type here...
Home Blog Page 361

Iran: Set Immediate Moratorium on Executions

-
0
Iran: Set Immediate Moratorium on Executions

 

(Beirut)– Iran should issue an immediate moratorium on executions in light of continued revelations of unlawful or politically motivated executions following flawed trials.excuted

On October 26, 2013, the government executed 16 people in what the prosecutor said was “retaliation” for the killings of more than a dozen border guards along the Iran-Pakistan border. In unrelated incidents, rights activists also reported that authorities had executed two Kurdish prisoners without warning on the same day.

“What kind of justice system hangs 16 prisoners ‘in response’ to a recent killing of security officials, with no indication that they had anything to do with these crimes,” said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. “The retaliatory execution of 16 men should sound the alarm for an immediate moratorium on the death penalty in Iran and a massive overhaul of its flawed judicial system.”

Rights groups have documented more than 400 executions in Iran so far in 2013, with at least 125 of those carried out since the election of President Hassan Rouhani on June 14 in a judicial system that is rife with due process failures.

On October 26, Mohammad Marzieh, the public prosecutor of the southeastern city of Zahedan,announced that authorities had “executed 16 bandits linked to anti-government groups in response to the martyrdom of the border guards.” The semi-official Fars News Agency reported that armed groups near the border town of Saravan in Sistan-Baluchistan province killed at least 14 members of Iran’s security forces on October 25.

In his statement to the Fars News Agency, Marzieh, Zahedan’s public prosecutor, said that the execution of the 16 men followed “previous warnings … that any action that resulted in injuries to innocent people or police and security forces would be responded to in kind.” He warned that Iran’s “judiciary would not, under any circumstances, look the other way in response to these [terrorist] actions.” Marzieh is an employee of Iran’s judiciary, which is headed by Ayatollah Sadegh Larijani. Under Iran’s constitution the head of the judiciary, who is appointed by the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has the power to pardon or prevent the execution of prisoners sentenced to death.

On October 27, Ebrahim Hamidi, the head of Sistan-Baluchistan’s judiciary, revealed the names of the 16 people executed. He said that all had previously been tried, convicted, and sentenced to death. He said eight were members of the terrorist group Jundullah, while the other eight had been sentenced to death for drug trafficking.

Hamidi said in his statement that the Jundullah members had not been executed earlier in the hope that they would show remorse for their actions, but that the recent border attack “proved” that they continue their belief in an oppressive cause and the use of violence. He implied that the attackers were formed from remnants of Jundullah, which the government claims it defeated after authorities captured and executed its leader, Abdolmalek Rigi, in 2010. The “judiciary issues no ruling or decision based on emotions or a desire to take revenge,” he said, but provided no explanation as to how any of those executed were, either directly or indirectly, involved in the recent border attack.

Initial reports indicate that the attackers fled across the border into Pakistan and were members of a Sunni extremist group called Jaish al-Adl (Army of Justice). On October 27, the group claimed responsibility for the attack on their website, saying that Iran’s involvement in Syria and its oppression of its Sunni minority justified the attack. Little is known about Jaish al-Adl, or its relationship, if any, to Jundullah.

Sistan-Baluchistan province and especially the border areas between Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan are plagued with insecurity and violence caused by a combination of drug trafficking and attacks by armed insurgent groups. The Iranian government claims that more than 3,500 members of its security forces have been killed in clashes with armed traffickers and insurgent groups linked to extremist Sunni factions.

On the same day as Marzieh’s announcement, Human Rights Watch learned of the execution of the two Kurdish prisoners sentenced to death for their alleged links to the armed Party for Free Life of Kurdistan, or PJAK. PJAK is identified as a terrorist group by the Iranian government and several other countries. Authorities executed a prominent Kurdish political prisoner, Habibollah Golparipour, in the northwest town of Orumiyeh without notification, his lawyer told Human Rights Watch. Ehsan Mojtavi, the lawyer, told Human Rights Watch that on the morning of October 26, authorities informed Golparipour’s family that they had hanged him in Orumiyeh prison. Mojtavi said authorities had not given any notice of the execution to him or the family.

Mojtavi said the family learned that authorities had transferred Golparipour to a solitary cell on October 25, so they traveled from Sanandaj, where they live, to Orumiyeh to seek information about Golparipour’s condition and whereabouts. But in the morning of October 26, authorities informed them that they had executed Golparipour the night before and refused to hand over his body. Mojtavi said a court convicted his client in 2007 based on books and writings taken from him during his arrest and witnesses who allegedly testified about his client’s involvement with PJAK, but whom Golparipour never had a chance to challenge in court or during trial.

