The Latest from Iran (22 May): Karroubi's Letter, University Protests

1810 GMT: University Protest. Video has emerged claiming to be of a protest on Thursday at Bani Akram University in Tabriz.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jc4Wc0JSzOc[/youtube]

1530 GMT: University Protest. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty reports, from an unnamed student source, "Basij forces at the university attacked protesting students and injured several of them....Students were chanting 'Death to the Dictator' and 'Ya Hossein, Mir Hossein'."

NEW Iran Nuke Analysis: Reading the US-Turkey Discussions
Iran Analysis: Four Perspectives on the Uranium-Sanctions Dance
The Latest from Iran (21 May): Friday Rest?

1515 GMT: University Protest. Reports are coming through of a demonstration at Azad University in Tehran today, with "several hundred" chanting against the continued detention of fellow students. Human Rights Activists News Agency claims there was a heavy security presence, with possible arrests. The claimed video:


[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vC8K-kjAzQ[/youtube]

1110 GMT: Karroubi's Letter. The Associated Press has picked up on Mehdi Karroubi's latest intervention, in a letter to Ayatollah Mousavi Ardebili (see 0645 GMT):

The judiciary, which...is required under the constitution to defend constitutional freedoms of the citizens, has become an instrument in the hands of the ruling system and security and military agencies. Instead of providing security to the people, the judiciary has turned to intimidation and imprisonment....

The present head of government [Mahmoud Ahmadinejad], with his strange behavior, has humiliated the Iranian nation.

0855 GMT: Sanctions Deals? In a separate entry, Ali Yenidunya looks at the tension in US-Turkish relations around this week's Iran-Turkey-Brazil agreement on the process for uranium enrichment talks.

Looks like Washington may have avoided such tensions with Moscow, however, over the path to sanctions on Tehran: on Friday, the US Government lifted any punishment of three Russian entities implicated in efforts to aid Iran's nuclear weapons and missile programmes.

0845 GMT: Rafsanjani Watch (cont.). The "hardline" journalist Fatemeh Rajabi has pronounced that Hashemi Rafsanjani's interpretation of Islamic rule is like "the time of the Shah".

0810 GMT: Economy Watch. This may be the most revealing statement in some time on the challenges to Iran's government. General Hassan Firouzabadi, who is a well-known economic expert as the head of Iran's armed forces, issued this declaration when he introduced Tehran Friday Prayers: "Reformists are responsible for the people's economic problems."

0750 GMT: Noticing. A burst of attention in the US media to internal affairs in Iran. William Yon and Michael Slackman write in The New York Times, "As Iran approaches the first anniversary of a contested presidential election that touched off a deep political crisis, opposition supporters remain under intense pressure, with student leaders [Bahareh Hedayat and  Milan Asadi] receiving long prison terms and a prominent opposition politician [Mohammad Ali Abtahi] and a filmmaker being attacked."

(I leave it for readers to consider whether the recent attack by the authors of Race for Iran on Nazila Fathi of the Times has actually spurred the newspaper to maintain its focus on the Government pressure before the 12 June anniversary.)

The Los Angeles Times picks up on the "bad hijab" campaign. It adds to our review of Ayatollah Jannati's Friday Prayer sermon in Tehran and then turns to Ayatollah Ahmad Alam-al-Hoda in Mashhad:

Badly veiled women and girls are like foot soldiers of the United States. Our enemies intend to pull the rug of religion from under the feet of our youth by spreading bad veil in the society. Anytime badly veiled women and girls sport strong makeup to deviate a young man from the right path, the enemy will be pleased with victory.

0745 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Journalist and filmmaker Mohammad Nourizad has been relocated to Evin Prison's general ward, but he says he will continue his hunger strike until a verdict is issued and he is freed.

0740 GMT: The Students Fast. Azad University students, despite pressure from intelligence agents, observed a one-day political fast on Wednesday to mark the 100th day of student Ali Malihi’s detention. The fast was broken on Thursday in an Iftar ceremony outside Evin Prison.

0735 GMT: Rafsanjani Watch. Mohammad Hashemi, a member of the Expediency Council and brother of Hashemi Rafsanjani, has again declared --- citing Ayatollah Khomeini --- "If people are not satisfied by a Government, the nezam [Iranian system] lacks acceptance."

