The Latest from Iran (19 February): Finding the Real Stories

2100 GMT: Human Rights Front. The Iran Human Rights Documentation Center has issued a statement challenging Iran's presentation on Monday at the UN Human Rights Commission: "United Nations human rights experts must immediately investigate Iran’s prisons, including allegations of rape, torture, and the detention of people for peacefully exercising their rights to freedoms of expression and assembly."

NEW Iran & the “Non-Bomb”: The Real Story on Tehran’s Nuclear Programme
NEW Iran Book Update: No More Good Reads in Tehran
NEW Iran: Are The Banks Failing?
Iran Document: Today’s Mousavi-Karroubi Meeting (18 February)
Iran Analysis: The “Now What” Moment (Farhi)
Iran: Getting to the Point on Detentions & Human Rights (Sadr)
Iran: Another Rethink on Green Opposition (Ansari)
Latest on Iran (18 February): Watching on Many Fronts

1910 GMT: And A Prisoner Released. Javad Askarian, an aide to Mehdi Karroubi, was released yesterday after a week in detention.

According to Saham News The veteran of the Iran-Iraq war had been sent to Evin prison on 10 February after being summoned by the intelligence ministry for providing “some explanations.”


1905 GMT: Another Political Prisoner. Iranian authorities have sentenced student activist Morteza Samiari to six years in prison. Samiari, an executive member of Iran’s national student union, was arrested because he received an open and official invitation to meet with representatives of a European Parliamentary Committee in Tehran.

1900 GMT: Your Friday Prayer Summary. Hardman Ahmad Khatami taking charge in Tehran today, and he is ready to gloat. Apparently "rioters" did not even bother to show up on 22 Bahman, disappointing the international media (you know, the reporters who were bused directly from the press centre to Azadi Square and back, not stopping and not Passing Go on the way) who wanted to relay “disturbances and clashes” rather than reflect the “epic” support of people for the Islamic Republic.

1740 GMT: Moscow's Slapdown. It's news that Russia has demanded "clear explanations" from Tehran about its nuclear programme. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said:

We are very alarmed and we cannot accept this, that Iran is refusing to cooperate with the IAEA. For about 20 years, the Iranian leadership carried out its clandestine nuclear program without reporting it to the IAEA. I I do not understand why there was such secrecy.

But it's even more news that Iranian state media is highlighting the apparent division between Tehran and Moscow.

1600 GMT: BloggingHeads. As it's a slowish afternoon, I've been listening to this discussion between Steve Clemons of the New America Foundation and former George W. Bush speechwriter David Frum about Iran. These are two of the most prominent analytic voices in Washington.

Striking to hear, therefore, the issue of whether Iran should be treated with respect and dignity reduced to "this is a country whose top three exports are pistachios, carpets, and saffron...aside from oil and gas, so it doesn't have a lot of claim to respect". And troubling to ask, after all 36 minutes....

How much knowledge of events inside Iran emerges in this discussion?



1500 GMT: We Pause for Levity. OK, this may not be serious news coverage, but it's Friday afternoon and I am already smiling at the breathless declaration, "Iran's Navy on Friday took the delivery of the first indigenously designed and developed guided missile destroyer Jamaran in the presence of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei."

Then the photo comes in. I think only two words will suffice: Caption Competition:



1350 GMT: Political Prisoner Update. Radio Zamaneh summarises last night's releases: Omid Mehregan, author, translator, and journalist released after two weeks; Ardavan Tarakemeh, film student and cinema critic, on $30,000 bail, after more than three weeks; Orouj Ali-Mohammadi, former governor of Tabriz; Safoura Tofangchi (her two daughters and husband are still detained); Mohammad Dardkeshan, a political activist with ties to the late Grand Ayatollah Montazeri, after two months.

1315 GMT: The Supreme Leader Says "No Nukes". Ayatollah Khamenei on the draft IAEA report: "Iran will not get emotional in its response to these nonsensical statements, because we have often said that our religious tenets and beliefs consider these kinds of weapons of mass destruction to be symbols of genocide and are, therefore, forbidden and considered to be haram (religiously banned). This is why we do not believe in atomic bombs and weapons and do not seek them."

1245 GMT: Well, Here's a Nuclear Surprise. Not. Iran's envoy to the International Atomic Energy Agency, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, called the IAEA's draft report "baseless". He said the cited documents were "fabricated and thus do not have any validity".