A letter allegedly written by Golparipour in March 2012 said that his interrogators in the Intelligence Ministry had subjected him to severe psychological and physical torture during his initial detention in Orumiyeh and Mahabad. He wrote that a court sentenced him to death after a trial that lasted no more than a few minutes. In his letter, Golparipour steadfastly denied carrying arms or otherwise supporting or calling for the use of violence. He said he had filed a complaint but that the authorities did not investigate his torture allegations. A trusted source also provided Human Rights Watch with two audio recordings said to be the voice of Golparipour, in which he vividly describes his torture at the hands of Intelligence Ministry officials, recounts various due process violations during his interrogation and trial, and notes the “injustice” of being sentenced to death “merely for distributing and publishing books.”

A copy of Golparipour’s conviction by Branch One of the Mahabad Revolutionary Court on March 15, 2010, which Human Rights Watch reviewed, indicates that the court sentenced him to death based on articles 186 and 190 of Iran’s old penal code for “corruption on earth” and “enmity against God.” The ruling states that Golparipour confessed to being a member of PJAK and “cooperating with and actively engaging on the terrorist group’s behalf.” Under those articles, anyone found guilty of taking up arms against the state, or belonging to an organization taking up arms against the government, also may be sentenced to death for “enmity against God” regardless of whether they used weapons or resorted to violence.

Iran’s new penal code, which went into effect in 2013, retains the death penalty for terrorism-related charges. In cases in which an alleged member of an armed or terrorist group is not found to have used weapons or resorted to violence, however, it calls for sentences not exceeding 15 years.

Mojtavi, the lawyer, confirmed to Human Rights Watch that Iran’s criminal law allows those convicted under the old penal code to request a review of their sentence if the new code imposes a lighter punishment. He said that about 15 to 20 days ago Golparipour’s family requested a review of his case in light of the amendments to the new penal code, hoping that the death sentence would be reduced. But the sentence was carried out before the Supreme Court could rule on the request.

Human Rights Watch has criticized both the old and new penal code’s definitions of terrorism-related crimes for being overly broad or vaguely worded.

Kurdish activists operating outside Iran informed Human Rights Watch that on October 26 authorities also executed Reza Esmaili on charges of membership in PJAK. Human Rights Watch has not been able to confirm information regarding Esmaili’s case and execution.

On October 10, Iran’s Revolutionary Guards announced that its forces had clashed with armed insurgents near the Kurdish town of Baneh, along the Iran-Iraq border, which led to the deaths of five of its members. Kurdish rights activists have told Human Rights Watch that at least 40 members of Iran’s Kurdish minority are on death row, convicted on political charges, crimes not considered “most serious” under international law, or sentenced after flawed trials. They include Zaniar and Loghman Moradi, who are at imminent risk of execution.

Article 38 of the Iranian Constitution prohibits all forms of torture “for the purpose of obtaining confessions.” The Penal Code also provides for the punishment of officials who torture citizens to obtain confessions. Despite these legal and constitutional guarantees regarding confessions under duress, the government sometimes broadcasts “confessions”on television even before a trial has concluded and generally accepts them as evidence in court. Such broadcasts violate Iran’s fair trial obligations under article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which it is a state party.

In 2012 Iran remained one of the world’s foremost executioners, with more than 500 prisoners hanged either in prisons or in public. The Iranian government has announced at least 260 executions in 2013, with rights groups alleging or documenting an additional 160 or so unannounced executions. At least 15 of these executions have been carried out in connection with terrorism-related charges such asmoharebeh. The vast majority of executions carried out in Iran during the past few years are for alleged drug-related offenses including trafficking, which are crimes not considered “most serious” under international law.

On August 1, Human Rights Watch wrote a letter in which it called on Rouhani, then the president-elect, to push for a moratorium on the death penalty. Human Rights Watch opposes capital punishment in all circumstances because of its irreversible, cruel, and inhumane nature.

“Iran’s judiciary should take seriously any admission or suggestion by its employees that executions are being carried out based on arbitrary and unlawful considerations such as responding to the killing of security forces,” Whitson said. “President Rouhani’s administration can play an important role by calling for a moratorium on all executions and a thorough review of the way Iran investigates, tries, and sentences suspects.”

HRW

Iranian reformer Mousavi’s daughters stripped and attacked by guards

-
0
Iranian reformer Mousavi’s daughters stripped and attacked by guards

 

Iranian female guards struck the two daughters of reformist opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi and bit one of them after they visited their father under house arrest, one of the daughters said on Facebook late on Thursday.

Mir Hossein Mousavi pictured in Tehran duiring the 2009 Iranian election. Photograph: Majid/Getty Images
Mir Hossein Mousavi pictured in Tehran duiring the 2009 Iranian election. Photograph: Majid/Getty Images

Mousavi, in his 70s and in poor health, has been held under house arrest since early 2011 when he called for marches in solidarity with Arab spring pro-democracy protests.

