The Latest from Iran (28 April): Making a Date

2130 GMT: Controlling the Teachers. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty summarises the pressure by Iranian authorities on teachers ahead of Teachers Day on 2 May.

This includes the arrest of two senior members of Iran's teachers union, Ali Akbar Baghani, and spokesman Mohammad Beheshti Langarudi, warnings to activists in several cities, including Tehran and Tabriz, not to take part in any protests, and fines and arrests for demonstrating. It is reported that several blogs and websites on teachers' issues have been blocked.

NEW Iran Document: English Text of Mousavi-Karroubi Meeting (26 April)
NEW Iran: President Ahmadinejad’s Joke of the Day
Iran’s Detained Journalists: EA’s (Vicarious) Confrontation with Foreign Minister Mottaki
Latest Iran Video: Mousavi & Karroubi Meet (26 April)

Earlier this week, the Coordinating Council of the Teachers Trade Unions called for a hunger strike on Teachers' Week (May 2-8) to protest prison sentences and death penalties handed out to teachers. Four teachers are reported to have been jailed in recent months and at least one, Kurdish teacher Farzad Kamangar, is facing the death penalty.


2045 GMT: Corruption Watch. Conservative member of Parliament Ali Motahari has criticized Iran's judiciary for lack of independence and nepotism.

Motahari told the Iranian Students News Agency that, in corruption cases involving relatives of top officials, prosecutors are seeking permission from the officials themselves before even investigating.

1600 GMT: Oil Squeeze Posturing. In an interview with Khabar Online, Ali Vakili, the managing director of Iran's Pars Oil and Gas Company, has warned Royal Dutch Shell and Spain's Repsol that they must declare if they plan to pursue a project, agreed in 2007, to develop liquefied natural gas in the South Pars field.

Shell recently announced that it is suspending all involvement in the project.

Vakili insisted that Iran can develop the South Pars, having overcome financial obstacles, and that it has the necessary technology.

1530 GMT: We've posted a special separate entry: the English translation of Monday's discussion between Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi.

1245 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. The lawyer for reformist politician Mostafa Tajzadeh has said that Tajzadeh has not yet reported to prison to begin his six-year sentence: “My client was admitted into a hospital in Tehran because of his disc problem (in his back)....During the past 2 days, my client was expected to introduce himself to the prison to continue serving his prison term; however, this has not happened....As soon as his physical condition improves, he will present himself to the authorities.”

0845 GMT: Corruption Watch. Mardomsalari newspaper frets that corruption has become a political issue and warns that "justice" should end it once and for all before foreign ennemies can take advantage of the situation.

0830 GMT: The Subsidy Battle. While there has been a general between Parliament and President over the subsidy cut and spending plans, the fight over implementation continues.

Maintaining that Iran's political, social and economic situation cannot cope with a shock, MP Ahmad Tavakoli has written Ahmadinejad with three propositions: 1) no across-the-board rise in prices, 2) provision of reliable data on familiy's income, and 3) gradual implementation of the plan. ()

0810 GMT: Culture Wars. Rah-e-Sabz claims there will be increased pressure from the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance upon people, especially women, to "satisfy the Supreme Leader" on the eve of the election's anniversary on 12 June. The website alleges there are "serious plans" for reeducation from kindergarten to university.

As if to prove the point, Kayhan proclaims that "bad hijab" has to be fought everywhere, from schools to offices.

0755 GMT: Does the Regime Need Legitimacy? An interesting debate, as reported by Rah-e-Sabz: the Supreme Leader's deputy to the Revolutionary Guard denies it is necessary to rely on people's votes, while Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi insists that the Government does precisely that.

0750 GMT: (More) Persistence. Reformist MP Rasul Montajabnia declares that hardliners cannot become an alternative to reformers and replace them: "We are alive."

0745 GMT: Continuing the Labour Theme. Rah-e-Sabz, anticipating May Day, reports that workers' incomes have suffered in the Iranian New Year. There are widespread dismissals and threats to dismiss those who "do not work enough". Meanwhile, protests have increased over the lack of accepted unions and organisations.

Reformist member of Parliament Hajsheikh Alikhani has insisted the government "doesn't give a damn about workers' problems".

0740 GMT: Awards. Hassan Karimzadeh from the banned newspaper Etemade Melli has won 1st prize in the World Press Cartoon competition.

Mahdi Razavi has been given an award by an Italian panel for his No War photograph.

