Iran: English Text of Dastgheib Letter to Assembly of Experts (22 September)

The Latest from Iran (27 September): Is There a Compromise Brewing?

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 is slowly becoming clear that last week's Assembly of Experts meeting was the setting for an unprecedented level of dispute and politics. By the end of the deliberations, Ayatollah Ka'abi was circulating a petition for the expulsion of Ayatollah Dastgheib, as Hashemi Rafsanjani tactfully absented himself.

This is the Dastgheib letter (translation by Khordaad 88) demanding the Assembly take over the administration of the Constitution, criticising the suppression of dissent by the regime, and calling for an invitation to Mir Hossein Mousavi, Mehdi Karroubi, and Mohammad Khatami to address the clerics:

In the name of the Great God,

To Honorable members of the Assembly of Experts of Supreme Leadership

May I recall several points; I hope that they would be beneficial.

1) Notes on the constitution: We are all aware that our constitution has no contradiction with Quran and the [Islamic] tradition. It is devised by the prominent clerics and the right intellectuals who have had the constitution considered by the Imam of nation (may love and mercy of God be upon him.)

But who is the guardian of this constitution? Can anybody other than the experts assume this role? Who is responsible for investigating devastations from the constitutions and who should be hold responsible for such deviations? Only the Experts can assume that role. But now why is it that when it becomes necessary to meet so that the experts could investigate deviancies from the constitution, the experts either find themselves incapable to meet or do not meet at all; even the president of the assembly who has been elected with more than 50 votes (out of 80) could not call for a meeting. Is not this just a complete ignorance on part of the Guardian Council towards the basic fundamentals of the constitution? Including the way members of the Guardian council are selected? An issue that I have suggested that the confirmations from two prominent scholars of Qom should be enough [for the selection for the members of the council] but not body paid attention. It would have been great if the honorable Ayatollah Rafsanjani had followed up so that today we wouldn’t have this problem and so many questions and concerns wouldn’t have been left without sufficient answers. People are aware that the fundamentals of Guardianship of the Islamic Juror [velayat-e-faqih] are in the constitution and they agree with it. If the constitution in not acted upon however, the fundamentals, in articles 5 and 110, will not be acted upon either.

2) Issue of desecrating Imam (Khomeini’s) loyal supporters who have put their wealth, dignities and lives for the continuation of the Islamic Republic for years: This desecration started four years ago until recently when IRIB (Islamic Republic of Iran broadcast – state TV.) Prominent figures like Ayatollah Rafsanjani , Hojataleslami Karoubi, and the sires Mr. Khatami and Mir Hossein Mousavi have been berated so significantly that cries of friends of the revolution and laughter of its enemies have been heard all over. Is the drama that unfolded legal? Was it based on constitution and derived from it? If no, why did all the Experts [here] kept their silence? Is it enough to sit down and grieve?

3) Why don’t we see the suspicious hands of Hojattieh [a Shia organisation formed in 1953 opposing the Baha'i religion, Sunni Islam, and the system of velayat-e-faqih] that the great Imam saw it as a threat to the revolution – behind the scenes? Who have jumped over the three branches of power, the parliament, the judiciary and the executive?

Why doesn’t any one take responsibility for all those illegalities? Why is it that the call for justice is answered with the military forces? Is this anything other than the existence of foreigners behind the scenes?

We had great religious scholars like Sheikh Morteza Ansari, Mirza Shirazi, Seyedna-Al-Esfahani, Seyedna-Al-Yazdi and the like. None of them ever thought to devastate the society so that they can provide the context for the Coming [of Imam Mahdi].

4) What is this situation that has overcome our society, and even the parliament? Whenever anyone of an opinion, a Marja, or a scholar makes a criticism, there some that, in support of a specific group, prepare themselves to remove that person from the scenes. All just so that some could be relieved and satisfied.

5) The Experts are responsible for protecting the Islamic ordinances and the belief of people in Quran and the tradition of the prophet (May peace be upon him) and his immaculate kin. This important responsibility is not fulfilled in the current events and unfortunately the efforts of the Islamic scholars have decreased.

6) In the end, I would like to say that it is still not late to ask from this assembly and the honorable speaker to invite Mr. Mousavi, Mr. Khatami and Mr. Karoubi to say what they want to say. Do not assume that everything has ended. People have faith in you.

