Week in Review

DoctorZin provides a review of this past week's [5/28/06 - 6/03/06] major news events regarding Iran. (The reports are listed in chronological order, not by importance) READ MORE

Iran's Nuclear Program & The UN Security Council.

• Reuters reported that the United States is pushing Europe and Japan to use broad sanctions to financially pressure Iran's leadership if diplomacy fails to resolve an international dispute over Iran's nuclear activities.
• Times Online reported that the US Government is putting Britain’s £1 billion annual trade with Iran at risk by pressing European banks to withdraw from the country.
• Reuters reported that Iran is pressing ahead with research tests on nuclear fusion, a type of atomic reaction which has yet to be developed for commercial power generation, but is used to produce thermonuclear bombs.
• Yahoo News reported that Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov was quoted as saying that the world's major powers are ready to guarantee Iran's right to develop nuclear energy provided Tehran cooperates fully with the UN nuclear safety agency.
• CTV reported that U.S., Russian, Chinese and European officials plan to sign off this week on a package of incentives and penalties meant to reward Iran if it gives up uranium enrichment -- and punish it if it doesn't.
• Yahoo News reported that Iran said it had no intention of moving all of its uranium enrichment work to Russia.
• Bloomberg reported that Iran said it is pressing ahead with its nuclear program, rejecting reports that it plans to scale the plan back.
• FoxNews reported that the presidents of Russia and the United States discussed Iran's nuclear program Tuesday before a six-nation meeting.
• The New York Times reported that the world's non-aligned states are likely to throw their weight behind Iran in its nuclear stand-off with the West, at a meeting in Malaysia.
• Richard Brookhiser, The Wall Street Journal suggested that in dealing with Iran the US should look to our first, second, third and fourth presidents and their own dealings with Islamic rogue nations.
• Secretary Condoleezza Rice, U.S. State Department published a major statement on Iran: "Thus, to underscore our commitment to a diplomatic solution and to enhance the prospects for success, as soon as Iran fully and verifiably suspends its enrichment and reprocessing activities, the United States will come to the table with our EU-3 colleagues and meet with Iran’s representatives." Full Text.
• US State Department released a transcript of the Rice interview with Wolf Blitzer, CNN about her statement on Iran.
• Michael Ledeen, The Corner responded to Rice's offer to Iran.
• Wall Street Journal examined Condi's Iran Gambit and concludes that Ahmadinejad is getting what he wanted.
• The Scotsman reported that Iran's official news agency IRNA said that an offer by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to join European nations in talks with Iran if it suspends uranium enrichment was a "propaganda move".
• Mehran Riazaty reported that Fars News Agency reported that Kazem Jalali, the spokesman for the Iran parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, said that the root of the US talks with Iran is positive, but Iran will reject any direct talks in which the US sets any preconditions.
• Yahoo News reported that the six world powers agreed on a "significant" package of incentives to convince Iran to halt its uranium enrichment program, British Foreign Secretary Margaret Becket said. "I am pleased to say we have agreed (on) a set of far-reaching proposals."
• The Financial Times reported that pressure has mounted on Iran to consider carefully the US offer of conditional talks as world powers met in Vienna.
• Times Online considered the question: How should we read the Iranian Foreign Minister's declaration, is he rejecting the American offer out of hand?
• ABC News reported that a European Union diplomat said: "There is something like a catalog of sanctions and we can pick and choose from them. The agreement reached ... is also that Russia and China can abstain from any sanctions, but not say no."
• The Guardian reported that Britain said that military force against Iran is not on the agenda in the international impasse over Iran's uranium enrichment program.
• Reuters reported that Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said: "I can say unambiguously that all the agreements from yesterday's meetings rule out in any circumstances the use of military force."
• News24.com reported that Iran has "weeks" to respond to a diplomatic initiative agreed on Thursday by the United States and other major powers.
• New York Sun reported that President Bush said of Iran: "If they continue their obstinance, if they continue to say to the world, 'We really don't care what your opinion is,' then the world is going to act in concert."
• The Times Online examined Condi Rice's Iran strategy and why Europe is likely to undermine it.
• BBC News reported that Javier Solana will deliver proposals agreed by six world powers in a visit Iran in the next few days in the latest diplomatic effort to persuade Iran to halt nuclear research.
• Mehran Riazaty published a summary of the recent comments by Iranian authorities on direct talks with the United States on its nuclear program.
  

The Unrest in Iran.

• Rooz Online provided a detailed report on the recent student unrest in Tehran.
• The Christian Science Monitor argued that ethnic tensions could crack Iran's firm resolve against the world.
• Ken Timmerman, Iran.org reported on the recent protests by Christian Iranians in the Northwest city of Ourimieh, in West Azerjaijan province.
• Rooz Online reported that an Iranian MP had informed other MPs of the march of some 10,000 protestors from the towns of Orumie, Ardebil, Tabriz, and Zanjan to Tehran to hold a sit-in in front of the Parliament.
• Rooz Online reported on the ban on media coverage of the growing Azerbaijan unrest.
• Rooz Online reported on the arrest of a large number of student activists and crackdown of students.
• Rooz Online reported that the planned trips of 8 Iranian journalists and intellectuals who had been invited to participate in international forums outside Iran have been cancelled.
• SMCCDI reported that several women and their male supporters were beaten or rounded up, yesterday, at the occasion of a soccer game.
• CNSNews.com reported that ethnic unrest continues in parts of Iran, prompting some exiled members of Iranian minorities to step up calls for a concerted effort to topple the clerical regime.
• Bill Samii, Radio Free Europe reported that as unrest among ethnic Azeris in Iran settles down, disturbances involving university students are picking up.

Iranian President seeks to join Russia and China's Shanghai Cooperation Organization.

• The Hindu reported that Donald H. Rumsfeld questioned Iran's involvement with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), saying the regime's terrorist links clashed with the aims of the Russian and Chinese-dominated group.
  

Iran's leaders latest statements.

• Ha'aretz reported that Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said: "there is no such country" as Israel.
  

Iranian leaderships unity weakening?

• MEMRI published: Power Struggle in Iran – Part II: Elections for the Assembly of Experts.
  

Iranian Dissidents.

• Reporters Without Borders called for the “immediate release” of two Azeri journalists, Amin Movahedi and Orouj Amiri.
• The Price of Freedom reported that Abed Tavanche an Iranian dissident blogger in Iran has supposedly been arrested.
• Rooz Online reported that Mansour Osanloo, the head of Iran’s bus syndicate is still in prison and refusing to make fake concessions or repent as requested by his interrogators.
• Reporters Without Borders said it was “very worried” about Abed Tavanchech, a blogger and student at Tehran’s Amirkabir polytechnic university, who has been missing since 26 May and may well have been arrested after posting photos and reports about the demonstrations.
• Reuters reported that Canada has asked Iran to either charge or release prominent philosopher Ramin Jahanbegloo.
  

Human Rights and Freedom of the Press in Iran.

• Rooz Online reported that in recent days, the Iranian government has sharply increased its control and monitoring of Internet users though what is known as “smart filtering.”
• Rooz Online reported on the ban on media coverage of the growing Azerbaijan unrest.
• Reporters Without Borders reported that Iran's Supreme Guide Ali Khamenei is a predator of press freedom.
• The New York Times reported that members of the Bahai religious minority in Iran said that the government had recently intensified a campaign of arrests, raids and propaganda that was aimed at eradicating their religion in Iran.
  

Rumors of War.

• Reuters reported that Israel will fully participate in a NATO naval exercise for the first time, in the face of arch-foe Iran's nuclear program.
  

Support for Internal Regime Change in Iran?

• Reuters reported that the exiled son of Iran's late shah on Monday called on the Bush administration to put action before rhetoric in ousting Tehran's Islamic regime.
• The Wall Street Journal published a surprising interview with Reza Pahlavi, the son of the former Shah of Iran. He called the US offer for direct talks with Iran "overall . . . a good move by Washington." The reason? "It will once and for all force Tehran's hand,"
• Izvestia also published an interview with Reza Pahlavi who stated that by July-August he will have formed a non-violent movement with the purpose to overthrow the current regime in Tehran.
  

Iran's Troublemaking.

• The Jerusalem Post reported that if cornered by the West over its nuclear program, Iran could direct Hizbollah to enlist its widespread international support network to aid in terrorist attacks.
  

US/Iran talks?

• Investor's Business Daily, in an editorial, warned that if the U.S. were to engage in bilateral talks with Iran, it would let Iran play the "America as bully" card, claiming the U.S. is being too tough on a "developing" nation.
• The Jerusalem Post reported that Iran has turned to Greece to convey messages to the United States regarding its contentious nuclear program and other disputes, officials said.
• Secretary Condoleezza Rice, U.S. State Department published a major statement on Iran: "Thus, to underscore our commitment to a diplomatic solution and to enhance the prospects for success, as soon as Iran fully and verifiably suspends its enrichment and reprocessing activities, the United States will come to the table with our EU-3 colleagues and meet with Iran’s representatives." Full Text.
• US State Department released a transcript of the Rice interview with Wolf Blitzer, CNN about her statement on Iran.
• Michael Ledeen, The Corner responded to Rice's offer to Iran.
• Wall Street Journal examined Condi's Iran Gambit and concludes that Ahmadinejad is getting what he wanted.
• The Scotsman reported that Iran's official news agency IRNA said that an offer by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to join European nations in talks with Iran if it suspends uranium enrichment was a "propaganda move".
• Mehran Riazaty reported that Fars News Agency reported that Kazem Jalali, the spokesman for the Iran parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, said that the root of the US talks with Iran is positive, but Iran will reject any direct talks in which the US sets any preconditions.
• Eli Lake, The New York Sun reported that Iran's democratic opposition and the key Republican senator who has supported them are alarmed at yesterday's about-turn by Secretary of State Rice on engaging Iran in negotiations over its enrichment of uranium.
• Michael Rubin, National Review Online criticized the US offer of nuclear talks with Iran saying: "Not only did Rice provide Ahmadinejad with an opportunity to humiliate the “arrogant power” to his domestic audience, but she also undercut what little international credibility the U.S. retains."
• Kenneth R. Timmerman, FrontPageMagazine.com reported that Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice threw down the gauntlet when offering the Iranian regime a clear choice between confrontation and accommodation with the West. He argued, when Iran makes its refusal known officially, it will not be time to unleash the dogs of war, but instead to help the Iranian people to achieve their freedom.
• The New York Times reported on the events that shifted the US stance on direct talks with Iran.
  

Iran and the International community.

• Middle East Newsline reported that Russia has again signaled a delay in the delivery of advanced air defense systems to Iran.
• The Washington Times reported that an international Jewish human rights group again urged Germany to bar Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad from attending soccer's World Cup finals.
• Zaman.com reported that the US House of Representatives asked Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan to step in to solve the Iranian nuclear crisis without arms.
• Dow Jones Newswires reported that Iran and Venezuela are discussing the creation of a heavy oil processing plant in the Orinico belt that could supply the Islamic nation with gasoline.
• Reuters reported that a group of 75 European Union lawmakers called for Iranian President Ahmadinejad to be banned from entering the bloc until he renounces inflammatory statements on Israel and the Holocaust.
• Monsters & Critics reported that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told Iran's football team he would make every effort to visit them in Germany if they reach the second round of the World Cup.
  

Must Read reports.

• The New York Times reported that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is trying to consolidate power in the office of the presidency in a way never before seen in the 27-year history of the Islamic Republic.
• The Financial Times reported that President Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad will need to spend an extra 5 Billon Dollars this year to pay for subsidies on sales to motorists of imported petrol.
• Spiegel published its aggressive interview with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad discussing the Holocaust, the future of the state of Israel, mistakes made by the United States in Iraq and Tehran's nuclear conflict with the West.
• Alan Peters, AntiMullah said publishing of the names and addresses of these radicals is a one way of reducing the violent suppression of the Iranian opposition.
• Mehran Riazaty sees a connection between the deadly traffic accident Monday involving U.S. troops sparked the worst rioting in the Afghan capital since the fall of the Taliban government, and Afghanistan's President Hamid Karzai's trip to Iran.
• The American Thinker criticized the New York Times and its recent positive treatment of Ahmadinejad.
• Iraq The Model provided evidence that CNN mistranslated a statement by an Iraqi minister defending Iran's nuclear program.
• Asia Times argued that the regime wants nothing short of ironclad guarantees that the US would not now, or in the future, attempt to destabilize its government.
• Marinka Peschmann, Western Standard reported that Iran's democrats are furious that former U.S. attorney general Ramsey Clark is protecting the mullahcracy he helped install. A must read.
• Allister Heath, The Spectator provides historical insight into why the Neo-Nazis are rallying to Iran's President.
  

The Experts.

• Amir Taheri, The Jerusalem Post reported that while some in Washington still talk of "preemptive war" against "rogue states," Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is practicing what could be labelled "preemptive diplomacy." An examination of the Iranian strategy.
• Ken Timmerman, Iran.org reported on the recent protests by Christian Iranians in the Northwest city of Ourimieh, in West Azerjaijan province.
• Michael Ledeen, National Review Online examines the Ahmadinejad interview in Der Spiegel.
• Michael Ledeen, The Corner responded to Rice's offer to Iran.
• Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., Townhall.com argued why the world should divest Iran.
• Michael Rubin, National Review Online criticized the US offer of nuclear talks with Iran saying: "Not only did Rice provide Ahmadinejad with an opportunity to humiliate the “arrogant power” to his domestic audience, but she also undercut what little international credibility the U.S. retains."
• Kenneth R. Timmerman, FrontPageMagazine.com reported that Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice threw down the gauntlet when offering the Iranian regime a clear choice between confrontation and accommodation with the West. He argued, when Iran makes its refusal known officially, it will not be time to unleash the dogs of war, but instead to help the Iranian people to achieve their freedom.
  

Photos, cartoons and videos.

• Cox & Forkum published a cartoon: Step by Step.
  

