Iran: In Praise of Citizen Journalists

Yesterday a prominent Iran correspondent for an international news agency wrote, as an afterthought on a post about the "Iranian Cyber Army", "The authorities have become much more organised and effective in their policing of the web recently. Their own way of puncturing some of the hot air that surrounds the so-called 'Twitter revolution'."

Once again, a snipe at social media --- whether from a lack of information or context, an ill-considered reaction, or the jealousy of a "professional" journalist on guard against those he sees as pretenders --- put me in a foul mood. It's one thing for the Iranian regime to try to snuff out an opposition movement by cutting off its communications, another for a well-respected journalist to assist them by belittling those who are maintain a flow of information in spite of those restrictions and repressions.

But, as I have made this opinion clear, I hit the Delete key and moved on.

Fortunately, I later read Brian Stelter's article in The New York Times, "Honoring Citizen Journalists". Stelter picks up the story, noted on EA, of the George Polk Award given to the "anonymous" people who filmed and distributed the images of the death of Neda Agha Soltan.

It's a useful reminder that the issue is not a "Twitter revolution". It is how Twitter --- and Facebook and YouTube and websites --- are used that makes a difference. Without the people in Iran who dared to put out the video of Neda, without the media to make that possible, without those outside Iran who further disseminated the story, a 26-year-old woman may have become "just a death" in the record of events set down by a mainstream media who had effectively been blinded by the authorities in the weeks after the Presidential election.

And it's not just Neda. Hers is an important story but so are the hundreds, thousands of others that have unfolded in the last eight months. Not only each political manoeuvre but each political prisoner escapes attempted silencing, not only each Ahmadinejad or Khamenei announcement but also each wielding of baton, each slogan, each whisper or shout of fear and hope is heard because, in the words of Mir Hossein Mousavi, each one of us is "the media".

If that is hot air, long may it circulate.

Honoring Citizen Journalists
Brian Stelter, New York Times

Anonymity is a privilege in journalism extended to sources and sometimes even to award winners.

Last week, a George Polk Award was given for an image of the violent death of an Iranian woman during protests last year. The man who first uploaded the video is anonymous, as are the man who captured the footage on a camera phone and the doctor who sent the video clip by e-mail with the message “please let the world know.” The uploader learned only last week that he had played a role in one of the highest honors in journalism, by reading an article about it on the Internet.

The 37-second video of the death of the woman, Neda Agha-Soltan, became a symbol of the Iranian opposition movement after the country’s disputed presidential election in June. It was first uploaded to the Internet by a 36-year-old native of Iran who lives in the Netherlands. After hearing about the award last week, the man said he was proud that the video had “concentrated the world’s attention to Iran and the Iranians, to their protest and their ways for expressing.”

The panel that administers the George Polk Awards, based at Long Island University, said it wanted to acknowledge the role of ordinary citizens in disseminating images and news, especially in times of tumult when professional reporters face restrictions, as they do in Iran. The university said it had never bestowed an award on an anonymous work before.

“It became such an important news element in and of itself,” said John Darnton, the curator of the Polk awards and a former reporter and editor for The New York Times.

The award in a new category, videography, recognizes “the efforts of the people responsible for recording” the death of Ms. Agha-Soltan, who collapsed on the street on June 20, apparently the victim of a sniper.

A chain of people aided in getting the video to the world, illustrating how the Internet erodes many traditional borders. The doctor sent the video clip by e-mail to several acquaintances outside of Iran, hoping they would be able to bypass the country’s Internet filters by uploading it to Web sites like YouTube.

The first person to do so, according to a Web search last June, was the Iranian man in the Netherlands, who requested anonymity to protect friends and family in Iran. The uploader spoke via telephone and e-mail, and provided The New York Times a copy of the doctor’s original e-mail message. That message was sent to five other people, and two of them confirmed that they had also received it.

One of those recipients, a British woman who asked that her name not be published, said she shared the video on Facebook, and watched as friends on the social networking site reposted it. The common theme of the Facebook postings was, “It’s shocking but please watch,” she said.

