The Latest from Iran (2 September): The Votes on the Cabinet

NEW Iran: Busted! Would-be Minister of Science Rewrites His "Ph.D."
The Latest from Iran (1 September): The Ripples of Debate Continue

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

2000 GMT: Here is That Split in the Judiciary. For those who don't think there is a battle going on within the establishment, take note that pro-Ahmadinejad and anti-Ahmadinejad officials are praying in separate parts of the judiciary building.

1740 GMT: Checking the Scorecard on the Nuclear Talks.

What We Predicted (1145 GMT): "The foreign policy story to watch today is not in Germany, where there will be a ritual consideration of the "5+1" powers of Iran's reported new proposal over its nuclear programme but no substantive developments (because, if Iran has really submitted a new proposal, time will be needed to examine it)."

What Happened (The Statement): "World powers pressed Iran on Wednesday to meet them for talks on its disputed nuclear program before a United Nations General Assembly meeting later this month.

Volker Stanzel, political director in the German foreign ministry, made the comments in a statement after chairing a meeting with his counterparts from Russia, China, the United States, France and Britain to discuss Iran's nuclear program."

What Happened (Translation): Nothing.

EA Scorecard: Bullseye!

1545 GMT: Another Story to Watch. We saw a report earlier today but held off pending verification. The Assembly of Members of Parliament, made up of former MPs, was due to see opposition leaders including Mohammad Khatami, Mir Hossein Mousavi, and Mehdi Karoubi at its general meeting.

The gathering was cancelled, however, after pressure from authorities, including -- according to one MP --- threatening phone calls from security forces.

Some of you may remember that last month some former MPs issued a call, invoking the Iranian Constitution, for reconsideration of the Supreme Leader's position.

1535 GMT: More on that supposed Supreme Leader letter urging MPs to confirm the Ahmadinejad Cabinet. It is being reported that one of the Ministerial nominees is circulating the letter.

1320 GMT: The reformist Parleman News has a useful summary of today's discussions of the Cabinet nominees. The headline claim is that the Supreme Leader has unofficially asked Parliament to give its approval, a step that would support our interpretation of a working Khamenei-Ahmadinejad alliance (0730 GMT) until the Cabinet is established.

1315 GMT: The Mystery of the Dismissed Ambassadors. The Iranian Foreign Ministry has downplayed the report that President Ahmadinejad has dismissed 40 ambassadors for "supporting rioters" after the elections. Spokesman Hassan Qashqavi said, "Changing the ambassadors, the heads of our overseas offices and consulates is a natural affair that happens every three years."

1310 GMT: Press TV has now posted an English-language summary of the breaking story that President Obama has sent a second letter to the Supreme Leader. It adds from Tabnak that Obama's first letter, sent four months ago, was answered: ""The Leader at the time replied to the letter by providing argumentation."

1240 GMT: The leader of the reformist bloc in Parliament, Mohammad Reza Tabesh, has responded to the claims by the commander of the Revolutionary Guard, General Mohammad Ali Jafari, that former President Khatami and other reformist leaders have tried to topple the Supreme Leader (0830 GMT). Tabesh said that the Revolutionary Guard "should be a non-partisan organization and those who gave the permision to IRGC to enter election politics, making arrests and obtain the 'confessions' should be prosecuted".

1230 GMT: Parliamentary Notes. Reuters reports that the nominee for Minister of Science, Research, and Technology, Kanesh Daneshjou, has faced criticism in the Majlis. The rumour that Daneshjou is claiming a false Ph.D. from a British university does not appear to be the problem; rather, it is his role running the Interior Ministry's election headquarters. Comments have included, "Considering the heat in the society after the presidential election, there are doubts whether the nomination of Mr. Daneshjou will help to cool down the society or whether it increases the heat," and "The question is whether the university environment will accept a renowned political and security figure like you as a scientific figure?"

1205 GMT: Another Delay. State media are now indicating, and the lack of news supports this, that votes of confidence in Parliament will be on Thursday.

1145 GMT: The Foreign Policy Story to Watch Today. It is not in Germany, where there will be a ritual consideration of the "5+1" powers of Iran's reported new proposal over its nuclear programme but no substantive developments (because, if Iran has really submitted a new proposal, time will be needed to examine it).

Instead, the story could well be in Tabnak, which is claiming that President Obama has sent a second letter to the Supreme Leader. The content is not known, but speculation is that this is another invitation to open up paths for dialogue.

