Iran: Conservatives v. Ahmadinejad (Jedinia)

Mehdi Jedinia writes for the Institute of War and Peace Reporting on tensions between the President and the Motalefeh Party:

Protests by the Green Movement, the reformist opposition in Iran, may have faded from the streets of Tehran, but President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is now at loggerheads with a new opponent, a long-established party of religious conservatives.

In formal terms, the Motalefeh party is still allied with Ahmadinejad, having backed his campaign for re-election last year. But the conflict between them is becoming ever more apparent.

The conflict is being played out indirectly, in the form of strife between the bazaar merchants who support the conservative Motalefeh party and the Ahmadinejad government. But there have also been more direct hostile exchanges between the president and the party. Ahmadinejad has dismissed Motalefeh as a relic of the past that is irrelevant in the modern world.

Hezb-e Motalefeh-ye Eslami (the Islamic Coalition Party), to give it its full current name, was founded in 1962 and its supporters in Iran’s bazaars helped fund the return and ascent to power of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the 1979 revolution.

When Ahmadinejad first stood for election in 2005, Motalefeh members initially backed his rival Ali Larijani and later former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, as he emerged as the stronger candidate. It was only when Rafsanjani and Ahmadinejad entered a second-round run-off, and it became apparent that the latter was the preferred choice of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, that Motalefeh swung behind him.

In last year’s election, Motalefeh again supported Ahmadinejad, but that did not mean the relationship was rosy. The party’s founding father and former leader, Habibullah Asgaroladi, subsequently made an attempt to mediate between Green Movement leaders Mir Hossein Moussavi and Mehdi Karroubi and the Supreme Leader – and was harshly criticised by Ahmadinejad allies for his pains.

Nor has the party received much in return for its electoral support. The Ahmadinejad camp has assiduously kept Motalefeh members away from positions of power, so that it is largely marginalised in government apart from a pocket of supporters among middle-ranking staff at the foreign ministry.

Motalefeh itself is divided internally over the question of continued support for Ahmadinejad. A younger faction is keen to back the president to the hilt, on the grounds that the Supreme Leader favours him. But many veterans – in a party founded in tradition and conservatism – would like to see him go, but are not saying so openly since there is no one else they see as a viable successor.

They are critical of government economic policies that has made domestic business and international trade more difficult for the merchant class. Perhaps surprisingly given Ahmadinejad’s reputation abroad, they have also accusing him of showing insufficient respect for religious values. For example, when Ahmadinejad remarked that he did not back a renewed police crackdown on women whose dress strays from the prescribed form of hejab, Motalefeh’s secretary-general Mohammad Nabi Habibi said that if the comment had come from someone from the opposition, they would have been arrested and prosecuted.

The main focus of their anger, though, is that Ahmadinejad has worked so hard to keep Motalefeh out of the positions of power that were once its by right. He prefers to bring in his own people and rely on their loyalty rather than on the older heavyweights of the Islamic Republic.

The relationship continues to sour. Mohammad-Nabi Habibi, the party’s current secretary general, has repeatedly criticised the Ahmadinejad administration over the past few months.

The feeling is mutual. Before last year’s presidential election, Ahmadinejad told Motalefeh leaders that their endorsement of him was worthless, as their party was not popular enough to deliver significant numbers of votes.

The two-week strike in July that shut Tehran’s Grand Bazaar and spread to markets in Tabriz, Mashhad and Hamadan was the most extensive industrial action seen in Iran since the revolution. The merchants’ protest was in response to a government plan to impose higher taxes on them and subject their accounts to greater scrutiny. After protracted negotiations, the government partially retreated and the Society of Islamic Guild and Bazaar Associations, the prime mover behind the strike – and closely linked with Motalefeh – was able to claim it had ended the strike on its own terms. (See Tehran Merchants in Showdown With Government for more on the strike.)

But the government was not about to give up so easily....

Read full article....

The Latest from Iran (26 August): Ahmadinejad v. "Seditionists"

2115 GMT: Economic Number of the Day. Deutsche Welle reports that the Ahmadinejad Government is now more than $140 billion in debt.

2010 GMT: Family Protection. Back to our first item of the day....

The Los Angeles Times offers an overview of the Family Protection Bill currently being considered by the Parliament, with Iranians offering a range of views on its provisions. The legislation has prompted criticism because of its provisions on the registration of temporary marriage (rejected yesterday by the Majlis) and on relaxing the conditions on polygamy.

