UPDATED Iran Video and English Text: Mousavi Interview with Kalemeh (21 November)

The Latest from Iran (21 November): Mousavi, Khomeini, and Ahmadinejad

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

UPDATE 22 November: An EA source has offered some additions to the English translation of the interview.

An English-summary translation of Mousavi's statement follows the video.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=338xHiia9nw[/youtube]

Mir Hossein Mousavi: A country that is governed under the name of Islam should not continue its path by terrorizing people

Invading the American embassy by Iranian students [in 1979] was a reaction to American interference into Iran affairs and its support for Shah. If it was Russia or Britain doing that, the same thing would have happened to them. Therefore our people pay attention to the fundamental roots and reasons behind 13 Aban [the demonstrations of 4 November] and against the interference of foreigners and not a specific country, and this is why on 13 Aban all people came to the streets.

This year’s November 4th, because of how people took the streets and remained on the scene, turned to a great memory for our nation....On November 4th, the regime brought an army to confront the people....[but] dividing the people and enforcing limitations created new circumstances for the Green movement.

“First, there was the number of armed forces put on the streets to confront people. In the history of the revolution, I had never seen so many forces placed at important points....I told myself even if today nobody shows up on the streets, this is a victory for the Green path of hope. It shows how afraid they are of it and what a significant movement it is.

A country that is governed under the name of Islam and have had a great revolution should not continue its path by terrorizing people....The first impression of all those armed forces on November 4 was creating terror to tackle people’s greatest asset [their bravery] despite the fact that if we want to have a prosperous nation and county we should emphasise this asset. This is what was being attacked on November 4. If you ask me if they achieved their goal: in my opinion, they did not....

They attacked people but people were not afraid. If you look at the footage from the streets, you see that they were beating people but people were not running away. They go on the other side of the street and continue chanting their slogans....

The next outcome of this kind of confrontation is anger, which will lead some to go beyond the basic slogans that the Green movement emphasises, which is abiding to the constitution and fulfilling all its principles in the country....People should note that no matter how much they (the government’s agents) show brutality, people should not fall into the trap of brutality. It is necessary for us to maintain our logic and our cool, and remain loyal and preserve our values and bravery to express our beliefs in the society....

We want freedom as a natural and innate demand in human and we will pay any price necessary for it....

[In another part of his interview, Mousavi commented on the plans by the Government to eliminate subsidies and noted the experts’ warnings against doing so. Mousavi said that in all countries there are some subsidies but the issue is how the Government distributes them to get the best benefit.

Mousavi reminded people that the elimination of subsidies will lead to increase in prices. He added that, just because the government sells oil cheaper inside the country than to the foreign countries, it should not conclude that it is paying a subsidy because other prices in the country are also cheaper than abroad. He questioned if the government is also willing to increase the wage of workers comparable to what is paid in other countries.]

What worries me is that the government does not have a comprehensive plan under the supervision of the Parliament. Because of the political and personal differences they have caused a lot of problems for the people. We witness that the government does not have an unbiased view of the national interest. [Mousavi added that, after the elimination of the subsidies, the government will only help those sectors that it favours and will not give any money to others that are not favoured.]

People don’t know what happened to the 300 billion dollar oil money in the past 4 years; where it was spent; and what its outcome was.

The Latest from Iran (20 November): Manoeuvres in Washington and Tabriz

NEW Iran: The Ahmadinejad Speech in Tabriz (19 November)
NEW Iran: Green Message to Obama "Back Us Instead of Dealing With Ahmadinejad"
Iran: What Happened on Election Night? The Ghalam News Editor’s Account
Iran Nuclear Special: What Tehran’s Latest Offer Means (and Why the West Should Consider It)
Iran’s 16 Azar Video: Greens Fight “The Pirates of the Persian Gulf”
Latest Iran Video: “A Death in Tehran” on Neda Agha Soltan (17 November)
The Latest in Iran (19 November): It’s the Nukes Today

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

2225 GMT: Today's UN Condemnation of Iran. The Third (Human Rights) Committee of the United Nations General Assembly has "expresse[d] its deep concern at serious ongoing and recurring human rights violations" in Iran. The non-binding resolution passed 74-48, with 59 abstentions.

The Committee voiced "particular concern at the response of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran following the Presidential election of 12 June 2009 and the concurrent rise in human rights violations", including "harassment, intimidation and persecution, including by arbitrary arrest, detention or disappearance, of opposition members, journalists and other media representatives, bloggers, lawyers, clerics, human rights defenders, academics, (and) students".

