UPDATED Iran Document: Full Text of Mousavi Speech on "Patience and Perseverance" (15 March)

Mir Hossein Mousavi's speech on Monday to the reformist Islamic Iran Participation Front, translated by Khordaad 88:

In the name of God, the Compassionate and the Merciful.

I would like to thank you for being present here. We are currently facing an extraordinary situation. It would have made me happy to see our other friends among you as well –-- friends who are currently in prison, such as Mr.Mirdamadi. [Mohsen Mirdamadi, the chairman of IIPF, has now been temporarily released.]

As a political party, you are better informed of the situation that we are currently in. You are [also well] aware of the restrictions and limitations that the Islamic Participation Front faces. In many countries, the activities of [opposition] parties and other groups are welcomed and encouraged since they provides a means for diagnosing national problems and solving them based on collective reasoning.

Political parties and NGOs are the link between the government and the public and they help to alleviate the image of the state as a fearful entity. Additionally, a large number of economic and social activities occur through these units. NGOs and other associations are a benchmark of development and progress in many countries. Even in countries where the rule of law is prevalent, these [social] entities are necessary to carry out various social, political and economic activities and educate the public. [An uneducated], populist society will not experience proper growth.

Similar institutions have existed in our society and they have traceable historical roots. We have a municipal council, which has played an important role in social preservation. For example, one can refer to the texture and structure of a city like Kashan, which consists of diverse districts with similar institutions. These organizations, funded by donation, helped preserve the city and encourage growth. Another example is the existence of various [religious] groups. In a modern society, these institutions have become particularly important and lead to the formation of political organizations.

Our Constitution evidently stresses and concentrates on the right to organize social gatherings and form [social/political] parties and organizations. Some people mistakenly assume that such organizations are gifts awarded to the people by the government. We mistakenly believe that these organizations should be shaped by the government and delivered to the people while this is a social demand and its prevalence results in a healthy society.

The government should not ban these activities. If the government did not place such severe pressure on people and allowed them to be politically active and form organizations --- without fear of prosecution --- then there would be no need to have demonstrations in the streets. Furthermore, if the government did not use such severe violence and trample on people’s rights, then everyone would remain calm and peaceful during those demonstrations. Unfortunately, over the past nine months, the authorities have been extremely violent towards the protesters and have ignored their right --- this has cost the people dearly. They have truly paid a great price in the violence that we have witnessed.

The situation that we face today, along with that of the Islamic Participation Front, are reason enough for an uprising. If the government had attended to the rights and demands of the people, then there would be no need for them to come to the streets and shout hostile slogans. The people are only demanding that their rights be respected and all the aggression of the past nine months has been the result of violence instigated by the government --- violence which has caused the people to suffer greatly.

In the demonstrations of June 15, 2009, people were mindful of their slogans as well as their compatriots’ safety. Nonetheless, tragedy happened despite the caution. What must constantly be reiterated is the sheer number of people who showed up to participate that day—that is something we must not forget. On that day, the atmosphere was joyful, organized, and peaceful and none of the slogans were hostile.

Unfortunately, the tragic incident that occurred towards the end, changed what was supposed to be a peaceful demonstration into a violent one. However, more attention needs to be paid to the style of that demonstration so that people today (as well as future generations) can learn about the very essence of the Green Movement. What needs to be highlighted is the nature and the source of the Green Movement and perpetually writing articles about June 15th can help us do that.

Fortunately, the people have kept the underlying idea and the spirit alive and over the course of the past nine months have given it considerable attention. Despite the bitter events of the last nine months, people have maintained their spirits as they were on day one, and developed the peaceful and civil aspects of the movement. It is true that we have had our ups and downs, but these are necessary features and they should be treated with vigilance.

Opponents of the movement have attempted to accuse its leaders and thinkers, like members of the Islamic Participation Front, of collusion with places [and groups] that people dislike. There have been different levels of intensity of accusations at different times, but there was [always] pressure. The Islamic Participation Front has been the target of some of the most extreme pressure, and its members have been falsely charged with immorality, which is an accusation that a nation should not accept.

