...ای کاش

حادثاتی که اخیرا در مناطق مختلف افغانستان رخ داد خیلی متاثر کننده بود ولی در عین زمان حس کمک رسانی و غم شریکی هموطنانم خرسند کننده است. چگونه همگی دست بدست هم داده و از شمال و جنوب، شرق و غرب و داخل و خارج کشوربه کمک اسیب دیدگان می شتابند. با دیدن این صحنه ها سوالهای ذهنم را به خود جلب کردند.  

تا کی یورش بیگانه گان باشد که ما را متحد سازد ؟؟؟ تا کی زلزله و سیلاب و زمین لغزه باشد که ما دست به دست هم دهیم ؟؟؟ تا کی آفات گریبان گیر ما گردد که تاجک و هزاره و پشتون و ازبک را فراموش کرده برادر وار به داد هم برسیم ؟؟؟ جنگها و مقاومتهای زیادی را برای دفاع از خانه مشترک مان کنار هم در یک سنگر گذراندیم ولی همین که دشمن شکست خورد، خود دشمن هم شدیم. بارها آفات بر سر ما آمدند ولی همینکه گذشتند و فارغ شدیم، خود به جان هم آفت شدیم. نمیدانم آفات تعصب های قومی، لسانی و سمتی، آفت نفاق، آفت کینه توزی، آفت... دامن ملت ما را کی رها خواهد کرد ؟؟؟ 

فکر میکنم شاید خدا هم میخواهد بار بار با فرستادن این آفات ما را درس عبرت بدهد و متوجه نفاق بین خودی کند. خیلی دلم میخواهد زمین لغزه بدخشان آخرین تجربه تلخ باشد که مردم ما را درس برادری، اخوت و همزیستی بدهد. به امید روزی که دیگر برای کمک رساندن به همدیگر، اظهار همبستگی و شریک بودن در غم های همدیگر منتظر سیلاب، زمین لغزه و مصیبت ها ننشینیم. 

عبدالباسط رادمنش        

یکشنبه، 14ثور/اردیبهشت 1393

پاسخ به دوستی در مورد حمایتم از تیم داکتر صاحب عبدالله عبدالله

دوستی از من پرسید:  چرا فکر میکنی که داکتر صاحب عبدالله برنامه بهتر دارد نسبت به رقیب انتخاباتی اش؟ فکر نمی کنی که رقیب اش داکتر صاحب غنی شاید تحصیل و تجربه و توانایی بهتر در بخش سیاست و حکومتداری و اقتصاد داشته باشد نسبت به داکتر صاحب عبدالله؟ و یا معیار چیزی دیگری است؟

پاسخ من:

 اولا ترکیب که تیم داکتر صاحب اشرف غنی دارد شکننده و دارای هم آهنگی فکری نمی باشد.

 دوما داکتر صاحب اشرف غنی در دوران جهاد و مقاومت اصلا در افغانستان حضور نداشتند و تجربه خاصی از تحولات و واقعات چندین ساله ندارند. 

سوما ایشان تابعیت آمریکای شان را منسوخ نکرده اند تا هنوز و طبق قانون اساسی اصلا حق کاندید شدن ندارند ولی خیر بگذریم ازین اصل (و در ضمن که هیچ یک از اعضای فامیل شان نیز از اتباع افغانستان بشمار نمی روند).

 چهارما ایشان به نفع جناح پرچم حزب (خونخوار) دموکراتیک خلق فعالیت میکردند در گذشته و بعدا هم در زمان داکتر نجیب الله حامی حزب وطن ( یک حزب فاشیستی و متشکل از پرچمی های خائن) بودند و همواره کوشش جلب کمکهای اقتصادی به نفع این حزب کردند.

 پنجما لابی گری که ایشان در آمریکا برای رژیم غاصب و دهشت افگن طالب کردند از هیچکس پنهان نیست. و عوامل زیاد دیگر هم هستند که اینجا ظرفیت جا دادن شان مشکل است. 

