Latest Iran Video: Sharif Uni Protest Against Javad Larijani (4 October)

The Latest from Iran (4 October): Waiting for Developments

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

Three videos from Sharif University of protest against a speech by Judiciary official Mohammad Javad Larijani

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5hw20kclXo&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtna8fRK_7E&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbfU4u7x1Ns&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]

The Latest from Iran (3 October): Debating Mousavi's Strategy

NEW Iran’s Nuclear Programme: Obama’s Balance Wobbles
Iran Video: Football & “Ya Hossein! Mir Hossein!”
Iran’s Nuclear Programme: Big Win for Tehran at Geneva Talks
The Latest from Iran (2 October): Back to the Homefront

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



2100 GMT: Just Back Away Slowly. Now this from the Iranian Government:

Atomic Energy Organization of Iran spokesman Ali Shirzadian said on Saturday that International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Mohamed ElBaradei’s two-day trip to Iran had previously been planned and is not linked to last Thursday’s talks between Iran and the 5+1 group.

2000 GMT: Rumour of the Day. No, it's not the one about Ahmadinejad being part-Jewish: the Daily Telegraph's "astonishing secret" is eight months old. Mehdi Khazali, the son of the late Ayatollah Khazali, posted the allegation eight months ago.

No, the more important loud whisper is that Major-General Hassan Firouzabadi, the head of Iran's armed forces, is being removed from his post. We held off reporting this, as there was no supporting evidence, but now his office has felt the story was serious enough to issue a denial.

1945 GMT: Mehdi Mirdamadi, the son of Mohsen Mirdamadi, the Secretary-General of the Islamic Iran Participation Front, has been released after 17 days in detention.

1635 GMT: Amidst all the confusion over the claimed drafts of National Unity Plans (see 1040 GMT), Pedestrian offers a thoughtful and pointed analysis. There are two drafts, one which would have be inclusive of opposition figures such as Mousavi and Karroubi and one put about by hard-liners who want to steal the limelight and quash an inclusive arrangement:

Now, the other side doesn’t want to be left behind and is trying to release a plan of their own. They don’t want the Mousavi camp to be the group to come up with “the” national unity plan. Which is just funny, since Mousavi and Rafsanjani after him were the ones who have been talking about a plan for months. RajaNews and FarsNews sound like a kid who suddenly decides to steal his classmate’s homework.

Sure, they could have waited for Mousavi’s and ignored it, but they know that it will be read by a whole lot of people, “national unity” is of utmost importance right now, and as much as they can yell and holler that nothing has happened, they know the cords it will strike and they want theirs to be front page news.

1616 GMT: Spinning Out the Game. First, it was the denial by Saeed Jalili's spokesman that Iran had agreed to "third-party enrichment". Now a member of the Iranian delegation from the Geneva talks says not only that no agreement was made on delivery of uranium to a country such as Russia but also that there was no deal on inspection of the second enrichment plant near Qom in the next two weeks: "In the Thursday talks, Iran elaborated on its package of proposals and how to implement them… and it was agreed that negotiations should continue on Iran’s package of proposals and the common points in this package and the package drawn up by the other side, and there was no other agreement.”

1610 GMT: International Atomic Energy Agency Mohammad El Baradei has arrived in Tehran to discuss arrangements for the inspection of Iran's second uranium enrichment facility.

1435 GMT: MediaCheck (EA v. CNN, Round 78) . Enduring America ($0/story), 2 October, 0700 GMT: "Big Win for Tehran at Geneva Talks".

CNN ($199/story), 3 October, 1320 GMT: "Iran is Winner in Nuclear Talks, At Least for Now"

1420 GMT: The reformist leader Saeed Hajjarian, detained for 100 days until he was bailed this week, has told the youth section of the Islamic Iran Participation Front of his stay in prison. He was totally cut off from the outside world and was unaware of events. He was held in solitary confinement in Evin Prison for a month and, after his transfer to another location, was only in contact with interrogators.

Hajjarian claimed that interrogators told him of many people killed in fighting and a big gap has been created between the authorities and the Iranian people, all due to his theories of reform. He added that he could hear people chanting “God is Great” outside Evin Prison, boosting his spirits.

