A love letter to my parents

My sister summed up our (by ours: I mean my siblings) feelings about the melding of political and personal history so beautifully:

Dear Mom & Dad:
This week in our country is definitely historic. And while the word of the last several months has been CHANGE - and moving this country forward. Let us take a moment to recognize the change that has been quietly taking place for the last 45 years. There has been a lot of talk this week about those conversations that happen around the kitchen table - and believe you me - I am all too familiar with those conversations. But there were conversations that happened around that table when we were kids that culminated into the historical moments of the last week. To you, Mom and Dad, and the other parents of our generation, thank you for putting your history aside and making sure to raise us with openness and equality you are the true unsung heroes of this historical moment. Your efforts changed the world and you are my heroes!

All my love,
Ruthie

Oppression is weak

"In an open society it is impossible to kill, jail, or occupy everyone who disagrees with you." (Bill Clinton speaking at the World Affairs Council)

The regime in Iran is a house of cards. Many may talk about their strength. I’ve heard it: money is rolling in because of the high price of oil. Yes. That is a strength. The revolutionary military supports the current president. Many in the Arab world and beyond see Ahmadinejad as a damn against the tide of Western imperialism. Another strength. They are acting boldly. Another strength. The world is paying attention. Yep, yet another.

Why do I say they are weak? A government that stones a man for adultery, sentences a woman to lashings for promoting the rights of women, imprisons professors, blocks social networking sites, and locks up union leaders is weak. W-E-A-K. We know now how weak the revolution was when Iraq attacked in the early 80s thus uniting the population behind the regime. That revolution was so weak that it tortured, killed, and imprisoned nearly all of the political thinkers and activists in the entire country.

Weak regimes respond with violence. Weak regimes keep their populations in a state of fear.

Read about the weaknesses here:
Listen to Halleh Esfandiari
talking to NPR about her imprisonment

Kamangir writes about the sentencing of feminist Delaram Ali

Here is an account of the stoning of the man put together by Hamid Tehrani at Global Voices

Read a report from the OpenNet initiative on Iran

Political Paralysis

"We love Americans; we just don't love your government," Iranians everywhere told me over and over and over again. "We have the same problem: bad governments," many added. When they did, I invariably responded: "The American government represents the people: you should hold us responsible for the actions of our government." It was kind of a mini civics lesson.

The fact is that most Americans do not know the extent and effect of American foreign policy. We are mostly concerned with domestic issues. And now, on top of that, most are *not* represented by the current government.

What I found most distressing during my recent stay in The US was the extent to which Americans had become more "Iranian." In Iran I met people frustrated with the system who had given up affecting it. I encountered a lack of will, a kind of political exhaustian in Iran. What I did not expect was to encounter this same phenomena in America. I have never ever ever experienced an America so at odds with its government and at such a loss about what to do about it.

Even though I met a couple of Bush supporters, most of the people I met in America were just paralyzed by mistrust and disgust. People are afraid there will be a war with Iran, they are sick of the war in Iraq, they are tired to the bone from lies.

What's next from this seemingly unstoppable administration?

More Links:

Peggy Noonan

Michael Winship

Question 2: Is there a chance that there will be political change in Iran?

Of course people ask us this question. What did you expect? Iran is portrayed as a pariah, arming Al Qaeda, the Shi'a death squads, and promoting terrorism. (Wait, or is the US funding Al Qaeda?[Warning to folks in Iran: a youtube video: takes lots of bandwidth!])Iran is the bogeyman.

The short answer is: Iran changes all the time. There is change in Iran today! There will be change tomorrow. There was change yesterday. Iran's path is unclear. It's future is unclear. The regime seems to think that the only way to guarantee its survival is by making sure young men and women don't hold hands in public and that women wear black and men take the gel out of their hair. I am being a bit facetious, but sometimes it really does seem that way to me.

Most people do not want another revolution (it seems)... they want slow change for the better, not the worse.

Iranians have never been happy with their governments. In Being Modern in Iran (fabulous book, by the way!)Fariba Adelkhah quotes from a source writing in the 1800s: he wrote that Iranians love their country and hate their government.

So maybe nothing will change.

Next post from me will be Jack from Canada's question: Are they in any way hostile to westerners? His question is one we get regularly.

Why oh why were British soldiers taken prisoner?

This morning when I woke up, I immediately turned on the TV to watch the latest BBC world news report on the British naval personnel who were captured yesterday morning, but I ended up watching a totally different program first, Francesco da Mosto’s travel journey to explore the history, culture, and modern-day life of Italy. He sets off heading south to Sicily. Francesco da Mosto’s journey is my favorite travel show. He finished this program by saying "Our country is not to be explained, but to be experienced and felt. I really think you can say that about Iran too.