In other words, concealing the distrust of some part of the society and neglecting them is unfair; for instance, the objection of the Islamic scholars and professors of universities and the rest. It is important to lessen this distrust to a minimum. Such that, if it is not possible to invite Mr. Mousavi and Mr. Karoubi to this assembly the State TV invites them so that they would express their objections. If that is not possible either, they can do so through the Assembly of Expert’s website. So that the members of the Assembly can express their opinions on whether there has been a breach of the Constitution or not.

Seyed Ali-Mohamad Dastgheib
September 22, 2009

The Latest from Iran (27 September): Is There a Compromise Brewing?

NEW Iran’s Nukes: Did Gates Just Complicate the Obama Position?
NEW Transcripts: Secretary of Defense Gates on CNN, ABC
Iran's Nuclear Program: Gary Sick on the US Approach after the "Secret Plant"
Iran’s “Secret” Nuclear Plant: Israel Jumps In
Iran: The “Die Zeit” Article on Opposition and Change
Iran Video: Ahmadinejad Interview on CNN’s Larry King
The Latest from Iran (26 September): The False Flag of the Nuke Issue

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: Back to Compromise? After a day of tough signals, this paragraph on Press TV's website from President Ahmadinejad return-from-US press conference in Tehran jumps out: ""By his change of rhetoric, Obama has signaled a strong commitment in the presence of the General Assembly. If the American government is seriously pursuing the path of change, Obama's speech can be considered a start."

2045 GMT: Mir Hossein Mousavi's website Kalemeh is down, and Mehdi Karroubi's Tagheer is still suspended 72 hours after announcing it was going off-line for construction.

1830 GMT: Ayatollah Mohammad Yazdi Giving Up Key Position? Tabnak offers the intriguing report that Ayatollah Yazdi, a firm supporter of President Ahmadinejad, is resigning from the Secretariat of the Assembly of Experts.Yazdi will retain his membership of the Assembly and his Vice Chair post, but his withdrawal from the Executive diminishes a key challenger to Hashemi Rafsanjani.

Yazdi was absent from the recent Assembly of Experts meeting.

1545 GMT: An Economic Victory for the Republican Guard. An Iranian consortium in which the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps is reputed to be a major actor has bought a 51 percent stake in the State telecommunications firm in the biggest privatisation in Iran's history.

1445 GMT: Another Ministerial Fraud? After the criticism of the Ministers of Interior and Science for dubious doctoral degrees from British universities, now it is the Minister of Transport Hamid Behbahani who faces allegations of false credentials. An article in the French daily newspaper Libération, claims Behbahani plagiarised parts of a work of the Professor Christophe Claramunt, his Chinese colleagues, and the Canadian academic Gerry Forbes for a 2006 publication in a Lithuanian journal.

1440 GMT: Your Latest Proof of the "Velvet Revolution". A Revolutionary Guard offical has said that the television signals of Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting were jammed during the election campaign. Brigadier General Gholamreza Jalali claimed that "enemies of the country" had tried to jam the transmission during a Presidential campaign debate.

1200 GMT: Report that student activists Ali Rafai and Mohsen Jafari have been released from detention.

1045 GMT: The New York Times Gets the Story Wrong...Big-Time. EA's Mr Smith picks up on this morning's article by , NewDavid Sanger and William Broad, which opens:

The Obama administration plans to tell Iran this week that it must open a newly revealed nuclear enrichment site to international inspectors “within weeks”, according to senior administration officials. The administration will also tell Tehran that inspectors must have full access to the key personnel who put together the clandestine plant and to the documents surrounding its construction, the officials said Saturday.

The story asserts that, while "Iranian officials have...said the facility near Qom is for peaceful purposes, they have not explained why it was located inside a heavily guarded base of the Revolutionary Guards".

Mr Smith notes:

This is incorrect. In remarks yesterday to Iranian Television, [Iran's top nuclear offcial Ali Akhbar] Salehi said that they felt like they needed to build a plant for uranium enrichment with maximum security to avoid 'stopping the production of enriched uranium for peaceful purposes'. I think everyone agrees that Natanz [Iran's first enrichment plant] isn't that secure, built as it is in open air. Therefore you would have to think that Iran is getting pushed in going underground with its nuclear plants because of the never-ending military threats, mostly from Israel but also, incessantly, from the US.

