Iran Election Guide

Donate to EAWV





Or, click to learn more

Search

Entries in Iran Elections 2009 (65)

Friday
Oct092009

The Latest from Iran (9 October): Almost Four Months

NEW Iran: Karroubi Reply to Ahmadinejad on US TV (9 October)
Now, for the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize: Mehdi Karroubi
NEW Iran: Did Yahoo Give Names of 200,000 Users to Authorities?
Green Tweets: Mapping Iran’s Movement via Twitter
Iran: A Telephone Poll on Politics You Can Absolutely Trust (Trust Us)
The Latest from Iran (8 October): Will There Be a Fight?

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

IRAN 3 NOV DEMOS1955 GMT: More on The Friday Prayer. State media's rather sanitised version of Ahmad Khatami's remarks is now being supplemented by other accounts summarising his attack on post-election protesters. He claimed that, on Qods Day, the foreign media focused on a "few thousand Republicans", who were enemies of Islam, rather than the millions of supporters of the Government and regime.

1655 GMT: A Friday Prayer Diversion. Ahmad Khatami's turn to give the address, and he (or at least the state media summarising him) continued the Ahmadinejad approach of looking overseas to avoid looking at home. He declared, "The meeting [at Geneva on Iran's nuclear programme] was a great victory for the Islamic Republic of Iran to such an extent that even the Western and Zionist media had to admit defeat."

1445 GMT: Flashback: The "Confession" That Means Death. We're posting the Press TV report from mid-August on Mohammad Reza Ali Zamani, the post-election protester sentenced to death earlier this week.

1230 GMT: Karroubi's Back. The reformist leader has written a sharp letter to the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting, refuting claims made by President Ahmadinejad on US television and asking for time to present the evidence of detainee abuses. We've posted the English text.

And, on the day that the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded, we've revived our entry on the drive to name Karroubi as the 2010 recipient.

0915 GMT: Urgent Correction. Readers have let us know (and thanks to all of you!) that the date for the major protest is 4 November, not 3 November as we originally reported, and that the occasion is Iran's Heritage Day as well as the anniversary of the 1979 takeover of the US Embassy.

0825 GMT: A Quick Reply on 4 November Demonstrations. It took only a few minutes for readers to confirm the information on Iran's streets about the forthcoming protest (see 0745 GMT). The poster (on left) has the following caption:
Join, my dear. On 13 Aban [4 November] we will greet the anti-riot police and security forces with flowers. And sitting down on the streets in silence, we will turn night into day and day into night with our unity

Invitation by the Student Society, Office of Strengthening Unity (Daftar-e Tahkim-e Vahdat), University of Tehran, the People & Students’ Green Movement

0745 GMT: 25 Days and Counting? A reader notes our statement "no major gatherings scheduled" (0630 GMT) and replies, "Do you know about the demonstrations being planned by the Sea of Green for 13 Aban (November 3), anniversary of the taking of US hostages in 1979?" [N.B.: Other readers later corrected this --- the date is 4 November, Iran's Heritage day.]

I have noticed references to this but have been awaiting further information on whether intentions have turned into plans. Any assistance from readers most welcome.

0730 GMT: A University Correction? We linked yesterday (1845 GMT) to a Government document which ordered the closure of a University newspaper after it implied that the Holocaust had been a historical event. A sharp-eyed reader has noted that the date on the document is Iranian Year 1387 --- last year --- rather than 1388.

0645 GMT: Credit to Michael Slackman of The New York Times. Yesterday he published a full review not only of the Revolutionary Guard's involvement in a coalition bid for 51% of Iran's state telecommunications company but also background cases such as the Guard's takeover of the management of Imam Khomeini Airport, the current Parliamentary investigation of the telecom deal, and "concerns in Iran over what some call the rise of a pseudogovernment".

Although the story is weeks old, it hasn't been noticed much in the Western media, and the Revolutionary Guard's role in the Iranian economy is one of the most important long-term aspects of this political crisis. The only clanger in Slackman's piece is his necessity to put in an irrelevant comment from Flynt Leverett, a former US National Security Council official: “In a strategic sense, I don’t think Iran is in a fundamentally different place than it was before elections, not in the way it approaches negotiations or the way it looks at its foreign policy."

