![\"Cover](\"https:\/\/www.ncr-iran.org\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2008\/12\/coverstory_ofrique_asie.jpg\" "\\"Cover")
Following is the translation from French of an interview with Mrs. Maryam Rajavi, the Iranian Resistance's President-elect by the monthly Africa-Asia which appeared in its December 2008 issue. <\/p>\nFollowing is the translation from French of an interview with Mrs. Maryam Rajavi, the Iranian Resistance's President-elect by the monthly Africa-Asia which appeared in its December 2008 issue. <\/p>\n
Maryam Rajavi was born in 1953 into a middle-class family in Tehran. She is the mother of a 24 year-old daughter, and graduated with a metallurgy degree from Sharif University in Tehran. She became an activist against the Shah’s regime in the 1970s. After entering university, she quickly became a leader in the student movement, and joined the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI), a Muslim democratic nationalist organization which seeks the establishment of a democratic government based on pluralism and the separation of church and state in Iran.<\/p>\n
The Shah’s regime executed Narges, one of Maryam’s sisters, while the Khomeini regime later executed one of her other sisters, Masoumeh. Masuomeh lost her life in 1982 under torture and was eight months pregnant at the time. Her husband, Mahmoud Izadkhah, also met the same fate.<\/p>\n
After the overthrow of the Shah, Maryam became one of the main figures in the PMOI and had a leading role in attracting university students to this organization, while the PMOI transformed into the main opposition movement against the mullahs’ regime. In 1980, Maryam became a candidate from Tehran in parliamentary elections, and despite widespread voting fraud, she gained 250,000 votes.<\/p>\n
Maryam Rajavi was influential in organizing two peaceful protests in Tehran in April and June 1981 against the newly formed dictatorship. On June 21, 1981, Iranians experienced Khomeini’s terrorizing rule. Tens of thousands were arrested and executed. In 1982, Maryam traveled to Paris, and in 1985 she was elected as the co-Secretary General of the PMOI. Four years later in 1989, at a congress of the organization, she was elected as the Secretary General of the PMOI. Then, in August 1993, the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), the Parliament-in-exile, elected her as the President-elect for the transition period after the mullahs’ overthrow.<\/p>\n
In her new position as the President-elect, Maryam became an extraordinary political, social, cultural, and ideological challenge against the ruling mullahs. Under her leadership, women attained key positions within the Resistance’s ranks. Half of the NCRI’s membership is made up of women. They have responsibilities in political, international relations, social, and cultural spheres within the Resistance.<\/p>\n
Maryam has sponsored numerous conferences on her favorite topic, a modern and democratic Islam that is opposed to the reactionary and fundamentalist religious interpretation. She believes the most important demarcation between these two completely opposing view points is highlighted by the issue of women. Some of the texts of her conference speeches are published as books, including “Strengthening the Status of Women,” “Islam, Women, and Equality,” and “Islamic Fundamentalism and Women.”<\/p>\n
Maryam Rajavi: No War, No Mullahs<\/p>\n
Interviewed by Augusta Conchiglia and Majed Nehmé<\/p>\n
In glaring detail, the President-elect of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, analyzes the fascist nature of the mullahs’ regime, and explains how the people of Iran, thanks to 30 years of resistance, will successfully overthrow the regime, if the West decides to finally take a neutral stance.<\/p>\n
“If the Resistance constitutes a threat to the regime, it is because it has relied on the Iranian people.”<\/p>\n
“To bring about change in Iran, we neither want money nor weapons. Rather, we ask that the West stay neutral.”<\/p>\n
Q: You are the first woman in the Islamic world to lead a wide-ranging resistance against a religious dictatorship. If the resistance which you symbolize obtains victory, what kind of reforms would you institute when it comes to the status of women?<\/p>\n
The most evident characteristic of the fundamentalist regime ruling Iran is its animosity toward women. Women in Iran have tolerated the highest degree of oppression. Tens of thousands of women in Iran have been executed for opposing this regime. We could not have stood against such a regime without full belief in equality as well as a practical commitment to it. The struggle against religious fascism and the issue of equality are two sides of the same coin for us. The increasing prominence of women’s role within the Iranian resistance movement has endowed our movement with a high degree of dynamism. Currently, 1,000 dependable Muslim PMOI women in Ashraf City symbolize the true strength and competence of an Iranian woman. Moreover, 52% of the 530-member parliament of the Resistance [NCRI] is made up of women. Naturally, acknowledgement of equal rights for women in political leadership of tomorrow’s Iran is one of this movement’s goals. In the future Iran all injustices and discrimination against women in the spheres of inheritance, judicial testimony, and child custody, will come to an end, and they will have equal rights with men, including the right to divorce, freely choose a spouse, free choice of clothing, selecting an occupation as well as equal pay for equal amount of work. We believe that no democracy in the world would be complete without completely implementing equality.<\/p>\n
