Iranian Liberal Democrat
به زبان فارسی
PICTORY
LATEST MUSIC
SEARCH
Causes and Ramifications of De-Listing of the PMOI from the U.S. State Department’s FTOs List
25-Feb-2011
Causes and Ramifications of De-Listing of the PMOI from the U.S. State Department’s FTOs List
I. Derivers of American Foreign Policy
1. The Clinton administration placed the PMOI on the FTOs (Foreign Terrorist Organizations) list in order to reward President Khatami’s moderation. This had less to do with what the PMOI or Khatami (and the fundamentalist terrorist regime) had actually done, and had more to do with what policies would serve the national interests of the U.S. Some times foreign policy is determined by ideals, but usually it is by interests. When ideals and interests are in conflict, most governments choose their interests in the determination of their foreign policy. Foreign policy is not about consistency. For example, the U.S. State department knew full-well then, and knows full well now, that the fundamentalist regime had engaged in unambiguous TERRORIST activities. For example, the terrorist regime mass murdered political prisoners in 1981 was done by Ayatollah Khomeini and at that very time Khatami was one of the main leaders of the regime. Under Khatami’s leadership of Keyhan, the regime’s mouthpiece, Keyhan viciously attacked the moderate forces such as Mehdi Bazargan and others pro-democracy forces (Bani Sadr, etc). Khatami was one the main propagandists of the fundamentalist regime in that period. Khatami was one of the main persons who authored Khomeini’s statements. From the invasion and takeover of the American embassy to the creation of the terrorist Lebanese Hezbollah, the magnitude of the actual terrorist actions of the fundamentalist regime is huge and Mohammad Khatami was among the leaders of the Islamic Republican Party, in Majles, editor-in-chief of Keyhan, and in the government.
When the State Department listed the PMOI in the FTO, it was not because Khatami was a decent democrat, but despite the FACT that Khatami was part of the leadership of the fundamentalist regime responsible for horrendous terrorist crimes. The U.S. closed its eyes to the terrorist crimes committed by the fundamentalist regime because it believed that Khatami would moderate the policies of the regime.
One of the funniest ironies is that among the examples of PMOI’s terrorism is that it supported the embassy hostage taking. It is true that the PMOI supported the hostage taking, but it was Khomeini and Khatami and the hard-liners and reformists who actually took the Americans hostage and kept them for 444 days. The actual terrorist ACTON was committed by the gang under the leadership of Khomeini, Khatami, and Khamenei. The PMOI supported those terrorist actions. There is a HUGE difference between ENGAGING in terrorist ACTIONS on the one hand, and supporting those terrorist action on the other. Khatami was guilty of being a prominent member of the gang that engaged in taking terrorist action, while the PMOI was guilty of supporting those actions by Khomeini and Khatami. Fundamentalists (reformists and hardliners) were the terrorists inside the embassy holding Americans hostage. The PMOI was outside marching and supporting the fundamentalists inside engaging in the terrorist action.
Therefore, the actual deeds were not the primary criteria. The interests of the U.S. was the primary determining factor. The State Department was following the decision of the White House in deciding to help and reward President Khatami DESPITE the FACT that in actual fact Khatami and the regime he represented was a main terrorist entity in the world. Khatami was promising a set of policies, and the U.S. wanted to reward those new policies. Therefore, the State Department rewarded the terrorist regime with listing the PMOI. Historical actions were ignored and new interests were the deciding factor.
In sum, what is germane is what each group could do today that would be in the interests of the U.S. or undermined them.
2. The Obama administration’s primary policy towards the fundamentalist regime was to sit down and negotiate with Khamenei with no pre-conditions. Hence, President Obama made the Norooz messages and used the term "The Islamic Republic of Iran," and repeatedly stated that it wants to reach agreements based on "mutual interests and mutual respect." There was no mention of the FACT that this regime is the primary state sponsor of terrorism and that the Supreme Leader in one of the top terrorists in the world. The Obama administration’s policy was to reach an agreement with the regime and therefore the Norooz message and private Obama letters to Khamenei.
For the sake of reaching an agreement with the regime, when Khamenei was brutalizing and murdering the protesters after the June 2009 election, the Obama administration refused to side with the protesters. The INTEREST of reaching an agreement with the hard-line regime on the nuclear enrichment issue was the primary concern of the Obama administration. If President Obama sided with the protesters and called for the change of the regime with democracy, then Khamenei would STOP the negotiations with the U.S. government. Therefore, President Obama made some mild remarks after great pressure. President Obama’s policy to sit down and talk with the regime provided legitimacy to the hard-line regime and strengthened the regime and had a demoralizing impact on the Green and pro-democracy protesters. President Obama chose what he regarded as American’s INTERESTS (reaching an agreement with the regime which would end the nuclear enrichment) and ignored America’s IDEALS (of democracy, freedom, human rights).
II. A New Policy Towards the PMOI
It became plain that the Obama policy of engagement with the regime had totally failed. Despite President Obama pursuing the policy of sitting down with officials of the regime to reach an agreement, no such agreement was reached. It is now more than 2 years and 1 month since President Obama took office. The regime has more centrifuges and more enriched uranium. Now it is clear to the Obama administration that the regime did not accept what they had offered the regime. The question is what would the fundamentalist regime accept in order to fully stop enrichment program. If the position of the fundamentalist regime is that it would not stop enrichment no matter what the U.S. would offer then no negotiation would succeed in stopping the regime from enrichment.
It appears to me that the Obama administration has given up on the possibility that the regime could be appeased. So, what NOW?
A number of things have occurred in the past 2 years.
1. The Green Movement (fortunately) rose and (unfortunately) fell. The hard-liners successfully repressed it (for now at least). The Obama administration by holding meetings with the officials of the hard-line regime, in actual fact provided legitimacy to Ahmadinejad-Khamenei.
2. The PMOI succeeded in winning several court cases in the UK and EU. The PMOI then succeeded in removing the PMOI from the UK and EU terrorist lists. Therefore, according to UK and EU, the PMOI is not a terrorist group.
3. The PMOI won a court case in the U.S. The court asked the State Department to review the case and allow the PMOI and its attorneys to challenge the designation.
4. Via some PR group, the PMOI has held several fantastically successful conferences where former TOP officials in the U.S. diplomatic, political, security, military, intelligence communities presented arguments for support of de-listing of the PMOI. Many made glowing support for the PMOI. They include liberal democrats, conservative republicans, neo-conservatives, Realists, etc. These are great victories for the PMOI.
