Statements in Meeting with Professors and Students of Qazvin

In the Name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

This is a very sweet, meaningful, and profound session. Wherever a gathering of young, faithful, and enthusiastic individuals is present, one can be certain that the door of divine mercy and guidance has been opened there.

The topics I have heard in this hour and fifteen minutes since the beginning of this session have been very good, elevated, and substantial, and most of what was said is acceptable to any fair-minded individual. Many of you young people may not be able to imagine the pleasure of old age, which sees its hopes and aspirations embodied in the faces of young people who have always been hopeful to come to the scene and follow this path. The joy and pleasure of people like me from what is happening in this session is indescribable.

I see many of the concepts that we wished to promote among the youth and be recognized as beliefs are today being expressed by them, backed by their faith and youthful enthusiasm, and are being projected into the cultural and intellectual atmosphere of society, filling it. You young people, as well as the esteemed professors and heads of universities, speak of knowledge production, software movement, the connection between universities and industry, and the many hopes that are concentrated in the young community of our country. These are the very things that have constituted my hopes and aspirations, and on the day I raised these issues in universities, I myself was hopeful; however, many said, how could raising these issues be beneficial!?

Three or four years ago, I said in one of the universities in Tehran that if I were to set the budget for research and universities in the country, I would act in a way that is appropriate; however, that condition is not available, and the officials of the sectors have authorities according to the law that they must carry out. I said I would raise the very important topic of knowledge production and the software movement and breaking the frontiers in the realm of knowledge creation, so that it could become the culture of the university environment. When this happens, then there will be no worries; because tens and hundreds of thousands of believing and eager hearts and young minds will embark on this path and pursue it. Today, I see the signs of these vanguards of hope and good tidings for the country. I have always told myself and my audience that the horizon is bright, and today I emphasize that the horizon is very bright and radiant, and the work is in your hands; in the hands of you young people.

Of course, what you have raised here, if recorded, will be transcribed and will be considered one by one, and what we need to recommend, we will recommend; what we need to assign to the institutions, we will assign, and God willing, these matters will be pursued to the extent of the country's capacity and capability. If it is not recorded, I ask the organizers of the session to take written notes of the content of the speeches of the friends who spoke, so that it can be followed up.

I would like to say a word to our dear brother, the disabled veteran, who says, "I am a conditional student of martyrdom at the university": You are by no means conditional. You veterans are the valuable reserves of the university jihad. Jihad is not necessarily accompanied by martyrdom; however, it is necessarily accompanied by attaining the rank of the Mujahideen and drawing closer to the Lord. The battlefield of jihad is everywhere; both in the military defense of the country, in the political and reputational defense of the country, and in the effort to advance the country and the nation, in which you are working today. All of these are struggles, and we all must struggle. A research, a scientific action, or a correct political movement of yours in the student movement or outside of it is a struggle.

I have often told my friends that my feelings today in the face of the vast front of global corruption, error, and misguidance have not changed from the feelings of the era of oppression under the tyrannical regime. Back then, we thought we had to struggle; today, I also think we must struggle. We are here to struggle; however, the form, arena, and dimensions of this struggle have changed, and the struggle has become more complex and harder; the heartache of this struggle is greater than the heartache of the struggle during the tyrannical era. Now, our opponent is the system of domination and oppression, hiding the ugliest traits of the misguided human under the guise of a smiling face, cologne, and a tied tie! Today, we are struggling against this entity. If a nation gives up the struggle for its ideals and becomes negligent for even a moment about what it believes to be right, it will face the same fate that the Islamic world and the Islamic Ummah and the nations of this region have faced throughout centuries. We had the most resources and the most natural wealth here; we had the most important strategic and geopolitical regions of the world here; the Islamic Ummah had the lifeblood of the modern, advanced, and industrial world, namely oil, at its disposal; but today, look at its political, scientific, and backward conditions! This is due to falling asleep and becoming negligent about the struggle. The hardships of the struggle must be endured to be able to reach the noble and cherished human status, and to elevate the successive generations after oneself. In this struggle, we must rely on God.

