The Latest from Iran (31 March): Nuclear Chatter & Political Prisoners

2000 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. The physicians of Ebrahim Yazdi, the 78-year-0ld former Foreign Minister and leader of the Freedom Movement of Iran, have requested an extension of his temporary leave from prison on grounds of ill health.

UPDATED Iran Politics and Music Video: “Karroubi” and the Arrest of Sasi Mankan
UPDATED Iran Appeal: Japan’s Deportation of Jamal Saberi
Iran: Preventing Tehran from “Going Nuclear” (Ramazani)
Iran Politics and Music: Sasi Mankan’s “Karroubi”
Iran: The Green Movement’s Next Steps (Shahryar)
The Latest from Iran (30 March): Strategies

1840 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Kalemeh reports that reformist journalist Masoud Lavasani will be set free tonight on a bail of around $500,000, four months after his arrest.

Bastani's initial prison sentence was reduced from 8 1/2 years to 4 1/2 years after appeal.

It is reported, from human rights activists in Iran, that Jafar Ashari who has been on hunger strike since March 17, has been transferred to Mahabad prison and is now in quarantine. Ashari has been in detention for more than five months.


1835 GMT: The Nuclear Defector. Press TV publishes an account, from Iranian state media, of "Missing Iran N-scientist 'defected to US'". What is interesting is that there is no denial of Shahram Amiri's claimed position in Iran's nuclear programme.

That means that, contrary to its initial position, the Iranian Government is no longer denying that Amiri is a nuclear scientist while the US Government is no longer denying that it is involved in Amiri's disappearance.

1500 GMT: More US-Iran Fencing. This time, the sparring is over Afghanistan, with the US military setting up Iran as a negative influence rather than a possible ally. The Chairman of the Joint Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, told a news conference in Kabul:

Iran is working to increase its influence in the area. On the one hand, that's not surprising, she is a neighbor state, a neighbor country. On the other hand, the influence I see is all too often negative. I was advised last night about a significant shipment of weapons from Iran into Kandahar, for example.

I have seen them over the last several years -- the last couple of years anyway, certainly be more than just interested, provide some capabilities. I am also concerned that that desire to be influential is increasing....I was taken aback. [The arms shipment] wasn't insignificant.

1355 GMT: More on Iran Air in Europe. An EA reader sends us an update:

Ramp checks on Iran Air - which has been subject to US Government sanctions - have turned up evidence of "insufficient oversight" over the past year, says the Commission.

But Iran Air will still be permitted to operate 18 Airbus A300/310s, nine Boeing 747s, six Airbus A320s and a single Boeing 737 into Europe.

The Commission says it will send representatives to Iran over the next few months to examine the situation with Iran Air.

1040 GMT: Nuke Chatter Continues. Iranian state media is reporting that Saeed Jalili, the Secretary of the National Security Council and the country's primary negotiator on nuclear issues, will visit China tomorrow for discussions.

0645 GMT: Trouble in the Air? An Iran Air official claims that, despite the European Commission's ban on the airline within Europe, that "nothing has changed" and no restrictions have been imposed on the airline.

An EA correspondent offers a contrasting view: "Even though the ban is limited in financial terms, its international outcome is devastating. From now on the regime must answer the question, for all of its boasting, if it is able to provide essential safety for its airplanes. This ban is the best reply to Iran's jamming of European satellite broadcast, as the safety issue is untouchable."

0635 GMT: Political Prisoner Resistance Watch. Rooz Online reports on the defiance, often humourous, of political prisoners.

0610 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Rah-e-Sabz reports on the poor conditions and hygiene in the women's section of  Evin Prison.

Christian pastor Wilson Issavi has been released on bail after 54 days in detention.

Rah-e-Sabz writes that 51-year-old university instructor Rahmatollah Bastani has been re-arrested by the Intelligence Bureau in Qom. Bastani was one of 30 people detained during Sunday's funeral for the wife of the late Grand Ayatollah Montazeri. He was released five hours later but was summoned on Monday for further interrogation.

0555 GMT: Economy Watch. Asre Iran reports that some Kuwaiti banks have stopped dealing with their Iranian counterparts, who have protested to the Kuwaiti Central Bank about the "unbearable injustice".

0545 GMT: Subsidy Watch. Back to more pressing concerns for most Iranians and for the President. In an unprecedented move, Ahmadinejad has proposed an "addendum" to the Parliament's approved budget, allowing him access to the extra $20 billion of revenues he wants from subsidy cuts.

