Iran Election Guide

Donate to EAWV





Or, click to learn more

Search

Entries in Mir Hossein Mousavi (47)

Monday
Jan112010

Iran Analysis: The Regime Beyond the Headlines

The world is once again watching Iran. A series of weekend developments are in the global press this morning. Thomas Erdbrink of The Washington Post covers the Parliamentary report on the abuse of detainees, headlining the allegations against former Tehran Prosecutor General and current Presidential aide Saeed Mortazavi, "An Iranian parliamentary probe has singled out a former Tehran prosecutor as being responsible for the violent deaths of three protesters in a now-closed prison facility after anti-government demonstrations in July." Nazila Fathi of The New York Times writes on the same lines.

Credit to both reporters and to others for picking up on the development. Credit also for coverage of the Supreme Leader's weekend address as well as notice of President Ahmadinejad's presentation of his five-year National Development Plan to Parliament.

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


However, all the information deserves a much closer look. Below the surface of pronouncement and public reports, there are powerful currents swirling within the Establishment. This is no less than an attempt, perhaps the last one before showdown reaches the highest levels of the regime, to find a way out of the political conflict.

There are hints tucked away in today's stories. Erdbrink, for example, has this enticing quote from Abbas Abdi, a former journalist critical of the Government: 
Mortazavi is the highest official the parliament could accuse without getting in trouble. If they would go after lower-level officials, their probe would have been meaningless." It is now up to the judiciary to press official charges against the former prosecutor.

Fathi goes for the line of a sop to the Green movement:
One analyst, a former senior official who spoke on condition of anonymity, said that in pinning the blame on Mr. Mortazavi, the government was trying to pacify the opposition.

“They might go as far as sacrificing Mortazavi, but I don’t think this is going to fool the opposition,” he said. “This does not mean a major compromise. It is just a tactic, and they are willing to sacrifice him because he crossed the lines.”

Both soundbites are half-right: Mortazavi now wears the title of Number One Scapegoat for the post-election excesses.

This, however, has little to do with concessions to the opposition. The regime's tough response to the Saturday march of Mothers of Mourning and their supporters, putting 33 in prison and reportedly injuring several, backs up the rhetoric that continues to come from Ministers, officials, Parliamentary leaders like Ali Larijani, and the Supreme Leader. No more demonstrations. No more resistance.

(At best, there may be an argument that the Parliamentary report is a signal to Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi, who raised the abuse charges back in July, that they should come in from the opposition cold and strike a deal. However, even that possibility --- raised in last week's letter from conservative/principlist leader and Presidential candidate Mohsen Rezaei to Ayatollah Khamenei --- has not been borne out by any other Government moves.)

And the Abdi line is incomplete, either in its reading or its representation by Erdbrink. The idea that Mortazavi is the biggest fish/scapegoat (pardon the mixing of animal metaphors) and therefore that the investigations and the allegations stop with the former prosecutor is a misunderstanding: the Parliamentary challenge to Ahmadinejad has come too far to stop with Mortazavi's punishment.

Remember, the President's response to this report --- after it was presented to Parliament --- was to proceed with the official ceremony for Mortazavi's appointment as the head of the unit investigating smuggling of currency and drugs. That's a come-and-get-me taunt to those in and close to the Majlis --- Rezaei, Ali Motahari, Ahmad Tavakoli, even Ali Larijani --- who want the President, not one of advisors, to admit errors and injustices. Motahari made that clear in his video interviews last week.

So leave the Green opposition to the side for the moment. One of two scenarios happens:

1. Mortazavi falls, and Ahmadinejad takes a blow to this authority. His Parliamentary and political foes will either then accept that they have contained Mahmoud or, smelling blood and victory, they will press on.

2. Ahmadinejad will not sacrifice Mortazavi, and the fight gets even more intense.

Into this mix let's throw in the Supreme Leader. His speech last Saturday was difficult to read because it had two apparently conflicting messages. On the one hand, as we initially updated, he was warning protesters to shut up and go away, a repetition of his 19 June line that tried to validate the Presidential election. On the other, he was indicating that there had to be some acceptance of excessive measures by security forces and assurances that they would not be repeated.

How to reconcile those signals? Well, by recognising to whom they are directed. The first is simply to keep the opposition at bay and, indeed, far, far away while the regime tries to sort itself out. The second, more immediately important message is to those who nominally support Khamenei. Read it carefully, and I think you've got the Supreme Leader lending some backing to the Parliamentary/political criticism of the Presidential office and, therefore, telling Ahmadinejad and the security forces aligned with him: Be Careful.

Another reminder: this isn't new. Rewind to July and August and there are a series of power plays and disputes between Parliament and the President and even the Supreme Leader and Ahmadinejad. Mahmoud and Company won some of those battles, getting more influence in ministries like Intelligence, and lost some, for example, with the forced climbdown over the appointment of Esfandiar Rahim-Mashai as First Vice President. At that time, however, Ahmadinejad's biggest victories were getting to be President, with his inauguration in August, and getting his big Cabinet picks the following month.

All of this is back in play, however. As a very well-informed source told me last week, "The only way this ends is if and when some [expletive deleted] stabs Ahmadinejad in the back."
Sunday
Jan102010

The Latest from Iran (10 January): "Middle" Ground?

1950 GMT: An American Strategy? I really don't understand what the Obama Administration is playing at. At the same time as Administration officials are putting out the story that the US is moving to a "sanctions for rights" approach (see separate analysis), the top US military commanders are going on rhetorical red alert and talking about confrontation.