If Slackman really wanted to establish significant in that quote from Leverett, which belongs in a piece on US-Iranian relations, he would link it to the former NSC official's continuing attempt to establish the legitimacy of the Ahmadinejad Government. For it is that legitimacy that it is at the political heart of possibly illegitimate moves by the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps.

0630 GMT: On Monday it will be four months since votes for President were counted/misaltered/manipulated in Iran, and the anniversary is being welcomed with one of the quietest phases in the post-election conflict. With no major gatherings scheduled, and with politicans and some clerics focused more on private talks than public statements, this is wait-and-see.

The anticipated Parliamentary fireworks have not materialised, and President Ahmadinejad is trying to stay out of trouble by not mentioning alleged abuses, his Ministers' records, or the Iranian economy. One interesting on the last of these: Iran state TV reported yesterday that the quota of subsidised gasoline/petrol for each person will be cut by 45%. Some US-based specialists interpreted this as a reaction to anticipated tighter sanctions from Washington; the simpler explanation is that the Iranian Government needs to cut costs.

Now into the Iranian weekend. No chatter yet about Friday Prayers --- we'll have a look now to see who's leading them. Expect instead more murmurs about detentions and punishment; slowly the death penalty passed on protester Mohammad Reza Ali Zamani, and some activists are also raising cases such as the trial, with possible death sentences, of seven member of the Baha'i faith.
Friday
Oct092009

Now, for the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize: Mehdi Karroubi

The Latest from Iran (20 September): Is Ramadan Over?

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

KARROUBI3

UPDATE 9 October: We originally posted this on 20 September, but in light of today's announcement of the 2009 award to a Mr B Obama, we thought it was not too soon to prepare for next year.

Mehdi Karroubi as a Nobel Prize Laureate? A group of activists certainly think so after the events in Iran since June, and they have launched a petition via Twitter to nominate the cleric and Presidential candidate. More information is available via this Twitition link.
Thursday
Oct082009

The Latest from Iran (8 October): Will There Be a Fight?

NEW Green Tweets: Mapping Iran's Movement via Twitter
NEW Iran: A Telephone Poll on Politics You Can Absolutely Trust (Trust Us)
UPDATED Iran: Rafsanjani Makes A Public Move with “Friendship Principles”
UPDATED Iran: How a Non-Story about a Non-Jew Became Media Non-Sense
The Latest from Iran (7 October): Drama in Parliament?

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

MORTAZAVI1900 GMT: It appears that the State Department's withdrawal of funding from four Iran-centred human rights organisations including the Iran Human Rights Documentation Center, which we noted yesterday, may get some media attention. Alex Massie of the British magazine The Spectator has written about the "shabby, and actually terrible" Government treatment of the groups, raising the concern of Andrew Sullivan of The Atlantic magazine.

1845 GMT: A University student newspaper has been closed by Government order after it implicitly accepted that the Holocaust had occurred.

1545 GMT: We're here, but it is a really slow news day, compounded by breakdowns in communication. Twitter seems to be out of action. Press TV's website is still leading with yesterday's story of the Supreme Leader's speech, and CNN has nothing beyond the disappearance of the Iranian nuclear scientist Shahram Amiri (see 1025 GMT).

1050 GMT: Fereshteh Ghazi ("Iranbaan") has posted another set of updates on the conditions of detainees.

1025 GMT: Kidnappings and Talks. Both in Iranian and non-Iranian media, headlines are devoted to Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki's allegation, "We have found documents that prove US interference in the disappearance of the Iranian pilgrim Shahram Amiri in Saudi Arabia."

The claim elevates an already murky story into the current power politics around Iran's nuclear program. Amiri is one of four Iranians who have "disappeared", whether through defection or kidnapping, since 2007. All four have been connected with Iran's military or nuclear programme. (Note that Press TV coyly refers to Amiri, beyond the "pilgrim" status, as "a researcher".) There have been allegations that the disappearances may be connected with an Israeli covert effort to cripple Iran's nuclear efforts.

Mottaki's statement, however, is connected more with an attempt to get leverage in the post-Geneva negotiations. The article uses comments by University of Tehran academic Seyed Mohammad Marandi to put further pressure on the US, "As long as the United States continues to behave in an unacceptable manner, I think it will be very difficult for Iranians to be convinced that true negotiations can lead to a fruitful conclusion." Marandi also applies that pressure to Iran's regional manoeuvres: "What is even more disturbing is the fact that the Saudi regime has effectively discredited itself and...will be seen by those who know what has gone on in the region as being confined to American demands and effectively abiding by American wishes."

