Mousavi’s 2nd Internet Interview – On Aban 13

Source: Kaleme.com
Date: Tuesday, November 21, 2009

Q) On this year’s anniversary of the Aban 13 (November 4) people were faced with violent security and military that was unheard of. The extent of forces was very massive. What is your opinion on the results that orchestartors of these forces were after? Did they achieve their aims? How do you see the Aban 13 of this year in general? What were some of the outcomes?

A) This year’s anniversary of the Aban 13 was turned into something great to remembered because of the way people were present on the streets and on political scene [in general.] During the first days of the revolution we had various events. Gradually, because of extravagant repeats, lack of innovation, stepping away from the roots, we distanced ourselves from the motivations that led to the atmosphere in those days and of those ceremonies. We forgot about the atmosphere [of kinship] that had taken over the nation, we forgot about all the fundamental values that were the actual causes of such ceremonies and events.

After the elections the historical events of the revolution were redefined and reanalyzed.

The events that happened during the elections led to a reanalysis and redefinition of every single one of these days whether they are of historical significance or they belong to the history of the Islamic revolution in such a way that created new symbolic meaning out of it and that is very important.

Aban 13 is a reminder of three events that were discussed in the statements. The most important of the three was the invasion of the house of spies and capture of the American embassy by the university student followers of Imam’s way. The reasons were clear. The issue of the Coup of the Mordaad 28 (August 19) [for pro-western regime change], the type of American activities in support of the Shah’s regime, crackdowns and killings of Iranians, the way they raided our economic resources an example of which was extensive purchase of weapons in that time. Another issue was the presence of several thousand American inside Iran who viewed the land as part of the American soil and who did whatever they wanted.

Our people are against the meddling of foreigners in their affairs and destinies.

I think if instead of the US, it were the Russians or the British the same event would happen to them. Our people oppose foreigners meddling in their destinies. Overtaking the American embassy was a reaction to such behavior; especially after taking the Shah to U.S with the atrocities that he had committed. People were angry and frustrated and took over the embassy. Less attention was paid to historical roots of this day (Aban 13) during recent years.

My interpretation is that stopping our relations with the U.S. was the right course of action. Maybe the activities of the Americans were not visible to the eyes and minds of youth but our people have always paid attention to the fundamentals. [our people] like their country to be independent without presence of foreigners. This was the common element between people who were on the streets on Aban 13 , and their view towards that day.

They organized a military campaign against people on Aban 13

Unfortunately, there was a lot of interference committed to the marches of the Aban 13. Separating people and constraining the green path and the green movement created a new situation.

Let me first say that what happened on the streets was a great military campaign organized against people. I have not seen such a thing throughout the history of the revolution where such great [military] forces were organized at sensitive locations.

The morning of the Aban 13 when I stepped out of towards to head to the ‘cultural center’ I was witness to concentrated military forces organized in front of the University of Tehran and all the streets that connected to the downtown.

Then, before people could still gather around I thought to myself that this is already a victory for the green movement even if nobody comes to the streets. Bringing such a massive force shows their fear and the great extent of the green movement.

A country that runs in the name of Islam should not advance by frightening people

If we look realistically, the establishment should not be afraid of this issue.  The way to march forward in a country that has come through a great revolution and is run in the name of Islam should not be through frightening people.

The Islamic revolution happened so that it provides courage to people. In the revolution people rose up and stared the world in the eye. They discovered courage within themselves.  It was courage that gave us the power to go stand against the all the forces during the eight years of holy defense; by giving countless martyrs so that we would not give even one millimeter of our soil. We do not have a larger asset than this in the history of revolution.

The first interpretation from that organization of forces on Aban 13 is that it can not have any meaning but inducing fear.  They are aiming for and threatening the largest asset (people’s courage.) But if we want to have stand up as a country and advance we must emphasize courage and stand up for it. This is what was targeted on Aban 13.

But if we ask whether they achieved this goal or not, I would say that no they did not.

Anger would cause some to move beyond the fundamental messages

People were irritated by the heavy presence of forces after the beatings that were published in images and website, and had countless witnesses. They caused damage to people but people did not become afraid. If you look at the scenes on the streets, people are hit and beaten but they do not escape they just walk to other side of streets and continue their slogans.

The next result of such [violent] actions is that the anger would push some beyond the fundamental messages that the green movement has emphasized on.  [Our] emphasis is on the constitution, and enforcing all the articles of the constitution without interfering with personal preferences and that is what we should pay our attention to.

It is necessary for us to maintain a reason and calm and remain committed to our fundamentals and our courage

If we want to maintain the significant mass [of the movement] to achieve the desired change and the aims that we have defined while we show our commitment we must maintain our commitment to this minimum [the constitution.] It is absolutely necessary to say that we are committed to constitution.

People must pay attention. No matter how violently the react, people should not become give in to their violence [anger] and emotions. It is necessary for us to maintain reason and calm and remain committed to our fundamentals and our courage to voice our opinion.