The Quote of the Week.

Ha'aretz reported that Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said:

"there is no such country" as Israel.

Tags: iran, news, nuclear

Sunday's Daily Briefing on Iran

DoctorZin reports, 6.4.2006:

Perm-5 + Germany's proposal to be delivered to Iran soon.

• BBC News reported that Javier Solana will deliver proposals agreed by six world powers in a visit Iran in the next few days in the latest diplomatic effort to persuade Iran to halt nuclear research.
• Mehran Riazaty published a summary of the recent comments by Iranian authorities on direct talks with the United States on its nuclear program.

Reza Pahlavi prepares movement to overthrow the Iranian regime.

• The Wall Street Journal published a surprising interview with Reza Pahlavi, the son of the former Shah of Iran. He called the US offer for direct talks with Iran "overall . . . a good move by Washington." The reason? "It will once and for all force Tehran's hand,"
• Izvestia also published an interview with Reza Pahlavi who stated that by July-August he will have formed a non-violent movement with the purpose to overthrow the current regime in Tehran.

Unrest in Iran picking up.

• Bill Samii, Radio Free Europe reported that as unrest among ethnic Azeris in Iran settles down, disturbances involving university students are picking up.

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

• The New York Times reported on the events that shifted the US stance on direct talks with Iran.
• Monsters & Critics reported that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told Iran's football team he would make every effort to visit them in Germany if they reach the second round of the World Cup.
  

Ahmadinejad to visit Germany if Iran reaches 2nd round in the World Cup

Monsters & Critics:

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told Iran's footballers Saturday he would make every effort to visit them if they reach the second round of the World Cup in Germany, sources close to the squad told Deutsche Presse-Agentur dpa. READ MORE

The players told the president they hoped he would make good on his promise and presented him with a national team jersey with the number 24 and his name on it, the sources said.

Iran, who play in Group D against Mexico in Nuremberg, Portugal in Frankfurt and Angola in Leipzig, need to fill one of the top two places to qualify for the second round.

During a farewell ceremony at the German ambassador's residence in Tehran, the players said the political controversy surrounding their country would not affect the team's performance.

The news agency ISNA quoted the head of the Iranian Football Federation (FFI) as confirming the probable visit of the president in case the Iranian reached the next round.

'The president is interested to see the games live in Germany if the team reaches the second round and Inshallah (God willing) we will both reach the second round and witness the presence of our president in the games (in Germany),' Mohammad Dadkan said.

'We are not after political issues in Germany and just want to transfer our message of peace and friendship to the world,' he said while adding that all necessary steps have been taken by both Iran and Germany to avoid any political tensions.

The FFI president had said earlier Saturday that the president might visit Germany for the World Cup.

'We met the president on Thursday and extended an official FFI invitation to him to join the team in Germany,' Dadkan told reporters prior to the team's departure for Germany.

'The president said that he would come if he could finish arranging the affairs of state and had some spare time,' Dadkan added.

Ahmadinejad has been roundly condemned by Germany and other western countries for denying the Holocaust and Israel's right to exist.

The Iranian squad is due to arrive in Germany on Sunday and take up residence in the southern city of Friedrichshafen.

Neo-Nazi groups in Germany have threatened to hold rallies in support of the Iran president's policies during the World Cup.

The Iranian Authorities Recent Comments on Talks with the United States

Mehran Riazaty: Iran Analyst

June 3, Mehr news Agency- Ahmadinejad in a telephone conversation with the United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan Friday night said Iran is prepared to hold talks on the nuclear issue if negotiations are fair and without any threat and precondition.

June 3, IRIB news agency- Iran will not suspend activities to enrich uranium, Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Commission Chairman Alaeddin Boroujerdi said here Saturday. "Suspension is impossible in technical terms. The Europeans had accepted that Iran cannot technically stop its enrichment activities at the research level but without disclosing it in their meetings. America also has no option but to accept it," Boroujerdi told reporters.

June 2, IRNA news agency- Ahmadinejad said the Iranian nation and government are standing firm to acquire peaceful nuclear energy and benefit from their absolute rights.

June 2, ISNA news agency- Iran's Foreign Minister Manuchehr Mottaki, while announcing Iran welcomed negotiations based on fair conditions, called the recent announcement by his U.S. counterpart as repetitive and lacking any logical solution for solving Iran's nuclear issue.

June 2, Mehr news agency- Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) Secretary Ali Larijani said Iran is prepared to hold negotiations if the talks are fair and without any discrimination and precondition.

June 2, Fars news agency- Interim Friday Prayers leader of Tehran, Ahmad Khatami, with reference to the US Secretary of State's recent statements that Iran would have to pay a heavy price if it decides to continue the present path, said that the Iranian nation is prepared to pay any price needed for defending its ideals and country.

June 2, IRIB news agency- Rapporteur of Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Commission Kazem Jalali said on Thursday the US is expected to do away from preconditions in the talks offer. He told IRNA that the US officials should also respect Iran's right in the context of Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), so favorable grounds will be prepared for talks.

Analyst Comment: Today, Fars news agency reported that Ali Akbar Velayati, former Iran’s Foreign Minister for about 16 years, and current advisor in international Affairs to the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei, said “Today the Islamic Republic of Iran’s revolution have been exported to all over the world, and the Islamic Republic is the third revolution after French Revolution and Communist Revolution in Russia that change the world.” He added that all of Iran’s foreign policies are decided by the Supreme Leader.

Therefore, all of above statements by the Iranian authorities could be reversed if suddenly Ayatollah Khamenei decides to talk with the United States.

Mehran Riazaty: a former Iran analyst for the Central Command of the Coalition Forces in Baghdad.

A Talk at Lunch That Shifted the Stance on Iran

Helen Cooper and David E. Sanger, The New York Times:

On a Tuesday afternoon two months ago, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice sat down to a small lunch in President Bush's private dining room behind the Oval Office and delivered grim news to her boss: Their coalition against Iran was at risk of falling apart.

A meeting she had attended in Berlin days earlier with European foreign ministers had been a disaster, she reported, according to participants in the discussion. Iran was neatly exploiting divisions among the Europeans and Russia, and speeding ahead with its enrichment of uranium. The president grimaced, one aide recalled, interpreting the look as one of exasperation "that said, 'O.K., team, what's the answer?' "

That body language touched off a closely held two-month effort to reach a drastically different strategy, one articulated two weeks later in a single sentence that Ms. Rice wrote in a private memorandum. It broached the idea that the United States end its nearly three-decade policy against direct talks with Iran. READ MORE

Mr. Bush's aides rarely describe policy debates in the Oval Office in much detail. But in recounting his decisions in this case, they appeared eager to portray him as determined to rebuild a fractured coalition still bearing scars from Iraq and find a way out of a negotiating dynamic that, as one aide said recently, "the Iranians were winning."

Mr. Bush gradually grew more comfortable with offering talks to a country that he considers the No. 1 state sponsor of terrorism, and whose president has advocated wiping Israel off the map. Mr. Bush's own early misgivings about the path he was considering came in a flurry of phone calls to Ms. Rice and to Stephen J. Hadley, his national security adviser, that often began with questions like "What if the Iranians do this," gaming out loud a number of possible situations.

