The Latest from Iran (16 July): Waiting for Rafsanjani's Prayers

NEW The “Other” Rafsanjani: Faezeh Hashemi Criticises Supreme Leader, Government, Khatami
NEW Iran: How Friday's Prayers Might Develop
UPDATED Iran: How Many Protesters Have Died?
The Latest from Iran (15 July): Chess not Checkers

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS- SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED



1940 GMT: A contact reports that Ahmadinejad's business trip to Mashad could be met with opposition demonstrations. Online rumour has it that an 'assassination attempt' will be staged by the Ahmadinejad camp, which will provide an excuse to increase security and surveillance in Iran- which can then be used against the opposition.

1930 GMT: A group of scholars have released a letter in support of Ayatollah Ostadi, who said after leading prayers in Qom last Friday that they would be his last for the foreseeable future. [Link: Persian / English via iran88] One of the scholars is Ayatollah Javadi-Amoli. [Link: Persian / English]

1920 GMT: An article on the UG Government's Radio Farda site demonstrates the diversity of opinion over what may be in The Rafsanjani speech tomorrow. The staunchlly pro-Government Kayhan is asking for a "unifying speech that is worthy of a pillar of Islamic leadership", while members of the reformist party have stated that "generally speaking, Mr. Rafsanjani's speeches in Friday prayers  have always had large political significance with huge effects".

1715 GMT: A possibly significant development from Wikileaks on the resignation of Aghazadeh as head of the Iranian nuclear programme: "Week ago, source in Iran gave WL a report of a nuclear accident at Natanz. Now Iran's nuke head resigns-no reason. Anyone know more?"

1610 GMT: Twitter's IranRiggedElect states that Mehdi Karroubi will also attend Friday prayers. (AUT News link, in Persian).

1600 GMT: The Guardian has updated its database of dead and detained in Iran- it now contains almost 700 names.

1545 GMT: Twitter's iranbaan reports says that, "Etemade Melli newspaper reports that Mohammad Khatami, Mehdi Karroubi, Hashemi Rafsanjani, and Ali  Nategh Nouri will not attend Ahmadinejad's inauguration ceremony."

1230 GMT: How Big is This News? Iranian Students News Agency reports that the head of Iran's nuclear programme, Gholam Reza Aghazadeh, submitted his resignation to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad almost three weeks ago.

It is unclear if the resignation is related to post-election conflict and why news of it was not released until now. An Enduring America correspondent notes, however, that the development could be very unsettling in the ongoing manoeuvres between Iran and the "West": "Aghazadeh was close to Ayatollah Khamenei but had also developed a good rapport with [former International Atomic Energy Agency head Mohammad] El-Baradei. He was one of the last of the Khatami-era officials."

Combined with Hillary Clinton's clumsy statement on Iran yesterday --- the US will "engage" but only to the end of September --- this news points to difficulties related to but beyond Iran's internal situation.

0835 GMT: Some public threats are being made that Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mohammad Khatami "will be beaten up" in Friday prayers. Possibly in response, the conservative newspaperKayhan has declared that " while some individuals claiming to be hezbollah [followers of the party] may engage in thuggish behavior, the intelligent Iranian public should recognize that this behavior is not hezbollah etiquette and should ostracize such individuals".

0830 GMT: More on the efforts of the Interior Ministry (0700 GMT) to check the protests. The ministry, which currently can authorise or ban political parties, has taken the unprecedented step of declaring that its permission is required for a "political front" of groups. The step comes after news this week that Mir Hossein Mousavi was seeking to form a front for the opposition challenge.

0745 GMT: Fintan Dunne has offered an estimate of 245 protester deaths since 12 June. We've posted an analysis in our separate blog on the casualties.

0700 GMT: The Regime Strikes Back (a Bit). Interior Minister Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Ejeie shook a fist at the opposition in a press conference on Wednesday, claiming that the Intelligence Ministry enquiries into post-election conflict were finding culprits: "The role of some of these political figures has been proven and their case is nearing completion."

