Freedom Movement, Aligned with America

TEHRAN (Iran News) The official view of the Islamic Republic toward the performance and positions of this party indicates that their fundamental deviations from the system’s ideological outlook are completely Western-oriented, and that their mode of struggle has been parliamentarian.

In this regard, sources close to principlist currents and supporters of the system have raised serious criticisms against the Freedom Movement and consider it a current deviating from the main line of the Revolution. From the perspective of these sources, the main deviations of this party include the following:

First, the intellectual foundations of the Freedom Movement are not compatible with Pure Muhammadan Islam and the official interpretation of Imam Khomeini (may he rest in peace) and the Islamic Republic system, and it adopts a completely extreme nationalist approach in opposition to Islamism.

Second, this party has been accused of lack of commitment to Velayat-e Faqih (Guardianship of the Jurist), attempts to establish relations with the United States in the early days of the Revolution, obstruction of the revolutionary path, and misleading the youth.

The main reference for this viewpoint is Imam Khomeini’s letter in 1987, in which he explicitly speaks of the “deviations of the Freedom Movement” and even considers its harm greater than that of other groups.

Statements have also been نقل (quoted) from the Supreme Leader emphasizing the betrayal and attachment of some elements of the Provisional Government to America.

On the other hand, the Freedom Movement presents itself as a “national–religious” party and a supporter of Islamic democracy.

In the official charter of this party, emphasis is placed on being Muslim, being Iranian, supporting constitutionalism, and remaining loyal to Mossadegh’s legacy.

Its bylaws also explicitly stress defending the foundations of the Revolution and the system of the Islamic Republic of Iran and striving to realize the principal ideals of the Revolution.

This party played a historical role in the struggle against the Pahlavi regime as well as in forming the Provisional Government after the Revolution, and it counts founders such as Mehdi Bazargan and Ayatollah Seyyed Mahmoud Taleghani among its record.

However, at present this party is not recognized by the Islamic Republic, and its activities in the country have been declared illegal.

The main محور (axis) of tension between the Freedom Movement and the official reading of the Islamic Republic system lies here: one side emphasizes nationalism and democracy with an ostensibly religious flavor, while the other insists on Pure Islam, Velayat-e Faqih, and anti-arrogance (anti-imperialism) as the foundations of the Revolution. Thus, from the perspective of official institutions, the conflict has largely taken shape based on this theoretical disagreement as well as the performance of the Provisional Government led by Engineer Mehdi Bazargan—especially regarding the issue of bypassing Imam Khomeini (may he rest in peace) and establishing relations with the United States in the meeting with Brzezinski in Algiers.

Attention to the fact that their way of thinking led to the separation of the Mojahedin-e Khalq, with their pendulum-like stance, raises doubts about the consistency between words and actions.

If we consider the criterion for struggle against the monarchical regime to be both anti-despotism and anti-imperialism, then this party has certainly lacked an anti-colonial outlook.

And without concern, and with clarity, the angle of their divergence is understandable and even measurable.