Iran Election Guide

Donate to EAWV





Or, click to learn more

Search

Entries in Middle East & Iran (139)

Tuesday
Mar022010

Video: Advertisements for Israelis to Fix the Image of Their Country

The Israeli Government has launched a campaign encouraging its citizens to represent the country abroad. Here is a clip from a video by the Ministry of Diaspora Affairs and Public Diplomacy:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4F2rKoQuI4[/youtube]
Monday
Mar012010

The Latest from Iran (1 March): In Like a Lion?

2135 GMT: Rumour of Day. Kalameh alleges that prisoners held in cellblock 209 of Evin Prison have been commanded to fill in forms about their views on election fraud and whether the protest leaders are connected to foreign countries.

2100 GMT: Dr Mohammad Maleki, the former head of Tehran University, has reportedly been released after 191  days in detention. Maleki, 76, suffers from prostate cancer.

Iran: Understanding the Assembly of Experts Statement “Crisis Continues”
Iran Document: Mousavi’s Interview “Reform Within the Current Framework” (27 February)
The Latest from Iran (28 February): What Do The Statements Mean?


2055 GMT: United4Iran has a profile of Jahanbakhsh Khanjani, former advisor to Iran’s Minister of Interior in the Khatami Presidency, who was released on 24 February after spending more than eight months in prison. According to another released prisoner, Khanjani was under pressure to confess and was constantly moved from general confinement to solidarity confinement.


2030 GMT: 2nd Picture of the Day (see 1540 GMT). The staff of Etemaad newspaper just after its suspension (1455 GMT) by Iranian authorities: "Victory".



1935 GMT: Faoud Sadeghi, the managing director of Ayande News, has reportedly been released.

Journalist Mahsa Jazini has been freed on $100,000 bail in Isfehan.

1930 GMT: Khatami Stands Firm. Back from an academic break to find a statement from former President Mohammad Khatami, responding to the Supreme Leader's declaration that opposition figures had put themselves beyond the Iranian system with their post-election challenge. He said in a meeting with students:
It is easy to create tensions in the world, but difficult to eliminate them. Detente requires courage and finesse, and the system has to take steps to that effect. We should not embark on adventurism in the world under pretext of having won so many enemies. We should hold back from speaking in a manner to inflict heavy costs....

Everyone may have had his own interpretation of reforms, but we mean reforms within the framework of criteria born out of Islam, the revolution and the nation's will. In the face of any possible deviation from Islam and Imam Khomeini's line, we have to give warning....

Go and ask the former revolutionary militants if the ongoing conditions reflect what they were after. Ask them if these arrests, blame games, vendettas and the imposition of costs on the nation were what the revolutionary forces sought. If not, our conscience necessitates that we close ranks in order to improve conditions....

We should not retreat from our demands, and we should keep fighting even if certain groups beat us on the head. Unfortunately, certain hard-line groups in the society are opposed to any compromise within the society.

1615 GMT: Really. Not-Very-Much-News. Iran's Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki has denied, amidst the fuss over the International Atomic Energy Agency report on Tehran's nuclear programme, that there is any problem:
The new chief and the new managers of the agency should look at the record of Iran's cooperation. We have fully cooperated with the agency. This cooperation will continue. We have always welcomed and encouraged negotiations and talks.

1555 GMT: Rigi Mystery. This story isn't over....

Kyrgyzstan’s foreign ministry has issued a statement saying that Iran has officially apologised for forcing a Kyrgyz plane to land in Iran. More significantly, the foreign ministry has denied that any passengers were taken off the plane, including Jundullah leader Abdolmalek Rigi, by the Iranians: “According to information available to this ministry, media reports that s two foreigners were arrested in this fight are untrue."

Now, is Kyrgyzstan making the denial to save face and cover up that Rigi was lifted from one of its flights? Or is it the case that the Jundullah leader was never on that plane?

1540 GMT: Picture of the Day. Abdolreza Tajik after his release from prison (see 0945 GMT):



1520 GMT: A Most Symbolic Visit. Seyyed Hassan Khomeini, the grandson of Ayatollah Khomeini, has visited Ali Karroubi, the son of Mehdi Karroubi who was beaten on 22 Bahman.

1515 GMT: Cutting off Business. Caterpillar, the US building equipment group, has announced steps to sever trading links with Iran. The company is barring its non-US subsidiaries from accepting orders for products that they know are destined for delivery to Iran.

1510 GMT: Not-Very-Much-News (from the Other Side). Press TV gives the Iran version:
Iran has called on the UN nuclear watchdog to bear in mind the West's past breaches of atomic fuel exchange deals with Tehran while reviewing Iran's nuclear program.

In a letter to the UN body, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, Iran's envoy to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), cited three instances on which Western countries failed to meet their commitments and provide Iran with nuclear fuel.

In other words, Tehran will hold out against a "3rd-party enrichment" deal involving Germany, US, or French authorities because they cannot be trusted.

But (and excuse me for being repetitive)...no mention of Japan as unreliable.

1505 GMT: Stopping the Protests. Rah-e-Sabz claims that 20,000 people were detained during the rallies of 22 Bahman (11 February).

1455 GMT: Back to the (Banned) News. Fars reports that Iranian authorities have banned the weekly magazine Iran Dokht, linked with Mehdi Karroubi. Etemaad has also been suspended.

1445 GMT: Not-Very-Much-News (cont.). Nothing --- yes, nothing --- new in the Amano report to the IAEA. It merely restates the long-standing finding, "[The IAEA] continues...to verify the non-diversion of declared nuclear material in Iran, but we cannot confirm that all nuclear material in Iran is in peaceful activities."

This, however, will not stop many in the media from declaring that something dramatic has occurred. The lead from the Associated Press: "The chief of the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency says he cannot confirm that all of Iran's nuclear activities are peaceful."

Nor will it deflect some from overblown declarations and calls to global conflict. Jamsheed Choksy (apologies that you'll have to pay to get the full polemic) in The Wall Street Journal: "Iran's New World Order --- Its nuclear program is part of a larger plan to radically reduce U.S. power."

