A Clergyman, a revolutionary woman and a diplomat in January 1989 went to Moscow, carrying a letter from the founder of the Islamic revolution of Iran to "Mr. Gorbachev! Head of state of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics" which in it was written: "It is clear to everybody that from now on communism will only have to be found in the museums of world political history." Mohammad Javad Larijani, deputy of the foreign minister, along with Ayatollah Javadi Amoli and Marzieh Hadidechi Dabbaq on January 4th 1989 delivered Imam Khomeini's letter to Mikhail Gorbachev, talking about hearing the bones of communism being broken and also clarified: "Islamic Republic of Iran as the greatest and most powerful base of the Islamic world can easily fill the ideological gap of your system." "Eduard Shevardnadze", then the foreign minister of the Soviet Union, on March 3rd 1989 informed Imam Khomeini about Gorbachev's reply in Jamaran Hosseiniyeh. Imam Khomeini's prediction occurred three years later, two years after the demise of Imam Khomeini the Soviet Union collapsed; as Mohammad Javad Larijani says one of the reasons of the letter was to design the relations after the Soviet collapse. Larijani has expirienced being a MP in different times, and also establishing the Research Center of the Parliament and Theoretical Physics and Mathematics Research Center which he is currently its chief, but he who has graduated in Electronic Engineering from Sharif University and has a Ph.D of Mathematics from California's Berkeley University, knows his delivering Imam's message the most important and different mission so on, and all these are about a diplomat who says: "I have done more than 3000 negotiations in the last 30 years in international level." He is now Secretary of the Human Rights Committee of Iran's Judicial System, the system where his brother, Sadiq, is its Chief Justice. His other brother, another son of Ayatollah Mirza Hashim Amoli, is Ali Larijani, Iran's Parliament Speaker.
***Why were you selected as a member of Imam Khomeini's delegation to deliver his message to Gorbachev? As a diplomat and the deputy of the foreign minister what was your responsibility in this delegation?
"An afternoon, Haj Ahmad Khomeini called me and told me that he has a written message and that Imam is going to send Gorbachev a message. He gave me 48 hours to read the message and give my opinion so it could be finalized. Imam said a delegation consisting Ayatollah Javadi Amoli, Mrs. Dabbaq and me are going to deliver this message, and he mentioned my responsibility in that delegation as preserving the diplomatic limitations and he remarked to me that before visiting Gorbachev, I should have a meeting with Eduard Shevardnadze (the the Soviet foreign minister, later the president of Georgia) and inform him about the message and its role and level, so when we read the message their minds will be ready. The night before visiting Gorbachev in Moscow, I had a long meeting with Shevardnadze and explained the message to him."
***Did you have any opinions about Imam's letter? Did they agree with your ideas?
"I received the minute of the letter from Haj Ahmad and took it to Ayatollah Khamenei who was then the president to inform him about it, though he already new about it. I had six ideas for the letter and Imam accepted six of them, but he didn't accept my most important idea and it was that Imam believed in that Marxism is finished in the Soviet Union. The fact is that this was a hot discussion then, and some believed that Marxism is coming to an end in the Soviet Union and some thought Gorbachev is going to improve Marxism and make it work again with a new power and structure, Margaret Toucher the British prime minister was among the second group. But Imam clearly said that he can hear the sound of Marxism's bones breaking. I wrote Imam that he should be more cautious about this issue, but he didn't accept it. After we returned from Moscow, early in the morning we went to visit Imam Khomeini; he told us: "Was Marxism over or not?" and I replied: "It was completely over". With a look to the structure of Imam's message we could consider that he had entered in three axises; firstly coming to end of MArxism which was an important issue. Marxism was a product of the secular thinking of west and it was an understanding of life based on this world. Through the 19th and 20th century secular thinking had produced three ways: Liberal Democracy, Fascism and Marxism. Fascism was an ideology which had both socialist and nationalist or racism views. Marxism was an interesting ideology in a time, it had attracted many of the students, I can say it had attracted our best students. Marxism was based on desires such as scientific struggle with imperialism and a future with out levels and a lot of theoretical work, it was an ideology which turned the Soviet Union into a superpower less than 50 years, Moscow that was a ruin at the beginning of the 19th century, in the second half of the 20th century had 25% of the GDP. Now after 70 years we are talking about Marxism coming to an end, this means the fall of an empire. But Imam was strict about his idea and he wanted to make Iran's position in future after the collapse of the Soviet Union."