1410 GMT: All 15 members of the Daftar-Tahkim-Vahdat (Unity Consolidation Bureau) reformist student group who were arrested on Friday morning have been released. One of the members told Deutsche Welle that these blind arrests are signs that the authorities are confused on how to deal with the protests.

1400 GMT: Press TV is now headlining the denial of the spokesman for Iran's National Security Council that Tehran "reached a deal with world powers to ship its enriched uranium abroad for further processing". The Secretary of the NSC, Saeed Jalili, is Iran's lead negotiator on the nuclear issue.

1200 GMT: Sir, It Was Not Me. Saeed Jalili, Iran's lead negotiator at the Geneva talks, has denied the widespread report that he and his US counterpart, William Burns, had a 30-minute 1-on-1 discussion during lunch. They "might have exchanged a few words during the lunch break with other delegations present". (See also our separate analysis.)

1050 GMT: Reports that some of the 15 or more student activists of Daftar-Takhim-Vadat, detained yesterday, have been released.

1040 GMT: The Plan (and A Breakthrough)? After 48 hours of quiet, some movement on the purported National Unity Plan.

Parleman News reports that the "Iran Conciliation Plan" is close to a final draft. Provisions include a release of post-election detainees, a change in the "attitude" of the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting, allowing both sides 2 voice their views, and an end to the "security atmosphere".

Mediators for the plan are named as Hassan Khomeini (Imam Khomeini's grandson), Hashemi Rafsanjani, Ayatollah Mahdavi Kani, Ayatollah Javadi-Amoli, and a few other prominent senior clerics.

Mediators have approached Mir Hossein Mousavi in the past weeks. He has indicated that he approves the grand design and is discussing minor changes. And here's the big shift: for the first time since drafts of a plan surfaced, it is reported that Mehdi Karroubi is also being asked to approve the initiative.

"Informed sources" have said that prisoner release and a change in Government could occur within days, as well as the arrest and prosecution of some "rogue" officials and demotion of others.

Now for a caution: this is the second "draft" to have appeared; the first, published in Fars News, provoked much comment and criticism that it was not the "real" plan. So, while this latest news is imporant, we await other signs that this indeed is the working scheme for reconciliation.

0805 GMT: Wow. The editorial staff at The New York Times must have been taking multi-strength vitamins (or getting words in their ears from those in the Obama Administration who aren't thrilled about the talks with Iran):

This is no time for complacency or wishful thinking. The United States and its partners must push Iran to open all of its declared nuclear facilities and allow inspectors to interview any Iranian scientist they choose to — the only way to figure out what else Iran may be hiding. The leading powers must also be ready to impose tough sanctions if Iran resists or if negotiations go nowhere.

0750 GMT: Chief Iranian nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili has repeated: "Within the framework of the IAEA and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the nuclear watchdog will be allowed to inspect the [second] nuclear site as it has been the case with the Natanz nuclear facility."

0730 GMT: Leading Principlist MP Hamid-Reza Katouzian has raised questions about the Parliamentary commission that is supposedly investigating post-election abuses. He notes that its composition is not "diverse", "its legal status is unclear", and it has not yet met.

0725 GMT: The commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps, General Mohammad Ali Jafari, has launched a pre-emptive strike against any plan for national unity, arguing that it is unnecessary given the legitimacy of the Presidential election and the strength of the Iranian system.

0700 GMT: Gary Sick, whose analysis on US-Iranian relations is always to be valued, yesterday put the "surprisingly productive" tag on the Geneva talks on Iran's nuclear programme. Juan Cole also held this view, adding, "Obama pwns Bush-Cheney on Iran", and this was soon picked up by other commentators such as Andrew Sulivan.

I share the hope that this is a breakthrough but, at the same, my concern (and that of EA colleagues) was that Geneva was being overplayed as a US victory "wringing concessions" out of the Iranians. The portrayal also obscured, even ignored, the tensions that continue within the Obama Administration.

