Monday
Jan252010
UPDATED Iran Snap Analysis: The Karroubi and Khatami Manoeuvres
Monday, January 25, 2010 at 12:56 
UPDATE 26 JANUARY: This reading is now overtaken by our special analysis on the significance of the Karroubi statementUPDATE 1915 GMT: First, an apology. I got this wrong earlier --- I missed the important nuances in Karroubi's statement and made the wrong connection: it is not linked to the Larijani-Rezaei-Qalibaf initiative.
Second, a top EA correspondent is finishing checks with sources and will have the best analysis of this situation later tonight.
Iran Special Analysis: What Karroubi’s Statement on “Mr Khamenei”/”Head of Government” Means
The Latest from Iran (26 January): Now for the Follow-Up….
The Latest from Iran (25 January): Who Makes A Move Today?
UPDATE 1630 GMT: An EA reader points us to a curious piece that appeared in Mehdi Karroubi's Saham News this past weekend. The apparent confusion and even dispute between Karroubi and Khatami over a supposed approach to the Supreme Leader has been at the back of my mind while trying to read latest events. Any assistance from readers appreciated.
UPDATE 1500 GMT: EA sources, as well as readers, offer important amendments to our reaction:
First, it should be noted that Hossein Karroubi contacted a number of press outlets after Fars News claimed that Mehdi Karroubi had declared, without reservation that, he "recognised the President". Given Fars' past record, as well as the unlikely scenario that Karroubi would make such an important statement through that outlet, the scenario is that Hossein Karroubi was putting out a hasty "clarification" to prevent the Fars story from getting any traction.
Second, Hossein Karroubi's clarification had two important qualifiers. First, he made clear that his father saw Ahmeadinejad as "selected leader" rather than "elected President". Second, even though that selection was on the basis of the Supreme Leader's endorsement, there was a pointed reference to this as the action of "Mr Khamenei".
So the story seems to move away from a concerted response linking Karroubi and the "establishment" critics of the Government. Still, questions remain:
Why did Hossein Karroubi not give a simple repudiation of the Fars report? For the statement he offered has a curious tension: Mehdi Karroubi accepts the overriding verdict of the Supreme Leader (and thus velayat-e-faqih) even as he diminishes leader and system with the "Mr" tag.
And perhaps more importantly, is the Khatami letter to the Supreme Leader legitimate? For if so, Karroubi's response is not only to Ayatollah Khamenei; it is to the former President's attempt to bring together a group for reconciliation.
A quick reaction to emerging events, combined with the inside information Enduring America received last week:
Last week, as part of our articles on a possible "Plot Against President Ahmadinejad", we noted that the key participants (Ali Larijani-Mohsen Rezaei-Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf) had extended invitations to Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi to join the move.
This morning, we are processing news that 1) Mehdi Karroubi, through his son, is saying that he is recognising Ahmadinejad as President because of the Supreme Leader's endorsement; 2) Mohammad Khatami has written to the Supreme Leader upholding the process of reform but recognising the legitimacy of the Iranian system and has suggested the arbitration of Hashemi Rafsanjani in a resolution of political issues.
No one has yet been able to put forward a reason for the apparent shift, so here goes: the overture by the "establishment group" was not rebuffed. Instead, a deal may have been struck: the Supreme Leader and velayat-e-faqih are beyond dispute. The June election will not be overturned (primarily because Ayatollah Khamenei endorsed it), but the "reformist" leaders can put their grievances and recommendations for change to a working group.
And Ahmadinejad remains on the outside of the process.
A lot of holes at this stage in the hypothesis. After all, this assumes that the Karroubi and Khatami statements are as reported (I tend to think that is the case). Mir Hossein Mousavi has not made a declaration. And, of course, there will be nothing in public to connect this to a Larijani-Rezaei-Qalibaf initiative.
But, given how much rough water will be stirred rather than smoothed by these developments, best to cling on to something....
Reader Comments (39)
florence achard,
re. “Yes. M and K know that the regime is in danger on 2 sides...”
I don’t see the regime (IRI as a whole) being in imminent danger of falling or disintegrating. There are signs of longer term fatality (loss of revolutionary and Islamic ideology with not much to replace it with, alienation of almost everyone in the country and within the establishment itself, the economy), but it’s not going to fall in weeks surely. 22 Bahman could be another serious dent in its legitimacy, but it won’t surely be the 22 Bahman of 1979.
Ahmadinejad & co and more significantly SL have managed to peg themselves to IR in a way that their downfall could trigger the fall of the regime. Just imagine having to replace the SL in the current situation. I am starting to think the IR has lost the support of the civil service and probably only has various military, intelligence and freelance thugs to keep it propped up. And a change of leadership as things stand could lead to doubt within and between these people that could well lead to unravelling of whatever is left of the regime. So going to SL now is like going for the whole regime. And because of SL’s support of Ahmadinejad and the things SL has sacrificed for Ahmadinejad’s “re-election”, you could argue that going after Ahmadinejd now would be going after SL, which would be going after the whole regime.
