To thee have we granted the fount (of abundance)? Culture, civilization and positive elements in the social life of the human being are indebted more than anything to the sacrifice of those wise men who, with their lofty ideas, call mankind towards equity, justice and freedom, towards happiness and eternity and a truth which is greater than the palpable and the phenomena of the material world. These men can themselves be placed into two groups: those who simply show the way and guard a school of thought through cultural and ideological struggle or establish an ideological system and a philosophical base; and those who, in addition to initiating cultural movements and changes, personally enter the arena to change the status quo and set in place the desired system. The latter are ready to sacrifice their lives in the struggle to realize their aims. Great men, who have proved the truth of their way and their ideas in practice -and of course it is they who have caused the most perpetual and profound social changes - have created true cultures and civilizations and have affected, :0 a great extent, the individual and social life of the human being. Undoubtedly, the most resplendent scenes of humankind’s history have been, rough about because of their struggles. At the head of this caravan of light, we found the great prophets and the godly people. The phenomena of the Islamic Revolution and Imam Khomeini’s movement can only be understood when looked at in the context of this journey and from this perspective. Indeed, had the movements of the prophets, and other uprisings which have taken place to ensure the continuation of their path, not occurred, could the life of the human being under the governance of autocrats and pleasure worshippers and the egotism of the irreligious human being find any other representation than a fetid swamp brimming with oppression and injustice? Alone, Imam Khomeini grasped the torch of guidance of the Islamic nation (umma) and no one would have believed that its lustrous rays would one day each the farthest corners of the world and illumine the path of combatants and fighters in the East and West.

Retelling past historical events of nations and revolutions is not beneficial imply because it elucidates the facts and blocks the way of distortion, but also understanding the past is an inevitable necessity for ensuring the continuation of he path for future generations. From the time that the destiny of Islam fell into the hands of unfit leaders, and the enemies of God’s religion dispersed the nation {umnia} of the prophet of unity with the weapon of discrimination and the vast dominions of Islam were divided and placed into the hands of corrupt governments, until the time that the present age thrilled at the call of the Islamic revolution, reform-seeking revolutions have continued to occur in Islamic countries. However, each of these movements, for various reasons including a lack of sufficient facilities and unpropitious conditions and in many cases because of the absence of a self-purified, decisive and strong leader, were. Stopped at their inception or midway, or treason forced them onto a deviated ath. Of course, the result of these continuous struggles and noble uprisings is been such that the slogans and ideas of Islam have been kept alive despite The dreadful events, which have taken, place in the life of the Islamic nation throughout history.

The genesis of the scientific renaissance in Europe (a major part of which is indebted to the transfer to the region of Muslim experience, science a expertise, a fact which just, Western historians have also acknowledged in their books), followed by a period of industrial progress, inventions and success~ discoveries, effected the imposition of the political power of the West, a bitter reality, on the third world and Islamic countries and created a distance between them which increased day by day in favours of the West. Expansionism and hegemony, two elements inherent in the neo-colonialist culture of West, along with progressive development, brought about or increased the West’s dominance on vast areas of the Muslim world. Formerly, many Islamic countries appeared in the group of European colonies, however with the rise America as another hegemonical and aggressive power, the problems of Islamic world increased. The two World Wars also left their mark, and t prepared the ground for further Western domination. The movements personalities dependent on the West were singled out from amongst on the elements with weak principles that enjoyed high positions and power in Islamic countries and were, through numerous deceits, given the reins power.

Under such circumstances, Islam, which as the last and most complete of the divine religions and the product of all the struggles of the prophets which through the devotion of the Prophet and Muhammad (upon whom be pea and his companions had in the early days of its existence and in a short space of time crossed the borders of the Sassanian and Byzantine empires, was n displaced, abused and alienated from the social life of the Muslims. Stripped of all its life-giving properties by the hegemonical powers, by the propaganda the enemies and the distortion of those akhunds dependent on the corrupt regimes, Islam was degraded to the confines of worship and personal practice.

The rise of Communism, with its deceiving and apparently revolution slogans, raised futile hopes, initially in the hearts of many Europeans and then in the hearts of Asians and Africans. However, not only did it have a positive effect on the painful situation of the Islamic societies, it also caused appearance of another imperious power. The endless struggle of communists with religion, the formation of leftist parties dependent on Communist bloc in many Islamic countries, and in some cases the formation of puppet Communist states, opened new chapters in the painful, problematic history of the Muslims.

The discovery of vast sources of oil in the Persian Gulf region and many other areas of the Islamic world became a basis and powerful motive for further encroachment and increased supremacy by the universally predominant powers before becoming a ray of hope for the improvement of the dreadful conditions of the Islamic world. The new political divisions and the polarization of the world into two spheres after the Second World War broadened the assault of the East and West against Muslim lands and increased their avaricious desire for supremacy there. The fire of local battles was inflamed. The holy land, the land of the Muslims’ first qibla, was given to the Zionists, and the usurp Tory government of Israel was set in place like a dagger in the heart of the Islamic countries. The relative vigilance of Muslims and their rage at the occupation of Quds was severely suppressed in its infancy, and the idea of Muslim unity against the new enemies was forgotten as nationalist sentiment and the enemies promoted slogans. Although some of the nationalists, such as Jamal ‘Abdul Nasser, worked for the people and succeeded in taking some positive steps at certain stages of history, on the whole, the nationalist movement was merely a means, propagated by both East and West, to obstruct the realization of true Muslim unity and to control and confine the anger of the Muslims arising from their potentially explosive situation to a specific area. Not only did Pan-Arabism, Pan-Turkism, Pan-Iranism and other such inclinations never act as a powerful advantage against aggressive Western culture, but also they always worked as a means for increasing the internal differences and diverting Muslim attention from the real enemies. In reality, nationalism was a tool in the hands of those powers, which sought to dominate.

Iran has played its role as one of the sensitive regions of the Islamic world during different periods of Islamic history. From the first centuries of Islam, it has been recognized as being one of the centers of defence of Abi Abdullah’s {Imam Husayn (upon whom be peace)) uprising against the Umayyads. However, in recent times, its situation has been no better than that of other Islamic countries. At the time of the Qajars, and because of their treason, important areas of Iran were ceded to others. The constitutional movement, which, led by the ‘ulama and fuqaha of the day, stirred hope in The hearts of the people was suppressed. Under pressure from Th governments, and because of the treason of irreligious intellectuals, leadership was taken away from the ‘ulama, the path of the movement was diverted and, consequently, the dominance of the corrupt kings was strengthened.

Iran’s strategic importance; its access to the warm waters of the Persiar Gulf; the fertility and vastness of the land; the varying climate; the population of the country; the discovery of great oil resources and underground mines an~ Iran’s common border with Tsarist Russia, first of all, and then later with the Soviet Union, were some of the factors which drew the covetous eyes of the new powers to this region. However, the deep religious belief and sentiment of the Iranian people was always the chief obstacle in the path of the hegemonical powers.

According to historical documents and the confessions of leaders of the Pahlavi regime, Reza Khan’s coup d’etat on February 2 1, 192 one, (Esfand 2 1 299 AHS) was organised by the British. The result was the enforcement o one of the most dictatorial forms of government on the people of Iran. Th dictated, public policy of Reza Khan was to copy Ataturk in the area o secularism and westernization. The decree prohibiting religious ceremonies an enforcing the removal of the hijab of women {forcing the women to remove their veils} was formally issued and implemented and stood as symbol 0 westernization and the dependence of the new government. The disperse uprisings of the believers and ‘Ulama in Mashhad and Isfahan and other region of Iran were severely suppressed; the murder of the people in the Gauhar Shad mosque in Mashhad on July 12, 1935 (Tir 2 1, 1314 AHS) serves as an example.

Contemporary with the victory of the Allies in the Second World War during the course of which some regions of northern and southern Iran war occupied by the aggressor powers - the famous conference of the allied hear of state (Churchill, Stalin and Roosevelt) took place in Tehran. The new policies of the hegemonical powers called for a change in the methods Governing and the familiarization of the puppet regimes with the new method and developments in the world. Just as the Allies had brought Reza khan t the throne, so too they now deposed him and banished him from Ira Muhammad Reza Pahlavi, who, according to the confessions of his closest ai (General Fardust), was closely supervised, guarded and trained by the British government from his youth, was put in power and another chapter of pain and tyranny was added to the history of the Iranian nation.

It was under these circumstances that the superior powers in the war promoted a wave of xenomaniacs, for the West, under the heading of intellectualism, and for the East, under the heading of revolution, in the third world and Islamic countries, including Iran. The common factor in both movements was the severe opposition to religion and religious slogans and manifestations. Unfortunately, the extensive propaganda campaign by the enemies to erase politics from religion and alienate religious categories from politics was greatly successful in subconsciously influencing the views of the people and even the opinions of those in the theological centers themselves. The role of the clergymen was confined to conducting formal religious ceremonies and delivering edifying sermons and lectures while attacks against them by the government were widespread and an atmosphere rife with deviated political and ideological thoughts prevailed. The sentiments of the vulnerable youth were driven towards deviating and politically dependent ideas of parties, such as the Tudeh Party, and of godless people like Kasravi.

Imam Khomeini was born on September 24, 1902 (Mehr 2, 123 1 AHS) into a family of learning, struggle and migration. His early days were marked by the strife between his honorable father and the khans and regional leaders, which eventually ended in his father’s martyrdom. Imam’s childhood years and youth coincided with a period of social and political crisis in Iran. His sensitive spirit, imbued with a desire to fight oppression and the existing conditions of the time, motivated him, even at that time, to familiarize himself with political problems and the pains and troubles which afflicted his nation. A man of exceptional ability, Imam Khomeini soon finished the various courses of Islamic sciences he had embarked upon. In addition to Islamic jurisprudence {fiqh} and Islamic principles {usul), he also studied philosophy and Gnosticism {‘irfan} at the highest level with the great teachers of that time. After Ayatullah Ha’ in moved to Qum, and the subsequent formation there of a centre for religious study, Imam Khomeini, with the greatest of pleasure, also went and settled there.

As was mentioned before, during this time Britain and other imperialist promoted a wave of hostility towards Islam in Islamic countries Governments. In Iran, the agents of Reza khan’s government, in collusion the irreligious, so-called intellectuals, pushed the ideas of Baha’ ism Wahhabism to the fore. At a time when an atmosphere of intense prevailed over the religious establishment, and its policy was one of silence the face of government atrocities, Imam Khomeini, in his first reaction, w the book Kashf al-Asrar in 1943 (1322 AHS) (two years after Reza Khan expulsion). In this book, Imam refutes the accusations of the anti-relig enemies and in numerous passages overtly attacks the Pahlavi rule for crimes. A short time later, in a trenchant political proclamation which b with Sura 34, Verse 46 of the Qur’an: “Say, I do admonish you on one p that ye do stand up for God” he exhorted all the ‘ulama of Islam and Iranian nation to rise up against the existing state of affairs.