Q: Thirty years after the institution of the Islamic Republic in Iran, how do you see the situation in today’s Iran?<\/p>\n
The Iranian regime has been mired in a deep crisis. The regime’s social base in the Iranian society has reached its lowest possible level, and does not exceed 3% of the population. These are essentially made up of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and the ruling mullahs’ factions. For example, during the sham parliamentary elections in March, according to official figures, those with the most number of votes in the largest cities, could not muster more than 4 to 12% of the eligible votes. Of course, even these numbers offered by the regime are not credible.<\/p>\n
Deteriorating Morale of the Mullahs<\/p>\n
Despite astonishing oil revenues, Iran is one of the five countries in the world facing high inflation, and is ranked alongside countries such as Zimbabwe and Eritrea. 80% of the people live in poverty and six million experience hunger. This situation has led to despair and conflict within the ranks of the regime. There is widespread defections among the commanders of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Many officials prefer to resign fearing the regime’s waning conditions.<\/p>\n
Fortunately, the organized networks of resistance inside Iran have grown during the past year. Last October, they distributed 9 million copies of the message issued by the Resistance’s leader across Iran. They organized many acts of protest among students, workers, women, and even Bazaar merchants. In a separate development, the regime announced that 20 people have been arrested in northern Tehran for sending SMS mobile messages in support of the Iranian Resistance, but this could not hamper the spread of SMS messages of this sort.<\/p>\n
Last year, the people of Iran carried out more than 5,000 acts of protest against the mullahs and demonstrated their strong demand for change.<\/p>\n
The mullahs have only survived through brutal suppression, and by the public hanging of youth and adolescents using construction cranes, amputation of hands in public locations, and stoning.<\/p>\n
Q: Do these acts that you speak of symbolize the opposition against the regime, or are they movements that have little resonance without prompting worries on the part of the regime?<\/p>\n
These movements are both widespread and also strongly feared by the regime. That is why the regime suppresses them intensely. The merchants’ strike in the Bazaars of Tehran and other towns, which took place for the first time during the rule of the mullahs, shocked the regime to the extent that it was forced to retreat from its position as a result.<\/p>\n
The number of students who for years have been imprisoned for participating in student protests has increased day by day. In spite of this, there is an increasing trend in the number of these protests. In recent weeks, we witnessed a number of student protests and worker strikes. We saw protests by the people of Kermanshah against the murder of a PMOI member in prison and under torture. In a word, more than anything else, the regime itself knows the significance and the danger embodied in people’s reactions. The regime fears that these acts would one day create a storm which could uproot the entire regime.<\/p>\n
Q: What is your proposed solution? How can we prevent another war in the Middle East?<\/p>\n
The formulation of “either appeasement or war” is a deceptive one. We oppose another war in the Middle East, and the consequences of the Iraq war are evident. On the other hand, we oppose the continuation of appeasement and cooperation of the West with the mullahs. The people of Iran and the Iranian Resistance have paid a high price for such appeasement. Rather, we propose a third option: Democratic change in Iran through the Iranian people and the Iranian Resistance. This is the only way to prevent war.<\/p>\n
Q: How?<\/p>\n
There are a number of factors that can make change by the people of Iran and their organized resistance a reality.<\/p>\n
Today, this resistance enjoys a broad social base inside and outside of Iran.<\/p>\n
The social networks of the Resistance organize most of the protests carried out by students, teachers, and workers.<\/p>\n
Thanks to this resistance network, the smallest facts about human rights, the regime’s nuclear weapons program, or its export of terror are exposed.<\/p>\n
Additionally, this Resistance has an extensive organization outside Iran among Iranian exiles. At a 70,000-strong gathering in Paris, Iranians voiced their support for the Iranian Resistance.<\/p>\n
Q: Is the Iranian exile community separate from the rest of the Iranian population?<\/p>\n
Without a doubt, the answer is no. Adopting the most conservative assumption, they represent middle-class and urban Iranians who have been the backbone of all historical developments in Iran during the past century.<\/p>\n
