Islamic awakening envisaged from Tehran
by Hajrudin Somun*

Having an affinity to Persian culture and civilization, I had the chance to be a student in Iran, to work as a correspondent after the collapse of the Pahlavi dynasty and Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini’s victory in the Iranian Revolution, and then as a diplomat.

I wanted to see where that revolution led the country I had not seen for two of the three decades of its life. When other people predicted in the spring of 1979 that it would last only a few months or a year, I told them, “Let’s hope we are alive and get to see it still there after 15 or even 20 years!” What I found now, or as much as I could feel in a week, is that the Islamic Republic of Iran is still very stable, in spite of all internal and external troubles, and that the image drawn in the West of only a black color has a spectrum of colors, despite the differences that exist internally. To help me in that sense, allow me to quote Kamran Bokhari, a Canadian journalist of Pakistani background but Western belonging -- although more Western than I am Bosnian -- who also attended the conference, and later wrote to STRATFOR, saying: “Obviously, the intensity of religious feelings varies in Iran, but a significant stratum of the public remains deeply religious and still believes in the national narrative of the revolutionary republic. This fact does not get enough attention in the Western media and discourse, clouding foreigners’ understanding of Iran and leading to misperceptions of an autocratic clergy clinging to power only by virtue of a massive security apparatus.”

The Islamic Awakening conference, Bidare Islami in Persian, was a good opportunity to get an impression of the multifaceted Iranian relationship with countries near and far. However, its main and official aim was to give broad support to the mass movements against authoritarian rule that are shaking the Middle East. The composition of its participants showed the main direction that support should head in -- it was a gathering of various political and religious parties and thinkers who believe the establishment of a new order in Arab countries should be based primarily on Islamic principles and praxis.

A display of attire of all kinds

Never before have I seen in one place such a wide variety of colors, attire and caps among religious Muslims. If you could only see how many white and black Shiite turbans there were in addition to the Sunni red fez wrapped in a white cloth. And there were also many different politically oriented people that are in the West commonly termed as “Islamic radicals”! Leaders from the Lebanese and all other “hezbollah” parties were there, the popular Sudanese opposition leader Sadiq al-Mahdi was there, and even Hamas’ more radical Palestinian veteran Ahmed Jibril made a showing, as did the leader of Malaysia’s PAS party, Abdul Hadi Awang, who even closed movie theaters in the provinces where his party rules. Few Afghan Taliban leaders came -- I imagine only to carefully follow Burhanuddin Rabbani so as to enable their people to assassinate him immediately after his return from Tehran. There were also people who could not be associated with “radical Islam” from Arab countries, Africa, Central Asia and the Balkans. Among the larger groups were the Sudanese and the Turks. The leader of Turkey’s Felicity Party (SP), Mustafa Kamalak, was among the speakers at plenary sessions. The commander of Iraqi Shiite anti-American paramilitary forces, Muqtada al-Sadr, whose followers call him “the son of Mahdi,” the 12th Shiite imam who is in occultation, was a star at the conference’s lobbies. Younger participants rushed to take a photo with him. Anyhow, there was a preponderance of Shiites in the mass of around 600 participants from 80 countries. Most of them look to Iran as an ideal solution for liberation from tyrannical rule and “arrogant foreign powers.”

The conference was prepared and led by Ali Akbar Velayati, a longtime Iranian foreign minister known for his calmness and measured attitude. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, known for his intemperate outbursts, was this time more moderate. The new head of Iranian diplomacy, Ali Akbar Salehi, predicted the establishment of a “new Middle East based on Islam.” However, Iranian Supreme Leader Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s address set the seal on the whole conference. Due to the profound and directive remarks in his speech, but also due to a specific reflective terminology used by the Iranian Islamic leadership, I would like to use some of Khamenei’s own words. Besides, it is not difficult to recognize behind such a particular expression a serious and pragmatic approach and the directions of the state’s foreign policy. Although always framed by pan-Islamism, their addresses express the deep Iranian national aims and feelings, and even those of their specific Shiite branch of Islam.

First, regarding the nature of the Arab uprisings, Ayatollah Khamenei says, “I believe that the most important factor in these revolutions has been the people’s substantial and pervasive presence on the scene of combat and jihad.” Some of the main principles of those movements are “restoring national glory and dignity,” “achieving psychological security, justice and prosperity under the banner of the Islamic Shariah,” “campaigning against the occupying Zionist regime” and “resisting the influence and hegemony of the United States and Europe” -- or the foreign powers that “have no right to claim a share in the victory of the revolutions.”

Here Ayatollah Khamenei recalls the similar experience the Islamic Revolution in Iran passed through. By stressing that the main factor of these revolutions’ identity is the “popular movement,” he simply reiterates a sentence that Imam Khomeini said a few decades ago, one that has nowadays become a slogan written on many walls in Teheran: “Today is the time that nations take action.” Under “sharing in the victory” he alludes to the US, France and Britain, who supported dictators, but then wooed rebels after becoming sure they were winning in Cairo, Tunisia, Tripoli and elsewhere.

