Given that the Greens are already fighting as hard as anybody can for Democracy right now, and that they’re bound to succeed sooner or later since they represent the majority, and history tells us you can only hold together a cult so long after the original guru dies anyway, I really don’t see any point in trying to encourage the people to improve their government through sanctions.

Freezing the assets of the IRGC and the Coup masters is a first step to the fair and just solution. That money belongs to the People of Iran.

President Obama is trying to install his vision of a nuclear-free world, but that takes time. In any case he can not be blamed for failing agreements with the IRI.
This regime lives on causing confusion, on constantly denying all international treaties, including the human rights treaty. It is, in fact, behaving like an outlaw in the international community. Unfortunately since the fraud elections in June this kind of constant turmoil is firing back at itself.
The “Green”, “Rainbow” or whatever kind of movement certainly lacks a solid structure and convincing leaders, but this very deficiency is also its point of strength, making it less vulnerable to constant brutal attacks.
The movement, which started 4 months ago with the demand for fair elections – within the system – is now heading for its abolition. Just have a look at Mohsen Sazegara’s daily messages: Last week he quoted Dariush Homayoun, a moderate monarchist (incroyable!), and today he stressed the importance of equal rights for all ethnic minorities in relation to the execution of young Kurdish activist Ehsan Fattahian.
Obviously major changes are taking place within the country, obviously unnoticed by all those, who exclusively rely on barely informed Western media. When some leaders of this movement start to compare the actual situation with the Shah’s time, stressing the fact that he never allowed his security forces to beat women, you get an idea what is really going on in Iran (you should listen to daily discussions on VOA Persian, especially ‘tafsir-e khabar’, the news’ analysis).
Legal pursue of the Alavi Foundation was a first warning to the regime to comply with international agreements, especially the uranium deal. If it does not accept it, others will follow.
Presenting Ataollah Mohajerani as a representative of this movement, is somewhat ridiculous, declaring him as the only information source for Obama’s administration even more. Mohajerani, who banned “Toos” newspaper and imprisoned its journalists during his term as secretary of education is part of the problem, not its solution. In any case we have to wait some time to see a solid structure and convincing leaders emerge for this popular movement.
In between the New York Times has published Obama’s accord with Chinese leader Hu Jin Tao on the Iran issue: http://video.nytimes.com/video/2009/11/17/multimedia/1247465724665/u-s-china-leaders-talk-trade-iran.html?nl=us&emc=politicsemailema1

News from inside:
1. The Anguran mine: http://www.mobinco.com/en/projects/anguran/index.php
was sold to the IRGC for 187 billion, instead of 1000 billion Tuman (real value): http://www.peykeiran.com/Content.aspx?ID=9483
Fits well with Transparency International’s 2009 Report, placing Iran at No 168 (from 180 countries) http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi/2009/cpi_2009_table
2. A series of famous Iranian singers, e.g. Ali Reza Eftekhari or Mohammad Nouri (Gol-e Maryam), are banned from the National Radio: http://www.peykeiran.com/Content.aspx?ID=9478
The Talibanization of Iran is proceeding fastly. Alas, it’s too late!

He appears to me to be someone who is very methodical in his reasoning and actions (maybe too much so for some of us) – but I have read that his electoral campaign was the best run and best orchestrated American Presidential campaign ever.

He (and the Americans in general) have some things in common with the Iranian Regime. In my free country, voting is compulsory — everybody MUST vote on penalty of a large fine (being free does not come free) . But, as I understand, the US is similar to Iran in that voting is not compulsory – you can do it if you feel like it, or perhaps it might be nicer to go to the beach (or desert) on that day. So, the parties involved do all they can to get their supporters to turn out. (In my country they know that everybody HAS to turn out)

Obama’s organization was apparently very good at getting their supporters out to vote – and so did Obama’s opposition (but maybe not as well). In Iran, I understand there was also a high turnout on voting day.

The difference between the 2 countries, of course, is that in the US, they actually counted the votes. Obama won convincingly. I have to give him credit for that.

Barry

That’s why the AN and SL clique wants us to believe that only the foreigners can cause and create massive unrest and opposition. Contrary to them, we know that:

1. We don’t need any “green light” from any foreign government to change our country’s destiny.
2. The brave people in Iran are putting their lives on the line because they believe they are empowered to bring change.
3. We only need the support of the world’s public opinion and the attention of the mass media (thank you Scott Lucas for your excellent work).
4. Let’s stop observing & discussing the tea leaves to read the mood or intent of Obama, Cheney or Brown. Let’s focus on the universal human rights and our right to free election that are being trampled by AN, SL & Co.