The election of relative moderate Hassan Rouhani as Iran‘s president in August and his expressed wish to see all political prisoners released has led to hopes that Mousavi, a former prime minister, and other reformists may soon be freed.

Nargess Mousavi said she and her sister were told they could visit their father and mother, also under house arrest, and have lunch with them on the occasion of the Shi’ite Muslim holy day of Eid al-Ghadeer on Wednesday. The visit took place at an intelligence ministry house in Tehran, next to her father’s place of arrest, in the presence of two female security agents, she said.

One of the guards attempted to search the women as they left. “We were then met with a bizarre and filthy demand by this prison guard,” she wrote on Facebook. “We couldn’t believe it at first, but she unabashedly repeated her demand, even saying she wanted us to take off our underwear. To try and describe her treatment of us defies basic human decency. After refusing to take off our underclothes, she attacked us and smacked both my sister Zahra and myself in the ear with a great deal of force.

“As I was trying to grab her hand to keep her from attacking us any further, she stopped acting like a human being and bit my entire wrist like a wild animal,” she wrote, attaching a picture of a wrist with what appeared to be teeth marks.

The Fars news agency, which is close to Iran’s elite Revolutionary Guards, quoted a source as saying Mousavi’s daughters attacked the guards in “a fully organised and intentional act to create an atmosphere for the media in order to exert pressure on security and judiciary officials”.

Mirhossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karoubi, a former speaker of the Iranian parliament, led the “green movement” protests that followed their 2009 disputed presidential election defeat to hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

At least 27 people were killed and hundreds jailed in a violent state crackdown on the protests, the largest opposition demonstrations since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

Mousavi and Karoubi have been under tight surveillance for more than two years but since Rouhani’s election their living conditions have been eased and their case referred to a powerful state security court as Iran seems keen to heal old conflicts both at home and with the West.

However, hardline conservative fears of renewed protest rallies may weigh against their release.

the guardian

Iran’s government criticised over nuclear talks

-
0
Iran’s government criticised over nuclear talks

 

By Peter Symonds
24 October 2013

In the aftermath of international talks in Geneva last week on Iran’s nuclear program, open divisions have begun to emerge in Tehran’s ruling circles over the efforts of Presidentphoto04Hassan Rouhani to reach a deal with Washington to end the punitive US-led sanctions that have crippled the country’s economy.

Rouhani won June’s presidential election and was installed in August. At the UN last month, he and his ministers engaged in what has been dubbed a “charm offensive,” speaking widely to the US media, business groups and think tanks, and mooting a possible rapprochement. Just before his return to Iran, Rouhani had a 15-minute phone conversation with Barack Obama, the first contact between the presidents of the two countries since the 1979 Iranian revolution ousted the brutal regime of US ally, Shah Reza Pahlavi.

At the Geneva talks last week, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Zarif made a PowerPoint presentation, entitled “Closing an Unnecessary Crisis, and Opening New Horizons,” which outlined the basis for negotiations to end the decade-long US-led confrontation with Iran over its nuclear programs. Details of the discussions have not been made public. The next round of talks between Iran and the P5+1 group (the US, China, Russia, Britain, France and Germany) has been scheduled for November 7-8.

Iran Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, cautiously gave the green light for Rouhani’s diplomatic efforts, which were also endorsed by the Iranian parliament. Nevertheless, elements of the “Principalist” faction have begun to publicly criticise the negotiations.

In a comment entitled “Why is the enemy satisfied?” the editor of the Kayhan newspaper, Hossein Shariatmadari, questioned the secrecy of the talks, saying that it raised “suspicions in public opinion that [Iran’s negotiators] might give an ‘inappropriate’ concession.” He declared: “The unprecedented excitement of [the US] … shows that we have not gained any concessions in return for all the concessions we have given away or promised to give away.”

Other “hardline” newspapers targeted Foreign Minister Zarif and “the New Yorkers circle” of Iranian officials, accusing them of being responsible for “damaging the national interest” in the past. Zarif was educated in the US and was based in New York as Iran’s UN ambassador for five years.

Former Iranian President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani came under fire for suggesting that the slogan “Death to America” would no longer be appropriate if relations between Tehran and Washington were normalised. General Masoud Jazayeri, a senior commander in Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, announced a “Death to America committee” to organise a major anti-US rally on November 4, the anniversary of the takeover of the US Embassy in 1979 by protesters.