The atmosphere of fear prevalent in the society, the torpor existing the theological centre and the disputes over politics, which took, place t were obstacles in the way of any basic steps. The only solution was to re the unity of the clergy, awaken the religious students and strengthen position of the theological centers and of the ‘ulama, as the trusted leader the people, a position which had been severely damaged by the policies of Khan. After the death of Ayatullah Ha’ in, Imam Khomeini was active promoting the candidacy of His Holiness Grand Ayatullah Burujirdi for position of supreme religious authority.

The Second World War prepared the grounds for US domination in regions under European control and the transfer of political power. At time, the European countries were immersed in the economic problems crises, which resulted from the war and were engaged in repairing the destruction. The American leaders, who were not directly affected by destruction of the war, imposed their economical system on the world began to expand their fiendish domination over other countries. The British government, which saw Iran as a country where it had traditionally held sw had no choice but to relinquish its role to America. At this time, two in concerns, namely: domination over oil-rich regions and acquiring geographic; strategic bases against the Russians, formed the focus of America’s political economic actions and from both points of view Iran was the centre attention.

Meanwhile, after the struggles of the late Mudarris, which ended in an act of tyranny with his martyrdom, the clergy were pushed out of the political scene of Iran. In the period between the referendum for the Sixteenth National Consultative Assembly in 1950 (1329 AHS) and 1953 (1332 AHS), an opportunity presented itself for the reappearance of the clergy on the political scene. The Fida ‘yan-i Islam killed the Prime Minister of that time, General Razmara, who severely opposed the movement for the nationalization of the country’s oil. The assistance and support given by Ayatullah Kashani to the minority group in the Parliament, under the leadership of Dr. Muhammad musaddiq, led to the approval of the bill nationalizing the oil industry. Demonstrations by the people on July21, 1951 (Tin 30, 1331 AHS) brought about the dismissal of Qavam ul-Saltana and the reappointment of Dr. Musaddiq as Prime Minister. The Shah was forced to leave Iran, but the members of the National Front did not desire the leadership of the clergy. Their opposition set Musaddiq against Ayatullah Kashani. The differences between these two leaders of the movement and the treacherous actions, both overt and covert, of the communist Tudeh Party prepared the grounds for the implementation of US plans. Consequently, with the coup d’etat of August 19, 1953 (Murdad 28, 1332 AHS), the dictator returned to Iran.

What comes to light from Imam Khomeini’s communications and: conversations with Ayatullah Kashani at that time, along with Imam’s later; peaches and messages, is that Imam was not altogether happy with the aims of: he movement, and, more importantly, with some of the personalities of the movement. Two years after the coup d’etat, the members of the Fida’yan-i r₅, ₀₁₇₁ group were arrested; Navab Safavi and his companions were tried in a military court and hanged at dawn on January 17, 1956 (Dey 27,1334 \ H 5).

With the appointment of General Zahedi, the American puppet, as ‘rime Minister, a period of treason and plunder of the vast resources of Iran vas ushered in once again, this time with an even greater urgency than before. From 1 953- 1 963 (1332- I 342 AHS) alone, the amount of oil plundered by he European and American companies was more than the amount of extracted oil pillaged by Britain over the previous fifty years.

The Iranian economy, agriculture and culture was subject to direct incursions by America and the West, and in a short time Iran was transformed Into a military base for preserving American interests in the sensitive region the Middle East. The responsibility for training the armed forces and the positions therein were handed over to American military advisers. Economy military and political agreements for the protection of the illegitimate interests of America were ratified one after the other by the coup d’etat regime.

The circumscribed reappearance of the National Front and a few o political groups in the political arena during the years 1 960-1 963 (13,1342 AHS) was not constructive and it actually resulted in the break up of organization. The religious wing of the National Front separated itself in I (I 340 AHS) and formed the Liberation Movement of Iran.

White House tacticians, in order to stave off popular unrest Communist influence, added the task of carrying out meretricious reforms the programmers of their puppet regimes. In Iran too, the Shah, under press from the Americans, gave the premiership to Dr. ‘Ali Amini. The political climate conceived by America was to be realized through series superficial reforms, at the head of which was to be the land reform program

The position of the theological centre in Qum, which had b strengthened by the struggles of Grand Ayatullah Ha’iri and the power presence of Grand Ayatullah Burujirdi and enlightened personalities such Imam Khomeini, was seen as being a potential obstacle in the way of American reforms. The Iranian regime, in its analysis of the situation upon death of Ayatullah Burujirdi and the subsequent divisions over the candidate position of supreme religious leader, believed that an opportunity for speedy implementation of the reform programmed had presented itself. I Shah, in a trip to America, won approval from the White House for his plans change the cabinet and appoint Asadullah ‘Alam as Prime Minister. January 1 962 (Dey, I 340 AHS), the land reform bill was approved. Addition to the manifold support given by America, the Russian state-controls media also praised the Shah’s actions.

In October I 962 (Mehr I 341 AHS), the Provincial and District Councils Bill was also approved. Essentially, the motive behind the bill was t eradication of Islam. With its approval, the Islamic stipulations concerning voters and candidates for election were dropped, and the pledge of allegiance was changed from “swearing on the Holy Qur’an”, to “swearing on the Holy Book”. The main goal of the regime was to assess conditions and prepare the Grounds for the implementation of the following and most important stage of so-called White Revolution.

Imam vigorously opposed this bill and invited the maraji’, the theological centers and the people to rise up in protest. Following Imam’s warnings to the government in the form of telegrams to the Prime Minister and speeches and proclamations, and the support given by the maraji’ as well as widespread demonstrations of the people in Qum, Tehran and other cities, Jam’s government informed the maraji’ of Qum that the bill had been rescinded. Imam Khomeini reacted with vigilance and announced that the annulment of the bill had to be officially and openly announced by the government. The regime was eventually forced to submit. This was the Iranian Jon’s first political victory under the leadership of Imam Khomeini after the up d’etat of August 19, 1953 (Murdad 28, 1331 AHS). Following this ant, the Shah’s regime increased its widespread propaganda campaign against ~ clergy. America persisted in implementing its new policies. The main ‘tenets of the so-called White Revolution were codified and implemented lowing a fraudulent referendum held on January 26, 1963 (Bahman 6, 41 AHS).

Imam Khomeini, aware of the consequences of an intensification of American dominance and worried about the future position of the theological centers, decided to adopt a policy of resistance and all-out opposition to the w policies of the Shah’s regime. Through his forceful messages and speeches, a time when suppression had cast its shadow over every facet of Iranian life d an atmosphere of silence prevailed; he rekindled the flame of revolutionary ml in the hearts of the people. In one of his speeches, delivered on February), 1963 (Esfand I, 1341 AHS) after the mendacious referendum, Imam “Do not be afraid of these rusty, old bayonets. These bayonets will on be broken. The regime cannot oppose the wishes of a great nation the bayonets and sooner or later it will be defeated.”

The young religious students of the theological schools and the believers prepared themselves to rise up in the way of Imam. On March 22, 1963 farvardin 2,1342 AHS), the day of the anniversary of the martyrdom of am Ja’far Sadiq (upon whom be peace), in a precipitous and barbaric move The regime attacked the Fayziya Madrasa in Qum.

Imam in a message following this attack explicitly announced his uncompromising position: “I have now prepared my heart for the bayonets of your agents; but I am not prepared to take your bullying and to be submissive in the face o your tyranny. God willing, I will explain God’s laws on any occasion I see fit and as long as I have a pen in my hand I will divulge actions taken which go against the interests of this country.”

In another message on the fortieth day of this disaster, Imam explains the connection between the Iranian Islamic revolution and the (interests of the Islamic world: “I declare to the heads of the Islamic countries, whether Arab 01 non-Arab: The ‘ulama of Islam, the religious leaders, the Iranian nation together with its noble army, are the brothers of the Islamic countries an share their interests. They abhor and are disgusted at the treaty with Israel, the enemy of Islam and Iran. I say this quite clearly; if they wish, let the agents of Israel come put an end to my life.”

The news of Imam’s revolt spread across Iran, and the atmosphere i Qum, Tehran and many other cities was tense. The afternoon of ‘1shur (June 3, 1963 AD, Khordad 13, 1342 AHS) arrived. Imam Khomeini, in harsh speech, revealed the secret relations, the friendship and the agreement existing between the Shah and Israel. On the evening of June 4 (Khurdad I 4) Imam’s home was surrounded by commandos. By the following morning, the leader of the uprising had been arrested and taken to Tehran.

The great event of Khordad 15,1342 (June 5, 1963), which in reality marked the peak of popular support for Imam Khomeini’s movement occurred. The shouts of “Either Death or Khomeini” rang out throughout Qum, Tehran and other cities of Iran.The American reforms, according to the plans of the White House, ha to be implemented in the different areas of the world - and especially in Ira which had the role of island of stability in a convulsive Middle East - in a atmosphere of peace and tranquility; thus the name White Revolution was given to the Shah’s reform plans. However, the uprising of the people on Khurdad 15 spoilt all the regime’s schemes. It was a bloody and widespread confrontation, and for the first time in the recent history of Iran an uprising h occurred which was one hundred percent Islamic and which under the leadership of the religious establishment was aimed at the overthrow of the monarchy. After the killings of Khordad 15, a wave of arrests and expulsions ok place all over the country. One after the other the friends of Imam were it to prison or into exile. Chivalrous people such as Tayyeb and Hajj Rezai, who were in the front line of the people’s demonstrations in the south of Tehran on Khordad 15, were executed, and the movement was apparently crushed and controlled.

In prison under interrogation, Imani announced openly that he did not accept the ruling body and the imperial judiciary as being righteous and legal.  He refused to respond to their repeated interrogations. The pressure of public opinion and the protests of the ‘ulama and people from different areas within the country and outside it eventually forced the regime to free Imam from confinement on April 7, 1 964 (Farvardin 1 8,1343 AHS) and transfer him Qum. The widespread celebrations, which took place in Qum, showed the termination of the religious students and the people in continuing their support for Imam. The Shah’s regime assumed that with the merciless killings Khordad 15 and the arrest of the effective elements of the movement, Imam Khomeini would abandon the movement and keep silent. On the contrary, immediately upon his release, and on the occasion of the issuance of decree condemning Ayatullah Taleghani and Mehdi Bazargan to imprisonment, Imam issued a statement in which he warned against the illegitimate actions of the ruling body, the danger of recognizing Israel and of Israeli dominance in the country’s affairs. Furthermore, in two speeches he announced his determination to continue the movement and said: “Even if they wish to hang Khomeini, he will not compromise. Do t be mistaken, even if Khomeini comes to an understanding with you, the nation of Islam will not compromise with you. Do not be mistaken, wt are in the same fortress as we were. We oppose all anti-Islamic decrees we oppose all coercion.”

