Explosive Revelations: Rafigh-Doust’s Confessions on Governmental Assassinations

An interview with Mohsen Rafigh-Doust, former IRGC minister and ex-head of the Mostazafan Foundation, on the program “Oral History of Didban-e Iran” on March 8 (18 Esfand) has sparked widespread reactions and led to the reopening of serious investigations. In the interview, Rafigh-Doust, speaking with pride and even a smile, acknowledged his role—and that of his team—in the assassinations of prominent figures, including Fereydoun Farrokhzad, an artist and political activist; Gholam-Ali Oueisi, the military governor of Tehran; Shahriar Shafigh, son of Ashraf Pahlavi; and Shapour Bakhtiar, the last prime minister under Mohammad Reza Shah. He further claimed that he had threatened the French government by asserting that if Anis Naghash—the individual responsible for the attempted assassination of Bakhtiar—was not released, France should brace for bomb explosions and other terrorist acts.

Rafigh-Doust admitted in the same interview that he had commanded several assassination operations against opponents of the Islamic Republic abroad. He revealed that during the 1980s and 1990s, the Islamic Republic, with its dedicated team, executed the killings of political opponents—including Bakhtiar, Oueisi, Shafigh, and Farrokhzad—in France and Germany. According to his account, these assassinations were carried out by a separatist group from Basque, Spain in exchange for money. Rafigh-Doust noted that the Islamic Republic did not have a direct organizational link with them but merely enlisted their services for these operations. However, the attempted assassination of Bakhtiar was executed under his command by Anis Naghash, which was foiled by the arrest of Naghash. Although Bakhtiar was later assassinated, Rafigh-Doust did not address that subsequent development.

In response to these controversial comments—which implicitly implicated the government in the assassination of political opponents—the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) dismissed Rafigh-Doust’s statements as “distorted” and “unsubstantiated.” In a statement released through domestic media, the IRGC denied any state involvement in overseas assassinations, asserting that, as a “defender of national security,” it views such claims as merely part of the enemy’s psychological warfare.

Rafigh-Doust’s revelations have triggered widespread reactions both domestically and internationally, intensifying pressure on the Islamic Republic. Several European human rights organizations, including those based in Germany, have called for the IRGC to be designated as a terrorist organization and for a comprehensive review of the financial networks linked to the Islamic Republic in Europe. Some political activists and human rights advocates have described Rafigh-Doust’s comments as “an outright confession to a policy of eliminating political opponents,” prompting groups in Europe—such as the Women, Life, Freedom association in Germany—to demand immediate action against both the IRGC and the Islamic Republic. Although proposals to label the IRGC as a terrorist organization had previously been raised within the European Union, opposition from some EU countries had stalled such moves. Now, in light of Rafigh-Doust’s incendiary statements, the issue has once again been thrust onto the agenda of certain European politicians and security agencies.

In its official response, the IRGC not only refuted these allegations but also accused Rafigh-Doust of “inaccuracy” in his statements, further criticizing foreign media for “exaggerating and distorting” his remarks and insisting that the Islamic Republic has “always been a victim of terrorism.” It is important to note that this is not the first time Iran’s involvement in overseas assassinations has been discussed. Incidents such as the killings of Shapour Bakhtiar, Abdulrahman Qasmlou, and the Mikonos affair in Germany have long been cited internationally as examples of the Islamic Republic’s policy of eliminating its opponents through targeted operations. Rafigh-Doust had previously recounted in his memoirs the brutal suppression of Turkmen protesters in 1979/1980, explicitly confirming the IRGC’s active role in that operation and justifying it as a necessary measure for national security. That crackdown, which resulted in widespread massacres and summary executions, has become emblematic of the government’s repressive policies in the early years following the revolution.