Just as Iran and EU start talking about Iran's willingness to consider the "constructive proposal" of the EU, Rice goes to congress to threaten Iran more! Which is telling me the Iranians are quite righ to say "Americans are not interested in negotiating to solve problems but only in negotiating for the sake of negotiation!
Also, the CNN didn't show the woman who confronted Rice with bloody hands, Calling her "War Criminal"
==============================================
Update (Tuesday Oct 23): Talks in Rome held, and successful too, According to Solana.
In this picture, he is shakinh hands with the resigned negotiator, Dr. Larijani. Iranians showed a united front, and willingness to negotiate peaceful solution.
I am beginning to romanticize the cleverness of the Iranian government, wondering with a satisfied grin: was the resignation a part of the choreography?
=================================
More than 180 Iranian MPs have signed a letter praising former chief nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani, who has resigned from his post.
The deputy speaker of Iran's parliament has said that Mr Larijani resigned because he could no longer work with Mr. Ahmadinejad, confirming suspicions that they had fallen out on policy, and possibly personality as well.
This means Ahmadinejad's in trouble!
This indicates that if Ahmadinejad deviates from the expressed wishes of the supreme leadership and the parliament, he will be in constitutional trouble! That, Larijani attended the Rome talks as representative of the supreme leader is already alluding to to exposed rift between Iran's ruling factions. However, it seems that the so called "islamo-fascist-dictatorship" in Iran is acting more responsibly and more democratically than that of the US of A!
Mr Velayati, the former war-time foreign minister- now senior foreign policy adviser to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei has expressed objection to Ahmadinejad accepting Larijani's resignation: "In the very important and sensitive situation where the nuclear issue is at the moment it would be better if this [resignation] did not happen, or at least it was prevented".
According to Velayati (read the voice of supreme leader on foreign matters) pragmatists believe in negotiating with the international community and talk of following the path of Japan.
It would be becoming worrisome however, if Ahmadinejad takes a radical stance against the supreme leader. He has been showing Komeini-ist megalomaniac symptoms, and he has been capitalizing on the capitalist corruption of those who are opposing him at this moment. Khomeini's radicalism has done great harm to Iran. I doubt this rookie is afraid to fall in the same Neo-Con trap that his spiritual leader fell, 30 years ago!
22 comments:
Sorry if I'm being off-topic, I'm just curious about something. I know the "Islamic" regime (and Islam generally) is disliked in Iran, but do you believe that the general Iranian sentiment is that in hindsight it would have been better for the Shah not to have been overthrown, ie, do the Iranian people dislike this regime more than the previous (and I am aware that many Iranians are too young to know what the previous regime was like, but you get the idea).
Thanks
A.N. Iraqi
Great post. Informative as always. But does cheney know this stuff? I mean, he is telling the American people more lies. He never aludes to any of the facts about the Iranian Paliamant and ruling authority.
So goes the bullshit spewd forth from cheney's mouth. Fodder to take the USA to another war, another step toward total destruction. But if all that is left is the rich, how will they get things done without the poor to labour for them?
Many countries have these same kinds of problems with their leaders. Not just USA or Iran or Iraq.
Peace to all
Hi A. N. Iraqi,
Your question is both easy and hard to answer.
I try in a nutshell.
First of all, you suggest :I know the "Islamic" regime (and Islam generally) is disliked in Iran
This is not an accurate observation. And I have a faint suspicion you say so because your exposure to Iranians has been outside of Iran. Yes, most secular Iranians, many of who happen to be living abroad dislike Islam. (They would dislike any religion, in fact)
You also have a brand of Iranian nationalists who think Islam was an "Arabic" intrusion, and they still detest the Arab invasion of the 6th century! This group will also be vocally anti-Islamic and anti-arabic as well.
Then you have a third group of Iranians who detest the Islamic Republic of Iran, and who hate the economic and the political antagonism imposed on them because of the "islamist" rhetoric of the government. These Iranians consider Mullahs to be hypocritical, and they resent the "establishment's version" of Islam.
And then you have the largest majority of Iranians who a)hate the government b)dislike Arabs, c)are nationalistic AND are devout Muslims!
This is what happened after revolution: a lot of people who had no relation to Islam suddenly became very "Islamic". And this created a huge sense of doubt about the real "islamicness" of anyone who cries Islam and wears his religion on his forehead!
The "dislike" that you suggest is of this nature.
Iranians, however, are deeply muslim. They believe in one god. They believe in Mohammad being the prophet. They do their pilgrimage, to Mecca and also to the hole shrines in Iraq and Syria. They celebrate eyds. They fast in Ramadan. They have a Koran as the "sanctity" of the house. They wear black on Aniiversary of Imam Hossein. They consider Imam Ali to be their role model. They observe the rules of modesty. They avoid alcohol. They avoid re-marital sex and etc etc etc.
