Week in Review

DoctorZin provides a review of this past week's [1/23/06 -1/29/06] major news events regarding Iran. (The reports are listed in chronological order, not by importance) READ MORE

Rumors of War.

• The Scotsman reported that Iran warned Israel it would be making a "fatal mistake" if it took military action against Tehran's nuclear program.
• Reuters reported that firebrand Iraqi cleric Moqtada al-Sadr has assured Iran that his Shi'ite Muslim militiamen will support the Islamic Republic if it comes under attack.
• Dow Jones Newswires reported that Prime Minister Tony Blair said: "We have no desire whatever to act against people in Iran."
• Christopher Dickey, Newsweek reported that if Iran initiates an Armageddon, those who survive will look back and see the warnings.
• News Max reported that former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich says that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is as big a threat to global security as Adolf Hitler.
• FOX News reported that according to their polling Americans think Iran is the country that poses the greatest immediate danger to the United States. Read the poll results.
• Gerard Baker, The Times argued that we need to prepare ourselves for the unthinkable, saying: War against Iran may be a necessity.
• Asia Times believes that the Bush administration planning for possible military action against Iranian nuclear facilities appears to have focused on commando operations to sabotage them rather than on air attacks.
• Middle East Newsline reminded us that just last month; Iran completed a huge military exercise that tested Teheran's ability to attack Western shipping and Arab oil facilities in the Gulf.
• Countdown argued that if the more ideologically oriented Iranian armed forces 9IRGC, etc) crumble for any reason (including strikes by the US) the traditional Iranian army has the potential to step in and end the conflict. That could be our winning card.
  

Other Options? How about an Internal Regime Change?

• David E. Sanger, The New York Times argued that while the US can execute a devastating attack on Iran's nuclear program the problem is managing the aftermath.
• Reuel Marc Gerecht, The Weekly Standard offered a frank discussion as how to head off the imam bomb. Must Read.
• David R. Sands, The Washington Times suggested why the US response to Iran is different from Iraq.
• The Jerusalem Post reported on the Herzliya Conference where differing views on the degree to which Iran's nuclear program poses a threat to Israel and the effective strategies for combating that threat were on display.
• Michael Ledeen, National Review Online reminded us that the Iranian regime is increasingly vulnerable to an internal regime change if the west would invest the resources necessary to broadcast the truth about the regime to its people.
• Kenneth R. Timmerman, NewsMax.com reported that Iran's apocalyptic President is creating internal fissures in the regime that the US needs to exploit now.
• Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, The Weekly Standard reported on how to understand and exploit Iran's internal fissures.
• Iran va Jahan reported that the influential US think tank "The Committee on the Present Danger" (CPD) has called for "Regime Change in Iran". CPD said: "We believe the United States's policy objective must be regime change in Iran..."
• The New York Sun in a Staff Editorial called for a regime change in Iran.
• Jeff Jacoby, The Boston Globe argued that the best solution for the Iranian crisis would be a regime change in Iran.
• Robert Kagan, The Washington Post reported that despite the Iranian threat and the Iranian people's desire for real democracy in Iran, the Bush administration has done little to push for political change or to exploit the evident weaknesses in the mullahs' regime.
  

Ahmadinejad.

• Al Jazeera reported that Iranian President Ahmadinejad said that the Middle East conflict has become “the locus of the final war” between Muslims and the West.
• Rooz Online reported on an emergency meeting attended by Ahmadinejad, Rafsanjani and friend.
• The Jerusalem Post reported that Iran threatened, if were Israel to attack Iran's nuclear facilities, they would respond so strongly that it would put the Jewish state into "an eternal coma."
• European Jewish Press reported that Iran said it was willing to send a team of "independent investigators" to visit former Nazi deaths camps across Europe.
• The International Herald Tribune reported that Iran has asked the United States to allow direct flights between the two countries.
  
• Meysam Tavab, Rooz Online reported that Ahmadinejad's government has asked Iran's Parliament to stop making foreign policy pronouncements.
• Shahram Rafizadeh, Rooz Online argued that the increasing international pressure on Iran has motivated Iranian leaders to search for younger neighboring allies, instead of depending on traditional diplomacy.
• IranMania.com reported that Iran congratulated the Islamist Palestinian group Hamas for its election victory and declared last month that they represented a "united front" against Israel.
  

Ahmadinejad's Worldview.

• Hossein Bastani, Rooz Online reported how Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi applies his ideology, in his own words.
  

Iran's Nuclear Program - The Coming IAEA Showdown.

• The Washington Post reported that the United States has been unable to win international support to officially report Iran to the U.N. Security Council.
• Iran Focus reported that Rafsanjani said: “The nuclear arena is one area where the Europeans seem to have problems making one enormous decision”. “The enemies are trying from to stop us from reaching our goals using different tactics”.
• The Financial Times reported that Iran’s top nuclear official warned Tehran would resume efforts to enrich uranium on an industrial scale if its case was reported to the UN Security Council.
• The Jerusalem Post reported that John Bolton, the US ambassador to the United Nations, said: US President George W. Bush will not accept a nuclear Iran.
• Reuters reported that U.S. President George W. Bush said on Monday he was concerned a future nuclear-armed Iran could blackmail the world.
  
