By Jamie Glazov
Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Roozbeh Farahanipour, an Iranian journalist, democracy activist and former political prisoner in Iran. He was a student leader in the 1999 uprising.
FP: Roozbeh Farahanipour, welcome to FrontPage Interview.
Farahanipour: Thank you Jamie.
FP: As the Iranian nuclear threat clearly grows, the question of some kind of possible regime change becomes increasingly urgent. I would like to talk to you today about the prospects for a nonviolent revolution in Iran. Before we get to this issue though, let’s begin with a bit of history to give us a background to the possibility.
Farahanipour: First of all, I would like to bring your attention to the fact that, in Iran’s history, violence has been forced onto the people by dictatorial regimes led by kings and mullahs.
In 1906, the famous Constitutional Revolution succeeded in establishing a Parliament, limiting the powers of the king, allowing for the participation of some sectors of the society and introducing the elements of modernism and liberalism, by non-violent means. Soon after, a violent military coup by the successor to the throne necessitated an armed revolution which succeeded in saving the Constitution but yielded a two pronged occupation of the country by the Csarist Russians and the British, the eruption of the first World War adding a third occupying force, the Ottomans, and a major revolution in neighboring Russia. A long civil war followed in Iran. The country was divided between revolutionary movements, tribal and ethnic warlords and corrupt princes of the ruling dynasty.
This situation lasted until the early 1920s when the first Pahlavi king, then a general, pacified the country by military means, a coup and the establishment of a new dynasty that basically ended all political activities, focusing only on major reconstruction, unification and secularization of the society.
The Allied occupation of Iran in 1941 and the exile of the increasingly pro-German king, began a 12 year period of relative political freedoms which enabled the society to produce its political parties, free press and to revive the Parliamentary process, leading to the Oil Nationalization movement under Prime Minister Mosaddegh, targeting the British dominance of the country and the Shah’s pro British rule. This movement also succeeded in a non-violent manner, in nationalizing the oil and pacifying the King.
Once again, however, a series of Western supported moves and coups, finally succeeded in overthrowing the Prime Minister, ending all the remaining political freedoms and activities, violently imposing a dictatorial monarchy and imposing a political mood of violence, radicalism and even terrorism upon a whole new generation of revolutionaries. Read more ...
Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Roozbeh Farahanipour, an Iranian journalist, democracy activist and former political prisoner in Iran. He was a student leader in the 1999 uprising.
FP: Roozbeh Farahanipour, welcome to FrontPage Interview.
Farahanipour: Thank you Jamie.
FP: As the Iranian nuclear threat clearly grows, the question of some kind of possible regime change becomes increasingly urgent. I would like to talk to you today about the prospects for a nonviolent revolution in Iran. Before we get to this issue though, let’s begin with a bit of history to give us a background to the possibility.
Farahanipour: First of all, I would like to bring your attention to the fact that, in Iran’s history, violence has been forced onto the people by dictatorial regimes led by kings and mullahs.
In 1906, the famous Constitutional Revolution succeeded in establishing a Parliament, limiting the powers of the king, allowing for the participation of some sectors of the society and introducing the elements of modernism and liberalism, by non-violent means. Soon after, a violent military coup by the successor to the throne necessitated an armed revolution which succeeded in saving the Constitution but yielded a two pronged occupation of the country by the Csarist Russians and the British, the eruption of the first World War adding a third occupying force, the Ottomans, and a major revolution in neighboring Russia. A long civil war followed in Iran. The country was divided between revolutionary movements, tribal and ethnic warlords and corrupt princes of the ruling dynasty.
This situation lasted until the early 1920s when the first Pahlavi king, then a general, pacified the country by military means, a coup and the establishment of a new dynasty that basically ended all political activities, focusing only on major reconstruction, unification and secularization of the society.
The Allied occupation of Iran in 1941 and the exile of the increasingly pro-German king, began a 12 year period of relative political freedoms which enabled the society to produce its political parties, free press and to revive the Parliamentary process, leading to the Oil Nationalization movement under Prime Minister Mosaddegh, targeting the British dominance of the country and the Shah’s pro British rule. This movement also succeeded in a non-violent manner, in nationalizing the oil and pacifying the King.
Once again, however, a series of Western supported moves and coups, finally succeeded in overthrowing the Prime Minister, ending all the remaining political freedoms and activities, violently imposing a dictatorial monarchy and imposing a political mood of violence, radicalism and even terrorism upon a whole new generation of revolutionaries. Read more ...
Source: FrontPage Magazine
Posts
