Posted on 02/06/2005 2:19:29 PM PST by freedom44
Top News Story
TEHRAN, 4 Feb. (IPS) A visibly worried Islamic Republic reacted angrily on Thursday at the US President's open support for the Iranian people's struggle for democracy and freedom.
"To the Iranian people, I say tonight: As you stand for your own liberty, America stands with you", President George W. Bush said in his State of the Union Address Wednesday night, naming also the Islamic Republic as the world’s major sponsor of international terrorism.
Mr. Bush's proposed referendum on the future of the Iranian regime has received strong support from the Iranians.
Mr. Bush’s backing for the Iranian people comes as a proposed project to organise referendum on the future of the Iranian regime. It has has received strong support from the Iranians, both inside and outside as well as from large segments among republicans and monarchists.
At the same time, green lights have been open to Iranian dissidents in the United States as well as in Europe.
According to well-informed French sources, some moderate neo-conservatives are sending discreetly signals to some of the ruling Iranian ayatollahs, including Mr. Ali Khameneh’i or President Mohammad Khatami, offering them to leave the place for a safe heaven of their preference, or face "people’s vengeance".
According to this source, Mr. Reza Pahlavi, the 45 years-old son of the late Mohammad Reza Pahlavi who was toppled by the Islamic revolution of 1979 is being "worked out" as a possible leader for coalition of Iranian forces, considered as "much more credible than the Iraqi dissidents under Saddam Hussein" to replace the present Islamic system with a transitory government.
Political Prisoners on hunger strike in IranUN women's rights official raps Iran over abuses
Iran would accelerate nuke programme if attacked
Cosmetics exhibition closed by Iranian judiciary
IIPF conditions Iran's presidential nomination
US is main supporter of terrorism, says Iran
Iran's ex-president: U.S should show goodwill
In a rare and exclusive interview in Tehran Sunday, Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, Iran's former president and the consensus frontrunner in June's presidential elections, talked with USA TODAY's Barbara Slavin about U.S.-Iranian relations, al-Qaeda, and Iran's alleged nuclear bomb program.
Slavin: What's your view of elections in Iraq?
Rafsanjani: I think the elections have gone well, although there is so much insecurity in Iraq. So far during the counting of ballots, there has not been a significant complaint. We have to wait to see what the outcome of the counting is. We think that the best outcome would be what the people choose, and naturally, because the majority of Iraqis are (Shiite Muslims) Shia, it would be to the benefit of the people (if the Shiites win). The rest of the people of Iraq are (Sunni) Muslims and Assyrians. We are interested in the other Muslims of Iraq. The important matter is freedom. When the people choose what they want, it is good for them and for us.
Slavin: Has the United States done you a favor by getting rid of the Taliban in Afghanistan and Saddam Hussein in Iraq?
Rafsanjani: This is an historical irony. Both of them were the children of the United States. They sacrificed their children for the benefit of the others. But they were not very devoted children of the United States. When I was the president, several times I mentioned this to the United States, that if they show goodwill we would enter a dialogue with them. And I gave this directive to them, that if they free our assets in the United States, that would be a sign of goodwill. I have the same idea this time.
Slavin: What's your estimate of assets frozen in the US?
Rafsanjani: We don't have a clear record, but we think it was about $8 billion and with interest over 25 years, it has to be more. Instead he's (President Bush) used tough language. They (the United States) did not keep their word at that time — through Turkey, Japan and the Secretary General of the United Nations, they said that there would be some changes if we helped with the hostage crisis in Lebanon (during the Reagan administration and the arms-for-hostages deal). And they said if we help with the crisis, they would do a lot of positive acts. After we helped in those crises, they showed negative acts and the Japanese and Turks were ashamed.
Slavin: Would you be prepared to reopen a dialogue with the United States?
Rafsanjani: The first step has to be from the U.S. part. They have to show positive signs for us so we can believe they are sincere. The main thing would be our assets. That would be the best positive sign. This is a very wrong action that they have betrayed our trust. When I talk about the assets, that was at the beginning of the talks. I was president then. I'm not president now. When I said it, this would be a sign of goodwill to begin the talks.
Slavin: Should Iran show goodwill by using its influence over the Palestinian groups to stop violence against the Israelis?