1240 GMT: The Rise of Rahim-Mashai. Yet another role for President Ahmadinejad's Chief of Staff Esfandiar Rahim-Mashai (see 0815 GMT): he has been appointed the President's deputy with full authority for "Rahyan-e Nour", the caravan trips to the battlegrounds of Khuzestan in southwestern Iran.

1100 GMT: A new Green website, Mardomkhabar, has been launched.

1055 GMT: The authorities are still jittery about a show by the opposition. Tehran police chief Ahmad Reza Radan has warned that those arrested during the celebration of Chaharshanbe Souri ("Fire Festival") will not be freed until the end of Iran's New Year celebrations.

1045 GMT: Economy Watch. Khabar Online has recycled the attack of MP Mus al-Reza Servati on the President's budget --- the Parliament would question Ahmadinejad over "irregularities", but is prevented from doing so by political considerations --- by reprinting the interview in English.

Khabar is also featuring an article, "Experts are warning on a drop in the oil production of the country," even as Iran's Oil Ministry is seeking a 25 percent increase by 2015.

0938 GMT: Iran's Nuclear Spin. Press TV is portraying the International Atomic Energy Agency report as "two-sided", verifying "the non-diversion of declared nuclear material" but "call[ing] on Iran to further discuss and cooperate on alleged issues".

0930 GMT: Punishing the Cleric. Kalemeh claims that Molana Abdol-Hamid, the Sunni Friday Prayer leader in Zahedan in eastern Iran has been prevented from leaving the country.

In his Friday Prayer address last week Abdol-Hamid described the Islamic Republic as a system that gives equal freedom to both pro- and anti-Government groups and allows voices of opposition to be heard: “The people of Iran brought the Revolution to victory to achieve its goals and now they demand the reviewing and realization of those goals.”

0925 GMT: Political Prisoner Update. Reporters and Humanright Activists in Iran reports that Tehran Prosecutor General Abbas Jafar Dolatabadi has personally handed down a 16-count indictment to Bahareh Hedayat during an interrogation session at Evin Prison. Charges include spreading propaganda against the regime, taking part in post-election events, talking to foreign media organizations, insulting the Supreme Leader, insulting the President, and conspiring to act against national security.

0820 GMT: It is reported that the prominent German insurers "Münchner Rück" and "Allianz Versicherung" (the largest insurance firm in Europe) are pulling out of Iran because of the political situation.

0815 GMT: Another Office for Rahim-Mashai. President Ahmadinejad's Chief of Staff, Esfandiar Rahim-Mashai, may be widely disliked, but he continues to pile up the honours of office. The latest title is chief of pilgrimage and culture of Razavi Province, whose capital is the important religious city of Mashhad.

0810 GMT: Economy Watch. The leading reformist MP Nasrullah Torabi has criticised the flaws and the deceptive figures in the Ahmadinejad budget, claiming it is based on an estimate of 12-15% inflation rather than the true figure of 20-25% and that the development budget is only 20% of the total expenditure rather than the declared 35%.

0740 GMT: Friday is likely to be a Distraction Day. The "Western" media are likely to be possessed and obsessed by the nuclear story, running the Iran Imminent Threat headlines. They will do that even though the real story is that Tehran is nowhere close to nuclear weapons capability. How do we know? Well, because the Obama Administration said so on Thursday --- see our separate analysis as well as the draft of the International Atomic Energy report.

In Iran, the regime will maintain its post-22 Bahman strategy, declaring that all is now well while condemning foreign instigation of a supposedly marginal protest. Friday Prayers in Tehran will be one venue for the display.

We'll be looking elsewhere, however. The meeting between Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi (see separate document) was a big signal yesterday that the opposition is re-assessing and preparing for its next surge. Theirmessage from the two men was "Be Patient. We're Working on This"; we'll be looking for reactions.

And of course the "establishment" challenge to President Ahmadinejad continues to pick up momentum. Economy Watch today has a piece assessing the state of Iran's banking sector.

We also report this morning from the  Cultural Front: it appears that the Iranian Government is blocking the booklovers' social site Goodreads as a threat to the regime.

Comments

[Son of Socrates]

Hello everybody,
First of all, sorry for my inelegant formulations, spelling mistakes etc.
Secondly, sorry for the lengths of my post. I have already posted large parts of it on EA, so maybe some of you might have already read it.

