The Latest from Iran (6 January): Distractions

2030 GMT: US Walks Tightrope on Green Movement. Earlier today we posted Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's declaration about the "ruthless repression" of the Iran Government. Now State Department official John Limbert, who has direct responsibility for Iran, has put out a longer, more balanced statement.

On the one hand, Limbert continues the rhetoric criticising and cautioning the regime, "I think it's very hard for the government to decide how to react to the legitimate demands of the people. The more violence it uses, the more it will hurt itself in the end....We will never remain silent in the face of state violence and the mistreatment of people."

On the other, Limbert is also assuring that the Obama Administration will not break off discussions with the Ahmadinejad Government: "As you know, the U.S. president is determined to renew ties with Iran despite all the problems -- which we don't underestimate -- based on a new beginning."

NEW Iran: Hillary Clinton on Engagement & Pressure with Regime of “Ruthless Repression”
UPDATED Iran: The 60 Forbidden Foreign Organisations
Latest Iran Video and Transcript: Haghighatjoo and Marandi on CNN (4 January)
Iran: How Outside “Help” Can Hurt the Green Movement

2020 GMT: Setareh Sabety has posted an article commenting on the recent declaration of five Iranian intellectuals living abroad and declaring, "[Their] ten demands...should be embraced because they provide the democratic framework within which we can debate the future of our beloved Iran."

2010 GMT: Kalemeh is reporting the latest statement of Mehdi Karroubi that he is "prepared for everything" and "could not have imagine" the behaviour of the regime in the post-election conflict.

1950 GMT: Mesbah Yazdi Calling for Death Penalty? Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi, close to President Ahmadinejad, ran out the standard line on the "evil" protests as the product of the "West" and Jews today. He allegedly added, however, that the demonstrators were "corruption on earth" and, as such, are subject to the death penalty.

1940 GMT: Iran's Energy Boost. "Turkmenistan has opened a second gas pipeline to Iran....Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad inaugurated the new 30km (19 miles) pipeline with Turkmen President Kurbanguly Berdymukhamedov in a ceremony in the desert near the Iranian border."

What is interesting beyond the story is that the BBC not only reports the development but praises it for "further eroding Russia's historical domination of its energy sector". Not sure the US authorities will see the deal in exactly the same way.

1930 GMT: Oh, Please (with an MKO twist).... We try our bet to limit the damage, but sometimes you cannot keep a bad article down. Laura Rozen of Politico, who normally has the best pairs of eyes and ears in Washington, swallows The New York Times "Iran Nuclear Bunkers/Tunnels" story (see 0640 GMT). What's more, she inadvertently highlights more reasons for concern, quoting Broad:

In late 2005, the Iranian opposition group [Mujahedin-e-Khalq] held news conferences in Paris and London to announce that its spies had learned that Iran was digging tunnels for missile and atomic work at 14 sites, including an underground complex near Qum. The government, one council official said, was building the tunnels to conceal “its pursuit of nuclear weapons”.

Hmm.... That's Mujahedin-e-Khalq, dedicated by all means to topple the Iranian regime. A neutral source for solid, reliable intelligence?

1430 GMT: With continued quiet, I'm off to address the conference in Beirut. Back for evening updates around 2000 GMT.

1305 GMT: Mortazavi Accused? Alef reports that a Parliament committee has unanimously approved a report, after several months of investigation, naming Saeed Mortazavi --- former Tehran Prosecutor General and current aide to President Ahmadinejad --- as chief suspect in the death of detainees in Kahrizak Prison.

1240 GMT: The day continues quietly in Iran, and in the lull more media mischief (see 0640 GMT). The Washington Times declares, "Iran's Al Qaeda Connection in Yemen", based on the suspect testimony of a former Guantanamo detainee, a suspect letter supposedly from Al Qa'eda Number 2 Ayman al-Zawahiri, and the assertion of a Yemeni politician.

For sheer stupidity, however, this pales into insignificance beside the Guardian's allocation of space to a Brian Binley, whose comment, "End Appeasement of Iran's Regime", offers this approach to resistance:

If the British government seriously wishes to find a solution to the Iran problem, they need look no further than the streets of Tehran and the Iranian people's determination to purse democratic ambitions.
For a number of years now, colleagues and I on the British Parliamentary Committee for Iran Freedom have worked with Iran's largest opposition group in exile, the National Council of Resistance of Iran, and its president-elect Maryam Rajavi to strengthen our policy towards Iran whilst seeking increased support for the Iranian opposition movement.

