Iran: The Green Movement and the Labour Movement (Assadi)

An interview by Gozaar journalist Mohammad Tavahori in Paris with Professor Jamshid Assadi, an analyst of political economy and member of the opposition group United Republicans of Iran:

Tahavori: In assessing the breadth and depth of the Green movement over the past ten months, many political analysts and observers have pointed to the lackluster role of the labor movement. Mir Hussein Mousavi, in a recent meeting with members of the Sazman-e Mojahedin-e Enqelab-e Eslami (Mojahedin of Islamic Revolution), stressed the need for the Green Movement to band together with the labor movement and to voice the demands of workers, teachers and other social classes. In your view, why has the labor movement failed to have a strong presence in the Green Movement so far?

Iran: A View from the Labour Front (Rahnema)

Assadi: That depends on how you define the Green Movement. If we look at it as a civil-social movement that is rooted in the public’s soaring, long-rooted discontent, but which flared up in a violent reaction to the blatant rigging of the June 12, 2009 elections and spread from there, then we’d conclude that the Green Movement is at core a wide-ranging movement encompassing diverse social groups, such as youth, women, workers, teachers, journalists, Muslims, atheists–in other words, a majority of society’s citizens.



With this definition in mind, the labor movement has never been excluded or disjointed from the Green Movement. There’s no need to wait for workers to be invited to “join” the Greens; the labor movement has always been an active component of the Green Movement.

But allow me to pose a question on the apparent lack of presence of workers among the Greens: Has Mr. Mousavi presented any strategy and roadmap going forward for his supporters whom he believes constitute the main active body of the movement, for him to voice concern about the absence of the labor class? In my view, the labor movement’s inclusion in the Green Movement is less a cause for concern than the performance of prominent Green figures in roles of leadership and providing guidance for the road ahead.

Tahavori: The question, though, is why the role and presence of workers is not visible [in the Green Movement] despite their long record [of social activism]?

Assadi: How is it not visible? Have workers at Haft Tapeh sugar factory and members of the Vahed Bus Company Union not been active in recent years? Has Mansour Osanlou, the president of Vahed Bus Company Union’s executive committee and one of Iran’s most prominent trade activists, ceased his resistance for a single moment in the past few years?

Let me offer some examples of labor movement activities during Esfand 1388-Farvardin 1389 [February-March 2010]. In this period, workers at Simin and Milad factories (subsidiaries of Qaemreza Industries) in Isfahan, the Telecommunications Industries (ITI) in Shiraz, Qaemshahr Textiles in Mazandaran, Alborz China in Qazvin, as well as workers in several other cities convened and staged demonstrations protesting unpaid wages in front of the Governor’s office and other official institutes in their districts.

Also bear in mind that the persecution of trade activists has continued during this period --- Homayoun Jaberi and Qolamreza Khani, two Tehran Bus Company Union members, are two examples. The elected representative of Kian Tires has also refused to sign a letter of agreement with the Ministry of Labor. These are cases that have occurred in the last 40 days --- I can cite more!

Tahavori: Actually, that’s just the question: with such a shining record, why does the labor movement play such a weak role in the Green Movement?

Assadi: The point is that when the movement takes on a social and civil form, the primary, national slogans replace the demands of specific groups, including trade unions. This is not a bad thing.

Like the student, women’s, and teachers’ movements, the labor movement has embraced the common demands and slogans of the past ten months. Given the conditions of this struggle, instead of articulating group-specific demands, workers have also voiced these public demands. This is why we don’t hear worker-related slogans chanted during Green protests.

Do young people --- who comprise the large part of this movement --- voice slogans for student demands? Do women, who have been frontrunners in popular movements in the past 30 years, chant slogans for gender equality? These groups founded the Green Movement, without raising their group-specific demands at this point in time. This is a plus, not a minus --- that the labor movement not focus on exclusive demands and instead, alongside other social movements, champion the mantra of seeking freedom for all Iranians.

