Jihad

...now browsing by tag

 
 

Turkish PM says no decision yet on further Iran oil import cuts

Saturday, May 18th, 2013

Turkey's Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan addresses his supporters during a Mother's Day event organized by his ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) in Istanbul May 12, 2013. REUTERS/Murad Sezer

Turkey’s Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan addresses his supporters during a Mother’s Day event organized by his ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) in Istanbul May 12, 2013.

Credit: Reuters/Murad Sezer

WASHINGTON | Fri May 17, 2013 1:50pm EDT

(Reuters) – Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan said on Friday Turkey had already significantly reduced its oil imports from Iran, which is under the choke of Western sanctions, and further cutbacks would depend on his country’s energy needs.

“On crude oil, there has been a significant decrease in the amount of oil we import from Iran … As to whether we would cut back any further, it will depend on our need. Time will tell,” Erdogan said at the Brookings Institution in Washington.

Last year, Ankara effectively halved imports of Iranian oil after a European Union oil embargo against Iran came into full force on July 1, which also targeted the marine insurance sector, cutting off the usual avenues for tanker insurance.

Turkey was twice granted a waiver on Iranian oil by the United States for 180 days after it made initial cuts.

Turkish imports of Iranian crude were steady in April at around 100,000 barrels per day, data from a well-informed shipping agent in the region showed two weeks ago.

Before the introduction of stricter U.S. and EU sanctions against Iran last year, imposed over Tehran’s disputed nuclear program, Ankara’s purchases were averaging 180,000 bpd.

Turkey nonetheless remains one of the largest customers for Iranian oil together with Asian buyers such as China, India, South Korea and Japan.

(Reporting by Nick Tattersall; Editing by Doina Chiacu)

Iran’s Farhadi And China’s Jia Make Cannes Splash

Saturday, May 18th, 2013

NPR

by THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

CANNES, France (AP) — Two directors from countries with tough film censorship brought bold and probing movies to the Cannes Film Festival on Friday — one exploring China’s social problems, the other delving into the mysteries of the human heart.

Jia Zhangke’s “A Touch of Sin” depicts facets of fast-changing China the government prefers to avoid: corruption, greed, violent crime and the growing gap between economic winners and losers.

“The Past,” by Academy Award-winning Iranian director Asghar Farhadi, is an unsparing tale of domestic upheaval, set in and around Paris and made with a largely French cast.

Both films are competing for Cannes’ top prize, the Palme d’Or — and both have been cleared for release in their homelands, where filmmakers often fall foul of restrictions.

Iran’s Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance has approved “The Past” for screening, and “A Touch of Sin” is due to open in China in the fall.

The two directors are pleased their films will be seen at home, but they gave very different descriptions of working in settings where official censorship is an everyday reality.

“I’m someone who is deeply attached to my creative freedom, and I always do my utmost to ensure I don’t indulge in any form of self-censorship,” said Jia, who has explored China’s rapid transformation throughout his career — from early underground films such as “Unknown Pleasures” to documentaries to the Venice Film Festival prize-winning 2006 feature “Still Life.”

Farhadi, though, said the effect of censorship was more insidious.

“One can try to free oneself of the past, but the past doesn’t let you do that,” he said — both a theme of “The Past” and an observation of his own situation.

“There are two kinds of censorship,” he told reporters. “You have official censorship which works in a certain way. But there is also self-censorship. You impose it on your innermost self.”

Iran’s authorities have long had an uneasy relationship with the country’s filmmakers, and influential clerics have often denounced the domestic cinema as dominated by Western-tainted liberals and political dissenters. Some directors and actors have faced arrest or fled the country.

While Farhadi shot previous films including “A Separation” — the 2012 foreign-language Oscar winner — in Iran, “The Past” was made entirely outside the country. It follows an Iranian man (actor-director Ali Mosaffa), who returns to France to finalize a divorce from his ex (Berenice Bejo, from “The Artist”), but soon becomes entangled again with her, her children and her new love (“A Prophet” star Tahar Rahim).

