The Latest from Iran (13 March): Settling In

2250 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Rah-e-Sabz has published a list of 192 detainees in Section 240 of Evin Prison. Activists have noted that the list is incomplete.

2240 GMT: Human Rights --- The Regime's Breakdown Strategy. But if the Iranian Government on the one hand is offering release from prison if detainees (including a number of prominent journalists and political activists) are silenced, it is also moving aggressively to break apart the human rights movement.

NEW Iran Special: Zahra Rahnavard on Women’s Rights and The Green Movement
NEW Iran: The Opposition’s New PR Campaign in the US
NEW Iran Analysis: Rafsanjani’s “Finger in the Dike” Strategy
UPDATED Iran Document: The Hardliners’ Project — Full Text (Bahavar)
Iran: An Opening Thought on the Disconnection in Washington
Video: “Iran at a Crossroads” Conference (10 March)
The Latest from Iran (12 March): Assessments

The propaganda strategy of tarnishing human rights activists has been re-doubled tonight with Kayhan joining Fars in declaring that 25-30 activists have been arrested because they serve as "cover" for the Mujahedin-e-Khalq and US-sponsored cyber-warfare.


Human Rights Activists in Iran's websites are still hacked and redirected to gerdab.ir (a website reportedly run by the Revolutionary Guard) this evening.

2230 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch --- The Regime's Release Strategy.

One of the two big stories this evening is of a flurry of releases from Evin Prison. According to BBC Persian, prominent journalists Lili Farhadpour, Vahid Pourostad and Somayyeh Momeni have been released, all on personal bail (someone else is ready to go to jail if the terms of bail are broken) or small monetary bails. However, other prominent reporters such as Akbar Montajabi, Ehsan Mehrabi and Emad Baghi, are still behind bars.

An EA source also reports that Iranian-American academic Kian Tajbakhsh, who had been imprisoned for 15 years, has been released. The terms are unknown.

1810 GMT: Cyber-War on Human Rights. Ahmad Batebi, a spokesman for Human Rights in Iran, confirms that all HRA websites have been hacked and visitors redirected to the regime's "cyber-war" site gerdab.ir.

1800 GMT: Rafsanjani Watch. While his ally Hassan Rohani attacks the Government (see 1340 GMT), Hashemi Rafsanjani continues his political balancing act with a statement that students should not remain silent in political matters but should communicate their demands in a “logical” manner in order to achieve reform.

Rafsanjani advised students to evaluate the current situation so they did not create excuses for people who are trying to use "security" as pretext to take control of society. He expalined added, “The atmosphere needs to remain logical and wise...[so those who] are expressing good ideas will ultimately triumph.” Students should speak in a manner so their enemies could not “take advantage” of them.

1755 GMT: The Attack on Human Rights Activists. The website of Human Rights Activists News Agency, on the same day that HRA was accused of being a cover group for terrorism and cyber-warfare (see 1735 GMT), has been hacked by Iranian authorities. The site re-directs to gerdab.ir, which activists claim is a location which tracks its visitors.


1750 GMT: Football and Politics. The latest YouTube video claiming that football has been used as a vehicle for protest comes from a match in Tabriz. Confirmation of the slogan being chanted by the crowd would be appreciated.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nH1rP-f90Hw&feature=youtu.be&a[/youtube]

1735 GMT: Propaganda (or Worse) Item of Day. Fars News has claimed that Human Rights Activists in Iran is a cover group for the "terrorist" Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MKO) with links to the US Government in a cyber-war against Iran. Naming (in other words, targeting) some of the members, Fars claims that 30 people who provided anti-filtering software have been arrested. It adds that Iranian authorities have asked Interpol to arrest HRA members outside Iran.

1730 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Azar Mansouri, a senior member of the Islamic Iran Participation Front, has been sentenced to three years in prison. She was convicted of "disturbing public order while participating in gatherings, issuing propaganda against the regime, spreading lies and plotting to harm national security".

1340 GMT: Rafsanjani Watch (and This is Definitely Worth Watching). Tehran Times have now posted an English version of Rafsanjani ally Hassan Rohani's attack on the Government (0940 GMT) and, even in translation, it is striking:

*Speaking at a ceremony to mark the first death anniversary of the late Imam Khomeini’s wife, Rohani...said, “We should not allow a group to make attempts to eliminate another group.”

Interpretation: The Government should back off attempts to "break" or contain Rafsanjani through pressure on his family. Could Rohani be also be warning against an attempt to break reformist leaders?

*It should not be allowed that some elements dare to make every improper and derogatory remarks against Imam’s household and companions, he emphasized.

Interpretation: Stop attacking Seyed Hassan Khomeini, the Imam's grandson, who has been critical of the Government and supportive of the opposition.

*The cleric added some figures believe that the country can be governed by a particular group, but according to Imam’s teachings all people should be engaged.

