Wednesday
Sep302009
UPDATED Iran: So What's This "National Unity Plan"?
Wednesday, September 30, 2009 at 16:56
The Latest from Iran (29 September): The Forthcoming Test?
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
UPDATE 1800 GMT: A reader usefully interjects, "I would like to just remind you that "The Unity Plan' is not from Rafsanjani and it is from 'Pro-Government people seeking truce.'"
It's a fair point, but the reason that this Plan was linked to Rafsanjani was because of widespread chatter, some of it fuelled by Rafsanjani allies, that the former President was the driving force behind the initiative for political reconciliation. Mehdi Karroubi's letter, published in a separate entry, also works from that assumption.
The overriding point is that we don't know Rafsanjani's role in this plan.
UPDATE 1650 GMT: My apologies for a slip-up in the previous entry. There are only eight names listed for the 9-member committee. That is because the 9th spot is for a representative of "political opposition (Mousavi)"
UPDATE 0650 GMT: The names of the proposed nine members of the top Committee in the "draft" of the Plan: Ayatollah Mahdavi Kani (“hard-line” cleric), Ayatollah Hashemi Shahroudi (former head of Judiciary), Ali Akbar Velayati (former Foreign Minister), Aboutorabi Fard (Deputy Parliament Speaker), Mahmoud Doai (Head of Etalaat News and former Ambassador to Iraq), Hassan Rohani (Rafsanjani stalwart), Masih Mohajeri (editor of Jomhuri Eslami newspaper), Habibollah Asgharowladi (leader of the Motalefeh Party).
It is claimed that the "draft" was written by Habibollah Asgaroladi, M.Mirsalim, M.Bahonar (Deputy Parliament Speaker), M.Nabavi, H.Mozafar, Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel (former Parliament Speaker).
UPDATE 30 September 0640 GMT: No further political developments but events at Fars News indicate that this was an early draft of a plan which the paper, either through poor journalism or an attempt to cause mischief, initially presented as a final, agreed proposal. After posting and then withdrawing several stories overnight, Fars eventually put up a version which explicitly refers to the Plan --- similar in its provisions to what we set out below --- as a "draft".
URGENT UPDATE 2015 GMT: There have been curious twists in the story. Fars had now modified its story of the document, saying that it is a "draft" from the Expediency Council. There is no date, no stamp, and no signature. (Note: within the last 30 minutes, the modified Fars story has been pulled from the website.)
This would still match up with a narrative, prominent in recent days, that the Expediency Council, chaired by Rafsanjani, had taken the initiative in producing a plan for political resolution to be considered by the Assembly of Experts. Yet, assuming the document is authentic, the story stops there. What happened to it when it was considered by the Assembly? Is the Expediency Council in charge of the process? What role does the Supreme Leader play in this political game?
Yet, the more one goes into the detail of the document, the more tenuous even this scenario becomes. The plan of a 9-person committee overseeing subcommittees to consider issues from electoral fraud to abuse of detainees is cumbersome, to say the least, but the prospects are almost fantastic. Would this complex set of committee and subcommittees dare overturn the Guardian Council's upholding of the original Presidential result or threaten widespread prosecution of security forces or government officials?
Even more striking is the document's deliberate slight of certain political figures. The repeated references to the inclusion of a representative from an "opposition candidate" (singular, not plural) and the equally repetitive naming of Mir Hossein Mousavi could not be clearer in its intent to split the Green opposition. So, if this is a plan for "National Unity", it rests upon a blunt attempt to cause disunity.
Indeed, the snub of Mehdi Karroubi (and, beyond the Green movement, Mohsen Rezaei) is so blatant that the document has a feel of "disinformation". However, if it were a false plan, one would expect it to be disowned very quickly by Mir Hossein Mousavi and, possibly, Rafsanjani. So far neither has spoken.
The other leading possibility is that this is an early draft of a plan floated by someone or some group. But whom? There the trail stops, for now.
What can be said tonight is that a purported plan for political resolution has actually provoked more division. The draft may explain why Karroubi wrote his second letter to Rafsanjani yesterday and why the tone was sharply critical. In effect, "Hashemi, why have you betrayed us?", both with a plan dividing the opposition (arguably co-opting Mousavi into the "establishment") and with the conversion of the Assembly of Experts into a body to close ranks against legitimate protest.