The Shah, in response to a congratulatory message from the American President after the fraudulent referendum said: “We can be assured of th good will of our American friends in the implementation of our economic and social plans.” The implementation of the new plans was not possible without the direct presence of the American military advisers. However, the Khurdad 15 movement and the continuation of Imam’s struggle presented a hazy future for the regime’s reforms. America decided to revive the medieval Capitulation Bill in order to safeguard the lives of its citizens and preserve its interests i Iran. According to this bill, American political and military advisers would receive judicial immunity and in reality, any unlawful and immoral act on their part would be permitted and could not be protested against. The Capitulation Bill, which had already been approved by the cabinet of Asadullah ‘Alam i October 1963 (Mehr 1342), was once again taken by the government Hasan ‘Ali Mansur to Parliament in October 1 964 (Mehr 1343) an approved. This bill was, in fact, an open and formal step towards t destruction and sale of the judicial and political independence of the country.

As soon as Imam Khomeini was informed of this treachery, he began widespread struggle against the bill. He sent messengers to different areas Iran to inform the people of his decision to deliver a speech on October 2,1964 (Aban 4,1343 AHS) revealing the regime’s plans. A frightened Shah sent a representative to Qum, but Imam refused to accept him. Eventually the representative succeeded in meeting with Imam’s eldest son, the mart Hajj Mustafa, to whom he delivered a message from the regime: “America in such a powerful position that any attack on it would be more dangerous th~ attacking the first person of the country. In these times, if Ayatullah Khomeini wishes to deliver a speech, he should be very careful not to cross swords with the American government, for to do so would be very dangerous and would effect a very sharp and strong reaction from them.” In spite of the regime’s serious threat, Imam delivered his famous speech against the Capitulation Bill on the day he had planned to do so. In his speech he attacked the regime’s open, anti-Islamic violation of Iranian sovereignty a Dependence, and in a warning to the ‘ulama. Maraji’, theological centers, my and nation of Iran openly exclaimed:

“Let the American President know that in the eyes of the Iranian nation, he is the most repulsive member of the human race today    all troubles today are caused by America.”

In addition to this speech, Imam Khomeini also issued a harsh? Declaration denouncing the bill. A new wave of objection and opposition swept over Iran. The Shah’s regime saw the solution to lie in the expulsion of Imam.At dawn on November 4, 1964 (Aban 13, 1343 AHS), Imam’s house ms once again surrounded by hundreds of commandos and paratroopers. Imam was arrested and taken straight to Mehrabad Airport in Tehran and from ere, according to agreements made by the regime, he was sent first to Istanbul and then into exile in Bursa, a city in the west of Turkey. There, under e observation of the security forces of the two countries, he was forbidden m carrying out any form of social or political activity.

On January 21, 1965 (Bahman 1,1343 AHS), Muhammad Bukhara’i and his friends - members of the United Islamic Groups who were supporters id followers of Imam - punished Hasan ‘Al) Mansur for his treason. All of e group members were arrested; four of them were executed and the rest are imprisoned for long periods.

By distancing Imam from the centre of revolution and through the widespread arrests of his followers, the movement of Khordad 15 was ‘controlled. By means of the Pahlavi regime, America carried out its desired changes in the different industrial, economic and cultural fields of the country d in the Iranian army.

Continual pressure from the people and ulama was brought to bear on e Shah’s regime to permit Imam to leave Turkey for a more favourable place exile, Najaf, one of the Shi’ite shrine cities of Iraq. Because of this pressured the difficulties encountered by the Turkish government in containing and controlling Imam’s activities, bearing in mind the similarity between the political climate prevailing in Turkey and that in Iran, consent was given on October 5, 1965 (Mehr 13, 1344 AHS) and Imam proceeded to Najaf. In agreeing to this move, the Shah’s regime believed it would free itself from popular pressure. However, more important was the assumption on the part of? Regime that the apathy and muteness which had gripped the theological .

In the past, the theological centre in Najaf had nurtured such outstanding and combatant personalities as the late Mirza Shirazi (upon whom be peace) and had been a fortress defending Islam against the enemies’ attacks. However, at the time of Imam’s exile, there the dynamism had stagnated and an air of apathy and muteness prevailed. The idea of the separation of religion from politics, which came about through the influence of latter-day colonialist propaganda and the policies of the Ba’ athist regime in Iraq, had cast noticeable shadow over this centre.

It was difficult and distressing for such a combatant personality as Imam who was so involved with the, many problems of the Islamic world, to b present there under such conditions and to have to endure them. Despite having the honor of being close to the holy sites and being able to make pilgrimage to them, Imam Khomeini himself has many times spoke acrimoniously about the conditions of the Najaf theological centre in his literary works.on entering the centre in Najaf, Imam met with much discouragement opposition and jealousy, not from enemies, but from ignorant friends an fellow-believers with fossilized ideas who felt that the life-giving Islamic laws ha to be confined to a few juristic categories of worship and business transactions This state of affairs was to continue in various forms until his migration to Paris Moreover, Imam’s open political activities were severely hindered by th control exercised by the Iranian and Iraqi security agents . In spite of these difficult conditions, Imam’s charisma, learnedness and awareness meant that hi classes came to be regarded as being of the highest caliber in Najaf in a very short space of time.

Despite the difficulties he had to face and in addition to his engagement in the teaching of courses in advanced studies of fiqh and the theoretical bases of Islamic rule entitled “Velavat- i Faqi/z”, Imam Khomeini assiduously monitored the political affairs of Iran and the world of Islam whilst in Najaf and he maintained contact in various ways with the revolutionary Iranians, political prisoners and the families of the tragedy of Khordad 15. once Imam had become settled in Iraq, a group of Iran’s revolutionary clergy successfully made the journey to Najaf, whilst others, disregarding sell centre in Najaf would form a natural and important obstacle to Imam’ activities.

Interests and having obtained Imam’s approval, remained in Iran in order to establish relations between Imam and the movement within the country and to safeguard all that had been achieved from the Khordad 15 uprising. Imam’s presence in Iraq presented the opportunity for a more direct and improved relationship between himself and both the devout Muslims and the Muslim students abroad than had prevailed in the past; and this very factor played a significant role in propagating Imam’s ideas and the objectives of the struggle throughout the world. With regard to the Arab-Israeli wars and the violations perpetrated by the Zionist regime, Imam Khomeini put a great deal of effort into supporting the Palestinian Muslims’ uprising and backing other frontier countries. Numerous meetings were held with the heads of rebel Palestinian organizations; certain envoys were sent to Lebanon; and an important historic religious decree was issued by Imam in which he declared it a religious duty to give full military, economic and moral support to the Palestinian uprising and to rebellions in those countries subjected to invasion. This was the first time that such attempts were made on such a grand scale by one of the world’s outstanding Shi’ i maraji’.

In spite of the stifling social climate within the country, communication the movement’s goals to the younger generation and people in general was maintained both by Imam’s children and friends in the religious learning centers d universities and by the efforts of the general public and their mass­ reproduction of Imam’s messages, books and treatises. Of course, many of these people willingly accepted exile, incarceration, severe tortures and martyrdom. The martyrdom of Ayatullahs Sa’idi and Ghaffari, who died under torture of the Shah’s agents, are cases in point. On different occasions Imam’s messages and speeches from Najaf were the only means of carrying the Iranian nation’s cries of protest to the ears of the rest of the world; whilst they D preserved the spirit of the revolution in people’s hearts. Examples of such occasions can be seen during the affair concerning the formation of the Shah’s Rastakhiz Party; during the period when the treaties of mutual cooperation between the Shah and the Zionist regime were being drawn up; and during the inauspicious crowning ceremonies of two-and-a-half millennia of monarchial rule I the Shiraz Art Festivals: the latter events taking place by the Shah’s exaction of hundreds of millions of dollars from the oppressed people of Iran to cover expenses incurred , which in fact strengthened America’s position in Iran and in the region as a whole.

Almost every year on the anniversary of Khordad 15 young revolutionary students from the religious learning centers would commemorate the event of that day, the most striking of these occasions being the religious students’ 1 975 three-day uprising in Fayziya Madrasa. Once more, the cries of “Down with Pahlavi rule” and “Long live Khomeini” were resumed in Qum for a three- day period, as were the repressive tactics and precautionary measures of the regime. The uprising ended with special anti-riot squads storming Fayziya from the roof and main entrance; about five hundred of the religious students were arrested and yet again, Fayziya Madrasa was closed down for a length of time. It was in fact Imam’s messages and speeches, alone which bravely defended this course of action taken by the religious students.

Meanwhile, after the quelling of the uprising and the exiling of the movement’s leadership, America swiftly resumed the execution of “Reformatory” plans in Iran. Indeed, the period extending from 196 1 until 1978 (1340 until 1357 AHS) saw the destruction of traditional agriculture A country which at one time had enjoyed a surfeit in the production of man foodstuffs and agricultural and dairy produce, now became heavily dependent upon foreign markets for people’s basic needs; that is everything from wheat and rice to other produce. The Shah’s regime, because of its tactless extraction of oil and the resultant oil revenue which had risen considerably due to th energy crisis, increased the number of assembly plants in various areas 0 industry; plants which are typically characterized among other things by a great dependence upon international companies. Consumption, especially 0 Western products reached an all-time high. The encouragement of a Western mentality and the effacement of Islam was the prime mission of the country’. Press, media and other broadcasting services. Zoroastrianism, Baha’ism Freemasonry were officially and openly propagandized. The designated origin of Iran’s national history (the Iranian calendar) was changed from the migration of the Prophet (pbuh) to the monarchial reign of the Achaemenian kings. The worst possible form of despotism had been imposed upon people. There w no sign of military autonomy to be seen and the Shah and a few of his corrupt agents were in absolute command. Universities, having been drawn towards immorality, had become an arena for the ideas of xenomaniacs and freemasons. The Shah’s infernal SAVAK dictated matters of politics, national security and social order to various governmental branches. This period in Iran’s history had truly been one of the darkest periods of rule by self-conceited sovereigns in this land. Over eighty percent of the national income and assets y at the disposal of a few capitalists who were allied to the Shah’s regime, of horn a considerable number were Baha’i. A vast expanse of fertile ground id land which lay around primary dams had officially been handed over to a internal number of the Shah’s entourage and family members; and the regime’s internal conflicts mainly revolved around the acquisition of wealth and the creased plunder of the public treasury.

