By: Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
TEHRAN -- Among the world’s most unique religious ceremonies, Muharram rituals are extremely fascinating, Polish photojournalist Marcin Kalinski told MNA on Friday.
Polish photojournalist Marcin Kalinski and his brother Piotr, a music specialist from the Dziennik newspaper, traveled Iran to take photos and also to review music performed during the Muharram ceremonies.
They unite Iranians into a single family who mourns for the loss of their most beloved member, namely Imam Hussein (AS).
They expressed their amazement over the continuation of such rituals for centuries in Iran and also lauded the collective nature of the mourning ceremonies.
“The Muharram rituals I observed were very different from Muharram I knew previously through Western media,” Marcin Kalinski mentioned.
“I saw a Reuters photo in which a Pakistani stabbed himself in the chest during a Muharram ceremony but the ceremonies I have witnessed in Iran are intense and meaningful, but without self-mutilation,” he added.
“I had expected to see Iranians injuring their bodies during the rituals but I did not see such a thing. In Iran, the Muharram mourning ceremonies were really quite different from what I expected.
“I have traveled to many countries and took several photos of different religious ceremonies but none of them were as extensive as those here in Iran. It seemed as though my brother and I were the only ones in the whole country not mourning Imam Hussein (AS),” he said.
Marcin Kalinski, who also traveled to Bander Abbas in southern Iran, commented on the Tazieh, Iranian passion plays performed in the street during the mourning period of Muharram. He said that although professional actors perform the Tazieh in Tehran, in other Iranian towns amateur actors perform in them.
Piotr Kalinski said that although he did not understand the liturgy recited during the Muharram rituals, he found that the music compositions performed were intriguing, sorrowful but also tranquil.
Tehran Times Art Desk
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
ANSWER director: Israeli actions are ‘a crime against the humanity’
By: Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
TEHRAN - The Mehr News Agency has conducted an interview with Brian Becker, the director of the Act Now to Stop War and End Racism (ANSWER) organization, on Israel’s war on Gaza.
ANSWER is a U.S.-based protest organization that has organized many of the largest anti-war demonstrations in the United States.
Becker believes what is Israel is doing in Gaza is a “war crime”. He says, “It is really a crime against the humanity and war crimes as defined by all international standards including the Nuremberg Treaty, the Nuremberg Trial and the Geneva Convention.”
Following is an excerpt of the interview:
Q: What is your view on the UN’s silence about the Gaza tragedy and the killing of women and children?
A: People are demonstrating in the streets and yet the UN does nothing and the reason is that the UN is manipulated by the U.S. It is the exercise of the dictatorship by the U.S. and then other countries of the world because these exercises of power are in the Security Council. The charter of the UN is now a mockery because the UN, rather than bringing peace, allows a war of aggression carried out by Israeli government but supported and financed by United States.
Q: Do you think the crimes committed in Gaza can be classified as war crimes?
A: It is really a crime against the humanity and war crimes as defined by all international standards including the Nuremberg Treaty, the Nuremberg Trial and the Geneva Convention. It is illegal to target or even to allow military combatants to target civilians…. That is a violation of international law. Clearly the Israel government is not only targeting the military and governmental centers in Gaza but this is a war against the entire people and this is a war crime and a crime against the humanity.
Q: Some analysts say Israel does not intend to stop the attacks. What do you think?
A: Israel has a goal and its goal is shared with the U.S. The goal is to destroy all organizations… those resistance organizations that reject the colonial projects called Israel. The goal is to destroy Hamas and other organizations that continue to resist against the colonial projects. Israel’s goal is to destroy the (Hamas) movement.
Q: Is there any effort to bring Israeli officials to trial?
A: To be realistic I don’t believe there will be a trial because U.S. and Israel almost represent one entity and they have a great power to stand trial in any court. So the court we are going to is the court of the world public opinion and the people have to rise up against the aggression that has been done by Israel and supported by the U.S.
Q: How will the EU respond?
A: I think the EU too is under the political and military dominance of NATO and I believe that they won’t act independent of the desire of the U.S.
Q: What are you trying to do for Palestine?
A: This (U.S.) government speaks in our name and spends our taxes in our name for policies that are unjust and are harmful and for aggression and we have a moral obligation to stand up and speak to say no. The government speaks in our name but we do not approve it.
Tehran Times Political Desk
TEHRAN - The Mehr News Agency has conducted an interview with Brian Becker, the director of the Act Now to Stop War and End Racism (ANSWER) organization, on Israel’s war on Gaza.
ANSWER is a U.S.-based protest organization that has organized many of the largest anti-war demonstrations in the United States.
Becker believes what is Israel is doing in Gaza is a “war crime”. He says, “It is really a crime against the humanity and war crimes as defined by all international standards including the Nuremberg Treaty, the Nuremberg Trial and the Geneva Convention.”
Following is an excerpt of the interview:
Q: What is your view on the UN’s silence about the Gaza tragedy and the killing of women and children?
A: People are demonstrating in the streets and yet the UN does nothing and the reason is that the UN is manipulated by the U.S. It is the exercise of the dictatorship by the U.S. and then other countries of the world because these exercises of power are in the Security Council. The charter of the UN is now a mockery because the UN, rather than bringing peace, allows a war of aggression carried out by Israeli government but supported and financed by United States.
Q: Do you think the crimes committed in Gaza can be classified as war crimes?
A: It is really a crime against the humanity and war crimes as defined by all international standards including the Nuremberg Treaty, the Nuremberg Trial and the Geneva Convention. It is illegal to target or even to allow military combatants to target civilians…. That is a violation of international law. Clearly the Israel government is not only targeting the military and governmental centers in Gaza but this is a war against the entire people and this is a war crime and a crime against the humanity.
Q: Some analysts say Israel does not intend to stop the attacks. What do you think?
A: Israel has a goal and its goal is shared with the U.S. The goal is to destroy all organizations… those resistance organizations that reject the colonial projects called Israel. The goal is to destroy Hamas and other organizations that continue to resist against the colonial projects. Israel’s goal is to destroy the (Hamas) movement.
Q: Is there any effort to bring Israeli officials to trial?
A: To be realistic I don’t believe there will be a trial because U.S. and Israel almost represent one entity and they have a great power to stand trial in any court. So the court we are going to is the court of the world public opinion and the people have to rise up against the aggression that has been done by Israel and supported by the U.S.
Q: How will the EU respond?
A: I think the EU too is under the political and military dominance of NATO and I believe that they won’t act independent of the desire of the U.S.
Q: What are you trying to do for Palestine?
A: This (U.S.) government speaks in our name and spends our taxes in our name for policies that are unjust and are harmful and for aggression and we have a moral obligation to stand up and speak to say no. The government speaks in our name but we do not approve it.
Tehran Times Political Desk
Israel’s crimes against Palestinians is out of ‘desperation’
By: Hamdollah Emad Heidari
TEHRAN - Sarah Flounder, director of International Action Center Organization in U.S., believes that brutal attacks against Palestinians in Gaza is out of desperation as the Tel Aviv regime has lost support among governments around the world.
Flounder is of the opinion that the resistance by Palestinians cannot be defeated even with the “most powerful weapons” in the world. She also says Israel will “cease to exist” by continuing such a policy.