We must not act passively in the face of such insults. We must maintain our balance at every moment that we [are forced to] endure such pressure. I mentioned before, in one of my interviews, that a group used to say that the "Constitutional Revolution" [of the early 20th century in Iran] was to the benefit of the British. In that interview, I responded by quoting Akhond Khorasani, who said: “Whatever we do, it will either benefit the British or the Russians. If that is the case, are we just to sit down and do nothing?” The answer is obviously "no".

We must strategize in a way that is right [and to our benefit] and stop getting distracted by such accusations. We must not act as if we are benefiting one or harming another. We must look to our own [problems] and design our own agendas. We must do what we have to do for ourselves.

One function of these allegations is to make us passive and indifferent; the other is to distance us from the people in a way that ruins the trust and optimism they have [placed] in us. We must not be indifferent and passive towards such issues, insults and analysis.

Recently, a magazine linked Mr. Khatami and the Participation Front to a terrorist from the south of Iran and to [US President] Obama. They have made absurd conclusions, obviously with the purpose of trying to prove that people like Mr. Khatami and members of the Participation Front are rooted to foreign powers.

We must stick with our values and avoid falling into their traps while stressing our core principles and our independence. We should not lose our equilibrium or resort to extremes. We want to shape our foreign relations based on our people’s welfare rather than creating thousands of enemies and losing all of our friends with every single speech. We should not be so adventurous.

One of the blessings that the Islamic Revolution has brought us is our independence and we must not lose it. Of course, we have issues with the outside world, with the United States and Europe, but our foreign relations should be shaped in a way to ensure our nation’s interests and our national security and to preserve our territorial integrity and to ensure our country’s growth and development. Our foreign policy should not be stressful and risky so that we lose the chance of having trusted friends and companions in hard conditions. We should not lose our state of balance because we are under pressure. The truth is that in the past few years the accusation of being in related to foreigners has been constantly used as a weapon for repressing and backlashing (withdrawing) people and intellectual forces from social spheres in our country and this should become clear.

We have been informed that those challenging the Green Movement have grossly distorted the truth about post-election events. They have conjured up a fictional tale --- one that they themselves are starting to believe in—and perpetuate this tale incessantly. In it, the government constructs a role for each party and public figure in order to put a spin on the truth and present events in a way that they benefit the government, not in the way that they actually occurred.

But, let us [now] explore and expose each dimension of this fictional tale. They have created a false picture of the Green Movement and, of course, they want to use this artificial representation to justify their position as well as the violence directed at the clergy and the pious. In their fictional tale, they claim that reformist parties and groups are affiliated with foreign powers. Propaganda based on this fictional tale was printed on flyers that were distributed during the 22nd of Bahman demonstration on February 11, 2010.

These so-called strategies are conjured up behind closed doors. What we need to do is demonstrate that this movement is in no way affiliated with foreign powers and is completely self-serving. We need to constantly emphasize that this movement has no qualms with religion, is aligned with the Constitution of the Islamic Republic, and is trying to rekindle the kind, generous, and just rule of Islam. I will stress that the same aspirations that characterize the Green Movement today were very much present during the fight for the Islamic Revolution (1979) and even earlier than that, during the Constitutional Revolution (1905-1911).

This movement is not against Islam, but arises from the people’s religious views as well as their aversion towards oppression. This movement was born from the Constitution --- that grand legacy, which many of our countrymen have sacrificed their lives for.

The Constitution is a interconnected collection of articles that provide a [coherent] meaning if understood together. People have voted for all of these articles. Therefore we should implement all of it together. We should not take advantage of certain section and ignore others. Doing this is against the will of people who voted for the Constitution as whole and will incur significant damage. To keep a official party from holding a convention is against the constitution and is harmful. In this situation , we should not confine ourselves strictly to [the opinions] of the elite. We should move beyond this and pay attention to other leading and influential groups. We should reach out to teachers, laborers, and all others; we should discuss the current issues with them. If we desire the expansion of this righteous movement, we should reach out to all [social] classes. Another important point is paying attention to the religious feelings of people.

