Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Iranian Alert -- October 18, 2003 -- IRAN LIVE THREAD PING LIST
The Iranian Student Movement Up To The Minute Reports ^ | 10.18.2003 | DoctorZin

Posted on 10/18/2003 12:05:52 AM PDT by DoctorZIn

The US media almost entirely ignores news regarding the Islamic Republic of Iran. As Tony Snow of the Fox News Network has put it, “this is probably the most under-reported news story of the year.” But most American’s are unaware that the Islamic Republic of Iran is NOT supported by the masses of Iranians today. Modern Iranians are among the most pro-American in the Middle East.

There is a popular revolt against the Iranian regime brewing in Iran today. Starting June 10th of this year, Iranians have begun taking to the streets to express their desire for a regime change. Most want to replace the regime with a secular democracy. Many even want the US to over throw their government.

The regime is working hard to keep the news about the protest movement in Iran from being reported. Unfortunately, the regime has successfully prohibited western news reporters from covering the demonstrations. The voices of discontent within Iran are sometime murdered, more often imprisoned. Still the people continue to take to the streets to demonstrate against the regime.

In support of this revolt, Iranians in America have been broadcasting news stories by satellite into Iran. This 21st century news link has greatly encouraged these protests. The regime has been attempting to jam the signals, and locate the satellite dishes. Still the people violate the law and listen to these broadcasts. Iranians also use the Internet and the regime attempts to block their access to news against the regime. In spite of this, many Iranians inside of Iran read these posts daily to keep informed of the events in their own country.

This daily thread contains nearly all of the English news reports on Iran. It is thorough. If you follow this thread you will witness, I believe, the transformation of a nation. This daily thread provides a central place where those interested in the events in Iran can find the best news and commentary. The news stories and commentary will from time to time include material from the regime itself. But if you read the post you will discover for yourself, the real story of what is occurring in Iran and its effects on the war on terror.

I am not of Iranian heritage. I am an American committed to supporting the efforts of those in Iran seeking to replace their government with a secular democracy. I am in contact with leaders of the Iranian community here in the United States and in Iran itself.

If you read the daily posts you will gain a better understanding of the US war on terrorism, the Middle East and why we need to support a change of regime in Iran. Feel free to ask your questions and post news stories you discover in the weeks to come.

If all goes well Iran will be free soon and I am convinced become a major ally in the war on terrorism. The regime will fall. Iran will be free. It is just a matter of time.


PS I have a daily ping list and a breaking news ping list. If you would like to receive alerts to these stories please let me know which list you would like to join.

TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: iaea; iran; iranianalert; protests; southasia; studentmovement; studentprotest
Discover all the news since the protests began on June 10th, go to:

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail DoctorZin”

1 posted on 10/18/2003 12:05:52 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife; fat city; freedom44; Tamsey; Grampa Dave; PhiKapMom; McGavin999; Hinoki Cypress; ...
Join Us At Today's Iranian Alert Thread

Live Thread Ping List | DoctorZin

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail DoctorZin”

2 posted on 10/18/2003 12:09:26 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Straw Not Sure of Traveling to Iran

October 17, 2003
Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting

London -- The British foreign office was unable to confirm Friday that Foreign Secretary Jack Straw would join his French and German counterparts in travelling to Tehran next week to negotiate a solution to the dispute over Iran's nuclear programme.

A foreign office spokesman said that there were "no firm plans" for straw to go to Iran, but he confirmed that a British delegation was in Tehran this week for talks with Iranian officials."

British official would have raised the normal range of topics," the spokesman said, when asked whether the talks included the nuclear issue.

The Financial Times Friday reported that the UK was part of a European delegation discussing the prospect of sharing fuel and technology with Iran to alleviate international concern over Iran's nuclear programme.

The delegation was said to include officials from France and Germany with the seeming prospects that the foreign ministers of the three European countries would visit Tehran if the technical discussions showed progress.
3 posted on 10/18/2003 12:13:15 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Britain Unites with France and Germany Over Iran's Nuclear Crisis

October 18, 2003
The Telegraph
Anton La Guardia

British, French and German foreign ministers are planning an unprecedented joint trip to Teheran next week to try to clinch a deal to resolve the crisis over Iran's nuclear programme.

The joint diplomatic mission is a sign of a more united European foreign policy after the bitter disputes over the war in Iraq, which was opposed by France and Germany.

In a speech to be broadcast tomorrow, Dominique de Villepin, the French foreign minister, will call for a new triumvirate of London, Paris and Berlin to lead an expanding European Union.

"Together with Germany, our three countries have the political will, the economic significance and the military capabilities that can shape our continent," M de Villepin will say, according to an advance text of the BBC's Dimbleby lecture, which he is giving this year.

The three foreign ministers are not travelling on the same plane but their joint visit is designed as the clearest sign that Iran will not be able to split the Europeans over the nuclear issue, as they were divided in the run-up to the war in Iraq.

Informally, they have offered Iran guaranteed supplies of nuclear fuel, probably to be delivered by Russia, if it gives up the ambition to enrich uranium.

Moreover, the European ministers want Teheran to sign up to a new intrusive system of inspections by signing the so-called "Additional Protocol" to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.

Amid Western fears that Iran is pursuing a secret nuclear weapons programme, the clerical regime in Teheran has been given until the end of the month to come clean on its nuclear projects or risk having the issue taken up at the United Nations by the Security Council.
4 posted on 10/18/2003 12:15:41 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Noble Aspirations

October 17, 2003
Iran va Jahan
Koorosh Afshar

The common westerner knows very little, if any, about the true psyche of the Iranian masses. It has been some centuries that the people of Our nation have been told to await a Messiah who will finally arrive. The think-tanks of the Ochlocratic regime of the Mullahs are well aware of this superstitious perception. Abusing this embarrassing psyche, the enemies of our nation set the stage for the Islamic revolution nearly a quarter of a century ago. Suffering from this self-inflicted, foreign-paced plague for more than two decades our nation was doomed to fall for another mendacious and potentially more sinister mullah, Khatami, some 6 years ago.

Time passed by and proved to the Iranian citizenry that this Mullah, like the others, was nothing more than a mediocre second handed Islamist politician, let alone the long awaited messiah of the Iranians.

In fact, the messiah never came.

After all these years of trial and error, I do not wish to amplify our achievements as what we have accomplished is petty in comparison to what we have lost during these past years notwithstanding the priceless experience we have gained. We are not looking for another messiah, at least, if not true about all the Iranian people, the majority of the new Iranian generation are diligently embracing the concept of self determination and the understanding of this fact that the head of a nation, albeit the best in that nation, cannot single-handedly or solely be fit to lead a country in today’s world.

It was a good tiding for us that a woman from amongst our compatriots, Dr.Shireen Ebadi, won the Noble peace prize. We sincerely hope that this will bolster secularization of our mindset and bring about meaningful and substratal change in our country. And it will have to, after all, for there is no other way for the future of our nation. Let us not forget that talk about reforms so long as the militant Islamists are in power, is simply futile. The first and foremost task for a person like Dr. Ebadi is to help represent the Iranian nationalist psyche and identity in the world. In that regard, her religion (whether compatible or at odds with the basic human rights) is quite impertinent as religion is merely a private matter and it must not and will not have any place in the future political system of Iran.

Historians know full well that whenever a state gets subjugated under a particular religion, the very first that occurs is the violation of human rights. You can not speak of individuality as, at the same time, the state takes side with one specific celestial ideology; the product of such a system will soon be a branding where citizens as categorized as either insiders or outsiders. Those peers of mine who poured into the streets of Tehran having nothing but clenched fists and slogans, had completely given up on "reform" and do not aspire to produce a milder version of the current ochlocracy. A fundamental change is what we are seeking.

Now Dr.Ebadi is at a very critical point. She can, with her wise secular words, shatter the suffocating boundaries of any religion, and in essence, repeat the desires of the Iranian nation.

She should keep in mind that nothing can be nobler than the noble and equitable secular aspirations of our nation. In the words of Thomas Paine:

Of all the tyrannies that affect mankind, tyranny in religion is the worst; every other species of tyranny is limited to the world we live in; but this attempts to stride beyond the grave, and seeks to pursue us into eternity.

In conclusion, we are not so much for the freedom of religion as we are for the religion of freedom.
5 posted on 10/18/2003 12:18:06 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
UC-Berkeley lecturer being held in Iran

By Dana Hull
Mercury News
Posted on Fri, Oct. 17, 2003

A political-science lecturer at the University of California-Berkeley and Santa Clara University is being held in Iran on charges of espionage, according to Iranian media.

Dariush Zahedi, a U.S. citizen, never returned from a trip to his native Iran this summer, and concerned students and colleagues at both campuses are trying to piece together what happened.

``We're deeply concerned for him and we very much hope that he will be released shortly,'' said David Leonard, dean of the International and Area Studies Department at UC-Berkeley. ``His teaching here at Berkeley was always balanced and fair, and as a consequence we cannot imagine what reason there might possibly be that led to this action.''

Zahedi is a part-time lecturer, which means he does not teach a full course load at any university. He was scheduled to teach ``War and Peace in the Middle East'' at UC-Berkeley this semester.

Zahedi, an East Bay resident who is single and whose mother and stepfather live in Orinda, also was scheduled to teach two courses this quarter in Santa Clara University's political-science department.

``He has taught for us in the past and he is well-liked,'' said Leslie Bethard, an administrative assistant in the department.

The State Department also is monitoring the situation.

``We are always interested when a U.S. citizen is detained,'' said Kelly Shannon, a spokesman for the Bureau of Consular Affairs.

Hooshang Amirahmadi, a Rutgers University professor and a friend of Zahedi's, said Zahedi often travels to Iran during the summers to visit his family, including a brother in Tehran.

``At first, we just heard that an American professor was arrested by the Ministry of Information and charged with spying,'' said Amirahmadi, who closely follows Iranian news. ``He was acquitted of the charges, but obviously the Justice Department in Iran intervened and would not let him go. They have kept him in the Evin prison in Tehran.''

Zahedi, who is in his late 30s, received a doctorate from the University of Southern California in 1998 in international relations and political science.

He has been active in the American Iranian Council, a non-profit organization that wants to see Iran become ``a democratically developed member of the global community with full respect for human rights.'' The group does not accept money from any government.

Zahedi and Amirahmadi edited a book based on the group's conference at Stanford University in spring 2002 titled ``Iran in the New Millenium: Opportunities and Challenges.''

``He was obviously critical of the regime, but he was still very positive about the country and went back and forth a lot,'' Amirahmadi said. ``There are millions of Iranians who are more critical of the government than he is, and they are in Tehran. I think he was arrested because his timing was terrible. He went to Iran just a few weeks before July 9.''

On July 9, 1999, Iranian college students began a mass movement for democratic reform in Iran, a date that is marked by Iranian exiles each year.

