Iran Special: Zahra Rahnavard on Women's Rights and The Green Movement

Zahra Rahnavard in an interview with Kalemeh, translated by Khordaad 88:

Q: It’s a good idea to start this interview with a question about women and the Green Movement. A while ago women’s rights activists released a statement writing that there has been no attention to their demands in any of the statements and discussions released after the day of the election. These activists wrote that they believe the issue of women is a big part of the current crisis, and without attempting to solve these issues, no solutions would be sustainable. That is why a group of these activists wrote a critical letter to Messrs [Mehdi] Karroubi and [Mir Hossein] mMousavi. What do you think about this?  Do you believe that from the day after the election, the candidates were oblivious to women and their issues?

RAHNAVARD: Truly, why do we women have to sit around and wait for someone to tend to us? We have to be the ones who step forward. We can learn much from the story of great women in history. We have thousands of years of history to draw on from the time, which, according to the Quran, humanity was one unified nation, or the time when, according to some theorists, women were the prime decision makers, when, according to archeological findings, the gods were female and ruled the world.



If nothing else, the history of civilization tells us that the first industrialists, cloth weavers,  potters and farmers (if not hunters) were women. Of course, in those times, there were unwritten agreements which, according to the physical, economic, religious and traditional beliefs, men and women divided tasks. And since it has not been historically proven that there once was a society ruled solely by women, at least we know that there was a time whe,n [though they may not have been at the pinnacle of rule, they played a huge role in the laws and governance of their society.

What is stopping us now from learning from them? In the third millennium,  during the recent  election women were maybe treated as first-rate citizens but  right after the election that status was taken away from them in a flash. Despite what happened,  we are in pursuit of our demands such as freedom , removing discrimination and] violence, and stopping polygamy.

Are the Green Movement and women’s rights movement related? If yes, can you tell us about their link?



On the more general issues, there is considerable overlap between the two movements. On more specific issues, there is a need for the women’s rights movement to branch out and push its own agenda above and beyond the support that it gleans from the Green Movement. When it comes to basic rights—such as gender equality, democracy, and law abidence, the two movements are in complete agreement. But I would like to firmly assert that in history, general political reform movements and revolutions have shown that women’s fight for equality needs to be distinguished from the general political movement for democracy.

In Iran, it is impossible to expect that the general political movement --- in this case, the Green Movement --- will be able to successfully eliminate inequality and violence against women without help from an established and independent women’s movement. The legal push for gender equality with regards to double standards in reparation money, court rulings, legally sanctioned polygamy, divorce laws, citizenship laws, and other ingrained double-standards should be fiercely pursued by advocates of the women’s movement.

The general political movements of the past two centuries, such as the industrial revolution, the French Revolution, the pursuit of American democracy, the Bolshevik Revolution, the fall of the Russian communist regime, did not do much to propagate the advancement of women’s rights. It was only until much later, when women put up a separate fight of their own, that they began to advance their legal rights.

What is the responsibility of the Green Movement towards gender equality?

The Green Movement must understand that today women are at the forefront; they take initiative and sacrifice in an awe-inspiring way, much like they did during the Islamic Revolution. Hence, the movement should not overlook the pursuit of women’s rights. The movement’s platform needs to be mindful of women’s rights issues and has to incorporate gender equality into its platform, in the same way that Mousavi said in a previous interview that we are friends of the women’s movement and this friendship means camaraderie.

However, the reality is that the Green Movement is like an umbrella to several other significant social movements --- for example, the women’s movement, the labour movement, the students’ movement, and the teachers’ movement. The general slogans of the Green Movement are freedom, equality, rule of law, and democracy. Leaning too much towards one of the sub-movements can make the Green Movement appear biased. Like I said before, the women’s movement, while being supported by the Green Movement, still needs to be active and push forward its agenda independent from the Green Movement as well.

At the same time, the Green Movement should in its statements and views acknowledge the importance of each of these sub-movements and should demand the amelioration of the political environment, and should push for a government that would ultimately grant the wishes of each sub-movement --- without appearing biased.

In this situation, what is the role of the government?

I have repeatedly declared that this government is illegitimate. But, since it has been established as the official one and it recognizes itself officially, it should fulfill its responsibilities accordingly. These should not consist of destroying families and condemning women and children to misery by neglecting their demands, repressing them, and proposing anti-women legislation in the name of supporting family while simply satisfying hedonists. If it claims to be a [government, it should withdraw anti-women legislations immediately, designate committees to restore women’s rights, and, inspired by the ideals of the women’s movement, interact with the Parliament and the Judiciary [to achieve these ideals]. However, this  government is incapable of carrying out such deeds.

In the aftermath of 10^th presidential election, a group of MPs, along with their supporters, have decided to pass the so-called family support legislation . This is while the slightest protest by students, teachers, workers and journalists against violation of citizen rights   is met with threats, arrests, and unjust trials. Why are they in such a hurry to pass legislation which would legalize polygamy and is more backward than the one passed 35 years ago?

This is puzzling. On one hand, they are trying to take advantage of the situation to advance their agenda against the will of freedom-loving women of this country. They think that the Green Movement does not pay attention to women issues; therefore they can use the opportunity to realize their backward demands. This is of course [in their view] an opportunity for them but not the reason, so what is the reason?

[ I believe] that this government has a retrogressive mindset that seeks violence. They are related to repressive pressure groups that have imposed their influence on certain layers of the Islamic society, who committed the Chain Murders, accused and threatened others, and physically assaulted their opponents in public gatherings so that they can create a closed society.

Today these groups are in power and have the authority to impose and enforce their views. But even if they succeed temporarily, they will be defeated in the long term. They should know that they cannot present their backward views in the name of Islam forever.

Islam is a progressive religion. It has the potential to interact with the modern world  and new ideas and its dynamic Ijtihad [making a legal decision by independent interpretation of the legal sources] has provided an opportunity for  innovation  in a contemporary context.

Overall I think the parliament is under pressure by the government to pass these anti-women legislations.

In an interview you declared that you do not recognize this government, and you will not compromise with it. That interview was greatly publicized. What reasons do you see behind such attention to your words?

There were rumors going around back then that leaders of the Green Movement, each in their own way, were compromising with the government. Of course this was the wrong interpretation. Such rumours were further promoted by "right conservative" [they do not deserve the word Principlists] newspapers. They were making a big deal out of baseless rumors to ruin the spirit of people. They glorified news that the Green Movement is frightened, that they have lost, and that they were regretting the course of action they had taken.

As a member of the Green Movement, side by side with people, I declared what they thought. I did not say anything new. What I said were the words of people who have refused to retreat. It is these people that guide the leaders of the Green Movement towards demands of the nature of freedom and democracy.