0725 GMT: Rahnavard Speaks. Le Monde publishes an interview with Zahra Rahnavard, activist and wife of Mir Hossein Mousavi, who declares, "Victory will come one day to the Iranian people," and links the Green and women's movements:

[This] is a movement that has echoes claims of the Iranian people that actually date back to over a hundred years, the Constitutional Revolution of 1906. And the presidential election was an opportunity to remember: freedom, rule of law, democracy. The Green Movement does not want the regime to fall; what it wants is reform. It comes from civil society and peaceful means. I repeat, peaceful, even if the regime has no shortage of weapons and uses violence.

This movement is expressed in various ways through meetings, rallies, civil society, and  literary and artistic expressions. All components of society are represented: teachers, workers, athletes, artists, representatives of ethnic minorities....Women, who represent half of the population, and students have played a special role and have an important place within the movement.

My message to Iranian women is, "Move on, raise your level of knowledge and studies to be eventually accepted as full citizens." I campaign for it and against polygamy, violence, and decades of discrimination. Iranian women have no choice; they must continue the fight.

0645 GMT: Karroubi Intervenes. The morning starts with news of a long letter from Mehdi Karroubi to Ayatollah Mousavi Ardebili.

Much of the letter is Karroubi's well-known call for justice and responsibilty. He harshly condemns the violation of the Islamic Republic's Constitution and wonders who will defend it: the Parliament is not serving as a representative of the public and the judiciary is not defending people's rights. Karroubi also complains about the "destruction of revolutionary personalities", economic decline, and the President's lack of diplomacy, "which has led to the humiliation of the Iranian people".

There is a twist, however. Karroubi defends the late Ayatollah Khomeini and Mir Hossein Mousavi against recent accusations that they accepted executions in the 1980s.

An EA correspondent evaluates, "."With Mousavi and Khomeini being accused of accepting executions during their rule, criticism has reached the core of this Iranian system. Although Karroubi defends him and Khomeini, he also complains that those incidents were never investigated. Clever tactics, declaring himself as the most acceptable Green candidate. In any case the genie is out of the bottle."

Afghanistan and Beyond: The Wicked Ideology of Counter-Insurgency (Mull)

EA correspondent Josh Mull is the Afghanistan Blogging Fellow for The Seminal and Brave New Foundation. He also writes for Rethink Afghanistan:

There's a lot of hate speech floating around out there. You're used to it by now. The President is a black Muslim Nazi, lesbians-gays-bisexuals-transgenders destroy families, immigrants are disease-ridden criminals.

It's not just that these lies are offensive, though, is it? It's that they hint at something darker, more wicked underneath. The argument isn't that immigrants have diseases, so let's try to help them. It's that they have diseases, so they're filthy and must be hunted down and annihilated.

Afghanistan & Pakistan Analysis: Obama on a Road to Ruin? (Englehardt)

The folks who spread this hate speech are not lying out of altruism or compassion, they're lying as an expression of the dangerous, sociopathic capacities they possess. We know this from our foreign policy as well. It's not just the overt anti-semitism of terrorist videos that doubles you over, it's the psychotic undercurrent of suicide bombings that  keeps you awake.

I thought about this when I read Steve Hynd's "COIN is like Soviet Communism?",  where he exposes counterinsurgency not as a strategy but an ideology. He's right, but it's not just that counterinsurgency is a demented ideology, that it propagates vicious lies like obliterating a houseful of Afghan civilians is "protecting the population."

It's that COIN is a symptom of an idea more primeval and dangerous: violence is the solution. The fundamental idea behind counterinsurgency is that war is the right tool for the job. It may look different and sound different, but it's still war, still violently brutalizing a population --- us and them --- for isolated and selfish political ends.

Much like the hate speech in our political discourse, you only need to scratch the surface of this ideology to see the fascist and criminal tendencies underneath. Here's Ann Marlowe writing in World Affairs:

More and more, I suspect that it’s the brutality that works, not the COIN. It’s moving hundreds of thousands of people across a country, or shooting all the men in a village as a reprisal for terrorism, or taking hostages, or doing extra-judicial kidnappings. Of course, the brutality would work without the COIN, too. Brutality works. But that’s not who we are.

Yes, you really just read that. The problem with our strategy is that it doesn't have enough ethnic cleansing. That's what it means when you shoot all the men in a village --- you wipe them out. I'll let you take a wild guess what happens to the women.

