The Latest from Iran (20 May): Back to Business

1955 GMT: Former Vice President Abtahi Attacked? Reformist and Green sites are circulating the claim of Mohammad Ali Abtahi, Vice President during the Khatami Government, that he was attacked by plainclothes militia today as he was attending a memorial service in the south of Tehran.

Abtahi wrote on his Facebook page that a vehicle suddenly blocked the route of his car, and he was attacked by motorcyclists with knives, cables, and tear gas. He reported, “I can say that I left the area with the broken glass and tear gas in a miraculous way. It was a very violent attage. No one came to help. They were very confident and dreaded nothing”.

Abtahi, who was detained for months after the June election and reportedly forced to make a public "confession", has published photos of the incident.

Iran Document: Simin Behbahani’s Poem for the Executed
Iran Videos: Former Diplomat Heidari Reveals the Regime
Iran’s Uranium: Why Can’t the US Take Yes for an Answer? (Parsi)
Iran’s Uranium: Washington “Can’t Afford to Look Ridiculous”, Makes Ridiculous Move (Emery)
Iran’s Uranium: US Shows a Middle Finger to Tehran…and Turkey and Brazil and… (Gary Sick)
Iran Document: Iranian Labour Unions “This is Not 1979″
The Latest from Iran (19 May): Fallout

1610 GMT: Film Corner. While two directors (Jafar Panahi and Mohammad Nourizad) are on hunger strike in Evin Prison, the film-meets-reality story of actress Kiana Firouz --- which EA featured on Tuesday --- continues:

A young Iranian actress named Kiana Firouz will attend the London premiere tonight of a film in which she plays a lesbian seeking asylum in Britain because the Iranian authorities are pursuing her. The Home Office rejects her application and sends her back to the Islamic republic, where homosexuality is a crime punishable by death.


Unfortunately for Kiana Firouz the film is not make-believe. It is based on her life. The Home Office has denied her asylum and she now faces the prospect of deportation to Iran followed by flogging, execution or both.

1400 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Kalemeh claims that journalist and filmmaker Mohammad Nourizad has been severely beaten by guards at Evin Prison. According to the website, Nourizad was taken from his cell by five security personnel and has suffered concussion and vision problems. He has now started a complete hunger strike in protest.

Nourizad was detained for writing letters to the Supreme Leader and the head of the judiciary, Sadegh Larijani, criticizing their approach to the post-election confrontation of protesters. He has been sentenced to 3 1/2 years in prison and 50 lashes.

1230 GMT: Larijani Takes a Side. Speaker of Parliament Ali Larijani has declared that the response of the US and "Western" countries to the Iran-Brazil-Turkey agreement "proved that they are not sincere in the [discussion of] a fuel swap" over Iran's uranium stocks.

The significance of the statement is more internal than external: some Larijani allies, like Ahmad Tavakoli, had criticised the Ahmadinejad Government for agreeing to let Iran's uranium go outside the country. The Western response allows Larijani to focus on the perfidy of foreigners rather than engaging in that internal debate.

1220 GMT: The Executions. We've posted a poem by Simin Behbahani for the five Iranians executed on 9 May.

0915 GMT: Not Kahrizak. Alireza Avaee, the Chief Officer for the Ministry of Justice, has announced that a "new" and "good" prison has opened near the Kahrizak facility, infamous for post-election abuses and killing of detainees.

0855 GMT: The Detained US Trio. Press TV is carrying the "breaking news" that the mothers of three detained US nationals, arrested when they walked across the Iran-Iraq border last summer, have met their children in a hotel in north Tehran.

0845 GMT: Beating the Oil Squeeze? An article in The Wall Street Journal claims that tankers of both Royal Dutch Shell and France's Total, who claim to have restricted activities in Iran, are secretly shipping Iranian oil.

0835 GMT: Today's All is Well Statement. Minister of Intelligence Heydar Moslehi puts out the assurance that security forces have managed to quell post-election disturbances: “Sedition has been brought to an end by suppression.”

