراق و درگذشت آیت‌الله خمینی، انقلاب اسلامی ایران توانست بقای خود را ادامه دهد اما یک دهه بعدی را با وجود جو شدید خصومت‌باری که علیه آن وجود داشت، در میان تحریم‌های یک‌جانبه و چندجانبه، صرف بازسازی خود کرد.

انقلاب اسلامی ایران به اشکال گوناگون الهام بخش بسیاری از گروه‌های منطقه بود. گروه‌ها و جنبش‌های اسلام‌گرا در عربستان سعودی، مصر، سوریه و لبنان سر برآوردند. ولی تنها تعداد کمی از آنها توانستند به باقی خود ادامه دهند. دلیل بقای این عده معدود، مثل حزب الله لبنان، این بود که آنها روح انقلاب اسلامی ایران را به عنوان یک طغیان اسلامی علیه امپریالیسم غربی درک کرده بودند. طنین حزب الله در بین مردم جهان عرب پیچیدن گرفت زیرا مناقشه فلسطین و مبارزه علیه امپریالیسم غربی را زنده نگه داشت. در همان زمان حماس نیز متولد شد، تا بر اساس نگرش عدم مصالحه دربرابر اشغالگر، اشغاال فلسطین را به چالش بکشد. اما این گروه، با روحیه متفاوتی از حزب‌الله لبنان متولد شد که نشات گرفته از رقابت‌های داخلی فلسطینیان و به شدت متاثر از نیروهای خارجی و رقیب منطقه‌ای بود.

نیروهایی که از زمان شکل‌گیری انقلاب اسلامی ایران، و با هدف تضعیف آن، سعی دارند تا میان مسلمانان اختلاف بیاندازند، نه تنها امروزه هم بر سر کارند، بلکه از سوی ده‌ها گروه تروریستی تکفیری که مدعی فعالیت به سود اسلام و مسلمانان هستند، نیز حمایت می‌شوند. به همین خاطر است که امروز، حزب‌الله و حماس، دو گروهی که سال ها برای هدفی یکسان تلاش کرده‌اند، امروزه شاهد اختلافاتی میان خود هستند.

انقلاب اسلامی ایران به وضوح مبارزه علیه امپریالیسم غربی را به عنوان مشخصه اسلام مدرن تعریف کرد. اما این انقلاب تنها جنبش اسلامی نبود که کنکاش برای باز تعریف اسلام در عصر مدرن را احیا کرد. هرچند، گروه‌های اسلامی که پیش از انقلاب ایران به وجود آمده بودند و بیشتر کسانی که از آن الهام گرفته بودند به دنبال بازگشت به دوره اسلامی پیش از رخنه امپریالیسم غربی بودند تا بتوانند ابزاری را برای به چالش کشیدن آن پیدا کنند. در نتیجه یک بازگشت نوستالژیک به اسلام منجر به سردرگمی در رابطه با غرب شد. در اینجا به طور خاص به اخوان‌المسلمین اشاره دارم. ابهام و سردرگمی اینها در این بود که می‌خواستند با ابزارهای مفهومی که پیش از ظهور امپریالیسم وجود داشت، به جنگ امپریالیسم بروند. این مسئله در بهترین حالت، یک راهبرد جنگی، و در بدترین حالت، مشروعیت بخشی به وهابیت است، خدعه ای که قلب اسلام را هدف قرار داده است. ابهام و سردرگمی دیگر در این حقیقت است که فرار این جنبش‌ها از عصر مدرن مانع از آن می‌شود که حتی درکی از امپریالیسم پیدا کنند و در نتیجه به جای فهمیدن، گیج می‌شوند و اجازه می‌دهند که مدرنیته بر دستگاه ایدئولوژیک آنها تاثیری بگذارد که حتی قادر به درک آن هم نیستند.

این کج فهمی تراژیکی است که شورشیان سنی برای دریافت چگونگی مبارزه با امپریالیسم غربی و احیای تلاش‌ها برای بازتعریف اسلام در عصر مدرن، گرفتار آن هستند. امپریالیسم غربی، بطور ذاتی، درباره برتری علم و فناوری است. بنابراین، سنیان شورشی، با انتخاب نوستالوژی و ابزارهای مفهومی دوران قبل از امپریالیسم، تنها می‌توانند با توسل به بربریت و وحشیگری که در القاعده و داعش دیده می‌شود، به جنگ برتری فنی غرب و روش زندگی مورد تاکید آن بروند.