We should just skip all that drivel about development and go for more extra-judicial kidnappings. Because "brutality works". Massive displacements, that' s been awesome for the Israelis, right? Both the countries of Israel and Palestine are peaceful and happy, all thanks to the Nakba.

But the reason we're not using this successful strategy of brutality in Afghanistan is your fault. It's because you're a pillow-biting westerner. Marlowe continues:

COIN makes sense intellectually, especially in the pellucid prose of David Galula, who wrote better in English than Roger Trinquier in French. Part of the reason it makes sense is that COIN is congruent with our culture’s bias toward a perspectival view of reality. As General McChrystal keeps saying, counterinsurgency is a matter of perception.

Right, that little voice inside you that says wiping out entire populations of human beings isn't a good thing, that's just your "cultural bias." You just want to believe in a "perspectival view of reality". Silly wimp, too many blue jeans and diet sodas for you! Big, tough Ann Marlowe knows the truth. War crimes are great:

In Algeria, the French were able to forcibly resettle villagers, build miles-long walls to close Algeria’s borders, and, of course, torture terrorists, or simply toss them out of planes if they wouldn’t talk. And that war didn’t end well. In Malaya, the British achieved success, but also with forcible resettlement of inconveniently located villagers and many other heavy-handed measures that would be completely beyond the pale today. Also, in both of these countries, the counterinsurgents essentially were the government, with long involvement on the ground.

Speaking of which, the Sri Lankan government seems to have succeeded against the Tamil Tigers, but if we could use their measures we would win in Afghanistan too. When the US government fought insurgents in the South after the Civil War, it declared martial law and shot enemy suspects on sight.

Aren't we all pining for the good old days of Blood and Iron, when we had martial law imposed on the South? Probably no innocents --- only the guilty --- were shot on sight, and even if they were, who gives a damn, we won! That sure was a shining moment of military strategy and of American values.

Now if only we could just replicate the tactics of the Sri Lankan government, "we would win in Afghanistan".  (Yep, she said "win," like maybe she thinks there's some kind of prize at the end.) And what did the government of Sri Lanka do to win? Well they just shelled all the Tamil villages. They displaced them into giant, hellscape refugee camps, and then obliterated them with artillery, air strikes, executions, and massacres.

Remember the Superdome during Katrina? Yeah, like that, only add carpet bombing. Murder everyone in their own filth, that's how to win in Afghanistan. Feel good?

Excuse my language, but this is some heavy, disturbing shit. This is sickness, rationalizing crimes against humanity. It's past stealing bread to feed to your family and to the point of justifying genocide. Completely absent are any Enlightenment achievements like rule of law and the value of human life.

But this is exactly what we should expect when we have the obvious, blaring warning signs of COIN. It starts with a little bit of violence, a little bit of war, but it starts expanding (devolving?). We need 30,000 more troops. We need to expand our extra-judicial killings and kidnappings, more drone strikes and more night raids. Is it any surprise that Ann Marlowe says skip the development and "the talking part", and jumps straight to reptilian sins like displacement and ethnic cleansing?

This is not some loose, rhetorical "slippery slope" argument, this is actually happening. Ann Marlowe published this on Thursday.  Thursday, 20 May 2010, almost a decade after the United States of America invaded and occupied Afghanistan, Ann Marlowe said our soldiers should commit war crimes against humanity to win. And she's not just dredging up ancient history from the Civil War, Sri Lanka was ethnically cleansed last year. The annihilation of the Tamil people happened right before our eyes, and we're so poisoned with war that our only reaction was "we need more of that!"

This is why we need to completely remove the military from Afghanistan, bring every last troop home. And more importantly, this is why need to avoid getting sucked into stupid media games. This is why we need to take such a hard line against our politicians. These ideas and debates have real consequences.

Democrats want to look tough on national security, and now 1,000 Americans are dead. We want a fine-tuned, population-friendly counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan, and now thousands of Afghans and Pakistanis are dead. We so believe in this concept of "victory" in Afghanistan that we have honest, thoughtful discussions on whether or not crimes against humanity are a good tactic.

Bring the troops home. We have better solutions to the problem, and we have other issues to deal with. Join us on Rethink Afghanistan’s Facebook page and collaborate with the tens of thousands of others around the country working to bring this war to an end.

