Gaza Aftermath: Israel and the "We Con the World" Video (Why I'm Not Laughing)

On Monday, the Israeli Government press office apologised after circulating a video, "We Con the World", mocking passengers aboard the Freedom Flotilla. Although the video was made by "private" pro-Israeli activists, the dissemination by Israeli officials gave it West Jerusalem's seal of approval.

Normally, I would not make comment on a video humiliating others. However, I am prompted to do so by the impudence and shamelessness of the spokesman for the Israeli Government, Mark Regev. Even as his colleagues were formally apologising, Regev told The Guardian of London, "I called my kids in to watch it because I thought it was funny. It is what Israelis feel. But the government has nothing to do with it."

Gaza Latest: What Will Be Done About the Blockade? (Not Much. Care for an Israeli Snack Food?)

Since Regev is now going to re-present the video as a bit of harmless comedy, let's re-visit the episode, starting with the video and lyrics:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOGG_osOoVg&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]

There comes a time
When we need to make a show
For the world
The Web and CNN

There is no people dying
So the best we can do
Is create
The greatest bluff of all

We must go on
Pretending day by day
That in Gaza
There is crisis, hunger and plague

Coz the billion bucks in aid
Won't buy their basic needs
Like some cheese
And missiles for the kids

We make the world
Abandon reason
We'll make them all believe that the Hamas
Is Momma Theresa

We are peaceful travellers
With guns and our own knives
The truth will never find its way
To your TV

Ooooh, we'll stab them at heart
They are soldiers, no one cares
We are small
And we took some pictures with doves

As Allah has shown us
For facts there is no demand
So we will always
Gain the upper hand

We make the world
Abandon reason
We'll make them all believe that the Hamas
Is Momma Theresa

We are peaceful travellers
We are waving our own knives
The truth will never find its way
To your TV

If Islam and terror
Brighten up your mood
But you worry that
It may not look so good

Well don't you realize
You just gotta call yourself
An activist
For peace and human aid

We make the world
Abandon reason
We'll make them all believe that the Hamas
Is Momma Theresa

We con the world
We con the people
We'll make them all believe
The IDF is the Jack the Ripper

Call me a spoilsport, but I'm immediately bothered by this fun-loving ignorance of the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Contrary to the assurance that Gazans can receive everything they need in their daily lives, the most recent report by an Israeli human rights group, the Gisha Legal Centre for Freedom of Movement, says that Israel permits just 97 different items to enter, compared to more than 4,000 that entered before June 2007.

Here is what can no longer enter Gaza. Construction materials, of course, since rebuilding the area --- which may have suffered a bit of damage in Israel's Operation Cast Lead in 2008-9 --- would be an imminent danger to Israeli security. But rubber, glue, and nylon also seem to pose a risk, since they're blocked (perhaps because they could be combined to make a new type of rocket?). And paper is out of the question for unrestricted access. Ginger is banned. And, presumably because Gazans might react to Israel's "We Con the World" with "Yes, Yes, You Do", musical instruments are not allowed across the border.

But let's have a look at the security equation of "We Con the World": Islam = terror. No need to issue a specific condemnation of the makers of the video. After all, this is the rhetoric of Israeli decision-makers and even opposition leaders. Moderates v. extremists means that the simple juxtaposition of West Bank v. Gaza can be put forth. One gets a measure of economic interchange with Israel and the prospect (always the prospect, never the reality) of two-state talks; the other gets nothing.

But let's get to the specific. How funny it is to ignore the deaths of at least nine activists on the Freedom Flotilla! Laugh hard enough and you can accept the punch-line of Israeli "self-defense", protecting soldiers from "terrorists", while rejecting the most un-funny notion of civilians trying to protect themselves from fully-equipped soldiers boarding a ship in international waters. You can turn hundreds of people --- some of whom might have refused initially to surrender to Israeli soldiers and might have offered resistance --- into the unqualified, unmitigated aggressed. You might even giggle at how self-defense turned into shooting  four people in the head and one in the chest at close range.