The outcome, the Committee asserted, had been "numerous deaths and injuries" Iwith "forced confessions and abuse of prisoners including ... rape and torture".

2115 GMT: The Brussels Non-Talks and Non-Sanctions. The New York Times has snippets of the statement issued by the delegations of the "5+1" powers after their review of the nuclear talks with Iran (see 1240 GMT):

We are disappointed by the lack of follow-up to the three understandings reached [at Geneva on 1 October]....[Iran has] not responded positively to the I.A.E.A. proposed agreement for the provision of nuclear fuel for its Tehran research reactor...[or] engaged in an intensified dialogue. ....[Iran should] reconsider the opportunity offered by this agreement to meet the humanitarian needs of its people and to engage seriously with us in dialogue and negotiations....[We will meet again soon] to complete our assessment of the situation and to decide on our next steps.

Read this carefully and you'll see that "the meeting...a sign of exasperation with Iran" is issuing a holding statement while the "West" tries to figure out a response to the Iran counter-offer, giving the appearance of stern action when nothing has been or will be decided.

It's good enough to take in The Times, which has seems to have no clue about the Mottaki counter-offer (1315 GMT), Iran's manoeuvres with Russia and Turkey (0945 and 1620 GMT), or even the manoeuvres of the International Atomic Energy Agency (1620 GMT). Thus, its simple depiction of the Iranian position as "rejection".

2020 GMT: Today's Media Stupidity Awards. First, the Gold Medal for Reasoned Argument for Mindless Violence. Step up, editorial writers of The Washington Times: "Get Ready to Bomb Iran: It's the last best chance for peace".

And now the Gold Medal for "Intellectual" Dismissal of The Other Side. It's Mamoun Fandy of the Christian Science Monitor:

Should the West trust Iranian promises? The short answer is "no." But the underlying question is "Why not?"

The answer lies in Iranian belief systems – notably the doctrine of taqiyya, a difficult concept for many non-Muslims to grasp. Taqiyya is the Shiite religious rationale for concealment or dissimulation in political or worldly affairs. At one level it means that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his regime can tell themselves that they are obliged by their faith not to tell the truth.

1955 GMT: More on Student Arrests (see 1410 GMT). Radio Zamaaneh have published summaries of the detentions of student leaders this week. Payvand also has information.

1945 GMT: You Better Watch Out. Back from a break for a debate on climate change and the Copenhagen summit to Iran’s Prosecutor General and former Minister of Intelligence, Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Ejeie, is getting tough with protesters. He warned yesterday on Iranian state television, "The Judiciary is determined to decisively and primitively confront any new unrest [caused] by those against the results of the Presidential Elections of Iran.”

1620 GMT: You Read It Here --- The Iran-Turkey Deal. Mr Smith checks in, and we think he may have an exclusive on the nuclear discussions:

It's interesting to spot smoke signals on the nuclear issue. The meeting of Ahmadinejad and Turkish Foreign Davutoglu meeting in Tabriz makes no sense unless Davutoglu was called in to discuss the nuclear issue, given the frequency of Iranian-Turkish encounters in the past weeks.

And I find El-Baradei's statements in Berlin to be subtly quite important. He said, according to AFP, "We have not received any written response from Iran. What I got...is an oral response, which basically said, 'We need to keep all the material in Iran until we get the fuel.' That to me is a case of extreme mistrust."

This is the gist of what I wrote in my own analysis the other day: mistrust by Iran, low-enriched uranium remaining inside Iran UNTIL fuel arrives. El Baradei's statement cannot be underestimated, as it gives hope to Turkey to be able to broker the deal. Needless to say, this would be the diplomatic coup of the century by Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan. It would raise his stature incommensurably and allow him to press on with the politics of the Nabucco energy pipeline.

1500 GMT: Not much fuss about Friday Prayers today, but there's a short clip up on YouTube.

1455 GMT: Ahmadinejad's Move for Legitimacy. We've posted a copy of the President's Thursday speech in Tabriz.

1410 GMT: Cracking Down on the Students. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty summarises a story we've been following for days: "arrests [as] a move by the authorities to prevent students from protesting against the government on December 7".

1315 GMT: The Mottaki Counter-Offer. Just picking up, after prompting from an EA reader, on an important signal from Iran's Foreign Minister. Most of the Western coverage of Iran's "rejection" of the deal on uranium enrichment (rather than consideration of Iran as taking the next step in negotiations) is based on a weak translation of Mottaki's interview with the Iranian Students News Agency. Almost unnoticed was the Foreign Minister's words to the Hindu newspaper:

We believe that with the continuation of the diplomacy going on now, it is possible to reach an agreement and compromise.... The truth of the matter is [the] interaction [of the "5+1" with the Iran proposal] could somehow build confidence among the Iranians.

