Iran has been the cradle of many advanced civilizations of the modern history covering thousands of years. Various religions and nationalities including Persians, Azeris, Kurds, baluchies, Arabs, Turkamans have coexisted on this plateau on tolerance and respect for each other for centuries. 

However, today, Iran and its people suffer from the lack of democracy, freedom of speech and association, social justice and peace and basic respect for human rights due to repressive regimes in the last century.  All the regimes within the last century have denied the people the freedom to assemble and the freedom to choose, which are paramount for a free and democratic society.  Iranian society has rarely seen a free media giving the population another angle of looking at the affairs of their country and the conduct of their rulers.  The politics of the country has either been conducted by a king or a cleric which has resulted in devastation.

The history of Iran, at least in the last century, shows that the people of Iran are not alien to the concepts of democracy and freedom; the constitutionalist movement of early 20^th century and the revolution of 1979 are two great examples of how the people of Iran turn into waves of change for the sake of their country; however, the despotic nature of the rulers along with world powers disregard for the consecutive regimes’ oppressive nature, among them the United States of America, and their discard for the will of the people of Iran for the sake of “security and stability” has led to the derailment of their democratization process.

The tragic event of September 11, 2001 has drastically shifted the policy of the world community among them the United States of America towards the Middle East and its governments.  The US policy makers are vigorously questioning the policy of appeasement of the cold war; furthermore, the important subject of democracy and freedom can no longer be sacrificed for security and stability. 

The long term interest of the American foreign policy, as the policy makers have come to grasp, relies on the democratization of the region that might lead to instability in the short-run, but will result in the long term peace and stability and as well as the assurance of US interest in the region.

The old thinking of the cold war of wining more alliances in the region at what ever cost is no longer valid in the eyes of the US policy makers; therefore, regimes, including Iran under the Islamic Republic of Iran that have been able to escape international scrutiny in the last 30 years, can no longer deprive their population of freedom and democracy.  The people of the Middle East, including the people of Iran have welcomed the new policy of the United States; furthermore, unlike the regimes in power, they view America as a friend rather than a foe.

The countries that have been under dictatorship for decades among them Iran, under the Islamic Republic of Iran, are feeling the heat of change that has been excreted by their people as well as by the international community’s support including the US for the cause of their freedom.

The American Iranian Democracy Initiative (AIDIRAN) advocates American policy towards the Middle East that promotes respect for human rights, civil and political librities and the rule of law.   

AIDIRAN is a non-political organization of Iranian-American that first and foremost

• Views the current regime in Iran as an obstacle to peace and stability not only in Iran but also the region at large.

• Supports the popular call for democratic change in Iran for a government that respects the rule of law and individual freedom.

• Views Iran as a multi-ethnic mosaic that accommodating the rights of the ethnic minorities is paramount to a future free, democratic and unified Iran.

• Views the US role and engagement in the future of Iran and support for its people vital to the development of democratic and just government in Iran.

• Views free ‘open’ ‘accountable’ and ‘diverse’ media as the most crucial pillar of a democratic society.

AIDIRAN strives to:

• Further engage the US policy-makers in the democratization of Iran to assist the people of Iran in establishing their democratic government.

• Produce educational materials on good governance, federalism, human rights and democracy in various languages.

• Publish journal and publications advocating democracy, good governance and tolerance in the multi-ethnic and multi-culture Iran.

• Promote the Freedom of Expression and the Free Flow of Information so people can have access to independent, diverse sources of news and information.

Sharif Behruz went on to assert that Iran under the Islamic Republic has become very thwarting for majority of the population who belong to the national minorities such as Kurds, Azeris, Turkmens, Arabs and Baluchis.  He elaborated on systematic human rights violation against Kurdish national minority in Iran and stated that “Kurds in Iran are deprived from one of the most fundamental right which is the right to practice their mother tongue in educational system.”

