UPDATED Iran: So What's This "National Unity Plan"?

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'."

Iran: Karroubi Letter to Rafsanjani (27 September)

UPDATED Iran: So What’s This “National Unity Plan”?
The Latest from Iran (30 September): Confusion

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 invaluable Iran Wiki has posted a translation of Medhi Karroubi's second letter to Hashemi Rafsanjani, published in Persian on Sunday. Reading this, I have no doubt that Karroubi is expressing genuine frustration and anger at Rafsanjani, asking why the former President has betrayed the legimitate demands of the opposition and the cases of those abused in post-election conflict:

I see that [Assembly of] Experts convened and you not only did not bring yourself to utter a word of criticism of the conditions governing the country or make any criticisms in accordance with your duties, but more curiously yet, you were absent at the closing of the session despite the importance that it had in such perilous times. I asked myself, is this the same Akbar Hashemi with that spirit which we saw in him before and after the revolution?

In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate

Ayatollah Hashemi-Rafsanjani
Honorable President of the Assembly of Experts
Greetings

This is the second letter which I have written to you following the recent pseudo-elections to the presidency.

I wrote the first because I had heard some very unpleasant and disturbing news from among the arrestees and I saw it as my duty to look into these events in accordance with your legal position and not allow transgressions against the life and property and honor of the people to become an ordinary occurrence. Unfortunately, this letter had no effect among the officials and you saw how negligence and contempt for the people’s rights has incinerated the trust we had harvested and ruined our system’s regard. Of course, the officials know the interest of their government. And so, if that letter accomplished nothing, I said to myself that perhaps it was beyond you to look into this letter.

But now I write this second letter to you because I saw that a session of the Assembly of Experts held and what needed to have been raised in it was not and what ought to have been investigated by members of this Assembly was not investigated. In a word, the Assembly of Experts, which much be the most distinguished supervisory institution in the Islamic Republic, has been turned into an ineffective institution. The result of this session was simply a few speeches and a statement which could have been issued without convening the session and gathering the esteemed members of this Assembly and exerting so much effort.

And so I decided to write this letter to you and remind you of the courage of His Eminence Imam Khomeini and the revolutionary forces of that age of monarchist oppression and remind you of the emphasis that the Imam and his disciples, such as you and myself, put on standing up to oppression and tyranny, and remind you that the Assembly of Experts' current philosophy and its members’ responsibilities so that you yourself can judge what your responsibilities were and are in these current dangerous circumstances, and to what degree you have protected the prestige of the seat in which you sit and to what extent you have defended the revolution in the post of presidency of the Assembly of Experts, the most important aim of which is to confront injustice and the violation of the people’s rights.

Honorable Mr. Hashemi,

Imam Khomeini during difficult and dangerous conditions fought hand to hand the system which was the embodiment of foreign support, armed to the teeth, which had spilled the youth’s valuable blood, in the darkness of Pahlavi absolutism, to defend Islam and the people’s freedom from absolutism and imperialism. You, who were one of the Imam’s disciples and went into battle at his side know that if it were not for his divine belief and firm will, confronting the Shah’s absolutist power and royal tyranny and that heroism and self-sacrifice would not have been a simple matter. You surely remember there were very few comrades who were of like mind in the ranks of the clergy about struggling against tyranny and absolutism under those terrifying conditions. It was a dangerous time, a time of prison and torture and arrest and exile and moving from house to house and homelessness. There was neither a great likelihood of victory nor a plan for the division of the spoils. Faith and a heart-felt belief in Islam and justice and the people ruled our hearts, and the urge to march in the desert to the Kaaba. That courage and self-sacrifice led by His Eminence the Imam of the Islamic and anti-absolutist revolution resulted in our now being its inheritors, and its thirst for justice is not limited to the borders of Iran, but has a world goal, including the land of Palestine and Noble Qods [Jerusalem].

Honorable Mr. Hashemi.