از سوی دیگر، انقلاب اسلامی ایران با استفاده از همان عناصری که غرب مدعی دارا بودن برتری در آنان است، یعنی فناوری، این کشور اما بر خلاف سایر کشورهای اسلامی که با تقلید از غرب به دنبال انرژی هسته ای به عنوان راهی برای دستیابی به برتری نظامی بودند، انرژی هسته ای را تنها برای اهداف غیر نظامی و حقی برای رسیدن به جایگاهی برابر در نظر داشت تا با به مخالفت با امپریالیسم یپردازد. از آنجا که غرب خود را در جایگاهی برتر می‌داند، کرامتی برای دیگران و کشورهای رام شده، قائل نیست و همه این کارها را نیز با بهره‌گیری از فناوری انجام می‌دهد.

اما بدون توجه به این که ایران چقدر به دنبال انرژی هسته‌ای برای اهداف غیرنظامی و پژوهش‌های فنی است، غرب همچنان خود را مشکوک به نیات ایران معرفی می‌کند. توافق اخیری که میان ایران و گروه 5+1 شد، پاسخی به این ادعاهاست و ابزار لازم برای اراده شواهد و صحت‌سنجی برنامه هسته‌ای ایران را فراهم می‌کند. علاوه بر آن، غربی‌ها به جای آنکه به دنبال اندازه‌گیری نیات جمهوری اسلامی باشند، باید تلاش این کشور برای رسیدن به فناوری غیرنظامی هسته‌ای را جشن بگیرند، چرا که اگر این کشور راهی به جز پیشرفت فنی را می‌پیمود، آن راه به بربریت ختم می‌شد.

البته، ممکن است گفته شود که پیشرفت فنی نیز ابعادی از بربریت را در خود دارد. بلی! استعمار اروپا و بعدها استعمار آمریکایی در آفریقا، خاورمیانه، آسیا و آمریکای جنوبی، بسیاری از همین ویژگی‌های بربریت را داشت که امروزه در گروه هایی مانند القاعده و داعش می‌بینیم. این مشکل برای همه انواع فناوری وجود دارد. فناوری‌ها، استانداردهای زندگی ما را ارتقاء می‌‌بخشند اما همزمان به ابزاری شرایط بنیادی انسان تبدیل شده است که در آرزوی خداست اما غرایزی حیوانی هم دارد که بدون اخلاقیات، بربریت همیشه در کمین آن است.

جمهوری اسلامی ایران به رغم داشتن ابزار و دانش فناوری هسته‌ای، همواره به تقبیح سلاح هسته‌ای پرداخته و هیچ‌گاه به دنبال اهداف نظامی از فناوری هسته‌ای نبوده و پیشرفت و اخلاقیات را در مقابل بربریت انتخاب کرده است.

جمهوری اسلامی، همزمان با استفاده از ابزارهای برتری غرب، یعنی فناوری، و ابزارهایی که خود از آموزه ‌های اخلاقی انقلاب اسلامی بدست آورده، به رویارویی با امپریالیسم غربی آمده است. اینگونه است که مذاکره‌کنندگان خستگی‌ناپذیر ایرانی همواره به فتوای آیت‌الله خامنه‌ای علیه ساخت تسلیحات هسته‌ای ارجاع داده‌اند و اخیرا نیز روحانی، رئیس‌جمهوری ایران با تاکید بر آنکه ایران هیچ گاه از دانش هسته‌ای خود علیه کشور دیگری استفاده نمی‌کند، این فتوا را به گونه‌ای دیگر تکرار کرد.

به این دلیل است که ایران با هدف رفع سوء ظن‌ها و پایان دادن به تحریم های نا عادلانه در 14 جولای 2015، با انجام بازرسی‌ها و شفاف‌سازی‌ بیشتر در خصوص برنامه هسته‌ای خود تن داد.

این تحولات اما زمانی اتفاق می‌افتد که ایران به عنوان یک بازیگر عمده در منطقه‌ای شناخته می‌شود که شاهد تهدیدات، درگیری‌ها، جنگ، تروریسم و وحشی‌گری‌های مختلفی است.