در ضمن نمیدانم چرا مردم همیشه سطح تحصیل را با قدرت و ظرفیت رهبریت اشتباه میگیرند. درست است که داکتر صاحب اشرف غنی از تحصیل و تجربه خوبی آنهم در بخش مدیریت برخوردار هستند ولی قدرت رهبریت که جناب داکتر صاحب عبدالله عبدالله دارند به مراتب بالاتر و قویتر است نسبت به دیگر همتا های شان. یک مثال ساده و بسیار بارز را خدمت تان عرض میکنم و بقیه قضاوت را میگذرام دست شما: اگر تحصیل و تجربه (ان هم در مدیریت) معیارهای رهبریت میبودند، چرا خداوند آخرین پیامبرش را از بین آن همه انسانهای تحصیل کرده و مجرب در علوم عصر از سرزمینهای متمدن انتخاب نکرد بل مردی را از صحراهای ریگستانی عرب برگزید که هنگام نزول اولین وحی حتی خواندن و نوشتن هم بلد  نبود و تمام تجربه اش بجز چوپانی و چند سال تجارت چیزی دیگری نبود؟؟؟  چه فکر میکنید معیارهای رهبریت نزد خداوند متعال چه ها اند - سطح دانش بلند و تجربه کافی و یا پدیده های متفاوت ازین دو؟؟؟

عبدالباسط رادمنش          

پنجشنبه - 4 ثور/اردیبهشت 1393

The very first step towards fighting the problem of Warlords in Afghanistan.

 A friend posed a question about how to fight the problem of warlords in Afghanistan and to remove them from key and leading positions in Government; fill their gap with young leaders belonging to the new generation.

          Of course the new generation must try to merge with today's leadership trends and try to dissociate and get rid of warlords especially those holding  vital positions in governmental and non-governmental bodies. But before you fight your enemies you need to know them very well. Unfortunately our people have witnessed war and destruction for decades and everybody wants to know the reasons and the warlords behind these wars. We all know after the defeat of Taliban and the establishment of a new government in Afghanistan there hasn't been found any such committee or court to subtly scrutinize and create a precise and accurate definition for the term WARLORD. A person is recognized as a warlord in north but he is recognized as a hero in the south and vice versa.

          Also the legitimacy and the causes of the recent wars are addressed differently in different regions and among different religious/ethnic groups. So according to me, if we want to solve the problem of warlords, the very first step would be to establish an impartial organization who would perform two main functions:

1) Provide a comprehensive description of the nature of wars and further weigh their legitimacy, assess their causes and categorize them under different names such as civil war, Jihad, wars fought against terrorism and invaders etc.

2) State a fine definition of "warlord" so to come up with the identity crises and accordingly recognize and put to trial those involved in the wars.

Have you got any better ideas ???

                                                                                Abdul Basit Radmanesh 

 Saturday, 19 April 2014
Bhopal-India          

مکث کوتاه بر گذارش ویژه در باره داکتر نجیب - تهیه شده در تلویزیون طلوع

افسوس به حال جوانانی که با دیدن چند نوار تصویری که در آن داکتر نجیب خود را به بسیار زیرکی تبرئه میبخشد و جز خودش همه را قاتل و خاین ثابت می سازد خیال میکنند بود و نبود همین جناب وطنپرست بود. به تمام جوانان بی خبر از تاریخ و کنشهای این جناب به صفت یک جوان مسلمان توصیه میکنم لطفا کارکردهای داکتر نجیب در زمان قدرت ببرک کارمل (جناح پرچم  1358-1365) به صفت رئیس شبکه استخباراتی خونین حکومت استبدادی وقت (خاد) را با دماغ آرام مطالعه کنند و از بزرگان و بلخصوص از قربانیان متضررین ان دوره در موردش بپرسند. شاید هم آنزمان به خوبی بدانند که چرا افغانهای خسته از جنگ به طرح زیبای مصالحه ملی اش تن ندادند و به حکومت اش تا اخر اعتماد نکردند. خوشبختانه بسیاری از کسانی که اینجا نظر میدهند کدام عضو جوان فامیل شان بطور ناگهانی و بی خبرانه از راه کار و مکتب و دانشگاه وغیره در اثر اندکترین اتهامات و شبه های بی اساس برداشته و بدون اندکترین محاسبه و محاکمه به گورهای دسته جمعی برای ابد خوابانده نشده تا اینها بدانند که داکتر نجیب یعنی که ؟! لطفا قبل ازینکه داکتر نجیب را قهرمان بخوانید سر به گریبان خود کرده و بگویید آیا قهرمان خواندن اش جفا به حق شهیدان خون خفته که حتی کفن نصیب شان نشد نیست؟؟؟ ایا اگر عضوی از اعضای خانواده تان را به گورهای دسته جمعی زنده میخواباند امروز باز هم قهرمانش میخواندید ؟؟؟ بهتر است وجدان تان را شاهد حال تان بگیرید و قضاوت کنید. در ضمن خوب است که در این گذارش بطور واضح یکبار دیگر میبینیم که عاملان اصلی از بین بردن حکومت حزب وطن کی ها بودند. درست است که یک عده از احزاب مربوط به مجاهدین علیه حکومت انزمان جنگیدند ولی متوجه باشید که عامل اصلی و رول مهمتر را اختلافات بینی خود حزب وطن بازی کرد نه احزاب جنگنده. هنوز یک عده زیاد از نظامیان و سیاسیون عصر که در ضعیف و کاواک ساختن حکومت اش از داخل دست داشتند، زنده اند و قوانین حقوقی اجازه نام گرفتن را نمیدهد وگرنه یکی یکی نامهای شان را ذکر میکردم ولی مطمئنا که اکثر مردم با چهره های شان آشنا اند. کودتای ناکام شهنواز تنی که دراین گذارش از ان ذکر شده را میتوان یک مثال بارزی از همچون حرکات خواند.گذارش ویژه را میتوانید ازینجا دنبال کنید.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNrN3jOZFGA

