Iran Special: Interpreting the Death of Professor Ali-Mohammadi

Perhaps the first rule of analysis, when considering an event such as yesterday's killing of Tehran University physicist Massoud Ali-Mohammadi, is this:

Wait. Wait and watch the analyses of others.

Throughout the day, Iranian state media beat out a steady rhythm. Ali-Mohammadi was a worthy "revolutionary" for the Islamic Republic, who was involved with its nuclear programme. He had been murdered by "anti-revolutionaries" and "enemies" as part of the plot to overthrow the Republic. The only distinction in the coverage was whether Ali-Mohammadi's assassins were monarchists or members of the "terrorist" Mojahedin-e-Khalq (MKO).

Latest Iran Video: The Leverett Line on Killing of Professor Ali-Mohammadi (13 January)
Latest Iran Video: How State Media Frames Killing of “Nuclear” Professor (12 January)
The Latest from Iran (12 January): The Killing of the Professor

As there was no evidence for this line --- apart from an assertion that the "Iran Royal Association" had taken responsibility for the assassination, a report immediately denied by the group --- any analysis based on it is spurious. What is more interesting is that the Iranian regime's declarations were echoed by another source: Israel.

DEBKAfile, the website linked to Israeli Government and private sources, should always be read for misinformation and "spin" rather than straight-up analysis. So it was intriguing that the site quickly posted:

The covert war against Iran's nuclear program struck deep inside the Islamic Republic with the death Tuesday, Jan. 12 of nuclear physicist professor Masoud Ali Mohammadi, 50, by a remote-controlled exploding motorbike as he left his Tehran home. He was a senior professor at Tehran University which DEBKAfile's Iranian sources say is an important hub of nuclear weapons research....

Iranian authorities see Mohammadi's death as ramping up the Western effort to recruit, intimidate or liquidate the brains behind Iran's nuclear progress and a warning

Meir Javedanfar, the Israel-based analyst whose readings are given more weight in the "mainstream" than the assertions of DEBKAfile, was not as definitive in The Guardian. However, he started from the premise that Ali-Mohammadi was in Iran's nuclear programme, and all his scenarios were of "foreign" hands in the killing. After putting forth the MKO option, he got to his argument:

It is also possible that Mohammadi was assassinated by a foreign intelligence agency. Should that be the case, this recent incident comes amid a series of setbacks for [Iran's] Oghab-2 counter-intelligence bureau.

There is evidence of an Israeli covert programme, supported by the US, to disrupt Iran's nuclear development through kidnappings and killings. However, there is no evidence that Mohammadi was a target. Instead, throughout yesterday, the public record put forth, mainly through activists searching the Internet, was not of a nuclear scientist. Ali-Mohammadi was a professor of particle physics who had published dozens of academic papers and had an international reputation in his field (see HomyLafayette's blog for a summary). Indeed, Ali-Mohammadi was even involved in a multi-national project which brought contact with Israeli colleagues:

The regional research project in which Ali-Mohammadi participated, along with other scientists from Iran, Israel and various Middle Eastern countries, is called Synchrotron-light for Experimental Science and Applications in the Middle East, or SESAME. It is based in Jordan and operates under United Nations auspices. Iranian and foreign scientists said the project has applications in industry, medicine, nanotechnology and other fields unrelated to nuclear power.

The Iranian and Israeli participation in the project is unusual because the two countries have had no ties since the 1979 Islamic revolution, and Iran refuses to recognize the Israeli government. Palestinian scientists also participate in the SESAME project, whose last meeting was held in November in Jordan.

So why this Israel-first line for the murder, for which (again) there is no evidence yet, out of Israel?

To show that it can. The message to Tehran: if you pursue your nuclear programme, we will get you. Possibly not through military action, since the US Government has objected, but through covert disruption. No one in that programme is safe.

In other words, it is irrelevant whether Mohammadi was a nuclear scientist. It is besides the point that Israel may not have had any role in the murder. Just the possibility is enough for a bit of psychological warfare against Tehran.

