In that sense we ought to note that in the past, namely throughout the cold war, when Iran played a key role in maintaining the regional peace, and when its territorial integrity had universal legitimacy and acceptance, enjoying the deterrence shield of the U.S. against the Soviet ambitions, today due to the modus operandi opted by the Islamic Republic, that legitimacy no longer has a universal adherence. No democratic country really supports the policies of the clerics, and what is even worse, no country would ever come to Iran's aid in case its independence or its territorial integrity is jeopardized, since Iran not only has no role in maintaining the regional peace but in fact it is the primary element in creating havoc in the area. After the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the advent of new developments in Central Asia, Caucasia, and the Middle-East, the Islamic Republic is vigorously bent on propagating its revolutionary version of Islam rather than exploring sensible economic and cultural ties. These imbecilic leaders in Iran, are wrongly contemplating the transformation of Tehran into an Islamist center, perhaps similar to what Moscow's role was during the years of Comm-Intern. Opting for a logical policy of capitalizing on historical and cultural ties with the newly independent ex-Soviet Republics, never occurred to the clerical leaders in Tehran, instead they chose to be the singular source of instability, turning their backs to any fruitful economic relations and basing their so called foreign policy on exporting their radical version of Islam. In this regard, it is quite ironic that when the Russians themselves are economically dependent on the West and specifically on the U.S., the clerical leadership, contrary to Iran's traditional and strategic interests, has opted to establish economic, political, and military ties with the Russians, and not even stopping at strategic levels. Currently, Iran with the Islamic Republic's anti-West, anti-American policies, is in an extremely sensitive situation. In Iran's neighborhood, numerous nations exist with various issues and differences amongst them. Powerful nations have serious interests in this region also.

Today, the Islamic Republic is not only part of the regional instability, but in some cases it is the main instigator. Without an insightful leadership, any sensible policies would have a tough time of survival. Almost none of the neighboring countries, wish to observe the Islamic Republic become more powerful and strong. The world powers also may not support an integrated Iran which has been embracing international terrorism under the leadership of the clerics. In the geographical perimeters of our nation, other countries either have vast differences with Iran or have some unresolved issues which have ended up entangling the Islamic Republic:

1) On the east, the flames of civil war are still vividly present in Afghanistan. Harat, nearly a back gate to Iran, is in the hands of forces opposing the Islamic Republic. The civil war and its prolongation would probably result in the disintegration of Afghanistan, which would not only bring the Baluchestan issue to surface, but it would also endanger the security of the Khorasan province in Iran.

2) On the North, the Caucasian and the Central Asian States have their own political, economic and border disputes, and despite ripe opportunities in various fields, Iranian leaders did not capitalize on anything, and in fact all events in this region are crystallizing against the interests of Iran with separatist, Pan-Turkist ideologies seeping in.

3) On the South and in the Persian Gulf, Iran's disputes with the U.A.E. concerning the three Islands of Greater and Lesser Tunb and Abu Musa, still persist. The short-sighted policies of the Islamic Republic have caused not only the Arab nations but also the U.S. to back the claims of the U.A.E.

4) On the West, neither Iraq nor Turkey have healthy, sensible relations with Iran. Their numerous problems specifically the ones involving the Kurdish issue, should be a grave concern for Iran. Aside from all this, despite the fact that Tehran and Baghdad, the seats of two despotic isolated regimes, have been conducting negotiations for the past several months, neither of them has any trust in the other. It must be noted that just as the vacuum of power, the weakening and the so called purifying of Iran's Armed Forces during the early years of the Revolution by Khomeini and his side-kicks, allowed Iraq to attack Iran, given a similar atmosphere, Iraq would not hesitate in repeating that incursion.

5) On any part inside or surrounding Iran, in the case of racial, regional and/or tribal unrest, the world powers in the wake of Islamic Republic's policies, would not only
turn their back to the Islamic Republic but they might also embark on activities aiding the adversaries of Iran.

THE PERILS OF CULTURAL DISRUPTION & THE WANING OF IRANIAN NATIONAL IDENTITY

The most important detriment in Iran, as mentioned earlier, is the weakening of the national identity, and the concurrent policy of ebbing the Iranian identity and cultural nationalism which has been being vigorously carried out by the ruling clergy and their lackeys for over 6,000 days. Sadly enough, the very force which for centuries served as the preserving element of the Iranian nationality, today is under attack, not from outside but, from a cancerous clique inside.