5. These efforts may lead to the de-listing of the PMOI.
I think in the next several months we will witness more efforts to have the PMOI de-listed. On one side will be the PMOI which will concentrate its efforts to de-list itself. I guess that the IRI is very upset about this. My guess is that the fundamentalist regime will tell its agents and supporters to do all they can to stop the de-listing of the PMOI.
My guess is that the PMOI will win this fight. Why? It is in the national interests of the U.S. to de-list the PMOI. The Obama administration has lost all hope to get the regime to agree to suspend uranium enrichment. So why the hell to negotiate with the regime if there is no chance that the regime would stop doing things that could provide them with the possibility to have nuclear weapons. The PMOI has provided intelligence to the U.S. Moreover, with the de-listing of the PMOI, the PMOI could increase its activities outside and inside Iran. American (and European) assistance would increase the power of the PMOI, which would allow it to become more active inside Iran. The more powerful the PMOI becomes, the more it could help the U.S. with intelligence and the like. If the regime would get close to acquiring nuclear weapons, then the U.S. could cooperate with the PMOI in sabotaging the nuclear facilities. Or in a war scenario, the PMOI could play the same role the Northern Alliance played in the U.S. war against al Qaeda-Taliban in Afghanistan in 2001. That is the U.S. would bomb (missiles, smart bombs from airplanes) the coercive apparatuses (IRGC, Basij, Ministry of Intelligence, Niroyeh Entezami) of the fundamentalist regime and then the PMOI forces would enter to fill the vacuum.
In other words there are a lot of REAL BENEFITS to American national interest by de-listing the PMOI and using the group. There are also disadvantages to the U.S. interests of de-listing the PMOI. One may criticize the U.S. for working with a group that itself had listed as terrorist. The U.S. has worked closely with groups once described as terrorist such as the PLO (and Yasser Arafat), ANC (African National Congress and Nelson Mandela) , IRA, etc. The U.S. has also has been working with former insurgents in Iraq and elements of Taliban in Afghanistan. In actual FACT the Obama administration engaged in negotiations with officials of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which the state department has classified as the number one state-sponsor of terrorism. So the U.S. has already been engaged in negotiations with the biggest terrorist in the world, so using a groups that has committed one-zillionth of those would not be much of a headache.
My guess is if the hard-liners arrested Mousavi and Karrubi in the next few days and there was a mass uprising and the regime successfully repressed the uprising, then the U.S. would lose all hope in the Green Movement. Then, the Obama administration would de-list the PMOI in a short order. In a cost-benefit analysis, the benefits outweigh the costs for the U.S. by de-listing the PMOI.
III. Losers
1. The BIGGEST LOSER is, of course, the fundamentalist regime. The IRI is most worried about the PMOI.
2. Those who promote appeasement of the fundamentalist regime.
IV. Winners
1. The BIGGEST WINNER is, of course, the PMOI.
V. Ramifications of De-Listing of the PMOI on the Opposition Groups
1. The Democratic Opposition (Iran National Front, NAMIR, Iran Liberal Party, etc)
The democratic opposition does NOT have any lobbying group in the U.S. If the democratic opposition had a lobbying group, then this lobby group would have openly and explicitly lobbied against the interests of the fundamentalist regime.
If the PMOI is de-listed, they would lobby against the regime. To the extent that a group (ANY group) works against the interests of the fundamentalist group, to that extent that is bad for the fundamentalist regime. With some exceptions, the policies that HARM the fundamentalist regime, of course hurt the regime, and thus are good for the Iranian people.
The PMOI would also lobby to benefit itself. This obviously would not be good for the democratic opposition.
The question is what is more significant? And relatedly, on BALANCE, are the advantages more or are the disadvantages more? It depends on the nature of the PMOI. The PMOI is by far the MOST organized opposition group. No other opposition group comes close. This is of course, the fault of us in the other opposition groups. The FACT that Jebhe Melli and monarchists and Marxists or not as organized is OUR fault. The PMOI is also intensely opposed by many Iranians, inside and outside Iran. Therefore, in a free and democratic election, the PMOI would get something like 5% of the vote. In other words, the PMOI could harm the fundamentalist regime, but in a democratic system could NOT harm other opposition groups.
Policy Ramifications for Iranian Democrats
If there are free and democratic elections in Iran, in all likelihood, we will win. Therefore, we do not have to fear any scenario in which there will be free and democratic elections. The PRIMARY obstacle for democracy in Iran is the existence of the fundamentalist regime. Therefore, OUR primary goal is to weaken the fundamentalist regime so that it would be overthrown or the regime accept free and democratic elections. The weaker the fundamentalist regime, the higher the likelihood of the regime being overthrown. The weaker the fundamentalist regime, the higher the likelihood of the regime accepting free and democratic elections.
If the fundamentalist regime is strong it would NOT accept free and democratic elections. If the regime is strong it would not be overthrown.
The PMOI does not pose any threat to the Iranian democrats as long as there will be democratic and free election. Many democrats hate and oppose the PMOI. In my opinion, the regime will send its agents and supporters to try to manipulate the members of the Iranian American community in order to use them as useful idiots in the regime’s fight against the PMOI. We should not fall for their tricks. We oppose the PMOI, but our MAIN enemy is the fundamentalist terrorist regime. As long as the PMOI does not attack us, they pose no threat to us. We should be smart and not allow the supporters of the regime fool the less politically astute and use them to help the fundamentalist regime.
Also all the opposition groups (JM, monarchists, Leftists, Greens, ethnic parties) should try to make their organizations stronger.
2. The Monarchists
The monarchists, by and large, prefer the fundamentalist regime to the PMOI. A smart plan of the Ministry of Intelligence would be to pose as an opponent of the IRI or supporter of monarchy in order to mobilize the monarchists to attack the PMOI. If a member of the Ministry of Intelligence arrived and said that he or she is a supporter of Ahmadinejad, he or she would not be very successful in mobilizing many in attacking the PMOI. But if that same person claimed to be an opponent of the IRI, then he or she would have a good change in fooling many in a campaign against the PMOI. Here the role of Reza Pahlavi and top monarchist personalities could counter the plans of the Ministry of Intelligence. RP and monarchist personalities have to find a way to prevent their supporters being used by the fundamentalist regime agents and supporters.