Of course, the process of prioritizing demands and slogans is not limited to the Greens in Iran. All over the world, when a social movement emerges and takes shape, the common denominator of demands --- namely: freedom, justice, democracy, human rights --- become pivotal. In Poland, labor unionists were the pillar of the struggle, but they did not elevate their trade demands above the public’s common demands. Indeed, the strength of social movements lies in the fact that group demands give way to core national demands.

Tahavori: I don’t think anyone is saying workers are not a part of the Green Movement. A look at the list of "Green martyrs" reveals the names of workers among them. But looking at the picture from another angle, we see that workers could have played a stronger role. For instance, consider that the neighborhoods where “Allah-u Akbar” (God is great) was chanted at night, such as Shahrak Qarb and Ekbatan, were actually not working-class districts. Besides, the main question is: how can the Green Movement foster stronger ties with social classes across the board -- including the labor class?

Assadi: To answer your question, allow me to note two things. First, the Green Movement, like mass movements everywhere, because it is a social and civil movement, has not chosen group-specific demands as the banner for its struggle. As I mentioned, I believe this is a strength of the movement, not a weakness.

Now to the second point: before inviting workers to join in the movement, Mr. Mousavi must clarify what way forward he is proposing. Let’s imagine no worker so far has been involved in the Green Movement: on what account must they heed Mr. Musavi’s call to join the Greens? What strategy has Mr. Musavi put forth on the kind of presence the labor movement should display within the Green Movement? What strategies has he proposed for those who do currently support him, for that matter?

Say workers do join the movement at Mr. Mousavi’s behest. Great—what’s the next step? Let’s say workers not previously involved in the Green Movement now join the ranks of supporters of the wartime prime minister. The invite is not to drink tea—what are they supposed to do? Should they, as Mr. Mousavi proposes in his Nourouz message, take up the path of “patience and perseverance” at their factories and workshops? Or, as he has suggested elsewhere, should every worker transform himself into a local “leader” for the movement? If that’s the case, why not leave the choice of whether to participate or not, or how to participate, in the movement up to these “autonomous leaders”?

My point, in effect, is that before we start thinking about the nature of the involvement of various groups in the Green Movement, we must think about the leadership of such a social movement. As long as the movement’s leaders and strategies are unclear, there can be no talk of getting various groups in society to actively take part in it and fight for its victory.

Additionally, Mousavi, Karroubi and Khatami are mistaken in thinking they can reduce the costs of the current struggle by venerating Ayatollah Khomeini and the [Islamic Republic] constitution. Of course, if they truly believe in such values, I’m not suggesting they forsake their beliefs. They are entitled to their view, and every person fights for the ideals that he believes in.

The point, however, is that for the regressive-minded ruling clique, the sole qualification for remaining a “regime insider” is loyalty and unconditional surrender to the hardliner Guards and Ayatollah Khamenei (which of them controls the other is another story!). By this token, there is not much difference between Mousavi and Karrubi, who openly declare their loyalty to Khomeini’s ideals and the Islamic Republic’s constitution, and diaspora opposition groups such as Reza Pahlavi, the Shah’s son, or the United Republicans of Iran.

Who has treated the establishment, the constitution, and the Supreme Leader more respectfully in these years than Mr. Khatami? What was his fate? An important point to note is that these [Reformist] statesmen’s lovely words—although they show commendable resistance and deserve appreciation—are not enough; they must break existing taboos with outspoken courage and thus fulfill their roles as the movement’s true leaders by guiding the way forward.

Tahavori: Mr. Mousavi says this year the Green Movement must focus on attracting the labor and teachers’ movements and other social classes. Isn’t that showing leadership and setting a general path for the movement?

Assadi: That’s not leadership; that’s stating the obvious. The role of a leader is to mobilize and organize forces, set effective strategy and provide a plan for the struggle. A leader who strategizes and guides the way, says, for instance, “People, we will march on so-and-so date to state our demand and nonviolent mission for free elections. If the government does not respond, we will increase our demands in the next demonstration.”

