Iran's President Election: Mousavi Makes His (Economic) Challenge

Chris Emery, who has kept Enduring America on top of the Iranian presidential election, offers a latest observation which suggest there might be a heated contest:

With Iranian voters going to the ballot box in less than three weeks, Mir-Hossein Mousavi, the candidate most likely to challenge President Ahmadinejad, has this month stepped up his campaign. With vital television debates beginning next week, in which the economy is likely to feature strongly as an issue, Mousavi's team published details of its economic plans over the weekend.

Mousavi’s manifesto has reportedly drawn on the analysis of 150 economists and is undeniably ambitious. The document calls for transparency on oil contracts, an increase in aid to boost and diversify production, and an economy that encourages “ethics and morality”. Iran’s dependence on oil revenue will be reduced through a shift to an industrial Ieconomy.

Mousavi places Iran’s nuclear energy programme at the centre of this effort. However, he also recognises that an overly provocative pursuit of nuclear energy will do little to advance the role of the private sector, which is another cornerstone of his economic strategy.

Indeed, there is a clear geo-political emphasis in Mousavi’s support for the liberalisation and diversification of Iran’s economy. In contrast to Ahmadinjad’s inflammatory anti-Israel rhetoric and his boasting of Iran’s regional power, Mousavi suggests that a stronger and more diverse national economy would offer Iran more influence as the region addresses its problems.

Yet, while the economy is likely to be the defining aspect of this campaign, Mousavi's challenge also shows the importance of political associations, in particular aligning oneself with political icons.

Mousavi’s choices don’t get much more iconic. By placing himself alongside Mohammed Mossedeq, the nationalist prime minister ousted by a CIA plot in 1953, Mousavi asserts his own belief not only in a strong national economy but in an economy linked to greater national autonomy and involvement in the region.

Mousavi's close personal relationship with former president Khatami cements his support from the young and takes advantages of Khatami’s large organisational network. This was seen earlier in the month during a rally Khatami organised to support Mousavi. Video footage shows a young audience, donned in Mousavi’s campaigning colours of green, shown videos of Mossedeq.

Also highly visible in the video is Mousavi’s wife, Zahra Rahnavard. Whilst candidates’ wives have become important campaigners for Western politicians, it is extremely rare in Iranian politics. President Ahmadinejad has been notoriously guarded about his own wife and children, who are almost never seen in public. In contrast, Rahnavard, a former university chancellor and supporter of women’s rights, has appeared at most of her husband’s campaign events.

The third iconic figure with which Mousavi has closely associated himself is the founder of the Revolution, Ayatollah Khomeini. Mousavi, who needs to appeal to moderate conservative elements if he is to win, has emphasised his close relationship with Khomeini, who was his chief political sponsor during the 1980s. After visiting the house in which Khomeini was born earlier this month Musavi stated, "We have to return to Imam Khomeini's values if we want justice and freedom in Iran."

Mousavi knows that a high turnout is vital for his victory. His sparring with Ahmadinejad during the television debates will be watched by millions, but it is his organisational machine which would deliver his success. Access to the reformist campaigning infrastructure which delivered Khatami two consecutive victories is crucial, but this will have to be complemented by a much broader appeal. It will a frantic run-in to the 12 June election.

Gaza: Israel's Destruction of Agricultural Land Continues

On 4 May, Israeli troops set fire to Palestinian crops along Gaza’s eastern border with Israel. According to the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights, 200,000 square meters of crops were destroyed. Wheats, barleys, vegetables, and the olive and pomegranate trees of local farmers were wiped out.

Why?

Was this a continuation of the war of Operation Cast Lead in December-January, punishing Gazans so would they give up support of Hamas? Is it part of a broader political plan to make Gazans suffer, rendering this more dependent to the West Bank economy which is to be improved with Israeli investment in cooperation with Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas?

This is not the first time Israeli forces have carried out this type of operation. The report of the fact-finding Committee, supported by the Arab Human Rights Commission, documented the destruction of Gazan agricultural lands by the Israeli Defense F:orces. Amongst the findings:

The Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, Mr. Olivier De Schutter (Belgium), reported, "An estimated 80 percent of agricultural land and crops has been damaged during recent hostilities, as evidenced by 395 impact craters resulting from shelling. Arable land has been contaminated by spills of sewage and toxic munitions."

The Palestinian National Early Recovery and Reconstruction Plan for Gaza reported that the agricultural sector was damaged extensively during the conflict. A preliminary damage assessment estimated the direct losses at more than $180 million.

Human rights commssions have reported that, following the bombardment of an agricultural area, cows which ate grass from the area shortly after the attack died.

It is hard to imagine the extent of the damage --- economic, political, and psychological --- in cold numbers. So perhaps the testimony of Safadi, a local farmer in the Gaza Strip, brings home the impact:

The Israeli soldiers fired from their jeeps, causing a fire to break out on the land. They burned the wheat, burned the pomegranate trees ... The fire spread across the valley. We called the fire brigades. They came to the area and put out the fire. But in some places the fire started again.