Moslehi's accuracy in reporting may be judged by his subsequent statement that he had not been informed of the story that the head of Mir-Hossein Mousavi’s security had been arrested. And his political line may be ascertained by his insistence that an arrest warrant had been issued for Mehdi Hashemi, the son of Hashemi Rafsanjani, who will be detained upon entry into Iran.

0830 GMT: Clerical Warning. The "conservative" Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi has put out another unsubtle message for the Government and possibly the clerical regime: "if we have no mercy for the people, God will inflict political, cultural and social evils upon us".

0715 GMT: Corruption Watch. First Vice President Mohammad Reza Rahimi, who has been under pressure over alleged fraud and mismanagement, has issued a threat: the use of Government funds by some newspapers and websites must be stopped.

0710 GMT: Uranium Deal --- The Discussion Within. Member of Parliament Elias Naderan, who has led the campaign against the Ahmadinejad Government over "corruption", has given his support to Monday's Iran-Brazil-Turkey agreement. Naderan said, "A positive outcome would be paving the way for the cooperation of Iran and IAEA which makes the international situation a win-win scene for the Islamic Republic. It means that the deal both provides the necessary security and guarantees our rights in nuclear fuel swap, and provides the ground for international economic cooperation which has been blocked by the sanctions imposed."

0705 GMT: Sanctions. The New York Times is featuring briefings from American and European officials that a "passing" reference in the sanctions resolution, introduced to the UN Security Council on Tuesday, gives a legal basis in the future for choking off financial transactions between Iran and banking centers in Europe and elsewhere.

However, to get Russia and China to even accept the introduction of the resolution, the US had to give up any specific reference to Iran's central bank. Instead the American and European officials are saying that there will be a call for "extreme vigilance" in dealing with Bank Melli.

0700 GMT: A New Campaign and a Suggestion. Rah-e-Sabz reports that Green supporters have founded the "National Campaign of Mousavi's and Rahnavard's Children".

Ebrahim Nabavi, warning of rising pressure on the Green Movement, calls for the spread of information to the people, from outside and inside Iran and especially via the Internet.

0530 GMT: With just over three weeks before the anniversary of the 2009 Presidential election, a good time to let others fuss over sanctions and Tehran's uranium enrichment and to look inside Iran....

Reviewing the Election

Dissected News carried out a detailed dissection of the "official" Presidential results and of the political context before, around, and beyond them. It concludes:

Within even a few days of the election, the Green Movement had become bigger than the June election; it had become a referendum on the legitimacy of the Islamic Republic itself, and the place in the world occupied by the educated Iranian youth. It had become about human rights, freedom of speech, the rights of women, and establishing life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for a 21st century Iran.

And no rigging of an election can stop that.

And For This Year....


United for Iran carries the news that almost 40 cities have already scheduled events to mark 12 June (22 Khordad) and its significance for rights and justice.

Political Prisoner Watch

Alireza Ezzabad, a student at Allameh Tabatabei University, has been sentenced to one year and 74 lashes for participation in demonstrations.

Iran Document: Iranian Labour Unions "This is Not 1979"

Posted by News & Letters:

Recently, we were directed to an article in the March-April 2010 News & Letters, "Iranian workers enter the fray," by Raha, in which an isolated quote from one of our members was used to prove that a regressive repeat of the 1979 Islamic revolution was in store for Iran. The author claimed that NILU (the Network of Iranian Labor Unions) was set against advancing workers' independent interests because this would supposedly weaken the Green Movement's internal unity. Starting from this rather dubious premise, the author further claimed that there were clear parallels to be made between the present moment and 1979 when millions of people blindly fell into the trap that Muslim fundamentalists had set for them.

We are happy to inform the author and N&L readers that while there are many difficulties and perils attending the nascent democratic movement, a repeat of the Islamic Revolution is definitely not one of them.