1430 GMT: Today's Not-Very-Much-News. Back from an academic break to find the media buzzing over the International Atomic Energy Agency meeting, with a report from new Secretary-General Yukiya Amano. The section on Iran:
I would like to inform you about the current situation concerning Iran’s request to the Agency for assistance in providing fuel for the Tehran Research Reactor, as I receive many questions in this regard.

In June 2009, the Agency received a request from Iran for assistance in obtaining fuel for the research reactor in Tehran, which produces isotopes for medical purposes. In October 2009, at a meeting with the Governments of Iran, France, the Russian Federation and the United States, the Agency made a proposal under which Iranian low enriched uranium (LEU) would be shipped to Russia for further enrichment and then to France for fabrication into fuel. Three of the four countries gave their consent to this proposal.

In a letter to the Agency dated 18 February, 2010, Iran said it continued to wish to buy the necessary nuclear fuel or, if this was not possible, to exchange some of its LEU for reactor fuel from abroad. Iran requested the IAEA to relay its request to potential suppliers and to facilitate the provision of the fuel. The Agency circulated Iran’s letter to Member States as requested.

The arrangement proposed by the Agency in October 2009 remains on the table. I believe it would ensure continued operation of the Tehran Research Reactor and serve as a confidence-building measure. At the same time, I am following up on Iran’s February 18 request, in accordance with the IAEA Statute, and have been in contact with the relevant countries....

Implementation of Safeguards in the Islamic Republic of Iran

You have received my report on Implementation of the NPT Safeguards Agreement and relevant provisions of Security Council Resolutions in the Islamic Republic of Iran. It is longer than previous reports because I wanted my first report to be a stand-alone document. I tried to make it factual, without overdoing the detail.

The Agency continues, under its Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement with Iran, to verify the non-diversion of declared nuclear material in Iran, but we cannot confirm that all nuclear material in Iran is in peaceful activities because Iran has not provided the Agency with the necessary cooperation.

The necessary cooperation includes, among other things, implementation of relevant resolutions of the IAEA Board of Governors and the United Nations Security Council, implementation of the Additional Protocol and of modified Code 3.1, as well as clarification of issues related to possible military dimensions to Iran’s nuclear programme.

I request Iran to take steps towards the full implementation of its Safeguards Agreement and its other obligations as a matter of high priority.

1200 GMT: Rafsanjani Watch. Faezeh Hashemi, the daughter of Hashemi Rafsanjani, has declared that her father accepts no bargaining on people's rights and that the only way out of the crisis is to follow the suggestions in his Friday Prayer of 17 July. Replying to the question of why Rafsanjani has not taken the podium at Friday Prayers since then, Hashemi said, “His main reason is not to cause harm to innocent people. In his last sermon, security and intelligence forces attacked protesters and arrested some of them.”

Hashemi, indirectly commenting on last week's Assembly of Experts meeting that Rafsanjani chaired, warned that extremists were trying to unseat Rafsanjani to achieve their goals.

1100 GMT: Claim of the Day. Rah-e Sabz asserts that the head of Iran's judiciary, Sadegh Larijani, has said that the Supreme Leader asked him to execute more protestors.

Larijani was reportedly confronted by his relatives and associates, including Mostafa Mohaghegh-Damad, the former head of the National Audit Office, who were unhappy with the  executions of Arash Rahmanipour and Mohammad Reza Ali Zamani in late January. Larijani replied, “Go and thank God that I have lowered the number of executions.”

Larijani allegedly said that he had attended a meeting at the time  including Khamenei. Ahmad Jannati (head of the Guardian Council), Mohammad Yazdi, and Mohammad Momen Qomi all invoked of the Sharia law demanding that the protesters and the "leaders of sedition" be executed.

Khamenei responded that, although this was their religious opinion, a large number of executions would cause political problems for the regime. He then turned to Larijani saying, “In all honesty we expected more than this [two executions].” Larijani later told associates, “I have tried very hard to keep the number of executions low, as my superiors had asked for more”.

1045 GMT: Following Up the Assembly. The political moves from last week's Assembly of Experts meeting continue, even beyond Mr Verde's Sunday analysis. While the official statement --- once it finally appeared --- pledged loyalty to the Supreme Leader, there has been an overlooked postscript.

The Secretariat of the Assembly has published the report by the Assembly’s Investigation Committee into the circumstances of the Supreme Leader and his fitness to remain in the post, under Article 111 of the Iranian Constitution). The report, dated 27 February, is signed by Mohsen Mojtahed-Shabestari (Assembly member, Khamenei's representative to East Azerbaijan, and Tabriz's Friday Prayer leader.

Although the report is similar to the Assembly's closing statement, the Green website Rah-e-Sabz is celebrating the publication of this report as a victory for public pressure on the Assembly. For the first time, the Supreme Leader's fitness for his post is now a matter of public discussion.

1000 GMT: But You Could Just Watch the Nukes Instead. On the nuclear programme front, it looks like another day of media focus on the rhetorical battle between Iran and members of the International Atomic Energy Agency. The IAEA, with a new Director-General, begins a four-day discussion of the draft report on Iran's current uranium enrichment efforts, and the occasion has been preceded by a series of Iranian verbals attacks, including the Supreme Leader's denunciation of a US-controlled IAEA.

The Los Angeles Times, for example, devotes a lengthy article to the political theatre: "[Iran has] dramatically shifted its public tone toward the United Nations' nuclear watchdog, dropping its previous deference while harshly criticizing the agency's latest report and its new director-general as an incompetent and biased lackey of the West."

Amidst the furour, few take any notice of Iran's more conciliatory position accepting Japan as a country for "third-party enrichment", signalled by Ali Larijani during his trip to Tokyo. And none, to my knowledge, consider the ripples of Larijani's changed position across the Iranian political waters.