• The U.S. Department of State said Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Italian Deputy Prime Minister Gianfranco Fini called for the international community to take a tough, unified position on Iran’s suspected nuclear weapons program.
• Telegraph added that Tony Blair insisted he did not want to take any action against Iran, saying it would be a "terrible miscalculation."
• Dow Jones Newswires reported that German Chancellor Angela Merkel called for a step-by-step diplomatic approach in the standoff with Iran.
• The Wall Street Journal reported that as U.S. and European officials press to have Iran brought before the United Nations Security Council, they are also promising that Tehran won't face serious punishment there -- for quite a while.
• Sara Esfahani, Rooz Online reported that an Iranian leader complained that the Russians were not supposed to make their nuclear proposal public and that the revelations of the plan made its acceptance by the more radical elements of the government very difficult.
• Reuters reported that El Baradei, the IAEA chief said "no" to a broad Iran report for February meeting.
• Telegraph reported that Iran has secretly extended the uranium enrichment plant at the centre of the international controversy.
• The Christian Science Monitor reported why the US doesn't trust Iran on nukes.
• Tod Lindberg, Washington Times examined the complexities dealing with a nuclear Iran.
• Moscow Times reported that Iran's top nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani, said: "Our research is on a laboratory scale, a small scale. If they want guarantees of no diversion of nuclear fuel, we can reach a formula acceptable to both sides in talks."
• Tulin Daloglu, The Washington Times asked: If former President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani were to be elected, would it change the regime's nuclear ambition? The short answer is "no."
• Adnkronos International suggested that the recent US air strike targeting al-Qaeda operatives in Pakistan was a message that Washington is upping pressure on Pakistan to hand over disgraced nuclear scientist Dr A.Q. Khan for questioning.
• The New York Times reported that the foreign ministers of Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will meet in London on Monday in an effort to resolve their differences on how best to punish Iran for its nuclear activities.
• The Financial Times reported that Robert Zoellick, the US Deputy Secretary of State said China has emphasized its support for international efforts to stop Iran’s nuclear program.
• Iran Focus reported that Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator is due to travel to Beijing on Thursday.
• Yahoo News reported that a landmark nuclear deal between India and the United States will "die" in Washington if New Delhi supports Iran.
• Ynet News reported that Israel's Ambassador to the U.N. Dan Gillerman said it is the U.N. Security Council's duty to prevent "another Holocaust."
• The New York Times reported that President Bush and the Chinese government both declared their full support for a Russian proposal. See also BBC News.
• BBC News reported that China's government has said: Plans to enrich uranium in Russia for use in Iran could help break a global stalemate over Tehran's nuclear aims.
• USInfo.State.gov reported that UN Ambassador John Bolton said that placing the Iran crisis under the spotlight of the Security Council, will “help dramatize the extent of world opposition to Iran obtaining nuclear weapons and demonstrate to them that the course they are pursuing is not acceptable.”
• Reuters reported that U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said: Iran is "feeling the heat" of international pressure over its nuclear program.
• BBC News reported that India has summoned the US ambassador to Delhi after comments he made over India's relations with Iran.
• Forbes reported that ElBaradei called on the United States to provide Iran with nuclear reactors.
• The Financial Times reported that Kofi Annan strengthened Iran's hand in the nuclear stand-off.
• Reuters reported that Iran's chief nuclear negotiator dampened hopes that Tehran was leaning toward a compromise.
• Reuters reported that Iran has pledged access for U.N. inspectors to equipment from the former Lavisan military site in a possible bid to avert a crackdown by the U.N. nuclear watchdog (IAEA) next week.
• Josh Gerstein, New York Sun reported that Bush's endorsement of a plan to end the nuclear standoff with Iran has left some of his supporters baffled. The proposal, essentially adopts a strategy advocated by Senator Kerry.
• Mortimer B. Zuckerman, US News & World Report reminded us that while Russian President Vladimir Putin has been supporting the Iranian regime, the author in an interview several years ago with him before the Iraq war said: "the real threat is Iran."
• The Guardian reviewed the EU's use of "soft" power and reminds us that it is an American invention that at its core involved the promoting the US as a beacon of prosperity and openness.
  

Iranian Oil a Weapon?

• Terry Keenan, New York Post discussed how Iran is plotting to use its oil weapon against the US.
• Ha'aretz reported that a senior Iranian official threatened that Tehran may forcibly prevent oil export via the Straits of Hormuz if the UN imposed economic sanctions.
• Iran Press News provided more of the statement: if our regime is referred to the security council, we have several options and one of those is to close off the Straits of Hormuz so that not one drop of oil can be exported.
• Iran Press News reported that OPEC member nations rejected the Islamic regimes petition to decrease oil production.
• The New York Sun Blog argued that while the president may be counting on Iran to reject Russia's offer but it also permits Iran the opportunity to now negotiate with Moscow for months on end, giving Iran more time to build its bomb.
• Agence France-Presse reported that the US cautioned that is was not 100 per cent supportive of Russia's proposed compromise.
• The Associated Press reported that the US ruled out any contact with Iranian delegates before next week's showdown vote.
  

Iran Preparing for Sanctions.

• Kenneth R. Timmerman, Iran.org is launching an appeal to identify and freeze Iranian government assets around the world.
• International Herald Tribune considered the question: If sanctions are the answer, what economic levers could they safely use? Gasoline imports.
• Ali Nourizadeh, Asharq Al-Awsat reminded us that Iran imports most of its gasoline and has only a 45 day supply.
• Iran Mania reported EU Energy Commissioner Andris Piebalgs said he doubted that Iran would cut oil exports in response to threatened sanctions.
• The Financial Times reported that Iran's central bank vice-governor, said on Tuesday Tehran had withdrawn foreign reserves from Italian banks but not elsewhere in Europe.
  

EU Business Responds.

• Forbes.com reported that Swiss banking giant UBS AG said it has stopped doing business with Iran.
• DW-World.de reported that German firms are seeking a lower profile in Iran since they have huge investments there.
• Forbes reported that German banks want to retain their interests in Iran for the time being.
• The Chicago Tribune reported that insurance brokerage firm, Aon Corp., will stop doing business in Iran.
• Reuters reported that German exports to Iran will fall sharply this year as a sweeping purge of officials at Iranian ministries and state companies is causing contracts with German firms to dry up.
  

The Dissidents.

• ReleaseGanji.net published a letter from the wife of Iranian dissident Akbar Ganji on the 2100th day of his imprisonment.
• Iran Press News reported that in the second round of hearings sentenced journalist and blogger, Arash Cigarchi to 3 years in prison for insulting Khamnei, the supreme leader.
  

The Unrest inside of Iran.

• BBC News reported that at least six people have been killed and 24 injured in a series of blasts in the south-western Iranian city of Ahwaz, the scence of numerous anti-regime protests.
• Agence France-Presse reported that the double bomb attack in Ahvaz occurred at the same time President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had been scheduled to visit the city.
• Mehr News Agency published photos of the newest bombings in Ahvaz, Iran.
• SMCCDI reported that Tehran's Collective Bus drivers issued another notice of strike scheduled for Saturday.
• Reuters reported that Iran accused Britain of cooperating with bombers who killed eight people in the southern Iranian city of Ahvaz on Tuesday.
• Bloomberg reported that Prime Minister Tony Blair rejected Iranian claims that British soldiers were involved in two bombings that killed at least nine people in the city of Ahvaz.
• SMCCDI reported that hundreds of Tehran's Collective Bus drivers, technicians and workers have been arrested, since yesterday, following the issuance of a notice of strike, scheduled for Saturday. Major reports expected tomorrow.
• SMCCDI reported that tens of Tehran's Collective Bus drivers, technicians, workers and wives have been wounded by brutal militiamen as a result of Saturday's strike.
• SMCCDI added that several buses have been damaged as angry crowds protested against the presence of Bassij Para-military appointed drivers attempting to break the strike.
• SMCCDI also reported that a fire forced the closure of a Tehran Metro Station, believed to be an act of arson on the same day that many of Tehran's Collective Bus drivers observed a protest action. Metro Station workers were heard shouting slogans by calling for solidarity with the Bus company's strikers.
  