Today, seeing you has lifted my spirits. Yesterday, many dear people who expressed great affection towards me - in addition to the city of Qazvin - were from Takestan, Bouin Zahra, and Abik; I thank all of them. Now, there are also individuals from the counties of Qazvin province present among you.

At the beginning of my speech, I want to present two short hadiths, one from Amir al-Mu'minin (peace be upon him) that is addressed to you. The address of Ali ibn Abi Talib (peace be upon him) to the youth is not a political or opportunistic address; it is a wise and paternal perspective and address. He does not want to employ the youth to enhance the economic market or his political arena, but rather wants to guide the youth towards growth and guidance, which is exemplified by Ali ibn Abi Talib himself. He said these two sentences to the youth: "O group of young people, protect your honor with manners and your religion with knowledge"; preserve your human dignity with manners, and your religion with knowledge. This is a very important statement. Knowledge preserves religion; this is the logic of Islam. Let the adversaries of Islam who speak nonsense about Islam not being compatible with knowledge continue to speak.

The other hadith is from the noble Prophet of Islam, Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him): "God has not divided anything among His servants that is more valuable than reason"; the Almighty God has not divided anything among His servants that is more valuable than wisdom. God has divided sustenance among His servants; air, water, life, and pleasures. "What we have of His blessings is from God"; everything belongs to God. Among all these diverse and colorful blessings, the Prophet of Islam testifies that no blessing is as valuable as wisdom. Then there are lengthy sentences that I will not read because they are long. In the end, he says: "And God did not send any messenger or prophet until he completed reason"; the Almighty God did not send any prophet throughout history among the people except for this purpose and goal: to complete reason among the people. In the sermon of Nahj al-Balagha, it is also stated that the Almighty God sent the Prophet "to stir up the treasures of reason among humans"; to awaken them. What is this reason for? This reason is for finding the path of life. One must think; one must analyze and assess to find the path of life. My most important recommendation to you, my dear youth, is this. One of the slogans I have repeated over the past few years is that we should not remain permanently in the realm of experience and translation - translated knowledge, even translated thought, ideas, and ideologies, and translated economics and politics - because it is a disgrace for a human not to use their own reason, assessment, analysis, and understanding and to close their eyes and be intimidated by the propaganda waves imposed on them, to accept a statement.

The greatest calamity that has directly and indirectly befallen the nations of the East, especially the Islamic nations, in these two hundred years of colonialism is that they became intimidated in the face of Western propaganda and retreated. They could not withstand this bloody and very severe onslaught that the leaders of Western arrogance inflicted on them through culture, and they were forced to retreat and raise their hands. In all areas of life, the Westerners and Europeans projected an idea that anyone who opposed it was met with uproar, mockery, and insult; they pressured to impose their culture. This culture had only one advantage: it was European culture; it had no other advantage. Of course, each nation has a culture that they can utilize from one another and complete their own culture by taking experiences and lessons from others. We have no objection to this and we are completely in agreement; however, what happened in the world was not this.

The difference between cultural invasion and cultural interaction is that cultural interaction is like going to a fruit or vegetable market and choosing what your appetite desires, what your eyes and palate like, and what suits your temperament, and you eat it. In the realm of culture, it is the same that you take what you see and like and find suitable for yourself and see no fault in it from another collection and nation; there is no problem with that. "Seek knowledge even if it is in China"; this was taught to us fourteen hundred years ago. In cultural invasion, they do not tell you to choose; rather, they put you to sleep, grab your hands and feet, and inject a substance that you do not know what it is and do not know if it is beneficial for you or not. Of course, the Western world did not let us feel that they had grabbed our hands and feet and injected us; they set the scene in such a way that we thought we were choosing, while we were not choosing; it was imposed on us. Then, these are the same people who, if there is even a slight blemish on the prevailing and accepted culture, they create a commotion. You see in France, which is considered the cradle of freedom, what uproar they have raised for three or four Muslim girls wearing hijabs! This is why we say we must think; we must analyze. The mindset of translation for a nation creates a very difficult destiny. This is my constant recommendation to you, my dear youth.

