Iran Document/Analysis: Karroubi's Statement on the Political Situation (27 January)

Britain's Financial Times has published a lengthy interview with Mehdi Karroubi. The full interview, covering Karroubi's political involvement from 1979 to the present, is well worth a read, but these extracts get to the heart of Karroubi's current move for reform and his challenge to the Ahmadinejad Government.

The cleric's comments appear to provide clarity on his proposed resolution, after his statement on Monday put him back in the centre of events: 1) once again, the call is for unity between "conservatives" and "reformists", working within the Iranian system to remedy injustices and to ensure that the Constitution is upheld; 2) Ahmadinejad must go; 3) the man who needs to ensure this is the Supreme Leader.

"Conservatives" like Ali Larijani, what say you? Ayatollah Khamenei, your response and agreement, please?

.....

FT: How do you feel now when you see your opponents call for your prosecution or try to put you back in Evin, the same jail you were in before the revolution?

MK: I have mixed feelings. One is that of sorrow. I feel sad to see some of those in jail now are the children of the revolution and had spent years in the Shah’s prisons. They have served the Islamic establishment for years.

I wonder what has happened to the revolution? It was supposed to spread its umbrella and attract even its opponents. The revolutionary circle was not supposed to be this tight that even its children are not tolerated. This makes me sad.

I believe in reform, which means to have the Islamic republic we promised during the revolution. I am committed to the promises of providing independence and freedom and establishing the Islamic Republic.

We promised to respect people’s rights, give them freedom. We said if our opponents did not resort to guns and conspiracies, they could freely express their opinions and criticise the regime. These promises have been seriously damaged.

FT: But your opponents say these acts are aimed at overthrowing the regime.

MK: We do not want to make another revolution and do not seek to overthrow the regime. We are attached to the real Islamic republic, the one we promised to people which was approved by 98 per cent of the people [in a 1979 referendum].

You can see republicanism within Islam and you can see Islam within republicanism. I have put my young-hood, life and motivations to this belief. If one day the Islamic republic is taken away from me, I would feel emptied.

One cannot spend decades for a cause and then conclude it was a waste of time. So, the Islamic revolution and the Islamic republic are the principles. Of course, this doesn’t mean we are denying weaknesses and shortcomings.

FT: What has happened that the children of the Islamic society who founded it are now accused of trying to destroy it?

MK: It is because neither the Islamic part of the Islamic republic has been paid the attention it deserved, nor the Republican part.

The republicanism necessitated free elections in which the criteria had to be people’s votes. In other words, people are the final decision-makers. Islamic republic means state organisations and military bodies should not interfere in elections to damage the republicanism side of the regime as is happening now.

On the other hand, Islamism of the system has been hurt. It means Islamic is presented in a very superficial way in discussions while superstitious and illusionary beliefs are spread.

Islam is not restricted to prayer and fasting. Respecting people, not humiliating them, and observing their rights are other major parts of Islam to attract followers not to dispel them.

We say a political current has been created which is weakening republicanism on one side because it doesn’t believe in votes and is undermining Islam.

FT: How could they become so strong and sweep to power?

MK: In sum, some power centres helped them to take control of some economic, political and cultural centres.

Those who believed in putting Islam in a tight framework have swept to power and have expanded their belief to republicanism. How they managed to do so cannot be discussed now.

Some immature acts in the first decade of the revolution – a period we are proud of – could be justified for a newly established system which had just got out of the Shah’s corrupt system and was struggling with a war with Iraq.

But even at the time Imam Khomeini believed security forces should not search for drugs if they go to an opponent’s house to confiscate his weapons. Now, family albums are searched.

Imam Khomeini believed some rogue acts in foreign policies, judicial matters and financial issues like confiscations of people’s properties had to stop after a certain period.

FT: How much do you blame Mr Ahmadi-Nejad himself for the recent political turmoil?

MK: Both Mr Ahmadi-Nejad himself and the political current behind him are very guilty for recent developments. Mr Ahmadi-Nejad is surely not alone. There is a group behind him who have a lot of influence on him.

The group working with him is neither left nor right. Traditional lefties and righties believe in serious competition while keeping friendship. But this trend doesn’t believe in this kind of relationship.