First there was the preview of General David Petraeus' remarks (see 0745 GMT). Now the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, is declaring that while the US is following a diplomatic path with Iran, military options cannot be ruled out. Mullen is also saying that he is convinced Iran is pursuing the military nuclear programme.

That might mean the US gun is loaded, but then Mullen says, "An attack by us or anybody else would be destabilising," and he assures that US officials have noted the "legitimate concern" that the Iranian opposition would have to support the regime in the event of a US assault.

I'm sorry, but I'm far too tired to make sense of this. Watch the video and see what you can do.

1935 GMT: Report Is Not Enough. The reformist Imam Khomeini Line party has declared that the Parliament report on detainee abuses is a positive step but is incomplete, failing to consider a number of allegations against officials and security forces. The party cites the attacks on University dormitories and the death of the Kahrizak doctor, Ramin Pourandarjan, as cases that should have been cited.

1930 GMT: Tehran Prosecutor General Abbas Jafari Doulatabadi announced that a Syrian journalist working for Dubai TV, arrested on Ashura (27 December), was released Sunday. Doulatabi also said a Swedish diplomat was detained on Ashura and later freed.

NEW Latest Iran Video: Military Commander Mullen on US Options (10 January)
NEW Iran Special Analysis: A US Move to “Sanctions for Rights”?
NEW Iran: Challenge to The Government in “The Heartlands”?
The Latest from Iran (9 January): Watching Carefully


1920 GMT: Larijani Playing the Hard Man. Ali Larijani, the Speaker of Parliament, may have played supporting act to President Ahmadinejad's speech today, but he still took the opportunity to talk tough: "Opposition figures have to distance themselves from rioters in an attempt to correct their political records."

1720 GMT: Rafsanjani's Silence. The Los Angeles Times has picked up on the interview of Hashemi Rafsanjani's brother, Mohammad Hashemi (see 0730 GMT), explaining that the former President has been silent "because no one listens to him":
In the early days of the revolution the opposition based in abroad, monarchists, and his foes abroad stormed him with their verbal attacks. Now, unfortunately some people within the system make slanders against him and some media without paying attention to the remarks of [the Supreme Leader] keep on libeling him.

That's the positive way of being the situation: Rafsanjani is choosing to lie low, awaiting his chance to arise. The negative way of framing it might be that Rafsanjani has been pressured into submission.

1625 GMT: Ahmadinejad Targeted? You may have noticed a theme in our LiveBlog --- the growing conservative/principlist challenge to the President.

I held off on noting this video fully until an EA correspondent could confirm the reading, but in this clip, member of Parliament Ali Motahhari declares that Ahmadinejad has to be considered as one of the sources of trouble as well as Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi.

1535 GMT: Iran's Hot New Television Series. It's called "Confessions of Ashura" --- whether it's a documentary or fictional drama is likely to be in the eye of the beholder.

1515 GMT: And Another University Demonstration (see 1100 GMT). About 800 students gathered at Shahid Behesti University yesterday to protest attacks on the campus and detentions of their classmates.

1505 GMT: Diplomatic Protests. A former Iranian diplomat has claimed that five current foreign service officers, serving in four Iranian embassies in European countries, have applied for asylum.

1430 GMT: Mediawatch. Reuters is featuring the story of the Parliament report on detainees, especially the abuses at Kahrizak prison:
More than 145 people detained after Iran's disputed June election were kept for several days in a room of 70 square metres at a Tehran jail, including three who died, a parliamentary report was quoted as saying on Sunday....

It rejected the initial claim by officials, including then Tehran chief prosecutor Saeed Mortazavi, that the three deaths were caused by meningitis...."Their deaths are attributed to various issues such as limitation of space, poor sanitary conditions, inappropriate nutrition, heat, lack of ventilation and ... also as a result of physical attacks."

1400 GMT: Update --- Arrests of the Mothers of Mourning.

The 30 arrested Mothers of Mourning and supporters, arrested at Laleh Park yesterday, were taken by bus this afternoon to Revolutionary Court, passing more than 70 other mourning mothers and supporters had gathered since 8:30 a.m. outside Vozara detention centre. Those inside the bus showed Victory signs, while supporters followed in cars.

Those amongst the arrested include Mansoureh Behkish, Dr. Laila Sayfollahi, and sisters Hakimeh and Sedigheh Shokri.  One of the detained, a 75-year-old grandmother, has reportedly been taken to hospital.

1345 GMT: Ahmadinejad v. Parliament --- The Economic Front. President Ahmadinejad has addressed the Parliament to submit the draft of the Five-Year Development Plan to the Parliament. The plan sets the guidelines for the development of infrastructure, covering not only only the economy but also social, political, cultural, defense, and security areas.

No real clue in Ahmadinejad's rhetoric to either his political strategy or Parliament's reaction: "The draft is totally objective, enjoys an internal coherence, is compatible with the current situation of the country and is developed in a transparent and operational way."

1200 GMT: Taking Down Mortazavi? Parleman News reports that the findings of a special Parliament committee on arrests and detentions have been read in the Majlis.

According to the article, the role of Saeed Mortazavi, former Tehran Prosecutor General, in the abuses of Kahrizak prison was officially recognised, and this committee stressed that the judiciary system should be held accountable for events.

1100 GMT: Another Student Demonstration. Word emerges of a sit-in strike, coinciding with final exams, at Razi University in Kermanshah in western Iran to protest the illegal detention of classmates.

0950 GMT: Justice Denied. Economist and journalist Saeed Laylaz has not been allowed to read out his defence in the appeal of his 9-year sentence.

