Thursday
Apr292010
Iran Interview: The Diplomat Who Resigned Over the Election
Thursday, April 29, 2010 at 11:05 
The website insideIRAN interviews Mohammad Reza Heidari, the Iranian diplomat in Norway who resigned from his post in December and remained in Oslo:Q: Why did you leave your post at the Iranian embassy in Norway and cut off ties with the Islamic Republic?
A: This did not happen over night. My friends and I followed the events of Iran as diplomats. My colleagues and I always talked about the progress other countries have made and compared that to the situation in Iran. Then we had the June 12 election. Everyone was shocked by the level of cheating.
The Latest from Iran (29 April): New Mousavi Video
On election day, I was in charge of the ballot box at the embassy and I never thought this was going to happen. Large numbers of Iranian expats voted in the election and Moussavi won in our precinct. Then the government in Iran reacted violently to people inside the country who were asking for their votes to be counted. These horrific scenes and seeing for ourselves the government killing our youth on the streets made me resign my post in order to motivate the Iranian people to continue their fight.
Q: Are there people in Iran benefiting from the government but are now against the system out of moral objections to the actions of the government? How large is this group? Are they growing in number?
A. Even the founders of the Islamic Republic, people like [Mir Hossein] Mousavi and [Mehdi] Karroubi who worked in the highest echelons of the system for many years, admit that this is a government that tries to make people dependent on its existence.
Almost all my colleagues reached the same conclusion. They see no future in the path the government has chosen. The vast majority of experts who work for Iran’s foreign policy apparatus have objections to what has been happening. Many of them have fled the country. Some have resigned quietly and some are resigning their posts as we speak. I think more complicated issues will challenge the regime and hopefully, this year will be their final year and the Iranian people will taste freedom.
Q. Is there widespread dissatisfaction only in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs or is there widespread dissatisfaction in the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps or the Ministry of Intelligence?
A. This is true about every institution in the government. When they send diplomats on foreign missions, they send us through multiple layers of security screenings. We were among those who served during the Iran—Iraq war. I have friends in the IRGC, the Basij, the Ministry of Intelligence, Iran’s radio and television, and other places who are against the government. They have to cooperate with the government because if they do otherwise, they will face many severe challenges. This issue requires a national will. Strikes are on the way. Teachers, who went on strike, have started the right thing. Iranian labourers are on the same path.
Q: How fearful is the Iranian government?
They have gathered a bunch of commoners around them to protect themselves. They try to associate the Green Movement with the rich and then tie them to Western countries. They are terrified. I am from the lower classes and I worked for the government for many years. All my friends are the same. The government has to spend large sums of money to feed people and bus them into cities in order to generate crowds for pro-government demonstrations. But they are still unable to address the basic causes of widespread dissatisfaction.
Q: The dissatisfaction you are talking about is just simply dissatisfaction with the government or are these friends of yours in the government questioning the very legitimacy of the regime?
The legitimacy of the regime was gradually destroyed by the actions of the regime since the June 12 election. The current government does not have legitimacy and it is only a body to carry out the responsibilities of the executive branch. With the crimes they committed, torture and rape, the regime has lost its legitimacy. They have been able to remain in power only through terrorizing the masses and using their coercive apparatus. New challenges such as sanctions are going to make matters much worse.
Q: The rhetoric of the EU [European Union] has gotten much harsher towards Iran. What is the reason behind that?
A: European countries have always been interested in their national interests. They did not care about what happened in Iran. But now, they realize a stable Iran is more suitable for investments and it would also prevent the flight of so many Iranians seeking asylum in Europe. The Europeans are tired of a regime that supports terrorism and is a major obstacle to peace in the Middle East. This Iranian government does not serve their long-term interests.
Q: What do you think about possible sanctions against Iran?
A: Sanctions must be smart and targeted and only go after the ruling elite. These sanctions should not affect the Iranian people. Countries should not issue visas for the leaders of Iran and their families. Companies should be banned from dealing with the IRGC. The last issue I would like to mention is human rights. Western countries must make human rights the priority. Iran has made such a big deal of the nuclear program to divert attention from its human rights abuse.
Reader Comments (69)
Catherine,
"I’d still be interested in reading the interviews you referred to in your first post: “In earlier interviews, Mr. Heidari said that his superiors had ordered him to falsify the results of the voting in Oslo, but that he refused.”
Do you have a link or other way of sharing with us what he said in them?
Thanks."
Sure. Check out the sources at footnote 14 in my article.
http://iran2009presidentialelection.blogspot.com/
Eric,
I think you misunderstand me --- Heidari had already come forward with his story before you wrote on this thread. What you have pressed for is documentary evidence or a name of a superior --- until you get that, you give no credence to his story. Just as you give no credence to the stories of Mousavi advisors Beheshti and Fateh.
Certainly, as a journalist, I would like to have any details of the claim --- just as I would like to have details to support the Guardian Council's report of July 2009 claiming no electoral manipulation.
Here's the difference for me: the Guardian Council has no worries about its security if it produces further information. And Heidari hasn't threatened and detained anyone to prop up his story.
S.
Eric,
I think you misunderstand me --- Heidari had already come forward with his story before you wrote on this thread. What you have pressed for is documentary evidence or a name of a superior --- until you get that, you give no credence to his story. Just as you give no credence to the stories of Mousavi advisors Beheshti and Fateh.
Certainly, as a journalist, I would like to have any details of the claim --- just as I would like to have details to support the Guardian Council's report of July 2009 claiming no electoral manipulation.
Here's a big difference for me: the Guardian Council has no worries about its security if it produces further information. And Heidari hasn't threatened and detained anyone to prop up his story.
S.
SCOTT:
All I'm saying is that "Who cares about Heidari's "story"? We have plenty of stories, and every single one of them might be true. But they all might be false too. When someone provides evidence, he prevents someone from challenging his story.
I understand that, even though he's defected and accused his "superiors" of electoral fraud, he might worry about the safety of himself, his family and family and friends still in Iran if he actually identifies which of his "superiors" he was referring to. But I find it hard to understand that. One would think he'd already crossed that bridge when he made the allegation. One could even argue that naming the "superior" might actually improve his situation, since doing so would at least deflect suspicion away from "superiors" he did not name.
Bottom line: We have enough "stories." Time for some evidence.
Here is an claim from my side. I have an "unnamed source" that claims that "certain members of the government" drink babies' bloods for Islamic Power, unfortunately I can't name my source nor provide any evidence, because he is afraid of retribution, so please take it as face value and do not challenge it.
All blogs and international media are free to use my above story about the Baby Drinking Practice of the IRA.
M. Ali,
Is Heidari wrong about the suppression of dissent after the election?
S.
Eric,
You cared enough about the regime's story that you have spent months defending it --- and I respect you for that. I care enough for Heidari's story, and for the stories of many others who have experienced or spoken up about abuse in this post-election climate, that I do it the justice of not dismissing it.
S.
SCOTT:
"Is Heidari wrong about the suppression of dissent after the election?"
My only focus is on the election. One can analyze that very thoroughly without being in Iran. That's harder to do with respect to the post-election matters.
I have no idea what the truth is about post-election matters. Nor does he. As far as I know, he hasn't been within a thousand miles of Iran since long before the election. He's just reading newspapers and Internet sites, talking to people inside Iran, just like the rest of us.
Why should his opinion count for more than anyone else's?
For those who haven't read the WSJ story about Heidari, you should. He strikes me as a very weak and troubled man with a strong-willed son and a very dissatisfied wife, a man whose decision to defect was motivated as much by personal troubles as by firm political beliefs. Each of us can reach his own conclusion, but that was mine. Absent any evidence for his charges of electoral fraud, and especially in light of his recent failure even to mention them in interviews, I am more than a little inclined to pay attention to him.
If he comes forward with some evidence, or at least remembers to tell his story next time he talks to a journalist, I'll be happy to change my view. I'm not holding my breath about that.