All of this eventually led to the acute and ever-increasing poverty of the majority of people in Iran, the ghastly sight of which could be seen in different spheres of people’s lives throughout the country, and even in large areas of Tehran. Under such circumstances, when the population of many regions in an and even that of large cities was deprived of clean drinking water, private lanes regularly brought in European clothes and food as well as flowers and embellishments for the Shah’s ceremonial programmers and for his cortege. ‘Freedom in the true sense of the word had been sacrificed for the Shah’s egocentricity and his false pride. A lack of space for the retention of a massive timber of political prisoners posed a major problem for SAVAK. Severe torture would begin from the first hour of arrest and it would be administered I a manner so savage that a great number of people actually lost their lives in this way. Indeed, it became notorious worldwide. The overt censorship of publishing and press activities was overwhelming. According to available documents and the disturbing confessions of the most intimate of the Shah’s assistants, at that time the regime’s foreign policy and its main domestic programmers were both devised and executed by the ambassadors of America id other Western countries. The extent of America’s interference with Iran’s destiny can be understood from the bitter event which occurred on the eve of February 11, 1978 (Bahman 22,1357), when a large number of America’s military and security advisers, dressed in military garb, secretly backed and

Directed the quelling of the uprising from the headquarters of Iran’s arm forces.During the period extending from Khordad 15,1342 (June 5, 1 96:

Until Dey 11,1356 (January 1, 1 977), the course of struggle experienced numerous difficulties and fluctuations. Subsequent to Imam’s exile, significant elements of the movement and in particular the revolutionary clergy we detained or sent to prison. The regime’s publicity efforts, aimed at erasing the effects of the uprising, were becoming more intense.

The National Front at this time was extremely tied up with its inter and organizational problems. In effect, its solidarity had been upset, whilst t slogans and objectives of the wholly religious uprising of Khordad 15 did not fact tally with its political stand. Furthermore, the Tudeh Party, which, prior the Murdad 28 (August I 9) coup had made a brief appearance on the Irani political scene whilst enjoying the backing of foreign governments, was not n engaged in any significant activity in the country following the coup d’etat a the blow suffered by the party’s military wing in the years between 1954 a 1978 (1333 and 1357 AHS). Once captured, a number of the part leading figures became members of SAVAK and assumed some of the posts of the Shah’s regime. From 1 96 1 until 1 963 (1340 until 1342 A the analysis of the Shah’s reforms made by those party leaders who w resident outside Iran, was in total accord with the opinions expressed by Ra Moscow and Pravda, the Soviet Communist Party’s state newspaper.

Latter supported the reforms regarding them as prerequisites in the transitional stage of the historical development of Iran’s economy; and in agreement with the Shah and Western governments it too condemned the Khurdad Uprising, labeling it as a reactionary move, which was hostile towards modernizing reforms.

Certain factors had caused a number of the youngsters and intellect of Iran to be attracted to the atheist thoughts of Marx and in some cases Maoism. These included a lack of strong religious political leadership prior 1961(1340 AHS); the instructive programmers of the Left and Tudeh Part the birth and development of Marxist movements in both Central and Latin America and elsewhere; and the espionage pursuits of Eastern governments. Following these betrayals and compromises and the successive defeats of the Tudeh Party, a group of leftists turned to armed struggle and created organizations such as Chirikha-yi Fada‘i-yi Khalq (Organization of the Iranian People’s Fedayin Guerillas). Although their activities did on occasion wound the Shah’s regime, nevertheless, several factors explain the ineffectiveness of the measures adopted by the leftists in Iran: the organization’s thoughts and ideology were incompatible with Iranian national culture; they ignored social and cultural factors at play in the country; they chose unsuitable methods and policies tried out in other parts of the world which are totally unlike Iran; they were wholly dependent on the financial and propagator support rendered to them by Eastern governments; and they misused means and energies which could have been employed in aid of the nation’s struggles.

The placing of most of the members of leftist forces at the top of the list of anti-revolutionary elements after the victory of the Islamic Revolution and the obvious opposition of these forces to the most popular regime of its time, were the result of these very ideological deviations, gross historical mistakes and heavy dependency upon foreign powers. Internal turmoil and perpetual divaricating are yet other characteristics typical of leftist organizations in Iran, which again are the consequences of misconceived ideas and a mistaken analysis of Iran’s social conditions. In 1 96 1 (1340 AHS) a group of religious intellectuals branched out from the National Front and established the Freedom Movement (Nihzat-i Azadi) in an attempt to confront the deviations of the leftists and to attract religious youngsters. The Freedom Movement’s religious outlook and its relationship and cooperation with figures such as Ayatullah Taleghani, left the Shah’s regime no choice but to take serious steps to curb their activities. The persistent arrest of certain heads of the Movement from the time the organization was set up until the year 1978 (1357 AHS), can be cited as an example of such steps. The Movement’s major activities were confined to certain university gatherings and intellectual assemblies both within and without: he country. As with other political organizations of that time however, there were various factors which prevented the Freedom Movement from playing a; significant and determining role in the leadership of the struggle and from representing a wide range of Iranian people. The following issues may be Considered examples of such factors: obstinacy with regard to the Nation Front’s point of view; assessing Iran’s political situation on the basis of analystmade at the time of the National Oil Movement; the restriction of issue relating to the struggle to the level of internal difficulties; disregard for the connection between Iran’s problems and those of the Islamic world inadvertence towards the firmness of the clergy’s leadership in both th Khordad 15 and subsequent uprisings; adoption of moderate and Fabian politics; approval of some of the dignatories of the monarchial system; an above all else the infiltration of those elements whose links with America an the West became disclosed in documentary evidence after the occupation America’s “spy den” in Iran.

The restricted political and propagators activities of the Freedom Movement and the lack of applicability of its declared policies, forced number of the youth and intellectuals connected with the Movement to take u armed struggle and thus in 1 965 (1344 AHS) the Organization of People’ Fighters (Sazman-i Mujahidin-i Khalq) was founded. The knowledge of Islam held by the founders of this organization was truly superficial, and its setup, i pamphlets of ideology and indoctrination and its proposed strategy for struggle were taken directly from typical leftist organizations. The organization’s books manuals and manifestoes and the kind of methods employed by its member were a combination of the thoughts and methods of Marxism and Maoism and on the face of it, of Islamic issues; and they were basically formed fro nationalistic tendencies. This organization could have capitalized from th existing vacuum and benefited both from the experiences of other organization and from the adoption of a more dynamic policy in its opposition; whilst, disguised as an apparently Islamic organization, it could have attracted considerably more youngsters and university scholars compared to other parties and groups. However, extreme ideological confusion and the complexity and wide variation of the thoughts it combined, resulted in a great number of the organization’s key members formally adopting the path of apostasy subsequent to the arrest and execution of the organization’s founders. During a bloody purging, those elements which insisted upon the religious aspect of the organization were eliminated; a declaration of the change in the organization’s ideological views was issued; communism was openly adhered to; and the worst of the leftist organizations such as Paykar were brought into being and developed. Following their arrest, some of the organization’s members: aped execution by writing several letters of recantation and expressing remorse. When, thanks to the renewed popular struggle in 1977 and 1978 356 and 1357 AHS), they were released from prison, they gave consideration to the reorganization of the dispersed group; and the people of in are well-acquainted with the Munafiqin ‘s⁵ black record after the triumph the Revolution. Its black pages document explosions and indiscriminate ‘terrorism; pleas to America and the West for asylum; mercenary activities for saddam throughout the war; and acts of espionage for alien foreign powers.

Now I must point out that Irnam Khomeini, with his amazing ‘powers of perception, was the only one to have been fully aware from the ginning of the meaningless slogans and ideological deviation of this organization. Many of Imam’s close associates and distinguished clerical figures requested that he gave his approval for and support to this organization at that time, but Imam persistently refused; and even the lengthy discussions heId between himself and the organization’s envoys to Najaf could not change the firm stance Irnam adopted towards them. Following the decomposition of the setup of these hybrid organizations and the divulgence to the public of their deviated path, certain revolutionary groups were formed from 1 972 (135 1 HS) onwards comprising those who believed in Imam’s line. The most notable of these were the seven groups, which later formed a coalition and eated the Fighters of the Islamic Revolution (Saztnan-i Mujahidin-i lnqilab-i rami). The formation and activities of these groups were in accordance with e people’s struggle and strongly supported the popular demonstrations and ‘strikes of 1977 and 1978 (1356 and 1357).

Fada’iyan-i Is/am, (Devotees of Islam), founded in 1944 (1323 AHS) rough the efforts of the revolutionary cleric Martyr Sayyid Mujtaba Navvab-i favi, was the most well-established of those religious parties and organizations believing in armed struggle, which held a deep-rooted faith in both Islam and e role of the clergy whilst housing no sympathy towards any other schools of thought. The measures taken by them at the beginning of the Shah’s rule and During the period in which they enjoyed the Support of the revolutionary sage Ayatullah Kashani, offered a ray of hope for the religious forces in comparison to the activities of other satellite parties such as the Tudeh Party. In addition to its continued political pursuits, among the militant activities of the Fada’iYafli islam were the killing of ‘Abdul Husayn Hajir and Marshal Razmara (the Shah’s Prime Minister); as well as several assassination attempts against the Shah, certain members of the royal family and Husayn ‘Ala (all of which failed). Subsequent to the event of Khordad 15,1342 Hay’atha-yi’talafa-yi islami (The Councils of the Islamic Revolution) was set up according to the directions of Imam Khomeini, which enjoyed both his support and his leadership. The founders of the Council comprised certain members and partisans of Fada’iyan-i Islam and a number of devout Muslim bazaar merchants and members of Tehran’s religious societies, who were in contact with and shared the ideas of distinguished figures such as Martyr Murteza Mutahhari and Martyr Dr. Bihishti. This group played a significant role in the reproduction and distribution of Imam’s books and declarations; in holding ceremonies and actively participating in demonstrations and marches held in support of the Khordad 15 uprising; and in continuing the movement following Imam’s exile. The revolutionary execution of Hasan ‘AIi Mansur (January 2 1, 1965 (Bahman 1,1343 AHS)) was organised and enacted by the military wing of this group.

