The Latest from Iran (4 December): The Weekend Before

2110 GMT: No to Sanctions. The National Iranian American Council has responded quickly to the news that members of the US House of Representatives are pressing for a vote on petroleum sanctions against Iran within the next two weeks: "Sanctions can play a constructive role within [engagement], but in order to be effective they must target the Iranian government and the individuals responsible for the government’s reprehensible behavior, with a special emphasis on those guilty of human rights violations."

NEW Iran: Routes and Information for 16 Azar (7 December)
NEW Iran’s Critical Moment: Three Days to Go
Iran, the Greens, and the ex-Bushman: With Washington Friends Like These, Who Needs….?
The Latest from Iran (3 December): Normal Service?

2020 GMT: Here's the Real Nuke Story. Put away the distracting rhetoric from Tehran and keep an eye on Saeed Jalili, the Secretary of the National Security Council and one of the key players in Iran's nuclear manoeuvres. He has been in Damascus bending the ear of President Bashir al-Assad, and now he is in Turkey meeting Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Jalili may be needing Turkish help more than ever, because it looks like he got a cold shoulder from Damascus. Rumours are circulating that Syrian-Iranian relations are deteriorating, to the point where yesterday's bus explosion may have been a tough signal to Tehran.

So here's a question, given that Turkey has been a broker for the "third-party enrichment" deal? Is Jalili trying to get the Turks to accept a package where uranium stays inside Iran? Or will the pressure work the other way, with Tehran trying to find a way to accept third-party enrichment and not lose face?

1840 GMT: Yawn. Ayatollah Jannati may have gotten worked up about the possibility of protesting "American agents" taking away 16 Azar, but Iranian state media can't even care enough to give this as much coverage as Enduring America's update (see 1210 GMT). Press TV puts out the stale rhetoric, "The recent resolution by the [International Atomic Energy Agency's] Board of Governors on Iran's peaceful nuclear activities and other anti-Iran resolutions by the UN Security Council have all been adopted under US pressure," and, um, that's it.

1825 GMT: Non-News of the Day. Even though it was a slow afternoon for events, I couldn't be bothered to update the posturing on the nuclear issue: "Iran will inform IAEA on new nuclear sites when ready", "Iran says it will give just six months’ notice before it begins operating 10 planned nuclear sites," etc., etc.

EA reader Catherine, however, has not only picked up those headlines but has given them the appropriate cursory analysis: "I have to laugh at the news about Iran coming out in the last couple of hours, as if it were some big act of defiance. Well duh....of course they’re going to take their time –-- they don’t even know where five of the 10 sites are going to be located yet."

1210 GMT: The Fight for 16 Azar. So the regime isn't worried? Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati used Friday Prayers in Tehran to warn that some people will try and take over National Students Day (7 December) to "satisfy the United States". He added to those who have "betrayed Islam and the revolution, "Criminals will see your work."

Perhaps Jannati should have taken a tip from Tehran Revolution Guard Commander Ali Fazli who played down the prospect of any trouble on 16 Azar, which is a "flower of a day" to be presented as thanks to Iranian students.

1010 GMT: Tehran Politics. Mohammad-Baqer Qalibaf steered an interesting course in a long video interview with Al Jazeera this week. He defended the "democracy" of the Presidential election but criticised both President Ahmadinejad and his opponents for post-election behaviour that fuelled conflict. Qalibaf say "no one was happy" with detentions but evaded placing any blame, saying "everyone is doing his or her best to resolve the issue and I hope no one will be left in prison".

Qalibaf also played down reports of the Revolutionary Guard's expanding influence in the Iranian economy, while saying that Iran's Article 44 governing privatisation must be respected.

1000 GMT: The Green Brief is Back. Josh Shahryar has resumed his updates on the Iran situation, from protests to political developments.

0800 GMT: It is the weekend in Iran, providing an opportunity to catch up on news and to take a breath before the escalation of events leading up to the demonstrations of 16 Azar on Monday. We've posted a special analysis, "Iran's Critical Moment: Three Days to Go".

Included in that piece is the latest manoeuvre from Speaker of the Parliament Ali Larijani to challenge the authority of and around President Ahmadinejad, albeit without naming his rival, “Creating tension in the country is easy but (fostering) unity is not that simple. Damaging reputation is easy but respecting others’ dignity is important. We should not slander others in order to solidify ourselves.”