0955 GMT: A Bit of Fun. Thanks to Persian Umpire, we have posted the ultimate telephone poll of Iranians on politics and President Ahmadinejad.

0915 GMT: The Death Sentence is Noticed. Reuters, citing the Green movement website Mowj-e-Sabz, has written about the death penalty imposed on Mohammad Reza Ali Zamani (see 0620 GMT).

0910 GMT: Parleman News offers an overview of yesterday's events in the Iranian Parliament. The focus is on Ali Larijani's success (and thus President Ahmadinejad's defeat) in winning re-election as head of the Principlist majority party, but there is also a bit of light-hearted banter between journalists and MPs over the question, "Where is my vote?"

0635 GMT: Following up our story of the morning (0600 GMT): Ayande News has an interview with Saeed Mortazavi (pictured), most of which is on the events surrounding Kahrizak Prison. Mortazavi minimises his role in the detentions and abuses, claiming that deaths occurred because of "prior injuries" rather than incidents at Kahrizak.

0620 GMT: Beyond the politics, a curious silence this morning on our last report of yesterday, the first death sentence passed on a post-election demonstrator, Mohammad Reza Ali Zamani. Possibly because the news has not been reported inside Iran, I cannot find a sign that the opposition has picked up on the development. If the death penalty is carried out, it could offer the symbolism of a martyr --- as with Neda Agha Soltan or Soltan Arabi --- for high-profile protest.

0600 GMT: The open challenge in Parliament to President Ahmadinejad, or at least to some high-profile officials, did not materialise yesterday, despite the existence of a report into post-election abuses which could be the foundation for that confrontation.

The document remained classified, and no one --- not even the reformist press --- broke out to make claims beyond the identification of two likely culprits, Iran Deputy Prosecutor General Saeed Mortazavi and Tehran police chief Ahmad Reza Radan.

That does not mean that the challenge has evaporated. To the contrary, there are enough signals from conservative/principlist members of Parliament to indicate anger with a Government which both oversaw and covered up the abuses. The symbolic catalyst for this is "Kahrizak", the prison where detainees were beaten, on occasion to death. One of those detainees was Mohsen Rohulamini, the son of a prominent academic and adviser to conservative Presidential candidate Mohsen Rezaei, and it is his case that appears to have propelled the movement that someone has to answer for "crimes".

The question, as we noted yesterday, is how far that anger has translated into talks "across parties" not only to press the President on the report but to turn this into a wider attack on his authority.

We know that Hashemi Rafsanjani met principlist clerics on Tuesday. What we don't know is how much contact he has had with conservative/principlist politicians and officials within the Government. And we do not know what role the "Green movement", or rather its leaders, have in any discussions. It could be that the relative silence of Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi in recent days is because they are now in talks which need time to produce action, or it could be that they are on the outside but waiting to see what occurs.

Throughout the crisis, EA readers have reminded me that Iranian politics is rarely measured in days or even weeks but in far longer periods. That timeframe seems to fit here.
Thursday
Oct082009

Green Tweets: Mapping Iran's Movement via Twitter

The Latest from Iran (8 October): Will There Be a Fight?

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

TWITTER IRANOur colleague Ali Fisher, who writes the excellent blog Wandren PD on public diplomacy and new media, has unveiled the first results from his study of the interaction of Twitter users with post-election protest in Iran. Writing for the USC Center on Public Diplomacy, he has mapped the conversation around the tags #GR88, #FreeIran, #Neda, and #Sohrab as well as the tag #helpiranelection (which I did not know about and was apparently created by a software developer in Israel).

As promising as this study is, the potential for it is even greater. As Fisher notes, "[The tag] #IranElection had so much data that a user would have had to scan 1,000 tweets every hour to keep up."
Thursday
Oct082009

Iran: A Telephone Poll on Politics You Can Absolutely Trust (Trust Us)

The Latest from Iran (8 October): Will There Be a Fight?