Rouhani is closely aligned with Rafsanjani, a billionaire businessman who served as president between 1989 and 1997. Rouhani served as Rafsanjani’s national security adviser, continuing in that role under “reformist” president Mohammad Khatami. Both Rafsanjani and Khatami sought to end the standoff with the US over the country’s nuclear programs as part of a program of pro-market restructuring aimed at opening up the economy to Western investment.

Rafsanjani speaks for layers of private businesses who have not only been hard hit by the international economic sanctions but have been squeezed by state-owned monopolies and particularly the extensive economic empire of the Revolutionary Guards. A Financial Times article last week pointed out: “The Guards have become the country’s commercial powerhouse by taking assets in privatisations as well as big energy and construction projects. It is almost impossible to estimate the force’s total wealth because of its opacity. Nonetheless, some analysts reckon the Guards’ companies and banks generate income of about $US100 billion annually.”

During the presidential election campaign, Rafsanjani bluntly declared that the Guards’ “now control the country’s pulse in the economy, foreign and domestic politics and would not be happy with anything less than the whole country.” Many of the so-called hardliners have close connections to the Guards, whose business interests would likely suffer if foreign investors began to compete after sanctions were lifted.

The US-led sanctions have cut Iran off from international banking and drastically reduced its main export—oil, compounding the country’s economic crisis and opening up divisions in the conservative faction. Political commentator Fereydoun Majlesi told the Wall Street Journal: “Many conservatives are also suffering under the present circumstances. They, too, prefer to enjoy the benefits of the business opportunities provided by normalisation of the Iran-West relations.”

In a speech last week, General Hassan Firouzabadi, second-in-command of Iran’s armed forces and a member of the National Security Council, endorsed Iran’s initiatives in the Geneva talks, saying it was a unique opportunity to end hostilities with the West. “America should seize this chance, which won’t last forever,” he said.

The Iranian bourgeoisie as a whole is deeply fearful that worsening social tensions will produce an eruption of opposition by the working class and rural poor. The latest official statistics reveal that the economy shrank by 5.4 percent over the past year, youth unemployment hit 28 percent and inflation rose to 40 percent. The prices of staple food items soared: rice by 70.4 percent, grain by 79.7 percent, vegetables by 83.7 percent and sugar by 43.2 percent.

According to the Financial Times, the government confronts a budget deficit estimated to be as high as $28 billion. Mahoud Ahmadinejad, the previous president, began the process of reining in public spending by slashing price subsidies on fuel and other basic commodities—a move that was praised by the International Monetary Fund. The subsidies were replaced by limited handouts, which the Rouhani administration is now looking to slash, either directly or indirectly by raising energy prices.

Such a step would rapidly generate opposition. Economics professor Hossein Raghfar told the FT that the subsidies cut had already hit working people hard. “During the past eight years under Ahmadinejad, the poor have increased from 22 percent of the population to more than 40 percent,” he noted.

For the time being, Rouhani appears to have the guarded backing of Supreme Leader Khamenei and a majority of the ruling elite to try to cut a deal with the US to ease the present economic impasse. The new government’s critics have been relatively muted, and protests against the “charm offensive” remain small by Tehran’s standards. But the present general consensus could rapidly fall apart if Rouhani’s overtures are rebuffed, the US fails to offer any significant concessions and the negotiating process drags out, plunging the country into a deeper economic and social crisis.

WSWS

Is Iran thumbing nose at US 30 years after Beirut bombing?

-
0
Is Iran thumbing nose at US 30 years after Beirut bombing?

 

Justin Fishel

Fox News

Thirty years after the Marine Corps barracks bombing in Beirut, one of the most horrific and formative terror attacks in American history, the new Iranian government appears to be thumbing its nose at the United States by appointing one of the alleged masterminds of that attack as its new defense minister.justin_fishel

On the morning of Oct. 23, 1983, an Iranian suicide bomber drove a Mercedes truck filled with 2,000 pounds of explosives into the Marine Corps barracks near the Beirut airport in Lebanon. The massive explosion flattened the building, killing 241 American servicemen, mostly Marines, who were sleeping at the time.

In a near simultaneous attack, another suicide bomber crashed into an international peacekeeping building nearby, killing 58 French soldiers. They were all part of a multinational force sent to keep the peace in the roiling Lebanese civil war.

Four days later, President Ronald Reagan addressed the nation from the Oval Office. He said: “This past Sunday, at 22 minutes after 6 Beirut time, with dawn just breaking, a truck, looking like a lot of other vehicles in the city, approached the airport on a busy, main road. There was nothing in its appearance to suggest it was any different than the trucks or cars that were normally seen on and around the airport. But this one was different. At the wheel was a young man on a suicide mission.”

The U.S. and its European allies would soon learn that the attack was planned by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, which was at the time establishing Hezbollah as a proxy force in Lebanon.

