Iranian Alert -- August 10, 2003 -- LIVE THREAD PING LIST

To find all the links to all 62 threads since the protests started, go to:

Join Us at the Iranian Alert -- August 10, 2003 -- LIVE THREAD PING LIST

Live Thread Ping List | 8.10.2003 | DoctorZin

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

Iran: The Mystery Meeting

NEWSWEEK

Aug. 18 issue — Why were two top Pentagon experts on Iran meeting with a notorious character from the Iran-contra scandal? DOD’s answer: it was by accident—both times. In high-summer Washington, though, conspiracy theories abound.

ONE SOURCE FAMILIAR with administration infighting on Iran says that neocons in the Defense Department don’t trust “appeasers” at State and the CIA to give unbiased intelligence about Tehran. And because the hard-line ayatollahs who dominate Iran’s security agencies support terrorism—including Al Qaeda—these DOD hawks view State’s hopes of someday negotiating a new relationship with Iran as delusional. So, the conspiracy theory runs, they reach out to people like Iranian businessman Manucher Ghorbanifar for an alternative view of what’s going on in Tehran.

The reality, senior DOD officials assert, is that when Pentagon experts Harold Rhode and Larry Franklin met with a handful of Iranians in Italy more than a year ago—the Iranians had offered, through an American intermediary, to give the United States information on terrorism—the DOD pair were startled to find Ghorbanifar there and argued against his remaining. (The CIA once labeled Ghorbanifar “an intelligence fabricator and nuisance.”) Then, one of the DOD pair “ran into” Ghorbanifar again in Paris this summer. End of story, they say. “There is no Defense Department back-channel on Iran,” a senior official insisted. The Italy meetings were authorized by the White House, say officials, though the “unscheduled” Paris session was not.

—Mark Hosenball and John Barry

http://www.msnbc.com/news/950458.asp

Iran: The Mystery Meeting

NEWSWEEK 8.17.2003 Issue

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/961369/posts?page=3#3

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

The reality, senior DOD officials assert, is that when Pentagon experts Harold Rhode and Larry Franklin met with a handful of Iranians in Italy more than a year ago—the Iranians had offered, through an American intermediary, to give the United States information on terrorism—the DOD pair were startled to find Ghorbanifar there and argued against his remaining. (The CIA once labeled Ghorbanifar “an intelligence fabricator and nuisance.”) Then, one of the DOD pair “ran into” Ghorbanifar again in Paris this summer. End of story, they say.

So what's the deal? Is Newsweek claiming that that the USA is cooperating with terrorists? Did we?

Dinner With the Sayyids

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
NYTIMES OP-ED COLUMNIST 8.10.2003

BAGHDAD, Iraq

The best thing about being in Baghdad these days is that you just never know who's going to show up for dinner.

Take last Wednesday night. I was invited to interview a rising progressive Iraqi Shiite cleric, Sayyid Iyad Jamaleddine, at his home on the banks of the Tigris. It was the most exciting conversation I've had on three trips to postwar Iraq. I listened to Mr. Jamaleddine eloquently advocate separation of mosque and state and lay out a broad, liberal agenda for Iraq's majority Shiites. As we sat down for a meal of Iraqi fish and flat bread, he introduced me to a small, black-turbaned cleric who was staying as his houseguest.

"Mr. Friedman, this is Sayyid Hussein Khomeini" — the grandson of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the founder of Iran's Islamic revolution.

Mr. Khomeini told me he had left the Iranian spiritual center of Qum to meet with scholars in the Iraqi Shiite spiritual centers of Karbala and Najaf. He, too, is a progressive, he explained, and he intends to use the freedom that the U.S. invasion has created in Iraq to press for real democratic reform in Iran. Now I understand why his grandfather once threw him in jail for a week. He has Ayatollah Khomeini's fiery eyes and steely determination, but the soul of a Muslim liberal.

The 46-year-old Mr. Khomeini said he's currently advocating a national referendum in Iran to revoke the absolute religious and political powers that have been grabbed by Iran's clergy. But in other interviews here, he was quoted as saying that Iran's hard-line clerical rulers were "the world's worst dictatorship," who have been exploiting his grandfather's name and the name of Islam "to continue their tyrannical rule." He and Mr. Jamaleddine told me their first objective was to open Shiite seminaries and schools in Iraq to teach their ideas to the young generation.

Ladies and gentlemen, I have no idea whether these are the only two liberal Shiite clerics in Iraq. People tell me they definitely are not. Either way, their willingness to express their ideas publicly is hugely important. It is, for my money, the most important reason we fought this war: If the West is going to avoid a war of armies with Islam, there has to be a war of ideas within Islam. The progressives have to take on both the religious totalitarians, like Osama bin Laden, and the secular totalitarians who exploit Islam as a cover, like Saddam Hussein. We cannot defeat their extremists, only they can. This war of ideas needs two things: a secure space for people to tell the truth and people with the courage to tell it. That's what these two young clerics represent, at least in potential.

