• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Iran Super Thread- Merged

More new protests.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090709/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iran_election

By NASSER KARIMI, Associated Press Writer Nasser Karimi, Associated Press Writer – 49 mins ago
TEHRAN, Iran – Hundreds of young men and women chanted "death to the dictator," confronting police wielding batons and firing tear gas in the capital Thursday as opposition activists sought to revive street protests despite authorities' vows to "smash" any new marches.

For days, supporters of opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi have been calling for new protests in Tehran and other cities on Thursday, their first significant attempt to get back on the streets since security forces crushed massive demonstrations nearly two weeks ago in Iran's postelection turmoil.

Tehran governor Morteza Tamaddon warned that any new march Thursday would meet the same fate.


"If some individuals plan to carry out any anti-security actions by listening to calls by counterrevolutionary networks, they will be smashed under the feet of our aware people," he said, according to the state news agency IRNA in a report late Wednesday.

Thursday afternoon, a stepped-up number of uniformed policemen along with plainclothes Basiji militiamen stood at intersections all along Revolution Street and at nearby near Tehran University, some of the sites where protests were called.

Still, a group of around 300 young people gathered in front of Tehran University and began to chant, "Death to the dictator," witnesses said. Many of them wore green surgical masks, the color of Mousavi's movement.

Police charged at them, swinging batons, but the protesters fled, then regrouped at another corner and resumed chanting, the witnesses said. Police chased them repeatedly as the protesters continued to regroup, the witnesses said, speaking on condition of anonymity because they feared government retribution.

Within an hour, the number of protesters grew to about 700 and marched toward the gates of Tehran University, the witnesses said. A line of policemen blocked their path, but they did nothing to disperse the gathering as the protesters stood and continued to chant, the witnesses said.

At another location, on Valiasr Street, around 200 protesters gathered, and police fired tear gas to disperse them, but the demonstrators sought to regroup elsewhere, the witnesses said.

Soon after the confrontations began, mobile phone service was cut off in Tehran, a step that was also taken during the height of the post-election protests to cut off communications. Mobile phone messaging has been cut in the country for the past three days.

They were the first such protests in 11 days, since the crackdown — though it did not compare to the hundreds of thousands who joined the marches that erupted after the June 12 presidential election, protesting what the opposition said were fraudulent results.

The calls for a new march have been circulating for days on social networking Web sites and pro-opposition Web sites. Opposition supporters planned the marches to coincide with the anniversary Thursday of a 1999 attack by Basij on a Tehran University dorm to stop protests in which one student was killed.

Ahead of Thursday's planned march, authorities appeared to have taken a number of other steps to prevent participation, including the halting of SMS messaging. The government also closed down universities and called a government holiday on Tuesday and Wednesday, citing a heavy dust and pollution cloud that has blanketed Tehran and other parts of the country this week.

Mousavi and his pro-reform supporters say he won the election, which official results showed as a landslide victory for incumbent hard-liner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei declared the results valid after a partial recount and warned that unrest would not be tolerated.

In the crackdown since the election, at least 20 protesters and 7 Basijis were killed.

Police have said 1,000 people were arrested and that most have since been released. But the state-run English language news network Press TV quoted prosecutor-general Qorban-Ali Dorri Najafabadi saying Wednesday that 2,500 people were arrested and that 500 of them could face trial. The remainder, he said, have been released.

Arrests have continued over the past week, with police rounding up dozens of activists, journalists and bloggers.


In the latest detentions, a prominent human rights lawyer Mohammad Ali Dadkhah was taken away by security forces from his office Wednesday along with his daughter and three other members of his staff, the pro-opposition news Web site Norouz reported. A former deputy commerce minister in a previous pro-reform government, Feizollah Arab-Sorkhi, was also arrested at his Tehran home, the site reported.

A large number of top figures in Iran's reform movement, including a former vice president and former Cabinet members, have been held for weeks since the election.

Iranian authorities have depicted the postelection turmoil as instigated by enemy nations aiming to thwart Ahmadinejad's re-election, and officials say some of those detained confessed to fomenting the unrest. Opposition supporters say the confessions were forced under duress.
 
The hardline approach is losing support within the regime and amongst the population as a whole. Today is the 10 Year Anniversary of The Iranian Student Protests of July, 1999 and thousands were in the streets protesting the regime.Ironic.
 
They are trying desperately to blame everything on US/British/whomever agitation, but never themselves......this has just created thousands of potential information sources for humit.....
 
Iran 'security state' lambasted
Iran Protesters Take to Streets Despite Threats, NY Times
Iran learns from past to crush dissent
Iran police tear gas protesters


G8 warning on Iran crackdown

G8 leaders are "seriously concerned" about the "appalling events" after Iran's elections,
US President Barack Obama said as the summit closed. He said the global leaders were
also "deeply troubled" by Iran's nuclear programme. Iran denies claims it is trying to
build a nuclear bomb. Mr Obama rebuffed suggestions that the summit had fallen short
in failing to agree fresh sanctions in Iran.

The G8 leaders said they would review Iran's progress in September. A joint declaration
from the summit in L'Aquila, Italy, said that media restrictions and the detention of foreign
nationals by Iran was "unacceptable".

Iran has recently released eight of nine British embassy staff that it arrested and accused
of spying during protests against the alleged rigging of presidential elections last month.
But one Briton and a French language teacher, Clotilde Reiss, 23, remain in Iranian custody.

On Friday, French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner called for her release and said
espionage accusations against her were "stupid".

Israel 'not alone'

The G8's joint declaration warned Tehran to comply with UN resolutions calling for a freeze
on its uranium enrichment activities - a process which can be used to make material for a
nuclear bomb - "without further delay." Speaking on Thursday, French President Nicolas
Sarkozy warned that a unilateral Israeli military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities would
be an "absolute catastrophe". But he reassured Israel that it was "not alone".

Mr Sarkozy threatened further sanctions against Iran if it failed to respond to US overtures
for talks on its nuclear activities.

Mr Obama said the international community would not wait "indefinitely" for Iran to comply
with its demands.

The joint declaration said the leaders would "take stock" of whether Iran had complied with
demands for a freeze on its nuclear activities at the G20 meeting in Pittsburgh in the US in
September. "Between August and September it's for them to decide how they want things
to evolve. Pittsburgh is the date," said Mr Sarkozy.

The summit follows pledges earlier this week by the US and Russia to cut their stockpiles
of nuclear weapons.

Mr Obama is planning an international conference on nuclear proliferation in March 2010.
 
More violent repression:



The 9th of July, the 18th of Tir

Posted By Michael Ledeen On July 8, 2009 @ 2:01 pm In Uncategorized | 54 Comments

Maybe it’ll be a turning point.  Maybe not.  It’s the anniversary of the massacre of students in Iran ten years ago, when they defied their tyrants and called for freedom.  There are certainly a lot of people around the world who will turn out to show their contempt for the Tehran regime.  I can’t keep track of them all, but there should be significant turnouts in the Hague, Vienna, Rome, Paris, Washington, New York, Irvine and Santa Monica, Seattle and Hamburg…and more and more.  In Iran itself, the regime’s opponents have called for “the biggest turnout yet,” totally silent, no posters or banners, just silence.

The silence of the demonstrations would be a counterpoint to the nightly chants from the rooftops and prisons of the nation.  Chants of “Allah is great,” along with “Death to the Dictator.”  If you believe the folks on Twitter, those chants have been louder with each passing night, despite the violence of the Basij and Revolutionary Guards, which ranges from snipers shooting from one rooftop to another, armed thugs breaking into homes to seize computers, cell phones and other communications devices, and arrest one or more family members.  Meanwhile, horribly maimed bodies have been showing up all over the country.  Some of the gouging of the bodies seems to have been done to remove all evidence of bullet holes, but whatever the “explanation,” the bloody savagery is well documented.

If you want some detail about the horrors inside Iranian hospitals, have a look at[1] Le Figaro’s account.

Over the objections of medical staff, bodies from the demonstrations were quickly moved elsewhere. “We believe they were transferred to the Baqiatollah military hospital or some other undisclosed location”, notes the doctor. Then, under the pretext of “organ donation”, all traces of bullets were removed from the bodies. “The parents were force to accept this if they wanted to retrieve the body for burial”.

And yet, the protest goes on.  For the past three days, a general strike has been in effect, with significant results.  Indeed, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei preemptively admitted defeat when government offices and factories were shut down in the name of a religious observance.  But the strikers only expanded the range of their actions, notably by shutting down electrical grids in several cities, including parts of Tehran.  Great swathes of the nation were plunged into darkness.  This sort of thing is likely to continue, whatever happens on the 9th.