This year, more than 250 Bay Area Iranians gathered in downtown Palo Alto to wave flags and shout chants against Iran's Islamic leadership. Student protesters in Iran clashed with police, who fired tear gas to disperse them; student leaders were arrested.

Fearful of reprisals in Iran, Zahedi's family has asked not to be identified in print.

``His mother and brother are in Tehran, and they have learned that he is in good health,'' his stepfather said in a phone interview Friday. ``I hope he will be released soon. I pray for him every day.''

Contact Dana Hull at or (510) 790-7311.
6 posted on 10/18/2003 12:20:03 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Iran says ready for any outside threat


PUTRAJAYA, Malaysia, Oct. 17 — Iran, under pressure from the United States and others over its nuclear programme, said on Friday it was on its guard against any threat from the outside.

President Mohammad Khatami, having mentioned the possibility of hostilities by the United States or Israel, told a news conference in Malaysia that he did not think Washington would do anything at this time.
''They are not in a position to commit another mistake but at the same time we remain ready, we remain vigilant,'' he said on the sidelines of an Islamic summit. ''I don't think the United States is in a position with the international community to commit this mistake a second or third time.''
7 posted on 10/18/2003 12:48:19 AM PDT by F14 Pilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn; McGavin999; Eala; AdmSmith; dixiechick2000; nuconvert; onyx; Pro-Bush; Valin; ...
The Dogs Of War Are Barking Again: The Iran "Threat"

Payvand News of Iran
By Kam Zarrabi

For any casual observer in the United States, America’s approach to the “problem” of Iran is not a complicated geopolitical issue requiring exhaustive diplomatic maneuverings. The casual observer simply “knows” that Iran, as the President has stated, is a member of the international Axis of Evil, and the Number One State Sponsor of International Terrorism.

We are now told that the Al Gha’eda leadership has direct connections with factions within the Iranian regime. And, of course, we are told that there is no question but that Iran is on the way to developing the ultimate weapon of terror, the nuclear bomb, and with the worst of intentions.

European countries have been alerted of this impending Iranian threat, and urged by the United States to implement all necessary measures to safeguard against an Iranian missile attack. Some poorer Eastern European countries, such as Hungary and Bulgaria, are promised adequate missile systems by the United States in order to be able to defend themselves against an Iranian attack.

With America’s blessing and encouragement, the Israeli navy has just added nuclear missiles to their fleet of diesel submarines in the Mediterranean and the Persian Gulf, for defensive purposes, we are told.

Additionally, Iran now intends to launch its own spy satellite into orbit, which means two things: Iran has the long-range missile capability to do so, therefore, Iran can reach any part of the globe with its nuclear-armed missiles; and, Iran can now locate sensitive military targets in Israel, so carefully guarded up till now from spying eyes, thanks to the US policy of deleting this data from the easily available archives of global satellite photographs.

To conclude, casual observers do not have to question any of these assertions; their only concern is how best to eliminate this source of unpredictable menace and threat to international peace and security. I know this is how the general public feels about the Iranian issue, not just by reading the newspaper headlines or listening to radio and television talk shows, but as a public speaker and instructor in international affairs to large and small audiences.

In such addresses, any statement that does not confirm such negative imageries is considered biased, overly defensive or, at the very least, apologetic. It is against this kind of torrent that one has to swim in order to challenge such deeply rooted perceptions.

I enjoyed reading the October 14 article in Payvand, ‘Iran Needs Nuclear Power’ by Mohammad Sahimi, Pirouz Mojtahed Zadeh and Kaveh Afrasiabi. Any well-informed and technically sound person would agree with what the authors have so clearly outlined. But, that’s not the issue, as we are not dealing with the well-informed or the well-intentioned!

As a country at an obvious disadvantage in confrontation with America, Iranian policy makers are both divided and confused. The hardliners or the ultraconservative so-called non-elected leadership in Iran, believe and behave much like their counterparts in the United States, the non-elected religious Right or fundamentalists and the ultraconservatives who wield power from the various think tanks that influence this Administration’s policy decisions. And, just as is the case right here in the United States of America, foreign influence peddlers do take advantage of sensitivities or soft spots in the Administration in order to promote their own self-interests. In America it is the formidable Israeli lobby with unquestioned power and influence over the supposedly democratic electoral processes, the public media, and the foreign policy apparatus. In Iran, it has been the anti Zionist activists who have basically highjacked the humanitarian support and sympathy for the Palestinians by forging it into a militant Islamic anti-Zionism.

Of course neither side is quite capable of unshackling itself from these tentacles that have penetrated so deep into the fabric of their respective societies to become cultural traditions, coequal to patriotism. Each society is paying a price for its passionate attachment, an attachment that seldom if ever has had, or is likely to have, anything positive or beneficial for the benefactors.

The price that Iran is paying for its quite principled commitment to a foreign cause has been by far more detrimental to its own best interests, compared to the negative impact to America for becoming the dog that is wagged by its tail, Israel. Iran’s progress and prosperity, if not its very survival, is being threatened today by forces that mere rhetoric cannot deter.

If we set aside passion and propaganda, every constituent in the Iranian leadership, elected or not, from the religious fundamentalist, hardcore conservative, to moderate, liberal, or secular nationalist, has the best interests of the nation in mind. Different groups and affiliations exist because opinions as to what is best for the country also vary. One should not be at all surprised to observe the similarities between the opinions and methods of approach among the radical ultraconservatives in the United States Congress and the White House, with the self-appointed guardians of faith and nationhood in Iran. Neither side would refrain from adopting any measure, no matter how drastic, in the pursuit of their goals; faith in their own righteousness drives their sense of logic and reason.

