GhandchiقندچيAzerbaijan Events and Structure of Power in Iran

Sam Ghandchi

وقایع آذربایجان و ساختار قدرت در ایران

P.S. Oct 1, 2017:Announcing Change of Position to Opposing any form of Federalism for Iran


Although most of the Iranian opposition thinkers agree that Iran's 1979 Revolution was a reactionary revolution [], but when they try to analyze particular events in Iran it is as if they forget that the goal of this regime from its inception to this day has been and is to "return to the past" of 1400 years ago.  Therefore they think of despotism of this regime of the kind of fascism or communism which were essentially the currents of the modern society that wanted to move faster forward by using their kind of dictatorship.


In a different article I noted the error of the mashrootiat model for analyzing the change in present Iran. I should recall that before mashrootiat, from Naserold-din Shah to Mozafaroldin Shah, they went to European trips and considered the modern world as their symbol and ideal.  Thus the difference between constitutionalists with the Qajar regime was that former wanted to move ahead faster, and of course the constitutionalists did not want progress only in the economic area but they also wanted it in the social realm meaning that they wanted democracy, the same way that the modern forces which were a minority in the 1979 Revolution desired modern democracy.


But the *mashrooe* group of mollahs at that time which were a weak group during mashrootiat and saw their chance in keeping the despotic monarchy of Qajar in power, wanted to return to the past and of course what they wanted, contrary to their belief, of Mohammad Ali Shah had succeeded, they would not have *achieved*, and what Khomeini did was what their wished would have been, and no wonder that Khomeini saw Sheikh Fazlolah Nouri as his forefather.  At the time of mashrootiat, contrary to 1979T Iranian society, was clearly directed toward the modern world.  I have written in details about 1979 Revolution and why the program to return to the past was able to become the flag of that revolution and how this regime conquered Iran [].


For more than 25 years, IRI has been trying to move Iran to the past, and in this attempt it has had to face internal and external obstacles, but this has been the direction of the regime all these years.  In fact the importance of putting veils on women's head is not that some Iranian women preferred to have veil and this had been their demand or that the traditional society has been reinstated.  The importance of this is in the fact that this is a move in a society where a great number of its women had been without veil, backwards to a society with Medieval standards and this goal and this goal is being pursued very consciously and only when the regime sees its survival at stake this retrogressive movement is adjusted to be continued anew later.  The difference between Iran's Islamic Republic with Taliban is only in the fact that IRI is more pragmatic or else they both have the same direction, and of course one has Shi'a ideals and the other has Sunni ideals.  Let me repeat again that I do not mean that someone is a Muslim and likes to wear veil, my point is about pulling back a society where the majority had removed veil for a long time.


The events of Azerbaijan has caused a surprise for many who say Azeris are also Shi'a and even Khamene'i and many of the regime's top brass are Azeri and then why such opposition to the regime and that being in Azerbaijan.  Let's return to the first years after the 1979 Revolution and remember the demonstrations of the supporters of Ayatollah Shariatmadari and hezbe khalghe mosalman that was suppressed in Tabriz.  If we look at it closely from as early as those days the Medievalism of this regime was the cause of the clashes.  Meaning that the leaders of this regime discriminated between the followers of Ayatollah Khomeii as marja and those following Ayatollah Shariatmadari and based on this Medieval distinction a part of the population was being suppressed.  In other words not just Sunis and followers of other religions like Baha'is but even having what Ayatollah as one's marja caused a difference in treatment of Shiites themselves. And later Ayatollah Montzeri fell from favor and Ayatollah Araki was favored and today Naser Makarem Shirazi and Fazel Lankarani and Meshkini are at the zenith of power.


What is important is not what Ayatollah is more popular among the Shi'a faithful, the issue is that IRI is pulling the society backwards and divides the population on the basis of these medieval differences which are within the constitution of the Islamic Republic and for example a group of petrified ayatollahs in the shorayeh negahban are controlling the whole political life of the society and valie faghih and shorayeh maslehat and all the Medieval institutions control all the power in Iran [].  The system is a power that for 25 years has tried to pull the society backwards in every realm of the society.  Many of the Iranian youth despite opposing the regime and despite their desire for Western culture of the media, nonetheless all these years have been under the influence of the superstition promoted by this regime in the schools and in every venue of the society, and the effects of that is evident now.  In contrast to mashrootiat that the competition of various forces of state was in moving forward, in the Islamic Republic the competition of the ruling forces is in returning the society to that of  1400 years ago.


Let's return to the events of Azerbaijan.  These events are reaction to a Medieval regime yet not a Medieval regime like Qajar or Saudi Arabia, but a medieval regime that is trying hard to move a society that has been modernized to the back and not just to the society of 100 years ago but to that of 1400 years ago and not just in Qom, Mashhad or Chahe Chamkranbut all over Iran.  In another article, I noted that we are now living in a global world where people have countless options  [] and this is why that we see millions of Iranians who have emigrated all over the world.


Are the demands of Azeri people ethnic?  I have explained about this a lot that in the present era basically national governments are losing their significance and what remains of nationalities is just that *ethnicity* which just like family is losing its political significance more and more [].  Therefore to oppose a regime that is only comparable to Taliban and Idi Amin of Uganda, although more pragmatic, the local and regional characteristics, because of the Medieva behaviorof the regime, in different periods are pronounced more, and the Iranian society will finally find its solution in a modern federal system of governance that would respect the local and regional characteristics and to establish democracy in all parts of Iran thru the checks and balances of the three branches of government all over the land []. 


It is true that if this regime remains in power for hundred years this can cause the disintegration of parts of Iran the same way that the end of Middle Ages meant the formation of new states in Europe that left the tyranny of the Medieval Church.  In fact millions of Iranian who do not want to live in Iran this way have not left because of not having job but have left because they do not want to accept the forcing of the return to Medieval life by them and in fact the Iranians living abroad are the first "separatist of Iran" who have separated from Iran because of opposing the regime by taking advantage of possibilities of a global world.  I hope that various parts of Iran instead of separating from each other to join hands with each other and to create a modern federal state that would pay attention to the demands of every Iranian with democracy and going forward.  A secular and federal state to end this regime of pushing Iran 1400 years to the past.


Hoping for a Federal, Democratic, and Secular Futurist Republic in Iran,


Sam Ghandchi, Editor/Publisher


June 7, 2006




Text in Persian


Related Papers: