Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett, who served in the CIA, the National Security Council and the State Department during the Clinton and Bush administrations, declare on their website that Syrian President Bashar Assad told them two weeks ago that the U.S. policy in the Middle East has been wrong for the past decade and has created a vacuum that improved the regional strategic standing for Iran, Syria, and Turkey.
Israel does not want peace with Syria. Let’s take off all the masks we’ve been hiding behind and tell the truth for a change. Let’s admit that there’s no formula that suits us, except the ludicrous “peace for peace.” Let’s admit it to ourselves, at least, that we do not want to leave the Golan Heights, no matter what. Forget about all the palaver, all the mediations, all the efforts. Read the rest of this entry »
Indirect Israel-Palestine Dialogue: On Wednesday, the leader of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, found political cover to enter into an indirect dialogue with Israel, as 14 ministers of the Arab League agreed in Cairo that the PA should engage in indirect negotiations with Israel for a preliminary four-month period. The Arab ministers also mentioned that no progress will be possible without a complete settlement freeze, indicating that the four months will be an assessment process.
“Despite the lack of conviction in the seriousness of the Israeli side, the committee sees that it would give the indirect talks the chance as a last attempt and to facilitate the US role,” said Arab League Secretary General Amr Moussa.
Of course, snap reaction from the US of this week’s events in Iran was unlikely to catch the depth of the developments and the prospects for the future. The disturbing while gleeful response of Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett was to be expected. (And, yes, I use “disturbing” without reservation: have a look at their “analysis” to see how they try to wipe away the post-election detentions, trials, and abuses.) Unsurprisingly, some Bush-era advocates of US power, having embraced the Green movement for “regime change”, backtracked when the Government did not fall on Thursday — Charles Krauthammer pronounced, “The regime has succeeded today, and unless there is some later demonstration of the power of the opposition, it could be a turning point in this process and the one that the regime will celebrate.”
However, what is most disturbing is how an analyst like Marc Lynch, normally quite good about Middle Eastern affairs, could issue this declaration after a superficial review of 22 Bahman and the Green movement, “I fully believe that the Iranian regime is more unpopular and less legitimate than ever before — but just don’t see it as especially vulnerable at the moment.” It is disturbing not because Lynch is duplicitous; to the contrary, he carries enough weight of expertise and of honesty in his approach for his analysis to race around the Washington network of political columnists as the final wisdom on the subject.
2320 GMT: The Committee of Human Rights Reporters has issued a statement on recent allegations against its members, many of whom are detained:
The civil society’s endurance depends on acceptance and realization of modern norms and principles. When a ruling establishment with an outdated legal system tries to impose itself politically and ideologically on a modern society, the result will be widespread protests.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s top aide said Friday Tehran is concerned about the direction of the US administration after President Barack Obama delivered his first State of the Union address.
“We have concerns Obama will not be successful in bring change to US policies,” Esfandiar Rahim-Mashai, the senior aide to President Ahmadinejad and his chief of staff, said.
With respect, Esfandiar, I don’t think President Obama is your biggest concern right now.
2300 GMT: Yawn. Well, we started the day with a sanctions sideshow (see 0650 GMT), so I guess it is fitting to close with one. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, speaking in Paris:
China will be under a lot of pressure to recognize the destabilizing impact that a nuclear-armed Iran would have in the [Persian] Gulf, from which they receive a significant percentage of their own supplies….We understand that right now it seems counterproductive to [China] to sanction a country from which you get so much of the natural resources your growing economy needs….[But China] needs to think about the longer-term implications.
1. The White House is not even at the point of agreeing a sanctions package with the US Congress, let alone countries with far different agendas.
2. China is not going to agree tough sanctions in the UN Security Council. Really. Clinton is blowing smoke.
3. About the only outcome of this will be Press TV running a story on bad America threatening good Iran Government.
It is clear that there is a relatively small group of decision makers inside Iran. They are in both political and commercial relationships, and if we can create a sanctions track that targets those who actually make the decisions, we think that is a smarter way to do sanctions. But all that is yet to be decided upon.
That’s not a breakthrough declaration, only a holding one. The White House does not want the sweeping sanctions proposed by Congress and will go for a “targeted” approach. It’s just not clear who is being targeted with what.
1945 GMT: Journalist Mohammad Reza Nourbakhsh has been sentenced to three years in jail by an appeals court for participating in rallies on 15 June. Nourbakhsh was originally given a six-year prison term.