I, as one of the disciples of the Imam’s school, consider myself indebted to him and his courageous leadership, and have promised myself to go into battle at the side of his thought and protecting that enormously valuable Islamic and anti-absolutist inheritance until the end of my life. What concern is it that my office and that of Mehdi Karoubi’s party is sealed and his newspaper is closed and even his comrades are in prison for the sake of the Islamic Republican system? What concern is it that vicious newspapers called Iran or Vatan or Zamin or Keyhan attack me and the public treasure is spent on their abuse and they are paid for this and the national media is turned into a partisan and political armory against me and even the sacred Friday prayers are used for their political ends, turned into a center to attack the late Imam’s comrades. But I consider suffering all these catastrophes sweet, recalling what fateful and consuming and terrible storms arose during those hard times before and after the revolution and how the unparalleled will of the Imam and the iron firmness of his comrades turned the cruelty of SAVAK and Pahlavi’s henchmen into the delight of blood triumphing over the sword and the victory of truth over falsehood. My lot is so sweet because of this victory that the bitterness of certain passing disasters has not and will not have an effect on me. I well know that you, too, experienced all those disasters and hardships riding into battle at the side of His Eminence the Imam and, as opposed to certain others, you know that the Islamic Republican system is based on extremely valuable capital and much courage. You served this system for thirty years and know what disasters and stages full of danger this system passed in the struggle with eclecticist and apostate groups and what a price was paid to uphold the Islamic system and establish a republican government. Alas, though, what have we accomplished with all this courage and thirst for justice and confrontation with absolutism? Where have we come?

I see that [Assembly of] Experts convened and you not only did not bring yourself to utter a word of criticism of the conditions governing the country or make any criticisms in accordance with your duties, but more curiously yet, you were absent at the closing of the session despite the importance that it had in such perilous times. I asked myself, is this the same Akbar Hashemi with that spirit which we saw in him before and after the revolution? I recall how you … courageously raised issues even in the Imam’s presence whenever you saw it as necessary, even if they went counter to the Imam’s perspective. I recall a meeting in which we were in His Eminence the Imam’s presence and he related his will and testament to us and asked our opinions and all spoke in favor of it, but you had something to say and did not hide it, but spoke out, and the Imam, too, agreed with the grandeur of your speech and acted in accord.

Honorable Mr. Hashemi.

You have been placed by the vote of the people and their representatives in the Assembly of Experts at the head of an institution which is the most sensitive and most important institution in the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Constitution. It is an institution which, according to Article 108 of the Constitution, is the architect and supervisor over the heights of power over the Iranian governmental structure and is responsible for the election and appointment of the Supreme Leader and supervising his actions and the organizations under him. No one gave this right and power to this Assembly who wants to take it back from it, nor is it a deposit which can be taken from this Assembly at will. The right of that Assembly to elect and supervise and investigate the Supreme Leadership is derived from the Constitution and embodies the Iranian nation’s will. This Assembly enjoys such prestige that no institution has the right to legislate with respect to it and its members have the right to determine for themselves the conditions under which it will work and supervise. A meeting of the [Assembly of] Experts with such a position monopolized by an individual has been convened under such current circumstances and my question to you as president of this Assembly is, has this Assembly acted in accordance with its duties during this session? Do these introductory speeches and the report and declaration which was issued truly answer to today’s Iran’s questions and doubts? If even the honorable Ayatollah Dastgheib, for all his shining past and profound popular position, had spoken out of concern for the people during that session, they would have treated him in such a fashion and there would have been talk about the need to expel and remove and punish him so that, as it were, he could say nothing in that session but flattery and exaltation, and no expert has the right to criticize the current situation in the country, and the mouth of that expert who has passed the Seven Trials of the Guardian Council and could find his way into the Assembly of Experts had to be filled with dust lest he speak with anything but flattery and praise of the existing conditions! Truly, where are we headed? And if it has been decided that the sacred goal we all treasured in the struggle against absolutism and imperialism was to arrive at such a point, where was there need for the Assembly of Experts? If it were decided that in the Assembly of Experts, no expert was to speak except in support, would it not have been better for its annual session not to be held? Truly, where was the need for spending from the public treasury and having a building and an office and staff and all these expenses? Would it not have been better to such an Assembly to have been convened if, God forbid, something were to happen to the Supreme Leader?

This session of the Assembly of Experts was held and it was hoped that the people’s representatives in that Assembly would closely examine what happened on the day of the June 12 elections and the crises which arose both before and after them. But I never expected that during this session the people’s experts would have called the crisis plaguing the country a fitna and in order to clean the problem’s appearances, hide their head in the snow. Truly Your Eminence, who saw the volcano of the people’s rage ignite before the elections and stated this publicly, went along with calling this volcano waves of fitna and so quietly overlooked the country’s perilous conditions. I am amazed about how the Constitution, that valuable heritage of the Imam, bought by the martyrs’ blood and fruit of the efforts and firmness of the revolution’s allies, and one of its most genuine bases, that very Assembly of Experts, are being treated! The grandeur of this Assembly and its position which it could have had in the protection and well-being of the Islamic Republican system and winning the people’s rights have suffered such a fate as this!