Interpretation: If a Government is not legitimate, then....

*He also noted that Imam used to attach high importance to the people’s votes and even put the name of the Islamic Republic to the vote.

Interpretation: Well, in the context of June 2009 and "Where is My Vote?", what would you think?

If Rohani is speaking on behalf of Rafsanjani, this is a powerful signal that the former President is now going to let Ahmadinejad rest easy.

1300 GMT: Iran Nuke Update --- Larijani Yes, Ahmadinejad No. You really can't get much more blatant than this from Khabar Online:

Iran's Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani paid his last foreign visit in the current Iranian year to Japan. As he earlier has made notable diplomatic achievements through his trips, many local analysts believe the diplomacy adopted by Parliament Speaker reveals the flops and drawbacks of governmental diplomacy.

Larijani's diplomacy consisted of putting forth the proposal for Japan to serve as the 3rd country in a deal to enrich Iran's uranium overseas.

1250 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Kurdish writer Susan Mohammadkhani Ghiasvand has been arrested at her home in Karaj.


1245 GMT: Student Protests. Students at Mazandaran University have carried out a two-day hunger strike to protest pressure from university officials. About 15 students had been summoned by the university's disciplinary committee.

1230 GMT: Economy Watch. Opponents of the Ahmadinejad economic strategy are warning that workers' "real wages" will drop 50% in this Iranian year. Labour organisations are demanding a guaranteed minimum wage.

1215 GMT: Women's Rights and the Green Movement. We have posted an extensive, illuminating interview with Zahra Rahnavard: "-It is impossible to expect that the general political movement — in this case, the Green Movement — will be able to successfully eliminate inequality and violence against women without help from an established and independent women’s movement."

1010 GMT: Qalibaf Attacks. An interesting intervention from Tehran Mayor Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, who has kept a low profile but has still been linked to an anti-Ahmadinejad group within the conservatives. In an interview, he has pronounced that Iran has "no time for errors" because "for 14 months no serious work has been done in this country". Qalibaf say dissidents should be invited to share revolutionary goals through hard work.

0940 GMT: Rafsanjani Watch. Hassan Rohani, a member of the Expediency Council and an ally of Hashemi Rafsanjani, has  sharply attacked the Government. He said some people want to govern the country with a gang, but Iranians should not allow society to fall into superstition and petrification.

0930 GMT: Rafsanjani Blackout? Rah-e-Sabz has published what it claims is a memorandum from management of the Islamic Republic News Agency, ordering staff not to publish the image of Hashemi Rafsanjani.

0830 GMT: Parliament Slaps Down Ahmadinejad? Have to admit that I missed this while I was on the road....

The latest chapter on the battle over the President's budget has been written over Ahmadinejad's insistence on being able to spend $40 billion of the savings from his subsidy reform plan; Parliament had authorised only $20 billion.

The week began with a meeting between Speaker of Parliament Ali Larijani and the Supreme Leader, a day after Ahmadinejad requested Khamenei's help. It ended yesterday when the President showed up at the Majlis to make a speech (he has done this before in the post-election crisis, even though it is a technical violation of Parliamentary rules). Ahmadinejad insisted, “I don’t believe in inflation, and inflation will decrease next year.”

The speech and the President's personal lobbying were not enough: the Parliament voted 111-105 against the $40 billion proposal.

0825 GMT: We've posted a separate entry on what appears to be a new push by Iranian opposition leaders, through representatives, to sway US political opinion.

0745 GMT: Rumour of Day - Khamenei and Ahmadinejad Split? Tehran Bureau reports the claim of "a senior aide to opposition cleric Mehdi Karroubi that Iran's supreme leader has cooled his support for president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad". The assertion was made to journalists at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace on Friday.

Beyond the headline, it's not much of a story. The senior aide "who worked with [Karroubi] for more than 25 years" is not actually in Iran but living in exile (while he is anonymous in the TB story, skilled Iran-watchers will identify him easily). The claim --- at least as reported in the article --- has no specific evidence but echoes a number of points (such as the incident over Ahmadinejad's close ally Esfandiar Rahim-Mashai) that we have noted since last summer.

What is far more significant is that this is a renewed Green Movement push to get support in the US. Putting forth the vision of a Khamenei-Ahmadinejad rift tries to shift a US Government which is based solely on "engagement"; it may even accept that Washington can work with the Supreme Leader while boycotting the President.

Even more important, but tucked away in the TB story, is this assertion from the senior aide: "The end goal is to have transparent, free and fair elections....Once that happens, you can be certain the Iranian people will elect [a president] who will secure peaceful and friendly relations with the world."

Last October, when a senior aide to Karroubi appeared at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, US journalists criticised the Green Movement's speaker for refusing to declare acceptance of Israel and renunciation of Iran's nuclear programme. In this article, no mention of the Israelis or the Bomb and thus no cause for a dismissal of the Greens.