0735 GMT: Labour Watch. Iran Labor Report offers a full summary of preparation for a "Labor Week" around May Day: "The experience of last May Day’s brutal clampdown...has prompted most independent labor organizations to call off May Day gatherings. Instead, they are encouraging workers to celebrate the occasion in small numbers at factories and shop-floors.

0730 GMT: Mahmoud Visits New York? A blog on the Foreign Policy website claims, from "senior UN officials and diplomats", that President Ahmadinejad has requested a visa to attend a high-level conference next week at United Nations headquarters to review progress on the 1970 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

0725 GMT: Not Worried (Really). The "hard-line" newspaper Kayhan has asserted that any Iranian using Haystack, the software developed by Austin Heap to allow access to the Internet while avoiding surveillance, will be tracked down by Iranian authorities. Kayhan claimed that the Green Movement is advising followers not to use the software.

0720 GMT: Persisting. The two major Iranian reformist organizations, Islamic Iran Participation Front and Mojahedin of Islamic Revolution, announced that they will continue their activities despite the recommendation of Parliament's Article 10 Commission for the dissolution of the parties. Both factions called for a public hearing in order to defend all their activities.

Leaders of the two organizations have written to the Commission maintaining that the dissolution lacks “legal justification.”

0420 GMT: Time will tell, but Tuesday appeared to be a day to mark in this lengthening crisis. The building series of statements from opposition figures, notably Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi, culminating in the emergence that, yes, the two men had met on Monday and, yes, they had called for a demonstration on 12 June, the anniversary of the election.

We'll wait a day or two for follow-up before attempting an analysis, but the obvious issue is whether --- after 2 1/2 months of relative passivity since the 22 Bahman (11 February) moment --- those challenging the regime can seize the initiative.

That follow-up has already begun. Mehdi Karroubi, in comments posted on Mihan News, has set out and defended his political approach, working with a cross-section of opposition groups: "I have talked to a lot of leftists. They did not become Muslim, and I didn't become a Communist." The message is not only for the regime, but for the Green Movement: secular and religious can co-exist in the demand for justice and rights in the Islamic Republic.

The Karroubi-Mousavi accompanies other signs of a renewed challenge to the Government. A Street Journalist has published an English translation of the joint resolution, with 15 demands, issued by a coalition of Iranian labour groups.

Elsewhere, reformist MP Jamshid Ansari has declared that, contrary to its claims, Parliament has not initiated an investigation into the attack on the dormitories of Tehran University on the night of 14/15 June.

In a debate with fellow MP Gholamreza Mesbahi Moghaddam at Tehran University, Ansari said, “You should not expect any report from the Parliament regarding this matter because no committee has been assigned to this task, neither by the Speaker nor by the Parliament.”

The raids by security forces killed several people and caused extensive damage, two days after the elections and hours before the mass march on 15 June.

Kyrgyzstan Uprising: Strange Days in Jalal-Abad (Pannier)

Although the drama in Kyrgyzstan has receded, we are keeping an eye on developments, as the provisional government tries to establish its authority and deal with the ousted President Kurmanbek Bakiyev. Meanwhile, Bruce Pannier reports for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty:

These are strange days in Jalal-Abad. A branch of the Silk Road passed through this southern Kyrgyz city and the area has hosted travelers for thousands of years, and there is a lot of local pride.

But Jalal-Abad and its surrounding region have received much unwelcome attention since a native son -- President Kurmanbek Bakiev -- returned and made the city his base in an attempt to cling to power.

Kyrgyzstan: An Eyewitness Account of the Uprising (Judah)
Kyrgyzstan Analysis: What Brought On the Colourless Revolution? (Madlena)

The first thing anyone familiar with Jalal-Abad notices is that there are fewer people than usual on the streets. Normally, it is difficult to weave through the crowds that fill the sidewalks in the city center, and even more so to navigate through the bustle of the bazaars downtown.


But everyone here knows what happened in the northern city of Talas and the capital, Bishkek, last week, when scores of people were killed in the unrest that eventually forced President Bakiev to seek refuge in his home region. And no one wants to be outside if that sort of violence breaks out here.

On the surface it appears that life goes on in Jalal-Abad. For the last few days, more and more places of business have opened their doors to customers and slowly more people are venturing out of their homes to buy the basic necessities.

But the presence of Bakiev, who still claims to be the legitimate president, hangs over the city and is a very sensitive subject for conversation. That is because it is unclear who is on whose side.

