Iran Feature: Sanctions, Iranians, and YouTube's "Life in a Day" (Esfandiary)

Negar Esfandiary writes for The Guardian of London:

On 6 July 2010, YouTube announced the launch of Life in a Day, an experimental documentary incorporating footage submitted by YouTube users, calling for "thousands of people everywhere in the world … on a single day, which is the 24 July this year, to film some aspect of their day and then post it onto YouTube so that we can use it to make a film that is a record of what it's like to be alive on that one day".

For the many active Iranian YouTube members, this was a sensational opportunity to finally contribute, participate and share in a non-political world community project through a medium they knew well. After all, it was the 2009 elections that inspired citizen filming in Iran, with YouTube serving as the main channel to the outside world. Clips of the brutality on the streets of Iran catapulted YouTube into newsrooms and signalled it as a potent news source.

It came as a slap in the face, then, to read the FAQ on the Life in a Day website: "Anyone over 13 years old can submit footage, except for residents and nationals of Iran, Syria, Cuba, Sudan, North Korea and Myanmar (Burma), and/or any other persons and entities restricted by US export controls and sanctions programmes." The "story of a single day on earth … One world, 24 hours, 6 billion perspectives" is actively boycotting 1.5 billion of the 6 billion perspectives it pursues.

Wouldn't it be great to have included these countries – to have seen something of daily life rather than the usual imagery? Surely that would have been more in step with the spirit of the project, especially given that most of the submissions will naturally end up on the cutting-room floor. Instead, this decision is meanspirited, hasty and compromises the integrity of a project intended to be truly universal, when it is in fact not open to all.

Read rest of article....

US Analysis: The Limits of Military Power (Miller)

James Miller writes for EA:

Last week, Tom Ashbrook (On Point Radio) interviewed Andrew Bacevich, retired U.S. Army colonel, and professor of history and international relations at Boston University. His newest book, Washington Rules: America's Path to Permanent War, examines the constant war-readiness of the United States.

Bacevich points out that America has had a history of a military engagement with the rest of the world. From the opening salvo of our independence, through our expansion in the West, our early imperialist conquests (Puerto Rico to the Philippines), and the World War/Cold War era, the US has a long history of spreading its ideology through military might, sometimes for better and sometimes for worse. Large parts of the global map have been written by United States military involvement, from the Monroe Doctrine to the defeat of the Axis powers to containment of Communism.

However, Bacevich, a former colonel, argues that the policies that built American power need to change, as they no longer work in the modern world. The numerous conflicts and interventions that the US has engaged in since 1945 have resulted in limited short-term success and even more limited long-term success. The expansion of American power over the last few decades has coincided with the growth of economic disparity, global jihadism, nuclear proliferation, and many other negative events, many of which have at least partially been caused by the unintended consequences of American policy.

To be clear, neither Bacevich (nor I) are appealing for disarmament or pacifism. Instead, Bacevich points out that Teddy Roosevelt's "speak softly and carry a big stick" policy has changed, since World War II, into a yell loudly and hit people with a stick approach. He asserted that we have placed ourselves as the chief military enforcers of the world, and this approach has serious consequences at home and abroad. He also questions whether these actions are the moral responsibility of the people of the United States.

The constant use or threat of our military might to maintain global order has put America in the position of picking the winners and losers in the rest of the world. The problem is that the United States has a nasty habit of backing less-than-upstanding leaders. Washington is then partially responsible for the actions of those leaders, as well as the backlash against these leaders if and when they are challenged by their own people. Haiti, large parts of South America, Saddam Hussein in Iraq, and the Shah of Iran are all prime examples.

One of the primary weaknesses in our military approach is the sheer cost of war. Since 2001, more than $1 trillion has been spent in Iraq and Afghanistan alone, not to mention the expense of our ramped-up intelligence and security operations across the globe. We have largely financed these operations by borrowing from places like China.

In other words, to maintain our national security and expand our global reach, we traded our influence in Iraq and Afghanistan for billions that we gave to the second-most powerful economic and military power in the world. (If this was a video game, the scale of this mistake would be immediately obvious, right?) While our future generations are paying this debt while also struggling to maintain our global position, future generations of Chinese will be able to use the payments on these debts to springboard to dominance.