***As an foreign ministry official and a diplomat in the Iran- Iraq peace talks delegation, further to the Marxism finishing issues, what messages do you see in Imam's letter in the political matters? And what specification did delivering such a letter had for you?
"One of the wonderful aspects of the life of Imam Khomeini was the long-term strategy, he used to say that the west has a 200 year program for us, he had long term views himself. In the issue of sending Gorbachev a message, he entered the struggle about Marxism coming to an end or not, a lot of westerns thought that they should act with the Soviet Union cautiously but Imam said Marxism has come to an end and he designed the relations of the post-Soviet based on this philosophy. The second axis of Imam's message was his warning about west's green light. Imam said, what would replace Marxism after its death? And he predicted the Yeltsin era from that time. He said that the reason of Marxism falling isn't the existence of Marxism or that Liberalism wasn't there, he clears it for us that the reason Marxism failed was its avoiding and fighting with God, and so he concludes that the west will reach to the same place and he wanted to introduce Islam. Imam always said that we should work on introducing our system as a suitable system in the modern world, his goal was to introduce Islamic system in the absence of Marxism system. Imam wanted us to have such a viewpoint, and this would cause a lot of responsibility for us, Imam invited Gorbachev to Islam, he said that Iran experience is highly significant. After the collapse of Marxism there were several discussions in the world , the Chinese thought bad economic situation caused this collapse so they moved to reform their economy system. In the west they thought not being free caused this collapse, but Imam said none of them are correct, you are both secular and their failure is inevitable. Imam taught us another lesson too, and that was his children should speak bravely. I always pity that Imam's letter was never analyzed well so that its thoughtful and deep sources could be revealed and we could find its meanings. This is the only issue which Imam officially sent a delegation in his own name to another country and this was an experience which made us all brave enough to talk about our thoughts openly, it took us to the war go great issues."
***When you mentioned the ending of Marxism in your discussions with the communist state which Imam's letter mentioned it also, they didn't react harshly,especially that you were talking about the relation of Tehran and Moscow for the post Soviet era?
"The third axis of Imam Khomeini's letter after clarifying the death of Marxism and the danger of Liberalisms green light and introduction of Islam was designing the relations of Tehran and Moscow for the post Soviet days. The letter had this message that we (the Islamic Republic), you (the Soviet Union) know you as finished state and are ready to have a new relation term after the collapse, as the relations of Iran and the post- Marxism Russia. In my talks with Shevardnadze I clarified for him that we see the Marxism system finished. From his and Gorbachev's reactions I found out that Imam was correct. Interesting to know that they didn't even get angry by eating these stuff, and they showed no reactions when we mentioned the Marxism system has come to an end."
***What was your role in the meeting with Gorbachev? It is said that further to the interpreting you gave some explanations about the content of the letter too.
"In the meeting with Gorbachev I tried to raise their attention and at time I gave some extra explaining. We had a good interpreter but the content of Imam's letter was difficult. For instance he had mentioned the lack of resignation for existence which is an important argue and it should had been explained for the Russian side. I had studied the complete translation of the letter into English. In the meeting with Gorbachev the interpreter translated the text fromPersian to Russian and in two or three sensitive parts I started to explain."
***It has been said that Gorbachev got angry once, did anything happen during the meeting?
"Gorbachev was worried by the letter mentioning the Muslims and the Azan sound. They are still worried about parts of Dagestan and Chechnya. We are against the deportations of countries, Imam had clearly mentioned this, and if only Gorbachev had realized that by giving religious freedom to the Muslim parts he could prevent a lot of problems in the future. Gorbachev understood all three axis of Imam's letter, but he wasn't strong enough to replace the Islamic thought instead of the Marxism thought. Imam's message had a great affect, the letters literature was quite interesting for them, they were faced with a leader like Imam Khomeini who spoke strongly, opposite to countries who spoke with strain against the Kremlin officials or always argue with them. Of course the meeting was in a special environment, Ayatolah Javadi Amoli spoke with his great and unique expression and our dear sister Mrs. Dabbaq had given a special feature to the meeting, I informed Gorbachev about her revolutionary experiences and that she had been a great irregular troop, and it was interesting for them. Gorbachev and Shevardnadze listened carefully, because they really didn't have any interests into Marxism, they were quite glad to hear these issues."
***What was the story go Shevardnadze coming to Jamaran for delivering the reply of Gorbachev? The meeting was unofficial and Imam hadn't wore an official suite.