Mr. Bush left open the option of scuttling the entire idea until early Wednesday morning, three senior officials said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because they were describing internal debates in the White House. He made the final decision only after telephone calls with President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia and the chancellor of Germany, Angela Merkel, led him to conclude that if Tehran refused to suspend its enrichment of uranium, or later dragged its feet, they would support an escalating series of sanctions against Iran at the United Nations that could lead to a confrontation.

Even after Mr. Bush edited the statement Ms. Rice was scheduled to read Wednesday before she flew to Vienna to encourage Europe and Russia to sign on to a final package of incentives for Iran — and sanctions if it turns the offer down — Ms. Rice wanted to check in one more time. She called Mr. Bush. Was he sure he was O.K. with his decision?

"Go do it," he responded.

She did, but the results remain unclear. Iran has given no indication it will agree to Mr. Bush's threshold condition, suspending nuclear fuel production. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Friday that he would oppose "any pressure to deprive our people from their right" to pursue a peaceful nuclear program.

The IRNA news agency reported that Iran's foreign minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, said Saturday that Javier Solana, the European Union's foreign policy chief, was expected to arrive in Tehran in the next few days with the new package of incentives.

"Iran will examine the proposal and announce its opinion after that," Mr. Mottaki said. Mr. Bush's aides now acknowledge that the approach they had once publicly described as successfully "isolating" Iran was in fact viewed internally as going nowhere. Mr. Bush's search for a new option was driven, they say, by concern that the path he was on two months ago would inevitably force one of two potentially disastrous outcomes: an Iranian bomb, or an American attack on Iran's facilities.

Conservatives, even some inside the administration, are worried that Mr. Bush may be forced into other concessions, including allowing Iran to continue some low level of nuclear fuel production. Others fear that the commitments Mr. Bush believes he extracted from other world leaders may erode.

But the story of how a president who rarely changes his mind did so in this case — after refusing similar proposals on Iran four years ago — illustrates the changed dynamic between the State Department and the White House in Mr. Bush's second term. When Colin L. Powell was secretary of state, the two buildings often seemed at war. But 18 months after Ms. Rice took over, her relationship with Mr. Bush has led to policies that one former adviser to Ms. Rice and Mr. Bush said "he never would have allowed Colin to pursue."

It is unclear how much dissent, if any, surrounded the decision, which appears to have been driven largely by the president, Ms. Rice and Mr. Hadley, with other senior national security officials playing a more remote role. Both White House and State Department officials say that Vice President Dick Cheney, long an opponent of proposals to engage Iran, agreed to this experiment. But it is unclear whether he is an enthusiast, or simply expects Iran to reject suspending enrichment — clearing the way to sanctions that could test the Iranian regime's ability to survive.

After the surprise election of Mr. Ahmadinejad last summer, Iran ended its suspension of uranium enrichment, and the United States and Europe won resolutions at the International Atomic Energy Agency to move the issue to the United Nations Security Council. But it took weeks over the winter to get the weakest of Security Council actions — a "presidential statement." Russia, which has huge financial interests in Iran and is supplying it with nuclear reactors, was particularly reluctant to push the Iranians too hard.

At a private dinner on March 6 at the Watergate with Ms. Rice, Mr. Hadley and Sergey Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, Mr. Lavrov warned that Iran could do what North Korea did in 2003 — throw out inspectors and abandon the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. That would close the biggest window into Iran's program, making it hard to assess the country's bomb capability — the same issue that had led to huge errors in Iraq.

On March 30, Ms. Rice traveled to Berlin for what turned into a fractious meeting with representatives of the other four permanent members of the Security Council and Germany. She questioned what kind of sanctions would be effective. The conversation went nowhere.

That led to Ms. Rice's warning to Mr. Bush over lunch, on April 4, that the momentum to confront Iran was disintegrating. Mr. Bush, one aide noted, was receiving special intelligence assessments every morning, some on Iran's intentions, others examining Mr. Ahmadinejad's personality, still others exploring how long it would take Iran to produce a bomb.

On Easter weekend, Ms. Rice sat in her apartment and drafted a two-page proposal for a new strategy that pursued three tracks: the threat of "coercive measures" through the United Nations, negotiations with Iran that included what Ms. Rice has called "bold" incentives for Iran to give up the production of all nuclear fuel and a separate set of strategies for economic sanctions if the Security Council failed to act.

For the first time, her proposal also raised a question the administration had long avoided: Had the time arrived for the United States to play what she and Mr. Bush, both bridge players, called their biggest card — offering to talk with Iran?

The idea intrigued Mr. Bush, White House officials say, and on May 8, Ms. Rice met with him just hours before flying to New York for a meeting with her European counterparts.

She asked him what kind of body language to display at the United Nations meeting. Should she signal that the United States was considering negotiations with Iran? "Be careful," he said, according to officials familiar with the conversation. "I haven't made up my mind."

That same day, an 18-page letter from Mr. Ahmadinejad arrived. It declared liberal democracy a failure, although it also was perceived by many as an effort to reach out and start a dialogue.

Ms. Rice and Mr. Hadley read the letter on the flight to New York, but dismissed it. "It isn't addressing the issues we're dealing with in a concrete way," Ms. Rice said that day.

Her meeting in New York with her European counterparts turned testy, particularly an exchange with Mr. Lavrov, who was still smarting from a speech by Mr. Cheney denouncing Russia for its increasingly authoritarian behavior. But the discussion, while fractious, convinced her that the only way to break the stalemate was to offer to join the negotiations.

While Mr. Bush was intrigued, he was intent on secrecy, and so when the National Security Council met on the subject on May 17, he warned against leaks. The session was notable because Mr. Cheney said the offer might work, largely because it would force the choices back on Iran. And while the council had dismissed the letter, it used the meeting to discuss whether to respond.

While Mr. Bush initially told Ms. Rice that others could work out the final negotiations, Ms. Rice told the president that "only you can nail this down," apparently a reference to keeping Ms. Merkel and Mr. Putin on board. Mr. Bush made the calls.

But Mr. Bush, led by Ms. Rice, is taking a significant risk. He must hold together countries that bitterly broke with the United States three years ago on Iraq. And now, he seems acutely aware that part of his legacy may depend on his ability to prevent Iran from emerging as a nuclear power in the Middle East, without again resorting to military force.

Nazila Fathi contributed reporting from Tehran for this article.

Iran: Authorities Detain Student Activists

Bill Samii, Radio Free Europe:

As unrest among ethnic Azeris in Iran settles down, disturbances involving university students are picking up. In the past week several student leaders have been detained by plainclothes security personnel and are being held at unknown locations. Such incidents follow protests triggered by the Iranian government's increasing interference in campus affairs. There are roughly 2.4 million university students in Iran, and student affairs will therefore have an impact on national politics for some time. READ MORE

Plainclothes And Disappearances

The Iranian government's involvement in university affairs includes dismissing popular professors, appointing unqualified individuals to administrative positions, and manipulating student elections. The most recent incidents involve the detention of student activists by security forces. Much is made of these forces being in plainclothes -- rather than in uniform -- because this makes it difficult to determine the security institution with which they are affiliated. Similarly, the detainees are frequently held incommunicado at unknown locations.