First, unlike the earlier generation with its all-too-familiar revolutionary-romantic/Manichean notions, the new generation is both more sophisticated and more canny as to who its friends and enemies are and the magnitude of the problems. For example, you cannot find one single individual--out of several million Greeners--that is taken in by Mir-Hossein Mousavi's personality, magnetism, political infallibility or mystical powers. When he announced his candidacy last Spring, few had any idea who he really was. For many, a vote for Mousavi was a vote against the system and a vote of no confidence against the regime itself. Today, Mousavi enjoys widespread popularity because he has stood up to the dictatorship and hasn't caved in to the pressures and threats. His popularity would just as easily evaporate if he sells out to the system.

Secondly, the present movement is distinctly democratic in content and in its aims. While practically all the 1979 participants in one way or other called for some form of democracy, none wanted it for the other groups in the struggle. That is decidedly not the case today. Decades of living under dictatorial rule by clerics has taught everyone important lessons in civic responsibility and tolerance. Even structurally, the Green Movement is made up of a vast number of small cells of like-minded people with lots of horizontal ties and few vertical ones.

Thirdly, unlike the violence-prone 1979 revolutionaries, present-day Greeners show a remarkable antipathy towards indiscriminate and mindless violence. In fact, this could be said to be the closest to civil non-violent struggle in memory. We welcome this development as a new form of struggle for social and political empowerment for the third world and beyond (see: Frontline, "A Winning Strategy" at pbs.org). The South African model--where regime henchmen were given blanket clemency--is all the more critical for us because for millions of our devout fellow citizens, support for the regime is unfortunately equated with maintaining faith in God and the prophet.

Finally, this brings us to the contention that our group is for subordinating workers' rights to some nebulous larger aims. What NILU member Homayoun Pourzad was saying in that interview was not that workers should put on hold the promotion of their class interests or that women and young people should not advance their interests. Any cursory glance at our English-language website, Iran Labor Report, would show that we are doing exactly opposite of what the N&L author wrote we are doing or saying. (The same could be said of Zahra Rahnavard, also treated unfairly by the author.) In fact, we are helping with organizing the unorganized at great risk to our security and safety.

What Pourzad said in the interview was that differences among the various Green Movement contingents should not be allowed to aid the enemy to the detriment of the movement. Our movement is still rather weak while the enemy is ruthless, powerful and extremely cunning. What makes them even more dangerous is the special combination of religion and right-wing politics which they excel at exploiting with devastating results. For instance, there are currently over 40,000 volunteers signed up for suicide missions in Iran. In 2005-2006, the mighty U.S. Army was almost brought to its knees in Iraq by less than 1,000 suicide mission volunteers.

The analogy is not unlike the Weimar Republic before Hitler's rise to power. Had the liberals, socialists and communists united against Hitler, instead of attacking one another, the Nazis would probably not have been able to capture power in 1933 or even later. We are at a historic juncture which we could ill afford to miss. Any move that makes us weaker must be avoided. Class, gender and ethnic differences must be respected and articulated comradely and amicably. This was and remains the gist of our position.

The Network of Iranian Labor Unions
April 17, 2010

Iran Analysis: The Contest at Home Over (and Beyond) the Uranium Agreement (Zahra)

Our newest correspondent, Ms Zahra, assesses the impact of yesterday's Iran-Brazil-Turkey uranium agreement on Iran's internal situation:

President Ahmadinejad has already declared himself as victorious, which is true, because he managed to convince his opponents within the Iranian system that an agreement --- even one allowing uranium to leave Tehran for a swap --- should be reached. Surely he will now present himself as the big saviour of Iran from more sanctions.

All of this occurring on a high-profile platform in Tehran is a bonus to mobilise the Ahmadinejad supporters. The photograph says it all:



However, there are also political talking points for the opposition. They can argue that Ahmadinejad has given in to superpowers, especially the US, and has had to accept their conditions, This is not a shining example of national sovereignty. Even worse, the Islamic Republic may become more vulnerable vis-a-vis Israel.

Ahmadinejad's critics can also claim that the agreement could have been signed six months ago. An unnecessary waste of time has led to more sanctions. Far from appearing strong in this crisis, the President has been weak and has failed to withstand foreign pressures.

But here's the internal dimension beyond the nuclear. If this agreement is still valid within a week, it will have far from the domestic impact that Ahmadinejad desires. Iranians are more concerned about high prices, lack of fuel and gas, unemployment, and the overall security atmosphere.