The Iranian Resistance has an enduring coalition, namely the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), which has put forward specific plans and a platform for the transition period. The NCRI represents a broad spectrum of political, ethnic, and religious forces from the Iranian people. The member forces and parties of the NCRI are united in their goal of overthrowing the mullahs’ regime and establishing a republic based on democracy and separation of church and state.<\/p>\n
On the other hand, in view of the fact that the backbone of the NCRI is the PMOI, which espouses a tolerant and democratic Islam, the NCRI also represents a cultural alternative against the fundamentalist mullahs.<\/p>\n
For the past 30 years, this Resistance has stood against the mullahs. Neither the most brutal forms of suppression in history, including the execution of 120,000 Resistance activists, nor the cooperation of western governments with the regime, and not even bombings during the [Iraq] War could not break the Resistance’s back. Quite the contrary, through it all, the Resistance has become stronger and more determined than ever before to continue with its struggle. The secret to its survival must be sought in two factors. One is the profoundly democratic relations within this Resistance, and the other is its sole reliance on the people of Iran. This is in stark contrast with what the propaganda of the regime and its lobbyists have attempted to portray. One day they said that the Soviet Union supports the PMOI. The next day they mentioned the US, and on other occasions Iraq, Israel, France, etc. If this was the case, then the PMOI would have been destroyed a thousand times through each of the changes that took place in the world and in the region. In fact, the PMOI has, is, and will be relying on the people of Iran alone.<\/p>\n
For all these reasons, the Iranian Resistance represents the most significant threat to the regime’s existence. Incidentally, since the regime is fully aware of this fact, it is doing everything in its power to bring the West in line to jointly suppress the Resistance, and all of its worries and its propaganda revolves around the Resistance.<\/p>\n
When obstacles such as the terror listing are removed from the path of the PMOI, the Iranian people and the Iranian Resistance can actualize change quickly.<\/p>\n
Q: How can one discover the extent of support for the Resistance in view of the fear inside Iran?<\/p>\n
It’s simple: Pressure the mullahs to accept free elections under the auspices of the international community so that the extent of popular support for any political force, including the Iranian Resistance, could be determined. The reason that the regime is unwilling to positively respond to our invitation is that it knows by experience that the smallest political breathing room would transform the PMOI into the largest political party in Iran. After the overthrow of the Shah, as acknowledged by the regime’s officials, the PMOI had half a million cadres, and the publication of its weekly, Mojahed, surpassed 600,000, which is the most copies ever sold.<\/p>\n
In the past three decades, this Resistance, through its reliance on vast social support, despite all the pressures imposed on it, has been able to remain an independent movement, and stand on its own feet in financial, political, and social terms.<\/p>\n
The best criterion for evaluating the influence and ability of this Resistance for brining about change is the fear and trepidation that the mullahs express with regards to the Resistance. The Wall Street Journal wrote in an article on October 23, that the Iranian regime has put forward the demand for the terrorist labeling of the PMOI as one of its highest priority demands in its diplomatic relations with other countries. In fact, there is no diplomatic exchange in which the main demand of the mullahs is not restricting the Resistance’s activities. Following its return from Iran, a delegation from the British Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee was shocked about the extent of the hysteria exhibited by the regime’s officials towards the PMOI. Hundreds of other examples abound.<\/p>\n
While the regime even pressures the supportive families of Resistance activists inside Iran, this movement’s gatherings in various countries attract tens of thousands each time.<\/p>\n
Q: In view of all this, the European court has once again ruled to remove the PMOI from the terror list. Would the European court verdicts be successful to one day force the European Union to delist the PMOI?<\/p>\n
This is a question that must be put to the Council of Ministers. How far are they willing to go in breaking the law and violating court rulings? This is a grave test for politicians, to choose between economic interests and the rule of law.<\/p>\n
But if you ask me, I think justice is still valuable for some, and in Europe there are conscious and principled people who force their own governments to respect the law. Don’t forget that the British government ultimately removed the PMOI from the list of proscribed organizations only after parliamentarians brought court actions and after court rulings and the unanimous vote to this effect in both houses of the Parliament. One can compare this unprecedented victory in Iranian history to the victory obtained by [Dr. Mohammad] Mossaddeq and the Iranian people at the Hague against Britain regarding the nationalization of oil. In that court, the ruling was issued by an honorable British judge. Today, everyone knows that the listing of the PMOI has been discredited and is the result of a dirty deal with the mullahs.<\/p>\n