1255 GMT: Nuke Discussions Still On. Can't be clearer than this. The US position, as outlined in Kabul yesterday:

The U.S. doesn’t consider the Iranian foreign minister’s rejection of a United Nations- brokered proposal to enrich Iran’s uranium overseas to be “the final word,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said.

While disappointing, she said, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki’s Nov. 18 statement won’t yet trigger the “consequences” that the U.S. and other nations on the UN Security Council have threatened.

1240 GMT: The Brussels "5+1" Talks. First (non)-news out of Brussels on discussions amongst representatives of the US, UK, France, Germany, Russia, and China after Wednesday's counter-offer by Iran for a "swap" of uranium. The meeting was of Foreign Ministry/State Department officials below ministerial level --- the US was represented by Undersecretary of State William Burns and Russia by Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov. The delegates reviewed the situation but made no decisions.

This is unsurprising. Contrary to the partial and inaccurate reports in Western media this morning (see 0725 GMT), Washington has not closed the door on discussions and is not moving aggressively for more sanctions. This meeting most likely considered a response to the Iranian counter-offer --- expect to see signals at the start of next week.

1155 GMT: Mahmoud is Proud of His Election. In his tour of Tabriz, President Ahmadinejad is emphasising that while elections in other countries are "entirely predetermined", the 85 percent participation in Iran's Presidential election in June shows the endpoint of the Islamic Republic's development.

Ahmadinejad also spoke about his economic plans, including subsidy and tax proposals, but it is notable that he --- or at least the Islamic Republic News Agency --- relegate this to a secondary position behind the President's words about an election hed more than five months ago.

0945 GMT: Two Smoke Signals on the Nuclear Deal. Turkish Foreign Ahmet Davutoglu will meet President Ahmadinejad in Tabriz today "to discuss the latest developments in Iran's nuclear case" with a view "to solv[ing] tensions between Iran and the West".

That reads as an effort by Iran to get Turkey's support for the "swap" of uranium inside Iran, rather than sending Tehran's uranium stocks outside the country for enrichment. It should be considered alongside Iran's manoeuvres with Russia: it is being reported that Russian Energy Minister Sergei Shmatko has told the Iranian Ambassador that "Russia will continue its cooperation with Iran".

0900 GMT: We've now posted an analysis of the significance of the mission by Mohsen Makhmalbaf, the campaign spokesman for Mir Hossein Mousavi, to Washington.

0725 GMT: On the surface, a quiet morning and a day that --- for the "Western" media --- will again be dominated by coverage of developments in the nuclear talks.

If last night's advance copies of articles are an indication, expect a distorted piece in The Washington Post claiming an Iranian rejection of the "5+1" proposals, highlighting a tough US response, and ignoring the significance of Wednesday's Iranian counter-offer. (That's distorted on two important counts: Tehran, or at least the Ahmadinejad Government is pushing for a deal and may have gotten some movement from the Supreme Leader to make the counter-offer, and the Obama Administration is far from concluding that the talks are over.)

That means a development which is just as important, if not more so, will be missed. The Wall Street Journal breaks the news of an "unofficial" visit by filmmaker Mohsen Makhmalbaf (pictured left) to Washington. Makhmalbaf, the spokesman for Mir Hossein Mousavi's Presidential campaign, "called for President Barack Obama to increase his public support for Iranian democrats and significantly intensify financial pressure on Tehran's elite military unit, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps".

A disturbing piece of news. Sources are claiming that Iranian security services are sending ominous SMS texts warning against further demonstrations.

The Latest in Iran (19 November): It's the Nukes Today

NEW Iran: What Happened on Election Night? The Ghalam News Editor’s Account
NEW Iran Nuclear Special: What Tehran’s Latest Offer Means (and Why the West Should Consider It)
NEW Iran’s 16 Azar Video: Greens Fight “The Pirates of the Persian Gulf”
The Latest Iran Video: Demonstration at University in Karaj (17 November)
Iran: Re-Evaluating the Green Movement After 5+ Months
The Iran Cul-de-Sac: 4 Points on Obama’s Embrace of Ahmadinejad (and Rejection of the Green Movement)
The Latest from Iran (18 November): Bubbling and Surfacing

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

2055 GMT: Keeping the Students Down. The Government effort to contain student protest continues. Iran's national student organisation Daftar-Tahkim-Vahdat reports that its political director, Abbas Hakimzadeh, has been arrested.