So I'm bothered. I'm not sure that Mr Regev's interest, or that of the Israeli Government, is to make sure I have a good laugh. I'm not even sure they're really that sorry.  

Because, after all, in the end --- with no conning of the world -- those passengers were all terrorists.

Gaza Latest: What Will Be Done About the Blockade? (Not Much. Care for an Israeli Snack Food?)

As the clash over the Freedom Flotilla recedes into the past, if not memory, the question arises: will anything be done about the Israeli blockade on Gaza?

Well, reading the signals, the provisional answer is...a shrug of the shoulders.

One possibility for a move forward might have been yesterday's meeting between President Barack Obama and Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas but --- at least publicly --- there was little of substance on Gaza.

Obama did lead with, "Not only is the status quo with respect to Gaza unsustainable," but that was only the set-up to slide to other areas: "The status quo with respect to the Middle East is unsustainable."

Gaza Flotilla Latest (8 June): The Battle over the Blockade

The President's priority? Not the blockade or even Gaza, but getting back to the Israel-Palestine (West Bank) talks: "It is time for us to go ahead, move forward on a two-state solution." He called for a limit on construction of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, and his announcement of $400 million in aid for Palestinians (of which only $70 million is "new" money) is also of no consequence for Gaza. Given the US ostracism of Hamas, the aid is effectively more support for the Palestinian Authority and the West Bank.

Back to the rhetoric: Obama continued his balancing act, offering sugar-coated words of care for Gazans but effectively saying there will be no immediate moves on the Israeli blockade:

We, and I think President Abbas agrees with this, recognize that Israel should not have missiles flying out of Gaza into its territories. And so there should be a means by which we are able to stop the flow of arms that could endanger Israel’s security.

At the same time we’re doing so in a way that allows the people in Gaza to live out their aspirations and their dreams both for themselves and their children. And that’s something that we’re going to spend a lot of time focusing on, and we’ve already begun some hardheaded discussions with the Israelis in achieving that.

Meanwhile, on the border, the public-relations effort over the blockade reached the level of the darkly humourous, with Israel announcing a relaxation of the blockade to permit "soda, juice, jam, spices, shaving cream, potato chips, cookies and candy" to pass.

This was in no way, however, to be construed as a concession in light of the Freedom Flotilla incident. Israeli defense officials maintained, “We will not allow everything in, since [detained soldier] Gilad Shalit is still held in Gaza and Hamas is still attacking us.”

(The "Fake Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs" offered the sharpest assessment of these developments with this announcement on Twitter: "Humanitarian Situation --- IDF [[Israel Defense Force] transferred 3 bags of potato chips, a diet coke and 6 cherry tomatoes through Keren Shalom crossing into Gaza.)

In Tel Aviv, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was defining the limits not only on imports to Gaza but on an investigation of the Flotilla attack: "Israeli commandos involved in the raid will face IDF  investigators only and will not be subject to any outside probe."

Iran Interview: Ahmad Batebi "People’s Movement Will Stay Alive with Knowledge and Information"

A discussion with activist Ahmad Batebi in Washington DC:

Persian2English: To what extent has the Freedom movement in Iran been successful in attracting the Iranian population that supports the government and/or the regime?

Ahmad Batebi: In Iran, there are two groups of people with connections to the government: those who ideologically believe in the system and those who receive benefits and monetary compensation. The former group, who is either brainwashed or is a supporter through family ties, would not join the Green Movement even if they were dissatisfied with the government. They would rather opt for political apathy and inaction. The latter group, however, will join the movement, if their funding is cut. Albeit, they join only as a number. Their effect is minimal.

P2E: Leading to the 1979 Revolution, Iranians living in remote areas were informed of Ayatollah Khomeini’s speeches and revolutionary ideas, even though Internet and satellite did not exist back then. Clerics visited rural areas and preached similarly to the way we receive information via technology. However, today, a lack of independent media creates a gap that is controlled by the Iranian regime. What are the challenges associated with information-spreading and how do we overcome state censorship?