Aidiran.org

April 21, 2009

Ottawa – An Iranian Kurdish representative from Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iran, Sharif Behruz appeared before the Subcommittee on International Human Rights of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development of the Parliament of Canada to give a witness statement on the condition of human rights in Iran especially the rights of the national minorities, among them the Kurds of Iran.

Members of the Subcommittee present at this Subcommittee were Wayne Marston (NDP), Scott Reid (CPC), Mario Silva (Liberal), David Sweet (CPC) and Ève-Mary Thaï Thi Lac (BQ).  Acting Members present were Francis Scarpaleggia for Hon. Irwin Cotler and John Weston for Russ Hiebert.

This meeting convened pursuant to Standing Order and the motion adopted by the Subcommittee on Tuesday, March 3, 2009, the Subcommittee continued its study of Human Rights in Iran.  The meeting convened with the opening remarks by the honourable Scott Reid, the Subcommittee Chair. 

Sharif Behruz, the US Representative of Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iran opened his remarks by thanking the Committee for taking on such an important task of studying the human rights conditions in Iran under the Islamic Republic of Iran.  He stated that “The people of Iran within the last three decades have witnessed the worst barbarism inflicted upon them by the Islamic regime in Iran.  The international community especially the United Nations human rights body has condemned Iran’s treatment of it people more than 22 times within the last 30 years.”

Sharif Behruz went on to assert that Iran under the Islamic Republic has become very thwarting for majority of the population who belong to the national minorities such as Kurds, Azeris, Turkmens, Arabs and Baluchis.  He elaborated on systematic human rights violation against Kurdish national minority in Iran and stated that “Kurds in Iran are deprived from one of the most fundamental right which is the right to practice their mother tongue in educational system.”  Furthermore, he said that they have little or no access to educational resources even in the Persian language, and those who are lucky enough to complete their primary school will have to face the governmental screening system to be able to enrol in higher education or find employment un public and private sector.

Kurdish regions in Iran which consists of four provinces of West Azerbijan, Kurdistan, Kirmanshah and Ilam and are all to the west and north-west of Iran, according to his witness statement have been economically neglected, resulting in entrenched poverty and hopelessness which has in turn resulted in various psychological disorders.  The eight year war with Iraq in the 1980s and the emergency rule in the Kurdish areas in the last 3 decades has resulted in extrajudicial killings, forced evictions and resettlements and destruction of homes and cities, he said.  

In his speech, he pointed out to the deep-rooted discrimination in social sphere and affirmed that parents are banned from registering their babies with certain Kurdish names while Persian and Islamic names are suggested and forced upon parents. The use of the Kurdish language and other nationalities languages in education system are prohibited.  Religious minorities that are mainly or partially Kurdish are targeted by measures designed to stigmatize and isolate them. The discriminatory ‘gozinesh’ or screening system – a selection procedure that requires prospective state officials, employees and students to demonstrate allegiance to Islam and the Islamic Republic of Iran – denies Kurds equality in employment, education and political participation.

In regards to abrupt human rights violation in Iranian Kurdistan, in his witness statement Sharif stated that “The deep-rooted discrimination against Kurds has given rise to generations of activists calling for greater respect for minorities and better protection of the human rights of all Iranians.” He also thanked the courageous activism of many Kurdish and Iranian activists such as Mohamad Sadiq Kaboudwand who is spending 11 years sentence for exposing the grave conditions of many Kurdish political prisoners in Iran who are deprived from all their rights and freedoms in Iranian prisons.

At the end, he reiterated the peaceful nature of Iranian nationalities efforts to bring about peace and democracy to Iran that can accommodate their rights within a democratic and federal Iran; however, Islamic Republic of Iran has always responded to these just and peaceful calls with violence.  He called upon Canada and the international community to abide by their international commitment and “to not only continuously condemn these gross human rights violations but also take necessary measures to make sure that the government in Iran can only represent its people at the global stage if and only if it starts respecting its citizens’ rights and freedoms.”