That would be the National Council of Resistance of Iran, the political wing of the Mujahedin-e-Khalq and its often-violent campaign to overthrow the Iranian Government since 1979.

Such political "wisdom" deserves a separate entry, I think.

0920 GMT: Breaking the Movement. Rooz Online reports the Freedom Movement of Iran, many of whose members have been detained, including the recent re-arrest of its head Ebrahim Yazdi, has suspended operations for the first time in its 48 years. The organisation added, “While we express our regret at the regime’s unlawful confrontation aimed at limiting the free flow of information and the demand that the Freedom Movement of Iran stop the activities of its official website and its analytical website Mizan until further notice, we reserve the right to legally pursue our rights in this regard.”

0730 GMT: To Be Fair. Disdain for some of the US portrayals of "Iran" this morning should be balanced with a hat-tip to Robin Wright of The Los Angeles Times, who considers the possibility of "An Opposition Manifesto in Iran":

Three bold statements calling for reform have been issued since Friday, one by opposition presidential candidate Mir-Hossein Mousavi, one by a group of exiled religious intellectuals and the third by university professors. Taken together, they suggest that the movement will not settle for anything short of radical change.

0640 GMT: Not much breaking news from Iran overnight and this morning, with the outcome that the US papers are awash in distracting rhetoric, tangential stories, and even a forceful call to recognise the legitimacy of the Iranian regime.

The rhetoric comes from Emanuele Ottolenghi in The Wall Street Journal. A long-time proponent of regime changes in countries such as Iraq, Ottolenghi grabs the Ashura story of the martyrdom of Imam Hussein to praise "Iran's Righteous Martyrs": "This time we should root for [them]." (Presumably the United States was unable to root for Imam Hussein in the 7th century.)

The Los Angeles Times, in an article by Robert Faturechi, features the claims that the cost of the Green movement's protests has been the "loss" of three detained Americans:

With street protests raging in Iran, political activism is on the rise among Los Angeles' already vocal Iranian American community. Flag-waving demonstrators clad in the opposition movement's signature green have been a common sight outside the Federal Building in Westwood, and Iranian-language media is abuzz with debate.

But when it comes to the three young American hikers being held in Iran on espionage charges the community has been decidedly silent. No large demonstrations, little conversation, virtually no push for action.

For William Broad in The New York Times, the issue is not the politics either of the Iranian protests or the imprisoned US trio, but Nukes, Nukes, Nukes.

In yet another piece fed to him by by "American government and private experts", Broad launches the latest proclamiation of Imminent Iranian Threat: "Iran has quietly hidden an increasingly large part of its atomic complex in networks of tunnels and bunkers across the country."

On a different page of The Times, however, the Iranian Government has a vocal defence team. Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett, in the latest of their numerous calls for discussion with President Ahmadinejad and his representatives, open with the declaration: "The Islamic Republic of Iran is not about to implode. Nevertheless, the misguided idea that it may do so is becoming enshrined as conventional wisdom in Washington."

To bolster their argument that the Obama Administration has no choice but to engage with Ahmadinejad, the Leveretts throw out a confetti of unsupported assertions:

Antigovernment Iranian Web sites claim there were “tens of thousands” of Ashura protesters; others in Iran say there were 2,000 to 4,000....Vastly more Iranians took to the streets on Dec. 30, in demonstrations organized by the government to show support for the Islamic Republic (one Web site that opposed President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s re-election in June estimated the crowds at one million people)....

Even President Ahmadinejad’s principal challenger in last June’s presidential election, Mir Hossein Mousavi, felt compelled to acknowledge the “unacceptable radicalism” of some Ashura protesters.

The Leveretts do put a series of challenges, discussed also at EA, about the opposition's leadership, its strategy, and its objectives, but this is all to prop up the "default" option that the regime (whose political, religious, economic, and ideological position is not examined beyond that claim of a million protesters on its behalf on 30 December) must not only be accepted but embraced in talks.