Steve Grove, head of news and politics for YouTube, said the video of Ms. Agha-Soltan was “pretty instantly fragmented into hundreds of other re-uploads.”

A shorter video clip of Ms. Agha-Soltan’s death was recorded by a second person and later uploaded by a Canadian YouTube user, who in June asked not to be identified and who did not respond to a request for comment last week. Within hours, copies of the two videos were viewed by millions of people.

The man who posted the clip in the Netherlands said the doctor and the man with the camera phone were aware of the world’s reaction. They have not sent any video clips since June.

The uploader is active in the online community that supports the Iranian opposition movement, and 10 days ago, he posted a link on Facebook to a video showing someone in riot gear beating and choking a person who appeared to be a protester.

“This procedure needs time and we have time,” the man said about the opposition movement. “It is fire under the ash. It will flare up and this time is not far away, even if it is not so close.”

He added, “I wish for the outcome to be a regime where there is no violence, where there is freedom of expression and freedom after expression.”

Mr. Grove said hundreds of protest videos from Iran are posted to YouTube each month.

“There’s an element of documentation here — just documenting what takes place. But there’s also an element of communication,” he said. “These videos are almost like moving e-mails, from Iran to other countries.”

Richard Pérez-Peña contributed reporting.

Photos of the Decade: 2002

Kidnapped Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, February 2002

Photos of the Decade: 2001
Photos of the Decade: 2000

The Latest from Iran (22 February): Karroubi's Challenge

2115 GMT: We've posted video, originally shown on BBC Persian, of the attack on Tehran University halls of resident on 15 June, three days after the Presidential election.

2100 GMT: Sanctions Follow-up. Earlier today (1555 GMT) I got a bit wound up about an editorial in The Wall Street Journal pushing --- I thought dishonestly --- for sanctions. Matt Duss follows up by taking apart the editorial's claim "prominent Iranian dissidents [have] moved from adamant opposition to severe sanctions to hesitant acceptance of the idea".

NEW Latest Iran Video: The Attack on Tehran University Dormitories (15 June 2009)
NEW New Jersey to Iran (and Back Again): The Activism of Mehdi Saharkhiz
Iran Analysis: Re-alignment v. Crackdown — Which “Wins”?
Iran: A Tale of Cricket, Andre the Giant, and Protests
The Latest from Iran (21 February): Catching Up

2050 GMT: Back to "Dirt and Dust". Ruhollah Hosseinian, the head of Islamic Revolution party in the Iranian Parliament (Majlis) and a fervent supporter of President Ahmadinejad, has choice words for the opposition in an interview with Khabar Online: "The opponents received a firm response from the people....Before February 11, I have said that on its way, the raging flood of people on the anniversary of Islamic revolution victory will remove any dirt and dust."

""Dirt and dust" was Ahmadinejad's infamous description of his opponents in his "victory" speech the day after the 12 June Presidential election.


Hosseinian's claim of mass support for the regime? "When Karroubi wanted to join people, they began hitting him. When Mr. Khatami appeared, people followed his car and didn't let him to attend the demonstration. Mousavi was also forced to put something like a scarf on the head and go back to his home. So it's better for them not to taint their reputation anymore."

1940 GMT: And Khatami Chips In. Former President Mohammad Khatami has made his first statement after 22 Bahman, in comments to families of political prisoners:

Our Constitution stipulates that nobody is allowed to restrict political and social freedoms under pretext of establishing security. A major challenge is that one newspaper is muzzled overnight and many journalists lose their jobs. But worse is the existence of 'pseudo-press' enjoying full immunity to lie.

It is no honor for the government to imprison so many journalists. I warn that the regime will be on the receiving end of these painful behaviours

1930 GMT: A Special Karroubi Watch. Back from an academic break to find that the Los Angeles Times has posted a valuable summary of Mehdi Karroubi's statement (see 1450 GMT).

