UPDATED Iran Video & Translation: Dr Etaat's Opposition On State Media (14 January --- Parts 1 and 2)

We have now posted Part 3 of the video, with translation:

There has been a massive buzz about the appearance by Dr Javad Etaat, a professor of political science at Shahid Behesti University, on Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting. Possibly in response to criticism that it has been one-sided in post-election coverage, IRIB has headlined a series of debates. It may not have bargained, however, for the intensity of Etaat's comments, made in his discussion with "conservative" MP Ali Reza Zakani.

Iran Video & Translation: Dr Etaat’s Opposition On State Media (14 January — Part 3)

Here are Parts 1 and 2 of the exchange, with extracts translated by the good people at the new website The Flying Carpet Institute.Further parts of the video are available via the same YouTube link, and a translation of Part 2 is promised tomorrow by our Flying Carpet friends.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06UU4IFDKmA[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7eE9bs25kLQ[/youtube]

PART 1

*I was once invited to hold a speech about the attempt to topple Iran political system with a Velvet Revolution. But we all know that Velvet Revolutions always occur in dictatorships. So basically when you say that some forces are planning to make a Velvet Revolution, you have indirectly admitted that your system is not democratic.



When elections, discussions and competition take place in a free atmosphere, why should people want to make a revolution? People make revolutions maybe only every hundred years and only then when they are totally fed up with the situation. It doesn’t matter whether the revolution is a violent, velvet, coloured, white, black, red yellow. So when the Islamic Republic talks about Velvet Revolution, there is an unintended confession that Iran is not a free country and people can’t achieve their goals through the institutions the system offers. So the result is that people want to make a revolution.

*As an expert of political issues I’m disappointed by IRIB’s current policies.

*Regarding the tearing of Imam Khomeini’s portrait: Someone tore his portrait…it’s not even clear who it was. But IRIB broadcast this scene over and over again. We all know that tearing Khomeini’s portrait is an insult to him, but what about attacking his former residense (Beyte Emam) during Tasua (26 December), when former president (Mohammad) Khatami was holding a speech? Isn’t that illegal? Isn’t that an insult to the Imam?

There are not many honourable men like Khatami who love Islam, the revolution and the constitution, like the way he does. But still he was attacked by armed thugs. Why did these people do that? Why is it forbidden to express a different view? Why wasn’t he allowed to interprete the historic Ashura event the way he wanted?

It’s a fact that Khatami is critical to many aspects of the regime, but it’s an insult to this revolution that, 30 years after this system was established, people dare to attack other people with batons and knives. Unfortunately IRIB encourages this kind of behaviour.

*Regarding Ashura: Everyone loves Imam Hossein (3rd Imam of Shi'a Islam), no matter if this person is a Jew, Christian, Sunni, or Shiite. So if someone committed a misconduct during Ashura, be sure that people will punish him. If singing and clapping is a misconduct during Ashura, then beating and killing people is a much more worse act. Now look how...we are ruling!

*IRIB unfortunately had a negative role in all these [developments]. How do you want the people to express their dissatisfaction with current events if you don’t offer them a fair platform? IRIB must think about that criticism. You even admitted that certain people refused to take part in your past shows, because they don’t trust the IRIB. I was one of those people but I wanted to use the rare opportunity to express my dissatisfaction.

Part 2

*You say that we prepared the ground for riots. I believe that it’s not right to generalize. The number of opponents of the government is far higher than the number of those you see on the streets protesting. You have to consider that you haven’t even permitted one of those past street rallies. On 25th Khordad (15 June), for example, people came to the streets even though there was no official call from the opposition to demonstrate. But still two to three million Iranians took the streets. If you had permitted the marches, a guaranteed right according to the Constitution of the Islamic Republic, you can be sure that the number of the protesters would be much, much higher than what you have witnessed on that day.

*You always mention law but you don’t understand that your very own acts are against the law. Our Constitution (Article 27) says, “Public gatherings and marches may be freely held, provided arms are not carried and that they are not detrimental to the fundamental principles of Islam.” We often asked you to allow us to hold rallies. By the way, we also asked for a permission to publicly protest against the tearing of the Imam’s portrait.

The Green movement condemns any kind of violence, and if a minority uses violence, then it’s wrong to say all the protesters are violent rioters. One of the representatives of the government once said that people who want to protest on the streets must also provide security by themselves. But I ask you: Why do we pay the police? They are paid to protect the people and offer general security in the society!

*In the past 5 years that your government ruled the country, you did things that created an atmosphere of dissatisfaction.

*Article 6 and Article 56 of the Constitution guarantee people’s sovereignty.

*I quote Article 177: The contents of the Articles of the Constitution related to the Islamic character of the political system; the basis of all the rules and regulations according to Islamic criteria; the religious footing; the objectives of the Islamic Republic of Iran; the democratic character of the government[…]are unalterable.