Batebi: The recent political history of other countries demonstrate that a social network is the most effective way to inform and educate. For example, four students can gather in a cafe and share news with each other who will share with the people around them (and then it is passed on to others). The clerics during the 1979 Revolution used these mechanisms of social networking. And yes, now, even though the media is much more abundant, it is censored.

We have to consider the censorship of the Iranian government as ineffective. Censorship exists through satellite (based mainly abroad) and domestic media and on the Internet. Inside Iran, not much can be done about censorship. It is impossible to run a newspaper without it being subject to state censorship. However, the Iranian expatriates can put pressure on foreign governments to facilitate the Iranian people’s access to the mediums of information (i.e., the Internet).

It does not mean each one of us has to set up a media and have people listen to or read it. We should provide people with proxies, anti-filtering software, and VPN so they can choose to access whatever they wish.





P2E: It appears that in the wake of the brutal and widespread crackdown of the June 2009 election protests, a wave of disappointment, pessimism, and lethargy has prevailed over the Iranian society. Persistence of this wave can result in missing a historical opportunity to be on the path to democracy. What approaches do you suggest for revitalizing the hope of society in addition to their drive and enthusiasm? What role can the Iranian Diaspora play in this regard?

Batebi: If any social movement does not achieve its goals in a limited period of time, then its government will become immune to the effects. Consider the student uprising in the summer of 1999. The city was in the hands of protesters for nearly a week. Then, [the regime] cracked down and the uprising cooled off. A few years passed and no action was possible, even on the anniversary of the uprising. This is the case for the Green Movement too: the protests did not blossom because the regime is immune.

Now, what can be done?

We have to consider three issues:

First, we should analyze the environment of the movement. What feeds it? What does its survival depend on? [The answer is] information and knowledge. For example, if the citizens of Tehran don’t realize that people in Tabriz protested the day before, or if Iranians don’t receive messages by leaders like Karroubi or Moussavi, or if they are not informed of the protests that occur outside the UN buildings against Ahmadinejad, then they will continue to go on with their daily lives. This is how the regime stifles the flow of information.

On the other hand, we should remember that the Iranian people are dealing with economic difficulties. They have to fight against the regime and put food on the table at the same time. That is a lot of pressure. Outside Iran, we go to work in the morning and come back in the afternoon to devote our time to the Iranian freedom movement. That is our main concern. However, in Iran, people need to fight against the regime and struggle to make ends meet. they are under much more pressure.

Second, we should create a ground so that the flow of information and knowledge remains constant in society. Second, we have to raise the price the government has to pay for committing human rights violations. In other words, the Islamic Republic should not dare to throw people into prison so easily. We have to establish a strong information network to spread the news of our compatriots from inside to the world.

Third, we have to take new measures such as boycotting any interests the coup d’état government has abroad, similar to the FAO [UN Food and Agricultural Organization] conference in Italy where Ahmadinejad and [Zimbabwe President Robert] Mugabe were not invited to the official dinner ceremony. We also need to stop Khatam-ol Anbia, an (engineering) firm controlled by the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps, from gaining their interests. This action needs to be taken by Iranians inside Iran.

We should have news regarding Iran in foreign media everyday and thereby influence foreign governments. We have to keep the people of our host countries updated on Iran’s main issues. When people are informed, they urge the media and politicians (to spread the news) and then governments are forced to react. That is how we can achieve a global consensus [in support of the movement].





P2E: In the wake of the election, many people became active in the process of information-spreading. What are your thoughts on this? Are activists doing enough work or should more be done?

Batebi: Spreading the news and informing is different from engaging in serious activities. Sometimes, you write a news piece or you translate it or you upload it on a website. On a scale of 1 to 100, these effort combined are worth 40. We have to achieve 100.





P2E: How?

Batebi: We should have someone in the media who we keep informed [about Iran's news] and who is invited to Iranian events and discussions. We have to force this person to listen. We need to provide this person with the most accurate news for publication. Informing and spreading the news is only part of the job. It is more complicated to oblige the media to cover the news and to take a stance.