Instead, the senior aide said that the Obama Administration's nuclear-first approach, at the expense of ignoring Iran's human rights violations, is "exactly what Ahmadinejad wants....If the U.S. reverses this approach and focuses on pressuring Iran for its human rights abuses...this is what the Iranian government fears most." he said.

And another point to notice:

Karroubi's aide recommended the use of "smart sanctions", targeted financial sanctions against members of the Revolutionary Guard. "For such sanctions to be truly 'smart', we need only to look at the multitude of companies set up in Dubai in the past 3-5 years," he said, hinting that much of import traffic to Iran from the UAE happened under the auspices of the Guards....

"As an Iranian, I'd hate to see our citizens suffer. But even if they are hurt in the short term, whatever shortens the life of this government is in the interests of the [Iranian] people."

0720 GMT: A US Rights-Based Strategy? While the panellists at Wednesday's NIAC conference were all focused on a nuclear-first approach to Iran (and I haven't forgotten that I owe you an analysis of the event), there are signs that the US Government is pursuing a more nuanced strategy.

On Friday, State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley issued a statement of Washington's "increasing concern" about Iran's "ongoing persecution" of religious minorities, including Baha'is, and called on Tehran to protect human rights at home.

Crowley noted that at least 25 Baha'is have been detained recently and as many as 60 are now imprisoned in Iran "solely on the basis of their religious beliefs". He also asserted that Iranian authorities had detained more than a dozen Christians, "some of whom are being held in custody without substantiated charges".

Crowley's statement follows Thursday's State Department release ofits annual review of human rights conditions around the world, which including a sharply-worded section on Iran. The report claimed Iran is continuing to restrict freedom of expression and assembly, with 70 people killed and 4,000 more detained since June 2009.

0710 GMT: After five days on the road, a chance to catch breath and review the latest in Iran....

We begin with a separate analysis, as Masoud Shafaee considers the manoeuvres of Hashemi Rafsanjani: "While Rafsanjani’s current primary concern may be preventing Ahmadinejad from tearing Iran’s already-polarized political landscape asunder, that may in time prove to be lead to his grander scheme: he was the boy who saved the city from ruin."

A new website publishes (in Persian) details of 109 victims of post-election conflict.

An open letter by activists calls for immediate assistance for more than 5000 Iranian refugees displaced by the post-election crisis and living in Turkey.

Comments

[Catherine]

RE 0720 GMT:
Looking forward to your analysis when you get the time. Please don't forget this question I asked in the thread with the video (http://enduringamerica.com/2010/03/11/video-iran-at-a-crossroads-conference-10-march/comment-page-1/#comment-31568) - thanks!

[Observer]

Has anyone seen the latest on ILNA (english)?

ILNA: "Guardian council welcomes reforms in election laws" - http://bit.ly/aG6Chy

[Scott Lucas]

Catherine,

While I have serious concerns about the approach taken by the afternoon panel at NIAC on US-Iran relations, I think Ray McGovern's allegation that they ignored Israel is flat-out wrong. What united the three panellists was the argument that a US approach to Iran should not just be on nukes but on a "grand settlement" which included talks on Afghanistan, Iraq, and the Middle East. Inevitably, that would involve questions relating to Israel.

There were individual statements tilting towards Israel, notably Robert Hunter's portrayal of Israel's holding of nuclear weapons as responsible and thus acceptable, but by no means was there a cover-up of any discussion on the issue.

I read the statement of McGovern (whom I admired for his forthright stance objecting to the 2003 Iraq War, especially the distortion of "intelligence") coming more from his belief that the US and Israel are united in a regime-change effort against Tehran, rather than any objective consideration of the panel's comments.

S.

[Maria Rohaly]

Sorry, but this is among Rahnavard's most annoying quotes:

"“-It is impossible to expect that the general political movement — in this case, the Green Movement — will be able to successfully eliminate inequality and violence against women without help from an established and independent women’s movement.”"

That would be the case in a nation where gender apartheid and devaluation of women was not CENTRAL to national law and policy.

But unfortunately, we are talking about the Islamic Republic. Gender apartheid is central to this regime's function IN THE SAME WAY that racial apartheid was central to the function of South Africa.

If anyone thinks that gender suppression is not central to the function of this regime, consider only the energies expended, and the FINANCIAL expenditure required to deploy the Zeinab sisters, using the military to enforce hijab, executing young girls who have had a boyfriend.

If the social relations are not obvious to the eye, then look from an expenditure angle.

It is so dangerous in this situation that we see gender apartheid as merely an extension of the "usual" sexism that is a feature of all societies. So bloody dangerous.

