The Open End of Protesters and the Prince for the Islamic Republic?

The leader of the Islamic Republic praised participants in the government rally on February 22, 1403, calling their presence a 'uprising' and stating they performed 'a timely act.' On the same day, scattered protests occurred in the city of Dehdasht. Shortly thereafter, a group of 'warriors from the Iran-Iraq war' called for a gathering on the anniversary of the house arrest of the leaders of the 'Green Movement.' A few days later, the death of a Tehran University student on the way to the dormitory sparked student protests. Subsequently, healthcare workers at a Tehran hospital gathered in protest against the rising dollar prices and their payments. Although the reasons for these protests varied, they all shared one commonality: 'dissatisfaction' with the current situation, which ultimately responds to protests with political and state violence. The government of Masoud Bezgian, known as 'National Accord,' considers itself loyal to 'implementing the general policies approved by the leader' and claims it does not want to make unachievable promises. Ahmad Zeidabadi, a reformist political activist, wrote on his Telegram channel about the state of Bezgian's government, stating that it is 'sinking in the swamp of Pasteur and apparently does not know it.' Prince Reza Pahlavi, a prominent opposition figure outside Iran, after announcing that the Munich Security Conference had canceled his invitation for the second time, reorganized his political campaign against the Islamic Republic and participated in the 'Munich Convergence' meeting, later traveling to Geneva to attend the 'Human Rights and Democracy' meeting held annually by 20 NGOs active in human rights. In this round of his activities, Prince Reza Pahlavi called for avoiding 'divisive slogans' like King Reza and stated that he does not intend to create a new organization, aiming instead to establish a 'mechanism' for cooperation among various groups. In this week's episode of 'The First Paragraph,' Pouran Nazemi, a pro-democracy political activist from Iran, and Hojjat Kalashi, a member of the Pan-Iranist Party from France, shared their assessments of internal protesters, the status of the opposition abroad, and the prince's position against the Islamic Republic. Pouran Nazemi, a signatory of the well-known 'Fourteen Signatures' statement calling for Ayatollah Khamenei's resignation and a transition from the Islamic Republic, considers the Islamic Republic on the verge of 'economic collapse' and states that anyone who raises their voice and protests is primarily concerned with issues related to people's livelihoods. Hojjat Kalashi, referencing the consequences of the February 57 Revolution and the 'decapitation of newly established economic industries,' believes that the private sector in Iran is gasping for breath. Kalashi agrees with other guests' comments, stating that Iran is a consumer country reliant on raw resources and oil, which has failed to establish constructive relations with the world, and since it has no serious allies, it is under sanctions; this has led to a decrease in the country's financial resources and an increased shadow of war over Iran. This political activist, who also attended the 'Munich Convergence' meeting, considers movements such as the reduction of pressures from the government regarding compulsory hijab as a 'reactive retreat' and believes it is a sign of the government's 'armed peace.' He states that when people exert pressure and the government cannot respond, it waits to resolve some of its international issues before applying pressure on the people. Hojjat Kalashi, who pursued his political activities inside Iran six years ago, views the opposition abroad's understanding of domestic Iranian issues as 'relative,' but believes that the digital revolution has provided an opportunity for political opponents abroad to 'synchronize their watches with Iran's time.' Kalashi states that the opposition's efforts abroad reflect the voice of the Iranian people on a global scale to achieve a capable structure for advancing the struggles of the Iranian people. Regarding the 'wishful thinking' of Bezgian to the crisis of confrontation between Iran and the US, Pouran Nazemi, who has been arrested multiple times for her political activities, criticizes the general state of the opposition, stating bluntly that no one is in their rightful place based on merit. Nazemi, lamenting the 'hero-worship' in Iranian society, accuses the media of failing to maintain 'neutrality,' saying, 'Some media have silenced the voices of activists inside under the pretext of our security. We welcome it ourselves; it is our choice; why are you upset?' She points out that some believe that friends and compatriots outside the country should be the voice of the people inside. Nazemi believes that having Prince Reza Pahlavi as the leader of the opposition is contradictory because, according to this political activist inside the country, the Iranian opposition is not just monarchists and royalists. She adds that among Iranians, there are those who oppose the Islamic Republic, oppose the hijab, and oppose religious governance, but they make money through the legal loopholes of this country and spend it elsewhere. She believes that 'neither Prince