In an interview with the Mehr News Agency she said the Israeli officials’ crimes against Palestinians is out of “desperation because more and more they have lost support everywhere in the world except from Washington and they have realized that even among Jewish people around the world and their own population they have lost the support they once had.”
She said it has become “impossible” for Israeli officials to “maintain an apartheid state”.
“A state built on racist exclusion is no longer possible in this world today. That is making them desperate to crush any form of resistance.
“They will not succeed although the impact for Palestinian people will be very hard, will be very terrible, but the Palestinian resistance will continue and in the long run Israel will cease to exist because… such a colonial enterprise cannot survive even with support from Washington.”
She stated the “resistance” shown by the Palestinians is “so powerful” that the “most powerful weapons in the world can not destroy it.”
“The bombardment from air, from land, from sea cannot destroy it and still in the impossible conditions Palestinians resist with tunnels with suicide bombs, just like the World War Second which people fought with rocks against the Nazis.
“So today what we see in Palestine is a heroic level of struggle and it has the solidarity of people everywhere in the world. Millions of people are demonstrating around the world… in New York, in Washington, in Boston in Los Angeles…”
She added that people from all major cities have poured into the streets “in support of Palestinian peoples, both Arabs, Muslims, Jews, Christians, secular forces, antiwar forces, peace organizations, trade unions… and this support is growing and growing and Israel is more isolated in its crime against Palestinian people.”
The Israeli criminal action in Gaza with “every form of explosive destruction” largely on “civilian population” is an effort to break any Palestinian resistance, she explained.
“This will not succeed and the whole world stands with Palestinian people against the occupation and the seizure of their land. And we are confident that Israel will not prevail.”
The director of International Action Center Organization said the U.S. is giving political, financial, and military support to Israel in its “great crime” against the Palestinian nation.
Flounder predicted that “this crime can not continue.”
“Israel’s action is genocide,” she noted.
She blasted the U.S. administration for its blind support for Israel.
“Here in U.S. we have a criminal government and it is people that must demand an end to aid for Israel’s military.
Tehran Times Political Desk
TEHRAN - Sarah Flounder, director of International Action Center Organization in U.S., believes that brutal attacks against Palestinians in Gaza is out of desperation as the Tel Aviv regime has lost support among governments around the world.
Flounder is of the opinion that the resistance by Palestinians cannot be defeated even with the “most powerful weapons” in the world. She also says Israel will “cease to exist” by continuing such a policy.
In an interview with the Mehr News Agency she said the Israeli officials’ crimes against Palestinians is out of “desperation because more and more they have lost support everywhere in the world except from Washington and they have realized that even among Jewish people around the world and their own population they have lost the support they once had.”
She said it has become “impossible” for Israeli officials to “maintain an apartheid state”.
“A state built on racist exclusion is no longer possible in this world today. That is making them desperate to crush any form of resistance.
“They will not succeed although the impact for Palestinian people will be very hard, will be very terrible, but the Palestinian resistance will continue and in the long run Israel will cease to exist because… such a colonial enterprise cannot survive even with support from Washington.”
She stated the “resistance” shown by the Palestinians is “so powerful” that the “most powerful weapons in the world can not destroy it.”
“The bombardment from air, from land, from sea cannot destroy it and still in the impossible conditions Palestinians resist with tunnels with suicide bombs, just like the World War Second which people fought with rocks against the Nazis.
“So today what we see in Palestine is a heroic level of struggle and it has the solidarity of people everywhere in the world. Millions of people are demonstrating around the world… in New York, in Washington, in Boston in Los Angeles…”
She added that people from all major cities have poured into the streets “in support of Palestinian peoples, both Arabs, Muslims, Jews, Christians, secular forces, antiwar forces, peace organizations, trade unions… and this support is growing and growing and Israel is more isolated in its crime against Palestinian people.”
The Israeli criminal action in Gaza with “every form of explosive destruction” largely on “civilian population” is an effort to break any Palestinian resistance, she explained.
“This will not succeed and the whole world stands with Palestinian people against the occupation and the seizure of their land. And we are confident that Israel will not prevail.”
The director of International Action Center Organization said the U.S. is giving political, financial, and military support to Israel in its “great crime” against the Palestinian nation.
Flounder predicted that “this crime can not continue.”
“Israel’s action is genocide,” she noted.
She blasted the U.S. administration for its blind support for Israel.
“Here in U.S. we have a criminal government and it is people that must demand an end to aid for Israel’s military.
Tehran Times Political Desk
Phenomenon of Ahmadinejad and Obama
Iran’s Election, Struggle for Dominance in Middle East
By: Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
Making the velvet revolution was the only remaining approaches for controlling the Iran developing dominance over ME.
While describing the political situation in the world in US and Iran, we are facing tow phenomena which have effected the world political scene a lot.
Two phenomena which have two character behind, Obama and Ahmadinejad. Each of these two political characters whom the history will remember for their especial effect on the balance of force in the world have their own strategy toward this.
Ahmadinejad as the representative of principalist political groups in Iran, in his four-year ruling over Iran’s diplomatic machine, having the best use of a weak America, dealing with two war in Iraq and Afghanistan and also global financial crisis, changed the balance of forces in the middle east in favor of the resistance under the Islamic Republics hegemony.
Having a good understanding of the world situation, Ahmadinejad resisted against the international pressure on Iran’s peaceful nuclear energy encouraged by Israel and US.Ahmadinejad won both these two difficult games and strengthened Iran position in the region and the world.
On the other part of the world, a different scenario was programmed for arranging the balance of force in this oil-rich region.
Referring to fact that this rich region with great natural resources and good geopolitical situation has been the most important part of the global hegemonies wishes for developing their authority over the world.
Us as a weak superpower after obama presidency tried to correct the mistakes done by George bush, the previous president of US.
Obama decreased the military aspect of the empire and showed its velvety hand to the world.Obama in the case of Iran proposed the straight dialogue and even restarting relations.
The velvety hands of a black President could attract some political characters and groups in Iran, hence, White House tried to bring the Troy Horse to Tehran and along with its traditional ally Britain could effect the presidential election in Iran.
The tenth presidential election in Iran was a real serious struggle between two phenomenons for remaining and effecting the balance of force in middle east.
By: Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
Making the velvet revolution was the only remaining approaches for controlling the Iran developing dominance over ME.
While describing the political situation in the world in US and Iran, we are facing tow phenomena which have effected the world political scene a lot.
Two phenomena which have two character behind, Obama and Ahmadinejad. Each of these two political characters whom the history will remember for their especial effect on the balance of force in the world have their own strategy toward this.
Ahmadinejad as the representative of principalist political groups in Iran, in his four-year ruling over Iran’s diplomatic machine, having the best use of a weak America, dealing with two war in Iraq and Afghanistan and also global financial crisis, changed the balance of forces in the middle east in favor of the resistance under the Islamic Republics hegemony.
Having a good understanding of the world situation, Ahmadinejad resisted against the international pressure on Iran’s peaceful nuclear energy encouraged by Israel and US.Ahmadinejad won both these two difficult games and strengthened Iran position in the region and the world.