[Catherine]

Hi Maria,
I've read quite a bit of your comments by now, here at EA and at the site (linked to by Scott) where you posted your lengthy explanation of the question you had asked the panel, including that very interesting dialogue you had with a commentator about gradualism versus ... uh .... whatever you called the opposite (sorry I can't remember). Anyway, I have a lot of respect for your various points of view by now and so I don't understand why you're so critical of Rahnavard saying in essence what the gender equality people in Iran are saying - that the women's movement has to independently continue to work toward its specific goals, and that the Green Movement can't accomplish this on its own, but needs the help and collaboration of the women's movement to successfully eliminate inequality and violence against women.

[Catherine]

Scott,
Thanks for your quick reply to Ray McGovern’s allegation that the paricipants in the panel were tiptoeing around the issue of Israel's nuclear arsenal. I've landed on his blog frequently while surfing for Iran items, and didn't know how much credence to lend to his often quite opinionated stances.

[Maria Rohaly]

Thanks, Catherine, for your note, and for reading our work.

I might not have been as clear as I should have been - I think because I was commenting on this snippet after having just finished reading and commenting more extensively on Rahnavard's interview here: http://enduringamerica.com/2010/03/13/iran-special-zahra-rahnavard-on-womens-rights-and-the-green-movement/

Basically, unlike those working for true gender equality in Iran, Rahnavard's comments are made from a perspective that fundamentally supports inequality of women, and you can see that current running through all of her work.

While there are those who say that the movement for women's equality has work to do beyond what the Green Movement can accommodate at this point in time, they frame their discussion very differently (in my opinion). For example, you can read the interview with Abbasgholizadeh:
http://www.iranhumanrights.org/2010/03/abbasgholizadeh-suppression-has-changed-iranian-womens-priorities

You can look at the words of Abbasgholizadeh, and she is very explicit about the demands of Iranian women for EQUALITY and non-discrimination (you will very rarely hear Rahnavard say "equality" - she always talks about "rights").

Abbasgholizadeh, on the other hand, makes explicit the centrality of the link between equality of women and democracy in Iran:

"The ever-present issue for the women’s movement in Iran continues to be their pursuit of equality and elimination of gender discrimination. This issue has an inseparable connection to the realization of a democratic society. Iranian women’s struggles for equality over the past years have disseminated a culture to pursue democracy amongst people with a feminist influence."

I contrast this with the tactical refusal of Rahnavard to see the problem of gender apartheid as central to the crisis of legitimacy that the Islamic Republic is facing at this moment.

When Rahnavard says that gender is another important demand alongside all of these other demands, and we can't privilege it, and it is not central - she says these things as a politician who wants everyone else to see it that way too. BUT the question of women's equality is NOT "just another social demand among many others."

It is THE central organizing principle of Iranian society.

I repeat: it is THE central organizing principle of Iranian society.

It is also IMPOSED BY the Islamic regime that she defends with every breath.

Abbasgholizadeh identifies it as such.

Rahnavard would die before she ever would say such a thing. Why? Because it is an existential threat to the system that she stands for, defends, and is complicit in.

And so when Rahnavard tells you, "Ooooh yes, women's rights are so important, but they are not ~*central*~, this movement can't do ~*everything*~, we will address ~*some*~ aspects of women's rights but we do not have an interest in making women's equality an issue of ~*central*~ attention here," THIS is TACTICAL. She frames these issues in this way for a REASON, and she tells you the reason in every other paragraph of this interview.

I choked when, in her interview, she said, "Leaning too much towards one of the sub-movements can make the Green Movement appear biased." If the question that this movement has risen to address is human rights and democracy in Iran, then gender apartheid MUST be a central target of this movement. The Islamic Republic itself has made gender a central concern since Day One. To say that it should not be a central concern of this movement should be a red flag to anyone who is interested in a free and democratic Iran.

But Rahnavard does not want that. She makes comment after comment that, on the one hand, tactically accepts "women's rights" as a goal of the green movement, and at the same time tactically denies the centrality of gender apartheid to the current crisis. Why? There is a reason for this.

Go back to the letter from the women's group to Mousavi & Karroubi. They pointed out that Mousavi (via Rahnavard) & Karroubi (via Fatemeh) implied a lot of things about how they would address "women's issues." Now they are demanding answers. [Did you see how Rahnavard refused to be held accountable for all of the things she implied during the campaign about how women's issues would be handled?] Has anyone actually gone back to look and see what Mousavi & Karroubi actually promised during the campaign (mostly via their wives, of course, so that they themselves cannot be held too acountable)? We have. There is nothing substantive. Nothing.

So why do the reformists (including Rahnavard) falsely hold themselves up as defenders and pursuers of women's rights?

Basically, these reformists know that they have to give lip service to women's issues in order to survive and position themselves against the hardliners. They know that they need women's forces to underwrite their campaign against those currently holding power. Like any other politicians in Iran, these promises to women have never been explicit and the appearance of emphasis on women's rights is politiclly expedient and nothing more. They do not stand for gender equality, but they are quite willing to try to make people think that they do in order to further their own agenda.