Measures taken by Imam Khomeini and his presence as the movement’s leader during the period of the clergy’s revolt in opposition to both the Provincial and District Councils Bill and the Shah’s referendum (which culminated in the Khordad 15 uprising), led to the winning of the co-operation and sympathy of the maraji’ of that time in Iran. The outcome of meetings and discussions held by Imam with the maraji’ were usually made public in the form of collectively or individually issued written statements. The young religious students and Imam’s revolutionary students lent their support to the movement, but there were many well-known figures and bigots in the religious teaching centers who were unable to truly grasp the struggle and who therefore made manifest their discontent in various forms. These included a wide range of people, from those who were opposed to philosophy and gnosticism and the formalists who saw politics as something beneath the dignity of the clergy, to those Hujjati and Velayati associations which, each in different ways, Questioned the aims of struggle both in public and private gatherings. To these must add those clerics who overtly or covertly had ties with the Shah’s me and those pessimists who regarded Imam’s movement as a cause of option to their comfortable positions, confining the affairs of the maraji to id kissing, writing disquisitions and receiving religious payments. Imam Khomeini, renowned for his patience and tolerance, had the owing to say in a message about the problems experienced by the movement under the prevailing circumstances in the religious learning centre: “The more influential of the crusading clergy have truly been wounded. Do not be mistaken in thinking that it is our rivals alone who have accused us of collaborating with the opposition and have cast aspersions of infidelity, for this is not at all the case. Those wounds inflicted, whether deliberately or not, by foreign agents among the clergy, re and still are many times deeper than those inflicted by our rivals. At outset of the Islamic struggle if one wished to say, “The Shah is a traitor”, one would immediately hear the retort “The Shah is Shi a”. Group of backward formalists regarded everything as forbidden by religious ~r and no one had the power to stand up to them. The anguish your old her (Imam himself) has suffered from this fossilized group has never fore been suffered by him from the pressures and adversities brought out by others -. . Learning a foreign language was seen as blasphemous; d philosophy and Gnosticism were considered sinful and polytheistic. In Fayziya Madrasa, my infant son, the late Mustafa, drank water from a then washed the jug. This they did because I taught philosophy

On Khordad 15, 1342 we were not only confronted by the rifle- and gun-fire of the Shah, if it had been solely this then the confrontation would have been eased, but in addition were the bullets of deceit, formalism, an~ petrification fired from within our own camp; the bullets of sarcasm am hypocrisy which tore apart and burned one’s heart and soul a thousand times more than could gunpowder and lead . . . The genuine clergy truly cried blood in solitude and captivity.”

Notwithstanding all of these difficulties, Imam’s forceful presence at the scene of the events of 1961 and 1964 (1340 and 1343 AHS) which tool place in the theological centre of Qum, overshadowed the hindrances of the opposition. Imam’s banishment however, saw the emergence of a period o oppression and lengthy exile for his friends and associates in the religious learning centers and of growth and development for rival organizations. The pressures exerted by the Shah’s regime and its heavy suppression of the movement had brought about a situation whereby the majority of the clergy believed it best to remain silent!!  This was true to the extent that until 1 977 (1356 AHS), when the movement attained new heights, no overt campaign message or speech indicative of the continuation of the movement’s aims wa to be seen or heard other than the declarations of Imam and his associates; or they were witnessed then they were very few and inconsequential.

The Hujjatiya Association expanded its organization by playing on the sympathies of the public and in particular those of the youth toward Islamic thoughts (which in fact was one of the products of the harvest reaped from Khordad 15). The Association’s secret meetings and the methods it employed to attract members held a certain appeal whereby the religious force would loin it. Its activities, whether by intention or not, suited SAVAK down to the ground, the vibrant energies of the youth and the educated which could have carried some of the weight of the struggle, being spent on learning about the shortcomings of the absurd Baha’i laws and how to campaign against these principles. The leaders of this Association never came to realize or accept that their activities constituted a struggle against the effect (and not the cause) and that they were in fact a diversion from the line of their movement, since Bahaism (born of American politics) was at that time a wholly political tool at the disposal of the Shah’s regime and not a true movement founded on ideas and thoughts. The danger posed by the Baha’is sprung from the fact that the elements of this group were organised as links in the chain of an Israeli-devised world plan and that they were installed by the Shah in the country’s pivotal positions as spies and safeguards of Israeli and American interests. The real struggle against these people entailed politics and rationale; something which ~as not to be found in any of the Hujjatiya Association’s programmers. It is no fonder that the affairs of this Association remained untouched by SAVAK’s aggression from the day of the Association’s conception until the triumph of he Islamic Revolution.

Article Nine of the Hujjatiya Association’s Constitution reads: “The association will in no way become involved in political affairs”. Accordingly, one of the conditions for membership was the submission of a written oath wearing non-interference in politics. In one of SAVAK’s documents which arrives the signature of the head of the Third Division, we read: “The chairman f the Association has requested SAVAK’s assistance in order for the Islamic propagation (an affiliation of the Hujjatiya Association) to hold an informed and philosophical confrontation in the capital with Baha’ism. “ In another document signed by the head of the Information Section of the Anti-Riot Joint: committee it is written: “According to information given by Hajj Shaykh ‘Mahmud Zakirzada (Tavalayi), known as Halabi, one of the co-ordinators of us meeting (of the Hujjatiya Association) is assisting the Twenty-First Division f the country’s State Security and Intelligence Organization (SAVAK) in Tehran. It is best to question the aforesaid man with regard to the meeting, which was held, prior to the others being summoned.

When in 1978 (1357 AHS) Imam declared celebrations of Sha’ban 3 and 5 forbidden by religious law in protest to the crimes of the Shah’ s regime, the Hujjatiya Association entered the arena in all earnest to end the protest. According to their reasoning, ideological decadence, inappropriate and negative analyses with regard to the awaited Savior and circumstances Surrounding the appearance of Hazrat Mahdi (may God hasten his renewed manifestation), had reached the stage where any kind of endeavours or political struggle to establish national sovereignty of the Righteous was condemned since would cause a delay in the appearance of the Imam of the Age. Thus, it is understood that in the light of such logic, submission to oppression would have been encouraged whereas the Khordad 15 uprising and Imam’s awakening cries would have been condemned.

Another front which enjoyed the support of SAVAK and confronted Imam Khomeini’s movement in the religious teaching institution was that which supported the ideas and activities of Mr. Sayyid Muhammad Kazim Shari’ atmadari and those institutions to which he was linked. Certain honorable ‘ulama had been aware of his true colours from the time when h had gone alone to welcome the Shah despite the ‘ulama of Tabriz having declared such conduct categorically forbidden; and there he had lauded an offered prayers for this taghut (Shah) in the latter’s presence.

However, after the demise of Ayatullah Burujirdi, Mr. Shari’ atmadari paved the way for his accession to the rank of maria ‘iat by taking advantage of the prevailing state of both the religious teaching centre and society as whole and by exhibiting apparent accord with the uprisings of 196 1 and 1 96 (1340 and 1341 AHS); but in truth, it was with the help of certain parties such as himself that those in power successfully calmed the situation, when following Imam’s exile, people prepared themselves for revolt. An example o the preventive measures taken by him during that period can be found in report dated 7/6/1963 (17/3/ 1342 AHS) which was made by the head o SAVAK in Qum and which details Mr. Shari’atmadari’s telephone conversations and letters of reply. It reads: “Yesterday afternoon, the above named person holds a telephone conversation with Tabriz . . . Shari’ armada states: ‘I must advise you on two issues: a- Call on the people to be calm an to in no way hold demonstrations . . . In Qum, whenever people hay demonstrated they have always been confronted by the military; but bullet cannot be fought against with lives alone! Hence rallying and demonstrating must be prevented; b- Do your best to ensure that they do not insult or show disrespect towards His Imperial Majesty. . - I am truly annoyed with Khomein I told Khomeini not to behave in this manner with the Shah and not t oppose the government or its policies; but he didn’t listen and look where -got him. Meanwhile, prepare a favourable petition for me as well.”

During Imam’s absence and exile Mr. Shariatmadari found the circumstances opportune and on 9/10/1965 (1 7/7/ 1344 AHS), before the first year of Imam’s exile had reached an end, he set up an organization named dar ul-Tabligh (House of Propagation) with a view to forming a circle to punter Imam’s line and the religious teaching center’s revolutionary group in um. The founding of Dar ul-Tabligh had in fact been propounded since? 62 (1341 AHS), but Imam’s presence and opposition had prevented it) From being officially active. The nature of Dar ul-Tabligh ‘s activities can easily determined from a report of 3 1/5/1964 (1 0/3/ 1343 AHS) which was made by the head of SAVAK in Qum to his superiors: “At present it is not ssible to persuade the writers of maktab-i Islam to write in the orementioned magazine about the issue in question. - It is likely that a nilar magazine will be launched in the future named Dar ul-Tabligh, the rect influencing of which will be possible. Mr. Shari’ atmadari has begun instructing the madrasa to which this magazine is affiliated. Signed: Badi’i, head of The State Security and Intelligence Organization (SAVAK) of Qum”.

The regime capitalised from Mr. Shari’ atmadari’s position which   was nstantly used as a propellant to exert pressure upon the loyal forces of Imam lomeini’s movement. The continual harassment of Imam’s followers by Mr. iari’atmadari’s supporters both in Qum and various other regions in Iran and eu troublesome activities throughout the period of Imam’s exile, accounted numerous occurrences, a discussion of which is beyond the scope of this introduction. Such instances include coagency and co-operation with the regime’s scheme concerning the Education Ministry’s orchestration of formal aminations for the theological students; the establishment of direct vernmental influence over the religious teaching institute; and the sending of igious student conscripts to military service in order to be able to distinguish the revolutionary forces.

Throughout the years 1977 and 1978 (1356 and 1357 AHS), at the ight of the Revolution’s progression, Mr. Shari’ atmadari in his interviews and mmuniques always adopted a stance different to that of Imam’s resolute sition. The following cases in point could be mentioned: his commitment to the previous Constitutional Law; his acceptance of monarchism; his opposition to the idea of establishing an Islamic government; his approval of a monarchial council subsequent to the Shah’s escape; and his condemnation of the government rather than the Shah and America, as the prime cause of crimes committed. His involvement in the trouble surrounding the K/ialq-i Musalinan Party and the attempted coup against the Islamic Republic are further matters, which the Iranian nation has witnessed from his televised confessions.