Human Rights/Religious and Press Freedom inside of Iran.

• Rooz Onlinereported on the governments rising confrontation with Iran's students.
• Iran Press Service reported that the Iranian Government has blocked the BBC's Persian language internet site.
  

The Iranian Economy.

• Iran Press News reported that more than 170 operational factories of industrial and manufacturing units of Iran are facing bankruptcy.
• World Tribune.com reported that Iran reported investors have poured $23 billion in the development of the South Pars natural gas field.
  

Iran's Military.

• Ali Nourizadeh, Asharq Al-Awsat examined Iran's military options and noted that Iranian General Kazemi had recently opposed a military confrontation with the US just prior to his sudden death.
• Telegraph reported that the head of Iran's Revolutionary Guards, once again, has warned America and Britain that Teheran will respond with its missiles if attacked.
  

Iran and the International community.

• Megan Clyne, The New York Sun reported that one of the American government's most wanted terrorists, Imad Mugniyah, visited Syria late last week with Iran's President Ahmadinejad.
• AxisGlobe reported that Iran is preparing to help Georgia in its gas crisis with Russia.
• VOA News reported that Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf has said that he will go ahead with plans to build a natural gas pipeline to Iran, despite U.S. pressure, unless the US wants to compensate them for giving it up.
• The Jerusalem Post reported that the former head of the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) said Hamas must choose Iran or Israel alliance.
• Eli Lake, The New York Sun reported that the victory of Hamas could lead to a civil war within Gaza and the West Bank and an Islamic theocracy.
• Debka Files reported that Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal promised Tehran an Iranian embassy in Ramallah very shortly after its victory.
  

Insight into the Iranian People.

• View from Iran published another of his "Tehran Taxi talks."
  

Bi-Partisan Unity on Iran in Senate.

• TheDay.com reported that U.S. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, D-Conn., said Iran could face economic sanctions, and possibly military force, if it refuses to back down and that there is bipartisan support among his Senate colleagues to work to peacefully to defuse any such efforts by Iran.
• ABS-CBN News reported that the US Senate on Friday unanimously passed a resolution condemning Iran for its nuclear program.

The MKO/MEK

• FrontPage Magazine published an exchange between Jalal Arani and Michael Rubin over the nature of the Iranian opposition group: the Mujahedin.
• Iran Press Service reported that the leadership of MKO now reject an armed struggle with the Iranian regime and commits itself only to non-violent means of struggle, in an attempt to lose its terrorist designation by the western powers.
• Ali Safavim, FrontPageMagazine.com responded to Michael Rubin's article on the Mujahedeen-e Khalq.
• Michael Rubin, FrontPageMagazine.com argued that Ali Safavi’s response is dishonest but useful as a study of Mujahedin-e Khalq (MKO) tactics.
  

Must Read reports.

• Saul Singer, The Jerusalem Post examined a disturbing comment made by Senator John McCain on Iran.
• Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, The Weekly Standard reported on how to understand and exploit Iran's internal fissures.
• The Economist reminded us of the irony that while the Iranian president calls Israel alien to the Middle East, since several of Israel's key leaders have Iranian origins.
• FOX News reported that according to their polling Americans think Iran is the country that poses the greatest immediate danger to the United States. Read the poll results.
• The New York Sun reported that the man who served as the no. 2 official in Saddam Hussein's air force says Iraq moved weapons of mass destruction into Syria before the war.
• Ha'aretz reminds us that Iran is radical Islam with sovereignty seeking a nuclear capability and the ruling mullahs there take their ideas seriously and back them up with money and action.
• Jeffrey Bell, The Weekly Standard suggested that the defining test of Bush's war presidency will be Iran.
  

The Experts.

• Victor Davis Hanson, Washington Times examined the end-of-days worldview of Ahmadinejad.
• Michael Ledeen, National Review Online reminded us that the Iranian regime is increasingly vulnerable to an internal regime change if the west would invest the resources necessary to broadcast the truth about the regime to its people.
• Kenneth R. Timmerman, NewsMax.com reported that Iran's apocalyptic President is creating internal fissures in the regime that the US needs to exploit now.
• FrontPage Magazine published an exchange between Jalal Arani and Michael Rubin over the nature of the Iranian opposition group: the Mujahedin.
• Amir Taheri, Arab News took a look at Iran's ethic unrest and reminded us that encouraging secessionism in the Iranian periphery could only mobilize mainstream nationalism of Iranians who despise the Iranian regime.
  

Photos, cartoons and videos.

• Cox & Forkum published a cartoon: Huff and Puff.
• The American Enterprise Institute held a panel discussion with the producer of a documentary on human rights violations in Iran: A Few Simple Shots. See the discussion and film here.
  

And finally, The Quote of the Week.

Iran Press News reported that Mohammed-Nabi Rudaki, deputy chairman of the Iranian parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Commission said:

"if our regime is referred to the security council, we have several options and one of those is to close off the Straits of Hormuz so that not one drop of oil can be exported."

Sunday's Daily Briefing on Iran

DoctorZin reports, 1.29.2005:

Tehran Bus Driver's Strike: reports.

• SMCCDI reported that tens of Tehran's Collective Bus drivers, technicians, workers and wives have been wounded by brutal militiamen as a result of Saturday's strike.
• SMCCDI added that several buses have been damaged as angry crowds protested against the presence of Bassij Para-military appointed drivers attempting to break the strike.
• SMCCDI also reported that a fire forced the closure of a Tehran Metro Station, believed to be an act of arson on the same day that many of Tehran's Collective Bus drivers observed a protest action. Metro Station workers were heard shouting slogans by calling for solidarity with the Bus company's strikers.

US Senate Begins to Focus on Iran?

• ABS-CBN News reported that the US Senate on Friday unanimously passed a resolution condemning Iran for its nuclear program.

Iranian General Threatens a Missile Attack, again.

• Telegraph reported that the head of Iran's Revolutionary Guards, once again, has warned America and Britain that Teheran will respond with its missiles if attacked.

US Holding Firm on Iran.

• Agence France-Presse reported that the US cautioned that is was not 100 per cent supportive of Russia's proposed compromise.
• The Associated Press reported that the US ruled out any contact with Iranian delegates before next week's showdown vote.

Hamas to establish an Iranian Embassy in the Palestinian Territory.

• Debka Files reported that Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal promised Tehran an Iranian embassy in Ramallah very shortly after its victory.

Another call for a Regime Change in Iran.

• Robert Kagan, The Washington Post reported that despite the Iranian threat and the Iranian people's desire for real democracy in Iran, the Bush administration has done little to push for political change or to exploit the evident weaknesses in the mullahs' regime.