2005 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Safe World for Women has published a special on human rights activists Shiva Nazar Ahari, detained since July 2009 and facing a possible death sentence on the charge of "moharab" (war against God).

Kurdish journalist Ejlal Qavami has been freed from interrogation.

1845 GMT: Parliament v. Government. MP Elyas Naderan, a leading critic of the Government, is at it again: he claims there is no serious will to implement subsidy cuts and says the Government is offering no information on implementation.

Members of Parliament for Zanjan have protested the dismissal of the head of Zanjan University, Professor Yousef Sobouti (see 0625 GMT).

Iran Propaganda Special: US Soldiers, Bitter Chocolate, & the Prophet Muhammad
Iran: Is President’s Chief of Staff Rahim-Mashai Taking On Foreign Policy?
The Latest from Iran (25 August): Unity?

1840 GMT: A Basij Empire? According to Peyke Iran, the head of the Basij paramilitary, Mohammad Reza Naqdi, has offered a vision of 7000 new Basiji bases: "Today we have 3.5 million active Basij; we must raise it to 20 million."

1830 GMT: Ahmadinejad Tough Talk. Rooz Online, drawing from Iranian sources, claims that the President has been dishing out critical comments in meetings: he called former President Hashemi Rafsanjani and former Presidential candidate Nategh Nouri "mofsed" (rotten people) and said that "seditionists" have not been dealt with yet.

1815 GMT: The President's Man Turns? Mehdi Kalhor, a former advisor to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has harshly criticised the President in a lengthy interview with Khabar Online.

Kalhor talked about Ahmadinejad's "wrong urban planning", including "forced migration" from Tehran, mis-management of the Mehr Housing Project, with the wasting of money by the Revolutionary Guard, and subsidy cuts.

Kalhor brought up the post-election conflict: "We have to find a sensible solution for many of last year's problems; there is still fire under the ashes." And he added this provocative comment about the President's loyalties: "I was insulted many times instead of [Chief of Staff Esfandiar Rahim] Mashai."

1800 GMT: Is This Iran's Nuclear Strategy? Some thoughts on the latest statement from Iran's head of atomic energy, Ali Akbar Salehi, proposing a joint consortium with Russia for production of fuel for the Bushehr nuclear plant (see 0835 GMT):

With the possibility of talks with the "5+1" (US, UK, France, Germany, Russia, China) this autumn, it appears Iran is playing down its need to enrich uranium to 20%, stressing instead the cooperation with Russia on low-level nuclear enrichment for power stations as well as finding domestic sources of uranium for an expanding system of nuclear energy production.

The presentation is that Iran is a responsible, low-enriching state, working under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency and with the help of Russia. In essence, it is a proposal to the Western powers of what a nuclear Iran would look like if sanctions were eased and/or concessions were made.

Salehi's statement is therefore much more than a proposed arrangement for Bushehr and other plants. It is a challenge to Russia to endorse this vision of Iran's nuclear future, giving Moscow the opportunity to serve as a broker between Iran and the West.

1555 GMT: Sanctions Watch. Turkey's Industry and Trade Minister Nihat Ergun has said that joint projects with Iran will continue despite United Nations and United States sanctions on Tehran.

1545 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Radio Zamaneh has more on the reformist Islamic Iran Participation Front's statement of concern about the return to detention of senior member Mostafa Tajzadeh and journalist/filmmaker Mohammad Nourizad.

The IIPF calls describes the blackout of information since Tajzadeh and Nourizad were summoned back to prison 11 and 8 days ago, respectively, as the “apex of lawlessness of the cruel-hearted jailors". The organisation condemned the violence against political prisoners and said that this will lead to the “fall of the Islamic Republic".

1500 GMT: Freedom Corner. Journalist and women's rights activist Mahboubeh Abbasgholizadeh and Mexican journalist Pedro Matías Arrazola have won Germany's Johann Philipp Palm Prize for freedom of expression and of the press.

1240 GMT: Missiles and Bombs. Edward Yeranian of Voice of America has a look at Iran's military posing, including yesterday's firing of a new version of a medium-range missile. EA makes an appearance by being just a bit cynical about the Tehran show of big muscles:

It is the other side of the threat narrative, that just as you get these whipped up stories in the United States about 'there could well be an Israeli attack on Iran,' that this is how Iran strikes back. If you are going to promote the fact that Tehran might be attacked, (Iran) will promote the fact that (it) can defend (itself).