Mr. Jamaleddine, age 42, grew up in Iraq, sought exile in Iran after one of Saddam's anti-Shiite crackdowns, tasted the harshness of the Iranian Islamic revolution firsthand, moved to Dubai, and then returned to Iraq as soon as Saddam fell. Here is a brief sampler of what he has been advocating:

On religion and state: "We want a secular constitution. That is the most important point. If we write a secular constitution and separate religion from state, that would be the end of despotism and it would liberate religion as well as the human being. . . . The Islamic religion has been hijacked for 14 centuries by the hands of the state. The state dominated religion, not the other way around. It used religion for its own ends. Tyrants ruled this nation for 14 centuries and they covered their tyranny with the cloak of religion. . . . When I called for secularism in Nasiriya (in the first postwar gathering of Iraqi leaders), they started saying things against me. But last week I had some calls from Qum, thanking me for presenting this thesis and saying, `We understand what you are calling for, but we cannot say so publicly.'

"Secularism is not blasphemy. I am a Muslim. I am devoted to my religion. I want to get it back from the state and that is why I want a secular state. . . . When young people come to religion, not because the state orders them to but because they feel it themselves in their hearts, it actually increases religious devotion. . . . The problem of the Middle East cannot be solved unless all the states in the area become secular. . . . I call for opening the door for Ijtihad [reinterpretation of the Koran in light of changing circumstances]. The Koran is a book to be interpreted [by] each age. Each epoch should not be tied to interpretations from 1,000 years ago. We should be open to interpretations based on new and changing times."

How will he deal with opposition to such ideas from Iraq's neighbors?

"The neighboring countries are all tyrannical countries and they are wary of a modern, liberal Iraq. . . . That is why they work to foil the U.S. presence. . . . If the U.S. wants to help Iraqis, it must help them the way it helped Germany and Japan, because to help Iraq is really to help 1.3 billion Muslims. Iraq will teach these values to the entire Islamic world. Because Iraq has both Sunnis and Shiites, and it has Arabs, Kurds and Turkmen. . . . If it succeeds here it can succeed elsewhere. But to succeed you also need to satisfy people's basic needs: jobs and electricity. If people are hungry, they will be easily recruited by the extremists. If they are well fed and employed, they will be receptive to good ideas. . . . The failure of this experiment in Iraq would mean success for all despots in the Arab and Islamic world. [That is why] this is a challenge that America must accept and take all the way."

Mr. Jamaleddine, Mr. Khomeini; these are real spiritual leaders here. But if the U.S. does not create a secure environment and stable economy in Iraq, their voices will never get through. If we do, though — wow. To the rest of the Arab world, I would simply say: Guess who's coming to dinner.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/10/opinion/10FRIE.html

'There is no Defense Department back-channel on Iran,' a senior official insisted.

Er, right. OK. Sure.

Dinner With the Sayyids (Sayyid Hussein Khomeini)

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
NYTIMES OP-ED COLUMNIST 8.10.2003

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/961369/posts?page=6#6

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

Mr. Jamaleddine, age 42, grew up in Iraq, sought exile in Iran after one of Saddam's anti-Shiite crackdowns, tasted the harshness of the Iranian Islamic revolution firsthand, moved to Dubai, and then returned to Iraq as soon as Saddam fell. Here is a brief sampler of what he has been advocating: On religion and state: "We want a secular constitution. That is the most important point. If we write a secular constitution and separate religion from state, that would be the end of despotism and it would liberate religion as well as the human being. . . .

Seperating religion from state is very important in order to establish a true Democracy.

Is Newsweek claiming that that the USA is cooperating with terrorists? Did we?

All this goes back to the 1980s. The Iran/Conra affair. So many unanswered questions. But whatever secret deals were going on, the emnity toward Iran persisted at the same time. Thus, the US was also arming Sadaam Hussein to make war on the Iranians.

Make Iran Next, Says Ayatollah's Grandson

August 10, 2003
The Observer
Jamie Wilson

Sayyid Hussein Khomeini is sitting cross-legged on a sofa inside a garish palm-fringed mansion nestled on the banks of the Tigris. It is the very heart of American-occupied Baghdad, not the first place that you might look for the grandson of Ayatollah Khomeini. The late Iranian leader built his Islamic revolution on a deep hatred of everything associated with the Stars and Stripes.

But then very little about the younger Khomeini is quite what might be expected.