Most of the protesters fear the worst, warning of snipers preparing to shoot into the crowds, and a massive buildup of security forces in Tehran.  There are rumors about possible countermeasures from the demonstrators, but, like the stories about massive repression, these remain to be confirmed.

Meanwhile, there are continuous accounts of internal strife in the regime’s ranks.  The London Guardian, in [2] a carefully worded account, tells us that the most powerful figure in the ongoing repression is Khamenei’s second son, Mojtaba.  He is said to be particularly enraged by the British Government’s seizure of more than a billion dollars in London accounts, at least some of which belongs to him.  No one would be surprised to find that the supreme leader was a very wealthy man, or that he had salted away some of his money outside Iran.  Others have been moving their funds to more secure lands of late.

Mother Nature struck a humorous blow at President Ahmadinezhad last night, when he delivered a speech to the nation.  As he spoke, a large insect buzzed him.  He tried  to maintain discipline, but, like a character in an old Ernie Kovacs routine, he could not stop his eyes from following the (fly?  wasp?) around his head, and of course it all gave rise to anti-regime humor.  Again, from Twitter:  “spreading: The bug that bugged AN has now been arrested and soon to confess on state TV.”

Mother Nature is doing better than the so-called Western world, which apparently cannot even bring itself to punish the regime for violating all rules of civilized behavior.  Obama, following his familiar pattern of allying himself with the tyrants rather than the democrats, doesn’t want new sanctions.  I suppose he’s still hoping that the tyranny will prevail, and then he can make a wonderful deal with Khamenei pere.  Or fils, as the case may be.  Again, the best commentary comes from Twitter:

“Honduras Shouts Where are the BLUE Helmets! Burma Shouts release Aung San Suu Kyi ! Iran Shouts Where is our Vote!”

But Obama, he don’t say nothin’.  Nor does Miss Hillary.

It seems so obvious to me that we should be helping the Iranian people–for both strategic and moral reasons–that I’m stunned at the insistence of so many smart people that we should do nothing.  [3] Take George Will, for instance:

Some persons fault the president for not having more ambitious plans to somehow prompt and guide Iranians toward regime change. That outcome is sometimes advocated, and its consequences confidently anticipated, by neoconservatives whose certitude about feasibility resembles that which, decades ago, neoconservatism was born to counter.

Leave aside the historical riff on the origins of neoconservatism, and accept the uncertainty that all human efforts entail;  that snooty dismissal of those who advocate peaceful regime change in Iran leaves me breathless.  Tell it to Neda’s family George.  Their daughter was executed, her father arrested and tortured, and they’ve been thrown out of their house.  See how they appreciate your view from on high.  Or try Iran’s neighbors, not your garden variety necons.

Meanwhile, [4] David Brooks has somehow convinced himself that Obama’s policies don’t really matter at all, because he’s so incredibly dignified:

Whatever policy differences people may have with him, we can all agree that he exemplifies reticence, dispassion and the other traits associated with dignity. The cultural effects of his presidency are not yet clear, but they may surpass his policy impact. He may revitalize the concept of dignity for a new generation and embody a new set of rules for self-mastery.

This reminds me of those journalists who were smitten with Mussolini in the twenties.  Never mind the policies, he’s so charismatic!

I’m afraid David one day will have to answer for this infatuation with style over substance.  And it won’t be pretty.

So let’s see what tomorrow brings.

UPDATE:  8 o’clock AM on Twitter, “Confirmed demonstrations tehran,shiraz,isfahan,ahwaz,babol,kerman,mashhad sari”

10 o’clock:  “There are many unconfr. reports but all of them have 1 thing in common, they all report: People are growing in numbers”

I expect to get a telephone update in about an hour.

11 o’clock:  We are still in the preliminary stage, according to the organizers.  The main events are supposed to get going in another hour or two.  There does not seem to be any shooting as yet, just tear gas, used by police and Revolutionary Guards forces.  The demonstrators were prepared for tear gas, and continue to chant “Death to the dictator!”  and “Death to the regime!”

This has long since ceased to be a protest over election results alone.  More in an hour or so.  I hope.

11:30:  Here is something new.  Twitter:  “ Chaos. Distress messages from security forces being shot at requesting airborne support.”  I see at least one other tweet about people shooting back at Basij and security forces, asking “who is shooting back?”

Is it true?

11:40:  No, it probably is not true.  I am told that security forces are acting frightened, as if they did not expect the large crowds to actually materialize, and they are shooting guns off in the air to try to scare off the demonstrators.  The protesters have set off many fires in the streets (just what Tehran didn’t need, after the recent sandstorms).  I think this is because some people believe the fires counteract the effects of tear gas, which is not correct.  But anyway, the fires are burning.

Further–and this is a fairly up to date observation–the security forces are acting with unprecedented violence.  The one-on-one attacks on the protesters are very brutal, the Basij are apparently tring to club them to death.  Very ugly.

But the crowds are getting bigger.

11:50:  Heh, from Twitter, “The situation is so bad, that the police are also attacking each other”

12:05:  Cell phone nets are largely shut down now, at least in Tehran.  And international calls are apparently being monitored very closely, so my updates may be slower.

There are more people saying that police are taking the side of the people, and defending them against the Basij.  Can’t confirm it yet.  And the violence still seems to be clubs, knives and tear gas, not guns.

12:33:  You might want to follow the “live blog” [5] here (actually it seems to be a selection of Twitter messages).

Many new reports of people going after Basij, and some about a group called NIR which, it is said, is protecting people from security forces.  I don’t know what that is, I’m trying to find out.

1 o’clock:  Going swimming (I’m gettinga new hip next Monday, have to keep muscle strength up).  Back in an hour or thereabouts.

2:30:  It’s now eleven o’clock at night in Iran, and the chants from the rooftops and the prisons have resumed.  And Khamenei sure hears them, “Death to the Dictator!”  “Allah is Great!”  What an ironic turnaround for this tyrant, who claims Divine sanction for his every thought and action, now to be threatened with death in the name of Allah.

Meanwhile, in an appalling act of appeasement, we released five Revolutionary Guards officers in Iraq, so that they could go to Tehran (and I doubt they will join the nocturnal chanters).  I got it from Washingtontv, which somehow accepted the official Iranian misidentification of these guys:

Washington, 9 July (WashingtonTV)—The US military on Thursday handed over five Iranian diplomats (NOT!  ML.  The mullahs claimed they were dips, but they were IRGC officers) it has held for over two years to Iraqi authorities, Iraqi and Iranian officials said.

Iran’s ambassador to Baghdad, Hassan Kazemi Qomi, said that the five men were handed over to Iraq’s Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, and that they would be handed over to the Iranian embassy in Baghdad after meeting al-Maliki, reports the official IRNA news agency.

The five diplomats, accused by the U.S. of funding and arming Shiite militants in Iraq, were arrested in the northern Iraqi city of Arbil on 11 January 2007.

The timing could hardly have been worse, and I’m sure the White House is roundly annoyed that this happened just on a day when the regime’s claws and fangs were so publicly exposed.  The White House had set the release up for several days ago, but then the Almighty–in the form of intense sandstorms that made it impossible to fly in and out of Tehran–intervened.

If my information is correct–and I must say I have rarely had a story so vigorously denied by my own government–this is part of the deal for Roxana Saberi, who, you’ll remember, was miraculously released from an Iranian prison a couple of months ago.  These IRGC commanders–with, I am told, hundreds of lower-level Iranian terror facilitators to come in the next days and weeks–were Iran’s price for freeing the American hostage.

I had inklings of this, and said so at the time.  So I’ll take the opportunity to remind everyone who follows Iranian matters, that the mullahs’ hostages are never released for humanitarian motives.  They are ransomed.  The only question is the price.

When I asked some folks in the government, about a week ago, if we were preparing to release these people, they acted as if I’d asked if the Vice President were about to convert to Islam.  But the releases have started.


It seems Obama overpaid, frankly.  But then, we always do.  Every president since Jimmy Carter has acted like a fool regarding Iran.  So it’s business as usual.

