Iranian Alert -- January 13, 2004 -- IRAN LIVE THREAD --Americans for Regime Change in Iran

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.

A Failure of Imagination
There's obviously a good deal of news coming out of Iran-- much of it potentially positive from the American perspective (and also from the perspective of general humanity).

Why is this news chiefly disseminated on the Internet? Why does Aaron Brown so seldom see fit to report on the possible powderkeg of Iran?

It is a function of political bias creating a failure of imagination.

The liberal news media does not believe that Bush's ambitious foreign policy could possibly work. We here at Ace of Spades do not believe with great certainty that it will work, but we are certainly open to (and hopeful for) the possibility that it could.

Not so the establishment print and broadcast news media. They are openly hostile to Bush's policy. Furthermore, in their heart of hearts, they don't want his policy to work. Were the Iraq War to cause a reverse-domino toppling of enemy regimes, it could only be called a victory for Bush (try as the media might to do the opposite). Good news for Bush is bad news for liberals and the media, as freely, and with an unseemly absence of shame, admitted by the ever-diminishing Michael Kinsely. (Poor Mr. Kinsley has "mixed emotions" about good news for the country, like an improving economy and the capture of Saddam Hussein.)

This political bias leads, in turn, to an utter failure of imagination as to the range of possibilites of what could happen. The recent news from Iran does not mean that a violent overthrow of the theocrats is imminent. We would be guilty of the precise opposite bias of the news media were we to suggest such a thing.

But events in Iran do suggest, possibly, that a crisis point is nearing.

The media is ever-alert for the possibility that Bush will be proven to be guilty of impeachment-level offenses; they actively follow all leads in that arena and breathlessly report of possible indications of presidential or vice-presidential felonies. The imagination of the media definitely does embrace the possibility of a public and legal repudiation of Bush. They are therefore quite thorough when it comes to such stories.

But their outright hostility to Bush, and especially to the Iraq war, prevents them from imagining that tangible positives might emerge from it. To the press, it is simply inconceivable that Iran could ever implode.

Thus, the constant barrage of Halliburton stories, and the peculiar dearth of stories about Iran. It's not that the mainstream media actively promotes Halliburton stories as potentially leading to impeachment or political repudiation; they don't. But they do seem open to such an eventuality, and therefore deem it important to keep the public appraised on the developing storyline.

But they plainly do not see the reports from Iran as possibly leading anywhere important. And thus, they don't deem these stories as particularly newsworthy.

Compare this situation to the media's utter lack of preparedness for the capture of Saddam Hussein. To the media, it was all but inconceivable that Saddam Hussein would ever be captured. In reality, Saddam's capture was near-inevitable; it was more a question of "when" not "if." And a fairly short-term "when" to boot. The shock and anguish on the faces of the liberal newsmen charged with the distasteful duty of reporting Saddam's capture to the American public spoke volumes. It was grim news, and furthermore it was utterly surprising news-- a "political UFO," as Tom Brokaw called it, a fantastically strange visitation from a bizarre alternate universe where black is white and Bush is occassionally competent.

Right now the American public has little comprehension that the political situation in Iran is deterioriating. They have not been so informed because the media simply cannot imagine that unfolding events in Iran could lead anywhere.

It could be that in three or six months, the media will once again stunned and dismayed by events that were both perfectly foreseeable and yet perfectly unforeseen. Once again, they could be ashen-complexion and grim-mouthed as they report on "breaking news" that in fact had been breaking for months and years without their notice.

The next "UFO" might be buzzing the minarets in Teheran.

posted at 13.1.04 by Black
http://www.ace-o-spades.blogspot.com/

Khatami Threatens Mass Resignation of Reformists

January 13, 2004
AFP
Yahoo News

TEHRAN -- Embattled Iranian President Mohammad Khatami threatened that he and his reformist allies would leave office en masse unless powerful conservatives ended a move to disqualify thousands of reformers from contesting next month's parliamentary elections.

In a dramatic escalation of one of the Islamic republic's worst political crises, the president bluntly told hardliners to allow free and fair polls on February 20 by rescinding their controversial blacklist.

"We will leave together (or) we will stay together. We have to remain firm. If one day we are asked to leave, then we will all leave, together," the president told a meeting of reformist allies.

"At this stage, my historic mission is to prevent the illegal seizing of the levers of power," he was quoted as saying by the state news agency IRNA.

It was an unprecedented threat from the mild-mannered cleric, widely criticized for being too weak in the face of constant conservative opposition to his effort to shake up the running of Iran.

A mass resignation of reformers would see almost all democratically elected officials out of office, presenting a crisis of legitimacy for the regime's marriage of democracy and theocracy.

But the conservative-run body behind the disqualification of thousands of would-be candidates vowed it would not cave in under what has become barrage of furious allegations of poll-rigging.

"The Guardians Council is doing its legal and religious duty and will not back down in the face of pressure and fuss," asserted Mohammad Jahromi, spokesman for the Surveillance Commission.

"People do not want corrupt people, hooligans and those who do not believe in Islam to be candidates," Jahromi said.

The Surveillance Commission is attached to the Guardians Council, an unelected bastion of Iran's religious right-wing that is charged with screening all legislation and vetting candidates for public office.

Disgruntled reformist MPs, 83 of whom have been barred from standing for re-election, have been keeping up a three-day-old sit-in at the Iranian parliament, or Majlis. They warn they are prepared to escalate their protest.

"Our objective in this sit-in is to go into the elections with a process that is legal," said Mohammad Reza Khatami, younger brother of the president and leader of Iran's largest reform party, the Islamic Iran Participation Front (IIPF).

"If not, we have other plans that we will reveal later," warned Khatami, who is one of those barred.

And student activists, a driving force behind reforms, hinted they could step in, six months after they brought thousands onto the streets in pro-democracy protests and sparked a countrywide security alert.

"Democracy has a price and we have to pay for it. We will continue to the end," said Payman Aref, a member of the Office to Consolidate Unity (OCU), the main pro-reform student group which sent a delegation to meet the MPs.

Blacklisted candidates and government officials are reported to be locked in intensive closed-door negotiations with the Guardians Council, hoping the bulk of the 3,605 disqualifications can be annulled in a complex appeals process.

"The criteria upon which such decisions should be made were not respected and there must be a revision," President Khatami said. "What has been done in the rejection of candidacies is not acceptable."

Nevertheless, he said he was "not pessimistic".

The 12-member council is due to make a final ruling on the disqualifications by the end of the month.

A definitive list of candidates is due to be released around February 12 -- barely a week before elections that were supposed to have been a celebration of Iran's 25-year-old experiment in "Islamic democracy".

Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has the final say on all matters of state and has directly or indirectly appointed all members of the Guardians Council, has yet to play his hand in the deepening crisis.

He has said he would only intervene if all legal channels failed.

The reformist-controlled interior ministry, which is responsible for organising elections, has judged the mass disqualifications "illegal" and has said they will not be respected, raising doubts over whether the elections can even be held under the current circumstances.

And in Qom, the capital of Iran's Shiite clergy, the student news agency ISNA reported that 2,000 clerics held a rally and called on the Guardians Council not to cave in.

The clerics reportedly threatened to descend on Tehran unless the MPs' sit-in ends on Wednesday.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20040113/ts_afp/on_040113203451

Can Iran's Election Row be Resolved?

January 13, 2004
BBC News
BBCi

A political crisis in Iran sparked by the disqualification of candidates for next month's parliamentary election is intensifying.

Vice-President Mohammad Sattarifar has warned that the government may resign if there is no resolution, although the BBC's Jim Muir says this does not amount to a specific threat.

More than 2,000 reformist candidates have been disqualified by the Guardian Council - a highly conservative unelected body, whose powers the reformists are keen to curb.

Iran's Supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said he will only intervene after legal procedures have been exhausted.

Widespread public disillusionment could result in a low turnout for the elections on 20 February.

Can the argument be resolved? Should the reformists be allowed to stand? Should the Ayatollah intervene?

The following comments reflect the balance of opinion we have received so far:

Human beings in any part of the world have the God-given right to express themselves without the hindrance of self-appointed representatives of the Almighty. Freedom of expression to Iran !!!
Ali Pahlavi, London, United Kingdom

Throughout history no regime or government has been around forever, and if they don't have the public support, they will be collapse at a much faster pace.
AliReza, Stockholm, Sweden

There is no point in resignation of the government. All the Mullahs have to go. A country cannot be run by some turbaned theologists and dictators. People of Iran want a democratic and secular regime!
Bijan, Leeds, England

As an American who lived in Iran for 15 years although I don't support the theocracy. I would like to see the reformers follow the legal process. The hardliners have created many laws for their own convenience while never standing by any laws once their own stake is in the middle. Their reason is that what they are doing is what Allah wants and his law/will is above all laws. The reformers should stick to the legal process or they will become just like their foes. Mass resignation sounds very legal to me.
Saffar, Cincinnati, Ohio

