|
Chávez terms "mafia boss" the Israeli Foreign Minister eluniversal.com - English Version 18:42
IRAQ: Shi’a Unity Deal Explodes U.S. Proxy War Myth Inter Press Service News Agency 18:41
Report: U.S. estimates Iran unable to produce nuke before 2013 Ha'aretz 18:20
Iran aims at 5th place of FIVB Junior World Championship after defeating US Payvand - Iran News 16:54
U.S. Treasury rejects freezing Iran visitors' bank accounts Payvand - Iran News 16:54
Witnesses Say US Group Hiked Far From Tourist Areas Institute for War and Peace Reporting - Iraq Report 16:34
Obama's Israel Albatross CounterPunch 15:54
U.S. strike on Iran "feasible": retired general Alarabiya.net - Middle East 15:36
US strike on Iran 'feasible and credible': retired general Yahoo! US - Middle East 15:22
A Statement On My Friends, Three U.S. Hikers Reportedly Detained at Iran/Iraq Border AlterNet.org - News 13:15
Hikers lost in stasis of US-Iran relations Asia Times - Middle East 10:58
RIL scraps oil exports to Iran Alexander's Gas & Oil Connections - East & SE Asia 08:42
Iran-Pakistan gas line big set back for the US Alexander's Gas & Oil Connections - North America 08:35
Further sanctions on Iranian oil industry could spur record gas prices in US Alexander's Gas & Oil Connections - North America 08:35
Iran won't bow to US plots: Press Gulf Today 07:50
US hikers detained in Iran made 'simple' mistake Arabianbusiness.com - Culture & Society 07:45
Cantor: US too focused on settlements Jerusalem Post 06:32
Oil traders may profit from US sanctions against Iran The Peninsula - Business 06:12
Intelligence Report Suggests Slower Timeline for Iranian Nuclear Capability: U.S. Analysts Also Discount Strength Of... Washington Post - World 05:21
There Is a Military Option on Iran The Wall Street Journal - Opinion 02:51 
Hikers crossed into Iran by mistake, friend says CNN - World 02:51
Has Obama turned his back on dissidents? The Week - News & Opinion 01:37
US hikers in Iran made 'simple' mistake SBS 00:30
Why the Iranian alliance will fail Ha'aretz - Print Edition 23:45 6-Aug-09
Detained Americans Didn't Know They Were in Iran CBS.com - Top Stories 21:58 6-Aug-09
Clinton: Iran 'afraid of truth' CNN - Law 21:45 6-Aug-09
Statement of Shon Meckfessel on Missing U.S. Hikers Pacific News Service 21:07 6-Aug-09
NKorea, Iran use similar script to get their way Pioneer Press, Minnesota - Nation 21:04 6-Aug-09 
Clinton: Iran 'is afraid of its own people' CNN 20:41 6-Aug-09
DHL settles U.S. case over Iran, Sudan shipments MarketWatch - Market 18:03 6-Aug-09
David Makovsky on Iran, Obama, and Settlements The Atlantic - Voices (Blogs) 17:35 6-Aug-09
Twitter delayed upgrade to help Iran protestors v3.co.uk 16:59 6-Aug-09
Nuclear Iran looms as hardliners prevail Trade Arabia - International 16:08 6-Aug-09
Iran is the problem, not Israeli settlements: US lawmaker Yahoo! US - Middle East 16:03 6-Aug-09
U.S. Calls For Scholar's Release Voice of America - Editorials 15:52 6-Aug-09
US has rethink on Ahmadinejad's poll The Australian - World 15:19 6-Aug-09
US delegation of Republicans 'troubled' by US policy on Israel Jerusalem Post - National 15:13 6-Aug-09
US Congressman: Iran is Threat, Not Israeli Settlements Voice of America - Politics 14:38 6-Aug-09
Fuel curbs to hurt Iran, boon for traders... Gulf Industry Magazine Online 14:33 6-Aug-09
U.S. fuel sanctions to hurt Iran, a boon for traders Reuters - ReutersEdge 14:10 6-Aug-09
Iranians in Bay Area call on U.S. leaders to help camp in Iraq InsideBayArea.com, California - Beyond the Bay 14:04 6-Aug-09
U.S. committed to prevent Iran from having nukes: Republican congressmen Xinhua Online - World 14:03 6-Aug-09
Iran is the problem, not Israeli settlements: US Khaleej Times - Middle East 13:54 6-Aug-09
Iran holds 3 Americans for illegal border crossing Casa Grande Dispatch, Arizona - World News 13:49 6-Aug-09
Congressman wants US attention on Iran, not Israel Middle East Online 13:44 6-Aug-09
Siding With The Generals ZNet 13:27 6-Aug-09
Rep. Cantor: Obama Israel Policy Sends Bad Signal NewsMax 12:54 6-Aug-09
GOP Whip Cantor: Obama Must Focus on Iran, not ‘Settlements’ Arutz Sheva - News 12:48 6-Aug-09
Iran press blasts US Himalayan Times - World 12:11 6-Aug-09
Iran is the problem, not settlements: US lawmaker Yahoo! US - Middle East 11:47 6-Aug-09
U.S. Republicans in Israel: We are `troubled` by Obama policy Ha'aretz 11:03 6-Aug-09
US State Dept asked Twitter to postpone work during Iranian election Telegraph.co.uk - News 10:42 6-Aug-09
The Propaganda Value of a Detained Journalist Pacific News Service 10:38 6-Aug-09
Republican delegation in Israel criticizes Obama's policy on Israel settlements Sun Sentinel, Florida - News 10:24 6-Aug-09
Republicans 'troubled' by US policy on Israel Associated Press - Middle East 10:18 6-Aug-09
Siding With The Generals - The Independent On Honduras MediaLens.org - Media Alerts 10:11 6-Aug-09
Twitter delayed upgrade during poll Yahoo! 09:23 6-Aug-09
