The Latest from Iran (29 October): Ahmadinejad Tries to Claim Legitimacy

NEW Iran: The Mousavi-Karroubi Meeting
Iran: The Supreme Leader’s Threat — Strength or Weakness?
Video: The Announcements for the 13 Aban Marches
Iran: Towards 13 Aban — The University Protests
Latest Iran Video: Families of Detainees Protest (28 October)
Iran: Are There Billions of Dollars Missing?
The Latest from Iran (28 October): The Supreme Leader Jumps In

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

1940 GMT: Mondo Bizarro Analogy of the Day. A superficial Daily Telegraph report, "Iran accused of playing games on nuclear deal", is redeemed by this quote from "one diplomati close to the talks": "It's like playing chess with a monkey. You get them to checkmate, and then they swallow the king."

1920 GMT: Throughout yesterday and today (1210 GMT) we have been noting the significance of a meeting between Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi. We have posted an English translation, courtesy of Khordaad 88, of the account of the discussion from Mousavi's Kalemeh.

1645 GMT: Defiance of the Day. Mowj-e-Sabz features the story of a mathematics student at Sharif University who challenged the Supreme Leader on Wednesday with a series of points about politics, media, and the Iranian leadership.

1505 GMT: Iran has formally submitted its response to the International Atomic Energy. As expected, Tehran has accepted the "framework" of third-party enrichment but wants further discussions on details, such as the timing and amount of uranum stock to be sent to Russia for enrichment.

The IAEA press release says merely, "The Director General is engaged in consultations with the government of Iran as well as all relevant parties, with the hope that agreement on his proposal can be reached soon."



1210 GMT: Now to Make Your Head Spin. In the current context of Ahmadinejad's move, this quote from Mir Hossein Mousavi in his latest talk with Mehdi Karroubi takes on significance: "The discussions in Geneva were really surprising and if the promises given (to the West) are realised, then the hard work of thousands of scientists would be ruined. And if we cannot keep our promises then it would prepare the ground for harder sanctions against the country."

Got it? Mousavi is against the third-party enrichment deal, trying to outbid Ahmadinejad as the defender of Iran's interests and sovereignty.

1200 GMT: Spinning Ahmadinejad Out of Control. The "Western" misunderstanding of the President's manoeuvre, not seeing the internal dimension in Ahmadinejad's quest for legitimacy through the nuclear talks, is escalating. CNN reproduces some of the quotes we have highlighted but reduces them to a "rare conciliatory note" struck by Ahmadinejad.

1110 GMT: Another note on the Ahmadinejad Nuclear Play (0850 and 1040 GMT). It is also significant that the Iranian President emphasised responsibility for past contracts in his talk today, calling on other countries to "fulfill their previous obligations"

We have nuclear contracts. It has been 30 years. We have paid for them…such agreements must be fulfilled … for technical activities, for reactors and power plants. If we intend to cooperate, such contracts must be addressed and the previous commitments must be fulfilled.

As an EA reader shrewdly noted during the Vienna talks, when Iran tried to sideline France from any agreement, Tehran is determined to get either finanical or political advantage out of pre-1979 payments to Western countries for nuclear reactors that were never completed.

1105 GMT: An EA source claims that Iran's judiciary officials are refusing to allow the lawyer of Iranian-American scholar Kian Tajbakhsh to file an appeal against his 15-year prison sentence.

1040 GMT: Western media are buzzing about President Ahmadinejad's statement on the nuclear talks (see 0850 GMT), to the point of mis-reading it.

The Los Angeles Times has a lengthy snap analysis which declares, "Iran's president appears to back nuclear proposal". That's not quite right. Ahmadinejad did not refer to the specific deal on third-party enrichment which Iran is still considering (its reply is supposed to be presented by its Ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency today). Instead he declared:

In the past ["the West"] said that we had to halt our nuclear activities. But today they say, 'Come consult about finding solutions for world problems,' and they want to cooperate for the exchange of fuel and development of nuclear technology and establishing a nuclear plant.

That is not an endorsement of a specific agreement but of the general process, and it is an endorsement based on the political advantage for the President rather than any benefit to Iran's nuclear position.

In other words, as we predicted and then debated in early October, Ahmadinejad is trying to use the Geneva and Vienna talks to establish an internal legitimacy that has been in question since 12 June. Whether that effort, which is largely going unnoticed by "Western" media succeeds, will be highlighted by the events up to and including the 13 Aban demonstrations.

0925 GMT: Human Rights Activists in Iran has issued its latest update on the status of post-election detainees, including the hunger strikes of Fariba Pajooh and Hengameh Shahidi.

