Wednesday, October 22, 2008

Amir Sepehr-Shahzadeh Reza Pahlavi

"عزيزان من، شما ميهن پرست هستيد يا رضا پهلوی پرست! اگر ميهن پرست هستيد، ديگر بس است اين خود فريبی ها. اصلآ نام اين بزرگزاده ی محترم، بخش بزرگی از نيروی ما که شما گراميان باشيد را، در خود زندانی کرده و توان هر گونه خيزش و حرکتی را از شما سلب کرده است. يعنی از شما ناسيوناليست های راستين ايران که می توانيد کوبنده ترين جنبش ها را سامان داده و سر اين اژدهای ضد ايرانی و آدمخوار را از تن جدا سازيد که جمهوری اسلامی نام دارد."

"ميهن پرست يا رضا پهلوی پرست؟" ؛ (امير سپهر، PDF)

بخش بالا را انتخاب كردم چون نه تنها از ديد من مهمترين بخش نوشته است، بلكه اين گوشزد را پيشتر، واژه به واژه، از ديگران هم شنيده ام.

ولی سوای آن "استدلال های آبكی" و "توجيه های کودکانه" ای كه در اين نوشته بانها اشاره می شود، استدلال های ديگری نيز وجود دارند كه گرچه بسادگی نمی شود و نبايد ناديده گرفت، كاملا ناديده گرفته می شوند. مهمترين آنها كه ‌از زبان بسياری شنيده ام اين كه "آمريكا و قدرتهای جهانی، يعنی براندازان اصلی پادشاهی ايران، نگذاشته اند و نخواهند گذاشت."

اين گفته كه "خاك بر سر ملتی كه برای استقلال ميهن منتظر پروانه از بيگانگان بماند" و يا بيان اينكه "تقصير و كوتاهی از خودمان است" فاكتوری كه مانند روز بر بسياری، اگر نگوئيم همگان، روشن بوده را فقط كمرنگ جلوه می دهد ولی طبيعتا از ميان نمی برد.

ديدگاه خود من اين است كه شاهزاده رضا پهلوی گروگان ميزبانانی است كه خود از واشنگتن و لندن "دولت" اشغالگران ايران را می گردانند (فقط سری بزنيد به مطبوعات "آزاد")، مگرنه شاهزاده نا اين اندازه در جبهه دشمنان ايران و پدر قرار نمی گرفتند.

شايد يك اعتراف كوچك هم بجا باشد كه از ديد من، اگر قرار باشد بيگانه ای به ما ياری برساند، ياری از بويژه چين و شايد روسيه (البته گويا روسيه هيچ درسی از انقلاب شكوهمند ٥٧ و چگونگی پيشزمينه سازی برای فروپاشی شوروی نياموخته است) را به "ياری های" آورندگان آنگلو-آمريكائی اشغالگران اسلامی ترجيح خواهم داد.

1 Comments:

Anonymous Farid said...

Dear Sarbaze Kuchak:

This is a rather complicated and painful subject. No believer in Persian monarchy relishes or takes pleasure out of criticizing the elder son of our beloved late monarch. In that light, it seems to me that Mr. Sepehr has poured his heart out and in doing so has performed a major patriotic service.
I agree with Mr. Sepehr. While I don’t disagree with you on whom the “Avarandegane” Khomeini were, I do disagree with your opinion that the cause of Reza Pahlavi’s inaction has been his being “hostage” to his hosts. This is not an adequate explanation. The problem with Reza Pahlavi is, Reza Pahlavi.
In my view, Reza Pahlavi is a “liberal”, not in the “classical” sense of the term but in the modern “American” (and no so respectable”) meaning of it. Like most men of the “liberal-left”, he enjoys talking more than action. He views himself as an “intellectual” and seeks the company of other self-described and self-anointed intellectuals, naturally of the “left”. He likes to enlighten his audience with his words of wisdom about such high-minded ideals as “secularism” and “pluralism”, as only a liberal assumes himself intellectually endowed to do. He despises “tradition” and has an aversion toward “conservatives” (ie: supporters of the old regime). The dirtiest words you can utter to him are words like “Aryamehr” or “Shahanshahi”. He regards the traditional supporters of his father as nothing more than “troglodytes” who do not deserve even his spit. He appears genuinely “ashamed” of his past. To him, having the approval of leftists and terrorist sympathizers of the past is more important than crowds of cheering Iranian traditionalists. He has no praise for his late father, but has it for Mosaddeq, as that is the safe and “politically correct” thing to do. After all, we are all “Mosadeqqists” these days! Right-wing (read: monarchist) writers and commentators are viewed as extremists and loose canons, whereas revolutionaries are referred to as “Degar-Andish”! ………..This is who he is, dear SK. After 30 years, it is hard not to arrive at these judgments…..If you are still not convinced, just take a survey of the personalities and characters who have served as RP’s “chief of staff” over the last three decades. With the possible exception of “Holakou Rambod”, all others have been accomodationists and non-confrontational appeasers! Reza Pahlavi has clearly demonstrated that he is not comfortable having “strong men” serving him. During Rambod’s short tenure, he at one time even declared that “Bakhtiar” (who was alive then) had committed “treason”! Or, he was saying that he had waited long enough and that it was time for him to “lead” in action! Can you imagine such words being uttered by RP? Rambod did not last long, because RP did not want him, I suppose. He is more at home with the likes of what he has now. So, the problem is not who serves him. They serve him at his pleasure………
Finally, to end where I started: it is not the “big powers” that have or are holding him back. Everyone wants to bet on a winner. Am I saying that “Avarandegane Khomeini” desire the return of Pahlavi monarchy to Iran? Not necessarily. But that argument only goes so far…..

Regards;
Farid

6:08 PM  

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home