'American liberty and freedom is the best freedom in the world,' he said, puffing on a cigarette and sipping a glass of sweet tea. 'The freedom for the individual that is written into the American Constitution you do not see in such concentration in any other constitution in the world. The Americans are here in Iraq, so freedom is here too.'

It is an extraordinary statement from a man whose grandfather labelled the US 'the Great Satan', but what Khomeini has to say about the current situation in Iran is even more radical: 'Iranians need freedom now, and if they can only achieve it with American interference I think they would welcome it. As an Iranian, I would welcome it.'

Not surprisingly, Khomeini, 45, has caused something of a stir in Baghdad, with the US media beating a path to the door of the house where he is staying.

According to his armed bodyguards, the luxurious house has been taken over by an Iraqi cleric, who shares Khomeini's view that religion and state should be separated. It used to belong to Izzat Ibrahim, vice-chairman of the deposed Revolutionary Command Council and one of Saddam Hussein's closest advisers. The King of Clubs on the list of most wanted Baathists, Ibrahim remains at large, although he is unlikely to return to evict the current tenants. There is, however, plenty to remind the visitor of the previous owner. A black Rolls-Royce with a golden grill is gathering dust in the drive, while the sitting room, with its three gold-trim sofas, is also home to a couple of enormous glass tanks containing dozens of tropical fish and several cages of canaries, chirping away merrily.

Wearing a black turban - a piece of clothing that marks him out as a descendant of the Prophet Muhammad - Khomeini dismisses as 'nonsense' a question about whether his grandfather would approve of his support for the Americans. 'He is not here, and in this case we cannot predict what position he would take,' he said.

As for Iraqi resistance to the US occupying forces - or liberators as Khomeini insists on calling them - in his opinion there is none.

'The persons who are carrying out the attacks have been paid previously to attack the US and the Americans are just in a position of defending themselves,' he said.

So what is a man whose grandfather cemented the Islamic theocracy in Iran by exploiting the 1979 US Embassy hostage crisis doing espousing views that could have come straight from an American foreign policy briefing or have been written by the press office of the Coalition Provisional Authority situated in the former presidential palace a couple of miles down the road?

Exactly how close Khomeini's ties are with the US is not clear, but the cleric has met officials from the CPA on several occasions. 'He's my favourite Khomeini!', one senior US official joked at a dinner the other night. A spokesman said that they found his ideas about the separation of religion and state 'interesting'.

Although he does not command a wide following, the very fact of who he is could in time make him a significant player, while any voice helping to dilute calls from some Iraqi Shia leaders for a system of clerical rule in Iraq will be welcomed with open arms by the Americans.

But the US might just have bigger plans for Khomeini. He spent 14 years of his life in Iraq, between 1964 and 1979, while his grandfather was plotting the Islamic revolution and conducting a campaign of snapping at the heels of the Shah from the holy city of Najaf. Listening to his grandson condemning the current situation in Tehran, it is difficult not to get a sense that perhaps history is repeating itself.

The Bush administration, which includes Iran in its diminishing axis of evil, has repeatedly accused the country of supporting terrorist groups and seeking to acquire nuclear weapons. But apart from general agreement that a change of government in Iran would be a good thing, there is no broad consensus within the administration about how best to achieve that aim. It is two years since the State Department began drafting a national security presidential directive on Iran, but the document remains unfinished.

Doves in Colin Powell's State Department are said to favour increased dialogue with potential reformers in the country, while Donald Rumsfeld's Pentagon is thought to be intent on pursuing aggressive destabilisation tactics towards Tehran.

Whatever way the administration decides to play it, Khomeini could be useful to both sides.

Asked when he thought he might return to Iran, Khomeini replied 'Inshallah' - It is God's will.

But some observers might argue that it is just as likely to be the Pentagon's.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1015689,00.html

Confirmation is right over here

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A36669-2003Aug8.html

Iran not an easy target for regime change
By Nadia Jaber, Staff Reporter | 10-08-2003

It seems that the United States has already made strategic plans to deal with regime change in Iran, the way it has done with Saddam Hussain's regime in Iraq.

The U.S. invaded Iraq under the slogan of finding weapons of mass destruction.....

http://www.gulf-news.com/Articles/news.asp?ArticleID=94789

Ministry drawing up a draft on journalists' security

Sunday, August 10, 2003 - ©2003 IranMania.com

Tehran, Aug 9, IRNA -- Minister of Culture and Islamic Guidance Ahmad Masjed Jamei here on Saturday said that the culture ministry is currently involved in drawing ....

http://www.iranmania.com/News/ArticleView/Default.asp?NewsCode=17397&NewsKind=CurrentAffairs

Gulf News is a pro regime publication as the quotes from your post, "Iran not an easy target for regime change," illustrates .