And we also make the inconvenient --- well, inconvenient for some in the Government --- linkage to internal matters: "Facing all types of political pressure within the system, and we are not just talking about pressure from the (opposition) Green Movement or reformists, but pressure from other conservatives and from clerics within the system, that you want to present this image of authority, this image of control."

And for some more threat chatter, over to Reuters:

Iran has stockpiled enough low-enriched uranium for 1-2 nuclear arms but it would not make sense for it to cross the bomb-making threshold with only this amount, a former top U.N. nuclear official was quoted as saying.

In unusual public remarks about Iran's disputed nuclear programme Olli Heinonen, the former chief of U.N. nuclear inspections worldwide, told Le Monde newspaper that Iran's uranium reserve still represented a "threat."

0900 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Britain's leading publication on universities, Times Higher Education, picks up the story --- reported in EA on 19 August --- that Durham University has gone public with its concern over the health and situation of detained Ph.D. student Ehsan Abdoh-Tabrizi, writing an open letter to the Iranian Ambassador to Britain.

The university, in consultation with Abdoh-Tabrizi, had pursued the case quietly since the student was detained during a visit to Iran last December. However, it had grown frustrated with a lack of response from Iranian officials to its correspondence.

0855 GMT: One Way Around the Sanctions? Press TV reports that creditors of Daewoo Electronics, South Korea's third-largest electronics firm, have reached a deal to sell the company to Iranian home appliance maker Entekhab Industrial Group.

South Korea recently joined international sanctions against Tehran.

0850 GMT: The Election "Coup"? Green Correspondents carries a lengthy statement by reformist politician Ali Shakouri-Rad about the complaint brought by seven of his colleagues --- all in detention --- over alleged military interference before and after the 2009 Presidential election. Shakouri-Rad reviews the audio of the Revolutionary Guard commander outlining the military's tactics to suppress oppression.

0845 GMT: Fashion Watch. HRANA claims that Tehran Prosecutor General Abbas Jafari Doulatabadi has said that "bad hijab" is a crime.

0835 GMT: A Nuclear Solution? Ali Akbar Salehi, the head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, has said that Tehran has made a proposal to Russia for joint production of nuclear fuel for the Russian-built Bushehr plant: "We have made a proposal to Russia for the creation of a consortium, licensed by that country, to do part of the work in Russia and part of it in Iran. Moscow is studying this offer."

0830 GMT: MediaWatch. William Yong and Robert Worth of The New York Times pick up on the formal order from the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance barring media from mentioning Mir Hossein Mousavi, Mehdi Karroubi, and Mehdi Karroubi by name.

Iraj Jamshidi, the editor of the recently banned newspaper Asia, tells them, “They [the Iranian Government] have already made it clear indirectly that news about these figures is banned,” said Under the current climate, no one dares to interview Mr. Moussavi or Mr. Karroubi. They want them to be forgotten.”

Interestingly, Yong and Worth tuck away in the story the news --- which may be far more politically important --- that Presidential aide and former Tehran Prosecutor General Saeed Mortazavi is one of the three officials suspended for connections to the Kahrizak Prison abuses.

0818 GMT: Tough Talk Today (Sedition and World War II Edition). Press TV, quoting Fars News, gets to the press conference of Minister of Intelligence Heydar Moslehi that we noted yesterday.

The "highlight" is Moslehi's assurance from his imagination, backing up the magic figure put out by Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, the head of the Guardian Council, of a US-Saudi backing of opposition figures for "regime change": "This issue is true. A fund of over even one billion dollars can be imagined.

Moslehi then gave his proof: "We have found clear clues about foreign support for the leaders of sedition. [Iranian state media have been ordered not to refer to Mir Housavi Mousavi, Mehdi Karroubi, and Mohammad Khatami by name: thus "leaders of sedition.] For example, a man who collected news for the leaders of sedition was arrested and confessed to receiving aid from the CIA intelligence services." Another person who has fled the country used to write statements for the sedition leaders, he continued: "The individual has acknowledged receiving support from intelligence services."

But, Moslehi assured, there was really nothing to worry about: wise and timely measures adopted by Iran's security forces had thwarted all the plots.

Press TV also features an attempt by Iranian officials, reaching back to World War II, to get some of that $1 billion from its foes: "Vice-President for Parliamentary Affairs Mohammad-Reza Mir-Tajeddini said Wednesday that Iran sought to demand compensation since it sustained heavy damages despite its neutrality in the war....'More than 4,000 documents have been prepared and we are compiling more on the issue,' he went on to say".

0635 GMT: Cartoon of Day. Nikahang Kowsar, in Rooz Online, portrays --- with the help of the image of Mir Hossein Mousavi --- the Iranian regime's model of national reconciliation.



0630 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Kurdish author and civil rights activist Behzad Kurdestani has been detained. The reason for arrest is unknown.

0625 GMT: Academic Purge. Deutsche Welle offers an overview of Government pressure on academic officials, claiming more than 20 university presidents have been dismissed in recent months in a "purification" of academia.

Mehdi Karroubi has protested the dismissal of Professor Yousef Sobouti, the President of Zanjan University. Sobouti's removal brought vocal protests by Zanjan students earlier this week.

0615 GMT: Story of the Day: Revolutionary Guard and Ministry of Intelligence Fight It Out....

Rah-e-Sabz claims that the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps had installed monitoring systems in a seven-story building frequented by high-ranking politicians.

Last week some of the politicians detected the surveillance and, unaware of who carried it out, asked the Ministry of Intelligence to check the building. The Ministry denied responsibility and sent technical specialists, who inevitably discovered many IRGC cameras and microphones. As the specialists were leaving, they were accosted by a group of Revolutionary Guard. A fight followed, with guns even being drawn.

Rah-e-Sabz claims that the order for surveillance was given by Hossein Taeb, the chief of the IRGC's Intelligence Bureau. It adds that one of the missions was to gather information on Presidential Chief of Staff Esfandiar Rahim-Mashai, who has fallen out of favour with the Supreme Leader. The IRGC are allegedly sending reports directly to Ayatollah Khamenei.

0555 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Massoud Shafiee, the lawyer for three Americans --- Sarah Shourd, Joshua Fattal and Shane Bauer --- arrested in July 2009 when they walked across the Iraq-Iran border, has written Tehran Prosecutor General Abbas Jafari Doulatabadi to request review of the case, in part of Shourd's deteriorating health: “I told the authorities in charge of this case that this woman is sick and has an acute gynecological illness, asking them to at least allow her to be transferred to the the Swiss Embassy until her trial time, which of course they turned down."

Shafiee said, “The charge of espionage is unwarranted" against his clients; however, even "in the impossible event that my clients were guilty of the charge of espionage, the punishment for this charge is one year in prison".

The lawyer added that the three Americans have not had any interrogation sessions during the past six to seven months.

The mother of Sarah Shourd has asked concerned people to write Iranian authorities to press for the release of the detainees. President Adbullah Wade of Senegal, who is also chairman of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, added his voice to those calling for the freeing of the trio.

0545 GMT: Family Protection. Straight into the news this morning....

The Parliament has rejected one of the provisions of the Family Protection Bill, which has been heatedly opposed by women's rights groups and many other activists. Article 21 for legal registration of "temporary marriages" was rejected with only 45 of 290 MPs voted for it.

The vote on Article 23, which makes it easier for men to pursue polygamy by dismissing the current conditions for the first wife’s consent and for proof of financial means, is still ahead.

Afghanistan: Latest US v. Karzai Fight over Corruption (Filkins/Mazzetti)

Dexter Filkins and Mark Mazzetti offer a tale, in The New York Times, of the fight between US officials and Afghan President Hamid Karzai over alleged corruption, pointing to how difficult and vicious the politics may become.

Indeed, in a story centred on Karzai's aide, Mohammad Zia Salehi, arrested for taking a bribe but soon released after the President's intervention, Filkins and Mazzetti are too polite to spell out the tactics in the battle. Some officials in the US Government, frustrated that the charges against Salehi have been blocked, is trying to bring him down by sticking the label of "CIA agent" on him:

The aide to President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan at the center of a politically sensitive corruption investigation is being paid by the Central Intelligence Agency, according to Afghan and American officials.

How Do You Solve A Problem Like Pakistan in Afghanistan? (Mull Responds to Ackerman)

Mohammed Zia Salehi, the chief of administration for the National Security Council, appears to have been on the payroll for many years, according to officials in Kabul and Washington. It is unclear exactly what Mr. Salehi does in exchange for his money, whether providing information to the spy agency, advancing American views inside the presidential palace, or both.