Another active force, which, both in the theological centers and in the society, sidetracked the struggle from its main objective i.e. the toppling of the monarchy, towards divisive issues, was that of the Velayatis. These also, like the other groups, constituted an incongruous collage. The corrupt pseudo- clerical elements which served the regime were the real disruptive influences, who, with some excuse or other, would create a problem within the religious communities on a daily basis; and who, by taking advantage of people’s sentiments and the true love felt towards velaya, drew public attention towards divergent issues and a confrontation with distinguished exegetes such as Martyr Mutahhari. The lectures and activities held by a group of clerical and university intellectuals in Husayniya-yi lrshad’³ (from 1967-1971 (1346-1350 AHS) and thereafter) had drawn the attention of a great number of university students and graduates towards a reassessment of Islamic interpretations and discussions and had introduced Islam to the country’s younger generation on a grand scale, as a dynamic, forceful school of thought. The shortfalls present in Dr. Shari’ ati’s works, his harsh attacks against the clergy and his innovative ideas in the exegesis of religious and revolutionary topics, which occasionally were combined with erroneous opinions, had become a target of attack for the so-called Velayati force. The rostrums from where this group preached and delivered speeches had turned into a platform for making charges and malicious accusations of irreligiousness and Wahabism against this and that person. Furthermore, opposition to and defence of certain arguments found in Martyr Javid’s book, at times spurred fierce divisive debates at the theological centers; and in the thick of these brawls, it was the Shah’s regime, which was the prime beneficiary. The latter tried to mar the face of the struggle and its supporters by aggravating differences and backing the opposition (of Imam’s movement). Moreover, the devious measures and fanaticism of a number of the apparently revolutionary elements in the theological centers added fuel to the flames of the prevailing situation, thus verifying the regime’s vicious propaganda. The murder of Ayatullah Shamsabadi in Isfahan and other sinlar occurrences, are illustrations of how SAVAK capitalised from such occasions.

What has so far been said is but a small fraction of a host of problems and obstacles which arose in the period stretching from the Khordad 15 uprising until the years 1977 and 1978 (1956 and 1957 AHS), when the Revolution was rekindled in the resumption of Imam’s struggle. On the one hand Imam Khomeini bore the pain of being away from his homeland, his crime having been to have cried out against America; and on the other hand he bore both the storm of events which had been inflicted upon Iran and the waves of malicious accusations and hindrances from religious pretenders and from the clergy in the theological centre in Najaf. Nevertheless, in spite of these sorrowful and wretched conditions, Imam had to guide the storm-beaten ship of the Revolution through the countless narrow straits of events. In truth, the most difficult and critical period of the Islamic Revolution was during these years, every moment of which was full of incident and every instant of which was a storm intent on leading the ship of Imam’s Revolution astray and extinguishing the torch that on Khordad 15, I 342 had been relit after thirteen centuries.

Mention must be made here of the great men who devoutly and resolutely revolved like moths both around Imam in Najaf and around the torch of his Revolution in Iran; and who eventually were consumed. They willingly endured accusations. Whilst at the pulpit or delivering sermons they spoke of lmani Khomeini and advocated his path. During the long dark stifling nights of the Shah’s period of oppression, they safeguarded the Star of Freedom. On many occasions, they braved the treacherous routes to Qum and Najaf by horse or on foot and passed on Imam’s messages, speeches and treatises from hand to hand and from heart to heart with the minimum of racilities to aid them. They stood up against the usurpers and conspirators in the theological centers. They willingly bore the bullets of affliction, imprisonment, torture, exile and displacement. They preserved martyrdom with their pure blood at a time when it had to a large extent lost its colou This they did in order to bear witness to the Truth which was proudl proclaimed later by their Imam:

“For centuries now the clergy of Islam has been the staff of th deprived - In each and every period of history they (the clergy) hay suffered affliction and hardship in order to defend the sacredness of their religion and nation; and as well as enduring all kinds of captivity, exile imprisonment, intimidation, harassment, and sarcasm, they hay bequeathed martyrs of great worth to the Holy Lord of Truth . . . In eve divine and popular movement and revolution the ‘ulama of Islam hay always been the first to decorate their foreheads with the blood o martyrdom.” Indeed, how can one regard as equal or even attempt to compare the value of the sacrifices made by these beloved martyrs and vanguards of Th struggle, with the new comradeship of those who have recently joined the rank of the Revolution?

When Jimmy Carter of the Democratic Party was elected President o the United States in 1976, the human rights issue was on the top of hi agenda. His main goal was to cover America’s crimes throughout the world and to try to erase the memory of its crinnal deeds in Japan, Vietnam, Korea and Palestine. In addition, the human rights issue was also used as a leverage for bringing pressure on America’s Eastern competitor, the now defunct Soviet Union, The enactment of this policy did not, however, bring about a change in the US government’s expansionist plans, its inhumanity towards other countries of the world or its oppressive behavior inside the country itself. The increase in world public opinion and awareness along with the new global circumstance brought with them repugnance for the old despotic systems which were supported by the American government.

In Iran, the Shah’s regime strengthened and stabilized its power b suppressing the opposition and eradicating the groups, which fuelled the armed struggle. After Britain left the region, it became Iran’s responsibility to police the Persian Gulf, this being absolutely imperative for US exploitation in that Centers) part of the world. Iran was to protect American and Western interests In this strategic region neighboring the Soviet Union, and it became known as a prototype of a Third World, Western-supported government.

The continuation of the absolute power of SAVAK and the despotic policies of the Shah were inconsistent with Carter’s new plan for the propagation of human rights. For this reason, the Americans put changes in the socio-political governing methods on the Shah’s agenda, but a change in the essential elements of imperial rule was not envisaged. An open political atmosphere was propagated at a time when the previous plans of America and the White Revolution had not achieved anything. The dissatisfaction of the impoverished nation increased as the great gulf between the classes of Iranian society widened daily, and the gates of the great civilization proved to be no more than a mirage. The first step in the plan was to discharge Amir ‘Abbas Hoveyda from his post as Prime Minister, after fourteen years in office, and replace him with a Western technocrat, Jamshid Amuzegar.

Imam’s perceptiveness and his ability to make timely use of the opportunities, which presented themselves, showed his great awareness of global conditions and especially of those in Iran, even though he had been away from his nation for many years. On November 23, 1977 (Azar 2,1358 AHS), Ayatullah Hajj Aqa Mustafa Khomeini was mysteriously martyred in Najaf. According to Imam’s friends and even many of his enemies at the theological centre, Mustafa was to be Imam’s successor in his movement. Despite the heavy blow, which this incident inflicted on the uprising, Imam Khomeini dealt with his death in a surprisingly patient manner accepting it as one of God’s hidden blessings. Huge ceremonies were held in memory of Imam’s son in several cities throughout Iran. Taking advantage of these large gatherings, evolutionary speakers spoke out on the regime’s crimes and on the aims of the khurdad I5 uprising. Once again, the name of Imam Khomeini was on everyone’s lips.

In an attempt to wreak revenge, the regime published an article entitled Iran and the Red and Black Imperialism” under the pseudonym of Rashidi Mutlaq in the lttiIa’at newspaper of January 7, 1 978 (Dey 1 7,1358 AHS), he anniversary of the day that Reza Shah proclaimed the law forbidding women D wear the Islamic veil (hijab). This article abused the revolutionary clergy and Imam. Another reason the regime published this article was to assess the conditions after the implementation of the new political policy, the American’s so-called human rights policy. Imam’s followers at the theological centre responded. The following day classes at the theological schools were suspended and a large crowd of people and religious students of Qum marched through the streets in protest at the publication of the article. They even went to the homes of the marafi’ and the lecturers of the Qum theological centre to seek their support. That evening the shouts of the crowd from the Azam mosque with slogans such as “Long live Khomeini” and “Death to the Pahiavi regime” shook the city of Qum reviving the memory of Khordad 15 (June 5, 1963). On the morning of January 9 (Dey 19), the demonstration continued and grew even larger than the day before. That afternoon the police began firing into the crowd and blood was shed. The skirmishes between police and demonstrators lasted into the night with several people being martyred and many more injured. This move was the spark which began the explosion which occurred a year later on February 12, 1979 (Bahman 22,1357), whereby through the strenuous efforts of the Iranian people and Imam’s perceptiveness the selfish Pahlavi government was overthrown.

Funeral ceremonies which, according to custom, took place on the third and seventh day in honor of the martyrs of January 9th (Dey 1 9), ~n especially the gatherings which took place on the fortieth day commemorating the deaths, occurred consecutively one after another in Tabriz, Yazd, Isfahan, Shiraz, Jahrom, Ahwaz, Tehran and many other cities throughout Iran serving to fuel the uprising. On every occasion, Imam’s inspirational and dynamic messages were sent from Najaf through many different channels; they reached Iran quickly and were widely distributed by the clergy and revolutionary youth, propelling the revolution ahead. New Year celebrations and ceremonies for the 15th of Sh’ aban in the year 1 978 were cancelled by Imam; instead the people revolted and held protest marches against the regime. Imam sent an eight-point message in Ramadan of that same year in which he stated that it was a religious duty to reveal the Shah’s crimes from the pulpits everywhere during this holy month. This action served to spread the revolution to all regions of Iran, even the villages.

The revolt of the people of Isfahan in the month of Ramadan forced Amuzegar’s government to announce a state of martial law in several cities of is state in spite of the open political policy. The populace however largely ignored martial law and demonstrations were not confined to the centers the regions nor were they restricted to specific hours.

Several hundred individuals died when a fire started by SAVAK agents consumed the Rex Cinema in Abadan. Amuzegar’s cabinet was dissolved and an attempt to control the situation, the regime set up the so-called “national conciliation” government with Senator Jaafar Sharif Imami at its head. In his televised speech, Imami referred to himself as a follower of Mr. Shari’ atmadari id a supporter of the clergy. In order to pacify the opposition and in accordance with orders from the American Embassy, he announced the abolishment of the imperial calendar and the return to the Islamic hijra calendar. However, Imam Khomeini held his stance and called on the people to continue their revolt until the downfall of the imperial government and the establishment of an Islamic government.

The ‘Id al-Fitr prayer gathering held on September 4, 1978 was led by martyr Mofateh in Qaytariya, Tehran, and the prayer gatherings held in several other cities were a show of the people’s support for Imam’s plans and of their opposition to the Shah. Two days later the national reconciliation government as forced to impose martial law in Tehran and twelve other major cities roughout Iran. In spite of the stationing of tanks and trucks of armed ‘Idiers, the people continued their demonstrations. Shouts of “Death to the shah” could be heard at all hours of the day and night. The Shah wreaked vengeance through Sharif Imami’s government, and hundreds of people were murdered in Tehran’s Shohada Square on September 8, 1978 (Shahrivar 1 7,1357 AHS).