According to Safadi, he lost 30,000 square meters in the blaze, including 300 pomegranate trees, 150 olive trees, and wheat.

As for Israel's political aims, it is unknown what position Safadi holds, or has ever held, on the legimitacy of Hamas.

George W. Bush: Iraq Was a Biblical War Against Gog and Magog

In 2003, just before the Iraq War, former President George W. Bush tried once more to get the support of France. His approach to French President Jacques Chirac was straightforward, drawing on thousands of years of history and on higher authority: "This confrontation is willed by God, who wants to use this conflict to erase his people's enemies before a New Age begins." This, he added, was the "holy" war in the Middle East, predicted in the Bible, against Gog and Magog.

For you heathen out there, Gog and Magog are first mentioned in the Old Testament books of Genesis and Ezekiel, prophesied to come out of the north to attack Israel. They make their big appearance in Revelations, Chapter 20, Verse 7-9, as the Devil's commanders in the final battle of Good and Evil:

7 - And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,
8 - And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.
9 - And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.

Some evangelists believe that Arab nations, supported by others, have to attack Israel in The Apocalypse for Gog and Magog, the enemies of Israel, to return and be defeated before the return of Jesus Christ to Earth.

More importantly, some people in very important political positions believe this. Chirac's advisors, according to a 2007 article in the university review Allez Savoir and now Chirac's memoirs, were concerned enough to ask the advice of Thomas Romer, a professor of theology at the University of Lausanne.

And it was not the only time Bush held up his wars as a religious duty. In June 2003, he told the Palestinian foreign minister that he was on "a mission from God" in launching the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan and was receiving commands from the Lord. About the same time, US military officers were adding Biblical quotes to the cover slides of intelligence reports from Iraq.

This is not to deny that there were other reasons for the US wars from 2001 to 2009, and of course the conflict in Afghanistan and Pakistan, irrespective of Gog and Magog, is still going strong. Still, rest assured that America's wars --- of Earthly or Biblical necessity --- were overseen by a "true believer" in the Bush years.

The Implications of the Unmanned Aerial Vehicles Sales between Moscow and Tel Aviv

Here's an international military manoeuvre to de-cipher: according to the Jerusalem Post, Israel is planning to expedite production of unmanned aerial vehicles for Russia.

There are two starting points for an analysis. In summer 2008, when Russia was at war with Georgia, Amos Gilad, the head of the Israeli Defense Ministry’s Diplomatic-Security Bureau, visited Moscow and took away the guarantee that Russia would not sell the S300 defensive missile system to Iran. And only last week, Russia announced that it had decided to halt the sale of advanced MIG-31 fighter jets to Syria.

Contrary to a long-standing assumption, it appears that Moscow has not had significant leverage over Tehran’s nuclear enrichment. This may be partly because of Iran halted its nuclear weapons design and weaponization activities in fall 2003, as the latest CIA report reiterates.

Thus, Russia has to find other bargaining chips in the Middle Eastern game. And it need not worry --- even without a nuclear weapons programme, Iran has enough conventional weapons initiatives for either pretext or genuine fear, and there are other countries such as Syria who will have to be kept in their proper military place.

Turkey: Manoeuvring Against Israel Over Palestine

Last Friday, Istanbul hosted the International Conference on Palestinian Solidarity. Amongst those present were the International Union for Muslim Scholars run by Yusuf Al-Kardavi, many members of Parliament and the Turkish Assembly, and the Palestine Friendship Group.

Journalists who focused on the separate seating of men and women at the meeting missed these important developments:

One of the MPs of the ruling Justice and Development Party, Zeyid Arslan, who is also the Chairman of the TBMM-Palestine Friendship Group, said, ‘As long as Hamas, which came to power through its people, is not seen as the representative of its people but as a terrorist group, solution of the Palestinian question is impossible.’ Indeed, he went further and accused Israel of committing genocide against Palestinians: “Everyone who is silent over Israel’s committing genocide is going to pay the price before history.”

So three years after the leader of the JDP, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan met Hamas political director, Khalied Meshaal, this is important because after Erdogan-Mashal meeting in 2006 and four months after Erdogan’s walk-out on Israeli President Shimon Peres at the Davos summit, the Justice and Development Party is still standing against Israel's line on Palestine and Hamas..

Other political leaders joined in. Yusuf Al-Kardavi called on Muslims to boycott American and Israeli goods. Raid Salah, head of the Islamic Movement, said: “We are going to maintain our struggle until we form the Palestinian state and declare Jerusalem as its capital.” Emanuel Musellem, head of the Catholic Church in Palestine, joined via teleconference to blame Israel for pressing of Muslims and Christians into a "Jewish" existence.

Thus, the political dance --- hastened by Israel's invasion --- continues. Is Turkey, led by Erdogan, prepared to step away from Israel or, given its long-term strategic links, will it continue to discreetly hold Tel Aviv's hand?