Month: October 2013

Assassination has long been used as a method to eliminate political rivals or opponents. The term assassination is mostly used to refer to a type of murder in which a person in a position of power, fame, or with political beliefs is killed, or when someone is killed for insulting a political or religious ideology. In French, the word “assassination” means terror and fear, and the rule of assassination is a fundamental principle of revolutionary governments. It was established after the fall of the Girondins (from May 31, 1793 to 1794) in France and involved numerous political executions. However, in Persian, it is commonly used to refer to political murder by means of a weapon. Nowadays, assassination has taken on other forms and personal assassination has also entered the world of political literature, in which the personal character of a rival or political opponent is destroyed through negative propaganda and irrelevant issues to the main competition.

Throughout history, with numerous examples, we have been faced with various forms of assassination, from the most primitive types to prominent examples in recent centuries, which over time, its proponents have tried to explain and justify it through philosophical, social, or religious reasoning. Ancient Roman orator Cicero compared the killing of individuals who were seen as human-faced monsters to cutting off diseased parts of the body, and saw it as a way to prevent corruption from spreading in the collective body of humans, that is, society.

The idea of overthrowing centuries of tyranny was then combined with the theory of popular legitimacy. Supporters of assassination argued that the legitimacy of government stems from…

Contract.

It is closed with the people and when the terms of the contract are violated, the ground is also prepared for removing the rulers.

The proponents of various religions have sometimes been placed among the promoters of terrorism in society. In this perspective, by labeling the individual as a corrupter of the earth or an apostate, a religious ruling of execution is issued and it is carried out in the form of assassination. Although this interpretation of religion is also faced with serious critics in religious discourse, many religious speakers confront it by relying on the practical conduct of religious saints or by adhering to the principle of avoiding the ugliness of religion.

Many perpetrators of assassinations consider the killings they have carried out as revolutionary executions and try to portray the victim as a legitimate and deserving criminal in order to justify their actions. This perspective was prevalent in the early second half of the twentieth century. However, with the development and spread of human rights and the principles of innocence and non-absolutism in judgment and condemnation of the death penalty, this perspective has lost its validity in regards to the issue of assassination.

Some individuals justify their actions of assassination under the banner of self-defense. In this perspective, they consider themselves as preemptively killing those who intend to harm them.

In recent years, with the expansion of a new concept called terrorism and public mobilization on a global level to combat this heinous phenomenon, many consider assassinations to be a part of terrorism. However, these two are completely distinct. While acts of tyranny and other forms of assassination are usually carried out within a framework of terror, there are significant differences between terrorism and political murder. As a result, many perpetrators of terrorism try to justify their actions under the label of assassination, while governments involved in the fight against terrorism label their opponents as terrorists. Although both of these phenomena may be condemned, there is a difference in the discourse of politics and human rights. In political murder, a specific individual is targeted for specific reasons and efforts are made to avoid harming others. However, in terrorism, the targets are usually unclear and carried out in a general manner. Although terrorists claim to eliminate rivals, kill innocent individuals, and punish criminals, they are attempting to solve this problem.

Nowadays, on one hand, there are efforts to conceal political assassinations (assassinations) within a framework.

Terrorism.

It has been done, and on the other hand, many terrorist groups also use political assassination tactics.

In the midst of this, thinkers like Rapoport present a new perspective for distinguishing political assassination from terrorist acts, in which instead of focusing on the motive, attention is paid to the action. He sees terrorism as a process and political assassination as an event; “Political assassination destroys a human who has corrupted a system, but terrorism destroys a military system that has previously corrupted anyone who has been placed in it. Political assassination is an incident, a passing act, and an event, but terrorism is a process, a way of life, and a sacrifice.”