0915 GMT: And so unfolds another week in a crisis which, according to the regime, was over. Mir Hossein Mousavi's interview continues to command attention and more than a few questions about strategy and prospects for the Green Movement. After initial doubts, I'm tilting towards a more optimistic reading. Because of the importance of the issue, the analysis is still being developed: we're hoping to have it out tomorrow.

Meanwhile, the regime --- which, again, has supposedly won this conflict --- continues to bluster. Basij Commander Mohammad Reza Naqdi, continuing the Government's propaganda drive on the capture of Jundullah leader Abdolmalek Rigi, declared that President Obama would confess as quickly if he came to Iran:
This pure form of Islam [practiced in Iran] is such that it will even break our staunchest enemies. This thug [Rigi] was nothing, even if Obama himself, who Rigi has confessed to cooperating with, comes to Iran he will also confess to all his sins under the influence of this [pure form of] Islam.

The U.S. and other Western countries have reached a cultural, military, political and economic dead-end and the only weapon in their hands to bully other countries is technology and if we succeed in prying this tool away from them they will be finished.

Far more significant is the news of the regime's freeing of high-profile figures from detention. Saturday and Sunday releases included editors and journalists Ali Hekmat, Abdolreza Tajik (Farheekhtegan), Mashallah Shamsolvaezin (formerly of Kayhan, Jame'eh, Neshat, and Asr-e Azadegan), Behrang Tonkaboni (Farhang va Ahang), and Mohammad Javad Mozafar (publishing house Kavir and vice president of the Committee for the Defense of Prisoners' Rights), and retired science professor Mohammad Sadeq Rabani.

An Iranian activist adds that journalist Rozbeh Karimi was released today and 20 protesters arrested on Ashura were freed from Rejaie Shahr prison in Karaj last night.

It is too early to tell if this is an orchestrated strategy of mass releases by the regime --- an effective "amnesty" if those freed will just shut up, stop writing, and stay off the streets --- but it follows Sunday's carrot-and-stick statement by Tehran prosecutor Abbas Jafari Doulatabadi (see yesterday's updates). Doulatabadi promises detainee releases on the eve of Iranian New Year but added that those who did not recent would be treated harshly.

The "stick" part of the strategy also has come out in a Rah-e-Sabz report:
Many of those arrested and released over the past few months have been contacted and told to be prepared for interviews, which are subsequently conducted inside Evin Prison....

Interrogators contacted these former prisoners, who have either received their initial verdict or are waiting to receive their verdict, and force them to participate in these interviews. A transcript of the interview is given to the prisoners by their interrogators and they are told to memorize the content and say it in their own words. These former prisoners have been threatened that if they refuse to participate in the interviews they will have to spend the [Iranian] New Year holiday in prison or receive a heavier sentence.

The Jaras [Rah-e-Sabz] reporter said, "Transcripts of these interviews are given to news agencies close to the Reformists and they are forced to publish them. In the recent scenario, aside from the Islamic Student News Agency (ISNA), where prisoners were escorted to upon their release to conduct interviews, Iranian Labor News Agency (ILNA) has been forced on board [as well]. For the news scenario, the date of the interview is sometimes days or months from the time of the prisoner's release and secondly the exact transcription has been forced on news agencies."

Still, even if the Green Movement could be quelled, the Government faces the trouble within. The latest sign of unhappiness is over the recent 18-minute video, shown on BBC Persian and then spread on YouTube, of the 15 June attack on Tehran University's dormitories. Kazem Jalali, a member of Parliament's "truth-finding committee", has hinted that some colleagues are holding out against an acknowledgement of possible wrongdoing:
It would be better if the members of the truth-finding committee all watch this film....I have followed up on the issue a few time via Mr. [Mohammad-Hassan] Abutorabi who heads the committee. I think you should also ask him this question.

However, the head of the National Security Commission, Alaeddin Boroujerdi, has tried to pre-empt any consideration of the evidence of damage, beatings, and even killings by the attackers, whose exact affiliation with the regime is still unclear: "Since the narrator of the film is the BBC, we must look at the matter with doubt because we do not consider the BBC a reliable source."
Monday
Mar012010

Israel Video & Transcript: Ehud Barak on CNN

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4gWAoWHwq4[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gODypjk3S1g[/youtube]

The Full Transcript:

AMANPOUR: Let's start with Iran, because I know there's a whole host of issues. But, you, from what I gather have really been focusing on that with all of your meetings here.


What do you make of the latest reports in the "New York Times" that Iran has moved some 4,300 pounds of enriched uranium out of underground storage and into an above ground facility, where it wants to further enrich it for its medical facility?

BARAK: I spent the day trying to encourage the economy of this city. So it is with the report.

AMANPOUR: So you were shopping, in other words?

BARAK: Yes, yes, yes. Of course. I did read this report. We are living in an open world. There is a freedom of speech and clearly freedom of speculation. I can hardly speculate about what the meaning of some developments in Israel or here. I would not dare to speculate what the meaning of something that's happened in Iran. You probably understand Iran better than I.

AMANPOUR: Well, you know what? You spent a lot of time thinking about it, though. It's been the focus of your trip here.

I'm going to play something that you said at a speech here about Iran's capability and its intentions.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARAK: I don't think that the Iranians, even if they got the bomb, they're going to drop it immediately on some neighbor. They fully understand what might follow. They're radical, but not total mishuginas.

(LAUGHTER)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That's a technical term.

BARAK: Some -- they have quite sophisticated decision making process and they understand realities.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: So, you said they're radical but not meshuggeneh. That means, crazy, right?

BARAK: Yes.

AMANPOUR: So you don't think even if they did have a weapon that they would drop it on Israel.

BARAK: You took one sentence from me, from a much longer, probably too long to be repeated here --

AMANPOUR: So?

BARAK: Let me tell you first. Iran is clearly heading toward nuclear missile capability. They're trying to defeat and defy the whole world. They're hoping to deter the whole world from responding to this. They have two examples in mind. One is Pakistan, which they feel somewhat similar. And the other is North Korea. And in those two cases they were successful against sanctions and whatever.