But experiencing it lately means feeling a lot of pain.

Have you ever had a time when nothing is going well for you? Yesterday’s capture of the British Navy personnel by Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Naval Corps is just another bad thing at a time when most Iranians feel nothing is going well for them. Considering Iran’s situation, one would think that we would do everything to improve its position in the world, and would do everything possible to make sure that the UN Security Council would not pass another damaging series of economic sanctions against it. But that is when you are rational and you are not looking for crises.

I still don’t understand what happened yesterday. But since yesterday I have been trying to figure out why Iran captured British Navy personnel at the moment when every eye in the world is upon us.

A couple of things came to my mind:

Iran is desperate to show the world and the west in particular that we are able to protect and control Iran’s territorial waters. Why we want to do this by capturing 15 British sailors is not clear to me just yet. The idea may be to have something to exchange for the 5 Iranians who were arrested last January in northern Iraq. This is also a bit strange since the 5 Iranians are held by American forces, not by British forces. It is not even clear those 5 want to come back to Iran.

Another idea is that perhaps Iran wants even more attention. Here are a few more notions that I have been considering:

1) We Iranians cannot read maps very well and got confused about where our territorial waters are.

2) Iran's Revolutionary Guard navy corps did not have anything to do on a boring Friday morning.

3) Iranians like to deal with multiple problems at the same time: a new UN resolution is just not enough for us to deal with when we can handle so many more crises at the same time.

4) The new Iranian Navy exercise in the waters off Bushehr province went berserk.

5) We know Margaret Beckett, the Foreign Secretary will say "We have asked for a full explanation on what has happened and we are leaving them in no doubt that we want the immediate and safe return of our personnel and their equipment."

6) Our president needed a reason for not traveling to the US to give a speech at the UN.

What do you guys think?

Naive, not stupid

From Keivan

I am not sure were I am going with this, but first let me thank you all for your interesting comments. I do feel that if you read all of the responses to my posting you guys all will get at least partial answers to your asked/non asked questions.

I am definitely not sorry for taking part in the revolution. A 16 year-old boy who was part of something so huge and amazing can’t take a lot to take a credit for anything.

I feel that I need to clarify a couple of things. A woman wrote: “ I am one of those Iranians who lost much because of the revolution. at times, I sit down and blame people like you (or my husband), who were young, and stupid, and didn't listen to your fathers”. Basically I am not sure how to answer this, but first let me tell you this I was definitely young, but not stupid. (I know that I wrote that I was young and stupid. Probably “naïve” is a better word than “stupid.” At the time I did feel that what I was part of was the right thing to do. I had a sense of social justice. I could not accept that 44,000 Americans were getting paid more than the rest of the country. It was obvious that there were people who were just stealing from the nation, just as there are now. We were also very concerned about human rights.

Almost the whole country was proud to be part of the 1979 revolution: whether they like to admit it now or not. Considering the situation now, you can say most of people were better off then than now. Looking at boys and girls who are the same age I was at the time of the revolution, I can easily say we had much better lives then than they have now.

I am not sorry to be part of the revolution at all. I would do it again under the same situation; you can call it stupid or what ever you want. My father was wrong to just use his personal (maybe historical) experiences to keep me from being part of a something that a lot of people in the world called it one of the most amazing events of the last century. I say that, but my father was also right. He was right for the wrong reasons.

I do think the direction of the revolution changed from the way we imagined it. That is why I would not forgive people for wasting our dreams building a society that is collapsing from corruption, drug abuse, and dishonesty. I see unjustness here everyday.

I am not going to get in to why the revolution changed, because there are 100’s of books that are still not able to describe all the factors. It is just unbelievable how people in power here can heep people is this miserable situation and still appear on TV/Radio as innocents to complain about the lack of this and the lack of that. Even the dumbest person/government should learn after 28 years how to govern.

Naj wrote: “But you see ... this time around, Iran wants peace, and America is sending more fighter carriers to the Persian gulf ... why IS America not leaving us to our own problems?” If Iran wants peace, then why are they playing a mouse and cat game with the international community? Iran should defend its rights, including the right to Nuclear Technology, but Iran should be more transparent, at least in its foreign affairs, because the International communities are not like you and me who can be shut-up by the Ahmadinejad government. There are many ways to get what you want. It looks like we Iranians use always the most difficult and least successful ways. This is how I feel about Iranians in Qom, Los Angeles, and Tehran. Sorry if I create more arguments for you guys. I am going away for a couple of weeks, so you’ll just have to argue by yourselves.

