Is Civil Disobedience the Answer to Iran’s Ongoing Uprising?

Amir2018TaghatiMay 2, 2023
Is Civil Disobedience the Answer to Iran’s Ongoing Uprising?
An ongoing wave of dissent relentlessly continues across Iran. With the clerical regime’s demise on the horizon

iran uprising botorbyke burned
Written by
Shahriar Kia

An ongoing wave of dissent relentlessly continues across Iran. With the clerical regime’s demise on the horizon, there are various speculations about what strategy results faster in regime change. Among the promoted options is “civil disobedience.” But would it work?

Civil disobedience is a form of nonviolent resistance where individuals intentionally break laws or regulations to challenge unjust government actions or policies. It was popularized by Henry David Thoreau in his essay “Civil Disobedience” in 1849, where he argued that individuals had a moral obligation to resist unjust laws.

Some of the most notable examples of civil disobedience include Mahatma Gandhi’s Salt March in India in 1930, the Montgomery Bus Boycott led by Martin Luther King Jr. in the US in 1955, and the Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia in 1989.

In other words, civil disobedience can be realized in a country with true reform is possible and a ruling establishment that tolerates peaceful dissent.

The Iranian regime is a unique political system that is governed by a Supreme Leader who has absolute power over all branches of the regime, including the judiciary, the legislative, and the executive. A brutal security apparatus, including the Revolutionary Guard and the Basij paramilitary force, also characterize the regime.

In a country like Iran, where the regime is medieval, civil disobedience does not lead to the regime’s overthrow. The regime responds with the most brutal suppression of any protest threatening to overthrow it. This is evident from the regime’s history, marked by the violent suppression of dissent.

Until June 1981, when there was a quasi-democratic atmosphere in Iran, opposition groups tried to express their point of view on the political scene of Iran through political activities. But the mullahs’ regime banned any activity and started arresting and killing the opponents. The regime’s response was swift and brutal, with thousands of political activists and intellectuals detained, tortured, and executed.

As the leading progressive-Muslim opposition group in Iran, the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK) fervently pursued the reformation of the new Republic after the 1979 revolution. Despite their numerous meetings, protests, attempts to participate in elections, and criticism of the government’s curtailment of liberties, MEK’s efforts were met with ruthless suppression. Supporters of the MEK were subjected to brutal beatings, with many paying the ultimate price for their beliefs. Between November 1978 and June 20, 1981, more than 50 MEK members were killed by extremists for distributing the organization’s newspaper, “Mojahed,” or participating in meetings.

One of the most infamous episodes in the history of the Iranian regime is the 1988 massacre of political prisoners when over 30,000 political prisoners were massacred in a matter of months. The victims were mainly members and supporters of the MEK.

Over the years, the Iranian regime has sought to deceive by promoting civil disobedience as the sole means of effecting change in the regime or its behavior. Through this tactic, the regime has succeeded in buying time for its oppressive rule. The regime has used the idea of reformists within its ranks as another facet of this strategy, advertising that change was attainable from within the system.

In the 1990s some of the most extremist individuals and groups rebranded themselves as moderates and reformists. But instead of becoming a force of real change, the so-called reform movement turned out to be a political and diplomatic tool for the regime to maintain its hold on power and delude the international community with a façade of democracy.

While the regime has put the so-called reformists and moderates in high positions of power, including the office of the president, Iran has seen nothing in terms of reform. Freedoms continue to be suppressed, dissidents are arrested, tortured, murdered, and executed. Religious and ethnic minorities continue to be denied their most basic rights. And women continue to be treated like second-class citizens.

Meanwhile, the regime has continued to mislead the international community by putting up a show of competition between different hardline and moderate factions. In reality, the power resides within the office of the supreme leader and the Revolutionary Guards. It has been proven time and again that under this regime, any kind of complacency and change from within is doomed to fail.

Encouraging civil disobedience in Iran— which ranks among the worst countries in freedom of expression, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and gender equality, among other criteria — is not only socially, politically, and historically unfeasible but also detracts from the ongoing uprising that many perceive as a burgeoning revolution in Iran. Proponents of this method cling to a firm belief in usurping office in a possible transfer of power, heavily relying on regime insiders, specifically the IRGC thugs, to assist them in pursuing authority.

The Iranian people fervently desire regime change and rightfully demand that the international community acknowledges their right to self-defense. In light of this, the discussion of civil disobedience is undeniably undermining their rights and demands.

Thus, those who promote civil disobedience implicitly attempt to hinder a revolution and instead persuade the people to continue believing in the long-disproved notion of moderation or the illusion of a transition of power with a Supreme Leader who is among the oldest and longest-standing tyrants. Therefore, the global community should lend its support to the Iranian people’s aspiration to entirely upend the regime.

The regime disregards the principles of lawful governance, necessitating its forceful overthrow. Recognizing the Iranian people’s right to self-defense is the primary action required to assist them in achieving their objectives, and this overdue measure must be taken without delay.

Amir2018TaghatiMay 2, 2023
Arab-Islamic Committee in Defence of Ashraf
Back to top button