4 o’clock:  there are still clashes in Tehran, and probably other cities as well.  It’s too early for an overall assessment of the “meaning” of the day, but some things are clear enough:

1.  The uprising is not over.  If anything, today’s turnout, discipline, and obviously improved tactics suggest that the opposition is stronger;

2.  The regime hasn’t won any converts to its side.  Rafsanjani’s daughter was reportedly in the crowd today, and I am still waiting for confirmation of the widely reported story that Mousavi appeared at a mosque and delivered a speech;

3.  The opposition seems to have gained a tempo in this game.  I’d expect the strikes to continue, and to intensify.  I wonder if any American trade union is going to support its Iranian brothers and sisters;

4.  Meanwhile, we’ve learned to accept [6] a simple truth about Khamenei.  You gotta read it!

4:30 PM (last reliable information I’m going to have today, I think).  Khamenei was told the following:


* massive demonstrations
* 3 killed
* 78 known as seriously wounded, many broken bones and ruptured internal organs, several may not make it; other wounded may have disappeared
* 600 arrests

SPECIAL MESSAGE FROM OPPOSITION: “please tell the world about these atrocities; people did nothing, silence, no provocations, no violence but fierce attacks by the government forces.”

And so we shall.  Good night Chet.  Good night David.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Article printed from Faster, Please!: http://pajamasmedia.com/michaelledeen

URL to article: http://pajamasmedia.com/michaelledeen/2009/07/08/the-9th-of-july/

URLs in this post:
[1] Le Figaro’s account.: http://pajamasmedia.com/michaelledeenSource:http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/2009/07/06/01003-20
090706ARTFIG00225-des-medecins-iraniens-temoignent-de-la-repression-.php

[2] a carefully worded account: http://pajamasmedia.com/michaelledeen/www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jul/08/khamenei-son-controls-ira
n-militia

[3] Take George Will: http://townhall.com/columnists/GeorgeWill/2009/07/08/mcnamaras_mind?page=1
[4] David Brooks has somehow convinced himself: http://pajamasmedia.com/michaelledeen http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/07/opinion/07brooks.html
[5] here : http://shooresh1917.blogspot.com/
[6] a simple truth about Khamenei: http://www.mererhetoric.com/archives/11275710.html
 
More recent dissent coming from another source again gets the spotlight:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31899937/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa

updated 2:49 a.m. ET, Tues., July 14, 2009
TEHRAN, Iran - Authorities have hanged in public 14 members of a Sunni Muslim rebel group blamed for bombings and killings in southeastern Iran, state radio said Tuesday.
The report said the executions took place in the city of Zahedan, some 930 miles southeast of Iran's capital Tehran.

The 14 included Abdulhamid Rigi, brother of Abdulmalik Rigi, the leader of Jundallah, or soldiers of God, a Sunni Muslim group that Iran says has close ties to "foreign forces" in neighboring Afghanistan, a possible reference to the al-Qaida terror group.
 
Read the full story here:  http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,532963,00.html

Israeli Navy Prepares for Potential Attack on Iran's Nuclear Facilities

Wednesday, July 15, 2009


Reuters

Two Israeli missile class warships have sailed through the Suez Canal.

Two Israeli missile class warships have sailed through the Suez Canal, ten days after a submarine capable of launching a nuclear missile strike, in preparation for a possible attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

The deployment into the Red Sea, confirmed by Israeli officials, was a clear signal that Israel was able to put its strike force within range of Iran at short notice. It came before long-range exercises by the Israeli air force in America later this month and the test of a missile defense shield at a U.S. missile range in the Pacific Ocean.

Israel has strengthened ties with Arab nations who also fear a nuclear-armed Iran. In particular, relations with Egypt have grown increasingly strong this year over the “shared mutual distrust of Iran”, according to one Israeli diplomat. Israeli naval vessels would likely pass through the Suez Canal for an Iranian strike.

“This is preparation that should be taken seriously. Israel is investing time in preparing itself for the complexity of an attack on Iran. These maneuvers are a message to Iran that Israel will follow up on its threats,” an Israeli defense official said.
 
More renewed unrest.

Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani's harsh rebuke of Ahmadinejad supporters is followed by renewed violence, suggesting the discontent over recent election results is as strong as ever.

Reporting from Tehran and Beirut -- Security forces fired tear gas and plainclothes militiamen armed with batons charged at crowds of protesters gathered near Tehran University after a Friday prayer sermon delivered by the cleric and opposition supporter Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, his first appearance at the nation's weekly keynote sermon since before the election.

Rafsanjani, in a closely watched speech, lashed out at the hard-line camp supporting President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, criticized the June 12 election results and promoted several key opposition demands. However, he failed to offer a solution to what has emerged as Iran's worst political crisis in decades.





http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iran-prayer18-2009jul18,0,6890660.story
 
As one who finds nuclear war quite “thinkable” I found this article, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s National Post, interesting:

http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=1802732
Atomic conflict would kill tens of millions: report
War would contaminate entire region

Peter Goodspeed, National Post
Published: Saturday, July 18, 2009

It's the nightmare that haunts the modern Middle East --Iran succeeds in its quest for nuclear weapons and goes to war with Israel, causing massive human casualties and destruction on a demonic scale that in turn could trigger a worldwide economic collapse.

Now, researchers at Washington's Center for Strategic & International Studies have tried to assess the extent to which civilian targets will be damaged in any Iran-Israel nuclear exchange.

The initial fireball accompanying a 100-kiloton nuclear bomb exploding in the heart of Tel Aviv will instantly kill 8,966 people and injure 3,243 more, say Anthony Cordesman and Abdullah Toukan.

But within three weeks, that death toll will soar to nearly 800,000 as a plume of radiation spreads across the country.

Given its tiny size and 7.2 million population, a single nuclear blast could devastate Israel.

It could "wipe Israel off the map in a matter of seconds," Michael Oren, Israel's ambassador to the United States, said recently. The Iranians could "accomplish in a matter of seconds what they denied Hitler did, and kill six million Jews, literally."

"Any missile with a nuclear warhead landing in Tel Aviv, Israel, will affect the West Bank, causing a large number of fatalities and injuries to the Palestinian inhabitants, pollute and contaminate the agricultural land and resources that lie in the Jordan Valley and, over the longer term, fallout radiation would reach the outskirts of Amman, Jordan, which is some 108 kilometres from Tel Aviv," the study warns.

Retaliatory Israeli nuclear strikes, with higher-yield bombs and accurate rocket delivery systems, would be far more destructive.

A single 500-kiloton Israeli nuclear bomb dropped on Tehran would instantly kill 56,771 people and the death toll would soar to 1.47 million, with 5.1 million injured, within a week.

A full-fledged Israeli nuclear response, using some, but not all, of its 200 nuclear weapons, would target most major Iranian cities and major military bases. It would kill 16 million to 28 million people within three weeks.

Metropolitan Tehran, with a population of 15 million, is "a topographic basin with mountain reflector -- nearly an ideal nuclear killing ground," the study said.

With thousands of centrifuges spinning away to produce highly enriched uranium, Iran gets closer to owning nuclear weapons with each day that passes.

"I don't see a lot of space between where Iran is headed and the potential of where that development might lead," U. S. military chief Admiral Mike Mullen told a Washington think-tank recently. "My concern is that the clock continues ticking. I believe that Iran is very much focused on getting that capability. This is a very narrow space we have."

For now, the United States is committed to finding a diplomatic way to dissuade Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.

Israel, on the other hand, is said to be seriously looking at military ways to destroy or substantially degrade Iran's nuclear facilities.

"Time is working in Iran's favour, and barring military action, Iran's possession of nuclear weapons is only a matter of time," the Israeli Institute for National Strategic Studies in Tel Aviv said in a report two years ago.

Now, Israeli intelligence agencies predict Iran could have a nuclear weapon later this year or in 2010. The U. S. intelligencecommunity estimates it won't happen before 2013.

So what would an Israeli strike against Iran look like, what are the targets and the chances for success?

In another study by the Center for Strategic&International Studies this year, Mr. Cordesman and Mr. Toukan concluded, "A military strike by Israel against Iranian facilities is possible...[ but] would be complex and high risk and would lack any assurances that the overall mission will have a high success rate."

The main problem facing Israeli military planners is a lack of clear intelligence on Iran's complete nuclear program.

Most strategists agree there are three obvious targets that will have to be destroyed to damage Iran's nuclear program -- the uranium enrichment facility in Natanz, where 50,000 centrifuges are being installed, a uranium conversion facility near Isfahan and a heavy-water reactor at Arak.

But, if Iran has a parallel secret uranium enrichment program, destroying the three obvious targets will do little to stop it from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

As it is, the three prime targets are heavily defended, partially buried underground and protected with a thick sheath of steel-reinforced concrete.

That means Israel might have to rely on nuclear-tipped bunker-busting bombs.

