Written evidence submitted by Anglo-Iranian Political Prisoners Association (UKI0016)

Introduction

This document is submitted by Anglo-Iranian Political Prisoners Association. This association comprises of British-Iranians who have been previously imprisoned in Iran on political grounds. We actively defend the rights of all prisoners and campaign for the release of all political prisoners in Iran.

We submit this evidence arguing that UK policies towards Iran, including the FCO’s role in multilateral diplomacy, have given a ‘green light’ and empowered the Iranian governments of the present and past to commit atrocious human rights abuses, including mass executions of political opponents and prisoners. This is partly but significantly a consequence of the UK’s historical interference with Iranian politics, UK’s soft appeasement policy and failure to prosecute known perpetrators of crimes against humanity. In this document, we aim to highlight past mistakes, draw conclusions and determine the path for the future policies to solve past shortcomings.

We hope our recommendations and evidence are taken into account as part of the UK’s inquiry into their relationship with Iran.

History and evolution of Iran-UK relations

While the history of British-Iranian relations dates back predominantly to the Safavid dynasty in the 17th Century, the most relevant part of history for the purpose of this submission starts in the early 19th century[1]. Misguided British policies during this period have instilled a negative mentality in the minds of the majority of Iranians. They view the UK as a colonial power that has historically worked against popular rule and the legitimate interests of the Iranian people, and instead, served their oppressors.

The main causes of this negative historical association with the UK includes:

-          The UK’s role in the Islamification of the Persian Constitutional Revolution in 1906;

-          The Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907 which essentially divided Iran between Britain and Russia[2];

-          The UK supporting the bombardment of the first established parliament in Iran along with Russia in 1908[3];

-          Other colonial agreements such as the 1919 Anglo-Persian Agreement which despite not being ratified by parliament, gave Britain rights to Iran’s oil[4];

-          The coup of 1920 against the Qajar Dynasty and placing Reza Khan in power and his subsequent replacement with his son Mohammad Reza Shah[5];

-          The 1953 coup against the popular and democratically elected Mossadegh and the British government's role in collaborating with the US government to carry out the coup[6];

-          The promotion of Khomeini over the people of Iran who fought and brought about the 1979 revolution, which was ultimately hijacked by Khomeini[7]. It is worth noting that amongst most Iranians, it is very common and infamous to believe that the mullahs were made by and supported by British colonialism, as such, the British public service broadcaster - BBC Persian - is nicknamed ‘Ayatollah BBC’ commonly amongst Iranians[8];

-          Following the dictatorial rule of Ruhollah Khomeini, the UK’s policy of appeasement and support towards the Islamic Republic for more than four decades and the consequences that derived from that support including proscribing the Iranian resistance on the UK’s proscribed terrorist list by Foreign Minister Jack Straw that enabled the Iranian regime to massacre MeK/PMOI political prisoners without accountability[9].

The continued foreign policy of appeasement by the European Union and the British government have not only put themselves in a position of weakness and the regime in a position of power, but also given the ‘green light’ for Iran to destabilise the region both directly and through its proxies. With regards to Iran, the belief held by British governments is that hard policies against Iran would push them to go to war, and so appeasement and a diplomatic solution would be the best option to deter them[10].

However, this is a false argument as on the contrary, the Iranian government as a response to appeasement and leniency towards them will view the UK as weak, and find courage in exploiting this weakness by achieving their goal of exporting their ‘revolution’ of fundamentalist Islam and terror across the Middle East. This is apparent through its proxy wars in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen, to name a few, where the Iranian regime’s proxies, such as numerous Islamic extremist groups, have challenged the UK and Coalition’s forces directly in the region and continue to threaten further attacks[11]. There are comparisons here with Prime Minister Chamberlain’s policy of appeasement towards a belligerent dictator like Adolf Hitler in World War II, in which Chamberlain believed appeasement would put a halt to Hitler’s pursue of war and expansion of the Nazi state.

As such, the UK must change its policy and follow the current United States administration - who has itself over many decades finally reached this important conclusion - to put a halt to any leniency and appeasement, and instead implement a policy of maximum pressure[12]. The Iranian regime is currently at its weakest point in history [13] due to this new policy by the United States, and the UK must follow suit.

Challenges of, and alternatives to, current methods of addressing bilateral disputes (past and present)

The Iranian regime's policy has been one of fearless force against Western interests, in like to a senseless driver who does not pull away from a head on collision. Promises to destroy Israel[14] and threatening the UK with retaliatory action[15], are common policies that the Iranian regime pursues as they view their enemies as weak. For the past forty years, with its terrorist and belligerent actions, the Iranian regime has been relentless with its policy of a ‘fearless driver’ resulting in the other side submitting to the regime’s wishes, so as to avoid any “collision” and its repercussions.