Notice, however, that the path has cut out the "middle man" of President Ahadminejad and gone straight to the top.

1000 GMT: Mehdi Karoubi has written to Grand Ayatollah Montazeri expressed his deep appreciation for Montazeri's support during the post-election conflict, in particular, the Ayatollah's expressions of regret and condemnation of attacks on protestors and detainees.

0830 GMT: Piling on the Pressure. Yet more confirmation of the Ahmadinejad-Revolutionary Guard to break the opposition: the Commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, General Mohammad Ali Jafari, has claimed that “the unpublished section of the confessions of the prisoners” indicate that former President Mohammad Khatami and other reformist leaders were trying to topple the Supreme Leader and the regime with post-election unrest.

(The stridently pro-Government Fars News features this as their lead story.)

0730 GMT: We've had another look at the story from yesterday of behind-the-scenes meetings between Ahmadinejad representatives, pro-Government senior clerics, and MPs to ensure approval of the President's ministers. Here is the translation from the National Iranian American Council:

There have been contacts from the office of the Supreme Leader and people close to Ahmadinejad to MPs. In one case, Commander of the Armed Forces Hassan Firouzabadi called some MPs into his office.

One MP told Rouydad [newspaper]: “They have contacted Representatives and they want Representatives to approve all of the Cabinet members. Their goal is to show, through a high vote of approval of all Ministers, that their power is great and that the influence of post-election protests has been negligible.”

When asked who did the contacting, this MP said, “The contacts came from the Supreme Leader’s office and some people close to Ahmadinejad, and Maj. Gen Hassan Firouzabadi even called some Representatives into his office.”

...The decision to put pressure on MPs to approve Cabinet officials was made last week in a meeting with the presence of Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami, Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, Mehdi Taeb, Morteza Moghtadaie, and some of Ahmadinejad’s deputies and some MPs including Gholamali Haddad-Adel, Mehdi Koochakzadeh, Hamid Rasaie, Movid Hosseini-Sadr, and Kazem Mousavi, as well the heads of two pro-government newspapers.

"Contacts from the office of the Supreme Leader". Is it safe to presume that, despite the weeks of bickering between Ayatollah Khamenei and President Ahmadinejad over political and legal issues, the two will be firmly allied to ensure the Cabinet is put in place?

0555 GMT: As we noted yesterday, the internal story in Iran is likely to be pushed aside by the international media in favour of the "5+1" talks on the Iranian nuclear programme in Germany today. This coverage was assured after Iran trumpeted that it was going to be put a new proposals to the powers (the US, UK, France, China, Russia, and Germany).

A separate feature isn't needed at this point. Here's the read: the date "15 September" has been floating around as the cut-off point for US engagement with Iran. While that date has been more a creation of White House spin and media speculation rather than a policy decision, Tehran needed to do something if it wanted to release the public pressure. That need is greater because the Ahmadinejad Government --- unlike the nuke-obsessed US media --- needs to concentrate on its internal position. So the day before a major international gathering, the Iranians say, "We'll talk," but give the appearance of doing it on their terms with a supposed new package.

0545 GMT: We held off from publishing this story yesterday, as it felt --- despite its apparent publication in Fars News --- like a rumour, but it has now been repreated by several Iranian sources.

President Ahmadinejad has apparently dismissed 40 ambassadors from their posts to bring "fundamental correction in the [Foreign] Ministry". The claim is that these ambassadors supported the Green movement and dissidents abroad and will be replaced with "specialists devoted to the bases of revolution".

If true, the action is far from unprecedented: soon after his initial election in 2005, Ahmadinejad recalled Iranian ambassadors from major posts, including London and Paris. In the current context, it should be seen as part of the President's efforts to assert his control over key ministries, including the judiciary and the Ministry of Intelligence as well as Foreign Affairs.

0530 GMT: After three days of debate, the Iranian Parliament is convening this morning for its votes of confidence in President Ahmadinejad's 21 Cabinet nominees. It's still anyone's guess how many will be rejected. Estimates of up to 7 had been put about.

News from the chamber yesterday continued to be mixed for the Government. MPs accepted without reservation Ahmadinejad's selection for Minister of Defence, Ahmad Vahidi, and the nominees for Justice and Agriculture apparently escaped criticism. However, the nominee for Welfare,  Fatehmeh Ajorloo, like another proposed female Minister, Marziyeh Vahid-Dastjerdi (Health), was attacked for her lack of knowledge.

