Israel and Iran: Moving From War Scenarios to "Tough Sanctions"

Israel's Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon is signalling the change in Israel's priorities regarding Tehran. Moving from his previous hawkish position, indicating no hesitation in striking Iran's nuclear facilities, without Washington's help and/or green light, Ayalon has started using the term "tough sanctions".

Last year, when Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said that his Israeli counterpart Shimon Peres had given assurances of no military option against Iran. Ayalon said: "It is certainly not a guarantee. I don't think that, with all due respect, the Russian president is authorized to speak for Israel and certainly we have not taken any option off the table."

The Latest from Iran (8 January): Defeating the Wrong Questions

In November, Ayalon stated that "the one who's bluffing is Iran, which is trying to play with cards they don't have." He continued: "If Iranian behavior and conduct continues as they have exhibited so far, it is obvious that their intentions are only to buy time and procrastinate."

However, on Saturday that Ayalon declared there will be a united front as this month leads to a regime change in Iran. He said:

It is not certain that the regime in power now in Iran will be there in one year.

The world is uniting against Iran's nuclear program and within a month there will be United Nations Security Council sanctions. There is agreement in Washington, Moscow and Beijing that a nuclear Iran would destroy the current world order.

On Wednesday, Ayalon continued his remarks on the the "existential threat" of Iran and underlined the significance of tough sanctions.

Following his statement that "a nuclear Iran would destroy the world order" and that "we would see a nuclear arms race which we have never seen before," he continued: "Suffice to say that I take the American president and secretary of state at their word and they are right to say and to state that all options are on the table."

Meanwhile, Israel's Ambassador Michael Oren said Wednesday that the main goal of sanctions should be to weaken the Islamic regime and not its citizens. He spoke to CNN: "We are focused now on sanctions, not on destroying," and added:

We don't believe that sanctions will galvanize the regime, but will further drive the regime and people apart.

I'm sure that Iran under different leadership will have different relationship with Israel.

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.

Today on EA (7 January 2010)

Iran: We've caught up with all the latest news this evening on our LiveBlog.

Josh Shahryar lets loose his frustrations at Will Heaven: "Next time, if you’re going to write on this subject, please, inform yourself about the many terms you used and try to show the real picture." Scott Lucas offers another perspective with a tribute to the bravery of two Iranian Twitterers no longer with us.

Videos from last night's international football game between Singapore and Iran are posted in a special section. Iranian State TV reportedly cut the soundtrack to block the sound of the very political, pro-green, chants being heard throughout the stadium.

Israel/Palestine: EA's Ali Yenidunya analyses the various statements and asks whether change could be in the air over the peace talks.

Israel: We report on an article in today's Jerusalem Post which compares and contrasts the current Prime Minister  Netanyahu with former PM Ariel Sharon.

Gaza: Following a call from Hamas rulers on Wednesday, protesting at the delay of an international aid convoy, a policeman has died and many activists have been injured following clashes between them and Egyptian forces.

Latest from Iran (7 January): Radio Silence?

2155 GMT: Hmm.... Looks like the homepage of Iran's Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance has been visited by a hacker.

2150 GMT: Are You Listening in Tel Aviv? The Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, has pretty much slapped a public restraining order on an Israeli attack on Iran. He told the Washington Institute of Near East Policy that Iran was "on a path that has strategic intent to develop nuclear weapons and have been for some time" and "that outcome is potentially a very, very destabilizing outcome"; however, he continued:

On the other hand, when asked about striking Iran, specifically, that also has a very, very destabilizing outcome....That part of the world could become much more unstable, which is a dangerous global outcome.

(Here's a surprise: Iran's Press TV is already featuring Mullen's words.)

Iran: The “10 Demands” Manifesto – Soroush Speaks
Iran & Twitter 101: Getting The Facts Right — A Response to Will Heaven
Iran & Twitter 101: Rereading A Tale of Two Twitterers
Latest Iran Video: Football’s Back…And It’s Still Green (6 January)
Iran: Hillary Clinton on Engagement & Pressure with Regime of “Ruthless Repression”
UPDATED Iran: The 60 Forbidden Foreign Organisations
The Latest from Iran (6 January): Distractions

2125 GMT: An Iranian blog has published pictures of those trying to attack Mehdi Karroubi in Qazvin tonight (see 2025 GMT).

An Iranian activist has posted a summary on Facebook, claiming about 200 plainclothes "thugs" gathered outside the house where Karroubi was staying. The police tried to prevent a confrontation as about 500 people looked on; however, according to the activist, there were Revolutionary Guard commanders amongst the would-be attackers. When Karroubi was leaving, his car was pelted with eggs and broken bricks.

2120 GMT: Deutsche Welle publishes a story mentioned by one of our readers earlier today. The Iranian Government has declared that "defaced" banknotes will not be considered as legal currency as of 16 January. The announcement is clearly aimed at the widespread movement of protest by putting Green slogans on the currency.

In response, the opposition has declared that 17 January will be a day of protest with massive circulation of the "Green" banknotes.

2039 GMT: 99% Support is Not Enough. Peyke Iran reports that Hojatoleslam Ruhollah Hosseinian has resigned as a member of Parliament because there has not been "100% support for Ayatollah Khamenei". Hosseinian is considered a fervent supporter of President Ahmadinejad, whom he has served as security advisor. He is also a former Deputy Minister of Intelligence.