How do you see the future of the Green Movement?

If a nation wants to change its destiny, it will definitely be successful. This is the message of hope from the great Quran. If you help God, God will help you back and fix your step on your path. It is the promise of the Almighty. If  our steps are fixed in this path, we will definitely be victorious and we can breathe a new life into the body of our thoughts and lives.

Some are very concerned with outbreaks of violence on the [Chaharshanbeh-Souri (Fire Festival)]  celebrations of the last Wednesday of the Iranian year [16 March]. What is your solution to stop the violence?

Those celebrations are among the ancient national rites of Iranians. It is a day of joy, a day where people wear smiles, and wipe the misery off their faces. It is when nature will flourish in an Spring-like fashion in colorful colors and flowers. Thanks to Norouz [New Year] celebrations of the first of Spring, and the kind spirit of this day and its gift of freedom, the Green Movement will definitely be happy and proud.

The Green Movement is with the purpose of compassion, resistance and calm. We will commemorate the memories of people like Neda [Agha Soltan], Sohrab [Arabi], and other martyrs. We would not commit any violence; we would love all people, whether they are Green, or any other color. We say to the military members that we love you too. Be our brothers, and give people flowers instead of batons and bullets. If there is a violence, it is violence of the government.

During the last 9 months you have been attacked many times. Sometimes these attacks were physical like the one on "University Students Day" [7 December] or on the day of anniversary of the Revolution [11 February]. Other times these attacks were in the form of slanders and accusations from the media attached to the government. One of the leaders of the opposition to the Green Movement had gone as far as saying that you are a Zionist, and support the Baha'i minorities and that you have hidden your real views from people. What is the reason behind all this violence against you?

They know very well what our women are capable of in the scientific and executive fields. They also know about my dedication and passion to the Green Movement and my role in it. Putting me in jail won’t do them any good at the moment, so they have decided to torment me in the streets and the media instread. What illusions! Our good people have not yet forgotten about thirty books I’ve written that clearly demonstrate my beliefs and principles. What I can do is given to me by God. Following the saying of Quran, I’ll just tell them not to fight against what is given by God, as it is his will.

They will not be able to suffocate me with the curse of their lies and libel as the Green Movement provides me with all the fresh oxygen I need to cheerfully and briskly go on.

In one of the media attacks, the opposition to the Green Movement had said that Mousavi would have nominated Zahra Rahnavard as his chief of staff. Is this an attack on you or actually praise to a woman?

The gentlemen who have spread these rumors, who are also aligned to the right, have not experienced the joy of being an intellectual and an artist in pursue of his/her nation’s freedom. Otherwise, they would know that if they gave us intellectuals and artists everything on the surface of this earth, including all the power in the country, we would throw it all back at them swiftly, as we are completely happy with working with our intellect and art or teaching our lovely students.

Nevertheless, I decided to become active during the election campaign to support our ignored Constitution, freedoms, and democracy, and I will continue to do so in the future. Perhaps as you mention, these comical statements by the opposition to the Green Movement praise the woman more so than condemning her. I will tell them from here that I’m only one of many women in the Green Movement, all of whom are more capable than I am. What will you do with them?

Ms. Rahnavard, you are better known as an artist. You have been active as a visual artist. One of your most famous pieces is the “Mother’s Sculpture” that was placed in Mother Square in Tehran and has become one of the most famous sculptures in Iran during the first two decades of the Islamic Republic. Some of your antagonists have put ropes around the sculpture’s neck. How do you feel about that?

For artists, their work is as close to them as their body. It comes from the heart.  The artist puts all of his/her love into art and it becomes the tale of all the untold stories, cries, secrets, morals, and dreams that the artist has. But when the extremist forces take people’s lives just because they’re seeking freedom, whether it is through executions, brutal beatings, or other means, what can we expect them to do with a bronze statue? How can they understand what this statue stands for? How can they understand motherhood and art?

You saw the reaction of our wonderful people who said if you take down the statue, we would bring Rahnavard herself and put her on the stand. I now worry about all of my art. The paintings and sculptures can easily be objects of such brutality. I hope God will save us all from their illusions.

What has upset the Green Movement these days and what are your expectations for the future?

The Islamic Revolution, despite its greatness and glory, was an incomplete project whose goals and ideals should have been realized in the Islamic Republic, but this did not happen. So the Green Movement is after issues like freedom, democracy, women’s rights, and the rule of law.

But with regard to your question about the Green Movement’s afflictions, don’t ask me to list all the grievances and sufferings that the movement has endured, as it will take oceans of ink to write them. I don’t want to compare, but imprisoning intellectuals, cutting hands, making minarets of heads and heaps out of bodies has been documented before [many times] in the history of dictatorships. I hope that those currently in power would learn from these notorious examples and spare our beloved republic from having such an awful and bitter fate.

So what should they do? What do we expect? What will it take to satisfy us? It is important that the right thing be done; it is not important by whom. So we expect the regime to free the press and media, the reporters, women, men, the young and old. We want them to provide the military forces with flowers, so they can present them to people in compensation for their actions. We want them to free the prisoners to an extent that instead of having the jails holding freedom-seekers, they will be planted with flowers, will be turned into gardens. They should be turned into cultural centers and scientific research labs, all efforts should be put together for developing our industries and agriculture so our youth would have less problems in employment, marriage, and education.

On the international level, we want carefully-thought and friendly policies that are in line with our national interests. We want the demands of the women’s, workers’, teachers’, and artists’ movements to be met. We want them to guarantee the freedom of expression and thought.

These and much more can be fulfilled by any decent establishment. Among civil movements, the Green Movement has a particular sympathy for the women’s movement. The Green Movement demands the freedom of all prisoners, particularly the women, whose spouses, mothers and children are impatiently awaiting their release these days.

Iran Analysis: Rafsanjani's "Finger in the Dike" Strategy

Masoud Shafaee writes at The Newest Deal:

As the Persian Nowruz New Year fast approaches and Iran's post-election crisis enters its ninth month, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani remains as mercurial a figure as ever in Iranian politics. True to his nickname of Kooseh, or "The Shark", Rafsanjani has been paying lip-service to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei while simultaneously signaling (if only tacitly) solidarity with Iran's Green opposition movement. With his reputation as an incredibly calculating figure, it is hard to believe that this contradiction is coincidental. In fact, Rafsanjani's high level of influence in the system may be paradoxically inhibiting him from more closely aligning with the Green Movement.

In many ways, Rafsanjani's position resembles that of the boy who stuck his finger in the leaking dike in Hans Brinker's classic tale.