Student activists told Radio Farda that on the morning of May 31 plainclothes security forces detained Abdullah Momeni, spokesman of the majority wing of the Office for Strengthening Unity (Daftar-i Tahkim-i Vahdat, DTV). Reza Delbari, another DTV member, told Radio Farda that the security forces have been after the organization's members for some time. The security forces, he continued, see no need to operate within a legal framework because any action on the part of the students prompts a disproportionate reaction.

On the same day, students at the Amir Kabir University of Technology in Tehran held a lunchtime rally to protest the detention of two classmates, ISNA reported. Yashar Qajar, the head of the Islamic Students Union at Amir Kabir University, and blogger Abed Tavancheh, who wrote about recent campus protests on his weblog, were detained the previous week.

Student Abbas Hakimzadeh told Radio Farda on May 30 that there is no news of Qajar's whereabouts and no one answers calls to his mobile telephone. The authorities told Tavancheh's family that he would be released after answering a few questions, Hakimzadeh said, but that was days ago. Hakimzadeh claims that the University Basij wants to bring the hard-line pressure group Ansar-i Hizbullah onto the campus. Hakimzadeh predicted that the situation will quiet down with the approach of exams and the summer holiday.

A Week Of Unrest

The detentions in Tehran follow violent demonstrations at Tehran University and Amir Kabir University on May 22-23.

Demonstrating students at Tehran University objected to "the prevalence of a police atmosphere at the university," "Mardom Salari" reported on May 23. This has been a concern for some time. Last November there were accusations of universities becoming "garrisons" if the personnel responsible for physical security of the facilities were given more extensive powers that might relate to intelligence-gathering. More recently, students objected to plans to bury veterans of the Iran-Iraq war on campuses.

Tehran police chief Morteza Talai said on May 24 that some 20-30 people were behind the previous night's unrest at Tehran University, and he estimated that some of these people were not students, IRNA reported. Eyewitnesses reported some injuries and damage to parked vehicles, and Talai said 40 police were hurt. Students told Radio Farda that some students are missing and others were injured when police and paramilitaries attacked them.

Tehran police spokesman Mohammad Turang said on May 26 that eight people were arrested for damaging dormitories. Turang referred to "thugs" who make trouble, and added that foreigners are involved: "Investigations show that a current from outside the university was involved in the recent turmoil in the Tehran University dormitory. It seems that these people are related to foreign sources."

Tehran was not the only place where disturbances involving university students occurred during the last week in May. Students at Chamran University in Ahvaz and at Kermanshah University complained of interference in campus elections. The ones in Ahvaz also complained that university authorities would not allow outside speakers who were critical of the government, ISNA reported on May 23. Kermanshah University students also complained that the university authorities refused to permit a seminar at which pro-reform politicians would discuss the economic situation, "Aftab-i Yazd" reported on May 23.

In other incidents, students in Kerman reported cases of harassment, students in Zanjan and other places demonstrated over the publication of the "cockroach" cartoon deemed insulting to Azeris, and those in Shiraz reported restrictions on their activities.

The protests continued in the last days of the month. Students at the Iran University of Medical Sciences staged a sit-in on May 29 to protest against the refusal of the chancellor's office to permit elections for the Islamic Students Union. Students Union head Mustafa Vafai said efforts to hold the election began seven months ago. He added that on May 28 the union was advised that it cannot hold elections until its activities conform with "the regulations regarding Islamic organizations." Vafai said the union was told at an earlier meeting that its Student Day rallies, its statements on the 2005 presidential election, and its publications are objectionable.

Anger Over Election Interference

The main concern at Amir Kabir University related to elections in the DTV, which now has two wings -- the more radical majority in the Neshast-i Allameh and the more traditional minority in the Neshast-i Shiraz (on student politics in Iran, see "Youth Movement Has Untapped Potential").

Members of the two DTV wings got in a brawl at Amir Kabir University on May 22, state television reported. The next day, the conservative "Kayhan" newspaper reported that the Allameh wing was trying to hold an illegal election and its members attacked another student group.

The Shiraz wing of the DTV at Amir Kabir University submitted a letter to the Ministry of Science, Research, and Technology in which it claimed that the other wing is trying to dominate the student organization, "Kayhan" reported on May 23. It accused the rival group of "denying the Islamic nature of Islamic associations and questioning the principles of the Islamic Revolution and the religion of Islam." It added that the Allameh wing has "been taking positions in conflict with the Iranian nation's national interests and in accordance with the country's foreign enemies at different junctures and during the country's political crises." The letter added, "they invite foreigners to interfere and meddle in Iran's internal affairs."

Two University of Tehran students who were members of the DTV central council explained in a letter to university Chancellor Ayatollah Abbas Ali Amid-Zanjani that because neither wing of the DTV could gain a majority in campus elections in spring 2005, they signed an agreement in which five of the traditionalists and four of the reformers would serve on the student council. Since that time, however, the traditionalists have squeezed out the reformers, "Sharq" reported on May 30.

Solana to Deliver Iran Proposals

BBC News:

The European Union foreign policy head will visit Iran in the next 48 hours in the latest diplomatic effort to persuade Iran to halt nuclear research. Javier Solana will deliver proposals agreed by six world powers in Vienna on Thursday, Iran's foreign minister said.

Manouchehr Mottaki said a breakthrough was possible but insisted Iran would not suspend its uranium production as a condition to talks.

He said Iran would have to study the plans before giving a formal response. READ MORE

The proposals have not been made public but sources say they could include giving Iran a nuclear reactor and an assured supply of enriched uranium.

Preconditions

Mr Mottaki said Iran had given the go ahead for Javier Solana to travel to Tehran in the next two days.

"We think that if there is good will, a breakthrough to get out of a situation [the European Union and US] have created for themselves... is possible," Mr Mottaki said.

However, he added: "Negotiations must be without preconditions. No condition for negotiations is acceptable, especially the condition that has been set."

The US has previously made it clear it will not enter into negotiations until Iran suspends its uranium enrichment programme.

Washington believes Iran is trying to make nuclear weapons while Tehran says its programme is for peaceful energy purposes.

Reza Pahalavi: "No War Is Needed - We Will Topple This Regime Ourselves"

Nadezhda Popova, Izvestia:

There seems to be no way to settle the “Iranian nuclear crisis”, despite all efforts by the international intermediaries. Tehran and Washington keep exchanging bellicose statements, increasingly more threatening. Is there a way out of the impasse? Will the U.S. use force against Iran and if it does, what will it lead to? How long will the present regime in Tehran be able to cling to power? Answers to these and other questions were supplied by the man who, under certain circumstances, could be heading Iran today (as arguably he will soon). This conversation with Mr. Reza Pahlavi, the son of the Shah of Iran deposed in 1979, was held by Nadezhda Popova.