Today, the occasion of the elections compels me to raise two or three other topics that relate to the issue of elections and are, of course, part of the mental and intellectual issues for our young generation.

One issue is the essence of the elections and its relation to democracy from the perspective of Islam. Western democracy - that is, democracy based on liberalism - has its own logic. The basis of this logic considers the legitimacy of governments and systems to be based on the majority vote. The foundation of this thought is the liberal idea; the idea of individual freedom, which has no moral constraints except for the limits of harming the freedom of others. The Western liberal thought is this: absolute personal and individual freedom of humans in all areas and in all domains, which will also manifest in the formation of the political system of the country. Since there are minorities and majorities in society, there is no choice but for the minority to follow the majority. This is the basis of Western democracy. If a system has this, it is legitimate according to liberal democracy; if a system does not have this, it is illegitimate. This is the theory of liberal democracy, while the actual practice of Western democracies is completely different from this theory, and what is observed today in the realm of practice in Western democracies is not this. If the basis of legitimacy is the majority vote of the people, meaning those who are the owners of the vote, then the government of America and this president of America is illegitimate; because they do not have the majority. Thirty-five, thirty-eight, or forty percent of the eligible voters participated in the elections, and of that number, for example, twenty-one percent voted for him - of course, it was not like that; you know that he was pushed into the White House by a judge's order! If we assume that this vote is sufficient for his legitimacy, then the current government of America is not legitimate. We have more reasons for the illegitimacy of the American government; but now we are discussing with their own logic, which is not exclusive to that government; many of these so-called democracies in the world, in their various elections, do not have the sixty, sixty-five, or seventy percent that you observe in the Islamic Republic of Iran, and their numbers are much lower than this. Of course, sometimes their numbers are indeed sixty or sixty-something percent; but often it is forty-something percent and fifty or thirty-eight percent and so on.

The contradiction in the behavior and speech of the Westerners and the system of arrogance, especially America - with which we are dealing today; we are not currently dealing with others - is much more than this. How many non-democratic governments have they accepted, meaning governments that have never had an election box in their country and have never taken a vote from anyone, and have treated them like a democratic government, and how many democracies have they overthrown with military coups! God willing, your lives will be long enough that in ten or twenty years, when gradually the documents of the coups of the past twenty or thirty years in Latin America are released from the archives of the U.S. State Department, you will see - of course, some of these documents have already been released; some of them we know ourselves without them releasing them from their archives - that in all of Latin America, there may not be a country left where if there was an election and freedom, and if the president was popular among the people, the CIA did not intervene and did not instigate a coup; did not create trouble and did not destroy the fathers of popular democracies. Now, Chile is famous, and we all know the story of that country. They did this in Africa and Asia and in various other places. How many dictatorial governments were established with the backing of America, which supported them unconditionally, and they, with the backing of America, killed, beat, and ruled for twenty or thirty years! In our own country, the tyrannical and dark dictatorship of the era of Reza Khan, which has rarely been seen in our history, was brought to power by the British, and then they brought Mohammad Reza to power as well. After a short period when Dr. Mossadegh came to power with the national movement, they tolerated it for a year or two in any way, but their patience ran out, and America and Britain conspired together and instigated the coup of August 19, and maintained the black dictatorship based on the coup of General Zahedi in Iran for twenty-five years.