The film premiered at Cannes on Friday and was hailed as the first Palme d’Or contender of the festival. Critics praised its meticulous and non-judgmental look at the messy effects of relationships and their breakdown, on adults and on children.

Farhadi admitted that he felt “more secure” shooting outside Iran, free of external restrictions — but not of his own inner guidelines. He said he tried to see these “not as an obstacle but as an asset” — part of his creative makeup as a director.

Like his previous work, “The Past” is emotionally revealing but not overtly political. The director said he was happy to keep working on an intimate canvas, exploring the dynamics of personal relationships.

“There is so much suffering and pain attached to a couple, but the suffering and pain is always unique,” he said. “I could spend my whole career exploring this theme without ever exhausting it.”

Farhadi said he doesn’t know what he will make next — or whether it will be in Iran.

“I won’t decide where it will take place,” he said. “It’s history that will decide for me.”

In contrast, “A Touch of Sin” feels strongly political. Made up of four linked episodes focusing on uprooted citizens of the new China, its story lines have been ripped from the headlines. There’s a villager driven to violence by official corruption; an amoral killer roaming the land; a factory worker driven to suicide.

Jia — whose film “24 City” played at Cannes in 2008 — said he became preoccupied by the increasingly frequent stories of violence he saw in the media, and wanted to dramatize the stories for Chinese moviegoers.

“In society people often hear about these violent events, but they quickly forget,” he said. “It’s not by turning your back on violence or hiding violence that you make progress.”

Jia said he didn’t think the topics he depicted “are particularly touchy or secretive in any way, because they were already covered in the Chinese press and on the Internet.”

But the director also was careful to stress — and the censors no doubt happy to hear — that the stories were timeless, not the product of modern politics, economics or technology.

“If these people were alive 100, 200, 300 years ago, at the time of the emperors, their motivation for acting like that would be exactly the same,” he said. “We live in the era of the Internet and high-speed trains, but have people changed?”

___

Jill Lawless can be reached at http://Twitter.com/JillLawless

Iran Wants More Money From You

Saturday, May 18th, 2013

fool.com

By Rich Smith
May 18, 2013

Americans spent more money on gasoline in 2012 than in any other year… ever. Meanwhile, here in 2013, retail gasoline prices spiked to $3.60 a gallon on average — $3.94 on the West Coast — the sharpest rise in prices seen in the past three months. And Iran is happy to hear it.

In fact, if the Islamic Republic has anything to say about it, Americans could wind up paying even more for gas than we already do. Right now, a barrel of benchmark crude costs about $95. But over the weekend, Iranian Oil Minister Rostam Ghasemi was quoted arguing that “the price of crude oil [should] remain at about $100.” Ghasemi thinks that price “is fair, and Iran supports it.”

Fair is in the eye of the beholder
Of course, that’s fine for him to say. After all, Iran gets about 80% of its revenue from selling oil abroad. Inside the country, however, motorists enjoy subsidized pricing on gasoline, which limits the cost for many motorists to as little as $1.25 per gallon.

So this is kind of an inside joke, what Ghasemi is telling — $100 is a fair price to pay… because most Iranians aren’t paying it. They’re paying the gasoline equivalent of closer to $33 oil.

Ha, ha
American consumers, on the other hand, aren’t laughing. Not with the cost of gasoline now consuming $4, on average, out of every $100 we spend on daily living — the highest percentage of our living expenses seen since 1983.

And yet, at the same time, Iran’s targeting a $100 price of oil does pose the country with a bit of a dilemma. Over in China, the engine that’s kept the oil price machine humming, demand for oil hit an eight-month low in April. And according to Economics 101, lower demand generally portends lower prices rather than higher.

Meanwhile, strong-ish retail sales numbers are lending strength to the U.S. dollar. And with most oil contracts still being denominated in dollars, a strong dollar tends to result in lower prices for crude.

OPEC — the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries — plans to meet in Vienna on May 31 to discuss how the cartel will respond to these dynamics. At present, most analysts expect OPEC to maintain a target production rate of 30 million barrels per day. However, if the idea is to raise prices in a scenario of sagging Chinese demand, and robust U.S. dollars, OPEC might well have to reduce its output in order to maintain pricing power.