Any attack force will also have to negotiate a dense air-defence system that includes surface-to-air missiles, anti-aircraft guns and combat planes.

It's also possible Iran has already bought and deployed a mobile anti-missile defence system from Russia.

An Israeli air strike would have to use 80 to 90 F-15 and F-16 aircraft (almost 20% of its fighters) as well as all nine of its aerial tankers to refuel the fighters.

Possible attack routes would see the Israelis fly north over the Mediterranean and refuel from airborne tankers before flying east over Turkey or Syria into Iran. A shorter route would run through Jordan and Iraq and directly into Iran, while a third possibility would be to fly southeast and then east along the Saudi-Iraq border to the Persian Gulf, attacking from the south.

Israel is believed to favour the northern route over Turkey. Last summer, it held a major military exercise over Greece and the eastern Mediterranean, with more than 100 F-16 and F-15 fighters and refuelling tankers.

About the same time, an Iraqi news agency cited Iraqi Defence Ministry sources as saying Israeli warplanes were flying in Jordanian airspace and landing in Iraq to practise raids on Iranian nuclear sites.

The report said the Israeli planes flew at night and landed at U. S. air bases near Haditha in western Iraq and Nasiriyah in the south.

An alternative to conventional air raids could see Israel attack the three key Iranian sites with ballistic missiles. Strategists from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who studied the possibility of an Israeli attack on Iran two years ago concluded "after years of modernization, Israel now possesses the capability to destroy even well-hardened targets in Iran with some degree of confidence."

The operation appears to be "no more risky" than the attack in June 1981 on the Osirak reactor in Iraq, which was destroyed by Israel to prevent Saddam Hussein getting nuclear weapons.

A similar attack on Iran "provides at least as much benefit in terms of delaying Iranian development of nuclear weapons," said researchers Whitney Raas and Austin Long.



First: There is, it seems to me a fair case to be made that the possession of nuclear weapons actually makes countries more responsible. But I’m sure few Israelis expect Iran to be less of a threat even if there is no evidence to suggest that having nuclear weapons increases aggression.

Second: No matter which set of options Israel pursues the Arabs and Persians lose, big time. There is no “winning scenario” for the Arabs/Persians. If they attack they “earn” the universal and unreserved condemnation of the entire civilized world, even France, and of much some of the less civilized world, too. Their oil will not help because China, Europe and Japan, supported by America, will move in to take whatever oil is not covered by a blanket of radiation. If they attack then we can be reasonably certain that, facing that which even Hitler could not accomplish, the Israelis will retaliate: massively and broadly. Amman, Baghdad, Cairo and Riyadh will likely suffer the same fate as Tehran. If the Israelis attack pre-emptively then the Arabs still lose because they will lack the political will and military acumen to band together and fight (and win) a conventional war against Israel. They will fail because they fear one another just as much – sometimes even more – than they fear Israel and none will commit enough resources to the “common cause” to achieve a victory.

Third: This is a regional, not a global, problem. Israel has no more, not less, right to exist than does, say, Angola or Botswana or Canada, for that matter. The Jews have a “claim” on Christendom’s conscience, Israel does not.

My guess: Israel will not launch a pre-emptive strike. Iran will attack, but not massively enough. Israel will retaliate: massively, broadly and cruelly. Muslims all over the world will suffer, for generations, for Iran’s folly. They will be despised and will suffer state sanctioned discrimination all around the world. Arab/Persian Islam, as a major, respectable world religion, will cease to exist; Islam will become an East Asian (Indonesian/Malaysian) religion that will shake off almost all of Islam’s Arab/Persian roots and absolutely all of its Arab/Persian cultural artefacts.

 
With the exception of a few intercine actions by various factions, that would seem to put paid to the whole issue....not the desired result or method, but not the first time massive upheaval changed history....
 
Multiple factors are now in play that make this difficult to call. Do the Iranians actually have enough enriched Uranium or Plutonium to make a weapon? Do they have the political will to strike (I suspect that there is a fairly large block of mullahs and politicians who are not ready to become radioactive vapour for the destruction of Israel). Will the reform movement topple the Theocracy, and if so, what will replace it?

We might start asking ourselves not if we need to send military forces to attack Iran, but should we be prepared to send forces to stabilize Iran in the chaos following the fall of the Theocracy. (If you thought Al Qada in Iraq or the Taliban were a bad scene, imagine stabilization ops against hordes of Basji and Revolutionary Guards cells determined to reimpose their vision on Iranian society).
 
Speaking of Iranian nuclear power:

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D99GET3G0&show_article=1

Diplomats: Iran has means to test bomb in 6 months 

Jul 17 05:35 PM US/Eastern
By GEORGE JAHN
Associated Press Writer 


  VIENNA (AP) - Iran is blocking U.N. nuclear agency attempts to upgrade monitoring of its atomic program while advancing those activities to the stage that the country would have the means to test a weapon within six months, diplomats told The Associated Press Friday.
The diplomats emphasized that there were no indications of plans for such a nuclear test, saying it was highly unlikely Iran would risk heightened confrontation with the West—and chances of Israeli attack—by embarking on such a course.


But they said that even as Iran expands uranium enrichment, which can create fissile nuclear material, it is resisting International Atomic Energy Agency attempts to increase surveillance of its enrichment site meant to keep pace with the plant's increased size and complexity.

For Iran to amass enough fissile material to conduct an underground test similar to North Korea's 2006 nuclear explosion, it would likely have to kick out monitors of the IAEA—the U.N. nuclear agency—from its one known uranium enrichment site at Natanz. Technicians then could reconfigure the centrifuges now churning out nuclear-fuel grade enriched uranium to highly enriched, weapons-grade material.

Iran is unlikely, however, to want to do that. Such a move would immediately set off international alarm bells and could bridge rifts on how strongly to react—Russia and China, which have resisted Western calls to increase pressure on Iran over its nuclear defiance, would likely endorse more sweeping U.N sanctions and other penalties.

With the U.N. nuclear agency strictly limited in its nuclear monitoring of Iran, the existence of a hidden enrichment site that could supply the weapons-grade uranium needed for a nuclear weapons test is also possible.

International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed Elbaradei has repeatedly warned that his agency cannot guarantee that Iran is not hiding nuclear activities. Iranian nuclear expert David Albright on Friday put the chances that such a secret site exists at "50-50."

But even a hidden enrichment plant meant to upgrade material to weapons level would likely have to be fed with low-enriched uranium from the Natanz site. So transporting that material would not escape the agency's detection.

In any case, international action—and possible Israeli attack—would be triggered at the latest by a nuclear test explosion.

Iran is still considered years away from developing a reliable nuclear warhead delivery system. So tipping its hand with a nuclear test, should it want to own such weapons, would make little sense.

"We are talking here not of intent but capability," said one of two western diplomats accredited to the International Atomic Energy Agency. Like his colleague from another country, this diplomat—who has access to intelligence on Iran's nuclear program—demanded anonymity in exchange for discussions of the highly confidential issue.

Since its clandestine enrichment efforts were revealed more than six years ago, Iran has steadily increased activities at its cavernous underground facility at Natanz, a city about 300 miles (500 kilometers) south of Tehran.

An International Atomic Energy Agency report circulated last month said nearly 5,000 centrifuges were now enriching at Natanz—about 1,000 more than at the time of the last agency report, issued in February—with more than 2,000 others ready to start enriching.

Iran says it is interested in producing only low-enriched uranium for fuel use, not highly enriched material for the fissile core of nuclear weapons, and the U.N. nuclear agency has detected no effort at Natanz to contravene that assertion.

Still, if Iran decided to risk an international crisis, it has the means to make weapons-grade uranium.

Most experts estimate that the more than 1,000 kilograms—2,200 pounds—of low-enriched uranium Iran had accumulated by February was enough to produce enough weapons-grade material through further enrichment for one nuclear weapon.

And as Iran expands its operations at Natanz, its potential capacity to produce highly enriched uranium is also growing.

Albright's Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security last month estimated that with the nearly 5,000 centrifuges then operating Iran could accumulate enough material to produce weapons-grade uranium for two warheads by February 2010—or sooner, if it brought the more than 2,000 additional machines on line immediately.

But one of the diplomats said Iran had already brought more centrifuges into full operation. And the other said that in any case, a test explosion could occur even sooner.

The six-month time frame confirmed to the AP Friday was first mentioned last week by the German magazine Stern, which cited Germany's Bundesnachrichtendienst, its main intelligence branch.

Albright said Friday six months are "in line with our estimates."