0850 GMT: Ahmadinejad's Nuclear Play. The Iranian President has asserted, in a televised speech from Mashaad, that Iran will not retreat "one iota" on its nuclear rights, but it is ready to cooperate on uranium enrichment and nuclear technology. The proposed deal for third-party enrichment for Tehran's medical research reactor is Iran's opportunity to evaluate the "honesty" of world powers and the International Atomic Energy Agency.

The President's trip to Mashaad, which is to be the first in a series of visits around Iran, and Iranian press --- as opposed to colleagues in the "West" --- are noting his general references to various issues in housing, industry, agriculture, water and natural resources, and urban planning. However, I'll repeat: Ahmadinejad is clearly using the nuclear figure to strike the pose of confident leader defending Iran. However, focusing on the international front is risky, given the bubbling internal situation leading up to 13 Aban (4 November).

0830 GMT: Ayatollah Khamenei is not the only political figure making a headline statement. The reformist politician and cleric Abdollah Nouri, in an interview with Advar News (summary via Pedestrian), declared that the post-election detentions were a signs of the regime's "hopelessness":

Each of these prisoners is connected to a bigger network. And their family, their friends, the country, we all feel close to them. The establishment has kept them in prison, to keep this protest against the establishment alive? What kind of strategy is that? I am guessing that certain analysis are offered to the lord of the establishment, which predicts that if the prisoners are freed, the establishment’s problems will grow. This is an analysis made out of hopelessness and must not be the basis for decision making.

But Nouri's attack went much farther:

They consider the parts of the constitution which stresses the rights of the people to be worthless trash and other parts as a holy book. When people act on their legal rights, they consider it an act against national security and a step towards overthrowing the system. So who is not acting according to the constitution, the protesters or the establishment?

0815 GMT: The Supreme Leader also made a public statement in his meeting with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Wednesday, focusing in this case on Iran's regional position: "The Western prescription for solving problems in the [Middle East] is not justice-based and efficient and cannot solve the region's issues, including the issues of Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan."

Khamenei praised Erdogan's policies, declaring, "Your stance in supporting the Palestinian people was rational and a right move in line with Islam. Adopting such stances will strengthen Turkey's position in the Muslim world."

0720 GMT: We begin today with an analysis of the Supreme Leader's threat to the opposition, handed down in a statement on Wednesday, which may surprise some readers.

Far from seeing it as a move of strength to break up the movement before 13 Aban (4 November), I am reading it as a speech coming out of regime uncertainty and worry over recent signs of protest, both from leaders and from the general public.

Meanwhile, the Government has flexed its muscles, albeit against another "foreign agent" with no connection to the Green movement. Hossein Rassam, an Iranian employee of the British employee, has been sentenced to four years in prison. Rassam was arrested soon after the 12 June election and paraded in the Tehran trials --- like Kian Tajbakhsh, the Iranian-American scholar recently given a 15-year jail term --- as a prime example of the "velvet revolution".

On the international front, a International Atomic Energy Agency team has returned from its three-day inspection of the second uranium enrichment plant at Fordoo near Qom. The head of the team called it a "good trip". Data from the plant will now be analysed and summarised in a report for the IAEA's Governing Board.

The Latest from Iran (27 October): Domestic and Foreign Collide

NEW Latest Iran Video: University Protests (27 October)
NEW Iran: More on Kian Tajbakhsh and Tehran’s “Velvet Revolution”
Latest Iran Video/Translation: Karroubi on Events in the Iran Media Fair
Iran’s Political Confusion: Khamenei, Ahmadinejad, and the Nuclear Agreement
Latest from Iran (26 October): After the Fair

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

2015 GMT: 13 Aban Does Not Exist. Homy Lafayette offers more detail on the Government's order to state media to "refrain from disseminating any news, photo, or topic which can lead to tension in the society or breach public order" during the demonstrations on 13 Aban (4 November).

The article includes an English translation of the document, issued by Deputy Culture and Islamic Guidance Minister Alireza Malekian.

1810 GMT: Iran's Nuclear Manoeuvre. If this story from Press TV is accurate, then Tehran is haggling over the details of third-party enrichment, rather than walking away from the deal.

The article re-quotes the source who spoke to Al Alam TV (see 1015 GMT), "Iran will announce its response to the proposal put forward by [International Atomic Energy Agency] Director-General [Mohamed] ElBaradei on Friday, October 30." The official added that Iran did not want to send 80 percent of its uranium stock in a single shipment to Russia, as set out in the deal from the Vienna talks: "Iran as a uranium buyer knows best how much uranium, enriched to a level of 19.75 percent, it needs [for its medical research reactor]; based on this argument, it will raise certain issues with this proposal."

In other words, Tehran will insist on a lower amount of uranium --- currently, the deal is for 1.2 million out of 1.5 million tonnes --- being sent to Russia in the first shipment. More would be delivered for enrichment as the medical reactor required new supplies.