So basically Amano of the IAEA, the new head of the IAEA, made quite important, courageous step by finally calling a spade a spade and told the world that people who are preparing neutron sources (ph) and implosion experiments with heavy metals -- they are bringing, or they are producing warheads of nuclear weapons for ground-to-ground missiles that could reach the whole region, not just Israel.

So we think that it's a major challenge for the whole world.

(CROSSTALK)

AMANPOUR: So how do you address -- but you just did there they they're not crazy enough to drop it on Israel.

BARAK: No. That doesn't mean it's not damaging to the whole world. I can hardly think of any conceivable world order if Iran turns nuclear. It will end any kind of non-proliferating regime.

(CROSSTALK)

BARAK: Saudi Arabia will turn nuclear in a few months.

AMANPOUR: But would it also be a problem for Israel because you clearly have a far superior conventional capability in that region. If, as you say, your fear Iran develops a nuclear weapon, does that mean that you will lose your conventional deterrence?

BARAK: I don't think we will lose it. We are the strongest country a thousand miles around --

AMANPOUR: Or, that it won't --

BARAK: But I see that there will be an intensive nuclear wave in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia, probably Turkey, probably Egypt will join. The countdown toward the (INAUDIBLE) vision of a crude nuclear device finding its way into the hands of terrorist group will start even if it takes half a generation.

We are going to live in a place with hegemonic Iran will intimidate neighbors on the other side of the Gulf and tame (ph) to all al Qaeda to Islamic Jihads, the (INAUDIBLE) or whatever.

AMANPOUR: Well this is a very apocalyptic vision that you're making right now.

BARAK: No it's not apocalyptic. It's something that we should take steps to avoid.

AMANPOUR: So how? Obviously there's been much, much speculation because Israel never puts this to sleep, that you're going to go and bomb its facilities at some point.

Are you going to do that?

BARAK: I think that the time is still a time for sanctions, for diplomacy and sanctions. Sanctions should be effective. It is not about our definition, whether targeting or crippling or paralyzing or deadly. It should be effective and bring them to a point where they decide not to continue with their nuclear effort. I believe and hope that this will be the case. I think that the administration should deserve a credit, the President Obama, for with all the other issues on his agenda, the heavy burden, both domestically, but mainly strategically, in the world they find the energy, the attention to move. That is important now.

AMANPOUR: OK. Let's just quickly play something that President Obama did say about the possibility of sanctions.

BARAK: Yes.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: They have made their choice so far, although the door is still open, and what we are going to be working on over the next several weeks is developing a significant regime of sanctions that will indicate to them how isolated they are from the international community as a whole. We are confident, right now, that the international community is unified around Iran's misbehavior in this area. How China operates at the Security Council, as we pursue sanctions is something that we're going to have to see.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: So, you have just said that you believe sanctions and the pursuit of that is the correct thing right now. But you also have said that you think the American chances of enlisting the Chinese is not great?

BARAK: It is a kind of a matter of fact observation. Sanctions will not be really effective without having the Russian, Chinese, probably the Indian.

AMANPOUR: So, how will they be effective if you don't think they are going to get the Chinese on board?

BARAK: First of all, I think that a lot of effort is made by the administration to make them understand it. We also, Israel, is a tiny place, but we sent two of our leading experts, Stanley Fischer, Senator Ben Cardin, and former chief of staff, who is now a minister, named Boogie Ya'alon to try to present to them the facts regarding to the issue. So, probably we will help them to -

AMANPOUR: Do you and the United States agree on the types of sanctions to be put on Iran?

BARAK: I think that we both agree should be effective.

AMANPOUR: Yes, but what does that mean? The type -- they are talking about the Revolutionary Guard -

BARAK: There are many, many, many types, it should start with financial transactions, with certain insurance issues, with certain limitations of how they can deal with their light distillate (ph) and so on. We feel that we should not stop until it becomes effective. And we will see it, you know, it won't take years to see whether it works or not. And I believe and hope that it can work, but we should be open enough.

AMANPOUR: Prime Minister Netanyahu has called for an energy embargo on Iran.

BARAK: Yes, you know, I don't think that it is worth-you are having an open dialogue about it in front of this camera. Consider that determined by this giving the Iranians early warning. It is clear it should be effective, limited in time, and I think, we think, we recommend to all players not to remove any option from the table. And we live by what we recommend to others.

AMANPOUR: OK, we are going to pursue those options and how much time those sanctions should take. And we'll be back with more in just a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD, IRANIAN PRESIDENT (through translator): Today the most important issue in the world is the issue of Palestine. If there is a conflict going on in Iraq, we believe that the conflict has been instigated by the Zionists. If there is a conflict in Afghanistan, the war has been provoked by the Zionists.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: Joining me again, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak.

So, you just heard the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, basically blaming everything on you, on Israel. But let me ask you this: The U.S. National Security Advisor Jim Jones has said that the increased pressure on Iran is likely to lead to an attack on Israel. Do you agree with that? Not necessarily by Iran?

BARAK: I understand the idea. I don't think that we are yet there. Yes, he probably intended, probably Hezbollah, or someone else, will attack us. In fact, Ahmadinejad, this guy, he was two days ago in Damascus, probably negotiating what should follow. He talked about a new Middle East, with no Zionists and no colonialists, meaning Israel and new Israel.

And this guy, you know, happened to develop not a new Avatar - like long bows, or Agincourt like long bows, but a nuclear weapon. So, we somehow have to take this situation seriously. I'm not sure whether we are going to face a pre-emptive attack by the Hezbollah, but anyhow, we are not interested in conflict in the north or in the east. But if it imposed upon us, we know how to respond.

AMANPOUR: Well you say that, but then, of course, there is the Goldstone Effect. In other words, would you do what you did to Hezbollah in 2006, all out attack, or are you limited now?

BARAK: Probably even more intensive, because in 2006, we were limited from hitting Lebanon's structures. In Lebanon, we see something totally abnormal. You know, the state of the UN, the militia -- the militia happen to have members of parliament, even veto power within the cabinet, and it still works under all those forms. Iran and -- equipped -- fear of Iran --

AMANPOUR: You would do that again?