This uncertainty was evident at a rally Bakiev held in the city center today. There were more than 4,000 people hanging around the scene, but Bakiev only drew applause from about one-third of that crowd when he made his appearance. And almost everyone was looking around to see who was cheering and who remained silent, as if to gauge which side they should be on.

No One Taking Sides - In Public

Not surprisingly, few in Jalal-Abad want to make any comment about that topic. Kyrgyzstan has an active political culture, but when asked on the street if they were pro-Bakiev or “pro-opposition,” everyone suddenly turns politically apathetic.

One young woman on one of the city’s main streets said she didn't follow politics. A young man standing next to her said the political feud didn't concern him, his family, or his friends.

Down the road in one of the bazaars, the responses were similar. A man selling jeans and shoes said he hoped the whole problem would just go away and he would be left in peace. Similar comments were made by shopkeepers, waiters, firemen, and construction workers. Hardly anyone wanted their opinions to be recorded, even though their comments were innocuous.

The acting provincial and city officials are all recent appointees of the interim self-declared government in Bishkek, so it is clear which side those officials support, at least publicly.

More curious is the position of the local police, who are returning to duty every day in growing numbers. Police cordoned off a route to allow Bakiev to get to today’s meeting in the city center. Traffic police also helped regulate the flow of vehicles to and from the April 12 rally near Bakiev’s home in the nearby village of Teyit.

The acting mayor of Jalal-Abad, Mederbek Usenov, told RFE/RL on April 12: “Kyrgyzstan is a democratic country. They have a right to hold a meeting.”

The police would not speak about whom they supported. At an intersection just off the city center where the rally was held today, police pushed away a microphone, shaking their heads to show they had no response on whether they were for Bakiev or the new government.

One senior policeman did comment briefly but again avoided speaking about the current stand-off for power. “I am simply working as usual, doing my job,” he said.

Pressed on the point about whether allowing Bakiev and his convoy to reach the city center wasn’t itself a sign of support for the ousted president, the policeman shot back: “Get out of here!”

It's fair to say most everyone in Jalal-Abad does in fact support one side or the other. But these are strange days here, and everyone seems to prefer that the people around not know if they are pro-Bakiev or pro-interim government. It is not Bakiev or the new government they are afraid of, but their fellow Jalal-Abad residents.

Iran: A Note About the Voice of America, NIAC, and the "Journalism" of The Washington Times

The Washington Times, never a shy paper in its assertions and opinions, leaves no doubts about its position in an editorial, "Voice of the Mullahs". With the supporting headline, "Public Diplomacy Takes A Pro-Islamist Tilt", the opinion pieces begins, "The Voice of America is becoming the Voice of the Islamic Republic of Iran."

Inflammatory stuff, and the newspaper keeps pouring on the gasoline. After giving big space to a letter to President Obama from 70 legislators requesting that the White House "investigate reported mismanagement and bias at Voice of America's Persian News Network (VOA-PNN)", two cases are cited:

1. On March 29, VOA-PNN interviewed Hooshang Amir-Ahmadi, "an anti-sanctions activist called "Iran's pseudo U.S. lobbyist" by Iranian democracy groups. Mr. Amir-Ahmadi expressed the view that Iran's belligerent posture and nuclear program are the natural results of being surrounded by U.S. missiles and bombs; hence, progress can come only through the United States softening its policies toward Tehran.

2. On April 1, VOA gave airtime to Trita Parsi, head of the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), which has received millions of dollars in federal funds to promote democracy in Iran. Mr. Parsi expressed various odd positions, such as that Israel prefers to have hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in power in Tehran, that members of the Obama administration know sanctions won't work but pursue them only as a bargaining position, and - most strangely - that even if Iran succeeded in establishing a democracy, the United States would nevertheless keep sanctions in place. VOA gave Mr. Parsi preferential treatment by banning callers while he was on the air even though he appeared on a call-in show; those who later took issue with his views were quickly cut off.

Allegations that the US Government's media outlets appease or even support the enemy are far from new. The Voice of America was a prime target for Republican Congressmen, including Senator Joseph McCarthy, and even Radio Free Europe, which pressed for "liberation" in Eastern Europe, came under fire in the 1950s.

This time, however, the VOA is just the whipping boy for the bitter conflict between The Washington Times and NIAC. We noted last autumn that one of the newspaper's reporters had channelled the claims of Hassan Daioleslam, who is being sued by Parsi over a series of allegations, that NIAC was an unregistered lobbying firm. The implication soon follows that NIAC is not only lobbying but doing so on behalf of the current Iranian Government.