In Islam, the people are a pillar of legitimacy, not the entire basis of legitimacy. The political system in Islam is based not only on the vote and will of the people but also on another fundamental basis called piety and justice. If someone who is elected for governance does not possess piety and justice, even if all the people agree on him, from the perspective of Islam, this government is illegitimate; let alone the majority. When Imam Hussein (peace be upon him) was invited to Kufa in a letter that is part of the enduring documents of Islamic history, it is written: "And the ruler is not the one who does not rule with justice"; a ruler in the Islamic community and government is not one who does not act justly. If he does not rule with justice, whoever appointed him and whoever elected him is illegitimate. This subject applies to all levels of government and is not exclusive to leadership in the Islamic Republic system. Of course, the responsibility of leadership is heavier, and the justice and piety required in leadership are, for example, not required in a member of parliament; but this does not mean that a member of parliament can go to parliament without having piety and justice; no, he also needs piety and justice; why? Because he is also a ruler and part of the power apparatus, just as the government and the judiciary are also rulers; because they govern over the lives and properties of the community under their power.

"The ruler must act justly, and be a debtor to the religion of God"; he must follow the path of God's religion. In the Quran, in God's address to Abraham, this very important point is mentioned that after numerous tests that God put Abraham through, and he emerged from various trials pure and purer, He said: "Indeed, I have made you a leader for the people"; I have made you a leader for the people. A leader is not only a religious leader and a matter of purity and ablution and prayer; a leader means a leader of religion and the world; a guide for the people towards righteousness. This is the meaning of a leader in the logic of religious laws from the beginning until today. Then Abraham asked: "And what about my offspring?"; Do my children and descendants have a share in this leadership? God did not say they do or do not; He gave a rule. "My covenant does not reach the wrongdoers"; the command and decree of leadership from Me does not reach the oppressors and wrongdoers; they must be just.

Amir al-Mu'minin (peace be upon him) is the leader of the just in the world and the embodiment of piety and justice. When, after the murder of Uthman, they rushed to his house to bring him to the scene of the caliphate, he did not come and did not accept - of course, there are reasons for this that are very important and meaningful discussions - even after accepting, he said: "If it were not for the presence of the present and the establishment of the proof by the existence of the supporter and what God has taken from the scholars that they should not agree with the oppression of the oppressor and the hunger of the oppressed, I would have thrown the rope over its neck"; if my duty, with regard to the acceptance, allegiance, and desire of the people, was not established and confirmed to stand against oppression and fight against discrimination and defend the oppressed, I still would not have accepted. This means that Amir al-Mu'minin says that I do not seek power for the sake of power. Now some take pride: we must go to take power! What do we want power for? If power is for the sake of power itself, it is a burden and a calamity; if power is for the struggle against the oppressor in all dimensions of oppression and injustice - internal, social, and economic, which is the most acute - it is good. Therefore, the basis of the legitimacy of government is not only the vote of the people; the main basis is piety and justice; however, piety and justice also do not work without the vote and acceptance of the people. Thus, the vote of the people is also necessary. Islam places importance on the vote of the people. The difference between Western democracy and the religious democracy that we propose is right here.

Western democracy does not have a solid intellectual foundation to rely on; however, religious democracy is not like that. Because its foundation is a religious foundation, it therefore has a clear answer. In religious democracy and in divine law, it is stated that the people must want the ruler for him to be accepted and have the right to govern. O you who are a Muslim, why is the vote of the people valid? It says because I am a Muslim; because I believe in Islam, and because in the logic of Islam, the vote of the people is valid based on the dignity of humans before the Almighty God. In Islam, no authority and governance over humans is accepted unless God specifies it. Whenever we have doubts in many jurisprudential issues that relate to the authority of the ruler, the authority of the judge, or the authority of the believer - which there are various types and categories of authority - we say no; why? Because the principle is the absence of authority. This is the logic of Islam. Then, this authority is accepted when the legislator has sanctioned it, and the sanction of the legislator is that the one to whom we give authority - at any level of authority - must have competence and qualification, meaning justice and piety, and the people must also want him. This is the logic of religious democracy, which is very solid and profound. A believer can fully accept this logic and act upon it; there is no room for doubt and temptation.