FT: Do you see Mr Ahmadi-Nejad and his backers as a risk to the Islamic republic?

MK: They are not a risk in a sense that they are hand-in-hand with foreigners. I would not say that, because it needs to be proved.

But isolating associations, thoughts, students, academics and the reform-minded clergy is really worrisome. Look at how [badly] the press, students, prisoners and students and even the senior clergy are treated.

FT: Are you worried that such behaviour could cause the collapse of the Islamic republic?

MK: These behaviours have made damages and will strike more blows but would not lead to the overthrow of the regime.

I believe the Islamic revolution has strong roots. It is true that the Islamic regime has opponents, but the roots of Islam, the revolution and the Islamic republic are deep. I also believe there are still many power centres, including political, non-political and religious institutions, which can stop the trend of radicalism.

Many senior clerics are unhappy with the current situation. They would not tolerate when they see serious damages are being made. They will surely stop it.

FT: Do you think the government of Mr Ahmadi-Nejad can finish its four-year term? Is there any chance it might be dismissed?

MK: When similar comments were made about the first four-year term of Mr Ahmadi-Nejad, I never agreed and insisted he would finish his term. It happened.

Considering the political and economic problems plus a controversial foreign policy, I personally believe Mr Ahmadi-Nejad would not be able to finish his term.

Look at the way he runs the country. He presented the budget to the parliament only yesterday [Jan 17] which is too late.

I want to say that from cultural, foreign policy, economic, management and security points of view, the government has serious problems. Taking all these problems into consideration, I think the government cannot survive.

FT: How much have the street protests against the government added to your doubts about the government’s survival?

MK: This is one of the problems. The government was unable to act logically, hold healthy elections and set up a group to study protests over the election. If the government were far-sighted, these problems would not have been created.

FT: Are the moderate forces of both sides getting close to each other to save the Islamic republic? And do they believe that one solution could be to dismiss the government?

MK: This week, Mr [Akbar] Hashemi-Rafsanjani [former president] once again said that moderate forces from both sides should get together and find a solution. He rightly said the best person who could help this happen is the supreme leader [Ayatollah Ali Khamenei]. I agree with him.

The forces from both sides who care about the Islamic system will join forces when they see, God forbid, the revolution, the system and the Islamic republic are at stake. This will happen quite soon.

FT: How soon?

MK: I don’t know how long it will take, but I think it won’t take too long. Look at certain indices: inflation, stagnation of the economy, closure of economic centres, in particular industrial units, which are working with 20 or 40 per cent of their capacities, increasing unemployment, poverty line standing at 7m rials ($700) which means above 40 per cent of people are poor.

The continuation of this situation will create problems. The government is unable to tackle the problems and does not have the capability [to]. Look how many times the government changed its interior and economy ministers.

FT: If such a meeting of moderate forces is convened in the not-too-distant future as you say, what would be your vote? Would you insist that Mr Ahmadi-Nejad should go? Or will you compromise and give legitimacy to his government?

MK: It will all depend on what kind of discussions and options are raised. One option would be to reshuffle the cabinet by which not all the cabinet members but those who are inefficient are changed and [the president’s] interferences in ministries are stopped.

Mr Ahmadi-Nejad says one thing every day and creates problems for the country. What I’m seeking is an efficient government.

But knowing this man, I believe he would not change his behaviour.

FT: So, you recognise the government and have retreated from your earlier position that this government is not legitimate?

MK: Whatever I said about the election is still valid and, I repeat, it was not a healthy poll.

But the truth is that the parliament has voted for him and he was sworn in. But I assure you the same parliamentarians who won the election because over 2,000 reformists were disqualified by the Guardian Council [the constitutional watchdog], are ready to remove Mr Ahmadi-Nejad in one month if they put aside some considerations and cautiousness.

FT: You used to say this government was illegal and illegitimate. Now you want to make the cabinet more efficient or restrict Mr Ahmadi-Nejad?

MK: What I said is that if a group sits together, which was your question, they will decide whether Mr Ahmadi-Nejad should go or stay. I cannot decide on my own what should happen to him.

If the majority in such a meeting says he should stay and change his behaviour, I cannot oppose this. But I personally say this man does not have the capacity to continue. The oil revenues Iran earned under his presidency – about $350bn – were extraordinary.