Kohzad Esmaili, head of the Gilan branch of the alumni organisation Advar-Tahkim-Vahdat (Office of Strengthening Unity), has been re-arrested after being freed on $20,000 bail.

2045 GMT: A Non-Crowd Story? While those pre-occupied with the nuclear issue try to read Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's Tabriz speech for signals (see 1425 GMT), the Green movement has other concerns, namely those who did or did not turn out:

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad received a very cold welcome from the citizens. Yoldash, the Green news organisation in Tabriz, reported that, despite the fact that the chief of "popular welcoming staff" of Ahmadinejad assured 100,000 people would be present at his speech today, only about 10-15,000 people participated in this event which can be easily recognized in the pictures taken by pro-coup Mehr news agency.

An EA source says that the Government tried to ensure a large turnout by giving university students, school children, and workers time off and transport to the rally. However, possibly because of the rain, possibly for other reasons, seats remained empty.

1805 GMT: Is Rafsanjani Lining Up with the Government's Nuclear Proposal? Former President Hashemi Rafsanjani has told the Swedish Ambassador to Iran that the International Atomic Energy Agency is legally obliged to provide 20 percent nuclear fuel to Tehran.

Sweden currently holds the European Union's rotating presidency.

1800 GMT: Clinton Speaks Out? Secretary of State Hillary Clinton declared to journalists in Kabul:

It is a very unfortunate, distressing development to see these sentences handed down in Iran, imposing the death penalty on people who participated in expressing their opposition to the government in demonstrating in the streets.It underscores the approach that the government in Iran takes for their own people.

We will continue to stand up for the rights of the people of Iran to speak for themselves, to have their votes counted, to be given an opportunity to have the measure of freedom and rights that any person deserves to have

1755 GMT: What Happened on Election Night? We've posted the account of Abolfazl Fateh, the editor of Ghalam News, a paper close to Mir Hossein Mousavi.

1550 GMT: Football Politics. In its latest friendly match, Iran's national football team drew 1-1 with Macedonia. The Tehran Times says 1000 people attended; an EA source says the number was closer to 500.

Still, that's better than the 100 who turned up at the match earlier this month with Iceland.

1455 GMT: The Clerics Plot. An EA source brings intriguing information from Qom. On Wednesday, Ayatollah Makarem-Shirazi and Ayatollah Nouri-Hamedani, whom Karroubi wrote last week, discussed next moves in the post-election crisis. Nouri-Hamedani reportedly said,  "I am ready to go to Tehran and talk to both sides" about a plan for national unity, and the two clerics (possibly joined by others) decided to seek a meeting with the Supreme Leader.

1440 GMT: And What is "The West" Doing? "Six world powers will meet in Brussels to discuss what measures could be applied against Tehran for its refusal to halt its nuclear enrichment program, an EU official said Thursday. Friday's meeting will include the U.N. Security Council's permanent members — Britain, China, France, Russia and the U.S. — plus Germany, the official said on condition of anonymity because she was not authorized to disclose details of the gathering."

1435 GMT: Negotiating from Strength, I Tell You. And hundreds of miles away in The Philippines, Foreign Minister Mottaki --- having put the Iranian counter-offer on uranium enrichment --- is serving as Ahmadinejad's wingman, warning against further sanctions on Iran: "“I think they [the world powers] are wise enough not to repeat failed experiences. Of course it's totally up to them."

1425 GMT: Mahmoud's Negotiating from Strength. Back from an academic break to read about President Ahmadinejad's speech in Tabriz today. His twin-track rhetoric is now established: the door is open to agreement with "the West", but Iran is holding that door open out of its principled leadership in the world, not out of weakness:

Iran is a nation supportive of peace and friendship and backs constructive cooperation on the international arena. Tehran is therefore ready to cooperate with the international community in different arenas including the revival of economy and the establishment of stable security across the globe....

....Iran is not after aggression. It only seeks its legal rights ... Those who say they want constructive interaction should know that...if the Iranian nation witnesses a genuine transparent change of their policy…if they respect the rights of the Iranian nation…if they honestly extend their hand of friendship then the people of Iran will accept [such overture]....

But the President added, "They should also know that if they are after deception and corruption in our region,” the Iranian nation would be the same “decisive” answer that it has already given to arrogant powers.