Here are a few other news items you may have missed.

• Mortimer B. Zuckerman, US News & World Report reminded us that while Russian President Vladimir Putin has been supporting the Iranian regime, the author in an interview several years ago with him before the Iraq war said: "the real threat is Iran."
• Ha'aretz reminds us that Iran is radical Islam with sovereignty seeking a nuclear capability and the ruling mullahs there take their ideas seriously and back them up with money and action.
• Amir Taheri, Arab News took a look at Iran's ethic unrest and reminded us that encouraging secessionism in the Iranian periphery could only mobilize mainstream nationalism of Iranians who despise the Iranian regime.
• The Guardian reviewed the EU's use of "soft" power and reminds us that it is an American invention that at its core involved the promoting the US as a beacon of prosperity and openness.
• And finally, Jeffrey Bell, The Weekly Standard suggested that the defining test of Bush's war presidency will be Iran.

Fire in Tehran Metro Station

SMCCDI (Information Service):

Fire forced the closure of the Navab Metro Station in the Iranian Capital. The incident which is believed to be an act of arson took place today and on the same day that many of Tehran's Collective Bus drivers observed a protest action.

Official sources have attributed the fire to a short circuit but curiously the same motif was used in order to justify the burning of a collective bus, happened the day before, in southern Tehran.

Several other Metro Stations were damaged and some of their drivers bowed by strikers' supporters who some of them were heard shouting slogans by calling for the solidarity of Metro drivers with the Bus company's strikers. READ MORE

Many Iranians and especially youngsters have shown their support of strikers by attacking militiamen who were appointed as bus drivers or by smashing the windows of the collective vehicles.

Many of the strikers and their family members, estimated at more than 1000 individuals, have been injured or arrested by brutal militiamen. The fate of many of the arrested activists is unknown and some have been transferred to section 240 of the infamous Evin Political Jail located in North Tehran.

Their colleagues have called on the free world and western unions and human rights' association to intervene for their immediate releases.

Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal promised Tehran an Iranian embassy in Ramallah very shortly after its victory

Debka Files:

The promise, indicating that Hamas was not surprised by its victory at the Jan 25 poll, was delivered at a secret meeting in Damascus on Jan. 20. On that day, Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmanidejad interviewed 11 Palestinian terrorist leaders based in the Syrian capital with cameras flashing. Not so, Mashaal’s half-hour absence for a secret down-to-earth discussion with the Iranian Republic Guards Corps’ al Quds division commander Gen. Qassam Suleimi, who was in the presidential party.

DEBKAfile’s counter-terror sources know Gen. Suleimi as the Islamic Republic’s supreme commander of Iran’s terrorist activities in Iraq, the rest of the Arab world, the Palestinian Authority and Israel. His meeting with the Hamas leader was the follow-up to their talks in Tehran last December, when Mashaal spent three weeks making the rounds of Iran’s terror executives. The Hamas leader intends arriving in Palestinian territory in the wake of the victory his movement snatched from the Fatah.

One of his first plans is to hoist the Iranian flag over Ramallah’s Manara Square.

If he sets foot in Israel-controlled territory, he will be arrested, but he can easily reach Gaza through Egypt. DEBKAfile counter-terror sources report that Thursday, Jan 26, the day the Hamas win was declared, Mahmoud Abbas indicated that far from stepping down after his Fatah party’s defeat, is collaborating fully with the winning Hamas. During Thursday night, Abu Mazen was on the phone to the real power behind Hamas, the radical Khaled Mashaal, at his Damascus headquarters.

Mashaal said he did not want to be prime minister and would therefore not appoint the new government. He advised the appointment of public Palestinian figures with international credibility as prime minister and also finance minister. The names Hamas would find acceptable were Fatah’s Nabil Shaath, Socialist Dr. Mustafa Barghouti and independent former finance minister Salim Fayyad. The portfolio that Hamas wanted was internal security with control over Palestinian security and intelligence services. The new Palestinian ruler will also take over the PA’s television, radio and press. READ MORE

Iran and Hamas understand the power of broadcasting their message to the people. I wish the US administration understood its power in broadcasting into Iran. Our present efforts are shameful. Ask any Iranian.

It's the Regime, Stupid

Robert Kagan, The Washington Post:

If an air and missile strike could destroy Iran's nuclear weapons program, it might seem the best of many bad options. But the likely costs outweigh the benefits.

Is the intelligence on Iran so much better than it was on Iraq? The Clinton administration launched Operation Desert Fox against Iraq in 1998 to degrade its weapons programs, and even today we don't know what it achieved. As President Clinton later put it, "We might have gotten it all; we might have gotten half of it; we might have gotten none of it. But we didn't know."

Would Desert Fox II in Iran, even on a larger scale, produce a very different result? The Pentagon can hit facilities it can see with relative confidence. But much of Iran's program is underground, and some of it we don't know about. Even if a strike set back Iran's plans, we would not know by how much. For all the price we would pay, we wouldn't even know what we'd achieved.

And we would pay a price. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the mullahs would declare victory, as Saddam Hussein did in 1998, and probably would gain some sympathy and admiration from the Muslim world and beyond. Instead of pushing for sanctions against Iran at the U.N. Security Council, the administration might be fending off resolutions censuring it for "aggression."

Then there is the prospect of Iranian retaliation: terrorist attacks, military activity in Iraq, attempts to close off the Persian Gulf shipping lanes and disrupt oil supplies. Unless we were prepared to escalate, ultimately to the point of taking down the regime, we could end up in worse shape than when we began.

But the inadequacy of the military strike option does not mean we can simply turn to diplomacy. Diplomacy by itself has no better chance of success. The present Iranian regime appears committed to acquiring a nuclear weapon. It has been undeterred by the prospect of international isolation or economic sanctions and apparently deems these hardships an acceptable cost. If so, even bigger carrots will not persuade it to forgo a program it considers vital to its interests. Fear of U.S. military action is probably the only reason Iran even pretended to negotiate with the Europeans (and a big reason why the Europeans have negotiated with Iran), but it has not been enough to stop their program.

We need to reorient our strategy. Our justifiable fixation on preventing Iran from getting the bomb has somehow kept us from pursuing a more fundamental and more essential goal: political change in Iran. We need to start supporting liberal and democratic change for an Iranian population that we know seeks both.

No one wants to see Iran get a bomb, but it does matter who is in power. We don't worry that France or Great Britain has nuclear weapons. We tolerate India's and Israel's arsenals largely because we have some faith that their democratic governments will not use them. Were Iran ruled by even an imperfect democratic government, we would be much less concerned about its weaponry. It might dismantle its program voluntarily, as did Ukraine and South Africa. But even if it didn't, a liberal and democratic Iran would be less paranoid about its security and therefore less reliant on nuclear weapons to defend itself.