As a woman at the 1979 march against hijab said, essentially: You knew we fought for freedom,and not to be put in hijab. If you wanted to force this on us, you should have told us before. Implication being that women would not have served as a force in the revolution if they knew that their demands for equality were going to be met with repression instead.

This is the same shit all over again: weasel-worded promises that sound great, until you are reminded that they are all made from within that same constitutional framework. The reformists are trying to gather then energies and forces of the green movement to underwrite their own agenda, which is to unseat Ahmadinejad's crew. Women are a formidable force in Iran, and of course politicians would love for women to multiply their power. But the Rahnavards, Mousavis, Karroubis of the world offer only illusion.

Don't forget who these people are. Don't forget how many died on their watch when they were in power. Don't forget how they got where they are. These people have well-defined interests, and they are trying to lead women along the primrose path to achieve those interests. Rahnavard is no innocent, as cute as she may look.

There are at minimum three sets of competing demands making themselves heard in Iran today:
1) the hardliners in power who want to stay in power,
2) the reformists who are fighting the hardliners to get into power and using the energies of the green movement to do so, and
3) those who demand freedom and equality (some of whom you see in the streets, many of whom are in jail or dead, many of whom are workers' rights or women's rights activists who do not see themselves represented in "green").

Rahnavard is in category 2. But claims to represent those in category 3. This is the fairy tale she is telling. I'd hate to see anyone believe it.

(Once again, I apologize for being long, and not having a chance to clean this up - I have to run out the door now. But I leave it like this for now, with apologies for lack of clarity).

Thanks again, Catherine! :)

~Maria

[Cyrus]

This is a very important point:
Karroubi’s aide recommended the use of “smart sanctions”, targeted financial sanctions against members of the Revolutionary Guard. “For such sanctions to be truly ’smart’, we need only to look at the multitude of companies set up in Dubai in the past 3-5 years,” he said, hinting that much of import traffic to Iran from the UAE happened under the auspices of the Guards….

“As an Iranian, I’d hate to see our citizens suffer. But even if they are hurt in the short term, whatever shortens the life of this government is in the interests of the [Iranian] people.”

I have always argued that without financial pressure on the regime by oil sanctions and other means to cut the IR's all sources of revenue, all other sanctions will be useless

Regime will survive under any conditions as long as the $150 billion dollars a day oil revenue is flowing to pay its IRGC and Basiji thugs & buy out international support by investing in other countries in Asia, S. America and Africa as well as billions of dollars in imports from China, India and elsewhere to further pressure the small businesses in Iran and pressure the middle class

[Aryajet]

Scott,
I'm an Iranian Azari and people in Tabriz stadium are chanting:

"We are the children of Babak*......We are not afraid of death"

* Babak Khorramdin was a 9th Cen. Iranian Azari freedom fighter who revolted against Abbasid Khalifat and finally ended close to 200 years old of arabs governance of over Iran.

Hope this helps.

[Arshama]

Maria,

Thank you for your detailed explanation and also for citing Mahboubeh Abbasgholizadeh. Her straightforward statements on the gender issue are just what I had wanted to oppose to Rahnavard's vague remarks on the subject, and I fully agree with you, that she does not intend genuine equality of women and men.

On the other hand I would not be so pessimistic about the Green movement in general: Iranians have already experienced the failures of Reformists in establishing more freedom and equality in this republic, and they are surely not willing to serve as gullible voters for political parties, which are mostly interested in regaining power.

Obviously the Green movement started with the demand for fair elections nine months ago, but since then it has been radicalized due to severe oppression, and I doubt if parts of it have not already changed over to the third group you mention. And then there is still a silent majority, which mistrusts all of them and is patiently awaiting future developments in its favour. In any case the rigged elections and all following events have helped to clarify some fundamental positions, have broken the deadly silence and reinstalled criticism in this vibrant society, which is still on the move to find and define itself...

Arshama

[Barry]

@ARYAJET

What is noticeable to me is the relatively young age of the people in that film -- therein lies the future of Iran.

Barry

[Scott Lucas]

Aryajet,

Thank you so much for this valuable info.

S.

[Maria Rohaly]

Dear Arshama,

Thanks for your comments. :)

This I fully agree with:
"On the other hand I would not be so pessimistic about the Green movement in general: Iranians have already experienced the failures of Reformists in establishing more freedom and equality in this republic, and they are surely not willing to serve as gullible voters for political parties, which are mostly interested in regaining power."

I don't worry about the peoples' movement in Iran - I think Iranians must be among the most politically savvy people on the face of the earth, out of sheer necessity - lol. And I fully agree with you when you say that parts of it have moved to that 3rd group.