So this morning "significant progress" has turned into "significant doubts" with the Obama Administration falling into confusion and squabbles over whether to welcome the engagement with Iran or to wag a finger of warning. We've got a separate analysis, "Iran’s Nuclear Programme: Obama’s Balance Wobbles".

0555 GMT: We're back after taking Friday night off to recharge.

Many thanks to our readers for a discussion which I think offers some of the best analysis of the internal politics, possibilities, and challenges. Where else on the Internet can you find a thorough discussion of Tehran Mayor Qalibaf, who may become a key figure in a plan for political resolution?

One of the questions which continues to occupy us is the strategy of Mir Hossein Mousavi. I have been sceptical of Mousavi's move "into the tent", setting aside a front of political opposition for a social network and apparent negotiation within the system, through a role on a committee for 2national unity. (My concern is not as much about Mousavi's decision as it is about the exclusion of Mehdi Karroubi from the process.) Our readers, however, have been considering the idea that Mousavi is fulfilling the long-term approach of the Green Wave; recognising that head-on confrontation will only lead to the crushing of the movement, he is seeking reform through some co-operation with the establishment's inquiries and re-evaluations. Still others don't trust Mousavi at all because of his past record, particularly as Prime Minister in the 1980s.

Very little movement on the internal front so far this morning, however, from Mousavi or anyone else.

Latest Iran Video: Football & "Ya Hossein! Mir Hossein!" (2 October)

The Latest from Iran (2 October): Back to the Homefront

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

Seven Videos from Today's Esteglhal-Persepolis Football Match in Tehran

Red and Blue Fans Unified by Green Politics

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mx-WDhsttFE[/youtube]

Final Minutes of Match"Ya Hossein! Mir Hossein!"/"We Don't Want Football with Politics!"

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llYmhSNcg80&feature=player_embedded#[/youtube]

Outside the Match

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tx9RITyP8k&feature=player_embedded#[/youtube] [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBN2z9bs90w&feature=player_embedded[/youtube] [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DFhGNmjutc&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]

More Extracts from Match

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuhITE5tqhI[/youtube] [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mmPApcjjDA[/youtube]

Iran's Nuclear Programme: Obama's Balance Wobbles

The Latest from Iran (3 October): Debating Mousavi’s Strategy
Iran’s Nuclear Programme: Big Win for Tehran at Geneva Talks
Latest Iran Video: Nuclear Official Jalili on CNN (1 October)
Iran’s Nuclear Programme: Obama Remarks on Geneva Talks

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

It only took 24 hours for the Obama Administration, after the "substantial progress" of Thursday's Geneva talks on Iran's nuclear programme, to hit the choppy waters of Washington and Tehran politics.

On Friday morning, it was looking very good for the White House. Most of the US media were putting out the news of Iran's agreement to invite the International Atomic Energy Agency to inspect the Qom enrichment facility and to ship uranium to Russia to be enriched. They were adding the Administration's gloss that this was all made to a forceful American stance which had pushed the Iranians into concessions.

By Friday afternoon, the public-relations glue had come unstuck, as a State Department briefing turned into black comedy. (Watch the clip from the 8:44 mark.) The first wobble was over the "third-party enrichment" which had supposedly been established. Journalists challenged that Iranian officials were saying only that they had agreed to consider the proposal; the Department spokesman, unprepared for this information, could only warble about an "agreement in principle".

He came off even worse in the second exchange over Iran's invitation to inspect the Qom plant, after he said there was "no hard-and-fast deadline" for the inspections. Why then, journalists clamoured, had Barack Obama pointedly mentioned on Thursday night a "two-week deadline"? Caught between his opening line of flexibility and the inconvenience of the President's firm marker, the spokesman, umm, stammered.

This would all be good voyeuristic fun if it did not pont to the two larger problems for the Administration. The first is that the Iranian Government is not going to go gently into the diplomatic night playing its assigned role. Tehran, in our view, was already going to be conciliatory at the opening discussions in the hope of getting more discussions. It was not going to jump into any hard-and-fast deal.

