The phobia of foreign intrigue is never far away in the Islamic Republic. Iran seems to blame all its internal problems on "the intelligence services" of the UK and US, and this time we have an additional culprit: Pakistan. Whether it is the peaceful post-presidential-election demonstrations of June or Sunday's bombing in the south-eastern province of Sistan-Baluchistan, they are all "organised from abroad", according to officials.
The Revolutionary Guards chief General Mohammad Ali Jafari said on Monday that the intelligence services of US, UK and Pakistan had been behind the bombing in Sistan-Baluchistan that killed 42, including six Revolutionary Guards commanders. Jafari promised revenge: "We shall choose an appropriate time for retaliation," he said. In a veiled threat, he added it would not be difficult for any intelligence agency "to mount an attack like that anywhere". President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad also blamed Pakistan and promised retaliation against the perpetrators.
However, this seemed like an easy response to the lingering ethno-religious problems in the province, where the Baluchi Sunni minority feel they are treated as second-class citizens. They have often accused the government of ignoring their mounting economic and social deprivation. Outspoken members of the Baluchi community are often arrested and treated harshly in Revolutionary Guard prisons.
There have been similar attacks in the past claimed by the Jundallah organisation, who claim to be fighting against political oppression in the province and often mount attacks when a member of their tribe is captured by Revolutionary Guards. A similar attack in February 2007 killed 11, including Revolutionary Guards. In May this year a bomb exploded at a mosque in the provincial capital, Zahedan, killing 19. So how Iran's parliamentary speaker Ali Larijani could blame the US for the attack is unclear. The US, British and Pakistani governments have all rejected the accusations.
Iran seems to be in the habit of heaping blame on the US and Britain without providing evidence. Four months on from the disputed June elections, the leaders of three opposition parties remain in the notorious Evin prison accused of being involved in sabotage "orchestrated by the US and Britain".
Today, long jail sentences were imposed on two journalists who took part in the demonstrations, the Iranian-American academic Kian Tajbakhsh (12 years), and Masoud Bastani, a young journalist (six years). Opposition leaders such as Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mohammad Khatami are repeatedly accused of "collaborating with foreigners", and there are calls for their being condemned for treason. There are fresh demands today for the prosecution of Mousavi. Not a shred of evidence is offered. Documents are being fabricated against them including crimes that could carry the death penalty. Some have been sentenced to death and many others live under the daily threat of such pronouncements.
The problem is compounded when the international community remains relatively silent on these human rights abuses while entering into nuclear negotiations. Yet the Islamic Republic plays its double act again. It agrees to a percentage of Iran's uranium being enriched in France and Russia and it allows the EU foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, to announce the agreement, only to deny it two weeks later. Then it announces it was only interested in the purchase of new enriched uranium, adding that France has been cut out of the deal because it has "foregone its commitments".
The Iranian delegation to Vienna consisted of one adviser, two technical officials and Iran's representative at IAEA, none of whom are capable of making any commitments on what the international community is hoping to achieve: a timetable for the gradual reduction in nuclear enrichment. Official media in Iran reported that the Vienna meeting was solely for the "purchase" of enriched uranium.
The international community is being subjected once again to Iran's delaying tactics. Ahmadinejad boasted at home that Iran was victorious at the Geneva talks, using the episode to boost for his damaged presidential legitimacy. It may benefit Iran to slow down enrichment and postpone weapons production, so as to let the talks continue, and allow the question of internal repression to gradually fade away as international diplomats pat Iran on the back.
But one question will continue to be posed: whether or not a deal is reached with Iran, what are the ramifications of dealing with the Islamic Republic? Experience shows that Iran will not change its ways and sanctions are a non-starter, as is military action. However, there is one path that may prove more effective.
Putting relentless international pressure on Iran for its serious abuse of human rights and questioning the legitimacy of Ahmadinejad's presidency may be both more appropriate and more effective than other paths at present. Contrary to Iran's constitution, the regime has consistently abused religious and minority rights, it has blocked all opposition activity, created a total media blackout, used excessive police force, made arbitrary arrests, tortured and abused inmates, fabricated evidence against opposition, and continued with juvenile executions. Perhaps questioning today's long jail sentences against two journalists could be a start.