So I wonder what would have happened if the hawks in Tel Aviv and DC had actually kept quiet rather than waving the military scarecrow all the time.

The US can say whatever it wants, but the heart of the matter is that, unless the IAEA proves that Iran has been feeding uranium into these plants, there is no violation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Now, we can discuss ad libitum what the real aims of Iran are, as Sick has valiantly done, but everyone is, so far, putting intentions on trial, rather than actual, hard evidence on violations by Iran. True, Iran has been lying and is not reliable in its disclosures. But does this amount to legal violation? It doesn't appear so...

0835 GMT: This is More Like It. A day after Iran's nuclear negotiator offered Iran's willingness to consider International Atomic Energy Agency access to the second enrichment facility, its ambassador to the IAEA, Ali Asghar Soltaniyeh, puts on a show of defiance: "I categorically reject that there have been any concealment or any deception."

As we predicted, Soltaniyeh rests Iran's legal case on the second plant on the claim that the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty did not force revelation of the facility's construction, only its imminent capacity for enrichment: "It is a pity that none of these three leaders have legal advisers to inform them that according to comprehensive safeguards we are only obliged to inform six months before we put nuclear material [into the plant]."

The ambassador adds the flourish that it is Washington, Paris, and London who are the nuclear rule-breakers:

Those three countries in fact have violated for the last 40 years NPT articles. The United Kingdom has [a] secret program of [Trident] nuclear submarines...[costing more than £30 billion.... France is also working on the nuclear weapon programs continuously. Americans are working hard on the nuclear weapon posture review. These are all deceptions and concealment.

0825 GMT: Two new pieces on the Iran nuclear programme. Ali Yenidunya takes a look at Israel's intervention (rhetorical so far) while Gary Sick assesses how the "secret plant" story shapes US strategy and tactics in talks with Tehran.

0655 GMT: Acting Tough. In a move about as surprising as the Pope's endorsement of Catholicism, Iran has announced that it has test-fired two short-range missiles in a missile exercise called "Great Prophet IV". And there will be more launches as the exercise is planned to last several days.

The signal to the "West" --- We Won't Be Pushed Around --- will poke US and UK media into headlines of how this demonstrates Tehran's threat in the context of the furour over the second enrichment plant.

0615 GMT: And a Deal on the International Front? US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton moved quickly to welcome the comment of Iran's lead official on the nuclear programme, Ali Akhbar Salehi, that Iran would permit visits by the International Atomic Energy Agency, under the rules of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, to its second enrichment plant (a "defensive facility"). Clinton said:

It is always welcome when Iran makes a decision to comply with the international rules and regulations, and particularly with respect to the IAEA. We are very hopeful that, in preparing for the meeting on October 1, Iran comes and shares with all of us what they are willing to do and give us a timetable on which they are willing to proceed

Hmm.... Salehi's remark appears to have been a holding statement while the Ahmadinejad Government considers its next move, and Clinton's welcome --- unsurprisingly --- fits into a US strategy to back Tehran into a corner of acceptance. The Los Angeles Times reports this morning:

The U.S. and its allies plan to demand that Iran provide "unfettered access" to scientists and information regarding an underground uranium enrichment plant suspected of being part of a secret nuclear weapons program, an Obama administration official said Saturday. A deadline for the access has not yet been determined, but Iran probably would have to comply within weeks.

0600 GMT: Relatively little breaking in Iran this morning, as we look for further signals that there is a compromise plan, led by or involving Hashemi Rafsanjani, making its way through the Iranian system.

What little has come out points more to the continued fencing between opposing camps. Reports are circulating of more official complaints against Mir Hossein Mousavi's campaign, while Mehdi Karroubi's Etemade Melli party website has published information about the abuse and rape of another detainee.

The most interesting claim is that Sardar Khorshidi, the father of President Ahmadinejad's son-in-law and a decorated commander during the Iran-Iraq War, has said he personally witnessed vote-rigging in the June election. He also points to the fragility of the regime: ""If each protester had a stick on Qods Day, the Army wouldn't have withsood them."

