Iran Election Guide

Donate to EAWV





Or, click to learn more

Search

Sunday
Jun132010

Iran Document: Karroubi "Greens Stronger & More Mature Than Last Year" (12 June)

Mehdi Karroubi, continuing his public-relations campaign with foreign media, conducted an e-mail interview with CNN, mainly on the current position of the Green Movement.



Significantly, it is unclear whether the cleric gave his answers before or after the developments of yesterday: CNN vaguely says, "Karrubi responded to CNN's questions on the first anniversary of the disputed vote."

CNN: How is Iran different today as compared to before last year's elections?

Mehdi Karrubi: Last year the elections started with excitement and joy, and most people came forward because they wanted change. We saw the political maturity of different levels of society and people supported their candidates faithfully. But after unprecedented fraud in the elections, we witnessed the peaceful protest of the people who wanted to take back their vote. Unfortunately the government's blatant and merciless crackdown cost the people a lot.

Today many in Iran have lost their loved ones just because they questioned the result of the vote. Many others were injured and many political activists and the children of this country filled the prisons. Security forces have trampled on constitutional laws, criminal laws and civil laws.

CNN: Is the situation in Iran better today than it was last year?

Karrubi: This can seen be seen from two viewpoints. From the way things appear, things have not improved because the political situation, the economy and international relations have been damaged. Iranians have paid a heavy price. But if we take a deeper look at the situation, the Iranian society has made strides in the path of knowing their rights, and this is a great achievement.

CNN: Many people were killed and arrested during the protests. Was the movement worth it?

Karrubi: It's a difficult situation but I have to say there is a heavy cost if you want to reform a system that's approaching corruption, ignoring the goals of the revolution, constitutional rights and the blood of our martyrs. From this viewpoint, despite the bitterness, this cost is understandable. History shows that obtaining freedom and rights is never without a cost, even with movements that are completely peaceful.

CNN: Why have the street protests stopped?

Karrubi: People have stopped taking part in demonstrations because of the brutal repression in the streets, the huge number of unjust arrests and inhumane behavior in prisons, and the creation [of] a police state, but this does not mean we will forget about our demands.

CNN: Is the Green Movement stronger than it was one year ago or weaker?

Karrubi: The Green Movement today is stronger and more mature than last year. Despite a heavy climate of repression, this movement has been able to unite and spread to different layers of society. Incidentally, the (Iranian) leadership understands this important development very well. The fact that funeral processions take place with the presence of anti-riot police and the fact that they never grant permission for any gatherings, even to honor Imam Khomeini, shows the strength of this movement and their fear of this movement.

CNN: What does the Green Movement want today? What is its goal?

Karrubi: This movement wants the execution of all the principles of the constitution, especially those related to the rights of the Iranian people. This movement wants Iran to grow under the reform movement and for the law to become reality for everyone. It wants fundamental civil rights for everyone. These are the goals of this movement.

CNN: How does the Green Movement hope to achieve its goal?

Karrubi: From reform and the return to the original path of the revolution and constitutional rights. Don't forget Iran's Green Movement is only after achieving its goals by raising awareness about people's rights through a peaceful and least costly path.

CNN: Do you consider Mr. Ahmadinejad your president?

Karrubi: No. Like I've repeatedly said, I consider him the head of the current government.

CNN: Do you fear for your safety?

Karrubi: There are many concerns but I'm not afraid. During the past year my family and I have endured a lot of pressure. From a bullet shot at my car in Ghazvin to an attack on my home. My biggest concern is the violent crackdown against people, especially the young men and women in the streets and prisons. I know that there's been a departure from the path of law and the path of the Imam, and I know change will not come easy. I see the defense of people's rights as my duty and I'm willing to do it at any cost.

CNN: What gives you hope that the Green Movement will succeed?

Karrubi: The strength of this movement is the participation of diverse layers of society. The key to the success of this movement is the awareness of the people, especially the youth and the women who are in the forefront of this movement, and the determination of people to go after their rights. The true leaders of this movement are the people, not us. There are hard days ahead but the path is clear and the future belongs to the people.
Sunday
Jun132010

Gaza Latest (13 June): Rumblings of the Next Flotilla

1400 GMT: Mahmoud Abbas denied that he had asked Obama to prevent the lifting of the naval blockade on Gaza. However, Netanyahu, during a meeting of Likud ministers, said that he supports easing the three-year blockade Israel has imposed on the Gaza Strip, but that he would not approve the lifting of the naval blockade.

