Cries for Democracy in Iran

This year marks the thirtieth anniversary of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Thirty years ago, Ruhollah Khomeini returned to Iran from exile to found a totalitarian theocracy -- the likes of which we have not seen for hundreds of years, perhaps even since medieval Europe. Thirty years ago, Iranian militants took American embassy workers hostage. Thirty years ago was the last time I saw Iran. To this day, I have not been able to return.

In 1979, the new Iranian clerical regime promised the Iranian people a republic. By definition, a "republic" is a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of its citizens. But in the last thirty years, Iranians have experienced an archaic system of theocracy tyrannically take hold.

The struggle in Iran today is about human rights and democracy. The struggle is not about the moderate camp versus the radical camp, rather it pits the forces of state despotism and religious fundamentalism against a nation that demands democracy, rejects military fundamentalists and repudiates the concept of a Supreme Leader. The issue in Iran is not which faction of the Islamic Republic can meet the demands of the Iranian people, but rather what system other than a self-appointed theocratic dictatorship can save Iran.

Every night, the brave sons and daughters of Iran shout from their rooftops for freedom. We know the day will come when those cries are answered, when the system of governance in Iran is one that belongs to the people -- a system that is both secular and democratic.

In the 19th Century, British writer George Jacob Holyoake coined the term "secularism" to describe a social order that is separate from religion and faith but that does not condemn religious beliefs. History has proven that Holyoake's philosophy is a feasible one.

The catch? You need a real democracy.

In a country where one supreme theologian selects six clerics directly and another six clerics indirectly to create an almighty Council of Guardians, and then has those twelve clerics approve the three candidates who can run for president, and then the government disenfranchises the people's vote, you do not have democracy. In a regime that bans coverage by international media, silences and imprisons its reporters, and murders its freedom-seeking youth, you do not have democracy. In an Islamic Republic, with a Supreme Leader at the helm, it is clear where the "supreme" power vests. And it is not with the people.

I envision a democratic Iran where leaders are elected through free and fair elections, where each individual's vote is a meaningful one. I envision an Iran where social, religious and cultural groups are both tolerated and celebrated.

Democracy, in addition to vesting power in a people, entails a robust exercise of human rights. Iranians have suffered the regime's brutal disregard of their most basic human rights. The world has witnessed the bloody Basij attempting to crush a hopeful and peaceful opposition movement. Daily, accounts of torture, rape and murder at the hands of the current regime amass. The Islamic Republic of Iran has shamelessly eroded the freedoms of equality and expression and the rights to life and liberty to which every human being is entitled.

History has taught us that the respect and revival of these fundamental liberties require a representative, democratic state. The case for a secular, democratic Iran must rest most firmly on this notion of human rights. But the tentacles of democracy would also reach the foreign policy front.

As a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, Iran has never actually been denied their sovereign right to nuclear technology and peaceful civilian use of it. However, without democracy, the world distrusts their motives. The issue is not nuclear capabilities, but rather, whose finger is on the trigger. And currently, that finger belongs to a Holocaust-denying, Hamas-supporting, brutal regime that kills its own people shamelessly. The current regime has demonstrated a perverse lack of transparency in its dealings with the international community. And only when true democracy reigns, can international credibility prevail.

I remain hopeful that in the face of the brutality and intransigence of the mullahs' regime, we will come together inside and outside Iran, in support of the higher ideals of secular democracy, majority rule and respect for human rights. In the aftermath of the June elections, people poured onto the streets to demand the end of tyranny powered by the manipulation of faith. The power of the people of Iran is this regime's Achilles' heel.

Secular democracy now inevitably awaits Iran. Let us remember that in a secular democracy, no one man incarnates what is good for a people. The movement in Iran belongs to everyone.

Comments

[Khirad]

Ahmadinejad reception in Mashhad at the Imam Reza shrine: http://www.payvand.com/news/09/nov/1023.html

[ramtin1979]

Reza Pahlavi's article was very interesting. Thank you Huffington Post for keeping us informed about Iran. I hope the Iranian people attain freedom and democracy one day soon.

[Krule]

Is it US style democracy they're crying for?

Don't think so...

The Persians are a wise and ancient people.

[WarSkeptic]

Democracy means you count the votes even when your side loses

Mousavi lost. He lost badly. Both pre- elction and post election polls show this very clearly.
Its unfortunate that so many in America oppose democracy in Iran

[wereeverywhere]

IRI is not a democracy, not even close.