In the story, the boy's plugging of the hole with his finger was not an attempt to solve the problem at hand, but rather, to prevent an immediate and far more dangerous outcome from occurring. Had the boy gone to fetch help to repair the dike, the levee would have broken and the city would have been flooded. By staying at the dike all night -- not fixing the problem, but preventing it from worsening -- the boy bought time until others discovered him the next morning and were able to make necessary, lasting repairs.

Rafsanjani may find himself in similar circumstances and equally incapable of making a significant move. Ahmadinejad and the Revolutionary Guard have shown no intention of curbing their quest to completely control the Islamic Republic. What started out as a President hand-in-hand with the Supreme Leader (with his undoubted blessing of plans to rig the June election) has grown into something far greater. Only one month after the election, Ahmadinejad publicly disobeyed Khamenei by failing to immediately withdraw Esfandiar Rahim-Mashai as his top deputy after the Supreme Leader voiced his disapproval. A month later, he showed up unannounced in the Majlis parliament flanked by his armed bodyguards. Constitutional rights have been discarded in countless instances. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's statement that "Iran is moving toward a military dictatorship" appears troublingly accurate.

One factor that has arguably prevented a complete takeover of the regime from already occurring is the enormous weight that Rafsanjani carries inside of Iran. A father-figure of the 1979 Islamic Revolution, head of two constitutional branches of government, and a man of considerable wealth and influence, Rafsanjani has in many ways served as a buffer to Ahmadinejad's megalomaniacal ambitions. And while by no means himself a democratizing figure, Rafsanjani's perceived loyalty to the Supreme Leader (and the ruling theocracy) has gone to ensure that he remains a formidable presence in the country's politics, thereby creating space for the Green Movement to breathe, evolve, and grow. Ayatollah Mahdavi Kani's recent remarks labeling "those who want to exclude Rafsanjani" from the system as "irrelevant" speaks of just this clout.

This public backing of Khamenei came as recently as two weeks ago, when Rafsanjani reaffirmed his support for the doctrine of Velayat-e Faqih. “Our focal point is clear and that is the constitution, Islam, the principle of the office of the jurisprudent and supreme leadership,” he said. Statements such as this are far more calculated than simply supporting the Supreme Leader for the sake of winning political capital. Indeed, Rafsanjani is essentially forcing Khamenei to own the very mess that he created. This was just the case when he stated back in December and again earlier this month that the Supreme Leader is “the only one” capable of unifying the country out of the current crisis. While elevating the position of the Supreme Leader with false praise, Rafsanjani’s words actually directly clash with the regime’s official line that there is in fact “no crisis in the country" to begin with.

This obviously does not mean that the Supreme Leader will lead the country out of crisis, nor would it excuse his actions were he to do the unthinkable and actually reverse course and unify the country. Rather, it points to Rafsanjani’s maneuvering within the system. He is not with the Greens per se, but he is taking steps that ultimately help their cause. He is not fixing or replacing the dike; he is plugging the hole until help arrives.

But just as Rafsanjani has been cautious to not stray too far from the conservative camp, he has also been equally cognizant of the need to reassure the Greens that he shares many of their same concerns. His daughter, Faezeh Hashemi, has phrased it less ambiguously,claiming that her father's demands "are the same as the Green Movement." When asked of the possibility of political reconciliation, she went even further, stating that any compromise would be "out of the question" if it did not take into account the gross violation of people's rights. The fact that the Iranian judiciary has now filed charges against Faezeh Hashemi (and her brother Mehdi) for "fomenting riots" in Tehran only adds to the credibility of the Rafsanjani name within Green circles.

Whether Rafsanjani is technically a 'Green' or not, comments posted on his website following his Khobregan [Assembly of Experts] address are unmistakably similar to some of the criticisms coming from the leaders of the Green Movement. Comparing the current crisis to the events surrounding the 1906-1911 Constitutional Revolution, Rafsanjani said that certain individuals, while conspiring against the regime, pretend to be supporting the ideals of the Islamic Revolution. With the proper historical context, his message is less veiled: much like how the country's very first National Assembly collapsed, leading to the coup d'etat of Reza Shah in 1921, the regime faces similar dangers today from those who carry the regime's banner but stray from its ideals. Mir-Hossein Mousavi made a similar assessment when he told Kalemeh in a post-22 Bahman interview that the refusal to listen to the people's demands "is a sign of tyranny and a distortion of the ideals of the Islamic Revolution."

And while "the Shark" has kept a relatively low profile during the last few months  -- at least when compared to the increasingly pointed rhetoric of both Mousavi and Mehdi Karoubi -- his maneuvering within the Islamic Republic's framework points to a strategy to align with some of the more immediate goals of the Green Movement. Just as Mousavi called for the reform of electoral laws in his 17th statement, the Expediency Council  -- a constitutional body which Rafsanjani chairs -- began considering a proposal that would take away the Guardian Council's vetting role, and instead give it to a new "National Election Committee." The committee, not coincidentally, would be under Rafsanjani's supervision at the Expediency Council. It should also be noted that Rafsanjani himself alleged election fraud following his defeat in the 2005 presidential election to none other than Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Yet it would be remiss to neglect mentioning that Khamenei ordered the new election plans to be drawn up two years ago. The plans, in other words, outdate post-election developments. Irrespective of their origin, there is no chance that the regime, facing its greatest crisis since its inception, will suddenly decide to make itself more democratic, and inevitably, more vulnerable.

Rafsanjani's intentions should not be seen in an altruistic or nationalist light. If he is indeed scheming to help the Greens, then he is surely being driven in part by his own political ambitions. For this was Ayatollah Khomenei's right-hand man, a two-term (and almost three-term) president, and still the head of two powerful constitutional bodies. He is Iran's de facto number-two. Helping the Green Movement's cause ultimately helps his cause: more power.

While Rafsanjani's current primary concern may be preventing Ahmadinejad from tearing Iran's already-polarized political landscape asunder, that may in time prove to be lead to his grander scheme: he was the boy who saved the city from ruin.

UPDATED Iran Document: The Hardliners' Project --- Full Text (Bahavar)

Pedestrian posts the thoughts of Emad Bahavar, a political activist in the Freedom Movement of Iran, writer, and the head of “Supporters of Khatami and Mousavi” in the 2009 Presidential campaign. He was arrested shortly after the election, and released after two months. He was detained last week but released on Tuesday.

