Latest Iran Video and Transcript: Obama's Nowruz Message (20 March)

Today, I want to extend my best wishes to all who are celebrating Nowruz in the United States and around the world. On this New Year’s celebration, friends and family have a unique opportunity to reflect on the year gone by; to celebrate their time together; and to share in their hopes for the future.


One year ago, I chose this occasion to speak directly to the people and leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and to offer a new chapter of engagement on the basis of mutual interests and mutual respect. I did so with no illusions. For three decades, the United States and Iran have been alienated from one another. Iran’s leaders have sought their own legitimacy through hostility to America. And we continue to have serious differences on many issues.

I said, last year, that the choice for a better future was in the hands of Iran’s leaders. That remains true today. Together with the international community, the United States acknowledges your right to peaceful nuclear energy – we insist only that you adhere to the same responsibilities that apply to other nations. We are familiar with your grievances from the past – we have our own grievances as well, but we are prepared to move forward. We know what you’re against; now tell us what you’re for.

For reasons known only to them, the leaders of Iran have shown themselves unable to answer that question. You have refused good faith proposals from the international community. They have turned their backs on a pathway that would bring more opportunity to all Iranians, and allow a great civilization to take its rightful place in the community of nations. Faced with an extended hand, Iran’s leaders have shown only a clenched fist.

Last June, the world watched with admiration, as Iranians sought to exercise their universal right to be heard. But tragically, the aspirations of the Iranian people were also met with a clenched fist, as people marching silently were beaten with batons; political prisoners were rounded up and abused; absurd and false accusations were leveled against the United States and the West; and people everywhere were horrified by the video of a young woman killed in the street.

The United States does not meddle in Iran’s internal affairs. Our commitment – our responsibility – is to stand up for those rights that should be universal to all human beings. That includes the right to speak freely, to assemble without fear; the right to the equal administration of justice, and to express your views without facing retribution against you or your families.

I want the Iranian people to know what my country stands for. The United States believes in the dignity of every human being, and an international order that bends the arc of history in the direction of justice – a future where Iranians can exercise their rights, to participate fully in the global economy, and enrich the world through educational and cultural exchanges beyond Iran’s borders. That is the future that we seek. That is what America is for.

That is why, even as we continue to have differences with the Iranian government, we will sustain our commitment to a more hopeful future for the Iranian people. For instance, by increasing opportunities for educational exchanges so that Iranian students can come to our colleges and universities and to our efforts to ensure that Iranians can have access to the software and Internet technology that will enable them to communicate with each other, and with the world without fear of censorship.

Finally, let me be clear: we are working with the international community to hold the Iranian government accountable because they refuse to live up to their international obligations. But our offer of comprehensive diplomatic contacts and dialogue stands. Indeed, over the course of the last year, it is the Iranian government that has chosen to isolate itself, and to choose a self-defeating focus on the past over a commitment to build a better future.

Last year, I quoted the words of the poet Saadi, who said: "The children of Adam are limbs to each other, having been created of one essence.” I still believe that – I believe it with every fiber of my being. And even as we have differences, the Iranian government continues to have the choice to pursue a better future, and to meet its international responsibilities, while respecting the dignity and fundamental human rights of its own people.

Thank you. And Aid-e-Shoma Mobarak.

The Latest from Iran (20 March): Nowruz

1400 GMT: The Next Nowruz Message...is reported to have come from Mehdi Karroubi.
(http://bit.ly/bLnMG0)

1245 GMT: Rumour of Day/Rafsanjani Watch. Two features in one, as news flies that Hossein Marashi, a relative and ally of Hashemi Rafsanjani, will be released
within days of his Thursday sentencing to one year in prison.
(http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,5374138,00.html)
Iranian media are speaking of “hidden hands” behind Marashi's release (http://www.khabaronline.ir/news-50341.aspx)

Deutsche Welle argues that this is bad news for the President, given the pressure of the Expediency Council (headed by Rafsanjani) to change electoral laws. Rafsanjani has also apparently managed to gain the support of the Combatant Clergy Assocation, headed by key conservative Ayatollah Mahdavi Kani. Another sign of Rafsanjani’s growing influence is the lifting of the ban on Shargh newspaper, which is meant to restart publication in two weeks.

So was Marashi’s arrest due to Ahmadinejad supporters trying to clip the challenge of Rafsanjani? And have they only succeeded in making that challenge stronger?

NEW Latest Iran Video and Transcript: Obama’s Nowruz Message (20 March)
NEW Iran Appeal: Japan’s Deportation of Jamal Saberi
NEW Iran Analysis: Ahmadinejad Fails in Qom? (Verde)
NEW Iran: Inside the Mind of the Interrogator
Iran: Ethnic Minorities and the Green Movement (Ghajar)
Iran Academic Question: Suspending North American Studies?
Latest Iran Video: Mousavi’s and Rahnavard’s New Year Messages (18 March)
The Latest from Iran (19 March): Untamed?

1125 GMT: Another Nowruz Message. A special greeting from Parvin Fahimi, the mother of Sohrab Arabi, who was slain by Government forces on 15 June:

Our dear slain children are not next to us on the New Year’s eve, but their memories shall live forever.