To claim that the Green Movement must bond with other movements but to leave it vague that after such bonding takes place, who does what and which strategies will be implemented, is certainly not leadership. In circumstances of severe repression, lovely words appear to symbolize resistance and courage, but they are insufficient and will never lead the movement to victory.

Tahavori: As a political activist and an economist, what strategy would you suggest the labor movement should follow?

Assadi: I’d need more time to answer that! But I can say that under the present conditions, the labor, students, and women’s movements will never achieve their demands until they part ways with the tyranny of the ruling regime. As long as the balance of powers are titled to the advantage of corrupt and dictatorial hardliners, no social demands will ever be met.

The labor movement is no exception. Today, workers are up against a regime that is unresponsive and ignores the wants of its people.

Let me add a last point. A vital condition for the success of the Greens is for them to impose the rules of the game on their opponent. They will lose the game if resistance figures continue to self-censor based on the pretext of “lessening the toll of the struggle”--to the point that they refrain from naming specific names in the dictatorial regime. Aren’t these leaders tired of having to prove to the regime’s ruling bullies day after day that they do not oppose the Islamic Republic and its constitution, and that they are not foreign stooges?

Tahavori: The question remains, how can workers continue the struggle at present? As you mentioned, the labor movement has been quite active in recent years. But due to the government’s fears that the Green Movement will return to the streets, workers and teachers will no longer be allowed to have their own peaceful protests. It even seems improbable that the state-sponsored march for Labor Day, which was organized by the Workers’ House [the official labor unions] every year, will be held this year.

Assadi: That’s a great question and it reflects what I’ve been saying. Your question illustrates the fact that while the balance of power rests with the hardliners, workers will not even be able to celebrate May Day—much less have the freedom to form unions to protect their rights and receive their wages on time!

In any case, I believe all defenders of freedom should march on May Day to demand freedom and to symbolically show their support for the demands of workers in the framework of the larger struggle for democracy. The first of May, May Day (International Labor Day), should be recorded in history as another successful day for the Greens, even better than Nov. 4 and Student’s Day … why not!

It is also important for the Iranian diaspora to mark this day. They should work to raise awareness among international labor organizations about the widespread repression of workers in Iran, and thereby give Iran’s labor movement hope for a better tomorrow.

Mousavi: "Can Repression & Brute Force Solve Iran's Problems?"

Green Voice of Freedom summarises yesterday's meeting between Mir Hossein Mousavi and the reformist Mojahedin of Islamic Revolution party. Khordaad 88 also has a version:

Mousavi said that the Islamic Republic is facing problems “far deeper” than the widespread street protests, and cannot simply be resolved by putting an end to the protests.

“Our [Islamic] system is facing problems and its manifestation is not limited to the protests on the streets. The issues and problems are far deeper than this. One of them is that the state believes that by ending the street protests the protesters’ concerns are [also] resolved.”

The Latest from Iran: Dialogue or Conflict? (9 April)

The former prime minister said during the meeting that all the things that give legitimacy to a state are being “destroyed” in Iran. “Regimes normally use brute force (police, military and security forces) in the end to survive at any cost, but this is happening in our country and this is cause for great thought and attention,” he added.



Mousavi stressed the issue of lies and deceptions in all levels of the state. “The issue of lying has become our main concern and people have an objection towards it,” Mousavi said. “It has created mistrust amongst people towards the very base of this troublesome system and [has created doubts] towards their beliefs. Ethical issues, foreign policy, widespread corruption, etc, these have all created a sense of mistrust towards authorities and the state.”

“Is this problem solvable through repression and using brute force?” Mousavi asked.

During the meeting, the 2009 presidential candidate told the members of the reformist party, “The current situation has totally disrupted the flow of investment into the country because the future has become unpredictable unlike a society like that of Japan’s where the history of investment in certain families is more than two centuries old.”