22 Bahman… and another day off…

Corrections to the text made thanks to comments from "M".

Tomorrow is the anniversary of the revolution: the day that the Shah's regime fell and several days after the Air France flight landed with Khomeini on board. Hundreds of thousands of Iranians (really millions: certainly all 10 million Basiji will be there) will turn out tomorrow to chant Nuclear energy is our inevitableinalienable right (inevitable? Why “inevitable” I wonder? Note to: M, I did see someone wearing a hand-painted sign that had "inevitable" written instead of "inalienable"), Down with America (of course), Down with Israel (double of course), Down with England (maybe they’re on to something ;-) ), and perhaps Down with France and Germany as well. For most it will mean nothing, but for some it will mean something. For a dangerous minority, the aggression is real.


I watched Khamenei speak to air force servicemenat the induction of new police officers (on television, not live). Thousands of blue-hatted men lifted their fists in the air and shouted “Down with America” like a bunch of automatons. Why do regimes always choose to portray themselves in the most despicable manner? Why do they goose step and raise their fists in the air? Why do they choose to set themselves against an enemy rather than for themselves?

It’s wasteful and despicable. And for all those Iranians asking me to tell the world “We are not terrorists,” I challenge you to present a different view. I know it is tough. I know, I know, I know. I am sympathetic. I know it’s fun to be out in a crowd. I know that it’s fun to let yourself get swept away in crowd behavior the way I might do when I go to a rock concert. I know. I know. What’s worse, is that I know how seductive the image of the demonstration is for the media (all-inclusive, because the Iranian media is just as responsible for the image of flag-burning, fist-waving fanaticism as the bugaboo Western media). I know that marchers ham it up for the camera. “I almost got my hair singed,” a photojournalist told me. “When the marchers saw me with my camera, they decided to burn one of their flags.” (For those of you who want to join the fun, burn your own virtual flag. Read what Scott Adams says about flag burning.)

This is the official picture of Iran and the unofficial picture of Iran. This image was created here, not in the west. It will have to be un-created here as well.

It doesn’t help for me to say that a black-tented woman shouting Down with America is much more likely to serve me dinner than to serve me up. It’s time for people here to start taking a bit of responsibility of the image being broadcast out.

And I know it’s hard. It may not even be possible.

Protect Norooz!

Categories: iran, ramadan, politics, norooz, taxis

Right after I posted about too much holiday, I got in a cab to go home. “Did you have to go to the bank today?” the driver asked me.

“No.”

“A half-hour errand ended up taking three hours. Everyone had to pay water and electricity and put money in the bank and take money out.”

The radio was on. The woman announcer was articulately complaining about the surprise holiday. Her final point was “Now they will probably announce that the Norooz (New Year’s) holidays are only one day. Eh.” (I love the way Iranians say “eh”)

This morning, during my morning cab ride, I heard the report from Parliament on the radio. One of the parliamentarians was trying to convince us that Eid-e Fetr was important for Iran and that Iran, because it is a Muslim nation, should have at least two days of holiday at the end of Ramadan.
“Even Muslims don’t agree with him,” the driver said. “Even they don’t think that we should celebrate Eid-e Fetr instead of Norooz.”

“Norooz is the best New Year in the world,” I tell him. “Ours is crap. January First. What kind of new year is that?”

Norooz falls at the Spring Equinox and is the same for everyone around the world. It is an Iranian national holiday: the only one left that has nothing to do with Islam or revolution.

Norooz is the most festive and amazing time of year in Iran. No matter what the government does, people take off for at least 10 days and most take 15. Last year they tried to make Sizdeh Bedar (the 13th day after the New Year and a national picnic day) a work day. They were not successful. They also tried to convince Iranians not to celebrate the last Tuesday of the year. Again, they were unsuccessful.

References:
This past year’s celebration of the last Tuesday of the year:

Give me Your Red


Scroll to near the bottom of a round-up of nuclear-related posts in my article

All about Norooz at Wikipedia

Our surprise holiday:
Too Much Holiday

Separation of Church & State

This link to an article from Amnesty Int'l on Payvand has more details including info on how to take action.

Iran: At least 40 followers of Ayatollah Sayed Hossein Kazemeyni Boroujerdi arrested: "Iran: At least 40 followers of Ayatollah Sayed Hossein Kazemeyni Boroujerdi arrested

Source: Amnesty International



At least 41 followers of Shia cleric Ayatollah Sayed Hossein Kazemeyni Boroujerdi were reportedly arrested in the courtyard of his house in Tehran during the morning of 28 September. They are thought to have been taken to Section 209 of Evin Prison in Tehran, which is run by the Ministry of Intelligence. One was reportedly later released. There are fears that the Ayatollah may be at risk of imminent arrest.