Iran steadfastly refuses to stop enriching despite the imposition of three rounds of economic, trade and financial sanctions by the U.N. Security Council. And worries have been heightened by the country's refusal to grant the U.N. nuclear agency broadened monitoring rights of its steadily increasing Natanz operations.


An International Atomic Energy Agency report last month touched on those concerns.

It said the agency had informed Iran that, due to the growth in enrichment capacity and output, it was seeking "improvements to the containment and surveillance measures" it now had at hand. And a senior U.N. official said expansion at Natanz "makes it increasingly difficult to do the surveillance" needed to ensure none of the material produced is being diverted.

To do its work at Natanz, the agency relies in part on monitoring by cameras and on inspections meant to give the Iranians a minimum of time between the announcement of the visit and the arrival of the inspectors—methods the agency would like to expand.

Diplomats last month told the AP that Iran's refusal to allow any additional cameras was a setback, along with its recent delay of an unannounced International Atomic Energy Agency inspection.

Since then, Iran has refused to grant broader monitoring rights, said one of the diplomats Friday.

He said it has also refused agency requests to separate operations at Natanz, where enrichment occurs in the same space as centrifuge repairs and setups of new chains of linked centrifuges, creating chaotic scenes that are difficult to monitor.


"It is really difficult for them to figure out what's happening, given the mix of different things going on," said the diplomat. He said that as of a week ago "Iran was not cooperating."
 
I hope Xiang comes here soon and explains all this war mongering.  It actually seems like we should be concerned about Iran. 
 
Iranian Cleric Is Seeking the Mantle of Khomeini

WASHINGTON — During his decades in Iranian politics, Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani
has been praised as a pragmatist, criticized as spineless, accused of corruption and
dismissed as a has-been.

Now, in assailing the government’s handling of last month’s disputed presidential election,
Mr. Rafsanjani, a 75-year-old cleric and former president, has cast himself in a new light :
as a player with the authority to interpret the ideals of Iran’s 30-year-old Islamic republic.
Using his perch as a designated prayer leader on Friday to deliver the speech of a lifetime,
Mr. Rafsanjani abandoned his customary caution to demand that the government release
those arrested in recent weeks, ease restrictions on the media and eradicate the “doubt”
the Iranian people have about the election result. And he implicitly challenged the authority
of the country’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, to make decisions without seeking
consensus.

Behind the words was the assertion that for the Islamic republic to survive, it must restore
its legitimacy, reaffirm its republican institutions and find a formula for governing.

To establish his own legitimacy, Mr. Rafsanjani evoked his long political history. “What you
are hearing now is from a person who has been with the revolution second by second from
the very beginning of the struggle,” he said, adding, “We are talking about 60 years ago up
until today.” He recalled that his mentor, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the father of the 1979
revolution, said that the “people’s will” must be done, and in this case, he said, the trust of
the people had been broken.

Mr. Rafsanjani was a supporter of the opposition candidate, Mir Hussein Moussavi, during the
campaign, and by speaking out on Friday he seemed to be moving closer to Mr. Moussavi as
a public symbol of opposition. But Mr. Rafsanjani also took care not to directly deny the
government’s declaration that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had won the election.

In delivering his sermon, Mr. Rafsanjani was defying a government campaign to silence him,
in which senior officials have interspersed personal attacks with veiled threats. That campaign
continued Saturday, when conservative figures criticized his speech. He was also essentially
usurping the institutional role of Ayatollah Khamenei.

“This was a speech Khamenei should have given,” said Farideh Farhi, a political scientist at the
University of Hawaii. “That’s his designated role as the spiritual and political guide, to be above
the fray. But Khamenei is probably too insecure and has too much to lose. He took sides.
Rafsanjani rose to the occasion.” Still, it would be wrong to say that Mr. Rafsanjani has suddenly
become a proponent of justice, human rights and freedom.

In the summer of 1999, after all, when the government crushed student demonstrations at Tehran
University, he delivered a harsh sermon in the same place as he did on Friday. Back then, he blamed
“enemies of the revolution” and “sources outside the country” for the unrest. He praised the use of
force by the state. During much of his earlier eight-year presidency, many Iranians were executed,
including political dissidents, drug offenders, Communists, Kurds, Bahais, even clerics.

Politically, Mr. Rafsanjani was humiliated twice: in 2000 when he ran for Parliament and came in 30th
and last place in Tehran (amid charges of ballot fraud in his favor), and again in 2005, when he performed
dismally in his bid to regain the presidency. But unlike many political figures, and certainly unlike most
clerics, Mr. Rafsanjani is the consummate politician. He refuses to abandon the political battlefield in a
country in which silence in the face of defeat is the norm. He also knows how to shift gears. A campaign
photograph in the 2000 campaign showed him without his turban. He must have thought that a clerical
uniform had become a liability.

Mr. Rafsanjani’s bold public stance is not without risks. Members of his family have been briefly detained
during this period of turmoil, and the government could use his record, and his family’s financial dealings,
to discredit him.

For his part, Ayatollah Khamenei delivered his own notable sermon four weeks ago, in which he embraced
the victory of Mr. Ahmadinejad, called the election proof of the people’s trust in the system and threatened
more violence if demonstrations continued.

Mr. Rafsanjani struggled to woo the center; the ayatollah stuck to his base of support on the right.
Mr. Rafsanjani spoke about the Prophet Muhammad’s style of governing in Medina, with its emphasis
on listening to the people, and treating them with respect and “Islamic kindness.” He used a pragmatic
argument in calling for the release of those who have been arrested. “Let’s not allow our enemies to
reprimand and laugh at us and hatch plots against us just because a few certain people are in prison,”
Mr. Rafsanjani said.

Ayatollah Khamenei, by contrast, in his sermon railed about the enemies of the prophet and the foreign
enemies both inside and outside Iran. “The violators,” as he called them, are “the ill-wishers, mercenaries
and agents of the Western intelligence services and the Zionists.” Ironically, his speech sounded much like
the one Mr. Rafsanjani gave after the disturbances a decade ago.

From the early days of the revolution, Mr. Rafsanjani has favored pragmatism over religious absolutism.
After the seizure of the American Embassy in Tehran in 1979, Iran’s leaders demanded the return of the
exiled Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi as a condition of the release of the 52 American hostages. Mr.
Rafsanjani had a better idea: “If the shah dies, that would help,” he said to this reporter in an interview
in 1980. (Shortly afterward, the shah died of complications caused by cancer.)

In 1986, after the Reagan administration’s secret American arms sales to Iran were disclosed, Mr. Rafsanjani,
then the speaker of Parliament, used his Friday sermon to explain why. He said Iran needed to acquire
weapons to fight Iraq, even if it meant dealing with the enemy, the United States. Later, he was credited
with helping to persuade Ayatollah Khomeini to end the eight-year war.

A state-builder, Mr. Rafsanjani even set aside religion to rehabilitate the image of Persepolis, the site of the
2,500-year-old Persian empire, saying, “Our people must know that they are not without a history.” This time,
he did not lay out goals. He did not say whether he hoped to get the election results overturned or merely to
convince the country to make peace with those results.

“He doesn’t address the basic problem for the opposition: that they have been dealt with brutally on the
streets and that this was a manipulated election,” said Shaul Bakhash, professor of Middle Eastern history
at George Mason University.

In his 1963 book about miracles, Mr. Rafsanjani bragged that he was saved from an assassin’s bullet because
of his “revolutionary speed” and his willingness to “punch those who say nonsense.” Given the fluid nature of
Iranian politics, it would be foolish to predict whether he can make miracles today.
 
Another update:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090721/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iran_election

By NASSER KARIMI and LEE KEATH, Associated Press Writers Nasser Karimi And Lee Keath, Associated Press Writers – Tue Jul 21, 1:56 pm ET
TEHRAN, Iran – Security forces and pro-government militiamen clamped down in the Iranian capital to prevent protests Tuesday as the country's police chief warned his forces would take a tough line if the opposition tries to take to the street.

Plainclothes Basiji militiamen hit passers-by with batons on a crowded main Tehran street to ensure they wouldn't gather, according to video from the site posted on line. A young woman in a headscarf can be seen arguing with the Basijis, who shove her.

Regular police forces were out in large numbers in parts of central Tehran, causing large traffic jams, but witnesses around the city speaking to The Associated Press did not report that any protests came together. There was no immediate report of arrests in the day's clampdown.