The Committee members then asked questions and Mr. Behruz responded to their questions. You can refer to the minutes of the hearing for the entire questions asked and the answers provided.

Please follow this link to view Mr. Behruz’s full statement appearing before the Subcommittee on International Human Rights of Canada’s Parliament in English  |  French.

Also you can watch the English version of the hearing in full via webcast in  English  |  French.

For further information visit Canada’s Parliament and also Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iran’s website.

Any reproduction or publication without mentioning the source is strictly prohibited

the conference panellists discussed federalism’s potential to accommodate Iran’s patchwork of national minorities. Discussion dwelled on the issues of autonomy, democratization, good governance, and press freedom before a final debate on the question of what the future may hold for Iran

Aidiran.org

Staff Writer

April 6, 2009

Brussels – Leading Iranian opposition figures representing the major nationalities of Iran met in Brussels, Belgium for a two-day conference on 1-2 April 2009 to discuss the prospects for democratization and federalism in Iran. 

 Entitled ‘Human Rights and the Question of Democratization and Federalism in Iran’, the conference panellists discussed federalism’s potential to accommodate Iran’s patchwork of national minorities. Discussion dwelled on the issues of autonomy, democratization, good governance, and press freedom before a final debate on the question of what the future may hold for Iran.

The conference was being organized by the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization (UNPO) in partnership with the Congress of Nationalities for a Federal Iran (CNFI) and Members of the European Parliament from the Nonviolent Radical Party.

The Conference convened with the opening speech of Marino Busdachin, General Secretary of the UNPO.  In his opening statement he asserted that this conference is not to divide Iran, rather it is an initiative to bring federalism to Iran, where within such a system of governance all nationalities in Iran will be recognized and their rights will be respected, and above all, Iran will remain united and integral.   Busdachin’s words reiterated the fact that such a conference is in line with efforts to bring about a modern and responsible government in Iran.

Opening speeches were also made by the co-sponsor of the conference Paulo Casaca MEP, member of the Socialist Group and member of the delegation for relations with Iran, and Marco Cappato MEP, vice-chairman of the delegation for relations with the Mashreq countries.

Sabin Meyer, an advisor on security and international relations in Free Europe and a member of the Green who chaired the first panel delivered an introductory speech on federalism. Christin Bacca from Leden University made some remarks on decentralization and D. Karim Abdian on behalf of the Alhawazi Arabs with the CNFI and Sanim Baluch representing the Iranian Baluchis each made a presentation in this panel. 

In other panels, Nahid Bahmani, Naser Mostasha, Zia Sadr-Ashrafi, Hedayat Soltanzadeh, Naser Iranpour, Dr. Golmorad Moradi, Professor Ali Ataie, Afrasyab Shokofteh, Fakhteh Zamani, Abdullah Hejab, Syria Dadyar, Golamreza Hosenbor, Naser Mobaraki, Abdullah Mohtadi and Kazem Mojdam representing various nationalities in Iran and Aman Van His from Amnesty International and Kianoush Tavakoli from Iran Global made remarks in this regard.

Overall, the presentations and discussions revolved around the topics of continued struggle to bring about a free and democratic society in Iran via decentralization, self-rule and federalism on the basis of preserving the territorial integrity of the country.

The two day conference concluded with a final resolution mainly to appeal to European law-makers to assist the democratization process in Iran by providing assistance to national minorities voices and concerns and as well as facilitating resources at their disposal for such a political makeover.

The two day conference in Brussels in the words of many participants has been the largest of its kind and the biggest gathering of the Congress of Nationalities of Federal Iran since its inception in 2005.