FT: What you are saying now is quite similar to what Mr Moussavi and Mr Khatami said recently. Does this mean the opposition leaders have decided to make a compromise because they see the future of Islamic republic at stake?

MK: My personal view is that the government is incapable and does not have the votes of the people. But it is the government with which we have problems. I think the government should go, but if others don’t say so, I cannot push for it.

The country’s problems will get worse and no choice will be left [for the regime] but to find a solution.

But the truth is there is no news yet that the other side seeks a solution. The other side still thinks the post-election event was “sedition”. They believe things are going back to normal and the so-called sedition is being put off.

FT: As I said, this was not your position before, that the government could go through some changes?

MK: What did I say before? That the Islamic republic should go?

FT: No. But you were refusing to recognise the government. Now you say the parliament has sworn him in.

MK: You say what is the solution and I say it’s not only with me. We should first accept to sit together and talk.

FT: The factors you cited that the government would not survive all existed in the first four- year term of the government as well. It survived last time. Why shouldn’t the government finish its term this time?

MK: You have a strong body but you can be weakened following incidents and illnesses. The Islamic republic has paid enormously for these four or five years of Mr Ahmadi-Nejad. It does not have further strength.

What happened in the presidential election [in June] had happened in the previous presidential election [in 2005] and the last two parliamentary polls. But the pent-up anger showed itself in an explosion this time. Such things don’t happen overnight.

The hefty oil revenues have been a good cover so far. Now, the banks’ overdue payments have exceeded $40bn. It is similar to a strong body which could bear hardships for a limited period. That body is weak now.

FT: Demonstrators first targeted Mr Ahmadi-Nejad in their street protests after the election. But as you know that it’s been quite some time that the whole system and the supreme leader have been targets. People now call for a secular state. What do you think?

MK: I think these slogans are 100 per cent wrong and won’t bear any fruits. I am even suspicious of such slogans and don’t know if it’s truly by the youth who are emotional and immature or by certain [power] centres try to make people over-react and then use it as an excuse for suppression.

Our slogans are within this system and this constitution. Our constitution has some weaknesses but has lots of [democratic] capacities.

FT: Why don’t you tell your supporters not to chant the slogans?

MK: I do tell them. A small number of people chanted “Neither Gaza, nor Lebanon, My life is for Iran”. You saw how much it was misused by the other side. Some wise people believed the slogan should have been “Both Gaza and Lebanon, My life is for Iran”.

FT: What’s your position on the supreme leader?

MK: I accept velayat-e faghih [the rule of supreme jurisprudent envisaged in the constitution]. I accept the Islamic republic and I accept the constitution. I don’t agree with slogans that call for changing power structures.

FT: Your allies are arrested. Your office and newspaper were shut down. What are your plans now?

MK: As far as it’s been possible, I have continued. But I feel sad that many of my friends are in jail. My pride is hurt that the Islamic republic has reached a point that it arrests its ministers, lawyers, vice-presidents, deputy ministers, governor generals and journalists. These people served the revolution for many years and were in jail under the Shah.

As for the limitations on me, I feel under semi-house arrest. The [state] policy is not to pay the price for putting me under an official house arrest. But in the meantime as soon as I have some kind of meeting somewhere, a group of basijis are dispatched to disrupt the gatherings.

I release statements and have some meetings with families of political prisoners. I do work to some extent. But these limitations are behind the radicalisation of slogans which I don’t agree with. Too much pressure backfires. When you hurt people, they chant radical slogans.

FT: Aren’t you worried that the gap between you and people might be widened now that you say their slogans are wrong?

MK: I back people but don’t want to cheat them. I tell them that we have reforms and believe in your freedom.

I have said repeatedly that people are their own leader. I’ve said many times that we are not leading the movement. People are protesting against the way they are treated. They feel humiliated. Iranians don’t accept to be dictated. They might tolerate for some time, but then they explode.

The most important factor behind Imam Khomeini’s success was that he valued people and respected their votes.

Yes, people are ahead of me. Being ahead means they are more determined and more prepared to achieve their rights without having any personal ambitions. Look at how women demonstrate sacrifice.