Some opposition activists had called for demonstrations Tuesday to mark the passage of 30 days since the killing of Neda Agha Soltan, a 27-year-old woman shot to death during a Tehran demonstration on June 20. Her dying moments on the street were caught on video and she was elevated to a symbol of the mass protest movement that erupted after Iran's disputed June 12 presidential election.

The protest call was also issued to coincide with the anniversary of nationwide protests that brought liberal Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh to office in 1950.

Last month's presidential election sparked massive protests by hundreds of thousands in support of opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi, after he claimed that official results were fraudulent and that he, not hard-line Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, won the vote.

A heavy crackdown by police, Basijis and the elite Revolutionary Guards shattered the protests, arresting more than 2,000 and killing at least 20 protesters — though rights groups say the toll is likely far higher. More than 500 protesters and opposition leaders remain in prison.

In the past two weeks, the opposition has been able to stage smaller protests twice, each time bringing out thousands of people, sparking clashes with police and the Basij. On Tuesday, the state news agency IRNA reported that 40 people were arrested during the last demonstrations, on Friday. It quoted police officials saying most of the 40 were released but a "handful" remained in custody.

Iran's police chief Ismail Ahmadi Moghaddam on Tuesday denounced the opposition and vowed that his forces would "deal with anyone, regardless of their status, who violates the law."


In a speech in the northeastern city of Mashhad, he blasted opposition leaders as "liars" and said they were "spreading sedition," IRNA reported.

____

Nasser Karimi reported from Tehran, Lee Keath from Cairo, Egypt.
 
Another update: Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei rejects the newly appointed vice-president of Ahmadinejad! And it seems from the updates below that there is now a major rift that has formed between Khamenei and Ahmadinejad because of this.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090722/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iran_politics

  Leader rejects Iran vice president appointment
By ALI AKBAR DAREINI, Associated Press Writer Ali Akbar Dareini, Associated Press Writer
33 mins ago

TEHRAN, Iran – President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is sticking by his controversial appointment for first vice president in an unusual defiance of a reported order from the supreme leader for his removal.

Ahmadinejad says he wants time to explain his decision to appoint Esfandiar Rahim Mashai to the post. In a speech Wednesday, Ahmadinejad has praised Mashai as an "honest and pious man," according to the state news agency IRNA.

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei ordered the president to remove Mashai
, semiofficial media have reported. Mashai's appointment last week angered the hard-line base because of his past pro-Israel comments.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — Iran's supreme leader handed a humiliation to the president, ordering him to dismiss his choice for top deputy after the appointment drew sharp condemnation from their hard-line base, media reported Wednesday.

The move by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei appeared to show his need to keep hard-liners' support even at the cost of angering the president, a close ally — at a time when Khamenei is facing unprecedented opposition after the disputed June 12 election.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's appointment for his top vice president sparked a deep split within the hard-line camp to which he belongs. A chorus of ultra-conservative clerics and politicians denounced his choice, Esfandiar Rahim Mashai, while Ahmadinejad had strongly defended the appointment.

Mashai is a relative by marriage to Ahmadinejad — his daughter is married to the president's son.
Mashai angered hard-liners in 2008 when he said Iranians were "friends of all people in the world — even Israelis." He was serving as vice president in charge of tourism and cultural heritage at the time.

Iran has 12 vice presidents, but the first vice president is the most important because he succeeds the president if he dies, is incapacitated, steps down or is removed. The first vice president also leads Cabinet meetings in the absence of the president.

After days of controversy, Khamenei ruled. "The view of the exalted leader on the removal of Mashai from the post of vice president has been given to Ahmadinejad in writing," the semiofficial Fars news agency reported Wednesday.

It was an expansion of the already broad powers of Khamenei, who has the ultimate say in state affairs in Iran. The supreme leader is believed to informally weigh in on senior government appointments behind the scenes. But he does not have a formal role in approving appointments and it is extremely rare for him to order an official's removal.

In the election dispute, Khamenei strongly supported the president, who is seen as his protege, declaring valid the results that showed Ahmadinejad's re-election. Opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi claims he won the election and Ahmadinejad's victory is fraudulent, and hundreds of thousands of supporters marched in the street in the weeks after the election.

A fierce crackdown suppressed the massive street protests. But the opposition continues to press its claims that Ahmadinejad's government is illegitimate. More importantly, the clerical leadership that Khamenei in theory leads has been split, with many moderate clerics angered by the handling of the election crisis or outright supportive of Mousavi.

That has made Khamenei more reliant on hard-line clerics for support.

It was not immediately clear if Ahmadinejad would cave in to Khamenei's order.

Ali Akbar Javanfekr, top media adviser to Ahmadinejad, said on Tuesday that the president won't change his mind over the controversy. But it was unclear if his comments came before or after the supreme leader's order.

"The president makes his decisions ... within the framework of his legal powers and on the basis of investigations carried out. Experience has proved that creating baseless controversies won't influence the president's decision," Javanfekr said in his blog.

Nearly the same time as Khamenei was issuing his order late Tuesday, Ahmadinejad vowed to keep Mashai.

"Mr. Mashai is a supporter of the position of the supreme leader and a pious, caring, honest and creative caretaker for Iran ... Why should he resign?" the official IRNA news agency quoted Ahmadinejad as saying. "Mashai has been appointed as first vice president and continues his activities in the government."

The deputy speaker of the parliament, Mohammad Hasan Aboutorabi-Fard, meanwhile, said that Mashai's dismissal was a decision by the ruling system itself, according to the semiofficial ISNA news.

"Removing Mashai from key posts and the position of vice president is a strategic decision of the system ... Dismissal or resignation of Mashai needs to be announced by the president without any delay," ISNA quoted him as saying late Tuesday.

Iran's state television didn't report Ahmadinejad's comments supporting his deputy. A conservative Web site said TV officials had orders from higher officials not to do so.

In his first term, Ahmadinejad had several tussles with his own hard-line camp over appointments, some of whom were seen as not qualified for their posts. In most cases, Khamenei stayed on the sidelines of those disputes.

Last year, the supreme leader rebuked Mashai, calling his Israel comments "illogical," but he also demanded that the flap over the comments be put the rest and expressed support for Ahmadinejad. Mashai remained in his position.

Mashai also angered many of Iran's top clerics in 2007 when he attended a ceremony in Turkey where women performed a traditional dance. Conservative interpretations of Islam prohibit women from dancing.

He ran into trouble again in 2008 when he hosted a ceremony in Tehran in which several women played tambourines and another one carried the Quran to a podium to recite verses from the Muslim holy book.
 
A political power struggle in the making?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090722/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iran_politics

Iran president defies supreme leader over deputy
By ALI AKBAR DAREINI and LEE KEATH, Associated Press Writers Ali Akbar Dareini And Lee Keath, Associated Press Writers
33 mins ago

TEHRAN, Iran – President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad showed rare defiance of his strongest backer, Iran's supreme leader, by insisting on his choice for vice president Wednesday despite vehement opposition from hard-liners that has opened a deep rift in the conservative leadership.

The tussle over the appointment comes at a time when the clerical leadership is facing its strongest challenge in decades following last month's disputed presidential election.

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's top concern appears to be keeping the strong support of clerical hard-liners so he can withstand attempts by the more moderate, pro-reform opposition to erode his authority.


Conservative clerics and politicians have denounced Ahmadinejad's choice for the post of first vice president, Esfandiar Rahim Mashai, because Mashai said last year that Iranians are friends with Israelis. There are also concerns because Mashai is a relative of Ahmadinejad — his daughter is married to the president's son.

Khamenei ordered Ahmadinejad to remove Mashai, semiofficial media reported Wednesday.

Arguing for a further chance to make his case, Ahmadinejad said, "there is a need for time and another opportunity to fully explain my real feelings and assessment about Mr. Mashai."

The president may be digging in because he fears an attempt by hard-liners to dictate the government he is due to form next month.


At the center of the dispute between the president and supreme leader is Mashai, a member of Ahmadinejad's personal inner circle. Iran has 12 vice presidents, and Mashai has been serving in one of the slots in charge of tourism and culture. Ahmadinejad said last week he was elevating Mashai to the first vice presidency. That is the most important of the 12 because it is in line to succeed the president if he dies, is incapacitated or removed. The first vice president also leads Cabinet meetings in the president's absence.

Ahmadinejad is a member of the hard-line camp, but throughout his first term he had disputes over policy and appointments with fellow conservatives, some of whom accused him of hoarding too much power for close associates rather than spreading it among factions.


