data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/14694/14694304a09b107e1b4b34f583441a51fdabedd8" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/02c48/02c485b876a56deaff643146efc18d8f036c26df" alt=""
March on the Pentagon Saturday, March 17, 2007
March and Rally in Seattle, Sunday, March 18
This blog is about fairness; about looking at objects from multiple perspectives. Stable transformation comes only slowly; and only if the environment is free of sporadic jitters of passion and anger that destabilize growth. I strongly believe that the path to peace crosses through the battle with self.
Well, there is a total blackout on the interviews with velayati in the US and UK press. Be very careful at the narrative that will be laid out in the coming days:
1-IAEA confirms Iran is continuing Uranium Enrichment.
No news paper would say that this enrichement is perfectly legitimate by international treaties but is being rendered illegitimate by the UN resolutions that are being crafted now outside any negotiations. So people will only have part of the truth. This is disinformation.
-2 The US will proclaim that the Un security council must vote more and more restrictive sanctions because Iran is not complying.
Complying to what ? Not to international law but to US demands.
-3 There will be escalation and nobody knows to which level the neocons are out of touch. because if theey go to war against Iran it is a regional deflagration...But they will say that it is Iran's fault.
It will end up, sanctions or/and war, to this simple truth: the US fabricates problems and sets out to solve them. In other words, US deconstructs international law, replace it with its own law and ask people to abide by it and if they don't then it goes to war.
Meawhile, Bush is meeting in Washington former militia Lebanese leader and war criminal Walid Jumblatt and asking the new UN secretary general to shake hands with him and the next visitor will be Samir Gea'gea who sent 15 years in prison for political assassinations and was released by amnesty and with the financial and political support of neocons' new puppet in lebanon, Saad Hariri...
Demands for an investigation into coercion of nations by the US during the vote against Iran at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), have been growing following the revelations by Stephen G. Rademaker a former ranking official of the Bush administration acknowledging that India's votes at the IAEA in 2005 and 2006 had been "coerced." ... The Indian government to date has not denied this accusation and has remained silent. ... this brings into question the entire legitimacy of the decision by the Governors' Board of the IAEA to refer Iran to the Security Council and the consequent passing of Resolutions 1696 and 1737 and any future resolutions against Iran the UN might pass. It also raises the question, “how many other members of the Governors' Board of the IAEA were coerced by the US to politicise Iran's nuclear file?US generals ‘will quit’ if Bush orders Iran attack
The Sunday Times has learnt that up to five generals and admirals are willing to resign rather than approve what they consider would be a reckless attack. ... A British defence source confirmed that there were deep misgivings inside the Pentagon about a military strike. “All the generals are perfectly clear that they don’t have the military capacity to take Iran on in any meaningful fashion. Nobody wants to do it and it would be a matter of conscience for them. ... A generals’ revolt on such a scale would be unprecedented. ... Robert Gates, the defence secretary, has repeatedly warned against striking Iran and is believed to represent the view of his senior commanders.
Johnson believes the enforcement of American hegemony over the world constitutes a new form of global empire. A long-time Cold Warrior, Johnson experienced a political awakening after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989, noting that instead of demobilizing its massive armed forces, the US accelerated its reliance on military solutions to problems both economic and political.
It's the ultimate hypocrisy of the west to punish Iran for a law Iran has not broken. When no one has found the tiniest evidence of Iran producing nuclear weapons - which is the whole purpose of the non-proliferation treaty that it has signed - what kind of international law justifies the UN security council's sanctions on Iran? ... Make no mistake, when the powerful UK, which has lived safely among its peaceful neighbours still feels the need for its nuclear arsenal, any sovereign state like Iran, which has constantly been under the US threat ... especially when suddenly it finds two of its neighbouring countries invaded.
10. In past visits, Tribune correspondents have found that Iranians generally like Americans. After chanting "Death to America" at Friday prayers, a group of Iranian women asked a Tribune correspondent where she was from. When told America, one woman said, "Oh, we didn't mean you. It's just something we say." Another woman gave our correspondent an apple.
