Important Political News

[Rasputin]

روز20 ژوئن چهار پناهجوی ایرانی که در یکی از ساختمانهای پناهجویان در شهر Lünen زندگی می کردند حاضر به تخلیه دادوطلبانه اتاقهای خود نشدند. شهرداری واداره خارجیان شهر دلیل می آورند که بخاطر صرفه جوئی در هزینه ها می خواهند همه پناهجویان مجرد را از هایم ( ساختمان) های مختلف ، در یک ساختمان متمرکز کنند.
ازاوائل ماه ژوئن اداره خارجیان و شهرداری شهر Lünen به چهار تن از پناهجویان یرانی در هایم Auf dem Ringe ابلاغ کرده بودند که باید وسائل خود ار جمع کرده و هر چهار نفر به یک اتاق 24 متری در هایم جدید Alstedder Straße نقل مکان کنند. استدلال شهرداری شهر این بود که این چهار پناهجو باید اتاق های خود را تخلیه کنند زیرا قرار است یک خانواده جدید را به جای آنها منتقل کنند.

پیشینه ماجرا
از اوائل ماه ژوئن و از زمانی که شهرداری این تصمیم را به پناهجویان ااطلاع داده بود، این پناهجویان نسبت به تصمیم اداره شهرداری اعتراض کرده و تلاش کردند تا افراد و نهادهائی در شهر را در جریان این مسئله قرار دهند. از جمله با افرادی از شورای شهر، یکی از مراکز مشاوره پناهجویان و یکی از کشیشان شهر تماس برقرار کرده وآنها را در جریان قرار دادند. فشار وارده از سوی حامیان پناهجویان به شهرداری باعث شد تا شهرداری تلاش کند با تشکیل یک جلسه به سوالات منتقدین خود پاسخ دهد. اما بدلیل آنکه شهرداری حاضر به تغییر تصمیم خود نشد، پناهجویان نیز از طریق یکی از وکلای فعال شهر نسبت به تصمیم شهرداری قانونا اعتراض کردند. دادگاه در دو نوبت اعتراض پناهجویان را رد کرده و بعد از آن اداره شهرداری با مأمورین خود برای تخلیه اجباری اتاق های این پناهجویان اقدام کرد. بدلیل حضور چند نفر از حامیان پناهجویان که در اعتراض به تخلیه اجباری، در اتاق پناهجویان گرد آمده بودند، تخلیه اجباری در نوبت اول عملی نشد. یک روز بعد اداره شهرداری برای تخلیه اجباری از پلیس کمک گرفت.
پناهجویان هشیارانه رفتار کرده وبدون برخورد و درگیری با پلیس، به آرامی اتاق خود را ترک ولی هیچ وسیله ای از خود را از اتاق خارج نکردند. پلیس تمامی وسایل این افراد را در نایلونهای بزرگ ریخته و پس از تخلیه اتاقها، شهرداری نیز اقدام به تعویض قفل درب اتاق این افراد می کند.



استدلال پناهجویان
پناهجویان استدلا ل می کردند که در این ساختمان چندین اتاق و واحد خالی وجود دارد و نیازی نیست که برای جای دهی یک خانواده جدید، این پناهجویان از اتاقهایشان بیرون رانده شوند. پناهجویان همچنین استدلال می کردند که آنها بین پنج تا هشت سال است که در آلمان زندگی می کنند و برخی نیزچندین سال در همان شهر کار کرده و مالیات پرداخت کرده و استدلال شهرداری شهر را فقط یک بهانه می دانند. از نظر پناهجویان، این رفتار شهرداری و اداره خارجیان را باید در کادر کلی تر سیاست آلمان در زمینه پناهجویان ارزیابی کرد که بر اساس آن اداره خارجیان تلاش دارد تا با ایجاد انواع فشار های روانی و اعمال محدودیتهای مختلفی همچون ندادن اجازه کار، قطع یا کم کردن پول ماهیانه و... پناهجویان را مجبور سازنند تا برگه های بازگشت داوطلبانه به کشور خود را پر کنند.
پناهجویان ایرانی با اشاره به نقض حقوق بشر در ایران، خود را فراریان سرکوب رژیم دیکتاتوری حاکم بر ایران می دانند . آنان اعلام می کنند، اگر چه درخواستشان برای پناهندگی مورد قبول و پذیرش ادارات پناهندگی ودادگاههای آلمان قرار نگرفته، اما آنان مخالفین جدی رژیم حاکم بر ایران بوده و حاضر به بازگشت داوطلبانه به ایران نیستند. از این رو در اعتراض به اقدام شهرداری شهر، پناهجویان ایرانی از رفتن به ساختمان جدید خود داری کردند. آنان معتقدند آنها چیزی برای از دست دادن ندارند. سالهاست که بلاتکلیف در آلمان زندگی کرده و هیچ چشم انداز مثبتی نسبت به آینده اقامتی خود در این کشور ندارند. آنان معترضند که در این سالها با محدودیتهای زیادی باید زندگی را می گذراندند . یا به آنها اجازه کار داده نمی شود و یا در دو مورد اجازه کار از آنها گرفته شده است. انها می گویند حتی در همان هایم قبلی نیز که زندگی می کردند شرایط زندگی نامطلوب بود. آنان معترضند که سیاست برخورد با پناهجویان ازسوی ادارات مختلف آلمان آنان را بیمار کرده و انتقال اجباری آنان به یک هایم دیگر و هر چهار نفر را با هم در یک اتاق 24 متری جای دادن دیگر فراتر از مرز وطاقت تحمل آنان می باشد.

پشتیبانی وحمایت محلی
بدلیل حمایتهای خوبی که پناهجویان از شخصیتها و نهادهای مختلف شهر در حمایت از خود دارند، ازهمان ابتدا روزنامه های محلی و سپس رسانه های منطقه ای به این مسئله توجه نشان داده و این واقعه را در سطح شهر و منطقه انعکاس داده اند.

پایداری پناهجویان ایرانی و ادامه تحصن آنها باعث شده تا بسیاری از مشکلات شهر در ارتباط با مهاجرین و خارجیان نیز کم کم رو گردند. طی این مدت رئیس کمیسون مهاجرین شهر که یک پزشک سوریه ای تبار است، رئیس و معاون ریئس فراکسیون حزب سبزها در شورای شهر، یک کشیش فعال در امور پناهجویان و رئیس و مسئولین یک مرکز مشاوره برای مهاجرین در این شهر در جلسات مختلف نسبت به رفتار رئیس اداره خارجیان با مهاجرین و پناهجویان اعتراض کرده اند.

جبهه بندی احزاب سیاسی رقیب
در پاسخ به این اعتراضات ، رئیس فراکسیونهای شورای شهر از احزاب س د او، و اس پ د ، و دو حزب کوچک محلی دیگر با انتشار اطلاعیه مشترکی در تاریخ 30.06.06 تلاش کرده اند تا به این سوالات و عتراضات پاسخ دهند. اگر چه این اطلاعیه مشترک در ظاهر تهاجمی تنظیم شده اما در اساس یک اقدام تدافعی است چرا که امضاء کنندگان اطلاعیه برای توجیه کار خود ناگزیر به آوردن دلایلی شده اند که تنها عمق مشکلات شهر در ارتباط با مسائل مهاجرین و خارجیان را هرچه بیشتر عیان می کند. آنها برای قانونی جلوه دادن اقدام خود به قانونی که 15 سال قبل در شورای شهر به تصویب رسیده استناد می کنند. اعتراضات بر سر مسئله خوابگاه پناهجویان ایرانی، به دلیل پایداری آنها بر سر خواسته هایشان ، اینک دیگر موجب تیز تر شدن جبهه بندی احزاب رقیب در شهرگشته و همین مقابله احزاب با هم باعث شده تا بسیاری از ناگفته های شهر در معرض دید عموم قرار بگیرد.
متأسفانه همزمانی تحصن واعتراض پناهجویان با تعطیلات تابستانی باعث شده تا علیرغم حمایت قوی محلی، تصممیم گیری در رابطه با وضعیت آنان به حالت رکود درآمده است. اداره شهرداری در توجیه اقدام خود به قانونی که 15 سال پیش در شورای شهر به تصویب رسیده استناد کرده و می گوید کار ما قانونی است. با این حال شدت اعتراضات نسبت به وضعیت این پناهجویان تا آن حد است که نماینده حزب اس پ د از این شهر در پارلمان سراسری آلمان که برای دیدار خانوادگی به این شهر آمده، با گروههای حامی پناهجویان جلسه داشته و ضمن ابراز تفاهم تأکید کرده از کانالهای شخصی و خصوصی تلاش خواهد کرد تا بتواند برای حل این مشکل راه حلی پیدا کند.