Beside putting out an unsubtle warning 48 hours before Friday prayers, Mohseni-Ejeie was also indicating that the Government would hold out against pressure to release detainees. As cases were still being investigated, "no exact time can be announced for their release." He added that confessions obtained from those arrested could be made public, should the country's judiciary decides to do so.

0500 GMT: Just over 24 hours to go before Friday prayers in Tehran, to be led by former President Hashemi Rafsanjani, and all is relatively quiet in Iran. The one important exception was last night's confirmation by Mir Hossein Mousavi that he will join the march to the prayer site. The news, which broke on Mousavi's website and Facebook page, was reconfirmed three hours ago.

In the lull before the event, the most intriguing discussion has been of Rafsanjani's approach tomorrow. Maryam at Keeping the Change has an excellent consideration of "the delicate balancing act that Rafsanjani will likely play on Friday". Reviewing both the former President's objectives and the hopes and fears of the opposition movement, Maryam summarises from "a source in the Mousavi campaign": "They are expecting Rafsanjani's speech to unite the opposing factions, though they also believe he will speak about the rights of the people and be critical of the government's treatment of them during the election crisis."

That assessment points to some interesting realities and some even more interesting questions. Rafsanjani's emergence highlights the striking weakness of President Ahmadinejad, whose relegation to the sidelines has been further illustrated by his flight to Mashaad and thus his non-appearance in Tehran on Friday. Just as striking has been the recent silence of the Supreme Leader. I cannot recall a statement by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei after the 18 Tir protests of last Thursday, which were scathing about the supposed role of his son, Mojtaba, in manipulating the election and leading security forces against the opposition.

But this is no means now a simple alliance of Rafsanjani with the Green Movement against the Government. Maryam's assessment points to the negotiation that is taking place between the former President, who after all was a key reason why Khameini ascended to the Supreme Leadership, and those who have been pressing for substantial change to the system. If Rafsanjani calls for a unity government, does Mousavi accept? Under what conditions? What of the reactions of Mehdi Karroubi, Mohammad Khatami, and other opposition leaders, some of whom still remain in detention? And how would the Rafsanjani appeal be received by a fragmented clerical leadership in Qom?

Maybe more importantly, is "compromise", if that is the word offered or hinted at by Rafsanjani, a word that will be accepted by a mass of protesters who have rallied but then been beaten --- verbally, emotionally, and sometimes physically --- by those in power?

UPDATED Iran: A Counter-coup against the Supreme Leader's Son Mojtaba?

The Latest from Iran (8 July): The Day Before….?

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS- SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED

UPDATE (9 JULY, 1200 GMT): After double-checking and reflecting on details, my opinion is that The Guardian story is an exaggeration of the tensions within the Iranian system. It is wrong in both factual details, such as Ali Larijani's position and that of Revolutionary Guard commander Jafari, but also in the general portrayal of a sweeping move against the Supreme Leader through the anger over Mojtaba Khameini.

But there is an important curiosity about the way this story appeared. Julian Borger is an excellent reporter and now Diplomatic Editor for The Guardian, but to my knowledge he has little experience in the Middle East and Iran. Robert Tait has been the long-time Tehran correspondent for the newspaper, and Ian Black, who has been the Middle Eastern correspondent, has filed recent stories. In contrast, Borger has generally been based in the US and Europe.

So how does a high-ranking Iranian politician come to Borger with the story? I suspect that there is a Western "broker" here, in other words, a Government or private institution (probably American or British) who knew of this Iranian politician's views and put him in contact with Borger or vice-versa.

That does not mean that The Guardian, Julian Borger, and the Iranian politician are just "puppets" of Western intrigue. Instead, it's a case of how very real internal tensions in Iran make their way out as "news".

So who is the source? The answer to that would tell you how serious this tale of a "counter-coup" could be.

On Wednesday afternoon, the website of The Guardian of London posts a story, based on “a politician with strong connections to the security apparatus”, publicising what has been discussed amongst Iranian activists for weeks: the Supreme Leader’s son, Mojtaba Khamenei (pictured), is now in charge of Iran’s paramilitary Basiji.

