M Ahmadinejad

[Rasputin]

تظاهرکنندگان در نیویورک: "احمدی نژاد را زندانی کنید"


گنجی: "مساله ما نقض گسترده و سیستماتیک حقوق بشر در ایران است"
همزمان با حضور محمود احمدی نژاد در نیویورک، تعدادی از مخالفان و منتقدان او به این شهر آمدند و تظاهراتی علیه او برگزار کردند.
محمود احمدی نژاد قرار است بعد از ظهر سه شنبه به وقت نیویورک در مقر سازمان ملل متحد سخنرانی کند.

سخنرانی آقای احمدی نژاد در شصت و سومین اجلاس مجمع عمومی سازمان ملل متحد ساعاتی بعد از نطق جورج بوش، رییس جمهور آمریکا انجام خواهد شد.

سفر رئیس جمهور ایران به نیویورک این فرصت را به مخالفان جمهوری اسلامی و منتقدان او داده است تا به حضور او در این شهر اعتراض کنند.

در تظاهراتی که گروه های یهودی در نیویورک برگزار کردند، الی ویزل برنده جایزه صلح نوبل، گفت: "رئیس جمهور ایران جنایتکار است و باید توسط سازمان ملل متحد بازداشت شود."

اما در عین حال، شماری از گروه های طرفدار صلح هم در محل حاضر شدند تا به مواضع "ضد ایرانی" تظاهرکنندگانی که برخی از آنها خواستار بمباران تاسیسات اتمی بوشهر بودند، اعتراض کنند.

منیژه صبا از ایالت نیوجرسی به نیویورک آمده است. او در این ارتباط گفت: " باید جلوی دروغ هایی که درباره ایران گفته می شود، ایستاد."

علاوه بر گروه های یهودی، تعدادی از هواداران سازمان مجاهدین خلق هم در گردهمایی اعتراض آمیز علیه آقای احمدی نژاد شرکت کرده بودند.

گروهی از اعضای گروهی به نام "جامعه مدنی ایران" هم با برگزاری نشستی خبری، دولت محمود احمدی نژاد را به نقض گسترده حقوق بشر متهم کردند.

این افراد با برگزاری یک کنفرانس مطبوعاتی در هتلی در مقابل مقر سازمان ملل متحد، از فرصت پیش آمده برای بیان نظرات خود استفاده کردند.


علاوه بر گروه های یهودی، مجاهدین خلق هم علیه احمدی نژاد تظاهرات کردند

'نقض گسترده حقوق بشر'

اکبر گنجی، فعال حقوق بشر در این جلسه مخالفت خود و همفکرانش با دولت آقای احمدی نژاد را متفاوت از دولت های غربی دانست.

آقای گنجی گفت: "مساله دولت های غربی فقط مساله هسته ای است ولی مساله ما نقض گسترده و سیستماتیک حقوق بشر در ایران است."

مهر انگیز کار، حقوقدان ایرانی و فعال حقوق بشر که از دیگر سخنرانان این برنامه بود، به خبرنگارها گفت: " اگر رئیس جمهور ایران را دیدند از او بپرسند که جنبش زنان ایران چه خطری دارد که سازمان های اطلاعاتی دولت او فعالان آن را تحت تعقیب قرار داده اند؟"

هادی قائمی از کمپین بین المللی برای حقوق بشر در ایران هم تاکید کرد که اگر با محمود احمدی نژاد رو د رو شود به او خواهد گفت: "شما چرا به اعدام نوجوان ها هیچ گونه عکس العملی نشان نمی دهید و اجازه می دهید این اعدام ها ایران را در سطح بین المللی بدنام کند؟"

فعالان حاضر در این برنامه همچنین گفتند پرونده هسته ای ایران نظر دنیا را از وضع "بحرانی" حقوق بشر در ایران منحرف کرده و نسبت به این موضوع ابراز نگرانی کردند.

با این همه، برای گروه های قدرتمند یهودی در نیویورک برنامه هسته ای ایران بیش از هر چیز دیگر نگران کننده است.


همه تظاهرکنندگان در نیویورک با حضور احمدی نژاد مخالف نبودند

'نگرانی یهودی ها'

سازمان های یهودی مختلفی در روز دوشنبه مقابل مقر سازمان ملل متحد جمع شدند تا به حضور محمود احمدی نژاد اعتراض کنند.

دلیل عمده حساسیت این گروه ها به رئیس جمهور ایران، تاکید او بر محو اسرائیل از نقشه جهان و نفی هولوکاست، کشتار گسترده یهودیان در دوران جنگ جهانی دوم است.

الی ویزل، برنده جایزه صلح نوبل که خود از بازماندگان هولوکاست است، در این تجمع محمود احمدی نژاد را خطری برای صلح دانست و گفت او باید در زندان سازمان ملل حبس شود، "نه این که در مجمع آن سخنرانی کند."

[Rasputin]

Nothing expresses the widening gap between the mind frames of the Iranian ruling elite and their Western counterparts more than the headlines in their respective newspapers. The American media, above all, have unilaterally resolved the intelligence questions over Iran's nuclear program. The New York Times leads the pack with articles and even editorials that assume Iran is building a nuclear bomb.(1) The American media, once again, are doing damage control for their President -- in this case, for the Bush Administration's embarrassing Iran policy, especially after the December 2007 National Intelligence Estimate's assessment that Iran abandoned its weapons program in 2003.

Western reporting on Iran's nuclear program is based on the underlying assumption that the Iranians are irrational in their policy-making, therefore Iran is a nation with whom diplomacy is a waste of time. A nuclear Iran has been framed by the Israeli hawks as an "existential threat," the framing adopted by the American media as well: Iran is a suicide-bombing nation. If allowed to build a nuclear bomb, they will strap it on and destroy Israel even if it means the destruction of their own country and its 70 million inhabitants.(2) The logical way to deal with such irrational self-destructive characters is to preempt them by destroying them. This logic looms behind Western news about Iran and remains a possible rationale for a military attack on the country.

We in the US are thus constantly bombarded with alarming media distortions of Iran's politics, as well as Sy Hersh's frenzied articles on the next possible date for a US and/or Israeli attack on Iran. The mood in Tehran, in contrast, is calm. Iranian newspapers daily herald their nation's breakthroughs in forcing the West to the negotiating table and creating ever more diplomatic and economic deals with other countries. They show a regime that feels itself well entrenched as a political system, one that is actively building its infrastructure at home and making important gains abroad. For them, Iran's nuclear program is symbolic of national independence and pride.

While the US pressures do pose a nuisance, they are in no way destabilizing the regime. In fact, for the section of the Iranian ruling elite who advocate greater independence from the West, such pressures are only further proof of US injustices. Moreover, the US economic sanctions, putting a Western face on the structural roots of Iran's economic problems, create a greater opportunity -- an impetus as well as an excuse -- to advance their domestic and international agenda. So, even as the sanctions compound the changes Iran's economy is going through, the Iranian government is capable of managing their impacts.

Looking inside Iran, one sees a much more lucid and coherent set of national and international goals on the part of the country's leadership than can be seen from the outside, though this is a leadership that is trapped by its own material interest, fickle and discontent population, and need for long-term stability, like any other ruling elite.

Even a cursory look at Iranian society and media shows that the most serious and far-reaching political debate and contention inside the country is not over the nation's nuclear program. It is, rather, over Iran's rocky attempts at privatization and the government's role in creating a free market. This debate -- named after Article 44 of Iran's Constitution, reinterpretations of which promise the transfer of government-owned industries to the private sector -- is what animates the country's ruling elite and is where competition among them is being fought out.

In that context, the controversy over Iran's nuclear program -- contrary to the goals of those who make military threats and impose economic sanctions against it -- is relevant for the nation's ruling class only in so far as the fallout from Western reaction affects their competition over the country's capitalist development. Whether it is out of confidence in their internal and international popularity or mere hubris, the Iranian regime is basically going about its business on its own terms and is expecting the world to follow.

Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei laid out his perspective for the nation's future in his annual Norooz address to thousands of pilgrims in the Iranian holy city of Mashhad on March 21 of this year. Alongside Iran's inalienable right to nuclear technology and its unwavering support for the oppressed across the globe, Ayatollah Khamenei positioned extremely worldly concerns over Iran's economy within the ideological framework of the Islamic Republic: "Creating new wealth is a form of worship."

Thus, the Supreme Leader articulated the Iranian version of American evangelicals' "Prosperity Doctrine" as he put his official stamp on Iranian government's open and unapologetic turn towards market-driven economics. The current fight amongst the discordant and competitive ruling elite, whose referee is Ayatollah Khamenei himself, is over who controls and benefits from this increasingly privatized market. It is one of the many ironies of the Islamic Republic that, as it increases its criticism of the West and resistance to Western pressures, it also increases its emulation of the worst kinds of American-led IMF/World Bank-style structural adjustments.