0935 GMT: We've posted a special assessment of Washington's shift in policy, "Sanctions for Rights"?

0930 GMT: Score 1 for EA, 0 for US Strategy. Less than two hours ago, we noted the declaration of General David Petraeus that all contingencies, e.g. military action, are in play regarding Iran, and predicted, 2No prizes for guessing what Iran's state media will make of that soundbite."

This just in from Press TV's website, "US drops strongest hint of Iran blitz in months."

0835 GMT: Piling on The Leveretts. Muhammad Sahimi joins the shredding of last week's New York Times opinion piece, by Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett, trying diminish the Green movement and promote the Ahmadinejad Government.

0830 GMT: Movement Outside Tehran? We've posted an interesting piece by Borzou Daragahi of The Los Angeles Times on political shifts beyond the capital.

0745 GMT: This Weekend's Unhelpful Statements. From the Iranian side, Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki made the jump from nuclear discussions to "regime change" allegations yesterday, "Western countries know that Iran does not seek to produce nuclear weapons. However, they intend to use it as a pretext for interfering in internal affairs."

No surprise there --- I heard a well-placed Iranian academic make the same "regime change" claim against the United States last week --- but it does nothing to break the stalemate in the talks on uranium enrichment.

And then from the US side, there's General David Petraeus, the head of the military's Central Command. Petraeus, in an interview to be aired on CNN today, whips out the spectre of The Bomb: "It would be almost literally irresponsible if CENTCOM were not to have been thinking about the various 'what ifs' and to make plans for a whole variety of different contingencies" against Tehran.

No prizes for guessing what Iran's state media will make of that soundbite, when it refers to "interfering in internal affairs".

0730 GMT: We're working on an analysis, to be published Monday, of manoeuvres including and surrounding the Supreme Leader's statement on Saturday. While the attempt to break the Green movement will continue, the question is whether this can be moderated, reducing overt violence and perhaps punishment specific officials for past excesses, while some notional "unity" arrangement can be struck with conservative/principlist critics.

Meanwhile, bits and pieces....

In the midst of these possible manoevures, an interesting comment from Mohammad Hashemi, who claims that former Hashemi Rafsanjani is remaining silent "because no one is listening".

Persian2English offers the latest information on detained members of the student movement Daftar-Takhim-Vahdat.
Friday
Jan082010

UPDATED Iran & Twitter 101: Getting The Facts Right --- A Response to Will Heaven

TWITTER IRANUPDATE 8 January: Will Heaven will not give up --- he has made another attempt, informed only by anecdote, distortion, and speculation, to justify his campaign for silence on Twitter about #IranElection.

I will break my own vow of silence (see comments below), regarding any discussion of and thus further publicity for the thoughtless and indefensible in Mr Heaven's "analysis", to say this:

@WillHeaven: You insult those of us who use #Twitter wisely and, hopefully, effectively. You insult @persiankiwi, & you insult the people of #Iran. If you have any decency, stop.

(P.S. Maybe you can be of use writing about #uksnow.)

---

Josh Shahryar writes:

Waking up every day and being a journalist is a very conflicting job. Sometimes, you read the work of other journalists who’ve written responsibly and with full knowledge of the subject matter and you feel proud of who you are. Other times, people write things that make you want to just sit there and mourn the fact that he or she belongs to the same profession as you.

Last week, in the online edition of Britain's Daily Telegraph, Will Heaven critiqued the people who have been active on Twitter for the cause of Iran --- some now for almost 200 days --- under the headline, “Iran and Twitter: the fatal folly of the online revolutionaries”.

Don’t get me wrong, Mr Heaven has freedom of speech on his side. But every now and then, I take the liberty to use the same right to point out where fellow journalists for filling the internet with assertions that misrepresent the truth and "analysis" that blatantly insults not only our intelligence but also our characters. I think Will Heaven fits that bill quite neatly.

I am simply going to reply to Mr Heaven's paragraphs one by one in order. I have not changed any of his words, and I will address him directly.

HEAVEN: As young men and women took to the streets of Tehran on Sunday to confront the Revolutionary Guard, another very different protest sprang to life all over the world. This one didn't face tear-gas or gunfire. And its participants didn't risk prison, torture or death. It took place on 2009's most trendy website: Twitter.com.

Well, now, how about the risk of having your family imprisoned, tortured or killed? Did you know that dozens of social media activists have families in Iran and dozens more have received e-mails from the Iranian government telling them to stop or else their families would face serious harm? Did you know that Fereshteh Ghazi (@iranbaan), another activist who writes about prisoners, has family in Iran? Did you know that Isa Saharkhiz, the father of the most active of the Twitterati, Mehdi Saharkhiz (@onlymehdi), is in prison and being tried in connection with the protests?

I think everyone would agree that even if these people aren’t personally facing imprisonment, torture and death, they might deserve a moment of recognition for persisting in their reporting when their families facing the same peril. If you don't choose to join recognition of them, at least pause and include these facts before you wag your finger at their supposed security.

For Twitter enthusiasts, this has been a bumper year. With a new online tool at their chubby fingertips, they've helped to change the world. Or at least, that's what they think: the so-called Iranian Twitter Revolution recently won a Webby award for being "one of the top 10 internet moments of the decade".”

Chubby fingertips? Nice use of the stereotype that portrays all geeks as being overweight. This here is just a direct and far from original insult. I’m not sure how you manage to call yourself a journalist and use such degrading language to get your fictitious points across.

As for the Iranian "Twitter Revolution", that is a creation of the mainstream media who are ignorant of what is going on inside and outside Iran.

If the protests in Iran are turning into a revolution, social networking websites had very little to do with it. The reason why the site are getting kudos is because they helped people bypass the failure of the mainstream media to cover the events in Iran and get informed about what was really happening on the streets of Tehran as well as shore up outside support for the cause.