*I quote Article 56: Absolute sovereignty over the world and man belongs to God, and it is He who has made man master of his own social destiny. No one can deprive man of this divine right, nor subordinate it to the vested interests of a particular individual or group. The people are to exercise this divine right in the manner specified in the following articles.*

*If you had acknowledged people’s sovereignty as it is described in the Constitution in the first place, no one would criticize you today. You rejected about 2400 potential candidates for the last parliamentary elections to create your own majority, and now you wonder why people are unhappy with the system. I don’t want to talk about the elections that were held in our country in the past. The question is why the Guardian Council misinterprets the constitution.*

*I’ll quote Article 44 of the constitution: “The economy of the Islamic Republic of Iran is to consist of three sectors: state, cooperative, and private, and is to be based on systematic and sound planning. The state sector is to include all large-scale and mother industries, foreign trade, major minerals, banking, insurance, power generation, dams and large-scale irrigation networks, radio and television, post, telegraph and telephone services, aviation, shipping, roads, railroads, and the like; all these will be publicly owned and administered by the State.”

But your government privatized almost all of those sectors! Then, when it comes to radio and television, you say that this sector must be controlled by the state! Why is that the case? Why does the Guardian Council say that the privatisation of the IRIB is forbidden? You see, you truly debase the people by your acts. And still you wonder why people are unhappy and want to protest.

*You close down newspapers and deny people’s right to criticize.

*Not only that….Your government is also incompetent when it comes to economic matters….The Government's wrong policies created a stunningly high inflation. In the eight years of Khatami’s government, the price for meat was about 3000 – 3700 Tomans. Are you aware that now the price for meat is 18,000 Tomans?…The same with real estate….

*Accept that people are opposing you because you failed in almost every field.

*I will now tell a story about the rule of Imam Ali to show you the gap between the quality of your rule and Ali’s: Once the “Khavaresh” who opposed Ali’s rule disrupted one of Ali’s sermons and insulted him in the mosque. But Ali said: "You are allowed to stay in the mosque and state your dissatisfaction, and as long you don’t use your sword we won’t punish you.”*

* But you closed down the mosque [in Shiraz] of Ayatollah Dastgheib, even though he is a Marja (senior cleric). You see the gap between your rule and Imam Ali’s!

The Latest from Iran (15 January): Refreshing?

2200 GMT: Your Late-Night Cyber-Treat. On Google, type "Ahmadinejad President of Iran". Hit "I'm Feeling Lucky".

2140 GMT: We started this morning (see 0715 GMT) by noting the possible significance of the "reformist" criticisms of Dr Javad Etaat making their way onto Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting. We end today by posting the video of the first part of the interview and an English translation.

2030 GMT: Cyber-Warfare Strike. Hacking the website of Iran's Hezbollah (Party of God) is one thing. Doing it with the slogan "The End is F***ing Near" is another. And accomplishing it with a diversion to the domain http://www.getasexpartner.com/hiz-bol.htm, well... Let's just say that Iran's police chief Esmail Ahmadi-Moghaddam (see 1220 GMT) may want to get a bigger Internet manual if he is serious about taking on the opposition in a Web slugfest.

NEW Latest Iran Video & Translation: Dr Etaat’s Opposition On State Media (14 January)
NEW Iran: Anger, Pain, & Fear — The Funeral of Professor Ali-Mohammadi
NEW Latest Iran Video: Green Protest and the Iran-Belgium Football Match (14 January)
NEW Iran: The Regime Censors the 1979 Revolution
NEW Latest Iran Audio: The Last Lecture of Professor Ali-Mohammadi
Latest Iran Video: Al Jazeera’s Debate Over The Death of Ali-Mohammadi (13 January)
Latest Iran Video: The Life, Death, and Funeral of Professor Ali-Mohammadi (14 January)
Latest Iran Video: “A Message to Armed Forces of Iran” (13 January)
Iran Analysis: Political Manoeuvring Around the Professor’s Death
The Latest from Iran (14 January): The Professor’s Funeral

1935 GMT: Quality Analysis of Day. Well done, Asadollah Badamchian, member of Parliament: “The assassination [of Professor Ali-Mohammadi] and terrorist operation was a previously planned step in the Green Velvet Revolution." The movement, Badamchian said, consists of five sub-groups, “each of which are gradually eroding”.

1825 GMT: That Supreme Leader Message of Condolence (Again). So sorry that Professor Ali-Mohammadi is dead, building up to "the criminal hand that brought this disaster has revealed the motive of the enemies of the Islamic Republic of Iran to deal a blow to the scientific movement of the country".

1624 GMT: A Bit of US Pressure? From an Indian news agency: "The United States has asked Pakistan to dump its plan of receiving natural gas from Iran through a pipeline. According to sources, US Special Envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke, during his meeting with Petroleum Minister Syed Naveed Qamar, said Islamabad would have to abandon its pipeline accord with Tehran in order to qualify for extensive American energy assistance especially for importing Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) and electricity."

