his testimony to be true. See Kalubi v. Ashcroft, 364 F.3d 1134, 1137-38 (9th Cir.2004). Maafi failed to demonstrate past persecution. However, he fears arrest and death based on the raid of his Iranian church, his friend’s subsequent death sentence, and the likely seizure of a list identifying him as a Christian. This fear is not an irrational phobia but, rather, is corroborated by the Country Report’s statement that “[ajpostasy, specifically conversion from Islam, may be punishable by death.” Thus, the evidence compels the conclusion that Maafi has an objectively reasonable, well-founded fear of future persecution. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(b); Ladha v. INS, 215 F.3d 889, 896-97 (9th Cir.2000) (as amended); INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421, 440, 107 S.Ct. 1207, 94 L.Ed.2d 434 (1987) (<HOLDING>). The IJ found that because Maafi failed to
holding that absent past persecution an alien can demonstrate eligibility for asylum based on a wellfounded fear of future persecution by demonstrating that he or she subjectively fears persecution and that this fear is objectively reasonable holding that general crime conditions are not a stated ground for a wellfounded fear of future persecution holding that absent a pattern of persecution linked to the applicant persecution of family members is insufficient to demonstrate a wellfounded fear of persecution holding that even a ten percent chance of persecution may establish a wellfounded fear recognizing that the governments inability to control the source of persecution may support a finding of a wellfounded fear