The Jack Decking Report

Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah stressed on Saturday that United Nations chief Ban Ki-moon’s concern about his party’s arms gives him comfort and happiness, vowing that the party will grow stronger.

“I felt happy when I heard that he (Ban) said he was concerned about our military power,” Nasrallah said in a televised speech during the commemoration of the Arbaeen in Baalbek.

He said that "this concern reassures and pleases us… We do not care if the United States and Israel are concerned."

Ban told a press conference following talks with Lebanese leaders on Friday that he was "deeply concerned" about the military prowess of Hizbullah.

The U.N. chief is on a three-day visit to Lebanon.

However, Nasrallah vowed that his party will not give up its weapons, stressing that the “resistance, army and the people are the only guarantee” to safeguard Lebanon.

"We confirm that our choice is the path of resistance and the arms of the resistance," he told a crowd of cheering supporters via video link.

"The resistance is here to stay. Its power, its readiness, will continue to grow."

He accused the March 14-led opposition, without naming it, of wanting to disarm his party by using the national dialogue as an alibi. “But they won’t be able to achieve this objective,” he stressed.

Nasrallah said that he supports the resumption of the national dialogue at Baabda palace to set a defense strategy.

Nasrallah said that Lebanon should disavow itself from developments in Syria as the crisis will have negative repercussions on the situation locally.

“We call on the Syrian opposition to abide by (Syrian President Bashar) Assad’s demands to engage in dialogue and cooperate with him to introduce reform that would resolve the country’s problems.”

Nasrallah tackled the death of Iranian nuclear scientist Mostafa Ahmedi Roshan, saying that Tahran will not stop its nuclear program and attempt to develop nuclear technology.

Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah stressed on Saturday that United Nations chief Ban Ki-moon’s concern about his party’s arms gives him comfort and happiness, vowing that the party will grow stronger.

“I felt happy when I heard that he (Ban) said he was concerned about our military power,” Nasrallah said in a televised speech during the commemoration of the Arbaeen in Baalbek.

He said that "this concern reassures and pleases us… We do not care if the United States and Israel are concerned."

Ban told a press conference following talks with Lebanese leaders on Friday that he was "deeply concerned" about the military prowess of Hizbullah.

The U.N. chief is on a three-day visit to Lebanon.

However, Nasrallah vowed that his party will not give up its weapons, stressing that the “resistance, army and the people are the only guarantee” to safeguard Lebanon.

"We confirm that our choice is the path of resistance and the arms of the resistance," he told a crowd of cheering supporters via video link.

"The resistance is here to stay. Its power, its readiness, will continue to grow."

He accused the March 14-led opposition, without naming it, of wanting to disarm his party by using the national dialogue as an alibi. “But they won’t be able to achieve this objective,” he stressed.

Nasrallah said that he supports the resumption of the national dialogue at Baabda palace to set a defense strategy.

Concerning the security situation, Hizbullah’s leader said that the party is keen to preserve the “civil peace and stability” in Lebanon

Nasrallah stressed that any “political dispute” shouldn’t affect the civil peace, urging the security forces to take charge of the security situation.

He voiced support to the cabinet urging Prime Minister Najib Miqati and the ministers to give priority to social issues and people’s living conditions.

On the controversial wage boost dispute, Nasrallah stressed the cabinet should resolve this “critical issue”.

The dispute between the involved parties, the Economic Committees, the General Labor Confederation, the Syndicate Coordination Committee and Labor Minister Charbel Nahhas mainly focuses on whether the new wage hike would include the transportation allowance.

Nasrallah said that Lebanon should disavow itself from developments in Syria as the crisis will have negative repercussions on the situation locally.

“We call on the Syrian opposition to abide by (Syrian President Bashar) Assad’s demands to engage in dialogue and cooperate with him to introduce reform that would resolve the country’s problems.”

Nasrallah tackled the death of Iranian nuclear scientist Mostafa Ahmedi Roshan, saying that Tahran will not stop its nuclear program and attempt to develop nuclear technology.

Ahmedi Roshan and his driver were killed on Wednesday when two men on a motorbike slapped a magnetic bomb on his car.

Hizbullah’s chief voiced his support to attempts to unveil the fate of Imam Moussa al-Sadr and his two companions, praising the cooperation of the Libyan authorities.

The head of Libya’s National Transitional Council Mustapha Abdul Jalil stated on Friday after holding talks in Libya with Foreign Minister Adnan Mansour that missing persons will be found throughout Libya, adding that so far missing Imam Moussa al-Sadr’s fate remains unknown.

By Najmeh Bozorgmehr in TehranThe Financial Times 

Getty

Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad was given a hostile reception by angry textile workers on Monday, in a rare humiliation for Iran’s populist president.

One worker threw his shoe at Mr Ahmadi-Nejad, while a group of labourers unfurled a banner saying ‘We have not been paid for 17 months’. The outburst is being seen as a reflection of mounting frustration among ordinary Iranians at rising inflation and high levels of unemployment.

The president was on a brief, low-profile visit to the northern city of Sari to commemorate the anniversary of a cabinet member’s death.

Some Iranian websites identified the man who hurled his shoe at Mr Ahmadi-Nejad as an unemployed textile work called Rashid, who was inspired by the Iraqi journalist who threw his shoe at George W Bush during a press conference in Baghdad three years ago. The worker was reportedly beaten by security forces, but it was not clear if he was detained.

A local journalist said the incident was “the talk of the town” in Sari, where many workers, particularly from the textile industry, do not receive their wages regularly.

Economists blame Mr Ahmadi-Nejad’s populist policies for causing to a rise in unemployment and inflation. Unemployment stood at 11.1 per cent last summer, but was 24.7 per cent for under 24 year-olds, according to the Iran Census Centre. Inflation is currently 19.8 per cent, according to the Central Bank of Iran, although analysts believe the real rates are far higher.

Insufficient support for industries such as the textile sector, which struggles with aging and dilapidated machinery as well as a lack of finance, with interest rates as high as 35 per cent, have left many factories working at less than half their capacity in recent years.

The problems have been exacerbated by international sanctions over the country’s nuclear programme, which make imports of raw material and technology even more expensive. As a result, many small and medium-sized industries have either shut down or laid off workers.

It is feared that the government’s removal of energy subsidies worth tens of billions of dollars over a year ago and its failure to pay compensation promised to the industrial sector could soon push many industries into bankruptcy.

The shoe-throwing incident could be a sign that public patience with the increasing economic difficulties is wearing thin. The shoe-thrower had been a worker at the Ghaem-Shahr textile factory, which a decade ago was a leading employer in the Caspian province of Mazandaran.

“The Ghaem-Shahr factory is producing practically nothing, with one part of the factory turning into a football field and another part planned to become a showroom for new [Iranian] cars,” said a local journalist.

It is increasingly difficult to draw a neat line between Iran's legitimate economy and its proliferation rackets.  

 By EMANUELE OTTOLENGHI AND CLAUDIA ROSETT

Wall Street Journal Europe edition 1/12/2011

In preparing to expand sanctions on Iran this week, the governments of the European Union face a critical choice. They can carry on with their current strategy of relying chiefly on pinpoint designations against suspected nuclear proliferators—an approach that, to judge by the latest report of the International Atomic Energy Agency, is failing to stop Iran's drive toward nuclear weapons. Or, in concert with the U.S., the EU can shift to a stronger, more comprehensive approach, targeting not only those directly involved in proliferation, but the networks to which they belong.

Some such measures are on the agenda this week, including imposing a ban on Iranian crude oil and sanctions against Iran's central bank. But most likely, the EU will simply expand its sanctioned-entity list based on the old paradigm of restricting proliferators without harming Iran's economy. The reality of the state's involvement in the national economy makes this a distinction that is nearly impossible to implement.

Take the case of Iran's powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. The IRGC is deeply entwined in Iran's nuclear and missile proliferation ventures, and with Iran's overseas terrorist clients and web of domestic repression. The IRGC can afford this mischief because it has also become one of the biggest economic interests in Iran, with a commercial empire encompassing hundreds of companies and financial holdings involved in everything from auto manufacturing to pipelines, petrochemicals and port logistics.

On Oct. 14, David Cohen, the U.S. Treasury Department's under secretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, told the U.S. Congress that "The IRGC has expanded its reach into critical sectors of Iran's economy, displacing ordinary Iranians, generating revenue for the IRGC and conducting business in support of Iran's illicit activities." He also reaffirmed that the IRGC plays a "central role" in "all forms of Iran's illicit conduct, including Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs, its support for terrorism, and its involvement in serious human rights abuses."

Accordingly, the U.S. has been raising the bar by blacklisting not only IRGC entities dedicated chiefly to proliferation, but other IRGC-linked outfits that help enable and sustain Iran's proliferation activities.

Enlarge Image

  Associated Press

A Vinashin Metal ship at Imam Khomeini Port in Persian Gulf.

The EU, however, has been reluctant to take broader action. To date, EU sanctions architecture relies on three relatively slim pillars: disrupting Iranian procurement networks, restricting and monitoring Iran's financial transactions, and interdicting Iranian transport companies with a proven record of assisting the nuclear program. Only since July 2010 has the EU begun to expand its measures by targeting Iran's energy sector, expanding previous sanctions and adding restrictive measures against human-rights violations. This has included singling out the IRGC and some of its companies and commanding officers for both proliferation activities and human-rights abuses.

But Iran's patterns of evasions and deceit are making it increasingly difficult to draw a neat line between its legitimate economy and its proliferation rackets.

A prime example of this difficulty is Tidewater Middle East PLC, an Iranian port operator blacklisted by the U.S. in June as an entity "owned by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps that has links to Iranian proliferation activities."

Among its activities, Tidewater runs Iran's most important container terminal, the Shaheed Rajaee Port Complex at Bandar Abbas, at the mouth of the Strait of Hormuz. Some 90% of Iran's container traffic passes through the Shaheed Rajaee complex. As operator of such a crucial port, Tidewater has long had close ties with the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines (IRISL) Group, the regime's main shipping fleet. Both the EU and the U.S. have identified the IRISL Group—along with scores of its ships, shell companies and subsidiaries—as one of the regime's main nuclear-arms conduits.