The problem with this too-clever-by-half spin is that it plays into the hands of those in the Iranian regime whose first priority is not necessarily the nuclear option but crushing internal opposition. The US Government, which is not as keen as Israel to be seen as a covert threat to Iran's ambitions, is staying well away from the line put out by DEBKAfile and Javedanfar as well as Iranian state media, calling the assertions "absurd". In a curious but convenient alliance, therefore, Tehran will be quite happy for Israeli "analysts" to put out the We Might Have Done It story.

But what of the Iranian opposition who might be affected by that story? That brings us to a far different scenario and spin, put out by elements of that opposition, that Ali-Mohammadi was killed by agents of the regime. Muhammad Sahimi of Tehran Bureau, picking up on the fact that Ali-Mohammadi supported the Presidential candidacy of Mir Hossein Mousavi and the assertion that the physicist had become a vocal critic of the Government, offers an example:

Given that Professor Ali-Mohammadi was apparently well informed about many of the IRGC [Revolutionary Guard] projects, and was a prominent academic supporter of the reformists and the Green Movement, and given also his prominence, his murder would send a message to others, particularly the academics, that the hardliners may have started a campaign of assassination in order to silence the opposition -- that is if the hardliners were behind the assassination.

Another characteristic of the hardliners is that they never forgive anyone who deserts them and joins the opposition. The deserters are usually dealt with much more harshly than bona fide members of the opposition. This only adds to the suspicion that the hardliners may have had something to do with Professor Ali-Mohammadi's murder....

If the assassination signals a new campaign by the hardliners, Iran may be moving toward becoming a second Pakistan, where the military and intelligence services eliminate the opposition with impunity and make the country even more unstable than it already is.

The truth is that, for all these scenarios and purported analyses, we do not know who is responsible for yesterday's murder.

What is most important this morning is that a man has been assassinated. What is significant is many participants in conflicts inside and outside Iran --- the regime, the Green movement, Israel --- will use that death to gain political advantage.

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.

UPDATED Iran & Twitter: Last Words on The Hell of Heaven (Shahryar)

UPDATE 12 JANUARY: Patrick Philippe Meyer has posted a thoughtful response, "Where I disagree with Will Heaven vs Josh Shahryar", which concludes: "Digital activists really need to get up to speed on nonviolent civil resistance tactics and strategies just as the latter need to get up to speed on how to communicate more securely in repressive environments."

---
EA's Josh Shahryar, to move beyond the myths of "security" on Iran and social media so we can continue in the task of information and analysis, offers some final thoughts to Will Heaven:

Before I get to your arguments, I want to clear something up first. My first response was rather insulting --- and it was knowingly so. You had clearly gone out of your way to insult people that I have come to know and cherish both as friends and as colleagues. These people are not 13-year olds with laptops who listen to Emo music all day and cut themselves for fun. They are experienced professionals from fields as diverse as psychology, law, journalism, medicine, politics, and information technology. And they care. So any attempt at undermining their efforts will be swiftly answered. Anyone questioning their intentions or work is going to receive a reply. And any insults hurled at them will result in ridicule for the hurler.

Iran & Twitter: Myth v. Reality of Security and “Deep Packet Inspection”
Iran & Twitter 101: Rereading A Tale of Two Twitterers
Iran & Twitter 101: Getting The Facts Right — A Response to Will Heaven
The Latest from Iran (11 January): Reading the Regime

Now let’s get to your latest, hopefully last, argument, posted on The Daily Telegraph website last Friday:

Picture this scene. In Tehran, during the summer of 2007, a group of young students – male and female – are enjoying a house party. It’s a very hot day. They are drinking, smoking pot and listening to music around a swimming pool. Then, unexpectedly, there is loud knock at the front door. Men wearing the uniform of the Revolutionary Guard barge in. The music is switched off and the party falls silent. The girls are wearing bikinis, and the boys are holding beers – they’ve all been caught red-handed. But the order given by the guards is this: every one of you with a laptop or a computer must hand it over to us now.