1618 GMT: Your Tehran Friday Prayers Summary. Ayatollah Mohammad Emami-Kashani gets the nod today, and he comes up with the stunning declaration, "The enemy uses every possible means to harm the establishment and the country so we should, in a very real sense, remain vigilant."

OK, not so stunning. In fact, repetitive. But we had to say something.

Oh, yes. Emami-Kashani also "called for televised debates to clear ambiguities about the country's current political affairs".

1615 GMT: We've posted an account of yesterday's funeral of Professor Ali-Mohammadi and its effects on academics and students.

1445 GMT: Supreme Leader's Message of Condolence to Family of Professor Ali-Mohammadi. Here's a summary: Ayatollah Khamenei expresses his sorrow, to Ali-Mohammadi's mother, wife, friends, colleagues, and students, and --- by the way --- this is a terror act that "reveals enemies' motive to harm Iran's scientific movement and jihad".

1245 GMT: Divine Declaration of Day. Hossein Taeb, head of the Intelligence Bureau of the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps and former head of the Basiji militia sets it out: the Supreme Leader is unjust are in error, those who follow him will go to Paradise. An Iranian activist offers this translation of Taeb's words:

Even though [the Supreme Leader] was suffering under [Grand Ayatollah] Montazeri during Imam Khomeini's time and despite all insults he had to endure, he did issue a beautifuland  gentle message upon Montazeri's passing and advised that he can be buried anywhere the family wanted. Those who say the Supreme Leader has left the [path of] justice, don't understand the meaning of it. They think that Supreme Leader is chosen by the Assembly of Experts. Supreme Leader is rather discovered by Experts and that is why they can't grant capabilities. It is God who does.

1220 GMT: We Will Find You. Is this a declaration of strength or nervousness? Iran's police chief Esmail Ahmadi-Moghaddam has warned against Internet and text messages to spread news of demonstrations:

These people should know where they are sending the SMS and email as these systems are under control. They should not think using proxies will prevent their identification. If these people continue, their records will be examined and those who organise or issue appeals have committed a worse crime than those who come to the streets.

1145 GMT: The Resigning Diplomat. Confirmation comes in a Norwegian television interview that Mohammad Reza Heidari, an Iranian diplomat in Norway, is quitting his post. Heydari's intention to resign was initally reported days ago on radio. He claims that an Iranian official came to Oslo to assure him he would not be hurt if he retracted the resignation: "I refused to agree to that. They suggested I'd do an interview in which I denied my defection in order to return to Tehran. But I know I made the right choice and that my conscience is clean."

1140 GMT: We've posted the latest video in our running series on football and protest, opposition chants at the Iran-Belgium indoor football match.

1010 GMT: Iran "Analysis" of Day. Islamic Republic News Agency presents the findings of an "Office of Research and Studies" that there was a "deep intrigue", courtesy of the US Government, for disorder and sedition after the Presidential election.

For those of you who aren't convinced about this exposure of "soft war", there are footnotes. And it's great to see Bush Administration has-been John Bolton and Thomas Friedman of The New York Times in the same "research" paper.

0840 GMT: One Less Death Sentence. Kalemeh reports that Hamid Ruhidnejad, arrested before the elections but condemned to death this summer, will now serve 10 years in jail. Ruhidnejad's father contends that, as his son suffers from multiple sclerosis and is half-blind, he is unlikely to survive the punishment.

0735 GMT: We've posted a separate entry, courtesy of Pedestrian, on how the regime is censoring videos and images of the 1979 Islamic Revolution in the run-up to its 31st anniversary on 22 Bahman (11 February)

0715 GMT: The Opposition Emerges on Iran's State Media. Dr. Javad Etaat, appearing on the Ru Be Farda programme of Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting, IRIB ("Ru be farda" magazine), criticised the "failed" economic plans of the Government, pointing to Iran's high rate of inflation. He also got political, denouncing the prohibition of demonstrations and the banning of newspapers. Perhaps most pointedly, he refers to Imam Ali, the first Imam of Shi'a Islam, to challenge any prohibition of dissent.

Etaat is a professor of political science at Shahad Behesti University and a former member of the Parliament's Cultural Commission. Unsurprisingly, the video of his comments is now racing around YouTube.

0705 GMT: The Scholars Protest (cont.). An EA reader writes us with a clarification, "That 300+ scholars lettter (see 0630 GMT) started a very long time ago! Deutsche Welle covered it on July 10th."