If the Georgians could overthrow their dictatorial regime peacefully so can the people of Iran. I hope they make their move soon.
Vishen, Malaysia

The people of Iran are sick and tired of religious dictatorship and want the way paved for a free and fair election.
Farhad, London, England

Reformists should have done this a few years ago when they had the public support. Now it's late and I guess the nation will not act seriously to support them. Iranians are now some steps ahead of governmental reformists and would like a real democracy not a controlled Islamic one. I believe that there eventually will be a compromise between left/right wings. However, this will not encourage people to attend that election party at all. The recent sad earthquake of Bam definitely showed that this regime, in total and not only conservatives, is completely incompetence to rule a country like Iran.
Reza Alavi, Iran

Iranians in Iran don't care about reformist v. hard-liner. Reformists haven't been popular since 2001, majority of student groups don't support them and hardly anyone supports the hard-liners. The masses support a Secular democracy, by pushing this row the hard-liners are risking a total revolution. They better be careful.
Ali Reza Rowhani, Tehran, Iran

While the current impasse may be resolved, the root of this problem never will, not while an unelected few hold power over those in a democratic process. The people of Iraq should pay close attention, a theocracy does not work, especially in a religion of unequal rights and limited freedoms.
L Miller, Los Angeles, CA

Iran is at its growth phase. The people of Iran have gone through hardships and will continue to do so until the core of the society is well educated and informed about the outcome of different ruling regimes; as they have learned about the previous regime. The people of Iran have experienced foreign occupation, monarchy and are experiencing religious theocracy. When this phase is complete the society will be fully matured to establish a secular government that will manage the country based on principles of business and laws of market. A government that will respect religion and religious beliefs of all kind and will acknowledge that religion is a private matter.

People will soon realize that Gods representation on earth is within their hearts and soul. God is represented by nature, not by Mankind. Nature will follow its due course and people and societies at large will adapt accordingly during this process. Let's hope for the best.
Mina Roshanfekr, Ontario, Canada

Going through motions of the democratic process does not change the fact the Iran is a theocracy. The elections seem like a moot point to me since the council of guardians are loath to give up any power. No surprise that the Iranians cannot be bothered to vote. The charade is adding insult to injury.
Robert Arisz, Amsterdam

This is a game plan between parties in a dictatorship regime. People don't believe in it and do not care about it.
Ali, Iran, Tehran

History will once again repeat itself in Iran. In the same manner that the Shah was deposed due to his autocratic rule, the clerical regime will face a similar fate. This will pave the way for Iran having a liberal representative democracy based on the Rule of Law.
Mohsen E, London, UK

Its a very tough position for Khatami and the other reformers to play. On one hand, they are the priests' fig leaf, helping create the perception that Iran has democracy when it doesn't. Quitting would be the only honest thing to do. On the other hand, without the reformers, limited as they are, what hope do people have for change? Religious government is not only an anachronism, it also concentrates too much power in too few hands and has too little accountability. That spells trouble every time.
Ross Larsen, London

The election row can only be resolved when the mullahs are brought to justice for their crimes (as it is for other totalitarian dictators) and when the Iranians would give up Islam and go back to their real Persian roots. At this point it seems that unfortunately the "democratic means" will not work and Iran must go through a shake-up.
Ramin, Tehran, Iran

As a faithful Iranian I am hoping that my country will evolve. However, from an educated person's standpoint, my opinion is that there will never be democracy or free elections in Iran until the supreme leader is deposed, the guardian council disbanded, and a clear separation of church and state. The Iranian parliament is a farce. Iran is in every respect a dictatorship - not unlike Saddam's regime, albeit less ruthless and tyrannical. Sadly, the motive for control over Iran is really economic and not religious. The Guardian council says they are preserving Islam but any informed person knows that that is a lie. They are trying to preserve their vested interest in the economy and continue to profit while the population suffers in poverty. I doubt Mohammed would approve. Let the people judge how "Islamic" the ruling clerics are for a change!
Baz, London, UK

If these people are have done nothing wrong why should they be barred from standing in an election? In the end it is those who vote who will decide whether they are fit to represent them. If you unfairly bar part of the community you only build up resentment which will tear a country apart, this should be a time of reconciliation and solidarity within Iran especially as certain Americans will be looking for an excuse for military conquest before their presidential elections; nothing has changed politically from the time of Rome - conquest always goes down well with the public
Dave, UK