After one or two weeks of big noise --- ta da! --- the situation will be the same or even worse. The subsidy reduction plan is ill-prepared, hundreds of protesters are still imprisoned, investment is at its lowest level in years, shaky oil prices and a squeeze on oil exports may worsen the budget deficit, which will not be covered with revenues of the privatisation of state companies often diverting to the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps and its interests.

As for future developments, there are again two possible scenarios:

The Government will hope that the aversion of crisis and an impression of Iran's strengthened position in international affairs, accompanied by peace and harmony, will bolster public opinion. Human rights? That's just an internal issue.

The opposition will contest that the nuclear deal has only masked the country's real problems. Now that this problem is solved, Western states can put more pressure on Tehran over human rights, possible by setting this as a requirement for extended trade. This time around, big companies will find it difficult to reinvest because of activists accusing them of cooperation with murderers and abusers.

And it will note: if this Government will retreat under pressure in the secondary arena of the international, what might happen if it again faces that pressure on the primary stage of the domestic?

UPDATED Iran Special: Executions, Politics, and the Attack on Nazila Fathi and The New York Times

UPDATE 14 MAY, 0640 GMT: The authors of Race for Iran have posted an attempted rebuttal of this column. As it is largely a misrepresentation of my analysis and a continuing assault on Nazila Fathi, I will not post a detailed response. There is no value in continued conversation with or even recognition of those who are void of information and deaf on ethics and morality.

I will note, however, how the authors met this challenge that I set on Wednesday: "1. Make their own critique of the material surrounding this case of the 5 executed Iranians and present that critique; 2. Alternatively, acknowledge that they have no concern with human rights, justice, and fairness within the Iranian system; 3. If they do so, disclaim any ability to assess the legitimacy of the Iranian Government since they are not concerned with issues — human rights, justice, fairness — which may affect the legitimacy of that Government in the eyes of the Iranian people."

The authors make no attempt to meet the first test, but they do tacitly accwept the second and third challenges: "[Race for Iran] is not focused on human rights; it is focused on Iran and its geopolitics."

UPDATE 14 MAY, 0630 GMT: The Iranian newspaper Kayhan has portrayed Sunday’s executions of “terrorists” as a test of “leaders of recent plots”. However, it regrets that those leaders refuse to “retreat” and “repent”.” (see today's updates).

I look forward to Race for Iran's denunciation of Kayhan, given its linkage of the executions and Government pressure on opposition leaders, for its "pro-Green bias".

The Latest from Iran (14 May): The Meaning of the Strike?

---
Let us assume, as their defenders claim, that the recent attack by the authors of Race on Iran on the reporting of Nazila Fathi was motivated solely by a concern over misleading journalism, with unsubstantiated links and unsupported claims. Let us assume that there was no wider motive of wiping away objections so "official justifications" for the execution of five Iranians could remain standing or of discrediting any attempt --- by labelling any critique as "pro-Green" --- to consider the legal and political context of the executions.


Let us assume that --- in contrast to the authors' claim of The New York Times' "agenda-driven, threat-hyping approach" and Fathi's "misleading reporting driven by an inflammatory agenda" --- Race for Iran has no agenda and no wish to hype any Government or institution.

Let us consider Race for Iran's narrow allegations:

1. Fathi has no basis for the link in the following paragraph:

"The Iranian government hanged five Kurdish activists, including a woman, on Sunday morning in the Evin prison in Tehran in what appeared to be an effort to intimidate protesters from marking the anniversary of last year’s huge anti-government rallies after the June 12 election."

The background to Fathi's story is that, two weeks before anticipated demonstrations on 22 Bahman (11 February), Mohammad Reza Ali Zamani and Arash Rahmanipour were executed. Many activists at the time saw this as an effort to intimidate the opposition, for Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, the head of the Guardian Council, had stated in Friday Prayers:

God ordered the prophet Muhammad to brutally slay hypocrites and ill-intentioned people who stuck to their convictions. Koran insistently orders such deaths. May God not forgive anyone showing leniency toward the corrupt on earth.