On the other part of the world, a different scenario was programmed for arranging the balance of force in this oil-rich region.
Referring to fact that this rich region with great natural resources and good geopolitical situation has been the most important part of the global hegemonies wishes for developing their authority over the world.
Us as a weak superpower after obama presidency tried to correct the mistakes done by George bush, the previous president of US.
Obama decreased the military aspect of the empire and showed its velvety hand to the world.Obama in the case of Iran proposed the straight dialogue and even restarting relations.
The velvety hands of a black President could attract some political characters and groups in Iran, hence, White House tried to bring the Troy Horse to Tehran and along with its traditional ally Britain could effect the presidential election in Iran.
The tenth presidential election in Iran was a real serious struggle between two phenomenons for remaining and effecting the balance of force in middle east.
The Real Mission of IAEA
By: Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
Developing the civilian nuclear energy and disarming the nuclear powers by IAEA is a just solution for resolving the nuclear race in the world, what has been forgotten under the big powers interference.
Many decades ago, when US dropped two nuclear bombs on Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, human being understood the fact that a new danger had been borne, a danger that could destroy everything in a minute by pushing a button.
Decades passed from that horrible incident but the powers, which had committed those crimes, continue their nuclear ambitions. Today, there have revealed proved evidences about the use of depleted uranium in Lebanon, Gaza, Iraq and Afghanistan by Israel and US. Although the nuclear weapon race has been speed up among regional and global powers, up to now there has been no other direct use of a nuclear weapon.
The increasing danger of nuclear weapons stocked in North Korea and Israel, the increasing nuclear tension between US and Russia, and India and Pakistan as the owners of the most horrible nuclear arsenals in the world makes the nuclear revolution essential.
World fossil reserves are gradually ran out. Besides, ozone penetration problems which has been caused by fossil energy consumption has made the use of nuclear energy a must. Nuclear energy is a clean, harmless and economic form of energy, so we cannot omit the nuclear option for solving the 21st century’s humankind energy problems. Many analysts call this century the century of struggle for energy. Powers struggle in Middle East, Caucasus, Central Asia, Parts of Africa and even North Pole are the real evidences of this struggle.
Now, in this crazy struggle for energy and crazy struggle for nuclear weapons, the only option forward is to make a distinction between these two, one forbidden and the other recommended.Disarming the countries, which have nuclear weapons without discrimination, and helping all nations for acquiring the civilian nuclear energy can be a good mission for IAEA to revolutionize the world nuclear atmosphere.
IAEA as the sole international powerful organization for controlling the nuclear tests and arsenals around the world can and should differentiate between nuclear weapon and peaceful nuclear energy in both rules and actions.Then, the most difficult and challenging introduction for a world free from nuclear weapons is to have an international nuclear watchdog free from power’s interference and political attitudes.
Developing the civilian nuclear energy and disarming the nuclear powers by IAEA is a just solution for resolving the nuclear race in the world, what has been forgotten under the big powers interference.
Many decades ago, when US dropped two nuclear bombs on Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, human being understood the fact that a new danger had been borne, a danger that could destroy everything in a minute by pushing a button.
Decades passed from that horrible incident but the powers, which had committed those crimes, continue their nuclear ambitions. Today, there have revealed proved evidences about the use of depleted uranium in Lebanon, Gaza, Iraq and Afghanistan by Israel and US. Although the nuclear weapon race has been speed up among regional and global powers, up to now there has been no other direct use of a nuclear weapon.
The increasing danger of nuclear weapons stocked in North Korea and Israel, the increasing nuclear tension between US and Russia, and India and Pakistan as the owners of the most horrible nuclear arsenals in the world makes the nuclear revolution essential.
World fossil reserves are gradually ran out. Besides, ozone penetration problems which has been caused by fossil energy consumption has made the use of nuclear energy a must. Nuclear energy is a clean, harmless and economic form of energy, so we cannot omit the nuclear option for solving the 21st century’s humankind energy problems. Many analysts call this century the century of struggle for energy. Powers struggle in Middle East, Caucasus, Central Asia, Parts of Africa and even North Pole are the real evidences of this struggle.
Now, in this crazy struggle for energy and crazy struggle for nuclear weapons, the only option forward is to make a distinction between these two, one forbidden and the other recommended.Disarming the countries, which have nuclear weapons without discrimination, and helping all nations for acquiring the civilian nuclear energy can be a good mission for IAEA to revolutionize the world nuclear atmosphere.
IAEA as the sole international powerful organization for controlling the nuclear tests and arsenals around the world can and should differentiate between nuclear weapon and peaceful nuclear energy in both rules and actions.Then, the most difficult and challenging introduction for a world free from nuclear weapons is to have an international nuclear watchdog free from power’s interference and political attitudes.
Will Amano Follow Ambiguity Procedure in IAEA?
By: Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
As the gap between developed and developing countries grows deeper, the selection of another pro-western character as the head of IAEA, means the extension of ambiguity and politicized procedure.
While the Far East Asian characters like Ban Ki-Moon have raised on the top of the UN as the most important international institution, appointing Yukia Amano, a Japanese diplomat as the head of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), shows a new phase in the rise of characters from the Far East.Although Ban Ki-Moon from South Korea has been judged as the most pro- American UN secretary general in UN history, nobody can judge about what the new secretary general will do in his new position in this phase.
It’s too soon to say that Amano like his past predecessors will continue the IAEA procedure in favor of the West and the big powers, however, the serious disagreement of the developing countries with Western countries choice shows a great global doubt about Amano’s approaches.
Of course Amano’s predecessor, Mohammad Albaradei in his last year in office tried to show an impartial stance, particularly about Iran’s nuclear issue and somehow against Israel’s big nuclear arsenal. However, history will remember him mostly for his political and pro-western stance.
Releasing double-edged documents about nuclear activities of Iran, the Egyptian diplomat paved the way for politicizing some technical facts about the peaceful nature of Iran peaceful nuclear program.
Amano’s victory over other campaigners is significant because of the real animosity, which exists between his country and North Korea as the most important part of the US axis of evil.In his previous activities as Japan ambassador in IAEA , Amano had reflected US and Western claims, saying that Iran is may seek for
Nuclear weapons. At the same time he had admitted that there had not been any evidence proving Iran’s deviation from IAEA rules.
Now after this difficult campaign between Abdul Samad Minty, apro-developing countries candidate and the pro-western Amano, what both developed and developing seem to seek is the nuclear justice and peaceful nuclear atomic energy for all.
Giving clear technical reports and judging them on the base of IAEAs protocols, not the veto and nuclear power’s obligations, is what Iranians and all other independent nations expect from the new head of IAEA.
As the gap between developed and developing countries grows deeper, the selection of another pro-western character as the head of IAEA, means the extension of ambiguity and politicized procedure.
While the Far East Asian characters like Ban Ki-Moon have raised on the top of the UN as the most important international institution, appointing Yukia Amano, a Japanese diplomat as the head of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), shows a new phase in the rise of characters from the Far East.Although Ban Ki-Moon from South Korea has been judged as the most pro- American UN secretary general in UN history, nobody can judge about what the new secretary general will do in his new position in this phase.