This anecdote – passed onto me by a trusted British-Iranian source – illustrates something very important about Iran’s authoritarian regime. For a long time, it has actively hunted for compromising hard-drive data in order to assert its control over the lives of Iranians. By confiscating the students’ laptops, the Guards gave themselves access to photos, documents and emails. Enough evidence, in other words, to prosecute (or at the very least threaten) the party-goers, who attended these sorts of events frequently.

More recent stories suggest these efforts have escalated. Take, for instance, Evgeny Morozov’s Iranian-American woman, who was asked by officers at Tehran’s International Airport to log into Facebook when she arrived there in July. At first, she denied having a Facebook account – so when they proved her wrong, they also noted down all of her Facebook friends’ names. I personally know of another Iranian who was arrested and imprisoned after posting anti-regime slogans, rather naively, on a publicly-listed Facebook profile.

I personally, as someone who looks at more substantial evidence, decline to tackle the anecdote you present. As for Morozov’s story and your other Iranian friend, yes, the regime has been actively hunting for data for years. But Morozov’s opinion about social media is pretty negative, not just about Iran but in general, and so I am not going to debate someone who has made up his mind even before tackling the Twitter Revolution. That Revolution is about awareness, not provoking a political revolt or helping it directly.

You persist:

It’s overwhelmingly clear, then, that it is dangerous for Iranians to partake in online protests on sites such as Twitter and Facebook, or to post compromising information online with the intention that it is read by a Western audience. Clearer still – as I wrote in the Daily Telegraph last week – that when Westerners encourage this communication, or provoke it, they could be putting Iranian lives in danger, especially given the prolific use of “Deep Packet Inspection” (DPI). It’s terrifying to think that a simple “re-tweet” could lead to torture, but it’s also worryingly plausible.

Your perception of what foreigners are doing for Iranians is unfounded and wrong. As for your continued worries about Deep Packet Inspection, the report about the Iranian regime using DPI is hotly contested --- have a look at Mike Dunn's dissection, posted today on EA, of your flimsy evidence or responses from professionals like David Isenberg or Christopher Parsons. DPI is not something that you can detect by simply checking systems from the outside. Indeed, About the only way you can tell if DPI is being utilized is if the user actually shows it to you.

You concede:

Now, I have received a lot of criticism for putting forward this view. The most recent from Daily Nite Owl writer Josh Shahryar, an influential#Iranelection Tweeter who has also written for The Huffington Post. His argument is forcefully made (to put it mildly), and he alleges that I have misunderstood the role played by Twitter in Iran. He writes:

Shahryar is spot on about one thing: Twitter has helped to share news about what is happening inside Iran – as I made clear in my Telegraph piece, “spreading awareness” is in theory a good thing. He is also to be commended for his efforts to conceal the identities of those Iranians who spread information online, by providing them with anonymity network software such as Tor and Freegate.

Thank you for the kind words, I certainly don’t deserve any of that. But our efforts are not concentrated on making the revolution a success. That is the job of Iranian protesters. Our job is to simply let the world know what is going inside Iran. If you have to measure our results, do it at how we have managed to spread the news about the protesters. I think there is enough evidence that that we have made a difference in that specific quest.

Instead of measurement, however, you make another fling at tearing down that effort:

But those softwares, as Shahryar admits, are only used by a “select few”. And it is foolish to think that their use guarantees safety: if the Revolutionary Guard were to find someone using the software, the consequences would be dire. “No one actually communicates with people in Iran,” he contests. “They post their stuff and they leave.” But who does he think they are posting their “stuff” for? If the regime was able to match information posted by someone in Iran with similar information being passed around in the US, does Shahryar think they would be forgiven?

Your initial argument was that Westerners are encouraging Iranians to engage in those activities. Now you’re saying not that we should stand aside but that we should intervene to discourage them from posting this information online? Who are we to do that?

"The select few" of whom I spoke  currently have software that is undetectable through even DPI. The exact nature of that software needs to remain a secret for their own safety. The other Iranians already have more primitive proxy server software that they use to access information.  They don’t post anything, but they certainly get informed.