The Bush administration, despite its doctrine of democratization, has not yet tried to apply it in the one place where ideals and strategic interest most clearly intersect. It has done little to push for political change or to exploit the evident weaknesses in the mullahs' regime.

The steps are obvious: Communicate directly to Iran's very westernized population, through radio, the Internet and other media; organize international support for unions and human rights and other civic groups, as well as religious groups that oppose the regime; provide covert support to those willing to use it; and impose sanctions, not so much to stop the nuclear program -- since they probably won't -- but to squeeze the business elite that supports the regime. READ MORE

Some worry about sparking another Hungarian-style uprising or Tiananmen Square massacre. True, the mullahs might quash dissident movements we support, just as they have quashed dissident movements we did not support. But the Iranian people would not be worse off than they are now, and if some want to risk their lives for freedom, who are we to tell them they shouldn't?

This doesn't mean giving up on diplomacy. A strategy aimed at changing the Iranian regime is entirely compatible with ongoing diplomatic efforts to slow Iran's weapons programs. It might even aid diplomacy, since Iran's leaders fear internal unrest more than external pressure. In the 1970s and '80s, the West pursued arms control while it supported dissidents and liberalization in the Soviet bloc. The one did not preclude the other.

But we shouldn't delude ourselves. Efforts to foment political change won't necessarily bear fruit in time to prevent Iran from acquiring a bomb. That may be the risk we have to take. But if this or the next administration decides it is too dangerous to wait for political change, then the answer will have to be an invasion, not merely an air and missile strike, to put an end to Iran's nuclear program as well as to its regime. If Iran's possession of a nuclear weapon is truly intolerable, that is the only military answer.

The nonmilitary answer in Iran is political change. That is where we should now be directing our energy, our diplomacy, our intelligence and our substantial economic resources. Yes, time is growing short, and partly because so many years have already been squandered. But better to start now than to squander more.

Robert Kagan, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and transatlantic fellow at the German Marshall Fund, writes a monthly column for The Post.

Several buses damaged by angry crowd

SMCCDI (Information Service):

Several buses have been damaged in several areas of south Tehran, such as Rey and Mahalat, as angry crowd protested against the presence of Bassij Para-military appointed drivers.

The mob intended to retaliate to the reports on the brutality used against the strikers and some of their families' members.

Glasses were smashed and some of the militiamen-drivers were wounded in the clashes. Security forces have arrested several individuals composed mainly of youngsters.

Tens of drivers wounded, wives taken as hostage

SMCCDI (Information Service):

Tens of Tehran's Collective Bus drivers, technicians and workers have been wounded by brutal militiamen who have attacked the strikers gathered in some of the terminals. The strikers were refusing to allow Bassij para-military members to take the wheels of their vehicles.

Wives of at least 3 strikers have been arrested at their homes and brought to an unknown destination in order to be used as tool of pressure against their husbands. Threats have been made about their fate if the strike doesn't come to an end and that the drivers and other employees of Tehran's Collective Bus Company don't start work on Sunday morning.

But despite all repressive methods used by the Islamic republic regime, many of the employees have stayed home by forcing the Islamic regime to deploy its plain clothes security agents in the streets of the Capital and behind the wheels of the buses. READ MORE

The un-experienced appointed drivers have a hard time to insure the service and many users are refusing to take the buses in sign of solidarity with the strikers.

Many workers, students and governmental employees, such as teachers, are using the transport problem for not showing up at their works or classes. Tracts have been distributed in the Capital by underground social or workers groups declaring solidarity with the strikers.

Many cab drivers have put their head lights on and are using their horns in show of solidarity and many residents are showing the 'V' (Victory) sign. The move is very noticeable in the Enghelab and Azadi squares. Militiamen are looking very worry and are arresting the residents.

The strike has created serious problems in the transport despite the fact that hundreds of regular drivers and the Greater Tehran's Collective Bus employees have been arrested or threatened.

Many of the arrests took place, yesterday evening, at the homes of those suspected to be part of the strike and the Islamic judiciary is intending to trial many of them for conspiracy. False charges, such as, "Drug trafficking", "Having Prohibited Arms" or "Endangering the National Security" are expected to be use against the arrested employees. Threats have been made against the family members of many employees and militiamen have been deployed in the terminals in order to control the situation. The Islamic regime has also transferred many militiamen of the Bassij Force's logistic to fill the shifts of the arrested employees.

The regime's leadership was hoping to limit the impact of the action by resorting to its usual repressive actions.

The Greater Tehran has appreciatively 12 millions of inhabitants and many Tehranis, who are using this cheaper way of transportation, are supportive of the strikers. The move is expected to plunge the Iranian Capital into a relative chaos, as it did during the last two collective actions.

Users showed, on December 23, 2005, an extreme sign of patience and their support of the strikers. Many refused to take the buses which were drove by militiamen and the domino effect created more complication for the regime, as, many governmental or industrial employees didn't show up at their posts or works while being able to justify their absenteeism.

The same trend was followed on January 7, 2006, when hundreds of drivers made a symbolic action on a very symbolic day, resulting in fear among all factions of the Islamic regime. Hardliners and Islamist 'reformists'. Partial strikes were made and most drivers put their head lights, in the middle of the day, for showing their exasperation. The move coincided with the anniversary the "Iranian Emancipation Law" adopted by the former Iranian regime, in 1935, and banned by the Islamic republic in 1979. Of course, this action had fewer echoes as the so-called "reformist" faction of the regime and most ultra Marxist groups preferred to pass it under silence. Never less many Tehranis, especially among females, were seen considering the bus drivers' move as a hidden support for the message of modernism, equality and secularism of the banned law. Many were seen showing the "V" (Victory) sign (well known in Iran) to each other and to the maverick drivers.

The today's move is putting more pressure on the Islamic republic regime, at a time that it's facing more international pressure. The strike, if extended due to the free world's support, might lead to the apparition of a worker movement, such as, the 1980's Solidarnosc (meaning Solidarity and which was the independent Polish Shipyards' Workers Union formed in Gdansk and lead by Lech Walesa) which was able to rally other cities drivers and various economic sectors behind it and to create the possibility of radical political changes.

Most National-Secularist groups, such as, the SMCCDI and the INSP (Iran's National-Secular Party) are supportive of the strikers and in general of any clean and clear move for a genuine democratic and secularist change in Iran. The two movements' members and supporters have been asked to help the families of the drivers. The expression of this support and calls on the population to protect the strikers have been made, at several occasion, on the waves of abroad based Iranian radio and satellite TV networks broadcasting for Iran.