Most surprising is Ahmadinejad's defiance of Khamenei's order for Mashai's removal. The supreme leader has been the president's top defender in the election dispute, dismissing opposition claims that Ahmadinejad's victory in the June 12 vote was fraudulent. The opposition says pro-reform candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi was the real winner and calls Ahmadinejad's government illegitimate.

Hard-line clerics on Wednesday demanded the president obey Khamenei.

Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami said whether Mashai is immediately dismissed "will test Ahmadinejad's loyalty to the supreme leader."


"When the exalted supreme leader takes a position explicitly, his statement must be accepted by all means and implemented immediately," he said, according to the Mehr news agency. "Those who voted for Ahmadinejad because of his loyalty to the supreme leader expect the president to show his obedience ... in practice."

Ahmadinejad may believe Khamenei's rejection of Mashai is not written in stone and is testing whether he can keep his close associate.

Iran expert Suzanne Maloney pointed out that the supreme leader has not publicly spoken on the issue and reports of his order have been leaked by hard-liners through semiofficial media.

"If Khamenei comes out in Friday prayers calling for (Mashai's) removal, then it would be difficult to imagine Ahmadinejad would refuse that," said Maloney, with the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Washington-based Brookings think tank.

Ahmadinejad is "not looking to open his second term by picking a fight with his most important ally in the system," she said.

Khamenei's order to remove Mashai is unusual extension of his powers — perhaps a sign he wants to strengthen his position as unquestioned leader in the face of the reformist threat.

As supreme leader, Khamenei has ultimate say in state affairs and stands at the peak of the unelected clerical leadership that under Iran's Islamic Republic can overrule the elected presidency and parliament.

Traditionally, the supreme leader has stayed out of a public role in government appointments. He is believed often to informally vet choices for senior positions behind the scenes, but he does not have a formal role in approving them or an official power to remove them. Even under Iran's 1997-2005 pro-reform government, with which Khamenei clashed, he never overtly ousted any of its officials.

Now Khamenei is facing tests to his authority on two fronts. One is from Ahmadinejad, the other is the open defiance from the reformist opposition, which has continued its campaign against Ahmadinejad despite the supreme leader's declarations that the election dispute is over.

Powerful moderate clerics in the religious leadership under Khamenei have backed Mousavi or declined to recognize Ahmadinejad as the victor. Hundreds of thousands held mass protests in support of Mousavi in the weeks after the election, but were crushed in a heavy crackdown that killed at least 20 protesters and left more than 500 in prison. Still, the opposition has managed to hold two smaller protests since, and is demanding a referendum on Ahmadinejad's legitimacy.

The announcement outraged hard-liners, who have opposed Mashai since he said in 2008 that Iranians were "friends of all people in the world — even Israelis." Mashai also angered many top clerics in 2007 when he attended a ceremony in Turkey where women performed a traditional dance and in 2008 when he hosted a ceremony in which women played tambourines. Conservative interpretations of Islam oppose women dancing.

After days of controversy, Khamenei weighed in. The semiofficial Fars news agency reported Wednesday that Ahmadinejad had been notified of the leader's order to remove Mashai.

The deputy parliament speaker, Mohammad Hasan Aboutorabi-Fard, said late Tuesday that Mashai's dismissal was "a strategic decision" by the system of ruling clerics and he must be removed "without delay," according to the semiofficial ISNA news.

Later Wednesday, Ahmadinejad stuck by Mashai in a speech at Mashai's farewell ceremony from his lower vice presidential post.

"One of virtues and glories God has bestowed to me in life was to get acquainted with this great, honest and pious man," Ahmadinejad said, according to the state news agency IRNA. He said he has "a thousand reasons" to support Mashai and that there was "no convincing" reason for the attacks on his choice.

___

Dareini reported from Tehran; Keath from Cairo, Egypt.
 
And now Ahmadinejad caves in.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090725/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iran_politics

Iran president caves in, dismisses his top deputy
        1 hr 2 mins ago
TEHRAN, Iran – Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad caved into pressure from hardline clerics and the country's supreme leader Friday and allowed the resignation of his top deputy after a week-long standoff.

For days, the president had resisted pressure from hard-liners, including a direct order from the supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, to dismiss his choice for the key post of first vice president, Esfandiar Rahim Mashai, who last year angered conservatives when he made friendly comments toward Israel.

The final blow, however, appeared to be the public reading on state television of the order issued earlier by Khamenei to dismiss Mashai because he is "contrary to the interest of you and the government."

The issue created a rare rift between Ahmadinejad and the hard-liners that form the bedrock of his support and comes at a particular sensitive time as he is battling opposition reformists who accuse him of winning the June 12 presidential elections through fraud.

"After the announcement of the exalted supreme leader's order, Mashai doesn't consider himself first vice president," IRNA quoted presidential aide Mojtaba Samareh Hashemi as saying late Friday.

The resignation capped a day of renewed pressure that featured conservative student street demonstrations and Friday sermons railing against Mashai's appointment.

Despite all the pressure, Ahmadinejad had pleaded for more time to explain his reasons for choosing a man he had described as a "pious, caring, honest and creative caretaker for Iran." Mashai's son is also married to the president's daughter.

The president even continued to back his man after his greatest supporter and the supreme leader of the country issued a private order Monday telling him that the appointment "causes a rift and disillusionment among your supporters. The aforementioned appointment must be canceled and consider it null and void."

Reading the order publicly Friday dramatically increased the pressure on Ahmadinejad, and further refusal to act would have amounted to a flagrant and public defiance of the supreme leader.

The issue was also the topic of the main Friday prayer sermon in Tehran. Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami said that "now that he (Khamenei) has expressed his opinion, there is no room for delay anymore."

Khamenei has the final say over all state matters and has rarely faced defiance in the past. That changed following last month's election when supporters of opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi challenged Khamenei's ruling that the June 12 vote was fair.

The flap over the vice presidency appears to signal a move by Khamenei to entrench for himself an even more unquestionable status in the face of the reformist threat. By demanding Mashai's removal, Khamenei is effectively appropriating a new power, since normally the supreme leader does not intervene openly to remove a government official, though he is believed to often vet appointments behind the scenes.

The president's brief defiance may have been out of fear of an attempt by hard-liners to dictate the government he is due to form next month.

Mashai angered hard-liners in 2008 when he said Iranians were "friends of all people in the world — even Israelis." He was serving as vice president in charge of tourism and cultural heritage at the time.

Iran has 12 vice presidents, but the first vice president is the most important because he succeeds the president if he dies, is incapacitated, steps down or is removed. The first vice president also leads Cabinet meetings in the absence of the president.

Hard-line students protesting in the streets Friday warned Ahmadinejad that they will withdraw their support unless he dismisses Mashai.

"Obeying the leader's order is the demand of the nation," they chanted.
 
So, question for Xiang (if he/she is still around)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090725/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iran_politics
Mashai angered hard-liners in 2008 when he said Iranians were "friends of all people in the world — even Israelis." He was serving as vice president in charge of tourism and cultural heritage at the time.

Okay, so if this VP got binned because he was slightly pro-Israel, and the entire ruling class of Iran snapped when he got his post, is there any reason to believe that Iran doesn't want to see Israel destroyed as they have so clearly stated in the past?  And since we all pretty much know that is the case, would not having nuclear weapons not be the best, most efficient way to make that happen? 
 
Even if Iran had no oil at all, it would still be in play due to it's geographic position. An interesting piece about Iran and China:

http://atimes.com/atimes/China/KG26Ad02.html

NEW GREAT GAME REVISITED, Part 2
Iran, China and the New Silk Road
By Pepe Escobar

Part 1: Iran and Russia, scorpions in a bottle

HONG KONG - Does it make sense to talk about a Beijing-Tehran axis? Apparently no, when one learns that Iran's application to become a full member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) was flatly denied at the 2008 summit in Tajikistan.

Apparently yes, when one sees how the military dictatorship of the mullahtariat in Tehran and the collective leadership in Beijing have dealt with their recent turmoil - the "green revolution" in Tehran and the Uighur riots in Urumqi - reawakening in the West the ghostly mythology of "Asian despotism".

The Iran-China relationship is like a game of Chinese boxes. Amid the turbulence, glorious or terrifying, of their equally millenarian histories, when one sees an Islamic Republic that now reveals itself as a militarized theocracy and a Popular Republic that is in fact a capitalist oligarchy, things are not what they seem to be.

No matter what recently happened in Iran, consolidating the power the Khamenei-Ahmadinejad-IRGC axis, the relationship will continue to develop within the framework of a clash between US hyperpower - declining as it may be - and the aspiring Chinese big power, allied with the re-emergent Russian big power.