Honorable President of the Assembly of Experts.

If the Imam had thought that this Assembly would have been a means to strengthen the Supreme Leader’s position, he did not think it was only expressions of appreciation and support for the good which had been done, but criticisms and objections about acts through acting on and performing its duty to supervise. Unfortunately, though, the position of this Assembly has reached such state during these last years that its representatives in past times such as the Grand Ayatollahs (God’s mercy be upon them!) [Ayatollah Hajj Sadeq] Ehsanbakhsh,¹ [Ayatollah Gholam-Hosein] Jami,² Abayi-Khorasani,³ [Hojjat ol-Eslam Sadeq] Khalkhali, and Ayatollah Abbasifar,⁴ have been trampled and the blade of supervision has been put to their necks and no one utters a word about what sort of disaster this is which has befallen the nation’s experts of this system or what crime they have committed to deserve being ignored. It is a result of this silence that today, some dare to raise an outcry about expelling and removing any representative from whom a word which displeases them is spoken. They do not realize that such repression and harshness, and this concerning a representative of the Assembly of Experts, is inexcusable for any sensible person. How can one excuse before the people the stifling of a member of the Assembly of Experts, upon whom a serious duty has been placed, simply because he had said something which displeased some? This rooster’s tail⁵ is not something which one can easily hide. The Supreme Leader must also go into action and stand up against this disrespect shown to a representative of the Assembly of Experts and prevent it. Truly, how can an Assembly, a member of which can be so commonly and easily humiliated, make the appropriate and necessary decisions for this country and nation in such difficult times and days which may we never see?

Honorable Mr. Hashemi.

What is your answer to people who are asking about the duties of the Assembly presided over by you under such circumstances? If the Assembly of Experts had given so much as a passing glance during its meeting to what has befallen this country these past four years, could it not have found much better grounds for the origins of the crisis which afflicts the country—what you have called a fitna. You in your speeches both before and after the elections have repeatedly referred to the economic crises and the collapse of the plan in the country and the deviation from it. But should not the discussion of these crises have been raised somewhere in the Assembly of Experts? Is it not your duty in the Assembly of Experts to examine what is called privatization and the execution of Article 44 of the Constitution and the institutions under the Supreme Leader’s supervision such as the Revolutionary Guards and the Staff for the Implementation of the Imam’s Command (which was given, according to the Imam’s command, to Your Servant and Ayatollah Hasan Sane’i, and in which it was decided that in at most two years, all properties’ seizure or release or, upon careful consideration, in the event that it was illegitimate, expropriation be determined and that this Staff should complete its task; a Staff of which even the dear grandson of the Imam repeatedly complained and requested that if it not be closed down, or at least that the word “Imam” should be removed from its title) would do in a half hour in its own name the work of a ministry and create yet another epic in the name of privatization to continue and complete the epic of the recent presidential elections? Truly, how much has the unplanned foreign policy, which has led to our systems enfeeblement in the international community, been discussed in this session? Are the social problems which plague the country and the securitizing of society’s political atmosphere in society, the universities, and different centers of the country of absolutely no importance, since the members of this Assembly paid no attention to them? Truly, how much have you investigated the activity of some of the organizations under the Supreme Leader’s purview, whose higher supervision over them is your responsibility, in the Assembly of Experts? Are you unaware of what is happening in our so-called national media and the catastrophe which this media’s pundits have wrought? Was there any discussion about why three of the candidates who allegedly lost in the recent pseudo-elections were put on the shelf and their supporters were thrown into solitary confinement and that they could only contact this national media from their solitary confinement cells, and even this to broadcast confessions, and that the gates to the media are only open, therefore, for the allegedly victorious candidate and the honorable Prosecutor General for them to come and make their biased speeches against the other candidates and go? Were you not aware of this issue? You were, and if there was nothing said about it in this session, does this not mean that the spirit of the thirst for justice and revolutionary courage has vanished from our midst and evaporated? And now, truly, what is your answer to those who claim that this Assembly has forgotten its supervisory mission and has been turned into an ineffectual and propagandistic institution? Would it not have been fitting for the members of this Assembly to have invited the three candidates who protested against the results of the elections, all of whom were of the wealth and service to this system, and heard them out and after this hasten to issue their statement?

