Even though Iraq continues to endure a level of terrorism that any other country would consider a national crisis, and even though Republican Congressman Dana Rohrbacher acknowledged recently that "everybody I know thinks it was a mistake to go in" to Iraq, you can still find people -- usually people who worked in the Bush administration -- who continue to insist that the war was worth it, and that the decision to invade and occupy and attempt to remake Iraq at a cost of trillions of dollars will be vindicated by history.
A recently published RAND study of the regional effects of the Iraq war should (but probably won't, as too many influential people have too much professionally and emotionally invested in the war being seen as a "success") put such claims to rest. The study finds that, in addition to facilitating the rise of Iranian power, undercutting perceptions of U.S. strength and influence, and increasing the profile of other actors like Russia and China, the war has seriously hurt the prospects for political reform in the region:
On the domestic front, societal conflict in the broader region resulting from the war has not yet materialized to the extent forecast; rather, state power has strengthened and tolerance of domestic political opposition has decreased. Specifically, Iraq's instability has become a convenient scarecrow neighboring regimes can use to delay political reform by asserting that democratization inevitably leads to insecurity. And while the entrenchment of U.S.-allied regimes may be deceptively reassuring in the short term, it does little to address the more deeply rooted problem of regime illegitimacy or to mitigate the wellsprings of radicalism.
So not only did the Bush administration's key (post-WMD) strategic claim about the war -- that replacing Saddam Hussein with a less despotic, more democratic government would start a democratic chain reaction in the region -- turn out to be false, the war actually made things worse for democracy. By offering democratic reform as a component to the "war on terror," which many Muslims see as a war against Islam, the U.S. alienated and isolated at the outset scores of potential reformist allies. By then promoting Iraq as a potential showpiece for that agenda ("See all these explosions? This could be your country! Who's in?") we discredited democratic reform even more.
The irony here is that, in diagnosing the overabundance of authoritarianism as a problem in the Middle East, the Bush administration and its neoconservative brain trust were not entirely wrong. Oppressive behavior by governments viewed by many as illegitimate and unjust is a key driver of extremism in the region. But the course of "treatment" that was undertaken by the Bush administration -- American invasion and military occupation -- has turned out to be just as bad, if not worse, than the disease, both for the U.S., whose power and influence have declined as a result, and for the region, which will be grappling with the destabilizing consequences of the war for decades to come.
The RAND study also concludes, "on a more-positive note," that "the war's appeal as a draw for terrorist recruitment has been offset by declining public support among Arabs of al-Qaeda's goals, operations, and tactics." Less popularity for Al Qaeda is obviously a good thing. But before anybody breaks out the champagne on this, let's remember that this is the result of Al Qaeda's brutality against Iraqi civilians, brutality that was directly facilitated by the U.S. invading and then failing to properly secure the country.
It's important to remember that luring terrorists to Iraq to blow themselves up in markets and mosques wasn't just some tragic side-effect of the Iraq policy. It was, for many of the war's architects and supporters, a bonus feature of the policy. The fact that "flypaper strategy" may have, by enabling the murder and maiming of thousands of Iraqi women, men and children, (Iraq accounts for more than half of all suicide bombings recorded since 1981) managed to drive down Al Qaeda's poll numbers in the region doesn't make the idea any less morally reprehensible, let alone qualify the policy as a whole as a success.
Scroll down for the video Calling it a case of "collateral murder," the WikiLeaks Web site today released harrowing until-now secret video of a U.S....
Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn) argued on Sunday that the Obama administration had erred in its decision to place several terrorist suspects into the criminal court...
BAGHDAD — Suicide attackers detonated three car bombs in quick succession near foreign embassies in Baghdad on Sunday, killing more than 40 people in coordinated...
Since their offensive here in February, the Marines have flooded Marja with hundreds of thousands of dollars a week. ... The approach helped turn the...
By Gareth Porter WASHINGTON, Oct 13 (IPS) - U.S. national security officials, concerned that President Barack Obama might be abandoning the strategy of full-fledged...
12:30 PM ET -- "Fighting side by side." This site publishes audio of a colorful voicemail apparently left by a woman in Iran. It begins, "I am 66 year old lady, we are group of 3, that have contact with each other and going out for protest together, and we are our own leader! I am the youngest one in this group, the next two are 70 and 73 years old! We are fighting side by side with our young ones!"
12:22 PM ET -- Ayatollah Watch. Tehran Bureau has an update list of the Ayatollahs who have spoken out in favor of the demonstrators.
8:33 AM ET -- No changes to House Foreign Affairs Committee panel. The communications director for Rep. Howard Berman, the Democratic committee chairman, tells me this morning that no new witnesses have been added to the Iran hearing this morning. As discussed yesterday, the panel is tilted towards neoconservatives, a particularly dangerous imbalance given how crucial it is that members of Congress receive good information on Iran.
To make matters worse, I just learned that, before the hearing (actually, as I type), committee member Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen is holding an Iran briefing with two former Bush administration uber-hawks Elliot Abrams and John Bolton. Here's the release:
Ros-Lehtinen Schedules Iran Briefing with Abrams, Bolton
Members Only briefing will precede Full Committee hearing on Iran
(WASHINGTON) - U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), Ranking Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, will host a briefing next Wednesday (July 22) on Iran with former Deputy National Security Advisor, Elliott Abrams, and former Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security and former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton. Statement by Ros-Lehtinen:
"The Iranian regime has never broken its stride in its pursuit of nuclear weapons, other unconventional weapons, and missile capabilities. Iran has also never waivered in its support of violent Islamist extremist groups with global reach.
"The regime has demonstrated an unparalleled disdain for the rights and human dignity of the Iranian people.
"Some still want to appease Tehran. But for our security, for the sake of our ally Israel, and in the interest of global peace and stability, we cannot afford to continue with a 'wait and see' approach, looking for the 'magic carrot' that will entice the Iranian regime to reverse course.
"No more delays. No more excuses. Let us take control of the process and stop allowing Iran to manipulate the U.S. and other free nations into silence or submission.
"The U.S. and other responsible nations must immediately cut off Iran's economic lifelines and block Iran's access to the funds, materials, and technology needed to carry out its deadly agenda."
7:30 AM ET -- Clinton talks Iran. For U.S. policy planners, the great downside of a weaponized Iran is a regional arms race, and Hillary Clinton's latest remarks suggest that the U.S. is trying to reassure relevant states that they will be protected even if Iran obtains a nuclear weapon.
What do you think?
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned Iran Wednesday that the United States would extend a "defense umbrella" over its allies in the Persian Gulf if the Islamic Republic obtains a nuclear weapons capability.
Appearing on a Thai TV program, Clinton said the U.S. would also take steps to "upgrade the defense" of America's Gulf allies in such an event, a reference to stepped-up military aid to those countries.
Clinton's reference to a U.S. "defense umbrella" over the Persian Gulf represented a potentially significant evolution in America's global defense posture. Washington already explicitly maintains a "nuclear umbrella" over Asian allies like Japan and South Korea, but seldom, if ever, has any senior U.S. official publicly discussed the concept in relation to the Gulf.
The secretary's remarks also suggested the course the Obama administration might pursue if, as many analysts predict, an unchecked Iran succeeds in obtaining a nuclear weapons capability before President Obama's term expires -- in effect, how the United States might live with a nuclear-armed Iran. Clinton's comments evoked a vision of the U.S. countering such a threat by bolstering regional defenses and reminding Iran of the dangers of mutually assured destruction -- but not by seeking regime change in Iran or by taking military action to destroy the country's nuclear apparatus.
"We want Iran to calculate what I think is a fair assessment that if the United States extends a defense umbrella over the region, if we do even more to support the military capacity of those in the Gulf, it's unlikely that Iran will be any stronger or safer because they won't be able to intimidate and dominate as they apparently believe they can once they have a nuclear weapon," Clinton said.
7:20 AM ET -- Khomeini's son leaves Iran. From the NIAC:
The 50 year old grandson of Ayatollah Khomeini, Sayed Hassan Khomeini, has reportedly left Iran rather than bow to recent pressure that he attend Ahmadinejad's upcoming inauguration ceremony. Sayed Hassan is a mid-level cleric who is also in charge of the beautiful and vast (5,000 acres) Mausoleum of his grandfather.
Worth reading the full post.
7:05 AM ET -- Activity in Tehran yesterday. I still haven't seen any accounts on whether the efforts to briefly shut down the electrical grid yesterday were successful. If you see any, let me know. (Update: an anecdotal update here, in Farsi.)
Additionally:
Amateur video has emerged of today's jittery encounter between would-be demonstrators and plainclothes Basiji militiamen wielding batons.
The video above could not be confirmed but appears to conform to witness accounts that described club-wielding Basiji militiamen hurrying pedestrians and would-be demonstrators along in Tehran's Seventh of Tir Square.
"Go!" the security forces call out, striking their clubs against metal objects for punctuation. "Don't stop."
Plainclothes Basiji militiamen hit passers-by with batons on a crowded main Tehran street to ensure they wouldn't gather, according to video from the site posted on line. A young woman in a headscarf can be seen arguing with the Basijis, who shove her.
Regular police forces were out in large numbers in parts of central Tehran, causing large traffic jams, but witnesses around the city speaking to The Associated Press did not report that any protests came together. There was no immediate report of arrests in the day's clampdown.
Here's more coverage from CNN:
7:00 AM ET -- L.A. County supervisors vote to divest from Iranian energy sector.
6:52 AM ET -- Ahmadinejad's VP pick: My praise of Israelis was actually criticism. In the tradition of politicians everywhere, he was for Israelis before he was against them.
Esfandiar Rahim-Mashaei, Iran's newly appointed Vice President, explains his earlier controversial remarks on Israel.
Rahim-Mashaei, whose appointment as the Vice President has brought Mahmoud Ahmadinejad under fire, explained his remarks on Israel in an interview with IRNA released on Tuesday.
In 2008, Rahim-Mashaei's comments on Israel unleashed a torrent of criticism in the country when he said Iran was a "friend of the Israeli people". He later detached himself from his earlier stance, saying that his comments had been misinterpreted.
The controversial figure, who served as the head of the Cultural Heritage, Handicrafts and Tourism Organization before receiving the elevation, however explained his remarks on Tuesday from a different perspective.
"What I said had nothing to do with the Israeli regime. I did not talk about the usurper Zionist regime. My remarks were about the people of the occupied lands and were in fact a psychological warfare against the Israeli regime," he said.
"What I said was that this regime was in such mess that it no longer enjoyed international support," he added, but insisted that he did not mean that Iran was a friend with Israelis.
He went on to defend his remarks by saying that he had just criticized Israel two days before his controversial remarks.
"I had said just two days before that, in a speech broadcast by the media, that the Zionist regime was a dead one but only no funeral procession had been conducted for it."
TUESDAY JULY 21
12:19 PM ET -- Khamenei overrules Ahmadinejad, fires his deputy.Ouch.
The Supreme Leader has ordered Ahmadinejad's first deputy to resign from Ahmadinejad's cabinet just days after his appointment, according to the Deputy Speaker of the Parliament. Deputy Speaker Aboutorabi said, "eliminating Mashaei from key positions and the first deputy position is a strategic decision by the regime. The Supreme Leader's opinion about the removal of the Mr. Rahim Mashaei from the position of president's first deputy has been submitted to the President in writing."