Decisions, decisions
At least, that’s how these things have worked historically. You see, OPEC’s job, in a nutshell, is to keep prices high enough to maximize the profits of oil exporting countries — while at the same time not letting prices rise so high as to discourage demand for oil — and the development of alternatives.

Raise prices too much — or, what’s really the same thing, cut supply too much — and you just encourage companies like First Solar (NASDAQ: FSLR  ) to develop cheaper and more efficient solar panels, and General Electric (NYSE: GE  ) to invest more in wind turbine production. In the long term, that’s a bad business idea for oil producers.

On the other hand, if you allow too much oil to be produced, prices fall, and OPEC members start leaving money on the table. So getting the oil price to $100 — and getting it to stick — isn’t as easy as it sounds.

He who fracks first, laughs last
Complicating matters for Iran, and for OPEC, is the revolution in “fracking” — drilling for oil and gas with the assistance of hydraulic fracturing technology — in the U.S. As companies fromChesapeake Energy (NYSE: CHK  ) to Sandridge (NYSE: SD  ) pioneer the practice, and move it into the mainstream, they’re doing their part to make the U.S. truly independent of oil price hikes by countries like Iran.

Indeed, in a recent report on energy trends over the next couple decades, British oil giant BP(NYSE: BP  ) basically came out and predicted that thanks to the efforts of the frackers, the U.S. will become “energy independent” by 2030.

Granted, so far this hasn’t been terrific news for the companies doing the heavy lifting. The high cost of getting this effort off the ground, coupled with a glut of natural gas that is being produced, has left both Chesapeake and Sandridge struggling to earn a profit.

But the situation’s at least as troublesome for Iran and its cohorts in OPEC. Sure, they can curtail oil production to try to put a floor under oil prices. But the only sure result of cutting oil production at OPEC is that OPEC will sell less oil, and probably collect less oil revenue. On the other hand, there’s no guarantee that a price hike will hurt us. And there’s no guarantee that new U.S. production won’t take up much of the slack for the rest of the world, either.

It almost begs the question: What if OPEC held a price hike party, and nobody (in the U.S.) came?

The John Batchelor Show

Saturday, May 18th, 2013

The John Batchelor Show

 Reza Kahlili, author, A Time to Betray, in re:  Iran elections and American influence as Ahmadinejad reaches term limits.

May 17, 2013

Listen Here

U.S. Quiet On Iran Women President Bar

Saturday, May 18th, 2013

Cleric Ayatollah Mohammad Yazdi, a member of the Guardian Council, said Iranian law prohibits women from being president.

Cleric Ayatollah Mohammad Yazdi, a member of the Guardian Council, said Iranian law prohibits women from being president.

May 18, 2013

RFE/RL

The United States has declined to take a firm stand after a member of Iran’s electoral overseer said women will be barred from standing in Iran’s June presidential election.

State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said Washington would not comment on specific candidates. She also noted that Iranian authorities must approve all candidates.

The spokeswoman said that, broadly, the United States supports women participating in elections for public office.
Earlier, Ayatollah Mohammad Yazdi, a member of the Guardian Council, said Iranian law prohibits women from being president.

The Guardian Council approves all candidates for Iran’s presidency and parliament.

A total of 686 people, including some women, have registered to run to replace President Mahmud Ahmadinejad in the June 14 election.

The final list of approved candidates is expected to be announced early next week.

Based on reports from AP and AFP

Afghan parliament fails to pass divisive women’s law

Saturday, May 18th, 2013

Saturday, 18 May 2013

Miriam Arghandiwal and Ibrahimi Aziz – Reuters

Religious members of Afghanistan’s parliament objected to at least eight articles in the legislation. (Photo Courtesy: AP)

Alarabiya

Afghanistan’s parliament failed to pass a law on Saturday banning violence against women, a severe blow to progress made in women’s rights in the conservative Muslim country since the Islamist Taliban was toppled over a decade ago.

President Hamid Karzai approved the law by decree in 2009 and parliament’s endorsement was required. But a rift between conservative and more secular members of the assembly resulted in debate being deferred to a later date.

