The Latest From Iran (3 February): Picking Up the Pace

2150 GMT: Pep Talks. It is not just Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi talking up 22 Bahman. Ayatollah Bayat-Zanjani has issued his second declaration in days, reiterating that "mohareb" (enemies of God) are those beating and injuring people bloodily, not peaceful protesters, and asserting that the military should not interfere in politics.

And Nasrullah Torabi, the prominent reformist member of Parliament, has reassured that 22 Bahman is a national holiday and people do not fear the warnings of hardliners.

2140 GMT: Rafsanjani's Children and the Regime. Rah-e-Sabz has an article considering the political and psychological battle around the threat of criminal charges against the children of Hashemi Rafsanjani.

2130 GMT: The Relay of Opposition. Radio Zamaneh has added details of Mehdi Karroubi's denunciation of the Government and call to march on 22 Bahman (see 1100 GMT). Karroubi has called on fellow clerics to “come to the aid of the people...reach[ing out to the people before all these atrocities [of the Government] are attributed to Islam, Shiites and the clergy" and declared that Iranians on 11 February will try to “stop their promising achievements and goals from falling into oblivion, and demand them with fortitude and an aversion of physical and verbal violence”.

Karroubi asserted, "From one side petty flatterers and from another side worthless extremists have closed the arena onto our scholars, thinkers and learned.” In contrast, the common ground for groups in the Green Movement is their demand for “open elections, freedom of the press, unconditional release of all political prisoners, reform of governance and the judiciary as well as respecting citizens’ rights.”

Significantly, given that the "Western" media was distracted earlier today by the Iran rocket launch (see 1325 GMT), CNN's website is now featuring the Karroubi statement.

2125 GMT: Blowing Smoke or Playing for Time? Tehran Prosecutor General Abbas Jafari Doulatabadi has said that death sentences for nine political prisoners have not been "finalised". Doulatabadi's statement adds to the confusion surrounding conflicting statements between the head of Iran's judiciary, Sadegh Larijani, who said he would not be pushed into speeding up executions, and his deputy, Ebrahim Raeesi, who gave assurances that the nine would be killed.

2035 GMT: And Another "Monarchist" Death Sentence. Mehdi Eslamian has been condemned to execution on charges of involvement in a bombing in Shiraz and ties to a monarchist group.

NEW Iran Special: Full Text of Mousavi Answers for 22 Bahman (2 February)
NEW Iran Snap Analysis: “Game-Changers” from Mousavi and Ahmadinejad
Iran Document: The Rallying Call of Mousavi’s 14 Points (2 February)
Iran Letter: Journalist Emadeddin Baghi in Prison
Iran Document: Khatami Statement on Rights and Protests (1 February)
The Latest from Iran (2 February): A Quiet Start to An Unquiet Day

2025 GMT: Another Arrest. Kaveh Ghasemi Kermanshahi, a leading human rights activist, member of the Central Council of the Human Rights Organization of Kurdistan, and journalist, has been detained.

2015 GMT: Let Me Tell You About Human Rights. Back from a break to find that the head of Iran's judiciary, Sadegh Larijani, is setting the world straight about violations of human rights (when they do it, it's a transgression against humanity; when we do it, it's the rule of law):

Larijani on Wednesday criticized advocates of human rights for mixing up the boundaries of law and order with human rights....

Prisons such as Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib along with invasion of Gaza are good examples of human rights violations, he said adding that all should do their best to reveal the anti-human rights nature of such brutal measures.

“We should spare no effort to present theoretical concepts of the Islamic human rights consistent with religious teachings,” he said.

1735 GMT: Well, That's a Relief. General David Petraeus, the head of US Central Command, has apparently declared that the US will not support a military operation against Iran with this "You Think?" assessment:

It's possible (a military strike) could be used to play to nationalist tendencies. There is certainly a history, in other countries, of fairly autocratic regimes almost creating incidents that inflame nationalist sentiment. So that could be among the many different, second, third, or even fourth order effects (of a strike).

1715 GMT: Teaser of the Day. So Ayande News, the website close to Hashemi Rafsanjani --- the same Rafsanjani whose family has been threatened with trials and jail sentences by Government officials --- runs a story based on a source who says that some want to blame the Revolutionary Guard for arrests. However, the source continues, the Guard aren't behind arrests, "certain Government officials" are.