1315 GMT: U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice has said there should be international participation in Israel's investigation into its raid of the flotilla. Israel's vice premier Dan Merridor replied: "There will be international elements in the commission which is going to be formed. For the moment it is not totally clear but the commission will be composed of five Israelis and two or three foreigners."

1245 GMT: Nabila Abu Rdineh, spokesman for Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas, said in an interview with local newspaper al-Ayyam, that an international mechanism to end the blockade imposed on the Gaza Strip might be formed within a few days. He added: "President Abbas told the U.S. administration that lifting the Gaza blockade is not less important than peace talks."

However, the issue is more complicated than it seems. On Wednesday, following President Barack Obama's political support for the "unsustainable" situation in Gaza along with $400 million pledge to Gazans, Abbas told Obama that the easing of the siege should not bolster Hamas. His suggestion was not to end the naval siege by Israel for the time being.

1200 GMT: Former MP George Galloway is planning a land and sea convoy in September. He said: "Following our negotiations in Istanbul, I can announce to you that the day after Ramadan [September 10], two mighty convoys, one by sea and one by land, will begin. The land convoy will leave from London, will travel though Europe, Turkey, Syria and Jordan, and it will sail from Aqaba to Sinai and enter the gates of Rafah, and I ask the Egyptian government, in the name of millions of people, open those gates and let the convoy through."

1130 GMT: An EA reader has just reported that 70 Iranian MPs are also volunteered to aboard.

1100 GMT: The Israeli Defense Ministry has announced that Defense Minister Ehud Barak will stay in Israel while the government creates a committee to investigate the raid on the Gaza-bound flotilla. He was supposed to be present at a new Israeli booth at the Eurosatory 2010 air show in Paris and to meet French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner. Barak took a decision following pro-Palestinian groups' threats that they would do their best to bring Barak to be justice for his alleged war crimes.

The former commander of the navy and Shin Bet, Ami Ayalon, also called on Barak to "accept responsibility for the consequences of the decision to raid flotilla" and to resign.

1045 GMT: The Voice of Israel reports that the Turkish delegation announced two weeks ago that it wasn’t coming to the conference on International Holocaust Education organized by Yad VaShem (Holocaust Martyrs' and Heroes' Remembrance Authority).

1030 GMT:  Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that the former Supreme Court chief justice Yaakov Tirkel will be appointed to head an investigation into Israeli Defense Forces' operation to Freedom Flotilla.

0900 GMT: Agence France Presse reports that the Iranian Red Crescent equipped and loaded two ships with aid and is awaiting the permission of the Foreign Ministry to set sail to Gaza. Iranian officials claim that 100.000 people have already volunteered to go aboard.

On Thursday, Israel's Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center warned that extremist Islamic organizations were planning to send more ships to the Gaza Strip.

0800 GMT: The head of the Arab League, Amr Moussa, is the first senior Arab official visiting Gaza since 2007. He met with Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas at the Rafah crossing, which Egypt is still keeping "temporarily" open,before seeing Hamas officials today to find a basis for the continuation of the reconciliation talks. Moussa said, "This blockade which we are all here to confront must be broken and the position of the Arab League is clear."
Sunday
Jun132010

US Politics Analysis: Party Over for the Tea Party? (Haddigan)

Lee Haddigan writes for EA:

The latest US election results 4, in a series of primaries for Governor's and Congressional contests this autumn, show that the Tea Party is still a significant voice in American politics.

For an extraodrinary example, consider the victory of Sharron Angle in the Nevada primary for the Republican nomination for November's Senate contest. In April she polled at 5% support for the Republican nomination for Senate. She then attracted the support of the Tea Party Express, with $400,000 in advertisements, and won with a vote of plurality of 40% in a campaign featuring controversial measures as gradual abolition of the federal income tax

However, Angle's victory and the remarkable figures mask a slowly emerging and major problem for the Tea Party. The movement is fatigued after 15 months of frenetic activity, and unsettled by internal dissension that threatens enthusiasm.

Some of the more discerning members of the Tea Party argue that this is "The Dip", a natural lull before the movement reenergizes itself for the November elections. The question still remains: can the Tea Party regain its internal vitality in time for the upcoming Congressional and gubernatorial elections?

Recently I hat-tipped the BUYcott campaign in Arizona as an initiative worthy of observation. Well, the results are in and even the most sympathetic commentator cannot regard the two weekends as anything other than a disappointment for the Tea Party. The first event saw a crowd of about 7000 attend a rally, "Stand With Arizona", in Tempe.