On the road

Iran and China are all about the New Silk Road - or routes - in Eurasia. Both are among the most venerable and ancient of (on the road) partners. The first encounter between the Parthian empire and the Han dynasty was in 140 BC, when Zhang Qian was sent to Bactria (in today's Afghanistan) to strike deals with nomad populations. This eventually led to Chinese expansion in Central Asia and interchange with India.

Trading exploded via the fabled Silk Road - silk, porcelain, horses, amber, ivory, incense. As a serial traveler across the Silk Road over the years, I ended up learning on the spot how the Persians controlled the Silk Road by mastering the art of making oases, thus becoming in the process the middlemen between China, India and the West.

Parallel to the land route there was also a naval route - from the Persian Gulf to Canton (today's Guangzhou). And there was of course a religious route - with Persians translating Buddhist texts and with Persian villages in the desert serving as springboards to Chinese pilgrims visiting India. Zoroastrianism - the official religion of the Sassanid empire - was imported to China by Persians at the end of the 6th century, and Manichaeism during the 7th. Diplomacy followed: the son of the last Sassanid emperor - fleeing the Arabs in 670 AD - found refuge in the Tang court. During the Mongol period, Islam spread into China.

Iran has never been colonized. But it was a privileged theater of the original Great Game between the British Empire and Russia in the 19th century and then during the Cold War between the US and the Soviet Union in the 20th. The Islamic Revolution may at first imply Khomeini's official policy of "neither East nor West". In fact, Iran dreams of bridging both.

That brings us to Iran's key, inescapable geopolitical role at the epicenter of Eurasia. The New Silk Road translates into an energy corridor - the Asian Energy Security Grid - in which the Caspian Sea is an essential node, linked to the Persian Gulf, from where oil is to be transported to Asia. And as far as gas is concerned, the name of the game is Pipelineistan - as in the recently agreed Iran-Pakistan (IP) pipeline and the interconnection between Iran and Turkmenistan, whose end result is a direct link between Iran and China.

Then there's the hyper-ambitious, so-called "North-South corridor" - a projected road and rail link between Europe and India, through Russia, Central Asia, Iran and the Persian Gulf. And the ultimate New Silk Road dream - an actual land route between China and the Persian Gulf via Central Asia (Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan).

The width of the circle

As the bastion of Shi'ite faith, encircled by Sunnis, Iran under what is now a de facto theocratic dictatorship still desperately needs to break out from its isolation. Talk about a turbulent environment: Iraq still under US occupation to the west, the ultra-unstable Caucasus in the northwest, fragile Central Asian "stans" in the northeast, basket cases Afghanistan and Pakistan to the east, not to mention the nuclear neighborhood -Israel, Russia, China, Pakistan and India.

Technological advancement for Iran means fully mastering a civilian nuclear program - which contains the added benefit of turning it into a sanctuary via the possibility of building a nuclear device. Officially, Tehran has declared ad infinitum it has no intention of possessing an "un-Islamic" bomb. Beijing understands Tehran's delicate position and supports its right to the peaceful use of nuclear energy. Beijing would have loved to see Tehran adopt the plan proposed by Russia, the US, Western Europe and, of course, China. Carefully evaluating its vital energy and national security interests, the last thing Beijing wants is for Washington to clench its fist again.

What happened to the George W Bush-declared, post-9/11 "global war on terror" (GWOT), now remixed by Obama as "overseas contingency operations" (OCO)? GWOT's key, shadowy aim was for Washington to firmly plant the flag in Central Asia. For those sorry neo-cons, China was the ultimate geopolitical enemy, so nothing was more enticing than to try to sway a batch of Asian countries against China. Easier dreamed of than done.

China's counter-power was to turn the whole game around in Central Asia, with Iran as its key peon. Beijing was quick to grasp that Iran is a matter of national security, in terms of assuring its vast energy needs.

Of course China also needs Russia - for energy and technology. This is arguably more of an alliance of circumstance - for all the ambitious targets embodied by the SCO - than a long-term strategic partnership. Russia, invoking a series of geopolitical reasons, considers its relationship with Iran as exclusive. China says slow down, we're also in the picture. And as Iran remains under pressure at different levels from both the US and Russia, what better "savior" than China?

Enter Pipelineistan. At first sight, Iranian energy and Chinese technology is a match made in heaven. But it's more complicated than that.

Still the victim of US sanctions, Iran has turned to China to modernize itself. Once again, the Bush/Dick Cheney years and the invasion of Iraq sent an unmistakable message to the collective leadership in Beijing. A push to control Iraq oil plus troops in Afghanistan, a stone's throw from the Caspian, added to the Pentagon's self-defined "arc of instability" from the Middle East to Central Asia - this was more than enough to imprint the message: the less dependent China is on US-subjugated Arab Middle East energy, the better.

The Arab Middle East used to account for 50% of China's oil imports. Soon China became the second-largest oil importer from Iran, after Japan. And since fateful 2003, China also has mastered the full cycle of prospection/exploitation/refining - thus Chinese companies are investing heavily in Iran's oil sector, whose refining capacity, for instance, is risible. Without urgent investment, some projections point to Iran possibly cutting off oil exports by 2020. Iran also needs everything else China can provide in areas like transportation systems, telecom, electricity and naval construction.

Iran needs China to develop its gas production in the gigantic north Pars and south Pars fields - which it shares with Qatar - in the Persian Gulf. So no wonder a "stable" Iran had to become a matter of Chinese national security.

Multipolar we go

So why the stalemate at the SCO? As China is always meticulously seeking to improve its global credibility, it had to be considering the pros and cons of admitting Iran, for which the SCO and its slogan of mutual cooperation for the stability of Central Asia, as well as economic and security benefits, are priceless. The SCO fights against Islamic terrorism and "separatism" in general - but now has also developed as an economic body, with a development fund and a multilateral economic council. The whole idea of it is to curb American influence in Central Asia.

Iran has been an observer since 2005. Next year may be crucial. The race is on to beat the clock, before a desperate Israeli strike, and have Iran accepted by the SCO while negotiating some sort of stability pact with the Barack Obama administration. For all this to happen relatively smoothly, Iran needs China - that is, to sell as much oil and gas as China needs below market prices, while accepting Chinese - and Russian - investment in the exploration and production of Caspian oil.

All this while Iran also courts India. Both Iran and India are focused on Central Asia. In Afghanistan, India is financing the construction of a US$250 million road between Zaranj, at the Iranian border, and Delaram - which is in the Afghan ring road linking Kabul, Kandahar, Herat and Mazar-i-Sharif. New Delhi sees in Iran a very important market. India is actively involved in the construction of a deep water port in Chabahar - that would be a twin for the Gwadar port built in southern Balochistan by China, and would be very helpful to landlocked Afghanistan (freeing it from Pakistani interference).

Iran also needs its doors to the north - the Caucasus and Turkey - to channel its energy production towards Europe. It's an uphill struggle. Iran has to fight fierce regional competition in the Caucasus; the US-Turkey alliance framed by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization; the perpetual US-Russian Cold War in the region; and last but not least Russia's own energy policy, which simply does not contemplate sharing the European energy market with Iran.

But energy agreements with Turkey are now part of the picture - after the moderate Islamists of the AKP took power in Ankara in 2002. Now it's not that far-fetched to imagine the possibility of Iran in the near future supplying much-needed gas for the ultra-expensive, US-supported Turkey-to-Austria Nabucco pipeline.

But the fact remains that for both Tehran and Beijing, the American thrust in the "arc of instability" from the Middle East to Central Asia is anathema. They're both anti-US hegemony and US unilateralism, Bush/Cheney style. As emerging powers, they're both pro multipolar. And as they're not Western-style liberal democracies, the empathy is even stronger. Few failed to notice the stark similarities in the degree of repression of the "green revolution" in Tehran and the Uighurs in Xinjiang. For China, a strategic alliance with Iran is above all about Pipelineistan, the Asian Energy Security Grid and the New Silk Road. For China, a peaceful solution to the Iranian nuclear dossier is imperative. This would lead to Iran being fully opened to (eager) European investment. Washington may be reluctant to admit it, but in the New Great Game in Eurasia, the Tehran-Beijing axis spells out the future: multipolarity.

Pepe Escobar is the author of Globalistan: How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War (Nimble Books, 2007) and Red Zone Blues: a snapshot of Baghdad during the surge. His new book, just out, is Obama does Globalistan (Nimble Books, 2009).
 
Back
Top