Rafsanjani: The Palestinian groups do not listen to us. We only help them in a humanitarian aspect like other countries, but they have no obligations towards us.
Slavin: Are you satisfied with the nuclear talks with the Europeans and would you like the U.S. to join the process?
Rafsanjani: I'm not satisfied with the progress of the work, but I am happy that the talks are going on. It might have a negative effect if the United States joins.
Slavin: Are you concerned about all the tough statements from Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other U.S. officials in recent days?
Rafsanjani: Miss Rice talks very tough. We have gotten used to this nonsense. Miss Rice is a bit emotional about this, and we predicted that she would have a more emotional approach to this.
Slavin: Do you see any difference between her and former Secretary of State Colin Powell?
Rafsanjani: They (Rice and Powell) might be different in the way they talk, but the policies of the United States are decided somewhere else.
Slavin: Have you ever visited the United States?
Rafsanjani: I have toured 20 states in a car (in 1974). I found the States a large, developed and rich country. I was surprised that they still look to smaller countries of the world to get benefits. That time I was in contact with Iranians, the students and my brother who was there. Now when I study about the States, there are interesting and capable people there. The technology and science are very impressive there. We don't have any bad memories of the people of the United States. If we have any problems, it's always with the government of the United States.
Slavin: What is the biggest problem facing Iran now?
Rafsanjani: We don't have a major problem right now in our country, and life is normal. Things like unemployment, which the youth are suffering from, and the rate of inflation — these are chronic conditions and we have to solve them.
Slavin: Many Iranians say they make just $200 a month, and they say that's not enough to live on.
Rafsanjani: $200 in Iran is the equivalent of $1,000 in other countries. In Iran, things like water, electricity and bread — the necessities of life — are cheaper compared to other places and there are a lot of subsidies. The purchasing power of the people is 3 times more than the GNP (gross national product) per capita because of subsidies.
Slavin: Have you decided to run for president (in the June 17 election)?
Rafsanjani: I haven't decided whether to run for the presidency or become a candidate. We would like for another person to come up, and with that person, they (the Iranian people) would become satisfied.
Slavin: If no one else emerges?
Rafsanjani: In that case, I might announce it, but we have 2 or 3 more months.
Slavin: People say you are the only one who can solve the problem with the United States.
Rafsanjani: I'm not the only one but I am one of them.
Slavin: The United States and Iran have had had lots of secret meetings, low level meetings. When will you be ready for high level dialogue? When you were president you indicated Iran was ready to have contacts with the United States.
Rafsanjani: When I said that I was ready (to have a dialogue with the U.S.) I was the president. If I again become responsible (for those matters), I would have to look at the situation again.
Slavin: But you've been quoted (in Iranian newspapers) as saying that all this talk with the Europeans is a waste of time —
Rafsanjani: I haven't said that.
Slavin: Isn't your real problem with the United States? You know the Europeans are never going to attack Iran.
Rafsanjani: We say they (the United States) wouldn't dare to attack us and they have tested it once (the failed hostage rescue in 1980). Before the U.S. was in Iran, they had all the means here and we threw them out with our bare hands.
Slavin: For Iran to develop, for it to have jobs and a complete end to isolation, don't you need the United States?
Rafsanjani: We do not trust the goodwill of the U.S. They have cut the ties.
Slavin: Didn't they have good reason because of the hostage crisis?
Rafsanjani: They admitted the shah (into the United States for medical treatment after he fled Iran). They started it. We did not treat the Americans badly. They left Iran in a relaxed mood. The embassy was active here after the revolution. We didn't have any problem with them. They started it.
Slavin: Would you be willing to invite high level members of congress such as (Senate Foreign Relations Committee leaders) Richard Lugar and Joe Biden to Iran?
Rafsanjani: They can come. We have no objection. If it is intended to be a serious visit, then we expect the U.S. would make a move to prove its goodwill, and that would be the kickoff point.
Slavin: Is there anything else the U.S. can do to show goodwill, or just unfreezing assets?
Rafsanjani: Goodwill can be indicated in various ways. I raised that particular example because at that time I was in charge. Today, I'm not in a position to present other possibilities.
Slavin: What about Iran's connection with al-Qaeda? There have been persistent reports that Iran has several high-level al-Qaeda people under house arrest in Tehran and won't turn them over.