It helps to have free speech, assembly, right to form independent unions, independent judiciary- quaint items like that that IRI lacks. It really helps when opposition figures aren't jailed, raped, tortured. The very structure of IRI, remember it's a theocracy, has the voters safely removed from the process- candidates vetted by undemocratic committees and the supreme leader is far from voters control. That's what non-democracy looks like.

I can see where someone that confused by what democracy isn't could hallucinate that the last election was fair by cherry picking polls to support said hallucination. However, that requires ignoring the brutal government response. But even worse, one would have to also ignore the people on the streets that yet fight for their freedom- that's what democracy looks like.

[WarSkeptic]

The countries various other problems have nothing to do with who won the election

As I'm sure you would agree if your preferred candidate (which as an American you have no vote on) would have won. But since he lost, you oppose the elections, the one semblance of democracy they do have.

[serenity11]

I gave Mousavi the benefit of the doubt with my vote and I know he has blood on his hands but you dont want me to give Pahlavi the benefit of the doubt, he left Iran when he was 18 and is not responsible for anything that happened there.

[serenity11]

Thanks Mr. Pahlavi. If all iranians could think like you we would have a democracy.

[Roozbeh]

joabear @

I don't see why Mr Pahlavi should 'renounce any claim to the throne' as you advise.

There are many constitutional monarchies around the world and mostly in industrial and well advanced countries like Sewden, Denmerk, Norway, Britain, Neaderlandsm, Belgium, and so on. Iran's tradition of having a governmental system in which supreme power is actually or NOMINALLY held by a monarch beats these all by centuries.

[sadi]

It's amazing how most of the negative comments here are coming from Americans. Who are you to tell us what Iranians want or need, what Iran's history is, or whose words of moral support Iranians should or should not accept? Iranians are so desperate for freedom at this point in their history that they have even turned to people like Mousavi, a former prime minister and member of Khomeini's inner circle, in hopes that he will help bring about necessary change. Think about that for a second! Mousavi himself has blood on his hands but Iranians will accept him as long as he stands with the people! The worst think you guys can say about RP is that he is someone's son!

What does it matter that he is the Shah's son? Even if we agree that the Shah was undemocratic, how can we blame RP, who was merely 18 years old when the revolution happened. Judging RP by his father's resume is unfair and counterproductive. At this point, anyone who speaks up for the human rights of the Iranian people is a patriot and the Iranian people appreciate such things.

Thank you RP please keep supporting us as much as you can.

[Observer963]

Are you kidding me? You compare that to how many civilian Iraquis and Afghans (of course our own soldiers) have died due to wars that GWB started? I am not commenting on the visit that you mentioned but that is ABSOLUTELY not comparison. Absolutely not.

[Observer963]

Sorry wrong thread!!

[joabear]

Defend Secular Democracy in UK

Its all very well for us to support the establishment of a secular democracy in Iran but lets not forget that our new homes are also under threat from fundamentalists and extremists. We have all enjoyed the privileges of living in secular democracies after our exiles, its time we make sure history is not repeated and we stop extremist dogma right at its infancy.


Lets join the rally against the Al-Muhajiroun extremists at Piccadily Circus - 1 PM, 31 October 2009.


The demonstration has been called by secular Muslims, see the video below.


Shaaz Mahboob, vice-chair of British Muslims for Secular Democracy says:

“Our counter-de­monstratio­n is based on our belief in, and commitment to, those liberal values that define the British state, including legal and constitutional equality for all, equal rights for women and minorities, and religious freedom, including the right to be free of faith”
http://azarmehr.blogspot.com/2009/10/defend-secular-democracy-in-uk.html

[joabear]

Obama's deal is no deal
The West led by the United States, on the other hand, is in dire need of stability in the Middle East; Iran’s assistance with the situations in Iraq and Afghanistan; and a steady flow of oil and gas. Thus, a "grand bargain" can be said to be in the making on the part of the parties involved in the negotiations, and, if the United States fails, in its present capacity as the leading promoter of peace [2], to introduce a balance between realpolitik and idealism into any future P5+1 negotiations with the incumbent regime in Iran, chances are it will end up doing more harm to the world than good.

[...]

Taken to its logical conclusion, the above orientation has the dangerous tendency of undermining the very principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states by rewarding criminal state behavior so long as it suits the perceived interests of the United States or those of a particular administration.