I hope that those prisoners whose empty place is felt strongly by their families are released and returned to the arms of their loved ones.

As a mother with an aching heart, I take refuge in God’s grace. What crime did our children commit that they should be subject to such injustice?

Our youth only demanded to have the same rights every human being is entitled to.

Once again, as a mother, I wish peace, freedom, joy, and health upon everyone. My son wanted the same thing.

(http://persian2english.com/?p=8659)


0733 GMT: Have a spare moment on Nowruz? Global Freedom Movement has created a"virtual solidarity" protest for those held in Evin Prison.

0725 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. No Nowruz release for Mashhad journalist Sadegh Javadi-Hessar.

0720 GMT: A New Year Approach. And, even before President Obama, was offering his Nowruz greeting, British Foreign Minister David Miliband was signalling the importance of Iran on the "Western" agenda and offering confirmation that "rights" are now going to accompany any nuclear approach:

The past year has been a difficult one for many in Iran but Norouz is a time of new beginnings. I hope that in 1389 the Iranian people will be able to enjoy a year that fulfils their hopes and ambitions, and allows them to express freely their own aspirations for the future. Noh-rooz eh hoob dashteh basheed.

The leader of the French Socialist Party, Martine Aubry, has also posted her best wishes.

0700 GMT: First and foremost, EA wishes everyone the best for Nowruz (Iranian New Year), wherever you might be celebrating. Here is to a fantastic and wonderful 1389.

We are not the only ones offering best wishes this morning. The White House has sent out a press release, now racing through the "Western" media and even on Press TV, offering President Obama's greetings to the Iranian people.  Last year, the Nowruz message was of a desired engagement with the Islamic Republic; this year, there is criticism of the Tehran Government on top of the extended hand to Iran's public:

Over the course of the last year, it is the Iranian government that has chosen to isolate itself, and to choose a self-defeating focus on the past over a commitment to build a better future. Even as we continue to have differences with the Iranian government, we will sustain our commitment to a more hopeful future for the Iranian people.

We've just located the video and transcript and will be posting soon.

Iran Analysis: Ahmadinejad Fails in Qom? (Verde)

Mr Verde evaluates President Ahmadinejad's visit to the senior clerics of Qom on Thursday:

If the aim of the trip was to gain respectability and acceptability from the clergy in Qom, it looks like it failed.

None of the big-name and independent Grand Ayatollahs were mentioned as having met with Ahmadinejad individually. He saw three that are known to be close to the establishment (for example, Ayatollah Nouri-Hamedani was the only Grand Ayatollah who has congratulated Ahmadinejad’s “election” victory ,and he usually repeat the establishment's words). Many of Ayatollah Mesbah-Yazdi’s students are staunch supporters of Ahmadinejad, and it is reported that the President is a follower of Mesbah (there were rumours that Mesbah has issued a fatwa OKing the election fraud in June 2009).


So no surprises and insignificance there. Instead the story seems to be that all the other Grand Ayatollahs, and also importantly, the representative in Iran of Grand Ayatollah Sistani, the spiritual leader in Najaf in Iraq, have given Ahmadinejad the cold shoulder.

Recently Ahmadinejad has proposed funds for Qom seminary in the budget --- traditionally Shia clerics have relied on private non-state financial support. It seems that money has not helped his cause, however. Indeed, throwing money at Qom may be seen as an insult by the clergy.

As for the "most senior authorities" reported to have persuaded the senior clerics to accept a meeting, I would look all the way to the Supreme Leader. Ayatollah Khamenei backed Ahmadinejad to the point that he has staked his reputation on him, and the situation isn't exactly as promising as he was hoping in June.

If it was Khamenei who tried to persuade the Grand Ayatollahs to back the President, the outcome is bad news for him.

The Truth About Mr Obama's Thriving Missile Defense (Futter)

Andrew Futter, a doctoral researcher at the University of Birmingham, writes for EA:

If you listen to conservative defence commentators such as Frank Gaffney Jr., John R Bolton, or Baker Spring, you would be forgiven for thinking that the American effort to protect itself against the threat from ballistic missile attack has suffered a significant recalibration, relegation, and de-emphasis over the last year or so. Indeed even if you listen to much of the analysis from more liberal commentators, you would be excused from believing that at the very least that the US missile defence programme has been "rationalized" and is now more "prudent".

Perhaps this is even what the Obama administration, so hung up on the idea of change, wants us to think. But the reality, I would argue, is quite different. Under Obama the American quest for ballistic missile defence has continued, been strengthened, and looks set to remain at the forefront of US security and non-proliferation policy well into the future.


Much of the confusion over missile defence has been caused by a misunderstanding about Obama’s decision to cancel the Bush Administration’s "third site" plan for missile defence in Europe, and some of the blame for this must rest with the President himself. By focusing attention on the "cancellation" of the plan set for Poland and the Czech Republic, and by making the announcement on the 70th anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Poland, the real reasons for the change of plan, and indeed the specifics of what replaces it, have been largely overlooked (even to some extent by Russia).