Izvestia: Just recently, you stated that by July-August you will have formed a movement with the purpose to overthrow the current regime in Tehran. How are you planning to accomplish this revolution? READ MORE

Reza Pahlavi: We are calling on Iranians for mass actions of civil disobedience. Meantime, we demand of the international community that it should apply sanctions in a way that would punish the regime but not harm the people. For example, members Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s government may be declared personae non grata. When the regime has been debunked, we will arrange a nation-wide referendum to have the Iranian people decide on their own the political future it wants for itself. We will conduct a democratic election. The parliament will draft a new constitution.

Izvestia: Who is going to participate in these acts of civil disobedience?

Reza Pahlavi: There are numerous opposition groups in Iran, bringing together workers, intellectuals and other social strata. Almost 50 million of the country’s 70 million population are young people under 30 years. They have access to information about what is going on in the world. They understand just how bad are the things now occurring in Iran. I think soon my countrymen will realize that the present regime does not care about ordinary people but cares exclusively for itself. Besides, we have opposition cells throughout the world, since many Iranians left their homeland after the revolution. With them, as well as with the opposition inside the country, we are in close contact.

Izvestia: Can the West, in your view, strike a military blow on Iran?

Reza Pahlavi: I do not rule this out. But the war would have horrendous consequences. What we now see in Afghanistan and Iraq must teach us a lesson. The Iranian problem has a peaceful solution to it.

Izvestia: How will Iran’s Kurdish and Azerbaijani communities respond in the case of a war conflict? Can they declare their will to secede?

Reza Pahlavi: Sure. The current regime is trumping the Shiite-Sunni card, pitting national minorities at each other’s throat. However Iran is a country which for centuries accorded welcome to people of different nationalities and faiths. So when we come to power, national minorities will have their rights guaranteed. The present regime creates too many complexities like terrorism, economic instability, nuclear menace, extremism. When it clears the stage, 90 percent of world problems will be resolved.

Izvestia: What is your personal stake in this?

Reza Pahlavi: We want the West to help us build democracy. To a certain extent, it is even more important than battling the nuclear weapons in Iran.

Izvestia: Which countries are you talking with?

Reza Pahlavi: The U.S. and Europeans. With all those who believe in the Iranian people’s ability to resolve the problem. Since all other methods will be more risky, more dangerous and, simply speaking, more expensive than what I am suggesting.

Izvestia: Could Americans wager on you as the future head of state if they decide to support the Iranian opposition?

Reza Pahlavi: I talk with the republicans as well as the democrats. People in the US understand that by bolstering democracy in Iran they invest in the bright future for the whole region. I think only of how to help my motherland. My role is modest indeed. And it does not matter whether we will have a monarchy or a republic and who will head the state. We will decide these later.

Izvestia: Did you have contacts with the Russian government?

Reza Pahlavi: No, regrettably. But I am ready to call on the Russians to try and dissuade Ahmadinejad from having a nuclear program, and pay attention to our people. After the end of the cold war Iranians’ attitude to your country was completely changed. While the USSR threatened our national interests, Russia is a friend.

IZVESTIA’S NOTE:

The last Shah of Iran Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was enthroned in September of 1941. He restored the authority of parliament and carried out liberal reforms. Everything changed, however, after the February 4, 1949 attempt on the Shah’s life. Mohammad Reza declared the state of emergency and switched to an authoritarian regime. Since January of 1978 when the Shah’s troops shot at participants of a protest action in Qum, the country was swept over by a wave of demonstrations against the monarch, organized by the clergy. On January 4, 1979, Mohammad Reza authorized opposition leader Shapour Bakhtiyar to form a new government. But very soon power passed on to the clerics headed by Ayatollah Khomeini who promulgated the Islamic Republic. On

January 16, 1979, the shah with his family left the country. By that time Reza, the eldest of the monarch’s three sons, had already lived abroad. He went to America in 1978. After completing the course at the Air Force Academy, he entered the department of political sciences at Williams College. Then he graduated from the University of California. Now Reza Pahlavi lives with his wife and three daughters in Maryland.

Reza Pahlavi Royal Democrat

Nancy Dewolf Smith, The Wall Street Journal:

It's been an agonizing week for Iranian patriots. On Monday, Washington's ambassador to the U.N., John Bolton, suggested that if Iran's ruling clerics abandon efforts to make nuclear weapons, they can remain in power. Thursday brought another jolt, when U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said that the U.S. would join direct negotiations with Tehran if Iran verifiably halt its weapons program.

In one fell swoop, it seems, the U.S. not only committed itself to a course that is certain to fail. It blundered into the one strategy guaranteed to strengthen the revolutionary regime while simultaneously undercutting the only force capable of stopping it: the Iranian people themselves.

At least, that's what I thought Reza Pahlavi would say when I telephoned Thursday for a comment on Secretary Rice's statement, following up on a long conversation we had in person last week. But Mr. Pahlavi, perhaps drawing on diplomatic skills he's honed in the quarter-century since his father, the shah of Iran, was deposed in 1979, gracefully called it "overall . . . a good move by Washington." The reason? "It will once and for all force Tehran's hand," and show that "the clerical regime is irreversibly committed to its dual-use enrichment program; that it will seek to stall for time, by following a pattern of deceit and duplicity; that at the end, it will prove its untrustworthiness and incapacity to become a reliable partner in diplomacy." READ MORE

But then Mr. Pahlavi brought up the alternative strategy which Iranians, at home and abroad, have been urging deaf Western policy makers to adopt for years now: "That can only be internal pressure on the regime . . . support for proponents of democracy and human rights in Iran. There is no other answer."

* * *
Mr. Pahlavi should know, and not only because he is the son of Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, who for a time made Iran the linchpin of Middle Eastern stability and set his country on a course toward modernity and prosperity. The famous name helps, but so, for instance, does the Internet. From his home in a Washington suburb where I visited him last week, Mr. Pahlavi is in constant contact with people all over his homeland, including curious students who turn to him as a link with a more liberal past and also to exchange thoughts about a democratic future.

In short, Mr. Pahlavi easily grasps what the rest of the international community refuses to understand or to acknowledge.

"There is no incentive that we can give the Islamic Republic to stand down," he told me over Memorial Day weekend. "They need to do what they're doing, first and foremost because this is a totalitarian system. It has to keep the mood on the streets in its favor by continuing this process. If they are using the slogan of enrichment as a tool to keep these people mobilized, the minute they concede, they will lose their entire praetorian guard. Therefore there's no way that they are going to concede on that point."

The threat of sanctions or the promise of aid won't budge the regime either, he says. "There is no economic incentive that you can throw at them, because you are not dealing with a conventional state, in the sense that it is ultimately accountable and responsible and cares about the citizens living in that boundary. It's not the welfare of the people that matters to them. They can send $100 million to Hamas in Palestine when people are starving on the streets of Iran. They could care less about their economic status, so long as they can fuel their own war machine.