The spin that the US Government "forced" Iran's concessions only adds to the dfficulty. Not wanting to appear to be forced into anything, Iranian officials "clarify" that firm measures have not been agreed but must be the subject of further talks, in this case, technical discussions in Vienna on 18 October and the next Iran meeting with the 5+1 powers, possibly at the end of this month.

The second and even greater challenge for the Obama Administration from within. There has always been a group of officials in the Executive who saw negotiations as a process that had to be endured before, with the Iranians inevitably breaking the talks and/or agreements, more pressure could be put on Tehran.

So, even as the "significantly positive" outcome of Geneva was being announced, they were tossing a bucket of red herrings to the media. There might be even more "secret" sites that Tehran had not declared. Iran still had enough uranium to make The Bomb. The Israelis were watching carefully. (Juan Cole points out how all these diversions made their way into Friday's New York Times.)

The loudest of these heckles was that, whatever happened at Geneva, The Iranians Weren't Really Serious. Yesterday morning The Wall Street Journal, which might as well declare that it is a propaganda sheet masquerading as news, declared in its opening paragraph, "Analysts cautioned that the Iranians merely may be seeking to defuse pressure for sanctions while continuing their nuclear program." (The two "analysts" were an Israeli reservist general and George W. Bush's "special envoy on nonproliferation issues".)

Lo and behold, this morning The New York Times headlines, "U.S. Wonders if Iran Is Playing for Time or Is Serious on Deal". Helene Cooper splashes about "administration officials" warning "the trick now for Mr. Obama...will be to avoid getting tripped up", which is actually only one "senior" official (Who is he/she? On the side of those pushing for a lasting agreement with the Iranians? On the side of those seeing no prospect of an agreement?) putting out the dampening comment, “That’s the big ‘if,’ isn’t it? Will they do it? No one wants to do a premature victory lap.”

Let's just put this basic comment out, already fearing that it will disappear in the media wash. The Iranian Government is playing this process "long". It is likely to allow an IAEA inspection of Qom, although even this will be subject to discussions on conditions, but other issues including third-party enrichment, will go into a set of committees. Any agreement will take months, rather than weeks, of contact.

From the start, the Obama Administration --- split between different factions --- have been locked into playing the process "short". A quick result had to be obtained, otherwise sanctions would have to be sought quickly. That is why all the fatuous talk of deadlines --- December? September? October? --- has loudly accompanied and even out-shouted the complexities of engagement.

The President has been unable to extricate himself from this unproductive dilemma. So once again, we will have a two-week cycle of domestic fury, even though the Administration has no stick to wield, before the technical talks in Vienna.

Iran's Nuclear Programme: Big Win for Tehran at Geneva Talks

LATEST Iran’s Nuclear Programme: Obama’s Balance Wobbles
Latest Iran Video: Nuclear Official Jalili on CNN (1 October)
Iran’s Nuclear Programme: Obama Remarks on Geneva Talks
The Latest from Iran (1 October): From Geneva to “Unity”?

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

First Things First. We may have underestimated the significance of yesterday's discussions between Iran and the "5+1" power when we wrote (1640 GMT), "The Iranians have achieved their primary objective, which is to avoid an immediate condemnation and the threat of sanctions from a “breakdown” of today’s discussions."

The biggest signal of a breakthrough at the talks was not the declaration, from all sides, that Iran would invite the International Atomic Energy Agency to visit the second enrichment facility at Qom "in the next couple of weeks" (1715 GMT). That was always the likely Iranian concession to "the West": contrary to the exaggerations in the US and British media, Qom is not that significant a plant, serving at this point as potential back-up to the main enrichment site at Natanz. So Tehran can accept inspections, provided its sovereignty is also maintained in an agreement, with the assurance that there's nothing illegal to be seen at the second facility.

No, here was the white smoke of a larger deal: "the Western media continues to miss the announcement, enthusiastically proclaimed by Press TV, that officials from Iran and the “5+1″ powers will have technical talks on 18 October on 'third-party enrichment'" (1935 GMT). A couple of hours later, McClatchy News Service put out the news:

Iran agreed in principle at high-level talks here to ship most of its enriched uranium to Russia, where it would be refined for exclusively peaceful uses, in what Western diplomats called a significant, but interim measure, to ease concerns over its nuclear development.