UPDATE: NIAC notes that Ahmadinejad's camp is fighting back:
That apparently did not stop Ahmadinejad's senior assistant from saying on a live TV program that "I have not seen a clear and convincing reason given by anyone to make [Mashaei's] appointment to the first deputy position impossible. Some say he has med mistakes in some of his statements. Well, everyone makes mistakes."
11:45 AM ET -- New demonstrations in Tehran. Reuters reports:
Iranian riot police detained dozens of pro-reform protesters in central Tehran on Tuesday, a witness said.
The witness said the protesters were chanting slogans against President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the government, including: "Ahmadinejad -- resign, resign" and "Death to the dictator."
The witness added: "Riot police are taking dozens of protesters into their cars and they are taking them away."
More details from the L.A. Times.
11:10 AM ET -- Guardian: Iran prisoner refuses to leave prison in protest. This is the first I've heard of Saeed Hajarian refusing to leave Evin prison, but it's a fascinating display of bravery if true.
Of all those dumped in Evin prison and other secret detention centres, the case of Hajarian does most to expose the regime's moral squalor and callousness. Long hailed as the intellectual mastermind of the reformist movement, he is today physically frail thanks to a failed assassination attempt nine years ago ordered, in all probability, by the same hardline zealots who plotted the recent election buffoonery.
Hajarian is confined to a wheelchair and able to speak only with great difficulty, having suffered severe spinal cord damage after being shot in the face by a fundamentalist who, though later convicted, hardly served any jail time. [...]
Hajarian's captors fear his brain. They are trying to force him to sign a confession owning up to plotting a "colourful" or velvet revolution that would have seen the Islamic republic toppled and replaced by a pro-western puppet government, the political bogeyman that keeps Khamenei and his acolytes awake at night. In return, he would be allowed to leave prison - thereby handing the regime a propaganda coup and sparing it the increasing embarrassment of imprisoning a man whom it is already responsible for reducing to a shell.
But Hajarian - himself one of the principle founders and architects of the intelligence ministry in his younger days - has turned the tables by refusing to leave prison. He has refused to give any admission, even when his jailers tried to break his resolve by interrogating his wife and detaining - though later releasing - his son. Effectively, the prisoner is holding his captors hostage, forcing them to provide, and even administer, the treatment needed to keep him alive. His interrogator has been reduced to carrying out his daily physiotherapy sessions.
10:47 AM ET -- Women praying with men. I've received multiple images like this in recent days. The reader who sent this noted, "in Islam, women NEVER pray in front of men - in fact, they typically pray in a separate room and all mosques are segregated."
Iran's women breaking barriers again.
10:45 AM ET -- Iran blackout planned tonight. A reader notes, "It looks like opposition supporters are planning to create another blackout tonight in Iran at 9:00 pm to commemorate those killed in the past 30 days (including Neda) by turning on their irons and other electrical goods at the same time."
From another reader, "If this works it could create a lot of problems for the government because it could take days trying to start up the power plants again. It's been planned for weeks. It could really shake up the system even more."
10:42 AM ET -- Iran's tragic joke. Roger Cohen's latest in the Times:
Allow me to quote the British novelist Martin Amis, writing about Persia in The Guardian: "Iran is one of the most venerable civilizations on earth: it makes China look like an adolescent, and America look like a stripling."
Iranians, aware of that history, are a proud people. They do not take kindly to being played around with, nor to seeing their country turned into a laughing stock. They do not like the memory of an election campaign that now seems like pure theater, the expression of the sadistic whim of some puppeteer.
So the line I take away from the important Friday sermon of Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the two-time former president who believes that the Islamic Republic's future lies in compromise rather than endless confrontation, is this one: "We shouldn't let our enemies laugh at us because we've imprisoned our own people."
There's been tragedy aplenty since June 12 -- dozens of killings, thousands of arrests, countless beatings of the innocent -- and I hope I belittle none of it when I say there's also been something laughable.
Iran's police chief is accusing opposition leaders of provoking instability, after they called for a referendum on the government's legitimacy.
The official IRNA news agency on Tuesday quoted Esmail Ahmadi Moghaddam as saying those who do not abide by law are "liars" who seek to create discord by spreading doubt in the Islamic republic.
Iranian hardliners denounced on Tuesday a call by reformists for a referendum to resolve the deepening political crisis in the Islamic republic, branding it a Western plot to cause more "havoc."
The Association of Combatant Clerics, a reformist group led by former president Mohammad Khatami, on Monday urged a referendum to try to end the turmoil gripping Iran since the June 12 disputed presidential election.
"They have suggested yet another Western plot to raise havoc by proposing a referendum," said Hossein Shariatmadari, managing director of the hardline newspaper Kayhan who is appointed by supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
"The main idea of this plan is to trigger tension. Their proposal is illegal amd impractical," Shariatmadari wrote.
12:40 AM ET -- Popular American interest in Iran. Via reader Goli, a YouTube video posted by an American "grannie"... I mention it less for the content of the video than simply to note again how much the Green uprising has increased Americans' interest in Iran and changed how people view the country.
12:32 AM ET -- "Hard-Line Force Extends Grip Over a Splintered Iran." A wonderful piece of reporting by the New York Times exploring Iran's Revolutionary Guard (and an example, in the midst of the Twitter fascination, of the importance of good journalism).
It's worth reading the full story, but I'd like to highlight two pieces. First, on the extent of control over political and economic levers that the Guard now holds:
"It is not a theocracy anymore," said Rasool Nafisi, an expert in Iranian affairs and a co-author of an exhaustive study of the corps for the RAND Corporation. "It is a regular military security government with a facade of a Shiite clerical system."