The warning by the UN secretary-general Ban Ki-moon in a report on 15 October about these violations of human rights was ignored by the international community and by those diplomats who continue to pat Iran on its back for its broken promises.
The Revolutionary Guards chief General Mohammad Ali Jafari said on Monday that the intelligence services of US, UK and Pakistan had been behind the bombing in Sistan-Baluchistan that killed 42, including six Revolutionary Guards commanders. Jafari promised revenge: "We shall choose an appropriate time for retaliation," he said. In a veiled threat, he added it would not be difficult for any intelligence agency "to mount an attack like that anywhere". President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad also blamed Pakistan and promised retaliation against the perpetrators.
However, this seemed like an easy response to the lingering ethno-religious problems in the province, where the Baluchi Sunni minority feel they are treated as second-class citizens. They have often accused the government of ignoring their mounting economic and social deprivation. Outspoken members of the Baluchi community are often arrested and treated harshly in Revolutionary Guard prisons.
There have been similar attacks in the past claimed by the Jundallah organisation, who claim to be fighting against political oppression in the province and often mount attacks when a member of their tribe is captured by Revolutionary Guards. A similar attack in February 2007 killed 11, including Revolutionary Guards. In May this year a bomb exploded at a mosque in the provincial capital, Zahedan, killing 19. So how Iran's parliamentary speaker Ali Larijani could blame the US for the attack is unclear. The US, British and Pakistani governments have all rejected the accusations.
Iran seems to be in the habit of heaping blame on the US and Britain without providing evidence. Four months on from the disputed June elections, the leaders of three opposition parties remain in the notorious Evin prison accused of being involved in sabotage "orchestrated by the US and Britain".
Today, long jail sentences were imposed on two journalists who took part in the demonstrations, the Iranian-American academic Kian Tajbakhsh (12 years), and Masoud Bastani, a young journalist (six years). Opposition leaders such as Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mohammad Khatami are repeatedly accused of "collaborating with foreigners", and there are calls for their being condemned for treason. There are fresh demands today for the prosecution of Mousavi. Not a shred of evidence is offered. Documents are being fabricated against them including crimes that could carry the death penalty. Some have been sentenced to death and many others live under the daily threat of such pronouncements.
The problem is compounded when the international community remains relatively silent on these human rights abuses while entering into nuclear negotiations. Yet the Islamic Republic plays its double act again. It agrees to a percentage of Iran's uranium being enriched in France and Russia and it allows the EU foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, to announce the agreement, only to deny it two weeks later. Then it announces it was only interested in the purchase of new enriched uranium, adding that France has been cut out of the deal because it has "foregone its commitments".
The Iranian delegation to Vienna consisted of one adviser, two technical officials and Iran's representative at IAEA, none of whom are capable of making any commitments on what the international community is hoping to achieve: a timetable for the gradual reduction in nuclear enrichment. Official media in Iran reported that the Vienna meeting was solely for the "purchase" of enriched uranium.
The international community is being subjected once again to Iran's delaying tactics. Ahmadinejad boasted at home that Iran was victorious at the Geneva talks, using the episode to boost for his damaged presidential legitimacy. It may benefit Iran to slow down enrichment and postpone weapons production, so as to let the talks continue, and allow the question of internal repression to gradually fade away as international diplomats pat Iran on the back.
But one question will continue to be posed: whether or not a deal is reached with Iran, what are the ramifications of dealing with the Islamic Republic? Experience shows that Iran will not change its ways and sanctions are a non-starter, as is military action. However, there is one path that may prove more effective.
Putting relentless international pressure on Iran for its serious abuse of human rights and questioning the legitimacy of Ahmadinejad's presidency may be both more appropriate and more effective than other paths at present. Contrary to Iran's constitution, the regime has consistently abused religious and minority rights, it has blocked all opposition activity, created a total media blackout, used excessive police force, made arbitrary arrests, tortured and abused inmates, fabricated evidence against opposition, and continued with juvenile executions. Perhaps questioning today's long jail sentences against two journalists could be a start.
The warning by the UN secretary-general Ban Ki-moon in a report on 15 October about these violations of human rights was ignored by the international community and by those diplomats who continue to pat Iran on its back for its broken promises.
Guardian CIF
No comments:
Post a Comment