March 2, 2009

By Dilan Soleimani

AIDIRAN.ORG

It was reported in the media that, Islamic Iran’s Expediency Council Chairman, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani will start a tour of Iraq next week at the invitation of Iraqi President Jalal Talabani. “The Islamic Republic of Iran’s Expediency Council chairman will visit Baghdad at the invitation of Jalal Talabani,” Iraqi ambassador to Tehran Mohammad Majid Al-Shaikh told the Mehr News Agency.  This trip will be the first visit of its kind to Iraq by Rafsanjani following the end of his term in 1997.

The new Iraq, liberated from Saddam’s rule in 2003, is one of the most famous fronts for the leaders of the Islamic Iran to advance the Iranian regime’s interest for many reasons.  The liberation of Iraq from the former arch-enemy Saddam Hussein was in fact a God-given gift to the leaders of Islamic Republic who had always felt threatened by the existence of powerful Sunni-led government in their next door.  There was lots of excitement among the clerics who viewed the removal of Saddam as a victory for their cause.

However, it was the post-invasion political was much more appealing to the Mullahs in Iran.  The Iranian-backed Shi’a groups who had opposed Saddam’s rule had been sheltered and equipped in Iran to prepare themselves – with the directions and assistance of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) – for the new changes brought about by the Americans.  Soon, the same people who had been Iran’s proxies for decades were the ones that rose to power in the newly liberated Iraq.

The clerical regime’s first official visit to Iraq visit was made by the former IRGC commander and current controversial President of the Islamic Iran, Mahmud Ahmadinejad at the invitation of Iraqi President Jalal Talabani in the March of 2008.  The Economist reported that Ahmadinejad’s trip to Iraq, the first after the revolution of 1979 “is almost certainly designed to show more than good neighbourliness.”   The regime’s officials want these trips to be a least a reminder to the neighbours that that Iran is a regional power to be reckoned with.

The shuttle diplomacy between Islamic Iran and the federal Iraq is the least expected from these two neighbouring countries with a bloody conflict; however, the political realities on the ground suggest that the clerical regime in Iran is pursuing a hidden agenda in establishing these ties that first and foremost is directly linked to rivalries between the Islamic Iran and the United States of America.  Iran under the Mullahs, according to many accounts is blamed for much of the shortcomings in the military and political stability of Iraq that the Iraqi leaders have chosen to overlook.  Even though many viewed the Iraqi invasion as a US initiative for a larger scale war with Iran, the Iranian Mullahs have succeeded in keeping the ball in US half, and Islamic Iran uses Iraq as a proxy war with US.  Iran’s other strategic goal in the new Iraq is to deal a heavy diplomatic blow to the opposition groups who had enjoyed logistical support in Iraq under Saddam Hussien against the Iranian regime.

Islamic Iran’s Terror Links

Ahmadinejad’s March 2008 trip to Iraq, though controversial in many respects, was still regarded as a customary and legitimate tour for a statesman, be it Ahmadinejad.  Unlike the loud drones in Washington and world capitals over Ahmadinejad’s trip to New York, the trip to Bagdad came as of a less surprise to many.  Even though there are credible allegations that he was among the jihadists who seized around seventy Americans in the American embassy in Tehran on November 4, 1979, and held them for 444 days, the US could do little to stop an arch-enemy head of state to place a foot in its soil. Still, it is worth making those loud sounds to unveil the bloody past of those like Ahmadinejad and Rafsanjani alike who gain legitimacy at international stage by clinging to power in Iran through terror and tyranny.

Aside from the allegations for his involvement in the 1979 hostage crisis, Ahmadinejad as a former IRGC commander, he was in charge of special operation abroad whose task was to eliminate hostile dissidents abroad.   On July 13, 1989, gunmen assassinated Abdul-Rahman Ghassemlou, head of the Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iran (PDKI), along with a PDKI representative in Europe and an Iraqi Kurdish mediator as the three met with an Iranian terrorist-diplomat delegation in a Vienna apartment.  Austrian authorities have classified documents suggesting that Islamist Iran’s president may have played a key role in the slayings of the Iranian Kurdish leader and his two associates.  In Austria, Green Party leader Peter Pilz told the newspaper he wants a warrant issued for the arrest of Ahmadinejad, who he alleged “stands under strong suspicion of having been involved.” Pilz accused the hard-liner of planning the murders of Kurdish resistance leader Abdul-Rahman Ghassemlou and two of his colleagues.

