Official Iran Thread

[Dr. Eddies Wingman]

Now go ahead and flame me.

No way. That was an excellent read. Have a praise.

At the university I am studying at (as I may have pointed out before, I am taking a PhD in chemical engineering) - and particularly in our own department, there has been quite an influx of PhD students from Iran lately. I guess the discovery of several new natural gas fields play an important role in that.

The point is: All of them seem to share a commonpride in being from Iran - but what they embrace is the rich Persian culture. Most of them despise today's regime, and many of them state that going back to Iran is simply not an option - despite their pride in their heritage. They want to stay in Europe, or get a position in the US.

Also, these Iranians are not nearly as strict about religion as their regime. OK, they don't eat pork and most of them don't drink alcohol, but these aren't the people saying "allahu akbar" over lunch and take time off five times a day to turn to Mecca. In fact, out of all those coming here from Muslim countries, those from Iran seem to be those with the least fundamentalist views.

These are just my impressions based on the Iranians I know myself.

 

[____no5]

Alright.

Still, the Netherlands have more strict control than in any another European country. I see no reason why should not believe our Minister of Foreign Affairs in this matter.

I'd rate Netherlands 2nd more strict from all European countries

Spoiler

whose Port authorities I've dealt with

behind Belgium, which is a huge pain in the ass.

Spoiler

In Netherlands there is some kind of freedom that ease the strictness, plus it does so in the correct direction
Like that there are a lot of private terminals, fact that by definition reduce the power of Harbour Masters and relative corruption
For resuming, there is a strictness which yet is acceptable, because it's logical.
...And because (in shipping) it's a pleasure to see Dutchmen working  

[...]
@Perun : Yeah why flame you, what you've said is as logic as it gets I know some Iranians and see what you're talking about.

 

[Forostar]

The Netherlands are very careful when it comes to (helping to spread) nuclear information.
Iranian students are not allowed to study physics and such in the Netherlands.

Why so careful? Perhaps to learn from the past, and who knows the doings of Abdul Qadeer Khan in our country might be the reason.

Perun, that was an interesting post. Still I will respond critically (in my typical sharp tone?).

I might make mistakes, because I am not that aware of the perspective of Iranians themselves. You speak students, you read media. So if you read some of my words and you think they are not correct, please enlighten me.

Let's get to the post now. I know that many have asked themselves why the hell Iran is so stubborn in this situation. Why is it so hard to negotiate with Iran, despite the fact that very generous offers have been made? Why do neither carrot nor stick seem to work? If Iran really only wants nuclear power, then why are they so dickish about it and insist on enriching their uranium in their own country and all that?

The reason is that Iran is tired of being treated like a second-class country.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is tired of being treated like a second-class organization.
On a more serious note: Did the IAEA have access to and cooperation with Russia, USA and Israel when it comes to nuclear weapons? If the answer is yes, then it might not be the best thing to compare these countries to Iran, what do you think?

I have read Iranian media for several years now, and one term kept reappearing when talking about the international relations of Iran: independent nation. Iran demands the same rights as any other independent nation on this earth. They don't want their ships checked extra-strict. They don't see why any other country in this world, be it the US, Brazil, Japan, The Netherlands or whatever, can happily plaster their countries with nuclear plants and they can't.

North Korea can't either. When leaders of countries speak in an hostile manner about other countries, make rocket tests, things become serious. What can we do about it? Nothing?*

And, that too shouldn't be disregarded, they don't see why the US, UK, Russia, India or Pakistan can have nuclear weapons and they can't.

I rather wouldn't like to see Iran having nuclear weapons. The other countries should also abandon them, and I believe the USA and Russia have already made some kind of agreement for a start.

That is independent of Ahmadinejad's rhetoric of wiping out Israel. Let's put this straight: Most Iranians hate Ahmadinejad, and his words about Israel are both a tactic (a very poor one) of driving attention away from his miserable performance as a politician, and simple attention-whoring. One of the most predominant accusations against Ahmadinejad is that he deprived the Iranian nation of its dignity.

I understand that they hate their president, but they can't stop him from ordering someone to push a red button, can they?