P2E: The Iranian people’s opposition to the Islamic Republic is not new. However, after the 2009 election, more people got involved inside and outside Iran. Will you comment on the Green Movement? What is this movement after all? Do you agree with the term “green”? If so, what does Green mean to you?

Batebi: Traditionally, we have always had opposition outside Iran. This opposition was either monarchist, or leftist and socialist, Mujahedin (MKO), or it had ties with the National Front. This is the traditional composition of Iran’s opposition movement, and the nature of their operations is clear-cut.  However, from a logical point of view, our work is useful when it is effective. It is true that there has always been opposition to the regime, but how successful has it been? Has the (traditional) opposition been able to do anything in Iran?  They have not. Their work and conduct has not been right. Their efforts are acknowledged, because they have worked hard, but it has been ineffective. People see and understand this. Moreover, people who are in Iran have a different way of expressing their demands because they are limited, thus their ways of expression are different than the traditional opposition.

During the 1997 Iranian presidential election, many people voted for [Mohammad] Khatami. This vote did not mean that we accepted Khatami and his mode of thought and we believed in his clerical attire. I voted for Khatami. This does not  mean I defended his thoughts or even the reformist movement. The vote was to send a message to the ruling establishment that we want something different than them.

The people’s demands for a civil society that embodies freedom of expression, equality between genders, the rights of children, labour unions, and students was not realized. And with the arrival of Ahmadinejad, the situation deteriorated. Then came the 2009 election where [MIr Hossein] Mousavi (who has a revolutionary background and has worked closely with Ayatollah Khomeini) and [Mehdi] Karroubi (who is in the same boat) were candidates. People voted for them. Again, this did not mean that they accepted Mousavi’s statements and beliefs. People are saying that we do not want what the regime wants, we will go and vote for somebody who is saying something different.

Now, an opposition has formed that has a different structure than the traditional opposition. They are all opposition but they have different forms. And now the Green Movement opposition….

Let me talk about  "green” first.

During the electoral campaign, each candidate camp chose a colour. Yellow was for Ahmadinejad, red was for Karroubi,  and green was for Mousavi.  Since the supporters of Mousavi were greater in number, green became the colour of the opposition movement. We do not necessarily agree with everything, but the Green movement possesses distinct characteristics that is also supported by Khatami, Karroubi, and Mousavi, such as encompassing  all people under its umbrella.

You look and see people in the Green Movement who are secular and some who are religious. They all say, “We don’t want this regime, we want human rights, we want equality between men and women.” It is the first time such a thing has happened. All social movements gradually reach this point.

Now, there are distinguished personalities in the movement like Karroubi and Mousavi who have the ability to mobilize people. Some consider them the leaders, others don’t. I believe they are leaders but just as much as the people. For example, when Karroubi announces that  people should take part in the anniversary of the June 12th election, he is displaying leadership. However, people are taking the lead too.  For example, on Ashura (27 December), nobody called out for the people to come out, but they took to the streets and protested. Thus, everyone is a leader, because everyone is carrying out his or her duties.





P2E: If the Green Movement is defined through Mousavi and Karroubi, then does the Green movement want the Islamic Republic? Some activists oppose green for this reason and opt for the term “people’s movement” instead. Noticeably, the difference in name for the opposition has resulted in a divide within the opposition, even though the main goals seem to be similar. What can we do to eliminate this (divide)?

Batebi: People think that the “Green Movement” and the “People’s movement” are different, but they are the same. You have a democratic movement when a “Green” supporter and a “People’s movement” supporter are classified in the same group. The vitality of the movement depends on these people communicating and finding common ground.

I think if the Islamic Republic is removed, it will be disastrous because we have nothing to offer. Not Mousavi and Karroubi, nor the opposition outside Iran can form a government. They can argue and fight and try to find common ground.