1140 GMT: Worst Media "Analysis" of the Day. In The Wall Street Journal, Mark "Black Hawk Down" Bowden explains, "How Iran's [1979] Revolution Was Hijacked". The historical part of the article is OK, with Bowden --- who has written a book on the US Embassy crisis -- claiming, "Nine months after Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi fled it was still unclear what kind of government Iran was going to have....[Ayatollah Khomeini] was ambivalent about the idea of clerical rule."

It's Bowden's jump to 2009 that turns reflection into farce: "So 30 years after seizing power, the mullahs of Qom find themselves in a difficult spot. To turn back the domestic tide of reform they must employ the very tools employed by the despised shah—mass arrests and trials, torture, execution and censorship."

Which "mullahs of Qom" would these be? Montazeri? Sane'i? Bayat-Zanjani? Dastgheib? Safi Golpaygani? Makarem Shirazi?

1050 GMT: The Preview of the Deal? Press TV, quoting from the Islamic Republic News Agency, has just posted a significant statement from Iran's envoy to the International Atomic Energy Agency, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, who says that UN inspectors will visit the second uranium enrichment facility at Fordoo today.

Here is the key line, however, from Soltanieh: "This site will from now on be under the IAEA supervision." That may be an unsubtle olive branch to the international community for the bigger deal: you can oversee our facilities inside Iran, so you can trust that we'll let you oversee uranium stocks as well.

1000 GMT: So What About Those Sanctions? President Obama may be issuing the warning that he's opening up a can of economic pain if Iran does not accept a nuclear deal, but the signals --- which we've noted for weeks --- are that the US is limited in what it can do:

Western powers are gearing up for talks on a fourth round of U.N. sanctions against Tehran over its nuclear program but will not target Iran's energy sector to ensure Russia's and China's support....The scaling back of the West's expectations for new U.N. steps against Iran for defying Security Council demands to stop enriching uranium shows that the Europeans and Americans have accepted that Moscow and Beijing, with their close trade ties to Tehran, will not let Iran's economy be crippled.

Diplomats said the Western powers are eager to ratchet up the pressure on the Islamic Republic. But they also need to keep Moscow and Beijing on board to send a clear signal to Tehran that the world's big powers are united against it.

If there is a move for UN sanctions, they will target "at least another bank, more individuals, more companies -- possibly a shipping company -- a tighter ban on arms, possibly political measures". Meanwhile, Washington will fall back on the notion that it can organise multilateral restrictions outside the United Nations. Steps could include a ban on Euro transactions for Iranian and withholding technology to produce liquefied natural gas.

0855 GMT: Extending our initial update (0650 GMT), Mr Smith brings us the Analysis of the Day, considering the latest Iranian offer in the nuclear talks and advising the "West" how to respond to it.

0815 GMT: Anticipating the protests of 16 Azar (7 December), we have posted a video "advertisement" for the demonstrations which is a pretty good parody: Welcome to "The Pirates of the Persian Gulf".

0800 GMT: Away from the nuclear issue, Michael Slackman of The New York Times has picked up on the case of Ramin Pourandarjan, the 26-year-0ld physician at Kahrizak Prison who died in mysterious circumstances (see our updates throughout this week).

0650 GMT: International media is likely to be dominated this morning by stories on the nuclear negotiations. Most outlets have noted Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki's counter-proposal, replacing the delivery of 50-80% of Iran's uranium stock to Russia with a "swap" inside Iran of 20% enriched uranium for Tehran's 3.5% supply. And almost all are jumping on the soundbite reactions, from French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner to President Obama.

Obama warned again that time was short for a deal and "consequences" would follow if Iran did not accept an agreement. He did the same on Sunday but, on this occasion, he added a tough if vague post-script: "Our expectations are that over the next several weeks we will be developing a package of potential steps that we could take that will indicate our seriousness to Iran." (It's notable that not only international media like Al Jazeera but also Iran's state broadcaster Press TV are carrying the story.)

But do the news agencies really have a handle on what is going on? CNN, for example, headlines, "Iran rejects key part of nuclear deal" and drops in, as one line in a 26-paragraph story, "Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said Iran might allow its nuclear material to be reprocessed inside Iran."

In contrast, the Los Angeles Times devotes almost all of its article to Mottaki's statement. Its headline and opening sentence, however, are just as negative: "Iran's foreign minister vowed Wednesday that his nation wouldn't allow any of its enriched uranium supply out of the country." This is "either a dismissal of a U.S.- and United Nations-backed proposal to ease international tensions over Iran's nuclear program by lowering Tehran's supply below the threshold required to make a bomb, or an attempt by Iran to haggle over the deal".

