Iran Election Guide

Donate to EAWV





Or, click to learn more

Search

Entries in Iran (116)

Wednesday
Nov112009

Israel Video: Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel at the Jewish Federation of North America

Israel: Netanyahu Arrives in Paris to Criticism from French Foreign Minister
Israel: White House Gets Busted on “Private” Meeting with Netanyahu
Transcript & Analysis: Netanyahu in US – Waiting for Obama, Talking about “Small” Israel

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis



On Tuesday, President Obama's chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, spoke at the Jewish Federation of North America's annual general assembly .He shared his Jewish roots with the audience and reiterated the rhetoric of the Obama Administration on the "significance of Israel's security to United States", "Palestinian responsibilities for stabilization", and "the rights of Palestinians on settlements and final borders [on] pre-1967 lines" Then he called on both parties to the negotiation table.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gmt3ElbMJJw[/youtube]

Emanuel declared:
It is only through dialogue that we can achieve the lasting peace that Israel seeks.

Make no mistake, the path toward peace is not one that Israel should be asked to walk alone. That is why the U.S. will remain actively engaged, and Israel's one true friend. The Palestinians must come to the table, recognize Israel's right to exist and reject violence.

As the president has said many times, as the president said in Cairo, the bond between the Israel and the U.S. is unbreakable. It's a bond rooted in shared interests and shared values.

Emananuel reassured Israelis that Washington's engagement with the Muslim world was not at the expense of Israel's interests:
There are those who have questioned that, as this administration has sought to be engaged in the region. There are some who suggest this implies a diminished level of support for Israel... That is not the intent and that is not the case, and never will be.

At the end of the speech, Emanuel touched the Iranian question, "Today thanks to the work of the president there is strong and growing international consensus against a nuclear armed Iran. Israel has been "a beacon of democracy in a region too often defined by strife."
Wednesday
Nov112009

Iran: Shadi Sadr's Speech Accepting "2009 Human Rights Defenders Tulip"

The Latest from Iran (11 November): Revelations & Connections

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

SHADI SADRLawyer, journalist, and human rights activist Shadi Sadr accepting the 2009 Human Rights Defenders Tulip at The Hague:

Jury of the Human Rights Tulip Award,
Your Excellency Foreign Minister of Holland
Ladies and Gentlemen

I am greatly honoured that the jury of the Human Rights Tulip Award has found me worth of receiving this year’s award and given me the opportunity to speak about the situation of women’s rights in Iran, the dire needs of people in Iran and also their expectations from the international community. You have all seen pictures and videos of people’s protests in the aftermath of this year’s presidential elections. You have seen how women, particularly young girls, have been at the forefront of all protests. They challenged the stereotype image of Iranian woman which was often imagined in veil or passive around the world. Neda, the young girl who was shot and murdered in demonstrations, quickly became a symbol for the struggles of Iranian people for freedom and democracy. To me, however, the active and determining role of women was not shaped only through images and videos. I had seen the leadership of women on the streets and the most lasting images I have in mind go back to the 9th of July this year.

On this day, large crowds of people took to the streets of Tehran on the 10th anniversary of the suppression of student protests of 1989. Demonstrations were about to end and as usual, violence and attacks were increasing by the minute. Along with a number of the demonstrators, to get away from pepper gas which was thrown into the crowd by security forces, I had to run into a city bus, while I was badly coughing from the effects of tear gas. A few stops away from there, when coughs were less disturbing, a political debate began among the people on the bus. Young women, who had broken the gender segregation rule on public buses and had found seats in the male area of the bus, were leading the debate. I asked loudly and with suprise, “Anyone from the gentlemen? They are all quiet!” Instead of someone from among men, a young girl who was dressed in black said, “Men had better be quiet now. Thirty years ago, they made this revolution and we have now seen its result. They had better be quiet now and let us do our job! This revolution is our revolution, women’s revolution!”

Here, I would like to pose this question: who are these women, who simply speak about a revolution of women, those whose images you have seen and I hope you have not forgotten? Who are they? And why do they fight so bravely for freedom and democracy?

Many of these young women have been born after the 1979 revolution or they have been young kids in the early days of the revolutions; they are completely products of an ideological system, which has had the monopoly of power in Iran for thirty years. Apart from having to suffer the lack of political freedoms and democracy like men, they also have to accept rules of compulsory veil, live with family laws which put them under the guardianship of men, seek the consent of their fathers for marriage, the right of getting a divorce and they are often deprived of the guardianship of their children. These are the same women who will be flogged in they have relationships other than in a marriage and if they are married women, an extra-marital relationship may lead to being stoned. These are the same women that Ahmadinejad’s government wants to minimise their role in universities and the labour market and make them stay at home and be isolated with fundamentalist policies which is now even more restrictive than the past 30 years.