Mousavi stated that the quick-return of interest [profit] had become the target in Iran because “there is no hope for the future and due to the current condition, no one is seeking to invest in production, in the long-term and in creating long-lasting jobs. Doesn’t the continuation of the current conditions mean more unemployment and poverty?”

Mousavi pointed out that despite the government’s massive spending; Iran was actually far behind in attracting foreign investment: “Is this not a catastrophe?”

On the issue of the current dispute between Ahmadinejad and the Parliament over the government’s proposed subsidy cuts, Mousavi said that the main source of dispute was about the government’s permission to spend around $1 million to buy votes in the rigged June election. Mousavi stated that the sense of mistrust towards the regime was “eating the system and making it void from within.”

According to the popular reformist politician, the misuse of religious and revolutionary values by authorities was playing an important role in portraying an unreal image of Islam, Imam Khomeini, and the Revolution.
Mousavi criticised the violent behaviour of security forces towards people who had recently gathered near the Orumiyeh Lake [in Azerbaijan] protesting the drying of the lakebed as a result of wrong government policies. Mousavi said, “Can all problems be resolved through [increasing] security and militarisation? They want to run the system with the rule of a certain group which is not possible.”

Mir-Hossein Mousavi told those present, that he would even accept the fraudulent results of the 2009 presidential election if the current rulers possessed a “relative efficiency” in running the country: “But we don’t even have this. For instance the government is unable to even carry out an [oil] project in Assaluyeh, and there is a problem in foreign policy every day and the situation is becoming more critical. The nuclear case in the past year is the best example for this.”

Mousavi said that even those currently in power in Iran lack any consensus and asked, “What does this show?”

Once again, Mousavi stressed the importance of the full implementation of the Iranian Constitution as a main demand of the Green Movement. “Many articles of this constitution which guarantee the rights of the people have been forgotten,” Mousavi said. He added:

If these are brought about well enough, an overall consensus will be reached within the movement. The base for any change in society is an idea and this idea has been created in our society and the will for change and amendment has become widespread. The people must be warned that the interests of a few in certain bodies is not allowing for them to easily surrender to the demands of the [Green] Movement and the nation.

On the future of the Green Movement and its activities, the wartime prime minister said, “We must bring about and redefine clear ideas and spread them through resisting and steadfastness and finding ways of working in a more organised way. The regime and state should be told that the least costly way for governing the country is the free activity of groups, media, associations and civil society, not confronting them.”

Mousavi called for more links between the different social groups inside the Green Movement and said that the goal of the movement was to create a better life for everyone, especially more impoverished and vulnerable sectors of society. He defended the rights of workers and teachers and acknowledged their important roles in Iranian life.

Mousavi also urged authorities to return to the Constitution, to remove the current security and military atmosphere in the country, and to open up. “If they do not choose this path, we will be forced to stand firm,” Mousavi said, expressing hope that authorities would return to the path of sanity as soon as possible:

We must stand firm until the issues and problems are resolved. The people have paid a heavy price during this period and they are used to paying such prices because they have great and righteous aspirations. You can see how prisoners have become the champions of the people and how they are welcomed [upon their freedom] and this is a sign of the ineffectiveness of these actions in confronting the [Green] Movement and the people’s demands.

Mousavi concluded with a call for the full usage of the capacity of political parties and an expansion of their activities. He also invited them to issue statements and analyses and to be in constant contact with the people for a “better tomorrow”.

Iran Document: Mousavi Meeting with Reformists (5 April)

From Parleman News, translated by Khordaad 88:

Mir Hossein Mousavi, the Prime Minister during the holy defense [Iran-Iraq War of 1980-1988], viewed the main cause behind the events following the election as the perspective that recognizes only one school of thought and one party and denies the collective wisdom. He further renounced depictions that the State Television broadcast about the departed Imam [Khomeini] and viewed them as ruining the fundamentals of the establishment: “State TV despoils the doctrine and behavior of the departed Imam Khomeini. This is exactly what foreign news agencies do.”