However, past experience shows that if the other side persists, the regime would have no choice but to retreat. A recent example of this is the retaliation for the assassination of Qassem Soleimani. The regime responded by confronting US forces in Iraq[16], however due to the US government's persistence in abiding by its policy of maximum pressure - the regime ultimately backed down and settled for a propaganda show. In the end, Iran had to abandon its promise of revenge for the assassination of Qassem Soleimani.

Iran has been predominantly successful with its aforementioned policy against the United States, UK and European Union due to the appeasement policies intended to prevent Iran turning into another Iraq. Such success is seen in Iraq following the 2003 War where the Coalition forces essentially were forced to hand over the country to Iran[17]. The UK must now change their policy of appeasement, and adopt a policy of maximum pressure so as to put a halt to Iran’s expansion, and terrorist activities in the Middle East.

The FCO's role in multilateral diplomacy regarding Iran, and the UK's priorities therein and the future of the JCPOA

Reviewing the Iranian regime’s history, we can identify that international pressure and sanctions were the policies that brought the regime to the negotiating table. However, even then, hints of appeasement are present as Iran seems to be benefiting from certain agreements. The JCPOA, for example, is used by the regime as a strategic and tactical ploy to deceive the parties concerned and the international community in general. The Iranian regime has used the JCPOA to buy time in order to secretly continue their nuclear projects to obtain a weapon that would create the ultimate deterrent that would make demands in the future non-negotiable.[18]

Undoubtedly, the main victims of the appeasement policy by Western governments, the UK and EU in particular, have been the Iranian people and the Iranian Resistance who are persecuted for their political beliefs. However, the negative consequences of this fundamentally misguided policy have also affected Western governments. The West's soft policies have given Iran permission to continue their belligerence. Some examples of such aggressions and malign activities include but are not limited to:

-          Terrorism and intervention in the region, including Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen[19];

-          Terrorist attacks on coalition positions, including British, in Afghanistan and Iraq[20];

-          Attacks on ships and tankers from other countries, including the seizure of a British ship in 2019, as well as the arrest of British sailors in 2007[21];

-          Attack on the British Embassy and its destruction and occupation in 2011[22];

-          The arrest of the British Ambassador (Mr. Rob Macaire) and the call for him to be chopped into pieces from Alamolhoda, the Supreme Leader’s (Khamenei) representative in the north-eastern Khorasan Razavi province[23].

-          Detention, torture and imprisonment of Western citizens, as well as dual citizens, including British-Iranian, Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe on false charges of membership of an illegal group[24].

-          Repeated violations of the provisions of the JCPOA[25], with various Iranian officials publicly confessing to have deceived the West while deliberately breaching its obligations.

-          Successive violations of UN Security Council Resolutions by continuing the dangerous project of ballistic missiles of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)[26].

In addition to international violations, Iran continues its widespread human rights abuses which are a direct consequence of lenient international policies, including by the United Kingdom. For more than four decades, the regime has been torturing and killing its opponents and dissidents. Directly shooting at citizens who were peacefully protesting for their rights, and the killing of more than 120,000 political dissidents in the last forty years including the massacre of 30,000 political prisoners in 1988[27]. The international community's failure to prosecute the known perpetrators of such crimes against humanity has led to the perpetrators to hold key positions in power today. This has encouraged the authorities to continue their crimes, just like in November 2019 where more than 1,500 Iranians were shot and killed on the streets, and more than 12,000 people were arrested, many of whose lives are still in danger today[28].

Further, the regime lied after targeting the Ukraine International Airline flight PS752 in January that killed 176 innocent people[29], and even now, more than 100 days after the tragedy, Iran refuses to hand over the flight’s black box to Ukraine or other concerned countries.

Another recent example of Iran's lies and incompetency’s is its cover-up[30] and concealment of the outbreak of Covid-19 in the country, where the regime first covered up the existence of the outbreak. They refuse to disclose real figures and have been consistently lying to the Iranian people and the international community[31]. The regime’s cover-up allowed the virus to spread both in Iran and from there to neighbouring countries and consequently to the West. Even now, months later and with the exponential increase in the number of people infected and killed by the Coronavirus, the regime is still refusing to quarantine the epicentres of the country and take other necessary measures. According to statements made by some of the regime's own officials, the number of cases and deaths are at least eight to ten times higher than the official figures[32].

The regime also refuses to release prisoners, particularly political prisoners, where the virus has spread horrendously, and have instead shot and executed prisoners who have resisted to save their own lives[33]. As former political prisoners who have spent many years of our lives in the prisons of this brutal regime, we understand more than anyone what a tragedy awaits prisoners in Iran. The lives and destinies of the prisoners and the people of Iran in general have no value and are of no consequence for the ruling regime.

