Goftogooye zaman – Ali Afshari:

“Has Green Movement Defeated?”

25 Feb 2011

11th December 2010

Ardavan Roozbeh / Radio Koocheh

Translated by: Azin R.

In the previous part of these dialogues I pointed out that we have ahead a series of discussion with the scholars as to evaluation of post-election trends and processes in Radio Koocheh . In such discussions we deal with attitudes and opinion of the interviewees as to post election trend flowed on the street like a wave and we shall analysis the matters which may be questions of many people.

For those came to streets and those chanted slogans, came together with other and now are witness of rise and fall of such wave.

Perhaps many ask where the Green Movement is. Perhaps so many people criticize it and perhaps some feel a must to support it as a duty. But is our today society assumes such critiques or not. Now it is 1.5 years passes those days, the leadership in this movement, its aftershocks and the problems people are facing can be talked.

“Ali Afshari” believes that the flow called Green Movement has not been prosperous , in his opinion such flow cannot meet the needs.

The guest of Zaman is Ali Afshari. He was one of the members of Tahkim Vahdat Central Councilduring reformist period. He was born in 1973 and is a graduate of Industrial Engineering from Ami Kabir University. He joined Islamic council of this university in 1995 and then he was elected as secretary of this Student Association for three years. He has records and background of four yeras of activity in Central Council of Islamic Association of Amir Kabir University and as its secretary for three courses and as member for five years in Central Council of Daftar Tahkim Vahdat and he has had responsibility of its political unit for three courses . Afshari was arrested after 18 Tir circumstances, went to solitary confinement and then he exited from Iran due to security pressures. He is now advisor to some active human rights organization in U.S.A and is now student of Ph.D. Course in George Washington University.

We had our dialogue at the 4th floor of this university in its lobby during a one-hour opportunity, Afshari discussed about his reasons for non-prosperous factors of Green Movement.

You are considered as one of the student activist before and now as an activist abroad , tell us what is your evaluation of Green Movement of Protest Movement of Iranian People and what do you think about its status at present ?

First I say hello and express my gratitude for your efforts, also I congratulate Radio Koocheh to provide the opportunity for such a dialogue. In my opinion the pathology is very significant and necessary at the present conditions of Iran, because some believe that when a flow is moving the pathologic discussion must be avoided.

It means its open and public pathology hoping not to weaken such movement but I believe that this opinion is wrong and conversely pathology along with the movement, while committed to its goals with benevolent aspect and such pathology is in context of the movement exaltation, is very necessary specially at the present Iranian condition which is so critical, therefore such critiques and pathologies must be welcomed.

But about Green Movement, you pointed out truly that is one of the most important events and milestone of the history at least after Iranian election and approximately during the last 32 years, but it does not mean that such movement is a new phenomenon, or a new incident not connected to the past.  It must be considered as continuation of all the opposition, democratic and reformist movements in the contemporary history, i.e. if we want to consider constitutional revolution as border between the new and old history of Iran , as of the latter date the Iranian society has been in a continuous unstable status . However some governments were succeeded to stable themselves in short term, but such stability had not been ever inner not penetrating completely in the inner layers of our society and the opinion of majority of the society have not supported it . there have been provisional stabilities that at the earliest possible time when the government has been weakened or a dynamic space has came into existence due to domestic and foreign conditions we have been witness of formation of some movements some of them with revolutionary state and some with reformist action and temporary , but all of them have been non-prosperous in creating a short term victory but they cause grounds and vital for continuous movement along with our contemporary history. The Green Movement must be seen in such view point, as well .

If we want to deal with the previous 1.5 years that such Movement raised its own mottos, it has not been a successful one, But I do not close the case because still there is opportunity, even less than the past and the probability for its success has been less, but the Movement was going to meet the people’s demands through victory in the election of the subsequent phase, i.e. prevention from cheating and convention of re-election, none of them realized.