... Ahmadinejad’s accession means the hardliners no longer depend on political alliances with other factions. They have learned from their mistakes of the past decade not to need a Rafsanjani or a Khatami to survive. [N: This is proving to be false] The interference by state institutions and militants in the electoral process, unprecedented in post-1979 history, helps contribute to broad suspicions that Ahmadinejad’s final vote is suspect.Trita Parsi, Foreign policy advisor to United States congressman, Bob Ney, the co-founder and president of the National Iranian American Council.
... The Tehran mayor’s triumph opens the way for untrammeled authoritarian rule in Iran led by an uncompromising minority. It could be a prelude to a worsening environment where resistance to the regime begins to shift outside the system as its legitimacy erodes beyond repair.
Such a development will have disastrous consequences for peaceful democratization in Iran. It raises the spectre of the country descending into an unpredictable spiral of repression, isolation, and instability. Moreover, it will place Iran squarely on the road to crisis with the United States. Some welcome this crisis and its likelihood of a military confrontation that will put an end to the mullahs’ rule. I am not insensitive to this sentiment, but see little prospect of such external intervention doing much to bolster democracy in Iran.
Bahman Kalbasi, a student who was imprisoned in Iran due to his political activities
The signs of the disconnect between the needs of Iran’s general population and existing platforms of political transformation have always been there, but many of us failed to understand their full extent. Perhaps we viewed Iran too much from a self-centred perspective where our own wants and needs shaped our analysis, at the expense of the expressed desires of people from classes we did not identify with as easily.
This certainly does not mean that people do not want social, political, and economic reform, but rather that the economic part of it takes precedence over the other – at least for now.
In many ways, this vindicates the argument of those who opposed the policy of isolating Iran economically a decade ago. They argued that democracy in Iran will take root when economic development has created a sizeable middle class who will serve as a cushion against the populist demands of the lower classes and the corruption and monopolist tendencies of the ruling class.
The middle class, in this perspective, would become the constituency with a direct, vested interest in Iran’s political liberalisation, to the extent that their political demands would take precedence over their economic concerns.
This middle class has never had a fair chance to develop – mainly due to the mismanagement and corruption of the rulers in Tehran, but also due to Washington’s policy of isolating Iran and preventing it from advancing economically.
Iran’s step to the right in the presidential elections may further boost the agenda of those in Washington who wish to isolate Iran. This will only serve even more to hamper the country’s ability to create a sustainable democracy from within.
The conclusion can only be that the disconnect of the pro-isolationists from the desires of the Iranian people is even greater than the disconnect of those who granted too much emphasis to their desire for social freedoms. [This guy is just brilliant!]
Here we have a simple, everyday guy who speaks in populist slogans and promises, who is at the same time deeply religious, and whose followers and supporters are the worst religious fundamentalists Iran has. When he assumes power he will not be the real decision-maker; the supreme leader and other men in the shadows will make the real decisions for him. Does this all ring a bell? A bit like George W Bush?Ramin Jahanbegloo, Iranian philosopher
We are now witnessing a resurgent authoritarian populism in Iran, caused by political factionalism. However, the pragmatic-technocratic faction led by Rafsanjani still possesses tremendous power in the Expediency Council and in the arena of foreign relations.
The new president faces serious challenges inside and outside Iran. Those who voted for him expect him to solve problems such as inflation, unemployment and corruption. Others who worry about the delicate negotiations over Iran’s nuclear programme seem to fear an increased tension with Washington and possible United States military intervention.
...
For the time being, the issues atop Ahmadinejad’s agenda are economic justice and redistribution of wealth. At the same time, we can expect a significant turning back of civil society’s important gains of the last several years, paving the way eventually for a full-spectrum Islamic society based on sharia law. [These kind of statements were perhaps why Jahanbegloo was arrested in Iran on charges of spying for neoconservatives. Isn't it ironic?] One way or another, the last word will be in the hands of Iranian civil society, which has thus far survived Iran’s political factionalism.
Roshanak Ameli-Tehrani, founder of Payvand Institute [what a brilliant woman!]
In authoritarian societies like Iran, a transition to democracy requires, amongst other things, a rift in the ranks of ruling despots. The two rounds of the 2005 presidential elections have created and exposed cracks in the monolith of power; they have shown a system riven with structural fissures at the bottom and factionalism at the top.