Iran Nuke Analysis: Reading the US-Turkey Discussions

A bit of background to Monday's agreement between Iran, Turkey, and Brazil on procedure for an uranium enrichment deal....

Four days before the announcement, on 13 May, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu had a telephone conversation with his counterpart Hillary Clinton. Two days after that, on Saturday, they met, just before Davutoglu went to Tehran.

Hours later, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan --- who had cancelled his own trip to Iran on the Friday --- reversed course. He set aside a visit to Azerbaijan and flew to Tehran.

So what happened in the high-letter US-Turkey encounters just before the IBT agreement? According to the State Department spokesman P. J. Crowley:

During the call [on 13 May], the Secretary stressed that, in our view, Iran’s recent diplomacy was an attempt to stop Security Council action without actually taking steps to address international concerns about its nuclear program.

There’s nothing new and nothing encouraging in Iran’s recent statements. It has failed to demonstrate good faith and build confidence with the international community, which was the original intent of the Tehran research reactor proposal. It has yet to formally respond to the IAEA.

She [Clinton] stressed that the burden is with Iran and its lack of seriousness about engagement requires us to intensify efforts to apply greater pressure on Iran. Now, that was the primary purpose of the conversation. They briefly touched on other subjects, including Middle East peace and the relationship between Turkey and Azerbaijan.

Throughout the question-and-answer session, Crowley was giving the message: Iran was not going to give up its own enrichment of 20-percent uranium and so there was still the "urgent" need for sanctions as a result of the dual policy towards Iran. Translated, Washington said that there would be no unclenched fist extended to Iran as long as Israel's protests  over Tehran's nuclear programme and the regional contest for influence continued.

Crowley continued:

Iran has been very busy in recent weeks having conversations with a range of countries. Part of that conversation did occur last week in the dinner in New York. And not only – during the conversation in New York, not only did Iran not offer any new, Foreign Minister Mottaki indicated during the dinner that notwithstanding any potential agreement on the Tehran research reactor, they would continue to enrich uranium to 20 percent, which we –-- which is of great concern to us and violates their obligations under the IAEA.

So they had initially, when they announced they were going to enrich uranium to 20 percent, they claimed at the time that it was for the Tehran research reactor, but it’s obviously part of a broader agenda. And that’s what we are concerned about. That’s why we continue to pursue the sanctions resolution as part of our pressure track.

When asked whether Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva's expected visit to Tehran was a "last opportunity", Crowley said:

Well, I mean, we are –-- we continue to move forward on a sanctions resolution, and we have a sense of urgency about this. We want to get this done as quickly as possible. But our view remains that we are doubtful that Iran is going to change course absent the kind of significant pressure that comes with a resolution and the consequences that come with them.

Then, when he was asked whether the State Department gave Davutoglu any red lines that Turkey should not cross, Crowley replied:

Regarding the TRR [the Tehran Research Reactor], it [a proposal for "third country enrichment"] was put on the table last fall to build confidence with the international community about the true intentions of Iran’s nuclear program. We have drawn conclusions from Iran’s failure to even respond –-- much less engage constructively –-- even respond to the proposal formally to the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency].

[Clinton] stressed to Foreign Minister Davutoglu again today that it’s not about the public statements that Iran makes. If Iran wishes to engage in –-- regarding the TRR, come up with alternatives that meet the fundamental intent of the proposal, then they can pick up the phone and call the IAEA, which is something they have failed to do.

Following the announcement of the IBT agreement, Crowley restated the reasons for an "urgent" sanctions draft:

In the statement, the White House acknowledged the efforts made by Turkey and Brazil and now called upon the IAEA to clearly and authoritatively convey the results of this arrangement to the IAEA. That said, the United States continues to have concerns about the arrangement. The joint declaration does not address the core concerns of the international community.

Iran remains in defiance of five UN Security Council resolutions, including its unwillingness to suspend enrichment operations. In fact, today Iran reaffirmed that it plans to continue to enrich uranium to 20 percent despite the fact that it previously justified this increased enrichment as for the Tehran research reactor. So public statements today suggest that the TRR deal is unrelated to it ongoing enrichment activity. In fact, they are integrally linked.

And then Crowley became very coy and even deceptive about how much Washington knew of the Turkish and Brazilian efforts:

I think we had conversations with Foreign Minister Amorim and Foreign Minister Davutoglu prior to their arrival in Tehran. I’m not aware of any specific contacts with them over the weekend.