The report is seconded by the head of Parliament's Foreign Policy and National Security Commission, Alaeddin Boroujerdi, "Iran can send the scheduled amount in separate shipments so that its fuel supply [provided by foreigners] is guaranteed....Iran can send only a part of its stockpile … and then as it receives its 20 percent enriched fuel it will send the next portion."

A word of caution on this interpretation: Boroujerdi is close to President Ahmadinejad and is putting the pro-deal view. It is unclear whether the dissenting voices such as Ali Larijani (and possibly, behind Larijani, the Supreme Leader) have come around to this position.

1750 GMT: Back from a teaching break to find that Rooz Online, following up a story prominent on the Internet this morning, has published details of an alleged Government order to censor and possibly shut out any news of mass demonstrations on 13 Aban (4 November).

1230 GMT: As reports continue to come in, with claims of 1500 students protesting at Azad University in Tehran, we've posted the first video footage.

1020 GMT: Reports that students gathered to demonstrate at Tehran University but are being forced to move by security forces.

1015 GMT: Reuters is reporting, from Iran's Al-Alam television, that Iran will accept the uranium enrichment agreement but will demand changes. The source is an "unnamed official" who indicates Iran's reply will be made within 48 hours.

0810 GMT: Detentions, Concerns, and Hunger Strikes. Human Rights Activists in Iran has posted a summary of latest developments regarding post-election detainees. Included is the information that journalist Henganeh Shahidi and student Payman Aref have started hunger strikes.

0800 GMT: Myth, Imprisonment, and "Velvet Revolution". We've just posted more on the jailed Iranian-American scholar Kian Tajbakhsh and the regime's accusations and tactics with the claim of foreign-directed regime change in

0715 GMT: A reader has pointed us to a report posted by CNN on a prison riot in Karaj, west of Tehran, on Sunday. Interestingly, the story comes from the National Council of Resistance in Iran, the opposition movement headed by Maryam Rajavi and linked to Mujahedin-e-Khalq.

0635 GMT: Meanwhile CNN International (broadcast, not website) is focusing on a peripheral story. Pakistan detained and has now released 11 Iranians who crossed the border yesterday. The original line was that the detainees were Revolutionary Guard members, possibly pursuing or looking for leads on those linked to last week's bombings. Pakistan, probably after discreet talks with Tehran, is now calling the wanderers "security guards"; Press TV portrays them as "border police" pursuing smugglers.

0630 GMT: Now The Washington Post has picked up on the effect of the internal debate on the enrichment agreement (and vice-versa) with an overview by Thomas Erdbrink, "Iran officials appear split on nuclear plan".

0600 GMT: One of the standing rules for analysis, when students and I consider US foreign policy, is that what happens overseas cannot be separated from what happens at home.

So it is proving --- and may prove in a significant way in the next 72 hours --- in Iran.

Tensions over the decision on the uranium enrichment deal are now beyond simmering and openly bubbling. Even this weekend, all the signals from the Iranian Government were that it would work out any issues and sign the proposal, with a significant portion of Iran's uranium stock going to Russia for enrichment, by Wednesday or Thursday. Now, all bets are off.

Readers took yesterday's analysis of the possible conflict between the Supreme Leader and President Ahmadinejad to a new level with their comments, but this morning I still find myself with questions rather than answers. The straightforward explanation would be that the Supreme Leader, working through the statements of Parliamentary leaders like Ali Larijani and Mohammad Reza Bahonar, is now blocking agreement. But, if so, why did he apparently endorse "engagement" to the point where the deal was almost struck? What could be the calculation in approaching the International Atomic Energy Agency, and thus Washington, in the summer and now walking out on the deal at the 11th hour?

Other theories from our readers include an Iranian "good cop, bad cop" act which would allow Ahmadinejad to portray himself as the guy who wanted to work with Obama but had to give way to Ayatollah Khamenei and the Iranians walking out of the arrangement because their ploy --- getting uranium for the medical reactor enriched for free while retaining enough of their stock to pursue other programmes --- hasn't yielded enough of a result.

Fortunately for my confusion, if not the general situation, there should be some clarification by Friday. Iran can't spin out the post-Vienna deliberations beyond the weekend, given that the US has already let last Friday's deadline slide in expectation of a Tehran decision within a few days. So it's accept, reject, or try to bring the "5+1" powers back to the table for talks.

And that declaration from Iran will in turn give the US Government, as well as the European powers, Russia, and China, a somewhat paradoxical choice. If Tehran does not sign the enrichment agreement, does the Obama Administration continue engagement, possibly strengthening the Iranian President against his own Supreme Leader? Or does it walk away (or is forced away by Congressional and public hostility to any more talks), now watching an internal Iranian situation in which Washington is no more than a bystander?