Letters

Write for The Iranian Editorial policy

Tuesday
April 24, 2001

Bad blood

I don't understand how a bad sophomoric joke about Reza Pahlavi ["Not without my mom"] can escalate into so much bad blood and personal attack on both sides ["Nothing to hide" vs. "Taste of your own medicine"].

On the one hand, there's a threat to expose the alleged personal life of Ms Sabety, which is nobody's business except Ms. Sabety. On the other hand, everyone who dares to defend the monarchy is an agent of SAVAK!

Isn't it time that we grow up a little bit and don't judge everything as black and white? I don't intend to get into the personal attacks of Kerman01 who shows his sick mind and immaturity beyond hope.

However, I would like to add a few comments to the bitter and somewhat personal attacks that Ms Sabety levied on the Pahlavis such as ".... holding Pahlavi regime entirely responsible for the culture of corruption and hypocrisy that led to revolution" , "... vulgar arrogant behavior of the member of the clan", "... corrupt church of Ashraf Pahlavi" or "... Pahlavi does not even like to pay his own dinner bills".

These statements are either personal attacks or they indicate more than a casual closeness and association with the Pahlavi family. And if that is the case, I would love to hear more!

I am not a defender of the Pahlavi regime at all. As a matter of fact, I think the only good outcome of the revolution was the overthrow of the monarchy. We definitely paid a very high price, but now let's keep that old fashioned type of government, which is even under the best situation, subject to corruption and abuse, out of our national psyche.

And I hope Reza Pahlavi also comes to his senses and forget about dreaming about the so-called "glorious" past. Once and for all, to both supporters and diehard enemies of the Pahlavis; remember that the Pahlavi dynasty is dead, and in no time in our history has an overthrown dynasty ever been revived to regain power.

We may have a monarchy in the future. However, more likely it would be a Khamenei dynasty, Rafsanjani dynasty or an army general. The likelihood of another Pahlavi coming to power is next to nothing.

Having said that, I wonder why there is so much animosity toward an inconsequential figure as Reza Pahlavi. I know he is not our enemy anymore or at least he is not Enemy Number One. We still talk about the murderous Shah and SAVAK and torture of innocent people that happened over 22 years ago but barely touch on the tens of thousands of young Iranians who have been murdered in Khomeini's prisons; teenage girls who were raped before execution.

And if you want my opinion, it is very simple: We are no longer scared of the Shah and SAVAK, rather it is the Islamic Republic's security and spy network that scares the hell out of us.

The semi-autonomous presidency and election system that we have at present is still much better than the presidency for life in Iraq, Egypt, and Syria or the coup after coup in Pakistan or the corrupt monarch in Kuwait or Saudi Arabia. The system in Iran will either gradually evolve or it will change with much more violence than before to get rid of the existing monarch for life, Mr. Khamenei, and that's an outcome that we all may hope for.

I don't believe everything that the former regime stood for was wrong either. The Pahlavis were the product of their own time and culture. They were not any worse than any of their predecessors or rulers in our neighboring countries and the main reason that the Shah's government was overthrown was not that he was the worst dictator in the region but because his opponents were more cunning and sophisticated.

Yes, compared to the King of Sweden, or Denmark, the Pahlavis were blood thirsty butchers and Iranians had no freedom. However, compare Iran to our neighbors in Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Pakistan, Afghanistan or even the USSR and you find out that life was not that bad.

What do you suppose the Shah's government had to do with the Kurds who wanted their autonomy? Baluchis who wanted their autonomy? The Tudeh Party and the Republic of Azarbaijan? The armed Mojahedin and the Chereek-haaye Fadaaee-ye khalgh? In retrospect, we can play intellectual and say that the Shah should have done it this way or another, but who knew that back then?

Whether it was due to the fact that the Shah had a vision or because he was totally dependent on U.S. policy (nokar'e dast beh sineh-ye Amrika), or for reasons totally out of his control, Iran had a very strong relationship with the West, particulary the U.S. That opened the door for the Iranian middle class to get access to new education, technology and ideas.

Do not forget that in the last ten years before the revolution, 10,000-15,000 students were coming abroad each year to get an education, and that transformed the Iranian society to a great extent. Iran in 1960 was not too different from Iraq or Afghanistan. However, in 1979 we were not comparable with our neighboring countries in terms of public awareness and education.

Thank God Ayatollah Khomeini was not victorious in his first uprising in 1963 (15th Khordad 1342). Iran today, could have been like Afghanistan under Taliban or worse. The reason Iranian women can vote today is due to the fact that they won that right before the revolution and Khomeini was stuck with it and could not reverse that trend.

We survive and we will thrive again! Wow, did I insult almost everyone?

Reza Reza

Comment for The Iranian letters section