Despite the fact that there is a case that still needs to be investigated in regards to Ahmadinejad’s direct involvement in the assassination of 1989 and there is not much that can be done while he is the president of the regime, this covert act of terror happened during Rafsanjani’s Presidency in 1989 who is not the President of the Mullahs any more, rather acts as one of the most influential power-brokers within the religious establishment.  What is more promising in regards to Rafsanjani’s fate internationally are two cases where he was found directly responsible for the terrorist acts in 1992 and 1994 during his Presidency, and there is even a warrant for his arrest in one case that should lay the grounds for Rafsanjani’s arrest.

A few months prior to the end of his term, a German court convicted two men of murder in the 1992 Mykonos restaurant assassinations of Sadigh Sharafkandi, an Iranian-Kurdish leader, as well as three of his associates, and convicted two others of being accessories to the crimes. Presiding Judge Frithjof Kubsch said the men had no personal motive but were following orders. Without naming names, Kubsch said the gangland-style murders had been ordered by Iran’s Committee for Special Operations, to which Iran’s President and spiritual leader belonged. Prosecutors had contended that Iran’s powerful spiritual leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and Iranian President Hashemi Rafsanjani had personally ordered the killings.

Also, On 25 October 2006, a team of Argentine prosecutors formally charged Iran and Shi’a militia Hezbollah with the 1994 AMIA Bombing in Buenos Aires, accusing the Iranian authorities of directing Hezbollah to carry out that attack and calling for the arrest of Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani and seven others.

In connection to this case, in August 2003 a British court ordered Iran’s former ambassador to Argentina to remain in custody while he faces possible extradition for the 1994 bombing of a Buenos Aires Jewish centre that killed 85 and wounded some 200. Soleimanpour, then Iranian envoy to Argentina, was arrested in Britain on an international warrant issued by Argentina, and he was one of eight Iranians ordered, including then the President Hashemi Rafsanjani, arrested by an Argentinean judge.

Prosecutors say Hashemi-Rafsanjani and other senior officials commissioned the attack. They say that while it was carried out by the Lebanese Hezbollah militia, the decision to target the Jewish center came from the “highest authorities” within the Iranian government.  Judge Canicoba Corral has also requested the arrest of a former minister of information, Ali Fallahian, and of foreign affairs, Ali-Akbar Velayati, as well as onetime commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps Mohsen Rezai and other ex-officials.

In a report complied by the Prague based RFE/RL in 2006, following Argentina’s warrant for eight Iranian officials, including Hashemi Rafsanjani, Dr. Abdulkarim Lahiji deputy head of the Paris-based International Federation of Human Rights noted that the warrants will limit travel options open to Iranian officials.   ”Since the issuing of the court order in the case known as ‘Mykonos,’ senior Iranian officials have not traveled to European countries, and, as far as I can remember, Rafsanjani has had several trips to Saudi Arabia and maybe to Syria,” Lahidji said. “So merely the fact that the traveling [options] for the officials of a country are limited is like sanctions — like the measures against senior Iranian officials that could be put in place regarding Iran’s nuclear case.”

Rafsanjani allowed his Ministry of Intelligence free rein for crackdowns on domestic political activists. During his term in office, many political dissidents were murdered by the state’s terror machine that was later referred to as “the chain killings”.  By the time Rafsanjani left office, EU states had withdrawn all their ambassadors from Iran due to evidence Tehran ordered the assassination of Iranian opposition figures in Germany; however, the European missions were soon reinstated following Khatami’s overwhelming victory in 1997.