Imam Khomeini decisively and without hesitation promised victory. He ndemned any kind of talk which did not call for the downfall of the Shah’s gime and he warned the people continuously against any such ideas. At this ne, the uprising was rapidly spreading and its leadership focused on Imam alone.Meanwhile, the American Embassy in Tehran held meetings with the opposition National Front and the names of people such as Sanjabi and Seddiqi ~re on everyone’s lips. Mr. Shari’atmadari entered the scene through the Help of the Nihzat Azadi (the Freedom Movement) and propaganda by nationalists, and sent messages or gave interviews daily, stating that he would participate in the leadership of the revolution.

Because of the nation’s uprising in the year 1 978 (I 356 AHS), several political prisoners were released at intervals. Several leaders of political groups were freed and once again began re-organizing their dismembered groups. Initially these groups did not support the uprising, and even criticized it for being wholly Islamic in its tendencies and for being led by the clergy and Imam, thus they played no major role in it. The massive and widespread demonstrations on the occasion of ‘Id al-Fitr and September 8 (Shahrivar 1 7), however, forced them to join the movement in order to reap some advantages. The fervor of political meetings, the claims to the leadership of the struggle and the appearance of placards bearing party propaganda increased throughout the uprising, but the slogans of the people, the organization of the demonstrations, which came from the mosques, and the leadership of the clergy who joined in the front lines of the marches, showed the deep infiltration of Imam’s messages and the people’s acceptance of his leadership.

Strikes gradually reached governmental offices. Strikes by the oil workers were financially a great blow to the regime because of its dependence on oil revenues. The workers of the telecommunications company soon followed suit in response to Imam’s messages, as did the employees of banks, the press and other companies and governmental centers. The Iraqi government had no control whatsoever over Imam Khomeini. During a series of visits to Imam in the autumn of 1 978 (1357 AHS), Sa’ dune Shaker, Iraq’s security chief, used threats in an attempt to stop Imam’s activities. In a speech, Imam mentions one of these visits and states:

“...He officially told me that due to an agreement with the Shah’s government, he could not tolerate my activities here... I must not write anything, say anything, nor prepare and send cassette tapes because this violates their agreements. I told him that this was my religious duty and that he should carry out whatever duties he had.”

In a SAVAK report concerning the results of a visit to Baghdad on October 2, 1978 (Mehr 10,1357 AHS) by a group of SAVAK agents to meet with Iraqi security heads it is written: “Discussions were held with Sa’ dune Shaker lasting for three and a half hours during which the following noteworthy remarks were made: he (Sa’ dune Shaker) held discussions with Khomeini and is of the opinion that the latter is determined in his plans and under no condition will desist from pursuing his aims. Khomeini, in reply to Shaker is   warning him to stop his political activities stated:

“I am political and religious, and I shall never compromise or yield in my political views. Due to pressures from the Iraqi regime, Imam Khomeini decided to make his historical migration. It was to prove to be a migration which would bring his long, rough journey of opposition to an end, a migration which mysteriously entered Imam’s mind and resulted in the voice of a just, Shi’ i inarfa’ being heard in the heart of Europe and throughout the Western world. On the reasons behind this decision Imam Khomeini states:“...We intended to go first to Kuwait and then Syria...we had no plans to go to Paris. Perhaps we had no say in the matter and it was God’s wish that was bound to be carried out.”Whatever, according to existing documents and the confessions of an air force commander in Kermanshah, as soon as SAVAK was informed of Imam’s impending departure from Najaf, they made plans to kidnap him if he Entered Iran and send him to an unspecified destination. Moqaddem, the head of SAVAK, sent an order to the chief of staff of the armed forces, which read: “...Regarding the possibility that the above-mentioned (Ruhullah Khomeini) may enter the country through one of the borders by air or land, in the event, he and his companions must be brought as quickly as possible to central headquarters by military plane or helicopter. Please communicate this order to officers of the military bases, airbases and border city patrols so that they can give the necessary co-operation to the intelligence and local security agencies”

After the unsuccessful discussions held between Iraq’s security chief and Imam, Ba’athist forces guarded his house in Najaf. Imam would not retreat from his position so the unanimous decision of the Ba’ ath Party of Iraq was to deport Imam. However, Imam Khomeini decided to leave Iraq for Kuwait. On arriving at the Kuwaiti border and after hours of delay, the Kuwaiti government did not give him permission to enter. Imam and those with him were then forced to return to Basra. The next choice was Syria, although it was not known whether permission to enter would be granted or whether, once there, he would be permitted to continue with his political activities. A short stopover in France would give Imam a chance to speak to the Muslims in Europe and to prepare for travel on to another country. I suggested going to France and after much consideration and debate over several other countries, Imam announced his decision to go to Paris. Finally, on the morning of October 5, 1978 (Mehr 13,1357 AHS), Imam, several followers and I left Baghdad for Paris. Some writers have not accurately reported the facts and have tried to imply that some group influenced Imam’s migration to France or individual, this is not true. The truth is what is stated here, just as Imam stated at the end of his will: “Some claim to have influenced my decision to go to Paris, this is untrue. After returning from Kuwait, I held discussions with Ahmad and chose Paris because it was possible that the Islamic countries would not allow me to enter. They were influenced by the Shah, but this was not the case with Paris.”

As Imam entered Paris, representatives from the Elysee palace met him and handed him an official message from the French government prohibiting him from any kind of political activity. Imam replied in the same decisive tone he had used with the Iraqi authorities and said: “I thought that here was different from Iraq. I will speak out wherever I am. I will travel from airport to airport and city-to-city in order to let the world know that all the oppressors of the world have joined hands together to stop the people of the world from hearing the voice of our oppressed nation. However, I will make the voice of the brave people of Iran reach the ears of the world. I will tell the world what is happening in Iran.” French moves to prevent Imam from continuing in his activities there provoked a strong reaction. The President of France, Giscard d’Estaing, and other French officials were inundated with telegrams and letters from religious and political circles and personalities, from students and ulama both inside and outside the country demanding that the Leader of the Revolution be allowed to pursue his activities. Imam’s popularity and public pressure caused the French authorities to adopt a less restrictive attitude, although they never officially announced this more liberal stance.

Imam Khomeini worked long hours at his residence in Neauphie-le­ Chateau, a suburb of Paris. He guided the process of revolution step by step through the speeches he repeatedly delivered to students and other visitors, through his many interviews and the numerous directives he issued on the situation in Iran. At this time, Iran made the headlines in news reports across the world. meanwhile, inside the country itself, the national reconciliation government ted by Sharif Imami - one of Britain’s most experienced pawns and a grand master of the Freemasons - could do nothing to help the Shah’s regime in the face of Imam’s decisive stance and the popular support he commanded. During his short term in office, the bloody massacre of September 8 (Shahrivar 1 7) was carried out, as was the disaster at the Friday Mosque in Kerman, martial law was imposed and widespread killings took place in many cities throughout the country. National strikes peaked. Imam Khomeini, in a statement issued on the September 8 (Shahrivar 1 7) disaster stated: “Oh, if only Khomeini could have been with you by your side at the warfront and could have died for the sake of God the Exalted. Oh people of Iran! Be assured that sooner or later victory will be yours.”

As the schools and universities began their autumn terms, t~ educational and cultural centers went on strike adding to the regime’s crisis.’ On the anniversary of Imam’s deportation on November 4, 1 978 (Aban 11357 AHS), widespread demonstrations were held in and around the University of Tehran. The shouts of “Death to the Shah” and “Death America” by tens of thousands of school children and university students revealed that Imam’s speech against the Capitulation Bill fourteen years ago hah now borne fruit. At the time of the noon prayer, the demonstrations becam the scene of much bloodshed as agents of the national reconciliation government attacked the crowds. The following day, Sharif Imami’s government was dismissed and a military government officially installed. General Azhari, better known as the “Tehran Butcher” because of the ruthless killings perpetrated during the month of Muharram, was put in charge forming a cabinet. Following the fall of Sharif Imami’s government, Imam Khomeini in a message thanked the people of Iran and announced: “My dear countrymen, have patience for the final victory is near an God is with the patient.”

The month of Muharram 1978 (1357 AHS) arrived. The people o Iran once again displayed their love for the Lord of the Martyrs, a love that had been preserved and passed down through the centuries from heart Heart. On the first evening of the month of Muharram at 9:00 p.m. at the suggestion of Imam’s fellow clergymen, people throughout Iran went onto their rooftops and shouted “Allahu Akbar” (God is Great) and “Death to the Shah” as police officers shot rounds of ammunition aimlessly into the air. The people than took to the streets in demonstrations and many were killed and wounded. Imam in a message on the occasion said: “A nation which rises up out of awareness and vigilance and recognizes its movement as being religious and divine, laughs at these rusty weapons. This great nation are the followers of the greatest man in history, who, with only a few followers, brought about the great ‘Ashura movement which buried the Umayyad dynasty forever in the graveyard of history. By the will of God the Exalted, this dear nation and followers of Imam Husayn (pbuh) will bury this wicked Pahiavi dynasty likewise and raise the banner of Islam not only in our country but throughout the World.” In this same message, whilst encouraging the strikes and demonstrations to continue until the downfall of the regime, Imam Khomeini also requested the soldiers to abandon the army barracks. Soon, throngs of soldiers began leaving their barracks thus delivering yet another deadly blow against the regime’s strategic stronghold. The revolt spread even to the Shah’s special guards, several officers of the guard stationed at Lavizan Military Base being killed on the anniversary of ‘Ashura by revolutionary soldiers. Following Imam Khomeini’s messages on the days of Tasu’a and ‘Ashura, a great demonstration organized by Ayatullah Talaqani and the Tehran Society of Revolutionary Clergy was held in Tehran which was reported to have had three to four million participants. This demonstration was in fact an unofficial referendum held by the people in support of Imam and in opposition to the Shah. There was no other way for Azhari to demonstrate the government’s authority in the country other than by using tanks and machine guns. Nearly all key government departments and the industrial, trade and cultural sectors of the country were on strike. Demonstrations and clashes between police and citizens continued day and night.

The employees of the Central Bank then published accounts for the months of September and October 1978 (Mehr and Shahrivar, 1357 AHS), announcing that people connected to the regime had taken over 130 billion rials in foreign exchange out of the country. News of this kind caused a rush on the bank, which in effect paralyzed the regime’s economy. The military government had previously announced that striking workers would not receive their salaries, so Imam then ordered that committees be formed to offer support to those on strike. In a demonstration held in Mashhad, several hundred people were injured or killed. The Shah’s televised plea of innocence and public apology were rejected by the nation. Now, according to his closest aides, the Shah began to completely lose control and humbly sought help from the American and British ambassadors, whilst at the same time the military government was aching from the defeat it had suffered. Once again, there was talk of a replacement being found from within the National Front for Azhari. In an interview, Imam denounced anyone who negotiated with the Shah and stated that whoever accepted that the Shah’s government was the responsible party in all of this was a traitor and would be opposed.

