See also Tuesday's Iran Live Coverage: "The Revolutionary Guards Will Protect the Election"
1712 GMT: The Battle Within. Mohsen Rezaei --- Presidential candidate, former Revolutionary Guards commander, and Secretary of the Expediency Council --- has warned that if the next government is not strong, it will fall within two years.
Rezaei told an audience in Khuzestan Province that if the pressure becomes too great in the next government's second year, it would be forced to resign and step down. He did not elaborate on what problems the next government might face.
Rezaei, who has launched his election campaign and is focussing on the economy, said that the Supreme Leader favours the conservative candidates. He explained that he is running in the election because "Today, if I and people like me do not run, it would be a betrayal of the country."
1705 GMT: Book Watch. A week after the Supreme Leader declared a "Year of Political and Economic Epic", his words have been published as a book.
1545 GMT: Election Watch. Hojatoleslam Heydar Moslehi, Iran's Minister of Intelligence, has commented on security measures ahead of June's Presidential elections.
Speaking to reporters during the first Cabinet meeting of the new Persian year, Moslehi said that all political streams that believed in the Islamic Republic's system can and may enter the elections, where they would face heavy competition within the "red line of the framework of that same system".
Moslehi added: "Enshallah [God willing], and with God's strength, the people will come out in force to create a political epic."
In response to questions from reporters, Moslehi said that the Intelligence Ministry had created a plan and had prepared for security during the elections. Those elections, he said, would be "passionate, competitive and consistent with our revolutionary values".
0730 GMT: Scare Story of the Day. US-based "analysts" are up to their nuclear tricks again in The Wall Street Journal, with David Albright of the Institute for Science and International Security joining forces with Mark Dubowitz of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and law professor Orde Kittrie to proclaim "Stopping an Undetectable Iranian Bomb".
One could respond that the Bomb is Undetectable because it does not exist, but this is unlikely to stop the trio:
We estimate that Iran, on its current trajectory, will by mid-2014 be able to dash to fissile material in one to two weeks unless its production of 20%-enriched uranium is curtailed. If the number or efficiency of Iran’s centrifuges unexpectedly increases, or if Tehran has a secret operational enrichment site, Tehran could reach critical capability before mid-2014. The date could be delayed, however, if Iran encounters unexpected difficulties in centrifuge operation or can no longer import centrifuge equipment and materials from China and elsewhere.
Perhaps needless to say, no support is given for this "estimate", which accompanies recent proclamation such as Albright's insistence on "Magnets of Doom" being acquired by Tehran. Nor do any of the trio mention that they have been saying for years that a Bomb is imminent.
To get back to basics, for example, the scary declaration, "Iran has also begun installing IR-2m centrifuges, which are reportedly three to five times as productive in enriching uranium as the currently standard IR-1 models"....
The IR-2m centrifuges, being installed at the Natanz enrichment plant, are replacing IR-1 centrifuges that have been in place since the 1970s. The new centrifuges, which are not yet confirmed as operational, are being used for production of 5% uranium.
That 5% uranium is for civilian use. It is not even at the enriched level of 20% --- still a civilian-only level --- being produced at the Fordoo plant.
On "sensitive issue" of nuclear talks, Fars notes Khamenei's emphasis that the US does not want to negotiate a "reasonable solution" to the Iranian nuclear issue but wants to "impose its view on Iran" --- thus talking to the Americans would be a "diplomatic war, not a constructive dialogue or diplomatic cooperation":
Apparently, the Obama administration's definition of power means it can consider the ability to change the behaviour of the other party by any means possible. So if Obama goes to negotiate with Iran, it follows that this would have the same function as sanctions, i.e. making Iran give in on its nuclear position.
It is clear that the US government sees the Iranian nuclear issue not has a national right of the Iranian people but as a disaster for itself, and to solve this issue it has a set of tools with which to advance its views. Sanctions are one tool, and negotiations are also a tool, and they only have one function -- to get the Iranian people to forgo their nuclear rights.
The proposed direct talks with America have two purposes, Fars said. First, Washington could continue with its "hegemonic behavior" and circumvent international organisations like the United Nations Security Council: "The Americans just want to show that they --- not international organisations --- can solve the world's problems."
The second reason was to show the world that Washington could bring most ardent opponent of American hegemonic power to the negotiating table, Fars said.
Regarding Khamenei's comments about Israel, Fars said the Supreme Leader had noted the "Zionist Regime" had made several verbal threats against Iran in recent years. "Though those threats were just words and unlikely to be followed through", this time the Supreme Leader had a new response to them --- not by emphasizing that Iran would respond in kind to any military assault but by specifically naming the two cities that Tehran would attack.
This, Fars said, was so that Israel's leaders could be aware of the exact consequences of their "stupidity" should they decide to strike the Islamic Republic.
Fars noted that while Israeli officials responded to Khamenei's threat, the US president was "extremely passive": "In Obama's response, he didn't say anything about America saving Tel Aviv and Haifa."