بنابراین ایران چگونه می‌تواند از داشتن یک برنامه نظامی هسته‌ای چشم پوشی کند آن هم در چنین شرایط خطرناکی که بیش از همه به چنین سلاحی نیاز دارد؟ این سوالی است که اخیراً ولی نصر، نویسنده و تحلیلگر آمریکایی طی مقاله‌ای در واشنگتن پست مطرح کرده است.

خود ولی نصر اینطور به این سوال پاسخ می‌دهد که جمهوری اسلامی به خاطر فشارهای داخلی، از موقعیت منطقه ای خود چشم پوشی کرده است تا بتواند بر بقای سیاسی خود در داخل کشور متمرکز شود. نصر در استدلال خود، بحث حیات انقلاب اسلامی در داخل را در مقابل جایگاه منطقه‌ای آن قرار می‌دهد.

من اما معتقدم که استدلال نصر متکی بر درک اشتباه غرب از انقلاب اسلامی و طرح اشتباه دوگانگی درون و داخل است.

در خصوص فشارهای داخلی که ایران بعد از وقایع انتخاباتی سال 2009 (1388) شاهد آن بود، زیاد گفته شده و اینطور ادعا شده است که این رویدادها ایران را وادار به ورود به روند مذاکراتی کرد که امروزه به پایان خود نزدیک شده است. اما این ادعا نیز بر پایه بسیاری مفروضات اشتباه بنا شده که می‌توان شواهد زیادی علیه آن ارائه کرد. در واقع این آمریکا بود که پیش‌قدم شد و فرآیند مذاکرات را آغاز کرد. در خصوص وقایع سال 2009، مطالعات بسیاری با تلاش برای اثبات تقلب احمدی‌نژاد انجام شد اما توفیقی در پی نداشتند، زیرا احمدی‌نژاد انتخاب مردم ایران در سال 2009 بود و هیچ تقلبی، آنطور که رسانه‌های غربی ادعا می‌کردند رخ نداد و برخی پژوهش‌های علمی نیز بر این مسئله صحه گذاشته‌اند.

حتی اسناد ویکی‌لیکز نیز نشان می‌دهند که این آمریکا بود که روایتی دروغین و مخالف با حقیقت در خصوص تقلب در انتخابات ایران را نشر داد. در خصوص وقایع بعد از انتخابات 2009، مفروضه‌های اشتباه زیادی در خصوص جوانان ایرانی و اینکه آنها مخالف انقلاب اسلامی هستند، طرح شد اما یک مطالعه غربی نشان می‌دهد که این مفروضه‌ها نادرست هستند و اکثریت جوانان ایرانی، حتی آنها که مواضع انتقادی نسبت به دولت دارند، در ارزش‌های انقلاب اسلامی ادغام شده و این ارزش‌ها در آنها درونی شده است.

اشتباه بودن دوگانگی شرایط زمینه‌ای داخل و خارج کشور که نصر آن را مطرح کرد نیز اثبات شده است. به خصوص در مورد داعش که نصر پذیرفته تهدیدی علیه ایران است. در مورد داعش، بقای انقلاب اسلامی ایران مساوی بقای کل اسلام است. زیرا شاخه دیگر اسلام که در مقابل ایران قرار گرفته، وحشیگری را انتخاب کرده است و رهبران و ترویج‌دهندگان این ایده، مثل داعش، مسلمانان را وارد مسیر بی بازگشتی کرده‌اند که به تخریب خودشان می‌انجامد.

در شرایط جدید و با حضور داعش، قربانیانی برای حفاظت از اسلام حقیقی و بازگشت کرامت مسلمانان وجود خواهند داشت. و این راه از طریق انقلاب اسلامی و پیام خاص آن صورت می‌گیرد. ایران تاثیر منطقه‌ای خود را اعمال خواهد کرد و لغو تحریم‌ها در نتیجه تلاش دیپلماتیک این کشور نیز به این هدف کمک خواهد کرد.

البته، گشودن درهای ایران، اقدامی پرخطر برای انقلاب اسلامی است، ولی همزمان این اقدام یک حرکت ایدئولوژیک و برای دفاع از اسلام است تا پیام این دین منتشر شود. این اقدامی است در راستای رسیدن انقلاب اسلامی ایران به جایگاه رهبری منطقه‌ای و جهانی که البته شایسته آن است.