...Most importantly, the whole world, including the Americans, is watching the poor performance of the coalition in post-Saddam Iraq.

The Americans should ask themselves now how to get out of the Iraqi quagmire instead of indulging themselves into the deeper one of Iran...

More photos of the Iranian journalists on strike.

http://news.gooya.com/2003/08/09/0908-k-14.php

Yes, But it is good to know who is defending the worst regime of the world.
Moreover, It is good for us to know who enemy or friend is.

Bush Faces Many Obstacles on Iran, North Korea

August 10, 2003
The Associated Press
Tom Raum

The Bush administration's use of discredited intelligence on Iraqi weapons may complicate America's ability to deal with more tangible nuclear dangers across the Middle East and in Asia.

The recent nuclear activity by North Korea and Iran and the broader issue of keeping mass-killing weapons away from terrorists loom as the biggest foreign policy challenges after the Iraq war.

Yet administration critics suggest President Bush's hand is weakened by credibility issues over assertions before the war about Iraq's nuclear and other weapons capabilities.

"What happens now when we need to rally the world about the weapons programs in North Korea and Iran? How likely are they to believe the detail of what we present to them?" asks Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware, senior Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

The administration is pinning its hopes on diplomacy as the way to contain Iranian and North Korean nuclear ambitions. The United States also is looking toward the same international weapons inspection apparatus that it spurned in Iraq.

The issue is not only whether the two remaining nations in Bush's "axis of evil" are building atomic bombs, but also how their neighbors would react.

For instance, North Korea's testing of a nuclear device might persuade Japan to quickly go nuclear itself, arms-control experts suggest. A nuclear Japan, in turn, might force China to increase its arsenal. That could put pressure on Taiwan to seek such weapons.

A nuclear Iran, meanwhile, could make it harder to establish pro-American governments in neighboring Iraq and Afghanistan.

Tehran's possession of the bomb could trigger an arms race between Iran and Israel. Israel might feel compelled to try to take out an Iranian nuclear plant -- as it did an Iraqi facility in 1981.

Israel has never confirmed being a nuclear power, but it is widely believed to have as many as 100 to 200 such weapons.

Then there are nuclear club members India and Pakistan.

"India has dozens of nuclear weapons and is actively pursuing a long-range missile program to enable them to target not simply Pakistan but also China," said John Pike, a military analyst with GlobalSecurity.org, a consulting group based in Arlington, Va.

"Pakistan's nuclear program and missile program has basically been developed in close concert with Iran and North Korea. You might even think of it as one program doing business at three locations," he added.

Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association, said Pakistan and India "are on a hair trigger that is even finer and shorter than the one that existed between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War."

"Yet there has been very little attention focused by U.S. policy-makers or the international community on a systematic, comprehensive approach to reducing risks in that region," Kimball said.

Pakistan's president, Pervez Musharraf, is an important ally in the U.S.-led fight against terrorism. That makes it harder for the administration to press its accusations that Pakistan helped North Korea's nuclear-arms program in return for missile parts.

Bush, vacationing this month in Texas, is hoping that diplomacy and pressure from neighboring powers will help defuse the nuclear threats in both Iran and North Korea.

The best course on Iran is "to convince others to join us in a clear declaration that the development of a nuclear weapon is not in their interests," Bush said.

As to North Korea, Bush hopes its agreement to meet for six-nation talks on its nuclear programs will lead to the country's renunciation of nuclear weaponry.

"We are making progress," national security adviser Condoleezza Rice said late last week. "It's a tough regime to deal with. ... But we're fairly sanguine that if you're going to get this done, it's going to have to be in coordination with other states."

But uncertainties abound.

North Korea last week balked at the makeup of the U.S. delegation to the six-nation talks. Iranian President Mohammad Khatami pledged not to give up a nuclear program he insisted was designed to produce electrical energy, not atomic bombs.

Whereas the first nuclear powers were major players on the world stage -- the United States, the Soviet Union, Britain, France and China -- the emerging nuclear powers are poorer, generally less stable governments.

That fact, and the chance that nuclear materials could wind up in the hands of terrorist groups, worries arms-control experts and administration officials.

Washington's hope is "that somehow diplomatically we can work our way through this issue," Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, recently told the Senate Armed Services Committee.

"The notion or the thought" that nuclear material "could be proliferated to other countries could change our security environment in a not-so-nice a way," Myers said.

EDITOR'S NOTE -- Tom Raum has covered Washington for The Associated Press since 1973, including five presidencies.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2003/08/09/national1234EDT0511.DTL

Bush Faces Many Obstacles on Iran, North Korea

August 10, 2003
The Associated Press
Tom Raum

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/961369/posts?page=18#18

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

Thank you for the article, F14, and I agree that it is good to know all opinions.