If you genuinely have concerns about DPI, read the articles that I mentioned above. But remember this as well:

It is naïve to think that Iranians are totally dependent on Westerners to protect them. More than two-thirds of Iran’s population is young and a large majority is very well-educated. They know their way around the Internet better than some folks in Britain and the US. And they  know the risks that they face. Again, it is immature --- and rather insulting --- to think that they are kids that are being manipulated by the ‘superior’ race in the West into doing things – and rather insulting.

Insulting to them when you reach desperately for evidence that they are being manipulated by "outsiders":

The idea that, as Shahryar puts it, “we aren’t encouraging anyone” could not be further from the truth. Here are a few tweets from the #Iranelection hashtag posted in the last few days, most of which have been re-tweeted numerous times:

@houmanr: How to stop basij motor bikes http://vasabaha.com/1388/04/07/mikh/ #iranelection (2 days ago)
@jefryslash: ?????? ?????? ?? ???? ? ???? ?? ????http://tinyurl.com/luex5x How to DEFEND AGAINT BASIJ & POLICE #iranelection in Streets #iranelection (2 days ago)
@PersianTechie: Two nails will stop basiji bike/car/truck. http://twitpic.com/7ychu #iranElection (3 days ago)
@fr33dom_fighter break the basiji knees with fierce strikes w/Bat and break their pride and make them humble #iranelection (4 days ago)
@tehranweekly: take all pictures of basij agents and post on twitter &facebook so we can retweet them #cn4iran#iranelection (1 day ago)

And that was just a quick search. It seems difficult to deny that these sorts of messages --- mainly posted by Iranian-Americans -- incite those inside Iran to commit very dangerous acts. Even if they are not carried out, they could be used as evidence against those Iranians who choose to re-tweet them or post them online.

Many of those who use Twitter "on the outside" are Iranian-Americans; many still retain their Iranian citizenship, and they certainly have a stake in their homeland. However, for the very few "Westerners" who cross the line with provocation, you also note my reference to how much we --- as the members of the #IranElection hashtag on Twitter --- are opposed to such childish activities. Your argument is self-defeating: it is we, not you, who are maintaining "security".

So unable to prove danger, you choose to belittle us. More importantly, by reducing Iranians to our helpless victims, you belittle them:

The positive aspects of online activism for change in Iran have been vastly overstated. And when you consider the danger posed to Iranians by online participation – compared with what online participation has achieved – the overall result is hardly tangible, and certainly not worth the risks which have been undertaken. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his brutal regime remains in power after a vicious crackdown. Tens (if not hundreds) of Iranians have been killed, dozens tortured and raped, and many more imprisoned. The Twitter revolutionaries, however, are too proud to re-think their strategy.

You ignore any counter-arguments, including those in my previous response, and just keep on beating your own drum. But let me try one more time to make you stop.

Will, the overwhelming majority of people who were arrested, killed and beaten faced that terror on the streets while protesting. No one online is responsible for that. They willingly chose to go and engage in those activities.

If you’re suggesting that Iranians are going out to protest because we’re asking them to...then I don’t know if I should mourn the lack of your common sense or the waste of my time engaging in this debate. We weren’t even around when Iranians started protesting and they came out in millions. They want to do this. If you don’t get that, then I’m not sure what you do get.

Once more, the main purpose of the Twitter Revolution is to help spread the word about news and human rights events outside Iran.

I really hope you can eventually grasp that. Because then you won't resort --- perhaps unintentionally --- to the insult of those who have faced the risks not from our manipulation but from their bravery:

Witness the demise of @Persiankiwi, a twitter-user followed by some 30,000 people all over the world. In June, he or she (apparently from inside Iran) posted regular updates about the post-election protests. Here are the account’s final tweets:

@Persiankiwi we must go – dont know when we can get internet – they take 1 of us, they will torture and get names – now we must move fast -#Iranelection (June 24th)
@Persiankiwi thank you ppls 4 supporting Sea of Green – pls remember always our martyrs – Allah Akbar – Allah Akbar – Allah Akbar #Iranelection (June 24th)
@Persiankiwi Allah – you are the creator of all and all must return to you – Allah Akbar -#Iranelection Sea of Green (June 24th)

After that, only silence. Was @Persiankiwi arrested or tortured, even killed? Was @Persiankiwi tracked down online by the Revolutionary Guard? Tragically, we’ll never know. But for me, that silence is a powerful reminder of the dangers faced by online activists working in dictatorships. I would not encourage the activity, unless the benefits clearly outweighed the enormous risks. In Iran, I’m afraid, that is plainly not the case.