اینطور نیست که ایران با پذیرش توافق هسته‌ای، انقلاب خود را از جهان ایزوله کرده و از نفوذ منطقه‌ای خود دست بکشد. برعکس، جمهوری اسلامی ایران از این پس نفوذ خود را به شکل متفاوتی و حتی گسترده‌تر بر مسلمانان اعمال می‌کند و پیام اسلام را نشر می‌دهد. زیرا با وجود داعش، حیات اسلام به زنده ماندن انقلاب اسلامی ایران بستگی دارد.

با شروع بهار عربی که به گفته این تحلیلگر، می‌رفت تا مدل انقلاب اسلامی را در منطقه پخش کند، حاکمان عرب کشورهای حاشیه خلیج فارس را به واکنش واداشت. همچنین القاعده و داعش نیز علیه اسلام سیاسی، انقلابی و ضد امپریالیستی که در ایران شکل گرفته، وارد عمل شدند. به همین خاطر است که بعد از توافق هسته ای، محمد جواد ظریف، وزیر خارجه ایران سفرهایی را به کشورهای همسایه عربی انجام داد.

با توجه به مسائلی که بیان شد، ممکن است این ایده طرح شود که این فشار داخلی نبود که ایران را به میز مذاکره کشاند، بلکه شرایط تهدیدی که علیه اسلام، بطور کلی، وجود دارد، انقلاب اسلامی ایران را قانع کرد که تنها راه برای تاثیرگذاری مثبت بر اسلام و منطقه،‌ یعنی همان ماموریت اصلی ایران، این است که از شر تحریم‌های تحمیلی خلاص شود.

برای صحت‌سنجی این ایده، واقعه‌ای را یادآوری می‌کنم؛ پس از حملات که ژانویه 2015 به نشریه فرانسوی شارلی هبدو شد و تاثیر بدی بر وجهه اسلام داشت، و در حالیکه تنها ابتکاری که جهان می‌توانست از ایران برای دفاع از اسلام انتظار داشته باشد، ابتکار عملی در مذاکرات هسته‌ای بود، آیت‌الله خامنه ای، رهبر ایران، آغازگر گفتگویی با غرب و جوانانی غربی در خصوص دین اسلام و پیام آن بود. #LetterForYou پیامی برای جوانان غرب و البته جهان بود که از طریق رسانه‌های اجتماعی منتشر شد و کوشید تا اسلام حقیقی را به دور از کلیشه‌های داعش و القاعده شرح دهد.

نامه آیت‌الله خامنه‌ای به جوانان غربی، معنای عمیق‌تری نیز دارد. این نامه، ادامه سیاست جمهوری اسلامی ایران برای باز کردن درهای گفتگوی خود با جهانیان و مکمل مذاکرات هسته‌ای بود.

نام آیت الله خامنه‌ای با آغاز گفتگویی با جوانان غربی درباره اسلام، به دنبال گسترش فهم و احترام افکار عمومی غرب است که جریان مذاکرات هسته‌ای نیز به آن دست یافته بود. رهبر ایران در نامه خود توضیح می‌دهد که او جوانان را مخاطب قرار داده است زیرا برای اصلاح تصورات غلطی که درخصوص اسلام در بین بزرگسالان غربی به وجود آمده، بسیار دیر شده است، بویژه که این تصورات غلط در خود غرب جعل شده‌اند.

کسی باید از مسلمانان در برابر خودشان دفاع کند. مطمئناً غرب این کار را نخواهد کرد. انقلاب اسلامی ایران به مقاومت، بقا، کرامت و احترام دست یافته است. و بهترین جایگاه را برای بر عهده گرفتن این وظیفه در اختیار دارد. شروع و پایان این وظیفه خطیر با گفتگویی صادقانه درباره اسلام است. این معنای عمیق نامه رهبری عالی ایران به جوانان غربی است. بعد از توافق هسته‌ای،‌جمهوری اسلامی ایران با دانش خود در همه حوزه‌ها، از فناوری گرفته تا دین، آماده مقابله با بربریت است.

این مهم‌ترین ماموریت انقلاب اسلامی در دنیای امروز است. اگر توافق هسته‌ای را دنبال کرده اما توجهی به نامه رهبری ایران به جوانان غربی نداشته‌اید، آنگاه مهمترین مسئله درباره این توافق را درک نکرده اید: یک گفتگو بر پایه احترام و شأن متقابل و علیه بربریت و تهدیداتی که اسلام با آن مواجه است.