But, setting aside Crowley's public spin, did the US know in advance of Erdogan's sudden decision to go to Iran? Most likely, Washington did not anticipate that the diplomatic efforts were moving towards an agreement, leading to the Turkish Prime Minister's change of plans. Ankara had made a decision: the benefits of a joint proposal with Iran and Brazil meant that it would exert autonomy and risk the US reaction.

Now the question is "What will Turkey will do in the UN?" This week, Erdogan wrote a letter to President Obama, saying that Ankara had opened the door slightly for a resolutio. Now the ball was in Washington's court.

In other words: "We did our part (and gained diplomatic and political advantage from doing so). You want to mess up this agreement with sanctions, so be it --- although don't expect us to vote for the resolution in the Security Council.

"We've got our ties with the US, which we value. But we also have our economic and political ties with Tehran."

US "War on Terror" Math: Guantanamo Shutdown = More Pakistan Drone Strikes

From the first days of the Obama Administration, we've how US agencies --- especially the Pentagon --- have waged a campaign to prevent the President's promise to close the Guantanamo Bay prison from becoming reality. This, however, may be the most creative line....

If we close Guantanamo, we will have to kill many more people with drone strikes in Pakistan.

This week Adam Entous of Reuters posted an article, "How the White House Learned to Love the Drone", with revelations such as, "An analysis of data provided to Reuters by U.S. government sources shows that the CIA has killed around 12 times more low-level fighters than mid-to-high-level al Qaeda and Taliban leaders since the drone strikes intensified in the summer of 2008." (The article also notes that even more civilians than "fighters" --- 20 to 150% more --- also die.)


These paragraphs jump out:

Some current and former counterterrorism officials say an unintended consequence of these decisions may be that capturing wanted militants has become a less viable option. As one official said: "There is nowhere to put them."

A former U.S. intelligence official, who was involved in the process until recently, said: "I got the sense: 'What the hell do we do with this guy if we get him?' It's not the primary consideration but it has to be a consideration."

Of course, there is a boiler-plate denial from a "senior US official", who claims, "Any comment along the lines of 'there is nowhere to put captured militants' would be flat wrong. Over the past 16 months, the U.S. has worked closely with its counterterrorism partners in South Asia and around the world to capture, detain, and interrogate hundreds of militants and terrorists."

The cold fact remains that President Obama has not tolerated the drone strikes --- he has embraced and increased them.

Now to the colder political question on the other side of the world. Even though the Guantanamo shutdown = more strikes rationale is flimsy --- where is the evidence that those released from Camp X-Ray would be dashing off to Pakistan? And what of the alternatives such as actually trying these supposed terrorists in a civilian courtroom? --- that doesn't mean it will disappear.

So, under the rationale that its existence means the US won't kill quite as many people in Pakistan (even American officials say that only 39 of 500 killed by the drone strikes were "high-" or "mid-level" targets), will Guantanamo still be standing as global testimony to US justice this time next year?

The Latest from Iran (21 May): Friday Rest?

1935 GMT:More Diplomatic Games. The Islamic Republic News Agency reports:

After the joint announcement of Iran, Turkey and Brazil, Iran's permanent ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency announced the country's readiness to submit the letter to the agency. In a meeting with the agency's chief Yukiya Amano on Monday, Iran will hand over the letter.

1920 GMT: Diplomatic Games. Back from a break to find that the US has denied a visa to Iran's Deputy Foreign Minister Mohammad Mehdi Akhondzadeh Basti.

Basti was planning to attend the month-long conference on the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty at the United Nations.

In a more positive development, the European Union's foreign policy director, Catherine Ashton, claims that Iran has signalled that it is ready to speak to representatives of the "5+1" powers (US, UK, France, Germany, Russia, China) about uranium enrichment.

NEW Iran Analysis: Four Perspectives on the Uranium-Sanctions Dance
Iran Document: Simin Behbahani’s Poem for the Executed
Iran Videos: Former Diplomat Heidari Reveals the Regime
The Latest from Iran (20 May): Back to Business

1540 GMT: Friday Rest, Indeed. A quiet day on the news front. Press TV now has the packaged summary of Ayatollah Jannati's Friday Prayer (much politer than our assessment at 1235 GMT), focusing on his portrayal of the Iran-Brazil-Turkey agreement on procedure over uranium enrichment: "This move by Iran is another step towards building trust and leaves no room for Western excuses."