The Islamic Republic has accepted and adopted the parliamentary system, which is one of the forms of democracy and is also a good form. This part of governance, meaning legislation - apart from the executive branch and leadership, which are also elected by the people in some way - is carried out by the direct election of the people with the same law that exists, which is foreseen in our constitution, and ordinary laws have also specified its arrangements, so that those who go and legislate. What does law mean? Law means the destiny of a country; law means the destiny of humans in a society. Because everyone is subject to it and must obey the law. The government must also obey the law; the leader must also obey the law.

Some think that this "absolute guardianship of the jurist" mentioned in the constitution means that the leadership is absolute and can do whatever it wants! The meaning of absolute guardianship is not this. The leadership must implement the laws meticulously and respect them. However, in cases where the officials and those in charge want to implement a law that is valid meticulously, they encounter problems. Human law is like this. The constitution has opened a way and said that where the officials in the implementation of a certain tax law or foreign policy, trade, industry, and university face difficulties and cannot do anything - the parliament is not such that today you take something and tomorrow they approve it and respond to you - the leadership is the reference. It was the same during Imam's time. I myself was the president at that time, and where we had difficulties, we would write to Imam, and he would give permission. After Imam, the previous and current government sometimes write about various issues that there is a difficulty here, please allow this part of the law to be violated. The leadership examines and scrutinizes, and if it feels that it must do this, it does it. There are also cases that are a significant national problem, which is referred to the Expediency Council. This is the meaning of absolute guardianship; otherwise, the leader, the president, the ministers, and the representatives are all subject to the law and must be submissive.

The law is so important that it is the framework of our actions. The one we elect and send to the parliament is someone who determines the destiny of the country for a specified four years. Initially, when we accepted this parliamentary system, some regional systems that were also Islamic protested, saying what is this that you have accepted?! I do not want to name names now. One of these claiming governments said why did you accept the parliamentary system?! We argued with them and proved to them that this parliamentary system is correct. Therefore, the first point is that the religious democracy, one of the most important manifestations of which is the elections of the Islamic Consultative Assembly, relies on the intellectual and belief foundation of Islam.

So far, multiple parliaments have been formed in Iran, all of which have arisen from the votes of the people and are based on a strong logical argument. Today's parliament is the sixth parliament, and all of these parliaments are valid, and whatever they approve must be acted upon by all. If we perceive that this approval or this parliament or this period is not in accordance with the interests of the country, we must refer to ourselves and see that these were elected by no one other than us; we elected them. This is why I emphasize the enthusiastic and widespread participation of everyone in the elections. Some think that if we have a vibrant election, the Islamic Republic will gain legitimacy, and if the election is not vibrant, the system will not gain legitimacy. This statement is not correct. The democratic systems in the world manage their systems with half the votes we have in the presidency and parliament and do not feel illegitimate. The reason I insist on the presence of the people is that this is a religious, moral, and rational duty; because when the parliament approves a law, everyone must submit to that law, so you must play a role in creating that parliament that will approve this law. If you withdraw, this withdrawal will not solve any problem; you must enter the field. If you have made your effort and what you wanted did not happen, you have made your effort; you have fulfilled your duty.

My dear ones! Let me tell you that the call to participate in the elections is not for the sake of the propaganda of others. Before the revolution, we read in books, and from the beginning of the revolution until now, we have been experiencing twenty-five years of global media propaganda and this predominantly Zionist empire. They never cease to speak ill of the Islamic Republic and any organization in the world that does not agree with them. If the people of Iran participate in a vibrant election, they speak one way; if they do not participate, they speak another way. Our statement is not to silence them. In the second Khordad election of 1997 - which was a vibrant election; a huge population participated, which of course was not unprecedented, and that percentage had previously participated in some other elections; but in that election, a very good percentage participated - foreign radios said the Iranian nation gathered and cast votes in the ballot boxes to say no to the Islamic Republic! You see, the people came at the invitation of the leadership, the system, and the officials and elected an official for the Islamic Republic. When it was crowded and the population participated at a high percentage, they said it that way; in the city council elections, where in large cities, especially Tehran, the people's participation was very low, they still said the people did not participate; meaning they said no to the Islamic Republic! Therefore, according to them, if the people participate in the elections, they say no; if they do not participate, they say no! This is how the enemy's propaganda works. No matter how much the people participate, it is enemy propaganda.

