Text: Latest Karroubi Statement on Detainees, Rafsanjani, and Larijani (13 August)

The Latest from Iran (14 August): Just Another Prayer Day?
Is the Challenge to the Regime Alive? Karroubi, Rafsanjani, and Detainees

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

The saga of Mehdi Karroubi's letter to Hashemi Rafsanjani on detainees moves on. We've analysed the political significance, after Hashemi Rafsanjani pressed the Iranian judiciary for action, in a separate post. In an interview with Saham News, Karroubi spoke about the letter and Rafsanjani's response:

Those [critics of my letters and their allegations] who are making the atmosphere of society tense should instead try to provide a safe and calm space [for those who are abused] and try to put together an independent delegation of individuals to investigate these abuses. The delegation should be comprised of individuals whom the abused prisoners can trust so that they can relate to the delegation how they have been treated. The abused prisoners must be convinced that the members of this delegation will defend their rights to the end.

I had many reasons to write to Mr. Rafsanjani: First, he has close contact with the Supreme Leader and therefore I am sure that he will convey these problems to the Supreme Leader. Secondly, Mr. Rafsanjani himself has criticised the recent events and at the Friday prayers he stated his complaints and even asked for the freedom of the detainees. Thirdly, I have already written to the Minister of Information and the head of the judiciary and [their behavior] led me to write to [Rafsanjani], who is both the head of the Expediency Council and the Assembly of Experts. Fourthly, I have known Mr Rafsanjani since the conception and gestation of the Islamic Revolution and I have continuously befriended him and worked both before and after the revolution.

I have the right to write to him. this has nothing to do with our personal differences, because I believe, regardless of our personal differences, that Mr. Rafsanjani occupies an immensely respectable and special position and therefore he may be able to do something. These gentlemen who are currently defaming and verbally abusing Mr. Rafsanjani must have forgotten that he was one of the closest friends of Imam [Khomeini]....

When I sent the letter, due to the horrific scale [of abuse] I expected him [Rafsanjani] to respond promptly; however, it took more than 10 days for Mr. Rafsanjani to respond. I am not saying this to complain, I just assumed that either he was not willing to answer my letter or that due to the current situation in society and his own personal considerations he decided not to involve himself in this mess. Therefore as a response to the torrent of alarming news that I was continuously receiving, I decided to make this letter public.

Of course I later understood that Mr. Rafsanjani had referred the letter to Mr. Shahroudi and he had ordered him to act upon my letter. Mr. Rafsanjani has also asked the head prosecutor, Mr. Dorri-Najafabadi, to contact me and state that he will send me [Karroubi] individuals to obtain my opinions and reflect them to the relevant officials....

When this letter was published many different reactions occurred. Some people welcomed this letter, because they said that this letter provided an atmosphere for those who had issues to say [regarding this abuse] to come forward....Of course there were also those who were incensed by this letter, and these individuals tried to create an atmosphere so that no one would dare to refer to these atrocities. An atmosphere in which no one dares to protest if people's children are killed or prisoners are insulted or the families of the prisoners are threatened and beaten up in front of the prison, people's homes are invaded, and their possesions damaged. Why instead of making such a horrendously terrifying atmosphere that oppresively silences the people, do you do not create a space in which people who have complaints have the opportunity to air their greivances in a free and safe atmosphere?

Will it not have been better if some of you instead of using profanity would have studied the main issue? Instead you are claiming that my letter is a pack of lies without even forming a committee to investigate these allegations....I am ashamed to bring up such instances of abuse."

....Although I have a great deal of respect towards Mr. Larijani, the head of parliament...and towards Mr. Boroujerdi, the head of the National Security Commission of Parliament, I must point out to these gentlemen that before they deny and dismiss the contents of my letter in haste they should have at least contacted me or asked me to provide witnesses. Maybe I could have provided some information that you do not have. How can you state that what I have written is pure fabrication without even setting up an investigation?...In a situation where even the head of parliament...is willing to label an issue as a falsehood without even researching and investigating it, how can individuals dare bring up these issues?

....It is 20 years that I, an insignificant member of the establishment, have tried to defend the civic and legal rights of the people and I assert that these defamation tactics will not deflect me from the pathway that I believe in.

Iran: Is the Challenge to the Regime Alive? Pressure on the Supreme Leader

The Latest from Iran (14 August): Just Another Prayer Day?

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

The intrigues over the Karroubi-Rafsanjani initiative on detainee, in itself, is an uncertainty to dominate political discussion for days, but attention to it has hidden a second development that may be just as significant. We noted yesterday that an organisation representing hundreds of former members of Parliament had written Rafsanjani calling for ""reviews of the activities and performance of Iranian institutions, security and military forces, and the judicial system in recent events”.

That summary was crucially incomplete. The full translation is "to review of the activities and performance of all Iranian institutions that operate under the direct supervision of the Supreme Leader including security and military forces, and the judicial system during the recent events”.

There you have it. This would not just be an examination of the Iranian system but of Ayatollah Khamenei's actions and role within it. The letter bluntly states:

Contrary to other political systems that absolve their leadership from responsibility, in the Islamic Republic of Iran according to Law Number 107 of the Constitution the Supreme Leader is equal to any other citizen, and according to law the Supreme Leader must assume responsibility for his actions due to his Supreme Leadership.