First of all, you clearly have no idea who @Persiankiwi is, even if I thank you for the concern. From what I know, @Persiankiwi is safe. If you want to pay a real tribute to @Persiankiwi, note that when @Persiankiwi was tweeting, there was no Twitter Revolution. We followed him/her as we made our decisions to support those inside Iran in distribution of information.

Here are a couple of paragraphs just to remind you of something that you have ignored in your previous opinion and your current response. More than 200 years ago, when the British tried to crush the American Revolution, peasants, innkeepers, merchants, students and ordinary folk in general knew that, if they took arms and fought for their freedom against an unjust ruler, some of them would die. Many did. But they kicked the tyrants out and took their freedom through force of arms.

The same happened with revolutionaries in South America in the early part of the 19th century and it has repeatedly happened all over the world. Just because the revolutions in the Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan, and Georgia were largely bloodless doesn’t mean revolutions are all going to be as peaceful. People don’t always get their rights by sitting at home and not doing anything. People have to put themselves in danger for what is dear to them. Sometimes, people die and still don’t get their rights. But the allure of having and enjoying human rights is too great.

The fact that Iranians are dying is not the fault of Westerners. It is not even a fault. It is a sacrifice that Iranians must make to gain their freedom. They know this very well. They aren’t doing it because anyone else is telling them to do it. They’re doing it because they’re humans. They’re not sheep. And humans need more than just food, clothes and a roof on top of their heads. Maybe you don’t get this, but Iranians do.

I don’t know you. You can be a perfectly nice guy in person. Criticism is just part of being a journalist. Here’s hoping next time I read something from you, I’ll be pleasantly surprised.

Iran & Social Media: Dispelling Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (Parsons)

Following our recent posts on Iran and Twitter, including yesterday's contributions by Josh Shahryar and Mike Dunn, Christopher Parsons posts a thorough review on his blog of censorship, surveillance, and social media.

Since the election of incumbent president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the world has witnessed considerable political tension in Iran. Protests over the questionable electoral results, beatings and deaths of political protestors, recurring protests by Iranians associated with the Green Revolution, and transmissions of information amongst civil- and global-actors have been broadcast using contemporary communications systems. Twitter, blogs, Facebook, and mobile phone video has enabled Iranians to coordinate, broadcast, and receive information. The existence of Web 2.0 infrastructure has set the conditions under which the Green Revolution operates.

Iran & Twitter: Last Words on The Hell of Heaven (Shahryar)
Iran & Twitter: Myth v. Reality of Security and “Deep Packet Inspection”

The Iranian government quickly recognized the power of cheap social coordination technologies and, in response, drastically reduced the capacity of national Internet links – the government, in effect, closed the nation’s Internet faucet, which greatly reduced how quickly data could be transmitted to, and received from, the ‘net as a whole. This claim is substantiated by Arbor Networks’ (Internet) border reports, which demonstrate how, immediately after the presidential election, there was a plummet in the data traffic entering and exiting the nation. (It should be noted that Arbor is a prominent supplier of Deep Packet Inspection equipment.)

Prior to trying to dispel the Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (FUD) surrounding the contemporary Iranian ISP-surveillance system that is regularly propagated by the media, I need to give a bit of context on the telecommunications structure in Iran.

Read rest of article....

The Latest from Iran (11 January): Reading the Regime

2045 GMT: Sanctions La-Dee-Dah. Associated Press is a-quiver over this statement by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, though I'm not sure why:

It is clear that there is a relatively small group of decision makers inside Iran. They are in both political and commercial relationships, and if we can create a sanctions track that targets those who actually make the decisions, we think that is a smarter way to do sanctions. But all that is yet to be decided upon.