Honorable Mr. Hashemi.

I consider it my duty to recall to you and others some of His Eminence the Imam’s explanations about the Assembly of Experts’ position, when he declared, “Now you, oh religious jurists [‘’faqih’’s] of the Assembly of Experts, the elect of that nation oppressed throughout the history of the monarchy and its tyranny, kindly accept your responsibility, which is above all other responsibilities, and set to work, for the fate of Islam and the toiling and martyr-providing and suffering nation is at stake. Let history and future generations judge you and the nation and God’s great Household of the Prophet observe your votes and deeds. “May God be at your back and your aid.” [In Arabic] The slightest carelessness or lapse or the slightest selfish act or, God forbid, pursuit of ones lusts which could pervert a noble deed, will cause a catastrophe of historical proportions.” And truly, what relation is there between the current work of this Assembly and what the Imam said about its position and the control which the Constitution and its authors bestowed upon it and its representatives in accordance with the people’s will? How can it be denied that such an important Assembly has been turned into an ineffectual institution in such a perilous time. I, Mehdi Karoubi, have written this letter to you and have raised these issues with you as a reminder, acting in accordance with my conscience before the late Imam, the revolution, and the noble people of Iran and so that I might show that what has befallen this Assembly is neither in the interests of the system nor in the interests of the people, neither does it secure the republicanism and Islam for which 98% of the people voted in Farvardin 1358.

Peace be upon you and God’s mercy and blessings

Mehdi Karoubi

6 Mehr 1388 (September 28, 2009)

Notes:
¹ A student of two of the most prominent religious families, Alam ol-Hoda and Bahr ol-Olum, he also studied psychology and secular jurisprudence. During the revolution, he was arrested and sent to Tehran for his agitation. After the revolution, he became the head of the Imam’s Committee (a vigilante force which attacked the leftist and rightist opponents of the Islamic regime), but was forced to leave Gilan in early 1980 for Tehran after his home was subject to frequent attacks by the left. He was dispatched to South Asia to purge the Iranian embassies and consulates there. He then became the Imam’s representative and Friday Imam in Rasht. In the spring of 1983, he was subject to an assassination attempt, after which he needed to undergo surgery fourteen times. He was elected to the Assembly of Experts in 1989. He passed away in June 2001. http://r-dehgani.blogfa.com/post-8.aspx
² Best known for his courage in staying in Abadan as Friday Imam when it was cut off and under intense bombardment by the Iraqis, where he kept up the people’s morale by continuing to carry on his functions as Friday Imam. In the eulogy for his recent death (January 2009), he was said to have been active in the Islamic opposition to the Shah since the 1963 revolt in Qom. http://www.magiran.com/npview.asp?ID=1777514
³ A student of Ayatollah Khomeini, a representative on the Assembly of Experts during its first period from Khorasan, a representative of the Imam in the Qom Missionary Office, temporary Friday Imam of Mashhad, elected to the Majlis during its sixth session, arrested and exiled repeatedly under the Shah. http://fa.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D9%85%D8%AD%D9%85%D8%AF_%D8%B9%D8%A8%D8%A7%DB%8C%DB%8C_%D8%AE%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%A7%D9%86%DB%8C and http://www.tebyan.net/social/sevencontinents/touringiran/undergroundwatertanks_bathes/2007/3/4/37699.html
⁴ Participated in the elections to the Assembly of Experts elections in 2008 with the encouragement of Rafsanjani, Khatami, and Karoubi. http://mosharekateilam.blogfa.com/post-102.aspx
⁵ From a Persian folk-saying about a chicken thief who steals a rooster and is discovered when its tail protrudes from under his coat.

The Latest from Iran (25 September): The Nuclear Distraction

NEW Video: Ahmadinejad Interview with Time Magazine
NEW Transcript: Obama and Sarkozy Statements on Iran Nuclear Programme
NEW Iran: Obama's "Get-Tough" Move for Engagement
Iran: Rafsanjani, Ahmadinejad, and the Multi-Sided Chess Match
Latest Video: Full Speech of Ahmadinejad at UN General Assembly
Iran: English Text of Letters between Mousavi and Montazeri (13 and 22 September)

1835 GMT: Report that Azar Mansouri, deputy head of the Islamic Iran Participation Front, has been arrested after an interview with Norooz.