Iran Special: Taking Apart the Regime's Defenses (Shahryar v. Afrasiabi)

The Latest from Iran (1 September): The Ripples of Debate Continue

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

Earlier this month, The Huffington Post featured a lengthy opinion piece from Professor Kaveh Afrasiabi, insisting on the legitimacy of the Presidential election and, beyond that, of the Ahmadinejad Government. While The Huffington Post is a high-profile outlet, I declined to reply to Afrasiabi. I had seen his polemical attack on Professor Ali Ansari in a Press TV discussion just after the election, and his arguments on the election had been put forth two months earlier by Flynt and Hillary Leverett and Seyed Mohammad Marandi.

Josh Shahryar (the creator of The Green Brief, one of the outstanding sources in this crisis) did respond, however, with a through dissection of Afrasiabi's assertions. We recommend this not to take sides in a fight but to illustrate how it is possible to marshal information, carefully and thoughtfully, for an analysis and an opinion with political impact. And, even as we are engaged in debate with "mainstream" journalists over the value of new media and Internet sources, we note that Shahryar's reading of events --- based on a network of contacts developed via the Web and Twitter as well as his thorough consideration of emerging news --- is far beyond that of much of the "established" broadcast and print media:

As a journalist who has been covering the Iranian Election, almost every day for the past two months from my puny little computer, I was shocked and dismayed when I read Kaveh L. Afrasiabi’s article on the Iranian Election Crisis. Published in The Huffington Post on August 20, 2009 and titled “Obama Should Congratulate Ahmadinejad,” the article urges President Obama to accept the outcome of the election and congratulate Ahmadinejad on his victory.

It must be pointed out, that throughout his article, Mr. Afrasiabi misrepresents the truth, omits key details, and at times simply presents inaccurate or false information to support his point of view. Fortunately, we live in a time of ‘information overload’ where the truth is easy to find, and we all know that there are always two sides to any given story.

Unlike Mr. Afrasiabi - who fails to mention on his Huffington Post profile that he has been a staunch supporter of Ahmadinejad for years - I concede that I have been drawn to the plight of millions of Iranians. I am an insignificant ‘International Green’ who supports Iranians in their struggle to obtain their rights. After reading Mr. Afrasiabi’s article, I had no other choice than to write a response – and I do so as an admirer and supporter of the Sea of Green – not as a representative.

Extracts of Mr. Afrasiabi’s article are included - without any touch-ups or rephrasing below in italics. My comments, rebuttals, and what I believe to be the “whole story” follow the extracts.

AFRASIABI: There are several good reasons why president Barack Obama should join his White House guest this week, Egypt's president Hosni Mubarak, as well as the UN's Secretary General, Ban Ki-Moon, and dozens of other world leaders who have extended congratulations to Iran's duly re-elected president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Not to do so reflects a poor judgment on the White House's part, particularly since Obama has yet to fulfill his own post-election promise of responding to Ahmadinejad's letter that congratulated him for his victory.

Contrary to what was stated, neither UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, nor President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt has congratulated Ahmadinejad. Mr. Ban Ki-Moon did send a letter to Ahmadinejad after the elections. His spokesperson, Marie Okabe, later clarified that the letter should not be construed, in any way, as congratulating Ahmadinejad. According to Ms. Okabe, “The letter takes advantage of the occasion of the inauguration to express the hope that Iran and the United Nations will continue to cooperate closely in addressing regional and global issues." She went on to add, "It is not accurate to refer to this as a congratulatory letter."

In regards to Mr. Mubarak, the Presidency of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s website did report, three weeks ago, that Mr. Mubarak had sent a note to Ahmadinejad congratulating him on his re-election. However, the Egyptian Foreign Ministry has since denied the report. Egyptian Foreign Ministry spokesman, Hossam Zaki’s response to the media about the story was, “I cannot confirm the authenticity of the report.” Furthermore, Arab League Secretary General, Amr Moussa’s act of congratulating Ahmadinejad cannot, in all honesty, be considered as an endorsement by Arab League Members – including Egypt.

Iranian media and government-run websites have claimed that the Japanese Premier, Taro Aso, has also congratulated Ahmadinejad. However, it comes as no surprise, that this report cannot be confirmed either.

