Leaders of Islamic Republic of Iran Consider Anti-Imperialism

Once the Islamic revolution led by Imam Khomeini (God’s Mercy be upon him) came to its glorious victory on Bahman 22, 1357 (Feb. 11, 1978), it initiated a new movement toward a multipolar world, and world powers were faced with a huge shock. In a world where countries were either dependent on the Eastern bloc or ranked as companions of Western power, there arose a movement without the least reliance upon either pole. It somehow defied the new world order that imperialists sought and entirely questioned the identity of political East and West. The slogan of “neither East nor West, only Islamic Republic,” was regarded as the main axiom of Imam Khomeini and the Islamic Republic’s foreign policy from the very beginning. It created conditions so that both the Eastern and Western powers, having many politico-economic interests in the area and thinking of our country as gendarme of the strategically ticklish region of the Middle East, suddenly found themselves in a situation in which they no longer had access to their interests, and their hands were tied with regard to many vital links and financial advantages.

Accordingly, enemies of the Islamic Republic of Iran began to challenge the regime and intervene in its affairs, as in their multilateral support of Iraq’s Ba’ath regime during the eight years of the imposed Iran-Iraq War. Of course, among their operations and plans, you can see support for rioters, various sanctions and vast financial backing for disintegration of the regime through internal forces. This trend went on until, as predicted by the late Khomeini in his early years of leadership in a letter to Gorbachev, the Soviet Union — a country earlier known as the main pole of universal power — collapsed and was divided into tens of small and large states and joined history.

After this, the American leaders, pleased with their rival’s demise, planned and organized the world with an aim to lead the international system toward a unipolar world with themselves at the helm. The problem ahead of them in their imperialistic and anti-Islamic measures was that they faced enormous barriers, the most basic of which were Iran’s regime and the stance of its leadership.

Under such circumstances, the Islamic Republic of Iran left behind two decades of its life and became stronger and tempered in the course of different events. As said by many strategists, America, symbolic of the modern West, arrogance and domineering power, saw the entity of the Islamic Republic as a token of Islamism and resistance in the face of bullying and imperialism. Hence, following the Soviet collapse, the U.S. has regarded Iran as its most fundamentally ideological foreign enemy; therefore, they are trying to topple the regime in different ways, such as by airing 100 subversive TV channels, overthrow of the Persian language and threatening a military strike, which failed thanks to national authority and public support.

I should explicitly state that there are other model countries in the world which claim to be Islamic and followers of Islamic rules, but they are totally different from Iran. For example, Turkey seeks to introduce a secular Islamic government to the world, and Saudi Arabia intends to usher a radical Islam coupled with violence into other countries of the world; the Islamic Republic of Iran presents a different model by giving priority to ideology, Shi’a school of thought and revolutionary Islam, something Americans have feared thus far. In the meantime, positions adopted by the regime leaders, whether in the deceased Khomeini’s era or during Ayatollah Khamenei’s rule as the supreme leader of the Islamic Republic, have been more effective in the face of America’s hostile motives.

For example, Imam Khomeini created new literature for Iran’s relations with America and other countries of the world by labeling America as “the Great Satan,” which implied that America takes the shape of Satan, aiming to instigate and deceive others to its own advantage. Elsewhere, he challenged the magnitude of the modern West with all its materialistic advancements by saying, “America can’t do a damn thing.” Because of this, America, in its foreign policy, suffered a blow to which it could hardly give a suitable response.

After the deceased Imam, the supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, in calling America Iran’s number one foe, continued to fight and stand up to this bullish power through great insistence on perennial antagonism toward America.

“They think they are right when they meddle in the affairs of the world’s nations. In one instance of involvement, they say they want to restore democracy! In another case, they say they want to stop left-wing infiltration! They say they want to establish security somewhere else! They say their interests are endangered in another country! They think the world belongs to them, as if they are in charge of securing democracy for nations and states! Today, the U.S. administration is in the grip of such foolish, arrogant and proud imagination. Obviously, enmity of power holders — above all, the U.S. — toward this nation, state, leader never ends. … ” he said, addressing Iran’s Air Force personnel and commanders on 19/01/1368 (Feb. 8, 1989).