The strikers' move and legitimate aspirations are not only limited to internal Iranian debate and in this line, several western workers' unions, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, and influent politicians, such as, the U.S. Senator Rick Santorum have already declared their support of the "Tehran Collective Bus drivers".

In a letter dated, January 6, 2006, Santorum requested from the U.S. Secretary of State to intervene on behalf of the arrested Tehran's Bus drivers and the repressed Iranian People.
Slamming the Islamic regime for the persistent human rights abuses and the brutal attack of the strikers, the Pennsylvanian Senator stated in part of his letter: "I ask that you and other senior leaders of the US Government make a concerted effort to reach out to groups of individuals, such as unions and students, to let them know the People of America stand with them in their fight for greater freedoms and liberties".

Without doubt, the continuation of such public declarations and a real financial support for the strikers can plunge the Islamic regime into an abyss from which it can not escape. The result would no more lead to just obtaining some greater freedoms or liberties, but to a total liberation of Iran due to a secular and democratic revolution without any need to any kind of military intervention. The trend has become so noticeable, as especially the absolute majority of Iranians have well taken their distances from the regime's "reformists from within" and some of their docile so-called student associations, such as, the "Office of Consolidation Unity" (OCU).

Iran Stalls for Time in Nuke Crisis

Agence France-Presse:

Iran urged Western powers overnight not to immediately refer a dispute over its nuclear programme to the UN Security Council, arguing talks with Russia on a potential compromise needed "more time". In a separate warning, the head of Iran's Revolutionary Guards said that the Islamic republic was ready to use its ballistic missiles if attacked.

Moscow's idea to enrich uranium outside Iran is seen as a way out of a growing crisis over Iran's nuclear drive and has received cautious and conditional support from the United States and European Union.

"This proposal is under review," Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said.

"On some factors like increasing the number of partners, we have reached an agreement. Regarding the place or places, we are still studying it," he asserted, adding a second round of talks would be held in Moscow on February 16.

"We are seriously studying it. This proposal should be comprehensive, so it becomes a solution for the nuclear case. We need more time: we should continue the intensive talks until the IAEA meeting in March."

Russia's idea is that the sensitive nuclear fuel work, which could potentially be diverted to produce nuclear weapons, is conducted outside the Islamic republic as a way of preventing Iran for acquiring bomb-making technology but also guaranteeing its access to nuclear energy.

But the EU and US still want to see Iran referred to the UN Security Council when the International Atomic Energy Agency's 35-nation board of governors holds an emergency meeting in Vienna on February 2.

They also want Iran to return to a full suspension of other fuel cycle work -- namely enrichment research which Iran restarted on January 10 and uranium conversion which was restarted last August.

Russia has huge economic interest in Iran's nuclear programme and is reluctant to call in the Security Council next week, preferring for the Council to be merely "informed" of developments.

But Mr Mottaki said the meeting "should pass" without any move against Iran "in order to reach a comprehensive understanding for the March meeting."

He also warned that "referring or informing the case to the UN Security Council carries the same meaning for us".

"Regarding the possible informing of the UN Security Council as a result of the February 2nd meeting of the IAEA, the Iranian government would be obliged to stop voluntary measures," he warned.

This warning has already been spelled out as comprising of a resumption of industrial-scale enrichment and a halt in the application of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty's additional protocol giving the IAEA more powers of inspection.

Iranian Revolutionary Guards chief General Yahya Rahim Safavi also issued a reminder of his ballistic missile capability, just in case a military option was put on the table in Israel or the West.

"Iran has a ballistic missile capability of 2000 km. We do not intend to attack any country, but if we are attacked we have the capability to give an effective response. Our policy is defensive," told state television.

The United States cautioned Friday that is was not 100 per cent supportive of Russia's proposed compromise.

"The United States has said that we find the Russian proposal to be interesting and it might be a good way to proceed with negotiations. We've never said that we accept every detail in that proposal," said Nicholas Burns, the assistant secretary of state for political affairs. READ MORE

Washington, he said, does "not believe that Iran should have the ability to exercise any process along the nuclear fuel cycle inside Iran itself."

But Britain struck a conciliatory tone ahead of the crunch IAEA meeting, saying diplomacy was the only way to solve the dispute and military action was not on the cards.

Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said Iranian negotiators appeared willing to resume talks with Western powers, and urged that any eventual deal must allow Tehran to "preserve a sense of national dignity."

"We have to have a bargain which enables both sides to come out of it with their head held high and not low," he said in a debate at Davos, where he also spoke of a "fast-changing situation."

Moscow's Mad Gamble

Mortimer B. Zuckerman, US News & World Report:

Russian President Vladimir Putin, in an interview several years ago, criticized America's decision to go to war against Iraq and told me, "The real threat is Iran." He was right. But Russia has become part of the problem, not the solution. READ MORE

Iran today is the mother of Islamic terrorism. Tehran openly provides funding, training, and weapons to the world's worst terrorists, including Hezbollah, Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and it has a cozy relationship with al Qaeda. It has given sanctuary to major al Qaeda terrorists, including senior military commander Saif al-Adel, three of Osama bin Laden's sons, and al Qaeda spokesman Suleiman Abu Ghaith. It supports many of the barbaric terrorists in Iraq who are murdering innocent civilians in order to destroy Iraq's fragile hold on democracy. Through its 900-mile border with Iraq, Iran is flooding its neighbor with money and fighters. It is infiltrating troublemakers into Afghanistan, supporting terrorism against Turkey, sustaining Syria, and had a hand in the Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia.

Iran today is in the grip of yet a new wave of extremists. Its president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is a revolutionary firebrand who has directly threatened the West. In his own words, "We are in the process of an historical war between the World of Arrogance [i.e., the West] and the Islamic world." His foreign policy ambition is an Islamic government for the whole world, under the leadership of the Mahdi, the absent imam of the Shiites--code language for the export of radical Islam. And he casts himself as Hitler reincarnated, calling for Israel to be "wiped off the map." Who can think that Iran poses no threat to world peace? History tells us that when madmen call for genocide, they usually mean it.

And Russia has made the threat more real. It sold the nuclear power plant at Bushehr to Iran and contracted to sell even more to bring cash into its nuclear industry. As one American diplomat put it, this business is a "giant hook in Russia's jaw." Russia provided critical assistance in the development of Iran's Shihab missile, which has an ever expanding delivery range and can carry a warhead designed for a nuclear charge.