The corps has become a vast military-based conglomerate, with control of Iran's missile batteries, oversight of its nuclear program and a multibillion-dollar business empire reaching into nearly every sector of the economy. It runs laser eye-surgery clinics, manufactures cars, builds roads and bridges, develops gas and oil fields and controls black-market smuggling, experts say.
If you're interested in digging deeper into Iran, the study by Nafisi mentioned above is essential.
Point two, on the ideological roots of the current Guard leadership:
Within this bloc is a core of military elites who have displaced -- and at times clashed with -- the clerical revolutionaries who worked beside Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in founding the Islamic republic. They are the second generation of revolutionaries, ideologically united and contemptuous of first-generation clerics like former President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, and of reformers and those eager to engage with the West. The corps has even trained its own clerics.
In an essay describing the rise of the Revolutionary Guards phenomenon, Professor Sahimi drew a portrait of the new elite: leaders in their mid-50s who as young men joined the corps and fought two wars: one against Iraq in the 1980s and another to force out the Mujahedeen Khalq, which the United States considers a terrorist organization and which is now based in Iraq.
The corps then split into two groups. One believed that Iran needed a chance to develop politically and socially; the other, which emerged the victor, was intent on maintaining strict control. Mr. Nafisi said Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was close to that second group.
Neocons invited to Congressional hearing on Iran. Last week, the House Foreign Affairs Committee announced that it was holding a hearing this Wednesday titled, "Iran: Recent Developments and Implications for U.S. Policy."
My initial thought was that the panel was decent but a bit disappointing, and lacking in progressive voices. Among the initial four witnesses announced were Patrick Clawson, a Bush administration supporter who repeatedly advocated that the U.S. use the threat of military strikes to shift policy in Iran, and Abbas Milani, whose 2004 op-ed arguing that President Bush should resist negotiations and publicly endorse democracy activists in Iran was distributed by the neocon outfit Project for a New American Century. (Milani has since shifted his position on the matter of negotiations.)
Suzanne Maloney, a Bush-era State Department official who notably worked against the administration's hawkish elements, is also invited to testify. So is Karim Sadjadpour of the Carnegie Endowment, who has generally done excellent work on Iran.
On Friday, I spoke with committee chairman Rep. Howard Berman's staff and suggested that they invite Trita Parsi, the superb analyst who heads the National Iranian American Council, to testify. I was told that Parsi would be considered but that it was late in the process to add witnesses.
But on Monday morning, the committee announced two new additions to the hearing, both aggressive neoconservatives whose Middle East analysis has proven detrimental. One is Orde F. Kittrie of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, the other is Michael Rubin of the American Enterprise Institute. (These witnesses were chosen by Republican members of the committee.)
Rubin's addition, in particular, is rather stunning. His career work include aiding Doug Feith in the notorious Office of Special Plans to advance dubious intelligence that helped lead the U.S. into war in Iraq; repeatedly advocating for military action against Iran over the last several years; and, in June, laying out the case for why Ahmadinejad would be preferable to a "more soft-spoken and less defiant" president like Mousavi -- "it would be easier for Obama to believe that Iran really was figuratively unclenching a fist when, in fact, it had it had its other hand hidden under its cloak, grasping a dagger."
This panel really needs some balance. If you're interested in calling the committee and suggesting Trita Parsi (or someone else), you can reach them at (202) 225-5021. You can also call the offices of members of the committee -- here are a few:
-- Rep. Gary Ackerman (Chairman, Subcommittee On the Middle East and South Asia): 202-225-2601
-- Rep. Donald Payne: 202-225-3436
-- Rep. Brad Sherman: 202-225-5911
-- Rep. Bill Delahunt: 202-225-3111
-- Rep. Lynn Woolsey: 202-225-5161
-- Rep. Barbara Lee: 202-225-2661
-- Rep. Keith Ellison: 202-225-4755
Let me know if you hear anything back.
MONDAY JULY 20
6:38 PM ET -- Seemingly small audience turns up for Ahmadinejad in Mashad. Earlier today, I received a video with the attached caption, "This is how many people that came to see Ahmadinejad speech in Mashad."
I didn't post it at first. Though Ahmadinejad delivered his speech in Mashad on Thursday, the video in question was only uploaded today, and you can't actually make out Ahmadinejad's face in the video.
But reader Chas Danner was able to track down the original version of the video and indeed, it appears that this was actually from Mashad, during Ahmadijad's speech.
In some related developments, I missed noting this news over the weekend:
Mr. Rafsanjani traveled over the weekend to the northeastern city of Mashad to discuss the postelection political crisis with high-ranking Shiite clerics. The move was likely to fuel rumors that Mr. Rafsanjani is building clerical support for the opposition. Two of the clerics Mr. Rafsanjani was meeting have declined to congratulate Mr. Ahmadinejad on his victory and may already be sympathetic to the opposition's claims that the election was rigged for Mr. Ahmadinejad.
Mr. Rafsanjani's reception in Mashad contrasted strikingly with that of Mr. Ahmadinejad, who was snubbed by at least one top-ranking cleric during his own visit two days earlier.
6:24 PM ET -- Iran proposes frightening new Internet law.
Iran has passed a new internet law that experts fear will make information on internet users more readily available to the authorities.
Press TV, a news channel funded by the Iranian government, said on Monday that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the country's president, has issued an order for the implementation of the law.
According to Press TV, the cyber law would provide internet users with "more security", as internet service providers are required to save all data sent and received by their clients for at least three months.
But critics of the legislation say the stored data would enable the authorities to monitor internet users, including anonymous bloggers opposed to the regime in the Islamic republic.