In the past thirty years, Iranian women have gone through the highest level of suppression and pressure in their personal and social lives and have sustained the most damage of all from the ruling system. Under such circumstances, it is obvious that they are the unhappiest and the angriest citizens who do not have much to lose. If they are arrested today because of attending demonstrations for democracy, they have been arrested before for attending gatherings in defence of women’s rights and they have gone to prison for it. If they are raped today by security forces, they have felt this rape on their body and their soul for thirty years in the violation of their rights and their human dignity. Given all these facts, do we still have to ask why, today, women are at the forefront of the struggles of Iranian people?

At the beginning of my talk, I said I hope you have not forgotten the images of the protests of Iranian people against the violation of human rights and the absence of freedom and democracy.

However, let me be honest and tell you that I concerned. I am concerned that these images and these struggles may be forgotten. Yes, if violation of human rights in Iran does not face any resistance or repercussions and if these struggles are not defended in a concrete way, the Iranian people have the right to tell us you have forgotten us. My concern becomes even much deeper when I see that the western media is becoming less and less concerned about the violation of human rights in Iran and even politicians are not better than the media.

Unfortunately, forgetting the thousands who were arrested and tortured in prisons, the hundreds who were killed and the unknown number of prisoners who were raped are killed in detention is a real concern. The fact is that in Iran, while on the one hand people’s struggles and protests are still powerful and living and on the other hand , violation of human rights continues in a systematic way in all spheres, from women’s rights to freedom of gatherings, from rights of prisoners to freedom of speech, it appears that European nations and states are beginning to forget what they witnesses in Iran this summer. It is my conviction that by forgetting these realities, western governments not only forget their own responsibility which has been defined as countries who uphold human rights, but they are also putting in jeopardy the interests of their own state and their own citizens by forgetting these events.

They sit at the same table of negotiations with Ahmadinejad in the capacity of a legitimate president and the only item on the agenda of these negotiations is the issue of nuclear energy, as if none of these events had happened in Iran and as if none of the disasters which we see today keep occurring in Iran. On the level of international politics, everything is business as usual with the Islamic Republic like before the events of this summer. Even when there is talk of sanctions against Iran, sanctions are considered in the face of Iran’s advancements in the area of nuclear technology, as if no one sees the day to day violation of the basic rights of Iranian citizens by the Iranian government. Human rights is a universal issue and if one state claims to be supporting human rights, this claim brings about responsibilities with it . Ignoring these responsibilities, not only subjects Iranian people to further and wider suppression, but it also has long term repercussion for the citizens of countries who consider themselves defenders of human rights, because just in the same way that human rights is universal, fundamentalism as one of the greatest enemies of human rights has also become universal and global. Silence, toleration and recognition of a fundamentalist government that violates the rights of women, dissidents and minorities result in the enhancement and the export of global fundamentalism. We can already see symptoms of it even on this side of the borders: Holland is one of the societies which is now dealing with the issue of religious fundamentalism as a social and political problem..

In the latest demonstration of the Iranian people against the government which was held last week, a large number of people and this time, women more than before, were attacked, beaten up and abused by security guards. Women were wounded, arrested and among them were a large number of political activists such as Vahideh Mowlavi, a women’s rights activist , were violently arrested. In these demonstrations, people were chanting the slogan: “Obama! Obama! You are either with us or with them!” The slogan clearly implies that right before the eyes of the people who are now fighting for freedom, democracy and human rights in Iran, one cannot sit at a negotiation table with a dictatorial government to speak about nuclear energy or economic contracts and talk about concrete conditions and at the same time, criticise the state of human rights in Iran through political statements which have no actual guarantee to be put into action. Demonstrators are overtly challenging Obama to clarify his position towards the struggles of the Iranian people and they have the same expectation from European governments.

As a women’s rights activist who comes from the heart of the struggles of the people, I am here in The Hague, in Holland – the city which is the seat of the International Criminal Court for addressing crimes against humanity – to speak of two dire needs of the movement of the Iranian people. These needs and necessities will not be realised unless western governments take responsibility. First, it is necessary that the issue of human rights in Iran remains on the table of negotiations alongside the issue of nuclear energy with equal significance. As long as the issue of human rights is not raised at least in a parallel way to the nuclear issue at all levels of political and economic negotiations with the Iranian government and sanctions and other possible guarantees of action do not include both areas, one cannot accept that some real effort has been made to stop the violation of the rights of Iranian citizens.

The second necessity is that all those involved and all those who have ordered the widespread and systematic violation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran should be prosecuted and tried. It is true that Iran, like many other violators of human rights, has not ratified the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, but western governments, including the Dutch government, as the host of the International Criminal Court, can ask the UN Security Council to pursue the issue of crimes against humanity through setting up an international court for Iran. Let us not forget that a global issue can only be dealt with through a global action.