The Iranian conservatives truly believe that easing up on the reigns of power will open the door to the dreaded alien intrusion and ultimate devastation of the cultural traditions and national identity of the country. There is a direct ratio between Israel’s military threats and American chest-thumping against the Iranian regime, and the strength and apparent legitimacy of the ultraconservative hardliners’ grip over Iran’s policies. Undoubtedly, the current American and Israeli strategy of threats and intimidation against Iran has had, and will continue to have, a negative impact on any positive reforms that the United States wants, so it claims, to see implemented in Iran.

The moderates and the truly reform-minded politicians and observers in Iran see America’s strategy as counterproductive to the interests of Iran and the region as a whole. It doesn’t take a conspiracy theorist’s creative imagination to conclude that what is behind the strategy of threats and intimidation is a grander design that, unchallenged, will lead to the temporary establishment of client states in the Middle East, which would inevitably re-explode into anarchy and chaos, resulting in decades of instability and turmoil.

As horrific as this scenario might seem, the results might very well suit the global strategic objectives of the world’s only superpower.

The chess game that is currently being played between Iran and the United States, with Israel as America’s coach, and the IAEA as a not-so-impartial referee, exemplifies the complexities of the issues. We now hear that IAEA has demanded the right to inspect Iran’s military installations in addition to the nuclear sites, to make sure that Iran is in compliance with the Non Proliferation Treaty requirements. In other words, the United States and Israel insist on gaining complete access to Iran’s military and defense installations, and to ensure that Iran lacks the potential to obtain nuclear weapons anytime soon. This would be invaluable information, as was the case before the invasion of Iraq, should a similar campaign take place against Iran, whether before or after Syria!

Iran will no doubt engage in every possible tactic to remain evasive and delay the process, even if by rejecting the demands of the IAEA outright, and taking its chances at the United Nations Security Council, perhaps hoping for a VETO by Russia against the imposition of stiff sanctions against it.

To argue for Iran’s legitimate need for developing its nuclear deterrent for defensive purposes, and demanding equal and evenhanded approach to Israel’s nuclear threats, might sound logical to any sane observer of the international scene. However, when the Assistant Secretary of State, John Bolton, was questioned recently during a visit to England about America’s disregard for Israel’s nuclear arsenal, his response was quite straight to the point. He basically stated America’s position as being concerned only about nuclear threats to America and American allies. This is clearly another indication that safeguarding Israel’s security interests by ensuring its unchallenged military supremacy is the on top of the agenda.

It, therefore, makes no sense and would be of very little impact to harp on the unfair or prejudicial approach of the United States in dealing with Iran or any other regime in the Middle East. It is also of no consequence to argue for or against Iran’s legitimate need for nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. Reasoned or globally accepted arguments, in other words, have no role to play in this scenario. It is not as though one could present sound arguments in favor of Iran’s legitimate rights to engage in nuclear research and its peaceful applications, in order to defuse allegations and suspicions raised against it by the United States, who is looking through Israeli eyes, of course.

We can clearly see that complaining, raising objections, screaming and crying, won’t help. So, what are the Iranians to do?

1- Close their eyes, hold their breaths, and hope for the best.

2- Accept the mandates imposed by the Empire, and readopt the decades-long practice of subordination as a compliant client state.

3- Resist change while intensifying animosity and counter threats against the Empire and its local surrogate, challenging them to a duel, even though the outcome is quite obvious – suicide!

4- Engage in shrewd diplomacy while making sure that any hostile intentions against Iran might just turn out to be more costly to any aggressor than they’d be willing to accept.

The last option seems the most logical for any responsible leadership in Iran, whether conservative, liberal, religious or secular. The big effort by the United States and Israel, obviously only for Israel’s sake, to speed up and intensify the IAEA inspections of Iran’s nuclear programs is to keep the last alternative from becoming a real option for Iran. The fear for Israel is that, without America’s blessings and support, taking any direct military action against Iran might prove disastrous. Iran can easily withstand such surgical attacks against its potential nuclear installation, only to intensify its support for the Lebanese groups and Palestinian militants, while waiting for the right opportunity to retaliate in kind, sooner or later. America, meantime, will have to wait until the mess it has created in Iraq, as well as in Afghanistan, is cleared up, perhaps until after the elections of 2004, to be able to consider the Iranian issue seriously. This, it is feared, will give Iran enough time to equip itself with at least a few nuclear warheads, if it doesn’t have any as yet.

Syria as a threat to Israeli interests can be brought to submission by denying it the oil flow from Iraq, now in America’s hands, and other economic sanctions. Without a viable Syrian support, the Lebanese assistance and support for the Palestinian resistance in the occupied territories will cease or be radically reduced. While Israel can thus pursue its own national interests with increasing impunity, Iran’s role may gradually fade as Israel’s potential ultimate nemesis. This can be achieved through a Cold-War type détente between the two states. Israel could then achieve the measure of security it has craved since its inception, albeit at the expense of the legitimate rights of the Palestinian populations, and Iran might escape the wrath of the Empire and proceed with its own inevitable reforms that are long overdue.

And, congratulations for a well-deserved Nobel Peace Prize to Ms. Shirin Ebadi.

About the author:
Kam Zarrabi is writer, lecturer, former president, World Affairs Council of San Diego, North County.
8 posted on 10/18/2003 7:03:09 AM PDT by F14 Pilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: F14 Pilot
Free Iran, Now!
9 posted on 10/18/2003 7:28:53 AM PDT by blackie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: F14 Pilot

What an article!