Tidewater's throughput has included some troubling items. According to a May 2011 report by the U.N.'s Panel of Experts on Iranian sanctions, six ships have been seized since 2009 with large Iranian cargos of weapons concealed inside containers. The weapons were destined for insurgents in the Niger Delta and for members of Hamas and Hezbollah. Of those six shipments, five originated from Bandar Abbas, where the lethal cargo was loaded in containers and hidden behind innocent merchandise such as cotton. Tidewater was the container-terminal operator that handled those shipments.

EU officials know that Tidewater is problematic. The Hamburg Port Authority canceled a cooperation deal with Tidewater in January 2010. Tidewater does not even bother to conceal its IRGC connections. Its history section indicates that the company was managed during the 1980s by the Foundation for the Oppressed and the Foundation for Martyrs' and Veterans' Affairs, two Iranian governmental foundations headed by an IRGC senior commander and staffed by IRGC veterans.

Tidewater has numerous subsidiaries that pad the résumés of some of its IRGC-linked board members. The board of directors of Efthekhar Saham, an investment and import/export company owned by Tidewater, includes Mohammad Saeed Garoosi, a former adviser for the Sepah Investment Company—a holding company of the IRGC's Bank Sepah, which is sanctioned by EU, U.S. and United Nations—and Mohammad Bidgeli, who also worked for Sepah Investment and later for Omid Investment Management Company, another holding of Bank Sepah.

Despite such evidence, which persuaded the U.S. to go after Tidewater, many European governments are demurring. They claim that shutting down business with a port operator will not stop proliferation efforts but will instead damage business, much of which they see as legitimate. No doubt some of it is. But failing to take action for the sake of these businesses comes at the cost of enabling and enriching the IRGC. If the EU is serious about sanctions, it must stop pinpoint measures and target the IRGC's entire commercial empire.

Emanuele Ottolenghi

With Russian and Chinese opposition to new international sanctions, and time running out, there is a need for Europe, the United States and their Western allies, to come together with more effective policies.

And what would these policies look like?

The EU has relied on a dual-track approach, hoping that incentives through diplomacy and pressure through sanctions would eventually bring the Iranian regime to a compromise. Nine years of this policy, however, have yielded little. Iran suffered some setbacks. Its economy has suffered – and so have the means by which Iran sought to procure its nuclear technology in the past. But Iran has steadily progressed towards its goal of nuclear weapons’ capability and is so far impervious to pressure.

The U.S. has sought to use extraterritorial measures and its influence to dissuade and discourage governments, financial institutions and the corporate world from doing business with Iran. It has sought to implement measures aimed at targeting the most strategic sectors of Iran’s economy. And it has given its full weight behind all diplomatic efforts aimed at Iran in recent years.

Israel, for its part, has played a helpful role on this challenge, sharing intelligence and resources with allies in Europe and the Western world for the purpose of slowing down, thwarting, delaying, and sabotaging Iran’s progress.

Ultimately though, Iran can only be stopped if a much more aggressive campaign of measures is adopted than the existing ones.

Efforts on both sides of the Atlantic must be praised for moving forward the sanctions’ route with more measures. The EU is expected to dramatically expand its list of travel bans against individual Iranian officials and of proscribed Iranian entities because of their link to proliferation activities.

However, European efforts to restrict sanctions to those areas of economic activities in Iran that can be directly linked to proliferation have now been proven to be insufficient.

A concerted effort now needs to recognise that Iran is unlikely to renounce its ambitions unless there is a clear and present danger for the survival of the regime. Such a danger can materialize in two ways:

The regime must be isolated; and

The current sanctions’ architecture is dramatically strengthened through additional, broad and aggressive sanctions.

High profile symbolic actions would not be useless if they created embarrassment for Tehran, focused public attention on the regime's true nature and helped to isolate Iran on the international stage. Among possible actions, here are some examples:

Western officials (ministers, parliamentarians, undersecretaries and deputy ministers) rarely travel to Iran any more, but if and when they do, they should make a habit of visiting prominent Iranian human rights dissidents. It should be an official part of their visit so that if Iran tries to block such meetings, visits would be cancelled. And if such events take place, they should be given broad exposure through joint press conferences, perhaps convened inside Western embassies.

When they meet their Iranian counterparts, Western dignitaries should insist on raising human rights as the first item on the agenda for bilateral discussion.

These exchanges should be concrete, specific and practical. And they should be recorded in any statement, communiqué or protocol issued. Discussions on human rights should not be mere gestures or generic condemnations. Western officials must provide a detailed list of specific abuses, with requests for action.

Such issues could include, say, a demand for the reopening of the many daily newspapers and magazines that the regime has closed down in recent years, as well as the freeing of political prisoners. Western diplomats should come to meetings equipped with lists of names, not a generic demand for more press and political freedom.

Western diplomats should also provide a timeline for implementation, with a clear statement of the punitive economic and diplomatic measures it will impose for lack of compliance.

Western countries that still have relations with Iran should signal their displeasure to Tehran. First, they could downgrade diplomatic relations by recalling ambassadors in Tehran, leaving chargés d’affaires to represent their countries. There would be little immediate fallout for trade, but it would have significant diplomatic impact.

Other types of bilateral contacts should be affected. EU parliamentarians could stop their frequent parliamentary delegations to the Iranian Majlis, while invitations to Iranian parliamentarians should be conditional on improvements on human rights issues. The composition of the Majlis and the way its members are selected are an insult to Europe’s democratic standards. Iranian parliamentarians should not be granted equal status with European MPs and MEPs. It does not mean suspending all contacts, but some contacts may not be worth maintaining for the sake of dialogue. Dialogue should continue, but it should not be ‘business as usual’.

When Iranian dignitaries visit Western capitals – and they still visit often – European hosts should severely limit the scope and extent of their visits. For example, there is no need to roll out the red carpet and offer them high-level meetings; nor is there any reason to grant visas to accompanying business delegations.

Even if some visits are still allowed in the name of dialogue, it should be made clear that specific figures among Iran’s ruling elites are not welcome.

Europe should ban travel to or through Europe for all Iranians who are suspected of involvement in the Buenos Aires bombing of 1994. Interpol did not issue an international warrant for all seven Iranians whom Argentina named as suspects, presumably for political reasons. Those who are not on the Interpol wanted list – former president Rafsanjani in particular – should not be granted permission to set foot on European soil under any circumstances.

The already existing lists produced by UNSCR 1737, 1747, 1803 and 1929 of Iranian individuals who are subject to restrictions should be extended to lower levels of the political hierarchy and of the IRGC.

When visits are unavoidable – for example, when Iran’s foreign minister or Iran’s nuclear negotiator come to Europe – European cities should mark their arrival with additional high-profile symbolic gestures. They could, for example, rename streets or districts where Islamic Republic embassies are located after prominent Iranian dissidents. The USA, under the late president Ronald Reagan, named the street where the USSR embassy was located after late Soviet dissident Andrei Sakharov. Similarly, the plight of famous dissidents could be highlighted in newspaper campaigns giving a human face to the suffering Iran visits upon its own citizens.

Activism in support of isolating Iran should neither begin nor end with government action. It is important, of course, that governments use the instruments of state – diplomatic channels, multilateral forums, international organisations, domestic legislation and other channels. Activities aimed at raising public awareness need not always have the official backing of states.

The following are examples of initiatives that NGOs and other organisations could initiate, sponsor, undertake and promote:

mobilising national unions and European federations of unions to support labour rights in Iran by embracing, for example, the plight of individual Iranian dissident unionists;

mobilising women’s rights groups in support of women’s rights in Iran;

mobilising the gay and lesbian community, through their organisations, activists, cultural centres and magazines, to highlight the persecution of homosexuals in Iran;

mobilising professional and trade organisations to promote people-to-people contacts in their particular areas of specialisation;

organising conferences and workshops on Iran’s human rights record under the auspices, and with the sponsorship, of national and local authorities;

organising awareness campaigns on specific themes through the national media to highlight incidents of on-going abuses, such as the absence of rights for religious minorities;

launching media campaigns in support of individual dissidents, for example with newspapers ‘adopting’ individual dissidents by telling their stories and launching campaigns on their behalf.

Such measures would transcend relations between governments, involving European civil society as a whole in the struggle for human rights in Iran. It is not only a worthy battle in its own right but it also has the advantage of imposing formidable pressure on the regime when it comes to the other contentious issues that divide Europe and Iran, from Iran’s support for terrorism to the nuclear issue.

When criticised for its human rights record, Tehran has shown weakness. It is easily embarrassed. European officials should exploit this vulnerability and contemplate a number of symbolic measures to signal their displeasure with Tehran while also demonstrating to the Iranian people that Europe is concerned about their plight no less than about their government’s relentless nuclear ambitions. Dialogue can continue, then, but not as it was.

Such embarrassments should become the rule, rather than the exception. The regime’s loss of face as a result of such events should not be dismissed as gesture politics. A country that holds national honour and pride so high will not be indifferent to regular displays of contempt to their leaders.

Clearly, symbolic gestures can only go so far.

Alongside this important aspect of public diplomacy, Europe and its allies need to set differences aside and recognize that the three pillars upon which the current sanctions' architecture is built need to be dramatically expanded.

Sanctions have so far targeted: the Iranian entities and individuals involved in the missile and nuclear programmes; the procurement networks and the Iranian corporate facilitators overseas that seek to acquire illicit technology for the programmes; the financial institutions responsible for facilitating these transactions; and the commercial vectors that Iran uses to transport its illicit technology. These measures are vital and have been successful in making Iran's efforts more costly and time consuming.

But they have not made a decisive dent in Iran's ability to move forward.

The EU, in particular, needs to stop the somewhat artificial distinction between entities linked to proliferation - which it considers to be legitimate targets - and entities that have no such proven link.

Sanctions have targeted the main sea and air transport vectors the regime uses for its proliferation activities. But many other shipping lines and at least one additional airline have eluded sanctions. This has to change.

But ultimately, if sanctions are to make an impression on Iran's rulers, they must go after the sources of revenues of the regime - in particular the Revolutionary Guards and their vast and growing network of companies and economic interests.

The IRGC is not only the regime’s sword and shield against domestic opposition forces. It is also a vital instrument of Iranian foreign policy. In Lebanon, the IRGC operates through its proxy, the Lebanese Shi’a terror group Hezbollah, an organization it helped establish. In Iraq, it works through a host of Iran-sponsored Shi’a militias, as well as Iraq’s powerful ministries of defense and interior. Elsewhere in the region, IRGC Special Forces and instructors have supplied weapons, training, and financing, and built a web of alliances with pariah governments like Omar al-Bashir’s Sudan, terrorist organizations like the Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hamas in Gaza, and other deadly groups, such as the Taliban in Afghanistan.