Iran: The "Die Zeit" Article on Opposition and Change

The Latest from Iran (27 September): Is There a Compromise Brewing?
The Latest from Iran (26 September): The False Flag of the Nuke Issue

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

For days, there has been a buzz about an article in the German newspaper Die Zeit. Most of it is a summary profile of the opposition in Iran, but deep in the article, there is the claim of "preparations for a new government", including "a group of five to eight clerics" on fixed terms to replace the Supreme Leader and President Ahmadinejad's resignation in favour of Tehran Mayor Mohammad-Baqer Qalibaf. The translation is by Paleene on the Anonymous Iran site:


The Green is not fading out

Protest of the mothers and planning for the Day X: How the Iranian opposition organizes and continues to fight.

BY CHARLOTTE WIEDEMANN

In a live broadcast on Iranian state television a mullah gives spiritual advice. An in-caller is talking about her marital problems, then she suddenly says: "Coincidentally, my husband has the same name as our newly elected president, Mir Hussein Mousavi," The moderator silences, the program is interrupted.

On money you will nowadays often find a green victory sign or the words "Down with the dictatorship”. Or a thumbnail portrait of Neda, the best known dead from the unrest in the days after the election in June. The print works give a professional impression, instructions circulate on the internet.

A football match in Isfahan, many spectators wearing green. The television cameras are trying to avoid these images. However, Green is the colour of the football club in Isfahan; now the club is requested to find a different colour.

The movement for democracy is visible in Iran, despite of all repression, torture and show trials. It is not strong enough to stop the Ahmadinejad government. But it is strong enough to keep the country in tension. Because meetings are banned, official occasions are subverted, eg. last Friday: During the anti‐Israel Quds rallies tens of thousands held their fingers up forming the V‐sign, demanded the release of imprisoned reformers. On this day, an experience from June repeated and changed the psychology of society: It is possible to take to the streets and defy prohibitions. It is dangerous but possible.
Another hidden source of energy is feeding the green movement; it has conciliated generations in families, bridging the gap between the old, who revolted 30 years ago, and the young, suffering from the outcomes today. Thus, sons started talking with their fathers again.

Every Saturday afternoon, the mothers of the killed protestors gather silently in Tehran's Laleh Park, all dressed in black . Other women surround them in silent solidarity. On a list of 72 dead, who are known by name, there are also workers, shoe salesmen, small employees. How the battle lines harden can be observed by the violation of previously existing taboos. Mohammad Khatami, the ex‐president, was pushed to the ground last Friday, his black turban torn down. In the first place, the usually moderate Khatami had accused the regime of "fascist" methods.

There is almost no way back after such actions and words. The events in Iran roll forward with a tenacious implacability. But where to? And can anyone control this process?

The young look forward to the great turning point, the elders are afraid of the chaos

The young, the students whose creativity influenced the aesthetics of the movement, still burn for the hope of something great to happen, a radical change ‐ in the system as in their lives. More prudent Iranians fear the power vacuum of a regime falling apart rapidly.

The 68‐year‐old Mir Hussein Mousavi, a candidate in June, remains the figurehead for all sides; but it is the width of the movement which makes him virtually incapable of acting. Coming from the system himself, the former prime minister wants to win as many of Ahmadinejad's conservative opponents as possible. For the moderates within the nomenklatura, Mousavi offers a great advantage, an insider explaine: "You know, he might take away their power, but not their lives.” But at the same time Mousavi has to appear unyielding, if he doesn’t want to lose the support of the young, and of the modern middle classes.

On the street outside his home, the regime has installed surveillance cameras. When Mousavi leaves home, a double cordon accompanies him: his own people and a troop of the Revolutionary Guard. The danger of being arrested is become greater for the leading group, so earlier plans for founding a party or a mass organization were discarded. The movement for democracy is to expand as a "network" which can’t be banned.

“Everyone appreciating the Iranian and Islamic identity of the country as a value and the constitution as the fundament for action is welcome "said Alireza Beheshti, a close adviser Mousavi. “The framework of the Islamic Republic should remain, but with corrections”, can be heard in Mousavi’s vicinity. Especially the civil rights under the constitution should show to advantage, including freedom of expression and freedom of assembly.

In his statements "to the people of Iran”, which Mousavi only can send out on the internet, he calls for: a reform of the electoral law, press freedom, the licensing of private radio and television stations, a law prohibiting the military to intervene in economics and politics, the release of political prisoners and the penalisation of atrocities in the prisons. In Tehran, it is said that along with this minimum catalogue subject-specific sections have begun "with the preparations for a new government". Members of the current administration as well as Iranians living abroad are said to be involved in these groups.