On 30 June 2006 the Ayatollah conducted a large religious ceremony at the Shahid Keshvari stadium in Tehran. On 30 July, the security forces reportedly arrested several of his family and followers at their homes. The security forces also reportedly tried to arrest the Ayatollah himself, but were prevented from doing so by his followers."

Voices From Iran

Tagged as:Iran, culture, politics

I read a report from the Foreign Policy Centre (what’s up with British spelling?). This report includes several anonymous interviews with key Iranian figures (it would take about 10 minutes to figure out who most of them are). It is a useful document for people who want to hear Iranians speak for themselves. I’ve pulled a few quotes, but there is a lot more.

From the Reformist Journalist:

The West and Iran:

“I don’t like to speak all the time with analogies, but I think the West is approaching Iran in exactly the wrong way. It’s like there is a dangerous element, a radical element in this country and perhaps at the moment it is holding us hostage. Rather like a terrorist who runs down the street with the police chasing after him and then takes refuge in a building. What should the police do? Negotiate with the people in the building until the people deliver the terrorist to them or the terrorist gives himself up; or attack the building, killing the terrorist but also killing lots of other people? If the United States were to attack Iran it would be like storming the building, a tragic mistake, because negotiation can resolve this dispute without anybody getting killed. ...”

On Ahmadinejad:

“The best way to deal with Ahmadinejad would be if he were left alone for a couple of years. If he can’t use foreign pressure to repress more, he will face internal challenges. The most dangerous class is the workers – he told them he would raise their salaries. He has given them too much expectation, there’s a possibility they could strike.”
“Engagement with Iran has a much better effect for pushing the reforms, if the world wants to fully change the people, even those considered to be hardliners. Even they could become pro-Western. Why do I think that? Well, there’s a strategic element in foreign relations. The current situation for Iran isn’t good. We are surrounded by a lack of friends. We don’t have many Muslim allies – people are Iranians first, then Muslims. Engagement is the most effective weapon. We can use our capacity in the region to contain terrorism. Isolation just fires back. The ex-officials of US make sense – there need to be more talks.”

.
From the Human Rights Activist:

On democracy:

“Democracy is not like a plane, you can’t just export it. You have to have social basics and foundations on which to build democracy. People must want democracy if you want to create democracy. If you truly want to change this government, you have to bring in a completely democratic government. The voice must be heard in the West – I want to make a union between a peace loving Iran and a peace loving West.”

On Iran’s nuclear capabilities:

“The international community worries about Iran being a nuclear power. There is no reason to worry, it won’t be an atomic bomb that will destroy West. There is no such bomb. It will be Chernobyl style events that might destroy our own nation. All of this expertise and equipment were acquired on the black market. These factories and reactors lack safety standards. The West has very transparent reactors, and at the same time you have the greens and the environmental lobby keeping a check. When something is secret and unknown, you can have no confidence for safety. We should be worried, not you. You’re scared for us, and that’s very strange.”

From the Feminist:

On higher education:

“Higher education gives women a clearer understanding of inequality and oppression, and that understanding will produce change. It’s already happening, in vocal opposition to policies that sanction polygamy, temporary marriage, free divorce for men, and child custody to fathers and their families. If you pick up a women’s magazine in Tehran, you’ll find it’s full of stories of wives suffering at the hands of despotic husbands, a long list of wife-beatings, suicides and loss of children. At the moment it’s happening at this kind of anecdotal level because the courts discriminate against women, not just in terms of outlook or judgment but technically speaking, so a man’s testimony is equivalent to that of two women.”
“But change is inevitable, regardless of which faction holds the presidency. Education is giving Iranian women a new understanding of freedom, the freedom of choice, which is not displaced by sharia law. Ultimately the mullahs cannot make women wear the hijab or the chador, and the women of Iran are beginning to see this.”

There is a lot more. You can download it at the Foreign Policy Centre’s Site.

f-ed up

Israel does Iran’s bidding
Tagged as: Iran: Israel

In college, I had a giant friend who told me that little guys were constantly picking fights with him: on the playground, in bars, everywhere. He was a really gentle guy, but it just drove him nuts. “They just want to prove themselves in a fight with me,” he would tell me. “It’s gotten to the point that I do not even like to go out.”


Is Israel the giant or the small guy? I would say a little of both. My allegory does not make any sense at all, and I probably should just delete it. What I really want to know is how could Israel allow itself to be lured into a war that will only serve to strengthen its enemies? It’s no secret anywhere that Iran is suspected of being behind Hezbollah’s kidnapping. It’s also no secret that Iran finances Hezbollah. There are even murals of Iranians “martyred” in battles fought with Hezbollah. Iran wants so many issues on the UN Security Council’s plate that no meaningful decisions can be reached. Now there is North Korea, Iran, and Israel to deal with. That’s quite a big serving.