BARAK: -- violation of Security Council Resolution 1701. We say loud and clear, we are not interested in conflict. We will not initiate one. But if we will be attacked, namely our civilian population -- because this militia happen to have more than 40,000 rockets (INAUDIBLE). We will not run or -- every individual Hezbollah fighter. We will hit Lebanon and whatever is under the responsibility of the Lebanese government.

AMANPOUR: OK.

BARAK: The Lebanese government has to make sure -- and I believe the international community has to make sure that 1701 is followed.

AMANPOUR: That's the U.N. Security Council resolution.

BARAK: Put handcuffs on the hands of Hezbollah or dismantle them.

AMANPOUR: Let me ask you again about Iran and the constantly raised military options. You all say every option is still on the table. Your former chief of the IDF, General Halutz, has said that Israel lacks the military means for a preemptive strike against Iran's nuclear facilities, that Israel should not be the flag bearer for the entire Western world. He said, I'm not just some passer-bye. I've had positions that give me levels of information that the general public doesn't have.

In other words, he's saying you can't do it alone.

BARAK: I respect General Halutz very much so. And I clearly said that at this stage, we believe it is still the time for sanctions. But I repeat my recommendation to others, as well as to everyone else, not to remove any options from the table. I hope that sanctions and any other means will work, but we'll have to wait and see.

AMANPOUR: But again, I've heard that the Iranian facilities are hardened. They're dispersed. The United States has certainly, up until know, that they will not necessarily help you, at the very least, and you wouldn't probably be able to fly over Iran. Israel cannot do it on its own, can it?

BARAK: I don't think that it makes sense, under the situation we're facing, to discuss it in the open and to try to really go into details of this. I keep saying what I've told you. I think the time is still for diplomacy and tough sanctions might change it. We have to focus on what is on the table, not on speculating on further steps that might be taken.

AMANPOUR: OK, you said tough sanctions should be put in place for a period of time. How long?

BARAK: I cannot put it by a certain date, but I can say it's a matter of we should see whether it works or not within months, probably more than a few months, but not years.

AMANPOUR: Next, we'll ask Ehud Barak why on Earth Israel took a provocative step over religious sites on the West Bank this week. Doesn't it just make peace less likely?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAMES BAKER, FORMER U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: Nothing has made my job of trying to find Arab and Palestinian partners for Israel more difficult than being greeted by a new settlement every time I arrive.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: That was nearly 20 years ago, and the settlement issue continues to cast a long shadow over Arab/Israeli peace talks. Israel's Defense Minister Ehud Barak joins me again.

This issue is still a major, major issue. And some very, very respected people, Sari Nusabr (ph), for instance, Palestinian, has said that the two state solution may no longer be possible. And that is because of the increasing number of settlements, and the inability of the Israeli government to withdraw them, let alone halt them.

BARAK: I don't think that is correct. We made recently the probably unprecedented step by freezing it for ten months any new settlement building. And it's clear the two state solution is the only solution. It's not just a favor we're doing to the Palestinians, compelling imperative for Israel as well.

But, having said that, it is -- the issue of settlements is used also as an excuse, because if we coerce these (INAUDIBLE) and solve the whole issue, it will be only part of implementation. We -- Abu Mazen negotiated with Olmert when the pace of building was twice the present one. Arafat, his predecessor, negotiated with the prime minister when the pace of settlement building was four times. It's not the real reason.

AMANPOUR: Let me ask you about this; as you know, President Obama started out by saying total freeze on settlements before talks. Now they've amended that position.

BARAK: They modified it for good reason because it's impractical. You know, we are an open society. If a private contractor strikes a contract with someone, an individual. If they want to build and we try to stop them, we will be ordered by the supreme court to --

AMANPOUR: As you know, it is a requirement of all the peace maps, the road maps and all the rest.

But I want to ask you about a comment that you made recently at a conference in, I believe it was Herzliya. And this is what you said:

"As long as in this territory, west of the Jordan River, there is only one political entity called Israel. It is going to be either non-Jewish or non-Democratic. If this block of millions of Palestinians cannot vote that will be an apartheid state."

That's what you said.

BARAK: I said the obvious, basically.

AMANPOUR: But that's very --

BARAK: It's not about the world apartheid. Basically what I said, we -- there is a compelling imperative for us to disengage from the Palestinians. As I said, there are over 11 million people -- if the blocks of millions vote, it is a non-Jewish state by nation. If they do not vote it's a non-Democratic state.

AMANPOUR: And you used the word "apartheid state." Do you stand by that?

BARAK: I said it. It's not a secret. In fact I'm saying it's in a different world -- 20 years since the time it was in --

AMANPOUR: But why don't you then, enact bolder steps --

BARAK: I don't think we're going to be there.

AMANPOUR: But if it's such a huge challenge, why don't you enact bolder steps?

BARAK: Let me tell you, I'm not afraid of any bolder steps. I said it in order toward ourselves that we might enter into a slippery slope toward either non-Jewish or non-Democratic faith. Neither is the Zionist dream. So we have to take steps to change it. That's why I am in this government. This government, in spite of being heavily biased to the white, agreed for the two state solution, agreed to accept all previous agreements signed by either of the government, agreed to accept the idea of the old maps and basically --

AMANPOUR: But right now --

BARAK: Netanyahu was talking about Palestinian tribal state with the national and (INAUDIBLE) flag, living side by side with Israel. This is our vision.

AMANPOUR: But right now, it is your vision. It's many other peoples' vision. It's not happening. It's stalled, still. The Palestinian leader Abu Mazen says that he won't come back to talks unless there is a halt (ph) to settlement.

Now, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called for an immediate resumption of the talks. Is it going to happen?

BARAK: I hope it will be resumed. Probably at the beginning, proximity talks. I think that all players should stop thinking in terms of speculating. I heard a lot of speculation in Israel that Abu Mazen cannot deliver, that he's too weak or whatever. And I've heard a lot of speculation here that Netanyahu is not there. He's not believing. I say the proof of the pudding is in the eating.