We only have one movement and that is the People’s Movement. Some say they are green, some say they are leftists, and some are monarchists or Mujaheds. We cannot have a successful government without participation from all fractions. For example, the Greens should understand that they are not the only “Greens” since all people are included.

By the way, the Green debate mostly occurs outside Iran. When security forces shoot at crowds in Iran and everybody is running away, no one is thinking, “You’re Mujahedin, therefore I will not run away with you.” When someone is shot by a bullet and falls to the ground, people don’t say, “You’re a communist so we won’t help you.” These are the preoccupations of Iranians living outside the country.

We have to think like people inside Iran. For people there, it is not important what our fights are about. People who say we are Green and the movement belongs to “us” just want to distinguish themselves from the traditional opposition. This is wrong. In tomorrow`s Iran, everybody, including Hizbollah members, have the right to form political parties and run for election. If people vote for them, they will be elected. This is democracy!

In order to have a successful movement, it is important to remember that the colour green does not just belong to (the opposition leaders). Mousavi states that we are successful and the movement is alive only when all opposition (parties) are included in the movement.

Iran Document: Karroubi "In the End, the Wiser Ones Will Take Over Iran" (9 June)

Mehdi Karroubi's interview with Rooz Online, published 9 June and translated by Khordaad 88:

Mr Karroubi, you have said before that you expected after Imam Khomeini’s death you will become more isolated by some individuals , who are these individuals ? and Why?

There was difference of opinion and approach among the forces and factions [at that time] . In other words , some had different interpretations of Islam, state and the Islamic republic [than us]. Since these factions were more close to centers of power=;, their views and opinions were more likely to be implemented.

Which groups?

Political groups like Motalefeh Party, Association of Clergy, Association of Religious Teachers. We had differences of opinion that led to discussions and arguments between us. These differences revolved around issues such as , taxation, municipal land, and other issues that were important at the time. However, Imam Khomeini’s support for us or our ideas would set them back. They had also come to understand that Imam preferred our opinions over theirs despite the fact that he had respect for them and he would appoint some of their important members to the Guardian Council.



These differences led to formation of the Expediency Discernment Council . As Dr. Mehrpour mentioned [once], if the Guardian Council had adopted a more open policy toward various issues and would consider Imam Khomeini’s warning, the Expediency Council would not have been formed. But we knew after Imam’s death , those groups will increase their power and presence, and we will become more isolated. And this is what has happened. Using their power through the Special Clerical Court, the Guardian Council and individuals that I do not want to name isolated the Imam’s Path forces.

Are the individuals that you prefer not to name the same people that you have referred to previously and said: “They could not tolerate a party office or newspaper”, “They want [to take control of ] the government to satisfy their own interests", “They engaged in fraudulent activity after the death of Imam Khomeini"?  Who are these people?

They are the same people who run the country now. In the judiciary they are those who order newspapers and offices closed. They are in the Ministry of Intelligence....They are in Basij, IRGC [Islamic Revolution Guards Corps], and among the Friday Prayer Imams. I should also mention that the traditional conservative forces with whom we were friends before despite our many differences have also to various degrees supported these people. Unfortunately, now an entirely new group of people with Ahmadinejad on top and others in lower ranks are leading [the country].

[Previously] you talked about the boat of the state that does not have capacity for 70 million people. In this turbulent sea of politics, is there a chance that this boat will reach the shore safely?

It is obvious that a boat does not have much capacity to manoeuvre even in calm waters. The sea needs a giant ship. And when the sea turns stormy and turbulent , 70 million people should be present to safely guide the ship to the shore. Therefore I think the current situation will not last [for long] and we are eventually forced to return to reforms although we will have to pay the costs.

What do you think the most important issues of the country are?

Losing the trust of the nation, militarizing the society, and deviating from the ideals of the revolution [are the most important issues we face today]. We have reduced ourselves to such a low level that we treat the family of Imam Khomeini with such disrespect [a reference to the treatment of Ayatollah Khomeini's grandson, Seyed Hassan Khomeini, at the 4 June ceremony for his grandfather's death]. They dare tell Mr. Jamarani, who has been organizing ceremonies on this day for Imam for 20 years, to stop organizing the ceremony this year.