1940 GMT: Beaten in Detention. Kalemeh claims Mehdi Mahmoudian, a senior member of the reformist Islamic Iran Participation Front, has been beaten by the authorities in Evin Prison.
1935 GMT: The Detained. Back from an academic break to find that an Iranian activist has posted the names of 156 people arrested between the religious days of Tasoa and Ashura (26-27 December) and 9 January. Read the rest of this entry »
1950 GMT: An American Strategy? I really don’t understand what the Obama Administration is playing at. At the same time as Administration officials are putting out the story that the US is moving to a “sanctions for rights” approach (see separate analysis), the top US military commanders are going on rhetorical red alert and talking about confrontation.
First there was the preview of General David Petraeus’ remarks (see 0745 GMT). Now the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, is declaring that while the US is following a diplomatic path with Iran, military options cannot be ruled out. Mullen is also saying that he is convinced Iran is pursuing the military nuclear programme.
That might mean the US gun is loaded, but then Mullen says, “An attack by us or anybody else would be destabilising,” and he assures that US officials have noted the “legitimate concern” that the Iranian opposition would have to support the regime in the event of a US assault.
I’m sorry, but I’m far too tired to make sense of this. Watch the video and see what you can do.
1935 GMT: Report Is Not Enough. The reformist Imam Khomeini Line party has declared that the Parliament report on detainee abuses is a positive step but is incomplete, failing to consider a number of allegations against officials and security forces. The party cites the attacks on University dormitories and the death of the Kahrizak doctor, Ramin Pourandarjan, as cases that should have been cited.
1930 GMT: Tehran Prosecutor General Abbas Jafari Doulatabadi announced that a Syrian journalist working for Dubai TV, arrested on Ashura (27 December), was released Sunday. Doulatabi also said a Swedish diplomat was detained on Ashura and later freed.
1920 GMT: Larijani Playing the Hard Man. Ali Larijani, the Speaker of Parliament, may have played supporting act to President Ahmadinejad’s speech today, but he still took the opportunity to talk tough: “Opposition figures have to distance themselves from rioters in an attempt to correct their political records.” Read the rest of this entry »
2225 GMT: More on Khamenei Speech (see 1445 and 1850 GMT). An EA reader who watched the Supreme Leader’s address today sends an interesting e-mail, “His speech did not sound aggressive. It sounded more as a request for calm and acting with wisdom after the fallouts of Ashura. It appeared that he was lacking in confidence. Same for the crowd.”
2220 GMT: Halting the Mothers of Martyrs. An Iranian activist reports that, during their weekly march in Laleh Park, about 30 of Mothers of Martyrs in the post-election crisis and their supporters were arrested and taken to Vozara detention centre.
2200 GMT: Mortazavi — Scapegoat or Valued Official? Iran-watchers may want to set aside a few moments for former Tehran prosecutor Saeed Mortazavi, whose future may turn upon the developments in the internal contest amidst conservatives and principlists.
Days after Mortazavi was reportedly named as prime “suspect” in the Parliamentary investigation of the deaths of Kahrizak detainees, he was formally named as President Ahmadinejad’s advisor to combating smuggling of drugs and currency.
Interpretation? Mortazavi is now the proxy in the battle between key conservatives/principlists and Ahmadinejad. The President wants him as a sign of Ahmadinejad’s authority and as a firewall to any move by Parliamentary challenges; Ahmadinejad’s critics see Mortazavi’s downfall as a necessary victory in their battle.
Another marker in the dispute is a statement by a “pro-Government” student organisation criticising Ahmadinejad for the appointments of Mortazavi and for Esfandiar Rahim-Mashai, the former First Vice-President — a few days after his appointment, he was removed from office amidst vehement criticism from the conservatives/principlists who may be aiming at Mortazavi — who is now Ahmadinejad’s chief of staff. Read the rest of this entry »
Bloggers and other foreign policy experts refuted many of the Leveretts’ specific points, especially their overestimation of government-sponsored protests and underestimation of opposition demonstrations. [EA's immediate reaction is in Wednesday's updates.] I have covered the numbers on my blog, but a very good second opinion is offered by Daniel Drezner in ForeignPolicy.com.
Drezner and Kevin Sullivan of Real Clear Politics set a wider challenge, however, when they argue that, beyond the Leveretts’ distortions, there are “good” analytical questions.
Those questions need a response, not necessarily because they are “good”, but because if they are not addressed, the Leveretts may get away with a blatant attempt at skewing facts to hammer in their argument that President Barack Obama should forget about the possibility of regime change in Iran. Read the rest of this entry »