The Guards’ role, however, is not limited to military and security matters. Since the end of the Iran-Iraq War, the IRGC has gradually become one of the biggest economic interests in the country, growing into an enormous conglomerate of hundreds of companies and financial holdings spanning every sector of Iran’s economy. From auto manufacturing to port logistics, from public works such as dams, tunnels, jetties, and highways to petrochemical factories and pipelines, the Guards’ work increasingly makes the IRGC the key stakeholder in Iran’s economy.

This wealth serves three important goals. First, it generates revenue to finance the IRGC’s military-oriented activities—including the nuclear program at home and sponsorship of terrorism abroad. Second, it offers the Guards a network of companies, enterprises, banks, offices, holdings, and joint ventures that can execute the regime’s procurement efforts in its quest for advanced weaponry and sensitive technology. And third, it generates personal affluence, which the Guards can translate into political influence.

The Guards’ rising riches go hand in hand with their increasing power in the political system. In recent years, the IRGC gained more visibility inside Iran’s power structure, especially since Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s election as Iran’s president in 2005. The number of former IRGC officers sitting in the Majles-e Shura-ye Eslami, or Majles, the popularly elected assembly charged with enacting national legislation, is just one part of their success story. IRGC former officials sit in the cabinet, rule as provincial governors, represent Iran abroad as ambassadors, run government-owned companies overseas, and fill key positions in or around the office of the Supreme Leader—the country’s final arbiter and commander-in-chief.

The interaction among military, economic and political power is critical in understanding the centrality of the IRGC to Iran’s current system; the IRGC takes advantage of its influence and capabilities in one realm in order to increase its involvement in another. Its growing economic clout is both an end in and of itself and a tool to advance other agendas. Thus, IRGC revenues from economic activities yield political leverage and the resources needed to advance its loyal members in positions of power. Its power, conversely, serves the economic enterprises it owns. But the profits inevitably fund its military activities, its involvement in the procurement and development efforts in the nuclear and ballistic missile programs—which in turn enhance its prestige and power within the system. Meanwhile, the Guards’ growing political and economic influence enables them to bank on the willingness of public companies to lend their services—both at home and abroad—to aid in the Guards’ efforts to procure forbidden technologies and raw materials, and to finance their purchases through middlemen on foreign markets.

The IRGC is an elite military force, a business, an organized crime syndicate, and a political actor at home and abroad. However, to finance its activities, the IRGC needs access to the international financial system, and it owns or controls several banks for this purpose. They include, but are not limited to:

Bank Sepah and all its affiliates, holdings, investments, and management companies, including foreign branches in London, Paris, Frankfurt, and Rome. This also includes investment affiliates Omid Investment Management Company (OIM Co) and Bank Sepah Brokerage Company (BSB Co). Together with OIM Co and BSB Co, Sepah Bank also owns 62.46 percent of outstanding shares of the Sepah Investment Company;

Post Bank, a financial institution created after Bank Sepah was hit by international sanctions, to handle all overseas transactions formerly conducted by Bank Sepah;

Bank Ansar, a newly established bank that was created by the Ansar Foundation (an IRGC entity);

ToseyeTa’avon Bank, created in July 2009, an offshoot of the IRGC Cooperative Foundation—an instrument established in 1988 to provide support and funding to IRGC companies in securing lands, legal aid and financing for projects.

Going after these banks is imperative. And sanctions should not limit themselves to monitoring the nature of their transactions. These banks’ activities in the international financial market should be shut off.

The Guards have also used Iran’s energy and heavy industry branch offices abroad—such as Kala Naft, the National Iranian Oil Company’s overseas procurement company, and Mobarakeh Steel, Iran’s biggest steel conglomerate—as fronts to acquire dual-use technologies and forbidden raw materials.

Such covers become critical when it comes to Iran’s nuclear program. For example, the Guards use Imam Hossein University to provide academic cover for illegitimate nuclear activities. Imam Hossein, the IRGC military college, is funded jointly by Iran’s Ministry of Research and Technology, the Ministry of Defense, and the IRGC. Its scientific endeavors include a nuclear physics program and comprehensive research on laser enrichment. Many of its activities are linked to Iran’s WMD program; the Government of Australia designated the university in 2010 for its role in proliferation activities. Other Western governments should now do the same.

The Guards’ economic interests also include a number of important manufacturing companies. Iran is the Middle East’s largest producer of cars. It is believed that the IRGC owns an important share of the Bahman Group, which produces Mazda cars under license.

IRGC companies are also prominent in the services and logistics sectors, where energy consulting companies, shipping, and harbor logistics (such as bunkering services and containers) have also fallen under the purview of the IRGC.

Ever since Ahmadinejad became president of Iran in 2005, and even more so since his controversial reelection in 2009, the Iranian regime has been increasingly worried about a possible cultural change in Iran, fearing such a change might eventually destabilize the regime. For this reason, the regime has been cracking down on every kind of artistic or cultural expression that is not deemed sufficiently Iranian and Islamic. Artists, filmmakers and actors, academics, intellectuals and authors – they have all suffered, and still suffer, the heavy-handed oppression of the Iranian regime.

Struggling against the "soft war"

Over 30 years after the Islamic Revolution, the regime now fears that the true threat to its stability is not a direct military attack, for example on the country’s nuclear facilities, but an indirect "soft war", a quiet cultural revolution, supported by the West. Therefore, at the same time it attempts to instill the "pure" Islamic values in the Iranian people (and to "export" these values abroad as well), the regime is also leading a never-ending campaign against anyone that is thought to be a propagator of a different culture.

It should be noted that this trend has exacerbated since Ahmadinejad's reelection, and should be attributed, in part, to his attempts to silence the many voices that disagree with his policies.

The mechanism of oppression

The policies of cultural oppression are outlined by various government ministries, headed by the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance (MCIG) and the High Council for Cultural Revolution. They assert that their goal is to put the values of Islamic culture – as defined by the founder of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Khomeini – into practice, and protect the Islamic Revolution from what they call the "cultural onslaught" on Iran.

The decisions of the MCIG, headed by Minister Seyyed Mohammad Hosseini, have a significant influence on every aspect of life of Iranian citizens – what they can wear, what schoolbags their children may use (Barbie is out!), what they can read, what movies and TV shows they may watch, and even how they should cut their hair.

  MCIG decisions are enforced by the various Iranian security forces – mainly the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), and the Ministry of Intelligence, but also the Judiciary and the prison system.

The uncensored version

Many Iranian artists and intellectuals who managed to incite the anger of the regime found their works banned or censored; they themselves have been persecuted, and some of them were imprisoned. These are only a few of their stories.

Cinema: “the mere thought of making a film can be a crime here”

Iranian film-makers need the MCIG permission before shooting, and all artistic productions are subject to vetting before release. Many film-makers have complained about increased censorship under Ahmadinejad.

In the case of celebrated filmmaker Jafar Panahi, the regime did more than just censor his works. He has been jailed for three months this year over an “unauthorized” film about the post-election unrest amid a crackdown on critics and opposition supporters.

On May 16, Panahi has gone on a hunger strike to protest abuse in jail as well as continuous threats against his family members. In a letter published by his family, Panahi stated:

}On Saturday night [May 15, 2010] agents attacked Evin Cell 56, forcing me and my cellmates outdoors without any clothing and kept us in the cold weather for one and half hours. On Sunday morning, they took me to an interrogation room and accused me of filming the inside of my cell, which is absolutely false. They then threatened that they would arrest my entire family and transfer them to Evin Prison and that they would send my daughter to an unsafe detention center in Rajaie Shahr~

After his release, Panahi said, “Sometimes I feel that the mere thought of writing a film can be a crime here, just the idea that to do so may be penalized. It may even be enough to go to jail.”

While Panahi was still in prison, the director of the Culture Ministry-affiliated Supervision and Evaluation Office (SEO), said: “Iranian filmmakers must obtain the approval of the Culture Ministry before offering cooperation to foreign productions, otherwise it will have a negative impact on the future of their careers.”

  Filmmaker and journalist Mohammad Nourizad had also had the unfortunate chance to write a public message from his prison cell in Evin. Nourizad was arrested after he had sent letters to Iran’s Supreme Leader in which he criticized the regime’s brutal actions following the June 2009 presidential elections. Sending these letters cost him a long detention during which he was flogged, battered and humiliated. In an announcement he published, Nourizad said his life was in danger:

}In the name of God I, Mohammad Nourizad, prisoner in Evin, inform that my life and my social status are not safe in any way. The things I have observed over the past several months in the conduct of the Intelligence Ministry’s interrogators, and heard from other political prisoners, made me realize that an unexpected ‘accident’ might occur to me or my family. Mohammad Nourizad, Evin prison, Ward 7, 11/3/1389 (June 1, 2010)~

Nourizad’s political affiliation is Conservative, but he reportedly suffered torture and harsh interrogations during his arrest.

Prominent Iranian director Rakhshan Bani-Etemad (right) and her actress daughter Baran Kousari (left) wear Green in solidarity with the Reformist Green Movement; 14th Iran Cinema Celebration, September 16.

    TV: what you must not see

Foreign films and TV shows must also be in line with Iran's Islamic values in order to be approved for broadcast. For example, earlier this year, one of the managers of the Iranian state-owned broadcaster announced that the Iranian television was not in a position to broadcast the TV series “Lost” since it was not in line with Islamic values.

A channel that dares to broadcast popular Western movies should be prepared to face harsh criticism about cooperating with Iran’s enemies. Lately, Jahan News slammed the Iranian Channel 5 for broadcasting Steven Spielberg’s “ET” and James Cameron’s “Abyss,” dubbing them “Zionist Cabalist Hollywood movies.” Jahan News accused the channel of spreading “cabalist propaganda,” and “thoughts of the Godless sect of ‘Israel’,” as well as exposing the public to “paranormal creatures.”

Therefore, it is not surprising that many Iranians try to watch their favorite shows on satellite dishes, which are also illegal in Iran…

  Banning and censoring literature: what you cannot read in Tehran

As with films, the contents of books must be pre-approved by the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance. There are three methods of censorship in Iran: a book or an author is either completely banned, or parts of the book are omitted, or omitted pages are replaced with new texts that are in line with the regime's ideology.