My agreement or disagreement with the regime wouldn’t have much impact on these people. The regime should be wise to find a solution and clear the mess to prevent further radicalisation.

People would take it positively if their demands are addressed and if free political debates are held in press.

FT: Do you think people now want to overthrow the regime?

MK: A majority of people do not want to overthrow the regime. In fact, anyone who cares about the future of this country is not after toppling the regime because it is not clear what would come out of it. If it was not thanks to the extraordinary leadership skills of Imam Khomeini, God knows what would have happened to Iran with the 1979 revolution.

We have to try to protect this system and the Islamic republic that we had promised should come into reality. In that case, the majority of people would be happy. We have to sit and see where the loopholes are and correct them.

FT: But your opponents say this is in fact an act of overthrowing the system.

MK: They wrongly say it is because they say that the US and Britain support us ,therefore we are wrong. And that the BBC supports us. BBC did the same during the 1979 revolution [backing the revolution].

We are neither after overthrowing the regime, not are its opponents. We are against monopolies, dictatorship and short-mindedness which would discredit Islam.

FT: Do you see Mr Moussavi regularly?

MK: Yes. We exchange views quite regularly.

FT: Do you co-ordinate policies?

MK: Yes and no. Mr Moussavi and his allies have certain views. The same is with me and my allies.

FT: Do you agree with his suggestions to end the political crisis?

MK: Yes, largely.

FT: Is there any sign that those suggestions are taken seriously by the regime?

MK: There is no sign yet.

FT: What about Mr Khatami?

MK: I see him less than Mr Moussavi.

FT: Why?

MK: That’s the way it is now. Mr Khatami does not release statements as we do.

FT: How about Mr Rafsanjani? How do you assess his role now?

MK: He should be assessed within his own framework. The favour he has done to us is that he has not condemned us even though he has been under a lot of pressure to do so.

He will have a significant role if there is supposed to be consensus one day. No one else could play his role between reformists and fundamentalists because of his background in the revolution and the role he played in choosing the supreme leader. He also holds two important positions at the Experts Assembly and the Expediency Council. He is able to do things that none of the elites in either sides can do.

FT: Is Mr Rafsanjani still waiting for the right time to come to intervene?

MK: I think he is under a lot of pressure and attacks in the media not to play any mediating role. The radicals know he can do certain things that we are not able to do.

Mr Rafsanjani threw his weight behind Mr Khatami [in 1997 presidential election] and Mr Moussavi [in June election].

FT: Will you attend the February 11 rally [to commemorate the revolution victory]?

MK: Definitely.

FT: You might be attacked. Your car was only recently shot.

MK: I was not scared at all. I was so calm. Thank God, my spirit is so high. I even welcome any risks to my life. I love to live like every human being and when you get older you feel more attached to your family and grandchildren.

This, however, does not stop me to go into the middle of crowd and travel around with sometimes a crappy car, as my wife complains [laughing].

FT: It is not always a question of risk to your life. As you know the nephew of Mir-Hossein Moussavi [the top opposition leader] was killed recently. Do you have any fears for your family?

MK: Without any exaggeration, I can say I have no fears. This is because I strongly believe in my ideas. My sons are now old and have white beards [laughing]. The youngest son is 31 years old. What can I do? Let them kill anyone they like?

FT: Last question: you created a storm by raising rape and torture in prisons and you came under a lot of pressure. Did that make any difference?

MK: Prisoners say their situation has improved a lot. I have no regrets for raising it, because I didn’t say the regime was systematically doing it. But there was some carelessness that I wanted to stop.

The Latest from Iran (28 January): Trouble Brewing

2045 GMT: Taking the Green Out of Iran. I don't want to say the Government is in any way threatened by the Green movement, but somebody has apparently decided that, when President Ahmadinejad is speaking, the Iranian flag no longer has to be Red, White, and Green:



1630 GMT: Activist Ehsan Hushmand and 4 Kurdish students have been freed on bail.

1620 GMT: All is Well. Really. Ahmad Khatami may have tried to put out the message that Hashemi Rafsanjani and the pro-Ahmadinejad Ayatollah Mohammad Yazdi have reconciled, but both Rah-e-Sabz and BBC Persian are claiming that Khatami has been pressing Rafsanjani not to publish his letter of grievance over Yazdi's allegations of Rafsanjani's irresponsibility and ambiguity.