Furthermore, neither of these wars occurred in isolation. Both were partially, or entirely, started as a result of the intersection of American militaristic engagement in the Middle East and the long-term, unintended consequences of those actions. What were the costs of installing dictators, redrawing maps, leading coups, defending Kuwait, maintaining a no-fly zone, supporting guerrilla fighters in Afghanistan, or any of the myriad of other actions, both big and small, that have had known and unknown consequences? What are the costs to maintain the readiness to jump into these situations at the drop of a hat?

None of this even considers the human costs: upon soldiers, their families, the wounded, the dead, or the millions of civilians affected by this violence. We also have not considered the human and financial cost of terrorism and the security designed to stop it, terrorism that can often be directly linked as a response to US foreign policy.

There are larger problems with this over-reliance on military might to solve global problems. Because of the human and economic costs of military engagement, the United States has picked and chosen which threats or humanitarian crises they respond to. Any time the price tag is too high, the political or physical terrain is too disquieting, the domestic political will is lacking, or our forces are engaged elsewhere, the U.S. is forced to ignore places that perhaps should not be overlook. As long as military action is the primary tool of choice for affecting global change and stability, other tools become blunted.

Wars like Iraq and Afghanistan are not exceptions to the rule; they are the new rule. Long gone are the days where superpowers constantly worried about widespread conventional warfare. Instability is rife in large parts of Africa, Southeast Asia, parts of South America, the Caribbean, and of course the Middle East. As the world gets hotter, water dries up (or floods), and conflict over oil rages, the United States will need to rely on less expensive and dangerous tools than the threat of force.

To adequately prepare for these problems, both political parties in America will have to drastically rethink their beliefs on American military dominance. Bacevich points out that this problem is bigger than the obvious spike in neo-conservative expansionism. Both Democrats and Republicans are drinking from the "police the world and expand the role of the military" Kool-aid. In fact, no major politician, on either side of the aisle, has successfully advocated an isolationist or military-reductionist platform in recent years. These thoughts are like political Kryptonite. The generations of reliance on an ultra-strong military are so deeply ingrained into the American psyche that it is hard for us to even contemplate the idea that this military strength might have become a liability.

The time has come for America to rethink its obligation to police the world, especially in its use of the military as its strongest negotiating tool. Bacevich is repeating many of the same warnings that we have heard from commanders over the generations, including Dwight Eisenhower in his speech about the military-industrial complex. When are the politicians finally going to take the hint?

New York's Proposed Islamic Cultural Center: Information & Comment (Olbermann)

"Because this is America...and in America when somebody comes for your neighbor and his Bible or his Torah or his atheist manifesto or his Qu'ran, you and I do what our fathers did and our grandmothers and our founders did and speak up." Keith Olbermann on MSNBC:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dXFo0UUACM[/youtube]

New York’s Proposed Islamic Cultural Center: The Daily Show’s Investigation

The Latest from Iran (17 August): The Green Movement, Ahmadinejad, and a "Confession"

2040 GMT: Parliament v. President. Another possible front in the escalating battle between the Majlis and the Government: Hamidreza Katouzian, the head of the Majlis Energy Commission has said that, after the Government failed to offer a charter for the National Iranian Oil Company, Parliament will vote on its own charter next week.

2030 GMT: The Cleric's Challenge. Green Voice of Freedom summarises the Ramadan speech of Ayatollah Dastgheib: "The Supreme Leader is part of the Constitution, not above it."

1845 GMT: The Battle Within. Two more articles picking up on the growing challenge to President Ahmadinejad: Abbas Djavadi for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and Mahan Abedin for Asia Times Online.

1440 GMT: We have posted a separate feature, following up our earlier updates, on what appears to be a Fars News effort (possibly instigated by the Revolutionary Guard) to discredit leading reformist Mostafa Tajzadeh, detained in Evin Prison, through a supposed "confession" that Mir Hossein Mousavi lost the 2009 election.

NEW Iran Special: Have Fars (& Revolutionary Guard) Faked a Reformist “Confession” on Election?
NEW Iran Video: “His Excellency” Ahmadinejad Interviewed by George Galloway (15 August)
NEW Iran Analysis: What Has Green Movement Achieved? (Sahimi)
Iran Document: Mohammad Khatami on Religion, the Islamic Revolution, and the Republic (15 August)
Iran’s Battle Within: Ahmadinejad Appeals to Supreme Leader (Rafiee)

1335 GMT: Karroubi Watch. Mehdi Karroubi, meeting a group of young reformists, has declared, that the opposition "movement is not limited to one person, medi,a or group". Criticising the deceitful and fraudulent remarks and actions of the government and the repression of the people, he advised his listeners to see beyond partisan lines and always stay loyal to their fundamental beliefs and values.