"No return." Everyone knows that the Bushehr "energy"plant is essentially a cover for Iran to have a nuclear infrastructure with a community of physicists, technicians, chemists, scientists, and engineers who can create a military capability. This became clear when Iran was found to be secretly building a facility at Natanz, involving centrifuges that could bring about nuclear enrichment to produce weapons-grade material. The work was suspended for a period of time, but Iran has now removed the United Nations seals, and its nuclear team is once again hard at work. Within a very few years, in all likelihood, Iran will be able to launch nuclear missiles.

The Russians had to know that the work at Bushehr was not for peaceful purposes, as the Iranians claimed, yet it has gone on assisting Iran in its grotesque deceptions and patently false protestations. When I challenged Putin on his support for the Bushehr program, he responded, "Why shouldn't we sell it to the Iranians if the Germans, the British, and the French would be the alternative suppliers if we didn't do it?"

But they wouldn't--and didn't. The Europeans have sincerely, if naively, tried to stop the process of uranium enrichment because they know that when Iran learns to make enough uranium hexafluoride, it will finally be at the "point of no return," meaning it could prevent the possibility of outside intervention.

Equally revealing--and deeply disturbing--is the fact that Russia, under Putin, has encouraged Iran to tough it out with the International Atomic Energy Agency. The agency has only persuasive power, but Russia has refused to condemn Iran's nuclear work and resists American and European efforts to force the issue at the U.N. Security Council, which could impose economic sanctions.

Russia has even bolstered Iran's ability to resist military intervention by confirming a deal to sell TOR-M1 surface-to-air missiles, the most advanced system available, which uses launchers to shoot down multiple targets like missiles and planes.

Some argue that bringing pressure on Iran weakens the moderates there. What moderates? And just who's prepared to gamble on that kind of wishful thinking? Military action, such as bombing the Iranian plants with cruise missiles and strike aircraft, would be justified in the circumstances. But that is hugely difficult politically, and covert action is very difficult operationally.

Still, the risks may have to be taken because the alternative is so awful. There may now be a window of opportunity for effective preventive action, but this window is more likely to be measured in months than years.

We must urgently find a way to persuade Moscow to reinforce the civilized world rather than subvert it.

Missiles Ready For Retaliation, Iran Says

Telegraph:

The head of Iran's Revolutionary Guards has warned America and Britain that Teheran will respond with its missiles if attacked over the ongoing crisis surrounding its nuclear capability. "The world knows Iran has a ballistic missile power with a range of 2,000 kilometres (1,300 miles)," Gen Yahya Rahim Safavi said on state-run television. READ MORE

"We have no intention to invade any country. We will take effective defence measures if attacked. These missiles are in the possession of the Guards."

Iran has sparked renewed international concern over its ambitions by announcing it was resuming work at its Natanz uranium enrichment facility.

There is growing pressure to refer Iran to the UN Security Council, but American Senator John McCain said yesterday that it was important to maintain the "leverage" of the military option.

Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, rejected talk of military action against Iran, saying it was "not on the table".

Mr Straw was speaking ahead of talks with Mohamed El-Baradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "There is not a military option. There certainly is not one on the table, let's be clear about that. And no-one is talking about it.

"I have never had a discussion with any senior American from the very top downwards, except to say the military option is not on the table."

Iran's Revolutionary Guards are a separate organization from the regular armed forces, with their own air, naval and ground components.

Iran insists its nuclear facilities are to provide energy, but other countries fear it is trying to develop a capability to make nuclear weapons.

Radical Islam - with Sovereignty

Jonathan Spyer, Ha'aretz:

Iran is radical Islam with sovereignty, and it seeks to become radical Islam with a nuclear capability. In its dealings with Israel, on the basis of ideology alone, it sponsors organizations whose main purpose is the murder of civilians. The West will need to decide if it feels happy about such a body possessing nuclear weapons.

British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw last week hurried to dispel any sense of imminent crisis in the nuclear stand-off with Iran. "I don't think we should rush our fences here," Straw told an audience in London, before going on to suggest that Iran's concern to avoid seeing the issue of its nuclear program brought before the UN Security Council indicated the "strength of the authority of that body." Iranian defiance of international will on the question of its uranium enrichment program, and President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad's open advocacy of the destruction of Israel and embrace of Holocaust denial, have caused widespread alarm and expressions of concern. Straw, however, confirms that basic European assumptions on Iran remain unchanged. Israel's experience with the Islamic Republic of Iran offers some clues as to the likely effectiveness of the European approach.

Iran's support for Palestinian organizations engaged in violence against Israel is of long standing. Palestinian Islamic Jihad has since its inception claimed inspiration from the Islamic revolution in Iran in 1979. Ramadan Shallah, the movement's leader, described his organization in May 2002 as "one of the many fruits on our leader Khomeini's tree." Israeli assessments consider the Iranians to be Islamic Jihad's near sole source of funding. The mullahs, as may be seen from last week's bombing in Tel Aviv, get a fair return for their outlay. In Islamic Jihad, Iran purchases for itself a fully deniable instrument of policy. The organization may be activated at will in order to keep the conflict on the boil, help scupper the calm that must precede a return to negotiation, and so on.

Iran's relations with Hamas are more complex. There ought to be a natural rivalry and indeed hostility between the Shiite mullahs and the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. The evidence suggests that in the first years of Hamas' existence, mutual anathema did indeed pertain. In the 1990s, however, a close relationship developed. The basis of this, of course, was a shared strategic commitment to the destruction of Israel. In the shorter term, a common desire to stymie all attempts at a diplomatic resolution of the conflict brought the Shiite Islamists of Tehran and the Sunni radicals of Gaza together. Sheikh Ahmed Yassin led a Hamas delegation to Iran in April, 1998. The delegation met with officials from Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's office, then minister of intelligence and security Ghorban Ali Dorrie Najafabadi and leaders of the Qods force - the special operations unit of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps.

According to Arabic media sources, the result was the creation of a "strategic alliance," which saw the commencement of large financial transfers from Iran to Hamas. The funds were to come from the Ministry of Intelligence and Security and other subsidiary bodies. Precise figures regarding the level of support are hard to come by. One respected United States researcher estimated that Iranian funding of Hamas probably reaches between $20 million and $50 million annually.

What relevance should all this have on the Western understanding of Iran? For the world according to Jack Straw to work, Iran must be understood to be a country governed by rational, practical men who, faced with firm criticism from the UN Security Council, will adjust their plans accordingly. The evidence outlined above, however, suggests that Islamist Iran is not like that. The support given to Hamas and Islamic Jihad continued untroubled during the presidency of the "moderate" Mohammed Khatami, before the arrival of Ahmedinejad, and the rise of the Revolutionary Guards. With no conceivable geo-strategic gain for itself, the non-Arab Iran, situated geographically far from Israel's borders and surrounded by unfriendly countries, chose to pour money into organizations committed to the destruction of Israel. They did so because of an idea.