We are all religious, but being religious is not enough. The strong propaganda they have been promoting in society has made some doubtful. Sometimes when I interact with religious clerical figures who know me very well, they assume that behind the scenes, something has greatly changed and that I’ve greatly changed. So I have to talk to them and calmly explain. We must open people’s eyes to the to the lies and propaganda.

Relationships with the clergymen must be expanded and strengthened, at least with those who are ready for this relationship. We must familiarize them with the goals of the movement. Some of the clergymen have come in contact with the movement through the street demonstrations, but nevertheless, they must become more familiar with it. This can nullify the fictional tales told of the Green Movement by the administration. These tales might be believed by those who don’t have access to different sources of information.

If the movement is to go on, it must publicize its goals in all sects and groups in the society and in different cities. Economic issues must be explained for the people. It must be elucidated that to address economic issues and social problems such as the high divorce rate, we must return to the Constitution and uphold its principles. People must feel this. They should not think that the Green Movement is only an angry reaction towards a cheated election. We must marry the Green Movement goals with the aspirations of an advanced and prosperous Iran.

In the coming year we must be patient and show endurance. Though absence of friends such as Mr. Mirdamadi is taxing, their presence in the administration’s prisons has had a noteworthy consequence. I believe that imprisonment is no longer an effective tool to fight the Green Movement. I have prayed on many occasions in the past eight to nine months for the administration to free the political prisoners and remove the restrictions on the press, but my preyers went unanswered. Surely people would not refer to the foreign media nearly as much if we didn’t have so many restrictions on our press and media.

If they [the country’s officials] are wise, they will know that the solution to the country’s problems is not through turning society into a military camp, the solution is in lawful freedom. If they hadn’t shut down the newspapers, if they hadn’t created such limitations, if they had left the environment just the smallest bit open for criticism, people would have left the streets empty. If they had given these minimum freedoms, the government and parliament and the overall ruling establishment would have been stronger. Of course, these freedoms create limitations for those in power, but this benefits the country and the ruling establishment, the ruling system will be stronger both in national and international spheres.

It is very sad that the judiciary which was supposed to be independent, and free of outside influence, is now in a condition where the ministry of intelligence and the IRGC [Revolutionary Guards] dictate who to arrest, who to let go, what verdicts to give … In the early days of the revolution, the High Judicial Council was formed so that no one could order the judiciary around, and unfortunately, this situation changed. It’s not that we don’t have compassionate judges, and in fact, those very compassionate and noble judges feel this oppression more, and suffer as a result. There are many compassionate, noble judges in the judiciary, but that’s not how it looks from the outside. I just hope that there is a turn in the direction the current ruling elite are taking the Islamic Republic. And I hope that in the system, there is a turn towards honoring the Constitution in running the country’s affairs, and a free environment is created so that in its shadow, the country’s problems and crises can be resolved.

In regards to the future, I feel that the movement that has begun is irreversible. We will never again return to the conditions that were a year ago. We have to value these change in ideas. I am very hopeful for the future, we must persuade people towards hope and patience, patience meaning faith. This movement wants nothing for itself, it wants freedom and prosperity and progress and better days for people and it will surely achieve these aims. The move after the election, and the election itself made the people aware of their rights, we must invite people to patience and perseverance. We must name and know the coming year as the year of patience and perseverance. A year of perseverance for the green movement to reach its aims.

Comments

[rezvan]

Good message and right to re-affirm the Green movement's religious authenticity and the key solution to the many socio-political problems being sincere adherence to the popularly approved IR constitution. This will be a disappointment to the secular fanatics and extremists supported and sustained by their friends amongst the Western & Israeli political elite. Good luck Mousavi, God give you and your movement success soon, enshallah.

[Arshama]

Scott,

Thank you for posting Mousavi's multifunctional speech, which appears amongst others to be a kind of to-do list for the Green movement.

Before entering the discussion, just a short note on "endurance" resp. "resistance": M. clearly speaks of "esteghamat" (endurance), not "moghavemat" (resistance). However "esteghamat" (or "paydari") has the very same meaning as the latter, but is more positive, as it is not "against", but insists on sth., i.e. the own right belief in front of the "lies". Perhaps "perseverance" is nearer to the Persian expression (derived from Arabic).