Israel’s costly mistakes in Lebanon have been widely critiqued by many generally favorable to Israel. What makes them repeat those mistakes? Someone tell me.

Laura Zittrain Eisenberg argues that clear borders are essential for Israel (MERIA Volume 4, No. 3 - September 2000). In her section on Israel’s entry into Lebanon’s civil war she points out this crucial mistake:

Begin relished the irony in the Jewish State rescuing oppressed Christians, while the rest of the world stayed mute. But Beirut was not Berlin, and Begin's insistence on viewing the Maronite situation in European, post-Holocaust terms removed him further from Lebanese realities than any of his predecessors.

A larger quote here:

Do Good Fences Make Good Neighbors?: Israel and Lebanon after the Withdrawal
Who is on the other side?

(The Israeli Perspective)

In the early 1980s Israel made its most dangerous blunder in assessing the intentions and relative power of its Lebanese friends and foes. Up until the 1970s the Zionist/Israeli exaggeration of a friendly Christian community of allies in Lebanon caused minimum damage because Israel did not predicate policy upon that faulty precept. While the increasingly unrealistic perception of a Maronite partner perhaps precluded the Yishuv from pursuing a more realistic and productive Lebanon policy, it had not exposed it to any special political or military threat. The same held true for the first two decades of Israeli statehood. But once the Lebanese civil war began in 1975, Israel fell into the common trap of relying on religious shorthand, Christian vs. Muslim, to distinguish the nature and intentions of the key actors and began to pursue policy in Lebanon accordingly.

But in actuality, the conflict was one between Maronites trying to preserve their traditional political and economic privileges in Lebanon versus everyone else trying to seize a larger piece of the Lebanese pie for themselves. Israel's interests in Lebanon were not "Christian" at all, but rather dictated by standard strategic political thinking, which made any anti-PLO (and later anti-Hizballah) force a potential ally. (17) Differences within and among the Israeli cabinet, military and intelligence services concerning the desirability and capability of the Phalange as an ally are well-documented in the many accounts of the 1982 war. There was general agreement over the usefulness of forcing the PLO away from the northern border and even destroying the organization, if possible, but Prime Minister Menahem Begin used the Maronite angle both in formulating strategy and in appealing to Israeli public opinion. Deeply steeped in the historical lore of Maronite friendliness, few Israelis initially balked at the depiction of Lebanese Christians threatened with genocide and a natural harmony of Christian and Israeli interests in the face of mutual Muslim, Palestinian, and Syrian foes.

Begin relished the irony in the Jewish State rescuing oppressed Christians, while the rest of the world stayed mute. But Beirut was not Berlin, and Begin's insistence on viewing the Maronite situation in European, post-Holocaust terms removed him further from Lebanese realities than any of his predecessors.

Despite behind-the-scenes diplomatic activity, support for the SLA, and its own military operations in July 1993 (Operation Accountability) and April 1996 (Grapes of Wrath), Israel failed to suppress Hizballah. Fatalities ran at 20-30 IDF soldiers per year. Attempting to avoid roadside bombs, the IDF began to ferry its soldiers to security zone bases by helicopter, a plan that worked only until a collision between two helicopters in February 1997 claimed 73 lives. From that tragedy the "Four Mothers" group was born, a grassroots movement initiated by four mothers of sons serving in Lebanon, with the goal of compelling the government to withdraw all Israeli troops from Lebanon. (18) The organization introduced and legitimized the concept of unilateral withdrawal in national debate, its message driven home by the relentless procession of IDF body bags from Lebanon. Hizballah had succeeded in making the security zone untenable.



(The Lebanese Perspective)

Israel was so focused on the PLO and its Lebanese and Syrian allies that it neglected to evaluate properly the Lebanese Shi`a's politicization in the early 1970s, marked by the rise to leadership of Musa al-Sadr, and the formation of Shi'a organizations such as Amal and the Islamic fundamentalist Hizballah. Although some Shi'a supported the Palestinians and the PLO, others--angered at oppressive PLO domination and PLO cross-border attacks that invited Israeli retaliatory strikes against their villages--responded to Israel's anti-PLO invasion of 1982 with relief and support. But as hostilities dragged on 1982, Israeli forces settled into the south, building new roads, posting road signs in Hebrew, commandeering facilities, and establishing bases or detention camps. These steps caused Israel to change in many Shi'a eyes from liberator to occupier. Despite the fact that a majority of the FLM and SLA foot soldiers were Shia, Israel had neither recognized nor rewarded the Shi'a as potential allies, taking their continued acquiescence for granted.