Get this straight; it was the failure to provide timely and accurate news regarding the events in Iran that forced the citizens of the world to step up and help educate people about the courage and perseverance of the Iranian people and the brutality and inhumanity of the Iranian government. You can whine all you want, but you, if you are representing a responsible "traditional" media vs. a supposedly tangential and irresponsible social media, have failed. And the fact that you failed does not give you the right to attempt and devalue the work of others.

Let me tell you why I find that deeply troubling. There has been no revolution in Iran. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has held on to power after a rigged election. Meanwhile, protests continue to be violently suppressed by government forces and unregulated militias, with human rights groups saying that at least 400 demonstrators have been killed since June. Dozens of those arrested remain unaccounted for, and many of those set free tell of rape and vicious beatings in Iran's most notorious prisons.

So don't tell me that Twitter and other online networks have improved the situation in Iran. It's deluded to think that "hashtags", "Tweets" and "Twibbons" have threatened the regime for a second. If all the internet could muster in a decade was smug armchair activists and pontificating techies, we may as well all log off in the New Year.

Again, Twitter has not improved the situation in Iran; it has improved the flow of news about that situation to the outside world. It has helped mobilize activists outside Iran, protesting across the world, to pressure the international community into taking action against the Iranian government.

If you had followed the news or understood what you have read, you would have known about the 25 July protests where thousands of people gathered in more than 100 cities around the globe in support of the Iranian people’s struggle for human rights. There have been dozens of protests in dozens of other cities since then; I attended one just a week ago. These protests have served to both inform the public and to pressure governments to deal with Iran’s repression of its citizens more harshly then they might have otherwise would have.

This would not have been possible if social networking websites had not connected people and informed them about what was going on inside Iran since, frankly, I see the mainstream media's primary interest in Iran as the nuclear energy program.

Your ignorance does not change the facts on the ground.

Here's the other thing "social media experts" will forget to tell you: dictatorships across the world now use their own tools to hunt down online protesters. In Iran, for instance, the government controls the internet with a nationalised communications company. Using a state-of-the-art method called "Deep Packet Inspection", data packages sent between protesters are now automatically broken down, checked for keywords, and reconstructed within milliseconds. Every Tweet and Facebook message, in other words, is firmly on the regime's radar.

As a result, the crackdown in Iran has been easier than ever before. Once the Revolutionary Guard intercept a suspect message, they are able to pinpoint the location of a guilty protester using their computer's IP address. Then it's just a question of knocking on doors – and confiscating laptops and PCs for hard evidence.
Sadly, when this happens, those outside Iran cannot always absolve themselves of responsibility. If you're an internet user in Britain who communicates with an Iranian protester online, or encourages them to send anti-regime messages over the internet, you could be putting their life in danger.


Here’s a bit of education in anti-filtering software. There’s a software called Tor –-- similar to Freegate --- that allows people to connect to the internet without fear of Deep Pocket Inspection tools. You can figure out that someone is using Tor with DPI, but you can never find out what they’re sending. Our "chubby-fingered" friends were intelligent and passionate enough to get that into Iranian hands as early as June. And that’s not all. Net activists have already created several new anti-DPI softwares that have already reached Iranians and are being skillfully used by a select few to get information out. With these, the government can’t even figure out if someone is using anti-filtering software or is connected straight up.

If this had not occurred, you would not get all the videos, pictures and information readily available within minutes of protests in Iran.

Just because you do not know about these things does not mean they do not exist or they do not work.

And contrary to what you claim, no one actually has to encourage Iranians to communicate information about their country to the outside world. They do it themselves. They feel a need to help the world understand what is going on in their country and not have to read fear-mongering articles on the mainstream media about how Iran is going to bomb Israel and there would be World War III and such. What the techies have done is help them access the software that allows them to do it without fear of getting arrested.

There's nothing wrong with spreading awareness outside Iran, but it's horribly naive to think that supporting illegal activity in a foreign country has no ethical dimension. It's equally foolish, of course, to kid yourself that you're on the front line.
For the Iranian authorities, the detective work often doesn't have to be remotely hi-tech. As Evgeny Morozov recently noted, it is now possible to calculate a person's sexual orientation by analysing who their Facebook friends are. Sure, it's a quirky news story in Britain, but terrifying for gay people living in countries such as Iran, where homosexuality is outlawed.


Illegal activity? What illegal activity? Iranians are granted the right to take to streets and peacefully protest by the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Just because the government is overstepping Iranian law does not mean you have to go out of your way to accommodate their will to hammer home your fallacious arguments. As for your assertion that helping Iranians spread the word about the situation is wrong, well, maybe you should know that freedom of expression is a universal human right. No country’s laws can infringe upon that. None.

I’m not sure you know that Facebook and Twitter are officially banned in Iran right now. People in Iran who are using the two applications have created accounts specifically to disseminate news and information, not for dating. Even if the government finds those accounts, it will not be able to trace them back to their owners because of new software.

Perhaps Barack Obama was one of the first world leaders to realise that social media have their limits. In March, on the feast of Nowruz (the Farsi New Year), he posted an online video in which he addressed the Iranian people and their leaders directly.

It signaled the launch of "YouTube diplomacy", one commentator gushed. But, like the Twitter Revolution, it has achieved very little – Iran remains determined to become a nuclear power, and America is still described by the regime as "the Great Satan".