What I do worry A LOT about is people OUTSIDE Iran who are seduced by what they see of Rahnavard, of Ebadi... what I find very unfortunate is that THESE tend to be the figures supported by Western feminist organizations, it is THEIR ideas that are taken to represent some fictitious, monolithic position of "women in Iran," and it is their agenda that continues to be accepted and disseminated in the outside world as the only legitimate position, capable of representing all Iranian women.

Creating such appearances and cultivating such support from women's groups internationally is not only convenient and useful for the reform agenda inside Iran, but it is also very convenient for the Washington DC establishment and key US economic interests which don't care so much about human rights for Iranian citizens when they are looking at their investments in Iran, which run into the billions of dollars.

The last thing they want is unpredictability in Iran. They will support whatever they can that doesn't look TOO depraved but still promises to protect their economic and geopolitical interests. They don't want radical change. Demanding legal equality for women in Iran implies scrapping the current constitution and changing out the entire political and power structure in Iran, i.e., revolution (violent or not, to do this constitutes revolutionary change, and that makes people with investments very nervous). US interests are not too excited about seeing that kind of instability. A little too inconvenient for their bottom line.

So if they can say, "Oh look how reasonable this Mousavi guy is - we can deal with him. And Ebadi says shari'a law is just fine, Rahnavard is such a feminist and she thinks shari'a law is fabulous if only implemented "correctly," - hey, no one can object to this reform agenda, it keeps things stable for us, the US women's movement is on board with that so we won't hear objections from them, let US policy support THAT."

The US women's movement, and US policymakers need to understand that we CANNOT get on board with THAT. And if US policy tried to support a reform agenda, then they need to hear about it loud and clear from women's organizations and human rights organizations that it is not morally acceptable to support an explicitly gender apartheidist regime, any more than it is morally acceptable to support an explicitly race apartheidist regime.

The "woman question" matters to US policymakers. "Gender" matters at USAID. It is a problem for the US government to be seen as not supporting women's rights and equality.

US policymakers should not be allowed to condone or support any regime in Iran that codifies women as second class citizens. It is up to those who "get it" about gender apartheid in Iran to make sure that US policymakers do not have an easy time of selling support for an apartheidist regime to the American people.

Ebadi and Rahnavard are already well-ahead in the public relations game: Ebadi has her Nobel prize to parlay, and Rahnavard is so darn cute and sassy and plays well to an audience and appears to say "the right things." Women demanding freedom and equality inside Iran are either rotting in jail, executed, or otherwise unable to speak as freely as they would like to. They are more or less silenced.

In a violently repressive society such as Iran, the voices that are allowed to have prime-time news space - the ones that are allowed to be heard - give a false representation of the demeanor and sentiments of the people.

Inside Iran, within the peoples' movement, has to work out their strategy, and I claim no role whatever in that.

Outside Iran, however, it is our responsibility to try to make sure that it is not only the voice of the Rahnavards and Ebadis that are heard, but the voices of women that demand real equality - that fought and died for that, whose voices have been repressed, whose voices even now are being drowned out by people like Rahnavard who pretends to be THE voice of women. She is not, and US policy must not be inappropriately influenced by her sham support of "women's rights."

xoxo
Maria

[pessimist]

The most poignant is the 7 10, twit open letter for the urgent assistance for refugees in Turkey. This is scandalous in many ways, the extreme bureaucracy in the various UN admins that prevent these poor victims from getting aid for months. Wake up you admins !

Karoubis witnesses here, so what do they say in Iran ? No proof. What was AM jabbing about with Erdogan ? Just about visas for azerbaijan ? I doubt.

Pity that the RT and # were not including Turkey's PM and members of parliament.

[pessimist]

@ Maria

you are loud and clear and I recommend staying like that. These wives - especially Mousavi's has pretty flowery parts on her chador but why don't they just wear a scarf ? If they knew what they represent to us, surely they wouldn't dress like flowery crows. That is no doubt quite symbolic to what you give in the 1), 2), 3).. positions.

[pessimist]

Wasn't sure where to post this. As it seems to be a discussion between Human rights vs the nuclear issue, after the conference in Washington, I'll post it here..

I had prepared this comment in response to a link posted towards the 'consortium' site, that talks about the taboo of talking about Israel during the discussions. But I can't find the page ! The site claims it is 'independant journalism', but the author says he works with ""Tell the Word", the publishing arm of the "ecumenical Church of the Saviour" in inner-city Washington. A 27-year veteran of CIA’s analysis division, he now serves on the Steering Group of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)."

How can religious writers be independant, to start with ?
His questions are legitimate though. But what could be the answers ? Apart from the usual 'death to Israel' from regime defenders.

This got me thinking about a couple of things on the nuclear issue. I've been thinking about it in wider terms.