عبدالباسط رادمنش          

پنجشنبه - 14 حمل/فروردین 1393

Under performance, and role of weak institutions and Islamisation Campaigns in it

Before going to social, economic, military and educational under-performance, let’s first define the term under-performance itself so to have a better understanding of these issues and to be able to develop more comprehensive thoughts regarding them. Different dictionaries have different meanings for it; Oxford says to perform less well than expected while another dictionary says to function less effectively or be less successful than expected or required. So to sum it up, under-performance means to perform less well, function less effectively and be less successful than expected. While dictionaries have merely relied on the term “expectation” in defining under-performance, I would like to point out another important term “relativity” or in other words “proportionality” to it. Relativity, as in many other things, plays a role in judging performance as well; a good performing system is categorized as under-performing when compared to a better one and an under-performing system is called excelling when compared to a worse one. Also different systems and entities have different values for under-performance according to the purposes, tasks and functions they are built for. Under-performance, as other phenomena, is not always bad and sometimes it is deliberately employed in some cases. As a good example, whilst testing newly designed and manufactured systems and objects, they are purposely run in worst ways and modes to find out the lowest performance possible by them as well as their failing point in order to set a safe region for their usage. Coming back to the under-performance experienced by various states in social, educational, military and economic fields, it is obvious that institutions play an important role in it.

Ideally, institutions serve several important roles as of following:

1. Establish rule of law.
2. Improve state’s economy and nation’s ideology according to the demands of the people.
3. Unify a nation embodying populations belonging to different cultural, ethnic, linguistic and religious backgrounds. 

Firstly, rule of law is necessary to be established in any state to ensure stability and well performance of public and private sectors in all aspects and to have a sustainable alternative to volatile situations such as coups being staged or martial law being applied. Without complete and firm rule of law, citizens of a country would always be subject to injustice, tyranny and whimsical rules made by non-state actors sometimes even resulting in civil wars and wash out of government. Secondly, institutions play a vigorous role not only in economic growth and expansion but also in ideological advancement of a nation. Al-Azhar university in Egypt, International Islamic University of Malaysia in Malaysia, Dar-ul-ulum Dewband in India are few examples of good educational institutions which have helped establish consistent Sharia law and reliable interpretation of religion, not only for the local citizens but also has exported it through hosted foreign students. These institutions have also triggered and supported technological development as well as cohesive ideology throughout the states subsequently instigating nationalism whereby bringing unity and maintaining peace.