So at whom is Ayande pointing? President Ahmadinejad? Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi? Mojtaba Khamenei, the son of the Supreme Leader?

Just asking....

1700 GMT: Law and Order Moment of the Day. Peyke Iran reports that amongst the charges against the two women in court today is this threat to national security: wearing "I am Neda" wristbands.

1415 GMT: The Ashura Trial. The Human Rights Activists News Agency has published an account in Persian of today's hearing of 16 defendants.

1400 GMT: Ahmadinejad Takes the Lead? A positive reaction from Iranian state media --- Press TV --- to the President's initiative in reviving "third-party enrichment" outside the country for Iran's uranium:

Russia and Britain said Wednesday that they would welcome Iran's readiness to accept a proposal aimed at ending the standoff over its nuclear program as a "positive sign."

"If Iran is ready to come back to the original agreement we can only welcome it," Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told reporters at a Wednesday news conference.

The UK's Foreign Office said in a statement that "if Iran is willing to take up the IAEA's proposed offer, it would be a positive sign of their willingness to engage with the international community on nuclear issues."

1325 GMT: Mediawatch --- Rockets and Trials. As expected, the "Western" media has rushed after the Iranian "rocket launch", dropping entirely the Mousavi story and so far not even noticing the regime's PR effort with the Ashura trial.

There is one notable exception on the trial front: Reuters publishes information from the Fars News account. That leads to a bit of interesting interpretation ("Student Denies Charges", referring to one of the five accused as "enemy of God"/"mohareb") and information (one defendant is from Manchester in the UK and has British nationality).

1300 GMT: Ahmadinejad's Nuke Move. A short but important update from Associated Press:

Iran's foreign minister says Tehran's plan to send its uranium abroad for further enrichment as requested by the U.N. is aimed at building confidence in the country's nuclear program.

Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki says swapping low-enriched uranium with uranium enriched by 20 percent is "a formula which could build confidence." He spoke Wednesday in Ankara.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu says there is room for a diplomatic solution over neighboring Iran's nuclear program.

Mottaki says, "Any threat to the security of Iran amounts to a threat to the security of Turkey."

1. This is the "external" complement to the "internal" (though unacknowledged) reasons for President Ahmadinejad's declaration last night.

2. To follow the nuclear story, keep an eye on Turkey. Ankara is pursuing its regional "strategy in depth", as put forward as Davutoglu, and the moves with Tehran bring not only bilateral advantages but also an enhanced presence in the Middle East and, as a bonus, brownie points with Washington.

3. Now, watch for the reaction within Iran's regime. Will the conservative critics accept the Turkey-Iran manoeuvre or will it be condemned as a giveaway to "the West"?

1210 GMT: Headline of Day. The Independent of London summarises the media's current focus on Tehran: "Iran Fires Mouse,Turtle and Worms into Space".

1110 GMT: On the Economic Front. The Institute for War and Peace Reporting has posted a useful overview by "Mitra Farnik" (the pseudonym of an Iranian writer) of President Ahmadinejad's economic difficulties.

1100 GMT: The Next Leg of the Race. This is almost becoming an opposition relay: Mehdi Karroubi last week, Mohammad Khatami on Monday, Mir Hossein Mousavi yesterday, and now Mehdi Karroubi today. The Facebook page supporting Mousavi has the full text and summarises:

Mehdi Karroubi,...issuing a statement for the 31st anniversary of the Islamic Revolution, invited everyone to participate in the Feb 11th (22 Bahman) rallies peacefully and strongly and emphasised, "The constitution is an order that people give to the rulers, and if a ruler does not obey that, then he/she is oppressor and should be removed from power."

1050 GMT: Swallowing Nuclear Poison? An interesting analysis by Jahanshah Javid in Iranian.com of the motives and likely political repercussions of the Ahmadinejad statement on Iran's nuclear negotiations:

Now the Islamic Republic has again swallowed poison (a reference to the famous 1988 quote of Ayatollah Khomeini when he accepted a cease-fire in the Iran-Iraq War) in the face of enormous international pressure and domestic upheaval. Suddenly it is bowing to the U.N. after years of insisting that it would never ever ever compromise over its enrichment program.

