On November 15, 2025, at the Free Iran Convention 2025 in Washington, D.C., former Speaker of the U.K. House of Commons John Bercow delivered an impassioned address praising the NCRI’s leadership, organizational strength, and democratic vision while sharply condemning Iran’s ruling regime as a decades-long “essay in barbarity.” Bercow lauded the energy and precision of the convention, commending both the NCRI’s organization and the panels—especially those led by women and youth—for demonstrating resilience, intellect, and moral clarity.
He argued that the Iranian regime’s cruelty, corruption, economic collapse, and export of terrorism have turned Iran into a “failed state,” not because of its people but because of rulers who “hate their fellow human beings.” Rejecting claims that “there is no alternative,” the former UK Parliament Speaker insisted that appeasement is futile and asserted that the only illegitimate “non-alternative” is a return to monarchy, delivering a blistering critique of Reza Pahlavi’s proposals and credentials.
Instead, Bercow maintained that legitimacy belongs to those who remained on the ground, organized resistance, and sacrificed for freedom—namely the MEK, the NCRI, and the Resistance Units. Highlighting their commitment to pluralism, gender equality, rule of law, and separation of religion and state, he declared that change is inevitable and urged supporters to persist relentlessly until Iran achieves genuine democracy.
Excerpts of John Bercow’s speech follow:
"To the PMOI supporters across Iran: I admire you and think of you constantly and support you always" said the Rt. Hon. John Bercow in an exclusive interview with Simay Azadi, on the sidelines of the #FreeIranConvention2025 in Washington D.C. pic.twitter.com/OIQ0LoSp84
— SIMAY AZADI TV (@en_simayazadi) November 16, 2025
Thank you for the unparalleled warmth and generosity of the welcome you’ve just extended to me, to which I don’t know whether I’m equal, but I’ll strive my level best. Let me say Ambassador Sands, Congressman Kennedy, other distinguished dignitaries here present, and of course, paying massive respect to Secretary of State Pompeo.
It is the most enormous privilege to be invited to be amongst your number today, and to be in the presence, perhaps not physical, but it felt almost literally physical, of greatness in the form of a political leader who is an example to women and all who aspire to political leadership in every part of the globe. And I refer, of course, to Mrs. Maryam Rajavi.
Part of the joie de vivre, the raison d’être of continued life at my age, is the occasional opportunity to experience something for which I can find no precedent. I have been actively involved in politics, my friends, and I think you are my friends, for 46 years.
I’ve been very privileged to attend meetings, seminars, congresses, conferences, and conventions in virtually every part of the world, and periodically been privileged to be invited to address them. I have to tell you that I have never attended, still less been asked to address, a convention that comes anywhere near to matching the electricity, energy, or all-engrossing enthusiasm on display in this convention hall today.
And in addition to saluting each and every one of you from the bottom of my heart, I want to say this. I’ve been present for every single moment of this great convention. I don’t say that because I’m proud of it. I’ve been fortunate, lucky, privileged to be, and I think two tributes are in order.
First, to the NCRI for conceiving, organizing, and facilitating with almost military precision and clockwork efficiency the best convention I’ve ever attended.
Secondly, my friends, is it not also appropriate to offer our salutations to the five panels whom we were fortunate to witness, and from whom we learned this morning? Each and every one sparklingly impressive, invigorating and inspiring. Intellectuals, academics, entrepreneurs, each added something, but I hope people will forgive me if I say, in that sea of unrivaled brilliance, that there were two that will remain with me for the rest of my life. And those two panels, in no particular order, were the women’s panel and the young people’s panel.
People who’ve suffered, people who’ve refused to accept defeat, people who have kept going, being positive, radiating enthusiasm, demonstrating commitment, doing the hard work, standing by others. And when we talk about standing by and remembering others, let’s not forget those distinguished denizens of Ashraf 3 who have sacrificed so much for so long in support of so many.
There are many others from whom you wish to hear and from whom you will hear. I would like to focus on three points.
Hon John Bercow:
To Pahlavi: You have an undistinguished past & future in Iran.Being on ground, organizing and a selfless sacrifices is what MEK has been enduring to bring democracy to Iran. #FreeIranConvention2025 pic.twitter.com/Vf9UcC4EoL
— SK (@ShanazRx) November 15, 2025
First, and it does bear repetition, the regime has offered a four-and-a-half-decade-in-the-making long essay in barbarity against its own people. This is a regime characterized by intolerance, by crudity, by viciousness, by bestiality, and above all its egregious sins, by a complete incomprehension of the purpose in the minds of freedom lovers of government itself. They’ve not quite got it, have they, the Ayatollahs? The purpose of government, I’ll say it slowly in the hope that it might one day register, the purpose of government is to serve, to facilitate, and to empower the people of your country.
Khomeini and his motley band of execrable thugs, think that the purpose of government is to attain power for self, and then to repress, to dominate, to terrorize, to intimidate, and to subjugate the people. They just don’t get it, never have got it, never will get it. That’s why they can’t be improved. They have to be removed.
And my friends, as we heard with such a combination of intellect and uncanny eloquence from so many people, Iran has become a global embarrassment. It is a veritable basket case. Not because of the inadequacies or shortcomings or lack of industry or talent of its people, but because of misgovernment, malfeasance, a government, frankly, of misanthropists, people who actually hate their fellow human beings.
That’s why you’ve got an economy destroyed, public services malfunctioning, no proper electricity or water supply, environmental degradation, mass unemployment with half the adult population not in sustainable work, [and] huge sums of money being poured into the repressive state apparatus, [and] the export of terrorism. Ladies and gentlemen, if I want to put it in three words, what have we got in this appalling government in Iran? We’ve got a failed state, a failed state.