Weak institutions fail to achieve the above mentioned goals and always cause instability and vitally affects the performance and efforts of states whereby reducing their efficiency and consequently causing a massive decline in their progress and development. To be more comprehensive, let us consider Islamic regions and examine the role of weak institutions as well as the role of political Islam or Islamisation campaigns in producing under-performance. If we look at North African states, Gulf monarchies and partly Arabian Peninsula, Middle East and South and East Asia, we will find one thing in common in all these regions and that is experience of colonialism. Colonial powers mainly Great Britain and France had mostly failed to establish institutional legacy and by the end of colonialism era and the rise of nationalism, they left the region drawing borders without taking ethnic, religious, cultural and linguistic differences in to account which caused massive problems for the newly born states. A good example is dividing India and establishing Pakistan that too in two separate pieces of east and west which further resulted in aggressive disputes on land (Kashmir) between India and Pakistan in the region continuing till today. The first war on Kashmir in 1947, then the war in 1965 which ended by Tashkent declaration and then the war of independence in 1971, an aggressive almost genocidal attempt by Pakistani military to reestablish order in east Pakistan which finally failed and resulted in establishment of a free Bangladesh are all nothing but the later consequences of border settings by colonial powers. To be more specific, Pakistan lost half of its navy force, a quarter of its army (around 90,000 soldiers) and one third of its air force in the war of 1971.

Another great example could be Afghanistan whose borders were shaped in a way to separate the spheres of influence of the then colonial powers Russia and England. The Saint Petersburg agreement of 1907 ended the British and Russian competition and Afghanistan merely became a buffer state between the empires. The Gandumak treaty in 1879, the Durand line drawn in 1893 and the creation of Wakhan Corridor in 1897 are clear evidences of colonialist efforts and struggles in drawing borders and further resetting them which proves today’s Afghanistan is nothing but merely a product of colonialist ambitions. Even today the conflict of the Durand line remains unsolved and has turned to be a non-healing sore on the face of relations between the two states. Civil wars are another cause of the negative trends resulting in under-performance and even fall of newly established post-colonial states. Collapse of several governments such as Lebanon in 1970, Iraq in 1990, Libya, Syria and Egypt recently are nothing but the aftermaths of the same negative trends. Political Islam has generally been used by various rulers and monarchs in Islamic regions as a tool against modernization and Westphalian institutions and has somewhat been made a participant in the negative trends.

On the other hand, if we take a look at Pakistan, the Islamisation campaign led by General Zia ul Haq was very effective in establishing and solidifying the regime. In fact political Islam has also been of great help to Malaysia in surviving the negative trends and making it to a better performance. Other nations who have successfully managed to survive the negative trends and relatively perform well are Turkey and to an extent Iran. Turkey’s secret lies in its emulation pattern of modernization and western principles. The secularism and reformism tools of Kemalism and the strong legal structure inherited from Ottoman Empire have been extremely helpful to Turkey in its survival and further development efforts. Whereas Iran has managed to keep hold on political Islam and despite of importing modernity has somewhat managed not to let go the traditional and religious assets. To sum it up, under-performance has been harshly threatening the development struggles in most of the Islamic states especially the Middle East and still remains as one of the major challenges to be dealt with.

     Abdul Basit Radmanesh  

Sunday, 16-February-2014

Bhopal-India        

فکاهه قرن بیست: پیام صلح از یک گروه غلام به ملت آزاده !

اگر خسته شده اید میتوانید چند دقیقه تانرا با خواندن چرندیات و پوچگویی های ملا آغا جان معتصم، مسئول این نشست و یکی از اعضای کمیته سیاسی طالبان، شاد گذرانید و شاید هم از خنده مثل من به زمین بیفتید. این خرمرده با نشستی که با دیگر خرمرده ها داشته به این نتیجه رسیده اند که با ملت افغانستان صلح کنند، مگر چی خیال کرده اند؟ این همه سال که ملت افغانستان علیه شان مقاومت کرد هیچ بود؟ مگر این همه جوانهای اردو و پلیس مان را بنام کافر و جاسوس کشتند هیچ بود ؟ زمین ها و دراریی های ملت را به یغما بردند هیچ بود ؟ جنایتهای مانند قاچاق و فروختن دختران و زنان جوان که ناموس این خاک بودند آن هم به جنرالان و کرنیلان شراب مست پنجابی، و صدها جنایت دیگر که زبان انسان از گفتنش عاجز میماند، هیچ بود؟ صلح با این غلامان در حقیقت تجارت با خون شهدای اند که هنوز خون شان در کفن نخشکیده و منتظر اند پاسخ قربانی شان را ازین ملت آزادیپرست دریابند. این سفاکان خونخوار با پلانهای تازه کوشش دارند با بیرون شدن قوای خارجی عوام را با پیامهای صلح و مبارزه سیاسی شان فریب دهند، بیخبر ازینکه مردم ما  دیگر از نام طالب نفرت دارند و مبارزه ما علیه شان دوام دارد و انشاءالله روزی که دولت مستحکم و اردوی قوی را صاحب شدیم دیگر احدی ازین خرمرده ها را اصلا مجال نفس گرفتن نخواهیم داد.