Merci mon cher Scott.
Ange,
As to "Glibness and superficial charm", I am quite convinced that AN's supporters believe in it - otherwise they would not praise him constantly.
Apart from that I am completely d'accord with you, but what else could one expect from such a shrimp?
dar sarzamine koutouleha jayi baraye bozorgan nist...
Arshama
Catherine,
Thanks for the link to that video, though I'm not able to understand much of it. Can you tell me whether Heidari mentioned his earlier allegations that he'd been pressured to falsify the vote?
Eric
To all,
Do you understand why none of you believes M.Ali's "baby blood drinker" story (which, of course, he didn't intend for anyone believe)?
You don't believe it simply because you can't accept that human beings could act that way.
If M.Ali were to present a less shocking story of depraved human behavior, however, you might or might not believe it, based in part on whether it seemed possible to you that ANY human being could do what M.Ali (hypothetically) described, and in part on WHOM M.Ali told you has been accused of doing it.
It's at least possible, I think, that some of you would find M.Ali's (hypothetical) story of human depravity more believable if he told you Ahmadinejad did it, less believable if he told you Mousavi did it.
I'd say instead: Where's the evidence? And I wouldn't feel that, by doing so, I was "dismissing" M.Ali's story.
Eric
I was dismissing Ali's story as well ! it's not in our culture to drink baby blood ! :-)
I am joking Eric , have a nice WE with lots of links avoiding to carry them in your dream .
Incidentally, as incredible as the "baby blood drinkers" story seems to any sane human being, it was only 20 years ago that the US government was spreading the story that Iraqi soldiers in Kuwait were removing Kuwaiti babies from incubators so that the incubators could be shipped back to Iraq. I will venture a guess that somewhere between 25% and 75% of Americans believed that story.
Ange,
And many thanks to you for kind words.
S.
Eric,
"My only focus is on the election." --- That, with respect, is where our approaches differ.
Nor do I wish to avoid news which may not fit preconceptions by tearing down a source (Heydari) with a character attack or avoiding the assertions by framing them as trivial opinions.
(For the record, my own latest "opinion" is that two more death sentences have been handed down on political prisoners.)
S.
SCOTT:
You're welcome for the kind words, but I had no choice: you deserve them.
Perhaps I shouldn't make a "character attack" on Mr. Heydari, especially since my view is that he's already got enough personal trouble in his life.
On the other hand, what can one say about someone who accuses his "superiors" of serious crimes and then neither offers evidence -- thereby showing that those serious charges are valid, and, in the process, exonerating any "superiors" not named who might have been suspected up till then -- nor even seems to remember, at times, that he ever made such so-far-unsubstantiated charges against these "superiors."
I suspect it's the same for you and others: someone for whom I qualified as a "superior" made some serious but unsubstantiated charge about his or her "superiors," and didn't bother either to substantiate or formally withdraw that charge, I would find that person to be of somewhat less sterling character than you suggest.
Heydari should "put up or shut up:" either substantiate his serious allegations, or formally withdraw them. If they are false, any honorable person would do that. (Of course, an honorable person wouldn't have made them in the first place if they were false.)
CLARIFICATION (added "IF"):
"I suspect it’s the same for you and others: IF someone for whom I qualified as a “superior” made some serious but unsubstantiated charge about his or her “superiors,” and didn’t bother either to substantiate or formally withdraw that charge, I would find that person to be of somewhat less sterling character than you suggest."
(Nobody's ever made charges of wrongdoing against me.)
Scott,
How long are you going to put up with unintelligible election comments? How long should your readers read the repeat of the same garbage? I know you treat this as a healthy debate and you may believe the longer it goes on the more the argument of the other side comes apart at the seams. I, however, find the sanctimonious comments an insult to everyone's intelligence. In a way I really feel the Iranian Greens are being beaten, tortured, and raped again this time not by IR rose-water soaked thugs but by an American (if he is an American) Basiji.
IR regime is trying to shut down the EA like all other publications, newspapers and bloggers inside Iran. Since they cannot shut EA down physically they are trying to infect it by “let’s analyze election” virus!!! Please activate the EA virus buster!