1040 GMT: On the Economic Front. The head of Bank Melli, Mahmoud Reza Khavari, declares that it is not bankrupt.

1030 GMT: Ahmadinejad, His Allies, and Government Money. Radio Farda reports that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's draft budget increases funds for insitutes close to the President by 143 percent.

One beneficiary is the Ayandeh Rooshan Organization, led by Ahmadinejad's brother-in-law, chief of staff, and close ally Esfandiar Rahim-Mashai. It will receive about $120 million if the budget is passed.

Increased funding will also go to the Imam Khomeini think tank, run by Ahmadinejad's "spiritual advisor" Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi.

1020 GMT: The Fight Within the Establishment. While the Mousavi statement holds the political spotlight, the "conservative" challenge to President Ahmadinejad continues.

A latest attack comes from Deputy Speaker of Parliament, Mohammad Reza Bahonar, in the pro-Larijani Khabar Online. While firmly defending the Supreme Leader, calling on opposition leaders to be accountable, and blaming the US for stirring unrest, Bahonar criticised the Government's response to protests:

Some forces fulfilled their responsibility on time, but some took hasty measures and others delayed. The sedition imposed heavy expenses on us which will be simply realized in future.

Many officials have neglected daily responsibilities and are engaged in a game designed by the enemy. If we are to put out the fire of sedition in the country, we should not add fuel to it.

Bahonar also attacked on the economic front, "We in the Parliament are still discussing the issue of budget bill. Perhaps the plans for the next year are not that much significant but outside the country the analyses are made that due to the chaos within the country, the government is so troubled that it cannot even complete a bill."

(It should also noted that Khabar Online has just featured a Monday speech by Davoud Ahmadinejad, brother of the President, attacking Presidential Chief of Staff Esfandiar Rahim-Mashai.)

0915 GMT: And For Our Next Showpiece. Today's latest hearing in the trial of 16 Ashura detainees is also being pushed by Iranian state media. The Islamic Republic News Agency is declaring the repentance of one of the defendants, who was misled by Hashemi Rafsanjani's Friday Prayer address in July (Regime to Hashemi: Take note and stay in your box) and by those seeking trouble on Ashura (27 December).

0850 GMT: Quick, Look Over There!

Can you pronounce "diversion"? This morning Iranian state media have been splashing rivers of ink over the launch of a satellite-boosting rocket, the Kavoshgar-3, and President Ahmadinejad is now speaking about it on national television.

No difficulty reading this move: this is the bid for legitimacy at home, trying to draw attention away from conflict and protest just over a week before 22 Bahman. Any power-posturing in the ongoing manoeuvres with the "West" over the nuclear programme and regional influence is secondary to this.

0845 GMT: We have just posted the English translation of Mir Hossein Mousavi's declaration, in an interview with Kalemeh, yesterday.

Forgive me for dropping journalistic objectivity. Wow. "Game-changer" indeed.

Any media outlet that gets diverted today, by Iran's posturing with the launch of a satellite-boosting rocket or even by President Ahmadinejad's statement on a nuclear deal, and misses the significance of Mousavi's statement needs to get its credentials checked.

0735 GMT: The Call to March. More than 80 Iranian civil rights activists have issued a statement denouncing the "naked violence" of the regime and calling for mass demonstrations on 22 Bahman:

We, the signatories to this statement, invite the wise and courageous people of Iran to demonstrate to the world their demands for justice and liberty with their peaceful and calm presence on the anniversary of the 1979 revolution, once again showing to the dictators that the right-seeking movement of enlightened Iranians will never be decapitated with the blade of violence and terror, and the execution of innocent Iranian youth and the injustice and violence of the coup agents will not leave the slightest impact on the national determination of Iranians to realize the dreams of democracy, human rights, and respect for the human dignity of all Iranian citizens, regardless of their gender, ideology and ethnicity.

0730 GMT: So much for a quiet day yesterday. Mir Hossein Mousavi's statement on Kalemeh emerged as a big boost for the opposition just over a week before 22 Bahman and the marches on the anniversary of the 1979 Revolution, and President Ahmadinejad had his own surprise last night with an apparent shift in Iran's position on its nuclear programme. We've got a special snap analysis.