Q: Today, Britain has backed away from labeling the PMOI as terrorists. Which country is now behind the listing of the PMOI? <\/p>\n
The basis relied on by the Council of Ministers for this shameful act is an empty case in France against Iranian Resistance activists. The case which opened in 2001 and is itself the consequence of a dirty deal between the then government of France and the mullahs’ regime.<\/p>\n
In June and July, the Iranian Resistance exposed how, following the British court rulings and the removal of the PMOI from this country’s terror list, the mullahs approached France and signed deals with them so that France would sanction the maintenance of the PMOI on the list. In the course of a month, the French ambassador in Tehran and the Iranian regime’s ambassador in Paris met with respective foreign ministry officials. The regime relied on huge oil companies to force the French government to carry out this illegal action. By referring to an ignominious 2001 case against some Resistance activists which had been opened at the behest of the Iranian regime, the government requested the maintenance of the PMOI on the list. This act marks an enormous embarrassment.<\/p>\n
The Empty Case<\/p>\n
We have been requesting for a long time that the case in France against Resistance activists be brought to court. But, apparently no one has dared to do so, and it is certain that such a court would not become a tool for the regime and its allies. So far, whenever a court in France has reviewed cases regarding members and sympathizers of this Resistance, it has ruled in their favor. I have no doubt that this case, which has greatly helped the mullahs’ regime to continue their suppression, would bring enormous embarrassment for those who initiated it.<\/p>\n
Q: Is the attainment of nuclear energy not a national issue? Why should nuclear technology be opposed?<\/p>\n
The nuclear program of the mullahs is an anti-nationalistic project under the control of the IRGC for the attainment of a nuclear weapon meant to guarantee the regime’s survival, while the majority of the Iranian people desire the regime’s overthrow. As such, in reaction to the regime’s mantra of “nuclear technology is our inalienable right,” students and workers in all their protests chant “freedom is our inalienable right,” and scorn the regime’s slogans.<\/p>\n
From any angle that you look at it, this program has an anti-nationalistic goal. In a January 2004 classified report which was drafted by the Research Center of the regime’s Parliament and obtained by the Iranian Resistance, it has been stated that, “In view of the abundance of natural gas in the country, it is not clear on the basis of what sort of economic or technical justification and on the basis of which human labor or practical potential, and most importantly, on the basis of which uranium supplies, the officials at Iran’s Atomic Energy Agency make their claims about production of electricity by nuclear plants. Especially in view of the fact that Iran is incredibly poor in terms of supply of uranium.” This report concludes that, “As such, all that has been invested will go to waste.” This is said in circumstances where the country does not have enough refinery plants to produce the required amount of gasoline.<\/p>\n
The mullahs are not after nuclear fuel for the production of electricity. Rather, they are pursuing nuclear weapons, and that is why they kept this program secret for 18 years, until the Resistance finally unveiled it. The first ones to bear the detriment of the mullahs obtaining a nuclear weapon would be the Iranian people and then the region, especially Arab countries neighboring Iran, since the regime would rely on the bomb to export terrorism and its fanatic ideology.<\/p>\n
Q: In view of what happened in Iraq and Afghanistan, would you support a military attack against Iran with the aim of regime change?<\/p>\n
Changing the regime is the responsibility and duty of the Iranian people and the Iranian Resistance. The way to obtain this change is not through foreign military intervention, and no one would favor the repeat of the Iraq experience in Iran. But, if we reflect on the facts, we would soon discover that the question is not whether the US would attack or not.<\/p>\n
The main question is whether it would acknowledge the Iranian people’s free choice to resist. And, will it decide to stay neutral between the Iranian people and the religious dictatorship ruling Iran? The question is how far the West wants to go in making concessions towards the mullahs.<\/p>\n
The historical irony is that despite the fact that the mullahs’ regime has been chanting slogans against the West, at the same time, no regime has benefited from the West to the extent that the Khomeini regime has. One should not forget that the policy of appeasement vis-à-vis a war mongering regime would ultimately result in war.<\/p>\n
Q: What is your demand from western governments?<\/p>\n