Bahavar's recent article in Rooz Online, “The destination was to begin the journey”, was the reason for his latest arrest. This is Part 1 of 3, with the following parts coming out in the next few days:

The Latest from Iran (11 March): Marathon

The destination was to begin the journey
Rooz Online, 6 March 2010

It is now quite obvious that what happened before and after the presidential election was a result of a very clumsy solution devised by security and military forces, to solve the “crisis of leadership” in the future system of the Islamic Republic. A solution that did not solve the crisis, and in fact, inflicted irreversible injury and damage to the very structure and legitimacy of the political system.


The ruling elite try to deny the existence of any political crisis, and to show that indeed it is the reformists who have reached a dead end. But analyzing their behavior and their responses to the aftermath of the election and the “green movement”, proves the opposite. A “political crisis”, in its most urgent form presents itself as a “crisis of legitimacy”, and a “crisis of legitimacy”, at its worse, becomes a “crisis of leadership”. Thus, not only is the system in a political crisis right now, this crisis is no ordinary quandary and is the worst of its kind.

“Who will be the next leader?” “What sort of mechanism will be used to choose the next leader?” “Is the current system of Leadership of the Jurist, in the current context of the constitution, sustainable?” These are questions which reformists, principalists and conservatives have been grappling with. The events of the recent election are in a way the product of different groups thinking of these questions. The events are in fact, a direct result of “serious measures” taken by the most hardline base of the establishment, in response to those questions. The result of the explosive, destructive actions following the election brought to light the very fact that a solution to these questions is not possible by “simple minded solutions” and the “crisis” and “dead end” argued here is much more serious to be solved by an adventurous wing of the establishment on its own.

What was this all about?

These events first seriously began when the most hardline wings of the system, composed of military groups, quasi-miliatry groups and extremist clerics, devised a strategy for “the transfer of leadership”. When Ayatollah Khamenei began his leadership of the country, most groups in the ruling establishment formed a consensus on his appointment and by acting above and beyond any faction or group, he was able to give the system relative stability and solidity. The election of a reformist president during his time, also gave many groups the belief that there is a chance to be active in the system and to reform it, without jeopardizing the stability of the entire system. But there was no guarantee that this stability would continue on forever.

There was no guarantee that when it came time to transfer the leadership to a “new leadership”, the same political stability would remain. By all accounts and all analysis, the system would experience great tension during this period and this tension might undermine its very existence. That is why all political factions within the system, from reformist to conservative to hardline, attempted to put forth a solution to this quandary in the frameworks of their own beliefs. For reasons of which I can not write about, it was the hardliners who were given the opportunity to carry out their solution. They were appointed to establish a “military rule”, a homogeneous ruling system empty and silent of dissent, to create an appropriate circumstance for the period of the transfer of leadership. This is how in 2005, “Mahmoud Ahmadinejad” was chosen to serve as president and to prepare suitable conditions for this period.

What was the hardliners’ solution?

The worst kind of political stability is when the future of an entire system is put to depend on the future of one person, because the smallest change in the top of the hierarchy will influence the entire system. In a monarchy, this quandary has been relatively solved by hereditary rule and the selection of the children or kin of the monarch as the next rulers. In this system, the death of the king and the succession of his son is seen as a legitimate, natural process, and does not undermine the entirety of the system.

But in the current ruling system of the Islamic Republic, the mechanisms are neither monarchical or democratic. From one angle, it seems that the Assembly of Experts is chosen by the nation to elect a leader, from another angle, the approbation supervision of the Guardian Council over the members of the assembly means that a substantial number of the nation’s real representatives never make their way through and thus have no say in the selection of the leader. Thus, the very principle of legitimacy and admissibility of the leader by the people [in the tradition of democratic systems] is undermined with the role of “approbation supervision” of the the Guardian Council.

So what was the solution the hardliners put forth? As we know, the hardliners follow extremist clerics like Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi, who never believed in the selection of the leader by the Assembly of Experts, and has always disapproved of this article of the constitution. The emphasis of Ayatollah Yazdi on the appointment of the leader is based on a theory of “seeking and appointing” --- not electing.

Thus, the solution of the hardliners for the transition process is something like a hereditary monarchy, with the different that the new leader does not necessarily have to be next of kin. In the view of Ayatollah Yazdi, the current leader has ways to seek the opinion of the twelfth Imam [who will return from occultation one day], and when notified of the Imam’s choice, inform the Assembly of Experts. The Assembly of Experts will in turn swear allegiance to the new leader on behalf of the nation and through this mechanism, the people’s approval will be satisfied. Thus, the new leader will be appointed by the old one (he will be “sought and appointed”), will have holy legitimacy, and through the approval of the Assembly of Experts (an indirect swearing of allegiance by the people) also have the people’s approval.

The belief of the hardliners is nothing but a recreation of theory of the caliphate. The Assembly of Experts and Parliament are nothing but a seal of approval for the caliphate. Hardline Shi’as in this way are very similar to hardline Sunnis. They believe that by implementing these theories, the tensions during the transition period will reach a minimum, and these tensions will be limited to insignificant political dissent and disapproval. In this way, the old leader will appoint the new one, and the Assembly of Experts will approve.

But the real quandary for the hardliners was implementing these plans, not writing them, as they had been written long ago, from the time of Sheykh Fazlollah. How can it ever be brought to fruition in the time of reformist publications, numerous newspapers, well known intellectuals, and clerics deeply opposed to such views? Is the implementation of such a project possible in such a pluralistic, politicized environment?

How did the hardliners’ project begin?

The hardliners were appointed to create a military government, homogeneous and clear of dissent, to pave the way for the new leadership. For this purpose, Ahmadinejad was chosen as president in 2005 and most of the positions on his cabinets were taken by former military officials. The hardliners’ plan was written out in “two parts”, for two presidential terms. In his first term, Ahmadinejad was appointed to either control or destroy the potentials created in civil society during the reformist era. The aim of this period was to “return to square one”. In this period, student associations, NGOs, political parties and the press were put under excruciating pressure, to attempt to return to the pre-1997 era [before Khatami].

The most important part of the project however, was to do with Ahmadnejad’s second term. The second term was a “period of elimination”. Two groups of political players had to be eliminated. One group which was a “barrier”, and one group which was the “goal”. The reformists were a barrier to the hardline project. It could be predicted that they would be vocal in their opposition to election fraud. So a scenario was written to widely arrest and eliminate the reformists, by accusing them of a “velvet revolution” and “soft overthrow”.

A second group which was to be eliminated consisted of moderate conservative politicians who had traditional been an ally to Rafsanjani. The goal was to eliminate Rafsanjani and his allies, because, in the view of hardliners, this group would have a big role in determining the next leader. Before the election, and in Ahmadinejad’s first term, there was great effort to take many of Rafsanjani’s close allies to court, people like [Hassan] Rowhani, [Housein] Mousavian, and Mehdi Hashemi. And that attempt was not very successful. The process of eliminating Rafsanjani was to begin with Ahmadinejad’s televised debate, and by firing up the nation, it was to be carried out swiftly.