1610 GMT: At Tehran Bureau, Setareh Sabety posts a poem reflecting on the executions of two "monarchists" (see 0940 GMT), "They Did Not Hang My Son Today".

1605 GMT: Where's Mahmoud? So how does President Ahmadinejad respond to the growing today? Well, with this declaration to officials in Tehran: “They (imperialist powers) seek to dominate energy resources of the Middle East....But the Iranian nation and other nations will not allow them to be successful."

1600 GMT: Let Mehdi Make This Perfectly Clear. We can no longer keep up with Mehdi Karroubi as he hammers home his attack against the Ahmadinejad Government. We have posted his latest interview, this one with Saham News.

1530 GMT: The Dead and Detained. The Guardian of London has updated its list of those killed and arrested in the post-election crisis. There are now 1259 people, arranged alphabetically by first name.

1525 GMT: All is Well Alert. Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami wants everyone to know that Hashemi Rafsanjani and Ayatollah Mohammad Yazdi, who only a few days ago slammed Rafsanjani's ambiguity, have made up and are now very good friends.

NEW Iran Document: Karroubi Maintains the Pressure (28 January)
NEW Iran Document: Resignation Letter of Diplomat in Japan “Join the People”
NEW Iran Document/Analysis: Karroubi’s Statement on the Political Situation (27 January)
NEW Iran Analysis: Leadership in the Green Movement
NEW Latest Iran Video: When Karroubi Met Fars (25 January)
NEW Iran & Karroubi: Why This is “Much Ado About Something”
The Latest from Iran (27 January): Battle Renewed

Beyond our smile, the possible significance: Government supporters are signalling to Rafsanjani that they will reduce the pressure on his family if he joins forces with them.

1520 GMT: We have posted the English translation of the resignation letter of an Iranian diplomat in Japan, asking his colleagues to "Join the People".

1000 GMT: Obama's State of the Union --- Nukes Trumps Rights. We'll have full analysis tomorrow of President Obama's speech (video and transcript in separate entry). Let's just say now that anyone expecting a boost or even a thumbs-up to the Iranian opposition will be disappointed.

Obama made only two references to Iran, and the primary one was to support his two-prong approach of engagement/sanctions on the nuclear issue:

These diplomatic efforts have...strengthened our hand in dealing with those nations that insist on violating international agreements in pursuit of these weapons....That is why the international community is more united, and the Islamic Republic of Iran is more isolated. And as Iran’s leaders continue to ignore their obligations, there should be no doubt: They, too, will face growing consequences.

Later in the speech was this fleeting reference:

We stand with the girl who yearns to go to school in Afghanistan, we support the human rights of the women marching through the streets of Iran, and we advocate for the young man denied a job by corruption in Guinea. For America must always stand on the side of freedom and human dignity.

0940 GMT: The Executions. The Iranian Students News Agency identifies the two demonstrators killed this morning, for "mohareb" (war against God), as Mohammad Reza Ali-Zamani and Arash Rahmanipour. Both had been detained before the elections as members of an outlawed monarchist group, and both had been put on television in a special Press TV documentary in August to "confess" (see separate EA video).

However, what is unsubtle is the further twisting of the two cases to fit the more recent show of resistance to the regime. The Tehran Prosecutor's office declared:

Following the riots and anti-revolutionary measures in recent months, particularly on the day of Ashura, a Tehran Islamic Revolutionary Court branch considered the cases of a number of accused and handed down death sentences against 11 of those. The sentences against two of these people... were carried out today at dawn and the accused were hanged.

The sentences for the other nine of the accused in recent months' riots are at the appeal stage... upon confirmation, measures will be undertaken to implement the sentences.

0925 GMT: As I make my way back from Dublin, two important pieces on EA:

We've posted extracts from Mehdi Karroubi's lengthy interview with the Financial Times of London, adding a snap analysis. The discussion seems to clarify Karroubi's position after this week's drama: he wants Ahmadinejad out and, while adhering to the Islamic system, he wants the Supreme Leader to be the man to defend the Constitution by pushing the President off the political cliff.