Islamic Iran and the new Iraq

Clerical regime’s policy in Iraq is multi-layered.  First, they are terrified that 150000 American troops are stationed at their door step that could be mobilized at any moment to fight the mullahs.  Secondly, stability in Iraq means that America’s policy for forceful change towards democracy in the region can be successful and Iran’s brutal regime can be changed through violent means as well.  So the meddling in Iraq and the assistance that Islamic Iran has been providing the insurgency with both Shia’s and Sunni emanates from this fear.  Finally, witnessing the removal of Saddam and the mergence of pro-Iranian government in Iraq, the mullahs have stepped up their diplomatic gestures to show that Iran is the real ally and the real winner of this conflict.  In fact, much of their diplomatic manoeuvre in Iraq is to annoy the Americans and as well as the strong Iranian opposition who have fled Iran to live in Iraq, among them the People’s Mojahidin Organization (PMO) and Iranian Kurdish opposition groups, notably Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iran or PDKI, a party that both Ahmadinejad and Rafsanjani seem to have deep nuisance with.

Iran has repeatedly asked for the deportation and hand-over of opposition groups in Iraq, especially the PMO (with the terrorist label on PMO, the Iranian regime can justify its request much easier) and the Iraq government has conveyed mixed messages in regards to their future in Iraq.  Recently, a policy recommendation for the Iranian presidency by its Centre for Strategic Studies was leaked to public that proposes a bolder diplomacy to disarm all opposition groups in Iraq including the Iranian Kurdish opposition groups and relocating them further to the South in the non-Kurdish areas.  This is very alarming for the opposition groups in Iraq especially in the Kurdish North, and the recent shuttle diplomacy between Tehran and Bagdad might make this proposal a real deal.

The Iraqi Kurdish Connection

Islamic Iran’s clandestine actions initially in Iraqi Kurdistan from 1991 and then in Iraq after 2003 are quite evident.  IRGC has set up an assortment of offices in Iraqi Kurdistan and now in Iraq to act as trade missions, television stations, journalists and reporters.  They were able to hunt down more than 300 members of Iranian-Kurdish opposition figures in Iraqi Kurdistan most of them belonging to PDKI during the period of 1992 to 1997.  Their offices in Erbil and Suliemanieh acted as a command centre for these operations.  According to US officials, the raid on the Iranian liaison office in Erbil in the January of 2007, which was used by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards as local headquarters, was part of a new U.S. intelligence and military operation launched against Iran to confront and break up Tehran’s networks inside Iraq. 

Following the raid and the arrest of five IRGC members, the Iraqi Kurdistan Regional Government condemned the raid and in later remarks, Masoud Barzani, the region’s President stated that the American forces who captured five Iranians in the northern city of Irbil were really after commanders of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards who were visiting Kurdish officials.  The Commander of IRGC who had fled the office a few hours prior to the raid was Mohammad Ja’fari Sahraroudi who was one of the representatives of the Iranian delegation in Austria in 1989 who were allegedly negotiating with the Iranian Kurdish leaders of PDKI, but ended up massacring them in the apartment where they held the meeting.  The Iranian terrorist-diplomats including Sahraroudi were able to return safely to Iran, with the help of the Austrian authorities, and he was promoted to brigadier-general and was later appointed to head an intelligence portfolio within the Qods Force. 

This dictatorial regime’s delegation that was headed by Ghassemlou’s executioner Mohammad Ja’fari Sahraroudi was also the guest of the Iraqi President, Jalal Talabani and according to President Barzani’s remarks “There was an Iranian delegation, including Revolutionary Guards commanders, and they came as guests of the president. He was in Sulaimaniyah. They came to Sulaimaniyah and then I received a call from the president’s office telling me that they wanted to meet me as well.”