Karroubi's first challenge is a general one. Let the Iranian people assemble to see what they really think of the political situation, he proposes: "Authorize us to rally to show them the difference between majority and minority. We assure the authorities that no unconventional slogans will be chanted." That's a pointed response to the regime: if you really think you have a mandate on the basis of your 30 December and 11 February rallies, then you should have no fear of an opposition gathering. He declared:

Through state television and their state-run mouthpieces, hard-liners and violence-seekers are covering up their savagery during the 22 Bahman rally in order to exploit the massive turnout of people for their political ends. Military and security forces had transformed Tehran into a military barrack. State media did not carry even a single image of their military campaign, firing teargas and beating people. They wrongly imagine they can push ahead with their project of denying people their sovereign rights.

One tendency is to be afraid of people's right to hold gatherings and rallies. This tendency only tolerates the presence of its own supporters in official rallies and considers other people, even though a majority, as dust and dirt. The other tendency recognizes everyone as part of the Iranian nation, regardless of gender and religious, tribal or cultural affiliations.

Then the cleric focused on a specific test and demand, calling for a referendum on the powers of the Guardian Council.

The ruling establishment intends to describe the Feb 11 as a referendum for endorsement of its violent and anti-human policies. I propose a referendum to be held to lead the country out of crisis and spell an end to the sovereignty of the Guardian Council....

The Guardian Council has meddled with people's sovereignty under cover of arbitrary vetting process. The Council's interferences do not allow free and fair elections for people to choose an independent President, Assembly of Experts [the body that chooses the Supreme Leader], and Parliament."

1555 GMT: Regime Change Sleight-of-Hand. Normally there is no significance in publishing the US-based opinion pieces, calling for the toppling of the Iranian system while claiming to uphold the good of the Iranian people, but the artifice is so blatant in this Wall Street Journal offering from Reuel Gerecht and Mark Dubowitz, both of the euphemistically named Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, that it deserves reward. In the space of one paragraph from Green friend to the real agenda:

Now is the time for Mr. Obama to rally Americans and Europeans to the cause of Iranian democracy. If Mr. Khamenei can manage to crush the opposition, we will have lost an enormous opportunity to bring some normality and hope to the Middle East. Gasoline sanctions may well be too little too late to throttle the regime's nuclear aspirations. But we are fooling ourselves if we believe that what we've done so far will stop the Islamic Republic's quest for the bomb.

1450 GMT: Karroubi's Strategy? According to Gooya, Mehdi Karroubi has issued a statement to the Iranian people with two core demands: freedom of assembly and a referendum on the legitimacy of the Guardian Council.

1345 GMT: Why Are All the Security Heads Changing? Hmm....

Commander Ali Fazli, head of Seyed-ol-Shoahda Revolutionary Guards in Tehran, is stepping down. The announcement comes a week, Tehran's police chief, Azizollah Rajabzadeh, "retired" after six months at his post.

The Governor of Tehran, Morteza Tamaddon, praised Commander Fazli’s actions in the post-election events against “the seditious movement and the riots”. Which only raises the question....

So why is he departing now?

1210 GMT: Iran to IAEA Head "You Suck". Missed this when I noted Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman lashing the International Atomic Energy Agency (see 0910 GMT). Iran Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki had set the tone on Sunday: “[New IAEA head Yukio] Amano is new to the job and clearly has a long way to go before he can reach the experience held by [former head of the International Atomic Energy Agency] Mohammad El Baradei. The report was Amano's first and, like many other first reports, it was seriously flawed."

1205 GMT: On the Pose Goes. Looks like Ali Akbar Salehi, the head of Iran's nuclear authority, has gotten his media moment today. Press TV is featuring not only his declaration that construction of two more uranium enrichment plants will begin in March (see 0910 GMT) but also that up to 20 sites for 10 more plants have been located.