Notwithstanding the above, there indeed have been some world leaders who have congratulated Ahmadinejad. A closer examination, however, reveals that out of the two dozen or so congratulatory notes, the majority were sent either by countries without a democracy or by heads of countries that do not wish to upset Iran’s Supreme Leader – given their geographic proximity and strong regional interests.

It is ludicrous to think that the leaders of China, North Korea, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, UAE, Syria, Qatar and Tajikistan would be, in any way, concerned about the fairness of an election. Let us not forget that the above-mentioned countries are dictatorships, strong-arm monarchies or have national leaders whose own elections were considered controversial.

The countries of Turkey, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Lebanon, Armenia and Iraq fall into the second category of “not wanting to upset Iran’s Supreme Leader.” Turkey - because of the Kurdish issue; Lebanon - to appease Hezbollah; Armenia - because Iran is one of the few neighbors with which it has friendly relations - and Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq - because their interests strongly demand good relations with Iran, regardless of the leadership.

This leaves out Brazil, India, Russia, Venezuela, Indonesia, Yemen and Hamas-held Gaza. As for countries such as Japan, Nations in the EU bloc, Australia, New Zealand and Canada – all countries that rank at the top when it comes to democracy – none have congratulated Ahmadinejad. Thus, Obama’s refusal to send a congratulatory note actually shows sound judgment on his part, as he heads a Nation that is a world-leader in democracy.

AFRASIABI: First, with the dust of the post-election turmoil settling and the absence of any hard evidence of "rigged elections" becoming more and more transparent, time is actually on the side of Ahmadinejad, who has been much vilified in the western press, and maligned at home by his reformist challengers, as the grinch who "stole" the election.

Unfortunately, the sum of evidence presented by Mr. Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi to corroborate their allegations of widespread fraud in the June 12th elections simply doesn't add up. This author has examined in depth both the official complaints of losing candidates, as well as the various reports issued by their "truth committee", and has found them to be dreadfully lacking in substance, contradictory, and thick on irrelevant innuendo, such as passing off such pre-election "irregularities" seen in television debates as evidence of election fraud.

The description of, “‘the dust of post-election turmoil settling” baffles the mind. The Iranian people have been protesting at every opportunity - in spite of an extremely high security presence. They have been shot at, beaten, tear gassed, imprisoned, tortured, and in many cases brutally killed. How has the dust settled?

In late June, thousands gathered at Ghoba Mosque and around Tehran. Thousands more turned out, facing the brutality of the security forces on July 30th. Hundreds were chanting in support of Karroubi, in front of Etemaade Melli’s office less than two weeks ago, although he explicitly asked them not to. Nightly, people chant “Alloha Akbar” from their rooftops, despite the threat of being shot at, fined, arrested or imprisoned. When the opposition calls for a protest, the people of Iran protest, not only in Tehran. We must keep in mind the thousands that gathered around the country, whose voices cannot be heard because of the government’s media blackout. The claim that, “The protests are over,” can only be made, IF and WHEN:

* Protests are no longer illegal; meaning that people can protest without the fear of reprisal
* Opposition Leaders call for a protest
* No one shows up

The truth of the matter is, if there are no “grand protests,” it is not because people don’t want to protest, but because the opposition has not called for one.

Regarding the claim, “The elections were not rigged,” the mere fact that "defeated" candidates and reformist politicians – and their followers - were not the only ones to have cast doubt on the results should merit speculation. Many others have challenged the validity of the results, including former President Hashemi Rafsanjani, who expressed his doubt during his sermon at Friday Prayer’s, as well as Khatami, who released a statement calling for a “referendum” over the issue.

For the sake of argument, let us set aside for a moment, that the previous Supreme Leader Rohullah Khomeini and the current Supreme Leader Seyed Ali Khamanei are dictators in the guise of religious sanctity. Mir Hossein Mousavi, Mohammad Khatami and Hashemi Rafsanjani are all two-term heads of the Iranian Government. Even if we discount Mousavi as a stakeholder in the election, dismiss Khatami as a reformist, what about arch-conservative Rafsanjani? Then again, these people are politicians and you never know what Rafsanjani might be hoping to gain from this.

Then what about a class of Iranian leaders who have little to nothing to gain by questioning the legitimacy of the government? Where do the clerics stand? In case anyone missed their comments here is what they have to say:

Read rest of article....