The Israeli experience thus suggests three things. The mullahs take their ideas seriously. They back them up with money and action. And the revolutionary ideas in question transcend their Shia origins, enabling Iran to sponsor a variety of radical Islamist groups, and to present itself as the key, sovereign force in radical Islam. READ MORE

Until now, the conflict between the West and radical Islam has taken the form of a clash between states and non-state Islamist organizations. Iran is radical Islam with sovereignty, and it seeks to become radical Islam with a nuclear capability. In its dealings with Israel, on the basis of ideology alone, it sponsors organizations whose main purpose is the murder of civilians. The West will need to decide if it feels happy about such a body possessing nuclear weapons. If it decides that it does not, it will then need to examine whether "action" in the form of a rebuke from the Security Council is likely to prove a sufficiently terrifying proposition to force the men of ideas and blood in Tehran to think again.

Dr. Jonathan Spyer is a senior research fellow at the Global Research in International Affairs Center at the Interdisciplinary Center, Herzliya.

Iran: Threat of Ethnic Dissent

Amir Taheri, Arab News:

Anxious to cultivate his populist image, Iran’s new President Ahmadinejad has promised to hold the monthly sessions of his Cabinet in provincial capitals rather than Tehran.

Now, however, it seems as if, for reasons of security, he may not be able to take his road show to all of Iran’s 30 provinces.

A session scheduled to take place in the province of Kurdistan last month had to be rescheduled at the last minute, supposedly because the relevant documents were not ready in time. And last week the president was forced to cancel another session, due to take place in Ahvaz, capital of the Khuzistan province, ostensibly for bad weather.

In both cases, however, factors other than bureaucratic delay and bad weather may have been at work.

The province of Kurdistan has been a scene of sporadic anti-government demonstrations since last June. At least 40 people have reportedly died in clashes with the security forces while more than 700 have been arrested. The authorities have also closed down a number of Kurdish-language publications, in contrast with Ahmadinejad’s promise not to organize a crackdown against the press.

Ahvaz, for its part, has witnessed a series of bomb attacks and terrorist operations during the past four months with several clandestine organizations calling on the province’s ethnic Arabs to revolt against Ahmadinejad’s “repressive policies.”

It is not yet clear whether or not the current unrest in Kurdistan and Khuzistan might have a major ethnic ingredient.

Iranian Kurds number around six million, or some nine percent of the population, and are divided in four provinces plus important communities in far away Tehran and Khorassan. The last time that Iranian Kurds were seduced by on a large scale by ethnic policies was in the mid-1940s when, with help from the Soviet Union, they set up a “republic” of their own in the city of Mahabad.

The “republic” folded after one year and nine of its 12 leaders were hanged in public. But its memory has lived on and continues to inspire a small but determined number of Iranian Kurds who feel that they are getting a rough deal from the Khomeinist ruling elite in Tehran.

As for ethnic Arabs, they number some three million or over four percent of the total population. At least half live in Khuzistan with others scattered in four provinces stretched along the Gulf.

Unlike the Kurds, Iran’s Arabs do not have any secessionist history. On the contrary they emerged as the most ardent defenders of Iran’s unity in the 1940s when the Soviet Union was busy promoting secessionist “republics” in Kurdistan and Azerbaijan. Bound to the majority of Iranians by their Shiite faith and a long history of intermarriage, the Khuzistan Arabs also played a leading role in the oil nationalization movement in the 1950s and, later, in defending Iran against Saddam Hussein’s invading armies in the 1980s.

During the Khomeinist revolution of 1978-79 both ethnic Kurds and Arabs stayed largely on the sidelines. The Kurds, a majority of whom are Sunni Muslims, were wary of a regime headed by Shiites. The Arabs, for their part, feared that a purely religious regime might try to restrict the wide measure of individual and social freedoms that Khuzistan, as one of Iran’s most advanced provinces, had built over the decades.

After an initial series of local revolts, all crushed with exceptional brutality, the Kurds resigned themselves to life under the Khomeinist regime. In the late 1980s and early 1990s the regime managed to decapitate the Kurdish political leadership through a series of assassinations inside and outside Iran.

In the past two to three years, however, Iran’s Kurdish-majority areas have witnessed an upsurge of political activity. One reason is the leading role that Iraqi Kurds have assumed in the new Iraqi system. Another is Ahmadinejad’s avowed devotion to the cult of the “Hidden Imam” and his claim of legitimacy on that score. The Kurds, however, do not believe in the concept of the “Hidden Imam” which they regard as “un-Islamic” and fear that the new cult may provide a cover for attacks against their own religious beliefs and culture.

Ahmadinejad would be wrong to dismiss or minimize the threat of ethnic dissent in the Islamic Republic. Iran’s ethnic minorities, including the Kurds, the Arabs, the Turkmen and the Baluch, account for at least 12 percent of the population.

Located along the country’s long and porous borders these communities could be open to manipulation by anyone who wishes to weaken Iran or pay back in the same currency the Islamic Republic for its machinations in neighboring countries.

Political expediency, not to mention justice and human rights, demands that urgent attention be paid to the legitimate grievances of Iran’s ethnic minorities. It took Turkey some 30 years of war to understand that it cannot force its Kurdish minority to abandon their identity and become ersatz Turks. It has taken Iraq almost 80 years of tragic experiments to recognize the Kurds as a distinct people deserving full cultural and national rights. In the long run Iran’s unity could only be preserved in the context of pluralist diversity.

In the meantime a word of warning is called for to all those who might think that playing the ethnic and sectarian cards against Ahmadinejad’s new militancy might help knock some sense into Tehran. Any attempt at encouraging secessionism in the Iranian periphery could only mobilize the mainstream nationalism of Iranians in support of a regime that, its feigned defiance notwithstanding, has lost much of its original support base. READ MORE

Ahmadinejad’s so-called “second revolution” may have little in the way of positive creativity to offer inside or outside Iran. But it still has large reserves of negative energy that could be deployed in the service of a destructive policy in the region as a whole.

Fanning the fires of ethnic and sectarian resentment against Tehran is not difficult — especially at a time that Ahmadinejad seems determined to lead the nation into an unnecessary conflict with the rest of the world. A Yugoslav-style scenario for Iran may help speed up the demise of the Islamic Republic. But it could unleash much darker forces of nationalism and religious zealotry that could plunge the entire region into years if not decades of bloody crises.

The current fever provoked in Iran by Ahmadinejad and his pseudo-messianic message is little more than an epiphenomenon which, given patience and wisdom, could be contained and neutralized. Here is a monster that feeds and grows on crisis and conflict. The answer is not to lead it to a banquet table but to starve it.