Just as the US Government set aside the inconvenience of Tiananmen Square 20 years ago, so it should put in the closet the trifling annoyance of those Iranians who demonstrate against rather than for the Government. The Leveretts conclude:

As a model, the president would do well to look to China. Since President Richard Nixon’s opening there (which took place amid the Cultural Revolution), successive American administrations have been wise enough not to let political conflict — whether among the ruling elite or between the state and the public, as in the Tiananmen Square protests and ethnic separatism in Xinjiang — divert Washington from sustained, strategic engagement with Beijing. President Obama needs to begin displaying similar statesmanship in his approach to Iran.

Comments

[Roe Lassie]

Well said to both AJ & Kevin Scott.

[Megan]

Decomaracy4iran,

Iranian Green also will make government infrastructure 80% more efficient, 100% more democratic and 100% cleaner (by removing elements of corruption and brutality). Clean, and efficient, that is the power of Green in San Fran or Iran.

[anonymous pacifist]

Wow, just want to also add thanks to Iranyar for sending the video links, I'm glad Scott Lucas has given them their own blog post.

So much courage displayed by protesters and chanters, too!

May peace come SOON.

[syntheticzero]

That New York Times op-ed has got to be one of the most fatuous pieces of unsupported rhetoric I've ever seen. The Ashura protests were 1-2 thousand? The pro-government rallies were a million? Give me a break.

[rezvan]

Has anyone heard the British PM, Gordon Brown, feels threatened by the mere talk and threat by a radical Muslim group to walk through a typical middle England market town in Oxfordshire, England with 500 coffins sybolising the many deaths of Afghan civilians at the hands of US and British forces. It is reported that he is having discussions to seek to ban the march and opposition and political intimidation is already being organised through the media and political circles to tar this group with the brush of extremism and bully them from even applying to even hold a rally in this 'mother' of parliamentary democracy.
For the last 6 months in the IRI now, with or without official sanction the opposition movement has organised or participated in numerous rallies as well as had the support of the most powerful media institutions in the world and have had their cause amply magnified and they complain that there is no freedom in the IRI. Then where have they been demonstrating and rallying in all these month? In Oxfordshire perhaps?

[Bozorg]

The authors of the New York op-ed piece are silly little amateurs. Check out their blog - http://www.raceforiran.com/

They compare and contrast unrepresentative photos from the Ashura protests with state photographs of the "huge" rallies to prove that the opposition movement is marginal - and in the process, prove that their "expertise" is marginal.

Very shady characters these two.

[Barry]

"It is reported that he is having discussions to seek to ban the march "

Rezvan

I would support the ban - until the Iranian regime gives official sanction to a similar march by the MKO through Tehran.

Barry

[Barry]

Some more info about that march

http://blogs.mirror.co.uk/anything-you-say/2010/01/cops-warn-they-probably-cant--.html

http://www.thesun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/papercolumnists/billleckie/2797736/Im-with-the-true-Muslims.html

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2797911/Officials-admit-We-cant-stop-hate-cleric-Anjem-Choudarys-benefits.html

Barry

[Samuel]

"The authors of the New York op-ed piece are silly little amateurs. Check out their blog"

Ha Ha here is Hillary Mann Leverett's Bio. Of course she is a rank amateur nowhere in her history dos she even address the intimate relationship between polictical protest and gastronomy.

This is fantastic finally the Western Press publishes something that is not Green Propaganda and now the authors are being accused here of being paid agents. How pathetic and revealing at the same time.

Hillary Mann Leverett – Biography
Hillary Mann Leverett is CEO of Strategic Energy and Global Analysis (STRATEGA), a political risk consultancy. In September 2010, she will also take up an appointment as Senior Lecturer and Senior Research Fellow at Yale University’s Jackson Institute for Global Affairs.