[Rasputin]

تجارب کار
اگر چه هنوز این چهار پناهجوی ایرانی نتوانسته اند به خواست خود برسند، اما تحصن واعتراض آنها دستاوردهای مثبت بسیاری داشته که فوقا به آن اشاره شد.

اما مهمترین نکات موفقیت تا کنونی این حرکت اعتراضی را می توان اینچنین بر شمرد:
- اتحاد و همبستگی هر چهار پناهجو با هم بر سر اتخاذ یک تصممیم واحد از همان ابتدا،
- حفظ وحدت و همبستگی وادامه تحصن با وجود سختی و کمبودهای زیاد و اختلافات فی مابین در دو هفته گذشته،
- داشتن ارتباطات و شناخته شدگی اجتماعی در این شهر که حاصل حضور اجتماعی آنان در سالیان گذشته بوده است. بدون شک اگر این افراد در سالیان گذشته سر در لاک خود فرو کرده و در انزوا در این شهر زندگی می کردند، حمایت بسیار بسیار کمتری از حمایت کنونی را می توانستند نسبت به خود جذب کنند.
- حمایت و پشتیبانی دیگر ایرانیان چه در هایم پناهندگی این شهر و نیز دیگر ایرانیان ساکن این شهر و اطراف که به شکل دیدار از متحصنین و یا بردن غذا برای آنان قابل ذکر است .
- حفظ ارتباط با مراکز مشاوره در امور پناهندگی برای تنظیم و هماهنگی کارها و برنامه های خود،
- وجود یک روحیه نسبتا قوی حمایت از مهاجرین در سطح شهر و نیز وجود افراد فعالی در شهر در پستها و سمتهای مختلف با شناحته شدگی مثبت اجتماعی،
- پوشش رسانه ای نسبتا خوب که مانع از آن شده است که با وجودی که این پناهجویان حتی اجازه نصب پلاکارت ندارند، افکار عمومی از وضعیت آنها با اطلاع باشد،
- انتخاب محلی بسیار مناسب در جلوی ساختمان اصلی شهرداری و در مر کز شهر،
- هوشیاری پناهجویان متحصن در پرهیز از درگیری با پلیس و یا برخی مردم عادی که با لحن تند و توهین آمیز با آنها برخورد کرده اند.

سیاستمداران محلی بخوبی می دانند بد لیل تعطیلات تابستانی و نیز مسابقات جام جهانی فوتبال که در آلمان در جریان است، این حرکت اعتراضی هنوز نتوانسته در سطح سراسری زیاد انعکاس یابد، اما ضمنا می دانند که بدلیل شرایط و قوانین غیر انسانی که در مورد پناهجویان وجود دارد و نیز به دلیل بالا بودن پتانسیل اعتراضی در سراسر آلمان نسبت به این مسئله، ادامه تحصن و اعتراض پناهجویان ایرانی می تواند تا مدت دیگر شکل گیری هسته اولیه یک اعتراض سراسری در آلمان را موجب گردد. ا زاین رو بی تردید تلاش خواهند کرد تا به طرق مختلف یا این حرکت اعتراضی را با استفاده از ابزارهای قانونی متوقف کنند ویا می کوشند با دادن امتیازی کوچک، پناهجویان را بدلیل طولانی شدن اعتراض و خسته گی شان به سازش بکشانند.

چشم انداز
پایداری پناهجویان و ادامه اعتراض آنها در هماهنگی با حامیانی که تا امروز از آنان پشتیبانی کرده اند می تواند نتیجه کار را به آنجا بکشاند که نهایتا شهرداری شهر عقب نشینی کند. آنان می توانند با ادامه اعتراض خود و پافشاری بر حقوق انسانی شان این حقیقت را روشن کنند که خوابگاه قبلی و وضعیت فعلیشان ناشی از پایمال شدن حق پناهندگی و اقامت آنها بوده و در صورت حل این مشکل و در صورت گرفتن اجازه کار، آنها به خوابگاههای غیر بهداشتی و غیر انسانی اداره شهرداری نیز نیازی نخواهند د اشت.

برای حمایت از تحصن پناهجویان می توانید از طریق آدرس ایمیلی زیر اقدام و یا با شماره تلفن داده شده تماس بگیرید:
آقای رضوی؛ تلفن: 2630815 - 0170
ایمیل: d.razavi@yahoo.de

[Rasputin]

دولت ,مستقل, و سياست خارجی
هنوز دو روز از سفرناگهانی بوش به بغداد نگذشته بود که دولت جديد عراق يا فرقه ای از آن، نعل وارو زد. اگر زرقاوی در مرگ هم مثل زندگی ميتوانست به کاخ سفيد خدمت کند، چرا دولت ظاهرا تحت الحمايه از اين موهبت محروم بماند؟ پنج شنبه 15 ژوئن مشاور امنيت ملی عراق موفق الربيعی يک کنفرانس مطبوعاتی برگزار کرد و در آن اعلام کرد مرحوم ملعون ابو مصعب الزرقاوی به املای خودش و با انشايی که بنا بر گزارش گاردين با انشاء های معمولی القاعده تفاوت داشت، سند داده است که در نظر داشت رابطه جمهوری اسلامی و آمريکا را تيره کند و ميخواست عملياتی در خارج عليه جان اتباع آمريکايی انجام دهد ولی نشانه هايی به جای بگذارد که وانمود کند کار جمهوری اسلامی است و در همان سند هم خدمات جمهوری اسلامی به آمريکا در حمله به عراق و افغانستان را يادآوری کرد و نيز خبر داد که القاعده قصد داشت اطلاعاتى را پخش كند كه ايران داراى تسليحات كشتار جمعى از جمله سلاح های شيميايى و بيولوژيك است.

آمريکايی ها نمی توانستند بگويند چطور اين اسناد زير 1000 تن بمب سالم مانده است. چنين اعتراضی صحنه نمايش رسانه ای را بکلی خراب ميکرد. به همين جهت مشاور امنيتی دولت تحت الحمايه برای آينده هم جا ذخيره کرد و گفت مقدارزيادی اسناد در زير بمباران تقريبا دست نخورده باقی مانده که حاوی اطلاعات زيادی است. وقتی هم که از او پرسيدند چطور ميتوان اصالت اين اطلاعات را تاييد کرد، پاسخ داد هيچ چيز اصيل تر از کامپيوتر جيبی زرقاوی نمی تواند وجود داشته باشد!

ضمنا مشاور امنيتی در همين کنفرانس از آمادگی,نيروهای امنيتی عراق, داد سخن داد و يک بار ديگر خاطرنشان کرد که نيروهای ائتلاف به رهبری آمريکا به زودی عراق را ترک ميکنند. مهلت هم تعيين کرد: بيشترشان تا آخر سال 2007، تمام شان تا آخر سال 2008!