AMANPOUR: OK.

BARAK: Stop speculating. Bring them together to one room and start negotiations.

AMANPOUR: Right.

BARAK: Either they directly or through authorized representatives.

AMANPOUR: You've been saying this for a long time. I want to play something that I asked you nearly 10 years ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: Do you really think there is room to restart the peace negotiations?

BARAK: Yes. There will always be a room. We will never lose hope of peace. The Palestinian people is going to be our neighbor forever. We will make peace with them.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: I mean, that was 10 years ago.

BARAK: No justice on Earth. You get younger, I get older clearly from what we see here.

AMANPOUR: But still it was 10 years ago and nothing has happened. I mean, words have changed, there have been different ideals put out there but --

BARAK: No living person in Israel was ready to go further than I did and risk his whole political career (INAUDIBLE) in order to try and reach it. We put on the table an offer during the Clinton administration. Your husband was in the vicinity. And I keep saying it was rejected by Arafat, but I keep saying, if it takes five months, five years or fifteen years, when an agreement will be reached it will be a result of leaders taking decision and will be -- a glass, a magnifier will be needed to see the difference from what we put on the table at Camp David.

AMANPOUR: OK.

BARAK: I told Abu Mazen.

AMANPOUR: We'll be right back. We've got to take a break, we'll be right back.

And next, secret missions. Once Ehud Barak went on disguised as a woman. We'll ask him about what many suspect was another of Israel's secret missions in Dubai last month.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, I'm Fredricka Whitfield at the CNN Center in Atlanta. Here's a look at the top stories.

The death tolls soars one day after Chile's massive 8.8 earthquake. The government now says more than 700 people have died and a half million homes as been damaged. Plus, more than 90 aftershocks, some of them powerful, continue to rattle the country. Meanwhile, a tsunami warning has been canceled for the entire Pacific basin.

Europe, meanwhile, is dealing with its own crisis. Violent storms are battering France and four other countries. So far, as many as 53 people have died and most of the victims were in western France. Many people drowned and were surprised by the rapid rise of water. The country's prime minister is calling it a national catastrophe.

And President Barack Obama's doctor says he is fit for duty. This morning, the 48-year-old commander-in-chief underwent his first physical since taking office. After the 90 minute exam, the president was deemed in excellent health, but his doctor did say he should his modify his diet to bring down his cholesterol level. The president is not due for another physical until August 2011, and that's after he turns 50.

And those are the headlines. Now back to "Amanpour" in a minute.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

AMANPOUR: Welcome back. Our guest, Ehud Barak, is no stranger to the secretive world of special operations. He's famous for foiling an airplane hijacking by disguising himself as a mechanic. And for once dressing up as a woman during an undercover mission to kill Palestinians.

Now there's another secret operation in the news, the assassination of a top Hamas commander in Dubai. And many are blaming that on Israel. Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak joins me again.

Is this another secret Mossad operation?

BARAK: I have nothing to say about this event in Dubai.

AMANPOUR: Except --

BARAK: But I want to correct you about the past. I never killed Palestinians, per se. I killed terrorists who were directly responsible for the killing -- indiscriminate killing -- of civilians. And I think that's the kind of, almost part of primary conduct of the government with its citizens, to protect them against indiscriminate killings of civilians.

AMANPOUR: Well, let me go back to this issue here. Because at first when the reports came out in Israel, you know, there was a certain amount of pride and glee. There were also words to the effect that Israel -- this was the way to attack terrorism. And then things got a little bit dicey because all these pictures came out, all the surveillance video, all the passports and the state's identities and the stolen identity, governments calling your ambassador's in to ask what on earth is going on since many of those people who stole those identities are Israeli residents and/or citizens. What was going on?

BARAK: Christine, you know me long enough to assume that when I tell you that I have nothing to say about this story, I have nothing to say and I will not say.

AMANPOUR: Would you deny it?

BARAK: I will not say anything.

AMANPOUR: You believe though in targeted assassinations. Israel, look, there was a famous one back in Jordan.

BARAK: Next interview you can ask me about it. If I will answer this right now, I will implicitly answer your question. I say I do not have anything to say about this.

AMANPOUR: But how -- OK, then how does it affect Israel's standing in the world, for instance? I mean, this is also giving you a credibility problem in terms of public relation. You are on a major public relations offensive, after the Goldstone report, after this as well around the world because people are saying, hang on, what is Israel doing in these circumstances?

BARAK: I will not say a word about deadstone (ph) but you mentioned Goldstone. I would like to say something about Goldstone. I see that after seven years of suffering thousands of rockets, terrorizing our civilian population around the Gaza Strip, Israel had the right and the duty to respond. And Goldstone's report is biased, distorted, totally unexplainable in my judgment and it even encourages somehow terror because it --

AMANPOUR: His report encourages that?

BARAK: Yes, of course. The moral equivalent between the perpetrators of terror and its victim and they are delivering to Hamas and to Hezbollah as well, are deliberately using civilian populations as human shields and we are being attacked. You know, I remember President Obama still as a candidate coming to show so much emphasis to the citizens in Sderot. We just found our first (INAUDIBLE) where we have to act and I can tell you, if it would have happened, if San Diego would have been bombarded one month from Tijuana this way, you would be already in Tijuana and the mountain, desert in the next few months.

AMANPOUR: Can I just -- we're going to talk about the Goldstone report in a second, but first I want to go back to this issue of what happened in Dubai. How are you going to respond to all these gunmen, the British, now the Australian, French, German, all of those governments who are calling your ambassadors in to ask you what on Earth is going on and why all those passports were found in your resident's possession?

BARAK: Christiane, I do not have anything to say about this story. It will not change it if you come from another corner into the same issue. I will not say anything.

AMANPOUR: Were you surprised that the Dubai government, the emirates government, launched such an exhaustive investigation? Did you expect in your wildest dreams that these pictures, that these passports would come out?