I'm not very savvy about all the interests involved or the personal moods of all the players.
But I can add just a wink out of the past from working several years ago in a R&D site for energy in France. Although my work was not all involved, I learned quite a few bits and pieces about nuclear plants and various security issues.

After the Ukranian Chernobyl disaster, there was much scurrying to get some sort of commission to inspect, evaluate, aid and correct security issues in Eastern European countries. I had the occasion to talk to a couple of people on a team that went to one of them. They described their astonishment on finding out how they ran their nuclear plant and how at their first meetings, the personnel didn't have any notes, or documents, they didn't keep them, it was all from memory !

I am inclined to think that when a country develops nuclear capacity, it's not so relevant that they go on to develop the bomb or not, (of course it IS important), because they are joining a club, and in itself it is a HUGE responsibility. There are huge security questions on environmental problems and managing waste.

I learned that there are loads of minor accidents that the public never get to know about. Many, even well managed plants have problems of pollution : soil, water, air. Even medical use means big problems of security, and management of waste. All this obviously needs very good gvt, and local authorities and private coordination and efficient management.

So this is without the added perpetual threat of terrorist attacks, whether internal or external. (planes ..). Or again, war, or even natural disasters like earthquakes.

So is Iran in the right, or good position to accomplish all these measures ? Can a country where a nuclear physicist has just been murdered with no knowledge of who was responsible, or the reason, be considered responsible to have nuclear power ? When they still organize crowds to shout 'death to Israel, death to America' ? And the president himself talks of 'slapping [countries'] faces in his frequent speeches ? Are they really trustworthy ?

This is not to mention the problem of parallel authorites who don't know who is deciding what. When the judiciary has no power over the militia. When an elderly religious leader has supreme decision making.

And, just as important if not more so, this regime has proved that they will suppress any public criticism, so, imagine what would happen if there were accidents, or bad management and there was pollution for people and the environment ? It would be covered up and the people imprisoned or executed.

May I regretfully mention that even France, who has numerous nuclear power plants, and full democracy, covered up the extent of the pollution of the Chernobyl disaster ! It was practically the only european country to do so. There are many who have various cancers because of this cover up. It is only very recently that they have even admitted this.

It's understandable that even the Greens want nuclear power for national 'pride's sake', but surely nobody can let such a regime have unlimited nuclear power, until the time when they become respectible and show real governmental capacity for managing such dangerous technologies military or not.

[James the Hype]

Here is a Radio Zamaneh article that describes that the targets of the "cyber warfare" arrests was a group called "Iran Proxy," supposedly backed by the United States and PMOK.

http://www.zamaaneh.com/enzam/2010/03/iran-arrests-30-suspected.html

[Catherine]

@ Pesimist
RE your post 18, you should send your concerns to http://www.un.org/disarmament/HomePage/about_us/odacontact.shtml

Few ever mention your concerns as part of their argument against Iran developing nuclear capacity, but Iran (government + population) is in the stone age regarding environmental protection and ecological awareness. Vast beautiful plains seen from the distance look like they're dotted with white flowers, but when you get close you discover what those "flowers" are - plastic bags! Thousands of them entwined in the shrubbery and short grass for as far as the eye can see. Lake Urumieh and the river running through Isfahan will soon dry up because of water use mismanagement, rolling electricity cuts are now standard in the summer months also because of water mismanagement that has compounded the effects of recent droughts to greatly reduce the volume of water at dams and hydroelectric plants, people build holiday homes and hotels wherever they want it seems and the pollution in cities like Tehran and Tabriz literally makes your eyes sting. When you try to view Tehran from the Tochal sky resort you peer through clouds of heavy smog covering the outlines of buildings that you have to complete with your imagination. I could go on and on. That total disregard for the environment and sensible resource management coupled with the tendencies of this regime you mention to suppress, hide and lie about anything it doesn't want the public to know .... make Iran one of the worst possible candidates for even peaceful use of nuclear energy.

[Catherine]

Hi Maria,
RE your post 7, thank you for the time and effort you put into explaining your views. I went back to Rahnavard's Kaleme interview and using ' find on this page' looked up every instance of the word 'equality' (instead of 'rights') and frankly, I didn't come away with as insidious an impression of her as you have, at least not in this particular interview, but I will certainly bear your warnings re Rahnavard and Ebadi in mind from now on.

I'm interested to know what you think of Shadi Sadr. I met her last December and she seems to have one agenda only - that of defending women's and human "rights". I don't know if she has also gone to court to fight for gender "equality" outside the current constitution. She and her team, as well as their colleague Muhammad Mostafei, have worked tirelessly to repeal stoning sentences and death sentence for juvenile offenders.