I said that day, and I say today that if the people did not participate in the city council elections, it was because they were not satisfied with the performance of the councils. If the councils perform well this term, you will see that in the next term, if they want to come to the ballot boxes for the councils, they will come vibrantly. Where the people have hope that something will be done, they come. When they see that the councils did not perform well, the people become disheartened and hopeless. About a month and a half ago, I told the officials in Zanjan that if you want the people to participate in the elections, improve your performances. If the people see the performances, they will be encouraged to enter the elections. Therefore, the issue of participation in the elections is important for us from the perspective of duty.

In Western democracies, specific qualifications are considered, which are mainly based on party affiliations. Both those who are nominated and those who nominate and those who vote for the nominees are actually voting for this party or that party. Now, in those countries that are two-party, like America and England, or in countries that are multi-party, they vote for one of these two or several parties. In the Islamic Republic system, apart from political knowledge and competence, moral and ideological competence is also necessary. Individuals should not say that ethics and beliefs are personal matters of humans. Yes, ethics and beliefs are personal matters of humans; but not for the responsible. If I am in a position of responsibility and have bad ethics; have a poor understanding of societal issues and believe that I should fill my own pockets, I cannot tell the people that this is my personal belief and ethics and has nothing to do with anyone! For a responsible person, beliefs and ethics are not personal matters; they are social and public matters; they govern the fate of the people. The one who goes to the parliament or reaches any other responsibility in the Islamic Republic system, if they are corrupt, foreign-oriented, and serve the interests of the privileged classes of society, they can no longer play the role that the people and the deprived classes want. If that person is a trader, susceptible to bribery and recommendations, and is intimidated by the pressures of propaganda and foreign policies, they can no longer be trusted by the people and go there to determine the fate of the country and the nation. This person, apart from inherent competence and knowledge, also needs moral courage, religious and political piety, and correct beliefs.

Of course, this statement of mine should not lead to an inquisition where they ask one by one what your opinion is on a certain issue. I am against inquisition, and at the time when in the 1980s some extremists asked strange questions for students to enter universities, I opposed it and have repeatedly announced my opposition. Someone who has practically and explicitly shown and proven; insists on appearing to oppose the value foundations of the system and does not agree, cannot become a representative of the people and go to the Islamic Consultative Assembly, which is the pillar of the system. Therefore, moral competence is necessary, and everyone must be sensitive to this aspect.

Some say that the right of citizenship to be elected should not be revoked. The right to be elected is not an ordinary citizenship right like the right to work, to reside in a city, to walk in the street, and to buy a car, etc. This is a citizenship right that requires specific qualifications that must be verified. The verification of these qualifications is not solely the responsibility of the Guardian Council; it is also the Ministry of Interior, as well as the Guardian Council, which must verify the qualifications. In verifying the qualifications of candidates, the people themselves are the best individuals and have the most responsibilities, so that when they verify a person’s qualifications, they introduce them to each other, and those who can provide facilities for that person so that a qualified person can enter this field.

Of course, I have had and will have discussions with the Guardian Council and the Ministry of Interior, which I tell the gentlemen in the working sessions they have with me, and when necessary, I will say it publicly. Each has a duty that they must perform according to the law, and no violation from any institution is accepted; however, now we generally say that the elections are a shared duty between these.