The jab at YouTube diplomacy is another creation of those in the media who know little about what is going on during protests on the streets in daylight, even with video evidence at hand, but who are more than ready to scare the hell out of everyone by proclaiming that Iran will get the ability to make a nuclear bomb soon. Your own retreat into that nuclear shelter, under cover of the ludicrous and unfounded accusations about the movement inside as well as outside Iran, is only an addition to that evasion.

So what can we do? Well, perhaps that’s a question for 2010, because the internet, combined with “offline” networks, probably can encourage openness in dictatorships. But before we work out how, let’s first drop the self-congratulation.

What can you do? You can actually report after researching the subject you are about to write on. You can find sources inside Iran to get some real news out. And you can stop hurling insults like poisoned candy.

Finally, we don’t need to self-congratulate ourselves. The media does it for us quite neatly. I will point you to just one article about the Twitter Revolution published a few days ago in one of Sweden’s largest tabloid newspapers, Expressen:
Today Mousavi's Facebook page [a page run by activists from outside Iran] is a more secure source of news than Al-Jazeera and the BBC, while micro-blogs and websites like the dailyniteowl.com and rahesabz.net [both websites that use direct information from tweets and Facebook] offer sympathizers as well as media consumers, fast, reliable news [about Iran] that traditional newsrooms cannot provide.

That is just one out of hundreds of articles that have been published about the worldwide effort to help get the reality on Iran’s streets to people around the globe through social networking websites like Twitter, Facebook and YouTube and through microblogs.

I understand your frustration at having to keep up with citizen reporting. But that does not give you the right to so flagrantly distort facts and insult a mass of people that have devoted their own time without any monetary compensation to helping their brothers and sisters in Iran.

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.
Tuesday
Jan052010

The Latest from Iran (5 January): The Longer Game

IRAN GREEN2225 GMT: Arguing Over the Mousavi Statement. Habib-allah Askaroladi, a leading principlist politician, has declared, "Today it is important not to allow the extremists to change the national scene into a battlefield.”

That's not a surprising statement. This, however, raises an eyebrow: Askaroladi breaks from Presidential candidate Mohsen Rezaei in recommending Mir Hossein Mousavi's recent statement as a possible route to conciliation: “Nowhere in Mousavi’s statement is an about-face seen.”

2155 GMT: Diplomatic Protest. The Iranian consul in Norway has resigned in protest at his Government's treatment of the Ashura demonstrators. He is also reported to have sought asylum.

A spokesman for the Iranian Embassy would not comment on what he called lies and rumours.

2100 GMT: We've posted video of Monday's CNN interview with the former member of Parliament Fatemeh Haghighatjoo and Tehran University academic Seyed Mohammad Marandi. There's also the transcript of the thoughts of former Obama Administration official Ray Takeyh.

1705 GMT: A Victory for the Government. After months of wrangling, Iran's Parliament has ratified President Ahmadinejad's economic bill aimed at gradually cutting energy and food subsidies. Of 243 members, 134 votes for a reform subsidy organization to enforce the plan.

NEW Latest Iran Video and Transcript: Haghighatjoo and Marandi on CNN (4 January)
NEW Iran: How Outside “Help” Can Hurt the Green Movement
Latest Iran Video: Maziar Bahari on Britain’s Channel 4
Iran: Five Expatriate Intellectuals Issue “The Demands of the Green Movement”
Latest Iran Video: Interview with Committee of Human Rights Reporters (3 January)
Iran: In Defence of Mousavi’s “5 Proposals”
Iran: The Genius of Washington’s “Strategic Leaking” on Nukes & Sanctions

The Latest from Iran (4 January): Watching and Debating

The breakthrough came with a compromise on oversight, insisted upon by Parliament, The Supreme Iranian Audit Court, charged with supervising "financial operations and activities" of organizations which benefit from the state budget, will monitor the organization and submit reports on its performance twice a year.

1635 GMT: Patrolling the Cyber-Revolution. Iranian authorities have reiterated that access to filtered websites is a crime, complementing the declaration by the Ministry of Intelligence yesterday of criminal activity for any association with more than 60 "foreign groups", such as Yale University, accused of fomenting insurrection.

1630 GMT: Apologies for no update service for most of today, as Internet access has been impossible out of my location in Beirut.

0555 GMT: Jackson Swayze, Neda...Ahmadinejad/Khamenei? Austin Heap reports the message that went up when the President's website was hacked:

Dear God, In 2009 you took my favorite singer –-- Michael Jackson, my
favorite actress –-- Farrah Fawcett, my favorite actor –-- Patrick Swayze, my
favorite voice –-- Neda.

Please, please, don’t forget my favorite politician – Ahmadinejad and my
favorite dictator – Khamenei in the year 2010. Thank you.

0530 GMT: Another Jail Sentence. Journalist Bahman Ahmadi Amoui, arrested in June, has been sentenced to seven years and four months in prison and 34 lashes.

0525 GMT: The Letter of the Professors. A story we saw on Sunday but let slip because we were not sure of the significance --- by last night, it was the lead Iran story in Western media such as The New York Times.

Almost 90 academics on the Technical Faculty of Tehran University signed an open letter to the Supreme Leader calling for the end of violence against protesters: “Nighttime attacks on defenseless student dormitories and daytime assaults on students at university campuses, venues of education and learning, is not a sign of strength. Nor is beating up students and their mass imprisonment.”

0520 GMT: Still No Cyber-Mahmoud. The President hasn't been able to blog from his travels in Tajikistan/Turkmenistan, as his website is still down.

0510 GMT: It is becoming clear that the Green movement is in a phase of regrouping and maintaining a lower public profile. There are no immediate markers for protest before the anniversary of the Islamic Revolution on 22 Bahman (11 February), although there was some chatter yesterday about a "40th day" memorial on 7 February for those killed on Ashura last week.