To most Iranians, the whole nuclear thing is not a big topic.

Naturally they don't expect Iran to fire nuclear weapons on their own cities. I still wonder if they fear repercussions? They never think about it? Do they read or write about it? Are they forbidden to write about it?
Or do they really trust their hated president so much?

They have different issues: Lack of freedom, poverty, unemployment and whatnot. The nuclear thing is simply non-existent in the average political Iranian's mind. But when you talk to them about it, and I really mean anti-Ahmadinejad Iranians, those who go out on the street and die fighting against him, you will still hear that they don't understand why they can't have nuclear power.

Why would they want to have those weapons, then? As a pure symbolic possession?
Ask them, their answer could be a basis for an interesting continuation of this discussion.
(However, I hope we'll hear more, besides "other countries have them" so why shouldn't we?)

Iranians are very sensitive when it comes to such things. This is something that is very difficult to understand for most westerners. In the course of the 20th century, many Iranians fought and died against foreign - western - dominance in their country. They were upset about seeing their country sold out to Russians, British and Americans, without getting even the smallest piece of the pie themselves. For a long time, Iran was under disability, patronised at best, enslaved at worst. Iranian governments were deposed and installed by foreign powers. For a decade, Iranians struggled long and hard for a constitution like every other independent nation in the world had, and then it became worthless because the Russians didn't like it. Leaders who had an interest in Iran becoming a strong, modern, independent nation were simply deposed by British, Soviet and American agents.

But how do the people you speak see the period since 1979? That is a more recent period. I suppose they understand why their parents (or they themselves) live in many numbers outside their own country? E.g. because they wish to have more freedom, and do not wish to be hunted down for some trivial matter? Is this subject as popular as the "hands off our country, even if you're worried about our powerplants"-mentality?

This sort of thing doesn't sit well with a nation. The Iranians believe that they are only demanding something that every other nation has- independence and sovereignty. That is a thought to be found with every Iranian, regardless of their political affiliation. It is the idea that the western countries are sticking their nose into what is Iran's business. They hate that.

I don't see why possessing nuclear weapons is a business of one nation.

Now go ahead and flame me.

Why would I? I hope my post came not across as a flaming one. I am very interested in this subject and hope that we all can debate about it without too much irritation, and I'd like to learn from all this as well.

*My main question at this point: If we don't want Iran's cooperation and if we don't have to check their ships and installations, what should "the world" do then?

 

[Perun]

These are just my impressions based on the Iranians I know myself.

Those are very interesting impressions, because they stem from people who have an affinity to the Islamic Republic. The Iranians I know are all exiled, and hate the system. Most are atheists, democrats and hate everything that has to do with the Islamic Republic.


Now Foro, unfortunately I can't answer all of your questions because, as I said, I am neither Iran nor its government. Plus, none of that was a statement of my opinion. So the following is again not what I think, but what Iranians think.

On a more serious note: Did the IAEA have access to and cooperation with Russia, USA and Israel when it comes to nuclear weapons?

I don't know.

Why would they want to have those weapons, then? As a pure symbolic possession?
Ask them, their answer could be a basis for an interesting continuation of this discussion.

Of course I don't want Iran to have nuclear weapons either. From what I gather, the general perspective of the Iranians I know and know of is that they don't want nuclear arms either, but don't want anybody to tell Iran that it is not allowed to have any, least of all another nuclear power. What they want is that the regime abolishes possible plans for nuclear armament by popular pressure from within the country. They want the government to listen to the people.

You see, the thing is this: As long as the US and the UK (very important, the British are considered the devil incarnate by the regime, a long, old story) raise their voice and say the same things as the Iranian people do, Ahmadinejad and Khamenei will always be able to say that it is western agents who are talking and not the people themselves. I'm not kidding, that is exactly what they are arguing with. So whatever the western countries do, it's not going to guarantee that it will help the people of Iran.

I understand that they hate their president, but they can't stop him from ordering someone to push a red button, can they?

I'm not sure what you mean with that. Of course they can't, because they'd get killed if they tried.