Before starting, a short remark about „the way to the Bomb“.
Any nation that aspires to possess an independent, indigigenous nuclear capability must engage on three fronts:
(1.) It must master the nuclear cycle, which involves enriching uranium or plutonium to weapons-grade levels.
(2.) It must develop the appropriate means of delivery, e.g. ballistic missiles.
(3.) It must develop the necessary tools to weaponise the enriched uranium and plutonium.
We'll have to see what we know about Iran's aspirations on this three fields.

The fact that the intelligence assessments were wrong on Iraq, does not automatically make them wrong in the case of Iran. (Actually the American and British intelligence probably knew that they had no clear evidence, but were pressed to cook something up in the case of Iraq; the French and the German intelligence never claimed that Iraq had loads of WMD or hidden WMD production sites. Maybe you remember there was some „disagreement“ between France/Germany and USA/Britain which lead to the infamous renaming of French Fries to Freedom Fries in the US.) The French non-prolifeation expert Bruno Tertrais noted in his book Iran, la prochaine guerre (2007) that the Iraninan dossier is of a different order: it actually consists of “a set of certainties” that did not exist in the case of Iraq. As far as I can remember, he cites three reasons for this assertion:

– Iran's program is condicted in many facilities that can be observed in satellite imagery, while in the case of Iraq there was a presumption of – but no evidence of the existence or location of – clandestine installtions.
– Iran's program relies significantly on supplies that came from the A.Q. Khan nuclear-proliferation network that was dismantled in 2003. Khan's network has supplied the IAEA with a wealth of detail on its nuclear transfers to Iran, and this has provided a clear picture of what Iran is pursuing hrough the technology it acquired from Khan.
– The most worrying details of Iran's nuclear program have come from the periodic reports of the IAEA – the same IAEA that asserted in early 2003, at the risk of enraging Washington, that Iraq did not appear to have resumed its nuclear program after 1991. The IAEA is not known for the production of “sexed-up dossiers”.
– [Well actually, people with some insider information told me that some things, which aren't mentioned in the reports, because intelligence services were afraid of endangering the informants by making public what they have found out, are even more worrying; I put this in brackets, because it's not confirmed information.]

Ok, something we know from the IAEA about Iran's nuclear program, although Iran has tried to conceal its nuclear programme from the world and IAEA for eighteen years – in clear violation of the NPT to which it is a signatory – well, to put it not so mildly, Iran has lied like a trooper, thus arousing quite high suspicion.

Concerning (1.)
– Iran seeks to enrich uranium, although it has no nuclear power plants that require the nuclear fuel it is trying to produce.
– Iran's facility at Arak is bound to produce plutonium, which can be exlained, most plausibly by a desire to make weapons-grade fissile material (its declared goal was first to use enriched uranium to generate its nuclear power plants, later it was declared to be run for “medial purposes” – the whole nuclear program seems to be about “medial purposes” (-:)
– Iran is doing research on laser enrichment technology which is very expensive and actually makes only sense as part of a military nuclear program.

Concering (2.)
– Iran is working on an aerospace program. Lately shooting some worms and a rat into the orbit. The technology is the same for intercontinental missiles.
– In March the Ukrainian President Juschtschenko confirmed that the predecessor government sold twelve cruise missiles of the type x-55 to Iran. They have a range of 3000 km and are constructed to carry nuclear warheads.

Concerning (3.) (just some points (!) to note)
– Iran has the blueprint to build a nuclear weapon.
– Iran is said to be building an underground shaft which includes a 400-metre-deep tunnel and several control points to test explosives with military applications.
– Iran has conducted studies on high explosives and multiple detonators, which are suited for nuclear weapons.
– Iran has tried to build uranium metal hemispheres and has conducted tests on „a full-scale hemispherical, converging explosively driven shock system“.
– Iran has conducteed studies – documented by a video that the IAEA deemed credible – to install a non-conventional warhead on its ballistic missile, the Shahab-3.
– Iranian scientists have conducted studies on the progression of the shock wave caused by teh Trinity test – the prototype of a plutonium bomb later dropped on Nagasaki.
– It is highly probalby that Iran is working on a warhead design based on two point implosion
– All the above activities – especially those with clear military applications – have adminstrative interlinks.