Replacing the powerful revolutionary leader, a group of five to eight clerics should directly be elected by the people for a limited period of time. They should represent a religious pluralism equivalent to the freedom of choice in Shiite everyday life, where believers are free to choose the teachings of a scholar they want to follow. In future, nobody should be allowed to rely on divine authority. Mousavi: "Nobody has the right to say: How I look at the Islam is the one and only valid way."

This will be no quick go. Sustained pressure and a progressive wearing down of Ahmadinejad’s regime could force him to resign over the medium term, that is the hope. Mousavi does not insist in replacing him. To gain time for the elucidation of the population, an intermediate solution might be necessary. This could look like this: Ahmadinejad resigns in favour of the Tehran mayor Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf. The moderate, popular conservative had recognized the width of the People's Movement in June, when he estimated the demonstrators to be in the three millions.

Mousavi seems to be aware of being severly influenced by three decades of Islamic Republic, so not to be able to represent Iran's future. As a strict Muslim, he constantly would struggle inwardly to meet the youth’s demand of a liberalized lifestyle. Iranians drinking alcohol should have a place in the movement ‐ but Mousavi does not want to sit down at a table where the wine is drunk.

Mehdi Karroubi, the second reform candidate, is acting much more aggressive. In recent weeks, the fine-boned clergyman was the real challenger of the regime. He published that men and women were raped in detention ‐ which has deeply shaken many Iranians, even the more simple, religious people in Ahmadinejad's clientele. Karroubi wouldn’t make a leader who is appealing the masses, but he has made the cracks in the system visible.

Mousavi is resembling the figure of the king in chess: small moves, in case of danger retreat, always covered by his men. It is not cowardice. His fellow campaigners assume the movement to slide into the underground, to radicalize and to narrow dangerously, if Mussawi is detained. He sees himself as someone who can open an unbloody way to change. But then the people have to decide which system they want to live in.

For the first time since the Iranian revolution of 1979, the Iranian opposition abroad has found a common language with the forces of change within the country. This opens up options that were unthinkable only recently. In the case Mousavi and Karroubi are arrested, the leadership of the Green movement would automatically be taken over abroad. Soon a statement will be released in Tehran, saying a five‐member committee in the diaspora ‐ the names are not disclosed ‐ is authorized to replace the leadership in case needed. The symbolic gesture says a lot in a country where the fear of foreign agents is almost obsessive. And Mousavi signals the regime: Look out! If you arrested me, you obstruct the peaceful path to change.

In the diaspora, former bitter enemies have reconciled. The monarchists are relegated to irrelevance, while the advocates of a secular republic criticize Mousavi only mutedly as for the time being. Several prominent heads of the reformers are currently in the West, among them the former Culture Minister Ataollah Mohajerani in London, the film director Mohsen Makhmalbaf in Paris, and reform theologian Mohsen Kadivar in the US.

Kadivar, currently teaching at Duke University, appealed to "the Iranian bourgeoisie" to provide funds for a new, independent national television. "The cost of a green medium have to be borne by Iranian investors." The Iranian women are requested to donate their jewels as a patriotic gesture. Free, uncensored and genuine Iranian Radio and satellite television: That's what currently is worked for in four countries. In Amsterdam, Mehdi Jami as a former head of the Farsi-speaking Radio Zamaneh has a lot of experience with bloggers in Iran. Now he wants to establish citizen journalism as a new generation of broadcasting, giving the young Iranians, who constantly provide their clandestine videos on YouTube, a national platform.

Thus, networking, making various voices audible and being virtual, is the strength of the green movement ‐ and its weakness. It lacks a clearly audible voice, which eg comments on the resuming nuclear negotiations between Iran and the international community, beginning 1 Oct. Suspicion about Ahmadinejad buying legitimacy abroad which he is denied at home is rampant even among those who want the dialogue, basically. In Mousavi’s vicinity they say that "what ever is agreed now has no validity until it has been reviewed by a legitimate, new government of Iran." Mousavi does not want to seek confrontation in this highly sensitive issue.

Iran: Rafsanjani Seizes the Initiative

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

I got it wrong. Writing on a train to Edinburgh and relying on a shaky translation, I updated yesterday that Hashemi Rafsanjani's address at the Assembly of Experts had been clever but cautious. With an emphasis on unity, an alignment with the Supreme Leader, and a call for resolution within the system, he had not made a direct challenge to the Government.