After an intense phase of discussion of the Mousavi statement on Sunday, there was less to note politically yesterday. Much of the Internet attention was on the "10 demands" of the five expatriate Iranian intellectuals, although it is still unclear how much impact their statement will have inside Iran.

Less news also from the regime. There was the flutter that "foreign nationals" had been arrested on Ashura, but nothing further emerged during the day. Less news of arrests as well --- perhaps because the Government is running out of targets to detain --- so last night was led by the seriousness/black comedy of the "blacklist" of 80/62/60 foreign organisations that are off-limits to Iranians.
Tuesday
Jan052010

Latest Iran Video and Transcript: Haghighatjoo and Marandi on CNN (4 January)

On Monday CNN framed the Iran story by interviewing Fatemeh Haghighatjoo, a former member of Parliament who is challenging the system, and Seyed Mohammad Marandi, a Tehran University academic who defends it. The transcript below the video also includes the comments of former State Department official Ray Takeyh:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6r0U1tB5U0[/youtube]

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN ANCHOR: Tonight, has Iran's opposition movement crossed the point of no return? And is the Islamic republic struggling to survive? We'll examine what is next for Iran.

Good evening, everyone. I'm Christiane Amanpour, and welcome to our program.

For the past week, Iran has again been plunged deep into crisis, with the outcome far from certain. On the holy day of Ashura last Sunday, Iranian security forces used bullets and batons to suppress the biggest anti-government protest since June. At least eight protestors were killed, including one who died when a police van reportedly ran over him, as you can see in these images.

Now, the government says that that van was stolen. Nonetheless, demonstrators vented their anger against Basij militiamen, burning their motorbikes, attacking their buildings, shocked that such a crackdown could happen on Ashura.

Government supporters, for their part, were also outraged that the opposition had turned Ashura into a day of political protests, and so hundreds of thousands of them came out three days later. We'll talk with a former Obama administration official about what all this means for the U.S. in a moment.

But we start with some prophetic words from an Iranian woman, a member of parliament who told me 10 years ago that Iran's conservative leadership was out of touch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FATEMEH HAGHIGHATJOO, FORMER IRAN PARLIAMENT MEMBER (through translator): The Koran gives us freedom of choice. If the conservatives want to disagree with the idea of personal freedom, then they are against the essence of the Koran. But unfortunately, the conservatives are doing this in order to maintain their own power.

AMANPOUR: What happens if you don't get what you want?

HAGHIGHATJOO (through translator): The reform movement of President Khatami has started, and it cannot go back. How many people can the conservatives throw in jail? They can't jail the whole population of Iran.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: That was 10 years ago. Today, Fatemeh Haghighatjoo lives in the United States after being forced to resign for her outspoken challenges to the regime. And now a visiting scholar at the University of Massachusetts in Boston, she joins me here in our studios.

And from Iran, Mohammad Marandi, head of the North American Studies program at the University of Tehran.

Welcome, both of you, to this program.

Let me ask you first, Mrs. Haghighatjoo, what is your reaction to what you told me 10 years ago? You basically said then that the government can't arrest everyone.

HAGHIGHATJOO: First of all, good evening, and thank you very much for having me here. As I said 10 years ago and still I am saying, the government is not able to arrest all population in Iran. People of Iran need fundamental change in the country, and I am so optimistic that they will see this change in the country in future.

AMANPOUR: And change for you means what exactly?

HAGHIGHATJOO: Change -- change for me, that means people could see their freedom in the country. They -- this diversity in the country, in the population could be seen inside the power structure in the country. And also the portion (ph) of the government is important for people of Iran.

AMANPOUR: Let me turn to you, Mr. Marandi. Thank you for joining us. It looks like the situation has really reached a turning point here, particularly with the events of Ashura and then the competing protests -- or, rather, counter-demonstrations -- on Wednesday. Many here in the United States are calling this a game-changer. How do you see it from there?

MOHAMMAD MARANDI, UNIVERSITY OF TEHRAN: Well, I think that the -- the so-called opposition -- I say so-called, because there is no monolithic opposition, and there is no monolithic conservative or principlist movement. There are many different political groups in Iran that have different agendas.

But I think that the opposition that protested on Ashura made a very major tactical mistake by -- by carrying out, by being very brutal towards the police on that day, and also by carrying out these protests on a day of public mourning.

And I think that there was a major backlash on Wednesday when probably the largest gathering of people in protest of Mr. Mousavi and the green movement in Tehran's history, really, gathered on Wednesday. They were -- I think that was a defining movement. I think Mr. Mousavi, his letter that was written the day after the anti-Mousavi demonstration, revealed that he, too, was a bit rattled.

AMANPOUR: OK, well, let me ask you this. You say that they were outraged, the government supporters, and yet the protestors -- and as you know, very huge sections of the international public opinion were outraged that the Iranian forces used deadly force, gunfire, against the protestors. I mean, does this not really challenge now the authority of the government?

MARANDI: Well, first of all, the -- the protest -- the demonstration in Tehran, it was -- was not necessarily pro-government. It was pro- Islamic republic. And many critics of the government but who are opposed to Mr. Mousavi participated. As I said, it was a huge rally. But they were not -- it's not a monolithic group on any side of the political equation that we can talk about easily.

But I think that the outrage here was that -- that the MEK terrorist organization, which although officially banned by the United States, it is being supported by the United States under different names, they were involved in Tehran, according to their own statements, and they were -- as you can see in the footage -- they attacked police stations...