I think that there are currently two groups arguing that the suspicion against Iran is unfounded – besides the IRI fan club of people like the Leveretts. The first group is the “there is no proof” faction. The second group thinks that it's all about war propaganda.
As regards the second faction. Well, in light of the fact that countries like Germany and France, which aren't really among the nations which have a feeling of inner bliss when thinking about waging a war, are as concerned about the Iranian nuclear program as the US, I can't see that the second group has good arguments on their side. Probably they are influenced by the political atmosphere of the US with its (un- or misinformed) ideological warmongers in Congress etc. In Continental Europe political discourse is not that belligerent. (that's in support of Rev. M points)
I think taking a close look at the findings of the IAEA shows that there is evidence for the thesis that Iran is running a military nuclear program. Of course, we will never stumble upon a sign in the Iranian desert saying: “Welcome to Iran's hidden nuclear programme. Please press the bomb sign for entrance.” It's not about having a clear proof for Iran's ambitions, but about the overall assessment of the clues we have. Of course, the big question is, how long it will/would take Teheran to gain the capability to produce it's first nuclear bomb. At the moment it's seem as if we still have some time.

As regards the question what the Islamic regime is up to.
That's the hard question (-: Some days ago, I talked about this issue with some members of Parliament and we all were scrathing our heads. Altough we don't have enough information about the inner power circle in control of the nuclear program, I think that the people in Washington and elsewhere who see another Holocaust on the horizon overact. Probably the priority of most decision makers in Iran is preserving the IRI and their sinecures. But there also seems to be a radical circle with a very aggressive antisemitic ideology whose rationality I wouldn't count on. I hope these people won't sit near to the “fire button” in case Iran should acquire nuclear weapons.
Besides the question what Iran would do, if its nuclear program can't be stopped, another open question is whether it is hell-bend on getting “the Bomb” or just wants to have the capability to build it within short time, i.e. wants the “bomb on the shelf”. Either way, its policy has a lot to do with Realpolitik and risk management. The people within the regime know that the possession of a nuclear arms capability would make the IRI unattackable and that it would strenghten it's strategic position in the Middle East and beyond. It's not about territorial expansion as in the 80th, but about expansion of influence. And, it's not only about he Middle East: With its missile program making progress Iran could soon be able to reach European capitals, thereby shifting the balance of power in its own favour.

As Scott has emphasized several times, what's problematic about Western concern about the Iranian nuclear program is (a) the fixation on it instead of human rights issues (as usual: stability and security count more than human rights and democracy) and (b) the exaggerations and hysteria in some parts of the media and political circles. I hope that the rational pundits will prevail against the ideologists.

[Samuel]

Barry,

You simply do not know what you are talking about when it comes to Iraq/Iran. The oil well incident was actually exaggerated by the Sunni minority in Iraq and its leaders, the same community still nostalgic for the days of Saddam when Sunnis ruled the country. The Shiite community ignored the oil well nonsense.

The Shiite parties in Iraq are very close to the IRI. Many of its leaders have spent long periods in Iran and ties go back a long, long time. To cite but one prominent example Naghdi the leader of the Basij was born and raised in Najaf, Iraq and was an officer in the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq. Today Moqtada Sadr, one of the Iraqi Shiite leaders whose power base is in Sadr city (there is a reason why it's named "Sadr City") and the South is continuing his religious studies in Qom, Iran.

You don't have to believe me just read read what Prof. Juan Cole, a prominent scholar, AND NO FRIEND OF THE IRI, wrote above. The key quote:

"Hizbullah was in part set up by the Islamic Mission Party, Da’wa, of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, and Da’wa supported Hamas in the recent Gaza War...Moreover, Baghdad has ceased helping contain Iran for the Sunni Arab world and the West, and is now a close ally of Tehran."

[Barry]

@Samuel

So I am taking it that you think that in Iraq - an unstable and very immature "Democracy" with significant Sunni and Kurdish minorities - these minorities will now and in the future simply accept some kind of major alliance between Iraq and Iran? - even forgetting that the Iraqi Shi'ites are Arab into the bargain.

Barry

[Samuel]

Barry,

So what if they are Arabs? Hizbullah and the great Hassan Nasrallah are Arab too.

The Sunnis won't like it but they are a small minority. The Kurds are primarily located in the North and they have and I believe will continue to have a defacto autonomous region. As long as they have that the Kurds will be happy. That leaves the Shiites who constitute about 60% of the population and growing, and the custodians of two of the holiest sites for Shiites, Karbala and Najaf.

