What Human Rights Report Reveals About Political Players In Iran And Abroad – OpEd

The breadth and scope of the battle for Iran’s freedom from the dictatorship of the mullah’s regime ruling Iran as pursued by the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), is vast. How can we recognize the extent of this resistance both inside and outside of Iran?

In this identification, what are the main factors or opposing fronts to be seen?

All three questions ultimately lead to this: which forces are currently recognized as the front line in the battle between freedom and tyranny in Iran, both inside and outside the country?

The starting point of these questions comes from the current political discourse around the latest report by the former United Nations Special Rapporteur for Iran, Professor Javid Rahman and his participation in a joint conference with a group of international lawyers, judges, and experts.

Rehman developed a legal theory around the genocide carried out by the regime Supreme Leader Ruhollah Khomeini and his forces during the 1988 massacre and throughout the 1980s. No international legal body has rejected this theory, and it has gained significant credibility among legal scholars.

The essence of this article and the core of the four questions is this: an all-encompassing battle, from across Iran to the United Nations, the U.S., and Europe, over freedom and justice, between two opposing fronts—the Iranian Resistance and the regime known as the “Islamic Republic.” This is the most comprehensive and decisive battle that will determine the fate of Iran, both domestically and internationally, until the outcome is resolved.

It is sufficient to observe the regime’s mobilization, both internally and externally, against Javaid Rehman. This mobilization stems from two reactions: hysteria over the documented and legal credibility of Rehman’s report, and even greater hysteria over its alignment with the justice-seeking movement of the NCRI regarding the 1988 massacre, as well as Rehman’s participation in the conference.

Identifying the elements of the two fronts is thought-provoking. The mullahs’ regime’s strategy against Javaid Rehman relies on appeasers and those with economic interests in the continuation of the clerical dictatorship as well as certain Persian-language media outlets that prioritize monarchist and clerical interests, or colonialist agendas, over the success of the Iranian people’s revolution.

On the other hand, the Iranian Resistance draws its strength from the mass justice-seeking movement inside and outside Iran, prominent lawyers and jurists from five continents, and several thousand international political, cultural, and human rights activists.

The battlefield reflects the internal and global dimensions and the main factors of this conflict. Therefore, in a battlefield as vast as Iran, with all the political, social, and cultural factions fighting the clerical regime, the daily and ongoing battle between the Iranian Resistance and the clerical regime remains the most pressing, active, and influential struggle, spanning from Iran to the five continents.

These characteristics reveal more than ever the continuation of the historical struggle from the Constitutional Revolution to Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh and now, between the forces of freedom and independence in Iran and hereditary dictatorships and colonialism.

They further confirm the true nature of each force participating in the political arena of Iran, measured by how clearly, they distinguish themselves from the clerical regime.

These characteristics demonstrate that this historical struggle has reached a decisive and critical stage, with the major transformation now imminent, driven by the intensity of the internal and international confrontation between these two fronts.