The first request the people of Iran would make from the West is to be neutral in the fight between the Iranian people and the regime. They should avoid hampering the Iranian Resistance’s activities and stop placing obstacles against the Iranian people’s will to bring about change. This is unfortunately what they have been doing to this day. With the aid of money and technology and kowtowing to the mullahs’ demands in terms of listing the PMOI, western governments have enabled the religious dictatorship in Iran to survive.<\/p>\n
As well, if the international community wants to avoid another destructive war in the Middle East, it should implement comprehensive diplomatic, technological, weapons, and oil sanctions against the regime.<\/p>\n
This would weaken the regime and make more accessible the ultimate solution, which is change of this regime by the Iranian people and the Iranian Resistance.<\/p>\n
Q: In the United States, a president was elected who is more willing to negotiate with the regime in Tehran. How do you see this new development in Washington?<\/p>\n
There are two sides to every negotiation. The Iranian regime has predetermined the fate of any negotiations between itself and the US. Otherwise, as far as the US is concerned, the previous government was also not unwilling to negotiate either. It was the Iranian regime that was neither willing nor able to back away from its objectives. This is a historical experience. Now, too, the results of any negotiations would not be anything but failure, and, of course, granting more opportunity to the Iranian regime to reach its objectives.<\/p>\n
The Myth of a “Moderate Mullah”<\/p>\n
During the 27 months after the Shah’s overthrow, we also tried to reform this regime from within. But, ultimately, we concluded that there is no such potential within this medieval regime. More than anyone else, a reformed regime would have benefited the people and the Iranian Resistance. The West also navigated that territory and it failed. America’s persisting policy, whether under a Democrat or a Republican administration, has been appeasement. But, this policy has failed because not only did it not result in the rise of a “moderate” mullah in Iran, it rather brought the most extremist and fascist factions to power, one of whose symbols is Ahmadinejad. I don’t think that negotiations with the regime would go far unless one would acknowledge the hegemony of a medieval and brutal regime equipped with a nuclear weapon over an important part of the world. Fortunately, Mr. Obama announced in his first speech that obtaining nuclear weapons by the Iranian regime is not acceptable and western countries must prevent such an outcome.<\/p>\n
Both the US and European policies must change course. In view of the US presidential elections, the West has now the opportunity to do this.<\/p>\n
The West must know that the Iranian people are determined to uproot the mullahs and establish a democratic and anti-fundamentalist system in Iran. This is the Iranian people’s right and therefore it is beneficial for the rest of the world to respect this right.<\/p>\n
Q: There has been a rumor spreading among some analysts that one of America’s options is to use the PMOI in another war. Would you confirm this?<\/p>\n
We have heard these sorts of false propaganda for years. The objective of this propaganda is to taint the image of the Resistance and to also prevent the formation of a resolute policy by the world against the regime. Without a doubt, after a technical analysis of the regime’s propaganda, we would conclude that no intelligence service in the world is as gifted as the mullahs and their Gestapo, the Ministry of Intelligence and Security, in spreading lies and deceptions. As you know, the main source of the false intelligence with regards to Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction were the Iranian mullahs who wanted to use it to set the stage for war and cover up their own weapons of mass destruction projects.<\/p>\n
Spending millions of dollars through its lobbies, the regime is behind this propaganda campaign. I have explained many times that we do not want money or weapons, whether it be from Europe or the US. We just want them to stay neutral. This is our highest demand. The people of Iran are heirs to a great civilization and can by themselves and with the help of a 30-year-old resistance actualize democratic change in their own country.<\/p>\n
Q: The previous American administration, despite declaring that the mullahs’ regime is a threat, handed Iraq in a silver platter to Tehran. How do you analyze this dichotomy?<\/p>\n
This shows that war was from the outset the wrong option. It allowed the mullahs to send tens of thousands of their agents to Iraq and commit terror and brutal murders there. I referred to the regime’s deceptive campaign earlier. The indubitable fact that the Iranian Resistance mentioned since day one is that Islamic fundamentalism, whose heart beats in Tehran under the rule of the mullahs, is the biggest threat to peace, security, and stability of the world. It is the common enemy of all the countries and the peoples of the region. Naturally, the Iranian regime has attempted and is still trying to reverse this picture. Therefore, independent of the desires of this or that country, when you appease this regime, you end up allowing it to forge ahead. Iraq is a clear example of where this wrong policy would lead to. In 2003, I warned that the threat posed by the Iranian regime’s meddling in Iraq is hundreds of times more serious than the threat of its building a nuclear bomb. But this warning was not heeded. The result was that today, as has been stated in a declaration signed by 5.2 million Iraqis: The mullahs’ Iran has carried out a secret occupation of Iraq and prevents the establishment of security, stability and democracy in Iraq, and it also hampers Iraq’s independence, and consequently, it has become an obstacle to a quick withdrawal of the Multi-National Forces from Iraq.<\/p>\n