American hikers held in Iran Canada.com 08:25 6-Aug-09
Iran won’t bow to US plots: hardline press Khaleej Times - Middle East 08:12 6-Aug-09
Hardline press insists Iran won't bow to US plots The Sydney Morning Herald - General 08:09 6-Aug-09
| Posted 11/8/2009 @ 13:55:57 GMT Iran prisoners were savagely raped after protests Mehdi Karroubi, Iranian reformist presidential candidate and former parliament speaker who has led protests to overturn the result of the June 12 vote, said that both women and young boys had been victims of assault. His allegations, made in a letter to the former president, Hashemi Rafsanjani, follow a number of individual claims made by Iranian blogs and foreign media. more |  |
آيا می شود نسبت به 17 دی بی تفاوت بود؟ شکوه ميرزادگی در مورد هفده دی و بزرگداشت آن، سال هاست که بين مردمان ما اختلاف نظر وجود دارد. اين اختلاف نظرها تقريباً، از پس جنگ دوم جهانی و رفتن رضاشاه از ايران تا کنون وجود داشته است. البته، در دوران محمد رضا شاه، هميشه هفده دی از سوی دولت به عنوان روز زن در ايران به رسميت شناخته می شد اما، چه در زمان محمد رضاشاه و چه پس از آن، واکنش تقريبا همه ی آن ها که با حکومت سلطنت مخالف بوده اند واکنشی منفی بوده است؛به صورت های مختلف. گروهی گفته اند که رضا شاه «کشف حجاب» را به زور و جبر بر زن ها ايران تحميل کرده است، گروهی آن را به دليل اين که هديه ای از جانب حکومت سلطنتی بود مردود شناخته اند و گروهی نيز به راحتی آن را نديده گرفته و هيچ حرف و سخنی درباره آن به ميان نياورده اند. در اين ميان، و ظاهرا به صورتی بديهی، طرفداران سلطنت هم، چه در زمان محمد رضا شاه و چه پس از آن، روز هفدهم دی را صرفا روزی دانسته اند که تعلق به سلطنت طلبان دارد ـ درست همانگونه که بسياری روز هشتم مارس، روز جهانی زن، را متعلق به چپ ها می دانند و به همين دليل هم هست که برخی آن را رد می کنند و يا آن را نديده می گيرند. من تا به حال کسی را نديده ام که بدون چسباندن روز 17 دی به طرفداران سلطنت ، لااقل محتوای اين روز را متعلق به زن ها، به طور اعم، و زن ها ايرانی به طور اخص، بدانند. و اصولا نديده ام که کسانی ارزش های احتمالی اين روز را، بدون توجه به مسايل سياسی، بررسی و تحليل کنند. در راستای کوششی از اين دست، هم در ارتباط با اين روز و هم در ربط با مساله زن، لازم می دانم ابتدا درباره ی وضعيت زن ايرانی، قبل از به سلطنت رسيدن رضاشاه و قبل از اقدامات او توضيح مختصری بدهم. تاريخ ما، تاريخ ايرانزمين، همچون تاريخ ملل ديگر، سرشار از اعتراض ها، حرکت ها و گاهی جنبش هايي است که زن ها برای رهايي خويش از چنبره ی بی عدالتی جوامع مردسالار داشته اند. از اين نظر، بين وضعيت آن ها و وضعيت بردگان شباهتی آشکار وجود دارد. و اين حرکت ها گاه وسيع و موثر بوده اند و گاه اندک و بی اثر. تاريخ ايران باستان سرشار از نشانه های حضور فعال زن ها در زندگی اجتماعی است. اين نکته را تاريخ نويسان در دوران ما به تدريج کشف می کنند (به خصوص پس از خواندن لوحه های هخامنشی نگهداری شده در دانشگاه شيکاگو که شرح وضعيت زندگی رومره و زندگی اجتماعی در آن ها وجود دارد)، و نگاه دوباره ای به شاهنامه (به عنوان نمايشی از وضعيت ايران باستان)، اثرات وجودی اين زن ها را در دوران های مختلف ايران قبل از اسلام را در مقابل ديد ما می نشاند. پس از آمدن اسلام به ايران نيز، عليرغم حضور بی امان مهاجمان مردسالار، و وارد آمد فشار قوانين آن ها بر گرده ی زن ها، باز می بينيم که مثلا زنی همچون «مهستی» در تاريخ ادبيات ما پيدا می شود که، علاوه بر داشتن حضوری فعال در صحنه های اجتماعی، با زبان شعر نيز به توضيح وضعيت بد زنان عصر خودش می پردازد، اقتدار شوهران را بر زنان رد می کند، حق انتخاب همسر را برای زنان نيز به رسميت می شناسد، ازدواج دختران جوان با مردان پير را با طنزی برنده به انتقاد می گيرد و، تا مرحله ی طرد شدن از شهر و ديار خود، پيش می رود و حرفش را ـ حداقل در ارتباط با خودش ـ به کرسی می نشاند. و يا زنی چون «نجمه منجمه» مقابل شخصيتی چون نظامی می ايستد و با دانش و منطق خويش او را وادار به دوستی و تحسين خود می کند. و صدها زن ديگری که نامشان در لابلای گرد و غبار تاريخ گم شده بود و تنها اکنون رفته رفته چهره شان روشن می شود. نزديکترهاشان به ما زن هايي هستند چون طاهره قره العين، که آنقدر قدرت نشان می دهد که در قوانين مذهبی دست می برد و، به عنوان شخصيتی مذهبی، چادر از سر برمی دارد و حجاب را که ـ رکنی اساسی در مذهب مسلمانان است ـ از مذهب حذف می کند. يا زن های ديگری چون تاج السلطان، بی بی خانم استرآبادی، جهانگير، صديقه دولت آبادی، صفيه يزدی، ماهرخ گوهرشناس و... ده ها زنی که زمانه ی خود را به مبارزه خوانده اند تا بتوانند به اندکی آزادی و برابری با مردها برسند. نزديک ترها به ما نيز بسيارانند که مرتب ازشان حرف و سخن هست. اما همه ی اين زن ها، چون ديگر زن های مبارز جهان، خيلی دير و خيلی سخت به عملی شدن خواسته های خود نزديک شده اند. اين راه مشکل بوده است و در اين مسير ديده شده که هر سرزمينی که توانسته زودتر مذهب را از سياست و حکومت جدا کند زودتر به تحقق اين خواسته ها نزديک شده است. و آن هايي که، چون ما، تا همين اوايل قرن بيستم، مذهب در همه ی شئونات زندگی شان دخالت داشت، بسيار ديرتر به سواد دور دست آرزوهاشان رسيده اند. شکل گرفتن جنبش مشروطه برای زن ايرانی جولانگاهی را بهمراه آورد تا او بتواند خواسته های حق طلبانه خود را صريح تر مطرح کند. در خواست های انقلاب مشروطيت خواست آزادی زنان نيز گنجانده شده بود؛ گاه به روشنی و وضوح (مثل قوانين ناظر بر حقوق عموم آحاد ملت ـ حق انتخاب مساوی و عمومی، آزادی بيان و تظاهرات، آزادی حقوق فردی ـ که می شد از درون همين قوانين حقوق زنان را نيز استخراج کرد)، و گاه