However, one point that needs public attention, particularly that of the Islamic Republic’s officials, and that has been frequently underscored by the supreme leader, is the difference between the ideal Islamic model and the current model. Obviously, this discrepancy and distance can be minimized by asking the assistance of divine grace and following Islam's commandments of conspicuous religion, on one hand, and fighting the inner and outer devil, meaning passion from people and officials, on the other.

Motives of Enmity with America

The important question posed here is: What motives lie behind our vengeance toward America? Why has the restoration of relations with this country been strongly rejected again, despite demands in past years to resume relations and engage in direct talks, whether in the time of Imam Khomeini or the supreme leader? The response can be clearly realized in what the officials of the Islamic Republic of Iran have said. For example, Imam Khomeini clarifies the positions on page 420, first edition of his book, “Sahifey-e-Noor” (Book of Light), by writing, “America is worse than the Soviet Union; the Soviet Union is worse than England; England is worse than both; all of them are more vicious than each other, but now we’re dealing with America.”

Elsewhere, the supreme leader says, “Of course, it is clear when a government or nation talks about a thick-necked power, who gets more vexed than others? It is the one who is more bullish. When they say something of injustice, who is the one that dislikes it more? It is the one that is crueler. When they say something of plundering, who frets more? It is the one that plunders more; meaning who? It is the American government; the government that is more thick-necked, plunders, is more merciless and more distanced from justice, so it is our main enemy. This enmity appeared so from scratch.” (Friday Congregational prayers sermons-Tehran-12/11/1357 [February 1, 1978])

What you read above is only one instance of his notion about the main motives of Iran and Iranians’ belligerence against the U.S. government. Topics and other motives in his remarks can be mentioned here:

• America is the true translation of “arrogance.” The leader regards this devil as the first arrogance in history, in the eyes of the holy Quran, by referring to the meaning of arrogance in our culture as well as its sense in the holy Quran. He further makes it clear by saying that if arrogance is well translated, today it aligns with the aggressive, haughty, rebellious, thick-necked America.

• America follows an immoral system attributed to its spirit of arrogance. This is displayed well by its intervention in other countries.

• America is known globally as a main hub of racial discrimination and conflict in different areas.

• The U.S. government is portrayed as a supporter of darkness, tyranny and viciousness. Their CV represents such facts well.

• America manifests global hegemony and seeks domination everywhere.

• Imperialist America seeks to promulgate ill cultures in the world and defies any Islamic, ideological or religious movement.

• America, with its nature of lordship politics, looks to establish a self-actualized new world order, something the Islamic Republic of Iran entirely challenges.

• The ominous Zionist-American alliance is something that cannot be easily embraced.

• America has become idolized for its power and the world obeys it unequivocally.

• America, in the course of history, has exhorted indiscriminate killing in different parts of the world, including Iran.

• America has vetoed significantly touchy U.N. resolutions on, for example, Israeli crimes.

• Striking down Iran Air passenger airline flight 655, so hostilely and brutally, amply demonstrates America’s bloodlust.

• America has left behind traces from major wars.

• The U.S. military is unlike normal human nature; it’s an inhumane system using the law of the jungle when acting in the world.

• The U.S. government is a complete manifestation of terrorist acts and the expansion of terrorism in the world, from which our country has suffered a great deal.

• America has shown all-out support of the use of chemical weapons during the eight-year Iran-Iraq War and other wars.

• America has conquered all political fortresses of the world save this one (Iran’s). They have lost hope for capturing this one.

• We will not break the ice with America.

Nowadays, the U.S.’ arrogant policies and recognized policy toward the Islamic Republic of Iran depend on points of our strength, meaning the strong points of our diplomacy and system. They want to weaken these points, cutting them loose from the regime. Therefore, compromise and flexibility are not worth showing to them.