My Response to Initiatives to Form a Viable Iranian Alternative
My Didgah (View) of Manshoor81
FOREWORD-Feb 28, 2003-In
September 2002, when various plans for unity of Iranian opposition were
proposed by various people/forces, I wrote my opinion of such plans in this
article, and I believe my points here are still valid. Manshoor
Well, the $million dollar question:-) How are independent Iranian political forces going to find the money to fund forming an independent party. Am I going to discuss it? No I am not. Why? Because "how" to do something is a question for people who know "what" they want to do and they agree on what they want to achieve. If one wants to make a rocket to go to the moon and another is trying to make the next medicine to cure cancer, they are both having very important tasks as their goals but the discussion about how between the two of them is useless. If one absolutely disagrees with the other about what s/he wants to do, then why should they discuss about "how to do" it? One needs to discuss about "how" with people who agree with him/her about "what to do".
The question about forming an independent political party of Iranians is first and foremost not the issue of "how". In other words, the first issue to address is about "what", or simply what platform we want and we agree on, before we can discuss about how to form the party.
As far as the proposed program for the Iranian Futurist Party, I had written my views in July 2001:
And I wrote my views on the minimum framework to unite the Iranian alternative to the Islamic Republic in Jan 2002:
Basically most of the secular democratic forces are OK with all the sections of what I have in the above documents except for three main differences which I will specify below as ISSUE#1, ISSUE#2, and ISSUE#3:
ISSUE#1-Although accepting UDHR implies the abolition of all Islamic laws of Shari'a, such as the Qesas laws or the laws against the heretics, but I still think it is good to have a line in any platform specifying the need to abolish *all* laws of Islamic Shari'a and to keep Shi'a clergy out of state offices. Especially after the experience of Afghanestan and shamefully ending up with an Islamic government and keeping laws of Shari'a as laws of the land, after all the sacrifices, I think it is necessary to emphasize that we do *not* want *any* form of Islamic government in Iran, and especially to note that we do not want any Islamic laws in the judicial system of future government of Iran:
ISSUE#2-I think one should go all the way for a *federal* state in Iran, although getting a consensus on federalism is next to impossible right now, but I think this requirement is a must. I do not know what else I can do to build the consensus on this topic more than what I have done in my following paper, but I think this is absolutely a major issue to emphasize because I think without it, Iran can end up in a nationalist dictatorship or a complete breakup of Iran can follow:
ISSUE#3-The need to clearly state opposition to any attempt to make state ownership the main form of ownership in the country. I think after the experience of all the communist countries, it is a shame that some people still do not want to take a clear stand on the issue of state ownership as main form of the country's ownership, which makes the state in the undeveloped countries to be the main owner of the country, and it is the economic foundation of the dictatorship:
Finally I think the need is to create new democratic organizations of opposition or democratizing the ones that exist, rather than relying on unity of existing dictatorial political and religious organizations, and that is the way to go. I have written my views about it below:
I welcome various initiatives in the Iranian opposition that may respond to the main body of what I have noted in this article and I support them accordingly.
Hoping for a Futurist, Secular, Federal, and Democratic Republic in Iran.
Sam Ghandchi, Publisher
Sept 29, 2003 (Foreword added on Feb 28, 2003)