 |
| Maryam Rajavi |
One
could easily argue that Iran’s ruling theocracy is facing the greatest internal
threat to its rule since the 1980s. In the beginning of this year, the country
was rocked by a mass uprising. The chain of protests was a major step forward
for the domestic Resistance movement in the sense that it extracted political
activism from farmers and the rural poor, despite the fact that these groups
had long been thought to tolerate or even support the clerical regime.
The
December-to-January uprising was comprised of protests in upwards of 140 cities
and towns spanning the entire country. And this diversity has remained on
display in the ensuing months, as activist networks and entire populations
continue to organize more localized demonstrations, in keeping with the
call-to-action issued in March by Maryam Rajavi,
the president of theNationalCouncil of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), a coalition headed by the
principle Iranian Resistance group, the People’sMojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK).
On
the occasion of the Iranian New Year, Nowruz, Mrs. Rajavi stated “the coming
year can and must be turned into a year full of uprisings,” which must continue
“until final victory.” The NCRI has elaborately outlined what “final victory”
might look like, and it entails the wholesale removal of the existing regime,
and its replacement with a democratic system. Rajavi has articulated a
ten-point plan describing the framework of this system, complete with free and fair
elections, secular governance, safeguards on the rights of women and
minorities, and a commitment to peaceful relations with Iran’s neighbors.
So
as Iran’s domestic situation and Western policies toward the Islamic Republic
both contend with periods of upheaval, it is important to address two essential
questions. Firstly, can the “final victory” predicted by Mrs. Rajavi actually
be achieved? And secondly, if the clerical regime can indeed be driven out of
power, what comes next?
The
January uprising goes a long way toward answering the first question, but there
is little doubt that skeptical onlookers will entertain the possibility of the
Resistance movement being effectively suppressed. But despite the
mullahs’ brutal suppression of the protests, various cities have witnessed
large anti-government protests that continued for several days at a time over
the past few months. To this, one must add the strike by truck drivers that
spread to hundreds of cities in all 31 provinces and continued despite
officials’ attempted crackdown on the drivers. These events demonstrate the
resilience of the Iranian public and the Resistance movement.
That
resilience has been evident for a long time, especially among the ranks of the
MEK, which was the main target of an effort by the regime to stamp out domestic
dissent in the summer of 1988. The leading opposition group made up the
overwhelming majority of the 30,000 political prisoners who were put to death
during that season, and yet it has only continued to grow since then, to the
point that even Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei was forced to acknowledge that it
played a leading role in planning and executing the anti-government
demonstrations at the start of this year.
The
MEK has also been credited with many of the most serious demonstrations to
emerge in the months since the nationwide uprising was broken. At the same
time, various experts on the Middle East have rightly concluded that the
regime’s repression would only fuel domestic unrest, ultimately contributing to
the predicted “year full of uprisings.” This is especially likely when one
considers that the uprising stretched Iran’s repressive institutions to their
limits. So there is good reason for Washington to stay the course in this
regard, and for European allies to join the effort on the understanding that it
could greatly increase the odds of the Iranian people rising up once again and
achieving their desired “final victory” over the clerical regime.
Yet
the real viability of this goal depends on the answer to the second question:
What happens after the ouster of the mullahs’ regime? This question can perhaps
best be answered by listening to the voices of Iranian expatriates, NCRI
officials, and their international supporters, including a stellar bipartisan
group of American political dignitaries and military commanders when they
gather for the Free Iran
2018 rally in Paris on June 30. The annual event this year has
special significance as a showcase for the broad popular support that has been
on display recently for Mrs. Rajavi’s ten-point plan.
With
that plan as a framework, the NCRI has established a leadership structure that
is ready to step in to replace the clerical regime and unify the population
behind the most longstanding advocates for its collective dream of democracy
and civic freedom. Such unity is the most important component to a peaceful
transition of power, and the NCRI brings unity not only to the domestic
population but also to all international policymakers who believe in Iran’s
democratic future.
It
should be difficult for anyone to witness that unity at the June 30 rally
without concluding that U.S. policy toward Iran is on the right course. This
escalating assertiveness ought to be understood as adding the Iranian people’s
hope for a domestically-driven change of government. And the rest of the
Western world should adopt a similar posture for that same reason.
Ken
Blackwell was the former US Ambassador to the United Nations Human Rights
Commission. He received the Superior Honor Award from the administrations of
both George H.W. Bush and Bill
Clinton.
Source: A Viable Democratic Alternative to the Iranian Regime
Comments
Post a Comment