That was a respectable amount, if not as many as anticipated, only tempered by the fact that no more than 25 rooms were booked at the local Conference Center hotel. It appears that most who went to the stadium were locals, not the out-of-staters the organisers claimed would participate.

The website of one of the organisers, Dr. Gina Loudon, included a defense for the slightly underwhelming figures, throw into relief because on the same day a rally in Arizona attacking the controversial "anti-immigrant" legislation, SB 1070, drew a crowd of 20 000:

When the news media asked Phillip Dennis from the Dallas Tea Party ---  before the event --- why the Tea Party might not draw its projected 20,000, he replied, “We are the productive people. We have jobs. No union paid for us to come here. I took two vacation days and paid my way. The other side is all astroturfed by the leftist operatives and union bosses.”

If the first meeting was discouraging, the second, held in Phoenix on 4 June, was no less than a failure. The local CBS TV channel reported that the crowd numbered in the hundreds, not the 50,000 anticipated to encourage "Buy Arizona! Now." A worrying shortfall in numbers, only partly explained by the inconvenience of a 105-degree (46 degrees Celsius) day.

As the Phoenix rally under-gathered, The Washington Post and ABC television conducted their latest poll. The outcome was an alarming drop in support for the Tea Party over the last 10 weeks. Respondents who regarded the Tea Party unfavorably increased from 39% to 50%, and those who backed the movement dropped from 41% to 36%. The most surprising revelation of the poll, however, was that it was the 18 to 29 age group who drove those changes, with a swing from 48-38 in favour to 27-60 against the Tea Party. These numbers were backed by the drop in support by white southerners from 45% to 30.

Critical reports of the Arizona rallies had been quick to point out the crowds were composed almost exclusively of middle-aged and "old" white participants. Whether the average young conservative white southerner is deserting the Tea Party because of the movement’s support for SB 1070 is unclear as yet. The raw numbers suggest, however, that Democrat strategists have a prime opportunity to exploit the age and race issue in the November elections.

As the Democrats have done this before. Back in the early 1960s, when the John Birch Society was as popular, if not more so, than the modern Tea Party, the California Senate Fact Finding Committee published a report on the Society. They dismissed charges that the JBS was fascist or anti-Semitic but damaged its effectivenessby concluding: "The cadre of the John Birch Society seems to be formed of wealthy businessmen, retired military officers and little old ladies in tennis shoes."

The JBS never really recovered from its constant association in the liberal press from those tennis-shoe clad little old ladies. (The media have not, so far, come up with such a memorable turn of phrase to describe the Tea Party, although Rachel Maddow of MSNBC has compared the  conservative resurgence to the JBS's "little old ladies" phenomenon.)

If the current Democrat leaders learn from their predecessors of the early 1960s, and take the poll numbers to heart, the lesson will be that they do not need to attack the Tea Party as "racist’. The dismissal of the movement as merely a "paranoid" section of an old America --- suffering from "status anxiety" --- will damage the Tea Party beyond recognition.

Before and after the poll and primary results, some members of the Tea Party recognised the movement has reached a critical juncture. The St. Louis Tea Party is one of the more active and reflective local organisations, and two of its co-founders have commented on the decline in support. Bill Hennessy, arguing the Tea Party movement is in "The Dip", recognized that fatigue has set in:
And a lot of people are exhausted.  Our houses need work—all the work we didn’t do last year or over the winter or this spring.   We’re tired of the commitments, of the arguments with spouses, of missing kids’ graduations and ball games, of turning down job opportunities.

He concluded that the knowledge of "The Dip" meant the movement could sustain itself in the tough battles to come, and he called for a realistic assessment that allowed for some setbacks along the way to achieving goals.

On 8 June, after the polls had come out, Hennessy returned to the reasons why the Tea Party was suffering a downturn. He gave seven explanations. One was the potentially major threat to the cohesiveness of the Tea Party this November, "In-fighting among tea partyers has left a foul taste in the mouths of many."

Hennessy continued, however, with his realistic approach to beating ‘The Dip’ by insisting that disagreement was to be expected in a movement with no structure and that it should not distract supporters of the Tea Party from the main purpose of influencing elections in the autumn.

The next day, another cofounder of the St. Louis Tea Party, Dana Loesch, continued the cautioning of the movement over problems of internal discord. Appearing on Fox News, she said the Party was experiencing a temporary "burnout" and that "shysters" were infiltrating the grassroots movement for their own gain.