Hundreds of writers, poets, historians, and thinkers – foreign and Iranian alike – are banned or censored in Iran.

One of the main targets of censorship has been some of Iran's best contemporary writers and researchers, such as Sadegh Hedayat, Sadegh Choobak, Ebrahim Golestan, Gholamhossein Saaedi, Ahmad Kasravi, Ali Dashti, Ebrahim Poordavoud, Zabih Behrouz, and others.

Among the many internationally renowned works of literature that have been censored or banned in Iran are titles such as Memories of My Melancholy Whores by Gabriel García Márquez, Evelina by Isabel Allende, and Nikos Kazantzakis's The Last Temptation of Christ. Further examples from contemporary literature include Tracy Chevalier's Girl With a Pearl Earring, which was banned from being republished, and Dan Brown's bestseller The Da Vinci Code.

The recent Tehran International Books Fair (May 2010) has also seen its share of censorship. Iran's Writers Association has said that a number of prominent publishing houses have been banned from attending the fair, and the licenses of several have been cancelled. According to the statement, several of the publishers have also been summoned by security officials.

Below is a very partial list of unwelcomed subjects and titles removed from the Tehran International Book Fair:

Documentation of the Holocaust

Works of late pro-Reformist Grand Ayatollah Montazeri, Ayatollah Beheshti and Grand Ayatollah Yusuf Sanei.

 Books using “false” name for the Persian Gulf (namely, Arabian Gulf) – the Egyptian exhibition, which featured an encyclopedia including this name, was closed down.

Books about the Baha’i faith.

Books “propagating Buddhism, treatises on meditation, books on Zen.”

  Music: “not compatible with the highest values of the sacred regime”

Iran's Supreme Leader, Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has recently taken the time to disparage the "disturbing phenomenon" of music studies in Iran. In August 2010, Khamenei announced that “promoting and teaching” of music was “not compatible with the highest values of the sacred regime of the Islamic Republic.” His comments came two months after Iran’s Education Ministry announced a ban on musical education in private schools.

Melody and Safoura Safavi, two sisters from the Iranian band “Abjeez,” responded to Khamenei’s comments. The Safavis started “Abjeez” in Iran, where women are banned from performing publicly, but have since moved to Sweden. Melody Safavi said, “I think music is a basic communication form, and it’s a language which is universal. You can’t eliminate or remove a communication form, especially not in a country where music has thousands of years of history. So honestly, it’s really laughable, what he says.” Safoura Safavi added, “I’m sorry to use this word, but it’s ridiculous. You can’t prohibit something like music.”

Underground culture and the regime's fight against it

Due to the numerous regime-enforced limitations, many Iranian youth that are drawn to Western culture have found refuge in Iran's underground culture. The regime, of course, is trying to act against this "poisoning of the youth's minds," and against the adoption of the "degenerate" Western values. Earlier this year, the Deputy Minister of Culture and Islamic Guidance stressed that the Government would firmly counter pop and rock music. He said this “underground music, disseminated through the Internet and satellite channels,” had bad impact on the youth’s values.

  No One Knows About Persian Cats is a film about a band trying to find a place to make music in Iran, where popular music is banned

  Among the measures taken against this trend, Iranian security forces raid underground parties organized by young people, and arrest the participants. In state-run media, these parties are usually described as licentious events, where young people drink alcohol, listen to forbidden music and watch "inappropriate and immoral" movies.

For example, in July 2010, the Head of the Department for Social Affairs at the Tehran Criminal Police announced that tens of thousands of “immoral and private films” are confiscated each week in pool parties and private parties throughout Tehran. He stressed the severe punishment expected to anyone involved in producing and selling such films.

A few more examples:

In May this year, Prosecutor Abbas Jafari Dolatabadi released a statement in which he reported the arrest of eighty young Iranian citizens, who were charged with “participation in a ceremony filled with pleasure and fooling around.” He added that “many of those arrested at this party were in an unnatural state of mind. Both locally produced and foreign-made alcohol was found on the site.”

A month later, 21 youths (13 men and 9 women) were arrested in Isfahan while holding a party. Most of the detainees are students from Tehran. The IRGC-affiliated daily Javan claims that the partygoers were drunk and half-naked and that "improper films" were found at the place and seized by police.

In October this year, an officer at Tehran Police announced the arrest of sixty 20-26 year-old youths during a late-night party that took place in northern Tehran. According to official reports, the party included dancing and serving of liquors.

Limiting and restricting intellectuals and academics: “Humanities promotes doubt in religious principles”

Intellectuals and academics have also been under increasing pressure by the regime in recent years. Reformists insist that professors are now being appointed for their willingness to support the government line rather than for their academic qualifications. Accordingly, a wave of politically motivated layoffs, or forced retirements, has been imposed on university lecturers throughout Iran. This wave has started shortly after the contested 2009 presidential elections and targets lecturers who do not adhere to the Government’s conservative ideology.

One insubordinate lecturer who paid the price for his views is Hadi Hakim Shafaei. In August 2010, a Revolutionary Court imposed a three-year sentence on Shafaei, a lecturer of literature at the Bojnurd University, who had been arrested during the crackdown on academics who joined the post-election protests. He was indicted with compromising national security and defaming the Supreme Leader.

This is of course just one of many such cases; Dr. Hossein Raeisian has also been punished by the regime for standing on the wrong side of the political map. Dr. Raeisian, a lecturer at the Imam Khomeni International University in Qazvin, was summoned to the Intelligence Ministry and arrested there. Dr. Raeisian is a member of the Scientific Council for Physics and was a senior member of Reformist leader Mir-Hossein Mousavi’s election campaign headquarters.

Introduction

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtVWZyMXius -view this clip about Iran in Africa.

Increasing political and economic isolation and a broader policy of “exporting the revolution” have led Iran to seek new allies around the world. In this way, Iran hopes to block diplomatic moves against it in the UN, expand into new markets and promote its radical agenda.

The clearest examples so far have been the members of a new anti-US alliance in Latin America.  But while this Latin American activism has been in the spotlight for some time, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his government have also been busy shuttling to Africa, speaking of a “new, just world order” and pledging to increase trade and to invest in development projects.  

But while Tehran is handing out countless economic promises and talking about the “end of Western capitalism and colonialism,” the effects of an increasing Iranian presence in Africa are already becoming apparent. There, too, Iran takes advantage of its new “friends” to promote its anti-Western foreign policy and support radical militant groups.

Rhetoric of a "New World Order"

An editorial published in the Iranian conservative daily Iran claims that in contrast with the West, whose relations with African states are based on "furthering its own interests", Iran is seeking relations that will prove mutually beneficial. Indeed, the main line in Tehran’s rhetoric about Africa is that the West is still looking to exploit African countries for its own gain, and Tehran often blames “colonialist powers” for Africa’s poverty and other problems. On a visit to Burkina Faso, Ghana and Togo,   Manouchehr Mottaki, then Iran's foreign minister, stated that the nations of the world are no longer willing to be subjected to an “unfair system”. For this reason, Iran claims that “resistance against the colonialist powers is the sole way to achieve independence and economic progress”. In any event, according to repeated claims by Ahmadinejad, the “capitalist system” is on the verge of collapse.

But some leading officials in African countries are fully aware of the truth about the Iranian regime. During Ahmadinejad’s visit to Harara in April, Zimbabwean Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai called the visit a “colossal political scandal”, and his Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) attacked Ahmadinejad over his record on human rights, saying, “He has made his reputation as a warmonger, a trampler of human rights, an executioner of those with dissenting voices and leader of questionable legitimacy.”

Even back in Iran Ahmadinejad’s doctrine is received with scepticism. A reformist newspaper recently warned that the president’s “unrealistic and impossible” view of a new world order only translates into large expenditures for the Iranian people.

It would be unrealistic of African countries to expect high benefits from developing their relations with Iran at the expense of their relations with Western countries, especially as Iran suffers from growing isolation. Furthermore, the modest truth behind Iran’s "big talk" is beginning to emerge.

Broken Promises in Africa and Around the World

Iran’s actions in Africa focus largely on economics with an emphasis on promises of aid to set up factories and various projects. These include, for example, projects linked to the supply of oil and water in Kenya, establishment of a joint investment corporation between Iran and Zimbabwe, construction of cement and asphalt production plants in Comoros, construction of an oil refinery, a tractor assembly plant and a beef cannery in Uganda, extension of a 120 million USD  line of credit from the Export Development Bank of Iran to Senegal for the purchase of Iranian tractors, and construction of Sierra Leone’s first dialysis center. During 2010, Tehran held an Iran-Africa Forum to boost economic and political cooperation, which was attended by representatives from over forty African nations.

However, Iran’s actions in the developing world seldom live up to its rhetoric. Signs of this are also beginning to emerge in Africa, and, according to several Iranian sources, twenty African nations threatened recently to close their embassies in Tehran following what they termed Ahmadinejad's failure to live up to the promises he made during his trips to Africa. Here are a few examples: 

Mali’s Hydroelectric Power Plant Fails to Materialize

In a June 2007 trip to Iran, Mali's President Amadou Toumani Touré asked Ahmadinejad to help construct a dam and hydroelectric power plant in his West African country, a project that the Iranians seemed to take seriously. In April 2008, Iran announced that it had increased the money allocated for the project to 120 million EUR and that the funds would be handled by Bank Saderat, which was already under US sanctions at the time (and whose assets in the UK would be frozen in July 2010). The construction was to last four years and the risk would be guaranteed by an Iranian fund, apparently since Iranian companies would be involved in the construction to the fullest extent possible.

In March 2009, Manouchehr Mottaki, then Iran's foreign minister, reiterated support for the project. However there is still no evidence that Iran has actually contributed any resources to getting  it started. But when recently a group of Malian parliamentarians met with Iranian consular officials, there was no word on the status of the project, but only vague nods to mutual support, platitudes regarding increased ties and cooperation, and the usual affirmation of Iran’s right to develop “peaceful nuclear technology”. In fact, there has been no mention of the Malian dam in the Iranian press for over a year, which suggests that Iran’s commitment to the project has flagged.

Senegal’s Refinery: Parties Still Far From Agreement

Senegal has in recent years served as “Iran’s gateway to Africa”, and the 16 million USD in exports to Senegal in 2009 constituted a greater volume of trade than that of Iran and all other West African countries combined.