Unfortunately for RP, the bulk of the monarchists are not very politically astute. They say things that harm the cause of monarchy. RP talks about "emrooz faghat etehad" day in and day out, but his supporters insult and attack every person who is not a monarchist or a sycophant of RP. Reza Pahlavi needs to find a way to prevent his supporters from being manipulated by the Ministry of intelligence and supporters of the fundamentalist regime and used as useful idiots.
Some monarchists who have been trying to get assistance from the U.S. government might feel jealous that the PMOI has succeeded in gaining support from the U.S. government. RP and monarchist officials need to analyze this rationally and not emotionally. They need to develop future alternative scenarios and see what policy they take today will help them in the next stages. Certainly siding with the fundamentalist regime against another opposition group – what exactly the Tudeh Party and Fadaian-Majority did between 1979 and 1985 – will be regarded the same way people view the policies of the Tudeh Party and Aksariyat as regime collaborators. The question for Reza Pahlavi is this. Realistically, does RP think that monarchists constitute more than 5 to 10 percent of the population? Realistically, does the PMOI get more than 5% of the vote? If RP really wants to see the fundamentalist regime overthrown, then which of the following policies would serve his goal? Policy ONE to engage in fight against PMOI; Policy TWO leave the PMOI alone and instead concentrate on building monarchists’ own organization.
Policy ONE to engage in a fight with the PMOI would definitely 100% help the fundamentalism regime and would definitely weaken the monarchists and would weaken the PMOI.
Policy TWO leave the PMOI alone, and organize monarchists own supporters and try to also gain some support from U.S. government as well. The fundamentalist regime would definitely 100% be the loser. The PMOI benefits a little. The monarchists will benefit a little.
3. The Marxists
The bulk of Iranian Marxists are highly educated and highly politically astute. Therefore, they could not be easily manipulated by the agents of the Ministry of Intelligence.
During Feb 1979-1985 or so (1983?) , the Tudeh Party and Fadaiyan-Majority did side with the fundamentalist regime and against other opposition groups (democrats, other Marxists, PMOI, Kurdish groups, etc). Many of them were executed by the terrorist regime in 1988 during the massacre of political prisoners.
Due to the weakness of Iranian Marxist groups, several pseudo-leftists have been fooling Western progressives in order to help the appeasement of the terrorist regime. Many leftists in the U.S., UK, parts of Western Europe, and Latin America are susceptible to being fooled and used as useful idiots by the fundamentalist regime and its supporter, agents and apologists.
Fortunately, in the past few months, I have noticed a rise in the activities of Iranian Marxists. This is a welcomed phenomena. First, Iranian Marxists can prevent the agents of the Ministry of Intelligence, the supporters and apologists of the fundamentalist regime from fooling Marxists around the world and use then as useful idiots. Second, Iranian Marxists can gain the solidarity of leftists around the world with progressive Iranians. Third, Iranian Marxists are part and parcel of Iranian society. Therefore, to the extent that they accept democracy and freedom, they can play a very positive role in the fight against the terrorist regime and a positive role in the construction of a multi-party democracy after the overthrow of the fundamentalist regime.
Unfortunately, almost all the Iranian Marxist groups in 1979 were terribly dictatorial. Equally bad were their wrong analyses, which made some to constantly attack the democratic forces (called us liberals, bourgeois, jadeh saf kon imperialist, etc), while some supported Khomeini and sided against JM, Bazargan, and Bani Sadr. Neither Fadaian-Minority, nor Peykar, supported the democrats. Tudeh and Fadaian-Majority totally sided with Khomeini and called democrats "jasos" and supporters of imperialism. There were some leftists who were democratic such as Sazeman Vahdat Kommunisti, Shoray Motehhad Chap, and National Democratic Front, but, unfortunately, they constituted a small minority of Iranian leftists.
Ramifications for Iranian Left
Like the democratic opposition, the left should simply remain quiet on the issue of de-listing of the PMOI.
The Iranian left should become more active in condemning the pseudo-leftists who engage in fooling the western leftists.
I think it would be helpful in the struggle against the IRI if the leftists would explicitly state that:
a. they oppose the one-party dictatorship that existed in the former USSR, China, and what was the so-called actually existing socialism;
b. they now fully support civil liberties for all and multiparty democracy;
c. their policies in the 1979-1980s were wrong, that they should have cooperated with the MODERN DEMOCRATIC groups (JM, Bazargan, Bani Sadr) and opposed Khomeini; and
d. now they are willing to fully support working with the liberal democratic forces in order to create a democratic secular republic, with freedom of the press, parties, and elections as well as human rights.
Once the Iranian leftists do these, it would become easier for those of us in the democratic opposition to make the argument that today’s leftists are not like the old Stalinist tyrants who massacred millions and millions. This would help all of us to concentrate all our attacks on the fundamentalist regime.
4. The Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdestan
The DPIK is well organized and enjoys great mass support among the Kurdish population inside Iran as well as among Kurds in the diaspora. The DPIK has moved from being pro-Soviet party (1940s to 1979), to a Euro-communist (1979-early 1980s), to Euro-socialist (mid 1980s to 1990s), to a pure ethnic party now. The DPIK has developed a close relationship and friendship with the U.S. government. In my opinion, the DPIK would benefit if the PMOI was de-listed. Both DPIK and PMOI wish the U.S. govt to stop appeasement of the fundamentalist regime. Their social base is also different, they do not compete for support among the same persons. The DPIK’s social base is among the Sunni Kurds and the PMOI’s social base is among non-Kurdish Iranians. The two groups could help each other in many ways in Iran, in Iraq, and in Washington DC. A PMOI-DPIK alliance or cooperation (formal or informal) would greatly enhance their abilities to gain support from the U.S. and other countries around the world.
The above may also hold for Komeleh. If I am not mistaken there are 2 or 3 Komeleh factions. I think that the above would hold for all them.
5. Greens
I see the Greens as being comprised of many elements.
a. Reformist Greens
The reformist faction (supporters of Mousavi and Karrubi) will not be happy with the de-listing of the PMOI. I guess that many of them will vocally condemn it. But paradoxically, it also may help them. Nothing scares the daylight out of the hard-line regime than the PMOI. The reformists have always presented themselves to the hard-line elements as a group (inside the fundamentalist oligarchy) that could successfully deflect the threat from the U.S. In other words, the reformist ARGUMENT to other members of the ruling fundamentalist oligarchy has been: "we and our policies will stop the U.S. from harming the nezam." If the hard-liners believe that there is no real threat from the PMOI or the U.S., then the hard-liners could easily repress the reformists with no worry. But if there is a possibility of real threat from the PMOI (or monarchists, or democrats, or DPIK), then the hard-liners would be worried to get rid of the reformists. In other words, sharing power with the reformists is actually good for the Nezam, both domestically and internationally.