Now are people happier with these dudes compared to shaah? No, they are not! Do many wish shaah had stayed? Yes. Do they all wanted shaah to go? No. Do Iranians think the "revolution" in whole was a "western plot/Israeli"? Yes. Was shah good for Iran? This is where the answers become complex.
The ultra nationalists hate him for
1) depending too much on the west
2) succumbing too easily to the west in taking their advice to leave
3) overthrowing Mosaddegh
The ultra religious hate him for
1) modernizing Iran too fast
2) acting too Westernly, especially in th emonth of Ramadan (that's what brought his demise, actually!)
The young people (who are the majority) do not care about him.
The old people (who are slowly dying) watch with a sad grin the same politics that shah espoused repeating themselves.
That people "dislike this regime" is not surprising:
-During shaah, Saddam never dared a war with Iran
-During shaah, you didn't need a visa to go abroad
-the shah's dictatorship was far less brutal than this one. He didn't massacre any prisoners. He didn't give decrees against the lives of writers who wrote books o fiction.
-people could wear and do what they wanted
-it is shah who laid the foundation of a lot of programs that are now completed by this regime.
I never know why he was overthrown. But what is done is done.
And this regime, in spite of all short comings has not been sitting on it's butt doing nothing. These people have been feeding 60 million people IN SPITE of a war, a revolution and endless sanctions.
Iranians have learned one important lesson though:
revolution is NOT the answer to their problems
And this is why the Iranian youth and the majority of the Iranian activists are putting their effort in forcing the existing government into reformation.
Without the Islamic Republic, Iranians will not have learned what "democracy" is. Also, every nation grows more mature out of war. We, Iranian and Iraqis, have learned that we are not each other's common enemy. Have we not?
This is why I am hopeful for Iran's future. It is the republic of people. Even though it still doesn't look like that on the surface! We shall grow out of this skin!
sorry I had a very critically misleading typo, so I edited and reposted my answer :)
Naj,
According to Tony Karon, Larijani's resignation is not what it seems to be. Larijani will be involved in the nuclear discussions but as representative for Khamenei Karon sees it more as a power struggle or a plan for power sharing in Iran. Didn't have time to got throught the whole article but it might be interesting to check it at Karon's site.
Spadoman
how will they get anything done for them
This is why they are not getting rid of "automotons and robots". People and nations who do not challenge them, and remain in their sheepish timid attitudes will survive for ever.
The project for Iran is not about their wanting war. It really is about preventing a muslim country raise to equal power
The project against Iran is fundamentally racist and anti-Islamist. I have to agree with Iran's objection that "they want to stop out scientific progress" That is what this really is.
If Iranian government "behaved" I promise you there would be at least one million of the most educated Iranians would have gone back to Iran. The FACT that the Texas A&M has started accepting post-grad students from Iran is suggesting that these people KNOW Iran's potential and are determined to PREVENT it from becoming what it is destined to be.
But this is also the fear they had during Shah's regime. Shah's megalomania was not entirely a figment of his psych. He wanted Iran to become a powerful nation. But anyways, just as they didn't succeed in crushing Iran under Saddam's military might, and under their sanctions, they should be sure that Iran is not going to just bend over and crawl out of history, only because a bunch of petty zionists and neoconservatives want it too.
Iran will be the thorn that will blind them, if they decide to pick its flowers!
Hi Sophia,
Thanks for the link. I will look it up.
If you have read my posts on this, that is what I am suggesting too.
Thanks for that reply.
I'm a PhD student who has lived in the UK almost my whole life.
I went to Mashhad, Tehran and Isfahan in 1998, and some mountain ragions far from the suburbs but I don't know any Persian so couldn't interact with the locals to get an impression of what they thought about life there.
Many of the Iranians I have met here in the UK (though certainly not all) are practicing muslims, but there is also a large and very vocal group of secular nationalists, who -maybe unintentionally because of their zeal - give a fairly one-sided view of Iranian society.
When I was a teenager (not that long ago), I and many of my circle of Iraqi friends, were vehemently pro-Iran and pro-regime. As far as we were concerned Iran was not to be questioned and could do no wrong...and anyone who had a problem with that was an ingorant fool or a traitor.
However, these days I think we would fall into the same category as the largest group you describe -namely, we dislike the Iranian regime because of it's corruption, abuses and dictatorship, and dislike the Arabs a great deal too, despite being Arabs ourselves. We still think it best that the Iraqi government strengthen ties with Tehran, however, because now is not the time to chide them- not while the hawks, wolves and Arabs are circling.
This is the impression I get from my community here in the UK. We criticise the regime in private, but not infront of others. It is still taboo to say a bad word about Khamenei, and still difficult to entertain the notion that Khomeini could have been anything less than noble in his intentions, even if the eventual outcome was the tragic state things are today in Iran. Any criticism is usually made obliquely and not explicit.