Iran-Senegal relations have grown much stronger during Ahmadinejad’s term in office, with Iran building a chemical plant and constructing a car assembly factory, all of which seemed to have paid off diplomatically as Senegal’s delegation to the United Nations routinely votes against resolutions condemning Iran’s poor human rights record.

To date, Iran’s most ambitious commitment in Senegal has been to construct a refinery there for its crude oil. This could potentially be a serious boon to the Senegalese economy and transform the country into a net exporter of petroleum. Although the Iranians proposed the idea in the summer of 2007, a business source in June 2010 reported that Iran and Senegal were still in protracted talks regarding the project and seemed far from any agreement.

Towards the end of 2010 the relations between the countries suffered a setback after the capture of an arms shipment in Lagos, Nigeria which was suspected as heading to Senegal. Iranian Foreign Minister at that time, Manouchehr Mottaki rushed to Senegal in order to calm Dakar's outrage  but was fired during the visit by President Ahmadinejad while still in Dakar.  Senegal reacted by recalling its ambassador from Teheran and relations were only mended after Salehi the new Iranian foreign minister went to Dakar and offered 200 million USD in aid.

On February 23, 2011 Senegal declared it would sever all diplomatic ties with Iran, accusing Tehran of supplying weapons to anti-government rebels. In a press statement explaining the matter, the Senegalese Foreign Ministry said that the weapons supplied by Iran to rebel militants in its southern Casamance region had caused the deaths of Senegalese soldiers.

Learning From the Experience of Others

Iran’s inability, or unwillingness, to back up its declarations with actions on the ground seems to be a familiar pattern. Iran has strewn a trail of unfulfilled promises across the Middle East, Asia and Latin America, as illustrated in the following examples.

Nicaragua: “Of the billions of dollars promised by Ahmadinejad, the Nicaraguans have yet to see a single cent”

Ahmadinejad has developed close ties with Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega,  As the second poorest country in the Western hemisphere, Nicaragua is in dire need of massive investment in its economy, which is why, in the late summer of 2007, Ahmadinejad and Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez announced a plan to build a deep water port for Nicaragua on its Pacific coast .

In a candid interview with the Washington Post in July 2009, an Ortega economic adviser by the name of Bayardo Arce expressed frustration that not only had the Iranians reneged on their promises of a port, hydroelectric dam and a tractor factory, the Iranian government had refused to forgive Nicaragua’s 160 million USD debt, citing the Koran as the reason for their inflexibility. “They haven’t invested anything. They haven’t built anything”, Arce said.

Asked to comment on Iranian policy in Latin America, former Costa Rican Vice President Kevin Roberto Casas Zamora described Iran’s failed commitments to Nicaragua even more starkly: “Of the billions of dollars in investments promised by Ahmadinejad, the Nicaraguans have yet to see a single cent.”

It appears that the Nicaraguans are no longer waiting for Iran. As of July 2010, two Korean firms were in negotiations with the Nicaraguan government to build a deep water port at Monkey Point.

UAE Crescent Seeks International Arbitration over Iran’s Failure to Fulfil Gas Contract

In 2001, a 25-year agreement was signed between the National Iranian Oil Corporation (NIOC) and Crescent Petroleum, based in the UAE. Because of rising prices, however, Iranian officials called for a reappraisal of the price-calculation system, leading to gas-supply delays.

In July 2009, Crescent appealed to international arbitration as a result of NIOC’s failure to comply with the agreement, coming out with the following statement:

“We did not want to take this step but some of our customers have lost patience and are demanding performance, leaving us with no option but to seek a determination on the legal obligation of NIOC to deliver gas, and also to seek indemnity from NIOC in respect of the claims of our customers.”

Early in 2010, it was announced that the NIOC had cancelled the agreement to supply gas to Crescent Petroleum. Crescent contradicted this by claiming that the agreement between the sides was still valid and was currently under international arbitration.

Wikileaks: Iran-Pakistan Gas Pipeline “Very Unlikely”; “Iran has Four Times Failed to Sign LNG Contracts at the Last Minute”

A US diplomatic cable released by WikiLeaks reveals that a multi-billion Iranian-Pakistani gas link project is unlikely to materialize, despite a signed deal between the two countries. Emphasizing Iran’s “unreliability”, the report further reads:

“During a panel discussion at the conference on the future prospects of Caspian gas, several commentators noted the difficulty of doing business in ‘unpredictable, overly bureaucratic’ Iran, and the alleged historical ‘unreliability’ of Iranian gas supply contracts previously reached with Turkey and Turkmenistan. For example, panelists recounted that, after long negotiations, Iran has four times failed to sign separate Liquefied Natural Gas contracts at the last minute. Two panelists claimed that Iran has repeatedly diverted gas supplies to meet domestic needs, thereby interrupting its contractual gas exports - and has not paid contractual penalties for these violations.”

Terrorism, Drugs and Destabilization

As in the economic sector, the experience of nations around the world in security-related matters does not bode well for Africa. Hezbollah in Lebanon, the aid being provided by Iran to anti-government Houthi insurgents in Yemen, Iran’s support for armed militias in Iraq, Iranian-supported terrorist cells in Latin America and in Egypt, all point to the same pattern.

In October 2010, Nigerian authorities in the port of Lagos intercepted an arms consignment from Iran, apparently destined for The Gambia. The consignment included rockets and grenades under the guise of construction materials, reportedly accompanied by two members of the Qods Force – the key arm through which Iran supports terrorist groups abroad. The presence of Qods Force members is no surprise, since senior officers of the Qods Force joined Ahmadinejad on at least one of his official visits to Africa and Latin America.

The then Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki tried to claim that a “private company” had sent the armaments and that the “misunderstanding had been settled” , but failed to convince Nigeria. As of today one Iranian national is on trial in Abuja (see photo) the other was released after heavy Iranian pressure.

The Nigerian government reported the incident to the UN Security Council and during January 2010 the UN "panel of experts" visited Nigeria to investigate the affair.  Nigeria also called off a friendly football match scheduled between the two countries.

The Gambia responded more forcefully. In November, it announced it was severing all ties with Iran and ordered Iranian diplomats to leave the country.

 In another incident involving Iran, in December of 2010, Nigeria’s National Drug Law Enforcement Agency seized close to 130 kilograms of heroin, worth about USD 10 million, concealed in engine parts shipped from Iran.

Military Presence and Terrorist Training Camps

The Nigerian incident is by no means exceptional or unusual. As the Islamic Republic tries to establish military presence in strategic locations, it reaches out to relatively isolated African countries, or countries in a state of crisis, that possess important sea-ports or other strategic locations, and offers military cooperation, which includes the establishment of arms factories and military bases.

One example is Eritrea. Iran is paying special attention to the countries along the Red Sea coast, and in this context it is busy strengthening its ties with Eritrea. There have been reports that Iranian weapons, soldiers, ballistic missiles, submarines and naval vessels have been deployed to Assab in Eritrea. This development is causing considerable alarm in Saudi Arabia and Yemen. A Saudi newspaper article stated that “Sana’a fears an extensive plot aimed at turning the Red Sea region, especially the region near the Eritrean coast, into an area of Iranian influence, after a number of boats carrying arms intended for Houthi insurgents were captured”. According to some reports, Eritrea is also engaged in providing training to Houthi rebels, with the “support and supervision of Iran”, at training camps in several locations in the country.

Another example of Iran’s subversive activities in Africa, this time in the Sudan, was revealed in 2009 with the attack on a convoy of arms being transported from Iran to terrorist organizations in the Gaza Strip. In an interview to the London-based Arab newspaper Al-Sharq al-Awsat, in September 2009, Ghazi Salah al-Din, an advisor to the Sudanese president, admitted that Iran has arms factories in Sudan. Reports from May 2010 suggest that the Qods Force established a new arms factory in Sudan. During the 1990s it was estimated that there were at least ten training camps in Sudan, providing training to Hamas and other Iran-backed terrorist organizations.

In addition, a report on the Zimbabwe Mail from February 2010 quotes the Iranian ambassador to Zimbabwe, Rasoul Momeni, affirming Iran’s plan to establish a military base in Zimbabwe.   

Shiitization: “The Aims of the Iranian Cultural Center are not Purely Humanitarian”    

In Africa, as in its operations elsewhere around the world, Iran is using the local Shiite population and Lebanese community. Not relying solely upon these groups, however, Iran is attempting to propagate its version of Shiite Islam in those African countries in which it operates through religious and cultural centres, working in cooperation with the Islamic Culture and Relations Organization (ICRO) . The stated aims of the ICRO are “revival and dissemination of Islamic tenets and thoughts with a view to reaching the true message of Islam to the people of the world”.

Such activity is a source of concern for African countries, no strangers to violent clashes between Shiite and Sunni Muslims.   

According to an investigative report by an Egyptian newspaper into Iran’s increasing interest in the Comoros, the spread of the Iranian-Shiite influence is arousing the opposition and wrath of Sunni clerics there. At the beginning of 2007, according to the report, Sunni clerics met in the capital city, Moroni, and warned against holding Shiite services on the island, after several local islanders held the first ever public event there commemorating the martyrdom of Husayn ibn Ali on Ashura Day. The newspaper reported that local clerics fear the activities of Iranian institutions on the island and have requested the foreign organisations and individuals preaching Shiite teachings be expelled. The Sunni clerics “are not convinced that the real motives of the centre are purely humanitarian”, said the report.

Iran paid Mauritania US$ 10 million and Promised to Complete an Israeli-Built Cancer Research Medical Centre in Return for the Severance of Relations with Israel

The Iranian regime was also behind Mauritania’s decision to sever its relations with Israel and order the Israeli diplomatic mission to leave Nouakchott. Reports say that Iran paid Mauritania US$ 10 million in return to the severance of relations. In addition, the Iranian regime promised to take over the “Israeli hospital”, as it is known by the locals -- an Israeli project, funded by the Israeli government and the American Jewish Committee, to build a cancer research medical centre in Nouakchott.

Iran's Uranium Procurement Efforts – the Zimbabwean Angle

Recent press reports have indicated that the Zimbabwean government intends to defy United Nations sanctions in a deal to sell uranium to Iran. A leaked intelligence report suggests Iran will be awarded with exclusive access to Zimbabwe's uranium in return for providing the country with fuel.

The report – compiled by the United Nations' nuclear watchdog – said Iran's Foreign and Co-operative Ministers had visited Zimbabwe to strike a deal, and sent engineers to assess uranium deposits.