"Iran now intends to launch its own spy satellite into orbit, which means two things: Iran has the long-range missile capability to do so, therefore, Iran can reach any part of the globe with its nuclear-armed missiles; and, Iran can now locate sensitive military targets in Israel"

Disturbing, to say the least.

10 posted on 10/18/2003 8:51:23 AM PDT by nuconvert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
France Warns Against Iran Action

October 18, 2003
The Guardian
Simon Tisdall and Ewen MacAskill

The US pursuit of forcible regime change is not a viable or safe policy in the dangerous world that exists after September 11, the French foreign minister, Dominique de Villepin, said in an interview with the Guardian.

In a wide-ranging critique of US policy in the Middle East and beyond, Mr De Villepin said that any military action against Iran over its alleged nuclear weapons would be "absolutely ridiculous".

He also said that, in spite of Thursday's UN security council resolution giving the US-British force in Iraq a mandate, "the conditions for real progress on the reconstruction of Iraq are not complied with today".

"Reconstruction has to have a partner, you have to have real sovereignty in Iraq if you want to have the Iraqi people working with you."

Mr De Villepin declined to commit France to providing reconstruction assistance at next week's donors' conference in Madrid, in spite of urgings to do so from Washington.

While emphasising France's desire to patch up relations with the US and to work with it on a range of international issues, the foreign minister also questioned Israel's US-backed security policies. He said Europe should play a vital role in advancing the peace process, not least because of Europe's close trade and aid links with both sides.

"I think that Israeli policy during the past months and years shows clearly that if you are going to imagine that only through security you are going to find solutions, you are mistaken...

"We think that using force, on the contrary, is going to... give new reasons to some people [like al-Qaida] to oppose us."

Mr De Villepin sketched out a French vision of a radically different approach to foreign policy in which differences of culture, society and religion should be weighed alongside questions of security.

"Regime change can not be a policy on its own in today's world," he said. "You have to be respectful of sovereignty.

"Of course, there are very difficult situations when human rights are concerned... we have known that in Kosovo. So in rare situations, we have to address these kinds of problems by military means. But you have to have the support of the international community... If there is one country that imagines it can solve this matter alone, we are going to see more vengeance, more difficulties, more problems, and the world is going to be more unstable."

Mr De Villepin's remarks underline the continuing differences between France, which led European opposition to the Iraq war, and Washington and London.

During a brief visit to London this week, Mr De Villepin had lunch with the foreign secretary, Jack Straw, and recorded the prestigious Dimbleby Lecture, which will be screened tomorrow on BBC1.

After his visit, it was announced that Mr De Villepin and Mr Straw and the German foreign minister, Joschka Fischer, are to visit Tehran on Monday to try to defuse the nuclear arms row. To the annoyance of the Bush administration, Britain, France and Germany have offered to supply civilian nuclear technology to Iran in return for its abandoning any ambition to seek nuclear weapons capability.,11882,1065801,00.html
11 posted on 10/18/2003 3:52:34 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Straw to Join EU FMs on Nuclear Mission to Tehran

October 18, 2003
The Guardian
Ewen MacAskill and Luke Harding

The British, French and German foreign ministers are planning an unprecedented joint diplomatic mission to Tehran next week to try to persuade the Iranian government against building a nuclear bomb.

They hope to convince Iran to comply with international regulations ahead of an October 31 deadline set by the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN watchdog.

The trip, if it goes ahead, would be remarkable for its show of European unity after a turbulent year in which Britain has sided with the US against France and Germany over Iraq.

It would also mark a departure from the stance of hawks in the US administration who advocate tough measures against Iran if it pursues nuclear weapons.

A final decision on whether the trip will take place will be made over the weekend. Officials are assessing whether it would be positive or counter-productive.

Trips to Tehran have often had to be cancelled at the last minute, dependent as they are on the shifting political balances between hardliners and modernisers in Iran.

The three ministers - Britain's Jack Straw, the French foreign minister, Dominique de Villepin, and the German foreign minister, Joschka Fischer - plan to fly independently to Tehran on Monday. They got together on the sidelines of a European Union meeting in Brussels on Thursday and tentatively agreed to go ahead.

The invitation was extended by the Iranian foreign minister, Kamal Kharrazi, several weeks ago.

A Foreign Office spokesman said last night: "We cannot confirm there will be a visit but we are discussing with our French and German partners how best to make it clear to Iran the urgent need to address the widespread international concern over its nuclear programme as spelt out in the recent IAEA board meeting decision."

A German official echoed this: "We are actively exploring this possibility [of a joint trip] at the moment."

The US and the European Union insist Iran is secretly building a nuclear weapon in contravention of its obligations under the non-proliferation treaty. But Tehran again denied the charge yesterday, claiming it was only pursuing a civil programme.

According to western diplomatic sources, France, Germany and the UK have agreed to provide technical help to Iran's civilian nuclear project in return for full compliance with the UN.

The EU ministers also insist that Iran signs an additional protocol that would allow surprise inspections of suspect sites. Western diplomatic sources in Tehran have confirmed that senior officials from the three European countries visited Tehran in recent days to "resolve this crisis peacefully".

The Iranian president, Mohammad Khatami, said yesterday his country had no plans to build nuclear weapons and predicted it would reach an agreement on its nuclear programme with the UN agency.

Mr Khatami, speaking at a meeting of Islamic countries in Malaysia, said Iran did not rule out signing the additional protocol but insisted his country's rights be respected.

He said another group of inspectors was expected soon. "We are going to make them sure that there is nothing to worry about in Iran," Mr Khatami said.