While new Iranian President Hassan Rouhani lately has sought to ease U.S. concerns about its alleged pursuit of a nuclear weapon, survivors of the barracks bombing today say anyone aligned with that attack cannot be trusted.

That includes current leadership in Tehran. Retired Col. Tim Geraghty, who commanded the international peacekeeping mission and the 24th Marine Amphibious Unit that lost 220 Marines that day, said Brig. Gen. Hossein Dehghan, the new Iranian defense minister, is the former Iranian Revolutionary Guard commander who helped oversee the attack.

Geraghty spoke at a remembrance ceremony at Camp Lejeune in Jacksonville, N.C., on Wednesday.

“The past three Iranian ministers of defense, including the current one selected a few months ago, all have peacekeepers’ blood on their hands and are leading the Iranian lockstep march for the acquisition of nuclear weapons,” Geraghty said.

Current Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos also spoke at the event, saying the attack “defined the beginning of what become known today as the war on terror.”

Retired Marine Col. Oliver North, who served in the Reagan White House and was in the Situation Room when first word of the attack came in, told Fox News that terrorists saw Beirut as a model for future attacks. He also called it a “disaster” for the Reagan White House.

“What happened is that the multinational peacekeeping force that had been deployed to Beirut keep the peace in the war torn civil war all withdrew, the United States, the Italians, the French, the Brits — everybody pulled out,” North said. “And that was the lesson that was learned, by radical Islamic terrorists, in the aftermath of both the embassy bombings and the Marine barracks.”

Usama Bin Laden would later speak about the importance of the attack and the importance of the American reaction to it.  He taught that suicide bombs could drive western powers from the Middle East.

Also at the remembrance ceremony Wednesday was Sgt. Donald Giblin, brother of Sgt. Timothy Giblin, who was killed in the bombing.  Both brothers were there that day, but Donald was outside the building and managed to survive.

“What happened 30 years ago is happening today,” Donald told Fox News. “Now you all know. We were the beginning of the new war. We were its first casualties. But we survived and we lived. And we’re here.”

Spy vs. Spy: Iran, Turkey, and Israel Edition

-
0
Spy vs. Spy: Iran, Turkey, and Israel Edition

 

By PHILIP GIRALDI • October 22, 2013

David Ignatius of the Washington Post is reporting that early in 2012 Ankara informed the Iranians of the identities of a number of Israeli intelligence sources that were being Iran_Israelroutinely met in Turkey. Per Ignatius, who is particularly well connected to the Israel government and its security agencies, 10 Iranians who were spying for Israel were, as a consequence, arrested, denying Israel one of its “significant” sources of information. The op-ed “Turkey Blows Israel’s Cover for Iranian Spy Ring” spins the revelation somewhat, perhaps predictably suggesting that the CIA regards the exposure as an “unfortunate intelligence loss.” Not knowing if the story is even true (it is being denied by Turkey in a follow-up New York Times article and has not been confirmed by Israel) or who the sources were and what their access to sensitive information might be, it is impossible to judge if that is an accurate assessment or just a red herring being put out either to protect other operations that are still running or to confuse Iranian counterintelligence. It also generously assumes that Israel was sharing the raw and presumably highly sensitive information obtained with Washington, which is unlikely.

I have no particular liking for the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, who traditionally play a key role in overseas intelligence operations as well as counterintelligence inside Iran. During my time in Istanbul in the late 1980s the intelligence war being waged against Iranian government hit teams was very intense indeed, with Revolutionary Guard units infiltrating Europe to kill opponents of the Khomeini regime. Former Prime Minister Shapour Bakhtiar was murdered in Paris in 1991 after an unsuccessful attempt eleven years earlier that killed a policeman and a bystander. Bakhtiar was one of at least 63 Iranian expats assassinated in Europe. I personally lost two sources who were murdered in Istanbul and was also myself on the receiving end of an assassination attempt by an Iranian agent that was thwarted with the assistance of the Turkish intelligence service (MIT).

Turkey has by default become a favorite venue for Iranians both supporting and opposing the regime to wage their proxy wars because it is Iran’s only contiguous neighbor that permits entry to Iranians without the necessity of obtaining a visa. It is also a stepping stone for dissidents to escape Iran, as every European country has a diplomatic mission in Turkey and there are regular, direct flights to nearly every capital in Europe, as well as to the United States.

Ignatius assumes, wrongly, that friendly relationships between intelligence services create something like mutual free-fire zones. Turkey’s closest intelligence relationship is with the United States, but even there one finds certain rules in place. His assumption that Turkey would not normally “‘shop’ Israeli agents to a hostile power” is incorrect, as Ankara would view unilateral operations run on its soil as a very serious violation of bilateral understandings.