Ms. Leverett has more than 20 years of academic, legal, business, diplomatic, and policy experience working on Middle Eastern issues. In the George W. Bush Administration, she worked as Director for Iran, Afghanistan and Persian Gulf Affairs at the National Security Council, Middle East expert on the Secretary of State’s Policy Planning Staff, and Political Advisor for Middle East, Central Asian and African issues at the U.S. Mission to the United Nations. From 2001-2003, she was one of a small number of U.S. diplomats authorized to negotiate with the Iranians over Afghanistan, al-Qa’ida and Iraq. In the Clinton Administration, Leverett also served as Political Advisor for Middle East, Central Asian and African issues for the U.S. Mission to the United Nations, Associate Director for Near Eastern Affairs at the National Security Council, and Special Assistant to the Ambassador at the U.S. embassy in Cairo. She was awarded a Fulbright Scholarship and a Watson Fellowship, and in 1990-1991 worked in the U.S. embassies in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Egypt and Israel, and was part of the team that reopened the U.S. Embassy in Kuwait after the first Gulf War.

Ms. Leverett has published extensively on Iran as well as on other Middle Eastern, Central and South Asian, and Russian issues. She has spoken about U.S.-Iranian relations at Harvard, MIT, the National Defense University, NYU, the Norwegian Institute for International Affairs, and major research centers in China. She has appeared on news and public affairs programs on BBC, CNN, MSNBC, and Al Jazeera (Arabic and English), and was featured in the highly acclaimed BBC documentary, Iran and the West. Along with Flynt Leverett, she appeared in the PBS Frontline documentary, “Showdown With Iran”, and was profiled in Esquire magazine. She has provided expert testimony to the U.S. House Government Reform and Oversight Committee.

Ms. Leverett is a graduate of Harvard Law School and Brandeis University. She also studied at the American University in Cairo and Tel Aviv University.

[Seyed]

Thank god the NY times is a rag. Real men read the wall steet journal.
And a photo of a green protestor has been the front page at my last count over and over.

[Samuel]

"I would support the ban – until the Iranian regime gives official sanction to a similar march by the MKO through Tehran."

I would support the march by the MKO through Tehran too since it would put some of these tools to work.

http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&source=hp&q=Khaybar%20KH-2002&rlz=1R2_____en&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi

Iran Small Arms – Assault Rifles

AK-47
Weight 3.6 kg
Length: 87 cm (fixed wood stock), 87 cm (folding stock), 64 cm (stock folded)
Cartridge: 7.62 x 39mm
Action Gas-operated, rotating bolt
ROF: 600 r/m
Muzzle Velocity: 715 m/s
Effective Range: 300 m

The AK-47 is likely the most infamous rifle in the world, gaining its reputation in nearly every conflict as a powerful and rugged weapon. The original, along with its variants holds the title of being the most produced assault rifle in history, being more then all other rifles combined.

Within the Iranian armed forces it is the main rifle of the Basij, the IRGC as well as specific units with both the regular army and the police. Multiple versions are produced, such as the basic AK-47 model, known locally as the KLS, the folding stock AKS-47, known as the KLF and AKMS (side-folding-stock AKM) known as the KLT. They different versions are produced both with wooden and synthetic stocks. One notable feature over the base soviet models is the addition of an M203 grenade launcher. In addition to this, they still maintain large stocks of older rifles purchased directly.

The most common type is the KLF and AKMS with a wooden handguard, being used by the army and the majority of the IRGC. However the fixed-stock KLS is far from being uncommon. Refurbishment stockpiles with newer rifles is done on a regional and organizational manner, not necessarily according to which regions need it.
The models with synthetic material are still uncommon, though are used regularly by the police with only a few being seen in service with the IRGC.

Use by the police is often determined by location, for instance police in Tehran usually carry pistols, or maybe MP-5’s or a rare AK-47, while those in Zahedan carry an AK-47 as part of their regular kit.

G3
Weight 4.4 kg (G3A3), 4.7 kg (G3A4
Length: 102 cm (G3A3 and G3A4, stock extended), 84 cm (G3A4, stock collapsed
Cartridge: 7.62 x 51mm

The G3 was developed by Heckler and Kock as a main battle rifle, not an assault rifle. It’s an extremely accurate and extremely powerful, but at the same time, it’s more a rifle then an assault weapon.

The G3 is the main rifle in the regular army as well as the navy and airforce. It is officially known by HK as the G3A6 as the model designated for the liscenced model in Iran. Surprisingly, Iran has retained the original German names for weapons, unusual given the Iranian penchant for naming everything they produce at least three times with completely different names.