The New York Times, for one, spreads Salehi's fame farther, devoting a lengthy summary to the announcement.
1140 GMT: A Lack of Insurance. The Financial Times updates on a significant development in the Iranian economy: leading insurance firm Lloyds has said it will not insure refined oil shipments to Iran if the US Congress passes sanctions legislation. This follows the decision of two prominent German insurers/re-insurers to cease all business in Iran.

As non-Iranian firms will not take on the risk of business in Iran without appropriate cover, the recent moves are likely to constrict investment. Specially, Lloyds' decision may disrupt the flow of oil inside Iran, raising gasoline prices in Iran.

1045 GMT: Pose of the Day. From the BBC:

The Iranian transport minister [Hamid Behbahani] has given foreign airlines 15 days to change the name to Persian Gulf on their in flight monitors.

If they failed, they would be prevented from entering Iranian airspace, he warned. And if the offence was repeated, foreign airliners would be grounded and refused permission to leave Iran.

0910 GMT: Morning Poses. The head of Iran's nuclear authority, Ali Akbar Salehi, declares, "Inshallah (God willing), in the next Iranian year (starting in March) as ordered by the president (Mahmoud Ahmadinejad), we may start the construction of two new enrichment sites." And the Foreign Ministry's spokesman wags a finger at the "West", "To maintain its prestige, we expect the [International Atomic Energy] Agency to not allow certain countries to impose their will on the international community through political approaches."

"The IAEA should adopt a legal approach to the issue of Iran's peaceful nuclear activities," he added.

0720 GMT: Our German Bureau sends us a photo from the Berlin International Film Festival, the Berlinale:



0712 GMT: Economy Watch. A shot at the President over health care, with the deputy chairman of Iran’s Association of General Practitioners, Masoud Moslemi-Fard, criticising the lack of funds in the budget and declaring, “At least two million Iranians will be under the poverty line with the current health expenses.”

0710 GMT: We start today with a feature all the way from the eastern United States: "New Jersey to Iran (and Back Again): The Activism of Mehdi Saharkhiz".

0700 GMT: With no big set-piece occasion and the opposition re-assessing its tactics, we're settling in for a long stretch of steady, if largely undramatic, pressure on the Government and regime.

Even as other media, noticing Iran on showpiece occasions but then walking away if there is no quick resolution, declare an end to the post-election conflict, the signals of the medium-term challenge are there to be heard. This weekend, it was the meeting of Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi and the manoeuvres of Hashemi Rafsanjani and his allies. Rafsanjani played a political card with his speech, backed up by Mohsen Rezaei, at the Expediency Council declaring loyalty to the Supreme Leader but calling for changes in the Iranian system, and then he made a symbolic declaration with his visit to Mehdi Karroubi's son Ali.

And there was the steady thump-thump-thump of the beat against the Government over the Iranian economy, complemented by the political challenge to President Ahmadinejad from "conservative" opposition.

So we're grabbing a cup of tea and taking up a position on the sofa. Nothing dramatic here; just the day-to-day, gradual shifting of Iran's political landscape.

Middle East Inside Line: EU on Dubai Killing, Netanyahu on Iran, Palestine State by 2012?

EU on Dubia Assassination: On Monday, the European Union is expected to issue a statement which will include three key elements: the EU's condemnation of the use of European passports by members of the assassination team, an expression of support for the UAE government and investigators in Dubai, and a commitment to investigate the passport forgeries and theft identities as quickly as possible.

Senior officials from Germany, France, Britain, Ireland, and the EU reportedly met Sunday to agree the language of the statement. Ireland is taking the hardest line among all EU members by demanding that the statement explicitly refer to Israel. However, according to a senior European diplomatic source, the statement will not directly cite Israel, nor is it expected to link Israel with the assassination or the forging of passports.

Meanwhile, a senior EU diplomat said on Sunday that Israel's suspected role in the slaying of a Hamas militant in Dubai and the killers' alleged use of forged EU passports will harm Israel's relations with the European bloc.

