Iranian Alert -- August 19, 2003 -- LIVE THREAD PING LIST

Could Cooperation With U.S. Put Tehran in Al Qaeda's Crosshairs?

August 18, 2003
Stratfor
Stratfor.com

Iran's national security chief claims that country, like the United States, has been a target of al Qaeda plots. Tehran may be manipulating the facts, but if it steps up cooperation with the United States against al Qaeda, it could in fact become a target in the future.

Analysis

The secretary-general of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, Hassan Rowhani, says Iran has foiled several al Qaeda attacks, the official Islamic Republic News Agency reported late Aug. 17. The agency quoted Hassan as saying that Iran had been battling al Qaeda for some time, and that Tehran had arrested hundreds of suspected militants.

Rowhani's statements are a direct signal to the United States that Iran is cooperating in the U.S. war against al Qaeda. Tehran and Washington are currently in talks focused on two issues: the situation in Iraq and Iran's harboring of al Qaeda members. In reality, it is unclear if Tehran has ever been targeted by al Qaeda, or if it will aid Washington's efforts to dismantle the organization. The risk for Iran, however, is that its cooperation with the United States could prompt al Qaeda to retaliate against the country itself.

Iran's relationship with al Qaeda is of prime importance to the United States. Washington believes one key to pre-empting further attacks is to deny the group sanctuary, especially in countries hostile to the United States. Washington also believes this will be vital in preventing al Qaeda from regrouping.

Iran -- an Islamic state that is adjacent to Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, and shares some of al Qaeda's goals -- makes an attractive host country for the group. Like Osama bin Laden's network, Tehran wants to see the United States withdraw from the Arabian Peninsula. Iran aspires to become the regional hegemon, but it cannot do so as long as the U.S. military dominates the area. Second, Iran sees instability stirred by al Qaeda in countries like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Yemen as advantageous to its influence over these states.

There are, however, reasons for discord between Iran and al Qaeda. For one thing, the militant group hopes to establish a Sunni Islamic caliphate, but Iran is predominantly Shia. Moreover, an al Qaeda-inspired regime in Riyadh ultimately would rival Tehran's influence in the region. These issues are real, though can perhaps be glossed over in the short term. In addition, Iranian diplomats tell Stratfor that al Qaeda has long plotted and carried out attacks against Iranian assets -- including its airliners -- inside the country.

Iranian officials are now in senior-level talks with the United States, and recent events point to progress on the terms of cooperation. On Aug. 17, IRNA reported that Iraq would reopen its embassy in Tehran on Sept. 1, 2003 -- a move that suggests Iran is willing to expand diplomatic ties with U.S.-occupied Iraq. It also indicates an indirect acceptance of the U.S. rule in Baghdad, as well as perhaps a new avenue for talks and cooperation.

Two days earlier, the U.S. State Department announced that it would close two of the Washington offices of the Mujahideen e-Khalq (MKO), an Iranian opposition group. Tehran has been angered by the U.S.-MKO alliance since U.S. military troops seized Baghdad. Washington's attempts to distance itself from the group, which is based in Iraq and has fought a decades-long war against the clerical regime in Tehran, signal a concession to Tehran.

The U.S.-Iranian talks are intended to prevent a clash between the two countries and to reduce U.S. anxiety about Tehran's relationship with al Qaeda. During a meeting with Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer in late May, Rowhani claimed that Iran had been battling al Qaeda even before Sept. 11 -- arresting more than 500 members and deporting scores to other countries. Australia is a close U.S. ally, and Rowhani's statements were meant for Washington's ears as well as Canberra's.

Rowhani's statement now that al Qaeda had planned to attack inside Iran emerges at an interesting time -- at a point when the U.S.-Iranian talks seem to be making progress. The claim might be meant to demonstrate a shared concern with Washington, though the plots themselves -- if they did in fact exist -- likely predated the detente between Washington and Tehran.

In Rowhani's words, "Their [Al Qaeda's] plans for a wide range of terrorist acts inside Iran were neutralized by our intelligence organizations." This comment suggests a time frame that likely would span the last several months, at the very least. Intelligence agencies aren't known to operate with lightning speed, and uncovering such plots can take weeks, months or even years. In addition, Rowhani claimed in May -- when Tehran and Washington were still doing more shadowboxing than secret talking -- that his government had started the crackdown on al Qaeda years ago.

Iran has reason to worry. Al Qaeda is no doubt unhappy with the Khamanei-Khatami government's cooperation with the Bush administration, nor will it appreciate Tehran's willingness to extradite its members to other countries like Egypt, Kuwait or Saudi Arabia, where members of the network would be tortured and jailed, if not executed.

Various reports, rumors and flies on the wall have claimed that several senior-level al Qaeda members are hiding out in Iran, including Egyptians Ayman al Zawahiri and Seif al Adel, Kuwaiti Sulaiman Abu Ghaith and Osama bin Laden's son, Saad. If Tehran were to extradite these men, it would deal a crippling blow to al Qaeda. A few small-scale attacks aimed at destabilizing Tehran would not be an unexpected response.

http://www.stratfor.com/corporate/static_index.neo

Could Cooperation With U.S. Put Tehran in Al Qaeda's Crosshairs?

August 18, 2003
Stratfor
Stratfor.com

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/966448/posts?page=41#41

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

In Iran, Clerics' Wealth Draws Ire

August 20, 2003
The Christian Science Monitor
Nicholas Birch

TEHRAN -- Two years ago, Hossein Yazdi was looking forward to a quiet retirement. Now he's back at work as one of Tehran's countless unofficial taxi drivers, trying to supplement a monthly pension of .

"[Two pounds] of meat costs $5 these days; most weeks my wife and I go without," he says. "If things carry on like this, people like us will soon be dying of starvation."

Daily conversation here turns with alarming speed to the daily struggle to make ends meet. But what makes such talk baffling is that most economists consider the country to be relatively well managed.

"Iran has huge resources of oil and gas, and the rise in oil prices since 1999 from $10 a barrel to over $26 today has given the economy an immense boost," says Yves Cadilhon, head of the French economic mission in Tehran.

So what are many Iranians complaining about? A powerful group of clerics and merchants who, critics say, have a stranglehold on the economy.

For Saeed Laylaz, an assistant manager at Iran's largest car manufacturer and a supporter of moderate President Muhammad Khatami, the gripes are an effect of political reforms. "People are no longer afraid to speak out: they're not getting angrier, just more vocal," he says.

Jahangir Amuzegar, who was Iran's finance minister in the 1970s, disagrees. "It's the envy factor," he says. "I doubt anybody is getting poorer, but the trouble is that a tiny minority is getting richer very quickly."

What happened to social justice?

That is a bitter pill to swallow given that "covenant of the meek," or social justice, was a favorite catchphrase of the leaders of Iran's 1979 revolution. But it's made far worse by the fact that the principal beneficiaries of wealth redistribution have been the regime clerics and their closest allies.

Among the main bastions of clerical control are the bonyad, immense foundations built up after 1979 from wealth confiscated from Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, Iran's last shah. Ostensibly "charitable" organizations, they frequently use their wealth - up to 35 percent of the economy, according to analysts - for questionable purposes. In 1997, for instance, one senior cleric and bonyad boss announced his institution was offering $2.5 million for the assassination of novelist Salman Rushdie.

Another bonyad based in the holy city of Mashhad, in northeastern Iran, has used donations from as many as 8 million pilgrims a year to buy up 90 percent of the arable land in the surrounding region. Controlled since 1979 by arch-conservative Ayatollah Abbas Vaez-Tabazi - whose son and daughter are married to two of supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's children - the foundation also owns universities and a Coca-Cola factory.

Backed by President Khatami, Iran's reform-minded parliament recently scrapped laws exempting the foundations from paying tax. Most observers doubt anything will change. Bonyad bosses, they say, can always fall back on privileged relations with Iran's banks, almost all state owned. "Credit is rationed," explains Mr. Amuzegar, "and it's rarely private business that gets it."

"I've never even bothered trying to get a bank loan," says Ataollah Khazali, owner of a small smelting works outside Tehran. "Perhaps the private banks will be better for people like me, but they're very new and few people trust them."

For now, cash-starved businessmen like Mr. Khazali are obliged to turn for credit to members of the country's bazaari class, strongly pro-regime merchants who double as money lenders.

"Iran lacks liquidity; we do our best to remedy that," one bazaari says. One method, he explains, is the systematic backdating of checks. "Strictly speaking it's illegal, but it enables us to play with money that isn't ours."

This bazaari is a small player, specializing only in copper goods. Others are far more powerful, and with political attachments. The current head of the influential pro-bazaari Coalition of Islamic Associations, Habibollah Asgar-Ouladi, was commerce minister in the 1980s, a position he used to procure lucrative foreign trade contracts for his brother. The family is now estimated to be worth $400 million.

Neither brother is renowned for his reformist sentiments. When Khatami broke his customary cautious reserve to warn against the rise of "religious fascism" in December 1998, Mr. Habibollah publicly reminded him he was "president of the whole nation and not just one group which insults and violates the holy values of the revolution."

"These bazaari are like a mafia, obeying no laws," says one clothes manufacturer, who buys all his fabric from them. "If one of them decides to boycott a company, they all do."

"Fortunately the younger generation is slightly more moderate," adds opposition economist Ali Rashidi.

Reworking crony capitalism

With Iran's chronic unemployment - officially 12.5 percent but probably closer to 20 percent - exacerbated by the arrival on the job market of 1980s baby boomers, analysts insist only a radical reworking of Iran's crony capitalism can stave off a crisis.

"The regime knows it has no choice but to liberalize," argues Mr. Laylaz. "They may use anti-Western rhetoric as their political trump card, but they can only save themselves by opening up."

But Amuzegar is more pessimistic. "It's not Islamic ideology that's holding the system up; it's the clerics' and bazaaris' hold on the economy," he says. "As long as they survive, so will the system."

http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0820/p06s01-wome.html

In Iran, Clerics' Wealth Draws Ire

August 20, 2003
The Christian Science Monitor
Nicholas Birch

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/966448/posts?page=43#43

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

Bremer Worried About Iran Meddling in Iraq's Affairs

August 19, 2003
The Associated Press
Barry Schweid

WASHINGTON -- The State Department credited Syria on Tuesday with ''limited progress'' in restraining terrorists from crossing the border with Iraq and in expelling some extremists.

But President Bashar Assad's government has not gone far enough, particularly in closing the offices of extremist groups in Damascus, department spokesman Richard Boucher said.

Earlier, and before Tuesday's bloody truck bombing at U.N. headquarters in Baghdad, the top U.S. official in Iraq took a tougher line against Syria.

L. Paul Bremer, who is in charge of U.S. occupation forces, said Syria was allowing foreign terrorists to sneak across the border.

''We held talks with the Syrians in this regard,'' Bremer told the London-based Arabic newspaper Al Hayat. ''We hope to see better cooperation.''

Bremer also said he was still worried about Iran meddling in Iraq's affairs. He accused Iran's Revolutionary Guards and Iranian intelligence of actively working against the U.S.-led coalition in Iraq.

''This is irresponsible conduct and runs counter to Iraq's interests. We believe that a free Iraq must not be subject to any interference by its neighbors,'' Bremer said.

Terrorism was on the agenda when Secretary of State Colin Powell held talks last spring in Damascus and during a meeting Assistant Secretary of State William Burns held last week with Assad in the Syrian capital. Syria opposed the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

But Rep. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., said Monday in Jerusalem after a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon that Sharon had complained that Syria allows Hezbollah to ''run wild'' in Lebanon and does not feel the heat of U.S. diplomatic overtures.

Engel said in a telephone interview that he would push a bill to sanction Syria unless it stops helping Hezbollah guerrillas and ends its military occupation of Lebanon.

The State Department has called on Syria to end its support for the group, which has resumed its cross-border conflict with Israel. Assad, however, defended recent rocket attacks by Hezbollah guerrillas on the Israel-Lebanon border, telling Burns they were in response to Israeli provocations.

Syria is listed by the State Department as a sponsor of terrorism and Hezbollah as a terrorist group.

Boucher said ''the Syrians understand and continue to understand that we expect to see continued progress, we expect to see significant progress.''

The spokesman said ''we'll keep pressing in that direction.''

Boucher said it was important that Syria restrain the activities of terrorists and terrorist groups, police its borders to prevent crossings and use its influence to restraint activity on the border between Lebanon and Israel.

''We've all noted in the past some efforts that the Syrians have made, whether it was closing the border or kicking some people out,'' he said. ''But like in the other areas, it's been limited progress, it hasn't been enough, and we've kept pressing for more.''

http://www.boston.com/dailynews/231/wash/State_Department_credits_Syria:.shtml

Bremer Worried About Iran Meddling in Iraq's Affairs

August 19, 2003
The Associated Press
Barry Schweid

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/966448/posts?page=45#45

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

Iraq Blast Fits Pattern of Sabotage

August 20, 2003
The Christian Science Monitor
Peter Grier and Faye Bowers

WASHINGTON AND BAGHDAD -– Insurgents opposed to the US presence in Iraq increasingly appear to have adopted a new strategy: create chaos by striking a wide range of targets.

Tuesday's suicide truck-bomb explosion at UN headquarters in Baghdad was but the latest in a string of attacks aimed at civilian and economic sites. Jordan's embassy in Baghdad was shattered by a similar bomb Aug. 7. Over the weekend Iraqi oil, water, and electricity lines were all hit by saboteurs.

The coordination involved in this campaign is unknown. US officials have said they believe that the violent Iraqi opposition is a polyglot mix of Saddam Hussein die-hards, Islamist terrorists, and criminals.

But some Western analysts believe that an influx of foreigners is driving this violence. Radical Muslims bent on jihad are now flooding into Iraq, some say, as they poured into Afghanistan during its years of Soviet occupation.

Whoever the perpetrators, their aim may be to convince the mass of Iraqis who are neither strongly anti- nor pro-American that the current situation is intolerable. They probably want to layer fear on top of the frustration and anger already felt by an Iraqi population whose economy and infrastructure are in shambles.

"The whole purpose is to demonstrate that the Americans are not in control. Nobody is safe," says a former intelligence officer with 25 years experience in the region.

The explosion at the UN's Baghdad headquarters, based in a three-story converted hotel, was the deadliest attack on an Iraqi soft target yet.

The nature of the strike showed the desperation of those who oppose the US presence in Iraq, claimed President Bush in an audio statement from his ranch in Crawford, Texas. He vowed that the US would persevere.

"The terrorists who struck today have again shown their contempt for the innocent; they showed their fear of progress and their hatred of peace," said Mr. Bush. "They're the enemies of the Iraqi people."

An enormous amount of explosives was used in the attack, according to Bernard Kerik, the former New York police commissioner now involved in the Iraqi rebuilding effort. The force of the blast ripped off the front of the building.

Early reports from the United Nations said that at least 14 people had been killed, including the top UN official in the country, Sergio Vieira de Mello.

Bystanders - the concerned, the curious, and the media - could only speculate about the nature of the blast as dusk fell in Baghdad.

One man said the bomber had been in a cement mixer whose driver was still in the vehicle as the explosion occurred.

The US military swarmed over the area in the wake of the attack, with dozens of Humvees converging on the site and helicopters circling overhead.

Those on the scene found it difficult to imagine a motive. The UN does not have a central role in Iraqi reconstruction at the moment, though it does distribute aid.

The UN's oil-for-food program, now being phased out in the wake of the US invasion, has funded regular food rations that have kept Iraqis fed for several years. Although the UN is associated in many Iraqis' minds with efforts to find and destroy Iraq's weapons, it has also maintained extensive humanitarian programs in the country.

The attack may have been "because there were so many foreigners there, probably," says Feriyal Scott, personnel director of the World Health Organization office in Baghdad. "And probably because the UN did not support the previous government [of Iraq]."

Analysts outside the country said that while they could not be sure about the reasons for the attack, it was likely the UN building was chosen almost at random because it was both a symbol of the West and vulnerable.

Blowing up the UN, as well as blowing up oil pipelines and water mains, can only make the ordinary life of Iraqis more miserable. Thus it seems obvious that the campaign of destruction aims to create chaos and deliberately harm the ability of the United States to administer Iraq.

"This could be very devastating to [US] efforts," says Judith Yaphe, an Iraq expert at the National Defense University.

It's possible that the attack was carried out by remnants of the Hussein regime, says Ms. Yaphe. Some of Mr. Hussein's elite forces, such as the Special Republican Guard, received training in car bombs and other means of sabotage.

But the smoothness of the planning and the clever choice of unexpected targets points to a more experienced kind of terrorist organization, according to Yaphe. That might mean jihadis crossing from Syria or Iran.