That's not a breakthrough declaration, only a holding one. The White House does not want the sweeping sanctions proposed by Congress and will go for a "targeted" approach. It's just not clear who is being targeted with what.

1945 GMT: Journalist Mohammad Reza Nourbakhsh has been sentenced to three years in jail by an appeals court for participating in rallies on 15 June. Nourbakhsh was originally given a six-year prison term.

1940 GMT: Beaten in Detention. Kalemeh claims Mehdi Mahmoudian, a senior member of the reformist Islamic Iran Participation Front, has been beaten by the authorities in Evin Prison.

NEW Iran Exclusive: The Latest Nuclear Riddle — Renewed Talks with “West”?
NEW Iran Analysis: Beyond the Headlines, The Regime Battles Itself
NEW Iran & Twitter: Myth v. Reality of Security and “Deep Packet Inspection”
NEW Iran & Twitter: Last Words on The Hell of Heaven (Shahryar)
Latest Iran Video: Military Commander Mullen on US Options (10 January)
Iran Special Analysis: A US Move to “Sanctions for Rights”?
Iran: Challenge to The Government in “The Heartlands”?
The Latest from Iran (10 January): “Middle” Ground?

1935 GMT: The Detained. Back from an academic break to find that an Iranian activist has posted the names of 156 people arrested between the religious days of Tasoa and Ashura (26-27 December) and 9 January.

1635 GMT: Spinning Rafsanjani. Hashemi Rafsanjani, speaking as chairman of the Expediency Council, has made another general call for reconcilation.

Press TV portrays this as "the Iranian nation should follow the rule of the law and avoid taking extrajudicial measures as not to obstruct the path of justice". While this could be applied as an injunction to both the opposition and Government forces, the state outlet puts the emphasis is on following the guidance of the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic: "If [this is] obeyed, balance will return to the society and there will be no room left for frictions. Foreign enemies have clung to the current state of affairs in the country as it is apparent in their tone."

The website also tries to rebut the claim, made by Rafsanjani's brother this weekend, that the former President has been pressured into silence. Instead, it claimed that "Rafsanjani rejected the notion and said he was always trying to resolve the problems away from media hype".

1615 GMT: Those Wacky Leveretts. They may have had their pro-Government, anti-Green movement opinion, published in The New York Times, shredded by analyst after analyst, but that doesn't stop Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett from returning to their defence of the regime.

On their website, the Leveretts crudely twist a Wall Street Journal article (which was considered in an EA analysis yesterday on the US policy on sanctions, Iran's nuclear programme, and a "rights-first" approach) into "THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION MOVES TOWARD REGIME CHANGE IN ITS IRAN POLICY". They select and crop quotes, to the point of distortion, but this is their sleight-of-hand claim:

Buying into the proposition that the Islamic Republic is imploding has the effect of driving the policy argument toward support for “regime change” in Tehran.

Umm, no. There is a difference between analysis --- in this case, evaluating the internal difficulties in the Iranian regime --- and advocacy. It's the "is-ought" difference, one which should be picked up by an undergraduate student, let alone a supposed foreign-policy expert: noting that something "is" happening is not the same as declaring it "ought" to happen.

The Leveretts are not undergraduate students, so they know what they are doing. By putting out this claim, "whether President Obama and his advisers want to call their policy “regime change”, that is precisely the direction in which they are moving", they will buttress the propaganda line of the Iranian Government that the opposition can all be attributed to "foreign instigation". (I heard this declaration loud and clear in two presentations, including one by an  academic who works with the Leveretts, at the Beirut conference I attended last week.)

Since the survival of the Iranian regime rests in part on making that allegation stick, and since the Leveretts support the quest for that survival, let's just recognise this piece for what it is: an "ought" piece of advocacy rather than an "is" contribution to analysis.

(P.S. to Flynt and Hillary: Throwing in a picture of Senator Joseph Lieberman, who is calling for a "rights-based" approach to sanctions, with Ahmad Chalabi of Iraq "regime change" infamy, is a really nice touch.)