Conclusion

Iran’s sole focus is to suppress any protests inside Iran, while heavily lobbying international politicians and media outlets to demand funds from the international community, especially to lift US sanctions. This is while the US government has repeatedly stated that sanctions do not include drugs, food and humanitarian aid or prohibit humanitarian contributions.[34] Additionally, in line with the Iranian regime’s track record, any monies will certainly not be spent on the Iranian people, but on terrorism and repression in Iran and the region[35]. Furthermore, the major political and financial institutions belonging to Khamenei, the IRGC, and other high-ranking officials have stolen and saved hundreds of billions of US Dollars from the Iranian people[36] and are refusing to spend even a small portion of it on the people themselves in these tragic circumstances. Instead, they insist on their effort to extort from the international community to further their domestic and international goals.

A regime which does not care about the fate of its own people, clearly would not adhere to any principles in the international arena (as also proven by the 41-year experience of the Islamic Republic) and would, at the earliest opportunity, betray and harm its so-called allies, and the countries that have entered into agreements and treaties with it. The hope of reforming the regime without maximum pressure and without targeted economic and diplomatic sanctions stems from a lack of comprehending the Islamic Republic’s basic principles. This lack of understanding of the Velayat-e-Faqih system (Absolute Rule of the Clergy) has been the dominant cause of flawed policies adopted by the EU and UK in relation to Iran.

In wrongly comparing Iran to 20th Century dictators, such as the Shah or Latin American dictatorships, may make the regime appear negotiable and reformable. However, 41 years of evidence proves that Iran views all appeasement, soft and lenient policies, as pursued by the FCO, as weakness. This wrong message, has been encouraging the regime to further intensify its export of terrorism and fundamentalism. Therefore, the UK and the FCO must stop their policy of appeasement and instead insert a policy of maximum pressure on the Iranian regime.

To rectify the historical mistakes made by British colonialism in the past and in particular the United Kingdom’s policies during the Islamic Republic’s reign, the British government must, for once, stand with the people of Iran who like the British people seek a better and more prosperous future for themselves and the  future generations.

The US State Department has taken the highly successful step of engaging Iranians directly on social media and debunking lies and myths churned by the ayatollahs regarding the sanctions. This change in policy was demonstrated in Iran by the Iranian people as students and protestors refused to walk over American flags painted at the entrances of universities and public passageways[37].

A change in policy will benefit the UK two-fold:

First, it will send a clear signal to the Iranian people that the British concern is for the country of Iran and its people, not the dictators ruling them. Dictators have never lasted in history and as the current one ruling Iran is inching closer to the end of its brutal reign, the British government needs to gain the trust of Iranians if it is ever to have relations with Iran in the future.

Second, for far too long, the British government has turned a blind eye to human rights abuses and violations of international law committed by the Islamic Republic not only in Iran but also aforementioned countries like Syria and Iraq where their proxies have killed and committed more war crimes than any of the countries’ own dictators. As such, it is time for the UK to stop prioritising economic and business deals, and instead tackle Iran’s human rights abuses as well as meddling and destruction of the region.

To this end, the UK government must:

-          Join the US maximum pressure campaign on Iran and work with regional allies to stop Iran’s destabilising and malign activities in the region;

-          Put pressure on Iran to put an immediate stop to the death penalty, release political prisoners unconditionally, and stop human rights abuses and make any future relations and trade talks contingent upon these demands;

-          Publicly and officially name and shame those responsible for serious human rights abuses in Iran, such as the head of the Judiciary, Ebrahim Raisi, who himself is responsible for the 1988 massacre of thousands of political prisoners; and impose sanctions on them for their role in the domestic repression; 

-          Put pressure on Tehran to allow the UN Special Rapporteur for Human rights in Iran to visit the country and grant the Special Rapporteur unhindered and unfettered access to prisons, political prisoners and their families in order to document and report on the ongoing human rights abuses in the country in line with the mandate of the Special Rapporteur provided by the UN Human Rights Council and supported by the UK;

-          Take the lead at the international level and the UN to end impunity for the regime’s leaders by establishing and supporting an international independent accountability process to hold them to account for the well-documented, pervasive human rights abuses committed today and in the past;

-          Call on the UN Secretary-General and the UN Human Rights Commissioner to set up a fact-finding committee to investigate the 1988 massacre of political prisoners and the trial of its perpetrators in the International Criminal Court;

-          Work with allies at the UN to make the above-mentioned recommendations, in particular the request for an international accountability process, included in the resolution adopted by the UN General Assembly on the human rights situation in Iran each year in December based on the report prepared by the Special Rapporteur;

-          Recognise and build direct ties with Iranian political forces and popular movements who endeavour to establish a secular republic and democratic institutions in Iran, like the Iranian Resistance, the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), as the legitimate representative of the Iranian people. Thus, taking the first step in sending a message of support to the Iranian people. This will also send a clear message to the Iranian regime that the UK stands firmly against their political intervention and terrorism in the affairs of other sovereign states and will no longer negotiate from a position of weakness.

April 2020