0645 GMT: The Battle With Rafsanjani. Hamid Rohani, a fervent supporter of President Ahmadinejad, has continued his attack on former President Hashemi Rafsanjani. Asked about his recent claim that Imam Khomeini had warned Rafsanjani could be "deceived" (noted in our updates earlier this week), Rohani insisted --- despite the lack of this claim in Khomeini's published letters --- that the incident was in 1973, when the Friday Prayers leader of the city of Rafsanjan wrote Khomeini. What is more: Rohani claims the exchange arose from Rafsanjani's request for religious funds for the People's Mujahideen Organization of Iran (PMOI), which the regime now considers a "terrorist" movement.

0635 GMT: Mousavi's Reference to Government "Enemies"? We noted last night that Mir Hossein Mousavi had sent condolences to the family of the murdered physicist, Massoud Ali-Mohammadi. This phrase, however, deserves attention: Ali-Mohammadi was assassinated by "enemies of the people". Who is that "enemy"?

0630 GMT: The Scholars Protest. Iranian academics working and studying abroad are circulating an open letter to the "Honourable People of Iran": "Preparing the grounds for the free exchange of information, opinions and beliefs, and most importantly the security of university students, academics, and thinkers, are the responsibilities of the government and are the most basic conditions for scientific and social growth of a nation."

More than 300 scholars have already signed the letter.

0625 GMT: It's the weekend in Iran, and we're expecting a bit of a lull after the furour over the killing of Professor Ali-Mohammadi. We have posted the full audio of the physicist's last lecture.

That said, there have been so many fissures in the "establishment" this week that there may not be a pause this Friday. And there's a sign that the Green movement has even gotten a foothold in the broadcasts of Islamic Republic Iran Broadcasting --- we're working on the video and story.

The Latest from Iran (12 January): The Killing of the Professor

2110 GMT: Peyke Iran has published the news we heard earlier (see 1810 GMT) that all the detained Mothers of Mourning have been released.

1855 GMT: HomyLafayette has an excellent summary of information around the Mohammadi case.

1845 GMT: More on the Trial of the Baha'i (see 0725 GMT). An EA reader notes confusion over the court hearing for seven Baha'i members arrested in 2008 for "organizing riots". Many accounts say the trial was today but one Iranian source reports that testimony began yesterday, a day early.

1815 GMT: Not A Nuclear Scientist. A highly reliable EA source checks in on the Professor's case: "I hand checked all three UN black lists [of Iranian nuclear scientists]. Ali Mohammadi isn't there."

1810 GMT: Mothers of Mourning Update. Norooz reports that 14 of the mothers arrested in last Saturday's protest have been transferred to Evin prison while the rest have been released.

An Iranian activist is claiming, however, that all mothers have been freed.

1800 GMT: Oh. My. Goodness. The Supreme Leader's representative to the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps, Ali Saeedi, has reportedly declared that the the deaths of 75,000 people will be worthwhile if the Islamic Republic is preserved. 1745 GMT: The Presidential website has made a contribution to the Mohammadi story, declaring that the Iranian nation will have its "revenge" on the "enemies" who killed the professor. More info, however, on Mohammadi as a particle physicist: his faculty profile and a list of publications which complements those we noted earlier (1445 GMT).

NEW Latest Iran Video: How State Media Frames Killing of “Nuclear” Professor (12 January) NEW Iran: How Far Do The Green Movements Go? NEW Iran & Social Media: Dispelling Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (Parsons) Iran Exclusive: The Latest Nuclear Riddle — Renewed Talks with “West”? Iran Analysis: Beyond the Headlines, The Regime Battles Itself Iran & Twitter: Myth v. Reality of Security and “Deep Packet Inspection” Iran & Twitter: Last Words on The Hell of Heaven (Shahryar) The Latest from Iran (11 January): Reading the Regime

1630 GMT: Rah-e-Sabz is reporting an explosion in Shariati Street, Tehran, which has killed one person.

1605 GMT: How the Mohammadi Story Was Clarified. It should be noted that the "Iranian blogger" mentioned at 1250 GMT, with the post which began to establish that Professor Mohammadi was a particle physicist and not a nuclear scientist, was one of Mohammadi's students.

1555 GMT: We've posted a video showing how Iran's state media are framing the killing of Professor Mohammadi. It is, according to Tehran University academic Seyed Mohammad Marandi, a "terrorist" act --- probably the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MKO) --- supported by the US and Israel.

1535 GMT: Not A Nuclear Scientist. The Iranian Atomic Energy Agency has formally denied any professional relationship with Professor Mohammad Ali Mohammadi. We also have another link for Professor Mohammadi: his involvement in the project "Synchrotron-light for Experimental Science and Applications in the Middle East" (SESAME).

1515 GMT: Curbing the Reformists. A group of members of Parliament has asked Speaker Ali Larijani to remove Ali Akbar Motashami, head of Mehdi Karroubi's Presidential campaign, as the chair of Committee for the Defense of Palestine. Motashami has criticised the outcome of the Presidential election since the day after the vote, and his Parliamentary opponents have claimed that he is responsible for the slogan, "No Gaza! No Lebanon! We Sacrifice for Iran!". Motashami was former Minister of Interior when Mir Hossein Mousavi was Prime Minister.