[cyrus]

No one in the islamic republic (including the reformist side) really care about the will of Iranian people or the country
Pessimist is right about the environmental damages to Iran caused under this regime
Many of the protected wild life areas in Iran are being purposely destroyed by the IRGC projects and you can't find a logical reason of why they are doing that. One of the examples is Gavkhani where hundreds of endangered species live, they are filling the lake and building a road across of it when there is no reason to build a road there

IRGC uses heavy construction equipment do dig out ancient artifacts from some of the oldest unregistered world heritage site, damaging all the remains of ancient civilizations and then smuggle out the pieces with higher value to other countries using its own private airlines such as Aseman Air.

I've never cared about none of Zahra Rahnavard statements, because in no ways she is representing the will of Iranian women. She is one of the founder of Hizbullah women branch, one of the key players in the formation of Women moral police responssible for arrest, imprisonment and torture of thousands of women annually over not wearing proper hejab

Women in Iran are demanding equality, not the barbaric anti-women rights in Koran or proposed by Khomeini, the man who brought all discriminations and inequalities to Iran

Forget about all the non-sense propoganda from both the reformist and conservatives of IR, equality is only possible under a secular democratic system and that's what we should focus on.

[danial]

@Cyrus

I know you are concerned, but your anti-islamic sentiment is not helpful.

[pessimist]

@ Catherine, Cyrus

Thanks will go to that site. From what you both say, it sounds really bad.

Usually environmental problems are the last of peoples' concerns when there is poverty or conflict. It's been a very long haul just to get the west into real environmental strict measures so obviously it's not on many other country's political agendas.

This is seen all over the world, with China finally admitting it's got a lot of damage to deal with, and all the illegal forest destruction (indonesia, amazon) that is providing everyone with wooden patios or furniture that is not sustainable.

The list, as you are both saying is very long, and the damage is everywhere in the health of populations, and reckless greed.

Nuclear pollution is not spoken about because it's so sensitive to each nations' huge financial interests. And the difference is that it is very very long term. And also, it crosses borders either by air or water.

In fact, what is even more distressing, is that really many people don't care. Decision makers, aren't bothered with these 'details'.

[cyrus]

Danial,
Can you tell me which part of my statement was anti-Islam?
When the majority of women in Iran want freedom of hejab and equality for all, when Iran had full equality before the revolution 31 years ago, who gives a damn what Koran says, its about the people, not their religion

Even there is no hejab requirement in Koran and the only reason hejab has become a part of Moslem tradition is because Arabs in Saudi deserts where Mohammad came up w/ Islam, had the pre-Islamic tradition to wear hejab, more for skin protection than sexual, after Islam Mohammad encouraged women to do so to avoid getting raped by the wild desert living Arab men.

If Moslems follow any logics, there is no need for a 21st century Iranian woman to wear Hejab unless wants to pay respect to imported Arab culture

After a decade of living outside Iran, I haven't seen a single Iranian Moslem woman wearing hejab, because our women do not like hejab & hejab does not make a person a religious person either
As a matter of fact, most prostitutes in Iran are from the most religious and hejabed ones

I know my mother suffered that she has to dress like that after the revolution, my sister was raised being tortured everyday as kid to wear that uncomfortable school uniform & tight chocking scarf and I know tens of millions of women feel the same in Iran

[James the Hype]

Hello Danial and Cyrus,

One of the problems of a theocracy where religious practices are forced down one's throat is that traditional means of celebrating religion stop meaning anything. For instance, the hejab, while not mandatory, is ONE way that a woman can show modesty through dress. Once the hejab is forced, however, wearing one no longer means modesty; it means obedience. This is unfortunate, because if a woman wanted to use the hejab as a sign of modesty, she would have to find a different way of doing this.

I'm an American, and I am religious, so I understand and appreciate that secularism is the best form of a society for both those who are religious and those who are not. If one believes in the God of the Judaeo-Christian-Muslim tradition, the God of Abraham, then one has to realize that Allah, God, gave man freedom of choice rather than forcing man to love Him. Secularism, therefor, allows men and women to exercise this choice freely.

I believe that, in the 21st century, people from every background, Christian, Jew, and Muslim, religious or not, can live together in peace without imposing their will on each other. I think it is unfortunate that Iraq, for example, seems to have shed its diversity and adopted sectarianism. This is not the direction that the world is moving in, and there is little positive to be gained by such a path. However, the Green Movement shows signs that they understand how theocracy and uniformity at the expense of diversity and secularism has failed. It will continue to fail, as it is fundamentally flawed because it does not reflect the people of Iran, Iraq, the United States, or anywhere else in the world.

[pessimist]

The green colour is used for Islam but also for ecology. Maybe the Green movement could use this aspect a bit more to demand more green *clean* ness, in politics, less corruption, in society, less dirt and poverty, in environment, less pollution and safeguard of the animals and vegetation, in education, less outside political or religious influence, in religion, less extremist dogma, in foreign policy, less aggression.. etc, etc.