In her blog, Loesch elaborated on her fears that the Tea Party had more to worry about within their own ranks than from without:
If the tea party doesn’t defeat itself and can maintain energy we will succeed all the way until 2012. Yes, if it doesn’t defeat itself. The biggest threat to the tea party isn’t the establishment, it isn’t the left, it’s the shysters, the famewhores, the people who failed in business but saw a gravy train in the tea party and thought they could make a buck even though they displayed no discernible skills pre-movement.

This brings us back to the significance of the Sharron Angle result. Angle was portrayed by the media after the result as "the Tea Party favorite". That is only partly true. She was the preferred candidate of one of the Tea Party groups –-- the Tea Party Express –-- who spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on ads promoting Angle. These ads were financed by hundreds of contributions from individuals nationwide to the TPE website, with the money spent by their political action committee, Our Country Deserves Better.

As an advertisement in The Las Vegas Tribune illustrates,  TPE was the only group to officially endorse Angle, probably because it is the only member of the Tea Party coalition with a political action committee. The outcome is also, however, the consequence of the general reluctance of other Tea Party participants to cooperate with TPE.

The dispute in Nevada specifically concerned the TPE’s support for Angle, and the Tea Party Nation’s reminder to voters that TPE did not speak for the movement as a whole. Judson Phillips, founder of the Tea Party Nation, released a statement that, contrary to misrepresentations by other (unnamed) groups, Angle was not the only person for whom Tea Partiers could vote, mentioning another candidate:
Danny Tarkanian has been unjustly maligned as someone who should not be in the race and someone who is unworthy of Tea Party support. Both statements are not supported by the facts.

Judson Phillips has attracted his own share of criticism within the Tea Party, with rumblings that Phillips has used TPN, a for profit organization, for his own personal gain. There is also the criticism of pricing out "grassroots" members. The first Nationa Tea Party Convention in February charged $549 a seat, and another will be held in Las Vegas, July 15 to 17 with tickets at $399 for non-members ($349 for members). Prices that high, without accommodation, are hardly likely to attract less affluent Tea Partiers.

The jury’s verdict on the likelihood of the Tea Party sustaining its influence through the November elections is still out. Angle’s victory in Nevada cannot hide apathy in Arizona, the latest poll results, and the Tea Party’s own admission the movement is experiencing a "burnout".

These are all indicator that the movement has a titanic struggle to regain its impetus for the congressional elections. And even if it can somehow come out of "The Dip" with batteries recharged after a summer of rest, Democrats will be ready to attack the paranoid movement of little old ladies with tennis shoes.

And what better ammunition can the Democrats have hoped for than the adoption by the Tea Party of two ideologues in Sharron Angle and Ron Paul? Quite how those two can avoid self destruction a la Barry Goldwater in 1964, in the face of the coming Democratic and media onslaught, is a political conundrum.

But even more ominous than this scenario is the coming dissolution of the Tea Party movement. As principled as the motives of the Tea Party might be, they could be ripped apart by internal struggles. History tells us that Democrats are the pragmatic party who put aside their differences to capture offices, while Republicans put their principles before political achievement. There is little to suggest the Tea Party will be able to overcome that lesson.
Sunday
Jun132010

EA on the Road: Our WorldView at the University of Birmingham

We're participating in the University of Birmingham's Community Day, chatting with folks about how we cover international events from the heart of Britain. And, amidst the barbecue, the fun fair, and even the demonstration of hydrogen cars, we'll be previewing the new look of EAWorldView.

Stop by in person  if you're nearby and stop by virtually if you're not.
Sunday
Jun132010

Turkey Analysis: Which Way is Ankara Heading? (Yenidunya)

There seems to be a lot of fuss right now about whether Turkey is "turning its face towards the East".

The query, often simplistic, arises from a number of development. Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu is pursuing a "Zero Problem with Neighbours" policy based on dialogue, various economic agreements, and the lifting of visa requirement. The policy includes a close relationship with both Syria and Iran.

This policy has been part of the uranium swap deal with Iran, dismissed by the West; the friction with Israel, from the "low chair" crisis up tothe  nine deaths on board the Mavi Marmara in the Freedom Flotilla; warming relations with Russia, crowned with a nuclear settlement; and the veto of sanctions against Iran in the UN Security Council.



Israeli officials reiterated, following the most recent crisis in high waters, that they view the region separated into two opposite camps. There are "moderates" such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Palestine (West Bank), Jordan, and Israel, There are "extremists" such as Iran, Lebanon, Syria, and (Palestine) Gaza. Israel asks: which will Turkey choose?