None of the coverage considers that, from the perspective of the Ahmadinejad Government (and possibly others), Mottaki's response is far from a rejection or a dismissal. Instead, it is a counter-offer which keeps the discussions alive --- indeed, I suspect it may have come out of talks with International Atomic Energy head Mohammad El Baradei. It puts the question to the US and its partners: will they accept a bargain in which Iran's uranium supply is swapped for 20% fuel which is for civilian rather than military purposes? Or is the initial export and warehousing of the majority of Tehran's low-enriched supply an unconditional requirement?

Beyond the negotiating table, Mottaki's statement is a pointer to another story, one which I suspect will go unnoticed today. In the context of the Iranian establishment, this is an attempt to bring peace between battling factions. President Ahmadinejad wants an agreement --- not perpetual "haggling" but an agreement --- and Mottaki's suggestion keeps open that prospect. Others (the Larijanis? the Supreme Leader?) have consented to or been forced to accept the opening.

If the Washington-led "5+1" powers reject that proposal, however, what next? What next not only for the nuclear discussions but also for the interna contests in Iran?

Iran: What Happened on Election Night? The Ghalam News Editor's Account

The Latest in Iran (19 November): It’s the Nukes Today

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

Abdofazl Fateh was the editor of Ghalam News, a publication close to Mir Hossein Mousavi before it was shut down by the Iranian Government. His account of what happened on the night of the Presidential election, 12 June, has re-surfaced.

Alongside the account of Mousavi advisor Alireza Beheshti, which we published on 25 August, Fateh's recollection puts forth the story of an opposition that feared manipulation of the results. Indeed, that fear prompted one of the key moves of the crisis, Mousavi's decision to hold a press conference before the votes were announced. The subsequent decision to write a letter to the Supreme Leader about the concerns brought this response from the head of Ayatollah Khamenei's security, Mr Vahid: "From his words I sensed that I must consider the election over. He said that he had sent a reminder to the Interior Ministry about the way they plan to announce the results, but he said that Mr. Ahmadinejad would win by a big margin."

Thanks to Pedestrian for the translation:

Thursday morning [11 June] we had consecutive meetings with Mr. Mousavi. The main topic of discussion was the provisions for election day. Numerous reports had reached people in the campaign which made us really worried about the election process. Supervising the ballot boxes was of serious concern to us.

Mir Hossein Mousavi chose a number of friends to follow up on these issues in parallel. One problem was that the text messaging service had been completely shut down by the ministry.

It was planned that Mousavi would vote in one of the mosques in the south of Tehran. This mosque was called the grand Jameh mosque in Rey [an old city in the south of Tehran]. Around 11 p.m. on Thursday, the time and place of Mousavi’s voting was put up on the Ghalam’s website [Mousavi's main webiste].

When I went to that mosque on Friday morning, a large group of reporters were there. Mr. Mousavi voted alongside Mrs. Rahnavard and went up to the podium of the mosque to give a talk for a very short time. He was saying that we will stay up tonight when the microphone was shut off.

We returned to the campaign headquarters right away. Mousavi was following the news. Reports that came from various election centers one after another indicated that the turnout was outstanding. Most of the reports pointed to a greater turnout for Mousavi.

It was only a few hours into voting day that pro-Government outlets and websites reported that Ahmadinejad had won. But reports indicated that we would be winning by a big margin.

Everyone was filled with an indescribable sense of happiness. A report was read by the Voter Protection Office. Many of the election centers were reporting very, very slow lines, the shortage of ballots, and various obstacles faced by voters. But, the combination of announced results we were getting indicated that Mousavi was well ahead.

Mousavi was continuously calling the heads of Parliament and judiciary, the leader’s office, and the Supreme Administrative Court to tell them about the problems and obstacles voters were facing.

Complaints were increasing minute by minute. In many voting centers, the ballots were finished. But nothing was done about it. We all came to the conclusion that this was a planned move on the part of the organizers of the election. It was apparent that they had no desire to get extra ballots to the centers, or to speed up the process or to extend voting hours. Reports told us that some voting centers had closed as early as 4 p.m. Even though hour by hour voting was to be extended to 10 p.m. many voting centers were closed before then, and even some people who had stood for hours in line did not get to vote.

Around 4 in the afternoon, someone called Mir Hossein Mousavi and told him that some have reached the decision to announced a 19 [million] vs. 14 [million] win for Ahmadinejad. Mousavi called the officials to let them know.

Around 6 p.m. in the afternoon, Mousavi wrote a letter to the Leader asking him to intervene and correct the voting irregularities we were continuously hearing.

