Mohammad Javad Akbarin, a scholar and reformist journalist living in Paris, began his journalistic and political activities after the events of June 2nd, 1997 by publishing articles in newspapers such as Nashat and Asr-e Azadegan. He was among the journalists who were arrested during the crackdown on the press in Ardabil in 1998 and spent some time in prison.

In line with the theme of the special issue of the monthly magazine “Khat-e-Solh”, we approached Mr. Akbarian Rafati and had a conversation with him about the conflict between the Green Movement, civil society, and the clergy.

He says it is not acceptable for Mr. Rouhani’s supporters that the lifting of the house arrest does not take place in the first year of the government’s activity, because Hassan Rouhani’s pride during the election campaign was that the lifting of Ayatollah Montazeri’s house arrest was done by him. He also believes that the lifting of the house arrest is not the end of a story, but the beginning of a return to a point from which they have gone astray…

Mr. Akbarian; Do you think supporting Mr. Rouhani’s government, considering his views and opinions, will improve the situation of civil society in Iran?

It depends on whether your intention for improvement is precisely improvement, not treatment; the importance of this precision is that when critics express their expectations and desires more clearly, it becomes clear that they are not only expecting improvement but are exactly seeking treatment, and for this reason, they are extremely dissatisfied and even hopeless; while with Mr. Rouhani’s positions and the natural conservatism of his government, the situation of our civil society is not being treated, part of the existing illness and weakness is reflected back onto our civil society, and part of it is, of course, attributed to a government that not only has not provided the groundwork but has also severely damaged the foundations of a strong civil society and in some ways has brought it to the brink of collapse. But if your intention is improvement, yes; I think with patience we can move this chess game to the benefit of civil society and if we believe that there is no way other than gradual improvement of the current situation, supporting and demanding from the new

With the arrival of Mr. Rouhani, what has happened to the demands of the Green Movement, which was composed of a huge number of protesting people? It doesn’t seem that its leadership and known forces intend to confront the new government…

Not only do they not intend to meet, but I can say with honesty that they consider themselves victorious in the 1992 elections; now even the principlists know that without the will, presence, and support of the Green Movement, this government would not have been victorious. The most extreme and dishonest faction of the principlists is represented by the Kayhan newspaper, which, just one day before the elections, on June 12, 1992, explicitly wrote that, in the words of Mr. Shariatmadari, they support Mr. Rouhani, the “American-Israeli traitors of the 88 sedition,” and emphasized that “their candidate [meaning Hassan Rouhani] is proud of the presence and support of this group, who in the 88 sedition clearly played the role of the fifth column of the enemy.” So the issue is not just a conflict, but if it weren’t for the Green Movement and Mr. Rouhani’s promises to fulfill their

If the demand for the release of Mr. Mousavi, Mr. Karroubi, and Ms. Rahnavard is still a serious demand against the government of Iran, who is making this demand and with what weight and leverage? Also, can you explain how this demand has not been fulfilled after several months of the new government taking office?

See, this is the most important challenge of the current government; of course, every government that comes into power has almost its entire term to fulfill the promises it made; even if it’s been a few months. But in the current situation, the government has very limited time to solve the issue of sanctions; both in the eyes of its supporters and its opponents… On the one hand, it is not acceptable for its supporters that the lifting of sanctions does not happen in the first year of Mr. Rouhani’s government, as he himself had boasted during the election campaign that the lifting of sanctions against the late Ayatollah Montazeri was done by him and he had emphasized that he could close the case of sanctions and political prisoners within a year; in fact, he gave the people a sign that he could also solve this problem. If we can give the Rouhani government time to solve foreign policy and economic problems, but there is absolutely no room for maneuver in this matter, my belief

If this siege ends today, what achievements do you think have been achieved for the government of Iran and what costs have been paid by the Iranian government for this siege?

In any case, the achievement is much less than the cost paid; imagine if Mr. Khamenei had treated the people with kindness in the 88 election and did not give in to the bloody battle between the military and pseudo-military forces and the protesters; can you imagine what a great achievement it would have been for his own character and the regime? But after 4 years, he was forced to accept a government that represented the demands of the same people in 88. Well, just like here, the cost that the government has paid is much more than its achievement in the matter of lifting the siege. A generation now has the right to ask the government for its track record, which among its 6 previous presidents, except for one who became a martyr at the beginning, 4 of them were traitors, seditionists, ignorant and deviated, and the last one who remained in power through fraud, today his billions of “embezzlement” documents are

As a final question, what should we know about the end of the siege as a sign and symbol?

The sign of the necessity to return to the same point of deviation and continue with reforms; let me make it clearer: in fact, all the warnings that Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi raised during the 88 elections, we later heard from the language of the principlists and even more fiercely; they either narrated or predicted the current deviation and corruption in Mr. Ahmadinejad’s government; they explicitly stated that he lies and cheats in the statistics; but Mr. Khamenei, in the first Friday prayer after the 88 elections, criticized the candidates and protesters for why they called the head of the government, who was close to him, a liar? But less than two years later, the principlist media was full of direct or indirect descriptions of Ahmadinejad’s government as a liar… This process shows who was right and who saw things correctly? Of course, I believe that with the participation in the 92 elections, the Green

Thank you for the opportunity you have given us to access the peace line.