Those important events, however, should not overshadow the steady patter of news as the regime sends out conflicting signals over its tough stance on protest. On the one hand, detainees are now being released each night to the crowd waiting and demonstrating in front of Evin Prison. On the other, there have been more arrests of activists, journalists, and key advisors. Norooz reported last night that Mohammad Davari, the editor-in-chief of Mehdi Karroubi's website Saham News, is still jailed after five months, ostensibly because he cannot post bail.

This morning, another act unfolds as the trial of 16 Ashura detainees, five of whom are charged with mohareb (war against God), resumes.

Best read? The Government is now caught up in some confusion over its approach to detentions, trials, and even executions --- witness the contradictory statements within 48 hours of Saeed Larijani, the head of Iran's judiciary, and his deputy, Ebrahim Raeesi --- which means that the harsh fist of We Will Arrest, We May Kill You is matched by the open hand of Maybe We Will Let You Have Bail. Overall, if there is a strategy before 22 Bahman, it appears to be letting "smaller fish" go while ensuring that those whom the regime sees as key organisers/mobilisers in the opposition are kept well out of sight.

Comments

[danial]

I think there will be more events of this nature in the coming days. I bet Ahmadinejad is going to surprise everyone with some untraditional statements.

Im certain they will not sit back for the 11-February event and hope everything goes well.

[Catherine]

RE GMT 10:30 - this article in FP, 'Iran's Bubble Boys', looks at the the men who make up Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's inner circle.

It concludes: "Despite the greatest political upheaval in Iran since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, popular demands for his resignation, and the great disdain in which even many conservatives hold him, Ahmadinejad has endured the storm by surrounding himself with these staunch loyalists. This might enable him to complete his presidential term, but by ousting anyone who does not agree with him, he has deepened the fragmentation within the government and left behind a trail of enemies at a time when he could use more than a small circle of loyalists to confront an opposition movement that grows more formidable by the day".
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/01/29/irans_bubble_boys?page=0,1

[Payam]

Hi Catherine,

I promise you AN will not complete his presidental term, since he ist not the elected President of Iran.

Furthermore the islamic republic will not stay any longer. Most Iranian are fed up with Relgion and Islam, they are looking for freedom and secularism.

I think people are not afraid any longer, and they will fight for their rights for human rights.

Before spring Iran will be freed!!!

[Catherine]

Dear Payam,
Please keep your promise!!!
On Twitter in the past 24 hours there have been lots of reports of strikes and workers' protests at different factories around Iran. The momentum is building.

[Megan]

Payam,

That is the best payam (news) you could have given us especially if you are sending this payam from inside Iran.

[Greeny]

Scott,

Re. 1050 GMT: Swallowing Nuclear Poison?

Let’s assume for now that this is a whole regime move and not just a move by the Ahmadinejad & co faction. If so, I am wondering why Khamenei is making a u-turn so soon after saying that IR will not compromise on the nuclear issue?

Back in the Sept/Oct 09 negotiations Jalili accepted that the uranium would be shipped out of Iran and was later, but the move was later (after a fairly long delay) slapped down by SL. Let’s not forget that as the nuclear negotiator Jallili is representing SL. Was it that at the time Jallili, under the influence of others (say Ahmadinejad) agreed with the uranium transfer? Or was it that he was doing this under orders from SL? At the time the existence of a new facility close to Qom was revealed (after its head had fled Iran, or as IR claims was abducted in Saudi Arabia). So it could have been that SL was worried about international pressure at the time and got Jallili to agree to the move to buy time. And then SL came out and disagreed with the move in order to look tough in front of the Iranian people. So he was buying time and also trying to look like a good strong leader inside Iran (to counter the protests and brutality of his security forces against the people). In that case he may have been hoping that the regime could finally get rid of all the opposition inside Iran and then deal with the US and others, giving them all they wanted and getting a promise of no more “regime change” (something which seems to worry SL a lot all the time).

But now not only they have not managed to control the protests but it also looks like the pressure on SL himself from inside the IR establishment (Mousavi, etc) is increasing. The question is why make such a move now? This move will leave SL (assuming he is behind it) open to charges of giving in to foreigners (Golestan and Torkamanchay treaties). This will be on top of all the charges that he has ordered the murder, rape, torture and beating of innocent people (which undermines his credentials to remain IR SL).