Q: In recent weeks there have been many reports about the transfer of Ashraf City’s protection. What is the situation there?<\/p>\n
The issue is regarding 3,500 PMOI members residing in Ashraf City who have received international attention. The regime in Tehran attempts to destroy Ashraf City, which is the source of resistance and hope against fundamentalism. The regime carries out these attempts while simultaneously carrying out missile attacks against Ashraf City. In my opinion, the issue of Ashraf is a grave test in compliance with the rule of law. According to leading experts, the protection of Ashraf must be carried out by US forces.<\/p>\n
The United Nations Secretary General, international human rights organizations, parliaments of various countries, the European Parliament, and the Council of Europe have stressed the rights of Ashraf City residents. Here I will refer to a statement by members of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe on October 2, which says, “Transferring the protection of Ashraf under the current circumstances amounts to violating the principle of non-refoulement, the Fourth Geneva Convention, the Refugees Convention, the Convention Against Torture, International Humanitarian Law, and international laws. It would lead to a human catastrophe. Therefore, we demand from US forces to continue protecting Ashraf residents as long as they remain in Iraq, and uphold their legal protection in accordance with international laws.”<\/p>\n
Here I call upon all human rights advocates and democratic and freedom-loving forces to rise up and support Ashraf residents in order to prevent the occurrence of a human catastrophe.<\/p>\n
Q: We see an increase in Shiite-Sunni rivalry in the Muslim and Arab world. Does the Iranian regime fan the flames of this rivalry? What lies behind the conflict? And, how do you evaluate the American policy which has led to the escalation of this conflict?<\/p>\n
The truth of the matter is that in the world of Islam the fight is not between Shiites and Sunnis. The actual conflict is between a democratic and tolerant Islam on the one hand and Islamic fundamentalism on the other. Indeed, any sort of fundamentalism represents a misguided interpretation of Islam, and this is the foundation of the terrorism and fundamentalism fueled by the Iranian regime. As far as the objectives of the mullahs are concerned, the goal is to dominate the Islamic world. Now, it can do this through Shiite fundamentalist forces or at other time it would also do this through Sunni fundamentalist forces. For example, in Palestine, it supports some fundamentalist Sunni movements. The regime’s actions are in effect irrelevant to Shiites and are condemned by the majority of the latter. This regime is the biggest enemy of Islam and Shiites. Naturally, wherever the regime has an open hand to intervene like the case is in Iraq, it fans the flames of this false conflict so that it could take advantage of it.<\/p>\n
Q: Iran, under the guise of providing aid for development, seeks to advocate Shiite religion in African countries. What are the real aims of the regime’s activities?<\/p>\n
The issue is not at all about Shiites and Sunnis. The issue concerns the expansion of fundamentalism and Islamic extremism anywhere it is possible to do so. Not only in Africa but also in countries like Iraq and Afghanistan, and in the majority of Islamic countries, the regime also attempts to funnel large sums of money or dispatch mullahs to implement its disgraceful policies. What the regime exports to these countries is first veiled as aid. Later, it advocates not religion, but the notion of velayat-e faqih [the supremacy of clerical rule] which has nothing to do with Islam. It then begins to recruit and dispatch its Qods Force agents. As a next step, it pursues political dominance, and to implement its goals it pursues terrorism, murder and brutality. This regime is the biggest enemy of Islam, Shiites, and the Prophet. Unfortunately, in this regard, through exploiting the lack of widespread knowledge about its true aims and by also exploiting poverty among other peoples it has progressed in meddling in some countries in a dangerous way. It is certain that the regime’s goal is not to spur development, since if this was the case, before starting development in other countries it would have started development and progress inside Iran and would not have had the tainted record it has now.<\/p>\n
Q: We see that some countries in Latin America, such as Venezuela under Chavez, are getting closer to the Iranian regime. Does this not demonstrate that Iran under Ahmadinejad has become the leading force of struggle against the US?<\/p>\n