Karroubi concluded that victory would inevitably be achieved with patience and perseverance.

1105 GMT: Reports indicate that an Iranian F4 fighter jet has crashed in the south of the country near the nuclear power plant being established at Bushehr.

1055 GMT: The University Crisis. Fars News is claiming that Abdollah Jasbi, the head of Islamic Azad University, will soon be stepping down.

If true, the development would be a setback for former President Hashemi Rafsanjani, who is trying to maintain influence over Iran's largest university system, with 1.3 million students, as President Ahmadinejad tries to take control of it.

1020 GMT: The Tajzadeh Election "Confession". An EA source says that the claimed video on Fars News of a detained reformist "confessing", "We lost the elections", is not from Evin Prison and could be in connection to a previous Presidential election. The source also says the audio may have been manipulated, thus the need for subtitles to give the "correct" interpretation.

1005 GMT: Fars News Special "Mostafa Tajzadeh: "We lost the elections". Fars News is pushing a video that it claims is the secretly-filmed confession of senior reformist and former Deputy Minister of Interior Mostafa Tajzadeh, speaking to fellow detainees Abdullah Ramezanzadeh and Mohsen Safai-Farahani.

Tajzadeh allegedly says, "I have experience in handling elections, so I know what happened. It is possible than one or two million votes have been displaced,we would have gotten 14-15 million votes. Not 25. We have lost the elections."

We cannot guarantee authenticity of the video. We are carrying out checks and also monitoring any reaction.

0950 GMT: War Chatter. An EA correspondent notes a discussion on Voice of America of the provocative "analysis" by Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic --- which we considered last week on EA --- projecting a likely Israeli airstrike on Iranian facilities.

0940 GMT: How to Handle the US Government and the Stoning Issue. Keyhan responds to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's recent statement criticising the death sentences of Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani, condemned for adultery, and three other prisoners:

Hillary Clinton, the wife of former US President Bill Clinton, still has to use her husband's name despite becoming Secretary of State. Taking advantage of the exploitative and perverse principle of freedom of choice which Hillary Clinton speaks about, Bill Clinton betrayed her and had a lengthy illicit relationship with his secretary Monica Lewinski which even in the promiscuous US society became a major scandal. Furthermore, Condoleezza Rice was notorious in the media for being promiscuous in her relationships.

0920 GMT: Rafsanjani Watch. An EA correspondent reports that the memoirs of former Hashemi Rafsanjani have been withdrawn from bookstands in Iran only a few weeks after they went on sale. (Could that be because of possible comparisons between the Iranian Government of the 1980s and the Iranian Government of today?)

In his introduction, Rafsanjani writes that his "hard-working staff" have copied all his diaries to CD ROM and stored them in a safe location. That's a message for Iran's security forces: if you raid the former President's offices, you won't get the original of his memoirs.

0855 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. The International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran claims that the officials of Ward 350 of Evin Prison have cancelled the mosque privileges of prisoners during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.

0845 GMT: The Hunger Strike. Advar News reports that three of the 17 political prisoners who have recently ended their hunger strike --- Abdollah Momeni, Bahman Ahmadi Amoui, and Keyvan Samimi --- are still in solitary confinement.

0825 GMT: Execution (Ashtiani) Watch. Following President Ahmadinejad's assurance that cases of death sentences by stoning were "insignificant" (see 0745 GMT), the Iranian Foreign Ministry has told other countries to stay out of the discussion over Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani, the woman whose scheduled execution has received international attention: "Independent nations do not allow other countries to interfere in their judicial affairs....Western nations must not pressurise and hype it (the case) up....Judicial cases have precise procedures, especially when it concerns murder."

0745 GMT: We have just posted the video of the interview of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, addressed as "His Excellency", by former British MP and current Press TV host George Galloway. The two men share their agreement on Iran's nuclear programme, the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Palestine/Gaza before Galloway offers this hard-hitting challenge on "internal Iranian questions":

GALLOWAY: I have police protection in London from the Iranian opposition because of my support for your election campaign. (Galloway is referring to an incident this winter when he was heckled at a post-election meeting in the Houses of Parliament.) I mention this so you know where I'm coming from....

