Two Choices Facing the Clerical Regime

From its inception, the clerical regime was confronted with two distinct paths. The first path was to rely on the immense energy liberated by the anti-monarchic revolution to advance progress, democracy, and independence for Iran—the very direction desired by the vast majority of the Iranian people.

The second path was to suppress this monumental force and turn toward regional intervention, warmongering, and terrorism that, for this regime, represent the flip side of domestic repression and a core component of its survival strategy.

Because this regime viewed freedom and democracy as an existential threat to its own survival, it chose the second path. Consequently, the struggle for freedom and human rights is not merely an internal Iranian affair; it is a vital prerequisite for ending the regime’s global warmongering.

For forty-seven years, a deep and protracted conflict has unfolded in Iran—one that constitutes the true battle, far eclipsing any external conflict. That is the fundamental war between the Iranian people and religious fascism.

Today, the remnants of the clerical regime are desperate to prolong the war. Khamenei’s son, who has inherited his position, has identified the continuation of war as the regime’s overarching strategic direction, using conflict as a shield against popular uprisings.

Meanwhile, the nation’s economy continues its downward spiral: one euro now trades at three million rials, more than double its value a year ago, with inflation reaching 73 percent and economic growth shrinking to negative 10 percent. Yet the clerics remain incapable of offering solutions, as they cannot curb their exorbitant expenditure on warmongering and domestic repression.

https://www.maryam-rajavi.com/en/message-conference-germany-two-choices-facing-the-clerical-regime/

Location: 8P72CGW9+V6

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Shah can't save Iran

Image
When authoritarian regimes start to wobble, outside observers often reach instinctively for the single, familiar idea of ‘the alternative’. It is a human reflex, but a dangerous one. In Iran, as the clerical theocracy shows signs of fracture and the country’s crisis deepens, some Western voices have begun to flirt with a thought that feels neat and historically legible: the return of the Shah’s son. That would be a profound mistake. Iran’s tragedy since 1979 has been that an autocracy was replaced by another autocracy. The lesson should be plain: changing the personality at the top is not enough. What matters is the nature of the state and the source of its legitimacy. Iran does not need a restoration. It needs a foundation for a democratic future. It has been argued that Reza Pahlavi could play a unifying role, perhaps as a symbolic constitutional monarch. But this misunderstands both Iran’s recent history and the political psychology of revolutions. The last Shah was not a constituti...
Read more

The power and sovereignty belongs to the Iranian people’s republic

Image
  Mike Pompeo: Iran's democratic opposition is ready to step up and lead. Former US House Speaker Newt Gingrich: The National Council of Resistance of Iran , an anti-Iranian regime group, announced on Saturday a "provisional government to transfer sovereignty" to the Iranian people and establish a Democratic Republic after the United States and Israel launched strikes against the regime. Rudy Giuliani: What Reza Pahlavi is attempting to do—by declaring himself Iran's "transitional leader"—is dangerous and will only destabilize the situation further. Pahlavi has next to no support inside the country, as he is literally the son of the man who was overthrown by the Iranian people after years of brutality, theft and oppressive rule. The Iranian people will not resort back to a tyrannical monarchy after freeing themselves of a tyrannical Islamic regime. This would be a formula for disaster.
Read more

The Only Path Ahead

Image
The situation in Iran has reached an exceptional moment. The clerical regime no longer faces multiple options or divergent paths. It confronts only one trajectory: either downfall through international belligerence and domestic repression, or downfall through retreat. Conversely, the Iranian people also face no range of choices. There is only one path—and one path alone: an organized uprising leading to the overthrow of religious tyranny in Iran . Yes, only one destination lies before us: victory . Only one path stretches ahead: a democratic revolution, the transfer of power to the Iranian people through democratic means, and, ultimately, the establishment of a democratic republic in Iran. https://www.maryam-rajavi.com/en/conference-at-the-european-parliament-europe-cannot-remain-silent-or-passive/
Read more