Iran has been facing the phenomenon of assassination from its distant past. Recent examples of assassinations targeting government figures include the assassination of Nasser al-Din Shah, the unsuccessful assassination of Mohammad Reza Shah, the assassination of Mansour, and the assassination of various figures of the Islamic Republic. However, a new phenomenon has emerged in recent years, which can be called governmental assassinations. In this type of assassination, the government tries to eliminate its political opponents by hiring assassins, targeting them in different parts of the world. The incident of Mykonos, the assassination of Christian priests in Iran, the assassination of figures like Dr. Sami in the 1960s, and many other examples are instances of this type of assassinations in Iran, where the government is involved. This phenomenon is known as one of the most condemnable types of assassinations in the world, and many governments are involved in it. Perhaps the assassinations of Iranian figures related to the nuclear issue of the Islamic

In general, the absence of a space for dialogue in society, the lack of belief in the sincerity of the other party, which is the primary principle for creating a space for dialogue and achieving rational understanding in society, the lack of respect for the maturity and understanding of society in choosing the right path and selecting any of the tendencies and beliefs, as well as the lack of self-confidence of each advocate of existing tendencies in society in the field of power of discussion and presenting an accurate and powerful reading of themselves and believing in their own weakness, will lead to the growth of assassination for physical elimination or character assassination in order to undermine the credibility of the opponents’ thoughts in society. This action puts peace at risk and spreads the principle of victory through fear, creating a vicious cycle in which the rotation of responsibility is not based on the growth of thought and values, but rather on the ability to create fear or eliminate rivals from the scene on the seat of power by each of the actors in the social arena.

In this issue of the Peace Line magazine, we will take a special look at the phenomenon of terrorism.

“Mr. Gandhi! Where there is no witness; there is no martyr involved either.”

Martin Buber, a Jewish rabbi and a peace-seeking religious scholar.

First; Integrity.

The term totalitarianism is very young compared to other terms in political philosophy. Its usage began in the 20th century and examples of it can be seen in some contemporary governments. Some of its characteristics include:

Single-party (single nation) government.

Charismatic and unconventional leadership.

Undercover police.

The police and army are powerful, tough, and…

The value of a Muslim is that this method of government did not exist in the classical divisions of types of government and its emergence coincides with the transition of society towards modernity; of course, it is not necessary. Because in the past, the criterion of governing, despite accepting labels such as…

Virtue

And/or.

Bravery.

“Roots have had a strong economic impact. The ruler holds the highest income-generating business, and those around him defend and maintain their income more than the ruler himself. However, with the transition to modern times and the entrance of reason into the realm of standards, beliefs and values ​​that have always been considered correct are at risk of being doubted or even collapsing, which means endangering the standards of rulership.”

In a historical perspective, one can discover this new criterion of governance, which reflects the desire for traditions and traditional rulers.

Defending values.

In any possible way, sometimes old values are transformed into a core that the ruling and traditional part of society is connected to and resist against social changes, and sometimes new values – seemingly – take on this role. Examples of the first form are the return of the Church in 18th century Spain and the Islamic Republic of Iran. Governments that use religious beliefs as the oldest and harshest means of unity and suppression. For the second form, fascist Italy and Nazi Germany in the 20th and 40th decades are the best examples where nationalism and racism were the basis of their actions.

Second; Fear and Violence.

From a psychological perspective, many of our conscious behaviors are manifestations of our unconscious desires, sometimes in alignment with those desires and sometimes not. For example, a child who sees themselves as a part of their mother’s body and their mother as a part of their own body, experiences repeated distress when separated from their mother, to the point that – according to Freud’s analysis – they develop deep-seated complexes towards their father. These types of reactions can be seen in our daily behaviors in countless ways.

One of the most vital natural reactions of humans is anger. A person who is powerless against the wild nature and does not see the ability to cope with many phenomena within themselves; inevitably decides to express violence with anger; sometimes to defend against an animal that has entered their territory, sometimes to escape from natural disasters, and sometimes to take control of land, food, etc. against their own kind.

In psychological terms, anger is rooted in perception.

Fear of losing.

We eat. Fear that arises from losing something, someone, or a position. It is not surprising to say that one of the simplest and most natural reactions of authoritarian governments to any opposition or protest will be violence. A government built on domination from its foundation.

Everything.

It will not be easy to lose his position of ownership in any field.

Let’s not forget that this government has taken shape towards modernism in a crucial moment of society. A society whose most important achievement is rationalism. If it is based on direct exchange of information between people (as it has been common in traditional societies) and the measure of reason is added, undoubtedly the ruler will face a deep challenge in controlling everything – including the stability of values. The point that Hannah Arendt rightly emphasizes is the ruler’s prevention of information exchange between individuals; a desirable society of integrity, composed of isolated and uninformed individuals; a society from its core.

Individual.

Why create division, ruler?

Anything.

He is afraid, so the ruler is in front of any action outside of his government’s charter.

Individuals.