Fathi does not cite this background. Instead, she cites Hadi Ghaemi of the International Committee for Human Rights in Iran, who no doubt is aware of this background when he stated, “The executions show that this government resorts to any kind of terror and violence to put down any challenge to its authority.”

Now Race for Iran could have done its own research. They could have considered the background, they could have checked out not only ICHRI's release on the executions but their significant collection of material on cases leading up to those executing and considering Ghaemi's claim of numerous sources amongst "Iranian civil society analysts and activists", they could have even taken a look at the case, dating back to detentions in 2006.

They do none of this. They have no sources beyond the reference to "official justifications" (without actually considering those justifications). They have no context --- political or legal --- for their case.

(Consider how this failure to provide any information beyond the attack on Fathi undermines Race for Iran's limited analysis: "The New York-based human rights activist opines that [the hangings] could lay the ground for the execution of post-election protesters'. But, Ms. Fathi herself reports that the five people executed on Sunday were sentenced in 2008—well before the June 12, 2009 presidential election."

The salient point is that, having been detained for 2-4 years, the five prisoners were suddenly rushed on Saturday night towards execution with no legal process and no notice to lawyers or families. Thus, the question, "Why Now?" The possible --- possible, not confirmed --- answer is that there was a political motive, in the context of current and forthcoming events and developments, for public executions.)

However, that is immaterial for the authors, for they have a wider aim beyond any detailed examination of the case: "Ms. Fathi seems to have been intent on using the story of Sunday’s executions to 'keep hope alive' for a revival of the moribund Green Movement".

Now the authors, who have loudly criticised Fathi's unsubstantiated claims, have no evidence for their own. They have no confirmation of Fathi's political views. They have no evidence of her connections to the Green Movement. They have no proof that the story is being disseminated amongst Iranian activists, inside and outside the country, to whip up demonstrations on 12 June.

But proof, let alone journalistic enquiry or analytic rigour, is not their aim. Instead, they wish to establish guilt by assertion: Fathi and The New York Times have a "pro-Green political agenda".

Which means, of course, that the authors can dismiss any article in The New York Times which they do not like --- without having to resort to evidence or context or analysis --- as politically biased.

(Declaration: I write this wearing the badge, when I have been named by Race for Iran, not of professor, academic, or journalist but of "Green Movement partisan".)

2. Fathi is guilty of significant omission when she calls the Kurdish separatist movement PJAK an "armed Kurdish rebel group" and does not mention that it was designated as a terrorist organisation by the US Government in 2009.

Point taken. But if we are going to talk journalism and omissions, consider this omission from Race for Iran's critique.

Here is how the authors deal with the perhaps significant point that the four defendants accused of PJAK membership (the fifth was accused of connections with a monarchist group): "Ms. Fathi...notes that all five denied the charges of which they were convicted “in public letters posted on Web sites'. (She links to the website of the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran to document this claim, but the link takes a reader to a page briefly describing such a letter from only one of the five prisoners.)"

Now the authors could have examined this. They could easily have found letters from at least three of the defendants. They could have cited the testimony of the lawyer for three of the defendants because it was in the ICHRI document that they mention. They could have considered reports on the case by Fereshteh Ghazi, Rooz Online, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Human Rights Activists News Agency, Rah-e-Sabz, Kalemeh, and other outlets.

They did not none of this because, in my opinion, the fundamental issue of whether the defendants were actually members of PJAK was at best tangential to them. Instead, they want to dismantle the (pro-Green) "preferred narrative" with the possibility that "individuals convicted of terrorist crimes in Iran are members of a group that the U.S. government has designated as a terrorist organization".

So, yes, Fathi could have mentioned that PJAK is proscribed as "terrorist" by the US Government. What Race for Iran wants, however, is much more: they want that to be the dominant statement, not just part of the context. The real question here is not of omission but of priority --- does one, in reporting and analysis, privilege the political issue raised by Race for Iran or the legal and human rights issue raised by the PJAK claim in the trials and executions?