My guess is that the reformist Greens will make many public statements against the de-listing of the PMOI. Many are emotionally intensely opposed to the PMOI. The reformists were those in the 1979-1980s who were among the leaders of the fundamentalist regime and were directly involved in the brutal fight against the PMOI. But ironically, they would not be a loser if the PMOI is de-listed. Some of their less astute supporters may think that the PMOI is going to get more powerful and thus would undermine their ability to get support and attention. That would be a little true outside Iran. But inside Iran, the de-listing of the PMOI could shake the hard-liners and make them stop the repression of the reformists. Although it should be kept in mind that the hard-liners may not think very rationally and do what is against the interests of the nezam.
In my opinion, the de-listing of the PMOI would have some advantages and some disadvantages for the reformist wing of the Greens.
b. Democratic Greens
Democratic Greens or Secular Greens are the ones whose slogans are "Esteghlal, Azadi, Jomhuri Irani" [Independence, Freedom, IRANIAN Republic], and "Marg bar Asl Velayat faghih" [Death to the Principle of Rule of a Cleric]. Their ideals are identical to those of the Iran National Front and other pro-democracy groups (i.e., they want a democratic secular republic). I don’t think the de-listing of the PMOI would have any measurable impact on the Democratic Greens. There might be some minor advantages and some minor disadvantages.
Conclusion
My guess is that in the next few months many of us will not be happy with some of the things we will see. But eventually, I think the BIGGEST loser is the fundamentalist terrorist regime. I do NOT think that the process will undermine the democratic forces (JM, NAMIR, Iran Liberal Party), or the monarchists, leftists, or Kurdish groups.
The de-listing of the PMOI will make the PMOI only a little more powerful. Their social base is very limited. It is about 5% of the population, but they are highly devoted and highly organized. The more powerful PMOI would be able to help the U.S. much more in gathering intelligence and perhaps some sabotage of various facilities of the terrorist regime on behalf of the U.S.
I think the BIGGEST LOSERS will be the fundamentalist regime and its supporters.
I do not think the PMOI has made a democratic transformation. If they remain dictatorial, they would become a nuisance to the rest of us. If they make a democratic transformation, that would be helpful in the post-fundamentalist Iran for the prospects of stability and democratization.
The BEST policy we all could take is to make various opposition groups stronger and stronger. Of course the stronger the pro-democracy groups, the higher the likelihood of transition to democracy in Iran.
With hope for a free and democratic Iran.
My 2 cents,
Masoud
P.S. My apologies for the typos. I would probably not be able to respond for the next 4 or 5 days.
| Recently by Masoud Kazemzadeh | Comments | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Great News for the PMOI, and Terrible News for the Terrorist Regime | 7 | Sep 22, 2012 |
| On the Lawsuit “Trita Parsi and NIAC v. Hassan Daieoleslam.” | 18 | Sep 15, 2012 |
| For Ali P: Khomeini, the Shah, and Sanjabi | 3 | Aug 09, 2012 |
RECENT COMMENTS
IRANIANS OF THE DAY
| Person | About | Day |
|---|---|---|
| نسرین ستوده: زندانی روز | Dec 04 | |
| Saeed Malekpour: Prisoner of the day | Lawyer says death sentence suspended | Dec 03 |
| Majid Tavakoli: Prisoner of the day | Iterview with mother | Dec 02 |
| احسان نراقی: جامعه شناس و نویسنده ۱۳۰۵-۱۳۹۱ | Dec 02 | |
| Nasrin Sotoudeh: Prisoner of the day | 46 days on hunger strike | Dec 01 |
| Nasrin Sotoudeh: Graffiti | In Barcelona | Nov 30 |
| گوهر عشقی: مادر ستار بهشتی | Nov 30 | |
| Abdollah Momeni: Prisoner of the day | Activist denied leave and family visits for 1.5 years | Nov 30 |
| محمد کلالی: یکی از حمله کنندگان به سفارت ایران در برلین | Nov 29 | |
| Habibollah Golparipour: Prisoner of the day | Kurdish Activist on Death Row | Nov 28 |
Where Are PMOI Members?
by G. Rahmanian on Sat Feb 26, 2011 04:12 AM PSTAs was expected, this article has aroused some "dormant" emotionalism. The question is, why aren't any PMOI members defending their cause, here? Could it be that the PMOI members find their cause worthier than involving themselves in the so-called, "debates" with entities who support the regime or individuals who think they are here to discuss political issues as if they were talking about their favorite movie stars? How was it possible for the organization to have its name removed from the list of terror groups in Europe, if not for its hard work, dedication AND, most importantly, their renunciation of terrorism as an act of achieving their political objectives. Whether the language of some comments is rough or soft does not make much difference. Their sole objective is to demonize and try to isolate an organization staunchly opposed to the regime. Organizations or entities which believe in negotiating with the regime of terror in Tehran can talk as "gently" as they like, but they can neither hide their motives nor can they dupe Iranians who seek genuine democracy. As I have previously said in my comments, except for some tiny groups which opposed Khomeini from day one, no organization is immune from criticism. The lessons, however, have not been learned, it seems. While calling PMOI all kinds of names, many are not doing any better. And, of course, there are the lame-brains who think former IR officials turned "opposition leaders" are capable of establishing a democracy while reminiscing about Khomeini's era and wishing to resurrect that horrendous period in our recent history. Some would even find it convenient to hide behind statements such as, PMOI has no support in Iran. One even claimed recently that he travels to Iran regularly and didn't think PMOI had many supporters. AS IF! No wonder Ahmadinejad decided to, audaciously, chastise Moamar Qadafi, the Libyan leader. He knows what sort of audience he is dealing with. By that same logic we can claim that there aren't millions of Iranians living in exile simply because we can hardly see more than a few hundred of them in any anti-regime demonstration.