Religious members objected to at least eight articles in the legislation, including keeping the legal age for women to marry at 16, the existence of shelters for domestic abuse victims and the halving of the number of wives permitted to two.

“Today, the parliamentarians who oppose women’s development, women’s rights and the success of women…made their voices loud and clear,” Fawzia Koofi, head of parliament’s women’s commission, told Reuters.

Women have won back the hard-fought right to education and work since the Taliban was toppled 12 years ago, but there are fears these freedoms could shrink once NATO-led forces leave Afghanistan by the end of next year.

Increasing insecurity is deterring some women from seeking work outside the home, and rights workers accuse the government of doing too little to protect women – allegations rejected by Karzai’s administration.

“2014 is coming, change is coming, and the future of women in this country is uncertain. A new president will come and if he doesn’t take women’s rights seriously he can change the decree,” Koofi said of the Elimination of Violence Against Women Law, which goes by the acronym EVAL.

The election for a new president is expected to be held in April 2014. The constitution bars Karzai from running again.

After almost two hours of clashes between Koofi and the more religious members of the 244-member parliament, speaker Abdul Rauf Ibrahimi said the assembly would consider the law again ata later date, but declined to say when.

Some members sought amendments, such as longer prison terms for crimes committed against women, such as beating and rape.

Many lawmakers, most of them male, cited violations of Islamic, or Sharia law.

“It is wrong that a woman and man cannot marry off their child until she is 16,” said Obaidullah Barekzai, a member from southeast Uruzgan province, where female literacy rates are among the lowest in the country.

An Afghan man must be at least 18 years old to marry.

Barekzai argued against all age limits for women, citing historical figure Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddiq, a close companion of the Prophet Mohammad, who married off his daughter at age seven.

At least eight other lawmakers, mostly from the Ulema Council, a government-appointed body of clerics, joined him in decrying the EVAL as un-Islamic.

Abdul Sattar Khawasi, member for Kapisa province, called women’s shelters “morally corrupt”. Justice Minister Habibullah Ghaleb last year dismissed them as houses of “prostitution and immorality”, provoking fierce condemnation from women’s groups.

Hezbollah exploits religion to intervene in Syria, says Shiite cleric

Saturday, May 18th, 2013

Saturday, 18 May 2013

Al Arabiya -

Ali Al-Amin, who was the former mufti of the city of Tyre and Mount Amil in southern Lebanon, criticized Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah. (Al Arabiya)

Lebanese Shiite party Hezbollah is exploiting religion to pursue its political agendas in Syria, a high-ranking Lebanese Shiite cleric told Al Arabiya in an interview on Saturday.

Ali Al-Amin, who was the former mufti of the city of Tyre and Mount Amil in southern Lebanon, criticized Hezbollah’s Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah for urging Shiites to head to Syria to defend the holy shrine of Sayyida Zainab.

Sayyida Zainab was the Prophet Muhammad’s granddaughter and her golden-domed tomb is considered to be one of Shiite Islam’s holiest sites.

Defending the shrine is not a “legitimate justification” to intervene in Syria, Amin said, adding that Shiite jihad should be in the homeland and not in the conflict-ravaged neighboring country.

“Our jihad is in Lebanon and that is to build our country amid national unity.”

At least 80,000 people having been killed since the start of the two-year Syrian conflict that started as a protest against President Bashar al-Assad’s regime but morphed into a civil war.

The conflict has polarized Lebanon between supporters and proponents of Assad’s regime, especially between Sunni and Shiite Lebanese.

Reports have indicated that Hezbollah fighters were fighting alongside Syrian forces against rebels in Shiite villages near the Lebanese border.

Earlier this month, Nasrallah made a strong indication that his group was ready to get more substantially involved in the neighboring country when he said that Syria’s friends would not let the Syrian regime fall.

“Syria has true friends in the region who will not allow Syria to fall into the hands of the United States, Israel and ‘takfiri’ groups,” he said, referring to Sunni Muslims fighting to overthrow Assad.

Meanwhile, Salafists in Lebanon expressed anger over the international community’s inaction to support the Syrian people’s struggle against Assad regime.