Thus, by imprisoning more than 500 political and civil activists, and eliminating conservatives from the top of the ruling establishment’s hierarchy, a suitable environment for the period of transition was to be prepared. In such an environment, there would even be an appropriate chance for changing to constitution to be more inline with the principle of “seeking and appointing”. But as we saw, all did not go according to the hardliners plan. The green movement was born.

What really Happened?

The discussion about how the Green Movement was born requires a lot more space, and will  not be the focus of this article. But what is quite obvious is that this movement was a blow to the hardliner project which they had been planning for years. Not only did they not achieve an appropriate environment for transferring leadership, but rather, the political landscape of the country was badly shaken. The hardliners expected to see hopelessness and silence from political activists and the public, after a brief period of protest following the election. But just the opposite happened. The protests saw no end and they became louder and louder every day. Even those people who had previously been apolitical and disinterested, got involved. Thus, not only were the political not silenced,the apolitical became active as well.

The hardliners project was defeated. The reformists stood their ground and did not back down. Imprisoning the reformists was not a victorious strategy, and did not have the desired result. The resilience of some reformists actually gave more life to their cause. Rafsanjani with his insightful brilliance, deterred any attempts by the hardliners to be eliminated. Not only did he not lose his position, he wisely kept his distance with the leadership.

The hardliners solution for this period of transfer was a simple minded “the use of brute force”. They assumed that technology and money would be enough. But the result was just the opposite of what they had planned for. The legitimacy of the system was greatly tarnished, and over night, its national and international appeal was damaged. Many of the system’s previous supporters became doubtful. The stability of the system was greatly undermined and the fracture between the people and the political elite became wider.

Thus, the effort of the hardliners was to return things to the way they were before the election. They tried to substitute their betrayal of the nation with violence. But whatever they did, it created a worse situation.

The blow that the hardliners forced on the system was worse than what any opposition could do. The damage and destruction brought on the system after the  election was the sole responsibility of military and quasi military forces which were the masterminds of the project. Only relying on their might and financial backing, they jeopardized the very existence of the system.

What was the role of pragmatic conservatives?

Last year, a group of conservatives had sent a message to reformists, asking them not to announce a candidate for the presidential election, and instead to back the conservative candidates (someone like [Mohammad-Baqer] Qalibaf, [Ali] Larijani, etc). The argument was that if the reformists have no candidate, there will less of a consensus on Ahmadinejad, and the moderate conservative would win. In the view of these pragmatic conservatives, that was the only way to unseat Ahmadinejad. The reformists of course turned down this offer. In their view there was no way to be sure that a consensus around Ahmadinejad could be broken. The conservatives took orders after all, and the harliners were bent on keeping Ahmadinejad in power. The only power that could unseat Ahmadinejad would be a nation wide momentum, like that of the 2nd Khordaad [when Mohammad Khatami was elected in 1997], not backroom deals between political factions. Thus, the reformists put their efforts in nominating Khatami again, and recreating 2nd of Khordaad.

Now, after nearly a year, individuals like Ali Motahari send letters to Mousavi and ask him to back down, and leave the job to moderate conservatives. The likes of Motahari argue that so long as the reformists are active, the hardliner and conservative consensus around  Ahmadinejad will not be broken. But if the reformists back down, the conservatives themselves will take care of Ahmadinejad.

This time too, the reformists and Mousavi’s response was negative. If Karoubi and Mousavi back down, not only will this not weaken Ahmadinejad, it will allow for a swift move on the part of hardliners to eliminate conservatives as well. The only reason that Rafsanjani’s allies and moderate conservatives have gone unscathed is that the hardliners have been busy with the repression and silencing of the green movement. The pragmatic conservatives underestimate the hardliners. If the hardliners remove the “barrier” that is the green movement, they will go straight for the conservatives. We must not forget that the actual aim was Rafsanjani and his allies, and the project remains unfinished. If the hardliners are not deterred, the pragmatic conservatives will not fare any better than the reformists.

During the months following the birth of the green movement, pragmatic conservatives tried to steer clear of the fights so that the two reformist and hardline factions would wear each other down. So that once both these factions were completely weakened, they could emerge as “the third force” or “saviors” and take control of government. But what happened was that the conflict between reformists and hardliners grew worse by the day and the political landscape was becoming ever more polarized and radicalized to a point where the entire system was at risk and there was no place for the conservatives.  That is why these conservatives decided to play a role in the events, after seven months of silence. A mediating role. The letter Mohsen Rezaie wrote to the leader, their attempts to reform election laws and to take Saeed Mortazavi [former Tehran Prosecutor General] to court, an attempt at changing the head of the police forces and the IRGC, parliament’s reports on government’s violations of law, their efforts to free imprisoned reformists and their numerous interviews in criticizing the government were all efforts on the part of pragmatic conservatives to end the conflict. Their efforts became more apparent after 22 Bahman [31st anniversary of the revolution].

What is waiting ahead?

The events of 2009 were a result of the deadlock in the reformist movement between 2002-2006. Who can clearly guess the repercussions of eliminating the reformists all together? The silencing of the symbols of the green movement has not destroyed that movement, but taken it to the inner layers of society. The green movement was beyond just “street protests” to be killed off when protests were no longer possible. The demands of this movement are very serious and the lack of a response to them leads the way for possible future political crises and more tension. Right in that moment when the hardliners think everything has come to an end and everything is calm, everything will start anew.

Two groups have always offered a wrong analysis of the Green Movement: an opposition which wants to overthrow the system, who interpreted the street protests as a “last action before the fall of the system” [a reference to Mohsen Sazegara] and the other group is conservatives who thought the Green Movement is the only obstacle towards a final stability of the system. (a writer in the conservative magazine Panjereh [Window] had declared the “end of history” right before a “final sin”; a sin that was the greatest sin of all and was the product of the devil).

The Green Movement however is a reformist, peaceful civil rights movement with clear demands, which is stubbornly trying to create better living conditions for all citizens. Thus, this movement will continue to live beyond the frameworks of those two groups, and will continue to speak out of its demands to the rulers, in whichever way possible, – and not just street protests. With the eruption of every national or international crisis, there is the chance that more street protests will take place. Even though Ahmadinejad has spent a great budget giving charity to the impoverished populations, with growing inflation and unemployment, this group too has much to protest. Amir Mohebian was right when he said: “Mousavi couldn’t tie the struggle of the lower classes to that of the middle class” but certainly, Ahmadinejad is up to the task.