It means that such expanded election fraud, which was going to realize the goals by presidency of Mr.Karoubi or Mousavi , was demolished at the beginning point . The series of protests which were happening during first months on streets, after descending in other negotiations and political actions, has not been succeeded to overthrow the coup-d’état government or led to re-election or change the balance of political powers, therefore despite that the movement is still moving but it has been non-prosperous as far as realization of its goals may concern.

But I say we cannot finalize the case it means that it has some achievements but naturally we cannot consider a several -year long term action as a political movement .unless to turn back to the same continuous action rooted in our 100-year contemporary history, and principally it cannot be limited to Green adjective or an adjective leaded by personalities like Mousvai , Khatami and Karoubi , that is the same one which had been at the beginning of this movement. Then we should look forward to a new event to be happened, this movement has one hundred years of history behind itself which is activated in its frame.

But as to discussion  about its pathology , firstly it was known that its political strategy , plan or platform shall not meet the needs , such assumption that the system and its Constitution has reform capacity and based on such capacity it permits [sic] , I think no , such opportunity  has not been  given like Khatami who reached the very point after several years  caught in structural dead end inside  the system .  First of all the status and standing must be clarified and the emphasize on activity in context of the same Constitution and by taking advantage of the same indices inside the system all show that the movement power has been weakened gradually. In my opinion this is the same significant factory in non-prosperous, causing that any political activity in such closed field, inevitably to be ended and reached to dead end.

Mr.Afshari you pointed out the movements before this and the attitude governing on the movement now. I have at least experience of interview with ten persons who involved in post-election trends, from the student activists to many ordinary people and citizens who participated in the protests , I saw a common point in all of them , they departed themselves from any events before .

It means that the student activist, who was from the new spectrum and faction, principally accused the previous ones for compromise and temporizing the system. And in one hand they believe that we are looking beyond this. And on the other hand I believe myself that a movement cannot be easily born spontaneously , i.e. separation of Iran to pre-election and post-election era  can be a historical gross error , perhaps led us to  find it. Why you think that post-election event has separated itself from its past?

While as you pointed out, during the last hundred years we have had a crisis similar to it, each ten or fifteen years. If not severe as this one but during post revolution in 1980s we had two cases, one at the first and the other late 1960s. during 1991 (1370) , the most important one was Kouye Daneshgah and 18th Tir, it means that on average we are 10 years ahead , why the present movement separate itself from its past without any official emphasis?

I do not know really that how much reflection on those is having such opinion in the Green Movement. The prominent opinion is people. But any way some have such idea. One is that generally each movement releases a new generation of forces bring the fresh forces to the scene, The Green Movement was so. Well they are not experienced they have no historical knowledge and since they came with such activity exposed themselves to the society they have natural intention to think that principally the history has commenced with them or see themselves separate from everything and it is not on purpose they drawn to this side unconsciously, there is a natural intention.

Second since some of the political forces wants the whole space, they strengthen such influences, it is an event with no connection to the past and is going to create new equations and tries to create such fracture. However I accept that it is a new phenomenon and is not repetition of the previous ones, but it is not separate too.

And now some people believes that they are more explicit in comparison with the previous generation, having the experience of reformist period, can tell specifically from Mr.Khatamai’s attitude. But we had previous experiences with more revolutionary and radical attitude or for instance the 18 Tirexperience when we put all these together these are existing but accidentally but inadvertently the evolution of previous challenges and campaigns in the Green movement is in its second phase not in the first one. In the first phase i.e. pre-election, there has not been such attitude basically; the street protests had not been decided to promote the people’s demands. For this reason all hoped for the ballot box magic and the pre-election phase was exactly like repetition of historical experience ofDovom Khordad reformist movement. But in its second phase those who were going to participate in election , had not think about that and had no plan to this effect , such event happened automatically and activated some forces.