And that’s why we know, as Secretary Pompeo has said, and as I’ve heard Ambassador Sands, from whom you’ll hear again, say on previous occasions, it is nonsense on stilts to think for a moment that there is no alternative. Of course there is an alternative. And the alternative isn’t to appease, because these people don’t respect weakness. They shudder only at a display of strength.
John Bercow: 100,000 have been slaughtered for standing up to this regime. Last year alone, 39,000 acts of defiance exposed a dictatorship with the world’s worst per-capita execution record. NCRI and #MEKResistanceUnits fight for true pluralist values. https://t.co/v0dFTABqBH
— NCRI-FAC (@iran_policy) November 15, 2025
So before I turn to the heroes in this debate and the sources of succor and encouragement and positivity as we move forward, allow me to focus on my second point, and that is what the alternative isn’t.
My friends, I don’t want to be too unkind, but that gives me a little bit of scope. The alternative is not, is not, is not son of Shah. No way!
This is a guy who’s lived a life of luxury, trundled around the world with enormous resources at his disposal, having scuttled away in ignominy and disgrace from the ill deeds and the consequences thereof of his late father, and who now comes forward with a blueprint, how jolly decent of the chap, for the future of Iran. An 18-month transition to a new government, but with the option of an 18-month extension on the 18 months.
And this is a fellow who in all solemnity, without even a titter, or so much as a smile of embarrassment etched upon the contours of his visage, proposes to have the lead role in the appointment of the head of the executive branch, the head of the judicial branch, and indeed the head of the legislative branch. You know, it’s sounding awfully like an old monarchy. I used to think this chap thought he was the prince over the water. Perhaps he reckons he’s the king over the water. I know not.
You know, the sheer audacity, the temerity, the cheek, if I may use, as my late father would have done, an old Yiddish expression, the chutzpah of the man. The insolence of it. The brazenness of the conduct and the complete absence of any capacity for self-reflection, self-awareness, consciousness of the absurdity of putting himself forward as an alternative for the country.
I say to Mr. Pahlavi, sir, I don’t know you personally. [I have gotten on outstandingly] and with fortitude over the last 62 years without having made your acquaintance, and I daresay I shall continue to put one foot in front of the other in my remaining days on this planet. But I hope I can say on behalf of all of you in this hall, Mr. Pahlavi, you have an undistinguished past behind you. You have an undistinguished future in front of you. Don’t call us, and you can be absolutely guaranteed and sure in the knowledge that we and the people of Iran will not call you.
So my friends, I come to the third and final point, you’ll be relieved to know. What is the alternative? And in particular, what’s the basis? What’s the basis in the course of a political debate for determining what, as an academic might say, is the determinative yardstick of who should be regarded as the authentic and legitimate alternative?
My friends, may I politely suggest to you that the most obvious and compelling source of legitimacy is being on the ground, not having run away, organizing resistance, sticking at it, empowering others, and conducting a life that is selfless, that is based upon service, and which accepts the inevitability periodically of sacrifice. That’s what the MEK has been doing for almost four and a half decades.
That’s why 100,000 of those wonderful human beings have been slaughtered by the regime, because they stand up to it. That’s why 17 are on death row as we speak. That’s why last year they engaged in 39,000 acts of publicity against the depredations of this most tyrannical regime, which, as has been articulated a number of times, per capita has the worst record for the execution of its citizens of any regime in any other part of the world. It is top of the league table of murderous infamy.
That’s the reality of this regime, and it’s the NCRI and the MEK Resistance Units that have stood up to the regime. And not only have they shown bravery and courage and the indomitable power of the human spirit, but they have fought and are fighting and will fight for recognizably pluralist values.
Anyone objecting to a horrible regime could say I’m a freedom fighter. I want something different. I want something better. You have to look at the specifics, examine the detail. Read and interpret the words, the commitments. Freedom of the press, the rule of law, gender equality, an independent judiciary, a separation between church and state, environmental husbandry, and very importantly, the right of the people to determine their own future.
And that’s what causes me to say that the power of self-government, the right to hire and fire our rulers, the capacity freely to chart our own destiny as individuals and as nations, are inalienable features of the human condition. And the reason why the regime is doomed to fail, doomed, I repeat, utterly doomed, is that in the end, you cannot extinguish the flame of freedom.
The reality of the matter is that love trumps hate. Hope trumps fear. Positivity trumps negativity. It will happen, as Secretary Pompeo, a man of vast experience and wisdom in these matters, knows, and he said, we don’t know exactly when. What we do know is that change, and change for the better, change to democracy, change to pluralism, change to parliamentarism, is as inevitable as the passage of the seasons, or you and I going to bed tonight and getting up in the morning and having breakfast. That’s how inevitable it is.
And perhaps I can conclude by simply saying this to you. I quoted this at lunch with Ambassador Sands, hoping that I wouldn’t be rebuked. I don’t know exactly when it’s going to happen, but I’m certain it will.
And you have to remember, I think Carla and I and others know this, and Patrick Kennedy knows this. Anybody engaged in the practice of politics knows this. In politics and campaigning, and our young friends who performed so brilliantly will know this. Quantity, persistence, and above all, repetition are even more important than the quality of your arguments.
Now, of course, the arguments must pass muster. They have to withstand scrutiny, they have to be up to it. They’ve got to be honest, truthful, credible, deliverable, supportable. But it’s a huge mistake to think you can say it once, get it accepted, have it done. It doesn’t work like that. You have to keep going on and on and on.
And we who support you, and the people of Iran, I know, the people of Ashraf 3, all of you, will go on doing so until the people of Iran enjoy the freedom, the democracy, the rule of law, the independent judiciary, the gender equality, and the separation of state and religion that we have so long enjoyed, and they have too long been denied. In short, my friends, we will win, and nothing, nothing, nothing on Earth can stop us winning.
Thank you.