War, Talks with the US, Referendum

Iranian blogger, Arash Motamed, Rooz Online:

Two months after Ahmadinejad took over the helms of Iran’s government, Iran’s nuclear issue has strongly influenced not only its foreign but even domestic policy. It’s most important impact has been the new alignment of political forces, whose epicenter is “national interest.”

Today, all political forces, whether those supporting the current hardline regime in Tehran or those calling for its complete removal agree that Iran is threatened by a serious danger. Ali Shamkhani, who is his new post, is in fact the commander of the war task force talks of preparing to confront the global forces and mentions “damage” in his analysis. Sazemane Mojahedin Engelab Eslami (Islamic Revolution Mojahedin Organization) cautiously puts aside its self imposed silence and warns, through a statement, of “the approaching danger”. “Referring Iran’s nuclear issue to the UN Security Council means relegating Iran’s sovereignty and national security to the United States”, it says. This is the very same danger that Ali Larijani fears too when he says “I hope Iran’s case does not go to the Security Council.”

Even the government of India, who in the words of Siavosh Zargar Yaghoobi, Iran’s former ambassador to New Delhi, “shocked Iran’ through its IAEA vote last week, talks of a danger that may be related to the same threat that Iranian officials have been refereeing to. According to AFP, India’s deputy Foreign Minister Shyam Saran says, in response to Iran’s protest that India’s affirmative vote at the IAEA was to “avert a major international confrontation between Iran and the international community.” Calcutta Telegraph newspaper as quoted by AP explains the issue in even more detail when it writes that in their talks with European and US teams, representatives of India had been assured that they would refrain from taking a hard and military posture against Iran.

The “approaching danger” that Iranian officials talk about is interpreted by some to mean economic sanctions, while others see it as military action against the country. Whatever form the danger takes, it will come through decisions at the Security Council. According to BBC, “UN Security Council can take harsh measures such as economic sanctions or even military action against Iran.” This possibility is becoming clear to Iranian officials five days after the IAEA vote that has threatened referral of Iran’s nuclear issue to the Security Council. The opposition groups too have become more vocal on the issue since the IAEA ruling. Sazemane Mojahedin Engelabe Eslami (Organization for the Mojahedin of the Islamic Revolution) group says that the current challenges and consequences of the nuclear issue lie in the hands of those officials who are responsible for current policies.

The brain child of the current approach to the nuclear issue is no other than Ali Larijani, who chairs the Supreme National Security Council and is Iran’s chief negotiator at the IAEA talks. His goal and that of his team is to buy time to respond properly to a situation that they themselves have created. A situation that is protested even by Mohsen Rezayi, the former Passdaran Revolutionary Guards chief who is very vocal these days. He calls the current nuclear policies “diplomatic mistakes.” A look at the events since the IAEA vote confirms that the only action taken in this regard, aside the usual threats and blames, is last week’s vote at the Parliament. In that vote, the government is given two weeks to respond to the Parliament’s call to withdraw from the NPT. Hadad Adel, the Speaker of Iran’s Parliament clarifies, however, that the Majlis resolution does not mean withdrawal from the NPT or the Additional Protocols.

The coalition against Iran seems to be strengthening and widening, after the IAEA resolution. Immediately after the vote, the German and British press made new claims against Iran. The German press has spoken of the presence of Amin Zarghavi - a leader AlQaeeda member – in Iran. German magazine Focus claims that Iran had a hand in the November of 1985 Frankfurt bombing at an American military base. This increased isolation is part of the goal of the US foreign policy, as described by the deputy US Secretary of State Nicholas Burns.

The British press has been advancing the notion that Passdaran Revolutionary Guards and Iran’s security forces are engaged in terrorist activities. This news that was not published in the Iranian press, found its answer in the demonstrations outside the British embassy in Tehran. But the meeting between Ali Larijani and British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw in New York put an end to the event. According to IRNA news agency, Ali Larijani said “Jack straw insisted on the continuation of talks with Iran in New York, and called for a calm atmosphere in this regard. But your behavior at the IAEA was contrary to our agreements and talks.” READ MORE

It is not clear in Iran what this “agreement” is and what is the reason that Britain has not honored it publicly and opted for a strong resolution against Iran. Iran’s response to the change was the demonstrations that took place in front of the British embassy last week. They ended with the intervention of the security forces. The protesters were calling for the “destruction of the British Embassy buildings over the heads of its residents.” The demonstrators did not seem to calm down even when Straw announced that Britain against military action against Iran.

War, Talks and Referendum

In the words of a university professor, “the current situation in Iran leaves three alternatives for the hardliners: Confrontation with the world and acceptance of its price; talks with the US; and, a referendum on the issue.

Observers have taken note that the idea of a referendum has originated from a newspaper that belongs to the military, indicating that it is something that the inner decision and policy members of the regime are discussing among themselves.