در لفافه و در زبانی روشنفکرانه. ما تفريبا در اشعار و مقالات اکثر روشنفکران اين دوره مطالبی را درباره آزادی زن می يابيم. آنان نشانه های اين آزادی را در سوادآموزی و برداشتن چادر از سر زن می ديدند. در اين سال ها، يعنی در سال های آغاز و اوج جنبش مشروطيت، اين زن ها بودند که در جنبش تحريم واردات کالاهای خارجی فعالانه شرکت کردند؛ هم آنان بودند که با پوشيدن منسوجات داخلی و پوشاندن بچه هايشان با آن پيشبرد اين حرکت را ميسر ساختند؛ زن ها بودند که با جمع آوری پول، فروش جواهرات و اثاثه ی خانه که متعلق به خودشان بود، تاسيس اولين بانک ملی ايران را امکان پذير کردند؛ زن ها بودند که اتحاديه های زيرزمينی و مخفی درست کردند و برای آگاه ساختن مردمان از حقوق زنان اقدام به انتشار جزوه ها و مقالات کردند؛ و همين زن ها بودند که از نمايندگان مجلس خواستند که وقتی قادر نيستند خدمتی به مردم سرزمين شان بکنند کنار بروند تا زنها بيايند و اين کار را انجام دهند. اما زن هايي که انتظار داشتند با پيروزی انقلاب مشروطيت بتوانند فرصت ها و حقوقی مساوی با مردها به دست آورند با رفتاری خصمانه روبرو شدند. قانون انتخابات مصوب 1906 با نفوذ مردان مذهبی صراحتا زنان را از فعاليت های سياسی منع کرد و، در مقابل اعتراض گروهی از زنان که به مجلس مراجعه کرده بودند، گفته شد که زن ها تنها کارشان امور خانگی و پرورش بچه و خدمت به شوهر و حفظ آبرو و ناموس خانواده است. توجه کنيد که همه ی اين مبارزات در سال های دهه اول قرن بيستم اتفاق افتاده است و رضا شاه در سال 1925 به سلطنت رسيد. يعنی مبارزه وسيع زنان (با توجه به محدود بودن آن در طول تاريخ پس از اسلام) پيش از به قدرت رسيدن رضاشاه شروع شده بود، و سالی چند می شد که اين مبارزه جهت و خواستی روشن پيدا نموده و خواسته هايي چون حق رای، حق طلاق، حق درس خواند در دانشگاه و حق کار کردن همسان با مردان را مطرح کرده بود. اما تا تحقق اين آرزوها راهی دراز در پيش می نمود. به دستور رضا شاه، در سال 1931 دولت وقت قانون حق طلاق، ممنوع کردن ازدواج کودکان نه ساله (که به عقيده ی من به همان اندازه آزادی لباس و امکان رفتن به دانشگاه برای زن ايرانی ارزشمند بوده است) و، همراه با آن، بالا بردن سن ازدواج برای دختران (به 15 سالگی) و کودکان پسر (از 12 سالگی به 18 سالگی) را به مجلس فرستاده و به تصويب رساند. در سال 1936 قانون کشف حجاب و مجاز شدن حضور زنان در دانشگاه ها و موسسات و ادارات نيز به تصويب رسيد. به اين سان، رضاشاه، با دخالت م ستقيم خويش، در واقع مهمترين خواسته های برحق و طبيعی زن ها را، که نتوانسته بودند، به دليل دخالت مستقيم روحانيون وقت، آن ها را از اولين مجلس های پس از پيروزی انقلاب مشروطيت بگيرند، به رسميت قانونی نشاند. در واقع آزادی زن ها يکی از جبرهای تاريخ است که نمی شود برای هميشه جلوی آن ايستاد. و رضاشاه اين جبر را درک کرد. حالا بگوييم که «اين درک را انگليس ها به او تفهميم کردند»، بگوييم که «آن را عده ای از اطرافيان روشنفکرش به گردنش گذاشتند»، بگوييم که «اين کارش از لج ملايان بود»، هر چه بگويند و بگوييم در اين نکته شک ندارم که هيچ يک از اين سخنان چيزی از ارزش او در ارتباط با اين اقدام تاريخی کم نمی کند. بياييد بين او و آيت الله خمينی و آيت الله ها و حجت الاسلام های کنونی مقايسه ای کنيم. بياد آوريم که در اواخر قرن بيستم ـ يعنی، قرنی که يکی از مهمترين دستاوردهای فرهنگی و اجتماعی اش تساوی حقوق زن ها است ـ چگونه آيت الله ها مقابل اين جبر تاريخی ايستادند و در اوايل قرن بيست و يکم نيز همچنان ايستاده اند و چگونه از درک ساده ترين مسايل انسانی عاجزند و چگونه دستاوردهای زن ها سرزمين مان را به تاراج می برند. آنگاه بياييد به قضاوت بنشينيم. من، مثل هر انسان عدالت طلب و آزادی خواه، طبعا رضاشاه را، برکنار از همه ی سازندگی های او، به عنوان يک ديکتاتور می شناسم، حتی روش های تحميلی او را برای برداشتن چادر از سر زن ها عملی ديکتاتوری می دانم، و تحقق نيافتن بسياری از خواسته های انقلاب مشروطيت، مثل آزادی بيان و انتخابات و احزاب را، نتيجه ی مستقيم رفتارهای نادرست او می دانم، اما، با اين همه، نمی توانم که به، عنوان يک فمنيست، اقدامات او را در ارتباط با آزادی زن با ارزش ندانم. به اعتقاد من، هر حرکتی که به آزادی انسان از بندهايي که سنت ها به دست و پای او بسته بيانجامد حرکتی قابل تعمق و توجه و ارج گذاری است. به عقيده من سال های 1931 تا 1936 (که تجلی گاه آن همين روز هفدهم دی است) سال های بزرگ و سرنوشت سازی برای زن ها ايرانی به طور اخص، و زن های جهان به طور اعم، است. در اين سال ها همان قوانينی به نفع زنان ايران تغيير کرد که در بسياری از کشورهای ديگر جهان هنوز ـ در اوايل قرن بيست و يکم ـ تغييری در آن ها مشاهده نشده است؛ مثلا بگيريم قوانين مربوط به سن ازدواج را. در همين کشور آيت الله ها کودکان نه ساله را قانونا مورد تجاوز قرار می دهند و اسمش را ازدواج می گذارند. هنوز در برخی از کشورها زن ها حق طلاق ندارند و هنوز در برخی از کشورها زن ها نمی توانند بدون پوششی اسلامی از خانه خارج شوند و يا کاری معادل مردها داشته باشند. و يا حتی پشت فرمان اتومبيل بنشينند. به اين ترتيب، به گمان من، روز هفده دی روزی است که در آن زن های ايرانی توانستند، پس از سال ها تلاش، بالاخره به برخی از خواسته های خود برسند ـ خواسته هايي که به اعتقاد من بسيار مهم و با ارزش هستند. هفده دی روزی است که در آن زن ها توانستند حکومتی قادر و قدرتمند را قانع کنند که خواسته های آن ها را قانونی و رسمی کند. و در نتيجه هر جشنی که برای اين روز گرفته شود جشنی است که مربوط به زن و حقوق زن ايرانی است.
www.shokoohmirzadegi.com: ---برگرفته از سايت نويسنده
Al-Watan Daily (Kuwait) - Ahmad Zakaria - Tuesday, November 27th, 2007
Q1- What is your evaluation of the current Iranian policy in general?