I beg to differ on 2 points:
1) On aims of the opposition, where Mousavi claims "Our Constitution rooted in the blood of thousands of martyrs. People have endorsed this national covenant and all its principles have to be implemented."

Here he refers clearly to the status before the elections -- it is not quite clear, if the people still want this Constitution, which has given total power to a SL to overrule people's demands, the common quandary of this stillborn "Republic" since its inception. To the putschists all principles of this national covenant are implemented, and when the SL says "Shut up" to the people, he is entitled to do so by virtue of his office!

2) In consequence the chapter "On strategies for the opposition" is invalidated in advance, because the alleged "We have to explain to people that the only option to alleviate economic pressure, reduce soaring divorce and resolve many other problems is to return to the Constitution" leads to nowhere else than the status quo.
The post-electoral events have proven in fact that this IRI does not dispose of mechanisms to constrain the powers of the "vali-e faghih" and his decision to install a SL-centered dictatorship in consequence.

I am aware that Mousavi cannot possibly demand the abolition of the IRI, by continuing to insist on what has proven wrong and noxious however, not a single problem of the actual political stalemate and Iranian society in general is going to be solved.
Mousavi may have strengthened the spirit of his supporters, but his solutions are unlikely to attract a broader public, which insists on its sovereignty as a citizen (not a subject to the vali) and its right on self-determination.

Arshama

[Bijan]

Arshama -

Interesting analysis. As always thank you for sharing. Regarding your point #1, i agree it is not clear if a majority want the existing Constitution in place...my feel is that while full replacement may be an option for some it may not be for many.

I believe Mousavi is hedging himself in some ways by not suggesting total replacement of the Constitution in order to place the country in a situation similar to the period immediately after the revolution..e.g. if the constitution should be replaced..by whom, how, when, etc. Secondly, I believe it is an attempt to bring as many various groups together. By example, in the US when the civil rights movement occurred, the result were acts which passed which in turn afforded the rights to people that they demanded. I am not an expert on the Iranian constitution and therefore no little of the process...just thinking theoritically.

I was trying to think back and do not recall Mousavi stating his support of the concept of valayet e faqih but rather simply states the desire to adhere to the Constitution....please dont hold me to this, i just don't remember. Granted this concept does exist within the constitution but is this a slight way of not confirming the concept of valayet e faqih? Is this not the central piece of many complaints against the existing facets of the constitution as it exists now..specifically to the complaints by the green movement as expressed by Mousavi? By this I refer to the circumvention/disregard of the articles of the Constitution by the SL and his regime.

Also still not seeing any "tactical" discussion from him. Is this another "here is where stand" statement while the tactics are being formulated or is this a sign the tactical piece is completely missing?

[Publicola]

As far as I can see, the speech is in itself (as such) an excellent piece of political tactics (measures to be taken to achieve one’s long-term aims),
while developing at the same time
tactical steps to be taken and
the strategy (long-term aims):

• "We insist on our independence without straying into extremism."
reform, not revolution

• "patience and endurance"
not rapid, revolutionary changes, not to stake everything on one chance/card

• "Even on the streets, if people are not denied their rights and do not face violence, they will maintain their calm."
• "People would not have turned to foreign media had our domestic media not faced so many restrictions. Were the regime wise, it would not resort to military campaigning in the streets. The solution lies in legal freedoms."
• "People would have left the streets had the papers not been muzzled and restrictions not imposed."
attempt at reassuring and pacifying the highly nervous and upset governing and ruling groups

• "our foreign relations [have to be] based on national interests, instead of winning so many enemies and leaving not a single friend with every speech."
Trying to win over relevant layers of society (business people, companies and corporations) by appealing to their interests

• "We should do our own job and we should not care for other countries’ reaction."
The democratic movement will not let itself be deviated from its basic aims

