By
Keyvan Salami
New
York – July marks the second anniversary of the controversial nuclear deal
between Iran and P5+1, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action(JCPOA).A deal which not only did not stop Iran’s nuclear program, but it only
delayed it and at the same time provided billions of dollars to the regime to
pursue its destructive policies in the region.
The
Obama Administration and other advocates of the appeasement policy claimed that
this agreement would bring serious changes to Iran’s behavior, including its
actions in the Middle East. Two years on, it is increasingly evident that these
claims, hollow and baseless on some levels, have fallen short.
The
deal and the misguided policy that it influenced have emboldened Iran in many
areas, especially its malign regional activities. The agreement not only failed
to improve the Iranian people’s economic status, but it actually granted
the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) billions of dollars to pursue its
destructive policies in the region.
After
spending the billions in windfall from the nuclear deal, Iran has begun
meddling with its neighboring countries. Superficially, Iran has become a
regional power, but what is the reality? Is Iran truly a regional powerhouse,
and is there an ulterior motive behind the involvement in other countries’
affairs?
A quick
look at Iran’s modern history suggests that its current actions in the region
might actually signal that it possesses less power than is
thought. Since the start of their rule, the mullahs based their
regime on two pillars: crushing any domestic opposition and creating crises
abroad. The adoption of such polices embodies the very nature of this
regime. The mullahs’ regime is a backward-minded regime belonging
to the Middle Ages which opposes social liberties and developments.
The
system is based on Velayat-e Faqih (custodianship of the
clergy) and it places all religious and legal authority in the hands of the
Supreme Leader. What this means, in both theory and in practice, is that the
Ali Khamenei (like Ruhollah Khomeini before him) plays a direct role in all the
country’s affairs; and no individual, group, or committee in the country has
the right to question or hold him accountable.
By
contrast, Iranian society is a sizable demographic of young, highly
educated citizens seeking increased development and more social liberties. This
regime cannot match the contemporary society’s needs and considers force and
suppression to be the only methods of maintaining their grip on power.
To
perpetuate the systematic and widespread suppression inside the country, the
mullahs rely on external crises to divert public attention. As a result, the
“export of revolution”—more precisely the “export of terrorism”—and “creating
crises outside of Iran” became Tehran’s official policy. There are numerous
examples of the consequences of this policy.
The
Iran-Iraq war, for example, lasted eight years, leaving millions on both sides
either dead or injured, and many more displaced. Hundreds of cities and
villages were destroyed, and damages were estimated at $1 trillion for Iran
alone. It also contributed to the establishment of Hezbollah and general
interference in Lebanon’s internal affairs, the rise of Houthis in Yemen, the
ascendancy of Syrian President Bashar Al Assad and the subsequent Syrian Civil
War.
Former
regime Supreme Leader Ruhollah Khomeini described the war as “God’s blessing.”
During the war, Tehran brutally crushed its opposition through mass executions;
in the summer of 1988 alone, 30,000 political prisoners were massacred across
the country. The victims were mainly members and supporters of the People’sMujahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI-MEK).
Other
international crises have served the regime in the same way. Tehran has brought
carnage and suffering to thousands of innocent people in Syria, Yemen, Iraq and
other Arab countries with their attempts to maintain their power.
Senior
Iranian officials argue, “One reason we have been in Syria… and Iraq, and
carried out these measures, is that instead of fighting the enemy in the
streets of Tehran, Kermanshah, Arak, Qum, Sanandaj and Tabriz, we have taken
the fight to Deir ez-Zur, Raqqa, Aleppo, Homs and Mosul….”
Iran’s
tactics and daliances in other countries affairs are not due to the nation’s
inherent strength. supporting regime change is the only real policy to
stand against their export of terrorism.
Change
to: Iran is not a regional power and its meddling in other countries
affairs is not a sign of their dominance, but on the contrary it’s a smoke
screen to hide their internal instability and weakness. As a result, the only
real policy to stop Iran’s export of terrorism is a change in the government
and regime in Iran.
The
annual Iranian Resistance gathering on July 1 clearly demonstrated how regime
change is within reach. Mrs. Maryam Rajavi, President-elect of theNational Council of Resistance of Iran, was the keynote speaker of the
conference. She emphasized that the only way to liberate the Iranian people
from religious tyranny and to establish peace and tranquility in the region is
to overthrow the Velayat-e faqih (absolute clerical rule).
The
overthrow of this regime is necessary, feasible and within reach, and that a
democratic alternative and an organized resistance exists to topple it, she
underscored.
The
parties behind the democratic alternative are working to establish freedom and
democracy in Iran. Their plans will bring harmony to various ethnic groups, end
discord and divide between Shiites and Sunnis, and eliminate tensions between
Iran and its neighbors, Mrs. Rajavi concluded.
Comments
Post a Comment