That, however, is only the beginning of the story. The Iranian source adds that victory over the protest — both on the streets and behind the scenes — has not been achieved, “This game has not finished. The game has only just started.”

Indeed, according to the politician, we may now be witnessing the counter-move against an election night seizure of power led by the Supreme Leader's son:

Mojtaba is the commander of this coup d'etat. The basiji are operating on Mojtaba's orders, but his name is always hidden in all of this. The government never mentions him. Everyone is angry about this. The maraji [Iran's most senior ayatollahs] and the clerics are angry, the conservatives are very angry and strongly critical of Mojtaba. This situation cannot continue with so many people on the top against it.

The source portrays a situation where, in part because of the anger against Mojtaba, the Supreme Leader can rely on only a minority of senior clerics, politicians like Ali Larijani, Mayor of Tehran Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, and Presidential candidate Mohsen Rezaei have been alienated, and key commanders of the Revolutionary Guard such as General Ali Jafari have been angered.

It must be emphasised that this is a single-source story. There are elements which are shaky: for example, General Jafari has swung behind the regime's crackdown on dissent. The extent of political opposition within the regime also seems exaggerated. Larijani, for one, appears to be sitting on the fence.

Still, there is much here which corresponds with our own sources on divisions in the clerical and political leadership. Definitely a story, if not the story, to watch in forthcoming days.

Torture: Britain's 'Catalogue Of Shame'

A major piece by Ian Cobain in today's Guardian examines the significant part torture has played in Britain's post-9/11 anti-terrorism policy:

Today, however, there is mounting evidence that torture is still regarded by some agents of the British state as a useful and legitimate investigative tool. There is evidence too that in the post-9/11 world, government officials have been prepared to look the other way while British citizens, and others, have been tortured in secret prisons around the world. It is also clear that an official policy, devised to govern British intelligence officers while interrogating people held overseas, resulted in people being tortured.

In a series of case studies Cobain shows how torture has become a standard method of interrogation for the British intelligence services, and how everyone involved- from personnel on the ground to high-ranking government ministers- may be complicit.

Some key paragraphs (though we recommend you read the full article). Lessons not learned from Northern Ireland (and this sounds suspiciously similar to Guantánamo-style 'of course we respect human rights but enhanced interrogation is OK' torture):

It appears that nobody thought to give officers from either agency any advice about the Geneva Conventions, and nor were they warned that in 1972 the British government had banned five techniques of mistreatment that had been employed by the British army in Northern Ireland - hooding, being forced to stand in a stressful position with arms outstretched against a wall, being subjected to loud noise, sleep deprivation, food and drink deprivation. But, as senior officers from both organisations later reassured the ISC, they "operate in a culture that respects human rights ..."

Leaving the dirty work to the ISI (though British agents provided the post-whipping/ drilling debrief):

Then a guard came in with an electric drill. "I was told to face the wall, and the guard was told: 'Drill another hole in his buttocks.'" The guard switched on the drill, and touched Amin's backside. At this point he appears to have passed out. When he came around the questioning continued, his interrogators whipping his head.

Over the next two weeks he was interrogated almost every day. His interrogation was co-ordinated with the questioning of 20 other men - one in New York, one in Ottawa, and 18 in London - who had been detained a few days earlier. Throughout his ordeal, Amin says, it was made clear to him that this treatment had been requested by the British.

And why this is likely to have gone all the way up to Tony Blair:

So who in government was party to these lengthy discussions? How high up did it go? Could it be that this is what is contained in the 42 classified US documents that Miliband is attempting to prevent the public from seeing? Stafford Smith has seen the documents, but is prevented by law from revealing their contents. However, when asked how far up the decisions over Mohamed were taken, Stafford Smith says this: "There are things I can't talk about because they're classified. I can't say why I believe that this probably went all the way to No 10. I would be astounded if No 10 didn't know what was going on."

Full article.