BARAK: Christiane --

AMANPOUR: No, I just want to know about the Dubai investigation. What do you think about it?

BARAK: Christiane, I told you, there's nothing to say about this story and I will not say when I have nothing to say. So I think that you're better for the benefit of the viewers that we change the issue.

AMANPOUR: We will keep trying and we're going to go to a break, and when we come back from the break, we're going to talk about the equally serious issue of what happened in Gaza, the Goldstone report, and Israel now quite on the defensive after that Goldstone report. That's when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JUDGE RICHARD GOLDSTONE, HUMAN RIGHTS JURIST: The report didn't question the right of Israel to take action, to stop the firing of rockets as we hold serious war crimes, but what happened is that Netanyahu ignores completely and what Israel has ignored are our criticisms of the way they fought the war. We didn't second guess generals. We didn't question the difficulty of fighting a war in a heavily built up civilian area. What we did was question the degree to which innocent civilians were targeted.

(END VIDEO CLIP

AMANPOUR: So that is Richard Goldstone, basically addressing the core issue of the report and answering a little bit of what you talked about just before, they're not questioning your rights to self defense. They're questioning the number of civilians who were caught in this and not taking enough care to avoid civilians. What I want to ask you is this, the central theme of the report is for your government, for you, to conduct an independent inquiry. Why won't you do it?

BARAK: We made our own -- we have our own processes. We know for sure that we did not order such an event. I can tell you more than this old Goldstone was ready to accept nomination to -- not to check whether crimes were done -- but to check, or investigate the war crimes done by Israel. We don't accept such terms of weapons --

AMANPOUR: No, he just said in that byte, Mr. Barak, he said in that interview that they held also that the targeting of Israel civilians by Hamas were war crimes.

BARAK: We provided to the U.N. --

AMANPOUR: But the question is, why no independent inquiries?

BARAK: What's not independent? We are running the most independent processes of any kind of leading free world state. We provided to the U.N. recently -- you know, there were two sides to it.

(CROSSTALK)

AMANPOUR: The U.N. has just given you another five months to come up with the inquiries.

BARAK: No, I challenge you to compare.

(CROSSTALK)

I challenge you to compare the report that we brought to -- the ridiculous document that the Palestinians gave.

AMANPOUR: But how can the ministry investigate itself?

BARAK: No, it's not investigate itself.

AMANPOUR: But that's what happens.

BARAK: No, that's not what happens. We have a system where -- first of all, all the cases mentioned by Goldstone and many others are systematically investigated. It's investigated under the chief attorney or (INAUDIBLE) --

AMANPOUR: Attorney General.

BARAK: Attorney General of the armed forces. He's not under the chief commander of the armed forces. He is nominated by us. He is under continued control of the attorney general of the state and the legal advisor to the government. It's totally independent. We compared it with the standard to what's going on here in America, in Great Britain, in the European countries. We are much ahead of them with the independence of investigations.

AMANPOUR: Would you agree that the Goldstone report makes you think twice about how you will conduct a future war?

BARAK: I don't think so. I think that --

AMANPOUR: Will you do nothing different?

BARAK: No, we always try to improve ourselves but we don't need the Goldstone report for this. We started investigation into the details of what happened long before Goldstone wrote his report. We opened it, we asked both NGOs, the U.N., even Palestinian individuals. We gave them address they could call and complain. We came to the gates of Gaza to interrogate them about possible violations (INAUDIBLE) by our soldiers.

We get soldiers or commanders who were found responsible of something, which was improper, into legal processes within the armed forces and that's what any other leading country in the west would have done.

AMANPOUR: Let me ask you, because again, they're still requiring you to do more than you're telling me you're doing. The notion of war crimes, as you know, there have been potential warrants out. People have called you a potential war criminal. They've potentially threatened to arrest former foreign minister Tzipi Livni, had she gone to London.

We asked her about that and this is what she said about the threat of arrest.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: Let me ask you because there was an arrest warrant potentially out for yourself, Israeli leaders, even Defense Minister Barak have likened to war criminals. There's a controversy going on in Turkey right now.

Are you worried that if you leave Israel and come to London, or other such places in Europe, that you could be arrested?

TZIPI LIVNI, FORMER ISRAELI FOREIGN MINISTER: It's not my worry on a personal basis. In a way I'd like this to have -- in a way, maybe even a test case because I'm willing to speak up and to speak about the military operation in Gaza Strip to explain that Israel left Gaza Strip. We dismantled a lot of settlements, we took us for (INAUDIBLE). Israel was targeted, we showed restraint. And in the end of the day we needed to act against terror and I'm willing to say so, including any court in London, or elsewhere.

AMANPOUR: So you're saying you're willing to be arrested --

(CROSSTALK)

LIVNI: But for me this in not the question. I mean, yes, the answer is yes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: So?

BARAK: So you surprisingly found one point where I agree with Tzipi Livni. She's the head of a position in our country and on this issue I agree with her.

AMANPOUR: That you also would agree to be arrested?

BARAK: Yes. I was in London when they announced there is an inquiry and they are going to issue a kind of arrest order. I didn't change an iota in my schedule in those two days.

AMANPOUR: And yet, and yet, let's be frank. Your government knows that there is a credibility problem right now. It's launched a massive, intense, unprecedented P.R. campaign by the Diaspora.

(CROSSTALK)

BARAK: Let me --

AMANPOUR: But isn't that true?

BARAK: I don't want to mention some --

AMANPOUR: But isn't that true?

BARAK: I don't want to mention some of the member states by names of these body (ph) called human rights of the council of the U.N. and to suggest to you to suggest the human rights conduct that they tell you they're following.

There is a need to have an academic and then legal discussion of the way to fight effectively terrorist who are using civilian population as human shields, especially when they attack another civilian population.

AMANPOUR: I understand that.

BARAK: I think there all of us are facing it in the battle against terror and there is a need for modification of this running kind of wolves of the gate. And not letting all of us -- paralyzing our capacity to fight against terror due to reports, like the Goldstone report, and the initiative of those members of the agency.