Iran Snap Analysis: Playtime’s Over
Iran Document: Rafsanjani Meets the Reformists
The Latest from Iran (6 April): Challenge Resumes

According to reports of Parleman News Agency, members of [the reformist Parliamentary coalition] Committee of Imam’s Path visited Mir Hossein Mousavi as part of New Year rituals.


At the introduction of this session, the most senior member of the committee, Mr. [Mohammad Reza] Tabesh, congratulated Mr. Prime Minister for the new year, and hoped that the new year would be a year of blessing for the great nation of Iran, families of martyrs, devotees of the Islamic Revolution and victims of the election aftermath.

Mr. Tabesh continued, “Last year, the nation of Iran defended the achievements of the revolution with their magnificent participation in the election, but unfortunately the government did not respond to them in the way they deserved. The government did not make a good deal with the nation.”

He then alluded to the name "Path of Imam" that minority opposition group of reformist delegates had adopted for their committee, and added: “As the members of Path of Imam committee in the parliament we should be informers, missionaries of Imam’s thoughts and views, and the path he had laid out.”

He further added: “Unfortunately, today the picture that Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting Corp. depicts of Imam [Khomeini] is a great misdeed towards Imam. Biased broadcasting of selected parts of Imam’s statements taken out of their original time and context makes the younger generations ask whether this is really how the "great" Imam [Khomeini], whom they have heard so much about, is.

Tabesh acknowledged Mr. Mousavi’s lengthy time of public of service as the Prime Minister during the leadership of Imam Khomeini, and requested that as one of companions of Imam, he would talk about Imam’s way of life, and strategies that Imam employed to balance the power and manage governance of the country.

As the meeting continued, Mr. Mousavi too, gave New Year's congratulations to the members present and wished greatness for the great nation of Iran. He continued with some of his memories from his time as Prime Minister:

Imam [Khomeini], despite his firm support of me and my government, he never made the decisions that impacted all people alone. To make such decisions he would consult the opinions of everyone necessary, and basically viewed such consultations as his religious duty. I remember, for instance, during those times there were issues on removing restrictions to bring rice from the north of country to Tehran and other locations in the country, and some of our friends were insisting that such restrictions should be removed so that prices would decline. In a meeting with three heads of three branches of power conceded that they would remove the restrictions though I was still against it for my own reasons. Imam heard this issue of my disagreement and said that, although he does not believe prices would decline, he orders that whatever the majority has ruled should be executed.

Mousavi expressed the view:

Despite his unique popularity within the people and despite the capabilities and abilities that he possessed according to law and thanks to trust of people along with his own accurate and apt view of issues, the departed Imam still gave the highest priority to consultations with heads of the branches of power and experts of the time on matters that impacted the whole nation. He would never base his decisions on views of one group. The meetings of the three branches, prior to the existence of an ‘Expediency Council’ ,and later establishing the Expediency Council were all results of this doctrine of Imam [Khomeini] in his governance.

The Prime Minister of Imam [Khomeini] reminded:

One of the reasons behind that government’s aptitude to solve the problems and crises in that time was due this relation that people directly had with the establishment, government, and the leadership, plus the fact that all the decisions were made rationally through consultations with the collective.

He recalled another memory:

In the last days of Imam Khomeini’s life, I foresaw major changes in the government and predicted that I won’t be there any more. I was worried about the problems that these changes would bring about. One of these problems was supplying essential goods needed in the country and so in a meeting between the heads of the executive, judiciary, and the legislative body, I proposed to dedicate some of the government’s income to purchase and store wheat. We all agreed on this matter and wrote a letter to Imam Khomeini informing him about our conclusion and seeking his ruling. He responded that we should proceed if we all agreed on the matter.

Though Imam could simply agree with our proposal, he demonstrated his dependence on collective reason using his language and emphasized that the use of collective reasoning be a principle. He always lived by this principle and so most decisions in his time were made collectively by government official in the legal framework with minimum exceptions to the rule.