,فرقه بازی, آمريکا در عراق، فقط امکان مانور برای نيروهای آمريکايی را فراهم نمی کند، بلکه عراق را به ميدان بازی و دخالت انواع نيروهای خارجی تبديل کرده است، از عربستان و سوريه و اردن و ساير کشورهای عربی گرفته تا گسترده تر از همه رژيم اسلامی ايران که هم آشکار و هم پنهان در عراق با کارت های خود بازی ميکند.
بنابراين سياست خارجی ,دولت مستقل, از قبل تعيين شده است: جمعه 23 ژوئن ژنرال کيسی فرمانده نيروهای آمريکايی در عراق در کنار دونالد رامسفلد ظاهر شد و گفت رژيم اسلامی ايران شورشيان افراطی شيعه عراق را مورد حمايت قرار ميدهد. او اضافه کرد با اينکه شواهدی در دست ندارد اما ميدانند نيروهای وابسته به رژيم ايران مداوما به نيروهای آمريکايی در عراق حمله ميکنند. اين چند روز بعد از آن بود که اجساد دو آمريکايی ربوده شده با آثار شکنجه روی بدنشان پيدا شد. وابسته مطبوعاتی بی بی سی پل رينولدز که اين خبر را مخابره ميکرد نوشت برخی از تحليل گران گروه بين المللی بحران به بی بی سی گفتند اين اتهامات نادرست است وسوخت شورش را اساسا ميليتانت های سنی تامين ميکنند.
تنها نگاهی به عکس اين صفحه که ضمنا حقيقت زندگی روزمره در عراق را به نمايش می گذارد، نشان ميدهد مقاومت عراق از کجا برمی خيزد. کدام ملتی حاضر است به آن حقارت و ذلت و اين رنج و درد تن در دهد؟ خود مقامات عراقی وابسته به آمريکا اعتراف ميکنند در عراق حدود 80 دسته مسلح فعاليت ميکنند که بطور روزمره از درون رنج و کشتارناشی از اشغال نيرو ميگيرند و در فواصل کوتاه هم نام و تاکتيک خود را تغيير ميدهند. طبيعتا همه نيروهای خارجی از جمهوری اسلامی و آمريکا گرفته تا تروريست های خارجی تعدادی از آن ها را به کارت خود تبديل کرده و مقاومت در برابر اشغال را به جنگ عراقی با عراقی تبديل ميکنند. اما ريشه اين ستيزه با نيروی اشغال را به رژيم اسلامی ايران يا القاعده نسبت دادن اتفاقا بزرگ ترين کمک است به نفوذ اين هردو، همانطور که بهترين کمک است به ادامه اشغال.
اما به هر حال با توجه به ,اخطار, ژنرال کيسی دولت مالکی يا فرقه هايی از آن بايد حساب کار خود را بکنند و بدانند اگر در انديشه نزديک شدن به جمهوری اسلامی باشند، بايد تيرخلاص را به شقيقه خود شليک کنند. حداقل در تئوری اين طور در نظر گرفته شده است، در عمل تاکنون همه چيز در زورآزمايی تعيين شده است.

ماه عسل مکروه
تا اين جای قضيه عمدتا با اطلاعاتی روبرو هستيم که حتی دستگاه خبر ريسی پنتاگون با همه عظمت و مهارتش نتوانسته آن رااز ديد ناظران و حتی بخش بزرگی از افکار عمومی مردم پنهان کند. اما سوالاتی هم هست که اين دستگاه و رقبای خارجی اش توانسته اند با مهارت از چشم ها پنهان کنند و ما را در ابهام بگذارند.
مهم تر از همه اين که اوضاع ,عراق نوين, درخود ,منطقه سبز, يعنی تنها نقطه ای از عراق که تحت کنترل آمريکا و دولت دست نشانده آن ست، چقدر شبيه اوضاع ,عراق نوين, در دوره علاوی است؟

اين راز سرپوشيده ای نيست که کانديد مطلوب آمريکا برای برعهده گرفتن پست نخست وزيری علاوی يا کسی مثل او بود. سرپيچی صندوق رای از اين اراده بود که به بن بست طولانی و مخالفت با الجعفری منجر شد و خونريزی در عراق را به مرحله موحشی از جنگ داخلی وارد کرد که عراق به اين زودی از عوارض آن نجات نخواهد يافت، حتی اگر به فرض محال از خود آن نجات پيدا کند.
درمورد علت توافق آمريکا با المالکی که از همان حزب جعفری است، انگشت گذاردن بر
, ناسيوناليسم, او، با توجه به اصرارهای اوليه مالکی برای تعيين مهلت خروج نيروهای آمريکا، توضيح قانع کننده ای به نظر نمی رسد. ژنرال کيسی فرمانده نيروهای آمريکا در عراق درپاسخ سوالی در مورد تفاوت مالکی و جعفری در کميته سنای آمريکا از جمله گفت: , تصميم حزب خودشان بود, و ميدانيم تصميم در مورد معرفی مالکی به جای جعفری با تصويب آيت الله سيستانی بود. کسی که حاضر نشد پاس ايرانی خود را تعويض کند.

آيا واقعيت اين نيست که آمريکا سرانجام زورش به فرقه های شيعه نرسيد و بنا براين به يک راه حل ميانه و موقت تن در داد؟
از طرف ديگر همين سوال در مورد فرقه های اصلی شيعه صادق است. آيا در مقابل فشار آمريکا آن ها به همان تاکتيکی متوسل نشده اند که در سال 2004 اتخاذ کردند؟ در آن زمان آن ها با آمريکا وارد ائتلاف شدند و مقاومت شيعه ها را عمدتا مهار کرده و در سرکوب شورش که بدنه اصلی آن سنی بود و بمباران های شهرهای سنی نشين همکاری يا حداقل ميتوان گفت سکوت کردند. در سرکوب خونين فلوجه که مسلما در تاريخ به يادگار خواهد ماند از سنگ صدا در آمد اما نه از آيت الله سيستانی. حتی سرانجام مقتدی صدر نيز که تندروترين جناح فرقه های شيعه بود به ائتلاف شيعه که اين تاکتيک را پيش می برد پيوست.

شيعه ها با اين سياست توانستند هم دربدنه اصلی نيروهای نظامی و امنيتی جاگير شوند و هم در چارچوب قواعد بازی خود آمريکا و از طريق انتخابات ها و رای گيری های آن به قدرت صعود کنند. اين وضعيت ادامه داشت تا وقتی که آمريکا دبه در آورد و ياران شيعه را که در همه جا از جمله در وزارت کشور به کار گرفته بود به عنوان , شيطان اصلی, معرفی کرد وشروع به افشای جنايات نيروهای امنيتی شيعه نمود که خود برای سرکوب شورش به خدمت گرفته بود.

اگر پاسخ به سوالات فوق مثبت باشد، اين ائتلافی است ناشی از استيصال و معلوم نيست اين ماه عسل همراه با اکراه و بيزاری تاکی دوام خواهد داشت؟ شايد تا انتخابات ميان دوره ای آمريکا. اين نخستين پاسخی است که به طور طبيعی به ذهن ميرسد، اما اوضاع وخيم عراق، شانس برنامه ريزی و نقشه چينی را برای همه طرف ها به شدت ضعيف کرده است و همه با حوادث گام های خود را تنظيم ميکنند. آن ها شايد مجبور شوند مدت زيادی با هم بمانند يا برعکس. آيا ,درز, گزارش زلمای خليل زاد به خانم رايس در مورد اوضاع ناامن عراق، که هفته گذشته وسيعا در رسانه ها انعکاس پيدا کرد، از کوتاهی اين ماه عسل خبر نمی دهد؟ هرچه باشد اين گزارش، دولت تازه را بيشتر عامل عدم امنيت معرفی ميکند تا عامل ثبات و امنيت. قابل توجه است که سايت راديو فردا که از انتشار اخباری که برخلاف ميل مقامات واشينگتن و واقعا ,درز , پيدا کرده باشد به شدت امساک ميکند، اين گزارش را بطور کامل منتشر کرد.

رای يا گلوله، کدام تصميم نهايی را روشن خواهد کرد؟
,افسانه استقلال دولت, جديد عراق را اسکات ريتر عضو آمريکايی هيات سابق بازرسی سلاح های کشتار جمعی سازمان ملل، در مقاله ای تحت همين عنوان اين طور جمع بندی کرد:

سياست نظامی را آمريکا تعيين ميکند، مرزها را آمريکا کنترل ميکند، اقتصاد را آمريکا کنترل ميکند، وزرا را آمريکا تعيين ميکند، پليس عراق حتی حق تحقيق در مورد جرايم و جنايات سربازان يا حتی مقاطعه کاران اجير خارجی را ندارد. مضمون واقعی اين افسانه آنست که زمان بندی خروج نيروهای آمريکا در واشينگتن و نه بغداد مورد بحث [و تصميم گيری] قرار ميگيرد.البته مثل بقيه چيزها تصميم نهايی رای مردم عراق تعيين خواهد کرد - نه با انداختن ورقه رای ballot، بلکه با پرتاب گلوله bullet و اين تصميم نه تنها سربازان آمريکايی را از عراق بيرون خواهد انداخت، بلکه همراه با آن هر نوع حکومت عراقی را نيز بيرون خواهد راند که آنقدر احمق باشد که خود را به دولتی ببندد که بطور غير قانونی و عليه قوانين بين المللی به يک کشور حمله کرده و به اشغال غيرقانونی آن همراه با خشونت و جنايت فزاينده و بازهم غير قانونی ادامه ميدهد.