It will be decided; those who have the ability to gather a large group of dissatisfied people. Therefore, the ruler resorts to violence.

Third; Demands and Assassination.

In the twentieth century, we witnessed the birth of the concept of unity and the formation of governments and many violent ideologies that continued into the present century. Of course, in this tumultuous century, movements against violence were able to secure fundamental rights for Indians, African Americans, and others in India, America, South Africa, etc. However, the dominant theme in the twentieth century was bloodshed and violence. In many cases, enlightened thinkers were silenced; sometimes specific races, sometimes followers of a religion, and sometimes all critics and protesters…

When a totalitarian government reaches a state of stability, it resorts to physically eliminating its opponents. The reason is very simple; to prevent reaching another critical point. In Germany, tolerating Jews was considered an insult to the high values of the German race, so there should be no doubt in the supreme goals of the superior race. They had to prevent any division by eliminating all conflicts and differences in society. In Iran, however, races came to an agreement based on divine beliefs, so conflicts and rebellions were formed by non-believers or those who tolerated them. They had to be eliminated so that future generations would not doubt the lies spread by the media.

About the idea of ​​totality and the occasional belief, the discussion is not limited to the domestic policies of governments; a prominent example of this is America’s seemingly non-totalitarian stance against the growth of communism. Just as Stalin in Russia and Mao in China shed blood and spread lies, America’s war machine also invaded Vietnam and Hollywood created myths about it. This is how powerful armies like NATO were formed…

“So as long as the slogans of economic rulers remain dominant and income remains the main concern, the act of assassination becomes less significant and concepts such as exploitation, hypocrisy, and corruption become more tangible; but when the veneer of any ideology is applied to the structure of economic interests, governments will survive.”

Self and selves.

Remove it.

Others.

They know…

Assassination, in French, means terror and intimidation. In Dehkhoda Dictionary it is stated: “Assassination is derived from Terreur and means political murder by weapons and has become common in Persian, and contemporary Tazians use the word “Ehrar” instead of “Assassination”. In French, this word means fear and terror, and the rule of terror is the fundamental rule of revolutionary government, which was established after the fall of the Girondins (from May 31, 1793 to 1794) in France and included numerous political executions. In politics, the violent and illegal actions of governments to suppress their opponents and intimidate them are called assassination, and the actions of militant groups that use violent and terrifying methods to achieve their political goals are also called assassination.

Assassination or political murder is a type of killing that is primarily carried out for political or ideological purposes. The victim is someone with a position, fame, or political interests, or is targeted for insulting a moral belief such as a religion. Assassination, which is mostly referred to as political murder in Persian, has fundamental and significant differences from terrorism. Terrorism, which in Persian is also known as horrorism or scaremongering, refers to any action or threat intended to scare or harm citizens, government, groups, or political figures. A terrorist or assassin is an individual or group that follows the ideology of assassination or terrorism. Terrorists usually resort to killing and assassination of non-political people in order to promote their ideology or retaliate against their enemy country, using fear and terror to achieve their goals. Tyrannical killings and other forms of assassination, while often carried out within the framework of terrorism, have important differences from political murder. The concept of the word assassination is a major source

Assassination for political purposes has had many supporters throughout history. The Roman orator Cicero compared killing those who were seen as human-faced monsters to cutting off the limbs of a decaying body, seeing it as a way to prevent the spread of corruption in the collective body of humanity, society. The idea of tyrannicide later became linked with the theory of popular legitimacy. Supporters of assassination argued that the legitimacy of government stems from a contract made with the people, and when the terms of the contract are violated, it also provides grounds for removing the rulers.

Assassination is a method used by governments to suppress and intimidate opponents through illegal arrests, torture, execution, and other forms of unlawful harassment by political, secret, or extremist police forces. It can also refer to the tactics of right or left-wing groups who use violence, murder, and destruction to overthrow or intimidate the government. The anarchist revolutionary method (known as nihilistic anarchism) and some other revolutionary groups in Tsarist Russia also used assassination. In this sense, assassination also refers to political killings, and those who engage in political killings are called assassins (terrorists).

During the period of the French Revolution, from May 1793 to July 1794, it is known as the “Reign of Terror” because thousands of people were executed by guillotine. In Iran, especially after the Constitutional Revolution, several groups of left and right-wing terrorists have emerged who have made political assassinations their method.