The velayat-e faqih regime in Iran as well as Ahmadinejad symbolize deception and charade. While they claim to defend the poor and the needy, they have increased the levels of poverty and hunger in Iran itself. While they hang individuals for the possession of drugs, the regime’s officials lead and encourage the main smuggling networks for drugs and trading Iranian women and girls. They tell their audience that they are after peace and stability in the region, but behind the scenes, they help the most criminal terrorist groups who target innocent civilians. Therefore, no one should be deceived by their slogans and rhetoric. For this regime, its rhetoric against the US is only a tool for implementing suppression and fear inside the country.<\/p>\n
After the [1979] revolution, Khomeini suppressed freedoms with the help of this slogan and usurped political power. The democratic front that formed around Massoud Rajavi at the time against Khomeini’s dictatorship used to say that without democracy the revolution would fall victim to deviation. And, that is exactly what happened.<\/p>\n
Freedom at any Cost<\/p>\n
One must not cooperate with the religious fascism ruling Iran under any pretext or slogan. Countries which align their fate with the fate of this dictatorship commit a grave error in their calculations, which will be detrimental to both the Iranian people and the people of their own countries. They must end any cooperation with this regime as soon as possible.<\/p>\n
Q: In this struggle, have you also lost many of your closest relatives? And, now, your own life is under constant threat. Do you ever think about this?<\/p>\n
When you are faced with a dark and ruthless dictatorship which has executed 120,000 political prisoners, and has committed at least 450 terrorist acts outside Iran, everything is imaginable. Many of my companions and friends have lost their lives in the course of this struggle. During the Shah’s time, one of my sisters was martyred, and during Khomeini’s rule, my other sister was taken to the torture chamber when she was pregnant, and was later martyred along with her spouse. They murdered my spouse’s sister, Monireh, during the 1988 massacre, and Massoud’s older brother, Kazem Rajavi, was assassinated in Geneva in 1990. This is the fate that of course any of the families who have decided to resist could face. Against all this dictatorship and ruthlessness we are determined to create a bright future for our people. To reach such a valuable goal, we have prepared ourselves to pay whatever price that is required.<\/p>\n
A Regime which Must be Resisted<\/p>\n
“The Iran for which we struggle can be described as such: A democratic Iran, which is pluralist, peaceful, and is not pursuing a nuclear program. We seek the establishment of a parliamentary republic which is based on the separation of church and state. We want to abolish capital punishment. In the future Iran, women will enjoy equal rights with men. Religious and ethnic minorities will have equal rights. In our opinion, the mullahs’ Sharia laws must be rejected. We want to institute a modern judicial system based on the right of innocence, the right to defense, the right to appeal, the right to have a public trial, as well as the full independence of judges. In tomorrow’s Iran, free market will be respected. And, we want to put an end to the poverty, unemployment, hunger, and drug addiction, all of which are the result of the current regime’s policies. And, we want a society on the basis of productive relations which is founded on freedom, justice, and popular rule.”<\/p>\n
After the Mullahs…<\/p>\n
“The first task of the Resistance after the overthrow is transferring power to the people, and as a consequence, it is to conduct free elections. Democracy is both a method and as well as an ideal for us. This Resistance’s commitment to democracy in its decision making and its internal and external relations is the most important factor in its survival against a brutal tyranny and will guarantee its future. As such, the National Council of Resistance of Iran has committed to conduct free parliamentary elections only six months after the mullahs have been overthrown, so that it can transfer the control of the country to this elected legislative assembly. Six months is a very short time. Nonetheless, this would be the most important task of the transition government. Naturally, one of the first initiatives of the transition government would be to abolish all the suppressive organs and revolutionary courts.”<\/p>\n
*Dolores Ibárruri Gómez, also known as La Pasionaria (the passion flower) (December 9, 1895–November 12, 1989), was a Spanish political leader. She was Secretary General of the Communist Party of Spain (PCE) (1944–1960), President of the Communist Party of Spain (1960–1989), and a member of the Cortes (1936 and 1977–1979). <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Following is the translation from French of an interview with Mrs. Maryam Rajavi, the Iranian Resistance’s President-elect by the monthly Africa-Asia which appeared in its December 2008 issue. Maryam Rajavi […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":32868,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[13],"tags":[175],"class_list":["post-5908","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-iran-resistance","tag-updated"],"yoast_head":"\n