1510 GMT: Motahari's Move. High-profile member of Parliament (and brother-in-law of Ali Larijani) Ali Motahari has continued his recent criticism of the Ahmadinejad Government through a letter  to  Hossein Shariatmardari, the editor of the pro-Ahmadinejad newspaper Kayhan. Motahari declared that the President started the political crisis when he accused all of the candidates in the election of being "spinning tops" of Hashemi Rafsanjani. Motahari put four questions to Shariatmardari, including the reason why Ahmadinejad attacked Hashemi Rafsanjani in pre-election debates, and he concluded the letter, "Maybe you and your colleagues need a rest". Indeed, it would be better for Iranian society if Shariatmardari and his friends went "for a holiday in an enjoyable place" and allowed the situation to improve.

1505 GMT: The Attack on Rafsanjani. Cleric Hamid Rohani  has announced that former President Hashemi Rafsanjani is "not a very important man" and asserted that Imam Khomeini believed Rafsanjani could be "deceived" by others.

1455 GMT: Makhmalbaf Puts Out Mousavi's Message? The filmmaker Mohsen Makhmalbaf, who is closely connected with Mir Hossein Mousavi, has set out a series of declarations, defining the state of the Green movement, in an interview:

Who are main leaders of the movement? It's the young generation. In each alley, in each street, you will see one smart youth lead 10 others. We have some famous people everywhere, but even if the government kills all of them, this movement will continue.

Makhmalbaf added a specific declaration on methods, "The past seven months have been the first time that we could ask people to think about non-violence. We are going to kill dictatorship, not dictators. We don't want to empty the prisons and then fill them with other people." The filmmaker also repeated his wish for "targeted sanctions" against the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps.

1445 GMT: More on the Particle Physicist. A fellow physicist has posted a link to 40 listed academic papers of "M. Alimohammadi" or "Mohsen Alimohammadi". None of them, according to the sources, are connected with nuclear physics.

1305 GMT: The Mohammadi Blame Game. Press TV, after carrying the message of Iran's Foreign Ministry of "signs of the involvement of the Zionist regime [Israel], the US and their allies" in the killing of Professor Mohammadi, rolls out the latest accusation

A terrorist group, whose radio station broadcast from the United States, took responsibility Tuesday for the fatal attack on an Iranian nuclear scientist in Tehran. The Iran Royal Association, an obscure monarchist group that seeks to reestablish the Pahlavi reign in Iran, announced in a statement that its "Tondar Commandos" were behind the assassination of Masoud Ali-Mohammadi.

And very quickly the "Iran Royal Association" denies the allegation.

1250 GMT: The Real Professor Mohammadi? A highly-reliable EA source provides the following important information:

I knew Ali Mohammadi personally and talked to him at length in Tehran in March. Almost certainly he had nothing to do with Iran's nuclear programme, according to very informed sources, and he was indeed a supporter of the Green movement. Rah-e-Sabz has published his signature on a letter sent by a group of university professors in support of Mousavi.

An Iranian blogger makes similar points, while adding that Mohammadi was a specialist on particle physics and linking to his Tehran University profile.

1050 GMT: The Battle over the Dead Professor. Wow, this is going to get heated. Ayande News , considered close to former President Hashemi Rafsanjani, has fought back against state media's portrayal that Massoud Mohammadi was a "dedicated revolutionary" killed by "anti-revolutionary" elements with the reminder that Mohammadi was publicly identified as a supporter of Mir Hossein Mousavi. The Mousavi site Kalameh also pushes this line and adds that Mohammadi, one of the first Ph.D. graduates in physics at Tehran University, was instrumental in the development of the programme over the last 20 years. (English summary)

0930 GMT: Killed Professor in Iran's Nuclear Programmme? The Internet chatter that Massoud Mohammadi, the Tehran University professor killed in an explosion this morning (see 0720 GMT), is a nuclear physicist now appears to be confirmed. Tehran Prosecutor General Abbas Jafari Doulatabadi has said that Mohammadi was a member of the country's "scientific elite" killed by Iran's enemies. (English summary in Los Angeles Times)

[NOTE: This update has been eclipsed by later news. It appears that the "nuclear physicist" claim is a line put out by Iranian authorities and does not represent Mohammadi's work.]

0920 GMT: Trials for US Citizens? The Iranian Foreign Ministry has repeated this morning that the three American citizens detained this summer when they crossed on foot into Iran from Iraq will soon be in court: "The judiciary will make a decision and we know that they will be tried soon." (Original story from Fars)

0750 GMT: A Cyber-Attack Too Far? Remember the "Iranian Cyber-Army", the group that carried out attacks on Twitter and, more importantly, the opposition website Mowj-e-Sabz? Well, they're back with a curious operation. This morning, their "diversion" attack posted their images and slogans on Baidu, China's top search engine. Baidu is now back in operation, but news of the hijacking has quickly spread. More importantly, so has the head-scratching. Why, given Tehran's need for Chinese support on a number of issues, would an Iranian group take down a prominent site accepted by the Chinese Government? If the Iranian Cyber-Army is close to the Government, someone has authorised a very stupid operation. If, on the other, the ICA is just a private group carrying out a bit of damage and silliness, it is not really helping anyone.