(However, I hope we'll hear more, besides "other countries have them" so why shouldn't we?)

Unfortunately, that is indeed the main argument... besides the fact that it is believed by some, I don't know how many, that since Iran is the biggest, most populous and most powerful nation of the region, it has every right to possess military superiority.

But how do the people you speak see the period since 1979? That is a more recent period. I suppose they understand why their parents (or they themselves) live in many numbers outside their own country? E.g. because they wish to have more freedom, and do not wish to be hunted down for some trivial matter? Is this subject as popular as the "hands off our country, even if you're worried about our powerplants"-mentality?

Yes, of course that is the most important topic. And most exiled Iranians are very political and know exactly why they are exiled. They oppose Ahmadinejad or even the entire Islamic Republic with a passion. But they are still very aware of the backgrounds of the 1978/79 revolution, and there are only very few who think the revolution in itself was wrong. The motives behind it, the deposition of a tyrant and the riddance of foreign influence, are supported to this day.
In fact, many democratic Iranians have a very strong affection to a certain Mohammed Mossadeq and share his mix of democracy and strong national politics.

What I keep hearing about the post-revolutionary time is this: Many non-Iranians ask why there hasn't been a political uprising since, even though the people aren't any better off than in the Shah era. The reason is that the 1978/79 revolution was really a popular revolution, not a coup d'etat like in most other countries. It was a revolution from within, with every element of the population participating. Seeing to where that led, many Iranians are frustrated and in resignation. In 1978/79 they thought "whatever happens, it can't get worse", and yet it did... so now they are more careful about political change. What I heard from many is that they are aiming for slow but steady progress, to improve the system from within until one day they'll notice they won't need the Islamic Republic anymore... but that is still a long road.

*My main question at this point: If we don't want Iran's cooperation and if we don't have to check their ships and installations, what should "the world" do then?

My personal opinion differs from the general Iranian view... which of the two are you asking for?



You see, what I am trying to point out with all this is that there is no easy solution when dealing with Iran. The matter is very complicated and in parts inconsistent and contradictory. A lot of sensitivity is necessary, and it is very difficult to understand how things work with Iran.

 

[Forostar]

Thanks, that was a lot of background info again!  

So whatever the western countries do, it's not going to guarantee that it will help the people of Iran.

That's a doomy prospect.

I'm not sure what you mean with that. Of course they can't, because they'd get killed if they tried.

I wondered if the people from Iran really have no fear of that subject (the threat of Iran using nuclear weapons). Do they know their president so well that he's only bluffing? I mean, they hate him, so why can they trust him?

My personal opinion differs from the general Iranian view... which of the two are you asking for?

If possible, both. Yours and e.g. one of the people you know personally.

You see, what I am trying to point out with all this is that there is no easy solution when dealing with Iran. The matter is very complicated and in parts inconsistent and contradictory. A lot of sensitivity is necessary, and it is very difficult to understand how things work with Iran.

I sure see it, you explained it well. I hope the Iranians have more faith in the path Obama has chosen.

 

[Forostar]

Another test. :/

+

Just found this plus many more questions and answers about Iran and the nuclear issue:

Don't existing nuclear powers have obligations to get rid of their weapons under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)?

Article VI commits them to "pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament". The nuclear powers claim they have done this by reducing their warheads, but critics say they have not really moved towards nuclear disarmament. Critics also argue that the US and UK have broken the treaty by transferring nuclear technology from one to another. The US and UK say that this is not affected by the NPT.


Doesn't Israel have a nuclear bomb?

Yes. Israel, however, is not a party to the NPT, so is not obliged to report to it. Neither are India or Pakistan, both of which have developed nuclear weapons. North Korea has left the treaty and has announced that it has acquired a nuclear weapons capacity.

On 18 September 2009, the IAEA called on Israel to join the NPT and open its nuclear facilities to inspection. The resolution said that the IAEA "Expresses concern about the Israeli nuclear capabilities, and calls upon Israel to accede to the NPT and place all its nuclear facilities under comprehensive IAEA safeguards... "

Israel refuses to join the NPT or allow inspections. It is reckoned to have up to 400 warheads but refuses to confirm or deny this.