If instigated by SL, it is a very strange move at a not so good a time for him. It could be that he is planning more crackdowns and wants to keep the West happy with the uranium so they won’t criticize the upcoming bloodshed. The point here is that Obama’s outstretched hand of friendship is still flopping in the wind and there is no guarantee that further brutality will help him or the IR.

One explanation would be that SL is thinking of getting rid of Ahmadinejad and wants the uranium deal to go in Ahmadinejad and he be blamed for it. So that the international pressure would be reduced on IR re the nuclear issues and SL would be able to blame Ahmadinjad for it, and once the latter is gone, SL is home dry. The problem with this is that SL has publicly said that Ahmadinejad is even closer to him that Rafsanjani whom he has been friends with for 6 decades. So Ahmadinejad is so of tied to SL. Also the public mood in Iran is now blaming SL for everything. Ahmadinejad is seen as a puppet who says something stupid and/or rude once in a while. So getting rid of Ahmadinejad will probably not help SL in the long term (it might buy him sometime, but probably not save him long term).

Another possibility is that Ahmadineajd & co are seeing that SL is very weak now. And now with the nuclear move they are forcing SL to take a stance, knowing full well that whatever SL does will damage him. In that case these people maybe planning to either weaken SL to the point that he will become their puppet or to remove him. I guess their plan is that afterwards either to take full control of the country suppressing all protests (which will probably not work) or to try to strike a deal with the people. In that case they would have gotten rid of all the old IR establishment and would go to the people and say look we are saving you from the chaos and the mayhem. It doesn’t look like this will work either.

In any case, this looks like a very desperate move. As desperate as the burning of Khomeini photo on 16 Azar or the 9th Day cake-and-soft-drinks pro-government rally or the executions.

[Bahman]

IMO Ahmadinejad's new overture on swapping uranium is just another attempt to buy more time to put down the protests.

It accomplishes key goals: diverts focus from the Feb 11 protests and gives the west hope for a nuclear dela which they hope will encourage it not to react strongly to regime's threats and violenece against protesters.

After Feb 11 they can re-assess the situation. They have not lost anything. They have left so many loop holes in AN's statement that they can easily back off and blame the west.

[danial]

David Petraeus says no to military campaign.

Also, US is going to push for the sanctions even after the Iran govt. has changed its stance towards a nuclear fuel exchange (do let me know if I'm wrong).

I think the US does not want to recognize the Iran govt. as legitimate.

Isn't this what Bani-Sadr called "active-neutrality"?

[Bahman]

If Iran regime would set aside its aggressive foriegn policy positions toward Israel, US would actually like this regime to stay in control because stability would keep oil prices down and stable.

More importantly, I don't care what the US or others want. I care about Iranian people's rights which their existing regime has violently violated.

[danial]

The US has responded to Iran's statement regarding both the nuclear issue & and the prisoner swap offer

From Al-Jazeera:
http://english.aljazeera.net//news/middleeast/2010/02/201023153045305934.html

[The Latest From Iran (3 Februa]

[...] original here: The Latest From Iran (3 February): Picking Up the Pace | Enduring … Share and [...]

[Scott Lucas]

Danial,

My sense is that the US Gov't is actually very uncertain re next step --- there was already the problem of the White House v. Congress difference on form/scope of sanctions. Now pushing the UN route to sanctions, in face of Ahmadinejad's latest, would put the onus of breaking talks on the "West".

S.

[pessimist]

Ooooh, Catherine, those two articles (radio Farda) and yours, really give me the shivers. Do you think that our western leaders or rather their advisers really know about and realize the meaning of all that apocalyptic stuff, and all that money going to these loonies ? And why don't they ever mention it ? Everything might be so much clearer if they did ! (puzzled)

[pessimist]

Greeny,

do you really think that this burning of poster of Khomeini was done by regime ? I've never understood this. It seems like a sort of double bind game, each side exploits it.

Bahman,

agree, but I'm still paying my heating fuel of 2008 (rise not because of Iran.. but am still very angry). On the other hand, is there a real reason to think that unrest would affect world prices ?

[pessimist]

On the other subject of the day, that is going non stop on our medias, the space launch, I can't help feeling sick every time they show that poor monkey tied down in a box and covered in electrodes and stuff. (I think it's a monkey). Pity no one ever mentions the treatement of animals in Iran. (Not that our labs don't do the same.. however.. )

[Greeny]

pessimist,

re. “do you really think that this burning of poster of Khomeini was done by regime ?”