Despite his image in the West, this is the primary role that President Ahmadinejad is playing inside Iran: he is using the autocratic and repressive state apparatus to privatize public industries, weaken labor laws, and take away government subsidies. He is, of course, doing so with an eye on building a stronger base for the regime and for his own re-election campaign next year. And in that sense, Ahmadinejad is becoming a double-edged sword for the leadership of the Islamic Republic. He is at once re-mobilizing some of the popular support for the regime and building a base for himself in order to operate as independently as possible. He recently voiced frustration at the limitations on the powers of the President to implement his vision, the same frustration that former President Khatami expressed a few years ago and was denounced widely as being out of step with the regime.

So, while Supreme Leader Khamenei has proclaimed his pleasure at President Ahmadinejad's strong stand against the West and has even hinted that the President should expect to be re-elected to a second term next year, establishment politicians such as former President Rafsanjani and former Speaker of the Parliament Nategh-Nouri have deepened their criticism of Ahmadinejad, his economic policies, and his attempts at repressing competitors.

In this process, one of the interesting outcomes of Ahmadinjead's leadership is the fact that a layer of the ruling (and relatively more liberal) clerics are being marginalized at the hands of lay technocrats. Many of these technocrats are veterans of the Iran-Iraq war, and they see themselves as, once again, picking up the banner of the Islamic Revolution from the indolence-prone mullahs. They hope to further the independence of Iran while supporting other developing countries suffering under Western imperialism. The nuclear program plays the ideological role of buttressing this sense of independence, and there are no forces inside Iran who are allowed to openly disagree with it.

Because of the West's choice to ignore the Khatami presidency's desire for rapprochement, President Ahmadinejad can say his own strong stand against the Western pressures is the only way to deal with Iran's adversaries. And as far as the Iranian establishment is concerned, he has been proven right. The current negotiations between the West and Iran have come to allow Iran a lot more leeway than those under President Khatami, whose nuclear negotiation team was willing to accept the West's preconditions before starting dialogue.(3) The West rejected President Khatami's overture, whereas President Ahmadinejad can point to his own success at bringing the West to the negotiating table under more favorable and just terms for Iran.

Though Ahmadinejad's contentious political and economic policies have made a huge dent in Iran's ability to join the international economic system -- a stated foreign policy goal of the Rafshanjani-Khatami period throughout the 1990s -- there is a logic to Ahmadinejad's seemingly reckless behavior: he is not only forcing the world to accept Iran's nuclear program, he is also actively and forcefully turning Iran's economy away from being focused on the Western market. Today Iran is becoming an increasingly independent nation.

And it was the decision in the West to not engage with Iran 10 years ago that has allowed Ahmadinejad to take Iran on its current course. "A decade ago, the most relevant debate inside Iran was how [we] should try to build trust with the West in order to join the world market," explains Bijan Khajehpour, Chairman of Atieh Group, one of Iran's most respected investment consultants. "Today, the debate is detached from the West and focuses on developing Iran's [economic] potential by first building this alliance with other developing nations with the objective of becoming the region's strongest economic and technological power [in the Persian Gulf and Central Asia]."

This trend finds ideological expression in President Ahmadinejad's talks of reviving the Non-Aligned Movement, and economically he is also putting his money where his mouth is. Iran's economy is moving towards development that relies on the formation of a second-tier economic alliance comprising sectors within the world economic system that have as tenuous an access to the capitalist core as does Iran. These possible allies include the BRIC nations (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) and smaller developing nations, as well as smaller sectors within the West.

[Rasputin]

This trend finds ideological expression in President Ahmadinejad's talks of reviving the Non-Aligned Movement, and economically he is also putting his money where his mouth is. Iran's economy is moving towards development that relies on the formation of a second-tier economic alliance comprising sectors within the world economic system that have as tenuous an access to the capitalist core as does Iran. These possible allies include the BRIC nations (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) and smaller developing nations, as well as smaller sectors within the West.

"Ever since September 11, there is a desire by many in the region to keep their money invested nearby [rather than in the US or Europe] and Iran is benefiting from this tendency," Khajepour explains. He continues to lay out a number of examples of the way Iran is making economic progress in spite of the international sanctions: offering gas and other commercial incentives to various nations in the region in return for financing projects inside Iran, the building of the "Peace Pipeline" to Pakistan and India, and working with mid-sized European companies (such as OMV of Austria, E.ON Ruhrgas of Germany, and Edison of Italy) that are less vulnerable to US sanctions. And with the closing of many major European banks in Iran, smaller banks are filling the void.