• "reviving a compassionate Islam and the Constitution"
• "Another point is to take into account people’s religious inclinations."
a) the question of religion and religious people (possibly the overwhelming majority in Iran, at least in the countryside) have to be taken into account; theology and religion have to be reformed in accordance with human rights;
b) insistence on one’s rights as far as they already exist and have been cast into the form of the present constitution

• "we should reach out to other influential groups, including teachers and laborers."
Establishing links to the intellectual and the working class, discussing demands of these two classes/social groups, supporting their demands

• "NGOs and political parties liaise people with governments"
not anly a second attempt at reassuring and pacifying the highly nervous and upset governing and ruling groups, but also formulating a sort of definition of the "green" movement:
The “green” movement is not a single party, but a grass-root movement, the members of which might be(come) active within different already existing poltical parties or might form new political parties, might form action groups, might work within already existing (unpolitical) clubs and associations or might form (unpolitical) clubs and associations thus cooperating and helping address problems/issues of a limited character

[Moussavis Rede über “Ged]

[...] America am 16. März 2010 Übersetzt ins Englische von Los Angeles Times Quelle (Englisch): http://enduringamerica.com/2010/03/16/iran-document-mousavi-speech-on-patience-and-resistance-15-mar... Übersetzung Englisch-Deutsch: Julia, bei Weiterveröffentlichung bitte Link angeben Anmerkungen in [...]

[Jack]

Arshama: I certainly agree with you on count #2, and think it likely that you are correct on point #1 as well. Having agreed that your premises are factually accurate however, I think that Mousavi may be taking the only road open to him with these statements. Do you find it possible that Mousavi just needs to buy the movement some space in which to operate? While he is fighting to get more penetration into those sectors of the populace the movement is currently weak within, he would be foolish were he to break drastically new rhetorical ground by calling for a non-constitutional solution.

It seems to me that this is one of the many internal contradictions that the green movement must master if it wishes to succeed. There is a very vocal faction of the movement calling for a neo-revolution. At the same time, the movement must remain attractive to the teachers and the laborers as Mousavi said. I don't think a majority of them want a new constitution. They would mostly be satisfied if they were being paid their salary on a regular basis.

[Arshama]

Bijan and Jack,

Thank you for your comments. Obviously I have adopted the most critical position to Mousavi's statement, which could be forwarded by the putschist government and foreign analysts respectively. The former is going to pretend that everything's alright, and the latter could ask him, in which respect he differs from AN.

Full replacement of the Constitution is certainly necessary, mainly because the omnipotent position of the SL, who stalled reforms already during Khatami's rule and is now supporting a radical political faction, which does not represent the majority's demands at all. I believe however that this replacement cannot be carried out in one step, but rather in a transitory process by setting up a new Constitution taking into account all the different positions in society and to vote on afterwards.

Apart from that I agree with both of you that Mousavi has to attract more groups of the society, and is certainly addressing them by this statement. Perhaps the labourers shall be satisfied by being paid their wages regularly, but the teachers as the progressive part of society are certainly demanding more political freedoms. I also agree with Bijan's remark on the missing 'tactical' discussion. The Green movement needs more than "resistance", it needs a political vision.

[Megan]

Arshama,

I think “Esteghamat” may also mean steadfastness.

On points 1 &2 I am in complete agreement with you.

I also would like to add this Movement is much bigger than Mousavi expected or he is expected to understand. I believe with every statement I find him more and more irrelevant. In my view with every statement or interview he impeaches himself.

I think Mousavi either does not understand the revised IR constitution and the article that gives absolute and total veto power to Vali-e-Faghih or he is not in agreement with the revision that grants power to that office. If it is the latter, he must clearly and unequivocally declare the necessity for nullification of that specific article. If he does not have the courage to do that he must bow-out of leadership role he has assumed so that another person can come forward and lead this Democracy Movement. He cannot lead on the back of a Movement that has different and all shades of Green in order to get his own Islamic Green of 1979. People have been there, done it, and are done with it.