1735 GMT: Is Iran's "Secret Nuclear Plant" Legal? The quick soundbite for Time from its interview with President Ahmadinejad is ""This does not mean we must inform Mr. Obama's administration of every facility that we have."

However, Ahmadinejad may have a point, one which is relevant to the current case. Iran notified the IAEA on Monday that it was constructing a new pilot enrichment plant. If Tehran has not put nuclear material into this facility, Iran is in compliance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty's Comprehensive Full Scope Safeguards Agreement, which requires it to a six-month notification period before nuclear material is put in the facility. (Iran withdrew from the more Subsidiary Agreement 3.1, which requires more detailed and timely notification, after the International Atomic Energy Agency referred Iran's nuclear program to the U.N. Security Council.

So the case to prosecute Iran under the Non-Proliferation Treaty is not clear-cut. Of course, the US can and will rely upon the U.N. Security Council resolutions demanding that Iran cease all enrichment. Whether other countries (China, Russia) take the same line remains to be seen.

1730 GMT: President Ahmadinejad may have backed out of an encounter with the New York media, but he did give a one-on-one video interview to Time magazine. We've posted in a separate entry.

1700 GMT: President Ahmadinejad has replaced his New York press conference with an interview with Press TV.

1500 GMT: We've just posted Chris Emery's shrewd analysis of the politics of the US revelation of the "secret nuclear plant" and the Obama statement: "This high-profile initiative by Obama was designed to get movement on engagement."

1425 GMT: Amidst the continuing chatter on the Obama statement --- no additional information, just the theme of "He was Really Tough" --- news services drop in this interesting twist "Ahmadinejad cancels his 5 pm EST (2100 GMT) speech in NYC [New York City]".

1245 GMT: The Obama Line. The President has just made his statement on the Iran "secret nuclear plant". The message? This demonstrates Iran's "continuing unwillingness" to meets its "international obligations" on development of nuclear capability. This showed the "urgency" of resolution at talks with Iran on 1 October in Geneva.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy has backed this up by saying "everything must be put on the table", and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has proclaimed this "the most urgent problem" of today.

This feels more and more like a scripted play. The "West" has known for some time that Iran was constructing a second uranium enrichment plant but had not announced this to the International Atomic Energy Agency. Tehran figured out that the US had learned of the plant and was preparing a big setpiece, ahead of the 1 October talks, to reveal the Iranian duplicity. So Iran went to the IAEA on Monday to put its plans above-board. This, however, was  not going to deflect the US-UK-France scheme to put Iran on the defensive in advance of the first direct discussions between Washington and Tehran.

1220 GMT: By the way, there was a Friday Prayer address today. After the drama of recent weeks, this one, by hard-line Government supporter and head of the Guardian Council Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, went almost unnoticed.

Nothing much new here. Jannati talks about triumph over "the enemy" through the political, military, and regional power of Iran and invokes the Holy Defense of the 1980-1988 war against Iraq. Like the Supreme Leader, he portrayed the demonstrations of Qods Day and Eid-ul-Fitr as Iranian support for the world's oppressed, and he condemned the tragedy of the assassination of the Kurdestan member of the Assembly of Experts.

1210 GMT: And Here's You Obama Administration  Line. A "senior Administration source" uses one of the reliable channels (i.e. will put out the message as presented, will not look behind or beyond it), ABC's Jake Tapper: "[Obama] to express 'great and increasing doubts about the strictly peaceful nature' of Iran's nuclear program"

1200 GMT: NBC's Ann Curry nails the politics on the "secret nuclear plant" story, and she only needs 1 Tweet to do it: "Remember the US and Iran about to negotiate. The West has an interest in increasing the pressure now."

1145 GMT: The Iran State Line. Press TV, in an article posted this morning, does not address the "secret nuclear plant" story but refers to French and British allegations of an Iranian nuclear progamme, made during the exchanges at the United Nations this week, as "totally baseless and untrue". The Iranian UN mission added that remarks by French President Nicolas Sarkozy were a "futile attempt aimed to cover up [French] non-compliance with its international disarmament obligations".

1050 GMT: So the story of Iran's "secret nuclear plant" (which isn't secret, since Tehran informed the International Atomic Agency of the construction of the uranium enrichment facility on Monday) is going to dominate the news cycle, as every US and many international outlets rush lemming-like to the tale and President Obama makes a statement at 1230 GMT.