It’s too soon to say that Amano like his past predecessors will continue the IAEA procedure in favor of the West and the big powers, however, the serious disagreement of the developing countries with Western countries choice shows a great global doubt about Amano’s approaches.
Of course Amano’s predecessor, Mohammad Albaradei in his last year in office tried to show an impartial stance, particularly about Iran’s nuclear issue and somehow against Israel’s big nuclear arsenal. However, history will remember him mostly for his political and pro-western stance.
Releasing double-edged documents about nuclear activities of Iran, the Egyptian diplomat paved the way for politicizing some technical facts about the peaceful nature of Iran peaceful nuclear program.
Amano’s victory over other campaigners is significant because of the real animosity, which exists between his country and North Korea as the most important part of the US axis of evil.In his previous activities as Japan ambassador in IAEA , Amano had reflected US and Western claims, saying that Iran is may seek for
Nuclear weapons. At the same time he had admitted that there had not been any evidence proving Iran’s deviation from IAEA rules.
Now after this difficult campaign between Abdul Samad Minty, apro-developing countries candidate and the pro-western Amano, what both developed and developing seem to seek is the nuclear justice and peaceful nuclear atomic energy for all.
Giving clear technical reports and judging them on the base of IAEAs protocols, not the veto and nuclear power’s obligations, is what Iranians and all other independent nations expect from the new head of IAEA.
Iran's One-Two Punch to Reset Reality
Iran's state-controlled media are waging an all-out propaganda assault to cast post-election unrest in the Islamic Republic as a futile attempt by "the West" to interfere.
From news stories alleging a British Embassy staffer was a ring-leader of the dramatic street protests, to editorial columns deriding a "West that imagined that supporting chaos in Iran would reduce the Islamic Republic's power," the message is clear.
Iran's Fars news agency reported Wednesday, citing unnamed officials, that one of three U.K. Embassy staffers (eight were arrested, five have been freed, all were Iranian nationals) still in detention, "had a remarkable role during the recent unrest in managing it behind the scenes."
Even if Fars, described as a "semi-official" news agency, had named its source in the government, the staffer's role in the protests would be impossible to verify, as Iran has kicked almost every foreign journalist out of the country.
With the street demonstrations largely squashed under the foot of security forces, more energy is being focused on painting Iran's leaders as protectors of the society, under threat from Israel and its alleged surrogates in Washington.
Iran's Press TV has an "exclusive interview" Wednesday with the man who ran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's election campaign. He told the network that President Obama, "originally took a soft stance on the results of Iran's presidential election but then was forced by the Zionists and the U.S. neoconservatives to make tough comments about Iran."
Many editorial columns discuss the election upheaval as if it ended weeks ago. One writer declared the United States the primary loser in the aftermath of the protests.
Hamdollah Emadi-Heydari wrote in the newspaper Siyasat-e Ruz that, "The West, under America's leadership, which, nervous of Iran's hazy election climate put all its eggs in [Iranian] rioters' basket, is being considered the main loser in the recent events as the political climate is gradually becoming clearer."
"What is significant now after the unrests have calmed down in Iran is that the West has put all its eggs in the rioters' basket," writes Emadi-Heydari.
CBS News correspondent Elizabeth Palmer was one of the last Western journalists to be forced out of Iran and she maintains contact with sources inside the country, who paint a different picture.
(AP Photo)
At left: Reformist presidential candidate Mehdi Karroubi attends a rally in Ghoba Mosque in Tehran, June 28, 2009.
Despite dramatically increased police presence on the streets of Tehran, the opposition movement continues to try and rally against the June 12 election results, which they claim were heavily rigged in favor of Ahmadinejad.
On Sunday, some 5,000 people gathered in central Tehran — they were reportedly met with batons and tear gas.
One man who joined an effort Monday to form a human chain on one of Tehran's main thoroughfares, in defiance of the regime, described what they were up against:
"As soon as more than five people tried to huddle, the groups were broken up. In downtown and midtown I heard people tried to walk in unison but they were beaten by batons and clubs."
Palmer points out that Iran's election has already fallen from the headlines of most Western media, and she says opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi lost his opportunity to try and force real change.
It has been a classic one-two punch from Iran's hard-line rulers: first they hit on the streets with batons, tear gas and arrests of opposition leaders. Now, in the newspapers and television broadcasts, they're striking with their own version of the truth.
If their version is repeated often enough, and dissenting voices are kept silent, it will quickly become the accepted reality for many Iranians. In this manner, the Islamic establishment which has ruled the country for 30 years may be able to sweep this "revolution" under the carpet.
From news stories alleging a British Embassy staffer was a ring-leader of the dramatic street protests, to editorial columns deriding a "West that imagined that supporting chaos in Iran would reduce the Islamic Republic's power," the message is clear.
Iran's Fars news agency reported Wednesday, citing unnamed officials, that one of three U.K. Embassy staffers (eight were arrested, five have been freed, all were Iranian nationals) still in detention, "had a remarkable role during the recent unrest in managing it behind the scenes."
Even if Fars, described as a "semi-official" news agency, had named its source in the government, the staffer's role in the protests would be impossible to verify, as Iran has kicked almost every foreign journalist out of the country.
With the street demonstrations largely squashed under the foot of security forces, more energy is being focused on painting Iran's leaders as protectors of the society, under threat from Israel and its alleged surrogates in Washington.
Iran's Press TV has an "exclusive interview" Wednesday with the man who ran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's election campaign. He told the network that President Obama, "originally took a soft stance on the results of Iran's presidential election but then was forced by the Zionists and the U.S. neoconservatives to make tough comments about Iran."
Many editorial columns discuss the election upheaval as if it ended weeks ago. One writer declared the United States the primary loser in the aftermath of the protests.
Hamdollah Emadi-Heydari wrote in the newspaper Siyasat-e Ruz that, "The West, under America's leadership, which, nervous of Iran's hazy election climate put all its eggs in [Iranian] rioters' basket, is being considered the main loser in the recent events as the political climate is gradually becoming clearer."
"What is significant now after the unrests have calmed down in Iran is that the West has put all its eggs in the rioters' basket," writes Emadi-Heydari.
CBS News correspondent Elizabeth Palmer was one of the last Western journalists to be forced out of Iran and she maintains contact with sources inside the country, who paint a different picture.
(AP Photo)
At left: Reformist presidential candidate Mehdi Karroubi attends a rally in Ghoba Mosque in Tehran, June 28, 2009.
Despite dramatically increased police presence on the streets of Tehran, the opposition movement continues to try and rally against the June 12 election results, which they claim were heavily rigged in favor of Ahmadinejad.
On Sunday, some 5,000 people gathered in central Tehran — they were reportedly met with batons and tear gas.
One man who joined an effort Monday to form a human chain on one of Tehran's main thoroughfares, in defiance of the regime, described what they were up against:
"As soon as more than five people tried to huddle, the groups were broken up. In downtown and midtown I heard people tried to walk in unison but they were beaten by batons and clubs."
Palmer points out that Iran's election has already fallen from the headlines of most Western media, and she says opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi lost his opportunity to try and force real change.
It has been a classic one-two punch from Iran's hard-line rulers: first they hit on the streets with batons, tear gas and arrests of opposition leaders. Now, in the newspapers and television broadcasts, they're striking with their own version of the truth.