Wrong.

Fortunately EA's Mr Johnson, with a thorough and incisive translation of the speech, corrected my reading in a later update and identified Rafsanjani's very direct message to President Ahmadinejad and his allies. Put not so cleverly and carefully, it is this. Mr President, it is time for you to compromise, especially with the senior clerics, in a process overseen by the Supreme Leader. Doing so, you will acknowledge where the final authority lies in the Islamic Republic: with Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, backed by his clerical experts, and not with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Doing so, you will acknowledge that your direction and your officials are responsible for post-election abuses which must be punished and redressed.

Several important caveats to this message should be noted. This does not mean that Hashemi Rafsanjani is in step with the Green movement. At no point yesterday, as far as I know, did he acknowledge their presence. The Qods Day demonstrations had been of the Iranian people showing their determined defense of the cause of Palestine. Mehdi Karroubi's letter was never cited as the source of Rafsanjani's knowledge of abuses. Only the Supreme Leader and the marjas (the most senior of clerics) were identified --- Khamenei explicitly, the marjas implicitly --- as the defenders of justice. And Rafsanjani always balanced his charges of crimes and abuses with the general invocation that they had been committed by all sides in the conflict, not just by the security forces and Government officials. Rafsanjani does not walk in step with the Green movement but their paths converge when it comes to the desire to curb Ahmadinejad.



And that leads to the second caveat: although Rafsanjani never said so, the opposition opened up the space and thus made it possible for him to make his challenge. In particular, Rafsanjani needs the demonstration on Qods Day that many Iranian people were not only still angry with the President, still insistent on changes in the system, but also ready to take to the streets to give political substance to their feelings. In retrospect, that seems to be the reason why the former President laid low on Friday, watching, wating, and calculating, and then made his appearance (which, inevitably, would be in the vicinity of President Ahmadinejad but, now it is clear, not alongside him) at the Supreme Leader's end-of-Ramadan speech. Rafsanjani had some security in the criticism of the Government by senior clerics, many of whom were in the Assembly yesterday, but even those individuals might be picked off by the Ahmadinejad forces with their relatives arrested and their reputations slandered. After Friday, however, he had the security of knowing that, if the Government persisted, so would mass opposition by the Green movement. Resistance would not be broken. And he had also had the security of the Supreme Leader's Sunday address. For Khamenei had said to the President and the Revolutionary Guard, in his directive that in-court confessions could not be used against any third party, that Rafsanjani's family were immune from the charges in the Tehran trials.

A third caveat is essential, however. Rafsanjani did not call and will not call, even in code, for the dismissal of Ahmadinejad. That moment, if it ever existed, passed long ago with the affirmation of the Supreme Leader that the 12 June election result would stand.

No, Ahmadinejad can still be top political dog. But Rafsanjani is asking that he be put in the doghouse and on a firm leash.

This leads to an irony which is not an irony. The still-loose President was on his way to New York when Rafsanjani made his speech challenging that President's authority. A far from ironic moment, however, because Rafsanjani had undoubtedly made another calculation. It is not just that Ahmadinejad is out of the country but that his rhetoric will be directed at external issues such as the nuclear programme and Irna's leadership in causes such as the campaign such as Zionism.

Those issues are secondary --- although almost all in the "Western" media will have no comprehension of this --- to the internal matters put forward by Rafsanjani yesterday. So, once more as with the 17 July Friday Prayer address, he has the initiative.

Here is the question. Will the Supreme Leader, who opened up the door to Rafsanjani's political re-entry, now accompany him in that initiative?

Iran: More on Rafsanjani and Khamenei's End-of-Ramadan Speech

The Latest from Iran (21 September): Distractions
Iran: Khamenei Scrambles for Position
The Latest from Iran (20 September): Khamenei’s End-of-Ramadan Speech

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

Complementing our reading of the dynamic between the Supreme Leader and Hashemi Rafsanjani, Pedestrian summarises the post of blogger Agh Bahman. Bahman also adds useful thoughts on the positions of Imam Khomeini's grandson, Seyed Hassan Khomeini, and Mohammad Khatami:


Everyone has been criticizing Rafsanjani and Hassan Khomeini for showing up at the Fetr prayer yesterday, and I just didn’t think the criticism was founded. We’ve had very few “real” politicians in our recent history, people willing to bend and compromise and adapt to circumstances. And I think Hashemi Rafsanjani, for all his shortcomings, is of this rare breed. Agh Bahman captures it perfectly (this is a summary of his post):

What got the most attention in yesterday’s prayer was the presence of Rafsanjani and Hassan Khomeini, and after them, Nateq Nouri in line behind the leader and beside Ahmadinejad. Many went so far as to interpret this as Rafsanjani’s betrayal of the people’s movement. When I got up and heard the news, I too was surprised. But when I thought a little more, my opinion changed completely. If you felt like me, read this, maybe your opinion will change too.

The Fetr prayer is one of the few state events which practically all high officials attend. Personally, I don’t remember any other even in which all officials participate. I think not showing up at Fetr prayer is like saying you don’t want to pray behind the leader. Did Rafsanjani do anything in the past three months that meant this remotely, so that now, showing up in the prayer is surprising?

In the past three months, Rafsanjani  did not attend two events which he was expected to attend: the two inauguration ceremonies. Both of these events had to do with Ahmadinejad and giving legitimacy to his government and this Rafsanjani did not want to do. Notice, just a few days after those ceremonies, he went to the goodbye and welcoming ceremonies for Shahroudi and Sadeq Larijani, the previous and current head of the judiciary. Probably one reason for his attendance was to show his respect to Shahroudi, but in any case, the judiciary head is appointed by the leader, and if Rafsanjani had reached a point where he wasn’t willing to pray behind the leader, he shouldn’t have showed up there either. And of course, Rafsanjani did not attend the two Friday prayers led by the leader, which was natural. From what I remember, unless Rafsanjani was prayer leader, he never attended the prayer  no matter who was leading. [notice, Rafsanjani sees himself, or at least used to see himself, as man #2. So just as the leader is not willing to pray behind anyone, and thus never shows up, neither does Rafsanjani].

Of course Rafsanjani did something else yesterday which didn’t get anyone’s attention and that was his absence in the leader’s meeting with the officials which takes place every year after the Fetr prayers in the leader’s beyt [the religious center adjacent to the leader’s home I think, or since “beyt” means “home” in Arabic, it’s supposed to be adjacent to his home, as was Khomeini’s, even if it isn’t.] From the photos we have of yesterday’s meeting, only the heads of the three branches of government are sitting behind the leader and Rafsanjani is very noticeably absent.

I went and found the photos from previous years. In the last four years, Rafsanjani was only missing in 2005. He was there last year and the year before that. I think by not going, he’s sending a message to the leader that he’s only willing to participate in events so far as he is formally obligated and no more. For instance, in a few days when the annual meeting of the Assembly of Experts with the leader takes place, I think Rafsanjani will go, and will sit beside the leader.

And now for Seyed Hassan Khomeini

I think Hasan Khomeini has a similar circumstance [as Rafsanjani]. He was in the first line of prayer every year at Fetr. In the past three months, he’s done nothing and said nothing which would mean that he’s turning his back on the leader. Khomeini showed his complaint out in the opinion on two occasions: not showing up at the inauguration, and not going to meet with Ahmadinejad in Imam Khoemini’s masoleum. Again, both these acts showed his disregard for Ahmdinejad and the legitimacy of his government.

And in fact, after the prayer, Khomeini did something that would obviously show his position: he went to see the family of Mohsen Mirdamadi (the chief officer of the Participation Front who is prison, and whose son was taken into custody just a few days ago) and Javad Emam (a recently released member of the Mojahedin party).

The Great Absence: Khatami

I think the biggest news from the prayer was not the presence of Rafsanjani or Khomeini, but the absence of Khatami.  Khatami too was first in line every year, and his absence sends a very clear signal: that he no longer accepts the leadership of this leader. Karoubi and Mousavi have been very vocal and have gone very far, and anyways, they were never seen in the first line of prayer these past few years. We can guess that they were absent for the same reasons as Khatami, but since Khatami was always first in line, his absence is much more noticed.

I should also add that I think one of the people to whom the leader’s words were address was Khatami. He said that confessions against other people in court was not credible. In court, a lot was said against Khatami. Against Karoubi and Mousavi too, but most was said about Khatami. I think the leader intended to appease Khatami with those words.