Another point regarding the elections is that there is a significant similarity between democracy in our parliament and Western democracies and parliaments, and that is that parliaments are established everywhere in the world to preserve and strengthen the system, not to fight against the system - those who are the audience of this statement should listen carefully - because the parliament is part of the system and is meant to complete it. The parliament is not a place for the presence of opponents of the system, where some say we will enter the Islamic Consultative Assembly to fight against the constitution or the Islamic Republic system! This is completely illogical and wrong everywhere in the world. You do not see anywhere in the world that the parliament opposes the system. Of course, they oppose governments; they impeach, bring down, and elevate; but no parliament opposes the structure of the political system; because the parliament is part of the structure of the system, and it does not make sense for it to oppose. Of course, within the Islamic Consultative Assembly, like all other parliaments, various groups - as they call them, various factions - are present, which have different programs and tastes, which must be there, and the parliament is a place for passionate, reasoned, and political discussions. They must debate and discuss passionately; but they must convince the opposing side with reasoning.

I am not in favor of a silent and submissive parliament that nods its head at every statement. I believe the parliament should not be stagnant and motionless; it must be dynamic, active, and vibrant. I myself was a member of the parliament at the beginning of the revolution and in the first parliament. The parliament needs an active representative who works, thinks, discusses, and logically proves and disproves. Imam often told us that the debates of seminary students should be a model for you in the Islamic Consultative Assembly. In the debates of seminary students, when two students debate, they refute each other, shout at each other, and when the debate is over, they are friends; they eat together, go to class together, and make tea together. The parliament should be like this: a place for reasoned debates, but all within the framework of the system. The parliament is a place for effort, planning, and progress within the system, not against the system. This is a point that everyone must pay attention to.

Regarding the general policies, I would like to say that the most important duty of leadership in the constitution is to set the general policies. The process of setting the general policies is one of the most logical and beautiful processes. Now, some want to constantly beat the drum of lies and slander. We do not say anything, and they can say whatever they want; it does not matter; but you young people may know, and if you do not know, know that the process of setting the general policies is a very strong and solid process. These policies are first set in government commissions and then come to the government. The government reviews and approves them and proposes them to the leadership. The leadership then gives them to the Expediency Council. These policies are reviewed and completed in the commissions of the Expediency Council with the presence of various experts from different economic, cultural, academic, and scientific sectors, both from within and outside the council; then they are given back to the leadership. The leadership then aligns these policies with the principles and values of the Islamic Republic system, approves them, and these policies are returned to the government and communicated to the parliament. The role of the leadership in setting the policies is to ensure that no shortcomings or deficiencies occur, and the leadership is aware of them. After these policies are communicated, then the parliament is obliged to legislate according to these policies, and the government is also obliged to set its executive policies and act according to them. The entire framework of these detailed executive, judicial, and legislative apparatuses operates within this framework, and each has its own responsibilities and must carry out the work.

The leadership does not interfere in the responsibilities of these apparatuses, except very rarely and in cases where it feels that a clear violation is taking place. The responsibilities of the parliament are with the parliament itself. I have many laws that are passed in the parliament that I do not believe in and do not accept, but when they become law, I also act according to that law and do not oppose it. Many instances arise from actions taken in the government that I do not accept; however, they have responsibilities that have been set and decided; it is their duty. If that decision includes the leadership itself, we act according to that decision and do not say no; however, there are cases where the leadership feels that if it does not remind and draw attention to a responsible person who has a duty and has not paid attention to it, a very dangerous deviation will occur in the general path of the nation. Therefore, it intervenes. In the case of this current Islamic Consultative Assembly, such a thing occurred about two or two and a half years ago regarding the press law, where I felt I had a religious duty to remind the parliament, and I did so. The parliament also cooperated with the leadership in this regard and did not follow the line that was foreseen in the commission, for which we are grateful.