The Shah is a bit surprising. On the one hand he seemed to be very contemptuous of women, considering them as inferior to men, and on the other hand, he had no problem acknowledging the disproportionate Jewish influence on US media and foreign policy. Weel, at least he knew when to leave, unlike Saddam.
A.N. Iraqi
A. N. Iraqi,
you say:When I was a teenager (not that long ago), I and many of my circle of Iraqi friends, were vehemently pro-Iran and pro-regime. As far as we were concerned Iran was not to be questioned and could do no wrong...and anyone who had a problem with that was an ingorant fool or a traitor.
Well this is exactly the strategy put forth by Khomeini, I am hapy to know it worked ;)
you say:The Shah is a bit surprising. On the one hand he seemed to be very contemptuous of women, considering them as inferior to men ...
uhmmm ... who said that?
It is he and whose father who opened the door of society to Iranian women!
(They would dislike any religion, in fact)
Naj, most of these who dislike religion, are more Zoarastrians believers!
a lot of people who had no relation to Islam suddenly became very "Islamic
This some thing not just in Iran it's across the Islamic regions.
This reflection of frustrations from the dictatorship/ tyrants regimes and the lack of freedom which make people to seek some ways to relief themselves.
In other side also there are growing political fiasco by those these new Mullah, and religious figures to lead and get power in this time and catch the fish, as criminal OBL did and tried to take a lead first in Afghanistan when most those Muslims donations forwarded to him to built his empire which made more guys encourage more corrupt guys to follow suite.
acting too Westernly, especially in th emonth of Ramadan (that's what brought his demise, actually!)
I think Ramadan its it's a personal practice between the person (Men and Women) and Allah, so it's not the matter of state to impose or to enforce such things on her people.
Look to the Muslims in western world what's Ramadan for them while surrounded by western life.
What about Ashoor Naj?
Did Shah band those inhuman acts that today Mullah exporting to Iraq, Pakistan, and Lebanon?
A.N. Iraqi
we criticise the regime in private, but not infront of others.
There is doubt by saying you are an Iraqi?
Is this right thing to do?
If there are faults/freedom to speak expressing your view why not?
It is still taboo to say a bad word about Khamenei, and still difficult to entertain the notion that Khomeini could have been anything less than noble
He is not NOBLE at all, he is as any other humans he came search for the power and the leadership which cost millions of lives, if he was noble he should not dragged to that for 8 years of bloody war.
To anonymous:
Naj, most of these who dislike religion, are more Zoarastrians believers!
nonesense!
Zoroasterians are religious believers themselves!
Iran has a LARGE population of silent atheists!
And that thing sis not Ashoor, it is Ashoora, which is the 10th month of the lunar calendar, and which is when Shiites gather to commemorate the "resistance" of Imam Hossein to the un-islamic rule of the Ommayeds.
Ashoora is a great festival, it is theatrical and it is passionate and it has its roots in PErsian culture and history. I am glad Iranians are still "celebrating" it! I doubt Pakistanis will care about Ashoora (as they are mostly Sunnis), but if the Shiites of Iraq and Lebanon seek power and unity by subscribing to Iran's shiism, I won't loose sleep for your Wahabi sentiments being hurt ;)
Also: the man who cost millions o flives was not Khomeini, it was Saddam!
After he was initially kicked in the first two years of the war, Saddam came like a crawling dog begging for ceasefire, only to buy himself time. Saddam was a criminal and Iranians were right to not trust his peace offer. It didn't take him long to get his war fever directed at other nations!
Ah that dumb ass Saddam ... what crimes he did to his own people!
Thanks for posting this awesome post. I've been meaning to write something similar, and not as good, so you've dropped my next post into my lap!
Cheers, Naj. A virtual espresso to you.
uhmmm ... who said that?
It is he and whose father who opened the door of society to Iranian women!
that's the impression I got from this interview http://www.payvand.com/news/06/mar/1067.html
There is doubt by saying you are an Iraqi?
No, I'm sure I'm Iraqi
Is this right thing to do?
Probably not
If there are faults/freedom to speak expressing your view why not?
Because all it does is give more ammunition to the hawks and wolves. Let us agree to speak out against all injustice, but then lot us not give preference to one injustice over another. Those who would lap up criticism of the Iranian regime will simply use it as fodder for anti-Iranian or anti-Shia rhetoric, with no criticism of themselves or balance in their views.
The Iranian regime is most harmful and threatening to it's own people and to Iraqis, not to Sunni Arabs, Americans or Israelis.
What about Ashoor Naj?
Did Shah band those inhuman acts that today Mullah exporting to Iraq, Pakistan, and Lebanon?