I will have to agree with you here.

It looks like we have a “plonker” in Mr Obama

Ever since WW2, every “war” that the US has involved themselves in, they have tied one of their own hands behind their own back. This has not worked very well – and Obama recognized that . So he now ties both hands behind their backs. We have yet to see how well that works.

Barry

In other words Mousavi is a hypocrite who does not mean what he says. No real surprise here.

On the issue of American-Iranian engagement it is truly puzzling why anyone would think that the US would have any real concern for a movement such as the Greens other than to use them as an asset to attack the Iranian Govt. While the previous American administration would have undoubtedly raised a bigger cry over the Greens than the current one, the notion that either administration cared or should care about the so-called reformists is childish.

Take the Obama administration in relation to a country like Russia or Cuba. Putin’s Russia today is no more “democratic” in a western sense than it was four years ago yet Obama has “reset” the relationship and eliminated much of the tension that existed with the Bush presidency. Russia is no longer attacked for its internal situation or for its actions in places like Georgia and South Ossetia. Some American politicians where full of rage last year over South Ossetia; today when South Ossetia has been made semi-independent you don’t hear a thing from Obama.

Obama has moved significantly to improve ties to Revolutionary Cuba and yet what has changed other than one Castro brother stepping aside so that another brother could take over? Cuba is as far away from having western style elections as it was in 1979, the year of the most significant revolution of the 20th century.

Surely the most pathetic spectacle in many years has been the Greens pleading with Master Obama to come and save them. It almost made one pity them. I said almost.

Very interesting thread and discussion however. Next to Rafsanjani and his next move, from the August timeframe, Obama is generating the next best in depth discussion in my opinion.

Agreed. Were they in real power, I think the Greens would make this deal (or something like it) AND go for a comprehensive agreement w/ the US.

Thank you for the reply — I see the logic in your points. I also thank you for the excellent and I think insightful quote via Klein. I don’t think Mousavi is opposing the talks with US on principle but over the legitimacy and domestic boost that the “victor” who gets a deal can claim.

S.

I’m only going to challenge you on #3. In this case, I think your analysis focuses too much on the internal dynamics. In the short-term, yes, sanctions might have little effect. BUTTTTT…

But the question that Iran has really been dealing with for quite some time is this: Will Iran become, if nothing else, a semi-normal functioning state (as Hashemi would like) or a perpetually convulsing, isolated, revolutionary state (as personified by Samuel here at EA)? I’m still unclear where Khamenei is on this, but I’m pretty sure even many, if not most, “Principlists” want a functioning state. The realities of 2009 demand it.

Would REAL, robust sanctions sway Khamenei? I don’t know. Would they even give hardliners (IRGC included, though they seem to support a deal) a short-term boost? Yes. But if you want a functioning, normal state, then the medium and long-term impact of said sanctions is VERY BAD indeed.

Joe Klein’s post-elec. TIME piece (though flawed in many ways) included an interesting quote from an Iranian conservative who basically said, “Look, everyone, reformist or conservative, wants to cement a deal with America. The issue is who gets credit for it.” The other issue, he noted, was Khamenei’s reluctance, since doing so means eliminating a “Bogeyman.”

In the end, though, I don’t think the SL could, even if he wanted to, could scuttle a comprehensive deal. Too many in Tehran know it needs to happen.

Finally, on the Israeli angle, I, for one, DON’T TRUST Benjamin Netanyahu to NOT do something really stupid vis-a-vis Iran. Given today’s news of 900 new West Bank settlements, and the reaction to it, I’m pretty sure the WH agrees with me, thus making serious negotiations necessary

* re. Nuclear proliferation, I do have the impression that Obama decided that the existing IAEA & NPT methods are not working, and there a great risk of a spread of nuclear bombs all over the place. He has restarted negotiations with Russia to significantly reduce their numbers of nuclear bombs: the only way to convince others to eventually abstain. It is a larger problem: if Iran gets the bomb, other countries will want to follow.

* re. isolation: At the moment, the US and many of its allies have sanctions to isolate Iran. However: Iran can easily survive, thanks mainly to support from Russia and China to provide alternatives. Because of that, hawkish & tough sanctions by the US alone are pretty useless, while some reduction in the support from Russia and China might have a much larger effect. (I’m not sure which other countries are relevant.. India, Turkey?) The best would of course be to reduce all support for IRG and its business operations.