"Haj Ahmad had informed us that Imam won't come to welcome Shevardnadze. He had in his mind that Ayatollah Javadi Amoli would accompany Shevardnadze when he enters the room so Imam would stand up in respect of Ayatollah Javadi Amoli. We thought we could go into another room so Imam would enter the room after us, and this really happened; we thought Imam will enter the room with an official clothing, but few minutes before the meeting Haj Ahmad had told us that Imam refuses to enter the meeting with an official clothing. We were surprised as we saw Imam enter the room with his night hat and slippers, and after sitting he covered his legs with a blanket. Imam's looking was penetrating, Shevardnadze was speechless, after Imam left Shevardnadze told me he was shelterless against Imam's looks."
***What leaps and bounds did the relations of Iran and the Soviet Union at the last years of the communist system had? And knowing that the Soviets have supported Iraq in the imposed war against us, were you hoping to have good relations with their replacers?
"The Soviets did two mistakes; attacking Afghanistan and equipping Iraq through the imposed war against Iran. The Soviets generously equipped Iraq with weapons. Despite all of these, Imam had designed the strategy of our relations with Moscow after the falling of Marxism and he noted that we are ready to rebuild our relations afterwards. I also have a memory of Imam's reaction towards these mistakes that the Soviets had made. When they attacked Afghanistan, Imam summoned for the Soviet ambassador in Tehran and asked him why did you attack them, your going to fail there, and leave there while you're insulted. The Soviet ambassador in a book which he wrote years later, noticed this meeting and mentions how angry he had been then, no one had talked with a super power like USSR this way. This meeting was over and we could see defeat in the faces of Soviet troops. The IRGC gave a port to Imam about the Soviets delivering weapons to Iraq for hitting Tehran. At that time Andrei Gromyko who had served 30 years as the Soviet foreign minister was the Chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet. I met him in trip to Moscow. As I sat down he started advising me to finish the war with Iraq and we replied him why have you started a war with Afghanistan? He said your as my grandson, are you advising me? Let speak straight, we failed in Afghanistan, you supported the Mujahedin (the militias), and they killed our troops, and we have supported the Iraqis. If you help us to have a decent withdrawal from Afghanistan, we'll help you in Iraq. Gromyko was asking us to officially recognize the communist regime of Afghanistan; in a meeting which was held in Haj Ahmad's house between the heads of powers (President, Parliament Speaker and Chief of Justice), Imam noted that we should enter in a matter which does not benefit the Afghan people, so we didn't accept the Soviet's offer. But we informed Ahmad Shah Masoud and the Mujahedin about the Soviet's message. This is why I believe that the US is going to face same destiny in Iraq, they are going to fail even sooner based on the number of their troops and they are going to need us to free them, that day isn't far."
***Through our talks with Mohammad Javad Larijani we reached to other issues about this letter. By saying a memory about his trip to Moscow in those days and issues which happened there he talked for us. The compare which Ayatollah Jannati had done between Imam's letter to Gorbachev and Mahmoud Ahmadi Nejad's letter to the US president was one of those issues. Considering this compare, Larijani added:
"The differences are in purpose and dignity of writing and the presentation of the letter. Imam Khomeini was in a level which he could write such a letter. The president could write letters too, any way we live in a complex world and we need to interact, in international issues friendship and being enemy doesn't matter, the important issue is improving our national benefits. We can consider that as part of the developed roadmap, the president writes a letter to his foreign counterpart. We should consider several issues. Firstly the dignity of writing a letter is different, Imam's letter is different than the president, minister or any other person's letter. Secondly a letter should be part of a great strategy. One of Imam's three axis letter was about designing the relations between Tehran and Moscow for after the collapse of the Soviet Union, a letter shouldn't only be a sniper shot. And third of all, sending and presenting such a letter needs some introductions. Imam didn't doubt about his letter, he asked me to read and give my idea about the letter as an expert, so I read it and gave 6 opinions which he only accepted 5 of them. Further to this Imam was sensitive about how are they going to react in front of his delegation. We reached to Moscow on sunset, I had a three hour meeting with Shevardnadze that night, the next day we held a meeting with Gorbachev. All these programs were arranged, and these factors are the cause of a massage's success. The officials are free to write letters, but the letter should be proper to the dignity of the writer and it should be based on a grand strategy. Its arrangements should also be thought about. But of course Imam's letter was a unique letter, which part of it being unique is because of himself, and part of it because of its contents. Imam opened that the message should be received in its own dignity and it should be part of a long-term perspective.