0745 GMT: Free the Mothers of Mourning. Amnesty International has called on Iran's authorities to release 33 Mothers of Mourning and their supporters, detained at the weekly protest in Laleh Park on Saturday.

0740 GMT: Nuclear Talks. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton confirmed, after  discussion of further US sanctions and Iran's latest proposals, that talks of the "5+1" powers (US, UK, France, Germany, China, Russia) on Tehran's nuclear programme will take place in New York at the end of this week.

0725 GMT: Blaming the Baha'is. A story that we should have noted this weekend. The Iranian regime will soon try seven leaders of the Baha'i faith, held in Evin prison since spring 2008. While the detentions occurred two years ago, the handling of the cases is now clearly tied to the Government's manoeuvres in the post-election crisis, blaming groups like the Baha'i, "terrorists", and foreign powers for the conflict. Tehran Prosecutor General Abbas Jafari Doulatabadi declared:

These people were not arrested because they were Baha'is....In searching their homes, a number of weapons and ammunition were discovered....[They] played a role in organizing the riots and sending pictures of the riots abroad. That is why they were arrested.

0720 GMT: Press TV is reporting that Dr Massoud Mohammadi, a Tehran University professor, has been killed near his home by the explosion of a booby-trapped motorbike. Mohammadi recently presented a paper on water resource management at an Australian conference. 0715 GMT: We begin today with two analyses. After yesterday's major development, the issuing of statements by Mehdi Karroubi and Mohammad Khatami, we put the question, "How Far Do The Green Movements Go?" in their demands. And amidst the recent discussion of #IranElection and Twitter, Christopher Parsons busts some fears and dispels some myths about Iran and social media.

Iran: "What is This Opposition?" Right Answers to Wrong Questions

EA's Josh Shahryar offers this analysis, also published in The Huffington Post:

On Wednesday in The New York Times, Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett attempted perhaps the most stinging dismissal of the importance of the ongoing opposition protests in Iran.

Bloggers and other foreign policy experts refuted many of the Leveretts' specific points, especially their overestimation of government-sponsored protests and underestimation of opposition demonstrations. [EA's immediate reaction is in Wednesday's updates.] I have covered the numbers on my blog, but a very good second opinion is offered by Daniel Drezner in ForeignPolicy.com.

Drezner and Kevin Sullivan of Real Clear Politics set a wider challenge, however, when they argue that, beyond the Leveretts' distortions, there are "good" analytical questions.

Those questions need a response, not necessarily because they are "good", but because if they are not addressed, the Leveretts may get away with a blatant attempt at skewing facts to hammer in their argument that President Barack Obama should forget about the possibility of regime change in Iran.

This is how the Leveretts set out their three queries:

Those who talk so confidently about an "opposition" in Iran as the vanguard for a new revolution should be made to answer three tough questions: First, what does this opposition want? Second, who leads it? Third, through what process will this opposition displace the government in Tehran? In the case of the 1979 revolutionaries, the answers to these questions were clear. They wanted to oust the American-backed regime of Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi and to replace it with an Islamic republic. Everyone knew who led the revolution: Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who despite living in exile in Paris could mobilize huge crowds in Iran simply by sending cassette tapes into the country. While supporters disagreed about the revolution's long-term agenda, Khomeini's ideas were well known from his writings and public statements. After the shah's departure, Khomeini returned to Iran with a draft constitution for the new political order in hand. As a result, the basic structure of the Islamic Republic was set up remarkably quickly.

Let's see what ancient China has to offer before I add my assessment. Back in the olden days, this man traveled hundreds of miles to meet a Taoist sage somewhere in China. After the necessary greetings, he said, "I have come a long way to ask you something. What is the answer to the ultimate question in the universe?" The sage smiled and barked, "Well, that is not what you should be asking. You should ask: is there an answer to the ultimate question in the universe?"

In this parable, the first question posed by the Leveretts is fair: what does this opposition want?

Well, certainly not what Mir Hossein Mousavi wants. Even if we ignore the protesters' repeated calls for the freedom of detainees and other chants that call for help from Imam Hossein against tyranny, I think "Down with the Dictator" --- heard for the last six months, heard loudly and clearly --- is a slogan that embodies the demands. President Ahmadinejad Must Go.

In recent months, however, protesters have also widely started chanting against Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The funeral of Grand Ayatollah Hossein-Ali Montazeri was filled with noise denouncing the Supreme Leader. Ashura's protests days later were condemned by the regime for committing the same offense.