Israel Pressure for Sanctions on Iran: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called on Monday for an immediate embargo on Iran's energy sector, even without UN Security Council approval:

If the world "is serious about stopping Iran, then what it needs to do is not watered-down sanctions, moderate sanctions ... but effective, biting sanctions that curtail the import and export of oil into Iran.

This is what is required now. It may not do the job, but nothing else will, and at least we will have known that it was tried. And if this cannot pass in the Security Council, then it should be done outside the Security Council, but immediately.

Palestinian Protest over West Bank Lands: Following the government's decision to include some West Bank lands on its list of protected Jewish holy sites, some 100 Palestinian protesters marched to the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron on Monday and clashed with Israel Defense Forces soldiers.

Fatah and Israel on Palestinian State by 2012: After the Franco-Spanish initiative to declare a Palestinian state within two years (which is, for Palestinian Authority leader Salam Fayyad, the time needed for the development of state institutions, economic reforms, and training of Palestinian security forces that would bring law and order to the West Bank), Nabil Sha'ath of Fatah's Central Committee told Ma'an news agency:

We welcome these European declarations, especially those of France, which we consider to have adopted a new attitude amidst the current political stalemate.

The result of Israel's stubbornness and ongoing settlement constriction, confiscation of Palestinian land, the Judiazation of Jerusalem, and the daily oppressions and detentions against the Palestinian people.

However, Israel's response was clear:

An imposed solution will not achieve the goals.

If the European Union will determine the results of the negotiations in advance and promises the Palestinians recognition of a state, they will have no motivation to resume negotiations.

France-Jordan Agreement on Uranium: On Sunday, French Prime Minister Francois Fillon said his country will help Jordan that has close ties with Washington and Moscow concerning its nuclear energy programme realize its nuclear ambitions with the signing of an agreement Sunday to mine its uranium reserves.

"American Takfiris": The US Proponents of Torture (and Why It Matters)

Adam Serwer writes in The Atlantic:

The theological justification for al Qaeda's wholesale slaughter of civilians was provided by Sayyid Imam al-Sharif, also known as Dr. Fadl, one of the founding fathers of al Qaeda. Because the murder of innocents is forbidden in Islam and the murder of Muslims in particular, Ayman al-Zawahiri and Osama bin Laden required some sort of theological framework for justifying terrorism. This was provided by al-Sharif, who essentially argued in his book, "The Compendium of the Pursuit of Divine Knowledge," that apostates could be murdered, and that approach, takfir (which has come to be known as takfirism) allowed al Qaeda to, for all intents and purposes, kill anyone they wanted without violating the laws of Islam by declaring them to be apostates. In other words, Dr. Fadl helped provided a theological justification for something that everyone involved knew was wrong.

War on Terror Flashback: Bush’s Lawyer Yoo “Civilians Can Be Massacred”

The legal memos justifying torture aren't very different in terms of reasoning--it's clear that John Yoo and his cohorts in the Office of Legal Counsel saw their job not as binding the president to the rule of law, but to declare legal any tactic that the executive branch believed necessary to fight terrorism. They worked backwards from this conclusion, and ethics officials at the Department of Justice, we now know, decided that they they had violated professional standards in doing so. Whereas al-Zawahiri and bin Laden turned to al-Sharif for a method to circumvent the plain language of the Koran, Bush and Cheney went to Yoo and Jay Bybee to circumvent the plain language of the law. Most Islamic scholars, just like most legal experts, reject their respective reasoning as unsound.