A1- One has to look at the fundamental nature of the clerical regime in order to understand its true and ultimate intentions. Since its advent in 1979, the regime’s leaders – starting with Khomeini himself – set out to export their radical ideology to the region and beyond. The primary mission (raison d’être) of the regime is to convert other regimes to its own mold with the goal of establish a modern-day Islamic Shi’ite Caliphate. It is so stated and defined in its Constitution as well as that of the Pasdaran’s (Revolutionary Guards). To accomplish this, the regime has to a) maintain repression domestically; and b) create diversions internationally (region) to shift attention away from its own shortcomings.
Q2- Do you aim at regaining the throne of Iran?
A2- To me it is the content and not the form of Iran’s future government that matters most. My current political mission and role is the leading of a vigorous campaign against the clerical regime with the sole goal of forcing its demise, replacing it with a modern, secular, democratic parliamentary system. This mission will end, in its current form, the day my compatriots go to the polls and freely choose for themselves their desired form of representative government. Beyond that point, my fate will be decided by the Iranian people whom I stand ready to serve in whatever capacity they deem me fit.
Q3- How do you evaluate the recurring executions carried out in Iran?
A3- The regime maintains its suffocating grip over the citizens by using brute force and repression of dissent. Gruesome acts of public executions are barbaric methods and chilling reminders of the fate of dissenters in Iran. Through fear and humiliation, the regime commands submission. Public stoning of women and the execution of underage youth are revolting reminders of the regime’s callous disregard for human life, dignity and civility.
Q4- What is your vision of the relations of Arab countries with Iran?
A4- First and foremost, a democratic government which would inherently be answerable, accountable and responsible to its citizens would be compelled to create and maintain an atmosphere of warm and sincere relationship with its immediate neighbors. Coveted for our energy reserves, our region has been subject to the tugs of rivalries and manipulations between East and West, or North and South, as during the Cold War. Today we have a variation of the same conflicts manifesting themselves in different forms including the danger of militancy and proliferations of an arms race.We must address our futures collectively by rebuilding our alliances, strengthening our cultural bonds, resolving old conflicts, and investing within the region. Time heals all wounds as strong roots breed new life. Our history and destinies are inseparable deeply rooted and a common bond of tradition. I am hopeful in my generation and have seen among my good friends in the region the real possibilities that await our horizon.
Q5- How do you find the Iranian threat to the gulf countries regarding using the sleeping cells to carry out violent actions?
A5- This is the unfortunate nature of the militant regime ruling my homeland. Its commitment to the export of its ideology takes many forms; the most troubling of which is the free use of terrorism and support of militancy as a tool of foreign policy. To reach its grand vision of Shi’aa hegemony, it will not hesitate to use any method necessary to convert its neighbors, even at the expense of destabilizing them.Q6- Where do you classify Reza Pahlavi in the Iranian opposition list?A6- Simply that my role is inclusively unique, in that I play a pivotal role in unifying all factions on common grounds and against one common enemy.
Q7- Do you expect an American attack against Iran?
A7- I have vociferously rejected and expressed my opposition to any kind of military action against my homeland! There is a much better way – far less costly and more legitimate – to put an end to the principal source of militancy in our region: Supporting the people of Iran, as the most natural ally to the free world in their quest to rid themselves of the clerical regime. A combination of domestic pressure coupled with a cohesive international economic and diplomatic pressure will enable the people of Iran, an “army in place,” to rid themselves of the regime. It however very much concerns me that due to the mounting domestic problems the regime is faced with, it may in fact invite and seek such a confrontation.
Q8- What is your stance regarding the Iranian nuclear activities?
A8- It is quite telling that the very same countries which used to compete with each other to sell nuclear energy technology to Iran prior to Islamic Republic are today joining force to impose sanctions on the clerical regime in an attempt to prevent it from possessing it! This issue is about transparency, trust and accountability.The clerical regime’s three decade long track record, its totalitarian nature, its domestic repression, its support for terrorism, its regional adventurism and lack of transparency on the very subject has rightly caused the international community to suspect the regime’s intent.The regime plays on the nationalistic argument of Iran’s sovereign right to the technology. They need to be reminded that Iran had that right before they came to power. As a matter a fact, it is their behavior which is the cause for Iran today to be denied the privilege. For a regime that has violated just about any international charter and regulations, they cannot invoke the NPT only when it suits their purpose, and violate it by the same token when it does not.But let us understand the ultimate logic behind the regime’s quest for the bomb. Be it via manufacturing or acquisition, the clerical regime views the bomb as its key to survival. Why? Because it will serve as a counterweight to the inferiority of its conventional military capabilities against the West. Under a nuclear umbrella, the regime would be able to continue its support of terrorism, undermine the region, holding it hostage with the ultimate goal to institutionalize itself.The question is can the world afford that moment? I do not think so.
Q9- What is your view of Arab ethnicities in Iran?
A9- Iran is a country of 70 million people. It has been for centuries a mosaic of different ethnic groups, cultures and religions. The richness of Iran’s civilization stems from the many cultures and ethnicities we have. Out identity is an actual collection and infusion of multiple unique identities that have lived together through the ages.From my point of view, whether Kurdish, Arab, Balouch or Azari, whether Shia, Sunni, Christian or Jewish, every Iranian citizen has to feel and be equal under the law, with full protection and practical sense of common ownership and belonging to the nation. The only way to guarantee this is through the rule of law and practice of a democratic, secular Constitution based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This is what I subscribe to, and have pledged to attain for my homeland.
Q10- Do you dream of being shah of Iran? If it happens, how will you deal with the gulf countries, especially Kuwait?
A10- I dream of helping liberate my homeland from this transient medieval system of clerical rule. It is the Iranian people whose dream and decision will determine the final form of our future constitution and government. Having said that, and in view of my homelands culture and history, I am confident that a modern constitutional monarchy, similar to that of Japan, Spain, UK and Sweden, will be perfectly capable in institutionalizing democracy and help usher in modernity, progress and development.As to Iran’s regional policy, it will, of course, be set by our future government and shall be reflective of the will of the Iranian people who aspire to a strong bond and friendly relations with all our neighbors. Personally however I am fully certain that a different era awaits our region, one which will be based on friendship, security and prosperity for our peoples. Relationships are based on individual decisions and actions. My generation will not loose a day or an opportunity to reach out to our neighbors. We have little time to waist and it can only be spent on building friendship and trust, and not by breeding conflict.As for Kuwait we are particularly proud of the strong bond and friendship that exits between our two people with so many of our families having built strong foundations of common heritage through extended multi-generational linkage.
Q11- What is your vision to the Iranian dispute with the Emirates over the three islands?
A11- Again, we have much more in common with our Emirate brothers than needs to be built upon. The era of conflict and confrontation will be replaced with one of trust, friendship and regional prosperity.