This principle, namely the cultural nationalism, has been not only the most effective and influential shielding weapon but it has also been Iran's main strategic reservoir. Throughout history, this national identity always prevented outsiders to overwhelm Iran, absorbing it into their sphere of influence. This force which has been the shining armor of Iran during its tumultuous history, is now repeatedly violated by a group of ruling mullahs, and it is for that very reason which every patriotic Iranian ought to be alarmed, seeking an immediate remedy.

Opposing national celebrations such as Bahmangan, Mehregan, and Norooz, taking a stand against the national and historic figures and replacing their memories with unfamiliar religious characters, changing Iranian names to those un-Iranian and foreign, replacing the names of various Army battalions, divisions, and weapons to those non-Persian; names such as the Army of Ashoora, the Army of Tasoo'a, the Brigade of Ammar, the Battalion of Zeynab, the Tareq Submarine, the Boraq Tank, the Maneuvers of Kheybar or Beyt-01-Moghaddas, all in all are carried out in an effort to willfully wane the cultural identity of Iran and to diminish the nationalist elements quintessential to the Iranian psyche.

A FOREIGN POLICY DEPENDENT UPON ISLAMIC IDEOLOGY

In the past 16 years, the foundation of the Islamic Republic's foreign policy has been based on the Pan-Islamic ideology along with the concept of "Velayate Faqih - The Governance of the Supreme Theologian", totally ignoring the real interests of the country. The clerical regime has completely abandoned the essence of Iran's traditional national policy which was based on cultural, historical and geo-political elements and which despite any short comings, followed the path of maintaining peace and security. The fruits of the current regime's efforts have been such that today Iran plays no role in the principal policies of the region. These activities neither pursue the national interests of Iran, nor do they aid in the peace process in the region:

1) Exporting the Islamic Revolution, aiding radical Islamists and instigating unrest in the moderate regimes.

2) Opposing the peace process in the Middle-East 3) Supporting International Terrorism.

4) Pursuing a nuclear policy and embarking on manufacturing of biological weapons.

5) Turning the friends and allies of Iran into its foes and adversaries.

The sum total of these efforts have caused a tremendous gap between the people and the government. In the foreign arena Iran is known as the "rogue State", becoming more and more isolated by the global community. Iran is no longer respected by its neighbors and Western governments. The international dignity of our nation is a thing of the past. Its territorial integrity could no longer be honored and worthy of protection in the eyes of the international community. This is evident in the use of the term "occupied" by the U.S. Secretary of State, when referring to the Abu Musa and Tunb Islands, during a meeting with the Foreign Ministers of the Persian Gulf nations, on March 11 th of this year. This is quite unlike the period in 1971 during which, Iran exercised its sovereign rights over these islands, and observed the content of the American officials which viewed it as a helpful effort in achieving security and stability for the Persian Gulf region.

THE INAUSPICIOUS TUNES OF SEPARATISM

The tunes of secessionism an separatism are spreading everywhere. The advent of the new technological inventions and the revolution in the nature and ease of instant communications is also aiding the propagation of such tunes. The notion of self-determination and the support afforded by the great powers and the U.N. to such desires, revives the hope among certain cliques to recklessly pursue their self-serving ambitions. Unfortunately, these ambitions are often instigated by the powerful nations to serve their interests. The horrific and bloody civil wars in Bosnia and the conflict between the Hutu and the Tutsi tribes in Africa are real eye openers in that regard. United Nation's Security
Council resolution no. 688 which was passed in 1991 (after the Desert Storm War) regarding the Kurds in Iraq, creates an ideal ground for a separatist movement to flourish. This resolution allows the U.N. to interfere in separatist issues under the pretext of human rights protection, and according to Professor Mario Bettati, by passing resolution no. 688, the Security Council has brought about a new heresy in international laws, allowing itself the right to alter the territorial integrity of member nations under an altruistic pretext. Consequently, separatist groups can almost count on the support of U.N. and other world powers. The doctrine of self-determination, which is based on liberal principles, and was originally introduced by President Woodrow Wilson at the end of World War I, has always resulted in illiberal consequences, adding fuel to bloody wars and transforming into an effective tool in weakening certain nations.