Mr. Kazemzadeh, in your response to me
by Anahid Hojjati on Sat Feb 26, 2011 04:12 AM PSTIt is as if you are writing to some kind of party leader or at least party activist. All I tried to tell you was to point to you some historical facts. When did I tell you about my present beliefs? Also when you write that you can not work with dependent left, what are you talking about? You write as if it is 1358. The whole world has changed. There is no USSR. China is not communist. Also, independence is great but please don't forget that horrible regimes can be independent too. I am not going to give you a long response but I just wanted to point out that you need to consider that almost 60 years has passed from 1332. We need to emphasize current events and build partnesrhips based on what is current. Thanks for your respone though.
Very Informative Article, as USUAL!
by P_J on Fri Feb 25, 2011 07:13 PM PSTDear Masoud!
Although I look at the PMOI as another Islamic Terrorist Cult…I believe that their number has dwindled in the years past and they no longer are as potent or as capable as they once were, but STILL dangerous.
Joining Sadam Hussein, and fighting against the Iranian Military, does and should amount to TREASON, by most people! I also believe that they are being used, by the West, as the BOGY man to scare off the FASCIST regime in Iran, and that has not worked out well either; in fact it has been counterproductive especially if as Aynak mentioned they were to restart their terrorist activities or campaigns, then the US would have lost all they have gained both in prestige and popularity!
For Monarchists, so far as I have seen, they are not but a BIG joke, especially RP!
Thanks for the GREAT article!
Another Persian paradox
by Rea on Fri Feb 25, 2011 05:32 PM PST//www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXePzX82zKk
'79 and again.
VPK
by Rea on Fri Feb 25, 2011 05:20 PM PSTIran is a special case, by all means. I've once called it a "Persian paradox".
I keep fighting to make European leftists make a distinction btwn Iran and IRI. Unfortunately, people don't understand.
No matter figures I provide about journalists, lawyers, executions, etc., the European Marxists still believe that's the way to go. Because IRI is "independent". And yet those people are atheists like myself. Go figure!
Frankly, sick and tired of the Marxists, no matter the country they reside in.
Re: U.S interests
by aynak on Fri Feb 25, 2011 05:02 PM PSTDear Masoud:
First when taling about U.S interests, I am not sure if we are talking about a single coherent entity. I am sure you agree there are various interest groups sometimes even at odds or with conflicting interest. What is good for oil industry is not the same as what is good for high tech. And what is good for farm industry is definitely not good for Military industrial complex.
As far as Iran's nuke, there is only one group that views a nuclear Iran as existential threat. So we can not say U.S will do this because it is in their interest as the interest itself is not singular.
My disagreement with your post was the passive role our community should play visa-a-vis Mojahedeen. There are several approaches here:
1-Say nothing (to de-listing of Mojahedeen as a terror group)
2-Oppose it
3-Make it conditional (as I explained and favor)
4-Advocate it.
I am voicing an opinion that says 2 and 4 need not be the only options.
regards, and look forward to your paper.
May we all have good dreams.
To be more presice, I am very concerned that
by Mehrban on Fri Feb 25, 2011 05:54 PM PSTIran will once again be handed on a silver platter to MEK as it was to Khomeini. If that happens, we should not kid ourselves they will not play nice and come into the Democratic fold just because we will ask them nicely, and why should they? That is not what they have played for all these years.
Masoud K.
by Rea on Fri Feb 25, 2011 04:45 PM PSTThx for replying, busy as you are.
In fact, I did not live under the brutal Stalinist system. It was Tito rather. Not the same, not at all !
What bothers me most about Marxists, in particular European Marxists, nowadays is the fact they are in love with AN. Because IRI is "independent". No imperialism, no capitalism. Never mind the Russian and Chinese junk IRI pays dearly. Pardoxal it may seem, but that's what the European Marxists believe.
And when you point out to those same Marxists that a true leftist would never subscribe to an islamic/vatican/whatever theocracy they don't answer. Instead they continue to brag about how great it is to be independent.
Rea
by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on Fri Feb 25, 2011 04:36 PM PSTI love opium and hate Marxism
Mehrban jaan
by Masoud Kazemzadeh on Fri Feb 25, 2011 04:16 PM PSTMehrban jaan,
I fully agree with you.
Best regards,
Masoud
Aynak jaan
by Masoud Kazemzadeh on Fri Feb 25, 2011 04:11 PM PSTAynak jaan,
I do not have any major disagreements with your analysis. I agree with large parts of it.
The emphasis of your article is what is good for Iran, and that the US should do what is good for Iran.
The emphasis of my blog was the U.S. govt will do what is in their INTERESTS. And I gave several examples of that.
My point is that we cannot ask the U.S. govt to do what is good for us, the pro-democracy Iranians, if that policy is bad for the U.S. national interests. Let me explain on the very issues that you and I used.
If the fundamentalist regime is close to finishing its nuclear bomb, the U.S. govt WILL use the PMOI to sabotage the terrorist regime nukes. The fundamentalist regime not having nukes is in the national interests of the U.S. If the US can use them, they will. What the PMOI did in 1972 or in 1979 matters less than what the PMOI can do in 2011 or 2012, or 2013.
The PMOI is valuable to the US because they can gather intelligence and that they can engage in sabotage and that they could play the role of the Northern Alliance.
If the terrorist regime’s nukes could not be destroyed by US surgical strikes or sabotage, then one option the US has is to overthrow the regime. Hence the example of Taliban and Northern Alliance. My opinion is that the PMOI is willing to play the role of Northern Alliance. Therefore, if that option is the option chosen by the US govt, then the use of the PMOI is in the interests of the US.
You and I will not be happy with that. The role of the US gov is to promote the national interests of the US. The role of the US govt is not to make you and I happy.
I also agree with you that the Green Movement is alive. The question of the US govt is when the IRI will be able to complete its nuclear bomb. If the IRI can do that in 2012, then it does not matter whether the Green Movement is alive or dead. The question is whether we can overthrow the fundamentalist regime BEFORE the IRI gets nukes. The US has stated that they will not accept the terrorist regime having nuclear weapons. Therefore, they will do everything they can to prevent the terrorist regime from completing its nuke program.
Best regards,
Masoud
They are being delisted
by Mehrban on Fri Feb 25, 2011 04:00 PM PSTpartly because they reported on the nuclear facilities of IR and have since been cooperating with US. They are also the only organized opposition to be considered. Bolton has been a staunch proponent of them. I am very uncomfortable about this development (not because they are being delisted but because they are emerging as a viable alternative) as far as the US is concerned. If the greens (?) do not get their act together this may mean the same old same old dictatorial system in Iran while the stooge of the Republican wing of the US.