Q12- Do you think that Iran interferes negatively in the Iraqi issue?
A12- Clearly there is plenty of circumstantial as well as concrete evidence pointing to this fact. The reason for this is two folds: a) the clerical regime could not have sat aside idly and watch its neighbor set the precedence of stability, modernity and a secular democratic state; b) the ability to sustain chaos gives the Islamic republic to set the stage for an opportunity to replicate itself in a land which is home to Najaf and Karbala, shiism’s two holiest cities.
دبيرخانه رضا پهلوي
سه شنبه 7 آبان 1387
پیام شاهزاده رضا پهلوی بمناسبت روز کورش بزرگ پیام رضا پهلوی بمناسبت سالروز جهانی حقوق بشر
دوشنبه 19 آذر 1386
هم میهنان عزیزم،امروز در سالروز جهانی حقوق بشر و در آستانـۀ شصتمین سالگــرد صدور اعلامیۀ جهانی حقوق بشر و بهنگامی که سازمـان ملل متحد آمادۀ برپــایی برنامۀ یک سالـه برای بزرگداشت این منشور تاریخی است، تمام مواد این اعلامیه در سرزمین ما زیرپا نهاده میشود.
مضحک است، در حالـی که میـراث اخلاقی و فرهنگی ملت ما، یکــی از مهمتریــن عوامل الهام بخش حقوق بشر بشمار میرود، شهروندان ایرانی، از بیشتر آزادی های اولیه محروم هستند
.امروز سازمان عفــو بین الملل و دیگر سازمان های ناظــر، ایــران را تقریبا در ردۀ بالای لیست کشورهای ناقض حقوق بشر قرار میدهند.
طی ۲۸ سال گذشته، هیچ بخشی از جامعــۀ ایران، از ستم ها مصون نبــوده است.
زنان، جوانان، کارگــران، روزنامه نــگاران، روحانیــان مستقل، کشاورزان، دانشگاهیان، اقلیــت های مذهبی و قومی، همه به نوعی، هدف خشونت های آشکار قرار گرفته اند.
رهبران جمهوری اسلامی، نهایت تلاش خود را برای خدشه دار کردن تصویر شکوهمند کشور ما انجام داده اند و مردمان ما را به عنوان مُبلغان تروریسم، افــراد متعصب و ناسازگار و سرشار از تنفرمعرفی کرده اند.
آنان برای حفظ و بقای قدرت سیاسی نامشروع خود، حقوق فردی شهروندان ایرانی را، در مسلخ ایدئولوژی واپسگرا قربانی کرده اند.
برای من کاملا روشن است که ملت ما به زودی خود را از کابــوس کنونی رها ساختــه و میراث راستین خویش را بعنوان دژ محکم حقوق بشر و نگاهبانان آزادی و کرامت بازپس خواهد گرفت.
من با پشتیبــانی کامل از فعالیت های سازمان ملل در پیشبــرد حقوق بشــر از هم میهنانم و نیز از جامعۀ جهانی می خواهم که یک صدا و باتفاق، با تمامی شیوه های نقض حقوق انسانی شهروندان ایرانی که توسط دیکتاتوری ملایان اِعمال میشود، مخالفت ورزند
.خداوند نگهدار ایران باد
رضا پهلوی
پيام شاھزاده رضا پھلوی
درپشتيبانی ازاعتراضات دانشجويان در روزھای اخير
٢١ آذرماه١٣٨٧
هم میهنان عزیزم،
باردیگر فریاد آزادیخواهی و حق طلبی جوانان آزاده و آگاه ایرانی از سنگر فرهنگ ساز دانشگاه
برخاست و بانگ رسای آن خواب سنگین سرکوبگرانِ «مردم ستیز و ایران خوار» را آشفته ساخت.
آنچه در دانشگاه ها گذشت، جنبش فرزندانِ «انقلابی» بود که جز خفقان، فقر و ظلم ارمغانی دیگر برای آنها نداشت.
فریاد دانشجویان پیامی بود که از درون سینۀ مردم محروم جامعه برخاست و در سنگری قوی بنام دانشگاه نیرو گرفت و در این میان سرود آزادی و آگاهی دوباره خوانده شد و آوای آن از کوی و برزن دانشگاه به دامان شهر و روستای ایران روان گردید.
ایران خاستگاه آزادی است و آزادی «این ارمغان ایران به جهانیان» که با خوی ایرانی پیوندی دیرینه دارد، گمگشته ای است که از آن فرهنگ ما است و ناگزیر به همت شما جوانان دوباره به زادگاه خود بازخواهد گشت.
دانشجویان عزیز،صدای حق طلبانۀ شما در سراسر جهان طنین انداز شده و نموداری از اراده و عزم راسخ نسلی است که تشنۀ آزادی است.
اطمینان داشته باشید که مردم ایران در این راه با شما همگام خواهند بود و راه را برای استقرار یک حکومت دموکراتیک، سکولار و ملی هموار خواهند ساخت.
با درود فراوان به همۀ رهروان راه رهایی، من هم بنام یک ایرانی آزادیخواه در همه جا و به ویژه در سنگر دانشگاه با شما جوانان ایرانی که با اندیشه های نوین خود خون جوانی را در فرهنگ کهنسال ایران زمین می دمید، همراه و هم پیمان هستم.
خداوند نگهدار ایران باد
رضا پهلوی
|
Editor’s Note: This is the third in a series of monographs on the geopolitics of countries that are currently critical in world affairs. Click here for a printable PDF of the monograph in its entirety.
To understand Iran, you must begin by understanding how large it is. Iran is the 17th largest country in world. It measures 1,684,000 square kilometers. That means that its territory is larger than the combined territories of France, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain and Portugal — Western Europe. Iran is the 16th most populous country in the world, with about 70 million people. Its population is larger than the populations of either France or the United Kingdom. Under the current circumstances, it might be useful to benchmark Iran against Iraq or Afghanistan. Iraq is 433,000 square kilometers, with about 25 million people, so Iran is roughly four times as large and three times as populous. Afghanistan is about 652,000 square kilometers, with a population of about 30 million. One way to look at it is that Iran is 68 percent larger than Iraq and Afghanistan combined, with 40 percent more population.More important are its topographical barriers. Iran is defined, above all, by its mountains, which form its frontiers, enfold its cities and describe its historical heartland. To understand Iran, you must understand not only how large it is but also how mountainous it is.