A closer reading of the "Phased, Adaptive Approach" (PAA) to BMD in Europe reveals a plan which has the potential to be more comprehensive, to involve more assets, and to become active far quicker than anything entertained by the Bush administration. Although the assets which will begin being deployed in 2011 will focus on short-range missile threats to only a small part of Southeastern Europe, by 2020 the system will involve hundreds of interceptor missiles on land and at sea, and it will have the capacity to protect the whole of Europe and the US against an Iranian long-range missile threat. It is entirely conceivable therefore that the new plan will present a far greater impediment on the road to better and more fruitful relations with Russia, and a substantial commitment to a continuing US role in the defence of Europe.

A similarly close reading of the recently released Ballistic Missile Defense Review Report suggests that the PAA in Europe is destined to become the model for US BMD policy in other parts of the world, notably East Asia and the Greater Middle East, but also potentially in any region of the world w,here the missile threat necessitates. Perhaps most importantly this renewed focus on regional or "theatre" missile defences has occurred because the Obama administration feels that the 30 ground-based interceptor missiles already operational in the US are sufficient to combat the current rogue state long-range missile threat, and not instead of it.

The Review also highlights strengthening and expanding international cooperation on BMD as a fundamental goal of the Obama administration; to this end, significant amounts of money have been requested for joint BMD development programmes with NATO, Japan, and Israel amongst others. Perhaps even more revealing is the fact that the Review makes it clear that the Obama administration will strongly reject any Russian (or Chinese) proposals to link US BMD activities and expansion to arms control (START) or any other strategic discussions (Iran?).

All this suggests that under Obama the BMD programme is alive, well, and indeed thriving, and that there is much evidence suggesting that its importance will increase rather than decrease in the near future. In fact I would suggest we might entering a period --– especially considering the renewed drive and energy behind nuclear disarmament and abolition –-- where missile defences play a greater role in US extended deterrence in Europe, the Middle East and East Asia, replacing the ‘nuclear umbrella’ which has predominated for decades.

Less than eight years after the abrogation of the ABM Treaty, which prohibited strategic defences, and despite what seems to have become "conventional wisdom", it is quite conceivable that we are entering a period where missile defences have become an accepted, normalized and perhaps even integral component of both US and wider international security thinking. It is hard to see this abating.

Iran: Inside the Mind of the Interrogator

Rooz Online's interview with a purported interrogator of post-election detainees. If true, his statements are a revealing insight into the conceptions of those who support and serve the regime:

ROOZ: How were the individuals to be arrested selected and what was the arrest process?

INTERROGATOR:All the people who were arrested were influential in creating the turbulent atmosphere of the 10th Presidential election because of their history of activism. In effect, all the people who were arrested initially had a leadership role, either by making speeches, giving interviews, publishing articles, etc. Also, the country’s intelligence and security apparatus had information that some people were planning to use the election process as an excuse to create chaos and disturbance under the name of soft or color revolution, similar to what took place in several other countries.


* In general, one can say that prevention is a normal and ordinary process in all governments, for example we have prevention in the ministry of health, and prevention is also a serious issue in national security areas.

* There is a difference between those who were arrested in the first round and those that were detained subsequently. Those arrested in the first round had the role of provocation and guidance while the latter were merely the field activists. We believed that if we caught the first group, which was the planning and guide group, then the color revolution would not succeed in its goals. And this perception was correct to a certain point. We aimed at preventing focus and organization of the opposition.

* One characteristic of color revolutions is the presence of revolutionary agents inside the government….It is rare for a group to be both part of the government and oppose it by belonging to the outside opposition. In our case, these inside agents of the revolution were previously in the government and became the opposition after their exit. They had an additional goal, which was to say authoritarianism and dictatorship exists. Policy papers of the Iran Participation Front say that parts of the ruling establishment must be come democratic. This is criticism, not reform. In reality this is media charlatanism that is portrayed through lies.

* The confessions of detainees were not extracted under pressure. They use beautiful reasoning and their confession that there was no fraud [in the election] benefits the people and the regime.

* In either case, such people are either liked or hated by the public. If he is hated, whether he confesses or not becomes irrelevant, and in that case it is in the regime’s interest to arrest him. But if he is liked, then when he comes and says fraud was the basis of [his] operation, then this is in the regime’s interest, because these issues are very important for the grey layers of society because the most popular web blog in Iran belongs to him.

* [Reformist politician] Behzad Nabavi’s claim that the arrest warrants were issued on June 9 is a lie. The June 9 warrant was a general warrant issued by the judiciary to the security apparatus.

* I regard most of the arrests to have been right, because the detainees were somehow involved in the soft revolution through their speeches, accusations of dictatorship, etc. The Iranian judiciary was weak. Everyone who raises such issues must be prosecuted. If he can’t prove what he claims, then he must be punished according to law. Some other people should have been arrested too, but were not. So there must have been some prioritization about arrests based on their involvement in the soft revolution process. Members of Mosharekat [Islamic Iran Participation] Party are an example who were involved in an attempt to secularize the regime.

* The release of many people after February 11 is a wise decision as the events showed the world that the regime is in control of events. We also have Islamic mercy and thus give some leaves, and others may be pardoned, while still others must spend time behind bars.