متن کامل این پیام را میتوانید اینجا بخوانید.

http://www.taand.com/archives/19282

      

       عبدالباسط رادمنش

پنجشنبه، 24 دلو/بهمن 1392                                                        

Modernization, Iran's recent problems and its response towards modernization (A brief elucidation)

Modernization, simply as the term expresses, means getting modern and being an object or subject of modernity. As a vague expression, it has been approached by many scholars with slightly different understandings and definitions. Anthony Giddens in his book “The Consequences of Modernity” suggests a start point to modernity and calls it a European product saying,

"As a first approximation, let us simply say the following: 'modernity' refers to modes of social life or organization which emerged in Europe from about the seventeenth century onward and which subsequently became more or less worldwide in their influence."

The most distinct feature of modernization I guess is globalization, subsequently introducing modern world development, being exceedingly at the mercy of technology and media, radically, changing the pre-modern traditional world.

While modernization is internationally accepted and welcomed as a wave of positive changes attractively shaping the globe with its products such as industrialization, advanced technology, democratization, governmental improvements and a fresh art, music, and literature, on the contrary, it is highly criticized for delivering radical changes to traditional societies, which at first was thought worth the price. Critics insist that traditional societies were often destroyed without ever gaining the advantages modernity had promised by, amongst other things, rise in the economic level between the progressive societies whom successfully managed to deal with modernization surviving the consequences and such outdated societies failing to cope up with modernity, which we can clearly see in the bodies of the so called third world backward states existing today; some of them being Tunisia, Pakistan, Bangladesh and most of the east and north African countries. Therefor it wouldn’t be wrong to claim that the net effect of modernization for some societis was the replacement of traditional poverty by a more modern form of misery, rather than any sort of economic enhancement.

Some other challenges that modernization posed to the traditional societies was taking away the certainties and believes of individuals imparted by various traditional, especially religious, sources which governed their life style by replacing them with a new, extremely unrestricted, social system and subsequently creating an open space where transformed population suddenly found themselves in, totally unsure of what to do with. Modernization was also threatening the legitimacy bestowed upon the rulers and monarchs as well as the ruling systems backed by traditional laws and statutes in those regions. Professor Afsah also pointed towards these facts in his lectures stating Modernity “creates a sense of emptiness and the loss of certainties of past”1 and saying “Modernity brings at the same time enormously powerful tools for industrial production, scientific insight, bureaucratic innovations and cultural changes. But with these opportunities, with this power to control comes the fear of destruction of old communities, values and even individuals. And so this control that is now possible by particularly the state, breeds anxiety and resentment”2. To some fundamentalist traditional societies specially shaped and inspired by religious laws, say Islamic states, such as Afghanistan, Iran, Indonesia, Egypt etc. accepting modernity was an equivalent of “humiliating” imposition of foreign/western domination.

Coming to Iran, before assessing and analyzing its response towards modernity, I would like to briefly mention the challenges Iran faced since 19th century.  Iran's geopolitical importance made it a central focus of the colonial "Great Game" between Russia and Great Britain. Ultimately, in August 1907, the two great powers decided to carve Iran up into spheres of influence; the agreement sealed Russian supremacy in the north and British supremacy in the south of Iran. At the same time, a struggle was taking place within Iran's borders, as the country was undergoing the Constitutional Revolution (1905–11). World War I found Iran in difficult straits. Its economy was shattered, and the country suffered from a growing power vacuum which was a great symbol of Iran’s Failure in approaching modernity. In 1921 Reza khan demanded that the cabinet be dissolved and that the failing Qajar shah appoint him commander of the military and He subsequently toppled the Qajar dynasty in 1925, which had ruled Iran since 1785. Shortly thereafter, Reza Khan assumed the position of Shah establishing the Pahlavi Dynasty. Iran under the leadership and direct supervision of the Shah became a nation-state, brought back from the verge of certain disintegration and achieved a degree of progress only dreamed of a generation before. In 1951, the Shah appointed Mossadeq as prime minister. Mossadeq followed through on his plans to nationalize the oil industry, and the National Iranian Oil Company was formed which was highly against the interests of west. In 1953 the British MI-6 and the CIA undertook Operation Ajax, which toppled Mossadeq from power.