The frail yet tyrannical leadership in Iran, oppression, injustice and persistent violation of the basic human rights of people, has resulted in such levels of public discontent that the perils of disintegration are now more imminent in Iran than any other time in history. The separatist elements do not hesitate to manipulate the simplistic emotions of people specially the youth, who are less informed about their nation's culture, history and world events. Corruption, social pressures, and adverse conditions all become ideal targets to justify secessionist arguments.

We know that in Iran the institution of Monarchy was replaced by the Islamic Republic and the latter due to its short-sighted policies, a wrong interpretation of Islam, and its corrupt and oppressive nature has caused massive repugnance towards religion. Today ideology has lost its worth and weight. It is replaced by knowledge, information and the new tools brought about by the silent revolution in the computer technology. Ironically, it is in environments such as the latter which regional separatist movements find ideal for their ambitions. All of this is occurring when the economic conditions in Iran are deteriorating on a daily basis and everyone's hands are tied, feeling helpless with a so-called Constitution based on the concept of "Velayate Fagih". The sum total of these has for the first time jeopardized the independence, territorial integrity and the national security of Iran. Unfortunately, in exile, the Iranian opposition has not fully realized the scale and severity of such notions, and under encouragement from certain groups who are supposedly the advocates of multi-culturalism in artificial nations, hurriedly make remarks which are later manipulated by the opportunists.

THE NECESSITY FOR CHANGE IN THE IRANIAN REGIME

The only path of salvation and the only way to prevent an economic collapse and disintegration of Iran, is the replacement of the mullahs with competent, secular, democratic, informed, patriotic and compassionate leadership which could run the affairs of the nation based on the will of the populace. On the thresholds of the 21st century, Iranians hanker for a progressive and nationally elected government, which would concentrate its capabilities to clean house in the economic and political arenas, defend and establish the fundamental freedoms of the people by actively incorporating and participating all layers of the populace in the sincere hopes of securing peace, tranquility, independence and the integrity of the nation.

It is necessary at this point, that we indicate the vital role which is to be played by the Armed Forces, the Pasdaran (Revolutionary Guards), and even the Basij (Khomeini's Red Guards) in transferring authority from the current corrupt rulers to the people. These Armed Forces are the protector of Iran's independence and its territorial integrity. They defended Iran against the incursion of Iraq, and in this noble cause, many lost their lives. These forces belong not to a small imbecilic clique of mullahs who have made numerous enemies for Iran, but to the people and are indeed from the ranks of every day patriotic Iranians. These are the times that try the souls of these noble men and women. They ought not be the mere puppets of these self-serving, incompetent mullahs who are knowingly pushing Iran to the brink of disintegration. For over three millennia our nation has been more or less governed based on its unique cultural, geographical and historical identity. The deviation from this traditional, cultural and strategic path is so dangerously obvious that for Iran to survive, this original course ought to be re-instated, strengthening the cultural nationalism and reviving the national identity of Iranians.

It is time for a powerful leader to manifest itself to redress all aspects of the Iranian politics both inside and outside of Iran. It is of no significance if this leader appears from inside or outside of Iran. He or she must have both the support and the trust of the people, and ought to regain the confidence of all neighboring states and democratic nations. This leader ought to gain the trust of the Armed Forces along with the blessing from all layers of the society including the various tribes. The Azadegan Foundation believes that the Armed Forces who are committed to and are more concerned about the independence of Iran, ought to come to the aid of the people in replacing the clerical regime, before the improvident policies of the latter sink the ship of our nation in an ensuing social typhoon. Luckily there are signs and indications that the Armed Forces too are aware of the precarious nature of the leadership in Tehran. This was evident in the aftermath of the uprisings in Qazvin. These Armed Forces must play a fundamental role in the manifestation and support of a popular and new leadership. The Azadegan Foundation has no doubt that as in the past, Iran would rid itself of the current calamity with the aid of its patriotic, noble and informed sons and daughters who have never refrained from sacrificing anything to see their nation as a dignified, peace loving member of the world community.