The Lebanese Salafits’ tone sharpened when they called for jihad in Syria against Damascus.

Al-Amin slammed the Salafists’ call for jihad as “sectarian.”

Iranian trade stats well below last April’s figures

Saturday, May 18th, 2013

RadioZamaneh

Fri, 05/17/2013 – 22:45

Iranian customs says imports into the country were down sharply last month compared to the same period in 2012.

According to the report, imports fell from $3.3 billion in April of 2012 to $1.3 billion in April of 2013.

Meanwhile, the export of petroleum products has also dropped by $312 million in the first month of spring compared to last year.

The UAE, China, India, Turkey and Switzerland are the top exporters of goods to Iran.

The U.S. and EU sanctions have restricted Iran’s ability to trade its petroleum exports, and sanctions on its financial sector have also created obstacles for all of Iran’s international trade activities.

Russia promotes Iranian role in solving Syrian conflict

Saturday, May 18th, 2013

RadioZamaneh

Fri, 05/17/2013
Sergei Lavrov

Russia has once again emphasized the need to include Iran in the International Conference aimed at ending the civil war in Syria.

Reuters reports that Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Thursday March 16: “Our colleagues have a tendency toward shrinking the foreign participants in the conference, so basically the setup is to be carried out with a handful of countries in a framework that has been determined previously, and the negotiating groups, the agenda and perhaps even the outcomes are pre-set.”

Russia and the U.S. agreed this month to hold an international conference, which would include groups representing the Beshar Assad government and the opposition.

However, there has been no agreement on including Iran in the negotiations.

Lavrov said: “You can’t exclude Iran from this process because of one’s geopolitical preferences. Iran, as a foreign country, has an important role, but we have not reached consensus on this.”

The U.S. State Department spokesman has remarked that it is not the U.S. that will decide if Iran will participate or not, but rather its allies in the United Nations together with Washington will make the final decision.

Iran has remained a supporter of the Beshar Assad government throughout the conflict that has torn Syria for the past two years.

Iran has indicated that it is prepared to participate in the conference with an eye to resolving the conflict.

Iran Elections and American Influence as Ahmadinejad Reaches term limits.

Friday, May 17th, 2013

The Guardian Express

by James Turnage on May 16, 2013.

illegal Iranian elections

Is the United States attempting to influence the elections next month in Iran?  According to a report by Reza Kahlili, former CIA spy in Iran, published on WND, the answer is yes.

Two last minute candidates rushed to file for the June election on Saturday, beating the 6 p.m. deadline.  One is reform-minded former president Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani and the other is Esfandiar Rahim Mashaei, frontman for outgoing President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.  (Ahmadinejad has reached his term limits.)

Before voting day on June 14, the Supreme Leader of this religion-ruled Shia Muslim republic, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and his Guardians Council of senior clerics will vet 686 people for their religious and moral suitability.

On Tuesday, hard line Iranian lawmakers appealed to authorities to ban both men from the election.

Feuds between President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, make Mashaei’s candidacy doubtful.  Several Iranian websites have reported that Rafsanjani has already been approved.  His popularity would have cast a pall over the elections if he had been rejected.  There were also reports that several other candidates have been approved.

“These are unofficial reports. We don’t confirm any of them,” Guardian Council spokesman Abass Ali Kadkhodaei was quoted by conservative news website, tasnimnews.com, on Wednesday.

WND is reporting that a memorandum was sent to Rafsanjani urging his candidacy, and offering United States Support by Secretary of State John Kerry.  The message was relayed through Saudi Arabia, to the U.S. Embassy in Riyadh to Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal, who arranged through the Saudi Embassy in Tehran to present the message to Rafsanjani.

The letter indicated that Rafsanjani would have Saudi support as well.

Rafsanjani’s relationship with the United States goes back to the 1980’s.  At the time, he was speaker of the Parliament, and a direct line was established between him and the United States.  Rafsanjani promised that after the death of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the revolution’s leader, relations would improve between Iran and the United States.  When Rafsanjani became president, promises were not kept.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei supported Ahmadinejad in 2005.  A rift began after the Supreme Leader was forced to order the stuffing of ballot boxes in 2009, ensuring Ahmadinejad a victory.  In recent months Ahmadinejad has been detained and given severe warnings by Khamenei.