China is a big factor in this dynamic. According to Mohsen Shariatinia, Senior Researcher at the Asia Research Group of the Center for Strategic Research, a major official think tank, "under the Rafsanjani period Iran was closely watching and following the Chinese model of development . . . basically learning how to turn a post-revolutionary society into a consumerist one."

Yet, as the Iranian ruling elite proved themselves much less cohesive and disciplined than their Chinese Communist Party counterparts, and as the American "War on Terror" and Iran's nuclear program marginalized Iran in the world economic system, they have had to change their models.

"Now," continues Shariatinia, "China has become Iran's primary economic partner and Iran has become China's largest trading partner in the Middle East." China is more an ally than a model, and with China's growing energy needs and Iran's large oil and gas reserves, there is no reason to believe that this trend will stop.

"The sanctions [in effect] have slowed down Iran's drive to be a major world energy power," Khajepour sums up, "but they have encouraged the Iranians to seek other means to build their potential." This will be Ahmadinejad's legacy if the Western threats and sanctions continue and Iran is left to develop its newly-liberalized economy under the current terms.

Looking at financial news in the Iranian newspapers since the Ahmadinejad presidency, one can see that Iran has strengthened its economic ties not only with its closest allies (Venezuela, Cuba) and neighbors (Iraq, Lebanon, Persian Gulf States) as well as the BRIC nations, but with such diverse countries as South Africa, Senegal, Nigeria, Ghana, Eritrea, Sudan, the Congo, Algeria, Belarus, Slovakia, Ukraine, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines, North and South Korea, Vietnam, Bolivia, and Nicaragua. This list is by no means exhaustive.

Of course, this kind of economic development will not bring the Iranian public the consumerist bliss of Dubai, Beirut, Amman, Cairo, or any other place that is developing on a Western model. But for a society that has been denied access to that kind of consumption pattern for 30 years, the inability to participate in the glitter that pours out of the satellite channels is not such a big deal. In fact, developing a model of a strong-yet-humble economy is exactly what has created the air of popularity around Ahmadinejad -- both nationally and internationally.

The social repercussion of this process within Iran is the marginalization of the class that prioritizes the Western consumerist culture. "Ahmadinejad is [in fact] actively destroying that class," laments Alireza Alavitabar, a liberal journalist and editor of numerous newspapers all of which were eventually banned. "And in order to do this, he has relied on the support of the rural and urban poor and the large sector of government employees."

Ahmadinejad is in effect re-animating and re-strengthening a social base which had been marginalized in the aftermath of the Iran-Iraq war. In the name of "Islamic banking" the Ahmadinejad administration has been giving away no-interest loans (Sandogh Mehr-e Reza and Qarz ol-Hassaneh) which are giving promises and perks to the poor and the marginalized, alongside short-term opportunities that they have been denied since the end of the Iran-Iraq war. This social base is, in many ways, in opposition to the classes that were benefiting from the Rafsanjani-Khatami period and who were seen as too unbeholden to the regime and its ideology.

Recent US media reports have shown that the US-led economic sanctions have had only a limited ability to stop even US exports to Iran. In fact, the total amount of US exports to Iran has steadily increased in the past 8 years.

As the sanctions are wiping out the long-standing economic relations with major European banks and manufacturers, the Iranian government is turning its attention to smaller European firms and, more importantly, welcoming companies from Asia, Latin America, and Africa. The government is encouraging a new layer of Iranian capital to benefit from this interaction. The sanctions have slowed this process, too, but they have not stopped it. In fact, it is not clear to what extant it is possible to hinder it through sanctions.

The question that remains to be asked is: if even the US itself is continuing economic engagement with Iran, then what purpose do the sanctions and threats of attack serve politically ... other than allowing the faction of the establishment in Iran that is most antagonistic to the West to use them to strengthen itself and its roots in Iranian society?

Kouross Esmaeli is a journalist and filmmaker living in New York City. Ramin Karimian is a scholar and researcher in Tehran. First published in MrZine.

NOTES

1 -- For the most recent examples, see New York Times editorials, "Adrift on Iran," April 11, 2008 and "Belatedly Making Nice," March 31, 2008; and Steven Lee Myers and Nicholas Kulish, "Iran Unmoved by Threats on Its Atomic Program," New York Times, June 12, 2008.