Meanwhile, Pedestrian has a short, powerful blog on the protest and uncertain fate of Mohammad Younes Rashidi, a student at Amir Kabir University (formerly Tehran Polytechnic). During a visit by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, he held up a sign, “Polytechnic is not your place, you Fascist President.”

Rashidi was expelled and is now reported to be in custody in his native city of Mazandaran.

Comments

[Catherine]

I have to laugh at the news about Iran coming out in the last couple of hours, as if it were some big act of defiance:

'Iran will inform IAEA on new nuclear sites when ready'

'Iran says it will give just six months' notice before it begins operating 10 planned nuclear sites.'

"Iran said it will provide the U.N. nuclear watchdog with the bare minimum of information about its plan to build 10 new uranium enrichment plants, a stance sure to stoke Western suspicions about its atomic agenda."

Well duh - of course they're going to take their time - they don't even know where five of the 10 sites are going to be located yet! :-)

[ange paris]

After what he has said, Galibaf dosen't deserve to replace AN :
" He defended the “democracy” of the Presidential election "

[Adam]

I agree Ange... Before I thought the most likely agreement to quell the crisis would be to install Larijani or Galibaf in AN's place, but I'm not sure how that can defuse the crisis now, as it still wouldn't bring the people back into the political process.

[Tricia Sutherland]

Now I am becoming more and more confused about the NIAC. Do they support the freedom and democracy movement in Iran, or do they support the Iranian Coup Government?

I've seen many people post on Facebook and Twitter denouncing Trita Parsi and his organisation as, at best apologists for the Islamic Republic and its human rights violations.

I'd be very interested in your experts' opinions on this.

[steve]

NIAC is a joke, they were exposed as a pro-Iran government organization long ago

[ange paris]

Catherine
If you want to laugh, look at this : AN has said about the war in Irak that the americans wanted to attack this country with this aim in view, avoiding the appearence of imam 12 because they knew that he desired to appear in this part of planet;
Oh my god !! how they can take all the people in the world for the fools !

http://www.facebook.com/notes/-/-/191281739089

[ange paris]

We have to ask NIAC, what are the sanctions that target " only" the Iranian government and the individuals responsible for the government’s reprehensible behavior, with a special emphasis on those guilty of human rights violations and not iranian people !

[Somebody]

@ ange paris

Yes, I'd like to know what kinds of sanctions can have this effect as well. Here's quote from a recent NIAC blog post:

"NIAC supports diplomacy with Iran, but NIAC has also been investigating how smart sanctions, which target Iran’s leaders rather than the general population, can be used effectively. (See our membership survey.) Stay tuned for more on this…"

http://niacblog.wordpress.com/2009/11/28/what-next/

I hope they can come up with something effective. Otherwise, options are limited.

[Megan]

Freezing their bank accounts in all foreign banks and stop shipment of raw materials and parts for manufacturing facilities IRG owns are a good start.

[Scott Lucas]

Tricia,

In my opinion, the best way to judge the stance of the National Iranian American Council is to read their opinions and analysis, before and after the June election, at http://www.niacouncil.org/.

For our reading on the attempt to blacken NIAC's reputation, see http://enduringamerica.com/2009/11/14/iran-the-political-attack-on-the-national-iranian-american-council/ and http://enduringamerica.com/2009/11/16/iran-more-on-the-political-attack-on-the-national-iranian-american-council/.

S.

[Catherine]

Ma chere Ange,
I'm deeply flattered that you think I can read Farsi :-). I really wish I could!
Is there anywhere where one can find an English summary of the statements AN made (http://www.facebook.com/notes/-/-/191281739089) RE the US invasion of Iraq being an attempt to prevent the 12th Imam from appearing in the area when he returns at the end of days?