The Revolution happened so that we can be brave and demand freedom

There was revolution so that we can commit to fundamentals. There was a revolution so that we can have courage and view freedom as a principle and always demand it as a natural want of humans. We can not return from these from these fundamentals and we would put up with anything necessary.

The demand of all people is the Green movement proceeds through the path of nonviolence

In out methodology, we have reached a consensus with people and this is the demand of people that the green wave of hope remains peaceful and through non-violent means. We have to maintain this consensus and God will help us on this path.

These days there are discussions on redirecting the subsidies. There have been many discussions between the advocates and opponents of this legislation. There are some concerns among the expert specialists. Considering your experiences in executive branch, what is your opinion on the results of this legislation?

The subsidy reform bill has a positive name. When they use this term they reiterate that paying subsidies is unavoidable but on the other hand they say that we want to redirect subsidies. But some people reason that paying subsidy is wrong and inappropriate but this is not the true.

All other world economies pay subsidies to their people. The key is how to distribute subsidies to achieve the best result for the country. Some advanced countries pay large amount of subsidies, we have a similar situation.

To those who argue that subsidies are inherently wrong and they should be completely remove , we should reply that this is not the case.

The problem with the subsidy reform bill is in the bill that was presented to the parliament. The result of this bill is not to remove the subsidies but to increase the price of certain necessary goods.

When we have plenty of oil that gives us relative benefits in the country ( we are not discussing the high or low sale price ) the difference between the price the governments receives compared to the international prices should not be taken as a subsidy. This is a wrong viewpoint. This difference in price also exists for domestic goods.

If we look at this bill with this line of reasoning then we should move toward establishing an organic connection between our national economy and global economy. If we increase the price of energy carries are we willing to let other part of economy adjust to international prices ?

We can ask this question that are we willing to sell a domestically produced car with an international price or pay wages according to international standards and adjust the average of domestic prices accordingly?

W can’t just adjust a section of economy with international prices and price of oil in Persian gulf but keep the distance in prices in other sections. For example 25% inflation resulted in reducing the buying power of people by a quarter, but what is the average inflation in the world or successful economies?

The state should look at this issue from this perspective that goods and services that it gives to people or the wages it pays are not at all related to international economy. Therefore a sudden elimination of subsidies and spike in prices in exchange for cash handouts of $10-$20 dollar per individual is a big mistake if implemented.

This will certainly influence people ‘s lives and make them feel bitter. It will possibly cause serious social , economic and security issues across the country and among lower income class. I remember at the beginning of the revolution when we discussed the low price of oil we believed we can use this to our advantage and improve our competitiveness on a global scale. I am not saying that we should not have any subsidy reform rather this can be presented in a more complete package that combines various policies

When the price of energy carriers goes up this will have ramifications in people ‘s lives. The consequences of this bill should be studied on education, healthcare and so on.

Have we made any preparation to reduce the negative impact of these policies ? or we are just planning to distribute the money that results from these policies. We cannot overcome problems in this way. High inflation rate removes the benefits of these types of programs and will put us in a precarious situation.
The administration does not have a neutral and comprehensive viewpoint for the overall interests of the country.

What worries me is that there is no comprehensive program with precise supervision of Majlis ¹. The government has tremendously tried to take control of the revenues of the bill of Increasing The Price of Energy Carriers ( I use this name rather than Subsidy Reform Bill). I feel that his problem leads to more confusion and corruption will be widespread in society.

Due to the political and opinion differences, people are facing a lot of problems.

We are now observing that this administration and anyone in the executive branch do not have a neutral stand and a comprehensive viewpoint for the overall interests of the country. Sometimes the differences between an executive and another bureaucracy that does not support administration’s viewpoint leads to delays in projects. Metro (Tehran’s subway system) is a good example. Subway systems are essential in the daily commutes. Gasoline price hikes are supposed to support public transportation systems like Metro. However, we have lost many years of its service due to political differences and people are paying the price.

In the execution of the Subsidy Reform bill, the administration only supports the sectors that have good relations with it. The essence of the Subsidy Reform bill is to control personal agendas and opinions which are sometimes excessive. One of the necessities of establishing Parliaments and its responsibilities has been to control and monitor the protocols of cost and revenues of the government since the Constitutional Revolution.In the Islamic Republic and the current Constitution this role for the parliament has been emphasized.

If the revenues from the abolition of the subsidies and increases in energy carrier (fuel) prices is not carefully monitored by the parliament, the results would be the domination of personal agendas and reckless spending.

People are not informed on how and where the 300 Billion dollars of revenues in the four years of the Ninth government is spent and what the results are.

People are not informed about the Foreign Exchange Reserves and its spending procedures. It is not clear how it is spent from the Reserve and people are not informed on how and where the 300 Billion dollars of revenues in the four years of the Ninth government is spent and what the results are. People have questions about these issues and others such as supposed measures to minimize the effect of the annual systematic increase of prices by the government based on the Fourth Development Plan.

I am pessimistic toward the Subsidy Reform Bill

I am generally pessimistic toward this bill. However, I believe that the Parliament should resist and have some monitoring procedures on spending. So that this budget is not used for populism and spending on special projects. This is an important issue that people and members of parliament should be observant.