Rafsanjani: Who created al-Qaeda? In fact they (the United States) were the ones who provoked al-Qaeda to come and give us trouble. These are all rumors (about high level al-Qaeda people here). When al-Qaeda was on the run from Afghanistan crossing through Iran, some were arrested and they are imprisoned. Some of them are charged with some actions in Iran.
Slavin: Some important ones?
Rafsanjani: You know these things, I don't. Several have been repatriated to related countries. Those who have remained are those who have committed crimes here and are awaiting trial. I would expect that you would forward a question to President Bush: Why terrorists who have committed crimes in Iran are not returned here? Worse yet, in your territory, they are permitted to enter your Congress, the U.N., and have lobbying and political activities, whereas no one can ever suggest that al Qaeda can ever have any activity in Iran. They are our enemies, too. You are aware of what (Jordanian al Qaeda leader Abu Musab) Zarqawi and his group have done to our friends in Iraq.
Slavin: How long will it be before Iraq is a stable country?
Rafsanjani: I assume that President Bush and (Defense) Secretary (Donald) Rumsfeld would know this better. I have no idea what the U.S. intends to do further there and what would be the reaction of the Iraqi people. I only know that the sole option is to leave Iraq to the Iraqi people.
Slavin: If the U.S. leaves Iraq, won't Iraq become more unstable?
Rafsanjani: The problem is that the Iraqi people are facing atrocities from both sides — Zarqawi and also the American troops at times. The Zarqawi groups uses car bombs, the Americans use other bombs. You also know what they do in the prisons.
Slavin: What about Iranian prisons? I hear prisoners not very well treated there. You have arrested many students and web bloggers for expressing opinions.
Rafsanjani: I am essentially against any harsh approach to these issues in Iran. There is no need for such actions. Each department and institution has its own authorities and responsibilities, and they act on that basis. It is wrong to even compare such actions to what is done in Guantanamo or elsewhere by the Americans. They do not stand on a high moral platform to preach to others.
Slavin: You've said Secretary of State Condi Rice is very tough. What about President Bush?
Rafsanjani: Condi Rice talks tough but she cannot be tough herself.
Slavin: And Bush?
Rafsanjani: President Bush also has slips of the tongue often. One could really write a full editorial comprising these slips. I do not think it is correct or appropriate for someone in that high position as the president of the United States (to talk that way). The United States is a big country but unfortunately it seems it has the brain of a little bird not befitting the greatness of the country.
Slavin: Does Iran need or want nuclear weapons, given that Israel, India and Pakistan have them?
Rafsanjani: We are certain that we will never use such weapons, therefore they have no utility for us. Even during our war with Iraq, we could have employed chemical weapons but we refrained. I'm sure you must be aware of the casualties we faced (some 750,000 dead or wounded over eight years). It is unfortunate that I have to stress that your country is among those that have to share part of the guilt (because the United States supplied chemical munitions to Saddam Hussein during 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war).
Slavin: Is there anything more you want to tell American people about your views on United States?
Rafsanjani: The mere fact that I am sitting here talking to you is an indication that we have no differences with the American people. This would not happen with an Israeli journalist. We want good relations with the American people. There has to be a dialogue between the governments, but what can one do when your government has always wronged us? We need to see evidence that this process will be reversed.
Referring to leaders of the Mujaheddin Khalq, an anti-Iranian regime group that is on the State Department's terrorist list but many of whose members are under U.S. protection in Iraq
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2005-02-06-rafsanjani-text_x.htm#question
Reza Pahlavi in a different capacity as the most qualified uniter would be a welcome savior to most Iranians. He has my vote as the force to implement the transition government and then, I am sure he will have the gratitude of the nation to spill over into being elected constitutionally once that is rewritten.
Let Freedom Reign!
I would say the flip around in Rafswnjani’s wish to be a candidate for presidency, shows mullahs are scared knowing they need someone else who can pretend to be a moderate to prolong their stay in power. This peachy report is a mask since in the election, if Iranians are not fooled into not voting, they will show their vote of no confidence in the murderous mullahs. Unfortunately there will not be a real opposition to the regime on the ballet. But that high vote turn out is needed for Iranians to confirm their displeasure with their regime by expressing their wish to change everyone holding office. I fear the pretend oppositions will encourage them to stay home and not vote.
bump
Bump!