If Karoubi is rushing to help SL now, then why did he talk so much about the rapes, tortures and other things? He most have knows that coming from him, such talk would not irreparable damage to the whole of the Islamic Republic. This is like shooting someone fatally and the stabbing them for good measure and kicking them too and then after a long time going to give them first aid. It just doesn’t make sense. (Not making sense to me, doesn’t mean it is not happening, but it sounds very strange)
Greeny
"Ahmadinejad & co and more significantly SL have managed to peg themselves to IR in a way that their downfall could trigger the fall of the regime."
But isn't this basically what happened in 1979 - once the Shah left, the rest folded up.
Barry
arabs dont even belong in iran, let alone run it~arabs and us persians dont mix we dont want your arabic ideology[islam]
remember islam was forced on us persians not chosen
Barry,
“But isn’t this basically what happened in 1979 – once the Shah left, the rest folded up.”
I don’t really know how much the current situation is similar to 1979. I have to say I wasn’t around in 79 to know what happened. I am guessing many who were around aren’t sure what really happened: it was before the information age. People who remember things then, say that when they heard the Shah had left, they knew that it was a matter of time before the rest gave up too.
This is what I mean by SL (and by attaching himself so much to SL, to a certain extent Ahmadinejad) has pegged himself to the regime: they have pushed any everyone else away from the centers of power to the extent that only they are left in the side of the regime. This is to an extent that the new guy SL installed as Tehran Friday prayer, does not know the difference between “passport” and “visa”. He also seems not to understand the difference between the Persian word for “subsidy” and the word for “computer”. He mentioned the “plan to create targeted computers” instead of “plan to create targeted subsidies” at least 8 times in one of his sermons. This goes to show how few people are left around SL. By doing this, he has created a situation where if he is suddenly gone, all will go. I think in 1979, the rest of the regime lost hope after the shah left.
I have difficulty seeing a too many similarities between now and 79. But as I said above, I have no memory of then.
To All,
Last week there were chatters about a Deal (not to be confused with the Plot to remove AN) between Khamenei, Mohammad Khatami and Rafsanjani. There were a great deal of speculations about terms of such deals but the most obvious one as evident by Khatami last speech was for reformist senior leaders like the two former presidents, Khatami and Rafsanjani, to bring the two rebels, Mousavi and Karroubi, home with public declaration that SL and principles of Valayet-e-Faghih are beyond reproach. And that the two rebels must do that before 22 Bahman. I guess in return their lives (Mousavi and Karroubi) or the lives of their families would be spared.
It appears that Khatami, the yellow belly, got in line and delivered insults after insults to Green Movement. It also appears from the piece in Saham News that Scott has posted http://sahamnews.org/?p=551 Khatami even blabbered about accomplishing his mission (delivering the warning to Mousavi and Karroubi) in a meeting with Majlis (parliament) National Security Committee.
Rafsanjani being a shrewd politician was a bit ambiguous in his statement and played double agent when he spoke.
What really is so painfully obvious that none of these brain-dead God’s rejects still get it? They do not get it that any damn deal must be made with people of Iran and people are the one who should accept it and not any GD Mullah or any GD leader.
Leaders and decision makers are people whom you (the regime) have wronged for 31 years. And what people are asking is for you criminals to leave town.
What part of “death to Asleh Valayet-e-Faghih” (death to the principles and concept of Valayet-e-faghih) you idiots do not understand. If you are petrified of 22 Bahman and days after 22 Bahman, then at minimum stop terrorizing people by continued arrest, firing people from their jobs, and killing innocent people. People are not allowed to even mourn their murdered loved ones.
I wish there was a drug that cured stupidity.
Megan I think they are going to work on the stupidity curing drug right after they perfect the HAARP earthquake machine.
Regarding Karoubi's maintained distance from Khatami, I think the leadership of the movement is still united but the point is that they both have to assure people that they won't give up fighting for their cause (that's what Karoubi is doing) and also assure the SL that they don't want to overthrow him (that's what Khatami is doing). So there's no abyssal gap between Khatami and Karoubi, it's only a pragmatic tactic (maybe an implicit agreement between the two).
Samuel,
There are some racist Iranians with anti-Islamic and anti-Arabic views. I am officially a Muslim, but do not practice Islam. One can even say that I am not a believer. However, I feel embarrassed when such people express their opinions. I consider two apparently opposing fractions (these Persian racists and their counter-part, Ahmadinejad and Mesbah-Yazdi as their symbols) as the main threat to peace in Iran. What's interesting is that they need each other to live, the Persian racists need AN and Mesbah to maintain an anti-Islamic position while AN and Mesbah need those racists to show that enemies of Islam exist and thus Islam is in threat.