The CIA is only allowed to conduct operations inside Turkey that are compatible, meaning acceptable to Turkey politically speaking. The Agency can run those operations without any direct Turkish involvement but has to share the results. Of course, both sides cheat as much as they think they can safely get away with. Knowing that, during my time in Istanbul, MIT was extremely aggressive in enforcing the rules, conducting regular heavy surveillance on identified CIA officers as well as carrying out random checks on other Consulate officials who appeared to be a bit too active trolling on the cocktail circuit.

This did not mean that CIA did not operate unilaterally, but it did so very carefully, frequently using officers who were brought into Turkey from elsewhere on civilian passports and who were therefore unknown to the Turks. Even then, the Turks sometimes caught the Americans with, shall we say, their pants down. One operation eerily similar to the incident recounted by Ignatius involved an American officer from Germany using business cover for meeting with eight Iranians in Istanbul. The men would return home to obtain information on targets of interest to Washington, then travel out to Turkey at intervals to be debriefed. The meetings were not detected by the Turks, but the American Case Officer made the mistake of trying to go through an airport metal detector with a pen clipped to his jacket, leading to a request to empty his pockets that produced eight false Iranian passports. He spent three nights in a Turkish prison trying to explain himself, a not very pleasant and sometimes painful experience, as viewers of the film “Midnight Express” might recall. When I went searching for the missing American, I wound up spending a night in the same slammer to teach a lesson about proper behavior until CIA fessed up to its “oversight” and we were both released.

Regarding Israel, a relationship that would be regarded as having many caveats, Turkey would have been willing to share information of mutual concern and might even countenance an Israeli-run operation jointly managed with MIT, but it would closely watch any suspect Israelis and would come down hard if the Israelis were detected running something independently. That is clearly what happened in the case cited by Ignatius. Though Ignatius takes pains to explain that the exposure was not due to poor tradecraft by the Israelis, that assumption is difficult to swallow given that the operation was blown. Be that as it may, the Israelis were punished for their transgression.

Ignatius also states that the election of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, with his incremental tilt towards the Palestinians, has presented a “unique challenge” for the Israel-Turkey intelligence relationship. Ignatius is no friend of Erdogan, having had one highly publicized run-in with him at Davos in 2009. Nevertheless his assessment might well be true, though the decisive factor in souring the so-called partnership was undoubtedly the killing of nine Turks by Israeli commandos on board the Mavi Marmara in international waters in May 2010. Given that backstory, it is easy to understand why Turkey would want to embarrass Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Ignatius is too ready to accept Israeli excuses for its intelligence failures. He cites how MIT’s head, Hakan Fidan, is described by the Israelis as “the MOIS Station Chief in Ankara,” MOIS being the acronym for the Iranian intelligence and security service. It is a clever jab but ignores the reality of Turkey’s geopolitical vulnerabilities. The bottom line is that Iran is a more important neighbor to the Turks than is Israel, an on-again off-again intelligence partner for Ankara maintained largely to satisfy the United States Congress, which is quick to punish any perceived slight to Tel Aviv. Ankara would work hard to cultivate good relations with Tehran out of its own interest, assuming, rightly, that the Iranians have more to offer in areas that the Turks regard as high priorities, most notably the Kurds. Israel, on the contrary, has exploited the Kurds to work against Iran, raising legitimate suspicions in Turkey about how deep that relationship runs.

All of which is to say that in the world of smoke and mirrors there are no permanent friends and no permanent enemies. Ignatius reveals a tale likely fed to him by his Israeli contacts that seeks to exonerate their own failings while casting Turkey in a negative light for exposing an operation against nearly everyone’s preferred enemy of choice, Iran. But, of course, it is more complicated than that. Israel’s increased regional isolation makes a working relationship with it less of an asset than it might have been 20 years ago, while Iran appears to be moving towards an enhanced international role and relevance.

The Turks understand that very well.

Philip Giraldi, a former CIA officer, is executive director of the Council for the National Interest.

AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE

 

After Geneva progress, Iranian team must battle hard-liners at home

-
0
After Geneva progress, Iranian team must battle hard-liners at home

 

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — The Iranian foreign minister’s parting words in Geneva carried hopes that the US and other world powers could begin closing the gap with Tehran over its nuclear program. He returns home with perhaps an even tougher challenge at finding common ground.