If only someone takes a step back to note this comment from CNN's Fareed Zakaria, made after President Ahmadinejad's UN speech: "Ahmadinejad has been on a campaign over the last few weeks to change the subject. His great fear was that he would come to New York and the subject would be the Iranian regime and his massive repression of the Iranian democracy movement, the street protests, all the allegations being made by Iranians of what is happening in Iran --- rape, torture, abuse. What he wanted to do was to talk about anything but that."

0900 GMT: Ahmadinejad's Useful US Idiots. I was going to write the following analysis for Saturday, but events prompt me to offer a preview:

Ahmadinejad was on verge of major mis-step by playing New York trip as sign that all now resolved at home. 'West', however, played into his hands by raising Iran (and Ahmadinejad) to iconic threat on nuke issue. And Netanyahu gives kiss of death to opposition by praising their supposed aim of regime change. So the President gets to do his aggressive defend-Iran thing, getting more legitimacy out of West than he has many of his own people.

Five minutes after jotting this down, I read the Administration's latest strategic masterpiece in The New York Times, courtesy of David Sanger (who seems to have no recognition that he is a messenger-boy);

President Obama and the leaders of Britain and France will accuse Iran Friday of building a secret underground plant to manufacture nuclear fuel, saying it has hidden the covert operation for years from international weapons inspectors, according to senior administration officials.

Well done, guys. Instead of keeping your mouths shut and letting Ahmadinejad return to political complications at home, you've given him the ideal platform to pose as defender of Iranian sovereignty. And watch how your PR stick, wielded just before talks with Iran on 1 October, is turned into a stick by the President, his allies, and his supportive State media to bash "foreign-directed" reformists and the Green movement at home.

Idiots.

0650 GMT: Catching up, indeed. Even though the EA roadtrip was less than 72 hours, there appears to be a month's worth of incidents to consider. Forget the Ahmadinejad sideshow in New York; the events in and around the Assembly of Experts offer a plethora of possibilities. We've attempted an analysis,
"Rafsanjani, Ahmadinejad, and the Multi-Sided Chess Match", this morning.

Of course, state media features Ayatollah Khamenei's address to the Assembly of Experts, but it also keeps playing up President Ahmadinejad's defiance of the "West", from his warning against sanctions to his explanation that "Down with the US" refers to the "ugly behavior" of the American Government.

Iran: Rafsanjani, Ahmadinejad, and the Multi-Sided Chess Match

The Latest from Iran (25 September): Catching Up

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

Yesterday EA's Mr Smith sent me a challenging analysis of the significance of this week's Assembly of Experts meetings and Hashemi Rafsanjani's latest manoeuvres:

"Basically the much-anticipated Assembly of Experts meeting ended up according to plan. There were some grievances on the current state of affairs --- Rafsanjani and others, such as Ayatollah Dastgheib, did emit warnings regarding the government --- but all in all it was far from being a threat to Ayatollah Khamenei. Of course, we have to wait and see what the proposal from the eminent politicians cited by Rafsanjani is going to be about. The photos published from the customary meeting between the AoE and Khamenei relay an atmosphere of cordiality. All accusations are vague and quite frankly not new."

I agree with Mr Smith that one outcome of the Assembly meeting is the clearest of indications that Rafsanjani is now aligning with the Supreme Leader, but that is far from a new development. Rafsanjani's Friday Prayer speech on 17 July did pose challenges to Khamenei, but throughout August and September, the former President has manoeuvred for position by declaring his firm support for the Supreme Leader and "unity".

Put bluntly, if this were an issue of a straightforward chess match of Rafsanjani v. Khamenei, this could be a case of Hashemi offering an honourable draw and moving to the next match alongside, rather than against the Supreme Leader. If that match was against the reformists, then one of the persistent questions of this crisis would have been settled: having raised prospects so high two months ago with his effective declaration that he was with the Green movement's opposition to the current system, Rafsanjani would have walked away from the struggle.