----

Nazila Fathi is not immune from criticism. No journalist should be. On occasion EA has challenged her reporting in these post-election months.

Nor should an author, simply because he/she takes a political position, be denied the legitimacy of critiquing a report. Race for Iran has its opinions;I have mine.

However, when that criticism is made, it should be done fairly, not only through a judicious reading of the journalism but by bringing other evidence and context to the table. In this case, Fathi's original article and analysis is based on two named sources, citation of an opposition website, and background material based on a range of unnamed sources.

Race for Iran's response is based on "official justifications" and precisely 0 sources, named or unnamed.

(Race for Iran has offered no comment on Fathi's follow-up article this week, considering the treatment of the families of the executed and the refusal to release the bodies of the prisoners, and its analysis, "The government’s refusal to hand over the bodies to the families appears to stem from a fear of antigovernment demonstrations during burial ceremonies in Kurdish areas.")

And when that criticism is made, it is not enough to deride the supposed "agenda" of one's target. One's own agenda and sources should be declared. If the authors of Race for Iran wish to turn Fathi's sources into her supposed membership of the Green Movement, then let us know the sources behind Race for Iran's commentary.  If the authors want to dismiss Fathi and The New York Times as "pro-Green", then --- in the context of this attack --- let us see the declaration that the authors are "pro-Iran Government", having defended the legitimacy of that Government since the June 2009 elections. Let us see the authors' declaration that, by tearing down Fathi and The New York Times, they may be bolstering the supposed legitimacy --- which has been questioned on issues such as justice, human rights, and fairness --- of that Government.

A final point: Race for Iran's last assault is to link Fathi to The New York Times' reporting, notably by Michael Gordon and Judith Miller, in the run-up to the 2003 Iraq War. I presume that is to make the connection that, as The Times prepared a false rationale for the invasion of Iraq, so its reporters with their "pro-Green" agenda are preparing a false rationale for the attempt to topple the Iranian Government.

Nazila Fathi is not Judith Miller. She did not report from Washington or New York in 2009; she reported from Tehran. She did so, even as journalists were being monitored, pressured, and in many cases detained (coincidentally, Maziar Bahari, detained from June to October 2009, wrote a powerful comment on the executions this week; Race for Iran seems to have missed this further example of "pro-Green" journalism). Fathi, as the post-election conflict, violence, and arrests escalated, continued to put out her reports. Finally, in summer 2009, she had to leave Iran.

This week, as other major "Western" outlets ignored the executions, simply repeated the account given by the Islamic Republic News Agency, or made glaring errors ("five demonstrators were killed"), Fathi considered the story in two articles.

Nazila Fathi is not Judith Miller. Her sources are not Ahmad Chalabi. And Iran 2009-2010, contrary to Race for Iran's attempted link, is not Iraq 2001-2003.

Iran 2009-2010 is Iran 2009-2010. And, rather than attacking any journalist who reports on Iran 2009-2010, simply because they do not like the news or the interpretation, it is high time that the authors of Race for Iran pursued journalism in addition to their political mission.

The Latest from Iran (13 May): Justice, Legitimacy, and a Strike in Kurdistan

2015 GMT: Kurdistan. ADN Kronos summarises, "Many shops, markets and public offices were closed in Kurdistan's main cities of Sanandaj, Saqqez, Kamiaran and Marivan. Most school and university students stayed away from school, according to the CyrusNews opposition website.

In Kamiaran, protesters gathered outside the home of Farzad Kamangar, one of five political prisoners executed on Sunday in Tehran's Evin prison."

2000 GMT: Iran and Iraq Troops Clash. From Agence France Presse:

Iraqi border guards exchanged fire with Iranian troops along the two countries' border on Thursday....

An Iraqi officer was captured by the Islamic Republic's forces in the 90-minute gunfight on the border with Iraq's autonomous Kurdish region, which was apparently sparked when Iranian troops mistook Iraqi soldiers for a Kurdish rebel group.