2 -- The clearest elaboration of this line may be found in Yossi Klein Halevi and Michael B. Oren's "Israel's Worst Nightmare," TNR, January 30, 2007. But just about every other article in TNR pushes the same line.

3 -- See Kaveh Ehsani, "The Populist Threat to Democracy," MERIP 241, Winter 2006.

[Rasputin]

http://www.alsumaria.tv/en/World-News/2-27290-Ahmadinejad:-USA-should-apologize.html

[Rasputin]

There's going to be another presidential election in Iran in June 2009. Another chance for the reformists to get their candidate elected to the office of Presidency.

Everyone in the reformists' camp agrees that they cannot afford another four years of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's presidency. The policy of spend, spend and spend has proved popular with the masses since they see the short term result. However, those who look further out can see that the huge drop in oil prices coupled with the lack of currency reserves is creating a huge obstacle in the path of Iran's economic progress. This obstacle is around the corner and most are either not seeing it or are just ignoring it. However, the crash of the economy is imminent.

The reformists are taking advantage of the looming economic crisis and have persuades Mohammad Khatami to run again for the office of Presidency. Another group is persuading Abdollah Nouri to run as a candidate of change. There are several questions regarding the candidacy of both individuals. Does Khatami have the power to win? Will Khatami be able to get the popular vote? Will the student groups and others who felt that Khatami did not fulfill his promises vote for him again? What about Nouri? Will the guardian council approve his candidacy? Will his hard stance still prove popular with the students and intellectuals? Will he have the name recognition necessary to defeat Ahmadinejad? Khatami has the name recognition and moderation which may prove successful in securing the majority vote. However, it takes more that moderate views to turn the tide of conservatism and huge spending instituted by Ahmadinejad and his government.

In my view, the best chance for winning the popular vote in the upcoming election is by collaboration of Khatami and Nouri. The time has come in Iranian politics for presidential candidates to take advantage of selecting a running mate that will augment their chances to get elected. Khatami is popular with the reformists yet seems too conciliatory when faced with adversity. Nouri, on the other hand, has proved that he stands on principle and does not give in to compromises. The combination of the two is what will win the next election. Reformists and their followers need to see that they will have someone who will fight for their ideas and the moderates need to see someone in office who will recognize the power of negotiation and compromise to move the country forward. Those qualities are not found in one person but two – Nouri and Khatami.

The question then becomes who should take the lead? In a perfect world, Khatami should act as the supporting candidate and Nouri should take the lead. Khatami had his chance for eight years and made huge contributions to the progress of democracy in Iranian politics. However, it is always better for the progress of democracy to bring in and elect "new blood" rather than circulating and sharing the power among the same old people. However, we do not live in a perfect world and the process of democracy in Iran is in its infancy stage. The candidates are not given enough time to be able to campaign effectively across the country and the candidates must first be approved by the Guardian Council before they can campaign.

It appears that Nouri may not get approved to run as a candidate. Therefore, Khatami must take the lead and by choosing Nouri as a running mate he will silence the critics that find him to be too soft and will bring them into his camp. If there is any chance for reformists to win the next election, it is by the power of collaboration between Khatami and Nouri. Whether the two will agree to work together is a question. However, there is no doubt that their joint effort will prove to be the best medicine for the Iranian politics and economy in the years to come.

[Rasputin]

http://www.tehranlondon.com/article.php?id=35657

[Rasputin]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/11/ahmadinejad-toy-monkey

[Rasputin]

http://www.tehranlondon.com/article.php?id=36744

[Rasputin]

Walkout at Iran leader's speech

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8008572.stm

[Rasputin]

http://www.khordaad.com/sNews.aspx?Id=1110

[Rasputin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7HKU75xzyp0

[DokhtarIrooni]

^^i just saw that on the news... it was hilarious

[Dokhtar Bandari]

The man (clown hair) was not one of protesters outside, he was one of the accompany delegates.

What an embaressment. Did you read his speech? I am not sure why he says the things that he says, but I am sure of one thing...the man is an jack***. There was not a single delegate that was not scratching his/her head wondering WTF...Frankly I am shocked they all did not get up and walk out.

[DokhtarIrooni]

^^man bavaram nemishe ke doctore.. vaghean hast?
I could not believe what i heard when he was speeking. And it was in front of such important people, and they just left. They didnt show him any respect, which he deservered, because he was being more disrespectfull than they were.

On the news here in denmark, they said that they were prepared for ahmadinejads speech and had already agreed that if he reached a sertain point they would leave.

[Rasputin]

http://www.tehranlondon.com/article.php?id=36756