Around 10 p.m. we heard some news that some are going to announce the end of the election with a win for Ahmadinejad. This is when counting votes had not started yet across the country.

Mousavi had a press conference and gave a warning regarding the counting process and mentioned some of the irregularities that had been reported.

Around 11 p.m. Mousavi wrote a confidential letter to the Leader, I transferred the letter to the Leader’s home/office myself and gave it to Mr. Vahid. We spoke for a few minutes and from his words I sensed that I must consider the election over. He said that he had sent a reminder to the interior ministry about the way they plan to announce the results, but he said that Mr. Ahmadinejad would win by a big margin. I told him that from all reports, eyewitness accounts, data and all logical assessment, it was just the opposite of what he was claiming.

After handing the letter, I came back to Mousavi. All our friends were there. Mousavi told the story to every single person and sought their advice. Everyone was dumbstruck. Nobody believed this result. And no report of such an outcome was sent to us by the officers overlooking the election centers [across the country]. After talking to everyone, Mousavi said: “the elections are people’s rights. I can’t give up people’s rights. I’m going to see this through and until this lie is cleared up, I will share the accounts of it with the people.”

The newspaper had been ordered not to headline anything that would predict the results. The Green Word [Mousavi's paper] had such a headline ready and was not permitted to run it. But, reports indicated that Iran and Kayhan newspapers were going to run a headline announcing Ahmadinejad’s victory [note, at this point, the final results had not yet been announced]. IRNA and Fars had already declared Ahmadinejad the winner.

Mousavi left the meeting at around 2 in the morning. We were all talking to one another and everybody was trying to come up with a solution but the results announced by the interior ministry were so great that it was obvious they were leaving no room for argument or protest.

Around 4 in the morning I heard that there had been disperse confrontations in the campaign headquarters and tear gas had been thrown [the headquarters were later raided].

Near the early hours of the morning, there were some in the street honking their horns, happy with victory.

I speak to Hamid Rasaee. Fourth months ago he’d said that Ahmadinejad would win 23 million votes and that he would surpass the 22 million votes for President Khatami in 1997. He’d said that Mousavi would have around 10 million votes. I wasn’t as smart as he was, I congratulated him on his prediction.

In the morning, we met up again and spoke among ourselves. Then we went to see Mousavi. He was sitting there, calm and collected as always. He read his statement for us.

The phone is constantly ringing. Everybody is startled, some are crying, some are screaming. Some are depressed, others worried. When I look at Mousavi, I too am ashamed and I can’t help but cry. I seek refuge in the presence of the lord and hope that he will watch over you. Alas! The diary had to end this way …

The Latest from Iran (18 November): Bubbling and Surfacing

NEW The Latest Iran Video: Demonstration at University in Karaj (17 November)
NEW Iran: Re-Evaluating the Green Movement After 5+ Months
NEW Latest Iran Video: “A Death in Tehran” on Neda Agha Soltan (17 November)
The Iran Cul-de-Sac: 4 Points on Obama’s Embrace of Ahmadinejad (and Rejection of the Green Movement)

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

2105 GMT: Apparently Saeed Sharati was freed "on the order of Tehran's Revolutionary Court", which seems like an acquittal. If so, that would be to my knowledge the first release of a prominent reformist after a trial.

2045 GMT: Carrot and Stick. Is the Government showing confidence that it has the reformists under control with a combination of jail sentences for some and releases for others? Saeed Shariati, a high-ranking Islamic Iran Participation Front members detained for more than three months, and Ashkan Mojallali, Mahdieh Minooie, and Iman Mirabzadeh, arrested at a prayer gathering last month, were freed --- presumably on bail --- earlier today.

1820 GMT: When Analyses Attack. From this morning's post: "One explanation for the shift may be that the Government’s 5+ months of restrictions on the communications and movements of the oppositonal leadership, “supported” by detentions and trials, have worn down the scope of the leadership’s declarations and ambitions."

This afternoon's news: "Rasoul Montajeb-Nia, the vice chairman of the Etemad Melli party [of Mehdi Karroubi] in an interview said that they are waiting for the authorities to remove the ban on this party's main office for further legal operation and activities."

Meanwhile, former President Mohammad Khatami visited Fatemeh Shahidi, a journalist for the reformist (and suspended) Etemade Melli newspape,) who was recently released after months in detention.