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

WPO POLL IRANWe avoided the media flutter last month over a poll by World Public Opinion of Iranian attitudes, not because we objected to the purported findings --- the most provocative that "eight in 10 Iranians say they consider [Mahmoud Ahmadinejad] to be the country's legitimate president" --- but because WPO's rationalisation could persuade us that this was a poll carried out under "neutral" conditions. A telephone call from the United States, coming out of the blue, to a household in Iran, made amidst post-election conflict in which there is a presumption that phone conversations may be under surveillance....hmm, didn't strike us as being optimal for getting full-and-frank answers.

We were going to let a wobbly survey fall of its own accord. But then Persian Umpire came along and put everything in perspective for us:

I wanted to mention the report by worldpublicopinion.org when it was first published but didn’t get a chance. Since it was referred to by [Dr Seyed Mohammad] Marandi  – considered by many here to be on the academic front of the mouthpiece industry  – in a CNN discussion on Sunday, it might be a good time to revisit the topic. The report stirred up controversy here, causing us much vexation and digestive upset.

In all honesty, I don’t know anything about polls and statistics, I am even forgetting my basic math, but to accept the results of this poll is tantamount to believing that the post-election chaos, on the streets and in the corridors of politics, must have only been a figment of our imaginations.

I don’t want to hurt their feelings, so let’s give worldpublicopinion.org A+ for effort. As for publishing the results of the effort, maybe they should have considered the health hazards and slept on it. So, they left me with no choice but to correct parts of the poll and repeat it. Unlike the original survey, the refusal rate for this one was a little less than 52%, so you can take this as solid information.

How much confidence do you have in US President Barack Obama to do the right thing regarding world affairs?

I found the answer consistent with the WPO report: 16%. Then last night I asked myself the question and didn’t get a wink of sleep. I got on the internet to find out what “World Affairs” really meant.

Six hours later, I realized I wasn’t any wiser. After perusing the 38,700,000 results and getting familiar with terms such as “socioeconomic”, “geopolitical”, “interdependence”, “trade”, “foreign policy”, “global economy” and many more, I think I have to refine the question and call all those people again. In fact the question may need to be broken into two, because I spent another six hours thinking about “doing the right thing”, which led me to concepts like “ethics”, “political philosophy”, “interests”, “utilitarianism”, and “eye of the beholder”.
In light of this development, I decided to leave the foreign stuff until I can further specify what I am asking these people.

Considering everything that has occurred before, during and after the elections, do you consider Ahmadinejad to be the legitimate president of Iran?

Of the 50% who answered the question, 12.5% said they belonged to either the Basij or the Sepah [Revolutionary Guard], and 87.5% said “considering everything that has occurred before, during and especially after the elections” they are willing to consider Ahmadinejad as higher than President if he wanted them too....

Note: one respondent misunderstood “legitimate” as meaning “bastard”, for which he is in trouble as his phone was wiretapped.

In general, how satisfied are you with the process by which the authorities are elected in this country?

Now this question in the report were very interesting to me, but I though it required further probing. Here, I initially got the same numbers: a very large majority (81%) said they are satisfied with the general process, though only 40% said they were very satisfied. Sixteen percent say they are not satisfied. But when respondents were asked if they were very very satisfied, 20% said they were, and then only 10% said they were very very very satisfied.
My assistants are still on the phone with this question, incrementally adding a “very”....I will publish the results once the question is over.

In Iran how free do you think people are to express controversial political views, without fear of being harassed or punished?

To me this question should have been binary. Free or not free. Combining “how free” with “without fear” was just confusing. Let us look at the response with a 71% rating in the WPO report: “I am somewhat free to express, without fear.” Perhaps it is just me but I don’t understand what this phrase means. I can handle “I am free to express without fear”, or the opposite “I am not free to express without fear.” I can also process “I am somewhat free to express” and its opposite. Let me say it another way: I am either free of fear to say something, or not. I cannot be “somewhat” free of that fear.

Before going insane, I decided to rephrase the question:

Do you agree with Mr. Ahmadinejad that Iranians have “almost complete freedom”?

Lo and behold, 100% said “yes”.

Are you comfortable answering silly political questions over the phone in Iran?

I squeezed in this last but essential question to assess the reliability of my survey. 14% refused to answer because they were offended, 5% said they were comfortable, 50% said they were not comfortable and 31% responded with a single tut. I marked them as "freaked out and afraid even to say so".

warninglabel2