In the history of Iran and the Islamic East, there is a sect known as the Ismailis or followers of Hasan Sabbah, who have used assassination as a permanent method. Their terrifying assassinations, including those of the Crusaders, have spread fear among all, and they are still known in European languages as the “Assassins” (apparently, a distortion of their original name, the Hashashins), meaning killers.

Islamic Republic and Terrorism.

Since 1979, the official authorities of the Islamic Republic of Iran, particularly individuals within the Revolutionary Guards and the Ministry of Intelligence, have been linked to at least 162 extrajudicial killings of political opponents around the world. The Islamic Republic of Iran has killed its opponents outside the country, with perhaps the most well-known being Shapour Bakhtiar, the last Prime Minister of the Pahlavi era, in Paris. On August 8, 1991, the bodies of Dr. Shapour Bakhtiar, former Prime Minister of Iran, and his secretary Soroush Katibeh were found murdered at their residence outside Paris, France. Dr. Bakhtiar, as the leader of a major symbol of unity for anti-Islamic Republic groups, had until then managed to escape two serious assassination attempts. He had been sentenced to death in absentia by a revolutionary court.

Victims of terrorist attacks attributed to the revolutionary government of Iran have been targeted in countries such as the United States, France, Iraq, and Pakistan. Among the casualties, the names of non-Iranian citizens are also noticeable. Paul Klebnikov, an American writer for Forbes magazine who had written articles under the title “Iran’s Millionaire Mullahs,” was shot and killed when leaving the magazine’s office in Moscow.

The first successful political assassination outside of Iran that can be attributed to the Islamic Republic of Iran was the murder of Shapour Bakhtiar, the former Shah’s nephew, in Paris in December 1979. This assassination took place just one month after the pro-National Front government, led by Prime Minister Mehdi Bazargan, was forced to step down and was replaced by the Revolutionary Council, which was dominated by fundamentalist clerics. The last political assassination outside of Iran and Iraq that can be directly linked to the Islamic Republic was the killing of Dr. Reza Mazloommanesh, the deputy head of the Forough-e Javidan organization, in Paris in April 1996.

Gholamali Oveisi and his brother Hossein Oveisi were also assassinated by agents of the Islamic Republic in Paris. Dr. Abdulrahman Qasemloo (Secretary General of the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan), Abdullah Ghaderi Azar (representative of the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan in Europe), and Mr. Fazil Rasul, an Iraqi Kurd who acted as a mediator, were killed during a secret meeting with representatives of the Iranian government in an apartment in Vienna. In the Mykonos assassination, four Kurdish activists opposed to the Islamic Republic (Fattah Abdoli, Homayoun Ardalan, Nouri Dehkordi, and Sadegh Sharafkandi) were killed in Berlin. The German prosecutor general accused Ali Khamenei, the leader of the Islamic Republic, and former Iranian president Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, former foreign minister Ali Akbar Velayati, and former intelligence minister Ali

In one of the most controversial murders attributed to the Islamic Republic, the brother of contemporary Iranian poet, Fereydoun Farrokhzad, was killed in his residence in the city of Bon by knife wounds. Farrokhzad was a poet, radio and television programmer, singer, TV and radio host, lyricist, composer, actor, and Iranian political activist who was critical of the Islamic Republic government.

It must be said that the killings that occurred between the years 1358 and 1375 violated some of the most fundamental principles of international human rights laws. These killings were planned, executed, and coordinated at the highest levels of political and religious organizations in Iran by senior officials of the regime, many of whom still hold positions of influence today. As Judge Fritz Kobsch stated in the final session of the Mykonos trial in Germany:

The evidence clearly shows that the rulers of Iran not only endorse cross-border killings and reward the perpetrators, but they themselves plan and carry out such killings against people who are deemed undesirable for purely political reasons. In order to maintain their power, they are willing to silence their political opponents.

• In the written text, the words “ترورگری” and “وحشت گرایی” have been used as the Persian equivalents of the word “terrorism”, and the word “ترورگر” has been used as the equivalent of the word “terrorist”.

Sources.

I’m sorry, there is no Farsi text provided for translation. Please provide the text you would like translated.

Political Encyclopedia, written by Dariush Ashouri.

There is no refuge (Global Operation of Assassination of the Islamic Republic of Iran), report published by the Iranian Human Rights Documentation Center.

Persian Wikipedia website.