We're working on a full analysis of the National Unity Plan, as printed in Fars News this afternoon, but to be honest, it is so potentially dramatic in its provisions that we need time to work through the dynamics. So here's how our snap analysis unfolded. If you follow the path, you'll probably see that we think there is a convergence of forces which brings Mir Hossein Mousavi into the "acceptable" negotiations and shuts out Mehdi Karroubi. What this means for the Supreme Leader (how much influence has he lost by handing over "resolution" to a Truth Commission?) and President Ahmadinejad (is the Plan/Commission with him or against him?) is far less certain:
1550 GMT: We are working on an analysis of the "National Unity Plan" published in Fars News this afternoon but here's the headline:
The authors, who call themselves the delsoozan ("those whose hearts are aching" over the post-election conflict) have declared, "Let's join hands and fix the nezam (system)." Because of "the rise of some uncertainties in the political arena", the "elders and devotees...after several meetings have decided a plan for national unity that would enable a --- way out of the present situation".
The plan appears to be inclusive in its recommendation for a "national unity committee", with representatives from all parties including one from Mir Hossein Mousavi's campaign.
1610 GMT: Sting in the Detail. But, if the National Unity Plan proposes a committee with at least one representative from the Green opposition, it also offers a big-time slap in the face to somebody:
In reality, what was witnessed after the elections was a vast effort and movement of a political entity that was against the legal institutions and pillars of the system. This went as far as the fact that during Qods Day, the sayings of the Imam and the Revolution went under attack by this group.
So was this destructive "political entity" the Green Wave?
1615 GMT: Another Cryptic Passage from the Plan. "Truth seeking commission must put the word 'end' to the current situation in the country."
1619 GMT: And, for what's it worth, an EA correspondent answers the question racing around the Internet, "Is This Rafsanjani's Plan?": "It's a Hashemi-laden letter. You can almost see his fingerprints."
1622 GMT: The Proposed Truth Commission? One representative of the marjas [senior clerics], one representative from Assembly of Experts, one representative from Interior Ministry, one rep from Majlis [Parliament], one representative from Judiciary, one representative from Expediency Council, one representative from Guardian Council, one representative from the "House of Parties", and one representative of the "protesting candidate (Mousavi)".
1628 GMT: So Who Got Left Out of the Plan? Take a look at that Commission membership again. No representative of the "other" defeated Presidential candidates, Mohsen Rezaei and Mehdi Karroubi.
1635 GMT: And while you're getting your heads around Who's In, Who's Out and Why, consider this from an EA correspondent: "The mere acceptance of this Plan by Supreme Leader would be quite something as he would have to implictly recognise that he has not been able and will not be able to cope with the situation alone and so he needs ad hoc help from 'friends and family'."
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
UPDATE 1800 GMT: A reader usefully interjects, "I would like to just remind you that "The Unity Plan' is not from Rafsanjani and it is from 'Pro-Government people seeking truce.'"It's a fair point, but the reason that this Plan was linked to Rafsanjani was because of widespread chatter, some of it fuelled by Rafsanjani allies, that the former President was the driving force behind the initiative for political reconciliation. Mehdi Karroubi's letter, published in a separate entry, also works from that assumption.
The overriding point is that we don't know Rafsanjani's role in this plan.
UPDATE 1650 GMT: My apologies for a slip-up in the previous entry. There are only eight names listed for the 9-member committee. That is because the 9th spot is for a representative of "political opposition (Mousavi)"
UPDATE 0650 GMT: The names of the proposed nine members of the top Committee in the "draft" of the Plan: Ayatollah Mahdavi Kani (“hard-line” cleric), Ayatollah Hashemi Shahroudi (former head of Judiciary), Ali Akbar Velayati (former Foreign Minister), Aboutorabi Fard (Deputy Parliament Speaker), Mahmoud Doai (Head of Etalaat News and former Ambassador to Iraq), Hassan Rohani (Rafsanjani stalwart), Masih Mohajeri (editor of Jomhuri Eslami newspaper), Habibollah Asgharowladi (leader of the Motalefeh Party).