Iran’s most important mountains are the Zagros. They are a southern extension of the Caucasus, running about 900 miles from the northwestern border of Iran, which adjoins Turkey and Armenia, southeast toward Bandar Abbas on the Strait of Hormuz. The first 150 miles of Iran’s western border is shared with Turkey. It is intensely mountainous on both sides. South of Turkey, the mountains on the western side of the border begin to diminish until they disappear altogether on the Iraqi side. From this point onward, south of the Kurdish regions, the land on the Iraqi side is increasingly flat, part of the Tigris-Euphrates basin. The Iranian side of the border is mountainous, beginning just a few miles east of the border. Iran has a mountainous border with Turkey, but mountains face a flat plain along the Iraq border. This is the historical frontier between Persia — the name of Iran until the early 20th century — and Mesopotamia (“land between two rivers”), as southern Iraq is called. The one region of the western border that does not adhere to this model is in the extreme south, in the swamps where the Tigris and Euphrates rivers join to form the Shatt al-Arab waterway. There the Zagros swing southeast, and the southern border between Iran and Iraq zigzags south to the Shatt al-Arab, which flows south 125 miles through flat terrain to the Persian Gulf. To the east is the Iranian province of Khuzestan, populated by ethnic Arabs, not Persians. Given the swampy nature of the ground, it can be easily defended and gives Iran a buffer against any force from the west seeking to move along the coastal plain of Iran on the Persian Gulf. Running east along the Caspian Sea are the Elburz Mountains, which serve as a mountain bridge between the Caucasus-Zagros range and Afghan mountains that eventually culminate in the Hindu Kush. The Elburz run along the southern coast of the Caspian to the Afghan border, buffering the Karakum Desert in Turkmenistan. Mountains of lesser elevations then swing down along the Afghan and Pakistani borders, almost to the Arabian Sea. Iran has about 800 miles of coastline, roughly half along the eastern shore of the Persian Gulf, the rest along the Gulf of Oman. Its most important port, Bandar Abbas, is located on the Strait of Hormuz. There are no equivalent ports along the Gulf of Oman, and the Strait of Hormuz is extremely vulnerable to interdiction. Therefore, Iran is not a major maritime or naval power. It is and always has been a land power. The center of Iran consists of two desert plateaus that are virtually uninhabited and uninhabitable. These are the Dasht-e Kavir, which stretches from Qom in the northwest nearly to the Afghan border, and the Dasht-e Lut, which extends south to Balochistan. The Dasht-e Kavir consists of a layer of salt covering thick mud, and it is easy to break through the salt layer and drown in the mud. It is one of the most miserable places on earth.
Iran’s population is concentrated in its mountains, not in its lowlands, as with other countries. That’s because its lowlands, with the exception of the southwest and the southeast (regions populated by non-Persians), are uninhabitable. Iran is a nation of 70 million mountain dwellers. Even its biggest city, Tehran, is in the foothills of towering mountains. Its population is in a belt stretching through the Zagros and Elbroz mountains on a line running from the eastern shore of the Caspian to the Strait of Hormuz. There is a secondary concentration of people to the northeast, centered on Mashhad. The rest of the country is lightly inhabited and almost impassable because of the salt-mud flats.
If you look carefully at a map of Iran, you can see that the western part of the country — the Zagros Mountains — is actually a land bridge for southern Asia. It is the only path between the Persian Gulf in the south and the Caspian Sea in the north. Iran is the route connecting the Indian subcontinent to the Mediterranean Sea. But because of its size and geography, Iran is not a country that can be easily traversed, much less conquered. The location of Iran’s oil fields is critical here, since oil remains its most important and most strategic export. Oil is to be found in three locations: The southwest is the major region, with lesser deposits along the Iraqi border in the north and one near Qom. The southwestern oil fields are an extension of the geological formation that created the oil fields in the Kurdish region of northern Iraq. Hence, the region east of the Shatt al-Arab is of critical importance to Iran. Iran has the third largest oil reserves in the world and is the world’s fourth largest producer. Therefore, one would expect it to be one of the wealthiest countries in the world. It isn’t.
Iran has the 28th largest economy in the world but ranks only 71st in per capita gross domestic product (as expressed in purchasing power). It ranks with countries like Belarus or Panama. Part of the reason is inefficiencies in the Iranian oil industry, the result of government policies. But there is a deeper geographic problem. Iran has a huge population mostly located in rugged mountains. Mountainous regions are rarely prosperous. The cost of transportation makes the development of industry difficult. Sparsely populated mountain regions are generally poor. Heavily populated mountain regions, when they exist, are much poorer. Iran’s geography and large population make substantial improvements in its economic life difficult. Unlike underpopulated and less geographically challenged countries such as Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, Iran cannot enjoy any shift in the underlying weakness of its economy brought on by higher oil prices and more production. The absence of inhabitable plains means that any industrial plant must develop in regions where the cost of infrastructure tends to undermine the benefits. Oil keeps Iran from sinking even deeper, but it alone cannot catapult Iran out of its condition.
Iran is a fortress. Surrounded on three sides by mountains and on the fourth by the ocean, with a wasteland at its center, Iran is extremely difficult to conquer. This was achieved once by the Mongols, who entered the country from the northeast. The Ottomans penetrated the Zagros Mountains and went northeast as far as the Caspian but made no attempt to move into the Persian heartland. Iran is a mountainous country looking for inhabitable plains. There are none to the north, only more mountains and desert, or to the east, where Afghanistan’s infrastructure is no more inviting. To the south there is only ocean. What plains there are in the region lie to the west, in modern-day Iraq and historical Mesopotamia and Babylon. If Iran could dominate these plains, and combine them with its own population, they would be the foundation of Iranian power.
Indeed, these plains were the foundation of the Persian Empire. The Persians originated in the Zagros Mountains as a warrior people. They built an empire by conquering the plains in the Tigris and Euphrates basin. They did this slowly, over an extended period at a time when there were no demarcated borders and they faced little resistance to the west. While it was difficult for a lowland people to attack through mountains, it was easier for a mountain-based people to descend to the plains. This combination of population and fertile plains allowed the Persians to expand. Iran’s attacking north or northwest into the Caucasus is impossible in force. The Russians, Turks and Iranians all ground to a halt along the current line in the 19th century; the country is so rugged that movement could be measured in yards rather than miles. Iran could attack northeast into Turkmenistan, but the land there is flat and brutal desert. The Iranians could move east into Afghanistan, but this would involve more mountain fighting for land of equally questionable value. Attacking west, into the Tigris and Euphrates river basin, and then moving to the Mediterranean, would seem doable. This was the path the Persians took when they created their empire and pushed all the way to Greece and Egypt. In terms of expansion, the problem for Iran is its mountains. They are as effective a container as they are a defensive bulwark. Supporting an attacking force requires logistics, and pushing supplies through the Zagros in any great numbers is impossible. Unless the Persians can occupy and exploit Iraq, further expansion is impossible. In order to exploit Iraq, Iran needs a high degree of active cooperation from Iraqis. Otherwise, rather than converting Iraq’s wealth into political and military power, the Iranians would succeed only in being bogged down in pacifying the Iraqis. In order to move west, Iran would require the active cooperation of conquered nations. Any offensive will break down because of the challenges posed by the mountains in moving supplies. This is why the Persians created the type of empire they did. They allowed conquered nations a great deal of autonomy, respected their culture and made certain that these nations benefited from the Persian imperial system. Once they left the Zagros, the Persians could not afford to pacify an empire. They needed the wealth at minimal cost. And this has been the limit on Persian/Iranian power ever since. Recreating a relationship with the inhabitants of the Tigris and Euphrates basin — today’s Iraq — is enormously difficult. Indeed, throughout most of history, the domination of the plains by Iran has been impossible. Other imperial powers — Alexandrian Greece, Rome, the Byzantines, Ottomans, British and Americans — have either seized the plains themselves or used them as a neutral buffer against the Persians.