A reader who sent that piece along noted this anecdote from Iran published by Foreign Policy magazine several days ago:
A trusted colleague - who is married to an Iranian-American and would thus prefer to stay anonymous - has told me of a very disturbing episode that happened to her friend, another Iranian-American, as she was flying to Iran last week. On passing through the immigration control at the airport in Tehran, she was asked by the officers if she has a Facebook account. When she said "no", the officers pulled up a laptop and searched for her name on Facebook. They found her account and noted down the names of her Facebook friends.
6:14 PM ET -- Bruno on Ahmadinejad. A comedic interlude...
1:51 PM ET -- Government-sanctioned killers. New video, date uncertain, from Iran.
1:41 PM ET -- Man reportedly tortured for information in Evin prison unable to answer their questions because he's deaf and mute.
1:38 PM ET -- Haute culture goes Green. Via the National Iranian American Council:
Green has never looked so good. Italian designer Guillermo Mariotto wore a Neda Alive shirt to honor Neda, who was killed during the Iranian election aftermath. Mariotto's attention to detail is quite admirable as every model on the catwalk wore a green ribbon on their wrist
1:24 PM ET -- Green scrolls in Paris. People at events held around the world have been signing their names to long green scrolls that declare, "Ahmadinejad is not Iran's president!" The plan is for those scrolls to be sent to Paris and, on Saturday July 25, they'll be attached together and displayed at the Eiffel Tower.
An activist with Whereismyvote.fr says that Paris has already received 87 such scrolls from around the world. "We're waiting for the next hundred or so to come during the next days," the group says. Pretty impressive.
UPDATE: Much more on Saturday's demonstrations.
Desmond Tutu, Nobel Peace Laureates, Iranian Poets and Artists Support July 25th Global Day of Action
Protests in Iran Continue - Global Activism Increasing
"We deplore the violence and crackdown on peaceful protesters, the increasing restrictions on civil liberties, and the imprisonment of a growing number of civil leaders in Iran. " Archbishop Destmond Tutu, Nobel Peace Laureate, 1984
"If one country sincerely wants to support democracy in another country that is under dictatorial rule, the only thing to do is to support the freedom fighters who stand for the democratic institutions of that country. Done this way, the sapling of democracy will bear the flower of freedom." Shirin Ebadi, Iranian human rights activist, Nobel Peace Laureate, 2003
"The Iranian leadership is violating the country's own commitments to international human rights treaties, as well as contravening Iran's own laws." Mairead Maguire, Nobel Peace Laureate, 1976
"We call for the release of all political prisoners, the secession of violence against protesters, and respect for human rights and civil liberties in Iran." Jody Williams, Nobel Peace Laureate, 1997
The two most prominent living Iranian poets, Ismael Khoie, and Simin Behbahani, who lives in Tehran, have joined the Global Day of Action. Dariush, socially conscious singer and Iranian cultural icon, will perform at the Washington D.C. United4Iran rally.
In over 55 cities around the world solidarity rallies are planned in support of civil and human rights for the Iranian people and for an end to the violence. Check www.united4Iran.org for a full list of participating cities and supporting organizations including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, FIDH, International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran, Nobel Women's Initiative and Peacejam.
12:47 PM ET -- "Senior U.S. defense official": Israel attack on Iran would be destabilizing. From the Jerusalem Post::
Amid reports that Defense Secretary Robert Gates is heading to Israel next week for talks on Teheran's nuclear program, a senior US defense official has told The Jerusalem Post that an Israeli strike on Iran could be profoundly destabilizing and would affect US interests.
Israel needed to take its relationship with America into account in contemplating any such attack, he warned.
Gates, who last week described the Islamic republic's nuclear drive as the greatest current threat to global security, is set to spend six hours here next Monday, discussing the Iranian threat with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak. He will also visit Jordan, according to officials involved in planning the trip.
In his interview with the Post at the Pentagon, the senior US defense official also suggested that Syria might be ready to "fundamentally" reorient its position toward the United States, which would include restarting talks with Israel, at a time when Hamas and Hizbullah have been put "on the defensive" by Obama administration policies and events in Iran.
10:14 AM ET -- Photos of Neda's alleged killer. There are some floating around on blogs, but I'm going to hold off posting until there is better confirmation.
Update: Dr. Arash Hejazi, who was with Neda when she was shot, says he has confirmed the ID of the person who killed Neda. A photo of the alleged killer is here.
9:28 AM ET -- Mousavi: Release the prisoners.
Mir Hossein Mousavi, the defeated reformist candidate in Iran's presidential election, has demanded the release of scores of protesters detained following the poll, which he insists was rigged.
Speaking to the families of some of the activists and protesters held since the June 12 poll, Mousavi said that detaining people would not resolve the dispute over its outcome, reformist websites reported on Monday.
"Who believes these people, many of them prominent figures, would work with the foreigners and to endanger their country's interests?" he was quoted as saying.
"They should be immediately released."
9:27 AM ET -- Gates to Israel. "US Defense Secretary Robert Gates will visit Israel on 27 July for talks likely to focus on Iran's nuclear program and US-Israeli strategic ties, officials involved in planning the trip said on Sunday. 'We expect Iran to be the main issue. There is obviously a value in a show of Americans and Israelis closing ranks about Iran,' one official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said about the visit, reports Reuters."
9:26 AM ET -- Iran and the West. The BBC begins a 3-part series.
7:58 AM ET -- Supreme Leader warns opposition to back down. Khamenei's first remarks since Rafsanjani's speech on Friday show him as recalcitrant as ever:
Iran's supreme leader told politicians Monday not to disturb the country's security in a strong warning to the opposition to back down after one of its top figures called for a referendum on the government.
Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei addressed "Iran's elite" and warned them to be cautious in the positions they take on the turmoil that has shaken the country since the disputed presidential election on June 12.
He said that hurting Iran's security was "the biggest vice," adding that "anybody who drives the society toward insecurity and disorder is a hated person in the view of the Iranian nation, whoever he is."
Khamenei did not mention any names, but the comments reported on state radio were clearly directed at Mir Hossein Mousavi, the pro-reform candidate who claims to have won the election, and Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the powerful cleric who on Friday criticized the leadership over the elections in a clear challenge to Khamenei.
7:56 AM ET -- Iran releases the last of nine British embassy staff, on bail.
7:55 AM ET -- 36 Army officers reportedly arrested over protest plans. The Guardian has a rather remarkable story.
The Iranian army has arrested 36 officers who planned to attend last week's Friday prayer sermon by former president Hashemi Rafsanjani in their military uniforms as an act of political defiance, according to Farsi-language websites.
The officers intended the gesture to show solidarity with the demonstrations against last month's presidential election result, which was won by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad but which has been clouded by allegations of mass fraud. [...]
The officers were rounded up on Friday morning by army intelligence agents who had caught wind of the plan. They are said to have been arrested at their homes and taken to an unknown location.
Peiknet, a Farsi website, said the officers had agreed the action at a weekly prayer meeting the night before at the Shah Abdolazim religious shrine in Shahr-e Rey, on Tehran's southern outskirts. "They decided to attend the Friday prayer in their military clothes as a sign of protest against the cruel massacre of people by the basij and revolutionary guards and to show their objection against this process and support for the people," the site said. It named 24 of the officers, who included two majors, four captains, eight lieutenants, six sergeants and four warrant officers.
7:52 AM ET -- Demonstrations on Sunday in Shiraz.
Several videos posted on social media sites showed what was billed as a protest by students at Ehsan University in Shiraz on Sunday. Scores of students are visible in the clips, which featured students demanding the release of political prisoners and singing songs from the 1979 revolution.
7:50 AM ET -- Al Jazeera: Iran's power struggle. A 23-minute mini-documentary broadcast this weekend:
7:45 AM ET -- Karrubi blasts "clear lies" of current government. Mehdi Karrubi, Iran's former parliament speaker and a reformist candidate in June's presidential election, has "blasted what he called the 'thoughtless and clear lies' of the country's security forces Sunday," referring to the government's claims that it hadn't attacked his supporters as "astonishing."
"How do they try to say that they do not confront people violently or to blame others? All of this took place in front of people's eyes," Karrubi told supporters, according to Aftab. "They kill the youth in front of people's eyes and then say that they didn't have firearms. As a member of this system, I am embarrassed of these thoughtless and clear lies."
There were reports Friday that Karrubi himself was roughed up by members of the Basij, the paramilitary force loyal to Iran's hardline leadership. CNN could not independently verify those reports at the time, but Karrubi said he was "assaulted" and that his turban was knocked off, according to Aftab.
7:37 AM ET -- Reformist former president calls for nationwide referendum.
Former president Mohammad Khatami has called for a nationwide referendum on the legitimacy of the government, saying Iranians have lost faith in their political leaders after last month's disputed election, according to reports posted Monday on several reformist Web sites. [...]
"Durability of order and continuation of the country's progress hinge on restoring public trust," Khatami, a popular reformist, said, according to the sites.
"From the start, we said there is a legal way to regain that trust. I openly say now that the solution to get out of the current crisis is holding a referendum."
Khatami, according to the Web sites, also accused hard-liners of undermining democracy and challenging the foundations of the Islamic republic when they chose to stand by the election results.
"We need to ask the people whether they are satisfied with the current situation? If a majority of the people are happy with this situation, we will submit (to their vote)," he said, referring to the referendum.
It is too early to say whether Khatami's call for a referendum would be adopted by authorities, but it constitutes the latest challenge to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme leader who has the last word on state matters. Khamenei has declared the results of the elections valid.
WASHINGTON, Apr 15 (IPS) - The U.S. programme of drone aircraft strikes against higher-ranking officials of al Qaeda and allied militant organisations, which has...
WASHINGTON, Mar 20 (IPS) - U.S. Special Operations forces in Afghanistan, whose commando raids and airstrikes against suspected Taliban targets have caused large numbers...
The Iraq War accomplished something very important for imperial America at the zenith of its power: it made international law a laughingstock, and it terminated the relevance of the United Nations Charter.
disintaGreatNation: The Iraq War accomplished something very important for imperial America
OIL was the reason we invaded Iraq; it remains to be seen if we get it.
Most likely other nations will get the Iraqi oil, but Neocons haven't given up yet.
Stability was not the goal of the Iraq war; just the opposite.
Insecurity is good for business, sells weapons and security services.
Disaster capitalism at its finest; read "Shock Doctrine" or be ignorant.
ThatsTheTheWayItIs: OIL was the reason we invaded Iraq; it remains to
We didn't invade Iraq to get the oil; it's always been for sale. The fact is Bush was trying to stabalize an important part fo the world and spread Democracy- apparently two mistakes.
Robster: We didn't invade Iraq to get the oil; it's always
How much was paid for this report that is nothing new? I could have written this before the invasion--In fact, many did. Many real experts with no corporate axe to grind predicted this very thing before the invasion, after the invasion, and regularly since and they were all ignored. It was never about WMD. It was never about a tyrant (Who we supported and armed and had dinner with) needing to be removed. It was never about democracy. It was all about oil and war profiteering. It's not that complicated and the same ones who said going to war in the ME was a horrible idea also stated many of the same reasons why it was going to occur and on none of those list was spreading democracy. I left off bankrupting America as one of the reasons NOT to invade.
morgan1: How much was paid for this report that is nothing
You fail to mention that the main reason for invasion was to teach a lesson to Iraq for wanting to sell oil outside the US exchange system. It was certainly not to democratize, rather to colonize. Subsequent oil deals have more than confirmed this.