It is claimed that the "draft" was written by Habibollah Asgaroladi, M.Mirsalim, M.Bahonar (Deputy Parliament Speaker), M.Nabavi, H.Mozafar, Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel (former Parliament Speaker).
UPDATE 30 September 0640 GMT: No further political developments but events at Fars News indicate that this was an early draft of a plan which the paper, either through poor journalism or an attempt to cause mischief, initially presented as a final, agreed proposal. After posting and then withdrawing several stories overnight, Fars eventually put up a version which explicitly refers to the Plan --- similar in its provisions to what we set out below --- as a "draft".
URGENT UPDATE 2015 GMT: There have been curious twists in the story. Fars had now modified its story of the document, saying that it is a "draft" from the Expediency Council. There is no date, no stamp, and no signature. (Note: within the last 30 minutes, the modified Fars story has been pulled from the website.)
This would still match up with a narrative, prominent in recent days, that the Expediency Council, chaired by Rafsanjani, had taken the initiative in producing a plan for political resolution to be considered by the Assembly of Experts. Yet, assuming the document is authentic, the story stops there. What happened to it when it was considered by the Assembly? Is the Expediency Council in charge of the process? What role does the Supreme Leader play in this political game?
Yet, the more one goes into the detail of the document, the more tenuous even this scenario becomes. The plan of a 9-person committee overseeing subcommittees to consider issues from electoral fraud to abuse of detainees is cumbersome, to say the least, but the prospects are almost fantastic. Would this complex set of committee and subcommittees dare overturn the Guardian Council's upholding of the original Presidential result or threaten widespread prosecution of security forces or government officials?
Even more striking is the document's deliberate slight of certain political figures. The repeated references to the inclusion of a representative from an "opposition candidate" (singular, not plural) and the equally repetitive naming of Mir Hossein Mousavi could not be clearer in its intent to split the Green opposition. So, if this is a plan for "National Unity", it rests upon a blunt attempt to cause disunity.
Indeed, the snub of Mehdi Karroubi (and, beyond the Green movement, Mohsen Rezaei) is so blatant that the document has a feel of "disinformation". However, if it were a false plan, one would expect it to be disowned very quickly by Mir Hossein Mousavi and, possibly, Rafsanjani. So far neither has spoken.
The other leading possibility is that this is an early draft of a plan floated by someone or some group. But whom? There the trail stops, for now.
What can be said tonight is that a purported plan for political resolution has actually provoked more division. The draft may explain why Karroubi wrote his second letter to Rafsanjani yesterday and why the tone was sharply critical. In effect, "Hashemi, why have you betrayed us?", both with a plan dividing the opposition (arguably co-opting Mousavi into the "establishment") and with the conversion of the Assembly of Experts into a body to close ranks against legitimate protest.
We're working on a full analysis of the National Unity Plan, as printed in Fars News this afternoon, but to be honest, it is so potentially dramatic in its provisions that we need time to work through the dynamics. So here's how our snap analysis unfolded. If you follow the path, you'll probably see that we think there is a convergence of forces which brings Mir Hossein Mousavi into the "acceptable" negotiations and shuts out Mehdi Karroubi. What this means for the Supreme Leader (how much influence has he lost by handing over "resolution" to a Truth Commission?) and President Ahmadinejad (is the Plan/Commission with him or against him?) is far less certain:
1550 GMT: We are working on an analysis of the "National Unity Plan" published in Fars News this afternoon but here's the headline:
The authors, who call themselves the delsoozan ("those whose hearts are aching" over the post-election conflict) have declared, "Let's join hands and fix the nezam (system)." Because of "the rise of some uncertainties in the political arena", the "elders and devotees...after several meetings have decided a plan for national unity that would enable a --- way out of the present situation".
The plan appears to be inclusive in its recommendation for a "national unity committee", with representatives from all parties including one from Mir Hossein Mousavi's campaign.