If their version is repeated often enough, and dissenting voices are kept silent, it will quickly become the accepted reality for many Iranians. In this manner, the Islamic establishment which has ruled the country for 30 years may be able to sweep this "revolution" under the carpet.
IPRI Analyst declares in an interview with Siasat Rooz
US and its Allies Are Behind Instability OF the Region
By: Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
An IPRI Analyst told siasat rooz that the expanding instability in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Xinjiang (China) and Central Asian countries is the result of what US and its coalition forces and their intelligence network are doing.
Muhammad Munir*, Islamabad Policy Research Institute Analyst believes that the West and the USA would never like to see a Muslim country such as Iran to develop its nuclear program even if it is for peaceful purposes.
Following is the text of the interview:
How the problematic situation in Afghanistan could be resolved Regarding the neighbors?
The problematic situation of Afghanistan cannot be resolved as long as the neighboring countries do not evolve conenoses on the issue. All the neighboring countries must understand the dangers of presence of Western/US forces in Afghanistan that is considered a destabilizing factor in the region.
The expanding instability in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Xingjian (China) and Central Asian countries is the result what US and Coalition forces and their intelligence network is doing. One thing that must be understood by the neighboring countries is that big powers such as USA are not so naive, they first create a problem and then try to resolve it according
to their interests.
How Iran and Afghanistan can help stability of Afghanistan?
Iran can play a very critical role for the stability in Afghanistan by involving all the important neighbors of Afghanistan for developing a coalition government representing all the ethnic groups in Afghanistan. Efforts should be made that no one be allowed to exploit the ethnic diversity in Afghanistan.
How a Tehran-Washington cooperation in Kabul can be achieved?
The regional approach to resolve the Afghan issue provides an opportunity for Iran to cooperate with USA. Pakistan and Iran are the two key countries for the resolution of the Afghan problems. Both should oppose the involvement of various countries, like India, in negative activities for destabilizing the region.
Can a Tehran-Washington cooperation in Kabul affect other issues like Iran peaceful nuclear activities?
The West and the USA will never like to see a Muslim country such as Iran to develop its nuclear program even if it is for peaceful purposes. I personally think US-Iran cooperation on Afghanistan would not change the approach of USA toward Iran’s nuclear program.
What is your prediction of the 5+1 group recent session on Iran nuclear activities?
The 5+1 group in its session on Iran’s nuclear activities has threatened Iran of more sanctions if it does not stop uranium enrichment. It seems to be pressure tactics for stoppage of Iranian nuclear program.
-----------------------------------------------------
*Muhammad Munir is working at IPRI as Administrative officer since July 26, 2000. He holds Masters in Defense and Strategic Studies from Quaid –i-Azam University of Islamabad and M.A (Political Science ) from Islamia University, Bahawalpur, Pakistan.
By: Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
An IPRI Analyst told siasat rooz that the expanding instability in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Xinjiang (China) and Central Asian countries is the result of what US and its coalition forces and their intelligence network are doing.
Muhammad Munir*, Islamabad Policy Research Institute Analyst believes that the West and the USA would never like to see a Muslim country such as Iran to develop its nuclear program even if it is for peaceful purposes.
Following is the text of the interview:
How the problematic situation in Afghanistan could be resolved Regarding the neighbors?
The problematic situation of Afghanistan cannot be resolved as long as the neighboring countries do not evolve conenoses on the issue. All the neighboring countries must understand the dangers of presence of Western/US forces in Afghanistan that is considered a destabilizing factor in the region.
The expanding instability in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Xingjian (China) and Central Asian countries is the result what US and Coalition forces and their intelligence network is doing. One thing that must be understood by the neighboring countries is that big powers such as USA are not so naive, they first create a problem and then try to resolve it according
to their interests.
How Iran and Afghanistan can help stability of Afghanistan?
Iran can play a very critical role for the stability in Afghanistan by involving all the important neighbors of Afghanistan for developing a coalition government representing all the ethnic groups in Afghanistan. Efforts should be made that no one be allowed to exploit the ethnic diversity in Afghanistan.
How a Tehran-Washington cooperation in Kabul can be achieved?
The regional approach to resolve the Afghan issue provides an opportunity for Iran to cooperate with USA. Pakistan and Iran are the two key countries for the resolution of the Afghan problems. Both should oppose the involvement of various countries, like India, in negative activities for destabilizing the region.
Can a Tehran-Washington cooperation in Kabul affect other issues like Iran peaceful nuclear activities?
The West and the USA will never like to see a Muslim country such as Iran to develop its nuclear program even if it is for peaceful purposes. I personally think US-Iran cooperation on Afghanistan would not change the approach of USA toward Iran’s nuclear program.
What is your prediction of the 5+1 group recent session on Iran nuclear activities?
The 5+1 group in its session on Iran’s nuclear activities has threatened Iran of more sanctions if it does not stop uranium enrichment. It seems to be pressure tactics for stoppage of Iranian nuclear program.
-----------------------------------------------------
*Muhammad Munir is working at IPRI as Administrative officer since July 26, 2000. He holds Masters in Defense and Strategic Studies from Quaid –i-Azam University of Islamabad and M.A (Political Science ) from Islamia University, Bahawalpur, Pakistan.
Hong Cong analyst:
Iran Has Legitimacy over his Efforts in ME
By: Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
Spokesman for universal humanism in Hong Kong told Siasat Rooz that Iran has legitimacy and lawfulness in its efforts to claim a strong role in the affairs of the ME as it’s physical situation impels it to look to these local affairs.
Tony Henderson, Spokesperson for the Asia-Pacific Region - Universal Humanism, in an exclusive interview with Siasat Rooz daily, described the real reasons behind US interventions in ME and Central Asia. “Oil and gas is the reason why the US is interested in the Middle East. The entire industrial west is dependant on access to and the price of oil and gas,” he said.
Referring to Iraq, he added: baghdad is sitting on immense volumes of oil and Afghanistan is a strategically situated stronghold of independent minded people unaffiliated with the USA or the West thus posing a threat if alliances are made by Afghanistan with competing nations such as Russia or India or China.
“Iraq is more complex but still oil is at the base of the military action. The universally condemned Saddam was in charge of an oil rich nation and that left an open door target for sufficiently sanctioned military operations that would leave the US-plus British and the West in general - or the developed industrialized nations altogether - in position allowing strategic leverage over events in the Middle East,” he said.
This analyst called the situation in Iraq a chance for Israel and said: Control over Iraq is a trump card, which also plays-in armed-to-the-teeth Israel, granting political space to that occupying power - put in place by the same forces - to expand and consolidate its territory at the expense of the divided forces of Palestine.
He described Afghanistan as a gate for Central Asia and said: “While there is no oil in Afghanistan, that country’s territory forms a direct route to take the oil and gas from deposits in Central Asia to the Indian Ocean for transshipment. That would sidestep dependence on oil from the so far irresolvable problems of the ME.
American oil companies have acquired rights to a large percent of the output of the new fields in Central Asia, and the US and western governments see the area around the Caspian and in Central Asia as an alternative to dependence on oil from the Persian Gulf region. US troops followed the signing of these contracts. US Special Forces began joint operations with Kazakhstan in 1997 and with Uzbekistan a year later, training for intervention especially in the mountainous southern region that includes Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and northern Afghanistan.”
