Political activist and human rights advocate
Many Iranians believe the football team in Qatar is not their national team, but belongs to a dictatorial regime that is ready to use it for its political goals.
In the 1998 World Cup, the American and Iranian teams faced each other for the first time after Iran's 1979 revolution.
The match was called "the most politically charged match in World Cup history" and ended with Iran's 2-1 victory. On the day of the match, my brother came to our house with two "Iran t-shirts," one for him and one for our father, who had recently been forced to immigrate to the United States.
Even though my father had taught physics and mechanics in Iran's high schools for nearly 50 years, had written textbooks, trained young teachers, and with the cooperation of some of his friends, founded Khorazmi Schools, one of the best private schools in Iran, he was forced to leave his country during his retirement.
After all my father had done to serve his country, the newly established Islamic regime penalized him severely. The regime confiscated his schools and arrested my brother and me for our anti-regime activities. My brother Bijan, who had received a ten-year sentence from the revolutionary courts for his political activities, and had spent more than six years behind bars, suddenly was executed in the 1988 massacre of the political prisoners and the Islamic Republic refused to give us his body or tell us where he was buried. The rest of us were forced to leave the country, and my father soon had to join us.
My father loved sports, especially soccer, and always memorized the players' names, the games' schedules, and the results. On that historic day, when he proudly sat in front of the TV to watch the game, I asked him, "Will you support Iran's regime team in this match?" He answered, "It doesn't matter to me which team wins. Iran is my homeland, but America has sheltered me, so whoever wins, I will feel victorious."
That day, my father's answer was not convincing because I had endured pain and suffering as a woman living in an Islamic country with a gender-apartheid regime. Immediately after the revolution, I was forced to go to an all-girls segregated school instead of a "mixed elementary school." The content of schoolbooks was changed to Islamic propaganda. I was forced to wear hijab, long dresses, and wide-leg pants in dark colors to cover my body's curves. All my human rights, including the right to divorce, the right to custody of my children, the right to equal inheritance, the right to testify in court, the right to leave the country, the right to study in a series of disciplines, the right to participate in a series of sports, the right to enter sports stadiums, the right to mingle with the opposite sex, the right to run for dozens of important positions in the country, including the presidency, were taken from me.
I didn't see this soccer team as my country's team, and I hated the Islamic Regime's flag and its anthem. That day, I had no interest in the Islamic Republic team winning, but I was in the minority. The passion for soccer and the World Cup mesmerized everyone. They had forgotten that soccer and the world events are a place for dictators to validate their existence, normalize their oppressive regimes, and spread their propaganda.
After 24 years, we are again at a historical moment, and on Tuesday, November 29, 2022, the teams of the Islamic Regime of Iran and the United States will face each other. In these 24 years, the regime's violence has reached a much wider range of people. If in the 1980s, the Islamic Republic committed crimes behind the walls of prisons and away from the eyes of the people, now it is shooting protesters in the streets in broad daylight, and cell phone cameras are recording these crimes.
In the 1980s, no one heard the voices of the prisoners who were executed and dumped secretly in individual or mass graves, but today we know the names of many of those killed in the recent protests. Due to access to the victims' social media accounts and because of satellite TVs and other forms of digital media, we know about the victims' interests, their lifestyles, and even the music they listened to. Many of the soccer players in the 1998 match, such as Ali Daei, Mahdi Mahdavi Kia, Karim Bagheri, Ahmad Reza Abedzadeh, etc., are standing by the people now and support the Iranian people's revolution against this brutal Regime.
Today, we should all boycott this World Cup and the Islamic regime's team, which instead of being a "national team," is an "Islamic regime team" and represents a child-killing gender apartheid political system, and hope that it will be the loser of this tournament. Every time the flag of the Islamic Republic is waved in international gatherings and its disgraceful anthem is played; it is a blow to the freedom movement of the Iranian people. In addition, the host of the World Cup, Qatar, is not qualified to host these competitions at all. Not only is it unclear how FIFA granted the hosting of this World Cup to a small country like Qatar, which has no history of football at all, but also Qatar's abuse of migrant workers, not paying their wages, the death of thousands of people during the construction of Qatar's stadiums, and discrimination against women and LGBTQ community makes this country ineligible to host the World Cup.
Although I have boycotted these games and will not watch them, I sincerely hope that the US team wins on Tuesday so that we no longer see the flag of a child-killing, gender-apartheid regime with no respect for human life and human dignity, waiving in the air.
The last victory of the Islamic regime against Wales team was celebrated by its repressive security forces in the street, the same forces that, until hours earlier, were killing innocent people with batons, guns, and bullets. The same forces that are committing crimes against humanity in Baluchistan and Kurdistan. Regime hired immigrants from other countries to cheer its team in Qatar's stadiums. It used all the intelligence capabilities and police forces of Qatar to prevent its opponents from entering the stadiums and silenced their voices. A team with this background does not deserve victory.
The real Iranian National Team is the young people willing to die in the streets for freedom and secularism. Our national team is imprisoned in Evin and other prisons in Iran. Our heroes are Nilofar Hamedi, Zainab Mousavi, Elaha Mohammadi, Hossein Ronaghi, Toomaj Salehi, Majid Tavakoli, Arash Sadeghi, Sepideh Qolian, Golrokh Iraei, Zeynab Jalali and thousands of others who are ready to give their lives for their country, for freedom of Iran, and a better tomorrow.