The events after the election were a kind of mini-political earthquake, a section of the population rejecting the results and a section of them openly attacking the Islamic system itself. Can I ask you, "What does the Green Movement mean to you?"

AHMADINEJAD: ....There are people in the Islamic Republic of Iran who continue to criticise and attack the President, and they are sure that nobody is going to harass them. They have peace of mind and they are comfortable. We really have free and democratic elections in this country, and people are the main element of elections, and people are also the executors of elections....

The other point is the conspiracy and plans of the United States and its allies. Before the elections, they had announced they would do everything possible to prevent the Government of Ahmadinejad to be re-elected....

At the end of the day, we see 14 million people have not voted for me. So it will be quite natural if you see number of demonstrators reach 14 million, but the number of the protestors was very insignificant. The people of Iran are very much united....

[The President then speaks of the opposition "within the system", describing Mir Hossein Mousavi, Mehdi Karroubi, and Mohammad Khatami but not naming them.]

GALLOWAY: Are they still inside the system?

AHMADINEJAD: Almost in the system. Of course, the people don't want them any longer. People have not voted for them. They have been successively defeated [during the Government's] two terms....

The post-election events was on the basis of a project made in the country and it was implemented inside the country among a limited number of people. The Islamic Republic of Iran did not intend to take a harsh attitude toward them....We have managed the situation with minimum cost....

GALLOWAY: Every so often an issue comes along which is seized upon by the enemies of Iran and magnified and it becomes a heavy problem. One such is the punishment scheduled originally against a woman convicted of adultery [Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani], the so-called stoning case.

I see that President Lula from Brazil has asked Iran if he can take this woman into exile there to solve this problem. Can Iran agree to this?

AHMADINEJAD: The number of such people [sentenced to death by stoning] is very, very insignficant. I talked to a judge at the end of the day, and judges are independent. But I talked to the head of the judiciary and the judiciary does not also agree with such a thing....I think there is no need to create some trouble for President Lula to take her to Brazil. We are keen to export our technology to Brazil....I think the problem is so limited.

0655 GMT: We begin this morning with Muhammad Sahimi's analysis, "What Has the Green Movement Achieved?"

Meanwhile....

Political Prisoner Watch

Majid Pashai, a student activist, has been given a two-year prison sentence.

War Talk

Neither the Green Movement nor political prisoners is getting a look in, however, with most US-based analysts. The Atlantic magazine --- motives to be considered in 25 words or less --- has re-made itself as Command Central for discussion of an Israeli strike on Tehran.

How far can one run with such chatter? Well, former Bush Administration official John Bolton used the news that Russia will supply uranium fuel rods to Iran's first nuclear power plant at Bushehr to claim that Israel has until 21 August to attack Iran's nuclear facilities: "Once the rods are in the reactor an attack on the reactor risks spreading radiation in the air, and perhaps into the water of the Persian Gulf."

Bolton made the claim even though Bushehr has no connnection to uranium enrichment, let alone any Iranian military nuclear programme.

UPDATED Iraq: At Least 48 Killed, More than 125 Injured in Bomb Attack

UPDATED 1400 GMT: The death toll is now at least 48, with at least 129 wounded.

According to Al Jazeera, the suicide bomber walked up to an army recruitment centre, on the historical side of Iraq's Ministry of Defense, as hundreds queued to sign up for the military.

A witness said the bomber, "wearing an army uniform, was talking to those recruits, pretending that he was trying to get their names, so people gathered around him and he detonated his charge".



Juan Cole sets the attack in the context of the continuing failure to form a government after the 7 March elections: "The two biggest political lists said that they entertained the most severe reservations about a proposal brought to Baghdad by State Department official Jeffrey Feltman that the two attempt to find a formula for power sharing."

---

At least 41 people have been killed in a suicide bomb attack at an army recruitment centre in the Iraqi capital, Baghdad.

Iraqi officials said at least 102 other people were wounded in the blast on Tuesday at around 7:30 a.m. (0430 GMT), when a suicide bomber detonated explosives outside the Iraqi army division headquarters in the Baab al-Muatham neighborhood of central Baghdad.