 ‘Creating chaos and inciting terrorism’

Second, Khamenei sees threats and dangers to the Arab revolutions “in our weakness and the ones that are directly planned by our enemies.” “Being afraid of the apparent might of the arrogant powers, of the US and other interventionist powers,” is also a threat that should be avoided. The first danger is “that we revel in the feeling of victory” and “fear the apparent might of the arrogant powers.” The first “potential threat,” he stresses, “is [to see] elements that show [a] commitment to the US and the West come to power.” If other Western tactics fail, “they will resort to methods like creating chaos, inciting terrorism and civil war between [the] followers of various religions, tribes and parties, and even provoking war between neighboring countries and nations.”

Translated into news coming from the terrain, it might mean that Arabs should learn from Iran how to avoid being afraid of the US and the West in spite of their might. Libyans should not celebrate before the job is done. Egyptians should not allow a new Mubarak to arise from their revolution. Syria is primarily seen as open to inspiring “chaos and civil war,” and conspiracy theorists are already involving Turkey and Syria in a military conflict.

“I advise people to stay on the scene…and know that God is always present to help you.” This was the first “piece of advice” Ayatollah Khamenei sent to the revolting Arabs. He asked for their slogans to be “purified and adapted to Islamic principles.” He then said: “Never trust the US, NATO and criminal regimes like Britain, France and Italy. … Conspiracies and betrayal are hidden behind their smiles and promises.” He also asked for ethnic, racial, tribal and border conflicts to be avoided. Their main task, according to the Iranian supreme leader, is to create a political system. “You should not allow models such as secularism, Western liberalism, radical nationalism or leftist Marxist inclinations to be imposed on you,” he advised the Arabs, adding, “The ultimate goal should be the creation of a united Islamic ummah and a new Islamic civilization based on religion, intellectuality, wisdom and morality.”

These pieces of advice, interpreted by actual news, become very concrete as well. They were written when French President Nicolas Sarkozy and British Prime Minister David Cameron were in Tripoli celebrating victory with the Libyans while their former leader was still hidden somewhere in the country. At this time, the Turkish prime minister was visiting Egypt and enjoying listening to the new Arab leaders saying that the Turkish model would be the best for them as well. When Ayatollah Khamenei listed secularism as the number one unwanted political model, he most probably had Turkey in mind. I should remind you now that Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian was warmly received in Tehran during the conference, while both sides were aware that Turkey’s relations with the Armenians are more complicated than with any of its other neighbors. The Iranian leadership was particularly upset by Turkey’s approval of a NATO anti-missile radar system to be installed on its territory that is, in the words of Iranian Defense Minister Ahmad Vahidi, “planned to be used in aggression against the Islamic Republic of Iran and its interests.” It was not only Turkey that was part of the conflicting national and confessional interests that were considered, overtly or not, by many participants of the Tehran conference. Host Iran should be respected for putting Islamic principles above national interests, but this couldn’t be hidden either. Iranians avoided accusing the Syrian regime of committing atrocities against demonstrators, but the involvement of the Saudi security forces in the suppression of the Shiite minority in Bahrain was openly criticized.

Everything else at the conference fell in the shadow of Ayatollah Khamenei’s address and appearance. It was obvious that his word is the first and last one on all Iranian issues, but he was once more approved as the unequivocal leader of all Shiite Islamic communities as well. Special respect was shown towards Velayati, whom Khamenei authorized to further follow the Islamic awakening that will be institutionalized in Tehran. He will certainly have in mind some different approaches to the Middle East uprisings expressed even at this conference. An Egyptian Islamic thinker, for example, said that “Protestants at Tahrir Square were not raising a banner for shariah or an ideology but revolted against a tyrant.” “Our duty was to help them,” he added. Apart from the main ideas of Ayatollah Khamenei, such an attitude also found a place in the conference’s final statement, which stressed, among other things, that “the Islamic Awakening has its roots in Islam, relying on the massive participation of people from all walks of life, and particularly youth and women, in all political and social arenas.”

These were impressions I brought from the conference on Islamic Awakening, held in the Iranian RTV congressional hall, at the foot of the bleak Mount Damavand that eclipses an overpopulated Tehran. But I should add to them a personal touch that was not only a personal one.

Asked to announce a subject I wanted to speak about, I said it was Palestine that was not among the priorities on the agenda. Ayatollah Khamenei said shortly it should be liberated “from the ferocious claws of the Zionists.” Others spoke about the liberation of “all of Palestine,” having in mind Israel as well.

Despite the joint statement by six radical Palestinian organizations against the quest by President Mahmoud Abbas for the recognition of Palestine as a state in the UN, issued at the conference, I did not give up my previous view that the two-state solution was the best possible solution for the Palestinians, Israelis and the whole Middle East.

I got a chance to say pretty politely that I was “against those who consider Palestine’s UN bid wrong,” only to get an immediate reply from a Hamas man who disagreed with me. However, I was able to find some solace in the wide predictions that Iran might still vote for the Palestinian quest at the UN once the date of the vote is set.