Underlying the external problems of Iran is a severe internal problem. Mountains allow nations to protect themselves. Completely eradicating a culture is difficult. Therefore, most mountain regions of the world contain large numbers of national and ethnic groups that retain their own characteristics. This is commonplace in all mountainous regions. These groups resist absorption and annihilation. Although a Muslim state with a population that is 55 to 60 percent ethnically Persian, Iran is divided into a large number of ethnic groups. It is also divided between the vastly dominant Shia and the minority Sunnis, who are clustered in three areas of the country — the northeast, the northwest and the southeast. Any foreign power interested in Iran will use these ethnoreligious groups to create allies in Iran to undermine the power of the central government. Thus, any Persian or Iranian government has as its first and primary strategic interest maintaining the internal integrity of the country against separatist groups. It is inevitable, therefore, for Iran to have a highly centralized government with an extremely strong security apparatus. For many countries, holding together its ethnic groups is important. For Iran it is essential because it has no room to retreat from its current lines and instability could undermine its entire security structure. Therefore, the Iranian central government will always face the problem of internal cohesion and will use its army and security forces for that purpose before any other.
For most countries, the first geographical imperative is to maintain internal cohesion. For Iran, it is to maintain secure borders, then secure the country internally. Without secure borders, Iran would be vulnerable to foreign powers that would continually try to manipulate its internal dynamics, destabilize its ruling regime and then exploit the resulting openings. Iran must first define the container and then control what it contains. Therefore, Iran’s geopolitical imperatives:
1. Control the Zagros and Elburz mountains. These constitute the Iranian heartland and the buffers against attacks from the west and north.
2. Control the mountains to the east of the Dasht-e Kavir and Dasht-e Lut, from Mashhad to Zahedan to the Makran coast, protecting Iran’s eastern frontiers with Pakistan and Afghanistan. Maintain a line as deep and as far north and west as possible in the Caucasus to limit Turkish and Russian threats. These are the secondary lines.
3. Secure a line on the Shatt al-Arab in order to protect the western coast of Iran on the Persian Gulf.
4. Control the divergent ethnic and religious elements in this box.
5. Protect the frontiers against potential threats, particularly major powers from outside the region.
Iran has achieved four of the five basic goals. It has created secure frontiers and is in control of the population inside the country. The greatest threat against Iran is the one it has faced since Alexander the Great — that posed by major powers outside the region. Historically, before deep-water navigation, Iran was the direct path to India for any Western power. In modern times, the Zagros remain the eastern anchor of Turkish power. Northern Iran blocks Russian expansion. And, of course, Iranian oil reserves make Iran attractive to contemporary great powers. There are two traditional paths into Iran. The northeastern region is vulnerable to Central Asian powers while the western approach is the most-often used (or attempted). A direct assault through the Zagros Mountains is not feasible, as Saddam Hussein discovered in 1980. However, manipulating the ethnic groups inside Iran is possible. The British, for example, based in Iraq, were able to manipulate internal political divisions in Iran, as did the Soviets, to the point that Iran virtually lost its national sovereignty during World War II. The greatest threat to Iran in recent centuries has been a foreign power dominating Iraq —Ottoman or British — and extending its power eastward not through main force but through subversion and political manipulation. The view of the contemporary Iranian government toward the United States is that, during the 1950s, it assumed Britain’s role of using its position in Iraq to manipulate Iranian politics and elevate the shah to power. The 1980-1988 war between Iran and Iraq was a terrific collision of two states, causing several million casualties on both sides. It also demonstrated two realities. The first is that a determined, well-funded, no-holds-barred assault from Mesopotamia against the Zagros Mountains will fail (albeit at an atrocious cost to the defender). The second is that, in the nation-state era, with fixed borders and standing armies, the logistical challenges posed by the Zagros make a major attack from Iran into Iraq equally impossible. There is a stalemate on that front. Nevertheless, from the Iranian point of view, the primary danger of Iraq is not direct attack but subversion. It is not only Iraq that worries them. Historically, Iranians also have been concerned about Russian manipulation and manipulation by the British and Russians through Afghanistan.
For the Iranians, the current situation has posed a dangerous scenario similar to what they faced from the British early in the 20th century. The United States has occupied, or at least placed substantial forces, to the east and the west of Iran, in Afghanistan and Iraq. Iran is not concerned about these troops invading Iran. That is not a military possibility. Iran’s concern is that the United States will use these positions as platforms to foment ethnic dissent in Iran.Indeed, the United States has tried to do this in several regions. In the southeast, in Balochistan, the Americans have supported separatist movements. It has also done this among the Arabs of Khuzestan, at the northern end of the Persian Gulf. And it has tried to manipulate the Kurds in northwestern Iran. (There is some evidence to suggest that the United States has used Azerbaijan as a launchpad to foment dissent among the Iranian Azeris in the northwestern part of the country.)
The Iranian counter to all this has several dimensions:
1. Maintain an extremely powerful and repressive security capability to counter these moves. In particular, focus on deflecting any intrusions in the Khuzestan region, which is not only the most physically vulnerable part of Iran but also where much of Iran’s oil reserves are located. This explains clashes such as the seizure of British sailors and constant reports of U.S. special operations teams in the region.
2. Manipulate ethnic and religious tensions in Iraq and Afghanistan to undermine the American positions there and divert American attention to defensive rather than offensive goals.
3. Maintain a military force capable of protecting the surrounding mountains so that major American forces cannot penetrate.
4. Move to create a nuclear force, very publicly, in order to deter attack in the long run and to give Iran a bargaining chip for negotiations in the short term.