Opinions expressed by the author are not necessarily the views of Iran International
The frequent government shutdown of internet access has caused serious disruption for individuals and small businesses based on digital sales and marketing.
The new measure, dubbed “Regulations to support freelancers active in the country's digital economy," was ratified by the government’s digital economy taskforce on Saturday in 10 articles, which probably will lead to strict monitoring of online activities and ensuring that regime supporters have internet access.
The use of the term ‘freelancer’ might be misleading. The definition in the regulation points to individuals or companies that apply as active in digital economy and approved by the government.
Headed by Communications and Information Technology Minister Issa Zarepour, the taskforce was established last year to coordinate the government’s supervision on online activities among four ministries.
It defines a freelancer and its range of services, includes instruction on how to create a database of digital ‘freelancers’, sets criteria on their accreditation and how government institutions should interact with them, as well as some insurance and financial matters.
According to the new regulations, the computer trade union has been tasked to set up a database of ‘freelancers’ and their activities within three months.
In its article 8, the Ministry of Information and Communications Technology has been tasked with providing the necessary infrastructure for “high-speed and stable Internet with appropriate level of access for accredited people," without clarifying on the “appropriate access” or who are the “accredited people.”
In another article, the government claims that in order to supervise the “fairness and transparency” of the contracts between freelancers and employers, instructions have been issued for monitoring software platforms. According to the document, the regulations for accreditation into the database will be announced by the ministry upon collaboration among Ministry of Information and Communications Technology, the country's computer trade union organization; Ministry of Cooperatives, Labour, and Social Welfare; Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance; the presidential office of Science and Technology and Knowledge-Based Economy; and last but definitely not least the Intelligence Ministry.
Many Islamic Republic officials, such as member of the parliament Javad Hassanikia and former Information Minister Mohammad-Javad Azari Jahromi, have talked about providing internet access to university professors or journalists. The move can be a measure to justify replacing the country’s internet with an intranet for the general population who will be disconnected from the world wide web and controlled by the regime’s limited domestic access. Azari-Jahromi was one of the main supporters of the idea of stratifying Internet access inside the country. In an address to the parliament, he defended the idea saying it is not possible to provide the same type of internet to all jobs and ages in the country.
Like almost all measures by the Islamic Republic that sound innocent but pursue ulterior motives, the new move is titled “regulations to support freelancers” but is meant to suppress any critical voice and cajole those who want normal access to the internet to be on the regime’s side. It means that if you want to have access to the internet, the government should be able to monitor your work and make sure you do not engage in any activity or cooperate with anyone the regime deems hostile.
The story was first reported by movie director Vahid Vakilifar and Mohammad Reza Shafiei, a producer linked to the Islamic Republic’s inner circles, who criticized the filmmakers, saying that “the enemy's hybrid warfare” has clouded their understanding and judgement of the current developments.
According to these reports, filmmakers are shooting the same scenes both with hijab and without, leaving the impression that they think the Islamic Republic’s mandatory dress code may be relaxed in future.
Later on, people on social media said that not only the movies are being filmed both with and without hijab, some series for home streaming services are also being shot both ways.
An official with the Islamic Republic’s Cinema Organization, a body that works under the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance, denied the reports on November 23, and threatened if the news is true, the production of the films will be stopped at any stage. Bahman Habashi warned of “irreparable consequences for the creators.” He also called on investors, producers and directors to be careful about the consequences of any violation of the country's official laws on their reputation, credit and capital.
It is not yet clear who are the filmmakers who are purportedly making such movies or how they are funded or whether the movies are being produced for screening inside the country.
Kianoush Ayari’s movie "Couch," in which the actresses do not have headscarves, but instead wear wigs, is still banned, or another movie “The Killer and the Savage” by Hamid Nematollah, in which the main character is a woman with a shaved head has not given permission for screening.
Although producing movies or shows in two version seems costly and arduous, there are some very famous examples for it, such as The Message, a 1976 epic flick by Syrian-American Moustapha Akkad that chronicles the life of Islam’s Prophet Muhammad. Having consulted with Islamic clerics in a thorough attempt to be respectful towards Islam, Akkad simultaneously filmed two versions of the drama - one with an international cast in English and one an Arabic version with an Arab cast.
However, there are some people on social media who believe these rumors were created by regime insiders to justify the crackdown on filmmakers. This may be true because there are a few government-backed companies which want to control all film and TV series production and distribution. They have an interest in banning films or arresting independent filmmakers.
In recent weeks, a large number of actresses and female filmmakers as well as sports celebrities have posted photos of themselves without the Islamic Republic’s mandatory hijab as a show of solidarity with antigovernment protests, ignited by the death of 22-year-old woman Mahsa Amini in custody of the country’s hijab – or the so-called morality – police.
Such acts of defiance by actresses have become extremely troubling for the Islamic Republic’s state broadcaster that has to remove them from TV series and movies they had appeared in or stop airing the shows altogether.
The regime has also arrested several of the celebrities who have unveiled in public and has threatened many with bans on their works and leaving the country. However, such measures seem futile as the list of people who are getting banned are increasing day by day. Even if the production of movies with a veiled and unveiled cast is only a rumor, it shows that many people are imagining the country’s cinematic landscape free of the Islamic Republic.