That blunt enquiry has been accompanied by some incredibly naive arguments, lacking an apparent notion of the basic principles of international relations. Nuh Yilmaz wrote in Foreign Policy magazine:
"All options are on the table” is the best phrase to describe how Turkey feels about Israel’s attack on humanitarian aid flotilla carrying more than 600 activists from 32 countries... Israel will, most likely, no longer be seen as a friendly state nor an ally, but will be treated as a rogue state by Turkey.

When I say Turkey will imply that “all options are on the table,” I do not mean that Turkey will wage a war against Israel. However, more dangerously, Israel will be seen as a state against which one should protect itself and should consider any possible action because of its unlawful and rogue character.

Others placed Ankara's "adventurism" at the centre of Turkish-American relations. Steven A. Cook of Foreign Policy argued that Turkey had not only shifted its axis but had dared to a challenge the US:
It is hard to admit, but after six decades of strategic cooperation, Turkey and the United States are becoming strategic competitors -- especially in the Middle East. This is the logical result of profound shifts in Turkish foreign and domestic politics and changes in the international system.

Some tried to find a formula for Turkey's "shift". On Thursday, Turkish daily Hurriyet asked whether there would be a "Middle East Union" under Turkey's leadership in the future. This would build on a joint declaration signed among Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan and Syria, seeking to lift visas and increase the level of cooperation in the fields of energy, health, agriculture, trade and customs.

Let me be blunt with you and with those who are wringing their hands. There has been no change in Turkey's axis.

Ankara's ultimate destination is still full membership in the European Union. Turkey's efforts and regional diplomatic initiatives are a part of its economic development and a part of its struggle to turn into a "strategic" mid-power which can help (re)shape the region.

The tension between a mid-power in Ankara and an American strategic partner --- a Middle East "spearhead" --- in Israel is the outcome of a power struggle between two allies at a time when the latter is under pressures and the benefits of "direct friendly support" of Washington are being seriously being questioned, inside and outside the US. The perception arises that Turkey is trying to fill the space Israel has left/will be forced to leave.

In the context of Turkey's economic boom and diplomatic manoeuvres to increase its credibility in the region, the  complicating factor is that its part to the European Union is currently blocked. Out of 34 chapters to be confirmed to accept Turkey as a part of the Union, only 12 chapters have been addressed so far. Of the other 22, 17 are being blocked by other countries --- eight alone by Cyprus.

The lesson to take from this dead end is crystal-clear: without political concessions on Cyprus and the Aegean Sea, there will be no European Union in the future for Turkey. So Ankara is not only  trying to gain time by looking to its back garden but also trying to knock on Europe's door with an increased credibility.

At the end of the day, Ankara's manoeuvres are not a new invention but the reflection of an active political agenda. As the president of the Washington-based American-Turkish Council, retired Ambassador James Holmes, said, "Turkey is expanding its interests, rather than isolating itself."

The current international alignments are suitable to Turkey's interests, since Washington needs Ankara more than other countries. That is not because of the political swamp in Afghanistan and Pakistan but also because of the ongoing diplomatic track with Iran and Syria, in the aftermath of Bush the Junior's imperial policies and Israel's perceived aggression in the region. Indeed, engagement and diplomacy is preferable to Washington rather than confrontations that could dynamite Obama's  "change", slapping aside unclenched fists and preventing a settlement between Israel and Ramallah.

There are limits to this political agenda. Although Ankara is ready with an economic surplus to deliver to its neighbours, it has not solved its own problems.

The weakest chain of the "Zero Problem" policy rattled in Turkey's relations with Armenia. Ankara couldn't break through long-standing fearsin the face of threats over energy supplies from the "little brother" Azerbaijan.

And, within Turkey, thousands of Kurdish children are in prisons and more officials of the Peace and Democracy Party (BDP) are arrested. Indeed, the war with the Kurdish separatist group PKK is accelerating day-by-day since the Erdogan Government see the Kurdish political movement as a "rival".

And, of course, there are always the Armenian "genocide" issue and the Cyprus problem...

Another limit is Israel . West Jerusalem still means more than a regional power to Washington, remaining and a "friend" and a nuclear "democratic" power. Indeed, Washington sorted out the most recent Flotilla problem and gave a green light to Tel Aviv for an internal inquiry into the violence on the Mavi Marmara. Israel is not discredited in the eyes of Washington just because of a few days, not when military/intelligence relations are indispensable for both sides.

Still, if Ankara can show progress in its Kurdish and Cyprus issues in the near future along with continuing diplomacy advances in the region and a move back from blunter discourse towards Israel, it can continue increasing both its credibility to use as leverage against the EU and to promote its strategic importance to Washington.