...
in the period between the two rounds of the election, three of the four top candidates defied Khamenei’s orders and talked openly about what they called the flawed (if not in practical terms rigged) election. One of the three candidates was brave enough to name Khamenei’s own son as a culprit. There are increasing signs that a de facto “United Front Against Fascism” is forming in Iran and it might well have in its ranks some of the erstwhile pillars of power in the regime.
...
The attempt by the right-wing cabal that masterminded the Ahmadinejad victory to solve Iran’s serious economic problems by reverting to old and tired populism is sure to fail. It will eventually deprive this group even of its small base of support amongst the poor in the city and countryside, whose piety and deprivation has made them dependent on the state. Bereft of this base, it will have only the military and security forces left to it, and that is hardly enough to maintain power in Iran today.
This presidential election has created room for cautious optimism, and for doubting the stalwarts of despotism who think they have successfully killed the democratic and reform movement in Iran.
In any modern sustainable democracy, three broad categories of institutions exist: the state, the private sector, and civil society. The most successful of the societies that have traversed the often long and winding road of “habituating” democracy are those with the most actively participatory civil societies.
Iran’s modern path toward democracy, a path that can be traced back to the constitutional revolution (1905-09), has been largely engineered and led by elites. Only since the end of the Iran-Iraq war in 1988 has civil society truly begun to take shape in Iran within the broader populace.
For reformists and moderates to regain trust and prominence, they must cast wider nets of inclusion and find a common narrative – one based on socio-economic goals that are inclusive of and relevant to the Iranian majority. During the coming period of regrouping, civil society will be vital to the creation of this narrative. A strong civil society encourages participation, creates synergy and allows access to resources – especially for the lower economic strata.
...The private sector and the upper class in Iran must also support such efforts....
The elections also signal a call for action to the Iranian diaspora. Depending on the source, the size of the Iranian diaspora ranges from 2-6 million, with the vast majority living in developed nations amongst the upper socio-economic strata. It is time for the diaspora to shift its dialogue away from political divides to a shared narrative – one based on actively promoting and preserving a viable civil society in Iran. The diaspora can no longer assume itself separate from the 69 million Iranians living in Iran and wait for the reformists to bring about change.
America is an imperialist, capitalist and a poweful country. But this is not a reason to cut ties with the US. This is against our national interest. In the past 19 years [1979-1998], we have been paying a multiple of the price to buy the American parts to be used in the 60-billion-dollars defense industries set up based on American producst. We need smart, honest and patriotic politicians who can protect our interest while dealing with Americans. Don't forget that during the cold war, USA and the USSR were pointing their missiles at eachother, but they talked. It was the American diplomacy that defied the Russians, not their weapons. ...
"No, our nuclear program is not about the bomb it's about power. We want to say -- that without the UK, U.S., France, Russia, Germany -- we have done this ourselves [set up a peaceful nuclear program].That is our strength."Amanpour's interview concluded with:
"The need to show power is 'just common sense after 300 recent years looking over our shoulder,' running through the list of those who have sent armies into Iran -- from Alexander the Great to the Mongols to the Ottomans to Russia to Saddam Hussein.
"The one country that never invaded us was America."
... instead of the United States saying, 'Iran out of the Persian Gulf, Iran out of Lebanon, Iran out of Iraq,' the United States should welcome Iran's presence and work with Iran to help keep the region stable
One particularly contentious issue concerned records of plans to build a nuclear warhead, which the CIA said it found on a stolen laptop computer supplied by an informant inside Iran. In July 2005, US intelligence officials showed printed versions of the material to IAEA officials, who judged it to be sufficiently specific to confront Iran.
Of course, Tehran rejects the material as forgeries. But even the IAEA doesn't seem to have convinced its internal operatives sufficiently. According to an IAEA official:
First of all, if you have a clandestine programme, you don't put it on laptops which can walk away. The data is all in English which may be reasonable for some of the technical matters, but at some point you'd have thought there would be at least some notes in Farsi. So there is some doubt over the provenance of the computer."
a 15-page document that appears to have been handed to IAEA inspectors by mistake in October 2005. That document roughly describes how to make hemispheres of enriched uranium, for which the only known use is in nuclear warheads. Iran has yet to present a satisfactory explanation of how and why it has the document.
"America in Captivity" was the headline that captured the mood of a country in psychic pain.
"Nuke Iran," read graffiti and T-shirts and posters.