Reza Pahlavi nor the republicans' have done their jobs correctly; because, according to this opponent of the Islamic Republic, during the forty-eighth session of the Universal Periodic Review of the Human Rights Council, where Gharibabadi, the Deputy for International Affairs and Legal Affairs of the Iranian Foreign Ministry, was present, none of these factions made efforts to condemn the Islamic Republic again. In response to Nazemi's criticism, Hojjat Kalashi speaks about the 'leadership' role of Prince Reza Pahlavi. According to him, the former crown prince of Iran 'has taken on the leadership of the revolution in response to the demands reflected in the slogans of the prince's supporters inside Iran.' Kalashi, referring to his experience at the 'Munich Convergence' meeting, states that among republicans, there are those who have concluded that the most democratic figure who can advance the struggles of the Iranian people is Prince Reza Pahlavi. According to this political activist, 'They believe that with Prince Reza Pahlavi, they can reach a point where they can freely choose the form of government.' Kalashi does not consider the former Shah's stance on using titles like 'Javid Shah or King Reza' as limiting for royalist supporters and states that it is natural for the royalist movement to act according to its beliefs. A member of the Pan-Iranist Party considers public acceptance as 'a prerequisite for victory' and believes that this is expanding for Prince Reza Pahlavi. When asked how much Prince Reza Pahlavi is relying on foreign powers for political changes in Iran, he says, 'He is one of the few politicians who has no expectations from foreigners.' He adds that some European and American countries are seeking to weaken the Islamic Republic as much as possible and negotiate with it when it is weakened. According to the founder of the Iran Constitutional Organization, they want to 'extract the teeth of the Islamic Republic, which include military weapons, enrichment facilities, etc., essentially taking the assets of the Iranian nation from this government.' Kalashi states that Prince Reza Pahlavi wants to remind these parties that the issue cannot be resolved through negotiation and that the Iranian people will not accept such deals. Regarding Prince Reza Pahlavi's trip to Israel amid the Islamic Republic's conflict with this country and Israel's military threats against Iran, he states that this trip occurred before military tensions, and the prince did not make any requests to the Israelis but wanted to convey that the existing conflict is not a conflict between the Iranian nation and Israel but one imposed by the Islamic Republic, and it is natural that if the Islamic Republic is not present, Iran, Israel, and all regional countries can have reasonable relations based on national interests. Hojjat Kalashi states, 'Prince Reza Pahlavi has explicitly stated that he opposes any military attack on Iran and does not see war as a solution.' According to him, Prince Reza Pahlavi has always stood outside the groups for the past twenty years and has tried to create harmony, but two years ago he entered the 'Mahsa Charter,' and that hypothesis failed. This political activist, referring to the change in Prince Reza Pahlavi's political approach, states that he cannot delay actions based on the idea that society wants more people to cooperate. The best course of action is to negotiate while moving forward. Pouran Nazemi, referring to the guest's comments about the 'Mahsa Charter,' states that the choices were not the right ones; at least it was expected of the prince to specify everyone's duties; this problem still exists. That was a small group; now it is on a larger scale. Nazemi believes that 'supporters of the government' and even the 'gray class' have interests, and if a framework is not established based on the interests of all groups and they are not spoken to in their own language, protests will never lead anywhere. She again refers to Hojjat Kalashi's comments about the 'national legitimacy' of Prince Reza Pahlavi, criticizing the lack of communication between the last Shah's son and opponents, stating that along with a group of protesters, they tried to communicate with the prince through various networks, but this was not possible; 'He does not want to or does not know what to do; how can one act without looking inside?' This political activist believes that the opponents, contrary to the government, do not have a plan or scenario. Hojjat Kalashi emphasizes that an established government with a specific budget cannot be compared to the opposition, stating that the opposition should not have a program in all areas. The opposition must have a program for its own victory. This Pan-Iranist political activist considers the current model as 'defeating the 57 Revolution' and states, 'The prince is in contact with Iran, and if someone is not in contact or their message has not reached, do not assume that communication with Iran has been cut off.' The weekly program 'The First Paragraph' is produced in collaboration with Benjamin Sadr and Shahram Abedini and is broadcast live every Wednesday at 8:30 PM Iran time on Radio Farda. To participate in this program, send us a message or your contact number via the ID @fardagram on Telegram so we can contact you.