By 1985 Amal, founded to champion Shia rights within Lebanon, was being outgunned by Hizballah, which proclaimed a pan-Islamic fundamentalism. Funded by Iran and encouraged by Syria, Hizballah sought to drive the Israelis back across the border. Frequent declarations by the organization also stated an intention to remove Israel from Palestine and Jerusalem, as well. It is ironic that the PLO, target of the 1982 invasion, became Israel's peace partner in 1993, while many of the previously friendly Shi'a of south Lebanon joined Israel's new Hizballah enemy.



Missed Opportunity?

Hindsight is always 20/20, but it does appear that Israel missed a critical opportunity for salvaging some benefit from the 1982 invasion in the year or two immediately afterward. Unlike the situation in 1978, the PLO was really gone this time, and although the alliance with the Phalange had already soured, relations were still good with the Christians and Shia of south Lebanon. Had Israel withdrawn at that time, and/or accurately recognized the sensibilities and needs of the south Lebanese people, it might have earned the trust of a population genuinely interested in seeing the border quiet and secure. In a reflective post-withdrawal interview, Israel's coordinator for activity in Lebanon, Uri Lubrani, similarly suggests that Israel could and should have redeployed to the international border in 1984. (19) By failing to identify and accommodate the south Lebanese actors who remained after the PLO's expulsion, Israel helped provoke the creation of Hizballah, an enemy equally or more punishing than the PLO had ever been.

Unfortunately for everyone, we are living in a time of inferior leaders.

My Baby She Wrote Me a Letter

Tagged as: Iran: foreign policy


AN is in the foreground, pen in hand, looking pensive; Bush is shown in the background, sitting in a simple chair, reading the letter on his lap. A woman reads the 18-page letter in stumbling Farsi.

That was Iranian tv a few nights ago. Why oh why didn’t I take a picture of the screen?

“When I read that letter,” a friend tells us, “I sat down and composed a 5-page letter to our president myself. Who does he think he is writing in that tone of voice? Everything he thinks he is saying about America is a problem here in Iran.”

“It could not be just 1-page, could it? Or even 5-pages? No, it had to be 18 pages. And can you imagine Bush reading PBUH Jesus Christ(PBUH)… What the hell is that supposed to mean?”

“You know when we lost it? It was during the ceremony to celebrate uranium enrichment with that blue dancing figure.”

“That was so James Bond, wasn’t it?”

“No we lost it long before that… How about when we saw Khomeini in the moon?”



Refs…
The man in the moon

One of the strangest occurrences in the revolution happened in late November 1978. A rumor circulated like wildfire that a pious old lady in the holy city of Qom had found a hair of the Prophet’s beard in the pages of the Qur’an. The same evening an apparition had informed the saintly lady that the faithful would be able to see the face of the Imam Khomeini in the full moon on 27 November. No one bothered to ask how the old lady knew that the hair belonged to the Prophet or whether any such old lady existed in the first place. Within a single day almost everyone had heard the rumor and millions of people gathered on the rooftops on the promised day and waited for the full moon, shouting “Allah Akbar.” Tears of joy were shed and huge quantities of sweets and fruits were consumed as millions of people jumped for joy, shouting “I’ve seen the Imam in the moon.” The episode, a masterly coup was, probably plotted by Beheshti, who had a remarkable understanding of popular psychology in Iran.

La lettre de Mahmoud Ahmadinejad à George W. Bush

From Iran, With Something Less Than Love


Iranian Leaders Watch Dance Celebrating Iran's Uranium Enrichment Capabilities

Happy May Day

AN said that Israel was like a prison, and I responded “Iran is the prison.” I was loathe to board the plane to Iran, but somehow managed to get myself on the flight. Once I did, it was a party in the sky: a plane filled with slightly inebriated Iranians laughing and talking the whole way back to Tehran.

“You must really love your husband to come back,” they joke.

The baby next to us laughed for the entire flight. She had several rows of playmates.

“You must serve more alcohol on this flight than any other flight,” I comment.

“Yes we do. At least we serve more than on any other flight to the Middle East. They board already a bit drunk.”

…

Iranians make heroic efforts to lead normal lives. They are ignoring the threat of sanctions as best they can, focusing instead on AN’s spending. He is holding huge government meetings all over the country. When questioned on the huge expenditures for each meeting, he is reported to have responded: “We just have tea and bread for breakfast: no cheese.” This has made for some good taxi conversations.