Absolutely any action which is occurred and that the people came to streets , and the previous unsuccessful experiences showed that the people could not expect that the Guardian Council interferes or   the government does so , but the symbolic leaders of the movement used the same previous formulas , when they diminished the street protests and withdrew their main benefit  I think they had role in diminishing the protests and also in upstream position , in finding the government and this is the point I want to consider in pathology , a feature that the phrase monopolizations may be too much for it , but when somebody thinks he is and the flows is dependent to him, then  he is creating a new historical event.

In such context I can say the experience by which the human reached revolution, not in sense of political replacement or change , the same assumption that an individual or a group think can releases himself from the past history  and can create a new history and a new world. And human being kept distance with such view point and perhaps it is the biggest achievement of 21st century, we cannot release ourselves completely from the past with any glance to past and no utopia came into existence with full fracture from the past but we can reach that point with gradual evolution and continuous improvement. Philosophically, there is a significant interpretation and such view did not exist in the forces , and the discussion were made who is Green and who is not . Who are the most noble Green and such struggles causes a series of competitions without any reason, demolishing its potentials.

There is another factor i.e. unreal understanding of forces from their potentials, reflected to political government and changes in the society and naturally the street protests is a vital factor, but no political system is existing merely with street protests and no big political change is made neither in Iran nor the world. The variety of forces inside Iran, in its positive sense, the political movement plan did not progress successfully. Any way the status of this movement and its goals and objectives must be specified in definition of its desires. Such heterogeneity must be converted to an acceptable variety or some terminology like self-leader or the assumption that the network can do magic causing evolution all have been wrong interpretation we have no movement with self-leader.

But all think that perhaps the Iranian Sufism has created the ground for such interpretation , not leadership that  means mobilization of possibilities and resources of that movement for realization of its goals and inevitably a person or group will create  , but this person or  group is committed  to the goals set by them and giving it legitimacy . But surely needs leadership but not a charismatic leader or leader like its Sufism model.

The network is a social organizing model and does not create anything per se and in the network the partnership of individuals are not at the same level however it has expansive scope. There are points in the network with more contact and communication and therefore they have more portions in decision making and organizations. Any way there were some issues like this simulated with Feb.1978 with wrong imagination but the present conditions of Iranian society is not like that time. Also it is a wrong idea to assume that everything began with rally on Tasoua and Ashura or that Chain Ceremony [Khatme Zanjirei], but it was accumulation of previous struggles and an opportunity was provided and the forces did it . As far as its pathology may concern, the assumption that Mr.Khomeini and his supporters did it , is wrong base for the subsequent exclusive actions and deletion of other groups. And if at present some people wants to delete the other forces or see themselves in a higher position, absolutely no democracy will be achieved, from such attitude.

As a matter of fact I want to emphasize on this part of your speech, during post-election process, if want to look impartially we will not see the minority societies for instance the Kurds, Baluchs, Turks and the other who are oppositions too, specially our Azerbaijani friends who believe that they are not minority , but as to social definition , the movement was centralized in capital.

Even it happened in cities like Babol , Mashhad, Isfahan and other places but it focused more in capital if we assume that the Movement would consider those demands  and gave opportunity to the Kurds to have their own cabinet or have their own people in the cabinet , also the Turks , Balouchs, Sonnis , Bahaeii and other small societies existing in Iran and their accumulations makes Iran , in this case what do you think about the new form of Movement , would not be more flexible?

Really replying such question is difficult because this Movement specially in  post-election phase , had heterogenic and unspecific figure to present a plan , platform or doctrine and merely under general title of Green , different demands  were raised and on the other hand it can’t be said it is not possible at any level, because some of these desires cannot be accomplished at once and  need a process , progressed  phase by phase.

In my opinion if this Movement would be victorious or if we hope it will be victorious in the little time left for it , in my opinion It had not capacity for full democracy with consideration to its records , mottos and minimum wishes of its symbolic leaders and its only advantage was providing a  good introduction and  atmosphere i.e a beginning to an end and not an end . Despite the fact that Mr.Karubi raised some plans but there were not merely plans there were a series of objectives and desires and no solutions were presented with consideration to content of existing Constitution which is full of conflict , therefore I can‌not say surely all of these would be successful but since the victory of Green Movement caused that such repression and authority would weakened , surely the space would be more opened causing that the different forces attend the scene to raise their wishes and have their own supporters, socially.