AMANPOUR: Which we'll show right now.

MARANDI: ... when a police officer was blinded -- sorry?

AMANPOUR: We're just showing that pictures as you speak.

MARANDI: Right. In any case, I can't hear you very well, but they attacked police stations, they destroyed public property, and they attacked police officers. And at the same time, as I said, it was a day of mourning. Ashura is the anniversary of the martyrdom of the grandson of the prophet of Islam, and it's a very holy day in Iran, and that didn't go down well with a majority of Iranians who saw these protestors clapping and whistling and so on.

But I think that, in general, the protests -- the counter-protests, the protest that was critical of Mr. Mousavi on Wednesday, was itself a turning point.

AMANPOUR: Well, let me ask you then, Mr. Haghighatjoo, you are in the reformist camp, obviously. Do you believe that there are violent elements taking part in your demonstration and in your movement? Is that a concern?

HAGHIGHATJOO: You know, what I am going to say is the people of Iran (inaudible) Green movement wanted, you know, requested, demand peacefully without violence. Unfortunately, the government forces try to pull people toward violence. And I would consider (inaudible) scenario by the government, they try to make these crash between -- clash between people in both sides.

And if you look at, since disputed election in June 12 to now, we will see that this protest was silent protest, and that shows that people wanted to do -- to request (inaudible) demand peacefully. But, unfortunately, the government, you know, especially on day of Ashura, you know, acted very violently, bloody against people and protests.

AMANPOUR: OK. Let's move -- since we're trying to figure out what's next, let us ask now about these steps that Mr. Mousavi has put out towards resolution. Now, I'm going to read them off here on our screen. He says, "First of all, the Iranian administration should be held accountable. Secondly, there should be new and clear election laws. Then, there should be the release of all political prisoners, free and informed media, and finally, recognition of legal demonstrations."

Mr. Marandi, do you think there's any chance the government is going to agree to those five ideas that Mr. Mousavi has put forward?

MARANDI: Well, I think the problem is that the government sees things in a different light from Mr. Mousavi. And as I said, there are very many different political factions at play, both in the government and in the opposition.

AMANPOUR: Right, but these seem to be -- this seems -- these seem to be clear requests that seem to manifest themselves under, in fact, the Iranian constitution. Is there any feeling that the government is willing at all to meet Mousavi halfway? Or is this going to be a continued confrontation?

MARANDI: Well, I think that after the anti-Mousavi protests throughout the country on Wednesday, Mr. Mousavi's position has been severely weakened, and I think that is partially reflected in his letter. But I also think that the government is not going to release people, for example, who've blinded police officers or abused police -- police officers and so on.

I do think that there are moves to, let's say, move -- go back to more openness, but I think that the major problem, really, is that Mr. Mousavi has affiliated himself with a more extreme faction within the reformist movement. Even people like Mr. Sahobi (ph) have spoken about how the green movement is moving towards violence. And I myself have experienced death threats every time I come on television to talk about these issues. So it is a reality.

But a lot of the more mainstream reformists, they are moving away from Mr. Mousavi, for example, Mr. Tabesh (ph), who is the head of the reformist faction in parliament.

So there are very sharp internal debates in Iran about policy, about politics, about many issues in the country, but I think that the government and many political factions in the country are no longer willing to discuss serious issues with Mr. Mousavi anymore.

AMANPOUR: OK. We want to show some pictures that we have up on our wall, pictures of Mr. Mousavi receiving condolences when his own nephew was gunned down on the day of Ashura. And I want to ask you (OFF-MIKE) is there, do you believe, a split inside the factions in -- in Iran? Mr. Marandi has talked about people moving away from the reformist movement. Is this true?

HAGHIGHATJOO: No. I wanted to say that, if we have really -- if the government (inaudible) for green movement, then we will see people would side with Mousavi or would side with government. I disagree with Mr. Marandi's analysis regarding weakening Mousavi's position, because the government, you know, try to bring (inaudible) by paying money in some place, by bringing paramilitia to the city, by bringing student from school to the (inaudible)

And I would say this is not pro-government demonstration. Let's see. If the government allow...

(CROSSTALK)

AMANPOUR: So you're talking about competing rallies to see whose are bigger?

HAGHIGHATJOO: Yes, yes, and then we will see what we're going on. And then the second issue, unfortunately, I -- unfortunately, I don't think so the government and the supreme leader is going to accept Mousavi's fair position, because, you know, they think they can control issue. Unfortunately, their -- their solution is wrong solution. And this is not real answer to the crisis.

AMANPOUR: One final question to Mr. Marandi. You know, so much has been made and so many fears raised about the actual security of the reform leaders, the opposition leaders, such as Mr. Mousavi and Mr. Karroubi. I've been told that actually a decision has been made to step up their security by the Iranian government. Does that ring true to you? Do you think that they're going to try to make sure no harm comes to those principal figures?

MARANDI: Yes, I think so, especially since his nephew was killed under very suspicious circumstances. He was not killed in the demonstrations themselves. And the fact that he was singled out and assassinated, I think, is something that the many people in the political establishment find suspicious, and they -- they believe that perhaps terrorist organizations were behind it to increase tension in the country.

I also believe I -- I should add one final point, and that is that, within Iran itself, there are -- we shouldn't be speaking about the government and the opposition, because within the, let's say, the conservative groups or the principlist movements, there's no consensus. And the same is true with the reformists. Many key reformists have come -- distanced themselves completely with Mr. Mousavi and the green movement, especially since Mr. Mousavi has more and more aligned himself with -- or at least silently accepted the support of Western, American-backed television stations being broadcast into Iran, as well as former shah supporters and the MEK terrorist organization.