You also fail to analyse the so called al Qaeda terror campaign correctly. If the US benefited from this campaign and other inner conflicts greatly, why would not they have been the ones pulling the strings from behind the curtain. The suicide bombing machinery would have been easy to infiltrate and coerce. The US has a history of close relationships with al Qaeda types.
AkiraBergman: You fail to mention that the main reason for invasion
If you all recall the early testimonies regarding the invasion of Iraq that General Odom, the former head of the NSA, said that going into Iraq would be the greatest strategic mistake of our history and at this point he appears to be right.
War is about money and Lenin said that a capitalist would sell you the rope to hang himself with.
RadioResearch: If you all recall the early testimonies regarding the invasion
re: Lone Oak prediction that "history" will approve of the W's Iraq War.
You sound like the Chinese guys who used to shout: The brilliant thought of Chairman Mao illuminate whole world. And they also claimed with great certainty that history would show Mao to have been the greatest leader who had ever lived. What does history have to say about that now?
What does the history we have today, now, say about the Iraq War - now? That it was the stupidest and most pre-pubescent little game ever played by an illegitimately-chosen President of the USA, a war that destroyed a country and drove a whole people into the dust without any respect for their humanity (see uranium-loaded ammunition and the present rising cancer rates among Iraq children), that it was a possibly fatal drain on US finances, that it turned Iran into a fascist hegemonic regional power with much more influence than it had before. That it destroyed the hard-earned good name of the USA amongst the citizens of the world (Abu Graibh, videos of American gunning down innocent Iraqians while joking and laughing, Gitmo, waterboarding). Who knows what history will say about all this. We know what that will be if Fox News writes it. We know what history is telling us NOW. Stick to that - your predictions immediately before the Iraq transgression didn't pan out did they?
JonBFertippton: re: Lone Oak prediction that "history" will approve of the
I do believe that the United States of America removed a genocidal dictator who was and most certainly would of been a national security threat to our country. I do believe that the United States of America helped foster into being a constitutional parliamentary democracy in Iraq which just held ANOTHER free and open election.
Just because many Americans were sucked into opposing the mission in Iraq solely because they were shallow hyper partisans and wished only to worship at and preach from the alter of Bush hate doesn't mean they are were or are on the right side of history. As a matter of fact I believe that most of those who opposed the mission in Iraq have come to the conclusion, or will soon come to the conclusion, that they choose to take a stance that was to say the least defeatist, antidemocratic, and assuredly anti-liberal. Of this they will be ashamed. The die hard Bush haters will never admit that they were wrong or be ashamed of their actions. They will list a thousand reasons why they were right. However, as Iraq grows into the free and economic powerhouse of the Middle East they will be blessedly forgotten by history.
Lone_Oak: I do believe that the United States of America removed
You really need to let people know when your using sarcasm.
Please point out one positive transformation from this illegal war. And I really wouldn't consider the removal of Saddam as positive considering the US has killed and maimed more Iraqis in the 8 years you have been there than Saddam did throughout his reign.
alysheba_3: You really need to let people know when your using
I am sure that I am not the only person who noticed that you conveniently left out of your reply any mention of the Iraqi deaths caused by the indiscriminate genocide conducted by al Qeada, the Saddamist, and the Iranian proxy thugs. I guess you are one of those pre-9/11 cold war believers in the stability dictators. Particularly dictators who murdered thousands of his own citizens with WMDs and a bullet to the back of the head. Don't forget he was also paying the families of homicide bombers up to $25,000 after they blew themselves up in Israel. Gosh, didn't Saddam also have a ten year plus adversary history with the United Sates. All those Democrats who voted for the war also though he was a really bad guy. That is until the radical left started breathing down their necks. Then they bravely decided that being against the war was, well, in their best political interest. Hey, what the heck. A few little details left out here and there are no big deal. No big deal at all.
What people expected something else? Did not Bush and the Republicans steal the 2000 election? What did you think you were getting an Eisenhower? Or a Roosevelt? The only charging up a hill Bush ever did was to the keg. And to think the US government paid Rand to figure out the obvious. Maybe the government should have called Ellsberg instead of dropping millions.
wesleypresley: What people expected something else? Did not Bush and the
Too much money was made on Iraq by too many very influential people for the beneficiaries to admit the war was a mistake. It may have been for many but not for those who sold weapons, security, services and materiel to the US Forces. It was also very beneficial for those who wish to do us harm: Bush adorned their recruiting posters. So we have a war benefiting rich, influential people on this side and on the other. I don't imagine Cheney will change his tune because one of the smartest groups in the world says he was wrong, nor do I imagine the Teabaggers will suddenly become doves. But it's nice to have what we knew all along confirmed by the Really Smart Guys. I feel for the families of the dead and maimed, victims of a malicious mistake.
Nosybear: Too much money was made on Iraq by too many
It's a strange thing that those experts charged with providing national security and the welfare of the American people are failing yet people like me (there are many who also predicted accurately that these wars were blunders) on the "outside" are correct as evinced in a column published in Jan. 2003 called The Missing Arab Support for the Iraq War.
It may well become a truism that the best and brightest are seldom in government from the Vietnam war to the Iraq war to the Afghan war and to the impending Iran war. (Too many wars to list.) There is one question to answer: what is in the best interest of the American people? That question has yet to evoke the best answer by those in power and those around them leading the country to continued failure and decline.
uniskywriter: It's a strange thing that those experts charged with providing
The problem is not that the best and brightest are not in government, it is that the psychopaths in Government don't listen to the best and brightest. Remember a psychopath has only one person's best interest in mind, his or her own.