Experts say the move contradicts Iran's claim that it now has enough domestic uranium supplies to sustain its nuclear energy ambitions. They say Zimbabwe's defiance of sanctions and its support for the pariah state will scare those considering investing in its economy, which is only just starting to recover after years of hyperinflation.

Simbarashe Mumbengegwi, Zimbabwe's foreign minister, said the sanctions – which prohibit member states from providing Iran with raw materials that it could use to make a nuclear weapon – were unfair and hypocritical.

He said that Zimbabwe, which is also the subject of sanctions over human rights abuses perpetrated by President Robert Mugabe's supporters, would benefit economically from the agreement.

Women may not ride bicycles in the city; special models planned – Mohammad Royanian, Head of the Iranian Transportation and Fuel Management Office, responded to the government’s plan to encourage bicycle riding and reported that special bicycles are being designed for women, for their protection and to maintain Islamic values. He stressed that women are forbidden to ride bicycles in the city and reminded listeners that this ban was issued by the Supreme Council for Cultural Revolution.

11/2/2011

Iran's Systematic Oppression of Workers

The Iranian government is one of the most oppressive in the world, controlling every aspect of society and restraining women’s rights, academic freedom, opposition movements and the working poor. Iran is consistently one of the lowest-rated countries in indexes published by international organizations[1]. The regime’s heavy hand does not spare Iranian workers, whose basic rights – including the right to unionize – are either limited or outright denied.

The regime's worries

The Iranian people are currently affected by several fundamental economic problems: the cost of living and the unemployment rate are high, while workers suffer a chronic delay of wages and face waves of factory closures and layoffs. Not only has the Iranian regime failed to provide a solution to the country's deep-seated economic problems, it also persistently suppresses any attempt by workers to organize in order to improve their working conditions, put a stop to workplace discrimination and otherwise maintain their most basic rights.

It should be noted that the regime’s stance contradicts not only Iran's international commitments, but also the Iranian constitution. Iran is a member of various international organizations, including the International Labour Organization, which obligates members to protect workers' rights. In addition, article 26 of the Iranian constitution reads: "The formation of parties, societies, political or professional associations… is permitted provided they do not violate the principles of independence, freedom, national unity, the criteria of Islam, or the basis of the Islamic Republic. No one may be prevented from participating in the aforementioned groups, or be compelled to participate in them."

However, at present Iranian Labour Law directly contradicts this article, imposing severe limitations on the freedom of association: for a worker to join an association he requires approval from the Ministry of Labor; the Supreme Leader can appoint his representatives to worker unions; and workers in various industries are completely denied the freedom of association.

One reason for these limitations is Iran’s longstanding tradition of active and vibrant worker unions with high social and professional awareness, which have been very prominent in shaping Iran’s work culture. It appears that the regime is concerned that the working class will join forces with the protest movement – which has grown in strength considerably since president Ahmadinejad's reelection in 2009 – and is thus engaged in heavily oppressing workers, even more so since the recent election.

Opposition movements have indeed supported their claims against the regime by calling attention to the brutal suppression of workers’ protests by security forces, while leaders of the protest movement have visited the families of detained labor-rights activists to express their support.

Chronicles of an ongoing struggle

The Iranian regime has employed various measures to maintain its stranglehold over every aspect of life in Iran: labor rights activists have been harassed, beaten and detained – as have their families – and some of them have been fired and even executed.

For the last six months we have closely followed the workers’ struggle for basic rights – including the right to unionize – and the regime's violent acts of suppression. These are their stories:

  Protests

In April 2010, the Coordinating Council of Iranian Teachers Associations announced that a group of teachers would begin a week-long hunger strike in protest of prison and death sentences issued against their colleagues. The Council also called on Iranian teachers to join this strike during Teacher Day, in May.

Around the same time, the regime restricted human rights activists and social organizations that were preparing for May Day events in Iran. As part of the preparations for the events, graffiti around Tehran called on the general population to participate in demonstrations on May 1, while labor unions made a joint statement about the right to demonstrate and to strike in protest of the heavy-handed policies against Iranian workers.

The regime worked to prevent protests and demonstrations through massive deployment of security forces in Tehran, mainly due to the lessons learned in the 2009 post-election events.

May and June saw reports of labor protests in central cities: hundreds of workers shut down various factories for several days, including metal and steel factories that were inaugurated by the president only months prior, to protest the delay of their wages for more than six months. Workers at the Zhaveh Reservoir Dam joined them. Various kinds of protests against worker exploitation and workplace conditions continued for a few weeks, including sit-ins and gatherings at the offices of the president and parliament.

In June, hundreds of workers in the Abadan oil refinery blocked the entrance to the facility and confronted security forces. Two of the protesters were beaten after using their cellular phones to document events. In July, 500 of the refinery workers went on strike in protest of delayed wages. Similar actions were taken by the workers in the Khuzestan pipe factory, whose wages had been delayed for 15 months.

During the same month, many store owners in the Tehran bazaar closed their stores in protest of the regime's new tax policies. The protest gained momentum, and eventually police officers were deployed around the bazaar and in other busy spots in Tehran. In addition, the regime announced that the bazaar would be closed for one day, while the protest spread from Tehran to bazaars in other Iranian cities. As a result of the protests, the regime announced its intention to lower the proposed taxes from 70% to 15%.

In August, 50 women teachers from Tehran who were not signed to permanent contracts with the Ministry of Education staged a silent protest in front of the Ministry of Education offices in Tehran, requesting to be officially employed by the ministry. In the same month, workers staged another strike to protest delayed wages, this time in a metal factory in Hormozgan where wages had been denied for three months.

In September, hundreds of workers in the Kanfkar factory staged a protest demanding to receive their wages, which they claimed had not been paid for 16 months. Similar protests were staged by the workers of the company Kerep-Naz, in front of the local Melat Bank administration offices, as well as by the workers of the Babakan textile company (51% of which is state-owned), where mass layoffs left only 360 of 1500 workers employed there. Likewise, hundreds of workers from another textile factory – Naz Nakh in the city of Qazvin – that had been laid off without receiving their last month’s wages and had remained unemployed since the factory was closed – protested in front of the Ministry of Industries and the president's office.

In October, gold merchants went on strike throughout Iran in protest of VAT law. In response, several protesters in the Tehran bazaar were attacked and arrested by security forces for taking part in the strike. The situation became protracted because of the government’s refusal to negotiate with the strikers; Tehran’s Prosecutor General eventually announced that they would be punished by the judiciary. In the same month, one hundred workers from the city of Qazvin protested unpaid wages in front of the president's office.

Protests against delayed wages continued throughout October. 500 South Pars Gas Field workers staged a strike to protest not having received their wages for a number of months; 750 textile workers demonstrated in front of the office of the Mazandaran province governor, also about delayed wages. In the Abadan oil refinery, workers who staged a strike to protest delayed wages were fired.

November saw reports on a week-long strike staged by 1300 workers in a tire factory near Tehran who demanded to receive wages that had been delayed for a number of months. Workers' representatives met with Ministry of Industries officers, but no resolution was achieved.

Indictments and harassments

In April 2010, another indictment was issued for Mansour Osanlou, leader of the Syndicate of Workers of Tehran and Suburbs Bus Company, on charges of contacting "enemies of the regime" during his time in prison. Osanlou, who has become one of the most vivid symbols of the struggle of Iranian workers, suffered pressure and torture in prison; in June 2010 he was transferred to solitary confinement in a Revolutionary Guards facility. His daughter in law was also arrested by Ministry of Intelligence agents in a Tehran Metro station, and suffered violent beatings which – along with improper care during her detainment – caused her to miscarry.

In July it was reported that Osanlou would be charged with "collaboration with enemies of the regime." That same month, Osanlou's family was visited by opposition leader Mehdi Karroubi, who said, regarding the violence inflicted on Osanlou's daughter in law, "The barbaric behavior against individuals and their families is oppression against the people that even the Shah regime, with all its corruption, never committed.” Karroubi went on to say: "I, as a member of this system, feel ashamed hearing you."

Osanlou's family was also visited by Dr. Zahra Rahnavard, wife of opposition leader Mir-Hossein Mousavi, who strongly condemned the regime's "inhuman treatment" of political prisoners and their families. In October, Osanlou's wife and his mother were both summoned for interrogation.

Seven other labor-rights activists were summoned to court in June, and later that month another activist, Khosrow Boukani, was sentenced to two years in prison.

In August, Rasoul Baddaghi, a member of the Iranian Teachers Trade Union, was sentenced to six years in prison and banned from social activities for five years, on charges of "propagating against the regime and endangering national security." A similar sentence was issued for Badr-al-Sadat Mofidi, secretary of the Journalists Syndicate.

October saw reports on two teachers and members of the Teachers Trade Union, Mohammad Tavakoli and Ali Sadeghi, being summoned for questioning on charges of propagating against the regime. The same month, the Ministry of Education banned the hiring of Ms. Tahere Naghiei, a teacher and activist for the Iranian Teachers Union. Another teachers’ rights activist – 68-year-old Seyed Hashem Khastar, head of the teachers union in Mashhad – was forbidden from making phone calls to his family from prison, where he is currently serving a two-year sentence.

In October, it was reported that the Iranian Labor News Agency (ILNA) was instructed by security services, following an order issued by the National Security Council, to avoid any publications or reports about Iranian workers’ protests and strikes.

Arrests

In the weeks preceding and immediately following Iranian Teacher Day (May 2), several members of the Teachers Trade Union were arrested under various charges. Those that were released were forced to sign a statement obligating them to refrain from participating in any "illegal protests" in the future. Two other union members were summoned in to security force offices in the city of Yazd and arrested there, while another member was arrested later and sent to the notorious Kahrizak prison. Two other activists, Mokhtar Asadi and Reza Shahabi, were arrested in June.

Saeed Torabian, a member of the Syndicate of Workers of Tehran and Suburbs Bus Company, was forbidden from resuming his position at work after being released from arrest in July. In October it was reported that he had been arrested again, along with fellow syndicate member Gholam-Reza Hosseini.

In November, 30 workers of a defense industries factory in the province of Luristan were arrested while protesting delayed wages.

Executions

On May 9, 2010 Farzad Kamangar, a Kurdish activist in the Teachers Trade Union arrested on bogus terrorism charges, was executed in secret along with four other Kurdish prisoners. The execution was harshly criticized by international organizations.