Sorry about the base language, it has been a long day.
Re:PMOI
by aynak on Fri Feb 25, 2011 03:55 PM PSTDear Masoud,
In my view, PMOI, like any other group must be swayed by us Iranian, to change its proxy role and help democracy or at least not be an obstacle to it by:
-renouncing violent means
If that means, asking U.S government, for such commitment from PMOI prior to de-listing them as a terrorist group, that is a good thing to be pursuing.
This is all we have to ask, to make real progress. It seems to me, you walk over the scenarios like Talibanization of the regime and by that token PMOI becoming the northern alliance so casually?!
The opposition force in Iran, not only has not died (contrary to what is being circulated outside by the regime and for some reason some forces echoing that voice) but is in fact stronger. The reason for this claim is several fold:
--Has the conditions that led to the post election/coup uprising improved?
--Has any of the demands for accountability of the government been met?
--Is there more social/political freedom?
--Is the trend in the region geared toward more openness or less?
--Are average Iranian, better off economically/financially than two years ago?
--Has the language of opposition inside, changed for more or less demands?
I think not a single one of the above questions would have an answer that is favorable for Ahmadi-Nejad or Khamaneh-ee. So time is working very much against the regime and not to its favor. The question then becomes, WHEN/HOW that spark like the one in Egypt or Tunis will set the whole regime on fire?
Islamic Regime through its existence but particularly in these days, like nothing more than another crisis and a major distraction. The two ships going to Syria through Suez was one example of trying to stoke a fire. They are doing all they can to trigger a major confrontation.
The real question is, would a group like PMOI WITH a militaristic doctrine help or hurt the cause of Islamic Regime, but even more important, help or hurt the cause of progression of democracy? That is what the focus of your analysis should be. Personally, I have no issue with de-listing PMOI as not a terrorist group ****IF**** they come out and renounce terror/military approaches.
If we take your forecasted role for PMOI, as a proxy fighter for U.S's clandestine operation, I fail to see how it helps:
a: Iran's democracy?
b:U.S's real interest (currently U.S is very popular in Iran, because no act of sabotage is directly linked with U.S a picture that will change quickly should PMOI with U.Ss protection start military operations in Iran).
Then how could someone with the knowledge of the situation and for democracy in the region dismiss these concerns, and not want U.S to *conditionally* remove the terror label?
But I have a bigger issue with your good/no-good, or enemy de-jour approach as well. Unfortunately with your approach, we can look back as early as the Iran-Iraq war, when PMOI sided with Saddam, and since Saddam was the enemy of my enemy (Khomanee) and if we take your approach at that time Iranian people SHOULD have supported Saddam and PMOI?! Or if they condemned Forough Javidan, they would be labeled IR supporter? Something that sounds very absurd then and now.
I think any sound approach or standing/analysis should view the issues of Iran, in terms of how an element would help/hurt democratic process rather than who will be happy with a given change. Else in grand scheme of things removal of Mobark or Saddam, will cause us unhappiness, just because at least on paper Islamic Regime shows happiness with their removal.
In summary: Iranian-Americans in my view, could serve both countries best by asking any de-listing of PMOI from terror list by U.S government to be contingent upon a complete de-militarization of PMOI.
BTW, one reason PMOI was classified as a terror group by U.S, was their action PRIOR to revolution and their assassinations of U.S officials, in Tehran.
All the best.
May we all have good dreams.
Rea
by Masoud Kazemzadeh on Fri Feb 25, 2011 03:43 PM PSTDear Rea,
I am extremely busy today and the next 4 or 5 days (finishing an article and submitting it and then grading the exams), but maybe in a week or two, I will try to write more on this.
Let me thank you for your wonderful contributions to this community.
Egalitarian ethos and ideals are very old. If channeled into democratic, pluralistic, and peaceful paths, they would strengthen democracy. If I am not mistaken you live in Eastern Europe and thus lived under the brutal Stalinist system. So you KNOW how brutal and dictatorial the Leninist system was. Many who did not live under such tyranny but held egalitarian IDEALS were fooled into thinking that that system would create a just utopia. They meant well. In many revolutions such idealistic individuals were among the first to be executed by the power hungry persons like Stalin and Mao and Pol Pot.
With the collapse of the USSR and the horrendous crimes under the communists regimes in Eastern Europe, many members of the traditional left began serious thinking. Many have evolved in democratic ways.
The Ministry of Intelligence has taken advantage in the past 10 years and utilized fake leftists to fool many leftists around the world in using them as useful idiots to help the IRI. I am very happy to see that Iranian Marxists have become active again. Because this is against the interests of the fundamentalist regime. And if they have become democratic, then a democratic socialist movement could become a close ally of the liberal democrats. This would greatly increase the likelihood of overthrowing the IRI and help establish democracy in Iran.
Best,
Masoud
Even the word Marxist makes my hair stand on end !
by Rea on Fri Feb 25, 2011 03:33 PM PSTUfff !
responses
by Masoud Kazemzadeh on Fri Feb 25, 2011 03:26 PM PSTRoozbeh jaan,
Let me thank YOU, Targol, and Paykar for your contributions to Iranian.com. The time and energy you spent succeeded in undermining the fascist regime and their supporter here. Ye donya mamnoon.
Best,
MK
====================================
Professor Ebi jaan,
Thank you my friend.
Masoud
=========================================
Anahid jaan,
1. The date 1985 was in error. The correct date is 1983.
2. It is crystal clear that I was not referring to the first quote in the link on Motahhari. I specifically mentioned Amir-Entezam, Dr. Nazih, Moghadam, and if you scroll down you will see in the 37th (p. 305-306) and 49th (p. 340) quotes that Tudeh Party made attacks on these pro-democracy forces and sided with Khomeini. In the struggle between pro-democracy forces and Khomeini’s forces, the Tudeh Party and Fadaian-Aksariyat sided with Khomeini.
I am shocked that you still support the reactionary position of Tudeh Party. If you STILL in 2011 support siding with Khomeini against the liberal democrats, then we can NOT have any cooperation. Before the revolution, it is justified to say that one did not know how dictatorial and reactionary Khomeini was. But after a few month the revolution, no one can claim that he or she did not know about the brutal fascistic and reactionary nature of Khomeini.