Kurds in either side of the border have had cozy and controversial relations with the central governments.  Kurds in Iraq have enjoyed relatively good relations with the Iranian regime, and this relationship stemmed merely from Iran’s hatred for Saddam’s regime rather than their love for the Iraqi Kurds.  Kurds in Iran and notably PDKI enjoyed similar relationships in nature with the Iraqi central government under Saddam Hussein, but such support and links were disrupted after the gulf war of 1991 and the subsequent creation of the autonomous Kurdistan regional government.

The political vacuum in Iraqi Kurdistan and especially the internal rifts and civil war between various factions had enabled the IRGC and its Quds force to well infiltrate the Iraqi Kurdish establishment especially that under the PUK which borders much of territories with Iran and in fact the only direct route for much supplies needed to counter the KDP sway.  The regime of Islamic Iran had stepped up its pressure on the Kurdish sides in Iraq to prevent any cross-border activities by the PDKI armed forces. Initially they were forced to move deeper into the Iraqi Kurdistan away from the Qandil Mountains where current PKK and its Iranian off-shoot party PJAK bases are located.  Then it came to monitoring of cross-border movements by the regional parties that resulted in the partial termination of peshmarga forces going back into Iranian Kurdistan in the mid 1990s, and the eventual shut down of radio broadcast which they were able to rebroadcast in Kirkuk under the Iraqi rule.

This carrot and stick approach of the Islamic Republic can be seen by the threat to cool ties and support unless Iraqi Kurds abandon any notion of support for the respective Iranian Kurdish nationalist movement, which they have, and keep tight control over their activities directly and indirectly.  The most striking stick approach took place in July 1996, when the Iranians sent 2-3,000 Iranian troops deep into PUK territory to pursue the peshmargas of PDKI at their headquarter in Koy Snajaq at the heart of the Iraqi Kurdistan.

It was then apparent who had the upper hand in this volatile region, and the IRGC agents continued to raid the bases of PDKI and assassinate its members throughout the Iraqi Kurdistan, and mainly in the PUK controlled areas.  Islamic Iran made sure that during the civil war PUK was in dire needs of IRGC weapons and materials and such assistance came at a heavy price for Iranian Kurds who had preferred the security and well-being of Iraqi Kurdistan over their aspiration to fight the Islamic government in Iran.

Today, the Islamic Iran uses Iraq as a base to fight two wars in two fronts: on one hand it fights to gain diplomatic upper-hand against the United States to establish ties with the new Iraqi central government and the Iraqi Kurdistan Regional Government.  The openings of embassies and consulates in Iraq and Iraqi Kurdistan and sending high level officials is a good indication of such claims.  It also attempts to show that Iran is no enemy of the Kurds, and its leaders have had and will have good relations with the Iraqi Kurds while keeping tight control over its Kurdish population estimated to be three times the size of the population of the Iraqi Kurds.

Iran under the Mullahs also uses the new Iraq to fight its conventional war with its traditional internal and external enemies.  The clerics use their proxies and other terrorist groups in Iraq to dig a deeper hole for the US troops so they do not dare to think of a similar plan for Iran.  The old Iraq was a safe haven for Iranian dissident groups striving to bring about regime change in Iran; ironically, the autonomous Iraqi Kurdistan and the newly liberated Iraq turned into hunting fields for IRGC agents and the right place to settle the old scores, and Rafsanjani’s planned trip to Iraq might just well serve this purpose.

Dilan Soleimani an associate at American Iranian Democracy Initiative contributed to this report.

He can be emailed at dila.sol@gmail.com

January 21, 2009

AIDIRAN.ORG – Washington DC – The US government is often being criticized for not having an outright and clear policy towards the Iranian government.  There have been many flip-flops over the last 30 years over how to deal with Iran as an emerging force in the Middle East.  The Iranian opposition groups have repeatedly criticized the US government for a lack transparency in policy when dealing with Iran which has resulted in mixed and confusing messages for Iranian people, and its opposition.

Mustafa Hijri, the Secretary-general of Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iran (PDKI) and one of the prominent Iranian Kurdish opposition in his latest interview with Kurdish magazine Lvin, highlighted number of issues that define his Party’s policies and perspectives in regards to regional and international developments and politics.