Iranian female demonstrators burn a representation of the US flag and a caricature of President Barack Obama in an annual state-backed rally in front of the former US Embassy in Tehran, Iran, in November 2012. (photo credit: AP/Vahid Salemi/File)
Iranian female demonstrators burn a representation of the US flag and a caricature of President Barack Obama in an annual state-backed rally in front of the former US Embassy in Tehran, Iran, in November 2012. (photo credit: AP/Vahid Salemi/File)

In a sharp counterpoint to the Western outreach by President Hassan Rouhani’s government, hard-line factions in Iran have amplified their bluster and backlash in messages that they cannot be ignored in any diplomatic moves with Washington either in the nuclear talks or beyond.

They also hold important sway over the pace and direction of Iran’s nuclear program through the Revolutionary Guard, the single most powerful institution in Iran. Without its clear backing, the West and its allies could grow increasingly skeptical over Rouhani’s ability to deliver on efforts to ease fears that Iran could be moving toward an atomic weapon or a so-called threshold state — without an actual bomb, but with all the expertise and material in place.

“Iran’s hard-liners are the not-so-silent partners in everything that Rouhani has set in motion,” said Scott Lucas, an Iranian affairs expert at Britain’s Birmingham University. “The Revolutionary Guard is never a bystander in Iran.”

Iran's Revolutionary Guard on parade (photo credit: YouTube image capture)

Even the smallest gestures toward the US by Iran poke at a nest of complications: Deep historical grievances, perceptions of national pride and a culture of “enemy” resistance that runs to the core of groups such as the Revolutionary Guard, which is instinctively wary about anything that could chip away at its vast influence that stretches from the military to the economy.

For Rouhani and his allies, it also means a possibly short leash.

Iran’s top decision-maker, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has allowed Rouhani to reach out to the US. The immediate goal is trying to address concerns over Iran’s nuclear program and getting painful economic sanctions rolled back in return. Two days of talks in Geneva this week between Iran and envoys from six nations — the permanent UN Security Council members plus Germany — ended with rare optimism that at least some new paths have been opened to explore.

But all noted that the negotiating process could drift well into next year, and it remains unclear whether Iran could offer verifiable concessions needed to end the deadlock. In Washington, State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said Iran had offered “a proposed approach” on moving the talks forward.

The West fears Iran’s uranium enrichment labs eventually could churn out weapons-grade material, and some in Israel and elsewhere worry the outreach and goodwill by Rouhani is merely a ploy to buy time. Iran insists it does not seek nuclear weapons.

It’s likely that Khamenei will keep his backing for Rouhani’s initiatives as long as it seems Iran is moving toward it objectives of easing sanctions, which have strangled the economy by cutting into vital oil exports and blocking the country from international banking networks.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani speaks during a news conference at the Millennium Hotel in midtown Manhattan in New York, on Friday, September 27, 2013. (photo credit: AP/John Minchillo)

But any stumbles — such as the West demanding sweeping United Nations inspections — certainly would bring a barrage of outrage from Iranian hard-liners. That, in turn, could pressure Khamenei to reconsider his support for Rouhani’s bid at historic detente with Washington.

“The Rouhani government understands that,” said Ehsan Ahrari, a Virginia-based strategic affairs analyst. “It is operating under a very short window of opportunity.”

This is part of the motivation behind Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif’s insistence for talks to quickly reconvene. The next two-day round is scheduled to begin Nov. 7 in Geneva.

A death to America committee

At the same time, Iran’s Revolutionary Guard and others are making it clear that Rouhani’s government will get no free pass in expanding dialogue with Washington after a nearly 34-year diplomatic freeze.

Hard-line factions, including Guard commanders, have pledged to stage a major anti-US rally November 4, the anniversary of the takeover of the US Embassy in 1979 in the wake of the Islamic Revolution. The date is marked each year by gatherings outside the former embassy’s brick walls, which are covered with anti-American murals. But the fervor has waned in recent years, with authorities bringing school children by bus to help fill out the crowds.

Gen. Masoud Jazayeri, a senior Guard commander, said a “death to the US committee” will be set up to organize next month’s rally, promising chants of “death to America” louder than any previous years.

It’s a direct response to appeals this month by Rouhani’s political mentor, former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, to drop the familiar slogan from events such as Friday prayers at Tehran University. In a speech Tuesday in the western city of Kermanshah, Rafsanjani repeatedly was interrupted by opponents bellowing anti-American chants.

Rafsanjani countered that Rouhani’s critics are holding the nation back.

“If extremists allow us to have relations with the world, many of the problems of the country will be resolved,” he told a group of industrialists and businessmen. “Otherwise, we will get nowhere.”

These kind of ideological collisions are not new in Iran. They flared nonstop during the 1997-2005 presidency of reformist Mohammad Khatami. In 2009, they triggered the worst domestic unrest since the Islamic Revolution following the disputed reelection of president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

But even deeper questions have been dredged up by the overtures to Washington opened by Rouhani at the UN in New York, which included a groundbreaking phone call from President Barack Obama.