"But there is a political motivation to put Iran under increasing pressure because it is concerned about the large nuclear arsenal in Israel."

At present, Israel is the only Middle Eastern country to have nuclear weapons.

Mr Khatami, having mentioned the possibility of military strikes by the US or Israel, said he did not think Washington would do anything provocative at this time. "They are not in a position to commit another mistake, but at the same time we remain ready, we remain vigilant."

Joint EU missions such as the one proposed to Iran are rare, although British and French foreign ministers flew to Africa together last year to try to resolve the Congo conflict.,11538,1065806,00.html
12 posted on 10/18/2003 3:53:52 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Iran, IAEA Negotiate Signing of Additional Nuclear Protocol

October 18, 2003
The Associated Press

TEHRAN - Under pressure to meet a United Nations deadline, Iran began detailed negotiations Saturday on the signing of an additional protocol to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty that would grant UN inspectors the right of unfettered access.

"The talks may take several days, [but] I'm optimistic that [we] will reach an agreement," Iran's representative to the International Atomic Energy Agency, Ali Akbar Salehi, told The Associated Press.

The IAEA, a UN agency, has set a deadline of October 31 for Iran to prove it has no secret program for producing nuclear weapons. If the IAEA finds that Iran has failed to respond satisfactorily, it is expected to refer the matter to the UN Security Council, which could lead to the imposition of sanctions.

The United States strongly suspects Iran does have a secret nuclear weapons program. Iran insists its nuclear facilities are only for generating electricity.

Saturday's talks follow a one-day visit to Tehran this week by Mohammed ElBaradei, the head of the IAEA, who said his organization still had "outstanding issues" to resolve with Iran.

ElBaradei said in Tehran on Thursday that Iran had promised greater access for IAEA inspectors. He said Iran had allowed inspectors to visit one military site and that there could be expanded reviews of both military and civilian facilities in the future.

The IAEA has urged Iran for months to sign the additional protocol to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty that would give IAEA inspectors access to any site they deem fit without notice.

Under Iran's existing agreement to the NPT, the country is not required to allow IAEA inspectors to visit non-nuclear sites, including military installations.

In Washington this week, a U.S. State Department spokesman said America wants Iran to comply with the IAEA's resolution setting the Oct. 31 deadline "in its entirety."

The head of the Iranian parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy committee, Mohsen Mirdamadi, told the AP on Thursday that "Iran's case should not go before the Security Council."

"If allowing inspections of military sites resolves this problem," Mirdamadi said, "then we should do it."

Iranian hard-liners, however, have urged the government to stand firm against world pressure over the nuclear program and even to withdraw from the nonproliferation treaty.
13 posted on 10/18/2003 3:55:15 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife; fat city; freedom44; Tamsey; Grampa Dave; PhiKapMom; McGavin999; Hinoki Cypress; ...
Those Who Bet on the Fall of Bush

October 18, 2003
Arab News
Abdul Rahman Al-Rashid

Those betting on the fall of President Bush should not hope for too much. Whether he goes or stays, US foreign policy is not going to change, except perhaps for the worse.

Nor should they set much store by the Iraqi crisis being the nail in Bush’s coffin. That would be a mistake, much like the one the Iranians made in the 1980s in thinking that the American hostage crisis would bring down Jimmy Carter — and that was on a par with the removal of the Shah and the arrival of Khomeini. Jimmy Carter was indeed never re-elected, but the Iranians suffered eight years of hell with Ronald Reagan, his successor.

By the same token, it is erroneous to bet on the events in Iraq bringing Bush down. The decisive factor in the election is almost always internal rather than external and is usually economic. Foreign policy, while featuring on the agenda, rarely takes center stage. Americans, like most people, have simple and immediate needs — employment, retirement, healthcare and education. Candidates rarely challenge the president on foreign affairs for fear of appearing unpatriotic. In any case the victorious president usually supports his defeated predecessor and safeguards his reputation.

Yet neither the Palestinian president nor the Iranians have been able to comprehend this. Yasser Arafat refused at the last minute Clinton’s peace project after going through all the negotiations and receiving most of what he wanted from Ehud Barak. Arafat thought that it would be better to sign the peace plan with the next president because Clinton’s second term was ending. This kind of thinking lost Arafat the deal of a lifetime.

Long before the Palestinians, the Iranians made the same mistake. They announced their joy at the defeat of Jimmy Carter and welcomed his successor Reagan by releasing all the hostages they had taken from the US Embassy. Rather than sending a letter of thanks, Reagan vowed that he would never forgive the Iranians for what they had done. Teheran went on to live isolated and surrounded. Regan’s policies still have repercussions today.

Therefore, it is erroneous for those scouring the opinion polls to believe that a new president would take a varying stand on the issue. Most often the situation is worse than that which preceded it. History is witness to this. Let me remind you of what Arab columnists wrote during Clinton’s reign — of how Jewish Americans influenced the administration and how his administration was the worst yet for its bias against Arabs and overt support for Israel. When Bush won they rejoiced — there was only one Jew in the White House. The truth, in hindsight, is that Clinton was the fairest of all American presidents toward the Palestinians. He received Arafat in the White House some 13 times, and the Israeli prime ministers never got invited. Clinton also visited Arafat in his house in Gaza, and together with his wife put up with the criticism from the American press. He inaugurated the airport with Arafat in spite of Israeli objections. Clinton also pushed Barak into accepting the return of all occupied territories except for four percent and compensated Arafat for it with equivalent Israeli land and the dismantling of all settlements. Clinton advanced some solutions for the problem of Palestinian refugees — namely international compensation. He also gave back occupied Jerusalem.