This standoff will continue until the Iranian people are able to rule themselves. The government is being run by people who might have been supported in their rise to power by the local populace, but the Iranian public doesn't appear to support them or their ideology. It is not good for Iran to have a revolution every quarter of a century and that is why I hope the unelected clerics will submit themselves to the will of the electorate, rather than continuing to cling onto their power.
Graeme Phillips, Berlin, Germany (normally UK)

I hope and pray that the supreme leader and the guardian council see where Iran is heading and voluntarily give up power before the country implodes. I am all for an advisory council to help guide the government, but an unelected body should not keep power. I fear they will remain stubborn and keep the country in chaos.
Nadeem Hhaikh, London, UK

I believe the election in Iran is just a game. They vote for themselves and they don't accept people's voting. It is just another cat and mouse play by conservative hard liners and reformists. They are together in this play and the people in Iran are awake and they don't accept these lies any more. As an Iranian student, even if it did come to an election, I would never vote to either of these parties for your information.
Mina Tahmasebi Pour, Iran

By asking the question "Should the Ayatollah intervene?" there is an implication that somehow Khamenei has a potentially constructive role to play. In fact he is the main opponent of liberty in Iran and the most powerful advocate for the Iranian police state. He and his associates rule through the threat of violence and other types of punishment and intimidation such as barring people from jobs. Clerical rule is the problem not part of the solution.
Will McElgin, Chicago USA

Will McElgin seems to be badly informed. In fact "Supreme Leader" Khamenei is relatively liberal. However, far from being "supreme", his power to make any real reform is severely constrained by hardliners such as the "Guardian Council". Let's hope that the Iranian people can curb the hardliners' powers and achieve real, independent democracy.
Merlin Cox, London, UK

The Western media again displays its love for blowing a domestic Iranian issue, out of global proportion. Every opportunity to condemn Iran will be gladly taken. Why have we not heard of the political domestic troubles of Brazil, Cuba, Morocco, Canada and every other country - of course all countries have domestic political problems! Yes, this Iranian issue can certainly be resolved, why do we not leave them to it as opposed to sticking our noses in everywhere they do not belong - and are not welcome.
Muhammed Reza Tajri, London, UK

It's interesting how governments seem to almost universally get lost in their own greed for either power or money, and forget their own roots. Begun in "revolution against an oppressive dictatorial regime", the Iranian Mullahs have become the same thing themselves. They are probably fairly close to the danger point of being overthrown themselves by the very people and exact same process that put them into the government in the first place.
Mike, Atlanta, US

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/3392349.stm

Iran: A "Sort" of Democracy

January 13, 2004
National Post
Amir Taheri

Together they form the largest bloc in the parliament where, with their allies, they command a two-third majority.

So, why are 80 members of the 290-member Islamic Consultative Assembly -- the Iranian parliament -- behaving like an opposition and holding a sit-in amid threats of mass resignation?

The reason is that the next general election, to be held on Feb. 20, could end the parliamentary career of many of them, not because of rejection by voters but because they won't even be allowed to stand.

A couple of months ago Richard Armitage, the No. 2 at the U.S. State Department, described the Islamic Republic of Iran as "a sort of democracy."

Well, he was sort of right if by democracy we mean the holding of regular elections without bothering about their quality and purpose.

In a normal democracy anyone who does not have a criminal record and meets basic qualifications, such as citizenship, is allowed to stand for elected office. But this is not the "sort of democracy" that Iran has had since the mullahs seized power in 1979.

In Iran all candidates must be pre-approved by a body known as The Council of the Guardians of the Constitution, a 12-man, mullah-dominated organ appointed by the "Supreme Guide" and answerable to him. These "guardian angels," as they are known not without irony, can decide who is a good Muslim and who is not. Good Muslims are allowed to stand for elections, and bad Muslims are pushed aside.

But even that is not the end of the story.

A man regarded as a good Muslim and allowed to stand as a candidate may be reclassified suddenly as a bad Muslim after the election. In that case "the guardian angels" have the power to cancel the election, kick the newly discovered bad Muslim out of the parliament, and even send him to jail.

The same man could enter one parliament as a good Muslim but be excluded from the next as a bad one. The present Speaker of the Majlis, a mullah named Mahdi Karrubi, was prevented from standing for election in 1994 because the "guardian angels" regarded him as a bad Muslim. By 1998, however, he had become a good Muslim once again and allowed to stand, was elected, and became Speaker. Next month he may, once again, become a bad Muslim and be kept out of the Majlis even if voters choose him.