Finally, after secret negotiations in Guadeloupe between the heads o~ three European countries (France, Britain and Germany) and the President of the United States, it was decided that Shahpour Bakhtiar was the West’s Iast hope. When General Huyser came to Iran, covert activities peaked and on January 3, 1978 (Dey 13,1357 AHS), America, believing it could repeat the Murdad 28 coup d’etat, appointed a minister from Musaddiq’s government who was an active member of the National Front, namely Bakhtiar, as Chancellor. Thirteen days later, the Shah fled the country as was previously arranged. The Speaker for the White House and the British Foreign Minister then officially requested the Iranian military to support Bakhtiar, and General Huyser became responsible for organizing the military forces in Iran. Imam Khomeini ignored the renewed warnings of the French government. After the Shah had fled, the Regency Council, which was of no significance other than the fact that it bore a name and had actually held one meeting, ostensibly came to be in charge of the Shah’s duties .The stance adopted by Imam however, soon caused this Council to be dissolved and its head to resign.

In a declaration containing ten articles which was given on the occasion of Arba’een Husayni (the fortieth mourning day of Imam Hussein’s martyrdom), Imam emphasizes the importance of forming a revolutionary council in Iran and subsequent demonstrations to commemorate Arba ‘ een are In fact more widespread than those held forty days earlier. In the above-mentioned message, Imam Khomeini states: “The Shah has gone and the sovereign regime has collapsed. The thieves have fled and have transferred that money which belongs to the people, abroad. This brave nation will settle its account with them at the first opportunity...God willing, I shall loin you in Iran very soon. Warn those representatives of Muhammad Reza shah who have unlawfully occupied the Parliament to leave this national house...those in the Regency Council who form a part of the whole illegal set-up, are again warned to hand In their resignations.”

It is worth noting here that the National Front, the Liberals and those who favored Fabian policies supported the establishment of the Regency Council. Many of these people tried in vain to change Imam’s opinion with regard to the Council but Imam’s unshaken firmness and keen insight were far too great to be affected by such proposals and arguments.

The people’s uprising was finally nearing the glorious days of victory. The news of Imam’s return to his homeland enraptured the hearts of millions of men and women. Crowds of people flooded into Tehran from various cities to welcome Imam home.

Bakhtiar ordered the airports to close down. Thus, throngs of people demonstrated in the streets from Inqilab Street to Azadi Square shouting that if Imam was prevented from returning they would resort to armed combat. The revolutionary clergy and lecturers from the theological centers gathered at Tehran University Mosque and were soon joined by many different groups and distinguished figures. The government was then forced to back down, and the command to close the airports was withdrawn.

Eventually, following many years of struggle, the aeroplane carrying the leader of the most authentic and far-reaching revolution ever - a revolution against which both the East and the West had risen up in opposition - finally landed at Mehrabad Airport in Tehran at 9:30 am on February 12, 1979 (Bahman 12, I 357 AHS), thus ending the nation’s fifteen-year-long state of expectation.

In what was reported as one of the greatest welcoming ceremonies of all time, Imam made a short speech at the airport and then continued on to Bihisht-i Zahra cemetery. The car in which Imam was seated moved slowly through the crowds that filled the road from the airport to the cemetery. However, the throng of people waiting at the cemetery was such that Imam had to be flown into the grounds by helicopter. Once there, Imam made a trenchant, historic speech, which will never fade from the memory of the people of Iran.ten days had not yet passed since Imam’s arrival when the final victory happened. During these ten days, named the “Ten Days of Dawn”, masses of Imam’s admirers came from all over the country to see him at the ‘Alavi and Refah School (where Imam was staying) and to swear their allegiance and support. The swearing of allegiance to Imam of military officials on February 8th (Bahman 19) was outstanding and signified the sure downfall of the Shah’s government, but American At the air force base, which was formally the centre of American mi and power, the religious and revolutionary forces there now joined the uprising By the evening of February 2 1 martial law is declared. According to account given by those leading figures that were arrested by the Shah’s regime accounts, which are verified by certain documents - a decision is now, reach by the regime to quash the uprising by performing a bloody massacre. Th tanks and armed vehicles now take to the streets. However, a crucial m made by Imam succeeds in foiling any final plans made by America and puppet government in Iran. Hence, the following message given by Imam reaches the people forthwith:“Today’s announcement of martial law is a deceitful trick which contravenes religious law, and the people are to ignore it.’Within a short time, crowds of men and women build barricades in the alleyways, high streets, and strategic areas of Tehran with thousands sandbags and other such things. Battle commences and less than twenty-four hours later the regime’s strongholds fall one after another until finally “T Voice of the Revolution” (radio) announces the ultimate victory of t Khordad 15 uprising as having been achieved by Imam and the nation, and declares the fall of the taghut to the world.

The numerous and devastating events which took place between the morning of February 22, 1979 (Bahman 22,1357 AHS) and June 3, 198 (Khurdad 13, 1368 AHS) are too involved and numerous to recount in this Introduction: events in which America played a pivotal role enjoying the unanimous support of Western governments and often of the Soviet Union and enjoying assistance from numerous left- and right-wing groups within lran which had joined in the fight against the Islamic Revolution. These even include the formation of armed groups within the country; the clashes are disturbances in Gunbad and Kurdistan; the sinister activities of the Khalq Musalman Party; the treachery of Bani Sadr and the Liberals; the merciless killing of Dr. Bihishti and 72 of Imams closest followers; the martyrdom Bahonar, Rajayl and those killed whilst leading congregational prayers (Shuhad yi Mihrab); the terrorist activities of the Munafiqin; the imposed eight-year w backed fully throughout by countries in both the East and the West; the Bombardment of cities, oil installations and places of great economic importance; the economic and political boycott and arms embargo imposed upon Iran by many of the allies of America and the West; the intended coup d’etats; and the wave of Western propaganda directed against the newly established regime in Iran. However, a summary of each of these events will be found in the following introductions to Imam’s speeches.

For the present, anyone of these incidents or any of the events and changes, which were taking place at that time around the world, could have altered the course of the revolution and may have eventually destroyed it. By God’s grace however and because of Imam’s keen perception and the loyalty and awareness of the Iranian nation, all plots were foiled, and in 1989 (1368 AHS), when the nation bid its last farewell to its leader, having endured many hardships over the previous eleven years, the crowd present was in fact several times greater than that which welcomed Imam to Iran; the people’s love and devotion was greater; their determination to continue in the path of Imam was stronger; and despise all the plots and events, their morale and the state of the revolution were stronger than ever before.

The present work, entitled Kauthar, is a collection of the speeches of a great man, who, through his faith in God and Islam and in the role of the people, embarked upon a long struggle which he led with great resolution throughout each of its many stages, making the necessary sacrifices as the need arose. The slogan: “Martyrdom and the victory of blood over the sword~” defeated all modern weapons and arms. While the world and all the united enemies of religion looked on in utter disbelief, Imam Khomeini established an independent and Islamic government; he brought dignity to Islam and the Muslims; he exposed the followers of the American “Islam”, and brought about a revolution and a revival deep in the hearts of millions of Muslims who were tired of oppressors; he dispensed with those beliefs and formalities which were based upon misunderstandings and instead revealed them in their true identity; he revived the “Deliverance from the Pagans” ritual which is performed during the Abrahamic Hajj ceremony; he practiced the policy of “neither East, nor great Satan of this century; he called upon the nations to rise up in opposition to the Pharoah of our time and shattered the dominant power of America; he demonstrated the lesson of steadfastness and perseverance in the face of superpowers’ tyranny; he revived the abandoned issues of defence and crus In the path of God’s religion (jihad) throughout the Islamic lands of  Palestine, Afghanistan, Saudia Arabia and Algeria; at a time when materiali was the predominant school of thought, he displayed spirituality, proving existence of virtue and gnosticism and of realities which lie beyond materia explanations; he issued the religious decree calling for Salman Rushdie’s dea as a result of the contempt shown be the latter for all things held sacred Islam, and he stood his ground in the face of all American and Western threa he announced to the world the downfall of Marxism before anyone else h even considered it possible; he instilled self-confidence and a desire to return an Islamic identity into Muslim societies and especially the younger generati henamed the battle between poverty and wealth “the holy war of the virtuo and the oppressed”, valuing one hair of the head of a nomad more than valued all of those who live in palaces. His aim was always to defend t oppressed and wipe out deprivation and his ambition was to free Palestine from the clutches of the Zionists. He believed that Vilayat-i Faqih was the mo righteous way to govern a society and the only way to establish true justice.

Because of Imam Khomeini’s teachings and endeavours, the present upsurge and growing expansion of pure, unadulterated Islam - or “Islam fundamentalism”, as the enemies term it - is now something seriously discuses as an undeniable fact in political and cultural circles worldwide. Without doubt, the future culture and civilization of Islam is indebted to Imam’s leadership and the sacrifices made by the Iranian nation of his time more than anything else.

Every page of his writings and speeches is a reminder of his prolongs suffering and his determined struggle against various obstacles and deviate thoughts. Kauthar is not the product of a writer’s thoughts documented some calm, tranquil surroundings, but rather, it is a collection of actual even and occurrences, which took place in the midst of dreadful traumas and crises throughout the history of the Islamic Revolution. It is a collect-ion of things Both spoken and written by the Leader of the Revolution, and thus in truth constitutes a book of guidance for those who continue to follow in his path. It is the historical documentation of the many-faceted Islamic Revolution, a revolution that has been the most popular mass uprising in recent times.

I extend my thanks to the officials and employees of the various divisions of this organization who have made painstaking efforts in putting together this collection. I would also like to thank Mr. Hand Ansari who worked very hard in writing the introductions and footnotes included in this work. It is our hope that the rest of Imam’s works, his speeches, messages, interviews and letters, will also be compiled and published in this same manner.

Even though throughout the compilation of Kauthar the names of people, places and dates have been carefully checked for accuracy, nevertheless, errors may well been made. We therefore ask the historians and researchers, and indeed any reader of this book, to notify us of any mistakes they may find therein in order to assist this organization in making the necessary corrections for future publications.

O God, help us to remain steadfast in the line of Imam’s principles and goals, which have been attested to by the blood of tens of thousands of martyrs. May the great nation of Iran - that has never wavered, taking all the bitter with the sweet - witness the fruits borne by its uprising, the daily advancement of Islam, and the fulfilllment of Imam’s lofty goals.

Ahmad Khomeini