The torture memos--indeed, all of the pro-torture arguments rest on a similar intellectual themes to the takfiris. Suspected terrorists are "illegal enemy combatants", outside the framework of laws that would otherwise guide us. Just as the takfiris justify the killing of even self-identified Muslims by excommunicating them as "infidels", torture apologists argue that even American citizens like Jose Padilla who are accused of being terrorists become legal "apostates" without any rights the president is bound to respect. These are extraordinary circumstances, this is an extraordinary war--and so, the Bush administration turned to Yoo, a man who believes the president is bound by no laws during wartime: he can murder a village of innocent civilian non-combatants just as surely as he can crush the testicles of a child or deploy the military against residents of the United States. The architects of torture are the intellectual mirror image of their declared enemies, depending on the perceived inhumanity of their foes to justify monstrous actions. It's worth noting however, that the Bush administration did not take full advantage of the wrongs that the lawyers in their Office of Legal Counsel would have enabled. My point is not to equate the deeds of AQ with the deeds of the Bush administration--merely to point out justification for acts that are on their face unjustifiable take a similar intellectual path.

From his cell in an Egyptian prison, al-Sharif denounced his former colleagues in al Qaeda, declaring that the killing of innocents was wrong. He essentially renounced his earlier work providing the theological basis for politically motivated murder and destruction, declaring, "There is no such thing in Islam as ends justifying the means," now arguing that the murder of innocents, Muslim or otherwise, was sinful. Whatever theological cover al-Sharif's original arguments provided were meaningless against the body count of mostly Muslim innocents amassed by al-Qaeda in their war against the "West", which by the numbers has been a war against fellow Muslims. In combination with the furious efforts of moderate Muslims and even committed Islamists like al-Sharif, al Qaeda and its methods have been largely discredited, to the point where, as Fareed Zakaria writes, we don't fear "a broad political movement but a handful of fanatics scattered across the globe."

I confess to being bothered that we haven't seen a similarly backlash against the architects of torture here--part of the reason we haven't, is because even though innocents were tortured, we still see them as fundamentally alien. Few Americans directly suffered as a result of what Yoo and Bybee did--although I think we have yet to understand that damage that's been done to our society as a whole. Bolstered by ideological partisans and powerful figures looking to avoid accountability for their actions, men like John Yoo and Jay Bybee have yet to be held responsible for the crimes they enabled--and I'm not sure they ever will be--although I'm less concerned with their punishment than with the permanent American rejection of torture. The Justice Department's David Margolis overruled the original conclusions of the Department's ethics lawyers that Yoo and Bybee had, in ignoring legal precedents and sanctioning behavior that was likely illegal, had committed "professional misconduct". That would have triggered professional sanctions for Yoo, a tenured professor at Berkeley, and Bybee, a sitting federal judge, but Margolis' memo instead concludes that they had excercised "flawed legal reasoning" that could be forgiven in part because of the context in which the memos were written, months after the 9/11 attacks. Margolis though, does not endorse their reasoning, and as for Yoo, he writes that whether or not he deliberately gave bad legal advice is a "close question."  Al-Sharif will never be able to wash the blood from his hands, but while this founding father of al Qaeda has recoiled from the fruits of his labor, the American architects of torture continue to argue that their reasoning is legally sound.

The American conscience, when it decides to act, is mighty--but it is also sluggish and vain. Americans are crushed by the weight of not fulfilling their own high expectations--so the shameful acts of one generation are often rectified by a subsequent generation unencumbered by their own complicity in such acts. So the compromise the Founding Fathers reached on the issue of slavery, in defiance of the spirit of the documents they authored, was eventually righted by the Civil War. The slavery by another name of reconstruction was ignored by a nation weary of conflict after nearly being rent in two--but eventually gave birth to the civil rights movement. The suffragettes were forced to accept a compromise on the 14th Amendment that denied them the vote--but they would ultimately prevail. Roosevelt interned Japanese Americans, Reagan gave them reparations. The American conscience is often slow to action, but not because it cannot recognize evil--but because our view of ourselves as a people guided by justice is so important to who we are that when confronted with proof of our own shortcomings, we recoil in shame and precious vanity. Eventually, with the big stuff, we usually find our way--we see this with our slow, staggering, but inevitable march towards full personhood for gays and lesbians.  And while those who stained America's honor with war crimes have escaped accountability for now, these American takfiris will eventually be judged by history with a clarity we cannot muster today.

The arc of the universe is long...you know, all that stuff.