What is quite troubling at this point in time, however, is the fact that there is now a vibrant reform movement in Iran which is being totally undermined by a United States administration that is seemingly only interested in proving the efficacy of its direct engagement policy to the world by attempting to strike a quick bargain of an undemocratic nature with the Iranian regime over the latter’s nuclear program.

http://iranian.com/...

[Khirad]

I don't see it as undermining the movement. Quite the opposite.

[SkipStone]

Reza, may your wishes become true. A free, democratic Iran.

Power to the People!

[Roozbeh]

Mr. Pahlavi, as you might know your grandfather, before he became king himself, tried to replace the system of monarchy with a republic. But in a referendum the voters rejected it.

He also confronted the ulama and tried to clip their wings. He must have known what would happen if the clergy ever ruled the country - something we see now. He and your father did a great number of projects to advance Iran as much as possible. During two hundred years of Qajars, while the world was speeding away in sciences and technology, the only signs of modernity in Iran were some street lamps and a few imported cars. And so on.

I think you should be proud or yourself and stand out for your country.

[joabear]

He is welcome to call for democracy
by Fair on Tue Oct 27, 2009 01:13 PM PDT


as is any Iranian. I don't see why if we can accept a Khatami or Moussavi with or Karroubi (both with criminal pasts) calling for change (all of these people were full participants in the establishment and support of theocracy with velayat-e-faghih at the top), we cannot accept this person's call for change, who had absolutely no responsibility in his father's government. He was just a kid that tagged along during ceremonies.

If we are going to be open minded, we should be open minded in both directions.

That being said, it would help his image tremendously if he just stood up and condemned the mistakes of the past instead of just saying that that was the past. My advice to Reza is to renounce any claim to the throne, and join our people's unequivocal call for a democratic system with no unelected official at the top. And the same goes for the "reformists" in this system- Khatami Karroubi Moussavi Rafsanjani and whoever should just come out and say that Velayat Faqih is wrong, and religion should be out of politics. Unequivocally. Kind of like Montazeri did (at least for VF being wrong).

[Rog49Thomas]

The son of the dictator preaching about democracy.

Sounds like just the guy for the job.

Wonder what the requirements are in Afghanistan to run for President.

[piul05]

You wouldn't believe how strange this thread has been - the only people who've been allowed to post are "newcomers" (in oddly high numbers) - and all very supportive of the writer.

Needless to say, the latter's biography is, somewhat economic with details.

It's times like this that I think I'm wasting my time writing here at the HP.

Shameful.

[longtimegone]

I came to the same conclusion: "I used to care, but things have changed."

[joabear]

Islamic Republic supports abroad ( mostly Palestinian and Lebanese Hizballhis descent) are shameful not those who call for liberation of Iranian people.

IRI on Huffington Post has had too many little helpers for too long. It's time to end the propagandizing agent provocaeutours tour of duty.

Victims of IRI's 30-year brutality against its own people: A searchable databse.

http://www.iranrights.org/

[babak2500]

Do you know someone better?
It is just amazing that non-iranians are more anti-shah, than Iranians themselves. This dictator which your mentioning was the number one ally of the US. When he was in power the Middle East was much more Stable and Islamic terrorism wasn't that strong. However having the Soviet Union as neighbor Iran was under the attack of Communist terroism. The so-called Left opposition were funded by Russia and the islamic opposition was sponsored by western countries. Specially when our great friend Jimmy Carter had his policy of "Green Belt". When you talk about democracy in Iran, you have to consider the fact that iran was for about 200 Years the playground for the oil Hungry Britians and Russians.
The Shah or so-called Dictator had no other choice then behaving the way he behaved. SAVAK, CIA, MI6 & KGB, they all operate the same way. As if the CIA or MI 6 don't torture in order get information for the National Security of their countries.
Enough about the past lets talk about Reza Pahlavi who is very democratic and is the only real Alternative for Democracy in Iran. Majority of Iranians respect him and love him. If you ask they same peolpe who went 30 years ago on the streets, they will respond to you that regret what they did. The prince of Persia will always be in the hearts of those iranians who love their country.

[Observer963]

Agreed. I have asked some people who demonstrated 30 years ago against Shah and they all love and respect Reza Pahlavi. They tell you that they have been following his statements and actions over the years and that he has earned their trust.

[MinnesotaDoc]

Thank you for this post. It helped soften my opinion.