      A worrying future for Iranian workers

Conditions for Iranian workers are deteriorating as the powerful Revolutionary Guards – already employed by the regime to control the civil population – gain control of Iran's economy as well. This process is effectively destroying private enterprise in Iran and harming many industries; old established factories no longer receive support from the government and from president Ahmadinejad, who prefer to support factories and projects run by the Revolutionary Guards instead.

The situation is especially tense at the moment, as the government is about to phase out subsidies. Despite attempts to provide assurances to the public that the cost of staple products will not increase, it is clear that the regime is anticipating unrest in the wake of higher prices. Omid Ali Nazeri, a trade union member from the province of Mazandaran, recently warned that the planned subsidy reform will bring about a new wave of factory closures, layoffs and unemployment.

The continued economic decline is expected to worsen the already dismal situation of workers, and might cause an increase in worker-authority confrontations. The regime has already increased security measures in the streets of Tehran and other cities in preparation for the brutal suppression of protests which are expected to follow the planned government subsidy reforms.

By Najmeh Bozorgmehr in Tehran 

 Published in The Financial Times 26/10/2011 

Photographers waited in vain this week for Ali-Akbar Salehi, Iran’s foreign minister, outside the entrance to a state-organised conference designed to help improve the Islamic regime’s relations with the European Union. 

After half an hour, organisers finally announced that Mr Salehi was “sick”and unable to attend the two-day event that ended on Tuesday. 

  Inside the hall, there were no European ambassadors even though they were all invited, fuelling suspicion that this was the real reason why Iran’s top diplomat failed to show up. Instead he sent the text of his speech to be read out to assembled foreign ministry officials, academics, businesspeople and some diplomats. Iran’s 

The cold shoulder by Europe’s envoys was a sign that  bid to improve ties with the region is viewed as too little too late at a time when Tehran is facing mounting international pressure and sanctions over its nuclear programme, alleged human rights violations and terrorism charges. 

“We want to eliminate the existing hurdles in [Iran’s] relations with the European Union,” Mr Salehi’s statement read. “We hope Iran’s relations with Europe will be normalised gradually, for which we need constant consultations and patience.” 

In 1997, the EU withdrew all its ambassadors to Tehran for more than six months and halted its policy of “critical dialogue” over Iran’s alleged terror attack against a Kurdish dissident in Berlin. 

Now Iran has full diplomatic relations with almost all European states, but the 27-member bloc has recently increased political and economic pressure to levels not seen in Tehran since the 1979 Islamic revolution.

The EU has supported four rounds of sanctions against Iran at the UN over the past three years over the country’s nuclear programme. The EU has also imposed unilateral punitive measures against Iran since 2008, including visa bans on senior officials and military commanders. It has also frozen the assets of individuals and entities, and enforced economic and banking sanctions.

The scope of Europe’s disagreement with Iran has recently expanded beyond the country’s controversial nuclear programme to human rights issues and Iran’s alleged participation in a plot to murder the Saudi ambassador to Washington.

“Iran is under an unprecedented level of international pressure and is trying to ease it,” said a university lecturer of international relations at the conference. “But one should not forget that the government of [Mahmoud] Ahmadi-Nejad is also trying to gain popularity at home through improving relations with western states.”

The Iranian public would like to see improved relations with the US and Europe, and Mr Salehi said in his statement that the Iranian nation had “never” had any problems with European states.

He insisted that negotiations were the only way to remove “wrong perceptions”, and that future talks could include human rights as well as other fields of mutual concern such as Iran’s influence in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and the Palestinians and the prevention of drug trafficking, organised crime and terrorism.

Responding to an offer by Iran to resume talks on its nuclear programme, Catherine Ashton, EU foreign policy chief, said talks between Iran and the US, Britain, France, Germany, as well as China and Russia, could resume within weeks if Iran was ready to discuss confidence-building measures without conditions.

The last round of talks in January made no progress as Iran continued to insist that enriching uranium was its right and that it had no intention of diverting its “peaceful” nuclear activities into a weapons programme.

European leaders at a Brussels summit on Sunday warned that Iran would face tougher sanctions if it failed to address international concerns about its nuclear programme. They urged Iran to engage in “constructive and substantial talks” to avoid “possible future restrictive measures”.

slavosh rajzadhe 

European Parliament's delegation for relations with Iran is planning to pay a five-day visit to Tehran at the end of this month.

The request for this trip was made months ago by two German MEPs Barbara Lochbieler and Kurt Lechner as part of the delegation. The trip will cost European tax-payers an estimated €100.000.

No delegation from the European Parliament has visited Iran in the current parliamentary term. It was due to concerns of atrocities committed by the Iranian authorities that the world witnessed following the sham Presidential Elections that was hijacked by Mahoud Ahmadinejad in 2009.

In September 2010, the European Parliament had authorised a delegation to Tehran on some conditions including lifting of the death penalty on Sakieneh Ashtiani who has been sentenced to death by stoning for alleged adultery. This condition was not met and the proposed 2010 delegation therefore did not travel.

Ms Ashtiani still remains on death row and nothing has improved but the new trip seems to have been planned ahead despite high criticism by international observers and NGOs. A 5-member delegation is scheduled to visit Tehran and other Iranian cities between 31 October and 4 November.

Only last month, Iran officially hanged a record high number of 100 prisoners and two weeks ago, the European Union expanded sanctions against 29 Iran officials because of their involvement in human rights abuses which the EU say have increased over the past weeks and months, including the execution of minors.

Opposition websites have warned of hundreds of newly planned executions since mid-September. A young Christian pastor, charged with apostasy, has been made to choose between renouncing his faith or die.

Last time a European Parliament delegation visited Iran in 2007, several people were hanged in public at their arrival day as well as during their visit. The delegation had justified the trip as ordinary inter-parliamentary activity.

Iran's strictly controlled elections systems allows only the highly loyal to run for a seat in theMajlis, the Iranian parliament. The current composition of the Majlis that the EP delegation is scheduled to meet consists to nearly a third of commanders of the notorious Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) many of whom have been involved in horrendous human rights abuses in the 1980s.

The IRGC was also involved in the alleged terror-plot to assassinate Saudi Ambassador in the United States this month.

Critics say whatever good intentions the EP delegation may claim to have, the mere fact that they do visit that dictatorship gives a highly undeserved credit to that regime, at the time when the international community is increasingly united in isolating the dictatorship for cruel behaviour of its people as well as its role in international terrorism.

"An EP visit would only be interpreted by Iran, as if no matter what crimes they commit, they are still respected and welcomed by the international community!" says, Ali M. an Iranian dissident who fled Iran few months ago and has applied for asylum in Luxembourg.

"Any visit to that regime is an insult to the blood of our loved ones who were murdered by the regime's henchmen" says Fereshte Dashti, an exiled Iranian who lost seven of her closest relatives for opposing the dictatorship in Iran.

"I am appalled to see these people insisting so much to make such trips, they seem to have nothing but personal interests. Human lives seem to mean nothing to them," she lamented.

The idea of such trip has also prompted frustration among other prominent members of European Parliament.

Struan Stevenson, a leading British Conservative MEP and President of Parliament's Delegations for relations with Iraq was outraged last week when he addressed Parliament's plenary session.

"Three hundred prisoners have been transferred to death row expecting imminent execution - and these are people, mostly students, who were arrested during the uprisings in Teheran and other cities in Iran - I think it is a deeply retrograde step that this House, that the Conference of Presidents, has agreed to send a delegation to Teheran in two or three weeks time. I think Iran is now beyond the pale; to give them that kind of publicity, to give them that kind of oxygen is completely wrong," he stressed.

He was supported by a colleague MEP Potito Salatto "I think this action will only be used as propaganda to publicise the regime in Tehran."

Italian MEP Marco Scurria, posted a statement on his website urging the new head of the Iran delegation, Mrs Tarja Cronberg, to cancel this trip in light of Iran's recent terror plot against United States.

"Rather than sending a delegation to Tehran it's time for Europe to put its hopes on the Iranian people and that the winds of the Arab Spring soon arrives to Iran, a country and a people who have such great historical and cultural traditions and does not deserve such government" he stressed in a joint statement with two colleagues.

In a time when Iran and Syria together with current Iraqi Prime minister seem to have built a vicious-block to prevent any democratic change, such visits would highly jeopardise European Parliament's reputation in the eyes of the suffering people of Iran and the rest of the Middle East.

Voice of America | September 22, 2011

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will address the United Nations General Assembly in New York on Thursday; just one day after Iran released two American hikers who had been held for two years on suspicion of spying.

During past addresses to the U.N., President Ahmadinejad has denied the holocaust and expressed doubt about the official version of the September 11, 2001 terror attacks. Iranian media say Mr. Ahmadinejad's speech on Thursday is expected to focus on the themes of global management and fundamental reform of the United Nations.

Meanwhile, New York based anti Iranian organizations, UANI and Iran180, have continued to rally against Ahmadinejad's visit to New York in General and against his scheduled address at the UN.

On Wednesday, Iranian authorities released the two hikers, Shane Bauer and Josh Fattal, on a combined bail of $1 million, in what President Ahmadinejad called a “humanitarian gesture.” Many analysts say the move may have been intended to gain international approval for Iran's president ahead of his address in New York.

The speech comes as Palestinian and Israeli leaders are locked in a diplomatic dispute over formal U.N. recognition of Palestinian statehood. Palestinian leaders are preparing to submit their application for full U.N. membership to the Security Council on Friday.

On Wednesday, President Ahmadinejad told ABC News that he supports such a move, calling Israel an “occupying and illegal government.”

Meanwhile, U.S. President Barack Obama warned Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas on Wednesday that the U.S. would veto any U.N. Security Council move to recognize a Palestinian state. President Obama held separate talks with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, where he reaffirmed the U.S. commitment to Israel's security.

In a speech to the General Assembly, President Obama said there can be “no shortcuts” to the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, saying the dispute must be resolved through direct negotiations, and not at the United Nations.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy also addressed the world body Wednesday, proposing that Palestinians be given upgraded observer status while setting out a roadmap for direct talks with Israel to be concluded within a year.

British Prime Minister David Cameron and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan are also expected to address the General Assembly on Thursday.