Referring to Iran geopolitical importance for US, Henderson said: How to get the oil and gas from that landlocked region to the world market, that’s the question: not wanting to rely on either the Russian pipeline system or - the easiest available land route - to unconditionally befriend Iran and have access to the Persian Gulf. Oil companies have explored alternative pipeline routes - westward through Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey to the Mediterranean; eastward through Kazakhstan and China to the Pacific; and, southwards from Turkmenistan across western Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Indian Ocean.
Explaining reasons behind the Obama administration willingness for talks with Iran, he said: Obama’s willingness to talk is a hopeful sign but governments and countries are not monolithic or static - recent events in Iran show this and the US election. The military industrial complex and the financial powers are still deeply entrenched, even though recent events have damaged their image a lot, So the outcome will depend on the balance of progressive-conservative forces in each country. Iran poses a problem to those assuming rightful dominance in that the country is striking a highly independent stance that radically opposes US and western hegemony in the ME. Iran has legitimacy and lawfulness in its efforts to claim a strong role in the affairs of the ME as it’s physical situation impels it to look to these local affairs.
Spokesperson for the Asia-Pacific Region - Universal Humanism said: Iran has a cultural depth. This brings its peoples through its government to demand the same rights any nations would expect. It could not be walked over with impunity, unlike its famed carpets.
After explaining Iran right for having a regional function, he referred to outside power interference and said: the US, the British and the French, are acting far from home and anyone would wonder just why they have such pretensions far from the fold, veiled by democratic and humanitarian posturing. It is oil, its accessibility and its transport, and securing an uninterrupted supply that provides the reason providing reason for the militaries of the more powerful nations to by camp in the homes and on the doorsteps of Afghanistan and Iraq. However, that oil is bypassing equally deserving though disadvantaged not-yet-economically developed nations, and that is a situation that needs mentioning.
By: Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
Spokesman for universal humanism in Hong Kong told Siasat Rooz that Iran has legitimacy and lawfulness in its efforts to claim a strong role in the affairs of the ME as it’s physical situation impels it to look to these local affairs.
Tony Henderson, Spokesperson for the Asia-Pacific Region - Universal Humanism, in an exclusive interview with Siasat Rooz daily, described the real reasons behind US interventions in ME and Central Asia. “Oil and gas is the reason why the US is interested in the Middle East. The entire industrial west is dependant on access to and the price of oil and gas,” he said.
Referring to Iraq, he added: baghdad is sitting on immense volumes of oil and Afghanistan is a strategically situated stronghold of independent minded people unaffiliated with the USA or the West thus posing a threat if alliances are made by Afghanistan with competing nations such as Russia or India or China.
“Iraq is more complex but still oil is at the base of the military action. The universally condemned Saddam was in charge of an oil rich nation and that left an open door target for sufficiently sanctioned military operations that would leave the US-plus British and the West in general - or the developed industrialized nations altogether - in position allowing strategic leverage over events in the Middle East,” he said.
This analyst called the situation in Iraq a chance for Israel and said: Control over Iraq is a trump card, which also plays-in armed-to-the-teeth Israel, granting political space to that occupying power - put in place by the same forces - to expand and consolidate its territory at the expense of the divided forces of Palestine.
He described Afghanistan as a gate for Central Asia and said: “While there is no oil in Afghanistan, that country’s territory forms a direct route to take the oil and gas from deposits in Central Asia to the Indian Ocean for transshipment. That would sidestep dependence on oil from the so far irresolvable problems of the ME.
American oil companies have acquired rights to a large percent of the output of the new fields in Central Asia, and the US and western governments see the area around the Caspian and in Central Asia as an alternative to dependence on oil from the Persian Gulf region. US troops followed the signing of these contracts. US Special Forces began joint operations with Kazakhstan in 1997 and with Uzbekistan a year later, training for intervention especially in the mountainous southern region that includes Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and northern Afghanistan.”
Referring to Iran geopolitical importance for US, Henderson said: How to get the oil and gas from that landlocked region to the world market, that’s the question: not wanting to rely on either the Russian pipeline system or - the easiest available land route - to unconditionally befriend Iran and have access to the Persian Gulf. Oil companies have explored alternative pipeline routes - westward through Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey to the Mediterranean; eastward through Kazakhstan and China to the Pacific; and, southwards from Turkmenistan across western Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Indian Ocean.
Explaining reasons behind the Obama administration willingness for talks with Iran, he said: Obama’s willingness to talk is a hopeful sign but governments and countries are not monolithic or static - recent events in Iran show this and the US election. The military industrial complex and the financial powers are still deeply entrenched, even though recent events have damaged their image a lot, So the outcome will depend on the balance of progressive-conservative forces in each country. Iran poses a problem to those assuming rightful dominance in that the country is striking a highly independent stance that radically opposes US and western hegemony in the ME. Iran has legitimacy and lawfulness in its efforts to claim a strong role in the affairs of the ME as it’s physical situation impels it to look to these local affairs.
Spokesperson for the Asia-Pacific Region - Universal Humanism said: Iran has a cultural depth. This brings its peoples through its government to demand the same rights any nations would expect. It could not be walked over with impunity, unlike its famed carpets.
After explaining Iran right for having a regional function, he referred to outside power interference and said: the US, the British and the French, are acting far from home and anyone would wonder just why they have such pretensions far from the fold, veiled by democratic and humanitarian posturing. It is oil, its accessibility and its transport, and securing an uninterrupted supply that provides the reason providing reason for the militaries of the more powerful nations to by camp in the homes and on the doorsteps of Afghanistan and Iraq. However, that oil is bypassing equally deserving though disadvantaged not-yet-economically developed nations, and that is a situation that needs mentioning.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Former US Assistant Secretary Of State:
By: Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
It’s Iran right to question Israel N-Arsenal
James Dobbins, Assistant Secretary of State under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W.Bush Presidents and the director for the International Security and Defense Policy Center at the RAND Corporation in an exclusive interview with Siasat Rooz daily said:” I think it’s perfectly appropriate for Iran to raise questions about Israel Nuclear Arsenal.
Following is the text of the interview:
Can the proposed Iranian package solve the Nuclear Struggle between Iran and the West?
It depends very much on what the Iranian proposals consists of, if the Iranian proposals contain new elements it could lead to serious dialogue. I think the Obama administration would like to enter in to a serious dialogue on these issues and indeed on other issues with Tehran but if the Iranian package does not contain new elements there would be a sense of disappointment and I expect the 5+1 group will begin to consider further economic sanctions.
Are sanctions useful for stopping Iran from continuing his peaceful nuclear activities?
I think it depends on what one mean by economic sanctions do they work, certainly economic sanctions were very important in denying Saddam Hussein capacity to threaten his neighbors and the economic sanctions extended from 1991 till 2003 very severely weekend Saddam military capacity, so they can work provided they are generally applied that is that they have brought international support. Unilateral sanctions by only the US and some small countries are likely to be much less effective.
Do you see any real differences between Obama approach and the former presidents’ approaches?