Thank you.
Wednesday
Nov112009

Iran Video Special: Ahmadinejad & Tehran's "$18.5 Billion in Turkey"

Iran Video Special: When Khamenei Met the US Hostage (and Why It’s Important Now)
Latest Iran Video: The Revelations of Hashemi Rafsanjani’s Son
The Latest from Iran (10 November): Uncertainty and Propaganda

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis



One of the more dramatic rumours in the post-election crisis has been the Iranian Government has moved out $18.5 billion in gold to Turkey for "safekeeping". It has emerged again during President Ahmadinejad's stay in Turkey for the Organization of Islamic Cooperation meeting on economic issues. In his press conference, Ahmadinejad replied to a question from a BBC Persian correspondent:
I think first the press should think over the news and evaluate it. Now I ask, do you know how much space does $18.5 billion takes up. I hear that it was $8.5 billion Gold, do you know how many Lorries it takes to transfer this amount of money. Where are you going to get this much gold in one place? It is impossible to find this much of money in one place. It is normal to transfer $100’000 from one bank to another, it is very common. But I think this was more like propaganda and the press rumour.

Wednesday
Nov112009

Iran Video Special: When Khamenei Met the US Hostage (and Why It's Important Now)

Latest Iran Video: The Revelations of Hashemi Rafsanjani’s Son
The Latest from Iran (10 November): Uncertainty and Propaganda

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis



The video below is extraordinary, showing Deputy Minister of Defense and MP Ali Khamenei in discussion with US diplomat John Limbert, one of the 52 American hostages in the 1979/81 US Embassy takeover. But the 2009 sequel to the story may be even more significant.



Although the footage had been shown on Iranian television at the time and had been posted by Liveleak in 2008, it rose to prominence when it was posted on the Supreme Leader's website on 2 November. At that time John Limbert was a prominent ex-diplomat, soon to appear on US television talking about the 30th anniversary of the Revolutionary and Embassy crisis. Now, however, John Limbert has been appointed to the new post of Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Iran.

So why does Ayatollah Khamenei's camp "out" this video just before the Obama Administration offers a significant signal on US-Iranian relations? Could it be that the Supreme Leader is wanting to turn Embassy pictures of 1979, which have spurred anti-Iran hostility for a generation in the US, into images of warmth and friendship? And could it be that the US Government, far from pushing a hard line on the Iranian nuclear programme (and the post-election crisis and human rights) leading to further sanctions or a suspension of talks, is demonstrating its renewed dedication to "engagement"?

In other words, are the Leader of Iran and the Leader of the Free World now walking alongside each other, unclenched fist in unclenched fist?

Summary of video from Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty:

In the video Khamenei, who was then a deputy defense minister and a member of parliament, is seen chatting with one of the hostages, who appears to be U.S. diplomat John Limbert, who speaks fluent Persian.

Khamenei asks him about the detention conditions and issues such as food, hygiene, or whether the hostages have access to books. “Any shortcomings, problems, or difficulties can be removed,” says Khamenei.

The U.S. hostage responds that there is only one problem. Khamenei quickly reacts by saying “right, the fact that you’re here” and then expresses hope that “the Iranian criminal,“ the shah, will be delivered to Iran and the hostages will be free to go. The hostage replies: “Inshallah.”

Later in the video Khamenei appears to be giving an interview to Iranian state television. He describes his meeting with the hostages and gives details about their detention, including what he says is the good library they have access to.

In the interview, Khamenei says that the hostages are “very happy” with their living conditions and the food they’re receiving. “American food is being specially prepared for them,” says Khamenei.
Wednesday
Nov112009

Latest Iran Video: The Revelations of Hashemi Rafsanjani's Son

The Latest from Iran (10 November): Uncertainty and Propaganda

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

This video emerged last week but we held off posting it until we could clarify what Mohsen Hashemi, the son of former President Hashemi Rafsanjani, was claiming.

At a "technical" meeting five days after the 12 June election, Mohsen Hashemi took the microphone to launch a fierce criticism of President Ahmadinejad. About six minutes into the clip, he claims that his family does not have a penny abroad, countering pre-election allegations (to be repeated in the Tehran trials) of Rafsanjani's corruption. Then he reveals....

Hashemi Rafsanjani's campaign manager in the 2000 Parliamentary elections was Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

That bit of information, offered publicly for the first year, puts the Rafsanjani-Ahmadinejad in a new light. The two men were politically, if not personally, close at one point but, for unknown reasons, fell out before the 2005 Presidential election.

More to come?
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6IfolNII0U[/youtube]