There are strong indicators that Khamenei will allow Rafsanjani to run.

With the destruction of much of the credibility of the country’s election process in 2009, Khamenei is seeking restoration of the integrity of the nation’s political system.

After rioting, arrests, and the detention of leaders of the protest, Khamenei is seeking a revival of the people’s trust.

Another issue with Khamenei is his desire to improve relations with the UN, and continue to develop the state’s nuclear program.

Khamenei controls Iran’s entire security system, including the Revolutionary Guards, the intelligence services, the judiciary and, of course, religious institutions.

In addition reports of voter apathy may persuade Khamenei to allow Rafsanjani’s name to remain on the ballot.  He desperately needs a large voter turnout.

Voter’s main concern is the state of their economy, which has become depressed mainly due to poor relations with the West.

James Turnage

The Guardian Express

Green Movement activists live in fear as Iran’s presidential election nears

Friday, May 17th, 2013

A journalist and an activist tell of four years of struggle under the shadow of arrests, beatings and torture

  • Tehran Bureau correspondent
  • guardian.co.uk
election rally

Supporters of Mir Hossein Mousavi in Tehran before the presidential election of 2009, when the Green Movement rose out of massive street protests. Photograph: Ben Curtis/AP

Nearly four years have passed since the birth of Iran’s green movement. Arising from the massive street protests against the official results of the 2009 presidential election, it endured brutal repression and finally receded in the face of arrests, beatings, and torture. Three of its most prominent figures – Mir-Hossein Mousavi, his wife, Zahra Rahnavard, and Mehdi Karroubi – have been under house arrest for more than two years. Other movement leaders are in prison or exile.

According to a recent report by the Committee to Protect Journalists,Iranian authorities are holding at least 40 journalists in prison as the June presidential election approaches, the second-highest total in the world. But what has become of others in the movement’s middle ranks inside the country, the political activists and journalists who stayed back?

I meet up with Arash – not his real name – by a newsstand on Tehran’s Enghelab Avenue. He has written for several of the newspapers that passersby are perusing on their way to work. As we walk to a nearby cafe, I ask what drew him to journalism. “Actually, I wanted to be a lawyer,” he replies. “But I was looking for an identity, I wanted to be a part of what the majority of Iranians were experiencing. I saw that in journalism.”

After the 1997 election, which swept the reformist Mohammad Khatami to the presidency, many young Iranians began to define their identities through social action. “Some joined political parties,” Arash explains, “others became involved in university associations. I started working as a journalist in the spring of 2000.”

Early that May, Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, vexed by the Khatami administration’s relaxation of state media control and censorship, ordered the judiciary to shut dozens of reformist papers in a single day; scores of prominent journalists were arrested in the raids. It was not a good time to set out in the field. Was he afraid?

“I wasn’t really afraid, at least not as much as I am today. We made up the second generation of reformist journalists. There was a strong sense of camaraderie and the fear was less intense because it was shared. There were giants who would take the brunt of the crackdowns, people like [journalists] Akbar Ganji, Shams ol-Vaezin, Masoud Behnood. We, the younger ones, were not the first in line when it came to arrests.”

We enter Cafe Godot, a modern coffee house whose young patrons are filling the air with cigarette smoke. As Arash lights up as well, he tells me about the summer of 2009, when the demonstrations first erupted. What he has to say surprises me.

“I didn’t participate in street protests. Basically, I didn’t believe in those tactics. I believed street presence would be fruitless by itself, that the regime had to be engaged in a dialogue. This point of view resulted in me becoming somewhat isolated among my friends.”

Still, he was not untouched by the crackdown that followed – his girlfriend was summoned to the ministry of information to answer for his writings. “It caused an emotional and ethical upheaval in me. I became more reclusive, more frightful, and in a way, a hostage to events, to fate.