 

[Perun]

Iran's youth is on the streets again. 26th December was Ashura, the highest Shi'ite holiday. Generally, the Iranian government permits mass demonstrations on this day, however they always hope it would be anti-American ones. But instead of chanting "marg bar amrika" (death to America), they are chanting "marg bar diktator"... and what should really give Khamenei and Ahmadinejad the chills is that people are also chanting "allahu akbar", "God is great", a traditional chant that has been on the people's lips in the 1905-1911 and 1978/79 revolutions.

The western media aren't properly reflecting on this. Everybody only cares for the nuclear program, but there is an actual revolution in Iran. The following article should put this a bit more into perspective:


Is this Iran’s Berlin Wall moment?
Robin Wright: Commentary

It is time to start wondering out loud whether Iran’s uprising could become one of those Berlin Wall moments.

This is not yet a counter-revolution. And the new “green movement” is a coalition of disparate factions — from former presidents to people who have never voted at all — who view the issues through vastly different prisms. Yet the pattern of public outpourings since the disputed election six months ago is setting historic precedents.

The opposition has proven it has the resolve and resilience to sustain its risky challenge, despite the regime’s ruthless use of force, mass arrests, show trials and reports of torture and rape in prison. In the escalating political showdown the opposition has the momentum.

Just as important, the emergence of people power is also setting a new precedent in the last bloc of countries ruled by authoritarian regimes. Thirty years ago, Iran’s revolution redefined politics throughout the Middle East by ending dynastic rule and introducing Islam as a modern political idiom. Iran’s uprising is doing it again — this time by taking to the streets to demand an end to dictatorship as well as calling for fundamental rights such as free speech, a free press and respect for the individual vote.
But the green movement is far more than simply sporadic eruptions. This is the most vibrant and imaginative civil disobedience campaign in the world.

There’s the currency campaign, for starters. Thousands of rial notes have been stamped with a simple green “V” for victory. Others bear handwritten slogans that echo the public chants denouncing the regime. Some have even been reprinted with pictures: one is a cartoon of President Ahmadinejad with “people’s enemy” written underneath. Another carries a picture from the mobile phone images of Neda Agha Soltan as she lay dying on the street from a sniper’s bullet. Underneath is written “death to the dictator” — a common public chant against Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

The currency campaign even denounces the regime’s foreign policy. “Khamenei the non-believer is the servant of [Russian leader Vladimir] Putin,” declares one slogan, written in green, on a 20,000-rial note. Another chastises: “They stole money and give it to [Venezuelan President Hugo] Chavez.” Some messages simply appeal for others to join the campaign to write anti-regime messages on one billion banknotes. The Government reportedly tried to take the marked notes out of circulation, but found there were too many to replace.

Then there is the boycott of goods advertised on state-controlled television. People in line at markets whisper to other shoppers not to buy certain products that help to subsidise the Government’s broadcasting monopoly — and its version of events. The opposition has also called for boycotts on mobile phone companies that provide technology to the Government. It is impossible to assess the impact but it adds a critical economic component to the political confrontation.

Civil disobedience is often brazen. Graffiti is increasingly showing up on public walls — in green spray paint — to berate the authorities or to announce a new demonstration. Large posters of arrested protesters and dissidents demanding their freedom have appeared on campuses, often timed for the appearance of a pro-regime event or speech.

At football matches and in subway tunnels, mobile phone videos record spontaneous outbursts of the two key opposition chants: “death to the dictator” and “God is great”. The latter was the pivotal revolutionary chant against the monarchy that has been usurped to denounce the revolution’s hardliners. The implication is that God has abandoned the revolution to side with and protect the green movement.

Participation in civil disobedience is far more widespread than the protests. It includes individual, uncoordinated acts, such as a challenge to the Supreme Leader by Mahmoud Vahidnia, an unassuming maths student with no record of dissent. At a meeting with Iran’s academic elite Ayatollah Khamenei warned that the “biggest crime” was questioning the June 12 election. Mr Vahidnia then went to the microphone and criticised the government crackdown, asking about alleged prison abuses and why no one was allowed to criticise the leader. He also told him that he lived in a bubble.