The heart of Iranian strategy is as it has always been, to use the mountains as a fortress. So long as it is anchored in those mountains, it cannot be invaded. Alexander succeeded and the Ottomans had limited success (little more than breaching the Zagros), but even the Romans and British did not go so far as to try to use main force in the region. Invading and occupying Iran is not an option. For Iran, its ultimate problem is internal tensions. But even these are under control, primarily because of Iran’s security system. Ever since the founding of the Persian Empire, the one thing that Iranians have been superb at is creating systems that both benefit other ethnic groups and punish them if they stray. That same mindset functions in Iran today in the powerful Ministry of Intelligence and Security and the elite Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC). (The Iranian military is configured mainly as an infantry force, with the regular army and IRGC ground forces together totaling about 450,000 troops, larger than all other service branches combined.)-Iran is, therefore, a self-contained entity. It is relatively poor, but it has superbly defensible borders and a disciplined central government with an excellent intelligence and internal security apparatus. Iran uses these same strengths to destabilize the American position (or that of any extraregional power) around it. Indeed, Iran is sufficiently secure that the positions of surrounding countries are more precarious than that of Iran. Iran is superb at low-cost, low-risk power projection using its covert capabilities. It is even better at blocking those of others. So long as the mountains are in Iranian hands, and the internal situation is controlled, Iran is a stable state, but one able to pose only a limited external threat. The creation of an Iranian nuclear program serves two functions. First, if successful, it further deters external threats. Second, simply having the program enhances Iranian power. Since the consequences of a strike against these facilities are uncertain and raise the possibility of Iranian attempts at interdiction of oil from the Persian Gulf, the strategic risk to the attacker’s economy discourages attack. The diplomatic route of trading the program for regional safety and power becomes more attractive than an attack against a potential threat in a country with a potent potential counter.Iran is secure from conceivable invasion. It enhances this security by using two tactics. First, it creates uncertainty as to whether it has an offensive nuclear capability. Second, it projects a carefully honed image of ideological extremism that makes it appear unpredictable. It makes itself appear threatening and unstable. Paradoxically, this increases the caution used in dealing with it because the main option, an air attack, has historically been ineffective without a follow-on ground attack. If just nuclear facilities are attacked and the attack fails, Iranian reaction is unpredictable and potentially disproportionate. Iranian posturing enhances the uncertainty. The threat of an air attack is deterred by Iran’s threat of an attack against sea-lanes. Such attacks would not be effective, but even a low-probability disruption of the world’s oil supply is a risk not worth taking. As always, the Persians face a major power prowling at the edges of their mountains. The mountains will protect them from main force but not from the threat of destabilization. Therefore, the Persians bind their nation together through a combination of political accommodation and repression. The major power will eventually leave. Persia will remain so long as its mountains stand.
Posts
Comments
[NEW] Interview with Sir David Frost Al Jazeera TV صدای آمريکا - رو در رو Exclusive Interview - Reza Pahlavi, Iran's exiled crown prince speaks out on Ahmadinejad مصاحبه با تلویزیون صدای آمریکا ميز گردی با شما LCI - Journal Du Monde du 31 mai 2007 مصاحبه با جمشيد چالنگی-ساعت هفت، تفسير خبر 
شاهزاده رضا پهلوی، ولیعهد سابق ایران، دریک سخنرانی در مقر پارلمان بریتانیا، دمکراسی، حقوق بشر و نقش غرب در آینده ایران را مورد بحث قرار داد.
رضا پهلوی به دعوت انجمن هنری جکسون در این جلسه که بریاست خانم جیزل استوارت نماینده حزب کارگر در مجلس عوام بریتانیا برگزار شد، شرکت داشت.
ولیعهد سابق ایران در یک بررسی کلی از اوضاع کنونی ایران گفت که تنها را ه برطرف کردن نگرانی بینالمللی از جمهوری اسلامی ایران، برقراری نظامی مردمی در ایران است.
پس از پایان این جلسه در گفت و گویی که با شاهزاده رضا پهلوی کردم، ابتدا از او پرسیدم:
Speeches English - Français - فارسي Messages to the Nation English - Français - فارسي Interviews English - Français - فارسي Press Releases English - Français - فارسي Human Rights Focus English - Français - فارسي Articles of Interest English - Français - فارسي Contact Us
"A Century of War"::"The coup against the Shah, like that against Mossadegh in 1953, was run by British and American intelligence, with the bombastic American, Brzezinski, taking public 'credit' for getting rid of the 'corrupt' Shah, while the British characteristically remained safely in the background.During 1978, negotiations were under way between the Shah's government and British Petroleum for renewal of the 25-year old extraction agreement. By October 1978, the talks had collapsed over a British 'offer' which demanded exclusive rights to Iran's future oil output, while refusing to guarantee purchase of the oil. With their dependence on British-controlled export apparently at an end, Iran appeared on the verge of independence in its oil sales policy for the first time since 1953, with eager prospective buyers in Germany, France, Japan and elsewhere.In its lead editorial that September, Iran's Kayhan International stated: In retrospect, the 25-year partnership with the [British Petroleum] consortium and the 50-year relationship with British Petroleum which preceded it, have not been satisfactory ones for Iran … Looking to the future, NIOC [National Iranian Oil Company] should plan to handle all operations by itself. London was blackmailing and putting enormous economic pressure on the Shah's regime by refusing to buy Iranian oil production, taking only 3 million or so barrels daily of an agreed minimum of 5 million barrels per day... See the bottom of this Blog's page for the full article.
Bahramerad
iranMehr100
persiandudeee
13 
Pan-Arabism's Legacy of Confrontation with Iran
Pan-Arabism's Legacy - By Dr. Kaveh Farrokh -
FRONTLINE/WORLD . Iran - Forbidden Iran . The Struggle for ...
FORA.tv - Mehrangiz Kar: Prospects for Democracy in IranProspects for Democracy in Iran: Assessing the Regime and the Opposition - Legislation and Democracy in Iran, a presentation by Iranian ... fora.tv/2007/11/02/Mehrangiz_ |
This paper explains how Iran developed its nuclear programme to the point where it threatens to achieve a weapons capability within a short time frame, and analyses Western policy responses aimed at forestalling that capability. The failure of these policies to prevent Iran from coming close to achieving a nuclear-weapons capability has promoted suggestions for strategies that would grant legitimacy to uranium enrichment in Iran in exchange for intrusive inspections and constraints on the programme. The paper assesses these options in terms of their feasibility and their impact on the proliferation risks of diversion of nuclear material and knowledge, clandestine development and NPT break-out, and the risk of stimulating a proliferation cascade in the Middle East and beyond. Read more
معمای رضا پهلویهيچکدام از سلطنت طلبان و پادشاهی خواهان نمی توانند «پروژه ها» ی خود را بدون آقای رضا پهلوی اجرا کنند. دليل اصلی اينکه انقلاب 57 رژيمی غير پادشاهی را بر ايران مسلط کرده است که لازمۀ انحلال آن برگزاری رفراندومی برای تعيين شکل حکومت بعدی است و همۀ سلطنت طلبان و پادشاهی خواهان انجام چنين رفراندومی را بدون وجود آقای رضا پهلوی ناممکن می بينند. بخصوص که بازگشت سلطنت در کشورهای ديگر هم بخاطر وجود شخصی به نام «پادشاه در تبعيد» ممکن شده است.
Posts 
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for your comment. This comment will be posted after it has been modarated by the editor.