In response to whether sending Barack Obama a congratulatory message has any significance, Mr. Hijri stresses on the existence of mutual relationship between his Party through the Party’s representation and various levels in the US government and he finds a quite ordinary for such exchanges of letters.

Lvin correspondent then moves on to question Mr. Hijri about US policy towards Iranian opposition especially Kurdish groups where he responds by stating that in fact US is lacking any clear cut policy towards the Iranian government let alone the opposition.  “Through the course of Bush’s presidency we have witnessed many warnings and change of policies; however, to date, the US has not clearly declared what it will do with Iran, so it lacks any transparent policy towards Iranian and Kurdish opposition.”

Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iran is the founder and the back bone of the Coalition of Iranian Nationalities called ‘Congress of Nationalities for Federal Iran’ and Mr. Hijri believes that along with an expanding policy for the coalition, the main objective are to introduce the coalition to international community especially in Europe and US to show that Iran is not only made up of one nation, rather there are other nationalities that exist in Iran and they are striving for a federal Iran based on ethnic and geographic composition.

Recently, a religious NGO came to existence in Iranian Kurdistan which PDKI claims no affiliation with though declaring support for this religious NGO publicly.  Mr. Hijri Believes that despite the weak grounds for the emergence of radical Islam in Iranian Kurdistan, one cannot ignore the destructive policies of the Islamic regime in Iran, especially in regards to providing safe haven and assistance to radical Islamic groups, as a result, it is imperative to give the opportunity to the moderate religious scholars who oppose regime’s policy and have no means and ways to express their opinions in Islamic Iran.

Mr. Hijri further elaborates on the policies of the Islamic regime and believes that “we should not point to Ahmadinejad or any one else in his position for the problems that Iran and its people are facing today, simply because the presidency or the parliament are some powerless pawns in the hands of the divine supreme leader.” He then goes on to state that “Islamic Republic has been holding back democratic transition and freedom since its inception; repression has increased; the economic conditions of the country despite the enormous flow of oil money have greatly deteriorated…It is quite obvious that such a system of governance will lead the country to chaos.”

He views that international policy towards Iran as a combination of carrot and sticks; on one hand, there are incentives like the 5+1 economic incentive package, and on the other hand there are threats of economic sanctions such as the United Nations Resolutions, and according to him “we still have the American military option on the table as they have stated repeatedly.  Regardless, the objectives are to force the Iranian regime to abide by international norms; however we should wait and see if the international community is willing to further tolerate Iranian bullies in the Middle East or force it to retreat.”

Mustafa Hijri is the top leader of Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan which has been fighting for the rights of the Kurds in Iran, who number approximately 12 million people.  His Party and his forces are stationed in Iraqi Kurdistan and from their bases they monitor the situation in Iranian Kurdistan and relay much of the sufferings of their people to the airways at their disposal.

The Iranian government has repeatedly threatened the main political parties in Iraqi Kurdistan to rein in the activities of PDKI.  In 1995 Iranian forces went into the heart of Iraqi Kurdistan to shell the bases of PDKI, and according to reliable sources more than 300 activists, mainly PDKI members, were assassinated by the Iranian agents in Iraqi Kurdistan in the period 1992-1997.

Two prominent leaders of PDKI, Dr. A. R. Ghassemlou and Dr. Sadegh Sharafkandi were also assassinated in Europe in 1989 Vienna and 1992 Berlin respectively.

PDKI was found in 1945 in the city of Mahabad where a few months later established the Kurdistan Republic, known as Mahabad Republic that lasted for 11 months.  PDKI has held 14 conventions; the latest being in September 2008 where Mustafa Hijri was elected Secretary-general.

PDKI’s strategic objective is to establish a democratic federal republic in Iran with the rights and demands of Kurds in Iran fully guaranteed with the federal structure.