So far the green movement has insisted on non-violence. Perhaps the ultimate irony in the Islamic Republic today is that a brutal revolutionary regime suspected of secretly working on a nuclear weapon faces its biggest challenge from peaceful civil disobedience. And even such a militarised regime has been unable to put it down.

Robin Wright is a senior Fellow at the US Institute of Peace in Washington. The author of five books on the Middle East, she has visited Iran regularly since 1973

 

[Forostar]

there is an actual revolution in Iran.

Thanks for the update. Let's hope it will turn into someting good, though I have a heavy heart about it.

 

[Perun]

It's not going to be bloodless.

 

[Forostar]

Exactly. And I'm afraid it will take years.

 

[Perun]

Exactly. And I'm afraid it will take years.

I read an account of the current movement earlier today, in which the author stated that the change of a society takes longer than a revolution against a political system, but unlike such revolution, it is permanent.

However, I don't think it will take very long anymore. A regime without popular support of any kind can't stay in office for very long, even if they have terror squads.

Here is a commentary on the pro-government rallies that have been occupying the media yesterday:

‘Millions’ Out in Support of Government in Iran? Think Again

Today, pro-government Iranians took to streets in Tehran and possibly other cities in a show of support for the Ahmadinejad government and for Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. A report by CNN spoke of hundreds of thousands of people in Tehran alone and perhaps thousands more in “Tabriz, Shiraz, Arak, Gilan and Sistan-Baluchestan province.”

According to CNN, protesters chanted slogans against Mir Hossein Mousavi, America, Britain, France, Israel and the Green Movement’s protests on Sunday – Ashura. However, the CNN report while accurate in most respects, failed to mention some very key facts about the protests; facts that would show the true nature of the protests.

For starters, the CNN report and some other media reports do not mention the fact that dozens of Buses chartered by the Iranian government ran non-stop from villages and suburbs around Tehran and other cities, bringing in government supporters in hordes to the protest venues. The buses began their operation the day before, ensuring the protest looked large enough.

These protesters were then later dispatched to their homes outside Tehran and other cities by the same buses. So what seemed like tens of thousands of Tehranis was in reality a mix of Tehranis and non-Tehranis brought in specifically for the purpose of fooling the world into believing that Tehran and other cities fully supports Khamenei and Ahmadinejad.

And while government-run media claimed millions and CNN claimed hundreds of thousands and that Tehran was ‘packed’ with protesters, independent analyses show that the protest in Tehran was composed of no more than 20,000 people.

Secondly, they fail to mention the fact that the protesters were offered free refreshments at the expense of the government to keep them there and to boost their morale. Their banners, slogans and even the declaration they released denouncing the opposition was written, prepared and handed over to them by the government. Protesters received all their material needs from the government from the minute they boarded the buses to the minute they got back home.

Even so, the enthusiasm that Green Movement supporters show when they are out protesting was non-existent during this protest. People had simply brought their whole families out for a day out on the streets after being prepped up by the government to counter the popular movement that is shaking the core of the Islamic Republic.

And even the government’s own media announced that there were no protests in some of the other large cities. Mashhad, the second largest city saw almost nothing. Neither did Isfahan, the third largest city. And there was no independent confirmation of protests from the cities that the government-run media reported.

Finally, there was no riot police, Basij or IRGC members out with batons, cables, pepper spray, tear gas and bullets to disperse the people or stop them from chanting and gathering. Compare this to the millions of people who marched onto streets in June or the hundreds of thousands that marched on Sunday in the face of brutal repression and a government ban on their protests and you will clearly see the desperate attempts by the Iranian government to make the world believe it has significant support among the populace.

If the government lifts bans on opposition protests, does not cut off telecommunication systems to disrupt planning, does not arrests hundreds and kill dozens, then we’ll see millions out on Iran’s streets every day.

The truth is, if the government did have support among the people, the crowds on Ashura would have been split between the Green Movement and the supporters of the Islamic Republic. On that day, it was an overwhelming show of support for reform and a clear rejection of the Islamic Republic – plain and simple. The ‘Tehranis’ the government showed the world today were huddled up in small pockets on that day or sitting at home in their villages, watching government propaganda on TV.