Alongside this, and indeed offering a contrast, is a guest analysis from Elham Gheytanchi on "Leadership and the Green Movement": "The Green Movement...has avoided centralized leadership and instead has mobilized ordinary people beyond what was previously thought possible."

0740 GMT: Britain's Sky News is reporting, from Iranian state media, that two Ashura demonstrators have been executed.

0700 GMT: A gentler --- if that is a word which can ever be applied to Iran's post-election crisis --- news day on Wednesday. There were no high-profile statements, and none of the drama of the Karroubi declaration of Monday.

Still, there were rumblings, most of which brought further bad omens for President Ahmadinejad.

There are reports that the Number One Target of both the "conservative" and "reformist" opposition, former Tehran Prosecutor General Saeed
Mortazavi, will not take up his position as head of the President's unit to combat smuggling. That brings Mortazavi one step closer to taking the public responsibility for the detainee abuses, especially at Kahrizak Prison. And the other primary target of the anti-Ahmadinejad forces, advisor Esfandiar Rahim-Mashai, was attacked in the newspaper Mardomsalari.

On the economic front, Ahmadinejad's subsidy reduction proposal is beginning to run into trouble with Parliament. Three days into the 10-day period to comment on the President's Development Plan, legislators forced the Government to withdraw "income bracketing" for the subsidy cuts.

And another foreign firm, a US chemical company, has declared that it is ending any involvement in Iran.

There was a piece of good news for the opposition, with journalist Mehdi Hosseinzadeh released after more than 7 months in detention. However, Persian2English posts on the "catastrophic situation" in Section 350 of Evin Prison.

The Latest from Iran (27 January): Battle Renewed

1715 GMT: Satellite Wars? Iran's Al-Alam television service has again been taken off-air by its Saudi-based satellite operator.

Al Alam was also briefly suspended in November. The cited reason was a contractual breach by the Saudi and Egyptian owners of the satellite service, although political tensions between Tehran, Riyadh, and Cairo may also have been involved.

1700 GMT: The German Menace. Oh, dear, it is a slow news day. Media are running with the Iran regime/media baton of the "German plot" behind the Ashura demonstrations (see 1130 GMT). Reuters put it on their newsfeed, and The Los Angeles Times' Babylon and Beyond has devoted a blog entry to the whipped-up story, which goes back to the brief detention of two German diplomats during the protest of 27 December.

At least the LA Times piece has some interesting related information, beyond the silliness of supposed German code names "Yogi" and "Ingo". For example, the Iranian intelligence official pointed to the Facebook page, from which EA often takes information and English translation, supporting Mir Hossein Mousavi: "Through his Facebook page, Mr. Mir-Hossein Mousavi had called for his supporters to turn out. Mr. Mousavi has never denied the page was run by him."

NEW Latest Iran Video: When Karroubi Met Fars (25 January)
NEW Iran & Karroubi: Why This is “Much Ado About Something”
Iran: Rafsanjani Chooses A Side?
Iran Special Analysis: What Karroubi’s Statement on “Mr Khamenei”/”Head of Government” Means
Latest Iran Audio: Hossein Karroubi on His Father’s Statement (25 January)
The Latest from Iran (26 January): Now for the Follow-Up….

(Message to our friends in the regime: in fact, Mir Hossein Mousavi has never had a connection with the page, which was set up by an Iranian in Germany who became enthused about the Mousavi Presidential campaign. That is why EA never cites information from that page as a reflection of Mousavi's views)

The Iranian official also put out the latest "directorate of exiles" supervising regime change: cleric Mohsen Kadivar, journalist Akbar Ganji, former culture minister Ataollah Mohajerani, filmmaker Mohsen Makhmalbaf and former lawmaker Fatemeh Haghighatjoo.

(Message to our friends in the regime: of those 5, exactly 0 are based in Germany --- 4 are in the US and 1 in France. If you're going to keep up this "German plot" thing, may want to find someone who actually has a resident's-eye view of the Brandenburg Gate.)

1445 GMT: Sanctions Spin. A "senior US official" has told media that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will use meetings in London this week, primarily devoted to Afghanistan and Yemen, to press other countries to accept new international sanctions on Iran over its nuclear programme.

1345 GMT: On the Economic Front. The story is throughout "Western" media that the German manufacturer Siemens is ending all interests in Iran.