1610 GMT: Sting in the Detail. But, if the National Unity Plan proposes a committee with at least one representative from the Green opposition, it also offers a big-time slap in the face to somebody:
In reality, what was witnessed after the elections was a vast effort and movement of a political entity that was against the legal institutions and pillars of the system. This went as far as the fact that during Qods Day, the sayings of the Imam and the Revolution went under attack by this group.
So was this destructive "political entity" the Green Wave?
1615 GMT: Another Cryptic Passage from the Plan. "Truth seeking commission must put the word 'end' to the current situation in the country."
1619 GMT: And, for what's it worth, an EA correspondent answers the question racing around the Internet, "Is This Rafsanjani's Plan?": "It's a Hashemi-laden letter. You can almost see his fingerprints."
1622 GMT: The Proposed Truth Commission? One representative of the marjas [senior clerics], one representative from Assembly of Experts, one representative from Interior Ministry, one rep from Majlis [Parliament], one representative from Judiciary, one representative from Expediency Council, one representative from Guardian Council, one representative from the "House of Parties", and one representative of the "protesting candidate (Mousavi)".
1628 GMT: So Who Got Left Out of the Plan? Take a look at that Commission membership again. No representative of the "other" defeated Presidential candidates, Mohsen Rezaei and Mehdi Karroubi.
1635 GMT: And while you're getting your heads around Who's In, Who's Out and Why, consider this from an EA correspondent: "The mere acceptance of this Plan by Supreme Leader would be quite something as he would have to implictly recognise that he has not been able and will not be able to cope with the situation alone and so he needs ad hoc help from 'friends and family'."
tagged Aboutorabi Fard, Ali Akbar Velayati, Assembly of Experts, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Ayatollah Hashemi Shahroudi, Ayatollah Mahdavi Kani, Expediency Council, Fars News, Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, Habibollah Asgaroladi, Habibollah Asgharowladi, Hashemi Rafsanjani, Hassan Rohani, Iran, Iran Elecitons 2009, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Mahmoud Doai, Masih Mohajeri, Mehdi Karroubi, Mir Hossein Mousavi, Mohammad Reza Bahonar, Mohsen Rezaei, National Unity Plan in Middle East & Iran
Aboutorabi Fard, Ali Akbar Velayati, Assembly of Experts, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Ayatollah Hashemi Shahroudi, Ayatollah Mahdavi Kani, Expediency Council, Fars News, Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, Habibollah Asgaroladi, Habibollah Asgharowladi, Hashemi Rafsanjani, Hassan Rohani, Iran, Iran Elecitons 2009, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Mahmoud Doai, Masih Mohajeri, Mehdi Karroubi, Mir Hossein Mousavi, Mohammad Reza Bahonar, Mohsen Rezaei, National Unity Plan in Middle East & Iran
Reader Comments (62)
Afshin, how will anyone get the IRGC under control, even with the 'unification' plan?
They have been undermining change at every step of the way with their 'shadow' security/judiciary/police powers. Who/what will stop this and how will it be accomplished, please?
Thank you for a reponse.
Maybe we can take one lesson from this: NEVER trust Fars News ;).
Afshin,
If you really believe Iranians have much changed from 1979, then why would you label my first comment in which I hoped people reject the “smoking peace pipe” charade as “idealistic”? To declare the notion that people should dismiss this Unity Committee of Dalsoozans (Translation: murderers, robbers, rapists, torturers, executioners, liars, charlatans, retarded, and shame of human race) as “idealist” is farce. On one hand you state Iranians have changed significantly from 1979 and on the other hand you advocate they continue making a pact with the devil? That tells me you really do not believe there are very many people with strong conviction to demand and fight for their basic individual human rights. That worries me.
I believe once you shake hand with those who have blood of innocents on their hands you are just like them. This not being idealistic this is being principled.
Those Iranians we see in the streets may be a lost generation but they need to stop conforming and submitting to this regime so they can save the next generation. They owe that to their children and grandchildren.
I listen to this song http://twt.fm/208952 over and over and I wonder if anyone can hear his cry or if anyone ever cares to really hear him. I do not know the vocalist, I wish I did. I came upon this by accident. I think he is an Iranian. Here is the YouTube version http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6p9848M7JIA&feature=related
@ Megan
In politics just because you believe something does not mean you have to say or do it in the open. Sometimes doing that would not be productive.