There is no need to take a position on those claims, which have split Iranian-American activists in the US, to note the shallowness of The Washington Times' latest assault. I haven't come across recordings of the two cases, but even the newspaper's attacking spin is shaky. One does not have to agree with "Iran's belligerent posture and nuclear program are the natural results of being surrounded by U.S. missiles and bombs" to note the argument that Washington's perceived hostility in measures such as the Nuclear Posture Review could prompt Tehran to respond with aggressive statements.

Parsi's supposed statement that "members of the Obama administration know sanctions won't work but pursue them only as a bargaining position" is a distortion of his position, set out in other articles, that US officials may not think that a toughened international sanctions regime will not be possible through the UN but take that line to achieve other goals. One might note, for example, EA's own analysis that the public posture on sanctions covers the "real" story, which is disinvestment by private firms who are quite likely to be in contact with Western Governments.

(Someone at the newspaper might want to reflect, if only for a few seconds, on the effectiveness of a broadcaster which provided only those views which were supportive of the official line of the US Government and/or those --- like The Washington Times --- who advocate military action against Iran.)

Irrespective of one's opinino on NIAC, even more important in this attack piece is The Washington Times' wilful attempt at collateral damage. This histrionic assault on the Voice of America does no good for a broadcaster which continues to provide news and analysis despite the serious restrictions on media by the Iranian regime. If the newspaper is really saying that the broadcasting services funded by the US Government are actually propaganda outlets for Tehran, then be honest and provide evidence for that sensational charge.

The Iranian Government claims VOA is part of America's "soft war" for "regime change"; The Washington Times claims VOA is not Washington's voice but that of Tehran.

Sometimes self-constructed paradoxes speak even more loudly than polemic posing as journalism.

(Full disclosure: I appeared in March on a panel at the US Senate organised by NIAC. I did so in a personal capacity, presenting my views on the internal situation in Iran and on US foreign policy towards Tehran. At no point did NIAC try to "steer" my comments.)

UPDATED Afghanistan: Karzai Back on the Attack

UPDATED 1645 GMT: Different accounts of the Karzai visit to Kandahar, made with US commander Stanley McChrystal. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty focuses on the message ahead of an expected US military offensive, with Karzai assured about 2,000 officials and tribal leaders that there will be no military operation there without their "cooperation and consultation". (Another warning shot to the Americans?)

The BBC chooses another angle with participants telling Karzai of their fear of being killed by militants and accusing the President of failing to deal with bribery and nepotism. Still, in a passage that extends the RFE/RL report, the BBC says "the message from this gathering of some 1,500 tribesmen is that they are not ready for any major military operation by Afghan and Nato led forces any time soon".

Afghanistan Follow-Up: Karzai Pulls Back from Confrontation with US?

Well, that "reconciliation" between Afghan President Hamid Karzai and the Obama Administration, marked by a phone call with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, lasted less than 24 hours, at least in public. The Wall Street Journal, from Afghan sources, claims another Karzai outburst:

President Hamid Karzai lashed out at his Western backers for the second time in three days on Saturday, accusing the U.S. of interfering in Afghan affairs and saying the Taliban insurgency would become a legitimate resistance movement if the meddling doesn't stop.

Mr. Karzai, whose government is propped up by billions of dollars in Western aid and nearly 100,000 American troops fighting the Taliban, made the comments during a private meeting with about 60 or 70 Afghan lawmakers.

At one point, Mr. Karzai suggested that he himself would be compelled to join the Taliban if the Parliament didn't back his controversial attempt to take control of the country's electoral watchdog from the United Nations, according to two of those who attended the meeting. The people included a close ally of the president.

Five of the lawmakers at the 2 1/2-hour meeting said Karzai criticised the Parliament for rejecting his attempt to take control of the country's Electoral Complaints Commission, saying that legislators were being used by Western officials who want to install a "puppet government" in Afghanistan.

One lawmaker claimed, "[Karzai] said that the only reason that the Taliban and other insurgent groups are fighting the Afghan government is that they see foreigners having the final say in everything." All five added that Karzai asserted the Taliban's "revolt will change" to a legitimate "resistance" if the US and its allies kept dictating how the Afghan Government was run.

Today Karzai has met local leaders in Kandahar, where his brother --- often criticised for corruption and contacts with insurgents --- is a key politician. News is eagerly awaited....