I don’t know who brunt the photo. I am sure there are many people who would have done that. But the fact that IRIB showed it god know how many times, and the fact that the regime tried (and failed badly) to organize rallies on the Friday after that week, shows to me that there was a “burning of Khomeini photo project” within the regime to use it as an excuse to crackdown harder on the opposition and to try to use people’s anger over the burning of the Khomeini photos to their own advantage. At the end no one really turned up for the rallies. Either people did want the regime to abuse their presence in the rallies or no one really care very much about Khoemini’s photos being burnt (I agree with the latter).

[BTW the way the footage was shown was strange in that it was taken by professional IRIB cameraman, but only focussed on the hands of teh people burning the photo and did not show their faces; why would the IRIB cameraman not try to help identify these "anti-revolutionaries"?]

In conclusions I do think it was a regime project (whether the burning itself was their work or not maybe debatable, but the project was theirs) and it failed like many other IR projects recently.

[Bahman]

Pessimist, regarding impact of unrest on oil prices.

Markets want stability to be able to predict oil prices in order to price their commodity puts and options. So the unrest per se does not affect oil prices but if they create "uncertainty" about production of oil in Iran or ability of tankers to pass thru Persian Gulf, it will raise prices.

Of course, I strongly believe that any short-term volatility will be well worth having a democratic regime in Iran.

AN represents a small branch of Shia thought with extreme views about the return of the Hidden Imam. Unfortunately that's the branch that has significantly consolidated its power since the election coup.

So the real question to me is whether that group is willing to step back from the gains that they have worked decades (or hundreds of years) to achieve or their belief in the immenent return of the Hidden Imam will drive them to go to any distance to prepare Imam's army.

[pessimist]

thanks Greeny, it clears up a few questions. I like your 'I agree with latter', that shows that maybe whoever did it, some (if not lots) actually don't care so don't really support the SL.

Bahman

thanks too for this info, and I would think that strikes as like at the time of the revolution, would effectively create a wave on the world daily stats, I don't know if this could ever be repeated, I hope not, but it's scary, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72eHkyz5BII

In your last paragraph, I'm not too sure, but are you saying that you hope that they will back down from their hundred year belief in this horrible idea that they can create an apocolypse to get (the return of) this imam at any pretext ?

But seriously, do you think that the western powers really understand this, is this a fundamental 'threat' through this basic belief of this group, that seems to be fighting to keep power ?

[Bahman]

Pessimist, I do hope that the coup branch hears the words of the majority of Shia leaders who: 1) do not believe that anyone can predict when the hidden imam will return and 2) do not believe that there is anything that any muslim can do to affect that the date of that return...those are two major differences between this sect and the majority.

I formed my opinion about what this group is truly after based on my personal knowledge of Shia Islam, reading many of this group's speeches and following their actions which all seem to support this hypothesis.

I'm sure there are others who disagree with me and I have no information on what other countries' leaders may believe.

BTW, this group's belief's are very similar to the beliefs of Christian evangelicals in the US who support the state of Israel not because of some humanatarian concerns for the jewish community, rather because it fits their version of apocolypse. So question for those of us outside of Ira is: what are we doing to push this group away from their powerful positions in the US.

[Rev. Magdalen]

I think the [1735 GMT] statement today by General Petraeus is huge. It may seem like a no-brainer but it reflects a monumental shift in US policy. Previously the US policy debate was about what to do about the current Iranian regime, and no consideration was given at all to the Green Movement, because the US intelligence estimate was that the Greens did not have a shot at success, so in the brutal realities of geopolitics, they simply were not figured into the equation. The question of how the people of Iran would feel about a US/Israeli strike on their nation's nuke facilities was simply not a factor to be considered.

Petraeus stating that the US now understands a strike would undermine the Iranian opposition means that the US now not only acknowledges there IS an Iranian opposition movement, but believes that it has a good chance of succeeding at fundamentally reforming the Iranian government.

Furthermore Petraeus' full statement indicates that he is aware that the Regime may try to foment hostility with the West as part of a bid to retain power, saying there is historical precedent of "autocratic regimes almost creating incidents," so we can rest assured that Obama is not going to take the bait. He's on to their game! Ahmadinejad can bluster all he wants, show off his missile prowess, but Obama's not falling for it. He's betting on Green!