1200 GMT: A Pause in Service. I'm off to Dublin for 24 hours so EA colleagues will keep an eye out for developments. Keep sending in any information --- it's a slow day so far....

1130 GMT: OK, Let's Try Blaming the Germans. Slow day today so nice of the Government and Iranian state media to raise a smile with their latest "findings":

Iran's Intelligence Ministry said Wednesday it has found evidence that German diplomats played a role in last month's "anti-revolution riots" in Tehran.

"Anti-Islamic Revolution agents, networks backed by Western intelligence services" and those who seek to promote sedition in the country had planned the Ashura riots in advance, the Iranian Students News Agency quoted a deputy intelligence minister as saying....

The intelligence official also said an advisor to the defeated presidential candidate Mir-Hossein Mousavi had also been arrested.

"Based on documents obtained from this person, he transferred confidential information to foreign countries through the ringleader of intelligence services of a European country," the official said.

1000 GMT: We've posted the video behind the fuss over the Karroubi statement on Monday --- his encounter with Fars News even includes a kiss on the head for the reporter.

0800 GMT: The Economic Front. An EA reader writes:

For what it's worth, spoke with a close family member in Iran today. It seems panic there is building about the economic situation. For one, there is fear about what is going to happen with money in the banks and more generally to the economy if the banks break down.

But that is the lesser fear. Most Iranians I know never fully trusted banks (or the rial) and so put money that they have (if they have it) into land, gold, and other assets. On the other hand, real panic building about the pulling of subsidies. Most Iranians I know live a middle middle-class lifestyle. They will not likely get any "direct payments" from the government, but will see their gas and utility bills quadruple. They don't know how they are going to afford it.

0715 GMT: For the first time in 48 hours, we're drawing breath amidst a lull in breaking news. We have posted a morning analysis, "Much Ado About Something", to go through the latest developments on the Karroubi statement and to draw out its political significance.

And, for those who missed it last night, we have also cast an eye over Hashemi Rafsanjani's latest statement to see if it has any immediate importance.

Latest Iran Video: When Karroubi Met Fars (25 January)

This video is racing around the Internet, with activists interpreting it as a patronising of Fars News' reporter, via the kiss on the forehead, and thus the subsequent mis-report that Mehdi Karroubi had recognised Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as President:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3GzhoItEfQ[/youtube]

doh

NEW Iran & Karroubi: Why This is “Much Ado About Something”
Iran Special Analysis: What Karroubi’s Statement on “Mr Khamenei”/”Head of Government” Means
The Latest from Iran (27 January): Battle Renewed

Iran & Karroubi: Why This is "Much Ado About Something"

Yesterday afternoon, the high-profile blog Babylon & Beyond declared that the attention given to Mehdi Karroubi's Monday statement about the legitimacy of the Ahmadinejad Government, as decreed by "Mr Khamenei", was "Much Ado About Nothing".

The blog was useful in correcting some key information, for example, quoting a Tehran analyst, "Karroubi [has] not budged at all. Karroubi said that the government is the government of the system. So it does not imply he has recognized it." However, because of its focus in taking apart the wayward media coverage of the statement --- a coverage corrected by the better analysts of the complexities of Iran's internal crisis --- it missed the more important point:

This is definitely Much Ado About Something.

Iran: Rafsanjani Chooses A Side?
Iran Special Analysis: What Karroubi’s Statement on “Mr Khamenei”/”Head of Government” Means
Latest Iran Audio: Hossein Karroubi on His Father’s Statement (25 January)
Iran Snap Analysis: The Karroubi and Khatami Manoeuvres

Karroubi may or may not have intended to stake out a direct challenge to the Government and regime when he met the large group of reporters and onlookers on Monday. But, once Fars News pushed him with the false claim that he had recognised "President" Ahmadinejad, he and his closest advisors chose to make a stand. Even the initial response given at the conference, with its "Mr Khamenei" and description of Ahmadinejad as the "head of the government of the regime", was a put-down, but throughout Monday and Tuesday, the clarifications got tougher and tougher in their tone and intentions.


