Islam without Violence is not Islam
Interview with Koorosh Modaresi
Ali Javadi: The Islamic Republic of Iran’s factions and media are
constantly debating the issue of violence. Khatami says that Islam
is a merciful religion; Mesbah Yazdi says Islam is a violent religion,
whilst Khamenei says Islam is both merciful and violent. The position
and role of violence in the Islamic government’s system is largely
clear; the question, however, is what are the political implications
of this debate in the current factional war and social upheavals?
Koorosh Modaresi: Violence is an inseparable part of the society we
live in, be it in the West, East or anywhere in the world. The violence
that exists in Iran, however, has another dimension – one that is
based on Islam. The very statement that an Islamic Republic exists
somewhere means that unparalleled and brutal violence exists in it.
The mere fact that people are forced to abide by laws based on something
some god has said somewhere or because a prophet has sneezed is violence.
If anyone protests against such laws, they will be subject to punishment
and suppression, which in its simplest form is violence. Since its
establishment, the Islamic Republic has been one of the most violent
governments in the world. Today, the 2nd Khordad [‘Reformist’] faction
and Mr Khatami who says that Islam is a merciful religion is himself
the head of the regime’s executive branch, which is executing and
imposing violent policies and laws. The most vicious violence has
been carried out under Khatami’s leadership and guidance. That one
side says Islam is merciful is a reflection that at least one side
is saying that ruthless Islamic violence is no longer effective, that
the people are not retreating, that the fate of the Islamic Republic
is in danger and, therefore, that the people must be dealt with differently.
Naturally, the other side thinks that as soon as they loosen their
grip, nothing will remain of the Islamic Republic. I think that the
debate over whether Islam is violent or not is a false one. Islam
means violence - the worst and most ferocious kind of violence. The
factional debate about violence has internal usage, in which one faction
is trying to justify itself in the current balance of power and maintain
the Islamic system.
Ali Javadi: At the end of the Cold War with the Eastern Bloc’s defeat,
bourgeois ideologues announced that the epoch of violence and class
struggle had ended, etc. Is there a connection between this and the
debate on violence in the Islamic Republic?
Koorosh Modaresi: In my opinion, they are not connected at all.
The claims made by Western ideologues after the end of the Cold War
was a more fundamental debate on the basis of society and meaning
of violence, which aimed to use the Eastern Bloc’s defeat to drive
a philosophical nail in the coffin of any protest and demand for equality.
The current debate in the Islamic Republic is a much more superficial
debate and has an administrative and political application and interest.
I think that in Iranian society, in that system and even within the
factions, you will not find anyone who can agree that there is no
violence or that Islam is fundamentally based on mercy. They still
stone men and women to death for having relations, they still execute
Communists and countless acts of Islamic brutality are still carried
out in that society. Moreover, those who speak of mercy still defend
the massacre of a generation during 1981 and 1988. They still remember
their actions as ‘revolutionary’ ones and would do the same again
if necessary. Consequently, I think that these two debates are not
connected. The other debate is about the role and roots of violence
in society and is an intellectual assault on the ideology of protest
and equality seeking. This debate in the Islamic Republic is a petty
political debate for present consumption.
Koorosh Modaresi is a member of WPI’s Political Bureau and Executive
Committee. The above is a translated summary of an interview, which
was broadcast on Radio International on April 20, 2000 and first published
in Persian in Hambastegi number 89 dated June 2000.