I do not mean to imply that Iraq will be a puppet state of Iran. It will be a close alliance with many shared interests and the ocassional disagreement. Sort of like most marriages.

My own preference would be for Iraq to have its own Islamic Revolution but I am realistic enough to realize that it will probably not happen. Perhaps if the elder Sadr had lived he would have become the Iraqi Khomeini.

[Bahman]

Scott,

Just because Israel (with all its atrocities) wants to make sure that Iran doesn't get a nuclear weapon, it doesn't mean that we should be open-minded about Iran developing that capability.

The reason I want to make sure Iran does not develop nuclear weapons has nothing to do with the desires of Israel or the US. I'm against it because that's the worst case schenario I can think of for the Iranian people: either a regime that uses its nuclear deterrent to commit genocie against its own people or a regime whose fanatic leader may have a dream one night that the Mahdi orders him to launch the bomb at some body, any body.

I'm not willing to place Iranians under such a risk. So we must continue to pressure Iran to open up its nuclear facilities to random, immediate IAEA inspections. Since I believe in Iranian people's ability to overthrow this regime on their own (not quickly, but in a couple years), I'm also for giving the regime a non-aggression guarantee if that gets them to open up their nuclear program.

But even after a non-aggression guarantee they continue their delay games long-enough that the probability of them developing such knowledge exceeds 50%, then I don't see anything wrong with bombing its nuclear facilities. With sufficient advance warnings, civilains can make appropriate action to stay away fromthose sites which happen to be far from major population centers.

Does that just set them back 2-3 years? OK, what's wrong with that? What is the alternative?

That scenario is very different from a ground invasion of Iraq which I was and still am against.

[Don Cox]

I think the aims of the IRI can be understood if you look at a map showing the empire of Cyrus the Great.

The methods are explained by Machiavelli.

[Catherine]

@ Scott,
Does this this detailed analysis of the latest IAEA report and how the US media totally mischaracterise it for the purpose of scaremongering, accurately reflect what you meant when you wrote " It is a matter of making a judgement based on the available evidence. And that evidence, once you strip aside the media spin, is that Iran is years away from a military nuclear programme, if Tehran is pursuing that objective." on your post 8? If so, and even if not so ;-), maybe others should have a look.
"Analysis of the Feb 2010 IAEA report on Iran"
http://www.iranaffairs.com/iran_affairs/2010/02/analysis-of-the-feb-2010-iaea-report-on-iran.html

[Latest Mind Control Auctions]

[...] The Latest from Iran (19 February): Finding the Real Stories … [...]

[Megan]

Son of Socrates, Thank you for your analysis.

Some of us have been saying that Iran is working toward developing nuclear weapon and one way or another it will get there unless it is stopped.

I do not believe the IAEA recent declaration of concerns is because Amano, the new IAEA chief, all of sudden made a new discovery. Amano is looking at the same data and reports as Mohamed ElBaradei. The difference is that ElBaradei for whatever reason or reasons tried mediation approach that he himself knew it would fail. Why? Perhaps future will answer that question.

A Nuclear Islamic Republic is a serious problem for Iranians and the world community. The longer we allow this problem to fester the more limited and the more costly would be remedies for stopping it. I, therefore, do not believe we should rest easy that it will take some time for Islamic Republic to acquire capabilities for making nuclear warheads. The issue should be that a non-democratic government, a government that denies fundamental rights of its own people, a government that is blatantly engaged in terrorist activities outside of its borders must not even contemplate Uranium enrichment outside watchful eyes of International communities, Period and end of story.

We have wasted too much time. Those who dismiss Islamic Republic nuclear ambitions as warmongerings attempt by some or compare it with Iraq WMD fiasco do not really understand the nature of IR and the culture of people who runs the IR show.

I am not at all certain that sanctions will stop IR and I hope I am wrong. I also do not believe Green Democracy Movement will succeed with peaceful demonstrations and without help from Iran regular army or help from outside the country in dissolving the current regime and consequently solving the nuclear issue. I would like to be wrong on that. I see the more we wait the closer we will get to taking drastic and bloody measures to stop Islamic Republic and its nuclear ambitions. I hope I am very wrong on this one.

[fieryilmilm]

[color=green][size=24][/size][/color]