People tell me that AN is going to let women into football games (google blog search blocked for “ahmadinejad women football”) and make the hijab optional (no one believes this). For some bizarre reason having to do with prayer times, Iran decided not to spring forward this year, so now we are only 1 ½ hour ahead of Europe. Some say this is costing Iran tons of money. The cost is most certainly offset by the amount of money the government would have to pay if it served cheese for breakfast.

…

Sometimes I am happy to be back. Everything is funnier in Iran.

Isolation…

Iran: politics

I need to reopen the conversation on isolating Iran through sanctions. Let’s start with this presumption: the mullahs are not going anywhere. They will not be overthrown or pushed out because of a few puny sanctions. In fact, the political-fundamentalists among them will be strengthened by sanctions because it will mean that most of the population will become dependent on their good graces. Sanctions also mean that the group in power will become the lone voice inside of Iran. It’s already hard enough to have any diversity of opinion.

The regime welcomes the threat of attack. The only way for them to unite is against a common enemy. Unity is what they long for. Unity is what they do not have. Achieving unity presupposes a common enemy.

So, isolating Iran plays into the hands of the political-fundamentalists by making them an even stronger voice in this country and by giving them an enemy. Hurray.

Iran is not waiting to become America or Europe. Iran minus the regime does not equal freedom or democracy as much as Iranians would like you to believe. You need to have a public debate and free speech before you get democracy. That’s a lot harder than it might sound.

The publicly sanctioned arguments are those of degrees here in Iran. They do not represent true opposition. Those involved meticulously filter the voices that get heard. When they fall out with those in power, their voices are also filtered. Lo and behold! They are surprised that after a career of keeping others quiet, they can longer be heard.

Reality Bites

Tagged:Iran politics and Iran: WMD

"Iranians don't think because if they did, they would not be able to sleep nights." I can't remember who told us this. Somebody at some party somewhere, no doubt.

After many sleepless nights, I have learned the Iranian art of not thinking. Every once in awhile someone or some event forces me to think, and I find myself up nights with my eyes wide open trying to replace my anxieties with the memory of an episode of the Simpsons or by immersing myself in the plot to Michael Swanwick's The Iron Dragon's Daughter ( at Amazon: www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0380730464?v=glance) When I am not successful, which is often, Bart and Lisa start to argue politics and predict Armageddon.

Oh well…

Predicting Armageddon

When AN arrived at the UN, the talk all over town (at least all over uptown) was of his clothing. I overheard a number of conversations about the president's appalling fashion sense. "Other leaders arrive looking clean and well-dressed, but our president looks like a mess. How could he dress that way in front of the UN?" This seemed to be the common refrain. Our friends confirmed that this was the topic of conversation everywhere they went. "If we were in South Tehran, they would probably be pleased. They're probably saying that he's just like us. He's a man of the people." Maybe.

Last night, we were up late discussing AN's speech and its possible effects. "Iran is overplaying its hand," a friend said. "They are underestimating America. They think America is weak."

And what does America think? If they think that an outside attack would lead to regime fall, than they are sadly mistaken. Does America think that we cannot let Iran get away with their nuclear shenanigans? And what does that mean?

Some Links:
(PDF file)A report from the Carnegie Endowment: (www.carnegieendowment.org/pdf/npp/iraniannuclearchallenge.pdf)

From Business Week: (http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_22/b3935148.htm)

Snow

Rain and thunder. The mountains are etched across the sky. The colors are amazing. And then: snow on the mountains! It really is beautiful.

That night, K and I sit on the balcony. The air is clean and cool. The sky is orange. Suddenly, Damavand's triangular peak makes its appearance. The snow that covers it reflects the sun so that you see this dramatic, orange cone.

"Tehran is so beautiful," K says.

Sometimes I feel as though I have lived the Prague Spring. I remember conversation from some movie I saw about Prague (what was it?). The characters are in a jazz club. The Soviets are threatening. "The West would never let them reinvade," one of the characters says.

I still get heartsick when I think of that 1-minute of film.

The announcement of the cabinet means that many Iranians have had their worst fears realized, yet they continue to hope for the best, whatever the best means.

All news, all the time

Ganji will probably die soon.

The explosion at BA was caused by a bottle of benzene in a garbage can. "It was not a bomb," the police reported. News accounts showed some broken windows, but that looked like it.
Katzav has made a plea for peace between Iran and Israel. The plea made it into the Iranian press.

Lawyers are being arrested, and a judge has been assassinated. (The lawyers work for the family of the Canadian photo-journalist who was killed in custody and for A. Ganji. The assassinated judge was responsible for imprisoning Ganji and other reformers.)