The story does not end there either. Even a parliament composed entirely of good Muslims cannot legislate as it deems fit. The "guardian angels" have the power to annul any piece of legislation they do not like.

The current crisis started when the Guardian Council rejected the applications of 2,004 men and women, among them scores of incumbents, who wished to stand in next month's general election. By doing so, the "guardian angels" have already determined the shape of the next parliament, making sure that it will be dominated by a new majority. And that has outraged the present majority.

But what are the key points of difference between the two sides?

The short answer is: not much.

For purposes of simplification, the Western media refer to the two sides in Iran as "reformists," supposedly led by President Mohammad Khatami, and "conservatives" whose leader is identified as another mullah, Ali Khamenei, the Islamic Republic's "Supreme Guide."

The terms "reformist" and "conservative," however, mean little, if anything, in the current context of Iranian politics.

The supposedly "reformist" bloc has controlled the presidency for the past six years and the parliament for the past four years. And yet, it has implemented absolutely no reforms of any significance. Nor has it even proposed such reform.

For its part the "conservative" faction bases its ideology not on the need to conserve anything, but on the necessity of exporting the Khomeinist revolution first to other Muslim countries, and then to the entire world.

The so-called "conservatives" have a coherent discourse that one may like or dislike. Put simply it runs like this: Islam is the only true faith, all other religions have either been abrogated by God or were man-made concoctions from the start. Today, the only country in the world that has a truly Islamic system is Iran. It is, therefore, Iran's duty to help replace all other regimes in the Muslim world with truly Islamic ones. Once that has happened, a powerful Islamic bloc should be formed, led by the Iranian "Supreme Guide," to convert the whole of mankind to the Khomeinist version of Islam, if necessary, by war.

In the meantime, no deviation from the established rules should be tolerated inside Iran. Women should cover their heads, and men should grow beards. The "polluting" culture of the West should be kept out. Such ideas as pluralism, democracy and human rights, all inventions of the Jews and the Crusaders, must be kept out of the Dar al-Islam (The House of Islam). Elections should still be held, but only as a periodical reconfirmation of the people's devotion to the system.

The discourse of the so-called "reformists" lacks similar clarity.

Khatami, for example, has become a master in the art of ambiguity and double-talk. When addressing the Europeans he talks of reason and science and cites Aristotle and Hegel. But when talking in Iran he claims that women should cover their head because their hair emanates a dangerous ray that drives men wild.

As far as foreign policy is concerned the "conservative" faction is not suicidal. It knows that it cannot take on the "Zionist-Crusader" bloc, led by the United States. It admits that it can never develop friendly ties with the "Zionist-Crusader" bloc, but is prepared to accept a period of peaceful coexistence in the name of detente.

The so-called "reformist" faction, however, is bedeviled by its contradictions. It knows that women's hair does not emanate deadly rays. But, at the same time, it opposes the repeal of the law imposing the hated headgear. The so-called "reformist" faction knows that it is possible to be a Muslim without growing a beard. But its members grow substantial beards and continue to spread the lie that those who shave will end up in Hell.

What is happening in Iran today is a power struggle between two factions within the same Khomeinist establishment.

The so-called "reformist" faction is not objecting to the principle of vetoing candidacies by the "guardian angels." It is objecting to the fact that its own members are vetoed.

The so-called "reformist" faction is not calling for a constitutional amendment either to abolish the Council of Guardians or to lift its veto over candidacies. What it really wants is to gain control of the council for itself and use it as a means of preventing its rivals from standing for election.

What is astonishing is that many in the democratic world still fail to understand the reality of the Iranian situation.

The European Union, for example, has just appealed to the "guardian angels" not to veto so many candidacies. The EU is only asking for a reduction in the dose of the poison, and not an end to the poisoning of a nation's political life.

Even if the Council of Guardians allows all the so-called "reformists" to stand as candidates the forthcoming election would still be far from democratic. The reason is that no one who is not a Khomeinist of one sort or another is allowed to stand for election to anything.

As long as the constitution remains in force the Islamic Republic, an oxymoron in itself, shall remain, at best, only a "sort of democracy," and, at worst, a tyranny that holds fraudulent elections to confuse the EU and people like Richard Armitage.

Amir Taheri is an Iranian journalist and author.; amirtaheri@benadorassociates.com

http://www.benadorassociates.com/article/1162

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.