I have not had time to see all videos of Chahar Shanbeh Souri, but the few I saw I did not hear anyone chanting his name. I heard “down with dictator.” In the past 9 months many lives were cut short and many lives were forever changed, thousands of people fled Iran to become third or fourth-class citizens in foreign lands and many are wasting away in Islamic Republic prisons. If any of my loved ones were among them, would I be chanting Mousavi’s name who still wants to keep me in bondage of his defunct republic? Absolutely Not.

[Megan]

Bijan,

I see fundamental differences between uprising in Iran and Civil Rights movement in the U.S. The most important one is that the U.S. had a functioning Constitution that had been in place for many decades before Civil Rights Movement, a constitution that had survived many wars, a constitution that gave no unelected person the absolute veto power. Furthermore, Civil Rights Movement in the U.S. was about equality under the law and it was not about the nullification of the entire system of government. People in Iran chant “down with Islamic Republic” and “down with principles of Velayat-e-Faghih”. The uprising in Iran, therefore, is about doing away with the very foundation of a failed system of government and a Republic that never was. Uprising in Iran is not about equality under the law because there are no laws in that corrupt system. You cannot get water out of stone, can you?

You wrote you did not remember if Mousavi had ever mentioned Velayat-e-Faghih. Well, let’s see. Mousavi wants restrict adherence to IR constitution, is he not? Well, Velayet-e-Faghih is part of Islamic Republic Constitution. Indeed, Mousavi by challenging election results that was approved by Vali-e-Faghih is technically in violation of the very same constitution that gives the final say in all matters to the office of Vali-e-Faghih. I am not sure what Mousavi is thinking when he repeatedly asks for return to IR constitution but whatever it is it does not pass the smell test.

[data]

Are we sure the LA Times did the translation of these excerpts? Anybody locate a fuller translation?

Alas, as has been the case for much of the past, the USG's ordinarily excellent translation service (OSC) has not translated this (as yet), at least not the version we academics suffer with via the miserable World News Connection.

[Bijan]

Arshama and Megan -

What are your thoughts on the concept of replacing the SL with a council as has been discussed by various in the past? Is this even a realistic concept given those who likely would be able to instigate such change have shown loyalty to the SL and concept of velayat e faqih?

Arshama -

Thank you for your additional comments. What do you see as steps necessary to start the process for new constitution? In retrospect, that was a underlying thought in my comments would be in the short term, how feasible would this be and is this a longer term question, e.g. as those in the generation in their 20's - 30's who seem to have more tendancy to a complete rework of the constitution and perhaps more secular views of government have replaced the current structure?

Megan -

Thank you for your comments as well. I apologize for not being clear. I was not attempting to draw a paralel to the concepts of the green movement and the civil rights movement in the US but rather was posing the question of would an amendment to the IRI constitution be a means to change versus a complete overhaul of the existing constitution. Point well taken regarding Mousavi. My opinion, and it is nothing more than that, is it is possible that while he may support the concept of the constitution as a whole and many components within the Constitution, the fact he has not, as I remember, came out and directly said he supports the concept of valayet e faqih. I agree that by default it would appear he does, but rather I pose the question if the fact he has not made this specific comment, if he in fact questions the concept...using Arshama comment above, b/c it has inhibitied reform oreinted change. Agree also on the seemingly contradicting statements..good observation.

Regards,

[ange paris]

In Mousavi's facebook, the translation of "esteghamat" is "persistence" which I find is more active and dynamic than "endurance" that means more " put up with "; persistence means "we are right so we insist.

[Bill]

Arshama,

Excellent analysis and I agree. However like Bijan I believe Moussavi's stance is one of political expedience. Simply put he has no other choice in order to keep the movement alive. To declare open oposition to the foundations of the governmnet is tantamount to a decleration of war. I believe he is looking at this from a pragmatic standpoint taking steps rather than trying to do it all at once. The question will be once the movement has sufficient power and popular backing will he follow the people's will and abolish vali-e faghih. My gut says he won't and that will be an issue later down the road. My only advice is to follow Mousavi's lead for the time being and get what you can. Going "gun ho" and attacking the SL at this point will only give the conservatives the ammunition to more brutally crack down and potentionally wipe out the Green Movement. All the best to you.

Thx
Bill