It challenges a power structure that gives the Revolutionary Guard and other hard-liners vast controls over policymaking, and forces many Iranians to reevaluate generations of anti-American views that go back to a US-backed coup that reinstalled the pro-Western shah dynasty in 1953.

“It scares Iran’s hard-liners like almost nothing else can,” Mustafa Alani, a political analyst at the Gulf Research Center in Geneva. “Taking away the fear of the ‘enemy’ — even if just a little bit for now — strikes directly at the cornerstones of groups like the Revolutionary Guard.”

Rouhani’s government has proposed conducting an opinion poll on US relations in a maneuver to possible muffle hard-liners. The idea, however, has been blasted by former Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velayati, a senior adviser to Khamenei.

“To offer their opinion, the people need to have access to secret information,” he said. “And it will be contrary to national interests to expose the secrets because the enemy will learn about it.”

___

Murphy reported from Dubai, United Arab Emirates

Copyright 2013 The Associated Press.

Iran’s IRGC: ‘a changing of the Guards’?

-
0
Iran’s IRGC: ‘a changing of the Guards’?

 

The victory of Hassan Rouhani in Iran’s presidential election was against the express wishes of the will of the powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps and the militant corps opposes the regime’s ostensible adoption of a more moderate approach to the West and domestic dissent, analysts suggest.sepahG

“Although hardliners opposed to Mr Rouhani (and close to the Guards and some radical clergy) seem largely under control, at least for now, there are fears in Tehran that an assault on their economic interests may trigger a backlash in other fields, such as the nuclear talks,” Financial Times analyst Najmeh Bozorgmehr writes in a must-read profile of the Sepah. “The Guards oppose any rapprochement with the US. That antipathy is an ideological pillar to keep junior forces loyal.”

For the Guards, ideology is married to interests:

Over the past decade, associates of the Guards have profited from $120bn of so-called privatizations ….the Guards own more than $20bn of oil and gas projects, including some in the South Pars field, the world’s biggest gasfield…[and] some analysts reckon the Guards’ companies and banks generate income of about $100bn annually.

demdigest

 

Iran’s revolutionary guards round up ‘homosexuals and satanists’

-
0
Iran’s revolutionary guards round up ‘homosexuals and satanists’

 

Iran’s revolutionary guards have announced the arrest of “a network of homosexuals and satanists” in the western city of Kermanshah.Sepah_Pasdaran

The arrests, which took place on Tuesday, were made by a branch of the country’s military intended to protect Islamic law.

According to Sepah News, the news site of the revolutionary guards, a “network of homosexuals and satanists” were detained after a raid on a rented hall where around 80 people, gay and straight, had gathered to dance and celebrate.

The exact number of arrests was not specified, but the report indicates that several of the people detained were foreign nationals including citizens of Iraq.

The arrests have prompted further concern over the way that LGBT people are treated in Iran, where they can face serious persecution. The revolutionary guards, who work independently of the government, actively track down gay people and same-sex sexual relationships can be punishable by death.

pinknews

Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Leader Calls Approach to U.S. a “Mistake”

-
0
Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Leader Calls Approach to U.S. a “Mistake”

In an interview Sunday, Mohammad Ali Jafari, the commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, made clear that the IRGC opposes any rapprochement with the U.S., according to Iran’s Fars News Agency. Jafari said, “Creating such moods is General_Jafaricontrary to the words of the late imam [Ruhollah Khomeini, the founder of the Islamic Republic] and the supreme leader [Ali Khamenei] and is a big mistake….The imam never said such a thing and never had a compromising stance toward America.”

Jafari said that certain people had misinterpreted and “misused” the leader’s remark on the importance of “heroic flexibility” in dealing with adversaries. These people wrongly think that “restoring relations with America will eliminate problems and sanctions.” He added that “the people, the Guards Corps, and the Basij are vigilant and follow the path of the Islamic system.”

{Andy Heller-Matzav.com Newscenter}

Revolutionary Guard makes arrests at birthday party

-
0
Revolutionary Guard makes arrests at birthday party

 

Iran’s Revolutionary Guard arrested at least 17 people for being part of “a network of homosexuals and Satanists,” security officials said.Sepah_Cell

The arrests were made at a birthday party.

Foreign nationals, including Iraqis, were among those arrested, the Revolutionary Guard said on its website. It said eight of the detainees were married to each other.

Security officials said those arrested were part of “a network of homosexuals and satanists,” Britain’s Guardian newspaper reported Thursday.

The arrests were made at a rented hall in Kermanshah, close to the Iraqi border. About 80 people were the party.

UPI

1...360361362...704Page 361 of 704