دکتر سونیا منصور ربیعه، نویسنده مسیحی کانادایی با اصالت عرب و استاد فلسفه و اخلاق در دانشگاه‌های این کشور است. نطرات وی به عنوان تحلیلگر مسائل خاورمیانه در رسانه‌های بین‌المللی منتشر می‌شود. می‌توانید وی را در تویتر دنبال کنید.

The post نامه رهبر ایران به جوانان غربی، رمزگشای توافق هسته‌ای first appeared on .

این مقاله را به فارسی بخوانید.

By: Sonia Mansour Robaey *

If I were a faithful and pious Muslim and if I were to take a look at the state of the religion of Islam and Muslims today, I would be extremely worried. And even though I am not a Muslim faithful but an Arab secular Christian woman, I can still worry for my Muslim sisters and brothers and the religion of Islam. This is not a selfless concern. The future of minorities in the Middle East depends largely on the state of the Muslim religion, which is the religion of the majority. Also, the Muslim religion and its people are part and parcel of my cultural background, of who I am as an Arab Christian, as much as Muslims of the Middle East are culturally shaped by their presence as pieces in a mosaic of religions and sects, which the region never ceased to be, until al Qaeda and its most notorious branch, the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, ISIS, came to be.

Again, as an Arab Christian, I was educated not on the holy Qur’an, but on the religion of Islam and its History. I grew up seeing Islam as a religion of conquest and enlightenment in the Arts and Sciences. I grew up seeing Islam as a forward progressive religion. Of course, as in every religion, I could perceive some extremism here and there, some backwardness, but these seemed marginal, or so was my perception during the late seventies, early eighties, until al Qaeda and its most notorious branch, ISIS, came to be.

Since 911, I have been asking myself: what happened to Islam? More so since the emergence and mainstreaming of sectarian killings inside Iraq after the 2003 US invasion and the recent mass displacements of religious minorities by ISIS in the Middle East, the largest since the Ottoman Empire disintegrated.

To answer this question one must understand what happened between the late seventies and the early eighties and how the struggles born out of these years came to their conclusion as the iron curtain fell on the Soviet bloc ushering in a short era of revigorated and unchallenged American and western imperialism.

During these decisive years, we witnessed an Islamic revolution in Iran that rose against western imperialism while another Islamic movement in Afghanistan came to be subsumed, and consumed, by the goals of western imperialism. We also witnessed a war on Iran from the West, with Iraq as a proxy, meant to challenge to the nascent Islamic revolution of Iran. These events, which will lead to a profound misunderstanding inside Islam, took place after the strong anti-imperialist sentiment in the Middle East, in which Palestine was the main conduit, was sidelined through a partial peace between Israel and Egypt. The Palestine struggle was buried by partial peace and the Palestinian resistance lost the support of most Arab states. This was going to lead to the still-born Oslo peace process and the slow asphyxiation of the Palestinian struggle, while Israeli settlements flourished as they continue to do until today.

The eighties end with the triumph of western imperialism. But in the Middle East, the Islamic revolution of Iran stood in the way of this triumph, albeit weakened and its society profoundly wounded by the Iraq war. After the end of the Iraq-Iran war and Ayatollah’s Khomeini’s death, the Islamic revolution of Iran had survived but the country was going to spend the next decade rebuilding itself amid a climate of increasing hostility, unilateral and multilateral sanctions.

Iran’s Islamic revolution inspired many and in many ways in the region. Islamist groups and Islamist movements rose in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria and Lebanon. Only few survived and those who did, like Hezbollah, did so because they understood the spirit of the Islamic revolution of Iran, as it stood, as an Islamist insurgency, first and foremost, against western imperialism. Hezbollah resonated with the populations of the Arab world because it revived the Palestinian struggle and the struggle against western imperialism. At the same time, Hamas was born to challenge the occupation of Palestine, based on a non-compromising attitude toward the occupation, but with a different spirit marked by the context of inter Palestinian rivalry heavily weighed by outside and competing regional influences.

This is why Hamas and Hezbollah, two groups moved by the same goal for many years, find themselves today at odds because the forces that have been pulling Muslims apart since the event of the Islamic revolution of Iran, not only are still at work today, but they are now aided by scores of terrorist Takfiri groups claiming to be working for Muslims and Islam.