The Iranian-produced versions have a few distinguishing features, first is that the stock and hand guard are green. While this might not be unique trait, it does help distinguish the older models that were directly purchased are black, whereas the new indigenous models still have a dark green stock and hand guard. Another feature is the addition of an M203 grenade launcher, though the hand guard must be removed and directly attacked to the barrel.

Khaybar KH-2002 and Sama.
Weight: 3.7kg
Length:
Cartridge:5.56x45mm NATO
Action: Gas-operated, rotating bolt
ROF:800 to 850 round/min, cyclic
Muzzle velocity:900 to 950 m/s
Effective range:450 m

The Khaybar is an indigenous Iranian rifle.

The Khyber is bullpup conversion and adaptation of the S.5.56 rifle, though with several distinct features.
There is also the addition of a longer carrying handle on top of the rifle. The charging handle has also been resituated to a position under the carrying handle, in much the same manner as the French FAMAS

[Bozorg]

"Propaganda and now the authors are being accused here of being paid agents. How pathetic and revealing at the same time.".....says the guy who characterizes Iran's grassroots opposition movement as a negligible group of paid agents in the employ of a Zionist-MKO cabal.

Yes, their analysis is amateurish. Credentials don't guarantee quality analysis.

Go play with your guns, son.

[Samuel]

Chef Bozorg,

"Go play with your guns, son."

You do the same with your sandwiches and cake in your toy kitchen.

[Samuel]

Analysis from a Zionist think tank appearing in an Australian paper.

The writer gets some things right but incredibly fails to mention the fact that Iraq is now under the control of Shiites. The following is surely correct although the word "domination" is at this stage a bit of an exaggeration.

"The formation of the new Lebanese government in November in essence confirms Hezbollah's domination of the country."

Iran hasn't won the cold war yet Jonathan Spyer From: The Australian January 07, 2010 12:00AM

THE salient strategic fact in the Middle East today is the Iranian drive for regional hegemony. This Iranian objective is being promoted by a rising hardline conservative elite within the Iranian regime, centred on a number of political associations and on the Iranian Revolutionary Guards corps.
This elite, which is personified by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has received the backing of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

Their aim is a second Islamic revolution that would revive the original fire of the revolution of 1979. They appear to be aiming for the augmenting of clerical rule with a streamlined, brutal police-security state, under the banner of Islam. Building Iranian power and influence throughout the Middle East is an integral part of their strategy.

The Iranian nuclear program is an aspect of this ambition.

A nuclear capability is meant to form the ultimate insurance for the Iranian regime as it aggressively builds its influence across the region.

This goal of hegemony is being pursued through the assembling of a bloc of states and organisations under Iranian leadership. This bloc, according to Iran, represents authentic Muslim currents within the region, battling against the US and its hirelings. The pro-Iranian bloc includes Syria, Sudan, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas among the Palestinians, and the Houthi rebel forces in northern Yemen.

A de facto rival alliance is emerging, consisting of states that are threatened by Iran and its allies and clients. This rival alliance includes Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Kuwait.

Israel, despite lacking official diplomatic relations with Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states, is also a key member of this camp. Unlike the pro-Iranian bloc, which has a simple guiding ideology of resistance to the West, the countries seeking to counter Iran are united by interest only.

The rivalry between these two camps now informs and underlies all-important developments in the Middle East. It is behind the joint Israeli-Egyptian effort to contain the Iran-sponsored Hamas enclave in the Gaza Strip. It is behind the fighting in north Yemen, as Saudi troops take on Shia rebels armed and supported by Iran. The rivalry is behind the face-off between pro-American and pro-Iranian forces in Lebanon. The insurgencies in Afghanistan and in Iraq are also notable for the presence of weaponry traceable to Iran in use by insurgents against Western forces.

Who is winning in this ongoing Middle East cold war? The rhetoric of the Iranians, of course, depicts their advance as unstoppable. The reality is more complex, and the past year has seen gains and losses for both sides.

First, within Iran the electoral victory of Ahmadinejad and the subsequent backing given to him by Khamenei represented a major advance for the Iranian hardline conservatives. Ahmadinejad subsequently confirmed his victory by forming a cabinet that is packed with conservatives and Revolutionary Guardsmen.