[Rasputin]

Islamic republic has got twenty seven years of history behind it, starting with the slogan "Freedom". What the ordinary Iranian people thought of that was democracy and human rights. But what the leaders of Islamic Republic really meant was freedom for themselves to destroy our country first and then export this so-called revolution to the Islamic world and in order to destroy the entire Western civilization and replacing it with Islamic fanatic ideas.

But the success of the Iranian theocracy even in Iran is out of the question. We live in the twenty-first century, in the age time of information explosion... nobody takes Iranian leaders seriously and if they are still in power it is because of their brutality -- and the support of some European countries which preferred to have trade relations with dictators in order to fulfill their own national interests with petro dollars, just as they did with Saddam Hussein in Iraq.

The recent presidential election showed the other face of Iran's criminal regime. For the first time in the life of the Islamic Republic, virtually every organ and institution of power, electable or otherwise, has been handed over to the complete control of the conservatives. It would appear on the surface that political power is now homogeneous and concentrated at the apex of the regime, in the hands of its Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

However, there is evidence that the coup was carried out behind the curtains of the elections and was not just directed against so-called reformists, or the leading candidate Hashemi Rafsanjani, but against the majority of the existing forces in the ruling oligarchy.

Moreover, by choosing Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, an extremist counter-intelligence officer in the Revolutionary Guards, with a history of involvement in terrorism and murder, even attendance at international gatherings has become more problematic than ever before. In particular with the nuclear weapons issue, the U.S. and Israel are in a better position to incite international public opinion against the Islamic Republic. Now, any judge or attorney anywhere can try their hand at prosecuting the most senior members of the Iranian government.

What is the real reason behind the Islamic republic's conflict with United States and its allies, including Israel? Ayatollah Khomeini the first leader of Islamic republic in 1979 was the first one who said Israel must be wiped off the map. Later Ali Akbar Rafsanjani used this phrase, that just one nuclear bomb can destroy the entire state of Israel. And now President Ahmadinejad is putting his foot in that direction, even including the destruction of the U.S. to his ridiculous dreams!

No matter what they say, the State of Israel is the only democratic country in the entire Middle East. Israel does not violate the human rights of its citizens, holds free election, respects freedom of speech, and all other real democratic values. That is the reason that Islamic Republic and all the other dictatorships in the Middle East can not tolerate it: They do not want the only democracy in the region to be in existence.

Also the United States and its allies have reached this point that in order to fight International terrorism, especially after the 9/11, they have to help the democratization of the Middle East, and Islamic Republic is the centre of wide terror network from Afghanistan to Lebanon and Syria and Iraq by spending numerous resources, financially and logistically, without leaving any traceable evidence. That is why the Islamic Republic is after destroying and wiping out these countries, because they are the real enemy of this theocratic and fanatic regime.

[Rasputin]

Mark Twain once said, "There is no humor in heaven". Twain believed humor was rooted in doubt, anxiety, sorrow, longing, and other human frailties. Since these are imperfections, he concluded they have no place in heaven.

Nothing funny in heaven?

I thought this was an interesting way to look at things, which led me to wonder if there is any humor in religion at all? In the Semitic, monotheistic religions that I know a little abou, like Islam, Christianity and Judaism, humor is not exactly a pillar of faith. In fact, it is hardly ever mentioned:

The word laugh/laughter is mentioned only 9 times in the Holy Quran, 8 of them in the context of ridicule or mockery, as in: "Let them laugh a little: much will they weep" (009.082), or "Those in sin used to laugh at those who believed" (083.029). The Holy Bible is not that much different. The Old Testament, which consists of 24 Books, mentions laugh/laughter all of 32 times. In the New Testament, which consists of 27 Books, laugh/laughter is mentioned just 6 times. For example, in James 4:9 it says: Be afflicted, and mourn, and weep: let your laughter be turned to mourning, and your joy to heaviness. (By contrast, death/dead/slay/kill is mentioned 231 times in the Holy Quran, 1,017 times in the Old Testament, and 443 times in the New Testament.)

Could this be the reason why fundamentalists violently protested cartoons of Prophet Muhammad? Maybe humor and religion don't mix.

If you were really curious- and brave, you could even take this argument further by asking: Does God have a sense of humor? Again, you must revisit your own feelings towards Twain's theory that humor's source is imperfection. If you agree with him, then there is no escaping the conclusion that God, by virtue of being defined as perfect, does not have a sense of humor. In other words, being perfect, not knowing sorrow or anxiety, God can not appreciate or relate to humor. This is clearly in contradiction with what we know of God as All Knowing, All Compassionate, All Everything. How can the created know about something- humor, that the creator does not know anything about? This is akin to heresy, or "kofr".

Therefore, if you believe in God, find a way to disprove what Twain said, either by proving there is humor in heaven, or showing humor can mix with perfection.

[Rasputin]

The two men could not be more different in almost all respects. But they do have a thing or two in common. For example, they both represent the worst of their country's nature.

Under President Bush, America has become known as an international bully, a nation engaged in torture and humiliation, a friend of the powerful, and an enemy of the weak- hardly the stuff America was founded on, and has been known around the world for.

I remember one Italian friend's story of his father fate at the end of World War II. His grandfather had advised his son to look for American GI's to surrender to, because they would treat him humanely. Now, for decades to come, perhaps generations, Americans will be thought of as torturers.

I remember laughing at an English newspaper's headline after Bush was re-elected: "HOW CAN 59,054,087 PEOPLE BE SO DUMB?"

We can wonder the same way about the people who elected Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. This man is completely un-Iranian. The policies he stands for, and the underlying values they represent, are foreign to Iran and Iranians.

It is not any part of our culture or traditions, going back at least 2,500 years, to wish for any people or country to be wiped off the face of the Earth. We simply would not have survived in a diverse neighborhood like the Middle East if we were this intolerant. He is no kinder to his enemies inside the country either, always favoring violence as the first option to deal with problems.

Asked about the demise of the Iranian stock market in the past few months, his reply was, "If it had been possible to hang a couple of people, the Tehran stock exchange would already have been put in order". These values are foreign to me as an Iranian.

Another thing these two men have in common is that they are both supported by religion and the religious, and they both consider themselves to be doing God's work.

I seriously doubt either man represents his nation well, let alone his God.

One good thing about leaders like this, who misrepresent their country's values, is that they awaken their own citizenry, and hasten the day when people reclaim their heritage and identity.

[Rasputin]

Jonathan Jones’ review of the Ancient Persian exhibit at the British Museum is a bit bizarre, to say the least. How is it that an art critic goes to look at some (very) ancient Persian relics at a museum, and comes out lecturing about modern “Western political theory”?

I think what he is saying is quite interesting to Persians. If you understand his central point, which has little to do with art, archeology, or history, you’ll start to see why Persia has been treated like the Rodney Dangerfield of world civilizations: no respect. His main point is to reassert Persia’s role in Western civilization as the original “evil empire”.

You may not see this point readily because he not only explains West’s inane disdain for Persia; he also exercises it in the same piece. Therefore, you may think he does not like the art, or that he is new to the field. Not so. Believe me, he didn’t even have to go to this show to write that review. “Where's the passion in Persian art?” he asks.

If he had found a DVD player among ancient Persian relics, he would ask, “Where is the surround”? “Where’s the motion and emotion?” he asks. If motion and emotion were the only yardsticks to measure art by, then a painting of “Dogs playing poker“ would be superior to the Mona Lisa, and Debbie Does Dallas would be a bigger cinematic masterpiece than Citizen Kane. So, forget what he thinks of the exhibit. That’s not his point.

His central point, in effect, is that the West cannot allow itself to appreciate Persia because doing so would undermine their own image of themselves. This comes across in passages like: “the Persians had the misfortune to be the others, the enemies - in short, the Orientals”, and, “All Western political theory is implicitly defined against the ghost of Persia”.

Part of the Western political theory he alludes to here, if I’m not mistaken, is the one that divided the world into Occident vs. Orient. Occidental refers to White, Christian, Western European peoples, in general, and to the British in particular. Oriental refers to all other peoples, in general, and to the people of the Middle East and Indian sub-continent, in particular.

A certain sense of superiority has been an underlying current in Western civilization to varying degrees, as the author correctly points out, from the time of the Greeks, through Romans and later the British Empire. But, he fails to note that it was really classified and articulated in its present form, as a political theory, in the 18th and 19th century England. The Great British Empire- and it was truly great was woefully short on pedigree and pretense as it grew into a world empire. (Earlier this summer, the same Jonathan Jones wrote another article tracing “The birth of British art” all the way back to the 13th Century!). So, they made some up.

First they wove this yarn in which they cast themselves as heirs to the Greeks, the first “European civilization”, then they mixed-in some Christianity, added some Queen & Country, and, Presto! They then had a righteous political theory that made them feel timeless and ascendant over other peoples and cultures. This is where ancient Persia enters their argument. As part of seeing their good selves as Greeks, they had to look at ancient Persia as evil. In other words, Persia is scorned because of Britain’s crush on Alexander!

In practice, it worked well for a while because they actually bought their own concoctions (as Jonathan Jones does to this day). They went off in all directions, believing that they were “civilizing the savage”. All the while, they were just carrying out the work of the empire by enriching themselves. Soon, power and greed dulled their brilliance, and they sank to new lows.

In the words of Mark Twain: “Taking someone else’s land is nothing new in the world, but this modern imperialism cloaks itself in a hypocritical self-righteousness that is particularly galling... In many countries we have chained the savage and starved him to death. In more than one country, we have hunted the savage, and his little children and their mother, with dogs and guns through the woods and swamps for an afternoon’s sport. In many countries we have taken the savage’s land from him, and made him our slave, and lashed him everyday, and broken his pride, and made death his only friend ... There are many humorous things in the world, among them, the white man’s notion that he is less savage than the other savages”.

The end for the British Empire came in one of history’s most delicious ironies. A single, unarmed, frail, old, Oriental in loincloth pulled the cloak back to point out who the real savage was. As is usually the case in these situations, the British themselves were the last ones to see the ugliness. Not all of them, but most of them did and do to this day.

I wouldn’t care for his review so much if I believed his kind of archaic view of humanity was in the past. Nor would Jonathan Jones be so frustrated to see Persia recognized in any way if he believed there were no chance of putting the old “theory” back into practice. America, who originally defined itself as the non-imperialist branch of Western civilization, has backtracked some since the end of World War II. Now they find themselves fighting natives in the Holy Land, forcing “civilization” onto savages with allies like Britain and Spain.

Jones’ Western political theory has, in practice, robbed countless peoples of their rightful assets, caused the deaths of millions of innocents on their own lands, and, most importantly, wasted numerous opportunities for humanity to bring peoples and cultures closer for obvious common goods.

Meanwhile, we can only hope (and work) for a paradigm shift, and look forward to a time when Jonathan Jones’ of the world would not be reviewing museum shows, but be on display in one.

[Rasputin]

As the results of the 2005 Iranian presidential election poured in, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi appeared to be the clear-cut winner. With 99.9% of precincts reporting, historians everywhere declared him the winner in a landslide.

This was a stunning victory considering that the Shah has been dead for almost a quarter of a century.

Also on the ballot was "Initiative 1953", in which the Shah also won a decisive moral victory. The people have been heard: the Shah was right all along!

Perhaps nowhere was the surprise more keenly felt than at Mossadegh headquarters in Paris. Spokesman Dr. Matin Ferferi exclaimed, “for 52 years we have held steadfast to the belief that if the Shah had not deposed Dr. Mosaddegh in the 1953 coup d’etat, Iran would be enjoying a flourishing democracy by now. Today’s results show otherwise. Perhaps Mosaddegh was merely another personality de jour, and that it was only a matter of time before this nation blew it and voted some loser in. We can’t believe it! We can never condone the 1953 coup d’etat, but, in hindsight, we can certainly appreciate the tough choices the Shah had to make in those days. These people are losers.”

Reached for comment in his resting place under the Farouk Mosque in Cairo, the late Shah rolled over in his grave, and said, “If I had known these people were this pathetic, I would’ve cashed out a lot sooner.” He said he has been feeling very well and resting comfortably lately. He spends most days playing poker with Kourosh, Shahpour, Abolghaasem “Hakim the Dream” Ferdsoi, Abbas “the sibil” Safavi, Amir Kabir, Mosaddegh, and a few others.

“We don’t bother much with everyday politics of Iran It’s too depressing,” said the King of Kings. “We’ve all been burned by it sometime or other. Now and then conversation turns to what’s wrong with these people. We all sit around stunned, but then somebody says ‘they get what they deserve’. We look down and see it’s true. Then we get on with the game.”

The Shah added, “Did you know that poker started in ancient Persia? Used to be called Aas Naas. It’s a heck of a game. Say, we need a woman in this game. When are you sending Shirin Ebadi up?”

Iran’s new head of State, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, did not appear surprised at the news conference.

“This is what the revolution aimed to achieve all along. A revolution dedicated to the mostazafaan (downtrodden), today, is on the verge of making all Iranians mostazaf. What could be better?”

Asked about whether his feelings get hurt when he is compared to an ape, the president-elect replied, “Not at all. I’m an engineer so I know all about the science behind it. An ape, which is a primate, is perfectly suited to rule over a bunch of jackasses. What the Iranian people resented all along was being ruled by snakes who belong to the reptile family and much lower on the evolutionary chain than the jackass.”

Meanwhile, in Los Angeles, the Young Shah, ended his hunger strike in style at a luncheon hosted by the Iranian American Republican Council (IARC) at the Shahrzad chelo-kababi.

Asked weather he was prepared to return to Iran to save the nation, he replied, “Ab zereshk, please!”

[Rasputin]

In early January of this year, a prominent American journalist published a strangely inaccurate attack on Iran, making the country complicit in the crimes of the Holocaust. I prepared the response below and sent it to the San Francisco Chronicle, where the original article had appeared. But the editors of the paper told me that they do not publish polemical responses. I prepared another essay, dealing directly with each of the accusations, and the essay was published in the Insight section of the Chronicle on Sunday, February 9, 2006. (p. E 5). But as the accusations in Mr. Black’s article are serious, I think publishing the direct response to his attacks is also necessary.

Even for acclaimed investigative journalists like Mr. Edwin Black, few things are more dangerous than the temptation to conflate fact and fiction, to traffic in hackneyed shibboleths, and to write half-truths based on scant knowledge. His defamatory diatribe against the nation of Iran, published in the San Francisco Chronicle of January 8, 2006, is replete with half-truths, gross misstatement of facts and a defiant disregard for known but inconvenient facts of history.

To chronicle every factual error and faulty accusation in the piece would require an essay much longer than the original piece. If nations could have their day in libel court, Mr. Black would now be looking for a whole bevy of lawyers to answer the many libelous accusations he has made against the entire nation of Iran.

The trigger for Mr. Black attack was Mr. Ahmadinejad’s odious comments about wiping Israel off the map, and his even more shameful denial of the Holocaust. Surely those comments deserve to be thoroughly condemned. The regime in Iran must be made to understand that the world community has zero tolerance for such anti-Semitic ranting. But it would be a tragic mistake to fall into a racist trap when condemning Mr. Ahmadinejad’s racist words, and that, unfortunately is precisely what Mr. Black has done in his essay. He claims that if we look at Iran’s “Hitler-era past” we will discover “that Iran and Iranians were strongly connected to the Holocaust and the Hitler regime.”

The facts of history are just the opposite of what Mr. Black has claimed. As early signs of the murderous Final Solution became visible, the Iranian government of the time convinced the Nazi race experts in Germany that Iranian Jews had lived in Iran for over twenty five hundred years and were fully assimilated citizens of the Iran and must be afforded all the rights of such citizens. The Nazis accepted this argument and the lives of all Iranian Jews living under the Nazi yoke was saved. An account of this episode can be found in the History of Contemporary Iranian Jews, published by Center for Iranian Jewish Oral History.

Moreover, as I have recounted in my Persian Sphinx, Iranian diplomats in Europe and elsewhere offered hundreds of Iranian passports to European Jews and thus saved their lives. And when the Nazi killing machines began their slaughter of innocent Polish Jews, 1388 Jews, including 871 children were moved to Tehran where they lived in relative safety till they moved to Israel. Again History of Contemporary Iranian Jews has provided an account of what are called “Tehran Children.”

Mr. Black goes on to claim that Iran and its leaders were not only aware of the “Holocaust, they played both parts ... the country offered escape routes for refugee Jews ... but only in exchange for extortionate passage fees.” The man responsible for the transfer of Jewish refugees in Iran -- who went on to become Israel’s ambassador to Iran--has an entirely different story to tell. He writes, “As the Shah of Iran had particular affinity for the Jews, the military and bureaucratic institutions of the country spared no effort in helping refugees reach Israel.” (Moir Ezry’s Yadnameh, vol. 1. p. 52). He goes on to say, “countries like Bulgaria, and Rumania asked for great sums of money from Israel in order to set their Jewish population free. But the Iranian government never asked for any money.”(p. 60)

With little to besmear the people of Iran with, Mr. Black eventually performs a conjurer’s trick. In the middle of the narrative, he introduces the notorious figure of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and then the Iranian nation is blamed for every step taken by that despicable figure. But as an acclaimed investigative journalist. Mr. Black should know that Iran was at the time of World War Two about eighty-percent Shiite, and that Muftis are unique to the Sunni sect of Islam. Considering the long simmering tension between Shiites and Sunnis, and between Persians and Arabs, an Arab Mufti, would be hardly a popular character in Iran.

Mr. Black’s story about Reza Shah and his affinity for the Nazis and his decision to change the name of the country to Iran suffers from revealing errors of omission and commission. Contrary to Mr. Black’s claim, Reza Shah’s affinity for Germany predates the rise of Nazis by almost two decades. During World War One, when Reza was just a colonel in the Cossack Brigade, he contacted Germany’s embassy in Tehran and solicited their help in fighting British and Russian encroachments on Iran. He was wooed by the Nazis who agreed to sell him the steel factory he coveted and considered a sine quo non of progress and modernity. Nevertheless, according to the British embassy reports from Tehran in 1940, the total number of German citizens in Iran -- from simple technicians to sinister spies -- was no more than a thousand.

Even when Mr. Black writes about the issue of the country’s change of name, he gets it only half right. He writes, “So intense was the Shah’s identification with the Third Reich that in 1935 he renamed his ancient country Iran.” But Iran has been called Iran for over twenty-five hundred years. Reza Shah did was not to rename his country; he asked the world not to call it Persia, but to use the country’s own name for itself. It was, as I have written elsewhere, a mistake. But it was not a wholesale recreation of a country’s identity that Mr. Black insists.

After mixing fact and fiction about the Nazi era, Mr. Black conveniently overlooks the next thirty-seven years and jumps to Mr. Ahamadinejad’s time. Here are a few facts overlooks.

Iran was the first Moslem country in the world to establish diplomatic and economic ties with Israel. Throughout the fifties, sixties and seventies, Iran supplied oil to Israel, and after the rise of Nasser’s Pan-Arab nationalism in the Middle East, Israel, along with Iran’s secret police, operated a radio station in the Southern provinces of Iran and beamed their anti-Nasser message to the entire Arab world.

David Menashri, one of the most eminent Israeli scholars of modern Iran, calls the sixties and seventies “the Golden Age of Iranian Jewry when Jews enjoyed almost total cultural and religious autonomy, experienced economic progress and had no less political freedom than their Muslim counterparts.” (David Menashri, “The Jews or Iran: Between the Shah and Khomeini,” in Anti-Semitism in Times of Crisis, ed. by Sander L. Gilam and Steven Katz, p. 356) He adds that, “On per capita terms, they may well have been the richest community in the world.’ (Menashri, p.35. But these facts are inconvenient for Mr. Black and forfeiting his responsibilities as an investigative journalist, he includes in his narrative only those facts and fictions that fit the tortured image he wants to give about Iran and Iranians.

Inside and outside Iran, the Iranian people are held hostage by the theocratic regime and leaders like Ahmadinejad. It is bizarre to hold the hostages responsible for the sins of the hostage takers. It is grossly unjust to fabricate a false past for the hostages and hold them responsible not only for the vices of their hostage takers, but also for crimes they never committed. Sadly, Iranian history, like the history of almost every other nation, is not free from the blemish of anti-Semitism.

The Bible tells us of the time when Esther was the queen of Persia, and the demonic anti-Semitism of the vizier, Haman threatened the lives of Iranian Jews. But Esther succeeded in saving her people -- and thus the feast of Purim. The bible is also replete with praise for Cyrus, the Persian king and God’s “anointed” and “Chosen” ruler, who liberated the Jews from their Babylonian captivity and helped rebuild Jerusaleum. Mr. Black’s rendition of Iranian history overlooks the Esthers of the past and focuses his angry gaze only at Hamans.

[Rasputin]

I gave a talk at a fundraiser last week. The event itself is worth writing about. The Iranian Federated Women's Club in the San Francisco Bay Area are offering scholarships of up to ten thousand dollars to ten young Iranians of university age. I thought you might be interested in the text of the talk.

In 1935, at the suggestion of Persia's misguided Ambassador to Nazi Germany, the country's name was changed to Iran. That was the heyday of Aryan supremacy and the word Iran literally means "land of the Aryans." Something of a breech began to appear in Persian and Western consciousness. Persia with its indelible aura of past grandeur and glory, was suddenly, and I think unwisely, replaced by Iran. With the simple stroke of a pen, as Foroughi soberly noted, the richly resonant and renowned identity of Persia was traded for a bleak unknown.

In English, German and French, Iran is a novice of a word, one that conjures no memory but only a distant, troubled, and more recently, troubling, land at the end of the earth. All too often, Iran is still confused with Iraq, assumed to be another 19th century colonial concoction, an expedient consequence of the "Great Game."

Persia has more than two thousand years of often-splendid recorded history. Though in recent times the malignancy of its politics has caused it to be much maligned in the Western media, it has contributed much to the common heritage of humanity. It has played a formative but frequently forgotten role in shaping Western consciousness itself.

What I can offer here tonight is a mere overture to the long and wondrous symphony called Persian history. To begin at the beginning -- and the beginning was the Word-- the Bible is replete with profuse praise for Persia and its kings. In the book of Ezra, the Lord of the Old Testament speaks through the proclamations of Cyrus, King of Persia, who declares, "The Lord God of heaven hath given me all the kingdoms of the earth, and he has charged me to build him a house in Jerusalem."

Cyrus, as we know, acceded to this lordly edict and thus was the second Temple in Jerusalem built. In other parts of the Old Testament, Cyrus is often referred to as God's "Anointed" and the "Chosen" Ruler. This fulsome praise was partially in recognition of his role in freeing Jews from their Babylonian captivity; of equal importance was the fact that the vast Persian empire of the time was a paragon of religious and cultural tolerance.

There is something of a consensus among historians -- with the glaring exception of Sheikh Sadeq Khalkhali, of course -- that Cyrus was in fact the first ruler to issue a declaration of human rights. It pre-dated the much-lauded Magna Carta by more than a millennium. Cyrus was also the first ruler to create a truly multi-cultural empire by affording the conquered peoples the liberty to maintain their own linguistic, religious and cultural autonomy. So ubiquitous was his reputation that songs in his praise had reached as far away as Iceland and formed an important part of their sagas.

Many Biblical scholars have further shown that a plethora of key theological concepts, from the notions of Satan and hell to those of angels and heaven, and most importantly, the idea of the resurrection of the body have all been the result of Persian-- or more specifically, Zoroastrian-- influences on the Bible. Some scholars have suggested that Zarathustra was the first prophet of a monotheistic religion; others maintain that the idea of a millennium -- the significance afforded to thousand-year cycles in history -- found its way to Christianity through the Zoroastrian religion.

Hegel, the 19th century German philosopher, whose writings are considered by many as the apex of Western philosophical tradition, uses unusual superlatives in describing the role of Persia and Zarathustra in history. "Persians," he writes, "are the first Historic people . . . In Persia first arises that light which shines itself and illuminates what is around . . . The principle of development begins with the history of Persia; this constitutes therefore the beginning of history."

Hegel wrote these lines around the time that Nietzsche was writing his magnum opus, Thus Spoke Zarathustra. The book offers a radical critique, almost a total debunking, of the whole Western tradition of philosophy. It is no mere accident that Nietzsche chose to articulate his critical views in the name of Zarathustra.