Do we have to witness changing the mood of the society to one of fear where tight security and control is imposed every day? Do we have to see forces armed with anti-riot shields march our streets every day? Nothing will work like this. The government should create security not constrain it. The way the authorities define "security’"seems very different [than what it should be]. Despite all, I believe this situation would not last; in the end the wiser ones will take over.

Everyone’s talking about the necessity to reexamine the Constitution. Where do you see the source of the problems in the Constitution? What should be done?

Every constitution has its own faults. I have said this many times. There is only one book without mistakes, and that’s the holy book, Quran. As Muslims we believe in that. It is possible that a non-Muslim becomes critical of Quran. [No book is perfect, and] it is for this very reason that Imam [Khomeini] allowed the possibility to reexamine the constitution. It is a common practice in the whole world to change the laws according to the most recent conditions and needs of the day. However, even if this constitution is acted upon [in our society], many of our problems would be resolved.

According to the existing constitution, the head of the judiciary is chosen by Supreme Leader. Does this process interfere with the independence of the judiciary branch? Do you not see any contradictions in this process?

At the time, those who created this process did the right thing. But right now we are degrading this law with our actions. Keep in mind that this process was not always like this, and later changed to become as such. Early on, five people constituted the leadership of the judiciary branch. Two of them were chosen by the Supreme Leader and three of them were chosen by a group of judges in a free and competitive election process. The problem right now is that the judiciary branch cannot act on its own and is taken over by the security officials.

What is the main demand of the Green Movement, and what can it be?

This movement that manifests itself through calm, nonviolent protests that takes the form of civil disobedience is created out of the insult and dissatisfaction that resulted from different elections.

Which elections?

The 7th and 8th parliamentary elections and the 9th and 10th Presidential elections. All the dissatisfactions piled up until it exploded after the 10th Presidential elections. This movement is originates from the hearts of people; it is a self-evolving movement. It is a movement that was created over the structure of force that the authorities created for people.

What are you after in this movement?

We are looking to see the full enactment of the Constitution: that we can have a free and sound election,and benefit from free political parties and newspapers; that students are free [to express what they want]. What we are looking for is that no one chooses the destiny of people for them. Accordingly, I believe that if even the current Constitution is enacted, despite the criticisms, many solutions would unfold. But unfortunately, some even don’t abide by this law. Those in power right now act despotically out of their own interests.

To achieve victory, how should the Green Movement move on from here? Wouldn’t the current process gradually degrade the movement? What must be done? What can be done?

Discontent and defiance in the nation will continue. Though people are more conservative in expressing their discontent, they are just waiting for the right moment to express themselves. This does not weaken the movement but the government. With regards to ways that the movement can proceed: first, people’s presence is the most important and critical thing for this movement or any other movement. Second, the movement cannot be after instant success; what comes easily goes just as easily.

The movement must be lively, it must reach out to people and strengthen its grass-root support. The gentlemen are presenting an untrue depiction of this movement to the public. They say this movement is against your religion and culture. They are publicizing this movement as a threat to national security and claim it will bring about a similar situation in Iran as is present in Iraq and Afghanistan. We must fight off these false publicized accusations while spreading our own messages to widest possible audience.

We are after security, peace, and calm for the country. We are loyal to this country. We are fighting dictatorship and fascism. We want to establish the rule of law. Thus evangelizing, organizing, and staying in touch with each other are important. The government is quite sensitive to these activities as it has confronted them in many occasions. This is a great testament to the effectiveness of these activities. So, despite what they might say, I don’t think the movement is diminishing,-; it is in fact growing.

What did Mehdi Karroubi think of the future in 1989 and how does that compare to the way events have been rolling out?

We thought the revolution would bring about mutual respect for every person and her/his ideas and rights. We wanted the revolution to bring about equality and respect for Islam. But that did not happen.