But the refusal of large sections of the Iranian people to accept the possibly rigged election and the unprecedented scenes of opposition in the streets of Iranian cities in recent weeks have severely tarnished this achievement.

The ongoing unrest in Iran probably does not constitute an immediate danger to the regime. But it surely indicates that large numbers of Iranians have no desire to see their country turned into the instrument of permanent Islamic revolution and resistance envisaged by the hardline conservatives. The domestic unrest thus hits significantly at the emerging regime's legitimacy, and their ability to promote their regime as a model for governance to the Arab and wider Muslim world.

Iran made major advances in Lebanon last year. The formation of the new Lebanese government in November in essence confirms Hezbollah's domination of the country. Hezbollah is the favoured child of the Iranian regime and its partner in subversive activity globally. There is now no serious internal force in Lebanon able to oppose its will.

In Gaza, the Iranian-sponsored Hamas regime is holding on. The Iranian investment is central to Hamas's ability to stay in power. The movement just announced a budget of $US540 million ($590m) for 2010. Of this, just $US55m is to be raised through taxes and local sources of revenue. The rest is to come from "aid and assistance". Hamas does not reveal the identity of its benefactors. But it is fairly obvious that the bulk of this funding will come from Iran. The Palestinian issue remains the central cause celebre of the Arab and Muslim world. The Iranian regime's goal is to take ownership of it.

But there have been setbacks here too. The Iranian resistance model failed in a straight fight with the Israeli Defence Forces in the early part of the year. Hamas's 100-man "Iranian unit" suffered near destruction in Gaza. The Hamas regime in Gaza managed to kill six IDF soldiers in the entire course of Operation Cast Lead. This is a failure, recorded as such by all regional observers.

In addition, someone or the other appears to be trying to demonstrate to the Iranians that the use of terrorism as an instrument of state policy is a two-way street. Hence the killing of 29 Revolutionary Guards in a bombing in October near the Iran-Pakistan border, and the mysterious explosion in Damascus last month that killed a number of Iranian pilgrims.

So at the beginning of 2010, the lines are clearly drawn in the Middle East cold war, and the contest is far from over.

Ultimately, like other totalitarians before them, the Iranian hardline conservatives are likely to fail through overreach. The inefficient, corruption-ridden and oppressive state they are coming to dominate is likely to prove an insufficient instrument to sustain their boundless ambition. Still, this process probably has a long way to run yet. Much will depend on the sense of purpose, will and resourcefulness of the Western and regional countries that this regime has identified as its enemies.

This is a contest for the future of the region. It has almost certainly not yet reached its height.

Jonathan Spyer is a senior research fellow at the Global Research in International Affairs Centre in Herzliya, Israel.

[Samuel]

Link:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/iran-hasnt-won-the-cold-war-yet/story-e6frg6zo-1225816749118

[Barry]

Samuel

That sounds like a reasonably balanced assessment of where things stand right now.

In the meantime, the Israelis are improving their defences http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1140862.html

Their offensive forces are sufficient to take on any takers in the Middle East (as has been the case since 1948) - with little effective defense from anyone they choose to attack.

Barry

[Samuel]

Barry,

You neglect to mention the BILLIONS of dollars that Israel gets in military and financial aid every year from the Americans.

[Barry]

Sorry - I thought that we all here would already know that.

Barry

[Arshama]

Some groups prefer an alleged "Cold War" in the Middle East, especially the IRGC traitors, who pursue the logics of war and waste national income for radical groups like Hamas and Hezbollah instead of building up the country. As Nourizadeh reported yesterday on VOA, due to popular uprising in Iran their tactics have failed. Recently leaders of both terrorist groups have started to emphasize their "Arabianity" and are searching Arab supporters for their warfare. When it comes to money, nationalism outweighs the concept of the "umma", cherished by the Shiite IRGC, who dreams of dominating the Sunni (and Arab) majority. The rats are deserting the sinking ship.

[ange paris]

Samuel
I have tried to read your comments and they are too long and impersonal ! you have to summerise an article after reading and put your personal touch ! and why do you speak about guns and ...
I thought you have change but it was an illusion ! What have you ? are you well ?