AMANPOUR: OK, Mr. Marandi. What do you say as a final word against - - you know, many people in Iran, obviously, are trying to discredit the reform movement, saying that they're agents of -- of -- of foreign countries. What do you say to that?

HAGHIGHATJOO: Unfortunately, this is analysis of the government and pro-government, you know, people. This is not...

MARANDI: I didn't...

(CROSSTALK)

MARANDI: ... for the government or Mr. Ahmadinejad.

HAGHIGHATJOO: Sorry. No reformists in the country will, you know, take (inaudible) Mousavi (inaudible) everybody support Mousavi. After Mousavi's statement, we see many people outspoken to support Mousavi's statement and all reformists, such as (inaudible) Mujahideen and also outside of the country, opposition and Iranian people who just (inaudible) for the country support Mousavi's current position.

AMANPOUR: All right. And we will talk to you again another time. And you, too, Professor Marandi. Thank you both very much for joining us.

MARANDI: Thank you.

AMANPOUR: And when we return, is the turmoil in Iran an opportunity or a challenge for the U.S. president, Barack Obama?
...
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: What's taking place within Iran is not about the United States or any other country. It's about the Iranian people and their aspirations for justice and a better life for themselves. And the decision of Iran's leaders to govern through fear and tyranny will not succeed in making those aspirations go away.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: So that was President Obama just a few days ago. We're joined now by Ray Takeyh, former Obama administration official on Iran and now continuing with the Council on Foreign Relations, joining me from Washington.

Mr. Takeyh, thank you for joining us. You probably heard our other two guests, and we're just particularly playing that sound bite from President Obama. Has he stepped up his rhetoric? And why is he doing that now?

RAY TAKEYH, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, SENIOR FELLOW: Well, I think it's inevitable as the situation in Iran deteriorates and as you have a greater degree of human rights abuses and government forceful suppression of the dissent movement that the United States and the president would react in this such manner. It's inconceivable for me -- for the president not to have done so, particularly strong language in terms of depicting Iran as -- as a tyranny.

AMANPOUR: What does that mean, then, for his desire to continue or to try to hold the door open for negotiations?

TAKEYH: Well, I'm not quite sure if the two are incompatible. You can have negotiations with Iran, as the United States has had negotiations with many adversarial countries, while also at the same time disapproving of the internal practices of those regimes, now, whether that was the Chinese government or -- or other such non-representative states.

I -- I think you can do both of them, but the president and the United States will have to stand up and declare that some of the behavior of the clerical regime is unacceptable, but also be open to negotiating some sort of a restraint on Iran's nuclear program, which also violates Iran's international obligations.

AMANPOUR: So you talk about the nuclear program. A deadline has come and come for Iran to respond to the -- to the proposals of the West. Iran is now putting its counterproposal.

TAKEYH: Right.

AMANPOUR: Where do you think this is headed in the -- in the immediate term?

[15:20:00]

TAKEYH: Well, I suspect, in the immediate term, the United States and its allies will try to ratchet up economic pressures on Iran, particularly targeting the Revolutionary Guard organization and its business -- business enterprises, maybe even some aspect of the Iranian petroleum sector, so you begin to see intensification of economic pressure on Iran in the hope that external pressure, combined with internal pressure, will cause Iran to adjust its behavior...

(CROSSTALK)

AMANPOUR: This is a tried and true -- Mr. Takeyh, this is a tried and -- some would say -- not so true method, that sanctions and pressure haven't really worked. Why would it be different this time?

TAKEYH: Well, it may not be different this time, but the idea is that you have a greater degree of international cooperation, particularly with a greater degree of assistance from Russia. That may be more hopeful than real, but that's essentially what the -- what the assessment is today.

Now, second of all, is the Iranian government internally is rather weak and vulnerable and it may seek some sort of an agreement abroad to at least mitigate international pressures.

I mean, as I said, this is -- this is a theory. And like most speculative ideas, we'll see how it pans out in practice.

AMANPOUR: You wrote an analysis on what was going on, and you basically compared the revolutionary situation back in '79 to what's going on right now, in that both seem to have, let's see, uncertain responses to the challenges of the regime. Do you think the government -- go ahead.

TAKEYH: Well -- well, it's important to suggest that history doesn't always repeat itself, actually, as a matter of fact, seldom repeats itself. Some of the challenges that the Islamic republic faces today are not dissimilar to the challenges that the monarchy faced. But the situations are also different.

I think the Iranian government at this point, for instance, if the supreme leader was receptive to some of the proposals made by Mr. Mousavi, you could perhaps see some sort of a peaceful resolution for this. But however it comes about, in terms of internal compromise, the supreme leader would have to accept that his power will be diminished, and I'm not quite sure if he's ready to do that.

AMANPOUR: Now, you heard what Mr. Marandi, who supports the Islamic republic, said in terms of saying that it's -- you know, the reform movement is fractured, that, you know, they're agents of the -- of international entities. What is the analysis inside the -- inside the U.S. about the strength of the reform movement?

TAKEYH: Well, in my view, that -- the -- the opposition movement is somewhat incoherent. It doesn't have a central nervous system. It doesn't even have an identifiable set of leaders or even a coherent ideology. It is a protest movement.

But it's been a peculiar protest movement in a sense that it has sustained itself. And the longer it sustains itself, the more ideology and so forth and even leadership will suggest themselves.

And whether they're agents of the West and that sort of a thing, that's just obviously nonsense. And I'm not sure if that rhetoric really impresses anyone. It certainly convinces no one.
Page 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 ... 10 Next 5 Entries »