Mr. Salehi’s relationship with the C.I.A. underscores deep contradictions at the heart of the Obama administration’s policy in Afghanistan, with American officials simultaneously demanding that Mr. Karzai root out the corruption that pervades his government while sometimes subsidizing the very people suspected of perpetrating it.

Mr. Salehi was arrested in July and released after Mr. Karzai intervened. There has been no suggestion that Mr. Salehi’s ties to the C.I.A. played a role in his release; rather, officials say, it is the fear that Mr. Salehi knows about corrupt dealings inside the Karzai administration.

The ties underscore doubts about how seriously the Obama administration intends to fight corruption here. The anticorruption drive, though strongly backed by the United States, is still vigorously debated inside the administration. Some argue it should be a centerpiece of American strategy, and others say that attacking corrupt officials who are crucial to the war effort could destabilize the Karzai government.

The Obama administration is also racing to show progress in Afghanistan by December, when the White House will evaluate its mission there. Some administration officials argue that any comprehensive campaign to fight corruption inside Afghanistan is overly ambitious, with less than a year to go before the American military is set to begin withdrawing troops.

“Fighting corruption is the very definition of mission creep,” one Obama administration official said.

Others in the administration view public corruption as the single greatest threat to the Afghan government and the American mission; it is the corrupt nature of the Karzai government, these officials say, that drives ordinary Afghans into the arms of the Taliban. Other prominent Afghans who American officials have said were on the C.I.A.’s payroll include the president’s half brother, Ahmed Wali Karzai, suspected by investigators of playing a role in Afghanistan’s booming opium trade. Earlier this year, American officials did not press Mr. Karzai to remove his brother from his post as the chairman of the Kandahar provincial council. Mr. Karzai denies any monetary relationship with the C.I.A. and any links to the drug trade.

Mr. Salehi was arrested by the Afghan police after, investigators say, they wiretapped him soliciting a bribe — in the form of a car for his son — in exchange for impeding an American-backed investigation into a company suspected of shipping billions of dollars out of the country for Afghan officials, drug smugglers and insurgents.

Mr. Salehi was released seven hours later, after telephoning Mr. Karzai from his jail cell to demand help, officials said, and after Mr. Karzai forcefully intervened on his behalf.

The president sent aides to get him and has since threatened to limit the power of the anticorruption unit that carried out the arrest. Mr. Salehi could not be reached for comment on Wednesday. A spokesman for President Karzai did not respond to a list of questions sent to his office, including whether Mr. Karzai knew that Mr. Salehi was a C.I.A. informant.

A spokesman for the C.I.A. declined to comment on any relationship with Mr. Salehi.

Read full article....

Iraq Follow-Up: 64 Dead in Bombings --- What is the Significance? (Cole)

Juan Cole writes:

On Wednesday, the Sunni Arab guerrilla insurgency of Iraq demonstrated it is alive and able to plan and carry out a nation-wide set of terrorist operations. The covert organization set off bombs in 13 cities, killing some 64 and wounding an estimated 274, and targeting mainly police stations and checkpoints. Indeed, the bloody events could be termed a one-day war on the Iraqi police.

In Baghdad, 7 police were killed and 26 wounded in the al-Qahirah district. In Kut, a car bomb struck the central police station, killing 15 and wounding 90. Among those killed was Gen. Walid Sami, the director of the police station, according to al-Hayat. Attacks in Karbala, Muqdadiya, Ramadi, Basra and other cities took smaller tolls but underlined that it is dangerous to be a policeman supporting the new, American-installed order in Iraq. In Mosul an army base was attacked, and in Baghdad a bomb was set off at the entrance to the Kadhemiya district that houses the Shiite shrine of the Seventh Imam, among the holiest sites for Shiites.

Iraq Breaking: Bombings Kill Dozens, Wound More than 200 Across Country

The ability of the Sunni Arab insurgents to strike in Kut and Basra is remarkable, given that both are in the Shiite zone. That they have recovered somewhat from their defeat in al-Anbar is made clear by the attacks in Ramadi and Fallujah.