Ahsura is a monumentally important event in Islamic history. It is difficult to over estimate the significance and depth of it. It has been mourned for 13 centuries, not since 1979. The Iranian Mullahs didn't export it, it was known a long time ago even to the Hindus and Sikhs of India. I have read Hindu poetry eulogising the event, and Hindus still take part in the commemorations till this day, because it strikes a universal chord not limited to Islam or religion.
However, some people only see the superficial aspects, such as mourners striking themselves, and don't even attempt to understand it, so I can see why you might think it is "inhuman". However, it is in reality possibly the greatest example of nobility, dignity and selflessness history has witnessed. But I am not here to preach so I'll leave it at that.
He is not NOBLE at all, he is as any other humans he came search for the power and the leadership which cost millions of lives,
I don't claim that he was noble, only that it is difficult to know what his intentions were, despite the outcome of his actions.
I have not lived in Iran, so I can't judge, but I can clearly see that there is a great deal of resentment and anger at him on the one hand, yet on the other he had a funeral of 10 million people, which is quite astonishing.
In any case, Khomeini should be subject to the harshest judgement, without any mercy or lee-way. I am simlpy not qualified to pass that judgement.
MarcLord:
============
your blog is my haven. Are you sure you are not Canadian? You are informedly humorous and sophisticated. That can only come from a Canadian :)
Do you know Rick Mercer's "Interview with Americans?"
A. N. Iraqi
==========================
You are a pleasure to have around. Thanks for visiting.
"During the celebration people flagellated themselves, beating their backs and chests with chains. As the crowds moved through the streets of Karbala, their emotions spanned from grief to joy. Some zealous believers even cut their heads with the flat edge of swords to show their extreme sorrow over Imam Husayn's death."
Wonder why these people are so violent
The Iranian Mullahs didn't export it, it was known a long time ago even to the Hindus and Sikhs of India.
If not so then why the Persian involved as Naj trying to educate us "by here lies" took it from them and impended with Islam?
Is this in Islam teaching, or in any Sunah, or even in (Nahaj Al-Balagah)?
So you and Naj shall call Hindus and Sikhs Muslim?
Anonymous:
You exhausted your welcome!
I find it cute how you are trying to confuse your identity by "implanting" obvious errors in English ... however, your rage gave you away :)
This is Iran-Facts. You go make a blog about Islam and people who want to learn about it will sure cheer you! Your raging attitude and Islamo-arabicism is not welcome here :)
Good luck!
Oh one things about Ashura:
It is a "theater" not Islam, do you know how read a response? It's like talking to a wall when one speaks to you Wajhabis ... pfff!
Also, for your information, the Islamic Republic government has BANNED the practice of inflicting wounds to one's skin! This is why in the pictures of Times magazine, people are cobered in tomato juice!
It is a symbolism!
It is not a common practice!
It is a form of theater in which only a very SMALL population of "male" Iranians (mostly in the northern province of Azerbaijan) take part.
No the Arabic version of Islam, stale in 1300 years is not what Iranians are interested. That is why shiites have Mulahs who re-interpret Koran to make it suitable to the requirements of the epoch.
Bahai's branched off of Islam. They disagree that Mohammad is the last prophet!
Don't bother responding. You are deviating from topic and you don't seem to understand any of teh things told to you.
Bahai's branched off of Islam.
How stupid would be with you insist to telling us laughable ideas and things even kids in primary schools knew what is Islam.
BTW, you should stop talking about Islam as you admitting that you are not Muslim and your hate far to be reasonable and balanced person to judge this subject.
Your Islamophopia very sick and disgusting.
There are NO branches from Islam! Isn't "our Mullah" Madam.
There are Muslims who believe in Islam and there are non Muslims whatever name they like to call themselves.
BTW, those your Baha'i guys very friendly and to your suddenly you went hysteria and hilarious Israelis, and they may be got supported by them.
Islam you were allowed to kill me, and actually go to heaven for it. No? ;)
Who is this? Miss Nassrallah tells her militia?
Did you remember your friend Sistanin asked his slaves to go and vote otherwise there will be in the Hell? I wonder he had the control of Haven and Hell
Oh just before you go remembering Iraqi war when Khomeini imported 12,000 key called he handed to his solders during Iraqi war and telling them this key of their castle in Haven if they die!!
How words common coming from Iranian minds not surprisingly it's all from Iran.
Excellent post Naj , already I read a rumor that the Foreign Minister wants to resign too ,I do not if it is true or not ,really excellent post
I'm a bit late to comment Naj, but this post is very interesting. I had not heard that Ali Larijani was now the personal representative of the Supreme Leader. Also, I did not hear that 180 Iranian MPs have praised him. These are positive developments that seem to be putting Ahmadinejad in his place. Thanks for the news.
Post a Comment