P.S. Oct 1, 2017:Announcing Change of Position to Opposing any form of Federalism for Iran
بعدالتحریر اول ماه اکتبر 2017: اعلام تغییر موضع به مخالفت با هرگونه فدرالیسم برای ایران



Sam Ghandchiسام قندچيUnity to End Islamic Republic of Iran

Sam Ghandchi


اتحاد برای پایان دادن جمهوری اسلامی



Twenty six years has passed since the founding of Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) and still a great majority of IRI opposition, are afraid of the fall of the regime, because of being worried that after the end of IRI, American Neocons, or Iranian Monarchists, or Mojahedin, or Communists, or Nationalists, or Separatists, or any other who is undesired in their view, may take over power in Iran.  As if our people are like a pregnant woman who because of thousands of things that could happen to the baby she has in her womb, decides to abort the fetus.  There has been several occasions in the last 26 years, that we got close to ending the IRI, and could have started a new regime, and because of the fear of future problems of the new regime, the change that was in fetus, we aborted, and stayed in IRI's prison.


If the political prisoners of Islamic Republic, instead of freedom, must be satisfied with "vacations," Iranian people too, from time to time, at times like the days of IRI elections, should be happy to be allowed to wear a reduced hijab for women and perhaps short pants for men.  If in the years preceding the 1979 Revolution, the Iranian political forces did not think of the conditions after the fall of the existing regime, and their thoughts were limited to the overthrow of Shah's regime, in the last 26 years, it has been the reverse.


We have discussed so much about what can happen if the regime falls, and have thought so much about the different scenarios, that we have not used the real possibilities that have come up, during the hostage-crisis, at the time of end of Iraq War, and even at time of 2nd of Khordad, to end the Islamic Republic, and instead, have been busy fighting among ourselves and discussing different scenarios. Thus did not use the opportunity to end this retrogressive regime, and even those who did not get any privileges themselves to participate in the IRI parliament, became the main promoters of IRI majles and presidential cabinets.


It is true that we should think about the regime following IRI and this time, contrary to the time of 1979 Revolution, we have done this and even we have many proposed future constitutions of our preference.  I have also very clearly stated what kind of a regime I like after the fall of IRI (1) and most forces have also refined their views.  But can one guarantee the success of any program before the change?  No.


Astute parents, consider all future plans for the child they have conceived, and think of future course of actions, but if they want a 100% guarantee, at the end they will have to have an abortion, because they can never reach such a certitude.  It is true that when one is sure that the birth of their child, means the birth of a deformed child with a thousand diseases, and if because of that they decide to have an abortion, they have made a right choice.  But just because of ensuring a 100% success, to fear the challenges and future calamities in front of their child's growth, to decide abortion, they are simply showing an immature perfectionism.


In fact, wise parents, are those who plan what can be planned, and are ready, at any time, to confront issues like drugs in the educational environment, unemployment, unexpected diseases, and thousands of other problems.  If we are worried about U.S. coup after IRI, we should, after the end of IRI, be vigilant about it, and not that we go and strengthen IRI today, doing that by bringing up distorted examples from the experience of 1953 coup of Iran.


Today in most of the Middle Eastern countries, regimes that are not coup regimes, and are in good relations with Europe for years, incidentally are despotic regimes that are not the representatives of their people.  In contrast, the Iraqi regime which according to some leftist critiques is a puppet of the U.S., represents the Iraqi people more than all those others, and is more democratic than all of them.  Whereas the U.S. puppet regimes of the 1950s everywhere, were dictatorial regimes, which did not represent their people.  Does this mean that I approve of U.S. interference in Iran?  No.  But my point is that historical examples out of context of time are useless.


The day after the end of IRI, perhaps the most important problem of pro-democracy forces could be American Neocons, or maybe not and the Iranian monarchists who want to restore Shah's regime could become the main problem.  Maybe some from the current IRI, like Ayatollah Taheri or Aghajari, who want to revive state Islamism in a different way could be the problem, or maybe the Mojahedin want to create a semi-Communist Islamic state.  Perhaps on the contrary, from monarchists to Mojahedin, after the end of IRI, from inside, an internal reform and transformation may happen inside them, and they end up helping the new secular republic.  Perhaps the evil forces like the terrorists who have no problem to behead humans to force their backward ideas on people, like they do in Iraq today, can become Iran's problem, or the separatists who do not want democratic iran, for the friendship of all Iranians, but want to use democracy to inflame fires of animosity.


The future development of Iran, just like other great historical changes in any society, does not mean that the day after end of IRI, we will not have problems anymore.  Even years after the American Revolution, The British forces put the White House in fire, and President Madison had to flee, but no one even for a moment thought that the American Revolution lacked prudence and thoughtfulness, because of those challenges.  It is true that in the years prior to the 1979 Revolution, Iranian political movement was not astute and did not think things through, and it was right to criticize this shortcoming after the defeat of Iranian progressive movement. Iranian intellectuals made extensive critique of themselves for not being astute in the years before 1979 (2).


But in the last 26 years, many aspects of future after IRI have been discussed and evaluated, and now we are not in a similar situation as in 1979, when for years we had only thought of overthrowing the current regime and had not thought of plans for future regime.  And we have our plans for future, but until this regime is ended, and until we try to build the future regime, all these plans will remain on paper, and there is no guarantee for success, and more than this, cannot achieved by just discussing plans.  Almost all political forces today, have their own platforms, but Islamic Republic does notr allow then to form their political parties, to campaign for their platforms. In short, Islamic Regime needs to be ended for al that to happen, and after the end, the field is open for anyone to catch the ball and get ahead.


In fact, one cannot end a regime any day we want to.  For example, at the time of the fall of Communist regimes, that started with the fall of the Eastern European states, and spread to the Soviet Union itself, it was a golden opportunity for the people of Cuba and China to participate in the historical movement as well, and to end the dictatorial regimes of their own countries, and because of any reason they did not, or could not succeed.  Today after the fall of Taliban and Saddam's regime in the Middle East, regardless of how those regimes fell, the historical conditions are ready for the fall of the Islamist regime of IRI.


Instead of the above noted perfectionism, it is better to use this opportunity, and end Islamic Republic of Iran, or else maybe like the people of China and Cuba, we may feel sorry for ourselves years later,  why our country is not an open society, an is still under the chains of Islamism.  The Eastern European Communist countries and former Soviet Republics, that threw away the chains of Communism, were not all the same, and did not end up in similar regimes either, but they all happened in a specific historical juncture, of the late 1980's, when they were able to achieve this task.  We also need to take advantage of this time and juncture before the opportunity passes.


Hoping for a democratic and secular futurist republic in Iran,

Sam Ghandchi, Editor/Publisher

May 22, 2005




1. Futurist Party Platform


پلاتفرم حزب آینده نگر


2. Progressiveness in the Present Epoch-Second Edition

ترقی خواهی در عصر کنونی- متن کامل - ويرايش دوم


Featured Topics