In actual fact, among the traditional left the Fadian-Aghaliyat, Fadain Ashraf Dehghani, Peykar, Ranjbaran, Rahe Kargar strongly opposed the dictatorship of Khomeini. KDPI strongly opposed Khomeini.
Among the democratic left, Sazeman Vahdat Kommunisti, Shoray Motehhad Chap, Jebhe Democraitc Melli all strongly opposed the fascist Khomeini within a few weeks or as soon as they were formed.
I strongly condemn the Tudeh Party and Fadain-Majority for their cooperation with Khomeini. You can either support that policy or condemn it.
Khomeini was a totally dictatorial, even fascistic person. Shariatmadari strongly opposed Khomeini. Shariatmadari supported the democratic forces such as JM openly (and quietly Bakhtiar before that). His party, Hezb Jomhurikhahan Khalq Mosalman opposed the vf constitution and explicitly supported democracy. Shariatmadari was viciously attacked by Tudeh Party. Tudeh sided with Khomeini against Shariatmadari and democratic forces.
On ideological matters. The Tudeh Party and Fadaian-Majority held the ideology similar to the USSR. There was no freedom of expression, freedom of political parties, free and democratic elections in the USSR. The USSR was a DICTATORSHIP. Either you think it was good to hold such a dictatorial ideology or it was bad to hold a dictatorial ideology. If you STILL in 2011 think that dictatorial ideology was good, then you are still dictatorial.
Many former traditional leftists have evolved and have criticized their dictatorial ideology. They openly state that the system of one party dictatorship in the former USSR was bad and should be condemned. The democratic forces can work with those former traditional leftists who have had a democratic evolution. But we cannot work with those who still hold to dictatorial ideologies.
Moreover, unlike the independent left among the traditional left (e.g., Peykar, Fadaian-Minority, Ashraf Dehghani group, etc), the Tudeh Party was fully dependent and subservient to the USSR. One might think it was ok. But those of us who support independence for Iran, and the independent left, also strongly then and now oppose the dependent nature of the Tudeh Party. Again, you might think the USSR was wonderful and all communists should do what Moscow told them to do. We in JM strongly opposed that. That is why there were major fights between JM and Tudeh Party from 1949. JM-Mossadegh nationalized the Northern Fisheries (Shilat Shomal) and opposed granting our oil in the north to the USSR and the Tudeh party opposed our policies. Our policies benefitted the national interests of Iran. The polices of the Tudeh Party sacrificed the national interests of Iran for the interests of USSR. According to Babak Amir Khosravi, former top leader of the Tudeh, the Soviet Union would tell the Tudeh leaders who should be their Secretary General, so that under the order of USSR they got rid of Eskandari and chose KiaNouri as their leader.
We in the JM and also many in the independent left considered the dependent nature of the Tudeh as bad. Again, you have every right to follow what Moscow so wished. We strongly oppose that. We believe that the decisions of Iran should be made by Iranians and not by any foreign power.
In conclusion, we in the JM can work with democratic and independent left. We will not work with dictatorial and dependent left (or right or whatever).
Best,
MK
====================================
Souri jaan,
Please read my comments to Anahid.
Best,
Masoud
Ah ?
by Rea on Fri Feb 25, 2011 03:22 PM PST"Fortunately, in the past few months, I have noticed a rise in the activities of Iranian Marxists."
What Marxists are we talking about here?
Marxism, religion, opium for the masses? Have we not learnt anything so far?
Thanks Souri jan and Vildemose, and a question
by Anahid Hojjati on Fri Feb 25, 2011 03:01 PM PSTOn a related subject; what is going on with
"Ettehade Joomhorikhahane Iran"?
Does any one have an update on their activities?
به خدا میدونستم چی میشه ها!!
Roozbeh_GilaniFri Feb 25, 2011 03:02 PM PST
Bavafaye aziz, and who do you think created and funded the original organisation of the "19 hijackers"? Nearer to home, who paid for our own "shaban-bi-mkh" and where did he have to run to in the end of his life? I wouldn't even go into the original founders of Hzibullah and Hamas. I hope you understand my comment better now...
Vildmose: I read some stuff about MKO, and then I came across the name of someone called Taghi Shahram. Others can correct me, but I believe that he was the first communist figure to be executed in Iran by the islamist regime (he led a bloody breakaway movement from MKO). There is limited info on him on internet, but reading about him would tell you quite a bit about MKO history. BTW, when I was only 8 years old, just after the revolution, He was pointed out to me outside a meeting by one of his comrades who talked very highly of him, that is how I even rememberd him.
Soosan khanoom, suffice to say, not for one second I thought you were a "desparate houswife"!! Sure, one day I'd love to read your blog about "rofagha", as soon as I finished defending myself :)
"Personal business must yield to collective interest."
Rozbeh
by Soosan Khanoom on Fri Feb 25, 2011 02:54 PM PSTI have posted and warned everyone of this with all those supporting links on my blog talking with Rofaga
but then everyone bashed me ...crashed me .. called me proregime ...and one even went that far that on his blog called me
"desparate housewife" .....
... what is the point of saying something when you will be called someone who supports mullahs .....
but I am saying it ......
I can write a book on this subject .... Mojahedeen khalg are willing to do anything and the money and green light do exist for them .. you are right they are old .... but they are not middle age ones who lives in the western who were crazy at their youth ... they have been given the freedom to come back to U.S and be trained rather than staying in Camp Asraf .... they would take it for sure and then giving the fact that how brainwashed and stupid they are ... they are willing to do anything for their retarded leaders ....
having said that as i mentioned on the other related post here
" Shah " , " Fadee " ..... "Todeei "......" Hezbollahi" ...... and the number one assholes of all " Mojaheedeens " are belong to the past ........... this time Iranian youth are not going to fall for these craps........ I am serious ....... America has never been a help and will never be ........ let them do what ever they want ......
Truth Shall be Prevailed
PS. for your information I am not desparate ... haha
and i am not a housewife either ... I am working my ass off researching working with DNA, RNA and proteins , etc
Rozbeh jan
by Bavafa on Fri Feb 25, 2011 02:16 PM PST"it takes quite some testicles for 3000 unarmed"
Similar thing has been said about the 19 hijackers who flew their plane to the buildings or many more who put on some explosive just to create terror among civilians. One's size of testicles has little to do with his/her desire for freedom and justice.
At the end of the day, there is little doubt that using MKO against IRI will have only the opposite affect in bringing democracy in Iran and only strengthen IRI hand in dealing with people as opposition group.