1355 GMT: Is This the End of the Nuclear Deal? Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki has made a declaration to the Islamic Students News Agency which appears to be significant:

We reviewed [the Vienna proposal] from an economic and technical aspect. We will definitely not send out our 3.5 percent enriched uranium....We will [instead] consider swapping the fuel simultaneously in Iran....Iranian experts are reviewing the issue of swap to see how much fuel can be transferred. The amount they mentioned for the swap is not acceptable ... and our experts are still studying it.

If I read this correctly, Iran is proposing that a delivery of "20 percent uranium" be brought in from outside the country and swapped for Iran's "3.5 percent uranium". That would mean no initial reduction in Iran's overall uranium stock of 1500 kilogrammes --- the Vienna proposal would have taken up to 80 percent outside Iran for enrichment in Russia.

Considered this way, the question thrown back at the "5+1" countries is whether they can accept that the existing level of uranium production and stock will remain inside Iran's border and thus in its control. That's not a death blow to the negotiations; as Mottaki noted in another interview:

Q: From what I gather, you are looking to modify the basic P5+1 proposal but U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said this is a ‘take it or leave it’ offer.

A: In diplomacy, we do not have zero or hundred. Therefore, flexibility is considered the essence of diplomacy. I believe this, and I guess the American side will understand this point as well…. Earlier, when they wanted to talk to us, they put some preconditions (like suspension of enrichment).But today they are talking and participating in talks without any preconditions.

However, the swap suggestion could be a measure too far for the US and European countries. As Mottaki noted, "We have called for another meeting of the technical people who were part of Vienna talks and we will explain our considerations. But so far such meeting has not convened."

1305 GMT: Iran's chief of police Esmail Ahmadi-Moghaddam has declared that the death of Ramin Pourandarjan, the 26-year-old physician at Kahrizak Prison, "was the result of suicide. The doctor had complaints of being threatened with a five-year jail term and had lost his spirit." Previously, state media said Pourandarjan had suffered a heart attack or stroke (see updates earlier this week).

"He committed suicide after he was summoned to the court."

1255 GMT: Journalist Kambiz Norouzi has been sentenced to two years in prison and 76 lashes after conviction "advertising against the establishment" and participating in post-election protests.

Ali Behzadiyan-Nejad, the nephew of Mir Hossein Mousavi's campaign manager, has been sentenced to six years in prison for “disturbing the security of the country” and “advertising against the establishment”. Behzadiyan’s lawyer said some of the evidence used against  by the prosecutor were “comments people wrote in [Behzadiyan's] personal blog”.

1225 GMT: Don't Do It. The commander of Basij militia, Mohammad Reza Naqdi, has warned that his forces will confront any further "street riots". Naqdi claimed that demonstrators had staged riots in response to calls from US-based satellite stations run by Iranian expatriates: "Those groups that chant slogans against the revolution's values ... should know that they will be confronted by Basij."

1015 GMT: The Banknote Rebellion. Soon after the post-election crisis began, protesters began inscribing Green slogans and criticism of the Government on Iranian banknotes. An EA reader points us to the follow-up story that the Central Bank of Iran has tried to take the banknotes out of circulation, but with so many about, they have given up the effort.

1000 GMT: Nuclear Manoeuvres. Trying to offset apparent pressure from Russia, the spokesman for Parliament's National Security Commission insists that the Bushehr nuclear reactor will soon be operational. Russian officials said earlier this week that the plant would be delayed past its proposed opening date of the end of 2009.

0930 GMT: A Surfacing from Raf? An interesting article, given the relative silence of former President Hashemi Rafsanjani since August. Emrooz, the newspaper linked to Tehran mayor Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, claims inside information from a meeting of Rafsanjani with several former members of Parliament.

One of those former MPs says Rafsanjani set four conditions, first offered in his 17 July sermon, for his return to Tehran Friday Prayers: the release of political prisoners, support for those injured in post-election conflict, rebuilding of relations with Grand Ayatollahs and clerics, and an opening-up of state radio and television to different viewpoints. Another source claims, “Without naming any specific individual, Hashemi warned against the growth of a movement that seeks to ignore the regime’s achievements and implicate everyone who cares about the regime.”

0920 GMT: A later start this morning, as we worked on an analysis of the shifts in the Green movement and their significance; even as leaders show caution in their statements, the signs of a long-term but far-from-disappearing movement persist. We have also posted the Public Broadcasting Service documentary, shown in the US last night, "A Death in Tehran" on the story of Neda Agha Soltan and the post-election protests.

Regular readers will note our frequent references to and use of sources from the Facebook page supporting Mir Hossein Mousavi. Tehran Bureau has a profile of the man behind the site, Mohammad Sadeghi.