But may God forgive him, Arafat refused all this, preferring to wait to give the honor of signing the peace with the new president who would be arriving within a few weeks.

Bush, once he got in, firmly closed the door, saying that Clinton had advised him that Arafat wasn’t to be trusted. Arafat wasn’t a liar; he just didn’t understand American policy.

After this overwhelming setback, and more than a year after Bush’s arrival on the scene, Arafat appeared and said that he was prepared to sign a peace agreement. He was told the offer was no longer on the table and was presented with a poor alternative, the road map, which merely opens the door for negotiations for the Palestinians.

Arafat isn’t the only one who misunderstands what electoral winds are blowing. Many Arab politicians have high hopes for the next president. It would be much better for them to deal with the reality of the current president or just forget about the American role altogether.,%20Abdul%20Rahman%20AlRashid.htm
14 posted on 10/18/2003 3:56:57 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
UN Watchdog Holds Tehran Talks

October 18, 2003
BBC News
Jim Muir

Iranian officials in Tehran have begun negotiations with International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) envoys on signing an agreement to allow tougher inspections of its nuclear facilities.

The IAEA has urged Iran to sign the Additional Protocol to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as part of a process of establishing that Tehran has no intention of trying to produce nuclear weapons.

The Iranians have until the end of the month to answer all the agency's questions about their past nuclear activities.

The negotiations over the Protocol are a vital part of a complex package which is being put together.

If all goes well, it could lead to Iran taking a big step towards shrugging off US President George W Bush's "axis of evil" stigma, and significantly improving its relations with Europe.

Iranian officials say the talks on the Protocol may go on for several days. But the IAEA negotiators expect to be in Tehran only until Sunday, so it could be sooner.

Dual outcome

If all goes well, and Iran signals that it is ready to announce acceptance of the protocol and meet other requirements, the foreign ministers of Britain, France and Germany are expected to fly to Tehran at very short notice.

Their purpose would be to assure Iran that if it signs the protocol and meets all the IAEA's other requirements, they would help ensure that the Iranians get access to the technology and enriched uranium fuel they need to produce their own peaceful nuclear power.

The ministers will only come if that understanding is assured.

Diplomats say it would depend on Iran's agreeing not only to sign the protocol, but also to suspend uranium enrichment activities as the IAEA has requested, and later to restrict them, under international safeguards, to low-grade fuel production sufficient for producing atomic power but not nuclear weapons.

The head of the IAEA, Mohamed ElBaradei left Tehran late on Thursday after receiving assurances that Iran was ready to come completely clean over its past nuclear activities, as demanded by a tough resolution from the Agency's Board of Governors in September which set Iran a deadline expiring at the end of October.

By then, the Iranians would have to clarify many outstanding questions, especially in the area of uranium enrichment.

Mr ElBaradei hinted that that might mean Tehran making some potentially embarrassing admissions about its past activities.

Decision time

Iran faces a vital turning point. While the signals at present are positive, if things go wrong, it could lead in quite the opposite direction.

If by the end of the month Iran has failed to give the IAEA all the information it needs to answer all the questions, it could find itself referred to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions.

That course would also entail, among other things, a huge setback to Tehran's relations with Europe.

The European Union has made it clear that continuing its current negotiations for a Trade and Cooperation Agreement with Iran depends heavily on Tehran's complying with the IAEA's requirements.
15 posted on 10/18/2003 3:58:03 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Iran Leads Islamic World's Nuclear Quest

October 18, 2003
David Warren
The Ottawa Citizen

The discussion about Iran this week has turned on the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to Shirin Ebadi.

She was met on her return to Iran by thousands of zealous well-wishers, to whom she is a symbol of democracy and freedom. The Western media, with their usual obtuseness, speculate about whether this will give a boost to the reforming faction in Iranian politics.

Yet they continue to assume that Mohammad Khatami, the twice-elected, if essentially powerless, president, is the key "reformer." He is instead the charming stooge of the fanatic ayatollahs against whom he shadow-boxes. He keeps his position at their pleasure, and provides the pretty face past which Europe and the U.S. State Department parade aid, trade and well-wishing missions. It is no longer easy to find anyone in Iran itself who takes him as other than a stooge.

And one will understand why, after listening to what President Khatami had to say about Ms. Ebadi's empty Nobel prize. He called the bestowal of it "politically motivated," an attempt to "embarrass all Muslims and the people of Iran." Which is just what the "hard-line" ayatollahs would have said, had they condescended to offer an opinion.

The true reformers of Iran have long since taken to the streets, and have been, so far as I can see, defeated there. The high point of the popular rebellion, with its demands for free elections and the separation of mosque and state, came in early July. The ayatollahs proved themselves to be in control of the situation, seeing off the campus and other street actions with a casual brutality which got them serious attention nowhere in the West.

My own assessment, from what Iranian sources I have directly and indirectly, is that the net effect of the Nobel Prize to Ms. Ebadi is nil. The only thing that could make an immediate difference in Iran's domestic situation would be direct confrontation with the U.S. Which is why so many Iranians -- including the late ayatollah Khomeini's own grandson, now speaking from safety in Shia Iraq -- are begging for this.

They are likely to be disappointed. Faced with the near-certainty that Iran will soon become the first Middle Eastern power other than Israel with nuclear weapons -- the perfect cover for increased Hezbollah operations throughout the region and the world -- the Bush administration is behaving like France. Pressure for increased inspections of Iranian nuclear sites is being directed almost entirely through the United Nations. And the ayatollahs are being allowed to play a Saddam-like game, in which they open a few more centres to inspection by the IAEA, in order to take the wind out of an Oct. 31 deadline to open all.