But for reaching a society in where ethnic minorities i.e.Kurds, Turks or the religious minorities, can have their rights, one way is the government and other negative factor is our public culture specially in field of religious minorities, there is minimum tendency in our jurisprudents even those who are independent and not governmental would not accept it and are fundamentally disagree with any religious activity freedom for non-shiiats.

Actually we have to do works in such areas and these are not the things achieved rapidly , we have to move towards it and another factor is the same forces because in case of declaration of power , such forces see themselves merely it means that what you say is true , they had not participated and the Green Movement was absolutely a movement did not find geographical expansion which is one of its big errors , even it did not find the expansion in the society strata, any way its main axis  was the middle class , relying on it but in this part perhaps they made it like an island.

For example one Turkish activist who is seeking identity sees just that element, even if I tell some of the tendencies that perhaps their weights are not the same , but it is bilateral by some extend. For example some of them does not consider value to the factors like democracy and human rights, or perhaps a person came closes to the fascists attitudes and those wishes are important for them thatAzari language would be free and they become federal state, now it is not important that in the capital of Iran,  Ahmadi Nejad and/or for instance a democratic person is governing .

These are multi-dimensional and complex discussions but their status and standing was not clear in Green Movement therefore there was not guaranty and in the best condition , it was a beginning to the end and we cannot say to create  utopia even with victory , no and this is the same reasons that I think we must emphasize on pathology of Iranian society and to effort that the expectations in the society to be realistic , actually the volume of difficulties and different discussion in Iran is in a manner that if we think reach the utopia in short term we are in a mistake and if anyone claims so , is seeking for  Demagoguery and fooling  the people. We have to make reasonable such expectations and to find such difficult points, these problems cannot be solved at once.

May be it is my personal opinion  that we cannot think that the Green Movement shall be victorious and for instance Reza Pahlavi will come to Iran by airplane and shall candid himself as a citizen or the Bahaian wants assembly seats like the Zoroastrians or Nematollahi Daravish , do not fear any more, we reach the  point that what are our demands in the Green Movement . The consequent of our demands are the same events and points raised vaguely?

Because I think the leaders of Green movement told mottos that the public agreed that the people have voting right and have the right to know what their destiny is. Even you may see the same in the Constitution of countries whose governments are fascist and radical .In Constitution no one writes that the freedom is limited or freedom is conditional. I find by your speech that if we assume that the Green Movement would reach a phase it was the initiation of a new action that the demands of all strata would raise therein.

It is true , an atmosphere would be provided that the Bahaiian demanded for removing the discriminations, the forces would came on top of the power were left parties or moderate reformists and those who did not go on top of the power found the opportunity to convene a group or party assuming that the symbolic leaders of Green Movement commit to the mottos , because as we experience  the persons have been different before and after victory.

One of the other concerns which has not been removed yet is repetition of experience of 1978 Revolution, Mr.Khomeini promised so much when he was in Neauphle Le Chateau. Mr.Khamanei and the present fundamentalists never say we do not give freedom to the society and we want oppression and injustice in the society even they do not assume responsibility of the murders happened on streets and it causes unrest in the country and as Mr.Khameni said, no government is silent towards unrest, but he says practically we forced and they did force us.

But for reaching a society in where ethnic minorities i.e.Kurds, Turks or the religious minorities, can have their rights, one way is the government and other negative factor is our public culture specially in field of religious minorities, there is minimum tendency in our jurisprudents even those who are independent and not governmental would not accept it and are fundamentally disagree with any religious activity freedom for non-shiiats.

With consideration to the fact that in our society there is no mechanisms to dismiss the one who is elected, and dismissal of persons is more important that their election, Popper says “right of dismissal in democracy is more important than election right”. Green Movement was not going to change structure with the same glance of symbolic leaders, there is risk in context of existing structure, Whether Mr.Karoubi and Mousavi and their supporters acted beyond expectations and lowered the risk but it is not ruled out. One of the points is that confidence to individuals and groups and their promises must not be a base. We have no sacred person without motive. Therefore it is better to emphasize on plans and systems promised by that flow. There is vacuum in Green Movement which is still continuing, these generalities would not reach us to anywhere, we have tested it repeatedly.

Now the black who are living in U.S.A are those who were killed when walking on the streets alone50 years ago  and in the society where its minimum external signals is land of democracy , the people were killed and nobody was accused for.

The Green Movement has been started and is product of former incidents rooted in 100 years ago or confederation of 1968 or even theCherikhaye Fadaei Khalgh, Communists and Socialists and the other who played a role . Perhaps when many of us look at the history , indebted power of Ayatollah Khomeini to the left parties of Iran who strongly supported him caused to find a standing and there were not merely the religious who supported him in 1978 , the year that social and political spaces is more open than ever.

We take that the Green Movement has created certain changes in the frame , whether victorious or not , I feel we are dealing with system collapse , according to the historical experiences, the systems reach the borders on their ending lines to arrest anyone who talks , any‌one who protests , no one can talk and everything has political aspect .severe growth of charges , and the tax issue all are among our problems of today-society. With such introduction, whether the system shall continue with or without green Movement , do you think that we are witness of collapse inside the system?

In my opinion the status of the system is critical and such crisis shall continue. Even there is probability that based on such frictions, clashes and internal reactions, it would be ended and the crises reach the uncontrollable border. Necessarily it is not so that the system termination and ending must be on behalf of the external forces. If the system can‌not gather the security and police emergency state in short term and give political aspects to its presence and survival , it can‌not absolutely continue.  This is the principle seen in all the civilizations and societies,  the officials  note it and are  seeking for formulas to empty the prisons, they do these as inevitable tasks not in sense of selected policies they want to promote themselves.

The second issue is that it can‌not control the competitions, disputes and domestic conflicts in context of a totality. Velayat Faghih has been the center of this system, we observe and follow these issues and we see that such stand has been weakened so much. One of the achievements of Green Movement is weakening such stand and Mr.Khamenei personally has been weakened after election and his speech is  not more  effective as in the past , disobedience is not specific to the left faction and the present reformists. Some of the members of right faction do the same. Like Assembly and government of Ahmadi Nejad.

The policy followed by Ahmadi Nejad making it separate from the other sections of the governmental the fundamentalists faction, makes divergence inside the system making it out of control led to collapse. Especially when we are witness of many crises in the society. We have economic problems, our foreign policy ties with the most tension during its lifetime. And there are no signals that they want to go towards decreasing such tension.

On the other hand the abnormalities in the society is growing more and more in the society, crime, divorce rate , low rate of marriage all show that the society is like a patient who is suffering from serious crisis. When we put all these besides each other it shows that it is possible that the system collapsed.

If we take that the system is facing to vanish and such process happened and collapse fulfilled, what the society will face to?

What we count has been a sudden case with no readiness before. But in view point of the same society, the fact is that the system has shown that it has not reform capacity. More than the present leader himself, his status is significant. Anyone with uncontrollable power without any supervision shall goes the same route as Mr.Khomeini went and now is going. There are persons who gather around such circle and find the advantages and benefit and do not want to lose it at all and the problems came into existence as you see now. Intension for exclusiveness is existing in nature of any human being. The modern governmental political systems have solution to this effect. Any‌one who is released without any control perhaps shall move towards the same side. The human beings presented formula for control of irrational habit which is increased more and more.

In my opinion changing the government and changing Constitution and Velayat Faghih , is the fundamental base of solution for  future of Iran . The Green Movement showed that there is no escape from such issue and election as well. In the first phase the best choice is that Mr.Kamenini himself starts reform from top to the bottom which is the lowest cost action and the rapidest one. But when he does not so, a dead end is formed between the existing status and the desirable one and inevitably moves toward.

But it does not mean the entire story. Our entire situation is not changing the existing political system. The existing political system requires condition and not the sufficient one. If we face to power vacuum led to occurrence of Islamic Revolution experience and Reza Shah after constitutional revolution, again we will blocked in this closed cycle and can no exit . Again the non-democratic structure shall be produced.

Change is not acceptable, at any price. If we consider the criteria to accept any movement against the government and merely emphasize on wickedness of present status, it is wrong, change is appropriate but we have to be assured that the democratic replacement shall be created. It needs the same discussions in order to find which power has more talent and which power has more distance. In such discussions dealing with critique of the existing government, I think critique of the people must be made too. The people must be informed that all problems of Iran shall not be solved by changing the government; we need a long term process and plan. The reforms shall be step by step and gradually and the expectations must not be increased.

The other issue is related to protecting the Iranian borders which is sensible and needs mutual dialogue. Surely our compatriots who live in borders and who are non-Fars experienced much deprivations in these years, must achieve their rights. On the other hand we have to consider the concerns of Iranian central forces and who want to preserve the territorial integrity of Iran . Our society must reach a phase not trapped in violence and this so complex and sensible,. Revenge and malice must not be the main issues of our society. Again led to space like Feb.1978 so many people encouraged execution and if anyone wants other than these, he was excluded.

As to foreign aspects I think the forces must be strengthened who want exaltation of Iranian society, democracy and rights of Iranian people, and their opposition with the existing government is somehow supporting the case. And the reaction must be made if anyone wants to violate geographical and political territory of Iran in the region.

On one hand we say the Green Movement has not been successful by now and its leaders could not raise the actual demands , on the other hand we say the system is collapsing , there is vacuum  among these two , what happened to this vacuum?

There is vacuum and it needs Iranian forces who are seeking for change.

Who do you consider as person who seeks for change?

All forces having such motive, I can‌not judge them, all forces having concern for an advanced and democratic Iran whose territorial integrity to be preserved. These forces must fill the vacuum as soon as possible.


Then we need a new conference?

No. , we need dialogue, Green Movement has no more time and the macro movement of Iran is one who wants democracy for Iran which is beyond Green Movement. The Green Movement found the opportunity to became the newest applicable and want to achieve its demands or to be victorious in the election and to have the government at hands or during the post-election process to overthrow the present government, none of these happened , nothing is seen in short landscape. Therefore it is possible that after a while the Green Movement at such sense would have no application and we have to be ready for a new movement, it is so vital, I think , it must use the appropriate formation of that Movement in experiences of this Green Movement and the other Iranian Similar movements. We need such movement very soon, through closing the concerns and dialogue , as well.

The Oil Nationalization Movement at time of Mosadegh was so significant and inclusive. Even not covered all Iran like Constitutional Movement but its geographical coverage was more than Green Movement’s and had much international consequences. When it got non-prosperous, andDr.Mosadegh went to Ahmad Abad, the subsequent movements came into existence who respected Oil Nationalization Movement and use its certain elements. But it was not the Oil Nationalization Movement, it operated in another context. Such destiny is probable for the Green Movement.

The Green Movement is a religious one, whether we want or not , one of the leaders is clergyman and the Siadat of another is the condition based on which Green Movement is for the same reason . In the thought of our society religion has highlighted role that I can‌not see its part in the sovereignty , the fact that  a woman makes self-immolation because of his brother’s severe attack , is not related to the sovereignty but it is a cause of life style in the society, what is role of religion in this condition? What is your definition of religion in the Iranian society after such collapse?

I am not agree with saying Green Movement is a religious one. There are three types of forces in green movement. Two forces were before the election i.e those who had the identity specifications of symbolic leaders, take Mr.Mousavi , these forces were more on top of the movement and less on the body.