Megan, be sure, up to now, EA is tiny enough not to come on their radar. They wouldn't need to physically shut it down, they could just filter it. Its not filtered yet.
Scott, I'm interested in how such stories shape public perception. It's a dangerous practice that people keep need to asking questions before allowing each action to formulate an image of Iran that makes it easier to base certain decisions on.
I bring your attention to my favorite example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Iranian_sumptuary_law_controversy
The wiki doesn't exactly capture the event as I remember it. Suddenly, news were all around the world, and politicians were falling over themselves to blast Iran. Everything was based on "sources from Iran". No facts, no evidence, just unnamed sources were enough to make headlines.
Once it was realized it was untrue, damage was already done.
This was the front page of National Post in Canada:
http://img124.imageshack.us/i/frontpage1lp.jpg/
More info - http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m23417&l=i&size=1&hd=0
The reason I'm mentioning this is how dangerous it is to put so much faith in claims without any hard evidence, and the only reason we believe it, is because we WANT TO BELIEVE IT, because the claim meets with our idealogies.
M. Ali,
EA was not in existence in 2006 so better to test your worries by reviewing the site's recent coverage of Iran. As you no doubt know, I have been scathing in criticising inaccurate reporting on Iran's nuclear programme, and I have been careful in the reporting of claimed developments inside Tehran. If you can find a case where we have dangerously mis-reported, I would be happy to discuss it.
As for Iran's radar, EA is most certainly on it --- I know this from sources inside and outside the country. Why it has not yet been filtered is a most intriguing question.
S.
M. (Mad or Mullah or whatever the M stands for) Ali
The God Damn Election is over; it is yesterday story. Close your election shop and go away. Greens are no longer protesting the GD election. Your argument and Brill’s are irrelevant. You guys are doing a good job making yourselves irrelevant as well.
Green has moved on. If you took the cotton balls out of your ears you might have heard it. What part of the chant “ Mousavi baha nas koleh nezaam neshaa nas” (Mousavi is an excuse, regime is our target) did you not understand??
You and Brill with no thrill can shrill until cows come home. Green Movement’s focus is to make sure we do not have to ever discuss another IR election and open up a circus for Mullah Ali (s) and Brill (s) of this world. Get it? Got it? Good.
Eric,
RE your post 35: "Thanks for the link to that video, though I’m not able to understand much of it. Can you tell me whether Heidari mentioned his earlier allegations that he’d been pressured to falsify the vote?"
In my post 9, Mohammad Reza Heidari's words are translated from Farsi just underneath the link to the video. If you want to know what the people speaking Norwegian said, just contact Iranian-Norwegian journalist Mina Ghabel at Norway's NRK TV channel.
For other matters of concern to you, contact VOA's journalist in Rome, Ahmad Rafat, who on a Voice of America's Newstalk programme in January reported that he had personally spoken to three Iranian diplomats in Europe who had told him that 27 diplomats in Europe, but also in countries in Asia, had resigned and that these resignations had occurred in recent weeks, particularly after the violence against protesters on Ashura. Who knows, maybe these diplomats also mentioned pressures from superiors to falsify election results as well - but these comments never made it into the programme? Or you could ask Mr Rafat to get back in contact with them and ask specifically about this.
You might also want to put the point in your post 28:
"I understand that, even though he’s defected and accused his “superiors” of electoral fraud, he might worry about the safety of himself, his family and family and friends still in Iran if he actually identifies which of his “superiors” he was referring to. But I find it hard to understand that. One would think he’d already crossed that bridge when he made the allegation."
to Mina Ghabel and Ahmad Rafat to see what their take is, seeing as they have probably reported on lots of Iranians in similar situations to those faced by the resigning diplomats in terms of concerns for their and their families' safety, and how many bridges actually may have to crossed, each with increasingly ominous consequences.
Regarding filtering: Maybe its thanks to people like me, Eric, and Samuel that challenge your reports! :D