But, as EA readers corrected me many weeks ago, this is not a two-player chess match. There are several sides to the board: the reformists occupy one, and so does the President and his allies. And, after all the head-scratching I've done this week, this feels like a different alignment of players:

Rafsanjani does want to be alongside Khamenei, but the ultimate opponent is Ahmadinejad. To be successful in that contest, it is to Rafsanjani's advantage to keep the other players in the match

Let's put the chess analogy another way: it is the President who has been trying to reduce this conflict to a straight-up, two-sided battle. Mahmoud v. the Greens. The system v. the illegitimate opposition. "Iran" v. the foreigners. Every statement he has made since the 12 June election, beginning with his denigration of the opposition as "dust" points to that simplification.

But, ironically, it was others within the Establishment and not the Green movement who complicated that plan. When the conservative and principlist politicians rebelled against the abuse of detainees and, more specifically, Ahmadinejad's leadership of his Cabinet, another player was at the chessboard. When the Supreme Leader made his limited but clear steps to criticise the President, including the closure of Kahrizak Prison and his insistence on the removal of First Vice President Rahim-Mashai, he had put his own set of pieces in play.

So Ahmadinejad and the Revolutionary Guard have not only had to fight their initial contest with the Green movement, they have to get back to that us v. them showdown. They succeeded, for now, in retiring the conservatives/principlists, but the Supreme Leader posed a trickier chess problem. Move too quickly in a challenge against Khamenei and the entire system of velayat-e-faqih (supreme clerical authority) becomes an issue. And, even if the President may wish to curb that system in practice, he probably does not want to appear to be doing so, for then the symbolic basis of the Islamic Republic since 1979 is exposed.

I have no doubt that Rafsanjani knows this. So this past week, indeed over the past weeks, he made a calculation and decisions to keep the board multi-sided. He did not need to make a high-profile appearance at Qods Day because the Green movement stayed in play with their own momentum of protest. Instead, he could concentrate on keeping the Supreme Leader in the game as an actor who could move against the President as well as the reformists.

And there's more. I think another player is now at the table. If there was a concrete step in the Assembly's general declaration, it was that the criticisms of marjas (the most senior Shi'a clerics) must be heeded, not only in principle but in practice. This does not mean immediate concessions to a Government opponent such as Ayatollah Montazeri who, for all his symbolic resonance with many Iranians, is on the fringe of the main contest. It does mean a recognition and response to the challenges put by other Grand Ayatollahs, including some who have long been seen as "conservative".

Consider two incidents. Less than two months ago, Ahmadinejad's supporters on the Assembly of Experts tried to reduce the chessboard by taking Rafsanjani out of play, with the blundering letter that claimed to be in the name of the Assembly and called for the former President's removal as chairman. Earlier this week it was Rafsanjani demonstrating that he was very much there and very much commanding the attention both of the Government and of its opponents.

But Rafsanjani was absent when the Assembly's statement was read, right? Absolutely, but my initial brow-raising concern, that he had suffered a setback, was replaced by another possibility. Rafsanjani needs his position as chair of the Assembly, but he is not solely reliant upon its members for his influence. Stepping away from the proceedings, he could indicate that he had achieved his main purpose and was now moving to the next steps of his alignment with Khamenei and others.

For consider the second incident. Before Qods Day, Speaker of the House Ali Larijani, apparently carrying messages from Ayatollah Khamenei, met Grand Ayatollahs and other senior clerics. The content of those discussions has not been leaked, but it now appears that Larijani's mission was not to warn the marjas but to seek an accommodation with them. And, if that is the case, who is the accommodation against?

A two-sided chess analogy might say the "Green movement". But some of those marjas are now supportive of the Green movement. And it is those marjas whom Rafsanjani said, only days after the Larijani meeting, are important in this ongoing political battle.

There's an important caveat in this analysis: just because Rafsanjani wants Khamenei in this match, able to move against as well as with Ahmadinejad, does not mean that this is a Supreme Leader on a string. And yesterday, as Khamenei addressed the Assembly, he tacked back to the "sophistication and extensiveness in planning by the enemy in the current situation". Coming weeks after the Supreme Leader had played down the notion of a "velvet revolution" in the post-election conflict, this appears to be Khamenei's own re-alignment with Government propaganda against the Green movement:

The Islamic system has a 30-years experience in confronting different challenges, but, in view of the development in the system and the complexity of its achievements, its opponents' conspiracies and plots have also become more complex. Thus, its diverse aspects must be identified in order to overcome them....

In their soft war, the opponents of the system have made use of an overwhelming amount of propaganda and telecommunications tools to attack the beliefs, the power of discernment, the motivation, and the foundations and pillars of a system and the country.