The way people are doing it now is showing their sissatisfaction BUT in a safe way. The Example is the "Allah'o Akbar" from a rooftop. If u ask people to go on their rooftops saying "Death To Khamenei" or "Death to Islamic Republic" u would see alot less people on the rooftops and a it would be alot easier to crush the movement. Also it would make it impoosible for the people in power to force change from the within.
With Idealistic (Or Priciplistic) I do not mean something negative, infact I think that make you a wonderfull person and you are right that if you flirt with the devil to much sooner or later you'll end up in the same bed, but in politics there is no place for idealists and Priciplist. At then end its always the pragmatic who win.
I truley believe the majority of the people are against the IRI and against perhaps not Islam but atleast the strict way it is being forced up on the people now. But Reality it is better to show your discontent in a way that does not make it impossible to achieve the change you want.
But again I do salute your Principlist idea that certain people if not all of the reform leaders today are them selves guilty of crimes against the People of Iran and Humanity in general and they should not be cheered at or helped. But when u live in the reality of Iran you take change, reform, freedom, democracy in anyway possible and regardless who the messanger is or who brings it.
@ Observer
When I was studying Business and Management they almost forced us daily to make a SWOT (Strenght, Weakness, Opportunities, Threats) Analyses on every little thing. To undertstand how to achieve something you have to know every little aspect of it and also understand the situation and at the same time your self, your allies and so on. I did a quick one for some elements in this chessboard before just for the fun of it and adjusted my own analyses on things here and there. But I never did one for the Guards. I never found the time for it and am kinda in a hurry today as well. so perhaps you huys can help out with that, just to see if the ideas bring something unexpected.
I am sure there are diffrent scenarios we can think off. A quick look at things tells me they are vulnerable at the TOP of the IRI. The S.L and the Guardian Council in the short futue might be the key. If pressure can be built on the S.L the opposition could little by little get more power within the Guardian Council and little by little force the Guards out of politics. Once that happens it is very easy to make new rules which will hit them at their heart, business. One could even go as far as reorganising the Guards, taking parts of it and merging it with the Army.
The Guardian Council is where the opposition lost it to start off with, I think they are now attacking the Guards through the S.L as that is the easiest way to hurt them. The S.L opens the door to Guardian Council, the GC opens a door for change without direct confrontation.
Another weakness of the Guards is TIME, If the S.L was to die who will be the next S.L and will he be as Guard Friendly one? Will he change the puppets at GC ? and so on.
If one does the full SWOT on all the players, really intresting things come forward, such as the possibility of a Military Coup by the Guards. If you guys have time feel free to start an analyses.
@ kevina
I think the intresting question is WHY WAS THIS LEAKED... ? Is someone wanting to force or prevent something by doing this? If so Who and Why ?
@Scott, Afshin and Whereismyvote
In these discussions about this chess game or card play which is going on we hear so little about the regular army? Do you have information about them? Who are the leaders and where do they stand? They are larger in number than the Guards, but are they independent from the Guards? Who or what are they loyal to? You should think they should form a great power within the system of the IRI, but how come that you seldom hear about them? For example it was said that the Guards were testing the missiles, not the Army.
Maybe you could try to launch a SWOT on them later? Or maybe you did already and I have missed it? Thanks for your information and analysis so far.
Afshin,
What's your thought about this theory:
The regime in a calculated move divulged the second nuclear production site under the pretext of creating a unifying event for the nation. They would then use this perceived threat to crush the reform movement. They have done so because they have correctly surmized the West/US has neither the political or economic capital to wage another war. The worst case scenario is a limited strike which they can survive. The strike would then only help the domestic cause more in their minds.
Just a thought but the more I look at this I can find no plausiable reason why they would divulge the site other than to provoke a response. Let me know your thoughts.
Thx
Bill
@ Nelly
I would seriously doubt anyone allow the Police to get involved let alone the Army. Military Service is Iran is still mandatory so the kids holding the guns are the same 18 year old boys that chant death to Dictator in the streets. allowing them to get involved is a major hazard to the IRI existance.