The Islamic revolution of Iran had clearly designated the anti-imperialist struggle as the defining project of modern Islam. But the Islamic revolution of Iran was not the only Islamic movement renewing the search to redefine Islam in modern times. However, the Islamist groups who came before it and most of those who were inspired by it sought a return to an era of Islam before western imperialism to find the tools to challenge western imperialism. Thus, the nostalgic return to Islam resulted in ambiguity toward the West. I am thinking here specifically of the Muslim Brotherhood. The ambiguity is in confronting modern western imperialism with conceptual tools that existed before this imperialism. This is at best a flight strategy, at worst, a legitimization of Wahhabism, the gangrene that’s been eating at the heart of Islam. Ambiguity exists also in the fact that running away from modernity prevents these movements from ever understanding imperialism, replacing understanding with mystification, leaving modernity to exert a fascination on their entire ideological conceptual apparatus without ever being able to understand it.

This is a tragic misunderstanding, by the insurgent Sunni branch of Islam, of how to conduct the struggle for relevance against western imperialism and renew the search to redefine Islam in modern times. Western imperialism, in its essence, is about the superiority of science and technology. By choosing nostalgia and pre-imperialist conceptual tools, insurgent Sunni Islam could then only fight western technical superiority and the way of life it implies with increased barbarism. Hence, al-Qaeda and ISIS.

The Islamic revolution of Iran, on the other side, has sought to fight western imperialism with the elements of its alleged superiority; technology. But contrary to other Muslim countries that had sought nuclear technology as a way to achieve military superiority, like the West, Iran sought nuclear technology only for civilian purposes and as a right to achieve equal status, to oppose to western imperialism the right to dignity. Because western imperialism sees itself as superior in status, it refuses dignity to others, to subdued countries, and it does so mainly through technology.

The post Iran N.Deal, Future of Islam and A.Khamenei’s Letter to Western Youth first appeared on .

In response to a question asked by one of the student about the aftermath of the 2009 presidential election, Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei urged that the main figures behind the election unrest  should not be forgotten, emphasizing that although many made mistakes during the unrest, the main issue was violation of law and street riots.

After the reformist-backed Hassan Rowhani won the 2013 presidential election, a number of so-called reformist figures and media demanded the freedom of Mir-Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi, two 2009 presidential candidates who are under house arrest for inviting people to street riots.

“The main issue should not be lost. Well, in 2009 election those who claimed fraud in the election why did called on people to come to streets to deal with the alleged cheating? Why don’t they answer this question?”

For the first time, Ayatollah Khamenei also talked about having private talks with the two candidates without mentioning their names. “We asked them many several times in non-public gatherings but they didn’t have any response. So why don’t they apologize? In private meetings they say we confess there was no fraud [in the 2009 election]. Well, if there was no cheating why did you brought all the disasters for the country. Why did you impose all the costs to the country?”

He warned that the 2009 unrest in Iran could have led to bloody conflicts like what currently is taking place in Egypt. “Had God not helped and people had fought each other, do you know what would have happened? Today you see in the countries in the region where people fight each other what happens. They led the country to the brink of such a precipice. God didn’t let that happen, the nation also had insight. This is the main issue of 2009 events.”

The MP Ali Motahari also demanded the clarification of the fate of Mousavi and Karroubi, pointing to the “national reconciliation” created as a result of the recent election. He also demanded “the removal of the effects of the 2009 crisis”.

But Iran’s leader has set two main conditions for forgiving Mousavi and Karroubi, “apologizing to the nation” and “publicly confessing that there was no vote fraud in 2009 election”.

Ayatollah khamenei also pointed to the strategy of the Islamic Republic in the region, emphasizing that Iran’s supports and policies about the regional events in most cases guarantees the internal stability of the country.

“The events you see happening in Egypt and some other places show Islamic Awakening exists in these countries but it wasn’t managed well, they acted naïvely. The scene in Egypt is a very painful scene. It is very painful for us who observe. This happened because of the mistakes. Some things should not have been done, some things should have been done but were not. The Arrogant Powers are in a strange lining today, making a long front against this awakening.

“When observing the regional events, one notices something and that is the deep strategy of the Islamic Republic in these regions. There are events that count like roots and means of stability or holding ropes of the tent for the inside [of the country]. This is deep strategy with which the Arrogant System is anxiously fighting, with no result so far and no result in the future.”

“They have a wrong understanding of our deep strategy and what they are doing is wrong,” Khamenei added.