2025 GMT: Karroubi Visit and Qazvin Clashes. A lot of chatter about Mehdi Karroubi's trip to Qazvin, 165 miles northwest of Tehran. Saham News reports that there were clashes when  the home of Hojetoleslam Ghavami, where Karroubi was staying, was attacked.

2000 GMT: Iranian human rights groups report that student leader Majid Tavakoli, detained after his speech at the 16 Azar (7 December) protests, has been tried and sentenced in Revolutionary Court.

Tavakoli, given permission to contact his family for the first time since his arrest, said he was charged with insulting the Supreme Leader, insulting the President, and gathering and spreading propaganda against the regime. The trial was held behind closed doors, and Tavakoli remains in solitary confinement in Evin Prison.

Iranian authorities attempted to humiliate Tavakoli by distributing his photograph in woman's hejab, prompting the protest "We Are All Majid".

1950 GMT: Fasih Yasamani was hanged on Wednesday.

Yasamani, in prison since 2007, was accused of belonging to the opposition party Pajvak,
an armed Kurdish group. The evidence against Yasamani were his confessions, which he claimed were obtained by torture.

The 28-year-old Yasamani is the second Kurdish citizen executed since the June election. Ehsan Fattahian was killed on 11 November.

Iranian human rights groups claim that there are 17 other political prisoners on death row in Kurdistan.

1945 GMT:Ashura "Mohareb" Trials? Islamic Republic News Agency reports that five of the protesters on Ashura (27 December) will be tried in Revolutionary Court.

There has already reportedly been a trial of demonstrators. The distinction in this report is these five will be charged with "mohareb" (a war against God), a crime which can be punished by death.

1730 GMT: Radio Silence Indeed. Because of complications of site outage and my commitments in Beirut, we've been limited in updates today. I'll be here about 1930 GMT to go through the day's events.

1005 GMT: Missing. The husband of student activist Bahareh Hedayat, has told Rooz Online, "We have no information about her." Hedayat was detained at the end of December.

1000 GMT: A Petition with Caution.
An interesting story out of Australia....

After the resignation of an Iranian diplomat in Norway in protest over the Government's handling of the post-election conflict, Iran Solidarity in Melbourne has posted a petition asking Iran's Ambassador to Australia to give up his post.

There's a note on the petition, however, which points to fear as well as activism: "***READ BEFORE SIGNING*** UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD ANYBODY USE THEIR REAL NAME WHEN SIGNING THIS PETITION."

0625 GMT: Tantalising --- but True? One claim, and it is only a claim at this point, to note: Maziar Bahari writes in Newsweek: "Sources close to conservatives say that some leading figures are now pressing [Supreme Leader] Khamenei to dump [President] Ahmadinejad in order to preserve his own position."

0620 GMT: Possibly the quietest period in Iranian politics since June, even in chatter amongst our Internet sources.

Speaking of those sources, we have two special analyses this morning. Josh Shahryar offers a detailed response to a recent article ridiculing the role of social media in the post-election events in Iran. And I flash back to late June with "A Tale of Two Twitterers".

We'll be on limited service today because of conference duties. Please keep sending in news and comment, especially if situation picks up later today.

Iran: The "10 Demands" Manifesto - Soroush Speaks

On 4 January, we posted the manifesto of five expatriate intellectuals- which followed the "5 Proposals" post-Ashura declaration of Mir Hossein Mousavi- with 10 demands, including freedom of media, adherence to the Constitution, recognition of civic groups, an independent judiciary, and the resignation of President Ahmadinejad.

One of the five authors, Abdolkarim Soroush, spoke about the manifesto and the Green movement to journalist Robin Wright:

Latest from Iran (7 January): Radio Silence?

Q: Why did you decide to issue a manifesto now?

A: The Green Movement is into its seventh month now, and I and my friends have been following events very closely and have been in touch with some of our friends in Iran. After [the protests on] Ashura on Dec 27, we came to realize that it was a real turning point. It was at that time that the regime decided to crack down on the Green Movement. In one instance, the regime rolled over a protester and killed him. It was a very severe message to all the protesters and defenders and supporters of the Green Movement that it intends to crush the movement harshly.

On the other hand, we have also individually been frequently asked by our friends: What are the real demands of the Green Movement, because the Green Movement was something that jumped on the scene? There was no planning for it. The election was the beginning, and it just evolved and evolved. As it evolved, some demands had emerged, but there was nothing that showed what was in the minds of the leaders of the movement.

The five of us thought that because we are close enough to the leaders of the movement – Mir Hossein Mousavi, Mehdi Karroubi and Mohammad Khatami – and know their demands, we should start drafting a manifesto or statement about the Green Movement. So we started drafting, and then Mousavi’s statement [that he would die for the movement if necessary] was issued [on Jan. 1]. Since we are living outside the country, don’t have to fear [the government] and know what is in the mind of the people, we decided to publish our own statement to make clear what Mousavi’s intentions and goals of the Green Movement are.

Q: Whose views does this manifesto reflect – just the leadership or the wider range of followers?

A: This is a pluralistic movement, including believers and non-believers, socialists and liberals. There are all walks of life in the Green Movement. We tried to come up with the common points for all. We know there are many more demands, many more than these.

Maybe in the next stage, they may demand redrafting the constitution. But for now, they would like to work within the framework of the constitution, and we were careful not to trespass those limits.

Read the rest here.