0500 GMT: Lots of white noise about the Iranian nuclear programme yesterday and this morning.

Following this week's New York Times wayward article on supposedly secret Iranian nuclear site, The Washington Times goes farther by mangling --- through misunderstanding or wilful distortion --- a story on the latest public US intelligence finding on Tehran's nuclear development. The newspaper headlines, "Iran is poised to begin producing nuclear weapons after its uranium program expansion in 2009, even though it has had problems with thousands of its centrifuges."

The report says no such thing. Here's the take-away, as noted by other Iran observers:

We continue to assess Iran is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons though we do not know whether Tehran eventually will decide to produce nuclear weapons. Iran continues to develop a range of capabilities that could be applied to producing nuclear weapons, if a decision is made to do so.

During the reporting period, Iran continued to expand its nuclear infrastructure and continued uranium enrichment and activities related to its heavy water research reactor, despite multiple United Nations Security Council Resolutions since late 2006 calling for the suspension of those activities. Although Iran made progress in expanding its nuclear infrastructure during 2009, some obstacles slowed progress during this period.

The misleading story seems to have disappeared with little notice, replaced by an intriguing claim:

An award-winning Iranian nuclear scientist, who disappeared last year under mysterious circumstances, has defected to the CIA and been resettled in the United States, according to people briefed on the operation by intelligence officials.

The officials were said to have termed the defection of the scientist, Shahram Amiri, "an intelligence coup" in the continuing CIA operation to spy on and undermine Iran's nuclear program....

Amiri, a nuclear physicist in his early 30s, went missing last June three days after arriving in Saudi Arabia on a pilgrimage.

On the political front, President Obama maintained the public stance of US and international pressure on Tehran, declaring at a press conference with visiting French President Nicolas Sarkozy:

I'm not interested in waiting months for a sanctions regime to be in place....I am interested in seeing that regime in place in weeks. And we are working diligently with our international partners, emphasizing to them, that as Nicolas said, this is not simply an issue of trying to isolate Iran, it has enormous implications for the safety and the security of the entire region.

Afghanistan Special: CIA Memorandum "How to Sell the War to Europe"

Wikileaks publishes a CIA "Red Cell" memorandum (other sources have confirmed that it is genuine), outlining how to influence public opinion in France and Germany. The guidance was produced after the fall of the Netherlands Government over the issue of troop deployment in Afghanistan, indicating Washington's fears that other European countries could also withdraw political and military support for the intervention.

Marked Confidential/No Foreign Nationals, the document is distinguished by some sweeping assertions:

1. President Obama is a great salesman for the war.

2. "Women" are also great salespeople or, to be precise, the war can be presented as a fight for women's rights, especially to the French.



3. The prospect of disorder from drugs and refugees, as well as Germany's standing in NATO, should scare Germans into prolonging their support for the war.

Afghanistan: US Military Holds On to Detainees

Afghanistan: Sustaining West European Support for the NATO-led Mission—Why Counting on Apathy Might Not Be Enough (C//NF)

The fall of the Dutch Government over its troop commitment to Afghanistan demonstrates the fragility of European support for the NATO-led ISAF mission.


Some NATO states, notably France and Germany, have counted on public apathy about Afghanistan to increase their contributions to the mission, but indifference might turn into active hostility if spring and summer fighting results in an upsurge in military or Afghan civilian casualties and if a Dutch-style debate spills over into other states contributing troops. The Red Cell invited a CIA expert on strategic communication and analysts following public opinion at the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) to consider information approaches that might better link the Afghan mission to the priorities of French, German, and other Western European publics. (C//NF)

Public Apathy Enables Leaders To Ignore Voters. . . (C//NF)

The Afghanistan mission’s low public salience has allowed French and German leaders to disregard popular opposition and steadily increase their troop contributions to the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). Berlin and Paris currently maintain the third and fourth highest ISAF troop levels, despite the opposition of 80 percent of German and
French respondents to increased ISAF deployments, according to INR polling in fall 2009.

• Only a fraction (0.1-1.3 percent) of French and German respondents identified “Afghanistan” as the most urgent issue facing their nation in an open-ended question, according to the same polling. These publics ranked “stabilizing Afghanistan” as among the lowest priorities for US and European leaders, according to polls by the German Marshall Fund (GMF) over the past two years.