We laugh, but actually many evangelical Christians (some of whom have held/hold positions of power in the US government and military) believe something comparable: that the Jews must congregate in Palestine and establish a Jewish state on all its territory so as to make the Second Coming of Jesus Christ (date - end of days; place - Jerusalem) possible, and they work in various ways to realise this aim. What makes messieur AN's statement really amusing is that he thinks US military and political commanders were ALSO convinced that the 12th Imam is going to show up and kick some ass at the same time and roughly in the same region! :-)

It's called Christian Zionism - read all about it:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_isra.htm

[Catherine]

Here is what I could find in a quick search of the NIAC site regarding their specific stances on sanctions. Admittedly, they don't give any details of exactly what sanctions would only target the government and IRG, but Megan mentioned a few above.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, November 4th, 2009
NIAC's sixth major conference on Capitol Hill

Boroujerdi: Sanctions should deprive the Iranian government of the tools it needs for the repression of its people. Other goods and services, for example civilian airline parts, should not be sanctioned because they will beget goodwill with the Iranian people.

10:26 am: What will be the effect of broad-based sanctions, such as a gasoline embargo?

Ghaemi: The majority of Iranians have been under severe economic hardship for 30 years. They would not welcome more economic punishment. This would just play into the hands of the government. But any sanctions that target the repressive arm of the Iranian government–the IRGC, the security sector, and the surveillance and censorship industries in Iran. We saw in Iraq–a decade of crippling sanctions did not hurt Saddam, it only crippled civil society.
http://niacblog.wordpress.com/2009/11/04/between-human-rights-diplomacy-and-sanctions/

+++++++++++++++++++++++

Iranian Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act Hurts Iranian People, Undermines International Unity on Iran
Friday, 04 December 2009

Washington DC – The National Iranian American Council is deeply concerned that the House of Representatives’ plan to bring H.R. 2194, the Iranian Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act (IRPSA), to a vote the week of December 14, 2009 is a move in the direction of punishing the Iranian people instead of the Iranian government. ... Sanctions can play a constructive role within that process [diplomatic engagement], but in order to be effective they must target the Iranian government and the individuals responsible for the government’s reprehensible behavior, with a special emphasis on those guilty of human rights violations. ...Unilateral sanctions such as those included in IRPSA will hurt the people of Iran immensely and do little to target the actors such as the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps who have consolidated power under the shadow of outside threats and profited under the sanctions economy.
http://www.niacouncil.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=100&Itemid=189

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

NIAC President Trita Parsi testifies before House Financial Services Subcommittee
Thursday, 12 March 2009
According to Parsi, "economic sanctions have undermined Iran's pro-democracy movement by weakening Iran's civil society and by hampering the emergence of a wealthy middle class. As long as the lion's share of the economy is controlled by the state, room for pushing for political liberalization will be severely limited."
http://www.niacouncil.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1363&Itemid=2

[Catherine]

@ Megan,
I honestly don't know what to make of this. A certain Hossein Askari, in his September 22, 2009 article 'A smarter way to sanction Iran', first shows why sanctions on Iran's gasoline imports and oil exports would not be effective, and proposes sticking with financial sanctions, but then suggests targeting Iran's foreign currency reserves in a way I've never heard mentioned before.

He writes, "The US Treasury could motivate Iranians (in Iran as well as those living in the US and in Europe) to liquidate their assets and to withdraw their money from Iran simply by announcing enforcement of a few existing, yet generally neglected, US laws", (see article linked below) which he argues, "would lead to a financial chaos and collapse that "would turn ordinary citizens, wealthy regime loyalists, and prominent bazaar merchants against the regime .. and .. deal a significant financial blow to the IRG". He concludes that, "ordinary Iranians might suffer for a few months, but then they would be free of this illegitimate and oppressive regime". Now imo this doesn't sound too pleasant at all for the people on the ground, but it struck me as a novel approach amidst all the debate surrounding the Iranian Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act (IRPSA).

http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0922/p09s01-coop.html

[Barry]

Catherine

The US has much financial clout in the world - regardless of their recent "problems".

My understanding is that there is much "sanctions" already enacted that have not in fact been enforced.

It's the money!!! Follow the money!!! The US could bring Iran Regime to its knees very quickly if it just follows the money.

As an example, Iran still does business with Companies arounbd the world. Those businesses need insurance to undertake their business- where does the Insurance come from? - Where are the large Insurance Companies? Can they be stopped (or preferably are they voluntarily willing to stop) providing Insurance to Companies transacting business with Iran?? No insurance coverage - no business!!

Barry