AMANPOUR: We're going to continue this right after a break.

Next, we have some concluding thoughts from Ehud Barak. A few more questions including a debate about Gefilte fish at Passover. We'll explain in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

AMANPOUR: And now we have a final couple of questions for our guest, Ehud Barak. Thanks again for joining us. This idea of the heritage sites on the West Bank where the prime minister has said that these are our heritage sites and it sparked days and days of clashes. Why do that now?

BARAK: It went out of proportion. The government decided to announce 400 heritage sites in Israel without any financial backing or anything else. These cable patriarchs are really part of our heritage, it's also most -- there's no intention to change the slightest, not one time the arrangement there. Everything should be agreed with the walk (ph) and we basically --

AMANPOUR: That's the Palestinian --

BARAK: There is no -- never in the history, in millennium there have been such a freedom of worship as it is now under the Israeli control of this place. So I don't think that we have any intention to change anything there, but it's part of our heritage. That's kind of self-evident.

AMANPOUR: And the Palestinian leader said it could spark war, a religious war.

BARAK: I don't think so. I hope that, you know, Fayyad, all of this place --

AMANPOUR: That's the prime minister.

BARAK: -- Prime Minister Fayyad and the security forces on both sides try to lower the flags. I hope it will not, and it should not develop into anything. Just went totally out of proportion.

AMANPOUR: Let me ask you a final thought. We're going to end on something a little bit more humorous. You were with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton this week and she spoke about the intractable problems between Israel and the Palestinians and in the Middle East. But she said there was another issue that was apparently equally important to you right now.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HILLARY CLINTON, SECRETARY OF STATE: We have so many serious matters to discuss together, but there's one matter that I have to raise that I was asked about in a congressional hearing yesterday and that is trying to get nine containers of gefilte fish from the processing plant in Illinois to Israel in time for Passover. So there are intractable problems, this one we might be able to solve.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: Did you have any idea?

BARAK: Gefilte fish is also part of our heritage. I hope it will not ignite anything with the Palestinians, but let's lift the containers and have them in Passover.

AMANPOUR: And on that note, Defense Minister Ehud Barak, thank you so much indeed for joining us.

BARAK: Thank you.

AMANPOUR: And that is our report. Thank you for joining us. During the week, you can watch our program on CNN International and you can see our daily podcast on amanpour.com. For now, good bye from New York.
Monday
Mar012010

Iraq: We're Staying --- US Military Challenges Obama's Withdrawal Plan

Within days of President Obama's inauguration last January, I began writing of a military attempt to "bump him" on three fronts: preventing the closure of Guantanamo Bay, getting more troops in Afghanistan, and delaying the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq.

Well, the commanders, backed by key individuals in the Executive and the complications of Congress, succeeded on the first two matters. And, days before Iraq's national elections, they are pressing again on the third. General Raymond Odierno, the commander of US forces in Iraq and a man who (a la General David Petraeus) has learned how to work the press, started telling favoured reporters that Obama's August date for removal of most combat troops might not be tenable. Prominent columnists like Thomas Friedman and Thomas Ricks soon rolled out the arguments for sticking around.



In contrast to last year, this is not yet a head-on clash with the President; Odierno and his allies, possibly including Petraeus, now head of the US Central Command for the region, are working around him through media channels. But it does set up a challenge for Obama, especially if expected political complications with the elections occur: does he again give way on policy to his military brass?

Ranj Alaaldin writes for The Guardian of London:

Yesterday came the first signs of the inevitable in Iraq: a prolonged
presence of US troops beyond the status of forces agreement deadline of 2011.


President Obama has promised to get all combat troops (ie most of those still in the country) out of Iraq by August this year. But Thomas Ricks of Foreign Policy magazine has revealed that the top US military commander in Iraq, General Ray Odierno, has asked Obama to keep a combat force in the north for longer than that.

Odierno's request suggests that a somewhat flexible approach will be taken towards the remaining 40,000 to 50,000 troops. The general has asked for a combat brigade to remain in Kirkuk, the ethnically mixed, oil-rich and volatile disputed territory. But the problem of Kirkuk will not be
resolved by the end of 2011 and it may never be peacefully resolved at all (see the Falklands, the other oil-rich disputed territory that has had
historic battles fought over it, where disputes exist over the rights to
its oil and also where the UN, as with Kirkuk, has been called to look
into).

If Obama does indeed give his approval then it is likely to be a reflection of the US troop presence in Iraq over the next five, possibly
10, years. Yet, we may well be seeing the South Korea-style permanent military presence taking root here, both as a counter-measure against the impenetrable Iranian influence in the country as well as a measure to keep the peace; since Kirkuk could decide whether Iraq collapses or survives, a prolonged military presence in Iraq focused around the province, as well as other northern areas like Mosul and Diyala – where joint US-Kurd-Arab military patrols have been initiated – can be justified.

How will this be sold to the American and Iraqi public? As I explained to
the LSE Ideas Middle East programme, the remaining 35,000 to 50,000 troops are expected to carry on in "advisory" capacities, code for "on standby" if things get really bad and a status more acceptable to a public largely critical of any "combative", and therefore seemingly aggressive, military mandate. Iraqis may welcome this so long as the US keeps out of everyday Iraqi life, stays in the background as the Iraqi security forces become more assertive and generally improve, and so long as it leads to improved security.

Politically speaking, there will be some, especially among the Sunnis who deride Iran's influence and the Shia hold on power, that deem a strong US presence a necessary and imperative counter-measure against other domestic and external forces that have a degree of power far superior than their own.

It is election time in Iraq and the nation is gripped with the campaigning
process as they prepare to cast their vote in less than 10 days. For this reason, the US administration is doing well to wait before coming out officially to extend the deadline – lest it hurt any allies, potential or
otherwise – and it is likely to wait up to two months after the election
as the political framework settles. For these reasons, it is unlikely that
the revelation will have any bearing on the elections.
Page 1 ... 24 25 26 27 28