2- Reformists and their leaders will not stop protesting. But the protests of the pragmatic conservatives will be much more effective and useful when they stand with the green movement, and not when they are alone. One of the reasons the reform movement was defeated was that Saeed Hajjarian’s strategy of “pressure from below, bargaining from above” never materialized. There was no pressure from below, and those around President Khatami had no ability to bargain.

The Green Movement is the restructuring and the reforming of the reform movement. When[Saeed] Hajjarian was in prison and was preparing for his televised interview, his strategies were being implemented outside prison. In an unwritten agreement, the people and the leaders of the Green Movement were pressuring [the ruling establishment] from below, and the bargaining was being done by the conservatives from above. This was an effective, realistic dividing of the responsibilities.

3- Up to this point, the hardliners have been defeated in their project. They have not been able to unseat Rafsanjani, and they have not been able to imprison Khatami, Mousavi and Karoubi. Even if Tehran does not see any other street protests, the political environment is so tense and inflamed that it will not allow them to carry out any other projects.

But we must remember that the hardliners are so determined to take the next leadership of the country that they are willing to put the country under any pressure. In order to create extreme circumstances, they are even willing to go to take the country to war with neighboring countries. We know that a war is a good excuse to carry out certain political decisions inside the country. (Faridedin Adel, the son of [Gholam-Ali] Hadad Adel [hardline ex-speaker of parliament] has predicated in an article that Iran will be going to war with Turkey in the next few months.)

4 – It has become quite obvious to the ruling establishment that the hardliners’ solution for the transfer of leadership is very very costly, and full of risk. And that even if this project was to succeed, sustaining it (in terms of its national and international legitimacy, economic difficulties, etc) would be near impossible. That is why we can be hopeful that in the future, the reformists and the pragmatic conservatives will also have the chance to put forth their  solution. These solutions include democratizing the parliament and the Assembly of Experts, eliminating the approbation supervision of the Guardian Council and creating a “Council of Leaders”.

The destination, was to begin the journey.

We can clearly witness two defeats for the contemporary  hardline Shi’a movement: the executions of Sheykh Fazlollah and Navab Safavi. Ayatollah Khomeini too left them dissappointed when establishing the Islamic Republic, by incorporating modern democratic institutions within the frameworks of the system. After the ayatollah’s death, the hardliners spent years trying to reclaim their century long pursuits. But in the last instant, with the rise of the “Imam’s prime minister” [Mousavi], a great movement took shape. The birth of the green movement was an end to the hardliner project, and marked another disappointment for them in history. The family of Ayatollah Khomeini raised their voice in protest and many of the marjas [grand ayatollahs], even some of the most conservative, spoke out in criticism.

If there is any group that is guilty of attempting to overthrow the system, it is the hardliners who wanted to overthrow the “Islamic Republic” and replace it with a “Shia Caliphate”. Mousavi had no choice but to disagree with such a move, even though it had a heavy price for him and the people. Mousavi consciously paid this  price to steer the reformists out of deadlock, because the reform movement is the only way of saving the democratic aspects of the system, and saving the Islamic Republic.

The hardliner project for eliminating the democratic aspects of the system was defeated with the birth of the green movement. The green movement reached its aim right at the start; whatever it might gain hereafter, are all added achievements. The destination was to begin the journey.

The Latest from Iran (10 March): The View from Washington

2305 GMT: Back on the Road Again. Off for flight to UK and work in Liverpool so will be quiet for a while. Thanks to everyone for backing up EA on an eventful day.

2300 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Reports that student activist and weblog writer Fouad Shams has been released from prison after 96 days. Saeed Nourmohammadi, a member of the youth branch of the Islamic Iran Participation Front has been freed after 4 1/2 months in detention.

NEW Iran Interview: Habibollah Peyman “Change Through Social Awareness”
Iran Analysis: Corruption Within the Government?
The Latest from Iran (9 March): Political Acts

2255 GMT: Maintaining Control. Radio Zamaneh headlines, "Iran's Supreme Leader May Approve Changes to Electoral Policies", but the more you read, the more this is an assertion of Khamenei's authority rather than reform.

Meeting members of the Assembly of Experts, the Supreme Leader said that he will approve the changes in “general policies of the elections” under discussion in the Expediency Council, headed by Hashemi Rafsanjani.

However, Khamenei added that the opinion of the Expediency Council regarding election policies is “debatable”, and once he is informed of their decision, he will enforce what he deems necessary. Hardly a ringing endorsement of the Council's moves for change.....


2240 GMT: Economy Watch. It's not the headlines over the sanctions that should be garnering attention; instead, keep an eye on the companies ceasing business with Iran.

Royal Dutch Shell has announced that it has stopped selling gasoline/petrol to Iran which, despite its oil reserves, is dependent on imports to meet domestic demand. Shell still receives revenues from an oilfield deal completed in 2005. (The New York Times also reports that Shell "has a natural gas development in the works" but --- and here is where a Washington conference comes in useful --- informed insiders say there is little likelihood of the project moving ahead in the foreseeable future.)

Ingersoll-Rand, a manufactuer of air compressors and cooling systems, has also said that it will no longer allow its foreign subsidiaries to sell parts or products to Iran.

2230 GMT: More In-Fighting. Kayhan editor Hossein Shariatmadari, in an editorial “Outrageous Overstatement”, has gone after Presidential Chief of Staff Esfandiar Rahim-Mashai for his recent “base,” “hyperbolic”, and “pompous” remarks. Shariatmadari accused Rahim-Mashai of seeking to undermine the presidency, distort the principle of velayat-e-faqih (clerical authority), and cause rifts among the principlists.

2225 GMT: Watch This Closely. Earlier this week Mr Verde picked up on the challenge of the head of Iran's judiciary, Sadegh Larijani, that he was going to root out corruption in the Government and punish those responsible, including a high-ranking official.

Well, Sadegh's got back-up from the Parliament that his brother Ali heads:

A majority of Iranian lawmakers have asked Judiciary Chief Ayatollah Sadeq Larijani to decisively deal with the case of a major ring of corrupt government employees.

Larijani announced on Sunday that the judicial system had arrested 11 members of a ring of corrupt employees who embezzled millions of dollars by forging government documents.

Ayatollah Larijani stated that 11 key members of the ring have been arrested and all of them have made confessions.

In a letter sent to the Judiciary chief on Wednesday, 216 MPs also thanked him for his efforts to ensure that the members of the gang were arrested.