"You cannot even offer them a security guarantee, they don't care. For them, war is a gift from God. [President] Ahmadinejad is talking about Armageddon. He's talking about paving the way for the reemergence of the 12th imam, which is coming back to the planet to bring back stability and peace after major cataclysm. They really believe that."

Until that happens, the prospect of negotiations with the U.S. is a little godsend for the regime, Mr. Pahlavi explains. Iran's rulers can say, "Look at us! We're standing against the Great Satan . . . and guess what? We have brought them to their knees, we have brought them to the table."

As for Tehran's end game, that's simple: "Ultimately, what is the grand prize for them? They would like to achieve something the Soviets never could -- the control of the Middle East. The economic lifeline of the Western world. By encircling the Persian Gulf, by institutionalizing themselves, with their proxies operating everywhere, and in a fait accompli-type scenario, force the world to reckon with them. Naturally, if they ultimately get the bomb, their deterrent will be even more dangerous."

Mr. Pahlavi, who is 45, has seen danger in his own life. He was at school in the United States when his parents left Iran, but joined them in exile and, after his father died in Egypt in 1980, became a target himself of the new regime's vilification campaign. Today, although he does not advertise his address, he doesn't surround himself with bodyguards. Inside his airy and attractive house in Maryland, pictures on a side table of his regally attired father and mother are the only obvious signs of his unique heritage.

Mr. Pahlavi is so focused on the future of Iran that he prefers not to spend time on the past. Even so, when I ask what might be different today if the Iranian revolution had never taken place, he points to a chain of events that seem even worse with hindsight than they did at the time: "The Russians probably would not have invaded Afghanistan the way they did, and Saddam Hussein would not have attacked Iran. . . . From Sudan to everywhere else you can think of, there have been acts of terrorism, attacks on apartments in Khobar, the blowing up of Marine barracks in Beirut. It's been all over the place. If you look at the world the way it was before this regime took over, we didn't have any of these problems."

And yet a solution to all of this is percolating up today, Mr. Pahlavi says, and it's coming from the Iranian people. In fact, he insists, in dealing with a belligerent Tehran, "there is only one thing that the outside world can do, and that is to tell the regime: 'We are serious about supporting the people who are inside Iran who are against you.' That is the only thing that will make Mr. Khamenei [Iran's supreme leader] and everybody stand down. Because nothing else ruffles them. The only thing they are really scared of are the people themselves."

Peaceful revolutions from within have worked before, so why, he asks, isn't the West investing in the Iranian people -- "the same way they supported so many movements in Eastern Europe that ultimately brought down communist governments that were under Moscow's umbrella?" Dissidents are everywhere, in the universities, workplaces, the conventional armed forces, he adds: "There are thousands of cells . . . each trying to bring as much pressure as they can -- but with very limited resources. Imagine the cumulative weight of all these resistance groups in a civil disobedience act -- nonviolent, we don't believe in violent change -- that could begin sustained pressure to the point of paralyzing the system until it would collapse."

* * *
It might be easy to dismiss Mr. Pahlavi as a typical pipe-dreaming exile if there weren't so much evidence from Iran of mounting popular unrest, including student demonstrations and other massive protests and labor strikes. Arguably, unrest does not automatically translate into a force for change. Like other Iranians in opposition, though, he has reason to believe that they could. People in Iran are among the world's busiest bloggers, for one thing, and many are talking their heads off to anyone who will listen:

"They want to have justice, they want to have equality, they want to have freedom of speech, they want to have a better life, they want to be connected to this progressive world, they like modernity. . . . And they know that the only obstacle between them and the free world is this regime. When you talk to young students today, they say: 'We don't have any more fears. We are out there, we are fighting -- all we need is the support and recognition because that is going to prompt even more action inside Iran.'"

Helping opponents of the regime inside Iran does seem like a smart option, especially when you look at Iraq today -- and then imagine how much better it would be if Saddam had been replaced by Iraqis who had already decided to pull together for a common cause and similar goals. It's also a far less precarious and destructive option than a military attack on the current regime or its nuclear sites.

Mr. Pahlavi is horrified by the thought, and not only because he loves his country. He can come up with plenty of other objections, beginning with the fact that Iran's top ayatollah and the rest of the regime would be the only beneficiaries: "I think Mr. Khamenei is sitting there praying and hoping that such an attack would occur. Because it would play right into their hands: They can call another jihad or it would give them every excuse in the book to deflect attention yet again [from their failings]. It would be the greatest gift you could give them."

Besides, he continues, "nobody in this world really believes that a full-scale military attack on Iran is foreseeable. Tanks marching all the way to Tehran -- impossible. Limited air strikes at best. [And] it wouldn't achieve anything except infuriate the people; . . . you would lose many nationalists, who would say: 'This is an attack on Iran, not defiance of the regime -- you want to hurt the regime, why don't you put sanctions on the regime? Keep their diplomats from traveling. Why don't you go and block and freeze all their assets and bank accounts and dummy companies that they operate through and [use to] transfer money to their cronies?'"

Why not indeed? Mr. Pahlavi says he is no enemy of diplomacy. What he can't figure out is why so much time and effort has been focused on Iran's rulers, while so little attention and support has been directed to the Iranian people. As he emphasizes every chance he gets, "It's not by sending the Sixth Fleet and annihilating the entire Iranian navy that anything is going to be achieved, not to mention the loss of lives. It's going to be by helping the people on the streets. . . . They are the best army that can fight against this evil and remove it from the planet."

By the way, Mr. Pahlavi says that in a democratic Iran, he would be honored to assume the title of shah in a parliamentary system, but only if the Iranian people ask him to. He already has at least one vote. On the way to meet him at his house, the nice lady who drove me there quite naturally referred to her boss as "His Majesty."

Ms. Smith is a member of the Journal's editorial board.

Saturday's Daily Briefing on Iran

DoctorZin reports, 6.3.2006:

Russia and China reportedly will not to oppose sanctions.

• ABC News reported that a European Union diplomat said: "There is something like a catalog of sanctions and we can pick and choose from them. The agreement reached ... is also that Russia and China can abstain from any sanctions, but not say no."

But military force against Iran "is not on the agenda."

• The Guardian reported that Britain said that military force against Iran is not on the agenda in the international impasse over Iran's uranium enrichment program.
• Reuters reported that Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said: "I can say unambiguously that all the agreements from yesterday's meetings rule out in any circumstances the use of military force."

Iran has "weeks" to respond.

• News24.com reported that Iran has "weeks" to respond to a diplomatic initiative agreed on Thursday by the United States and other major powers.

What Iran wants.

• Asia Times argued that the regime wants nothing short of ironclad guarantees that the US would not now, or in the future, attempt to destabilize its government.
  

Bush warns Iran: Say no and "the world is going to act in concert."

• New York Sun reported that President Bush said of Iran: "If they continue their obstinance, if they continue to say to the world, 'We really don't care what your opinion is,' then the world is going to act in concert."

But is the US strategy on Iran being undermined by Europe?

• The Times Online examined Condi Rice's Iran strategy and why Europe is likely to undermine it.

Ramsey Clark: The devils' advocate.