"Iranian forces thought that the border guards belonged to PJAK (the Party of Free Life of Kurdistan -- an Iranian Kurdish rebel group) and started to open fire," Brigadier General Ahmed Gharib Diskara, the head of Iraq's border guards in Sulaimaniyah province, told reporters.

"The border guards shot back and one officer of the Iraqi army has been captured. Negotiations are ongoing to free him."

NEW Latest Iran Video: Strike in Kurdistan (13 May)
NEW Iran Special: Executions, Politics, and the Attack on Nazila Fathi and The New York Times
NEW Iran Transcript: Mousavi “Do Iranian Mothers Have Rights?” (12 May)
NEW Iran Document: A Letter from Majid Tavakoli About the Executed (11 May)
Iran Update: The Aftermath of the Executions
Iran Document: Maziar Bahari’s Response to His 13-Year (and 74-Lash) Sentence
Iran Special: A Renewal of Protest for 12 June?
The Latest from Iran (12 May): Defending the Indefencible

1945 GMT: Kurdistan. Report --- Ajlal Aghvami, the spokesman of the Kurdistan Human Rights Organization, has been arrested in Sanandaj.


1540 GMT: Last Words from the Executed? Peyke Iran has posted what it claims is the last statement of Mehdi Eslamian, executed on Sunday, and footage from inside Gohardahst Prison in Karaj.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rv92USld_rY&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]

1535 GMT: Investigation Complete? Mohammad Hassan Abutorabi-Fard, the Deputy Speaker of Parliament, has claimed that a report has been completed on last June's attack on Tehran University dormitories. Reformist members of Parliament had claimed that the supposed enquiry into the events had been set aside.

1525 GMT: Meanwhile...Where's Mahmoud? Khabar Online has pictures of President Ahmadinejad's visit to Yasuj in southwestern Iran, including a poster, "Sir, where is the gas you promised to the village of Kalous?"

And the President's message? "Be sure, Iran's next government will be 10 times more revolutionary....People all over the world, even USA and Europe, are disappointed by their leaders:their only hope is Iran! We should prepare the world for the arrival of the Mahdi."
1515 GMT: Kurdistan (Containing the Students). In addition to the 15 Kurdish student activists reportedly arrested in Marivan (five names have been published), Peyke Iran claims seven Kurdish students have been summoned to Evin court.

1500 GMT: The Kurdistan Strike. We are now featuring videos apparently showing widespread closure of shops and empty streets in cities in Iranian Kurdistan.

The strike was called for by the Kurdish Communist Party, the Democratic Party of Kurdistan, and Komeleh, including its Socialist branch.

BBC Persian have now posted a brief item on the events.

1455 GMT: A Rights-First Approach. Writing in The Washington Post, Roxana Saberi, who was detained in Iran from late January until early April 2009, begins with this story:

I received an e-mail from a human rights campaigner in Tehran who knew one of them, asking me to spread the word about the hangings. "We are truly helpless," she wrote, "and we feel lost."

Saberi argues:

As the international community focuses on Iran's nuclear program, it should also make human rights a first-tier issue. When the U.N. Human Rights Council meets in Geneva next month, Washington and the European Union should lead calls for a resolution setting up a mechanism to investigate human rights atrocities in Iran during the past year. A bigger push should be made to send a U.N. special envoy on human rights to Iran and to aid Iranians, including the many journalists forced to flee their country out of fear of persecution.

But perhaps even more important than government efforts is the outcry of ordinary people worldwide. When everyday citizens speak out against Iran's human rights violations, Tehran has a tougher time asserting that their calls have been masterminded by foreign governments.

1045 GMT: Kurdistan. An EA correspondent writes:

The point worth noting is the discipline and strong support evidently commanded by the Democratic Party within the population. The appeal for the strike was made over Kurdish satellite TV, and in contrast to the response of Iranian counterparts to calls for national strikes, the people of Sanandaj were immediately receptive. The photos have prompted congratulatory messages from people in Tehran, who commented on the efficacy of strike action in Iranian Kurdistan, as opposed to getting anything done elsewhere in the country.