Ahwazis are being taken in by pyramid schemes and they do not appreciate it. The news reports these as anti-government protests, but K's family says that the protests are in response to something more mundane. Apparently, many Ahwazis have been taken in by promises to receive a car or a stove or other appliance after depositing 200,000 tuman (about $250) for a few months. Some have received their promised gifts. It's a typical pyramid scheme.

It feels like something is happening, but it's unclear what that something is.

Ch-ch-changes

It's countdown to a new president in Iran.

Last night Khatami gave an important speech that K found pretty exciting. "Everything he should have said 8 years ago, he is saying now." I hope to find a good translation soon. You can read Payvand's summary here: http://www.payvand.com/news/05/aug/1005.html.

Until then, here is K's summary:

Since the beginning of the revolution, there have been two Islams. One that embraces tolerance and diversity and guarantees freedom of worship for Zoroastrians, Jews, and Christians, and one that uses the tools of terror to impose its will. There is the Islam of Al Q'aeda and the Taliban and of those who support the use of methods of terror. And there is the Islam that says: we do not have all the answers. It says, we have to use scholarship to examine our faith and modernize our faith.

…

No manager in my government has ever been more than 5 meters from prison.

…

The Middle East can prosper when there is a true dialogue among the different faiths. The Middle East can prosper when Muslims, Christians, and Jews have a meaningful conversation with one another.

(1 ½ hours of explanation and then: standing ovation… )

I had a hard time following the speech. I'll just say that it was the most animated speech I have seen Khatami give and that it was interrupted several times by applause.

Fashion

"T, you will never guess what we saw when we visited my cousin," An observant friend told me. "A girl, my daughter's size, clearly a teenager at the very least, who went out into the streets of Ahwaz in a tank top and jeans. No scarf. No manteau."

"No scarf even?"

"No."

"Ahmadinejad," her daughter laughed.

"Maybe she was only 9," I commented.

"She'd have to be even younger," the daughter said.
Among the Tehranis and Ahwazis in K's family, the girls wear as little of the hijab as they can until they are given a warning or picked up by the police. The girls in his family have a fortunate girlish look that belies their years. This is totally unlike the unfortunate daughter of a friend who is extraordinarily tall for her age, and, as if that were not enough, has entered puberty early. "She absolutely refuses to wear a scarf," my friend told me. "I had to send her to a boarding school in England. I could not keep her here."

Recently, a man I met told me how heartbroken he was about Iran. "I am a nationalist. I am Islamic. My wife and I both pray 5 times a day. The other day my nine-year old daughter asked me if she could go live with her uncle in England. I asked her why, and she told me that she does not want to wear the hijab. I told my uncles who are clerics. 'How could you do this to my country?' I asked them. 'How could you do this to the religion I love? How could your rules push my daughter away from me?'"

Fashion in Tehran: Giant scarves and tiny manteaus. Hemlines are just below the ass. The scarves are huge, flowered, and fringed, and look like your grandmother's tablecloths.

That's what I really wanted to write about. It's never that easy is it…? Over and over again I have tried not to make hijab an issue, but it is. It was over 110 degrees here for 3 weeks! In a headscarf. And a manteau. It's hot in that frigging outfit.

World Qods Day

Today is the day of a huge anti-Israel rally. World Qods Day. Qods is the name for the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem: the third holiest site in Islam. For two weeks, television programming has been mainly anti-Israel & anti-America. "They're getting people on to the streets again," K said, as we watched the early-morning coverage of the demonstration near the university in Tehran.

This, of course, is combined with the drama of Arafat's death. "They're saying that Israel poisoned him."

It's an election year in Iran. Most of the programming shows Rafsanjani and Khameini. Rafsanjani is poised to be the "once and future" president of Iran.

K and I were mesmerized by hours and hours of programming featuring Khameini meeting with the families of people killed during the Iran-Iraq war. (We watched for about an hour.) Families came who had lost all of their sons, one son, one husband, four brothers… They kissed Khameini. His aides wrote the names of the families. Khameini promised to visit some of them. Sometimes he gave a young man his checked scarf: a symbol of the Hezbollah. His aides brought him a new scarf.

Later in the week, we saw a speech by Khameini to students in Tehran. I recognized some of the students. (Believe it or not… K often recognizes people in the audience of speeches. That's the nature of Iran. It's not such a very big country.). They seemed to spontaneously and wholeheartedly break out into chants of "Death to America." About a month ago, in Isfahan, the crowd barely joined in for the obligatory "Death to America" chant. That said, it's impossible to gauge how Iranians feel about politics by their participation in chants and demonstrations. Superficial assessments get you nowhere in Iran.