But remember that although these bombings took a lot of lives and maimed a lot of people, they could have been carried out by a relatively small group of people, perhaps as few as 100. In addition, it is not clear what practical gain they could have realized from these attacks. Is anyone really not going to join the police because of a few bombings? Are the police really going to respond by giving the insurgents greater leeway to operate? Would the public really be intimidated? Can the bombings change the government or provoke a coup or revolution? No, no, no and no. Rather, the guerrillas are just making themselves even more hated and are provoking the army and police to improve their counter-terrorism capabilities.

The violence and lack of security, to be sure, is making Iraqis depressed, as Arwa Damon of CNN bravely describes it. But, again, it is hard to see a political gain for the guerrillas in creating such a dark mood in the public.

As for those who argue that the bombing campaign is a reason to halt or reverse the American military withdrawal, I don’t understand their argument. What practical thing could US troops do to stop random bombings in Kut and Muqdadiya? When they were in charge of Iraq, they were unable to stop bombing waves, so how would they do so now? They can support the Iraqi military in counter-terrorism, but they can do that whether the US is in Iraq in strength or not.

The Iraqi military has two major security challenges. One is to patrol the cities and keep them from being in the hands of militias and gangs. In that task, the new Iraqi military seems to perform just all right. They can patrol independently, and will stand and fight if they come under fire from a militia. But the other major task is counter-insurgency, and in that struggle the new Iraqi military is still not very good. They don’t do checkpoint well, and they have a superstitious belief in divining rods that are supposed to discover explosive in the trunk (they don’t). In any case, both these security tasks are best undertaken by Iraqis.

As I argued at CNN on Monday,, the very presence of the US troops in such large numbers may retard Iraqi political parties’ progress toward reconciliation. The Shiites and Kurds are made arrogant by their knowledge that the US will back them, and so haven’t tried very hard for reconciliation with the Sunni Arabs– the only thing that would end the insurgency.

The bombings are getting on the nerves of the Iraqi public in part because of the political uncertainty of the moment. The March 7 parliamentary elections produced a hung parliament (just as all the recent elections in the countries with a Westminster parliamentary system have produced hung parliaments). So far no party has put together a ruling coalition, leaving the state in the hands of a weak caretaker hold-over government.

It would be fairly easy to form a government if the Shiite religious parties formed a super-coalition, as they have in the past. But this time they are divided between the State of Law coalition of incumbent prime minister Nuri al-Maliki and the more fundamentalist parties grouped in the National Iraqi Alliance. The latter include the Sadr Bloc led by clergyman Muqtada al-Sadr, who is studying in the Iranian seminary city of Qom. Sadr does not like al-Maliki because the prime minister sent troops against his Mahdi Army militia in 2008. If Sadr would accept al-Maliki as PM for a second term, the government could be formed tomorrow.

Al-Sharq al-Awsat reports that Muqtada in Iran is coming under strong pressure both from the government of Mahmud Ahmadinejad and from his clerical teachers, themarja`iyyah or spiritual and legal Exemplars to accept al-Maliki for the sake of Shiite power in Iraq. Muqtada has been flirting instead with an alliance with ex-Baathist Iyad Allawi, the darling of the Americans, who is perceived as anti-Iran. Iran really does not want a prime minister Allawi next door in Iraq, and so is trying to strong-arm Muqtada.

Muqtada is not, however, easy to strong-arm, and is now reportedly considering relocating to Beirut as a way of escaping Iranian pressure and also of retaining his independence from the Iraqi political scene. (He may also be thinking he could fill the vacuum created by the death of Lebanese grand ayatollah Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah.) The rumors were denied by Muqtada’s spokesmen in Baghdad, who said it was much more likely that he would return to Iraq.

It would be so ironic if the American hopes for an Allawi government were made to come true by Muqtada al-Sadr.

US Politics: Can Obama and the Democrats Retain Control of Congress? (Haddigan)

EA's US Politics correspondent Lee Haddigan writes:

With latest figures suggesting that the American economy is still performing poorly and a continuing restlessness in the progressive Left over health care reform, the prospects for the Democrat Party in November look bleak.

Incumbent administrations almost always suffer badly at the mid-term polls, but President Obama is facing a particularly mammoth struggle to retain control of Congress --- the upper body of the Senate and the lower body of the House of Representatives --- in his election cycle. Faced with a resurgent conservative opposition and a general dissatisfaction with his handling of the economy and health care, the President needs an issue to recapture the enthusiasm of apathetic Democrat voters.