Of course the end of the nineteenth century was not the only or the last time Zarathustra played a prominent role in shaping Western philosophic discourse. Indeed, in the 1990s, so strong were Persian influences in the millennial fever, and in other New Age ideas, that Harold Bloom, the eminent American critic, wrote in his Omens of Millennium that the last decade of the twentieth century should in truth be called the age of Zoroastrian revival.

Zarathustra was not the only Persian prophet to play an important role in the development of Judeo-Christian theology. Scholars like Carl Gustav Jung have traced some of the ideas and rituals of Christianity, particularly the notion of a Messiah sent down from heaven, the ritual of baptism, and the sharing in the body and the blood of Christ, to Mithraic rites.

Even the architecture of the Christian church, with its hallowed nave, seems inspired by the designs of Mithraian temples. Western art, no less than history and theology, bear testimony to the ubiquity of the Persian presence in antiquity. Of all the extant works of Greek tragedy, for example, the only one that is about a non-Greek subject is Aeschylus' play The Persians.

[Rasputin]

Persian influences continued long after the days when Christianity was born. St. Augustine's Confessions, written a good three centuries later, affords clear evidence of the immense influence Persian ideas, including those of Mani, exerted on Augustine's intellectual development, and through him, on the evolution of Christian theology and culture. In fact, some scholars have suggested that Augustine's strict admonishments against bodily pleasures, and his dualistic vision of the world as a place riven between good and evil, are evidence that he co-opted many of Mani's ideas into Christianity.

Indeed, Persia can be held at least partially accountable for what has come to be pejoratively called the Manichean view: A vision that reduces the infinite complexities of reality into a simple duality of good and evil. Even well into the twenty first century, the cosmology and ethics of such popular films as Star Wars, and Lord of the Rings, continue to resonate with Manichean perspectives.

Interesting and important as these religious influences are, Persia's role in the development of the Greco-Roman or Western sense of cultural identity is no less significant. It would be no exaggeration to suggest that the West's consciousness of itself as a unified civilization, distinct from the culturally different "Other," was shaped in opposition to Persia.

More than four hundred years before the birth of Christ, Herodotus, often called the father of Western history, and himself born within the confines of the vast Persian Empire, wrote his seminal work to chronicle the wars between the Greeks and the Persians. In the opening paragraphs of his Histories, he writes, "in this book, I hope to do two things. To preserve the memory of the past by putting on record the astonishing achievements both of our own and of the Asiatic people. Secondly and more importantly, to show how the two races came into conflict." He goes on to explain that by Asia he means both Persians and the lands dominated by them.

Though in what must be the first clear instance of smug Eurocentrism, he calls Persians "Barbarians," he nevertheless marvels at their many accomplishments. He writes, for example, of Darius as the discoverer of much of Asia, as the king who mapped for the first time many of the seas and rivers of the world, and as the far-sighted monarch who even attempted to build a waterway where 2400 years later, the Suez Canal was constructed.

Darius is of course also the king who helped build the great city of Persepolis. The ruins of that once great city are still considered one of the most important historic sites in the world; its architecture, combining eclectic influences from many corners of the globe, exemplifies the genius of the Persian spirit.

Persians freely adopted aspects of other cultures, but always did so only after creatively transforming them into something that was uniquely Persian. This fascinating trajectory can be traced in everything from the way we prepare our tea and rice, to the way we build our colonnades and domes.

Even in religion the same spirit seems to have prevailed. In a monumental four-volume study, the French philosopher, Henri Corbin, shows in some detail how pre-Islamic Zoroastrian, Mithraic and Manichean ideas, by dint of the Persian assimilating and persevering instinct, were reformulated in such a way as to make them amenable to the conquering Arabs and their new religion. Indeed, an eclectic cultural elasticity has been said to be one of the key defining characteristics of the Persian spirit and a clue to its historic longevity.

The bulk of my time has already lapsed and I have barely hit even the high notes of the first five hundred years of Persian history; I have hardly finished the overture to the symphony I had promised. If we had more time, I would have talked about the library at Sarouye -- located near where the city of Isfahan is today.

Though only a few random pages of its vast holdings have survived, we know of its grandeur through the testimony of its contemporaries, who compared it, in terms of the awe it inspired, to the Egyptian pyramids. We could have reminisced about the famous Jondi Shapour Medical center in Pre-Islamic Iran, and I could have offered evidence of its refreshing openness to scholars and doctors from any and all religions and nationalities of the world.

[Rasputin]

We could have delighted in discovering the fascinating role Persia played in the consciousness of the medieval Western mind. We could have talked of the Grail Legend and the scholarly belief that its sources should be sought in the Persian myth of the Cup of Jamshid and in the text, Borzounameh. We would have talked of the role Persians played in the early inception of A Thousand and One Nights, often called one of the most influential books of all time. The Shahrzad of the story, a Persian princess, is universally recognized as the archetypal story-teller, the embodiment of the power of clever and cunning narrative.

We could have talked of the impressive litany of Persian theologians, philosophers, mathematicians, astronomers and scientists who, according to Ehsan Yarshater, helped shape what has come to be called the Golden Age of Islam. I would have reminded you that as an ironic result of the Crusades, Europeans rediscovered Aristotle through the Islamic world, and that this discovery, in turn, helped spur the Renaissance.

I would have told you about Avicenna and Biruni whose work in medicine and astronomy were standard texts in European universities well into the nineteenth century. We could have talked about the work of scholars who argue that the Copernican revolution in Europe would not have been possible without the earlier contributions of Persian astronomers. I would have reminded you of the glories of Rasad-khaneye (Observatory) at Maraghe, arguably the most famous center for astronomical research in the thirteenth century. At that time, scholars from as far away as Sweden traveled to Maraghe to learn the newest theories and discoveries of astronomy.

I would have referred to the works of the Persian mathematician, Kharazmi whose name is synonymous with Algebra. At the same time, we would have lamented the fact that in recent years some museums and libraries around the world, apparently seduced by the flow of Arab Petro-dollars, have begun to call their Persian collections by the misnomer of Islamic, or sometimes even Arabic, art and culture.

We could have referred to the work of scholars who have found strong Persian influences on such canonical works of Western consciousness as Dante's Divine Comedy and two great works of Chaucer-- the Canterbury Tales and the Parliament of Fowls. We could have together traced the early evolution of Paris University, the center of intellectual ferment and rebirth in thirteenth-century Europe, and investigated the role Persian thinkers and scientists played in this renaissance of rationality in the West.

I could have described what I think was a native, nascent, Persian modernity that emerged between the tenth and twelfth centuries. I would have talked of Beyhaghi and Sa'di, Arouzi and Razi who, long before the West, began to experiment with ideas that would later form the kernel of the European Renaissance. I would have invited you to read Ohran Pamuk's new novel, My Name is Red, where the Turkish author suggests that Persian painters of the Isfahan, Gazvin and Herat schools experimented with the laws of perspective, long before Giotto painted what is hailed as the first modern painting.

I would have described some of the wonders of the sixteenth century city of Isfahan, and how it captured the imagination of so many European travelers, awed by its grand mosques, its sumptuous bazaars, its tree-lined boulevards and its splendid gardens. Versailles in France is said to have been at least partially inspired by these gardens. Much in fact could have been said about the Persian idea of a garden, so different from its Western counterpart. As Persian gardens found their way to the West, so did the Persian word pardis, where it became the source of the word "paradise".

If we had time, we could talk of the unusually large number of invariably favorable references to Persia in Shakespeare's poems and plays. You might have been surprised to learn that Shakespeare was familiar with the writings of the Sherley brothers and other English travelers to Persia. It was probably the reports of these brothers that led Shakespeare to equate Persia, the land of the Sophy, with luxury, lavishness and beauty.

To complete our overture, we would have to talk about the formative role Persians played in the development of Sufism, the Islamic brand of mysticism. We would talk about the influence these Sufi poets had in the development of 19th century Romanticism. We could have together browsed through some of the essays of Emerson, the quintessential American intellectual, and read the passages where he suggests, with no hint of hyperbole, that Saidi's prose and poetry are only comparable to the Bible in terms of the universality of their transcendental wisdom.