Let me say a word about the twenty-year outlook program. Since time has passed - of course, when I am with the youth, I am neither tired of speaking nor of listening; but since the call to prayer has been made, we do not want to delay too much past noon - I want to conclude the discussion. A lot of work has been done on this twenty-year outlook program, which, God willing, I will briefly discuss in the meeting of the officials - the place for its discussion is not here - but this outlook program is a real program; that is, it has been completely calculated, determined, and communicated, and the same large governmental apparatuses and the Expediency Council have helped us in its formulation. As soon as we announced this program, the malicious media apparatuses of the world that did not like it began to interfere; because this program means hope, enthusiasm, and determination for progress, and it is clear that they do not like this program in relation to countries that are not under their control, and this disapproval comes mostly from the radios affiliated with America and the Zionists. Of course, these small and petty individuals of theirs also created commotions inside! I do not know if these derisive commotions still exist or not. In the past, a derisive person would stand, and a little derisive child would be next to him. He would say something, and this one would confirm it; this one would say something, and he would approve it; they would put words in each other's mouths! Truly, one suffers to see that some individuals inside the country, under the shadow of the Islamic Republic and thanks to the great popular movement and their sacrifices, have been able to gain freedom from the tyranny of the tyrants and speak; but the words they utter are nothing but a shameless repetition of what the enemies of this nation say. One suffers from such ignorance.

The twenty-year outlook program, by the grace of the Lord, is the document of the planned movement of the government, the Islamic Consultative Assembly, and the Iranian nation. I want to tell you young people that you can play very effective roles in realizing this outlook. The very words that these dear young people said; the very demands that the professors and heads of universities raised are among the matters that provide the prerequisites for the twenty-year outlook program. We must move towards this program. The outlook is at the top of the peak; it is not a paved road that one can step on the gas and reach there; no. Moving, having determination, putting pressure on oneself, and the rapid and healthy flow of blood and its nourishment in the veins of this great body, which is called the Iranian nation, is necessary for moving towards the peak. When we reach there, we are at the top of the peak. Reaching the top of the peak for a nation is both honor and dignity, as well as immunity and security. At that time, no one can insult or offend the Iranian nation and prevent its interests. This work will also serve as a model for the Islamic world, and even broader than the Islamic world; and this effort requires effort.

The youth and the owners of knowledge, thought, and wisdom must strive. Do not imagine that the enemy can stop this effort; no. The maximum that this enemy, which is now in front of nations - that is, America - can do is military and espionage work, to find someone like the unfortunate Saddam in a hole, or to engage in corruption and debauchery through mass media and cultural activities; otherwise, even through economic pressures, it is not as easy for them as they wish; because in the realm of economic communications in the world, there are corners and complexities, and it is not the case that if they want to ruin a nation economically, they can do so. During the war, the Western world - America and Europe and their affiliates - imposed sanctions on us and were aware of the number of our weapons, planes, and tanks, and thought that within six months all of these would be finished! They dragged the eight-year war out, and at the end of these eight years, our capabilities and equipment were better and more than at the beginning! The result of military dominance over a collection like Saddam's, who was both treacherous and cowardly, and his surroundings were traitors - he betrayed his nation, and his surroundings betrayed him - is this. Dominating over someone like Saddam is not a sign of power; that someone thinks that now this pole of global power can do whatever it wants; no, it is not the case that they can do whatever they want. Military dominance is achieved by invaders against nations like Genghis and Timur and their ilk, who came, then left, and were destroyed; but nations rose again. Wherever nations want and stand firm, there is also divine will, mercy, attention, and help.

O Lord! Send down Your help upon this people. Make the hearts of these dear youth happier, more blossomed, and more vibrant day by day. O Lord! Increase our national unity day by day. Crush the enemies of this nation. By Your grace and kindness, save all the Muslim nations from the hands of foreigners and their domination. Guide and assist us towards that which is pleasing to You.

Peace be upon you and God's mercy and blessings.