I think that Obama has made clear that he is prepared for an unconditioned dialogue with the Iranian government and I think that is different from the Bushed administration’s approach which was to establish conditions for such a kind of dialogue although, I think the objectives are largely the same but there is a greater openness to dialogue and perhaps to compromise.
Why talks between Tehran and US halted during the past 6 month’s?
Unfortunately at least for the first half of this year, the government in Tehran was not ready to engage in such a kind of dialogue, it was probably focused on internal politics preparations for the Iranian presidential elections. It, therefore postponed any serious response to Obama’s overtures; since then the Controversy over the presidential elections has probably further complicated any discussions within the Iranian government and how to response to Obama’s overtures. So I think every body would be very interested to see whether this new Iranian proposal contains new elements. I think that the allegations against US and other countries were instrumental and the protests which took place in Iran over the recent elections in Tehran were much exaggerated. I think that there is absolutely no bases for believing that US has that kind of influence or is capable of projecting and controlling that kind of influence in to Iran. Certainly Washington supports in a general way the promotion of democracy not just in Iran but eventually in all countries.
Why US do not accept the IAEA reports about the peaceful identity of Iran’s nuclear activities?
The IAEA has raised questions about Iranian nuclear activities and has not be fully satisfied by the Iranian responses and that the assessment in Washington and other capitals is that Iran is at the minimum trying to develop the technology and sophistication and level of sophistication which would allow it to build nuclear weapons if its to choose to do so. Actually, the question of whether it has chosen to make a nuclear bomb is uncertain and there is concern about that not in Washington but much more generally. In terms of whether or not to require Iran or to ask Tehran to avoid certain activities, basically there are Security Council resolutions which are the force of low.Iran had signed the UN charter the UN charter allows the security council to make resolutions which all nations are required to adhere to by the terms of the un charter which IRI assigned.So the Iran is bound not only by the NPT agreement but by the UN charter and the UN charter requires it to conform to Security Council resolutions.
What is your idea about the current nuclear discrimination against Iran and in favor of Israel?
I think its perfectly appropriate for Iran to raise questions about Israel Nuclear Arsenal, on the other hand ,Israel is not an NPT signatory,It never promised not to manufacturing nuclear weapons but IRI is a signatory and It did promised not to manufacture nuclear weapons, so the legal requirements on Islamic Republic are unfortunately more stringent than the legal requirements on Tel Aviv but it is a perfectly legitimate argument for Iran to ask that Israel should give up its nuclear weapons and if Tehran wanted to propose and pursue the creation of a nuclear free zone that encompass the entire ME including Israel, that would be a reasonable position for Islamic Republic to take.
What is your idea about making a Regional Concretion for enrichment in Iran?
I think if Iran were to propose that the enrichment facility run by a Concretion that would be a positive step in negotiations. I don’t know whether it finally would be accepted but I think it would be regarded as a positive move by Iran.I think, neither side is prepared in this stage to say what its final positions is and what it ultimately accepts. The real question is whether both sides are prepared to begin to make small Concertinos which ultimately can lead to agreement.
Does the Iranian political position for supporting resistance toward Israel, affected Iran and US Nuclear Conflict?
I think in judging and in the assessment of any potential thread that is always a combination of capabilities and that is what is the potential adversary capability and what is the potential adversaries intent; if the capabilities are high but the intent is benign then its not only a concern if the capabilities is low but the intents is not benign but malign then it not again a great concern because the capabilities are low; when the capability is high and the intent is negative, is considered malign, the concern is very high; so naturally any assessment of IRI’s potential thread is a combination of What Iran’s capabilities are and what Tehran intents are; And so Iranian statements and Iranian support for Hamas and Hezbollah, the statements of Iranian leaders that they want to eliminate the state of Israel, this kinds of indications of intent naturally factor in any assessment regarding the potential thread ,Tehran might pose along with capabilities.It’s the combination of the tow so yes there is countries like for instance Japan that could make a Nuclear Weapon, if it chose, it has that level of technology but nobody think It is likely to do so, it’s not considered a serious problem.other countries which have more questionable intents are more serious concerned and I am afraid Iran is in that custard.
Does a new sanction against Iran possible, while China and Russia support it?
China and Russia has both accepted security council resolutions which demands Iran stop enrichment, so China and Russia don’t support the enrichment, infract, they support association of enrichment. To agree of which they are prepared to and they had also accepted, a number of sanctions on IRI by reason of refusal to conform to those security council resolutions and now whether China and Russia will support more sanctions, we don’t know but they accepted sanctions that exist today and as far as I know they are planning the sanctions.
Iran President declared the Nuclear Struggle is finished, what is your idea?
In term’s of Ahmadinejad presented intentions ,first of all, The decision to whether go a head or not in Iranian nuclear program is not a decision for the president of Iran but for the supreme leader as I understand the Iranian constitutional, but that issue aside , I think the question is whether or not Islamic Republic and the courtiers with which negotiate can begin to make more steps that brings them together toward some compromise, if theIranian side position is this, no compromise will be possible and no further discussion is useful and then of course we won’t have an agreement. If IRI is willing to begin to make some small steps then I would hope that there would be movement on other side and perhaps an agreement.
What steps do you suggest for solving the Nuclear Struggle between Iran and the West?
There has been some suggestions that there should be a temporally halt in further enrichment and further sanctions to allow negotiations could resume.There are also,the idea of putting the enrichment facility under the control of a broader concretion.
As the first American Special Envoy for Afghanistan after 2001 attack, what’s your idea about the given up Washington-Tehran talks for cooperation in this region?
I think American and Iranian interest in Afghanistan are largely coincident and the same and US and IRI did cooperate quite closely in 2001; I think it was a mistake for the US to have rejected Iranian cooperate and further assistance in 2002 and I would hope that Iran and US could have a serious discussion about how to further stabilize Afghanistan.Iran has much to offer, It is a major aid donor to Afghanistan and its assistance is quite helpful.Iran, obviously has influence in Afghanistan which it can be used in a positive direction that help stabilize this country. Iran has strong trade relations with Afghanistan which again can help to stabiles that country and of course, Tehran has a strong interest in combating Afghan drug trade which is another possible area for cooperation.Iran and US, both have interests in stabilized peaceful Afghanistan and not because one is going to pay another one to cooperate but because both have the similar interests.
James Dobbins directs the International Security and Defense Policy Center at the RAND Corporation and served as Assistant Secretary of State under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. He was the Clinton administration’s special envoy to Bosnia, Haiti, Kosovo, and Somalia and the Bush administration’s first envoy to Afghanistan
It’s Iran right to question Israel N-Arsenal
James Dobbins, Assistant Secretary of State under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W.Bush Presidents and the director for the International Security and Defense Policy Center at the RAND Corporation in an exclusive interview with Siasat Rooz daily said:” I think it’s perfectly appropriate for Iran to raise questions about Israel Nuclear Arsenal.
Following is the text of the interview:
Can the proposed Iranian package solve the Nuclear Struggle between Iran and the West?
It depends very much on what the Iranian proposals consists of, if the Iranian proposals contain new elements it could lead to serious dialogue. I think the Obama administration would like to enter in to a serious dialogue on these issues and indeed on other issues with Tehran but if the Iranian package does not contain new elements there would be a sense of disappointment and I expect the 5+1 group will begin to consider further economic sanctions.