• According to INR polling in the fall of 2009, the view that the Afghanistan mission is a waste of resources and “not our problem” was cited as the most common reason for opposing ISAF by German respondents and was the second most common reason by French respondents. But the “not our problem” sentiment also suggests that, so for, sending troops to Afghanistan is not yet on most voters’
radar. (C//NF)

. . . But Casualties Could Precipitate Backlash (C//NF)
If some forecasts of a bloody summer in Afghanistan come to pass, passive French and German dislike of their troop presence could turn into active and politically potent hostility. The tone of previous debate suggests that a spike in French or German casualties or in Afghan civilian casualties could become a tipping point in converting passive opposition into active calls for immediate withdrawal. (C//NF)

French and German commitments to NATO are a safeguard against a precipitous departure, but leaders fearing a backlash ahead of spring regional elections might become unwilling to pay a political price for increasing troop levels or extending deployments. If domestic politics forces the Dutch to depart, politicians elsewhere might cite a precedent for “listening to the voters.” French and German leaders have over the past two years taken steps to preempt an upsurge of opposition but their vulnerability may be higher now:

• To strengthen support, President Sarkozy called on the National Assembly—whose approval is not required for ISAF—to affirm the French mission after the combat deaths of 10 soldiers in August 2008. The government won the vote handily, defusing a potential crisis and giving Sarkozy cover to deploy approximately 3,000 additional troops. Sarkozy, however, may now be more vulnerable to an upsurge in
casualties because his party faces key regional elections this March and the already low support for ISAF has fallen by one-third since March 2009, according to INR polling in the fall of 2009.

• Political fallout from the German-ordered Kunduz airstrike in September 2009 which killed dozens of Afghan civilians, demonstrated the potential pressure on the German Government when Afghanistan issues come up on the public radar. Concern about the potential effects of Afghanistan issues on the state-level election in North Rhine-Westphalia in May 2010 could make Chancellor Merkel—who has shown an unwillingness to expend political capital on Afghanistan—more hesitant about increasing or even sustaining Germany’s ISAF contributions. (C//NF)

Tailoring Messaging Could Forestall or At Least Contain Backlash (C//NF)

Western European publics might be better prepared to tolerate a spring and summer of greater military and civilian casualties if they perceive clear connections between outcomes in Afghanistan and their own priorities. A consistent and iterative strategic communication program across NATO troop contributors that taps into the key concerns of specific Western European audiences could provide a buffer if today’s apathy becomes tomorrow’s opposition to ISAF, giving politicians greater scope to support deployments to Afghanistan. (C//NF)

French Focused On Civilians and Refugees. Focusing on a message that ISAF benefits Afghan civilians and citing examples of concrete gains could limit and perhaps even reverse opposition to the mission. Such tailored messages could tap into acute French concern for civilians and refugees. Those who support ISAF in INR surveys from fall 2009 most frequently cited their perception that the mission helps Afghan civilians, while opponents most commonly argued that the mission hurts civilians. Contradicting the “ISAF does more harm than good” perception is clearly important, particularly for France’s Muslim minority:

• Highlighting Afghans’ broad support for ISAF could underscore the mission’s positive impact on civilians. About two-thirds of Afghans support the presence of ISAF forces in Afghanistan, according to a reliable ABC/BBC/ADR poll conducted in December 2009. According to INR polling in fall 2009, those French and German respondents who believed that the Afghan people oppose ISAF—48 percent and 52
percent, respectively—were more likely than others to oppose participation in the mission.

• Conversely, messaging that dramatizes the potential adverse consequences of an ISAF defeat for Afghan civilians could leverage French (and other European) guilt for abandoning them. The prospect of the Taliban rolling back hard-won progress on girls’ education could provoke French indignation, become a rallying point for France’s largely secular public, and give voters a reason to support a good and
necessary cause despite casualties.

• The media controversy generated by Paris’s decision to expel 12 Afghan refugees in late 2009 suggests that stories about the plight of Afghan refugees are likely to resonate with French audiences. The French government has already made combating Afghan human trafficking networks a priority and would probably support an information campaign that a NATO defeat in Afghanistan could
precipitate a refugee crisis. (C//NF)

Germans Worried About Price And Principle Of ISAF Mission. German opponents of ISAF worry that a war in Afghanistan is a waste of resources, not a German problem, and
objectionable in principle, judging from an INR poll in the fall of 2009. Some German opposition to ISAF might be muted by proof of progress on the ground, warnings about the potential consequences for Germany of a defeat, and reassurances that Germany is a valued partner in a necessary NATO-led mission.