But the MPs said that based on the available information, the embezzlement ring has been active in more than one state organization and therefore the rest of its members should be tracked down and arrested.

They said they have been informed that certain people with high-ranking positions played more active roles in the ring than those who have been arrested.

The lawmakers urged Larijani to deal with all the members of the ring, regardless of their positions.

"Certain people with high-ranking positions"? First Vice President Mohammad Reza Rahimi, by chance?

2200 GMT: Back from a most interesting day of Iran panels. Hoping to collect thoughts for an analysis, but I'm very tired. So, for now, thanks a million to everyone for all the great support.

1300 GMT: March on Washington. I'm off to Capitol Hill to see some folks about Iran. We'll be on the road for awhile, so keep us up-to-date with developments by posting in our Comments section.

1220 GMT: We have posted the thoughts of Dr Habibollah Peyman, the head of the banned Movement of Combatant Muslims, on the strategy of the Green Movement.

1115 GMT: Kiarostami Speaks Out. The prominent Iranian director Abbas Kiarostami has published an open letter in a Tehran newspaper calling for the release of Jafar Panahi and Mahmoud Rasoulof, fellow directors who were detained last week.

Kiarostami has also sent an English translation thorough a friend to The New York Times, which prints the text.

1105 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Persian2English summarises news of a series of releases on bail:

Emad Bahavar, member of reformist group Nehzat-e Azadi [Freedom Movement of Iran] , and Yashar Darolshafa, a student activist, were released last night.

Political activist Mehrdad Rahimi was released last night after posting a $70,000 bail. Rahimi, who was arrested over two months ago, was under pressure to submit to confessions on live television.

Political activist Hamideh Ghasemi, journalist Ahmad Jalali Farahani, and Saleh Noghrekar were also released after a month in prison.

Saleh Noghrekar is the nephew of opposition leader, Zahra Rahnavard. He was released on a $50,000 bail.

Mehdi Amizesh, children’s rights activist, was also released on bail after two months in prison.

1055 GMT: Mahmoud Knocks, K arzai Not at Home. Here is the not-so-dramatic of the saga of President Ahmadinejad saying he would go to Afghanistan on Monday (Sunday), Ahmadinejad not going to Afghanistan (Monday), Ahmadinejad saying "oh, I meant Wednesday" (Tuesday).

Well, the good news is that the President finally got to see Kabul's sights, and Hamid Karzai is one of them. Initial reports indicated that the Afghanistan President was not at home, but the two men finally showed up at a press conference.

With US Secretary of Defense Gates still in Afghanistan --- his visit with Karzai on Monday was the likely reason for the postponement of Ahmadinejad's trip --- the Iranian President took a swipe at Washington, "I believe that they themselves are playing a double game. They themselves created terrorists and now they're saying that they are fighting terrorists." Gates had put out the "double game" charge against Tehran earlier in the week.

1045 GMT: I Don't Even Like the Guy. If Jahan News was trying to undermine Mehdi Karroubi with the claim that he was very nice to Saeed Mortazavi, the Ahmadinejad aide who has been blamed for the post-election abuses at Kahrizak, the effort does not appear to have worked. Karroubi hasn't reacted, but Mortazavi is more than a bit upset. His office put out this statement:

Mr. Mortazavi attended a memorial service held for the mother of his colleague in Nour Mosque on Saturday....Mr. Mehdi Karroubi was present at the beginning of the ceremony and left approximately half an hour before Mr. Mortazavi arrived. Therefore, Mr. Karroubi and Mortazavi never encountered each other.

It is not clear what the intentions of this website was in reporting the warm exchange of pleasantries and kisses between these two individuals [Karroubi, Mortazavi]. The intention to disseminate such false news reports is also a matter to reflect upon.

The son of Mr. Karroubi was one of the suspects the former Tehran prosecutor [Mortazavi] dealt with and the Etemade Melli newspaper owned by Mr. Karroubi was banned by him therefore such fabricated stories aimed at influencing public opinion will have no success.

0450 GMT: We're off for some downtime before the Wednesday conference. Back in a few hours.

0435 GMT: The War on Football. Yesterday we noted that Iranian authorities had issued a warning, for an unspecified reason, to a football publication.

Well, here's an even more serious football story from Iran Human Rights Voice:

Football journalist Abdollah Sadoughi was arrested in the city of Tabriz, north-west Iran, on 18 January, after publishing a poster supporting the city’s Traktor Sazi football team. He is held without charge at Tabriz prison, and is on hunger strike in protest at what he considers to be his baseless detention....

Abdollah Sadoughi, aged 33, a member of Iran’s Azerbaijani minority, writes for the Iranian publications Goal, Corner and Khosh Khabar (Good News). He supports Tabriz’s Traktor Sazi football team. The authorities have accused him of acts “against national security” including supporting “Pan-Turkism” for publishing posters, one of which says, in the Azerbaijani Turkic language, “All of Azerbaijan feels pride with you”, alongside an image of the football team. Abdollah Sadoughi maintains he had permission from the relevant authorities to print posters [but] Azerbaijani Turkic is not recognized as an official language in Iran....

In late February, Abdollah Sadoughi began a hunger strike. According to media reports, soon after starting his hunger strike he was transferred to solitary confinement and held in filthy conditions, and then moved to a cell with criminal convicts. On 2 March 2010, having lost considerable weight and suffering from various medical problems, he was transferred to the clinic within Tabriz prison. Abdollah Sadoughi has been able to meet his lawyer and his family, most recently on 6 March, when he said he would continue his hunger strike until he is released or brought before a court.

0430 GMT: Does the Movement Live? Mohammad Sadeghi offers a spirited response to those who claimed 22 Bahman (11 February) marked the end of the Green Movement:

Any measure of the movement's success must focus on the incredible changes brought about in Iran thus far, rather than the outcome of specific tactics. Conversations on the proper role of government, which would have been unthinkable less than a year ago, are now commonplace throughout the country. The government is constantly on the defensive on issues ranging from sexual abuse in prisons to its failed economic policies. Although the regime maintains tight control over all levers of power in society -- police and security forces, the media, the oil industry, etc. -- its popular support has been steadily slipping since June's presidential election. These changes have taken place because of the millions of Iranians who see it as their duty to peacefully protest in the streets, document the regime's brutality, and spread this documentation around the world. In other words, the movement owes its greatest successes to the horizontal organization and innovative use of technology that [critics are] so quick to dismiss.

0315 GMT: Now in place in Washington for Wednesday's open hearing on Iran and US-Iran relations. Will get an insider's look later today but already one point of note has emerged: the Ali Larijani mission to Japan for a possible uranium enrichment deal should be taken seriously.