Under the tentative deal reached here, Iran would ship what a U.S. official said was "most" of its approximately 3.300 pounds of low-enriched uranium to Russia where it would be further refined. French technicians would then fabricate it into fuel rods and return it to Tehran, to insert into a nuclear research reactor that is used to make isotopes for nuclear medicine.

This morning, The New York Times headlines, "Iran Agrees to Send Enriched Uranium to Russia", and The Washington Post also picks up on the development. Perhaps most importantly, President Obama slipped the news into his statement last night, "Taking the step of transferring its low-enriched uranium to a third country would be a step towards building confidence that Iran’s program is in fact peaceful."

Of course, this is far from a done deal. The head of Iran's delegation, Saeed Jalili, was cautious when he appeared on CNN last night, saying that the matter would not have to be discussed by the "experts" in the IAEA, rather than the 5+1 Powers. Press TV's website, in contrast to the network's excited declaration of the technical talks on 18 October, is now silent on the matter.

Yet make no mistake. At this point the outcome is a victory for the Ahmadinejad Government. A week ago, President Obama, flanked by the British and French leaders, was loudly declaring that the US would be punishing Iran economically if Tehran did not concede on the "secret nuclear plant". The White House scrambled last night to keep the stick on the table, with Obama putting out boilerplate warnings, Talk is not substitute for action. Pledges of cooperation must be fulfilled....Our patience is not unlimited." An official added the specific caution to The New York Times, "[This] would represent a major accomplishment for the West, reducing Iran’s ability to make a nuclear weapon quickly and buying more time for negotiations to bear fruit. If Iran has secret stockpiles of enriched uranium, however, the accomplishment would be hollow."

Now, however, that stick would have to be waved in the face of not one but two tracks of conversations. There are the technical talks, and there is the next meeting of the 5+1 powers with Iran, flagged up for the end of October. So, unless the US is prepared to pull the plug suddenly on both processes (or unless the Iranian Government is foolish enough to abandon the discussions), there is no pretext for further sanctions before the end of the year, even if Tehran draws out the talks with the IAEA over access to the second enrichment facility.

And even then, Washington's stick has been a limp one. Juan Cole enthuses this morning, "Barack Obama pwned Bush-Cheney in one day, and got more concessions from Iran in 7 1/2 hours than the former administration got in 8 years of saber-rattling," but the Obama Administration probably could have had the same result that it got yesterday had it kept its collective mouth shut last week. Instead, the President and his advisors raised the stakes with threats and then found, in the 72 hours leading up to Geneva, that they could not deliver if necessary: neither Russia nor China was on board, and the European Union as well as the IAEA signalled their preference for genuine discussions.

This alone would be excellent reward for Tehran, but President Ahmadinejad's victory --- and this will be the unnoticed side-effect of the discussions --- is even greater. For over the last week, the "Western" powers have given him the legitimacy for which he has struggled at home. Have no doubt: the President and his advisors will be proclaiming loudly that they have defended Iran's sovereignty, upheld the rights of other peoples with their insistence on discussion on wider political and economic issues, and forced the US, Britain, and France to back down. Last night Jalili was already denouncing the "media terrorism" which tried to humiliate Iran and refusing to acknowledge a question from an Israeli reporter.

In other words --- I doubt you can find many non-Iranian commentators who will note this, although The Guardian has noted somewhat clumsily, "An Islamic regime involved in rape...is more of an issue in Tehran than the nuclear one" --- the Geneva discussions were the second theatre for the Ahmadinejad Government. What it needed, even more than the disappearance of the sanctions threat and space for its nuclear programme, was the drama and spectacle of recognition to take back home.

The President and his advisors may have been playing to the Western galleries, but they recognise that the primary theatre is still at home. So now the question arises: can the regime use the nuclear talks to push aside the challenges to its authority or will other issues --- detentions, abuses, Constitutional manipulations --- now return to centre stage?