The second one those who had not such specification, even they had different life style but attached to the political project. The third group were activated after election, they had more radical political tendencies and they were more varied. As such if we look at Green Movement as a collection of all these it was a cross-religious movement that the religious and non-religious forces were existing therein.

If you see the profile of campaigns and propagation plans of Mr.Karoubi and Mousavi , you will find it has not much religious frame.

But it starts in religion ground, is it true?

It is true and its religious backup. Mr,.Mousavi innovated Green color initially for attracting the religious forces. The movement was not anti-religion or strange to the religion,. “Cross” is a good term for it includes religious and non-religious forces. We reach the point that the religion is a very significant and at the same time complex. Some of the problems of our society rooted in the religion . I believe that there are interpretations and readings from the religion misused by the governing system. But anyway there have been some elements that it has been happened not occurred in the vacuum. Responsibility must be assumed some of our problems is due to religious interpretation and a remedy must be thought.

On the other hand some specifications of our society has been religion which is a powerful element and our solution is existing in .

The Shia Clergymen do not give opportunity and have its own methods, even more extremist in some parts , so do you think they will accept the Sonni clergyman , with his own attitude , because we have religious history problems in our society ,what is the solution?

Religion and government are issues raised in the Green Movement too. What struck the natural order of our society and hurt the religious principle was integrating these two issues . Separation of religion from state shall help everything stands at its natural place.

However our clergies and Shiat jurisprudents are not integrated but they have intentions and simply get aloof. But they consider certain rights for themselves as to some issues, i.e. the government must observe the sharia ruling and does not take rules and policies in conflict with ruling, or they don’t acceot existence of Bahaiat in the society, the non-political jurisprudents are like the political ones , they have more radical position . Because they have Sonni –fighting attitude more than the government. All shall be inhibited when the doping is not among the power and government.

Now all the Shiat clergies have no problem with women voting right , but by 1963 all of them were strongly opposed . one of the causes the King [Shah] kept this issue by death of Mr.Boroujerdi because he had told that if such a thing happened he shall quit Ian to destination of Najaf and it would disturb Iranian society . what caused such issue? The facts of the time and overcoming the issue. There are persons who are not satisfied with this issue but they can‌not express it , for the facts of the society set them aside.

When they separate from each other, it shall go toward the natural competition of the society and the subcultures and different life styles are put besides each other. In the transition phase we need interpretations of religion justifying separation of these two institutions religiously. We have not such issue in our dominant interpretation from Shiat Jurisprudence. All of them do not believe in Velayet Faghih and his ruling, and separated it to religious and customary Velayat . But did not completely separated government institution from religion institution. They believe that the rules must come fromJafari jurisprudence with no conflict. The clergy must raise the freedom of thought scope in the society and intervene in judicial affairs.

Therefore here the religious reformist actions become important. Such actions are a belief and also life style for the persons having religious intellectual and religious modernism postulates. I think the due benefit is not merely for the movement, but it is for the society generalities helping that the transition period performed more easily and to be more stable. Because it is possible to set aside the religious flows and to decide in contrary to their opinion, in an interval.  But there is no guaranty that they do not object again and not inflict the society status.

In your opinion all these event need comprehensive and physical leadership?

It needs leadership, but a leader who is product of group and collective dialogue. No‌body can make him/herself leader.  Because it is not based on liberalism basis. But we need it in dialogues; one of the problems created by dictatorship government is divergence of opinion which is damaging. Such authority must be elected in democratic form and the competent and capable persons to be in this area.

Do you see any potential in our society members for leadership? Do you know anyone who can be leader with consideration to the needs and demands of the society?

This question has been raised by so many people. Finding such person is so difficult but I think the leader shall be created in process of dialogues, some persons show capacity. But it is possible that an unknown person can find such position. I don’t see anyone who says Mr.Mousavi can act in this regard, he showed himself during action, we have to discuss about the reason of having much little persons with required specifications for leadership. Perhaps the leadership is not summarized in one person and to be seen in more than one person.

کلیدواژه ها: , , , , ,

نظر شما چیست؟