During the 60s and 70s Iran experienced an exceptional transformation that left nothing unaffected, including Islam that became radicalized under the influence of crude Marxism-Leninism. The new Muslim radicals and high clerics among them concealed their rejection of modernity in a language of anti-imperialism and quasi-socialism. They successfully turned culture and national identity, which were equated with Islam, into a weapon against westernization.  And finally the Islamic revolution of Iran takes place in 1979 putting an end to Pahlavi’s dynasty and the return of Ayatollah Khomeini to Iran and establishment of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Soon Iran found itself in war with Iraq, lasting for 8 years finally ending up with Iraq’s defeat which consequently favored the newly established Islamic Republic with important legitimacy and self-image.
The Iranian modernizers in their search for applicable models looked to Turkey and later Japan. Japan would seem a perfect model but since it was far away and nobody knew much about it, Turkey proved a more practical example. During the years of Reza Shah Pahlavi's ascendance (1921 - 41) Iran, wholeheartedly, pursued a program of modernization copied from Turkey. According to late 19^th century’s intellects, modernization was the only way to defend Iran's independence, culture and identity and this defensive and limited view of modernization, distorted Iran's discourse of Modernity. Iranian Islamists and the role of Islamic clergy has always resulted in national backwardness by not letting secularism get into Iran and has continuously distorted the trend of modernization to an extent that Iran at the beginning of 21st century faces the same old problem: how to become a truly modern society?

1- Video Lecture 2.3, 08:53
     Constitutional struggles in Muslim world
     www.coursera.org
2- Video lecture 2.3, 00:53)
     Constitutional struggles in Muslim world
     www.coursera.org

Abdul Basit Radmanes   

     Saturday, 11 January 2014

 Bhopal-India          

کاندیدهای اسلامگرا و عاقبت انتخابات - مکث کوتاه

 خواستم یک نکته که امروز هنگام دیدن حمایت بعضی ها از کاندید های اسلامگرا در فیسبوک به ذهنم رخنه کرد، را با دوستان عزیز به اشتراک بگذارم. کاندیدهای اسلامگرا که در لیست نهایی نام شان درج است، اشخاص بدی نیستند. مثلا جناب استاد یک شخصیت خوب و یک تن از علمای هستند که واقعا بالای شان میشود افتخار کرد ولی بیایید کوشش کنیم باریکی زمان را درک کنیم و برای یک بار هم که شده اهداف و افکار کاندیداهای اسلامگرای معزز مان را با اهداف و افکار افراد و دولتهای که تمویل و حمایه کننده دولت که جناب شان میخواهند رئیس اش شوند، مقایسه کنیم. فکر میکنم به بسیار خوبی خواهیم فهمید که چنین کاری امکان پذیر نیست و محال است و جزحیف و میل آرای مردم و زحمات شان (در راستای اخذ کارت رای دهی و آمدن شان تا پایه های صندوقهای رای آنهم  در شرایط دشوار و نا امن. بار شرطا اگر یکی ازین کاندید های محترم رئیس جمهور شوند و آن هم از راه دموکراتیک و آرای مردم (که شخصا این کار را دور از امکان می بینم)، خبرگان و نخبگان سیاسی ما به خوبی از عاقبت چنین کاری آگاه اند چون فکر نمیکنم جریانهای اخیر در مصر و عاقبت دولت محمد مرسی ( اسلامگرا) را به این زودی فراموش کرده باشند.دوستها شاید فکر کنند که دولت مصر کجا و دولت افغانستان کجا، ولی تا جایی که من فکر میکنم چه افکار و منبع الهام اسلامگرایان این دو دولت و چه هم دوستان و منابع حمایوی این دو دولت، همه تقریبا یکسان اند. اگر دوستی فکر میکند در اشتباه  هستم، خواهش میکنم تا نظر بدهد و نقد کند.

سپاس

         عبدالباسط رادمنش  
چهار شنبه، 10 جدی/دی ماه 1392