According to Law Number 57, all three branches of government act under the Supreme Leader, we are therefore asking you as the head of the Assembly of Experts to ensure that the Assembly performs its duty as delineated by Law Number 111 and review of the activities and performance of all Iranian institutions that operate under the direct supervision of the supreme leader including security and military forces, and the judicial system during the recent events.

it is the invocation of "Law Number 111" that raises the red flag to Khamenei. The full text of the clause:

Whenever the Supreme Leader is unable to perform his duties or it is ascertained that he does not currently meet one of the conditions [for Leadership] in laws 5 and 109 (or it is demonstrated that he did not have these
conditions from the beginning) he can be set aside and it is the job of the Assembly of Experts to ascertain this issue.

OK, but these are just former members of Parliament, right? Well, consider a second development --- largely missed by the media --- that we noted last Wednesday and then highlighted in our first update yesterday. Ayatollah Ali Mohammad Dastgheib, a member of the Assembly of Experts, called for an emergency meeting to review the political and legal situation. His statement was a blunt challenge to the performance of Ayatollah Khamenei, the equivalent of asking "Law Number 111" to be implemented.

I concluded yesterday, "Dastgheib’s initiative...is more about keeping up pressure than raising the likelihood of a majority Assembly vote against the Iranian leadership." After the statement of the former MPs, however, an EA colleague asserts, "This is the greatest challenge to Khamenei ever."

I'm not ready to go that far yet. But as this crisis has already shown --- repeatedly --- ripples turn into waves.

Iran: Ayatollah Jannati's Challenge at Friday Prayers (Rafsanjani, We're Watching You)

The Latest from Iran (1 August): The Regime Gets Tough

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

Less than 24 hours after the "40th Day" memorial demonstrations, the regime offered its response through Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati's address at Friday prayers in Tehran. The message was far from subtle, but for some it may be surprising.

Right now, those supporting the Government do not see the protestors as the main threat. The challenge does not come from the leaders of that movement, such as Mir Hossein Mousavi, Mehdi Karoubi, or Mohammad Khatami. It is not even in the statements of senior clerics from Qom.

The man they fear is former President Hashemi Rafsanjani.

On reflection, this may always have been the case. A week after the election, in his address at Friday prayers, the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, gave nothing to the Green opposition. However, he devoted much attention to Rafsanjani, offering conciliatory words over the verbal fighting before the election (especially over "corruption") but concluding that he preferred the political views of President Ahmadinejad.

The difference yesterday was that Jannati did not extend any hand of compromise to Rafsanjani. Instead, he cast him as the shadow behind the post-election conflict, "an unrest four years in the making". That reference to the 2005 election, in which Ahmadinejad defeated Rafsanjani in the second round, could not have been clearer. (Even Press TV English is openly framing this as a showdown allegation against the former President.) Jannati charged, "After defeat was inflicted on a certain figure four years ago, those who could not stand a young man in power colluded against him. Since then, they have planned to avenge (their loss)."

The "young man" reference deserves special attention. As sharper analysts of Iran have noted, there is a wider battle here between politicians and clerics who emerged in the early years of the Revolution, including Rafsanjani and Mousavi, and a "new guard" including Ahmadinejad. In 2005 the Supreme Leader, despite having gained his position in 1989 in large part because of Rafsanjani's manoeuvring, backed the "young man" in what was widely seen as a political upset.

The shifting alliances --- Rafsanjani now finds himself on the same side as Ayatollah Montazeri, the clerical leader ousted in favour of Khamenei in 1989 --- do not replace the challenge on the streets. Jannati noted this yesterday when he warned opposition leaders, ""You were behind these unrests. You are responsible for the bloodshed… Now you go to their graves and offer prayers? Sooner or later, you will be punished for your unlawful acts."

However, since Rafsanjani chose to make his challenge public when he led prayers on 17 July, it is his specific threat that has galvanised supporters of the current regime. It is no coincidence that Jannati, the Secretary of the Guardian Council, is also one of the key figures behind the letter --- signed by 16 of the 86 members of the Assembly of Experts --- that tried to remove Rafsanjani as chairman of that body. And a contributing factor to his address was the reaction from other members of the Assembly, who sharply rebuked him and others for claiming a widespread mandate for the letter --- Jannati directly responded by claiming that while many members scattered around the country could not sign, they of course were fully supportive of the contents.

So the regime turns its eyes upon and points its fingers at Rafsanjani, waiting for his response. That still leaves intriguing questions, four days before the Presidential inauguration: if Rafsanjani is willing to compromise by promising no long-term challenge to the Supreme Leader and the system, will Jannati and his colleagues, including Khamenei, sacrifice Ahmadinejad? And, as the first trials of detainees begin today, with hundreds (how many hundreds?) languishing in prison, will the regime risk saying, "We were wrong", by giving in to the primary demand --- a demand not only of the Green opposition but of Rafsanjani and other political and clerical figures within the system --- to release and apologise to those who were taken off the streets and from their homes?