“The self-exile of many of my journalist friends… I think that was the worst blow. I lost many of my friends, my emotional and professional supports…. How long will it take to develop such friendships in my life again? All contacts with friends who have left Iran have been severed, because of my caution and their prudence. I have no contact with anyone on the other side. No one. And you certainly know our situation inside [Iran].”

Chain smoking, he is now on his fourth cigarette. “I feel such monotony,” he continues. “Each day is like the day before; not only do we have no psychological stability, we don’t even have financial security. This profession is the opposite of others. I mean, the more your professional rank rises, the more you’re in danger.”

So why does he persist? Or why not emigrate?

“You know, this job has become a part of my identity,” he says. “To tell you the truth, daily professional stress has become an addiction. Over the last three years I have become very stoic, and since censorship has made publications and dailies ineffectual, I have become more interested in research work.

“If I emigrate, I would be limited to Persian media outlets. And, well, I consider journalism at home more effective and more important,” he says, seemingly contradicting his preceding comment about the ineffectuality of the profession.

In his view, the green movement is not “distilled in demonstrations and politics. It’s a form of social cohesion and solidarity… It has had many other effects, in the arts, in the society at large.”

I ask him about the upcoming presidential election and his hopes for the future. “Hope is not limited to elections,” he muses. “My hope rests on collective exercise of tolerance by the Iranian society and the political powers. Working to learn to listen… The elections are just a family feud within the ruling echelons. See, we are nobodies in these elections.”

Another day, in a distant corner of the city, I visit Ahmad, a political activist whose name has also been changed for this article.

Greeting me with a smile, he ushers me in to his one-bedroom apartment. Shelves filled with books on politics, sociology, and history line the walls; here and there a novel has slipped in.

“In my last year of high school and first year of university, I became attracted to politics,” he tells me. “Not in the sense in which I am involved today, but student activities. They drew me to politics – my first main foray was during the 2005 national elections.”

He worked at the reformist campaign headquarters, but Iranian voters, disenchanted by how little had changed during Khatami’s two terms in office, turned in other directions and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad became president.

Ahmad had been summoned by his university’s disciplinary committee that year for publishing a series of pro-reformist bulletins. “They gave me a written warning, which could have had dangerous consequences.” But he continued his political activism.

“While the price [of activism] wasn’t that high then, they were escalating step by step,” he says. “The first such toll is like an ugly stigma. When you break through that, then it becomes normal. For example, the summons by the disciplinary committee that year indeed carried a high price, but afterward, even expulsion, which also happened to me, was no longer a big deal. It had become routine. Receiving sentences from judges and spending time in jail also became routine.”

Ahmad says that he was involved in the presidential campaign during 2009 as well. “I had lots of hope. Until two days before the election, I had lots of hope.” He pauses, then carries on. “Two nights before the elections, I felt something was about to happen, [because of] things that Ahmadinejad said in the debates with Mousavi, Khamenei’s June 4 speech, and the way the government began treating the [reformist] campaigners.”

He describes a commentary he wrote, published just three days before the election, in which he called on Iranians to be vigilant to forestall an event like the CIA-sponsored coup d’etat of August 1953 that toppled the democratic government of Mohammad Mosaddegh. “The evening of June 13, 2009, when they started announcing the election results, became one of the worst nights of my life. I was certain that there had been a coup.”

He says that the ensuing arrests of scores of political activists made him fearful, and he stayed away from his home for nearly 10 days until things settled down. “Later on, I discovered that the information ministry officials had been quite focused on me. I learned this from friends who had been summoned to the ministry.”

He says that when it became clear that the green movement was not a fleeting phenomenon, he felt that his political activities had become truly meaningful: “I spent a lot of energy then. I believed that the movement had to continue on its path even if its political aims were not realized in the short term.

“As I had a history of detention, I tried to help people who were arrested… More importantly, we covered events and demonstrations – we would collect photos and videos and send them to foreign media outlets.”

Ahmad says that he was prepared to be arrested at any moment. “I was ready to spend two or three years in prison, and that was not a high price for me. I was ready to pay that cost.”