"The only thing that could ever straighten out this screwed-up country [Iran] is an atomic bomb! Wipe it off the map and start over," recommended "Not Without My Daughter," the most popular book about Iran ever published in the United States. [hmmm, and Betti Mahmoodi, unlike Ahmadinejad, didn't speak to America through translation, did she?]
Twenty-eight years later, Iranians find themselves hostages of their own hostage taking. read more
Most of these books depict Iran as an angry sea of chest-pounding, fist-shaking mobs that burn effigies of the American president, trample on the American flag and scream "death to America" like a mantra. Displaying images of veiled women on their covers, many of these narratives milk the cliches and reinforce the stereotypes evoked by
this all-too-familiar image.
While scholarly books reach a narrow audience, popular books on Iran and mainstream media coverage of the country reach millions of people. They wield much power by touching the hearts and souls of the American public. Part reality and part imagination, and with a splash of concern for national and international security thrown in for good measure, they offer engaging stories and fan the flames of antagonism between the two countries.
...in 2004, the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control began to consider books from Iran as "embargoed literature." To publish her memoir,Shirin Ebadi , the 2003 Nobel Peace Prize laureate, had to initiate a lawsuit, invoking rights granted even to non-Americans by the U.S. Constitution.
There is so much to discover in this megalopolis of 14 million people; it even makes Karachi look quaint and small. The landscape of Iran is said to have been continuously inhabited by a single nation of people longer than any other part of land the world over
...
Safak Pavey , who heads the United Nations High Commission for Refugee's external relations office, told me that in the early 1990s, after the Gulf War (part one) Iran was home to 4.5 millions refugees from Iraq and Afghanistan. "Iran should receive thanks for that; can you imagine a European country giving 4.5 million refugees asylum?"
Mitra is an elegant and professional woman, the weekend before Muharram she was wearing red; I wouldn't have pegged her as having Revolutionary sympathies. And she didn't necessarily, but like most Iranians she was willing to balance the difficult and sometimes frustrating changes of the Revolution with its benefits.
...
It is impossible to essentialize in Iran, impossible to paint things black or white - or red - there are so many facets to life in this country. Those diametric opposites do share the same space in Iran and its people, and perhaps Mitra, are examples of its dynamism.
No doubt, fans of the US standard MM-DD-YY date format that pisses off so much of the rest of the world will be delighted to discover that the Iranians also apparently use it - presumably because the US is such a big export customer for Iranian produced munitions...
How do markings printed on a Western standard calibre mortar round, written in English and conforming to Western not Iranian dating conventions prove that the round was recently manufactured in Iran? And while we're at it, what the fuck are you paid for? To uncritically parrot everything you are told by 'unnamed senior security sources' or to do some elementary research before passing that crap off as news and in-depth analysis?
The administration finally unveiled its case this weekend, first in coordinated and anonymous leaks to a trusting New York Times reporter, then in an extraordinarily secretive military briefing at which no one would speak on the record, journalists weren't allowed to photograph the so-called evidence, and nothing even remotely like proof of direct Iranian government involvement was presented.
The fear that the regional Arab states might find it imperative to enter a nuclear arms race to neutralize an atomic-armed Iran is based on politically motivated and clearly flawed arguments. First, a nuclear Pakistan, the home of Al-Gha'eda and other terrorist groups that are the arch enemies of the oil-rich and corrupt Arab rulers did not invoke such fears. Second, neither has Israel's known nuclear arsenal that rivals that of France or Great Britain. Third, All these Arab states are signatories to the NPT agreement, as is Iran. With the IAEA supervision and monitoring, embarking on such an arms race would not be possible, especially for desert-dwelling lands with no hiding space to clandestinely pursue such projects.
In all those years that the women movement activists were worried for the fate of Afsaneh Noroozi, Kobra Rahmanpoor, Leyla Mafi, Shahla Jahed, Nazanin Fathi, Fatemeh Pejooh, ashraf kalhori and etc*; and restlessly collected petitions, wrote articles and demonstrated to save their lives, many a man walked blindfolded up to gallows and were hanged, without a short report in any paper, without a voice of protest.**...
Why is it that the stoning and the execution of women has turned into a social discourse, but the civil society is silent about the execution of men?