Regarding those who believe the leaders of the movement would betray us, I guess they are those who did not vote in the election because they thought Mousavi is no different from Ahmadinejad. They were proved to be wrong just a few days after the election. Those who questioned the legitimacy of the IRI are not those who did not vote in the election, exactly the opposite; it was by voting in the election and agitating in its aftermath that the legitimacy of the IRI was weakened.
Me personally, in a situation where you're facing pure fascism, I prefer leaders who publicly say whatever they need to say in order to stay alive and at large and ready for the final push for total overthrow, but that's just me. Are Mousavi and Karroubi doing that? We'll find out sooner or later out on the streets!
@ Rev Magdalen
yes - as I said in another thread -- "All's fair in love and war!" - especially when deceiving the enemy.
Also, we have previously discussed here what I would call a "tenet" of Shi'ism which allows one to tell some porkies to stay alive -- can't remember now what the principle is called.
Barry
Majid,
Re: your comments at 6:02
That is considered deception and not a tactic pragmatic or otherwise. That is how Khomeini, the charlatan and the mass murderer, deceived people in 1979. He promised democracy to get people’s support and then gave them fascism.
There has been enough deception by these losers for 31 years. They all have blood on their hands, they all have robbed people of Iran and they all have to go to hell.
If People of Green Movement are smart they would play all of these losers like a violin. They should use them and then toss them out like disposable diapers. That would be returning a favor that has been long overdue.
Megan,
I am aware of Khomeini's crimes and that he betrayed those who support him during the revolution by not delivering his promises. I don't know whether Khomeini was aware what he was entering into, so I cannot call it a deception. One who deceives is aware that he/she is deceiving. I also believe that he should be responsible for all those crimes. But I can't call it a deception.
I cannot defend Khatami if you condemn him as a chicken. But I am sure he won't deceive people. Mousavi and Karroubi played a big role in weakening the legitimacy of the IRI in the eyes of people who believe it to be a just regime. It was something the secular opposition could not do for about 30 years. Do you think these two can deceive people?
If you insist on your theory of deception, and you found people trusting them more than you and those who think like you, I hope you are brave enough to declare that you are ashamed of struggling alongside such people.
Regarding the "blood on their hands", I hope the situation in Iran changes so that WE can ask them about the crimes in 1980's and their roles. But your approach to the problem is like those who don't even bother listening their possible responses.
Majid,
Thank you for your reply. I hope you come to this thread and read my reply to your comments at 14:46
“whether Khomeini was aware what he was entering into, so I cannot call it a deception. One who deceives is aware that he/she is deceiving.”
Though I disagree with you that Khomeini could not foresee the treacherous path he was plotting for Iran, I am going to go along with your notion that Khomeini did not know his path would open an area of fascism.
If one finds himself on the wrong road should he not change path? And if so why not?
If clerical supremacy, Velayat-e-Faghih which was not subject to people’s vote, was not Khomeini’s original intent, then why did he go along with it and betrayed people’s trust? Not only he went along with that system but he ostracized the cleric who stood against the concept of Velayat –e-Faghih once he realized it was undemocratic (the same cleric who was the original architect of Velayat Faghih, Montazeri). Khomeini not only did not course-correct but murdered thousands who stood against clerical Supremacy. This was deception premeditated or not.
Khomeini was a pitiful devious, vengeful, power hungry, narrow-minded man with grandiosity disorder. He even went further and sanctified himself to a saint (imam) to cover his crimes. His damage to Iran and Islam is long-lasting.
“I cannot defend Khatami if you condemn him as a chicken. But I am sure he won’t deceive people.”
Khatami is the man who ordered closing of several newspapers in late 1999 and under his watch the massacre at Tehran University dormitory happened. And you say he won’t deceive people. It is time for us to see the wolves through their sheep clothings. And if we do not we will have the repeat of 1979.
“Mousavi and Karroubi played a big role in weakening the legitimacy of the IRI in the eyes of people who believe it to be a just regime. “
Credit for that goes to people of Iran and not to Mousavi or Karroubi. Credit goes to those people who were brought down with assassin bullets and baton or lost their lives in the confined of prison walls when they were raped and tortured. It was those people who bled to death and with that they aired the regime dirty laundry on the global stage. Mousavi and Karroubi were and still are for the ride. It is our countrymen and women we are indebted to.
“Do you think these two can deceive people? “
I do not know. All I know I do not trust any member of this regime in any position of power anymore. Both Mousavi and Karroubi had said they did believe in Velayat-e-Faghih, the mullah kingdom, and that for me is an immediate disqualifier. But I am ONE VOTE and we need to see what other millions of voters in Iran would say.
“If you insist on your theory of deception, and you found people trusting them more than you and those who think like you, I hope you are brave enough to declare that you are ashamed of struggling alongside such people.”
I think I address your point above but in a democratic system each person has one vote and the majority rules. There is no reason to be ashamed of yourself or others for having different beliefs. I can only hope that we do not, once again, go from bad to worse. As the saying goes “you fool me once shame on you and you fool me twice shame on me”. I hope we do not have to say shame on us because we were fooled again.