In December 2009, the government brought the hammer down on dissent, sanctioning savage attacks on street demonstrators. There were no more large-scale protests until spring 2011, after the Arab spring had created an opening. That revival was short-lived, in part due to the incarceration of Mousavi and Karroubi with which the government responded to the marches of 25 Bahman (February 14).

Ahmad concedes that he is no longer as politically active as he once was. “The main reason is that the communal energy has flagged. Not that I feel hopeless, like so many others whose lack of hope made them give up politics. In fact, the level of excitement among us activists is in direct proportion to society’s enthusiasm and dynamism, which, well, has subsided at the moment… But I still hold to the same vision I did prior to the 2009 election.”

Meanwhile, the developments of the last four years have affected him in more personal ways. “I have become a more sensitive person, which is normal. I’ve been detained twice during this period, interrogated and maltreated – events which affect you. My capacity to overlook daily incidents has diminished.”

He describes what it means to be a political activist in the Iran of 2013. “We really don’t have such a thing called politics as it exists in the real world – not when the slightest overt action results in arrests. Most of our activities are in the virtual world, in the domains of Facebook and the Internet. We disseminate the news, launch a tweeter cascade, and of course attend casual gatherings at each other’s homes.”

While he sometimes takes a week or even a month off from all political activity to rest and recuperate, he says he is not about to give up on his activism, or on his country.

“The cost to my personal life has been high… but I never hold society at fault. I have never regretted the path I’ve embarked on. I am not arrogantly proud, but I think I am on the right path.”

What plans does he have for the few weeks remaining until the presidential vote?

“I don’t see much of a role for myself,” he replies. “My level of political activity usually doesn’t mirror society’s, where there is a rise in activity at the approach of elections and then it tapers off. I try to continue at my own tempo.”

At the same time, he observes, one has to take advantage of such moments, especially when it is clear that there are deep rifts within the ruling system.

Ahmad’s mood appears to have changed over the course of our conversation. Speaking with greater ease, he says that if all the progressive political forces in the country focus on a single candidate, he might become active in the campaign, despite all the hardships he has experienced.

Ultimately, he too contradicts himself.

“The reality is that our society’s development process is not one that will get somewhere quickly. We must use every opportunity, in any space that opens up for progress. These types of occasions are chances for resuscitation, for getting small creeks flowing again.

If we don’t take advantage of such opportunities, the society will in all likelihood end up politically incapacitated or dead, leaving a dark void with an unfathomable end. It has happened in other countries.

“I will certainly participate in the electoral sphere, to help nurture democracy even a little. What happened after the 2009 election may recur or a moderate president may come to power. It is a win-win game. Of course, we have to pay the price that comes with it.”

European nations urged to boycott U.N. disarmament body chaired by Iran

Friday, May 17th, 2013

JTA.Org

May 17, 2013 6:42am

THE HAGUE (JTA) — A Dutch group monitoring rights in Iran urged the Netherlands and other European nations to join the United States and Canada in boycotting a U.N. forum on disarmament that will be chaired by Tehran.

Iran’s chairmanship of the U.N. Conference on Disarmament “comes at the expense of the United Nations’ credibility as a body meant to safeguard global safety,” the Hague-based Iran Comite wrote to Dutch Foreign Minister Frans Timmermans on Thursday.

Hillel Neuer of the Geneva-based nonprofit UN Watch also called on France, Germany and Britain to boycott the forum. He said Iran’s chairmanship “is like putting Jack the Ripper in charge of a women’s shelter.”

A meeting in New York in April was meant to breathe new life into the the Conference on Disarmament, established in 1979 but inactive for the past 15 years. However, the fresh start was mired in controversy when it emerged that Iran will become the conference’s chairman through what U.N. officials called an automatic rotation system among the forum’s 65 member states.

Earlier this week, the United States and Canada said they would boycott the body for the duration of the five-week chairmanship of Iran, which begins May 27.

“The Dutch government should boycott the Conference on Disarmament for as long as Iran heads it and should urge other countries to do the same,” read the letter by the Iran Comite, a watchdog group made up of former Dutch politicians, Kurds, Iranian opposition figures, gay rights activists and Jews.

Bad Behavior has blocked 2415 access attempts in the last 7 days.