Certainly, Mousavi is still bargaining with the government. However, people on the street aren't ready to chicken out of their demands, even in the face of gunfire. If the government hadn't forcefully stopped them from presenting their demands through the media, you would have already seen that clearly.

The second question of the Leveretts is one the Taoist sage would have barked at: Who leads it?

The two questioners attempt to fool us into believing that their enquiry is fair by paralleling it with the Iranian Revolution of 1979. Revolutions need leaders and the current protesters don't have one --- quod erat demonstrandum, this is not a revolution.

The first assumption is not true, however: it is not a prerequisite for revolutions to have leaders. Consider the February Revolution of 1917 that overthrew Tsar Nicholas I of Russia. Academics are generally in agreement that it was without what we today consider a definite and centralized leadership. Almost a century later, if you envisage scattered activists working together to bring people out to protest, then Iran has no shortage of those. Mousavi, often considered the de-facto "leader" of the current protesters -- didn't even sanction or support protests that were joined by hundreds of thousands in Ashura.

The third question of the Leveretts made me smirk because it has no immediate relevance: through what process will this opposition displace the government in Tehran?

Well, I wish I knew. But just because the protesters' demands have not been met yet, does not mean that we need to figure how they are going to achieve them. That is their task, a quest for which they've been coming out onto the streets of Iran, chanting as loud as they can, getting arrested, and spilling blood for the past six months to show their commitment to achieving those demands.

Who knows what might overthrow the regime? Maybe the Islamic Republic of Iran Army (Artesh) will finally step in. Maybe millions will turn up and storm Khamenei and Ahmadinejad's house and the parliament. Maybe the violence will get so rampant that the leaders of Iran will simply board a plane to Moscow and flee. This we don't know.

But we do know that simply because they have not met their goals yet, does not mean they won't in the future. The Leveretts' attempt to parallel this movement with the Revolution of 1979 tries to force us into believing that we need to know how, but we really don't.

When the change happens, we will know. Until then, all we can do is support the opposition because they're not just fighting for political rights, but for their human rights. If President Obama believes the Leveretts and discounts the power of the Green Movement, he risks making enemies of the open and secular Iran of the future, just like Jimmy Carter did when he discounted the Revolution of 1979. (Not to mention the fact that he would be guilty of legitimizing an illegitimate regime.)

The Leveretts' piece made me really grateful to an old professor of mine, Dr. Rick Schubert, bless him. Dr. Schubert gave me a D in Philosophy 101, but he taught me what now has become my Golden Rule: questions are equally as important as the answer to them, so be careful before you ask. Maybe the Leveretts should attend one of his classes.

Iran: 2009's Year of Living Dangerously (Part 1)

A special analysis from EA's Mr Smith:

When Iran entered 2009, most observers thought that the year --- which marked the 30th anniversary of the Revolution that swept away the Shah's regime and the 20th anniversary of "post-Khomeini Iran", the unwieldy political arrangement that emerged in the aftermath of the death of the founding father of the Islamic Republic --- would also see a lacklustre confirmation of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for a second Presidential term.

As Iran exits the year, it is reeling from its worst-ever political crisis, one that has finally undermined the halo of sanctity built over the persona of the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, in the past two decades and has finally witnessed the collapse of the fragile factional equilibrium that held sway for the past decade.

After half a decade of carefully pasteurised electoral lists produced by the Guardian Council, there were serious doubts about the population's appetite for electoral politics. Iranian history, however, always remind us that change is sudden and abrupt rather than gradual and predictable. Conscious of their eroding influence in state affairs and their descent into oblivion in the eyes of public opinion, reformist political leaders were determined to make a last stand, one that had to rely upon the return to the scene of its most prominent figure.

Shortly before the anniversary of the Revolution's triumph, February 11, former President Mohammad Khatami, still loved by the urban middle classes, succumbed to the incessant campaign carried out --- largely through the Internet --- by his youthful supporters. He announced that he would "seriously" enter the Presidential campaign. The declaration seemed to fulfil Khatami's earlier promise that either he or the hitherto obscure Mir-Hossein Mousavi, a darling of Ayatollah Khomeini in the Eighties who had estranged himself from politics ever since the death of his mentor, would join the race.

For reasons unknown, Mousavi did not keep to this informal pact and stand aside for Khatami. Several weeks later, he suddenly announced the end of his political lethargy and his intention to register as a candidate for the 12 June elections. An embarrassed Khatami was forced to withdraw from the race shortly afterwards, with the prospect of three heavyweight reformist candidates --- former Majlis speaker Mehdi Karroubi had long announced his presently in the race --- weakening the reformist chances.

Mousavi's re-entrance into the mainstream was an enigma to many. Notwithstanding his long absence from day-to-day politics, his particularly bad relationship with Ayatollah Khamenei throughout the late 1980, with Mousavi's departure from the scene once he was defeated by the present Supreme Leader in a struggle over the reform of the Constitution, meant that any forced co-habitation with Khamenei would not be a happy one.