@ Bill Davit
I dont think anything in the world would unite the nation in Iran. Now uniting the Regime or the Old and the New elements within the stablishment is a diffrent story. And even that I would think is a huge task on its own. Nothing except perhaps an Israeli strike would unite the top of the IRI at this point.
If the attack is done by the US it would have less effect but it done by the Israilis it might unite the nation somewhat but only to a certain extent.
At this moment thers ia such a HUGE majority in the opposition that really nothing will unite this nation to stand behind the IRI again.
Now the possibility of uniting the nation AGAINST the IRI is alot more to my liking...
Afshin,
I should have been more clear regarding a strike. I was assuming it would come form israel. The US cannot afford another military adventure so they could just turn a blind eye and let Israel strike. I think the regime believes this as well otherwise they would not be so boisterous and unyielding in their stance on the nuclear issue. I do agree with your stance on a unifying event however I also believe the regime does have illusions it will work because it did in the past. Dictators often follow this same pattern because they simply don't listen.
What are your thoughts on further sanctions regarding the reform movement? Will it hurt or help the issue.
Thx
Bill
Is this an interview with Afshin here now?
I am not sure if there has ever been a case where Sanctions have worked. I think sancions will not hurt the Guards all that much. An attack by Israel however would do the Guards a world of good.
In general a military strike without the Ground troops going in is the worse possible scenario.
The reformists condemn the sanctions and believe that it won't do any harm to the regime and so do the people of Iran who are all now a part of the re'forme
@Afshin
'In general a military strike without the Ground troops going in is the worse possible scenario' how come?
@ Hasty
It would just add atleast another 15 years to the life of this regime.
It would allow them to do whatever they want under the pretext of National Security. Goodbye reform, Goodbye change, goodbye hope, hello fascisme....
@ UPDATE 0650 GMT:
By my count there is 8 names there. What about the 9th? Also further looking into the names, reveals lots, as some of these names are hard line, but none in a 100% hard line AN supporter, except perhaps Mahdavi Kani, but the absence of any Pasdaran / AN men is intriguing...
@Afshin
I know, but I mean any sort of attack by any outsider would do that not just israili's military strike without the Ground troops going in, wouldn't it?
@hasty
Yes it would. With Israel it would be a bit more sensetive but yes any attack would do that and would be disasterous for the reform movement.
@whereismyvote
This looks like a list no one is happy with except the S.L and his allies and I doubt these are the final names. Hence my interest why this list was leaked, by whom and for what purpose !
Regarding the events that would unify Iran, I think you have to be careful to define what unifying means..is this case particularly who would be unified? An attack by anyone, specifically Israel, would allow AN/Pasdaran, etc to call to a general sense of nationalism within the general population that would be pervasive and reach to all corners of the country...we know of examples of this.
The point above that Afshin makes several times is a good one...looking beyond what has been leaked but why. Assuming for a moment that these names are correct or more importantly their affiliation, it does seem to bode best for those who are for maintaining the status quo of the establishment as is pointed out in the comments above.
One of Verbrugge's extended tweets says, from sources,, that if the plan (whatever version were on at this point) is truly enforced, then Ahmadi's done. Why? Evidence of electoral fraud will be overwhelming, and he'll have to go*.
The plan would also give legitimacy to all parties/groups w/in IRI.
But Verbrugge's worried about SL dithering.
*Provided Pasdaran don't go couping a 2nd time.
Regarding an attack on Iran: The US is not going to do it because we don't want a new world war, especailly while we are vulnerable. Israel is not going to do it because as Zbigniew Brezenski recently said it is not in US interests and if they try to by air we will have to confront them.
Regarding the Qom Facility revelation: I think this was a tag-team diplomatic approach by US and Russia. The US told them of this card they held and Russia informed Iran of this to see their reaction. This followed by the letter to the IAEA, showing Iran followed the NPT, before the UN meeting which they knew Obama was going to introduce non-proliferation issues. Key message being sent by US and Russia before tomorrow's Geneva talks is be serious in resolving the issue.
Regarding the Fars news leak: could this be political posturing by concerned interests trying to get their representative on board the commisson because they know it will happen one way or another?