We could have also talked about Goethe, one of the greatest German Romantic poets of all times, who, in his own words, reached a new "mountain peak of his life" when he first encountered the poetry of Hafez. He went on to write his Eastern Divan in homage to Persian poets. We would have reminisced about Khayam and his genius for science and poetry, as well as his contagious appetite for a loaf of bread and a jug of wine. We might have found in his poetry early traces of what in the twentieth century came to be known as Existentialism. We would have talked of the 11th century Persian poet, Rumi, who is now amongst the best-selling poets in America.

[Rasputin]

To give you a sense of the image of Persia in the Romantic imagination, I would invite you to read Sackville-West's delectable memoirs of her trip to Iran. And finally, I would ask you to read again Moby Dick, Melville's great American novel, and note the role Persia played in the author's cosmology.

Each of the recipients of these scholarships, each generous contributor who makes this lofty and noble enterprise possible, every one of the ladies whose vision led to the creation of the Iranian Federated Women's Club, and whose tenacity and perseverance brought it to its current state of inspiring success, is an Ahab, fighting not to be revenged on the behemoth of the sea, but instead to seek the best of a great and glorious tradition.

Needless to say, what I have offered tonight has been a highly selective series of images from a long and complicated history. Consciousness of such peaks of civilization must not turn us into self-deluded and self-satisfied addicts of our past glory, oblivious to our country's all too many lapses into despotism and fanaticism. From the Chagari troop, bent on literally cannibalizing their king's foes, to despots that blinded the male population of a city at a whim, Persia has had more than her fair share of historic calamities and inhuman barbarities.

Furthermore, as the West began to take its leap into modernity, we fell into a dread abyss of tyranny, religious fanaticism and irrationalism. We have yet to altogether free ourselves from these benighted conditions. Khayam could have been referring to our time, when he wrote, "They say the lion and the lizard Keep/the court where Jamshid gloried and drank deep."

Maybe on nights like these we are allowed to dwell on the glories of our past; we are, after all, gathered here to help support the education of a new generation of Persians, whose critical understanding of the accomplishments of our much abused nation will make them wise and gallant torch-bearers in the long, complicated, sometimes terrible, often glorious march of our history and heritage.

Author

Raised in Iran, Abbas Milani was sent to be educated in California in the 1960s. He became politically active and in 1974 received a PhD. in Political Science. He returned to Tehran and taught at the National University but was imprisoned by the Pahlavi regime in 1977. After the revolution he became a professor at Tehran University, but in 1986 he emigrated to the United States. Since 1987, he has been chair of the Department of History and Political Science at Notre Dame De Namur University. He is currently a Research Fellow at Stanford University. His books include The Persian Sphinx: Amir Abbas Hoveyda and the Riddle of the Iranian Revolution, Tales of Two Cities: A Persian Memoir and King of the Benighted.

[Rasputin]

Based on the Alien Torts Claims Act (ATCA), it may be possible for Iranian plaintiffs to file suit and seek monetary damages for human rights violations (such as torture) experienced in Iran. The Alien Torts Claims Act allows “non Americans to sue for human rights abuses in U.S. Courts.” See: Center for Constitutional Rights, www.ccr-ny.org.

In 1979 Rhonda Copelon and Peter Weiss, attorneys at the Center for Constitutional Rights, used ATCA to litigate Filartiga v. Pena-Irala – a landmark human rights case with a $10.4 million dollar judgment awarded for the torture and murder of Paraguayan 17 year old Joelito Filartiga.

The following information regarding filing of such international human rights claims (under ATCA) is based on a guide published by Jennifer Green and Beth Stephens at the Center for Constitutional Rights, “An Activists Guide: Bringing International Human Rights Claims in United States Courts”.

To file a claim, there must be a gross violation of international human rights law (such as torture). If the suit is filled against an individual perpetrator of the human rights violations, that perpetrator must reside in the United States. If the suit is filled against a corporation, the corporation must be based in the United States or at least have sufficient minimal contacts with the United States to enable the jurisdiction of U.S. courts over the entity.

Direct victims, legal representatives of the direct victim, and close family members (on behalf of the direct victim or on their own behalf, based on the family’s suffering as a result of the violations suffered by the direct victim) are potential plaintiffs in a suit filed under the Alien Torts Claims Act.

Using the Alien Torts Claims Act, the Center for Constitutional Rights has filed suit for reparations on behalf of the victims of South African Apartheid. Other suits pending and filed under the act include defendants such as Unocal, Shell, and Chevron. In Matar v. Dichter, the Center for Constitutional Rights and the Palestinian Center for Human Rights filed a class action suit against Israel’s former Director of General Security Service on behalf of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip during the 2002 air strike.

The possibility of Iranian plaintiffs (whether living in the U.S. or abroad) suing for the human rights violations inflicted by perpetrators currently residing in the U.S. or by corporations with at least minimal U.S. contacts – is a possibility worth the research and investigation.

The Alien Torts Claims Act has significantly expanded the use of law in advocating and seeking compensation on behalf of victims of human rights abuses. While post 9-11 political realities may ostensibly present prospective obstacles in the success of a suit filed by Iranian plaintiffs in a U.S. Court against corporations with minimal contacts in the U.S. (or against a perpetrator currently residing in the U.S.) – judicial decisions have not always been based on the political desirability of the suit.

For example, after 9-11, in Rasul v. Bush, the United States Supreme Court held in favor of Center for Constitutional Rights, which successfully argued that detainees at Guantanamo Naval Base in Cuba have the legal “right to challenge their detention in a U.S. Court.” See Center for Constitutional Rights, www.ccr-ny.org. Information about the Alien Torts Claims Act and past and pending international human rights cases can be found at the same website.

Bahar Mirhosseini is a second year law student and Haywood Burns Fellow in Civil and Human Rights at the City University of New York (CUNY) School of Law.

[Rasputin]

The evening of Saturday May 15, 2004, in an unprecedented move, Nobel Laureate Shirin Ebadi married the L.A. Iranian community. At the public engagement party yesterday afternoon, in UCLA's Royce Hall Auditorium, the Nobel Laureate received multiple standing ovations and outbursts from a few dissenters opposed to the entire thing. The Ebadi Organizing Committee, consisting of active and well-connected members of the L.A. Iranian community, worked tirelessly like parents exhausting themselves over the planning of their adult-child's wedding.

At a private high profile gala held in an upscale UCLA conference facility, guests purchased $100 seats in support of Ebadi's Nobel Peace Prize victory (any moneys remaining after expenses will be donated to Ebadi's human rights organization). Prior to the event, the black tie guests enjoyed cocktails and hot Iranian tea, mingling among chilled shrimp and baklava like sweets on a large balcony overlooking the University. Meanwhile members of the Ebadi Organizing Committee, like the bride's best friends and immediate family, rushed around checking last minute details such as flowers, silverware, and seating arrangements.

As in a big fat Iranian wedding, hundreds of guests all wanted to congratulate the one -- Iran's one and only Nobel bride. When the honorable Ebadi walked across the balcony, in a way much akin to the procession of a bride, community members trailed after her, aggressively vying for her undivided attention, stampeding her with hugs, smiles, and the digital camera flashes of an Iranian paparazzi.

As Iranians, we are a family thirsty for world renowned role-models, thirsty for national symbols we can love. We invest in our first Iranian Nobel Laureate our sense of pride -- even after she sobers us with reminders that she is not a hero, that she is just an attorney doing her job. And as mortal as even the most honorable can be, in the bottom of our heart of hearts we esteem her with hope for the future of Iran.

Thank you to the Ebadi Organizing Committee, for the months of planning behind this polished party. The candles, mirrors, and flower arrangements set the ambiance for celebrating a Diaspora's love of Shirin Ebadi. Like any Iranian wedding, Ebadi tirelessly posed for photographs with the decked out guests at each table. After guests went home for the evening, members of the Organizing Committee stayed at the facility assisting the employees with cleaning up the left-overs of a once in a lifetime wedding.

Like with any kind of love, the real relationship begins after the hype and buzz of a honeymoon wedding have died down. The true test of love between Ebadi and our L.A. Iranian community is in the ways we will support her without a glamorous gala or cold shrimp.

Our true test of love, for Ebadi and for Iran's destiny, will be in the ways we maintain a continued support for the causes of human rights and democracy, in the ways we support this most qualified attorney in overcoming the everyday challenges of meeting our homeland's most basic human needs. Tonight, in a beautiful wedding, Nobel Laureate Shirin Ebadi married the L.A. Iranian community.