The Daily Beast | February 5, 2011

As protests sweep the Middle East, the Iranian government has launched a brutal wave of executions in what many see as an intimidation tactic aimed at discouraging fresh uprisings. During the month of January, Iran executed at least 73 people, an average of two to three hangings each day. The numbers are alarming, even in a country second only to China for the most executions in the world. The killings have sent a bone chilling message to members of Iran’s pro-democracy Green Movement about the deadly risks of following the lead of frustrated citizens in Egypt, Tunisia and Yemen. Many of those executed in Iran in recent weeks were political prisoners originally rounded up during the protests that swept Tehran in 2009, after the alleged fraudulent election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

“The executions, for those who live in close quarters with death-row inmates, have dealt a severe emotional blow,” said a family member of a political prisoner in Farsi. The hanging of a Dutch-Iranian prisoner, Zahra Bahrami, last week was particularly shattering for the inmates, according to the family member. Bahrami’s hanging sparked outcry from the international community, though drowned by the massive uprisings in the region. She was initially arrested for participating in the protests in 2009, but was later charged with possessing 400 grams of cocaine and opium—a crime punishable by death. Her fellow inmates knew she was originally a political prisoner. They also knew that she had been severely tortured. So the news of her execution was particularly shocking.

Since the uprising in Iran two years ago, the green movement has been largely silenced with extreme violence and intimidation that reportedly includes secret prisons and hangings without due process. Those demonstrations led to more than 5,000 prisoners, dozens of murdered protesters, and several prisoners who died from torture. And as the anniversary of the Iranian Revolution in 1979 approaches next week, the government fears the day will be used by organizers for more protests. The regime uses the day to tout the triumph of Islam over a despotic regime. But the people can tout it as a remembrance of overthrowing a despised and brutal authority.

A large number of executions are reportedly taking place in secret in Vakilabad prison in Mashad, one of the holiest cities in Shi'ite Islam. In the month of January alone, close to 100 executions took place inside the Iranian prisons, according to various sources. According to Iranian media accounts, the number is between 66 and 73—but activists and journalists believe it to be even more. "We know that other executions take place…no newspaper would dare to challenge the government statistics and information," said a Tehran-based journalist on the condition of anonymity. "Talking about the executions is very much like debating the nuclear issue or criticizing Ahmadinejad—they are all considered security issues and this could have serious repercussions for journalists or papers."

The Iranian government claims that most of those executed had charges related to drug trafficking or trade, but there are political prisoners among them. During the past few weeks, at least three political prisoners were hanged, two of whom had been arrested during the post-election protests. A large number of executions are reportedly taking place in secret in Vakilabad prison in Mashad, one of the holiest cities in Shi'ite Islam, according to the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran.

Five hundred miles east of Tehran, there are allegedly dozens, if not hundreds of prisoners, hanged outside the prison—without due process, and completely hidden from the eyes of the international community. And as news of the rash of executions continues to spread among the population, people are showing signs of utter disgust, according to an activist in Iran who helps international human rights organizations gather data. "Iran's economic crisis coupled with its crisis of legitimacy is all reaching a pivotal point," said a human rights activist on the condition of anonymity for fear of political repercussions. He believes that there will be a "bread uprising" akin to those in Tunisia in Egypt as the economic conditions inside the country worsen. And the people first hit by a crumbling economy are the poor, which stirs anxiety inside the regime about revolt, he said. So the execution of political activists intimidates protestors, while execution of ordinary citizens for drug trafficking, intimidates the poor. These executions as an intimidation tool can, of course, backfire. If the poorer, rural people and the educated middle class find common ground, violence will eventually be met with violence, he said.

To confound the problem, there has not been a UN human rights monitor in Iran since 2002. Just last week, two UN independent experts warned that there has been a dramatic surge in death sentences in Iran carried out, in the absence of internationally recognized safeguards, despite numerous calls by the UN to immediately halt executions. "We call on the Iranian Government to immediately declare a moratorium on the death penalty in view of the gravity of the situation…" said the UN Special Rapporteur Christof Heyns last week. "Any death sentence undertaken in contravention of a Government's international obligations is tantamount to an arbitrary execution," he said.

On September 20, 2011, despite calls by human rights group Amnesty International, Alireza Molla-Soltani, a 17 year old boy, was brutally executed by hanging in a public square of the city of Karaj.

"The fact that Iran has decided to execute a 17-year old shows how little respect the authorities have for international human rights standards," said the London-based watchdog's deputy director for the Middle East and North Africa, Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui.

"Executing juvenile offenders is strictly forbidden under international treaties that Iran has signed up to." He added. Link to pictures of the public hanging of Alireza Molla-Soltani from the official Iranian News Agency "FARS":

** Caution: The images you are about to view are extremely graphic and can be offensive to some audiences" **

Tehran officials exploit a loophole to travel the world

The Wall Street Journal | August 11, 2011

Fereydoon Abbasi-Davani is a dangerous man. A trained nuclear physicist, he was described in a recent report by the Institute for Science and International Security as "a key scientist in the Iranian covert nuclear weapons program" who "personally directed work to calculate the yield of a nuclear weapon as well as work on high energy neutron sources."

In 2007, he was designated by the U.N.'s Security Council, placed under a travel ban and subject to an asset freeze. The European Union has placed him under similar restrictions.

So what was Mr. Abbasi doing giving a press conference in Vienna in June? As the recently appointed head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, he can take advantage of a sanctions loophole that allows him to attend intergovernmental meetings, particularly those convened "under the auspices of the United Nations." The U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency is headquartered in Vienna, and Mr. Abbasi was there as the Islamic Republic's official representative.

Also headquartered in Vienna is the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries. The current president of OPEC is Iran's new oil minister, Rostam Qasemi. Mr. Qasemi, until recently a commander in the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, is the former head of Khatam al-Anbia, a Guards-controlled engineering firm that has been designated by the U.S., the EU and the U.N. for its role in nuclear proliferation.

Then there is Ali Akbar Salehi, who preceded Mr. Abbasi as head of Iran's Atomic Energy Agency and has a doctorate in nuclear physics from MIT. In 2009 Mr. Salehi was placed under an EU-wide travel ban. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made Mr. Salehi his foreign minister in January, and in May the EU quietly announced that his ban had been "suspended" in the interests of dialogue. Mr. Salehi visited Austria and Slovenia last month, and he will likely join Mr. Ahmadinejad at the U.N.'s annual General Assembly in New York next month.

It's not surprising that the Iranians would get wise to the loophole through which they can evade sanctions merely by naming the sanctioned officials to high government posts. More depressing is that the U.N. and EU would allow Iran to mock them after enacting sanctions with so much fanfare. As our friends at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies suggest, if the EU were serious it would close the travel loopholes. And if the U.S. were serious it would sanction any company that refuels the planes on which the Iranians travel abroad. Sanctions can play a helpful, if never decisive, role in increasing the costs to Iran for refusing to comply with U.N. resolutions and stop its nuclear programs. But there's no point in enacting sanctions if there is no serious intention of enforcing them. When the best the international community can do against Iran is a sanctions E-Z Pass, it's no wonder Iran's illicit nuclear programs are speeding ahead in broad daylight.

On Anniversary, Iran's Ahmadinejad

Says U.S. Planned 9/11 Attacks

By LEE FERRAN | ABC News Sept. 11, 2011

As thousands of Americans gather across the country for tearful ceremonies to remember the nearly 3,000 killed in the Sept. 11 terror attacks ten years ago today, Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad marked the anniversary by repeating the conspiracy theory that the attacks were orchestrated by the U.S. as a pretext for war.

"The September 11 [attacks] were actually a planned game to provoke the human community's sentiments and find an excuse for launching attack on Muslim regions and occupying Iraq and Afghanistan, which led to the massacre of one million innocent people," Ahmadinejad said today according to Iranian press reports.

Ahmadinejad also said the U.S. and its allies attempt to wage war in different parts of the world in an attempt to increase the sale of small arms.

Ahmadinejad -- and several others -- have made the conspiracy theory claim previously. Last year, the Iranian president asked the U.N. General Assembly to form an independent fact-finding group to investigate the 9/11 attacks.

Iran's Fars News Agency paraphrased previous remarks by a senior Iranian foreign ministry official in a report today as saying the 9/11 attacks were a plot by neo-conservatives in Washington, D.C., to victimize "thousands of Americans in a bid to attain an array of large-scale goals, including finding control over the world nations and their wealth."

Despite a painstaking, years-long investigation by the 9/11 Commission which found the attacks were the work of the al Qaeda terrorist organization, conspiracy theories about what actually happened on Sept. 11, 2001, survive. Those who doubt the official account, known by some as "9/11 Truthers", allege the twin towers were actually brought down by controlled demolitions and the Pentagon was hit by a cruise missile, rather than an airplane.

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, told ABC News that anyone positing such conspiracy theories "trivializes" the "most tragic event to affect the United States." "People making these claims are disgraceful, and they should be ashamed of themselves," King said Friday.

ABC News' Joel Siegel contributed to this report.

Abbasi-Davani : Directing the Path Toward the Iranian Bomb

Iranian nuclear scientist Fereydoun Abbasi-Davani  is currently head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI).  He was appointed to this position by President Ahmadinejad in February - replacing Ali Akbar Salehi, now Iran's foreign minister.

Abbasi has been regularly linked by the international community to Tehran’s efforts to develop a nuclear weapon arsenal.  United Nations Security Council resolution 1747 (2007) sanctioned him for being “involved in nuclear or ballistic missile activities,” sanctions that include a travel ban and an asset freeze.  Subsequently, Abbasi was also subjected to European Union sanctions due to his involvement in the Iranian nuclear program, including its military dimensions.

According to international experts, Abbasi, who is considered to be a key scientist in the Iranian covert nuclear weapons program, personally directed work to calculate the yield of a nuclear weapon, and also worked on high energy neutron sources.

Abbasi has been a member of Iran's Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) since the 1979 Islamic revolution.  Prior to his appointment as AEOI head, he ran the physics department at Tehran's Imam Hossein University, also linked to the IRGC.

Since his appointment as head of the AEOI, Abbasi has fueled tensions with the IAEA.  In a public response to a letter from IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano in which the latter reiterated the Agency’s “concerns about the possible military dimensions” of Iran's program, Abbasi stated:  “We will respond to the Agency by stepping up our efforts in the area of nuclear expertise and technology.”

During a high level IAEA meeting in June, Abbasi accused the Agency of focusing on "baseless and marginal issues" and its "reliance ... on the unlawful resolutions of the United Nations Security Council." In a 12-page June letter to Amano, Abbasi rejected numerous areas of criticism included in the Agency's May report, calling it "not balanced and factual."