This is really, really good news for Greens. The US will hold back the dogs of war and give them as much time as possible to achieve their goals.

[pessimist]

Bahman
Thanks for these details that in effect seem to be really important. You are saying that the other branches of these Shia beliefs, are therefore opponents to the minority group of believers that has the power (ahmaidnejad/ yadzi)

I'm sorry if that sounds too obvious to those who know, but really, many foreigners don't have a clue about these sorts of things.

In effect, you are saying that the 'majority' of the Shia leaders.. (names ?) have a more moderate interpretation of this Shia belief.

As for your comparison with various christian apocalyptic groups of course you are right, but ooooohhh, I get wary about boundaries concerning Israel. That's another subject.

this is

[Bahman]

Pessimist, exactly. Just like any other major religion, there are major differences among muslims and even within Shia and within Sunnis (think of it as branches of protestant church).

The whole concept of clerics getting involved in politics is a very new one to shia islam which has traditionally believed in focusing on self-improvement and staying away from politics.

Examples of high-level clerics who oppose AN's interpretation of the Hidden Imam include the recently passed spiritual leader of the Greens, Ayatollah Montazeri, Ayatollah Sanei, and even Ayatollah Sistani who is the top shia cleric in Iraq.

Just like any other idealogy, Shia have their reasonable and the extremists. Unfortunately we are seeing the extremists in power now. But our people are the most politically-aware people not only in the middle east but probably among all other non-democratic countries. So I have confidence that as long as foreign countries do not hurt the protesters' movement they will achieve their own flavor of democracy.

p.s., Israel's 60+ years of atrocities toward palestinians provide great fuel for middle east extremists, both Sunni and Shia...but I won't go there!!! ;)

[Submitto]

"Just like any other major religion, there are major differences among muslims and even within Shia and within Sunnis (think of it as branches of protestant church)."

Sure, but what you all have in common and what all muslims never fail to bond through is the in Islam inherent blatant Anti-Semitism. Oh and what a surprise to see a muslim being "critical" of the state of Israel!

"they will achieve their own flavor of democracy."

Like ice in the sunshine.

Or how about this: How about democracy in Iran for a change and then you can play the human rights missionary for the rest of the world?

[Catherine]

RE 2035 GMT: And Another “Monarchist” Death Sentence. Mehdi Eslamian has been condemned to execution on charges of involvement in a bombing in Shiraz and ties to a monarchist group.

This regime is so full of it. In late May 2008 while we were travelling in Iran, our guide/driver was listening to the news on the radio and said the government had just announced they had caught the people responsible for the bombing in Shiraz.
How many times have they caught these supposed perpetrators? Once in May 2008 (Mehdi Eslamian was arrested on 3 May 2008) and then again in April 2009 (one of the two men hanged was found guilty of onvolvement in that explosion). That, considering that on March 22nd, 2009, Eslamian’s 20 year old brother, Mohsen was hanged along with 2 other political prisoners, Ali-Asghar Poshtar and Roozbeh Yahya-Zadeh, in Shiraz - also accused of involvement in the same explosion at Hosseinieh Rahpooyan in Shiraz. This explosion seems to be the gift that keeps on giving...

[Catherine]

Pessimist,
RE your question: Do you think that our western leaders or rather their advisers really know about and realize the meaning of all that apocalyptic stuff, and all that money going to these loonies ? And why don’t they ever mention it ? Everything might be so much clearer if they did ! (puzzled)

I would expect the country analysts at the various Bureau's or Departments of Near Eastern or Middle Eastern Affairs at the State Department, the FCO and the foreign ministries of western countries are all aware of this, as well as the their political affairs officers at their Tehran embassies (exception of US).

But whether they take it seriously or not is probably the question. I wouldn't be surprised if the people at the US State department don't because the US has not only historically been full of religious fanatics, but was founded in part by them, so I don't think the fact that AN and his closest cohorts are religious nuts will raise any eyebrows. It's all the other issues they're concerned about: sponsoring Hezbollah and Hamas, the nuclear issue, Iran's influence on Iraq, etc. At least that's what I think - I don't know for sure. And I don't know if other western governments take this aspect of AN & Co seriously either.