Khamenei praised the election --- again --- with "a high and unprecedented vote is one of our great strengths". He praised Iran's "solid infrastructure and the country's preparedness for a leap forward, significant scientific progress, the system's 30-year experience, an energetic, educated and self-confident young generation, and the [20-year strategic] plan defining the movement of the country towards its horizons until 2026".

What he did not do, however, was single out the President for exaltation. And that, as Hashemi Rafsanjani listened, leaves open the question: who has aligned with whom against whom?

A rule: the more players in the chess match, the more difficult the situation is for Ahmadinejad, even if he tries to walk away from that match with his "international" appearances. And, to me, it looks like this chessboard expanded, rather than contracted, this week.

Iran: The (Il)Legitimacy of Ahmadinejad

He came and he's gone. From New York, that is, not from his claimed authority as President of Iran. And after all the built-up drama surrounding his appearance at the United Nations, much of it a pre-scripted sideshow posing as the main act (Israel, the Holocaust, Iran's nuclear programme), what matters is the political situation to which Mahmoud Ahmadinejad returns, not the one he has just left.

This is in no way to denigrate the protestors who turned out yesterday to show the US and the world that Ahmadinejad was not acceptable. They represent the challenge to legitimacy that is at the heart of the conflict in Iran.

The important question was always going to be how many observers recognised that challenge. After all, Iranian state media were always going to ignore the protests in favour of the presentation of Ahmadinejad as international statesman. The postures that fuel the finger-wagging of the "Western" media --- his campaign against Zionism, his questioning of the scientific basis of the Holocaust, his chiding of "imperialism" --- support that portrayal. So this morning Fars News (farsnews.ir) has several articles pointing to Ahmadinejad as the agenda-setter in New York, including one on his six-point plan for global change.

So it is depressing to see that the Los Angeles Times sets aside the issue of legitimacy for "more important" headlines such as "Russia's president pledges to help U.S. nudge Iran on nuclear issue" and "Iran's President Extols Himself and Denounces Israel". It highlights Ahmadinejad's declaration, "[The Iranian voters] entrusted me once more, by a large majority, with this heavy responsibility," and only notes several paragraphs later, "Earlier, outside the United Nations, hundreds of protesters raised green flags -- the color of the opposition movement in Iran -- and signs reading 'Free Iran' as they railed against Ahmadinejad." The New York Times opens with the "thousands of demonstrators" and Ahmadinejad "stoutly defend[ing] his legitimacy. However, it then races to the safer ground of "familiar attacks against the United States and...an oblique rant against Jews", as well as the discussions of "world powers" over Iran's nuclear programme.

Far more important than the game of charades in New York but well beyond the notice of all but Iranian media, a more complex act of political theatre was being played out in Tehran. Having made his opening statement at the Assembly of Experts, Hashemi Rafsanjani was absent from the second day of the session. That enabled the fervent Ahmadinejad supporter, Ahmad Khatami, to read out a statement and claim that Rafsanjani endorsed "every line" of it.

The statement expressed full allegiance to the Supreme Leader --- no surprises there, for the flutter of a challenge to Ayatollah Khamenei's position has now stilled, and Rafsanjani's own strategy is to show undisputed support to bring the Supreme Leader towards his position. More significant was the appreciation of
the Supreme Leader’s “wise policies” in extinguishing the “seditious flames” in recent events. That one-sided view of blame for post-election conflict is at odds with Rafsanjani's more balanced presentation, as is the explicit claim that foreign powers had conspired to overthrow the Islamic system of Iran in recent events.

Most importantly, the Assembly upheld the legitimacy of Ahmadinejad's authority, praising Ayatollah Khamenei for dismissing any notion of fraud in the election and congratulating the President on his second term. The one opening for opponents of that legitimacy, and a more-than-implicit nod to the absent Rafsanjani, was the injunction that Ahmadinejad heed the “critiques of concerned Shiite clerics” as he led the Government.

So the wheel turns once more. The New York distraction is over --- thank goodness. For less than week of Qods Day, Iranian politics has again run the gauntlet of demonstration, resistance, negotiation, and Establishment pushback.

Confrontation or compromise? The question may have been a dramatic device to frame the last 72 hours in the United States. In Iran, that question is not artifice: it is at the heart of the battle for legitimacy that has defined the most important period for the Islamic Republic since 1979.