• Marinka Peschmann, Western Standard reported that Iran's democrats are furious that former U.S. attorney general Ramsey Clark is protecting the mullahcracy he helped install. A must read.
  

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

• Allister Heath, The Spectator provides historical insight into why the Neo-Nazis are rallying to Iran's President.
• The Jerusalem Post reported that if cornered by the West over its nuclear program, Iran could direct Hizbollah to enlist its widespread international support network to aid in terrorist attacks.
• CNSNews.com reported that ethnic unrest continues in parts of Iran, prompting some exiled members of Iranian minorities to step up calls for a concerted effort to topple the clerical regime.
• The Hindu reported that Donald H. Rumsfeld questioned Iran's involvement with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), saying the regime's terrorist links clashed with the aims of the Russian and Chinese-dominated group.
  

Tags: iran, news, iraq, nuclear

Rumsfeld questions Iran's involvement with SCO

The Hindu:

U.S. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld on Saturday questioned Iran's involvement with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), saying the regime's terrorist links clashed with the aims of the Russian and Chinese-dominated group.

Speaking at a regional security conference, Rumsfeld said he found it ``strange'' that the SCO would include Iran, given the group's stated opposition to terrorism and extremism.

Iran's hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been invited to attend the annual SCO summit in Shanghai this month. READ MORE

Iran is an observer to group, which also includes Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, and has applied for full membership.

US intel.: Hizbullah could become threat alongside Iran

The Jerusalem Post:

If cornered by the West over its nuclear program, Iran could direct Hizbullah to enlist its widespread international support network to aid in terrorist attacks, intelligence officials say.

In interviews with The Associated Press, several Western intelligence officials said they have seen signs that Hizbullah's fundraisers, recruiters and criminal elements could be adapted to provide logistical help to terrorist operatives.

Such help could include obtaining forged travel documents or off-the-shelf technology - global positioning equipment and night goggles, for example - that could be used for military purposes. READ MORE

The senior officials spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive positions they occupy.

Hizbullah was responsible for the 1983 bombings of the US Embassy and the Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon. The group's Saudi wing, in coordination with the larger Lebanese Hizbullah, is blamed for the Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia in 1996 that killed hundreds of American servicemen.

Tensions between Iran and the United States and its allies have grown over Iran's expanding nuclear program. Iran insists its aims are peaceful; US officials say they are convinced the Iranians intend to develop a nuclear weapon within the next decade.

John Negroponte, head of the US intelligence network, suggested in an interview aired Friday by the British Broadcasting Corp. that an Iranian bomb could be a fact in as little as four years, although he admitted, "We don't have clear-cut knowledge."

The United States and five other world powers agreed Thursday on a plan designed to persuade Iran to give up its nuclear ambitions. Iran's president, without directly mentioning the proposal, pledged on Friday that the West would not deprive his country of nuclear technology.

The Bush administration and US allies know that Iran could order attacks. Some officials believe that threat is a bargaining chip worth more to Iran if kept in reserve.

Given the potential that diplomacy could fail to defuse the nuclear standoff, US intelligence agencies are studying Iran's options to retaliate: using oil as a weapon, attacking Americans in Iraq and elsewhere, unleashing Hizbullah, or other tactics.

To the State Department, Hizbullah is a militant Lebanese group classified as a terror organization. Its terrorist wing, the Islamic Jihad Organization, is a global threat with cells in the Middle East, Europe, Africa, South America, Asia and North America. Before the attacks of September 11, 2001, Hizbullah was responsible for more American deaths than any other single terrorist organization.

Yet in many countries, Hizbullah is praised for providing education, medical care and housing, particularly in Lebanon's south, and raising money for it is legal.

So far there are no signs the Iranian-backed group plans an imminent attack on US interests. But the possibility has counterterrorism agencies keeping close watch as the friction with Iran grows.

US analysts believe the potential is greater for Iran to use terrorism to retaliate, rather than to strike first. But they have considered scenarios under which Iran may view its own pre-emptive attack as a deterrent.

One senior official said that if Iran were backed into a corner and considered US-led military action as inevitable, the Iranians might calculate that terrorism could break international unity, increase pressure on the United States or shift Americans' public opinion.

US analysts, however, are cautious in their judgments about what might lead Iran to order strikes.

Hizbullah, which means Party of God, was founded in 1982 to respond to Israel's invasion of Lebanon. The radical Shiite organization advocates for Israel's elimination and the establishment of an Islamic government in Lebanon modeled after the religious theocracy in Iran.

With some exceptions, Hizbullah has not targeted the United States in recent years - a strategic decision that gives the group more freedom to operate, according to one US counterterrorism official.

Hizbullah was tied to a string of kidnappings and assassinationsof Westerners in the 1980s, ordered up by Iran. Victims included the CIA's former station chief in Tehran, William Buckley.

Hizbullah is accused of bombing the Israeli Embassy and a Jewish community center in Argentina in the early 1990s, killing more than 100. The group denies the charges.

A former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee said before and right after the Sept. 11 attacks that Hizbullah was believed to have the largest embedded terrorist network inside the United States. "I have no reason to believe that there has been a dismantlement of that capability," said former Democratic Sen. Bob Graham.

Steven Monblatt, head of the Organization of American States' Inter-American Committee Against Terrorism, said tensions with Iran could lead Hizbullah to begin preparing attacks on Western interests in Latin America and elsewhere.

"I think it is legitimate to be concerned about situations where terrorist groups will not have an operational base, but will have made the preparations to establish one," said Monblatt, a former State Department official. "I don't know anyone alleging an operational cell right now. Now, how do you distinguish an operational cell from a sleeper operation - a more kind of logistical base?"

Leadership in Hizbullah is exercised by Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, a Shiite Muslim cleric who took over after an Israeli helicopter strike in 1992 killed Sheik Abbas Musawi.

Hizbullah gets significant support from Iran, Shiite communities and particularly the Lebanese diaspora. One official said the group has access to several hundred million dollars a year, much of it going to the social service network in southern Lebanon.

The organization has been linked to all kinds of organized crime, including drug trafficking, drug counterfeiting and stolen baby formula. The substantial profits are thought to be funneled almost entirely back to the Middle East.

Kevin Brock, a career FBI agent who is now deputy director of the National Counterterrorism Center, recently told reporters that the United States has active investigations into Hizbullah around the world.

"The prioritization obviously has been al-Qaida, but that doesn't mean Hizbullah has dropped off the screen by any stretch of the imagination," Brock said.

The FBI and other law enforcement agencies have had success in breaking up Hizbullah-linked crime rings, including a cigarette-smuggling operation in North Carolina, a tobacco-growing Southern state.

This year, the Justice Department announced an indictment charging 19 people with a global racketeering conspiracy to sell counterfeit rolling papers, contraband cigarettes and counterfeit Viagra. Portions of the profits were given to Hizbullah.

Extensive operations have been uncovered in South America, where Hizbullah is well connected to the drug trade, particularly in the region where Argentina, Brazil and Paraguay meet. The area has a large Shiite Muslim immigrant population.