Are sanctions useful for stopping Iran from continuing his peaceful nuclear activities?
I think it depends on what one mean by economic sanctions do they work, certainly economic sanctions were very important in denying Saddam Hussein capacity to threaten his neighbors and the economic sanctions extended from 1991 till 2003 very severely weekend Saddam military capacity, so they can work provided they are generally applied that is that they have brought international support. Unilateral sanctions by only the US and some small countries are likely to be much less effective.
Do you see any real differences between Obama approach and the former presidents’ approaches?
I think that Obama has made clear that he is prepared for an unconditioned dialogue with the Iranian government and I think that is different from the Bushed administration’s approach which was to establish conditions for such a kind of dialogue although, I think the objectives are largely the same but there is a greater openness to dialogue and perhaps to compromise.
Why talks between Tehran and US halted during the past 6 month’s?
Unfortunately at least for the first half of this year, the government in Tehran was not ready to engage in such a kind of dialogue, it was probably focused on internal politics preparations for the Iranian presidential elections. It, therefore postponed any serious response to Obama’s overtures; since then the Controversy over the presidential elections has probably further complicated any discussions within the Iranian government and how to response to Obama’s overtures. So I think every body would be very interested to see whether this new Iranian proposal contains new elements. I think that the allegations against US and other countries were instrumental and the protests which took place in Iran over the recent elections in Tehran were much exaggerated. I think that there is absolutely no bases for believing that US has that kind of influence or is capable of projecting and controlling that kind of influence in to Iran. Certainly Washington supports in a general way the promotion of democracy not just in Iran but eventually in all countries.
Why US do not accept the IAEA reports about the peaceful identity of Iran’s nuclear activities?
The IAEA has raised questions about Iranian nuclear activities and has not be fully satisfied by the Iranian responses and that the assessment in Washington and other capitals is that Iran is at the minimum trying to develop the technology and sophistication and level of sophistication which would allow it to build nuclear weapons if its to choose to do so. Actually, the question of whether it has chosen to make a nuclear bomb is uncertain and there is concern about that not in Washington but much more generally. In terms of whether or not to require Iran or to ask Tehran to avoid certain activities, basically there are Security Council resolutions which are the force of low.Iran had signed the UN charter the UN charter allows the security council to make resolutions which all nations are required to adhere to by the terms of the un charter which IRI assigned.So the Iran is bound not only by the NPT agreement but by the UN charter and the UN charter requires it to conform to Security Council resolutions.
What is your idea about the current nuclear discrimination against Iran and in favor of Israel?
I think its perfectly appropriate for Iran to raise questions about Israel Nuclear Arsenal, on the other hand ,Israel is not an NPT signatory,It never promised not to manufacturing nuclear weapons but IRI is a signatory and It did promised not to manufacture nuclear weapons, so the legal requirements on Islamic Republic are unfortunately more stringent than the legal requirements on Tel Aviv but it is a perfectly legitimate argument for Iran to ask that Israel should give up its nuclear weapons and if Tehran wanted to propose and pursue the creation of a nuclear free zone that encompass the entire ME including Israel, that would be a reasonable position for Islamic Republic to take.
What is your idea about making a Regional Concretion for enrichment in Iran?
I think if Iran were to propose that the enrichment facility run by a Concretion that would be a positive step in negotiations. I don’t know whether it finally would be accepted but I think it would be regarded as a positive move by Iran.I think, neither side is prepared in this stage to say what its final positions is and what it ultimately accepts. The real question is whether both sides are prepared to begin to make small Concertinos which ultimately can lead to agreement.
Does the Iranian political position for supporting resistance toward Israel, affected Iran and US Nuclear Conflict?
I think in judging and in the assessment of any potential thread that is always a combination of capabilities and that is what is the potential adversary capability and what is the potential adversaries intent; if the capabilities are high but the intent is benign then its not only a concern if the capabilities is low but the intents is not benign but malign then it not again a great concern because the capabilities are low; when the capability is high and the intent is negative, is considered malign, the concern is very high; so naturally any assessment of IRI’s potential thread is a combination of What Iran’s capabilities are and what Tehran intents are; And so Iranian statements and Iranian support for Hamas and Hezbollah, the statements of Iranian leaders that they want to eliminate the state of Israel, this kinds of indications of intent naturally factor in any assessment regarding the potential thread ,Tehran might pose along with capabilities.It’s the combination of the tow so yes there is countries like for instance Japan that could make a Nuclear Weapon, if it chose, it has that level of technology but nobody think It is likely to do so, it’s not considered a serious problem.other countries which have more questionable intents are more serious concerned and I am afraid Iran is in that custard.
Does a new sanction against Iran possible, while China and Russia support it?
China and Russia has both accepted security council resolutions which demands Iran stop enrichment, so China and Russia don’t support the enrichment, infract, they support association of enrichment. To agree of which they are prepared to and they had also accepted, a number of sanctions on IRI by reason of refusal to conform to those security council resolutions and now whether China and Russia will support more sanctions, we don’t know but they accepted sanctions that exist today and as far as I know they are planning the sanctions.
Iran President declared the Nuclear Struggle is finished, what is your idea?
In term’s of Ahmadinejad presented intentions ,first of all, The decision to whether go a head or not in Iranian nuclear program is not a decision for the president of Iran but for the supreme leader as I understand the Iranian constitutional, but that issue aside , I think the question is whether or not Islamic Republic and the courtiers with which negotiate can begin to make more steps that brings them together toward some compromise, if theIranian side position is this, no compromise will be possible and no further discussion is useful and then of course we won’t have an agreement. If IRI is willing to begin to make some small steps then I would hope that there would be movement on other side and perhaps an agreement.
What steps do you suggest for solving the Nuclear Struggle between Iran and the West?
There has been some suggestions that there should be a temporally halt in further enrichment and further sanctions to allow negotiations could resume.There are also,the idea of putting the enrichment facility under the control of a broader concretion.
As the first American Special Envoy for Afghanistan after 2001 attack, what’s your idea about the given up Washington-Tehran talks for cooperation in this region?
I think American and Iranian interest in Afghanistan are largely coincident and the same and US and IRI did cooperate quite closely in 2001; I think it was a mistake for the US to have rejected Iranian cooperate and further assistance in 2002 and I would hope that Iran and US could have a serious discussion about how to further stabilize Afghanistan.Iran has much to offer, It is a major aid donor to Afghanistan and its assistance is quite helpful.Iran, obviously has influence in Afghanistan which it can be used in a positive direction that help stabilize this country. Iran has strong trade relations with Afghanistan which again can help to stabiles that country and of course, Tehran has a strong interest in combating Afghan drug trade which is another possible area for cooperation.Iran and US, both have interests in stabilized peaceful Afghanistan and not because one is going to pay another one to cooperate but because both have the similar interests.
James Dobbins directs the International Security and Defense Policy Center at the RAND Corporation and served as Assistant Secretary of State under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. He was the Clinton administration’s special envoy to Bosnia, Haiti, Kosovo, and Somalia and the Bush administration’s first envoy to Afghanistan
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)