1505 GMT: Today's Fist-Shaker. It's Iran Prosecutor General Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Ejeie making an appearance to tell Tehran Prosecutor General Abbas Jafari Doulatabadi that it's time for measures against "elements behind the recent sedition....It is expected that the demands ... that those who were leading the post-election sedition are put on trial, are met."

1500 GMT: The "Reformist" Push. Former President Mohammad Khatami has put out his own statement, following that of Mehdi Karroubi, calling for an end to the "extreme violence" and dialogue over political, social, and economic issues.

1455 GMT: A Day for Analyses. Not sure why, but a lot of information seems to be falling into place today. The latest topic is Iran's nuclear manoeuvres with "the West" --- we've got an exclusive on Tehran's latest attempt to keep the discussions going.

1340 GMT: Waving Sticks. EA readers have offered comments considering the reasons for this weekend's declaration by General David Petraeus, the head of the US military's Central Command, that all military options are open in contingency plans for Iran (see yesterday's updates).

For the Iranian Government, however, there is a simple reading. The Foreign Ministry spokesman declared today, "[Petraeus'] comments are thoughtless and it is better that any statement made in this regard take a constructive approach."

1315 GMT: The Karroubi Statement (see 1150 GMT). Reuters has picked up on Mehdi Karroubi's declaration with takeaway quotes such as....

[I am] prepared for any disaster.....Some are thinking that they can block the reform course by closing down newspapers and putting reformers in jail ... but I remain firm in the path that I have chosen....I announce that such threats will not frighten me and will not weaken me in this path.

Agence France Presse has a shorter but similar article. Inexplicably, both Reuters and AFP miss the even more important part of Karroubi's statement, the 5-point proposal for resolution.

1200 GMT: We've posted a special analysis, based on latest developments and speech, of the battles within the Iranian regime. The conclusion? This will only be resolved "when someone stabs Ahmadinejad in the back".

1150 GMT: Karroubi's "5-Point" Plan. First it was Mir Hossein Mousavi with a 5-point post-Ashura proposal for political resolution; now it's Mehdi Karroubi.

Karroubi has written an open letter proposing 1) admission by Government officials of injustices; 2) adherence to the values of the Islamic Revolution through guarantees such as freedom of the press and legal rights; 3) adherence to non-violence for reform and acceptance of the Supreme Leader; 4) acceptance of criticism and an end to violence against those who dissent; 5) a national debate so Iranian people can make a free and informed decision about the way forward for the country.

1145 GMT: Rah-e-Sabz reports that 56 professors at Elm-o-Sanat University in Tehran have written in support of students, asking that they are able to take examinations without fear of disciplinary action over protests.

The intervention follows an open letter by almost 90 professors at Tehran University to the Supreme Leader, asking for a cessation of violence against demonstrations.

1130 GMT: The "Incomplete" Detainees Report. Parallelling and extending the "reformist" criticism that the Parliament report on detainee abuse is incomplete, Ayande News --- which is far from reformist --- is claiming that Iranian state media have not given a full account of the report and its discussion in the Majlis. Ayande even asks whether those responsible for the abuses at Kahrizak Prison are also responsible for output on Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting.

1110 GMT: Foreign Presence. The Government's overseas push is in Syria, as Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki visits Damascus. No significant news has come out of the talks so far.

0920 GMT: No major news this morning, but a lot of individual developments with deeper meanings this weekend. The Supreme Leader's speech, President Ahmadinejad's appearance in Parliament, the arrest of the Mothers of Mourning and their supporters in Laleh Park, the Parliamentary report on the abuse of detainees: all have gotten headline coverage, but the intra-regime tensions that they reveal have yet to be analysed, if recognised. We'll make a start on that analysis later today.

Meanwhile, Josh Shahryar and Mike Dunn have special analyses trying to put away the recent mis-information on #IranElection, Twitter, and security. Shahryar offers final words of reply to Will Heaven, the blogger for The Daily Telegraph who tried to blame "Twitterati" for endangering the Iranian people, while Dunn separates myth from reality over "Deep Packet Inspection".