• Underscoring the contradiction between German pessimism about ISAF and Afghan optimism about the mission’s progress could challenge skeptics’ assertions that the mission is a waste of resources. The same ABC/BBC/ADR poll revealed that 70 percent of Afghans thought their country was heading in the right direction and would improve in 2010, while a 2009 GMF poll showed that about the same proportion of German respondents were pessimistic about ever stabilizing Afghanistan.

• Messages that dramatize the consequences of a NATO defeat for specific German interests could counter the widely held perception that Afghanistan is not Germany’s problem. For example, messages that illustrate how a defeat in Afghanistan could heighten Germany’s exposure to terrorism, opium, and refugees might help to make the war more salient to skeptics.

• Emphasis on the mission’s multilateral and humanitarian aspects could help ease Germans’ concerns about waging any kind of war while appealing to their desire to support multilateral efforts. Despite their allergy to armed conflict, Germans were willing to break precedent and use force in the Balkans in the 1990s to show commitment to their NATO allies. German respondents cited helping their allies as one of the most compelling reasons for supporting ISAF, according to an INR poll in
the fall of 2009. (C//NF)

Appeals by President Obama and Afghan Women Might Gain Traction (C//NF)

The confidence of the French and German publics in President Obama’s ability to handle foreign affairs in general and Afghanistan in particular suggest that they would be receptive to his direct affirmation of their importance to the ISAF mission—and sensitive to direct expressions of disappointment in allies who do not help.

• According to a GMF poll conducted in June 2009, about 90 percent of French and German respondents were confident in the President’s ability to handle foreign policies. The same poll revealed that 82 percent of French and 74 percent of German respondents were confident in the President’s ability to stabilize Afghanistan, although the subsequent wait for the US surge strategy may have eroded some of this confidence.

• The same poll also found that, when respondents were reminded that President Obama himself had asked for increased deployments to Afghanistan, their support for granting this request increased dramatically, from 4 to 15 percent among French respondents and from 7 to 13 percent among Germans. The total percentages may be small but they suggest significant sensitivity to disappointing a president seen as broadly in sync with European concerns. (C//NF)

Afghan women could serve as ideal messengers in humanizing the ISAF role in combating the Taliban because of women’s ability to speak personally and credibly about their experiences under the Taliban, their aspirations for the future, and their fears of a Taliban victory. Outreach initiatives that create media opportunities for Afghan women to share
their stories with French, German, and other European women could help to overcome pervasive skepticism among women in Western Europe toward the ISAF mission.

• According to INR polling in the fall of 2009, French women are 8 percentage points less likely to support the mission than are men, and German women are 22 percentage points less likely to support the war than are men.

• Media events that feature testimonials by Afghan women would probably be most effective if broadcast on programs that have large and disproportionately female audiences. (C//NF)

Europe Watch: French Warships to Russia

On Wednesday Russia, fulfilling an agreement in principle reached four weeks ago, announced that it plans to buy four Mistral-class warships from France.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy said that, with the first deal between a NATO member and a former Soviet state, he wanted to turn the page on the Cold War; Russia must be a partner, not a threat. Sarkozy added that the deal will build trust at a time when West is seeking Russian support on issues such as Iran’s nuclear programme:

Can we say to President Medvedev in the morning, "Ah, I trust you, vote with us at the Security Council, work with us on the same resolution against Iran," then in the afternoon, tell him, "No no, excuse us, as we don’t trust you and we don’t work together — we won’t send you the Mistral?

The Mistral-class ships can deploy 16 helicopters, four landing barges, and up to 70 armoured vehicles, including 13 battle tanks, and 450 troops.

Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania expressed their concerns about Russia’s intentions. Estonia’s military chief of staff, Lieutenant General Ants Laaneots, said, "We don't know what they are going to do with a Mistral, are they going to keep them in the Baltic Sea, the Black Sea, the northern fleet?" Harri Tiido, the undersecretary for political affairs at the Estonian Foreign Ministry, argued, “Definitely, it would not add to the security of the region. And I think the nations around the Baltic Sea in that case would have to see what they have to do to change their defense planning, maybe; but also, it could influence the defense planning of NATO." Georgia’s President Mikhail Saakashvili declared that the sale is a threat for his country and Eastern Europe.

Some concerns emphasized Russia's new strategic doctrine on NATO, which labels the expanded alliance a threat, and a Baltic war-games scenario last year that included a pincer operation cutting off Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. Francois Heibourg, an adviser at the Foundation for Strategic Research in Paris, while noting that Russia's demand is understandable, assessed, “The Mistral is a considerable strategic tool: Russia's power projection capability will be much increased in the Black Sea, the Baltic, and even far into Asia."