US Politics: Is This the Beginning — or the Beginning of the End — for Glenn Beck? (Haddigan)

Failing an astounding change in economic fortunes in the economy, it is a near-certainty that the administration will turn to blaming the Bush years for the current troubles, as well as bringing out the old Democrat bugbear of big-business funding Republican causes. In these Congressional elections, an estimated $153 million will be spent on campaigns, nearly double the $77 million spent in 2006.

Last week the Labor Department announced an unexpected rise of 500,000 in the number of jobless claims, a figurethat that prompted John Boehner, the Minority Leader in the House of Representative, to call for the firing of President Obama’s top two economic aides. This week it was revealed that new home purchases in June were at their lowest level since collection of the data began in 1963. With weak consumer confidence and nervous investors, the state of the economy has led to warnings that the United States may suffer a double-dip recession: Mark Zandi, the economist who helped the administration determine the extent of its stimulus package, recently raised his evaluation of the chances of a renewed recession from 20% to 33%. The long-term odds may still be in President Obama’s favour, but the reality is that he will not be able to point to the success of his economic spending package come November.

Nor will President Obama be able to promote the first two years of his Presidency as a victory for health care reform without alienating the left wing of his party. Despite the historic achievement of passing an act that revolutionises the provision of patient care, progressives are infuriated at the omission of a public option, and some Democrats are rebelling against the administration’s portrayal of the Affordable Care And Patient Protection Act as the best result that could be achieved.

Recently, 128 Democrats co-sponsored a bill to amend the health care law to include a public option (government-run insurance provision) from 2014. Initially confident that the public would hail the economic benefits of reform, including the reduction of the Federal deficit, health care advocacy groups who helped President Obama garner enough votes to pass the act are now stressing that it can be improved with the inclusion of a public option. The bill is highly unlikely to pass, but it sends a clear message to the administration that come January, if the Democrats manage to retain control of Congress, the public option will be back on the agenda.

Two weeks ago Robert Gibbs, Obama’s press secretary, spoke to The Hill, a Washington-based website covering Congressional politics: the “lack of appreciation or recognition for what Obama has accomplished has left Gibbs and others in furious disbelief". Top analyst Larry Berman said Gibbs' outburst “reflects the fact that the conservative opposition has been so effective at undermining the president’s popular approval.”

Meanwhile, the President was unveiling another tactic in the election strategy. At the end of July, he urged passage of the DISCLOSE Act for campaign finance reform. On 9 August, at a Texas fundraising dinner for the Democratic National Committee, he went further, as he claimed that failure to pass the Act was allowing groups like Americans for Prosperity to run attack ads against Democrat candidates, with no indication of who was funding the assault. He warned that “harmless-sounding” organizations like the AFP were able to influence the forthcoming elections because of Republican obstructionism in Congress, asserting, “We’ve got to make sure that we don't have a corporate takeover of our democracy.” The President returned to the theme last Saturday in his Weekly Address, titled unsubtly, "No Corporate Takeover of Our Democracy."

All three of these speeches attacked the pernicious influence of special interest groups on elections, indicating President Obama is going to use campaign reform as an important issue in the run-up to November. Two of the statements refer to Theodore Roosevelt, the "grandaddy" of progressive politics, and his warning 100 years ago of corporations as “one of the principal sources of corruption in our political affairs”. Obama called for a bi-partisan solution in Congress, i.e., the DISCLOSE Act, and a return to “a democracy that works for ordinary Americans --- a government of, by, and for the people”.

There is a long way, in political terms, before the elections, but it is already apparent that it would be suicide for Democrats to stand solely on their record on the economy and health care reform . To retain control of Congress, President Obama will need to give voters a reason to distinguish between the politics he represents and that of the Republicans/Tea Party. He will draw on the residual contempt among Democrats for all that President Bush stood for and the campaign finance issue. Obama’s "politics of hope" of 2008 have become the "politics of fear".

Still, there are reasons for Democrats to be optimistic they can perform better in the elections than current poll indicate: the tendency of grassroots conservative movements like the Tea Party to implode, the ability of President Obama to convince voters to turn out for him, a significant advantage in cash, and the possibility that the unknown variable of state and local concerns may help Democrat candidates.

To make a foolhardy prediction, as the race just begins in earnest, I believe that the Democrats --- in what looksto be an ill-mannered campaign --- will surprise many in November and narrowly retain both the House and the Senate. The present administration, and its supporters, are not yet "tired" enough of their policies to relinquish control of Congress so easily.