Nosybear: The problem is not that the best and brightest are
So, was Bill Clinton a psychopath, Carter, Reagan, Ford, Bush(I,II)? I don't think there's that much altruism in the world, people in general tend to seek their own self-interest, if you don't, no one else is going to do it FOR you...maybe the problem is that there's about 6.8 billion 'psychopaths', as you put it, and more than that, an equal number of people that've never really cracked a science book other than as a subject of compulsory study, because the issue of Iraq, bluntly put, is energy.
In the modern age, we have habits, one of those is the consumption of energy habit. If everyone in this country, and in other countries, shut off all their circuit breakers, and parked their cars and mothballed them, there'd be no energy 'crisis'. Ah, but there is, because people want what they want. They want TV, GoogleInterBookNet, The snazzy new sedan with all the bells and whistles, and a double cheese burger to go, please. Well, how's it feel to want, and how's it feel to see where oil comes from? Because if the eco-whiners don't relent, and let the oil companies drill and stuff, then oil demand is going to be one more pressure to support future occupations of foreign countries to get the oil. Can't have your cake, and eat it, too...
realitytrumpsbull: So, was Bill Clinton a psychopath, Carter, Reagan, Ford, Bush(I,II)?
We can't kill our way to peace, and we can't impose democracy with the barrel of a gun.
And then there was our effort to engender freedom by creating a massive system of military checkpoints. Kind of like "If everyone in a country is in prison, then no one really is".
On the other hand, BUSHCO reaped the most massive profit in history from the presidency of the son of the family genius so that has to qualify as some kind of a success.
oldpotsmuggler: We can't kill our way to peace, and we can't
Wrong road for for our nation if our goal is to survive and thrive.
Most likely other nations will get the Iraqi oil, but Neocons haven't given up yet.
Stability was not the goal of the Iraq war; just the opposite.
Insecurity is good for business, sells weapons and security services.
Disaster capitalism at its finest; read "Shock Doctrine" or be ignorant.
Apparently you know nothing except what is fed to you by Faux.
You also fail to analyse the so called al Qaeda terror campaign correctly. If the US benefited from this campaign and other inner conflicts greatly, why would not they have been the ones pulling the strings from behind the curtain. The suicide bombing machinery would have been easy to infiltrate and coerce. The US has a history of close relationships with al Qaeda types.
War is about money and Lenin said that a capitalist would sell you the rope to hang himself with.
You sound like the Chinese guys who used to shout: The brilliant thought of Chairman Mao illuminate whole world. And they also claimed with great certainty that history would show Mao to have been the greatest leader who had ever lived. What does history have to say about that now?
What does the history we have today, now, say about the Iraq War - now? That it was the stupidest and most pre-pubescent little game ever played by an illegitimately-chosen President of the USA, a war that destroyed a country and drove a whole people into the dust without any respect for their humanity (see uranium-loaded ammunition and the present rising cancer rates among Iraq children), that it was a possibly fatal drain on US finances, that it turned Iran into a fascist hegemonic regional power with much more influence than it had before. That it destroyed the hard-earned good name of the USA amongst the citizens of the world (Abu Graibh, videos of American gunning down innocent Iraqians while joking and laughing, Gitmo, waterboarding). Who knows what history will say about all this. We know what that will be if Fox News writes it. We know what history is telling us NOW. Stick to that - your predictions immediately before the Iraq transgression didn't pan out did they?
Just because many Americans were sucked into opposing the mission in Iraq solely because they were shallow hyper partisans and wished only to worship at and preach from the alter of Bush hate doesn't mean they are were or are on the right side of history. As a matter of fact I believe that most of those who opposed the mission in Iraq have come to the conclusion, or will soon come to the conclusion, that they choose to take a stance that was to say the least defeatist, antidemocratic, and assuredly anti-liberal. Of this they will be ashamed. The die hard Bush haters will never admit that they were wrong or be ashamed of their actions. They will list a thousand reasons why they were right. However, as Iraq grows into the free and economic powerhouse of the Middle East they will be blessedly forgotten by history.
Please point out one positive transformation from this illegal war. And I really wouldn't consider the removal of Saddam as positive considering the US has killed and maimed more Iraqis in the 8 years you have been there than Saddam did throughout his reign.
Every American should read the report:
A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm
http://www.why-war.com/files/cleanbreak.pdf
End it yesterday.
It may well become a truism that the best and brightest are seldom in government from the Vietnam war to the Iraq war to the Afghan war and to the impending Iran war. (Too many wars to list.) There is one question to answer: what is in the best interest of the American people? That question has yet to evoke the best answer by those in power and those around them leading the country to continued failure and decline.
In the modern age, we have habits, one of those is the consumption of energy habit. If everyone in this country, and in other countries, shut off all their circuit breakers, and parked their cars and mothballed them, there'd be no energy 'crisis'. Ah, but there is, because people want what they want. They want TV, GoogleInterBookNet, The snazzy new sedan with all the bells and whistles, and a double cheese burger to go, please. Well, how's it feel to want, and how's it feel to see where oil comes from? Because if the eco-whiners don't relent, and let the oil companies drill and stuff, then oil demand is going to be one more pressure to support future occupations of foreign countries to get the oil. Can't have your cake, and eat it, too...
And then there was our effort to engender freedom by creating a massive system of military checkpoints. Kind of like "If everyone in a country is in prison, then no one really is".
On the other hand, BUSHCO reaped the most massive profit in history from the presidency of the son of the family genius so that has to qualify as some kind of a success.