After a long Internet-based prologue and the start of campaign meetings in March and April, Iran's presidential race picked up pace about three weeks before June 12. Indeed, it was proving to be different. Suddenly the whole nation's squares were ablaze with incessant debate on the virtues and fallacies of each candidate. Popular participation in hustings and meetings was unprecedented, considerably higher than even Khatami's quasi-mythical victory back in May 1997. When the administration of Tehran's Polytechnic (Amir Kabir University), the nation's most politicised campus, denied Karroubi the use of their premises for a campaign event, the 72 year-old cleric was lifted into the campus for an impromptu sermon within the university mosque. It was there that the slogan "Marg bar Diktator" ("Death to Dictator") re-echoed where it was conceived a generation earlier.

A few days before the elections, another innovation of political campaigning had a lasting effect on the emerging contest. For the first time ever, Iranian television featured US-styled debates between the political candidates. The detached criticism that marked the previous presidential campaigns was replaced by the unearthing of latent tension and hatred.

Anxious to prove his position of defender of the common man against the vicious tentacles of the likes of former President Hashemi Rafsanjani, Ahmadinejad claimed --- in his highly-anticipated debate with Mir-Hossein Mousavi --- that he was the victim of a plot hatched by Rafsanjani and executed by Mousavi and Karroubi. The association of the head of the Assembly of Experts and the two candidates was, however, a clumsy move. Karroubi had fiercely criticised Rafsanjani on many occasions during the past two decades, while Mousavi was anything but an ally of the then-Majlis speaker during the 1980s. It was and still is impossible to gauge the effect of Ahmadinejad's accusation on the population.

The last days before the vote transformed the streets of Tehran and other major cities into a never-ending open-air carnival. At 6 or 7 p.m., acting as though a switch had suddenly turned them on, tens of thousands of people would descend upon the capital's main thoroughfares in cars, on motorcycles, or on foot to campaign for their candidate. The equally-divided crowds of the first few days of campaigning soon developed into large crowds for either Mousavi or Ahmadinejad --- Karroubi and Mohsen Rezaei appeared to be lagging behind in the final stages of the campaigning. Rather than being based on distinct electoral programmes, the campaign took the form of a clash of personalities, with voters left to chose the candidate that best embodied their own social position and aspirations. Mousavi's calls for the removal of limits to the "flow of information", his statement that Iran should stop being an enemy of many foreign powers, and, most importantly, his defiant calls against the "lies" and "unaccountability" of Ahmadinejad were decisive in shoring his support for him amongst a vast segment of the urban population.

On the eve of the vote, virtually all analysts and journalists were placing their guess on a run-off between the two major candidates. The exception was the management of the Karroubi-owned Etemade Melli newspaper, who over the course of the last few days before the vote was repeatedly warning observers in private that "things had been arranged to ensure a first-round Ahmadinejad victory". A similar warning was given, before a single vote had been cast, to one of the major international news agencies in Tehran by another source well-placed inside the regime. Etemade Melli devoted most of the front page on the eve of the vote to an article, "We Shall All Remain Awake on Friday Night". It was an implicit reminder of Karroubi's "nap" at 5 a.m. on the night the votes were counted in the first round of 2005, which allegedly cost the cleric the chance to compete in a run-off with Rafsanjani (a run-off that would have precluded any Ahmadinejad Presidency).

June 12 began as a hot, sticky day in Tehran. At the last minute, Mir-Hossein Mousavi reverse his decision to vote together with Rafsanjani and Khatami at Ayatollah Khomeini's residence in Jamaran, North Tehran, and cast his ballot instead at a mosque in Shahr-e Rey, an old and humble area of South Tehran. His smile ended as soon as he took to the podium to deliver a short post-vote speech. In it he claimed, at 10:30 a.m. on Election day, that irregularities were already taking place across the country.

Ahmadinejad voted in Afsariyeh, West Tehran. For the rest of the day, people turned out in droves to cast their votes in all areas of the capital. Turnout was especially strong in middle-class areas whose desertion from the ballot box had helped Ahmadinejad become Mayor of Tehran in 2003 and President in 2005.

As nightfall descended, the news was not quite what was expected. Reformist supporters had already gathered outside the Interior Ministry, and Mousavi emerged for a press conference, during which he dared to claim that he was the victor of the bitterly-fought contest, and that any other result would be the product of fraud.

As the night wore on, the official returns would not show a Mousavi victory. Indeed, they would not even point to the run-off predicted by almost all observers. Not only would the gap between Mousavi and Ahmadinejad widen, the President would easily hurdle the 50 percent required for a first-round victory. To the shock and dismay of the reformist supporters and voters, Ahmadinejad was declared the winner on 13 June.