Mousavi further talked about the previous year's events and remarked: “If in dealing with these occurrences, we followed Imam’s path in using collective reasoning, looking at the bigger picture, and preventing one group to dominate the discourse and the decision making process, we would not have come across these bitter moments.”

Recalling another occurrence, Mousavi added:

I remember that in parliamentary elections, Esfahan was an important electoral district that attracted a lot of attention. As with every other human, Imam also had a preference for some of the candidates running in Esfahan. Once when I was reading to him the election results, he smiled: ‘It’s OK, let them take Esfahan.’ Those in attendance appreciated how well Imam handled the results.

Imam encouraged presence of all factions and streams and did not prevent specific groups [from participating in the political process]. It was people who, by means of their vote, decided which group or school of thought took power. The Imam’s proposals for constitutional reform showed that he continuously insisted on collective reasoning and the necessity to abide by the law. Discussing these issues is a proper way of introducing Imam Khomeini’s way of thinking, his manners and methods.

Unfortunately what we witness on the state media, which is to damage Imam Khomeini’s doctrine and conduct, destroys the pillars of the system. This is exactly what the foreign media does as well. Both state and foreign media show a part of his speech, without discussing the context in which the speech was given, to imply a specific misguided image of Imam Khomeini. This results in an incomplete and incorrect understanding of Imam Khomeini by the audience specifically the younger generation. I think in this regard, the foreign and state media are like two blades of scissor which damage Imam Khomeini’s bright image.

Introducing Imam Khomeini to the public as he really was would have increased the legitimacy of the system. It is unfortunate that some do not take advantage of this great opportunity and on the contrary attack and damage roots of this system with [misguided] propaganda [regarding Imam Khomeini].

Last year’s events reemphasized the reality that it is useful to look at the past and compensate for those events based on collective reasoning and Imam’s true image –-- not the one introduced in certain media –-- as a role model.

Iran Document: Rafsanjani Meets the Reformists

From the reformist Parleman News, translated by Khordaad 88:

In continuing their New Year visits, the delegates of the coalition of reformist parties, the Imam Khomeini Line, went to see Hashemi Rafsanjani today.

Mohammad Reza Tabesh [MP from the city of Ardakan, a nephew of Mohammad Khatami , and seated to the left of Rafsanjani] said, “Although right now different issues are being discussed in the country, especially the the subsidies bill and the economic situation, we must not forget that these issues are secondary and the primary issue at hand is the stability and security of the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

He continued, “We must not see further distancing of the ruling establishment and the people. And we hope that the ruling establishment will use wisdom and foresight to fill the distances [that have been created].”



Referring to Ayatollah Khomeini’s statement that “Parliament must be at the forefront” Tabesh said, “today, I think there is an absolute need for parliament to be at the head of the country’s affairs.”

It was then Hashemi Rafsanjani’s turn to put forth his views. “The disagreements that have been created in the current circumstance, must be rectified. This is only possible with the Leader at the forefront. All other forces must move in accordance with the pivotal role of the leader.”

Hashemi Rafsanjani referred to the different needs of Iran’s young population and said, “We must meet the youth’s cultural and social needs with appropriate planning. At the same time, we must act in a way such that the younger generations know of the value and worth of previous achievements. We must not talk in a way which degrades past achievements.”

He too referred to Ayatollah Khomeini’s statements about Parliament being at forefront of the country’s affairs and recalled memories of the formation of the first Parliament [after the Revolution].

The head of the Assembly of Experts continued, “when the Imam [Khomeini] said that Parliament must be at the forefront, this wasn’t a tactical or political statement, it was a foundational statement [which defined the basis of the Islamic Republic]. Because Parliament is the symbol of the people’s will and the foundation of the rule of the people and the Imam emphasized that democracy must continue through Parliament.”

Rafsanjani continued, “The Imam believed that Parliament should be at the helm, and that saving the revolution would only be possible through valuing parliament. And in the same spirit, so through [valuing] the Imam, Leader, and the Constitution. Parliament is a powerful body which has been able to bring many of the country’s laws to a conclusion.”

He referred to the negligence towards subsidies reform in the Fourth Development Plan and called this reform a very important task that would benefit the country if carried out properly. “Surgically removing subsidies will certainly have consequences, and the greater the amount [of cuts], the bigger the consequences and the shock. Carrying out this law requires a great deal of empathy, and correct management. It must not be carried out in a way to cause the discontent of the people.”

“Saving the Islamic Republic is of great importance, and in the new year, we need to create trust in the country’s political sphere.” He emphasized, “I am gravely worried to see that those who greatly care for the system are distanced [from the system]. Considering the situation in neighboring countries, if we are united, we can create an island of stability for the entire region.”

Iran: The Clerical Challenge Continues (Shahryar)

Josh Shahryar writes for EA:

As the Green Movement reconsiders its strategy of opposition to the government, Iranian clerics are also continuing their opposition to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the Supreme Leader. Some of the strongest sentiments were shown yesterday by Ayatollah Mousavi Tabrizi, as Ayatollah Safi Golpayegani joined in for a jab at Khamenei Inc.

In the first attack, the head of Iran's judiciary, Sadegh Larijani, was harshly rebuked on his stance over post-election detentions by Golpayegani. Larijani, who is meeting prominent clerics in Qom, was told that even one day's delay in the release of detainees was against Islamic law.


Radio Zameneh reports that Golapyegani told Larijani...

...the delays in processing charges and maintained that the judiciary must do its utmost to avoid any delays in processing people's files. If external forces interfere in the judiciary and influence the judges and they fail to follow the truth in their sentencing, the independence of the judiciary will be compromised.

Ayatollah Safi Golpayegani insisted that recent attempts at resolving the problems of the judiciary and aligning it with the provisions of Islam had been unacceptable. He maintained, "All sentencing and imprisonments should follow the basic laws of Islam."

Golpayegani may sound like he is a reformist, but this is the same cleric that issued a fatwa against the appointment of women as provincial governors. He is firmly on the side of the Green Movement, however, calling the Presidential election "a grand lie".

Further pressure yesterday came from Ayatollah Mousavi Tabrizi. Speaking to the Iranian Labor News Agency --- an outlet considered a channel for Hashemi Rafsanjani --- Tabrizi said that "the issue of leadership of a senior cleric, referred to as 'velayat-e-faqih' in the Islamic Republic's Constitution can be very well put to a referendum and even the late leader of the 1979 Revolution, Ayatollah Khomeini would have agreed with such a referendum".

Payvand adds:

[Mousavi Tabrizi] stressed that Islam cannot be established on dictatorship and it has to be based on the will of the people....The late founder of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Khomeini, believed in 'velayat-e-faqih', [but] from a political standpoint he believed that it must be the choice of the people....If the Imam were alive today and some people were to tell him that due to post-Revolution generational developments in society, the majority are probably no longer in favour of 'velayat-e-faqih', and we want to gauge the support of people at this time, the Imam would have agreed with a referendum.

Mousavi Tabrizi is the secretary-general of the Assembly of Teachers and Researchers of Qom, which is considered close to the reformist movement. After the election, Mousavi-Tabrizi praised Rafsanjani's sermon of 17 July which called for release of detainees and declared that the Guardian Council was biased with respect to the elections and that people had a right to demonstrate.

What is evident from these statements is that the Green Movement continues to enjoy support from high-ranking clerics. Golapyegani is on par in terms of experience with Grand Ayatollah Yusuf Sane'i, who is currently filling the late Grand Ayatollah Montazeri's void in opposition to the Government. Both of them are higher in rank than Khamenei. Tabrizi himself is of no less stature.

As the Green Movement transforms itself, it seems thatvtheir cause will be important to clerics. The government will have to continue to fight on three fronts to stop itself from falling from the public's favor: the Green Movement, the international community, and the religious leaders who are supposedly the foundation of the Islamic Republic.