By Jahanshah Rashidian, 1.10.2011
Political Islam is an ideology of a bankrupt regime in Iran and knowing all its historical flaws and now tangibly existing characters of an occupier force is progressively more challenged by Iranians. Therefore, the Islamic regime needs another alternative with a symbolic colour, say a green make-up, to cover its rotten darkness up.
In this light, the Green movement under Moussavi / Karrubi’s ex-leadership of the same rotten regime aims to ultimately safeguard the Islamic regime in Iran under any form and colour. Their real aims are not the idea of democracy and secularism because such things would never emerge under any Islamic regime, neither do they care about the national interests because these latter can be easily wasted and robbed as war- trophies under Islam. We know that brutal animosities among birds of prey do not mean love for the prey because they devour the prey. Various factions of the regime seem to be the same birds of prey or fierce aggressors. Their inner struggles are not to save Iran and Iranians from the clutches of Islam, but mainly to safeguard Islam. Regardless if the bird of prey is “green” or black, it devours.
We should learn from the history: Stalin murdered millions and sent many more of his people and comrades to labour camps (Gulag). After his death in 1953, he was replaced by Nikita Khrushchev. He criticised Stalin in his 1956 speech and promised destalinisation. Nevertheless, the communist dictatorship continued under his leadership as well. Imagine the historical affinities, when we believe in Moussavi and his clique, we will let them continue the same dictatorship. Transforming Green movement to a democratic and patriotic alternative is so wrong as if we cannot believe in Khrushchev as an end to the Stalin’s legacy. In the several decades of the East Bloc and before its collapse, no change in leadership brought a change in the nature of communist dictatorship. So a super- man like Khatami, Moussavi, Karrubi… may seem as plausible as to accomplish some reforms, but after all this would be another way to continue the dictatorship of Khomeini’s legacy. We, freedom-loving Iranians, wash out this fake “Green” colour and show the other dark side of this coin, as another side of Islamist-Stalinist legacy.
Calling themselves “Green” with secularism, as some Iranian non-Muslim activists do, is a big mistake. Associating “Green” with this concept can be complaisance to the factions of the regime or at least be a lack of courage and self-perseverance. Something is missing in their “Green” of our Iranian secularists who live in the secular world. Their “Green” is not originally a symbolic colour or emblem representing “secularism”. Since no member of factions of the regime, who are all the trained cadres of this regime, would ever align with their “secularism”-- such secularism gradually loses credit. First they must take over “Green”, while conventional oppositions do not have any platform, yet alone unified. There are other Islamist groups, quite unified, and are ready to take over the opposition. The top members of leadership in any Islamic alternative are pushing movement to keep it aligned with their own agenda, in fact are singing some new verses to confine within Islamic boundaries. How can a secular movement align with that?
When we see a regime use more and more violence, we know that the regime is politically bankrupt. Such a regime not only uses violence, and reforms, but has inner-splits too and consequently attempts to find “coloured” alternatives to taint people’s opposition. These “coloured” alternatives, along with violence, are the only methods which might prolong its parasitic life. From the beginning, Green movement was not a people-led movement. The Islamic leaders of Green movement use the word “Green” to associate it with values of Shiite Islam. This colour is not owned by the people of Iran who want to end the whole Islamic regime, but symbolised by the Imams of Shiites -- Shiites believe in 12 direct descendants of Prophet Muhammad as his successors. Therefore, the colour was baptised by Mousavi / Karrubi and Co. It implicitly means “Islam, Islamic Constitution, and the path of Khomeini”, all of which have long-broken rules of human rights, democracy and support for our country.
Green in the first sense means the values of Islam. Green movement misuses it as a trick to disperse the opposition. Green movement knows that a subjugated Iran finally comes to the conclusion that people need unity for freedom. The factions of the regime divert and warn our people that the price of unity is too high and too expensive. For that diversion, a crowd of sell-outs are hired by the regime to support it. To understand these sell-outs and their lobbying activities in the West, I suggest my readers see Mr. Hassan Dai’s facebook-site. It is obvious that supporters of the regime are among us, and they can undermine our unity.
The totalitarian Islamic regime seems to be like a withdrawing shadow, changing colours, presenting both “Dark” and “Green” alternatives, but a Mullah remains a Mullah, and a thorn in the eyes of a whole Iranian nation. We have all seen their tricky manipulations through the state-run or state-bought media, the exported journalists, the sold media and lobbyists in the West, but now these old methods do not work anymore because we expose them. This is the appropriate occasion to mobilise as much angry people as possible to topple this regime. Later, it may be too late because the Mullahs who have started their war against our people might expand their war out of our country. They may cause a total destruction of our country.
Our people are vastly increasing awareness; their awareness has no colour and will gradually not be tainted by “Green”. It will find, in relation to their need for freedom, new colour or symbol. It will be the colour of awareness. Now, it is vitally than ever to be aware of our powerful awareness. If this enthusiastic power is not properly used, we will carry the dark yoke of subjugation for years or centuries to come.