Let me spell out what I hinted in the last paragraph. The immediate danger from a nuclear-armed Iran is not that they will pump a missile into Tel Aviv, as Ayatollah Rafsanjani has boasted in the past. They are not so crazy. The threat itself is sufficient to win concessions from any enemy; whereas acting on the threat would only bring Armageddon. A deployed nuclear arsenal instead provides its owner with the freedom to do anything else he wants, with near impunity. And that "anything else" is likely to consist of using Hezbollah, and other Iranian-controlled terrorist assets, to rekindle the Islamic Revolution that Khomeini began, far beyond Iran's borders.

Iran is not the only threat. One of the more unnerving now emerging is the possibility Pakistan might station some of its own nuclear arsenal on Saudi territory, ostensibly as a counter to the Iranian weapons that Pakistan helped develop (funnelling nuclear and missile technology to Iran from China and North Korea). The Saudis have adamantly denied they have their own nuclear weapons program, and there is no convincing reason to think they do; but they could get around their signature on non-proliferation agreements by leaving Pakistanis in control of the arsenal, on the analogy of the U.S. deployment of weapons in non-proliferating Germany. The only difference being the Saudis have largely paid for Pakistan's nuclear development.

If this all sounds rather incestuous, or triangular, it is probably because it is. What all parties share -- Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan -- is the commitment to an "Islamic bomb," which all believe, perhaps rightly, can provide the great equalizer between a weak Islamic world and a strong West.

The parties disagree about the form of the Islamic ideology they represent; but hardly disagree about the need to empower Islam in some form; or to preserve their own regimes against the threat of secularizing and democratizing forces. It is what puts each of them into a special relationship with international terrorism -- though much different in kind from country to country.

Iran is at the cutting edge, however. In the absence of deeply penetrating human agents, we cannot trust Western intelligence to guess when or even how Iran may suddenly declare what the North Koreans have recently declared -- that they have gotten beyond the point at which any plausible quick strike could knock out their nuclear capabilities.

We can only know that when that point is reached, we have a whole new ball game; a true World Series.
16 posted on 10/18/2003 3:59:18 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife; fat city; freedom44; Tamsey; Grampa Dave; PhiKapMom; McGavin999; Hinoki Cypress; ...
Iran Leads Islamic World's Nuclear Quest

October 18, 2003
David Warren
The Ottawa Citizen
17 posted on 10/18/2003 4:00:35 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
Abroad based Satellite TV re-broadcasts Movement's reminder for Ms. Ebadi

SMCCDI (Information Service)
Oct 18, 2003

The abroad based "Azadi TV" re-broadcasted, this evening the Movement's reminder for the first Iranian Nobelist. The program was initially broadcasted, live, the day before the historic departure of Ms. Ebadi for Tehran and was seen in Iran, Europe and the N. American continent.

Speaking on behalf of SMCCDI, Aryo B. Pirouznia who was interviewed by Mr. Cyrus Sharafshahi of Azadi Tv and the head editor of the Los Angeles based "Sobh e Emrooz", had stated:" While cheering this nomination, as mentioned in the Movement's Public Statement entitled "The Nobel Prize and an Historic Mission" and of which a copy was remitted to Ms. Ebadi herself, we request from our Nobelist to be very careful of avoiding to fall in the trap of any factions of the regime and especially its so-called reformists....

We believe that Ms. Ebadi, who was a purged Judge and later a victim of the regime's sham reforms, must be now aware that mixing religion and state will never result in Democracy and Justice... She shall avoid giving up to the calls by some individuals to make of her a candidate for the future presidency of the republic and shall focus as like as Gandhi to fight for the promotion of Freedom and Secularity...

... Iranians have placed a big hope in her and as she'll notice, tomorrow evening they'll show their support by gathering at the Airport and in several areas of the Capital... If she remains true to them, then, they'll support her till the Day of Freedom...."

"...It's only by choosing such way that her name will appear in the Golden Book of Rights activists beside other illustre Nobelist names, such as the late Andrei Sakharov in the former USSR and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi in Myanmar" Pirouznia added in other parts of the interview.

The Movement's mass e.mailed public statement and its request for the popular support of Ebadi, from the Airport till the Day of Freedom, was as well mentioned, several times, by several other abroad based radio and Satellite TV networks, broadcasting for Iran, such as the famous NITV and the AFN on October 13th.
18 posted on 10/18/2003 4:04:02 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: F14 Pilot
The hardliners or the ultraconservative so-called non-elected leadership in Iran, believe and behave much like their counterparts in the United States, the non-elected religious Right or fundamentalists and the ultraconservatives who wield power from the various think tanks that influence this Administration’s policy decisions.

Why just the other day Sean Hannity called for the Christian bomb to kill all the infidels.

The author is certifiable.

Iran wants the bomb to kill the Jews and instigate its religious dictatorship over a wider area.

It will respond to firmness--witness the release of American hostages when Reagan assumed power.

It will capitalize on appeasement--witness the retention of American hostages when Jimmy Peanut was "in power".

19 posted on 10/18/2003 4:40:34 PM PDT by PhilDragoo (Hitlery: das Butch von Buchenvald)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DoctorZIn
This thread is now closed.

Join Us At Today's Iranian Alert Thread

Live Thread Ping List | DoctorZin

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail DoctorZin”

20 posted on 10/19/2003 12:02:52 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson