[DoctorZIn]

Join Us At Today's Iranian Alert Thread – The Most Underreported Story Of The Year!

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail DoctorZin”

[DoctorZIn]

Join Us At Today's Iranian Alert Thread – The Most Underreported Story Of The Year!

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail DoctorZin”

[Betaille]

G-d bless you. I hope the Iranians kick their leaders out of power and hang them. I hope Bush helps them. If he does, he will get re-elected in a landslide... the poll boost will still be on-going by election day.

[DoctorZIn]

Important!
I am posting this thread at midnight, Eastern Standard Time.
If your have any comments on this change, please freepmail me.

DoctorZin

[DoctorZIn]

IRAN WARNED OF RECIPROCITY COUNTRIES THAT ACT AGAINST IT

TEHRAN, 14 Mar. (IPS)

Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the Iranian regime’s number two man reiterated Sunday that his country was determined to acquire advanced nuclear technologies and no force in the world can stop it on this way.

Speaking to Iranian and foreign correspondents, Mr. Hashemi Rafsanjani, who is the Chairman of the powerful Assembly for Discerning the Interests of the State (ADIS, or the Expediency Council) said all the regime’s leaders are unanimous that Iran must have advanced nuclear technologies for peaceful purposes, including the fuel needed for the atomic powered electricity plants.

But he said at the same time, Iran was ready to show everything to the world in order to dissipate concerns over its nuclear-related activities.

The cleric, who was celebrating the 25th anniversary of the ADIS, criticised the Resolution passed on Saturday by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Board of Directors, describing it as "unexpected", especially after Iran had open cooperation with the Vienna-based organization.

On Saturday, the 35 Directors of the United Nations international nuclear watchdog approved a resolution without vote taking that deplores Iran’s hiding of some of its nuclear programs and equipments, used mostly for enriching uranium, but at the same time praised Tehran’s recent cooperation with the Agency.

"We were expecting them (the Directors) to express gratitude towards Iran, something that they did but at the same time they accused us and by doing so, they soured the taste of the thanking. That was a big mistake", he said.

The former president also sent a strong warning to all the nations that acted against Iran at the IAEA, saying what one must not forget these countries and the best way to deal with them was to reciprocate.

"However, as a result of the decision, the past confidence Iran had placed on the IAEA has vanished", Mr. Hashemi Rafsanjani said, adding that one needed more time to rebuild confidence.

As about the same time, Mr. Hamid Reza Asefi, the senior spokesman for Iranian Foreign Affairs Ministry regretted the language used by the Directors in the Resolution, saying that in response, Iran had decided to delay indefinitely the next visit to Iran of the IAEA inspectors, that was due next week, coinciding with the long No Rooz holidays of the Iranian New Year, that starts on 21 March.

"Iran does not accept such a language and literature from any one and the postponement of the visit by international inspectors is in answer to the insulting language used in the Resolution", he told journalists during his weekly press briefing.

Like Hojjatoleslam Hasan Rohani, the Secretary of the Supreme Council on National Security who is also Iran’s senior negotiator with IAEA, Mr. Asefi observed that the Resolution does not impose any new commitments on the Islamic Republic and warned, "Anyhow, Iran would not accept any new engagements".

Here is the full text of the draft resolution submitted by the chairman of the IAEA board of governors, which was adopted without a vote:

The Board of Governors:

(a) Recalling the resolutions adopted by the Board on 26 November 2003 (GOV/2003/81), and on 12 September 2003 (GOV/2003/69) and the statement by the Board of 19 June 2003 (GOV/OR.1072),

(b) Noting with appreciation the Director General's report of 24 February 2004 (GOV/2004/11), on the implementation of safeguards in Iran,

(c) Commending the Director General and the Secretariat for their continuing efforts to implement the Safeguards Agreement with Iran and to resolve all outstanding issues in Iran,

(d) Noting with satisfaction that Iran signed the Additional Protocol on 18 December 2003 and that, in its communication to the Director General of 10 November 2003, Iran committed itself to acting in accordance with the provisions of the Protocol with effect from that date; but also noting that the Protocol has not yet been ratified as called for in the Board's resolutions of 12 September 2003 (GOV/2003/69) and November 2003 (GOV/2003/81),

(e) Noting the decision by Iran of 24 February 2004 to extend the scope of its suspension of enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, and its confirmation that the suspension applied to all facilities in Iran,

(f) Noting with serious concern that the declarations made by Iran in October 2003 did not amount to the complete and final picture of Iran's past and present nuclear program considered essential by the Board's November 2003 resolution, in that the Agency has since uncovered a number of omissions -- e.g., a more advanced centrifuge design than previously declared, including associated research, manufacturing and testing activities; two mass spectrometers used in the laser enrichment program; and designs for the construction of hot cells at the Arak heavy water research reactor -- which require further investigation, not least as they may point to nuclear activities not so far acknowledged by Iran;

(g) Noting with equal concern that Iran has not resolved all questions regarding the development of its enrichment technology to its current extent, and that a number of other questions remain unresolved, including the source of all HEU contamination in Iran; the location, extent, and purpose of activities involving the planned heavy-water reactor, and evidence to support claims regarding the purpose of polonium-210 experiments, and

(h) Noting with concern also in light of the Director General's report of 20 February 2004 (GOV/2004/12), that, although the timelines are different, Iran's and Libya's conversion and centrifuge programs share several common elements, including technology largely obtained from the same foreign sources,

1. Recognizes that the Director General reports Iran to have been actively cooperating with the Agency in providing access to locations requested by the Agency, but, as Iran's cooperation so far has fallen short of what is required, calls on Iran to continue and intensify its cooperation, in particular through the prompt and proactive provision of detailed and accurate information on every aspect of Iran's past and present nuclear activities.

2. Welcomes Iran's signature of the Additional Protocol, urges its prompt ratification, underlines the Board's understanding that, in its communication to the Director General of 10 November 2003, Iran voluntarily committed itself to acting in accordance with the provisions of the Protocol with effect from that date; and stresses the importance of Iran complying with the deadline for declarations envisaged in Article 3 of the Protocol;

3. Recalls that in its resolutions of 26 November 2003 and 12 September 2003 the Board called on Iran to suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, notes that Iran's voluntary decisions of 29 December 2003 and 24 February 2004 constitute useful steps in this respect, calls on Iran to extend the application of this commitment to all such activities throughout Iran, and requests the Director General to verify the full implementation of these steps'

4. Deplores that Iran, as detailed in the report by the Director General, omitted any reference, in its letter of 21 October 2003 which was to have provided the 'full scope of Iranian nuclear activities' and a 'complete centrifuge R&D chronology', to its possession of P-2 centrifuge design drawings and to associated research, manufacturing, and mechanical testing activities -- which the Director General describes as 'a matter of serious concern, particularly in view of the importance and sensitivity of those activities';

5. Echoes the concern expressed by the Director General over the issue of the purpose of Iran's activities related to experiments on the production and intended use of polonium-210, in the absence of information to support Iran's statements in this regard;

6. Calls on Iran to be pro-active in taking all necessary steps on an urgent basis to resolve all outstanding issues, including the issue of LEU and HEU contamination at the Kalaye Electric Company workshop and Natanz; the issue of the nature and scope of Iran's laser isotope enrichment research; and the issue of the experiments on the production of polonium-210;

7. Notes with appreciation that the Agency is investigating the supply routes and sources of technology and related equipment, and nuclear and non-nuclear materials, found in Iran, and reiterates that the urgent, full and close cooperation with the Agency of all third countries is essential in the clarification of outstanding questions concerning Iran's nuclear program, including the acquisition of nuclear technology from foreign sources; and also appreciates any cooperation in this regard as may already have been extended to the Agency;

8. Requests the Director General to report on these issues before the end of May, as well as on the implementation of this and prior resolutions on Iran, for consideration by the June Board of Governors -- or to report earlier if appropriate; and

9. Decides to defer until its June meeting, and after the receipt of the report of the Director General referred to above, consideration of progress in verifying Iran's declarations, and of how to respond to the above-mentioned omissions; and

10. Decides to remain seized of the matter.

ENDS IAEA IRAN RESOLUTION 14304

http://www.iran-press-service.com/articles_2004/Mar_04/iaea_iran_resolution_14304.htm

[DoctorZIn]

Iraq Governing Council delegation heads for Iran


Baghdad, March 13, IRNA --

A high-ranking delegation from the Iraq Governing Council left here for Tehran Saturday morning to discuss possible avenues for bolstering mutual ties.

The current president of the council, Mohammad Bahr al-Uloum, heads the delegation, comprising a number of Iraqi ministers. During its five-day stay in Iran, the Iraqi delegation is scheduled to meet with a number of senior Iranian officials.

Iranian Charge d'Affaires to Iraq Hassan Kazemi Qomi, who is accompanying the Iraqi delegation, said the visit is aimed at strengthening bilateral cooperation.

He said exchange of pilgrims for holy sites is among the most important issues to be discussed.

Kazemi Qomi noted that Iraq's minister of the interior and foreign minister are accompanying Bahr al-Uloum, saying the ministers would be conferring with their Iranian counterparts on security issues, foreign policy, regional and international developments.

The official termed this visit by the Iraqi delegation to Iran as important considering the recent domestic developments in that country which have great significance. An important development is the signing last week of the Iraqi interim constitution.

A high-ranking delegation of the Iraq Governing Council headed by the council's then president, Jalal Talabani, visited Iran in November 2003.

http://www.payvand.com/news/04/mar/1100.html

[DoctorZIn]

RETHINKING THE ARAB WORLD IN CAIRO

by Amir Taheri
Townhall
March 14, 2004

According to the Arab media the conference of Arab foreign ministers, held in Cairo recently, ended with "total failure."

The ministers, representing the 22 members of the Arab League, were supposed to approve a package of recommendations for the Arab summit scheduled to be held in Tunis at the end of March.

The package was expected to include three elements: a common Arab position vis-à-vis Washington's so-called "Greater Middle East Initiative"; a blueprint for reforming the Arab League itself; and a set of recommendations for internal political and economic reforms.

In Cairo it became clear that there would be no such package.

Contrary to the unanimous opinion of the Arab media, I think the Cairo ministerial conference, far from being a total failure, was something of a modest success.

Let us start with the Greater Middle East Initiative issue.

At the Cairo meeting, three views emerged with regard to the Arab response.

Some members wanted the conference to dismiss the American initiative as a blatant attempt at intervention in the internal affairs of sovereign and independent nations. Their argument was simple: Washington has no business telling us how we should run our domestic political and economic lives?

A second view belonged to those members who wanted the conference to extend a diplomatic welcome to the American initiative without committing the Arabs to any particular course of action.

The idea is that the United States has entered an electoral season and that President George W Bush should be treated as a lame-duck until his fate is known on 2 November. It is no secret that a majority of he Arab League members wish to see the back of George W and believe that, if elected president, John Kerry would prove more malleable.

A third view, held by half a dozen members, was that the American initiative must be sincerely welcomed and used as part of a set of ideas designed to attract Western diplomatic, political and economic support for an ambitious all-round modernisation programme of the Arab world.

The second issue that divided the conference concerned the reform of the Arab League. Everyone admitted that the league, created by the British as an instrument of their strategy in the Middle East, and later transformed into an arm of pan-Arabism wielded by Egypt, serves little or no purpose today.

We know of at least two members that want the league to be abolished outright.

The league's bureaucracy, led by Amr Moussa, a former Foreign Minister of Egypt, presented its own reform project. But this turned out to be a recipe for a massive expansion of the league's bureaucracy and budget without redefining its raison d'etre.

The league project envisages the creation of an Arab parliament, and half a dozen "councils" dealing with social, cultural, economic and technological issues. If implemented, the project will turn the Arab League into a gigantic paper-pushing machine modelled on the European Union but without the latter's mission and mandate.

While most members tried to remain polite in response to the project, some made it clear that it would be laughed out of the forthcoming summit.

Another project came from Saudi Arabia and Egypt while Libya and Yemen offered a verbal account of how they wished to reform the league. The conference also examined a more detailed reform project prepared by Qatar more than three years ago while Algeria expressed a few ideas of its own.

There was no agreement on any reform plan because the real question-what is the league for?- remains un-tackled.

The third, and tougher, issue that divided the Cairo conference concerned domestic political and economic reforms.

Here, too, the league membership divided into three groups.

One group consisted of members that pretend that their regimes are so perfect as to require no reforms. They know that reform becomes meaningful if different policies are introduced and implemented by different people. And, yet, they have no intention of doing things differently, let alone allowing others to do it. These guys remind one of the orchestra on the Titanic, playing the same tune while the ship is sinking.

A second group consisted of members that are prepared to offer minor concessions so as to avoid major ones. They regard a strategic reform deal with the US and the European Union as a means of both limiting the scope of changes needed and providing additional insurance for their own regimes.

Finally, a small number of members appeared to be genuinely committed to reform. These are the guys who know that their neck of the wood cannot remain the only spot on the globe where basic political, cultural and economic freedoms remain severely restricted.

By the year 2010 almost all members of the league will have joined the World Trade Organisation (WTO), thus committing themselves to a set of new rules that cannot be ignored let alone violated at will. At the same time, in all Arab states the new middle classes are beginning to discover their potential power and demand a share in the decision-making process.

Now, let us see why the Cairo conference could be regarded as a success.

The first reason is that the participants broke with a 50-year tradition under which all league conferences and summits had to end with a "position of unity."

Over decades league members have approved the most ill-considered, not to say dangerously stupid, positions simply because they confused unity with unanimity.

They have voted for policies that they knew were based on lies and could lead only to disaster, because none wished to be singled out as "the breaker of sacred unity." In some cases they have had to sacrifice the concrete interests of their own people in order to serve an abstract, and often non-existent, pan-Arab interest.

Obsession with unanimity prevented the members from telling the truth even when the Arab world was being marched into a trap by incompetent and irresponsible leaders. Anyone who stepped out of line, like Tunisia's Habib Bourguiba in his time, would be ostracised, or, as was the case with Egypt's Anwar Sadat, assassinated.

The Cairo conference must be seen as the first nail in the coffin of unanimity masquerading as unity.

Many members have passed on a simple message: we shall not endorse policies that contradict not only our own national interest but also the rules of reason!

And that, you can be sure, is a great coming of age for many Arab states that are fed up with being bullied by their bigger brothers in the name of unity.

The second reason why the Cairo conference was a success is that it refused to fudge the issue of the Greater Middle East Initiative. It was a wise move to wait and see what the American project actually consists of.

Grown-up Arab states should have no problem examining the project with a cool head, accepting parts that they judge to be reasonable and in their own national interest, rejecting parts that are not.

The Arab League could have a future only if it is reorganised on the basis of unity without unanimity and in the context of diversity. And even then it would have to look for minimum consensus on a small number of issues where full agreement is possible, allowing member states to pursue their own national policies in all other domains. To expect so many states with different geopolitical interests, economic systems, political structures, national aspirations, and cultural backgrounds, to adopt exactly the same policies on all issues is naïve, to say the least.

For the first time, the Cairo conference acknowledged that fact by showing that the Arab are not robots that think and move alike on all issues. And that, tome at least, looks like success.

Amir Taheri is an Iranian author of ten books on the Middle East and Islam. He's reachable through www.benadorassociates.com.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/GuestColumns/Taheri20040313.shtml

[DoctorZIn]

Iran punishing itself by delaying inspections: IAEA

AFP[ MONDAY, MARCH 15, 2004 06:55:00 AM ]

WASHINGTON: Iran is punishing itself by delaying international inspections since this will prolong the UN nuclear watchdog's investigation of Tehran's atomic programme, the watchdog's head Mohamed ElBaradei said.

"It is not a question of punishing the agency. They will be punishing themselves if they delay things," ElBaradei told reporters yesterday on a flight from Vienna to Washington, where he is to meet on Wednesday with US President George W Bush.

The watchdog the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) adopted on Saturday in Vienna a US-backed resolution condemning Iran for hiding possibly weapons-related nuclear activities, drawing ire from Tehran, which suspended inspections.

Iran warned again yesterday it could revise the level of its cooperation with the international nuclear watchdog, but said it has no plans to pull out of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

Foreign ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi also left open the return of IAEA inspectors, which Tehran suspended after the strong IAEA resolution against it, but said this would have to be renegotiated.

The IAEA, which verifies the NPT, has since February 2003 been working to determine whether Iran's nuclear programme is peaceful, or geared towards secretly developing atomic weapons as the United States has charged.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/560403.cms

[DoctorZIn]

Iran makes big strides in missile capability

Abu Dhabi |By Nadim Kawach, Bureau Chief | 15-03-2004

Iran has made big strides in building a military missile capability and is in the process of producing a long-range rocket that could fly as far as 5,000km.

Although it has sought missile technology from China, Russia and North Korea, Iran is now heavily reliant on its own resources and technology for home-made missiles and other military hardware, according to a UAE defence magazine.

Its missile industry programmes picked up after the 1980-1988 war with neighbouring Iraq, in which the bulk of Iran's defence capability was destroyed, said the Abu Dhabi-based Arabic language magazine Gulf Defence.

In study entitled Iran: the past empire…the present and future republic, the magazine said Iran was the world's fourth largest military power after the United States, former Soviet Union and China before the 1979 Islamic revolution overthrew its late Shah.

"Iran's military capability was crushed during the war with Iraq…after the war, it started to cooperate with North Korea, China and Russia to rebuild its defence capability…the focus has been on missiles after it was hit by Iraqi missiles during the war," said the study by Major General Ali Mohammed Rajab, a retired Egyptian army officer.

"Iran has made substantial progress in its military industries by producing home-made long range missiles, jet fighters and tanks despite the boycott and isolation which it is suffering…this shows how skilful the Iranians are in dodging the boycott and overcoming international political and military hurdles."

Citing international military sources, the study estimated Iran's armed forces at more than 545,000 troops, including 350,000 infantry soldiers, 50,000 air personnel and nearly 20,600 navy men. Its defence spending was put at an average 2.7 per cent of the gross domestic product over the past few years, one of the highest ratios.

With such a force, the study considered Iran as militarily superior to all GCC countries, adding that nearly 70 per cent of Iran's arsenal includes old US-made weapons.

Iran's first major home-made missiles include Shahin 2 and Iqab, with a range of between 60-150km. Medium-range missiles were then developed, with a range of between 500-600km and another updated generation with a range of 1,000 developed in collaboration with North Korea and Russia.

"Iran has also produced an advanced missile named Shehab-3 with a range of 1,300km and is 17-metre long…it is capable of carrying an 800-kg warhead….the missile is a product of technological cooperation with North Korea, Germany, Russia and China…this missile is a developed version of the North Korean Nodong missile, which is itself an advanced version of the Russian Scud," the study said.

"Iran is now in the process of developing strategic missiles with a range of 2,000km…it is called Shehab-4, which depends on the technology employed in the Russian Sandal SS-4 missile, which has a range of 3,600km….it can carry non-conventional warheads weighing between 250-500kg."

It said that missile would be followed by another one, the Shehab-5, with a range of 5,000km, which Iran says is designed to serve its space programmes.

To support such missile power, Iran is also trying to acquire advanced fighters, including the Russian-built Mig29 and Sukhoi 30 as well as T-90 and T-72 tanks. It is also building an advanced electronic air control and radar system covering Iran and other Gulf countries, part of Israel, southern Russia, Turkey and other areas.

The study said it believes Iran, which has been under international pressure over its nuclear programmes, is rebuilding its military arsenal for self-defence on the grounds most of its weapons have a defence rather than an assault nature.

"Iran wants to reach a situation where it can ensure relative security to its territory, sovereignty and infrastructure…the Iranian armed forces appear to be taking into consideration the political and security concerns of other countries and in return expect those countries to take into account Iran's defence and strategic needs," it said.

"Some regional countries see in Iran an extension of their efforts to face external threats and challenges….this runs counter to the intentions and objectives of some non-regional states which are working to spark rifts within the region…Iran's concept of building its defence capability is based on the need to remove fears by its neighbours as the bulk of its military industries have a defence nature, or to a lesser extent, a deterrent nature."

http://www.gulf-news.com/Articles/news.asp?ArticleID=113979

[DoctorZIn]

Rôle of US Former Pres. Carter Emerging in Illegal Financial Demands on Shah of Iran

Defense & Foreign Affairs Daily
Volume XXII, No. 46
Monday, March 15, 2004
© 2004, Global Information System, ISSA

Exclusive. Analysis. By Alan Peters,1 GIS. Strong intelligence has begun to emerge that US President Jimmy Carter attempted to demand financial favors for his political friends from the Shah of Iran. The rejection of this demand by the Shah could well have led to Pres. Carter’s resolve to remove the Iranian Emperor from office.

The linkage between the destruction of the Shah’s Government — directly attributable to Carter’s actions — and the Iran-Iraq war which cost millions of dead and injured on both sides, and to the subsequent rise of radical Islamist terrorism makes the new information of considerable significance.

Pres. Carter’s anti-Shah feelings appeared to have ignited after he sent a group of several of his friends from his home state, Georgia, to Tehran with an audience arranged with His Majesty directly by the Oval Office and in Carter’s name. At this meeting, as reported by Prime Minister Amir Abbas Hoveyda to some confidantes, these businessmen told the Shah that Pres. Carter wanted a contract. previously awarded to Brown & Root to build a huge port complex at Bandar Mahshahr, to be cancelled and as a personal favor to him to be awarded to the visiting group at 10 percent above the cost quoted by Brown & Root.

The group would then charge the 10 percent as a management fee and supervise the project for Iran, passing the actual construction work back to Brown & Root for implementation, as previously awarded. They insisted that without their management the project would face untold difficulties at the US end and that Pres. Carter was “trying to be helpful”. They told the Shah that in these perilous political times, he should appreciate the favor which Pres. Carter was doing him.

According to Prime Minister Hoveyda, the Georgia visitors left a stunned monarch and his bewildered Prime Minister speechless, other than to later comment among close confidantes about the hypocrisy of the US President, who talked glibly of God and religion but practiced blackmail and extortion through his emissaries.

The multi-billion dollar Bandar Mahshahr project would have made 10 percent “management fee” a huge sum to give away to Pres. Carter’s friends as a favor for unnecessary services. The Shah politely declined the “personal” management request which had been passed on to him. The refusal appeared to earn the Shah the determination of Carter to remove him from office.

Carter subsequently refused to allow tear gas and rubber bullets to be exported to Iran when anti-Shah rioting broke out, nor to allow water cannon vehicles to reach Iran to control such outbreaks, generally instigated out of the Soviet Embassy in Tehran. There was speculation in some Iranian quarters — as well as in some US minds — at the time and later that Carter’s actions were the result of either close ties to, or empathy for, the Soviet Union, which was anxious to break out of the longstanding US-led strategic containment of the USSR, which had prevented the Soviets from reaching the warm waters of the Indian Ocean.

Sensing that Iran’s exports could be blocked by a couple of ships sunk in the Persian Gulf shipping lanes, the Shah planned a port which would have the capacity to handle virtually all of Iran’s sea exports unimpeded.

Contrary to accusations leveled at him about the huge, “megalomaniac” projects like Bandar Mahshahr, these served as a means to provide jobs for a million graduating high school students every year for whom there were no university slots available. Guest workers, mostly from Pakistan and Afghanistan were used to start and expand the projects and Iranians replaced the foreigners as job demand required, while essential infrastructure for Iran was built ahead of schedule.

In late February 2004, Islamic Iran’s Deputy Minister of Economy stated that the country needed $18-billion a year to create one-million jobs and achieve economic prosperity. And at the first job creation conference held in Tehran’s Amir Kabir University, Iran’s Student News Agency estimated the jobless at some three-million. Or a budget figure of $54-billion to deal with the problem.

Thirty years earlier, the Shah had already taken steps to resolve the same challenges, which were lost in the revolution which had been so resolutely supported by Jimmy Carter.

A quarter-century after the toppling of the Shah and his Government by the widespread unrest which had been largely initiated by groups with Soviet funding — but which was, ironically, to bring the mullahs rather than the radical-left to power — Ayatollah Shariatmadari’s warning that the clerics were not equipped to run the country was echoed by the Head of Islamic Iran’s Investment Organization, who said: “We are hardly familiar with the required knowledge concerning the proper use of foreign resources both in State and private sectors, nor how to make the best use of domestic resources.” Not even after 25 years.

Historians and observers still debate Carter’s reasons for his actions during his tenure at the White House, where almost everything, including shutting down satellite surveillance over Cuba at an inappropriate time for the US, seemed to benefit Soviet aims and policies. Some claim he was inept and ignorant, others that he was allowing his liberal leanings to overshadow US national interests.

The British Foreign & Commonwealth Office had enough doubts in this respect, even to the extent of questioning whether Carter was a Russian mole, that they sent around 200 observers to monitor Carter’s 1980 presidential campaign against Ronald Reagan to see if the Soviets would try to “buy” the presidency for Carter.

In the narrow aspect of Carter setting aside international common sense to remove the US’ most powerful ally in the Middle East, this focused change was definitely contrary to US interests and events over the next 25 years proved this.

According to Prime Minister Hoveyda, Jimmy Carter’s next attack on the Shah was a formal country to country demand that the Shah sign a 50-year oil agreement with the US to supply oil at a fixed price of $8 a barrel. No longer couched as a personal request, the Shah was told he should heed the contract proposal if he wished to enjoy continued support from the US. In these perilous, political times which, could become much worse.

Faced with this growing pressure and threat, the monarch still could not believe that Iran, the staunchest US ally in the region, other than Israel, would be discarded or maimed so readily by Carter, expecting he would be prevailed upon by more experienced minds to avoid destabilizing the regional power structure and tried to explain his position. Firstly, Iran did not have 50-years of proven oil reserves that could be covered by a contract. Secondly, when the petrochemical complex in Bandar Abbas, in the South, was completed a few years later, each barrel of oil would produce $1,000 worth of petrochemicals so it would be treasonous for the Shah to give oil away for only $8.

Apologists, while acknowledging that Carter had caused the destabilization of the monarchy in Iran, claim he was only trying to salvage what he could from a rapidly deteriorating political situation to obtain maximum benefits for the US. But, after the Shah was forced from the throne, Carter’s focused effort to get re-elected via the Iran hostage situation points to less high minded motives.

Rumor has always had it that Carter had tried to negotiate to have the US hostages, held for 444 days by the Islamic Republic which he had helped establish in Iran, released just before the November 1980 election date, but that opposition (Republican) candidate Ronald Reagan had subverted, taken over and blocked the plan. An eye-witness account of the seizure by “students” of the US Embassy on November 4, 1979, in Tehran confirms a different scenario.

The mostly “rent-a-crowd” group of “students” organized to climb the US Embassy walls was spearheaded by a mullah on top of a Volkswagen van, who with a two-way radio in one hand and a bullhorn in the other, controlled the speed of the march on the Embassy according to instructions he received over the radio. He would slow it down, hurry it up and slow it down again in spurts and starts, triggering the curiosity of an educated pro-Khomeini vigilante, who later told the story to a friend in London.

When asked by the vigilante for the reason of this irregular movement, the stressed cleric replied that he had instructions to provide the US Embassy staff with enough time to destroy their most sensitive documents and to give the three most senior US diplomats adequate opportunity to then take refuge at the Islamic Republic Foreign Ministry rather than be taken with the other hostages. Someone at the Embassy was informing the Foreign Ministry as to progress over the telephone and the cleric was being told what to do over his radio.

The vigilante then asked why the Islamic Government would bother to be so accommodating to the Great Satan and was told that the whole operation was planned in advance by Prime Minister Mehdi Bazargan’s revolutionary Government with Pres. Carter in return for Carter having helped depose the Shah and that this was being done to ensure Carter got re-elected. “He helped us, now we help him” was the matter-of-fact comment from the cleric.

In 1978 while the West was deciding to remove His Majesty Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi from the throne, Shariatmadari was telling anyone who would listen not to allow “Ayatollah” Ruhollah Khomeini and his velayat faghih (Islamic jurist) version of Islam to be allowed to govern Iran. Ayatollah Shariatmadari noted: “We mullahs will behave like bickering whores in a brothel if we come to power ... and we have no experience on how to run a modern nation so we will destroy Iran and lose all that has been achieved at such great cost and effort.”2

Pres. Carter reportedly responded that Khomeini was a religious man — as he himself claimed to be — and that he knew how to talk to a man of God, who would live in the holy city of Qom like an Iranian “pope” and act only as an advisor to the secular, popular revolutionary Government of Mehdi Bazargan and his group of anti-Shah executives, some of whom were US-educated and expected to show preferences for US interests.

Carter’s mistaken assessment of Khomeini was encouraged by advisors with a desire to form an Islamic “green belt” to contain atheist Soviet expansion with the religious fervor of Islam. Eventually all 30 of the scenarios on Iran presented to Carter by his intelligence agencies proved wrong, and totally misjudged Khomeini as a person and as a political entity.

Today, Iranian-born, Grand Ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani, the dominant Shia leader in Iraq faces Shariatmadari’s dilemma and shares the same “quietist” Islamic philosophy of sharia (religious law) guidance rather than direct governing by the clerics themselves. Sistani’s “Khomeini” equivalent, militant Ayatollah Mohammed Baqir al-Sadr, was gunned down in 1999 by then-Iraqi Pres. Saddam Hussein’s forces. Sadr’s son, 30-year-old Muqtada al-Sadr, lacks enough followers or religious seniority/clout to immediately oppose Sistani but has a hard core of violent followers biding their time.

According to all estimates, the young Sadr waits for the June 2004 scheduled handover of power in Iraq, opening the way for serious, militant intervention on his side by Iranian clerics. The Iranian clerical leaders, the successors to Khomeini, see, far more clearly than US leaders and observers, the parallels between 1979-80 and 2004: as a result, they have put far more effort into activities designed to ensure that “Reagan’s successor”, US Pres. George W. Bush, does not win power.

Footnotes:

1. © 2004 Alan Peters. The name “Alan Peters” is a nom de plume for a writer who was for many years involved in intelligence and security matters in Iran. He had significant access inside Iran at the highest levels during the rule of the Shah, until early 1979.

2. See Defense & Foreign Affairs Daily, March 2, 2004: Credibility and Legitimacy of Ruling Iranian Clerics Unraveling as Pressures Mount Against Them; The Source of Clerical Ruling Authority Now Being Questioned. This report, also by Alan Peters, details the background of “Ayatollah” Khomeini, the fact that his qualifications for his religious title were not in place, and the fact that he was not of Iranian origin.

[DoctorZIn]

Unrest and clashes continue in N. Iran

SMCCDI (information Service)
Mar 15, 2004

Unrest and violent clashes continued, today and for the 3rd consecutive day, in Fereydoon-Kenar and spreaded to the neighboring cities of Babolsar, Khezer-Shahr and Babol.

Thousands of residents came into the streets especially in Fereydoon-Kenar and resisted to the brutal assaults of the regime forces. Several more demonstrators have been wounded in the today's clashes after the regime heliported special forces opened the charge.

Barricades have been formed and tires set ablaze by the residents who are defended by armed masked young freedom fighters.

All night long, noise of sporadic shootings where heard in the city and a man hunt was organized by the regime forces trying to arrest those involved in the organization of the popular resistance.

Sporadic demos took place in Babolsar, Khezer-Shahr and Babol where the crowd came into the streets by shouting slogans against the regime and its leaders. Road blocks have been instated by the regime forces in order to keep the demonstrators separate .

The situation of the region is very tense and the security measures have been increased in the cities of Amol, Now-Shahr and Chaloos.

http://www.daneshjoo.org/generalnews/article/publish/article_5351.shtml

[DoctorZIn]

Iran Expects Nuclear Inspectors to Return

March 15, 2004
Reuters
Paul Hughes

TEHRAN -- Iran will allow the resumption of U.N. nuclear inspections it halted last week in protest at a tough resolution on its nuclear program, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator was quoted as saying on Monday.

But Hassan Rohani, secretary-general of the Supreme National Security Council, did not specify when inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) would be allowed back.

"We will definitely reach an agreement with the agency on the resumption of inspections," the official IRNA news agency quoted Rohani as saying.

Speaking to reporters before leaving for an official visit to Japan, Rohani said the suspension of IAEA visits was a "technical matter." He did not elaborate.

Iran suspended the inspections as the IAEA board of governors drafted a tough resolution criticizing Iran for failing to report sensitive nuclear research which could be used to make bomb material.

IAEA Chief Mohamed ElBaradei said on Saturday Iranian officials had promised to give him an answer later this week to his calls for a swift resumption of inspections.

Several Western diplomats said they suspected Iran may have frozen inspections because it has something to hide.

Iran strongly denies U.S. accusations it is pursuing nuclear weapons and says its atomic program is geared solely to producing electricity.

HARD-LINER SAYS END COOPERATION

Rohani called on all members of the IAEA board to cooperate with Iran to "bring a closure to Iran's case."

But an influential hard-line commentator appointed by Iran's Supreme Leader said Iran would never get a fair hearing at the IAEA and called for Tehran to halt cooperation with the agency.

"It is now definitely obvious that the IAEA, in its sly moves and by killing time, is trying to deprive Iran of nuclear technology," Hossein Shariatmadari, president of the hardline Kayhan publishing group, wrote in the English-language Kayhan International on Thursday.

Shariatmadari, whom many analysts say is a close confidant of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said Iran should "stop all cooperation with the IAEA" and resume uranium enrichment.

Iran agreed last year to suspend uranium enrichment and allow snap checks of its nuclear sites as confidence-building measures.

Shariatmadari suggested giving the IAEA a three-month ultimatum to pronounce Iran's nuclear program peaceful and allow it to develop atomic technology to generate electricity.

Should the IAEA fail to meet the ultimatum, Iran should withdraw from the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), he said -- a move which would put Iran's nuclear program out of reach of nuclear inspectors and safeguards.

Iranian government officials have repeatedly denied Tehran intends to follow North Korea's example by exiting the NPT.

Western diplomats have often considered such threats by hard-liners in Iran to be aimed chiefly at the domestic audience and have little bearing on policy.

Shariatmadari addressed this theory and urged officials to disprove it. "We should stop sitting on our hands and do something to respond to such humiliating treatments by first of all stopping further IAEA inspectors' visits to Iran," he wrote. "In other words, we should shape up now or ship out for good."

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=4566602

[DoctorZIn]

US Soldiers Kill 1 Uniformed Man, Wound 1, On Iraq-Iran Border

March 14, 2004
The Associated Press
Dow Jones Newswires

TIKRIT, Iraq -- U.S. soldiers killed one uniformed man and injured another, both possibly Iranian border guards, Sunday in a clash on the Iraqi-Iranian border, the U.S. Army said.

The clash occurred between two checkpoints on either side of the border at about 5 p.m., a U.S. military official in Tikrit said.

U.S. soldiers based in Iraq were questioning two suspected fertilizer smugglers in a buffer area between the checkpoints when they were attacked by three men in green and brown uniforms, said the official, who didn't give his name. The gunmen fired from the Iranian side of the border.

The U.S. troops returned fire, killing one assailant and wounding another, the official said. The third man fled.

Based in Tikrit, the 4th Infantry Division's Taskforce Iron Horse is responsible for security in the area northeast of Baghdad where the clash took place. The exact location was unclear.

Saturday, Iraq's U.S.-led occupation authority announced that it will shut most border crossings with Iran.

The new border policy is meant to prevent terrorism in Iraq by monitoring and tightening controls on Iranians, and soon, on other states bordering Iraq, starting with Syria, coalition spokesman Dan Senor said.

By next Saturday, Iraq will close 16 of its 19 border posts on the country's longest border, the 1,440-kilometer frontier with Iran .

But an Iraqi spokesman said the policy ran counter to Iraq's interest and would be reversed after the country gains sovereignty June 30.

"Sooner or later we will have our sovereignty and we will want to have long and friendly relations with Iran ," said Entifadh Qanbar, a spokesman for Ahmad Chalabi, a member of the U.S.-appointed Iraqi Governing Council.

http://online.wsj.com/public/us

[DoctorZIn]

Iran Denies Border Clash With American Troops

March 15, 2004
Santa Fe New Mexican
santafenewmexican.com

BAGHDAD, Iraq -- Gunmen killed a member of the city council and a bodyguard in the northern city of Kirkuk on Monday, Iraqi police said.

The Shiite councilor, Aggar Al-Taweel, was shot several times in the head as he drove to the weekly meeting of the city council, said police chief Torhan Yussif. The gunmen fired from a red car and fled.

Al-Taweel, who founded an Arab political party that later splintered, was known for frank opinions and he often outspoken in council debates.

Oil-rich Kirkuk has seen increasing ethnic tensions, occasionally erupting into violence, as Kurds, Arabs and ethnic Turkmen jostle for domination.

Kurds see the city as the heart of their Kurdistan homeland, and leaders are pressing for the city to eventually hold a referendum to determine if it will join a Kurdish federal region - a step opposed by many Arabs and Turkmen.

In another northern city, Mosul, assailants fired several mortar shells at a police station early Monday. The shells failed to hit any buildings, but lightly injured a civilian and damaged some cars outside the station.

Meanwhile, a senior official at Iran's Interior Ministry denied a U.S. military report that an Iranian border guard may have been killed in a border clash with American soldiers.

"There have been no clashes and no Iranian border guards has been killed or injured," he said Monday on condition of anonymity.

U.S. Army spokesman Maj. Neal O'Brien said the shootout occurred 17 kilometers (10 miles) east of the Iraqi town of Mawat on Sunday. American soldiers killed one uniformed man and injured another - both possibly Iranian border guards - who had fired on them from the Iranian side of the border, according to the U.S. military.

O'Brien said the soldiers involved in the shooting were from the 25th Infantry Division's 2nd Brigade.

Over the weekend, roadside bombs killed six American soldiers. Four died in Baghdad, and the other two were slain in Tikrit, the hometown of ousted dictator Saddam Hussein.

http://www.santafenewmexican.com/main.asp?SectionID=2&SubSectionID=8&ArticleID=41889

[DoctorZIn]

Japan Urges Iran to Meet Nuclear Obligations

March 15, 2004
Reuters
Khaleej Times

TOKYO -- Japan wants Iran to respond seriously to a resolution by the UN nuclear watchdog reprimanding Tehran for withholding sensitive nuclear information, its top government spokesman said on Monday as Tehran’s chief nuclear negotiator arrived in Tokyo.

Hassan Rohani, secretary-general of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, said on Saturday that International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors were barred from Iran for the time being to show dissatisfaction with an IAEA resolution. He arrived in Tokyo on Monday and will meet Japanese officials on Tuesday.

The IAEA board of governors said in a resolution it “deplored” Iran’s omissions of key atomic technology from an October declaration, including undeclared research on advanced “P2” centrifuges that can make bomb-grade uranium.

The board also said it would decide in June how to respond to the omissions, which diplomats said kept the door open for a possible report to the UN Security Council and economic sanctions.

“We welcome this (resolution),” Japan’s Chief Cabinet Secretary Yasuo Fukuda told a news conference. “We strongly hope Iran takes it seriously and follows it.”

Japan last month clinched a $2 billion deal to develop a huge Iranian oil field despite pressure from the United States to back off because of concerns Tehran was developing nuclear weapons. Japan, which relies on the Middle East for almost all its oil, had been juggling its desire to develop Iran’s Azadegan oil field with the pressure from the United States, its key security ally.

Tokyo said then that it would keep urging Iran to meet its obligations to the IAEA.

Rohani is expected to meet Japanese Foreign Minister Yoriko Kawaguchi and Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi on Tuesday.

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle.asp?xfile=data/theworld/2004/March/theworld_March341.xml&section=theworld&col=

[DoctorZIn]

An Unwelcome Visit

March 15, 2004
The Wall Street Journal
Review & Outlook

Iran's nuclear pointman Hassan Rohani begins his official visit to Japan today. That's right, Tokyo is hosting the man who only last week practically admitted Tehran is intent on pursuing nuclear weapons.

"We want Iran to be recognized as a member of the nuclear club, that means Iran be recognized as a country having the nuclear fuel cycle, and enriching uranium," said Mr. Rohani, who is also head of Iran's Supreme Council for National Security, prior to an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) meeting in Vienna last Friday. At that meeting, Tehran announced a freeze on all further inspections of its nuclear program.

Tehran is well versed in the art of trying to drive a wedge between America and its allies. In recent weeks, it's been trying to do this with Europe, offering lucrative oil contracts and warning countries such as Britain, France and Germany to "resist U.S. pressure" for tougher action against its nuclear program.

Now it's Japan's turn. Indeed Mr. Rohani's already been laying the groundwork for the sort of message he's likely to be delivering in Tokyo today. In January, he warned Japanese Foreign Minister Yoriko Kawaguchi not to let "third parties" influence foreign policy.

That makes it all the more troubling for Tokyo to be facilitating such economic blackmail by hosting a known nuclear troublemaker. Japan says it'll use the visit to try to persuade Iran to implement the additional protocol it signed with the IAEA in December, allowing international inspectors to make extensive checks of its nuclear facilities. But judging from the latest freeze on inspections, any such pleas are likely to fall on deaf ears as Tehran continues its divide and rule tactics.

It's a strategy that's already reaped dividends elsewhere in the world. At the board meeting of the IAEA in Vienna last week, Washington gave in to European demands to tone down a resolution criticizing Iran's clandestine nuclear program. It now praises Tehran's "cooperation" with the IAEA, cooperation which Iranian President Mohammed Khatami had threatened to end in the event of a strong rebuke. The resolution also makes no mention of referring the issue to the United Nations Security Council, despite Iran's nuclear cheating.

The latest evidence of this came when inspectors recently revealed they'd found traces of bomb-grade, 90%-enriched uranium-235. There is no civilian application for uranium of that quality. Iran has also been forced to fess up to the military links of what it had claimed was merely a civilian enrichment program. And of course Tehran had denied having any enrichment program at all until an Iranian resistance group and Western intelligence proved otherwise. IAEA inspectors have also found traces of polonium-210, a radioactive element primarily useful as the trigger for a nuclear explosion.

No serious person can doubt that the Iranians are bent on building a nuclear arsenal. And there's no shortage of steps which could be taken to stop them, if the world would get serious.

Henry Sokolski of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center has useful suggestions on strengthening "country-neutral" non-proliferation rules. They include a declaration that countries cannot unilaterally withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, a step hinted at in Iran's state-sanctioned press, the suspension of all nuclear cooperation with any nation that doesn't get the IAEA's full seal of approval, and support for interdiction efforts against countries failing the IAEA test. He also suggests asking the IAEA to spell out exactly what and how long it would take to certify that Iran is not in the bomb-making business.

The only question is whether America's allies will support Washington in pushing for such measures. So far, Europe has shown few signs of being willing to do so. We'd like to believe Japan is made of sterner stuff, but the signs are not encouraging. Mr. Rohani's visit follows similar trips to Tokyo by high-ranking officials from two other rogue states-Libya and Syria.

It's probably too late to rescind his invitation. But Japan should use Mr. Rohani's visit to make clear there will be no deals with Iran until it allows inspections to resume and comes clean about its nuclear program.

http://online.wsj.com/public/us

[DoctorZIn]

The Islamic Republic is Looking More Unstable Day by Day

March 15, 2004
Iran va Jahan
Potkin Azarmehr

The recent events in Fereydoon Kenar are a reflection of the anger felt by the Iranian people and their readiness to overthrow the 25 year old rule of clerics in Iran.

The Islamic authorities in Fereydoon-Kenar, North Iran, declared the results of three polling stations null and void. Such blatant cheating in favour of Meghdad Najaf-Nejad, made the people spontaneously gather on the town's main bridge around 8:00 am on Saturday and shout slogans against the unashamed cheatings.

As the crowds grew and the slogans became more radical, the Law Enforcement Forces(LEF) started opening fire at the protesters with pellet guns. Far from pushing the crowd back, the shooting by LEF made the people angrier and they retaliated. As the crowd became more confident they targeted the Friday Sermon preacher Bakooyi, who was the driving force behind the election frauds in town.

The crowd moved towards Bakooyi's ostentatious residence, intent on killing the preacher. At this point they were shouting: "We will make his (Bakooyi) blood flow here, We will make his palace, his grave" "mA injA ro khoon mikonim, ghasresho ghabresh mikonim" and "All the criminals here are in the LEF" har chi injA jAnieh, nirooye entezAmieh".

Bakooyi is said to have fled the town for Qom, but one of his cars was completely destroyed and his lavish residence was set on fire.

Latest reports suggest the Friday Sermon preacher, Bakooyi is still hiding in Qom and does not dare to go back to Fereydoon Kenar.

As the protests spread, the people attacked the provincial government building and took control of a police station.

The Islamic authorities who were unable to control the crowd with the local LEF, brought in the special guards from Tehran, Isfahan, Amol and Babol. Five are reported killed (Three men and two women) and several hundred are wounded so far.

Three of the dead are known to be students by the names of Behrooz Khanlartabar, Hossein Ghavami, and Hossein Khodayi.

The hardline daily Jomhoori-Eslami, reported the incidence by saying "a throng of thugs marched towards the house of Friday Sermon Preacher of Fereydoon-Kanar but they were pushed back by the LEF. Some have been wounded"

E'etemad daily on the other hand in today's edition of its paper has reported the situation in Fereydoon-Kenar as completely critical, with all the schools, banks, and the Bazaar closed. The daily has reports the number of wounded 68 with 6 in critical conditions.

The selected winner of Fereydoon-Kenar 'elections', Meghdad Najaf-Nejad, either having realised the level of hatred felt by the people towards him or just aware of the futility of his selection has handed in his resignation.

The people of Fereydoon-Kenar have won the first round of battle for free and fair elections in Iran. With the ongoing teachers strike, youth riots during the Shiite mourning periods, and riots in other parts of Iran, the Islamic Republic is looking more unstable day by day.

http://iranvajahan.net/cgi-bin/news.pl?l=en&y=2004&m=03&d=15&a=8

[DoctorZIn]

ElBaradei Says Iran Ends Halt of UN Inspections

March 15, 2004
Reuters
Reuters.com

WASHINGTON -- The head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog said he spoke with the Iranians on Monday and they told him the freeze on IAEA inspections would be lifted so they could resume on March 27.

"I was informed by the Iranian authorities that the new date for inspectors arriving would be on March 27," said International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei. "Although this delay is regrettable, nonetheless the new date is still within our time schedule for conducting inspections."

The IAEA's governing board condemned Iran on Saturday for withholding sensitive nuclear information. Iran hit back, saying the reason it had suspended U.N. nuclear inspections on Friday was to show its displeasure at the resolution, then in draft form.

In a statement to reporters on the first full day of his four-day official visit to the United States, ElBaradei said Iran would benefit from adhering to a policy of full transparency.

Washington says Iran's nuclear program is a front for building an atom bomb. Tehran denies this, saying its program is solely for the peaceful generation of electricity.

"It is clearly in the interest of Iran to cooperate fully with the IAEA and adopt a policy of proactive cooperation, so the IAEA can clarify all outstanding issues as early as possible," ElBaradei said.

An agency spokeswoman said the new date for the arrival of inspectors would still give the agency enough time to reach some conclusions by the next IAEA board meeting in June.