That impression is accompanied by signals from Iranian state media of confidence that the push for tougher international sanctions on Tehran will fail. Under the headline, "Anti-Iran plot failing, Israeli envoy laments", Press TV carries Agence France Presse's quotation from Israeli Ambassador to the UN Gabriela Shalev: "The chances now seem grim regarding sanctions that will be crippling." Shalev said Russia and China "are still looking to the diplomatic track" and appear reluctant to back a new round of sanctions.

Back in Iran, the trial of 12 police officers charged with post-election abuses in Kahrizak Prison has begun.

The Latest from Iran (7 March): The Elections Next Door

2225 GMT: Petraeus Pronounces. On a slowish political evening, General David Petraeus dishes out some rhetoric on Iran's "thugocracy". We'll have an analysis tomorrow (hint: it's actually a signal that US is backing off any immediate military pressure), but for now, we've posted the video.

1945 GMT: Larijani Watch. Nice move by the head of Iran's judiciary, Mohammad Sadegh Larijani. He has announced the discovery of a large group inside the Government carrying out fraud and economic corruption: one case alone was embezzlement of 6 bilionl Toman more than $6 million).

NEW Iran: Senior Reformist Amani “We Have Not Decided to Remain Silent”
UPDATED Death, Confusion, and Clerics in Iran: The Case of Mohammad Amin Valian
NEW An Open Letter to the Editors of Iran’s “Principled” Newspapers
The Latest from Iran (7 March): The Elections Next Door

Thus, Larijani takes a swipe at Ahmadinejad and poses as a a defender of justice for the Iranian people.


1930 GMT: Bypassing Sanctions. All the way back to our first update (0730 GMT) on "Western" firms who trade with Tehran: Welt Online has a lengthy article on German companies who use Dubai as a "back door" to get into Iran.

1900 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Madhi Forouzandehpour, who was in charge of Mir Hossein Mousavi’s office, has been released after more than two months in detention.

1750 GMT: The Uranium Enrichment Deal. Don't say EA didn't tell you....
A couple of weeks after the visit by Speaker of Parliament Ali Larijani to Tokyo, this nugget from the Foreign Ministry:

Iran is ready to conduct its uranium exchange plan also with fresh countries, Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast said Sunday, according to the Fars News Agency.

"As we have reached no results yet with France, Russia and the United States over the uranium exchange plan, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) head has asked other countries to get involved," Mehmanparast said.

"We will wait and see whether other countries would be capable to provide us with the required fuel," the spokesman added in a meeting with students at the Shahid Beheshti university in Tehran.

Japan is reportedly one of the countries interested to get engaged in the deal.

1730 GMT: Political Prisoner/Mohareb Watch. Tehran Prosecutor General Abbas Jafari Doulatababi announced that 250 Ashura detainees have been indicted, but he said reports of a confirmed death sentence for Mohammad Amin Valian were false.

1710 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Leading student activist Abdollah Momeni has reportedly been released on $800,000 bail.

1645 GMT: Karroubi Takes on Mohareb. It looks like Mehdi Karroubi may have another front in his battle against the regime over its conception of "justice". He told an audience today,

I have previously pointed out [the need for] changing the definition of Mohareb [warring against God] in the current situation and have asked judiciary officials for its abolition....Some officials, unpremeditatedly or premeditatedly and even intentionally, called the streets protests and movements Moharebeh, and this is unfortunate.

Karroubi referred to the case of Mohammad Amin Valian, the Ashura protester condemned to death, as a “negative point” since Valian was only “taking part in street protests.” Karroubi claimed that Iranian officials "don’t know that Iran’s reputation in the international community is tarnished with such acts”.

1640 GMT: On the Women's Front. The Iranian Labor News Agency dares to proclaim, on the eve of International Women's Day, that "statistics and recent events in Iran indicate Iranian women did not experience an enjoyable year".

1630 GMT: That Cyber-War Thing. Following the declaration of Iranian officials that the Green Movement will be "crushed" in the battle of the Internet, an Islamic Revolution Guard Corps commander has said that 18,000 IRGC troops will be deployed in the "cyber-war".

1615 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Amirhossein Kazemi, weblog writer and member of the Freedom Movement of Iran, was arrested last night after being summoned to the Intelligence Ministry and taken to an unknown location. Emad Behavar, the head of the youth branch and member of the political bureau of the FMI, has been arrested for the third time in the post-election crisis.

Many of the FMI's leaders have been detained.

1200 GMT: We've posted an interview with a senior reformist, Shahrbanou Amani, considering the state of the Green Movement: "We Have Not Decided to Remain Silent".

1000 GMT: Posture of the Day. The Iranian Government, represented by Minister of Defense Ahmad Vahidi, is boasting of a new domestically-manufactured short-range cruise missile that can "eliminate targets of up to 300 tons".

0800 GMT: Butterfly on a Wheel. Golshifteh Farahani, the first Iranian actress since 1979 to appear in a major Hollywood film, has spoken of the oppression of Iran's artists by the current regime.

After her appearance in Body of Lies with Leonardo DiCaprio and Russell Crowe, Farahani was harassed by Iranian intelligence services for months before she went into exile in Paris.

Reacting to the arrest of award-winning director Jafar Panahi last week, Farahani said, "We are so angry. Jafar is one, maybe the only one… still in Iran who is talking. Most artists [in Iran] don't talk because they would rather work somehow. I appreciate that, but Jafar is the one who had the courage to talk, and he talked for everyone."

0755 GMT: A Government's Satanic Aims. Former President Mohammad Khatami has delcared in a speech:

It is a catastrophe that satanic aims and inhuman methods are imposed on the people in the name of God and holiness. Peace is the most beautiful word that exists, but unfortunately we see rare examples in the historical reality (today).

0750 GMT: Here's Some Culture for You. Former Minister of Culture and Islamic Guidance Mohammad-Hossein Saffar-Harandi has declared at a conference that Iran's "cyber-army" will reach "greater achievements", crushing the Green Movement.

0730 GMT: Nine months after Iran's Presidential election, media attention --- including that of Iranian outlets --- will be focused on a vote next door, as Iraqis go to the polls. We'll be starting our Iran morning in a reflective mood, with a senior reformist politician, Shahrbanou Amani, considering the state of the movement: "We have not decided to remain silent."

Anticipating US legislating punishing firms who trade both with the American Government and with Iran, The New York Times has published a list of 74 companies who could have been affected. Heading the list is Halliburton, the oil and gas drilling services firm connected with former Vice President Dick Cheney, at $27.1 billion. (Like a number of others on the list, Halliburton has now officially withdrawn from Iran.)