Likewise, Iranians may only be distrusting of foreign States such as US or Israel but they hate MKO.
Mehrdad
بگم؟ نگم؟ ......به درک، میگم!
Roozbeh_GilaniFri Feb 25, 2011 01:27 PM PST
Like it or not, the very fact that not a single person on this site full of "cyber revolutionaries" (starting with myself to save a response!) is in favour of MKO, speaks well for the US governments line of approach to them!
In the end of the day, hate them or despise them, it takes quite some testicles for 3000 unarmed, mostly middle aged ex warriers with price on their heads to camp just across the border from khamenei kingdom, surrounded by armed to teeth khamenei loving Iraqi shia militia, and stick one middle finger at him and his entire velayare faghih!
And thanks as always to Dear Masoud. ( I mean our own Masoud Kazemzadeh, not the other one, before you all ask for my vitual head on a virtual plate!!!)
"Personal business must yield to collective interest."
"You are fake"
by comrade on Fri Feb 25, 2011 01:27 PM PSTYour statement can not take the title of response. You may indeed need few days for a break, as initially stated in the blog, before coming back with a response. We all know,this is not the first time that your organization desperately rushes for a bandwagon.
As we say in Farsi: Don't rush to BOOYEH KABAAB, since it's DAARAN KHAR DAAGH MIKONAN, only.
Never increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything.
Very good point Anahid
by Souri on Fri Feb 25, 2011 01:25 PM PSTTo Masoud Kazemzadeh:
Toudeh Party has always condemned any kind of terror against any person. Toudeh was just against all kind of terror! They even condemned Sadat's terror while they have been against Sadat's politics. Toudeh Party was against violence.
Then why are you surprised that they would have condemned any attempt to terror by any group against anyone?
VPOK: Agreed. I don't really
by vildemose on Fri Feb 25, 2011 01:12 PM PSTVPOK: Agreed. I don't really know much about the group, past or present. But I'm willing to listen to what they have to say now and will have to see how they behave in the future in interacting with other opposition groups.
Also, I would like to see
by vildemose on Fri Feb 25, 2011 01:09 PM PSTAlso, I would like to see some examples that MKO has reached to other opposition groups. Are there any?
Bravo, Anhaid jan. That A MUST for the MKO to be given any chance of redeeming themselves if they really want a democracy. The ball is in their court when and if the regime is toppled. They have to run candidates just like any other parties or groups in a secular Iran.
Masoud jaan
by ebi amirhosseini on Fri Feb 25, 2011 12:55 PM PSTInformative as always.
Ebi aka Haaji
Mr. Kazemzadeh, have you checked your links?
by Anahid Hojjati on Fri Feb 25, 2011 12:57 PM PSTFirst in your artilce, you note that Tudeh supported IRI until 1985, then after my comment, in your comment, you mention up to 1983. Then regardingyour links. They are not even directly from Tudeh literature. They are excerpts and they only go up to end of 1358 which is only 1 year and 1 month after revolution. You mention something and then you bring up a link, hoping perhaps that people do not check the links but I invite every one to check the URLs that you provided. You write about Tudeh being bad with Ayatollah Shariatmadari and you talk of him being against Vf. The fact is that Shariatmadari was even more fanatic moslem than khomeini. Some of your links are about Tudeh condemning terror of Ayatolah Motahari and terror attempt of Rafsanjani. what does this prove? Do you expect a party that at the time had daftar in Tehran and held demonstrations to approve terror of officials? Please take the readers of Iranian.com more seriously.
responses
by Masoud Kazemzadeh on Fri Feb 25, 2011 12:42 PM PSTDear GR,
Thank you for your kind note.
MK
===================================
"Comrade"
Many on this site do NOT trust you. The genuine leftists on this side like Roozbeh and Mash Ghassem think that you are a supporter of IRI who pretends to be leftist to fool people. Initially I thought that you were monarchists pretending to be leftist, then I thought you might be a supporter of IRI pretending to be leftist. I am certain of one thing: you are NOT a leftist. You are fake.
MK
==================================
Others,
Thank you for your comments.
MK
On Tudeh and Fadaian-Majority Siding with Khomeini and Attacking
by Masoud Kazemzadeh on Fri Feb 25, 2011 12:37 PM PSTAnahid jaan,
Until 1983, Tudeh Party and Fadaian-Majority sided with Khomeini and attacked the democratic and leftist forces. The Chief of KGB in Tehran defected to the UK and provided the names of over 1,000 Tudeh and Fadaian-Majority to the British who provided the list to the U.S. which provided the list to the IRI. Then the IRI arrested those in the list. Among Tudeh members executed was the Chief of the Navy and the Intelligence Chief of IRGC in Azerbaijan.
The Tudeh and Fadaian-Majority strongly sided with Khomeini and strongly attacked and insulted the pro-democracy forces until they were arrested by the IRI. Here is a collection of their own documents posted by the highly credible site Golshan:
Tudeh strongly condemns the pro-democracy forces and sided with Khomeini:
//www.golshan.com/asnaad/toodeh/html/dowlat.html
Tudeh Party attacks Hezb Iran, AmirEntezam, Moghadam, Nazih and sides with Khomeini:
//www.golshan.com/asnaad/toodeh/html/zedenghelab.html
Tudeh Party strongly supports the dictatorial vf constitution. The democratic parties such as JM strongly condemned the vf constitution as dictatorial. Here is Tudeh Party support for VF constitution:
//www.golshan.com/asnaad/toodeh/html/ghanoon.html
Tudeh Party leader providing intelligence on other opposition groups to IRI:
//www.golshan.com/asnaad/toodeh/html/rafsanjani.html
Tudeh Party siding with Khomeini and attacking the uprising in Azerbaijan in support of Grand Ayatollah Shariatmadari. Shariatmadari was the highest ranked cleric and was standing up to Khomeini in imposing the VF constitution.
//www.golshan.com/asnaad/toodeh/html/hezbjkhm.html
//www.golshan.com/asnaad/toodeh/html/azarbayjan.html
Fadaian-Majority on siding with IRGC and attacking other opposition groups:
//www.golshan.com/asnaad/aksariat/html/hamkari.html
//www.golshan.com/asnaad/aksariat/html/sarbedaran.html
//www.golshan.com/asnaad/aksariat/aksariat.html
I hope these documents are helpful.
Masoud