The Facebook site supporting Mir Hossein Mousavi and The Flying Carpet Institute have tracked Karroubi's course, set out by his website Saham News, with a series of English translations. This was Karroubi's son Mohammad Taghi yesterday:

Mehdi Karroubi is an honest and brave man who won’t sell his eternal life and people’s love, for the sake of this short material life. If there was a case of compromise or ignoring the events, he would have not tolerated all the insults, inhuman attacks and assassination threats for seven months. Be sure that if there is any news that Mehdi Karoubi would know about, he will announce that truthfully and bluntly. There is no compromise and there is no fear.

Legitimacy and reality are two separate issues. In order to gain legitimacy in any case there is the need to satisfy certain conditions. Mehdi Karroubi have repeatedly said this since the first day [after the election] until today that he does not accept that the result of the election was based on the votes casted by the people. Even yesterday he emphasised that there are issues with the results. In his views the results of the election were fabricated. But following the confirmation by the Guardian Council and the Supreme Leader according to the law, Ahmadinejad became the head of the administration, whether we like it or not.

The head of the administration gives the budget and makes decisions that influence our lives, we cannot deny this reality. But to gain recognition and legitimacy, it is needed to satisfy certain conditions and the protestors believe those conditions were not met.

Then there was Karroubi himself, in his latest statement:

With the passing of time, I become even more convinced of the extensive manipulations and fraud that took place in the recent elections, as every day we receive new information that demonstrates the regrettable nature in which the authorities handled the trust given to them by the people of Iran....

Ask yourself what were the desires and demands of the the people who spontaneously came to the streets in such large numbers after the election? What were the demands of the 3 million people who roared in the streets from Imam Hossein to Azadi Square, with their silent march, without any form of advertising or propaganda motivating them to attend? Should the response to a nation who took to the streets with such noble intentions have been batons, tear gas and gun shots? Should our dear youth who dared ask “Where is our Vote?” within the framework of the law have faced violence and death at Kahrizak and other prisons?”

We should tell those responsible for these atrocities “How do you expect the people of Iran to accept your one sided claims regarding the election when it is so evident that you lie? Did some of you not have the audacity to suggest that these young people had lost their lives to meningitis? Would you have ever admitted to the occurrence of these crimes had it not been for persistent and defiant cries & demands by myself, Mr. Mousavi and the brave nation of Iran?

Just as important, Karroubi is not alone. Zahra Rahnavard, the wife of Mir Hossein Mousavi and an important political figure in her own right, was forceful and eloquent when she declare, We neither recognise Ahmadinejad’s administration [as a legitimate government] nor compromise but we are honestly following people’s rights and demands….We have put our hearts as our shields and we are ready for any bullet, attack or assassination."

Consider both the scope and timing of this episode. With the passage of month, the regime had been successful in moving attention away from June's Presidential election, even as the general notion of opposition to the "system" was being debated amongst the opposition. Of course, no protester was recognising Ahmadinejad, but the specific issues in play were now injustices and the abuses of detainees.

The effect of the last 48 hours has been to resurrect the electoral, as well as the political and judicial, legitimacy of Ahmadinejad. And that in turn raises an interesting intersection: while the "conservative" opposition to the President does not want to revisit June, they do want to take down Ahmadinejad's allies and curb his authority. So now "the head of the government of the regime" faces a renewed challenge from multiple direcitons.

And all of this occurs in what was supposed to be the quieter water between Ashura and the commemoration of the Islamic Revolution's anniversary (1-11 February). Without taking to the streets, even as many of its leading activists have been swept up in arrests, the opposition has taken the initiative.

None of this should be read as a coordinated victory. Some in the Green movement, after the initial confusion over Monday's statement, are still distrustful and even disdainful of "Obi-Wan Karroubi", and there is still uncertainty over the relationship between Karroubi and Mohammad Khatami. I suspect, however, that both of these tensions will diminish in the next week.

It also remains to be seen whether this challenge, which Karroubi is again framing as one against the Government rather the system despite his "Mr Khamenei" jibe, will be expanded to take on the Supreme Leader. It is possible, however, that this question --- again because of the most recent developments --- can be put behind the immediate confrontation.

Legitimacy. That is what the fight was over in June. And 7 1/2 months, it is still the battleground. "President" Ahmadinejad can run, but this week will re-establish that he cannot hide.