1040 GMT: The Oil Squeeze. Financial Times Deutschland reports that Iran is having problems finding buyers for its oil, with supplies sitting on tankers.

1035 GMT: Kurdistan. Peyke Iran is claiming a heavy security presence and authorities' pressure on shopkeepers to reopen their shops in Sanandaj. The website claims that
two protesters were shot and injured in Sanandaj and that there have been clashes. Most Kurdish pupils and students reportedly did not show up at classes today.

1020 GMT: Streets are reportedly deserted in Sanandaj, Iranian Kurdistan's largest city.


1000 GMT: The Strike in Kurdistan. For three days, I have been following Internet chatter that there would be a general strike in Iranian Kurdistan, protesting the executions. However, as I could not hard evidence, apart from a statement from a Kurdish Communist Party (apologies to readers if I missed information), I held back on reporting.

Now, however, photos have emerged indicating that some shops are closed today. There are also claimed photos of clashes; we are trying to confirm.





0945 GMT: Apologies for limited updates. I have been occupied with writing an analysis, "Executions, Politics, and the Attack on Nazila Fathi and The New York Times".


0700 GMT: The Executions --- The Official Account. Yesterday we posted, without comment or criticism, Fars News' "further update" on Sunday's execution of five Iranians. This was based on the official statement of the public relations office of Tehran’s General and Revolutionary Public Prosecutor’s Office.

Having allowed time for readers to consider that account, we now have the queries of an EA correspondent over the failure to establish a justification for the executions, offer a credible defense that due process was indeed followed, or explain the timing:

1. Only four of the five are identified as members of the Kurdish separatist movement PJAK. One defendant was executed for a bombing in Shiraz although no claim is made that he was involved in the bombing and no evidence is offered that he knew about the intent to bomb before the operation. It is stated, based on the accused's confession, that he learned about the bombing after he became suspicious of a friend and persuaded that friend to admit that he was involved in the bombing. He then helped the friend flee.

2. The cases of two of the executed were never sent to the Supreme Court for final decision. The executions were performed with mere confirmation of the Appeals Court.

3. The Supreme Court decision to confirm the execution order of the other three was apparently rendered on 1 March 2009 after an Appeals Court decision that was rendered in February 2008. The delay in executions until May 2010 is not explained.

4. The evidence given in the statement regarding the PJAK membership of four accused is at best circumstantial.

The evidence given for Farzad Kamangar's membership in PJAK is that his brother was active in "party activities" in Sulaymanieh and has a "conviction record" for involvement with the PKK, the Kurdish movement active across Iran, Iran, and Iraq. The statement does not say if the record is in Iran, Iraq, or Turkey and does not explain why this blood relationship is significant in relation to alleged crimes.

The other evidence given for Kamangar's membership are the words of the other two executed men --- one of whom himself is alleged to be PJAK because of a coded note and PJAK booklet found in his house --- that they knew Kamangar, lived in the same neighborhood, and forged documents for him. They do not accuse Kamangar of being a member of PJAK and the statement does not say that they themselves admitted being members of PJAK.

If the Prosecutor's statement is accepted at face value, Kamangar was never involved in the actual bombing. Allegedly an explosive timer was found in his house and he was also accused of fabricating documents for two people, who intended to put together material for explosives found by police in a car.

0620 GMT: The Oil Squeeze. Kalemeh reports on the significant number of foreign companies who have suspended development of the South Pars and Assalouyieh oil and gas fields.

In recent weeks Iranian officials have issued "ultimata" to Royal Dutch Shell and Spain's Repsol to resume development or face eviction from Iran.

0615 GMT: The Executions. The Iranian Writers' Association has condemned the hanging of five Iranians on Sunday: "There are no words which could describe this bloodshed and bloodthirst"

0520 GMT: We begin this morning with two features. We have posted a letter from student activist Majid Tavakoli, detained in Evin Prison since 7 December, about three of the Iranians executed on Sunday. And we have put up the English translation of Mir Hossein Mousavi's wide-ranging comments on Tuesday about the Green Movement and the legitimacy of an unjust Government, "Do Iranian Mothers Have Rights?"