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=4568569

[DoctorZIn]

Iran: Dead Regime Walking

March 15, 2004
FrontPageMagazine.com
Reza Bayegan

The Islamic Republic of Iran has been put on Death Row, not by the hawks on the Bush administration or what its rulers call their ‘Zionist enemies,’ but by the dint of its own internal contradictions. These fatal contradictions were outlined by the prominent Iranian economist and dissident, Dr. Shaheen Fatemi in a lecture delivered recently at The Iranian Society for Modernity and Development in Paris.

As the forces of fanaticism and repression tighten their grip on the country, becoming less and less tolerant of dissent, the exiled Iranian community is assuming a bigger role in speaking up for the stifled voices of freedom and democracy. The Iranian Society for Development and Modernity that is based in Paris is an important venue where such an expression can find an outlet. Comprised of dissident artists, novelists, political experts and intellectuals, it organizes monthly lectures with the aim of looking at the economic and political situation in Iran in a balanced and non-partisan manner.

In the Society's latest lecture, entitled "Iran at the Threshold of Transformation," professor Fatemi explored two sets of opposing factors that detract from, and contribute to, the survival of the Islamic state.

Shaheen Fatemi, in addition to his impressive academic credentials, enjoys extensive connections with key political figures inside and outside Iran. Accordingly, his analysis has the advantage of being up to speed, while remaining down to earth and abreast of everyday political developments in the country.

First and foremost, Fatemi said, the clerical regime has kept itself in power by brute force using the most inhumane measures against the population. However, in spite of suffering excruciating hardship, Iranians are not willing to overthrow their rulers through violent means. They have learned from the frenetic turmoil unleashed by Ayatollah Khomeini in 1979 that the human thirst for justice and liberty cannot be quenched in the bloodstained waters of carnage and revolution.

The relentless violence perpetrated against legitimate demands of peaceful Iranian citizens has turned the force of international public opinion against the mullahs and has moved the most hesitant governments to speak up against the clerical regime’s breach of democratic principles. The European Union’s recent criticism of the parliamentary elections in Iran as "a setback for democracy" is bound to have a powerful effect on exposing and further isolating the clerical government. One cannot forget the importance of mobilized international opinion in bringing down ruthless political systems such as apartheid in South Africa.

A possible increase in the price of oil could contribute to the longevity of the Islamic Republic by providing the mullahs with the extra cash to prop up a prostrate economy, which is kept alive through artificial means. Not only the whole machinery of the clerical regime operates on oil revenue, but also thanks to the Ayatollahs, for the past quarter of a century the wealth of Iranian petroleum has kept the network of Middle Eastern terrorism in business; sponsoring death, instability and destruction. To sign an agreement with the mullahs to develop the oil industry as the Japanese have done in an estimated $2 billion deal to exploit Iran's Azadegan oil field, is therefore nothing short of contributing to this evil endeavor. It is about time that world governments realize that to make short-term gains in dealing with criminal regimes will cost humanity long-term suffering that no amount of cash can undo or repair.

Any gesture such as the ill-advised visit of Prince Charles to Iran, and his meeting with Mohammad Khatami that might be construed as a nod in the direction of the regime can only contribute to purchasing time for the mullahs and further postpone the fulfillment of the democratic dream of the Iranian people.

Now the unreserved support of the global community should be given to the Iranian opposition that is calling for a free and democratic national referendum to determine the future of the country. Mainly owing to the lack of democratic experience during the past two decades, the political opposition inside the country and abroad has suffered from fraction and disorganization. The painful mistakes that have contributed to the survival of the totalitarian government have taught us the necessity of patience and tolerance. We have come to recognize that agreeing to disagree is the cornerstone of a healthy pluralistic society.

Whether our people choose a republic, or a constitutional monarchy in the national referendum does not really matter that much. The difference between these two systems will only entail slight variations in a few articles of the future constitution. What matters is enacting laws and provisions that guarantee the democratic rights of each and every citizen.

A democratic constitution while guaranteeing freedom of belief for all citizens should at the same time ensure the separation of government from religion. In Shiite faith, religion has traditionally been in opposition to the temporal power. Its religious hierarchy has acted as a spiritual government within the state exerting enormous moral power. Its involvement in the day-to-day business of the country has undermined its spiritual authority and has eroded its moral credibility. This anomaly in the Islamic Republic that has plucked the Shiite faith from its traditional role in society and has stymied the performance of the government will inevitably unhinge the current system.

Lastly, the Islamic Republic is doomed to destruction by its hostility to progress and its inability to adapt to modern administrative and economic paradigms. In the dynamic world of the 21st century, freezing in the mental framework of the 6th century A.D. and deriving guidelines for a banking system and fiscal policy from what was practiced a millennium-and-a-half ago in Arabia is nothing short of suicide bombing one's way into the future. All these concerns must be taken care of before Iran can take its place among the great nations of the world – where it belongs.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=12573

[DoctorZIn]

This just in from Anonymizer.com for all Iranians inside of Iran...

"Below you will find two links that you can use on your site, these will allow people to start getting the newsletter with the free proxies."

http://www.azadgar.com/web_add.html

http://www.bazeshkon.com/web_add.html

[DoctorZIn]

Election Results Changed in Iran

March 15, 2004
Radio Free Europe
Bill Samii

The Guardians Council announced on 13 March that it has changed the election results in the Babolsar, Darab, Zanjan, and Tarom constituencies, state radio reported.

In Babolsar all the ballots in three boxes were cancelled because the votes were solicited through "threats and coercion," and the ballots in two other boxes were cancelled because the seals on the boxes were tampered with. Ballots in two boxes in Darab were cancelled because the votes were solicited through "threats and coercion." After a recount of votes in Tarom and Zanjan the overall results were altered, leading to a new winner and two people going to the second round.

The Guardians Council overturned election results in the constituencies of Iranshahr and Sarbaz, state television reported on 7 March. Guardians Council Secretary Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati said in a letter to Interior Minister Hojatoleslam Abdolvahed Musavi-Lari that the decision is the result of research that discovered "rampant" vote buying and intimidation.

Tehran Governor Ali-Awsat Hashemi said on 7 March that Ali Abbaspur-Tehrani has been added to the list of candidates who won in the first round of voting in the capital, according to the Interior Ministry website (http://www.moi.ir). Tehran is represented by 30 parliamentarians, and eight candidates will vie for four as-yet-unfilled seats in an upcoming second round of voting.

Mr. Rasuli, the governor of Natanz in Isfahan Province, on 6 March rejected reports about the annulment of election results there, the Iranian Students News Agency (ISNA) reported. He said that such claims have arisen after other elections and he linked this with the area's ethnic composition. Rasuli acknowledged that there were complaints but he classified them as "limited and minor" and said they had been handled. The town's Friday prayer leader and others had complained about voters being shipped in from other constituencies, "Iran" reported on 4 March.

Mr. Ahmadi, the Fars province deputy governor-general for security affairs, on 6 March rejected reports about the annulment of election results in the Sepidan constituency, ISNA reported. "There were some complaints to the supervisory board pertaining to the result of the voting in Sepidan," he said, but the problems were resolved.

http://www.rferl.org/reports/iran-report/