The mothers of the three detained US citizens, arrested for crossing the Iran-Iraq border last summer, have met their children for a second time.

I'm off to chat with the Islamic Student Society at the University of Birmingham about US-Iran relations.

1240 GMT: Detainee Connections? Borzou Daragahi of the Los Angeles Times notes Iraq's release of two Iranians --- one arrested seven years ago and one in 2007 by US troops --- and speculates that there is a link to Tehran's permission for the mothers of 3 detained Americans to visit their children.

1235 GMT: Your Friday Prayer Summary. It's Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, the head of the Guardian Council, at the podium today, and he's taking the audience on a global tour. The G-15 Summit of non-aligned nations, President Ahmadinejad's speech to the United Nations on nuclear non-proliferation, and the Turkish and Brazilian talks lead to Monday's agreement on a procedure over uranium enrichment: it's a buffet of international triumph.

But that's not to say that Jannati stayed away from the domestic scene. Here is a summary: Chastity good. Hijab very good. University students, take notice. Thank you and have a lovely day (if you're chaste and wearing the veil).

1225 GMT: Panahi Bail Hearing Tomorrow. The wife and lawyer of detained film director Jafar Panahi have told media that his case will be heard in Revolutionary Court on Saturday. Lawyer Farideh Gheirat said,  "Based on the promise I got (from the judiciary), I am hopeful that he will be released until the date set for his trial."

Panahi was arrested in early March and has recently gone on hunger strike to protest his treatment in prison.


0920 GMT: Economy Watch. Iran Labor Report surveys layoffs, unpaid wages, and problems for factories in Tabriz, including the threat to close one of the largest industries in the city, Tractors Manufacturing.

0915 GMT: The Afghanistan Protests. Demonstrations continue in Afghanistan over the jailing of Afghans in Iranian jails: the latest was outside the Iranian Consulate in Herat, with chants of "Marg bar Khamenei" (Death to Khamenei).

0910 GMT: Cyber-Wars. Revolutionary Guard commander Ebrahim Jabbari announces, "We have the second biggest cyber army of the world."

0755 GMT: Fashion Warning. Mohammad Hosseini, the Minister of Culture and Islamic Guidance, has warned that women are not appropriately dressed in Iranian films.

0750 GMT: Conspiracy Theory of Day.Hojatoleslam Ruhollah Hosseinian, an Ahmadinejad supporter in Parliament, has "revealed" that, after meeting global financier George Soros, former President Mohammad Khatami anointed Mir Hossein Mousavi for leadership by "putting the green shawl around Mousavi's neck".

0740 GMT: Global Analysis of Day. Ahmadinejad Chief of Staff Esfandiar Rahim-Mashai hands down a lesson in politics at home and abroad. He pronounces that "near to nothing is left over" from Israel, which exists only to serve superpowers in the Middle East". In contrast, Iran is a model where "no one has to be jobless", so "in 15 years millions of people in the world will be at our service".

0625 GMT: Brotherhood, Defence, and Hikers' Moms. A glance at Press TV's "Iran" section this morning is instructive: none of the lead stories are about internal matters. Instead, there is the platform of a meeting with the Speaker of Kuwait's Parliament for President Ahmadinejad to declare,
"The age of threat is over and (the) future belongs to brotherly talks."

The commander of Iran's ground forces, General Ahmad-Reza Pourdastan responds to the age of non-threat with the announcement that Iran will deploy remote-controlled weapons on its border areas: ""So if any enemy enters these areas it will face either soldiers or weaponry that act as soldiers and will target them."

Elsewhere, it is Iranian goodwill that dominates, with features on Thursday's hotel visit by the mothers of three detained US citizens with their children, arrested for crossing the Iraq-Iran border last summer.

0555 GMT: So to the end of a week with both the artificial drama of the Iran-Brazil-Turkey agreement on uranium enrichment and the US-led response of a sanctions resolution introduced to the United Nations Security Council and the escalating drama of a Government, struggling to maintain legitimacy, stepping up intimidation and detentions.

We've posted a separate entry with four incisive and very different perspectives on the uranium dispute.

And now to watch for developments on the domestic front....