People of Iran may look at him as some body whom they can gather behind and back the struggle for freedom sstronger!
Iran needs an Iranian type of Iraqi INC for the transitional government.
I don't think Reza Pahlavi can become the transitional leader of Iran, he is more valuable than an interim leader. His leadership can be determined in a free election once the interim government gains the control in my country. Although at this moment, details are not important. Freedom of Iran is much more important than these details.
And for Iran, the SHAH (KING) has been a symbol of uniting the country in its path to the future and prosperity.
I believe in democratic mind and sould of Reza Pahlavi and I am sure he can be a very real democratic king for Iran.
He has my support and many others' inside and outside of Iran.
Iran’s Ebadi protests against maltreatment in Evin
Monday, February 07, 2005 - ©2005 IranMania.com
LONDON, Feb 7 (IranMania) – Prominent Iranian lawyer, Shirin Ebadi through a letter to the Human Rights Commission of the Iranian Lawyers’ Association affiliated to the country’s Justice Department protested against the discriminatory behavior of Evin Prison’s guards toward her, Iran’s Sina News Agency reported.
The Nobel Peace Prize Laureate is Nasser Zarafshan’s lawyer who was arrested in August 7th, 2002. Zarafchan was sentenced to two years imprisonment for opinions that he had expressed during interviews with the press, concerning the trial dealing with the assassinations of Iranian intellectuals, which came to a ‘conclusion’ in January 2001. He was also sentenced to three years imprisonment for "possession of firearms and alcoholic drinks”.
“Although there is no rule for lawyers regarding wearing a chador while entering the prison, the guards forced me to do so and carried out a body search in a bid to insult me.” Ebadi said
Ebadi asserted that since she decided to represent the family of Iranian-Canadian Zahra Kazemi at the trial of the security agent charged with her murder, many Evin Prison staff including the guards have taken a hostile approach towards her.
http://www.iranmania.com/News/ArticleView/Default.asp?NewsCode=29477&NewsKind=Current%20Affairs
"No torture in Iran’s judicial system": Alizadeh
Monday, February 07, 2005 - ©2005 IranMania.com
LONDON, Feb 7 (IranMania) – The Head of Tehran’s Justice Department took part in a press conference in Tehran on Sunday commenting on a variety of issues.
Concerning the recent statements issued by different European circles on Iran’s human rights and judicial situation, Alizadeh noted: “We have to make the Human Rights Commission understand two main issues. First, for certain crimes, we have our own rules and punishments and they have no right to comment on such matters. Second, in other cases we act as the rest of the world does. For example we also avoid illegal arrests and condemn torture. We have no such punishments as stoning or cutting body parts.”
Human rights advocates and organizations have recently built up pressure on Iran to change its policies regarding its judicial rules. However Iranian officials obstinately try to play down the protests through every possible means, turning a deaf ear to critics who decry Iran’s insular approach toward such issues.
"We have recently found out that many housing cooperatives affiliated to governmental organizations have been involved in illegal land grabs in different parts of the country. Therefore we have set up a special court to deal with the issue." Alizadeh said.
He declined to comment on the upcoming presidential elections saying: "Election is a matter of politics and the Judiciary prefers to distance itself from political issues."
http://www.iranmania.com/News/ArticleView/Default.asp?NewsCode=29478&NewsKind=Current%20Affairs
Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi in flight suite. He was an F-5 pilot
bump
I as well am for Reza Pahlavi to head the revolution. Once there, let Iranians decide what is next in their election and he would be the obvious choice. I am not sure of the viability of monarchy for 21st century Iran. But I as well as all know he is the best choice to lead Iran under any title.
Thanks for the ping Phil. That is interesting to read. I pray that Iraq doesn't let the Islamic Mullahs take control of their government. If they do well in Iraq it will influence Iran and possibly Syria.
Sorry, the source is: RFE/RL Iran Report Vol. 8, No. 6, 7 February 2005
Rafsanjani: The mere fact that I am sitting here talking to you is an indication that we have no differences with the American people. This would not happen with an Israeli journalist. We want good relations with the American people. There has to be a dialogue between the governments, but what can one do when your government has always wronged us?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