Protests like today’s may make the government feel a bit less insecure about its prospects of survival, but it is in no way going to change the resolve of the Iranian people or the perception of the government’s brutality and weakness in the minds of foreigners.

 

[Forostar]

dozens of Buses chartered by the Iranian government ran non-stop from villages and suburbs around Tehran and other cities, bringing in government supporters in hordes to the protest venues.

+

Their banners, slogans and even the declaration they released denouncing the opposition was written, prepared and handed over to them by the government.

Man, this government is so pathetic. Somehow I have to think about Monty Python, not sure why. Especially, that sentence with "buses ran non-stop" sounds comical, even if it isn't of course.

Thanks for posting again mate, let's hope those buses will run out of gas soon.

 

[Perun]

What you see is not real
Those who know will not tell

Silent screams, laughing here
Dying to tell you the truth

 

[Genghis Khan]

Thanks for the update Perun.  When I read that Iranians were out in huge numbers supporting the government, I wondered how secure the protesters were in achieving their goals.  Keep us updated! 

Iran could be the first real democracy in the Middle East (I don't count Turkey as Middle East).  Hopefully, the new movement has learned from the mistakes of the 1980 Revolution.

 

[Perun]

I'm not sure if this made any news abroad, but Shimon Peres visited Germany this week. Apart from traffic chaos resulting from the closing-down of central Berlin, the visit was very significant in its own right. It was only the third time an Israeli head of government visited Germany, and the first time since reunification. Peres' visit coincided with the Holocaust memorial day, and Peres and German chancellor Merkel visited the Holocaust Memorial together. In her speech, Merkel addressed Iran and its stance towards Israel. I couldn't find a decent article on an English-language German website, so I'm quoting from here:

German Chancellor Angela Merkel voiced a tough position vis-à-vis Iran Monday in the annual reception for German diplomats, warning that Tehran can expect tougher sanctions should it fail to cooperate with the West.

"Time is running out," Merkel was quoted as saying by the DPA news agency, adding that tighter sanctions would constitute a "tragedy" for Iranian citizens.

In the wake of this, it has been pointed out by exiled Iranians and German media, that the Iranian government is using German logistics and technology to monitor telephone and internet communication within Iran, as well as communication between people inside and outside Iran. It's not exactly news, but nobody cared for this sort of thing after Michael Jackson died.

Amazingly, there has now actually been a reaction from the responsible company who said they will reject future orders from Iran. Whether they unofficially quit those deals is anyone's guess. And as the article I linked to says, other German companies don't give a wet fart.

 

[Genghis Khan]

Thanks for the update.  I did not see any comments about German communication companies in that article.  Did I miss something?

 

[Perun]

It's in the last two links, not the first one.

 

[Perun]

This is just too fucking hilarious... all the world's media is falling for Ahmadinejad's trap.

Yesterday was the 31. anniversary of the Iranian Revolution, and protesters again took the streets in major Iranian cities. I know of confirmed reports of protests and clashes in Tehran, Esfahan, Shiraz, Mashhad, Ahvaz and Tabriz. Obviously, Ahmadi knew what was going to happen, so he tried to distract observers by announcing that Iran is now a nuclear country. And indeed, he managed to trick the western media... all the world is yet again talking about the nuclear program, and nobody mentions that protesters have taken control of an entire district in central Tehran.

I know nobody cares for the people of Iran, but still, it's ironic that our oh so advanced and freedom-loving society just ignores an entire people's fight for freedom.

 

[Deleted member 7164]

It means that our society is highly ironic and contradictory.
In any case, they have my full support. Always good to see people fighting against injustice. Especially when your society is a textbook example of apathy.

 

[____no5]

I know nobody cares for the people of Iran, but still, it's ironic that our oh so advanced and freedom-loving society just ignores an entire people's fight for freedom.

There are a few people who care and appreciate Iran's people effort, including myself.
The number of those supporters has been grown since the elections, and will keep growing.