In those days, people were in with the government, they knew everything that was going on. That’s because we realized our legitimacy came from people’s approval. We wanted to be a role model and a leader in the world and tried hard to reach these goals. Of course some of the blame lies with us and some with others.

The fact of the matter is that in the beginning of the revolution, there were some violent struggles. Parts of the country stated independence and invaded central government’s military bases. Azarbayejan, Gonbad, Khozestan, and Kordestan were amongst those regions. The late Mr. Taleghani and Mr. Foroohar traveled to these regions to speak to the people and try to resolve the conflicts. After that, assassinations of the country’s intellectuals and leaders started: Martyrs Motahari, Beheshti, Ghazi, Tabatabaie, Mofateh, and many others.

In those day, secret shared homes were created by the armed militants and violent confrontations started taking shape. The war against Iraq started as these conflicts were still ongoing. When the presidential headquarters and political party headquarters of a country are blown up by internal anti government militants, it is obvious that the country is headed towards radicalism. In any case, they didn’t make it possible to achieve the goals that we had; we missed the chance. In those years, after the bombings, we had the worst situation in the Parliament. Government officials were under pressure by the war, internal conflicts and assassinations, and the country’s management…. These were difficult times. Those who created the internal conflicts did a great injustice to this country.

On the Israel-Palestine issue: If two countries reach an agreement,  what would be your position?

We might have an ideal position in our mind, but we should realize that Palestine belongs to Palestinians, so if they reached an agreement that they find pleasing, we should congratulate them.

Iran is facing detrimental quandaries in its foreign policy, if you were in charge what policy would you adopt regarding the following issues: the US?

I believe that,with the exception of Israel, we should have relationship with all other countries. Despite everything that has happened between Iran and United States, I think we should reestablish the relations without neglecting Iran’s dignity and independence. Unfortunately Iran-US relations have become a domestic political discussion in Iran. When one side agrees to normalizing relations , another side opposes and vice versa . It has become an internal quarrel between different streams.

Relations with China and Russia?

We have normal relations with both countries now, and I agree that we should. I travelled to both countries when I was head of the parliament numerous times in order to expand our political and economical relations. Russia is our neighbour, therefore we should maintain our relations. I should mention though that states only seek their own interests in relations with other states. Having relations with another country should be based on benefits [that we seek].

Nuclear issue?

We should become more transparent We should negotiate, we should defend our rights, but we should also make [our intention and conduct] more transparent.

The human rights file?

The human rights are those rights that belong to all people. These rights are undermined today in many countries. For example, in Palestine, these rights are completely ignored by the Israelis. In our country too, on some issues these rights are undermined. We must not abuse human rights like a political tool.

What I believe is that we cannot take human right issues very seriously for one country, and then ignore them completely for another one. One obvious example of the latter is the human rights issue in the conflict between Israel and Palestine.

If we divide the history of Islamic Republic into different periods, from Mr. Karroubi’s perspective, which period would be closest to the ideals of the Islamic Revolution and which period was the furthest from them?

Naturally every revolution is closest to its ideals at the very early state. I have said this many times. In every revolution, radical moves and abrupt reactions break out due to inexperience and immaturity. I can say this confidently: most of those who act radically now are those who acted in a radical way back then. The first decade was one of ideals. We gradually entered a different atmosphere that concluded in what we see right now. I believe the worst conditions are what we have right now.

And last question: What is your greatest wish today?

I wish for governance of people, denial of outsiders’ interference, and insiders’ despotism. I wish for health and prosperity of this nation, for the greatness of Iran, development of our country. I wish for rise of pride for Islam and enactment of its rules. I don’t believe in imposing our perspectives; I don’t mean interfering with private lives of people. What I mean by wishing enactment of rules is enactment of ethics in the society, enactment of justice, and keeping the dignity and respect of people.

Latest Iran Video: Obama Statement on Sanctions...and Rights (9 June)

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Iran Analysis: What’s Most Important Today? (Hint: Not Sanctions)
The Latest from Iran (9 June): Paying Attention