In response to a student who asked about the motto of the president-elect, “the moderation policy”, the leader said the president himself is going to define “the moderation” and people can judge it then. He reiterated his support for Rowhani and the future government, reacting to the criticism against the president-elect. “I don’t oppose criticism but note that first, criticism is different from reproaching, and second, he must be given a chance to work.”

The post Iran’s Khamenei Lays Conditions For 2009 Protest Leaders Release first appeared on .

“True approaches of the revolution set by Imam Khomeini are clear and there’s no need to re-evaluate,” he said on Sunday.

Ayatollah Khamenei once again criticized the post 2009 election street riots and said: “Power transition in Iran was always calm and smooth, except for 2009 in which some people made blunders and pushed the country on the verge of collapse.”

“The Islamic Republic and the Iranian nation proposed a new model to the world; a healthy power transition without the common tricks in the west,” He added.

The Leader Defends Ahmadinejad’s Records

At the beginning of the session, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad read the report on what has been done in his 8 years of presidency.

Ayatollah Khamenei implicitly criticized some remarks by reformists against Ahmadinejad.

Newly elected president Hassan Rowhani was also present in the session. Ayatollah Khamenei’s remark to the next administration revealed that the Leader is not content with reformists cruel criticizing Ahmadinejad’s administration and believes that Ahmadinejad made more good in his administration than his failures.

“Every administration should take a positive look at his predecessor. It is worthy that the next administration shows as much enthusiasm and energy as the previous one.”

Stressing on the Diplomacy of Resistance

He also noted actions of some of the foreign countries against Iran, saying “Arrogant powers, some western leaders and some weak regional leaders formed a huge front against Iran that has not been done against any other country,”

“We have to be patient and resist the enemy front. We have to strengthen our national and domestic power to continue our advancement and reaching Idealistic goals,” Ayatollah Khamenei said.

He insisted on officials not to recoil on foreign pressures and said: “Our officials shouldn’t hesitate when facing political, economic and propaganda pressures by the enemies,”

“Senior officials, law makers and all officials in the country should focus on two main priorities which are economic issues and scientific advancement.”

“Our pace in scientific advancement in the past 10 years was very significant but we shouldn’t slow down. Because we have to keep pace to reach the front lines of science in the world.”

Interactions With the World is OK but US Proved We Shouldn’t Be Optimistic

“We have always believed in the interaction with the world but any interaction must be based on a proper recognition of the other side,” he said.

He reiterated the importance of noting other countries’ history with Iran and said: “When interacting with the world, we should not forget our enemy’s history; even if we don’t speak of it for some reasons.”

“I have previoulsy said that I’m not optimistic about direct talks, even though I didn’t bar direct talks in special circumstances like in Iraq.” said the Supreme Leader regarding recent remarks by US officials for direct talks.

“US officials are untrustworthy and not logical and not honest,” he said.

“US officials’ remarks in the past several months show that we shouldn’t be optimistic,” He added.

Hassan Rowhani said several times that he’s after improving relations with the world.

We can take the Leader’s remarks about interaction with the world as a rule of law for the next administration

“One should continue his path in global interaction without being stopped by enemies and it is harmful to make a U turn when interacting with the world.”

The post Iran’s Leader Sets The Tone For The Rowhani’s Administration first appeared on .

– This election was a response to all the accusations against the Islamic Republic and its purity.

 – Islamic Republic’s founder taught us that the country should be ruled by people according to Islamic laws.

 – Iranians chose a new path. The future administration should act according to the will majority of voters. Iranians voted for moderation and logic.

– I’ve heard many people who didn’t vote that they are sorry that they didn’t participate in the glorious election. They usually say they didn’t know it was going to turn out like this.

On the next administration’s approach:

– The future administration should avoid extremism. Iranians demanded national unity.  People demanded implementing the law. The government is obliged to treat people equally according to law.

 – Moderation should be present in every aspect of the country.

– I have discussed with the President Ahmadinejad to facilitate the transition process.

-The future administration is faithful to its promises. This administration is not from one political faction and is not committed to one party. I welcome every politician from any political faction, only if they are moderate.

On the Foreign Policy:

 -We are facing a unique situation in our foreign policy. Our foreign policy is neither a contentiousness nor animosity.

– We have to cooperate with other countries according to our mutual interests. We have to take confidence building steps.

Excerpts collected from our partner NasimOnline.

The post Excerpts From The New President’s First Live Speech: Iranians Chose a New Path first appeared on .