Former prime minister: Are the dynasties of 2,500 years ago returning when a son succeeds his father?

The Zeitun website is close to Mir-Hossein Mousavi, Iran's prime minister from 1960 to 1968, who remains under house arrest. A few months ago, the site included parts of an introduction written by Mousavi in a book on the 1988 uprising, in which he compared the words of Ali Khamenei's son, Mojtaba Khamenei, with those of the former prime minister. 

Mojtaba Khamenei's name is not mentioned in the lines of Mousavi's writing in Zeitoun, but it is clear that the former prime minister said: "Have the royal dynasties of 2,500 years returned for a son to rule after his father?" Referring to a reproachful speech by the founder of the Islamic Republic about the "imperialists", he added: "The news of this conspiracy has been known for thirteen years. If they are not really looking for it, why don't they deny such an intention once and for all? 

In Tehran circles, the appointment of the current president, Ebrahim Raisi, implicated in the 1988 massacre of political prisoners, is said to have caused Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei to abandon his closest allies, such as the former speaker of parliament (Majlis), mainly to have a free hand in nuclear affairs and to suppress the revolts, so he needed someone who was completely obedient. But there could be another reason, that his son Mojtaba could become crown prince after his death.  

Khamenei has only one red line, and that is to keep the government at all costs, even if it is inherited and remains in the hands of his family after his death.  

It is very naïve to believe that Khamenei, whose only concern is to maintain power, would accept a nuclear deal that protects not only the interests of the Iranian people, but also those of the people of the Middle East and the world, for the simple reason that Khamenei has long wanted nuclear power to ensure his survival, and is determined to obtain it at the cost of unprecedented poverty for the Iranian people and the global isolation of the civilised country of Iran.  

Therefore, as in the last 20 years, since 2002, when the regime's two nuclear facilities were revealed at a press conference in the United States by the National Council of Resistance of Iran, Khamenei has tried in various ways to conceal all the plants and reject a deal.  

For the past two decades, the international community and the mullahs' regime have struggled to determine the secret nature and financing of the mullahs' atomic programme and their efforts to obtain nuclear weapons.  

On the one hand, the mullahs have resorted to all kinds of deception and have tried to conceal the reality from the world community in order to secretly advance the various aspects of their sinister project and obtain the nuclear bomb. But on the other hand, the Iranian resistance and other international institutions have continued to expose the regime's locations or activities that have a military dimension. 

Meanwhile, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has tried to get a concrete answer on Iran's nuclear aspects, but has continually been met with obstruction, deception, lack of transparency and accountability on the part of the mullahs. 

The regime has never been transparent about the nuclear project. Whenever there have been revelations from the Iranian resistance or other sources, or they have had to deal with undeniable documents and information, acknowledgements of its existence have been long overdue. At the same time, they have sought to keep other aspects of the plan secret. In many cases, the regime has clearly destroyed and cleaned up sites and projects to remove traces of them.

However, instead of using the language of firmness with this regime, especially after the scandals were revealed, Western countries negotiated with it - or rather appeased it - and granted it important concessions. Had a firm policy been adopted then instead of this misguided approach, the regime's nuclear weapons programme would not have caused so much concern.  

The mullahs' regime will not abandon the project of obtaining a nuclear bomb. And if today we sometimes see the regime come to the negotiating table, it is to reduce global pressure or to buy time to reach the tipping point. 

The regime is more isolated than ever among the Iranian people. It considers the atomic bomb necessary for its survival. Today, its leaders speak unabashedly of their intention to build an atomic weapon. Determination is needed to prevent a fundamentalist and terrorist dictatorship from acquiring such a weapon. To this end, UN Security Council resolutions must be reactivated and comprehensive sanctions must be applied against the regime. The relentless pursuit of the negotiating game buys the regime time to advance its nuclear project. Negotiating with this regime jeopardises world peace and security.  

Are not thousands of Syrian children, the people of Iraq and Yemen, and now the people of Ukraine, paying the price for the lack of a decisive policy towards this fundamentalist regime?

Hamid Enayat es politólogo, especialista en Irán, y colaborador de la oposición democrática iraní