"I can believe there are all kinds of forces coming to play here," she says.

A US attack last month on an alleged terrorist training camp in the desert west of Baghdad killed 70 foreign fighters. They included Saudis, Yemenis, Afghans, and Sudanese, according to news reports.

A statement purportedly from Al Qaeda broadcast Aug. 18 on Arab satellite television asserted that the recent spate of attacks in Iraq was indeed the work of such jihadis.

Whatever the nature of the opposition, it is clearly adjusting, adapting, and searching out targets that have not yet been protected.

That makes life more difficult for US administrators on a number of levels. More troops might have to be dispatched for the guarding of pipelines and other infrastructure, for instance - stretching an already thin force.

Pressure to send yet more soldiers to Iraq might increase. On Tuesday, Sen. John McCain (R) of Arizona said publicly, "I think they need more people."

Mr. McCain did not specify how many additional troops he thought were necessary. Current US end strength in Iraq is about 140,000.

At the same time, nations that the US is attempting to persuade to join the occupation effort may become more reluctant to get involved. India, Pakistan, and other such countries might be wary about sending their units into a clearly hostile country.

"Most have wanted to avoid this for obvious reasons, and this is going to make it [easier for them to do so]," says Jim Walsh, an international security expert at Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government.

The real target of the blast was not so much the UN as the Iraqi people at large, according to Mr. Walsh. Without their confidence, the US occupation of Iraq won't succeed in building a stable nation.

"It's hard to get [the insurgents] unless the average Iraqi has faith and ... a sense of security and sees their future best hope is for a successful reconstruction," says Walsh.

But a simmering summer with poor electrical service and 60 percent unemployment has already hammered Iraqi morale. US military tactics that seem as occasionally heavy-handed may only become more so as the search for Hussein adherents and terrorists intensifies.

Both the Shiite and Sunni Muslim religious establishments have taken umbrage at recent US actions, say other experts. The establishment of an Iraqi governing council may have been a step in the right direction, but, like US administrators, the Iraqi leaders have to operate from behind barbed wire and a guard of US guns.

"I don't think we are poised to break out of this very quickly," says the former intelligence officer with expertise in the region.

- Cameron Barr contributed from Baghdad.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0820/p01s01-woiq.html

Iraq Blast Fits Pattern of Sabotage

August 20, 2003
The Christian Science Monitor
Peter Grier and Faye Bowers

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/966448/posts?page=47#47

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

Thank you, Doctor.

"The UN does not have a central role in Iraqi reconstruction at the moment, though it does distribute aid." "...has funded regular food rations that have kept Iraqis fed for several years."
"The real target of the blast was not so much the UN as the Iraqi people at large,..."

It boggles the mind. There are people who think there is justification in killing their own, and killing those trying help their own.

(An extra-sad day in the Middle East with this news and the bus in Israel. And now Sharon must retaliate.....)

IMHO, the "Current Pattern" of attacks in Iraq resemble the efforts of "Outlaws" of the "Old West!"

They are trying to Intimidate the "Locals" enough that they can "Dictate Terms" of Future Conflicts.

In that respect, the American Troops are like the old "Cavalry;" NONE of the "Bad Guys" want to face them!!

If "Memory Serves," the "Cavalry" eventually Prevailed--& the "Outlaws" were Decimated & Eliminated!!

Perhaps "W," the Cowboy, is WAY AHEAD of His Detractors with Regards to Iraq!!

I Recently saw an artice which referred to Iraq as, "Carefully Hung Flypaper."

It Appears that a LOT of "Terrorist Activity" is now Directed at Westerners in Iraq.

Perhaps--Once Again--"W's" Team is playing CHESS---NOT "Checkers!!!"

What a Delicious Thought!!

Doc

Mohammad Ayatollahi Tabaar meeds to go back to school- preferably in another country where he would feel more comfortable, such as France.

I've ever said that it is not wrong to know both sides' view points.
Moreover, We can realize the enemies within.
Thanks for your reply.

IRAN INTENT ON KEEPING PACE WITH CASPIAN BASIN ENERGY DEVELOPMENT
Hooman Peimami: 8/19/03

Iran is intent on staying competitive in the great game to dominate Caspian Basin energy exports. Tehran has announced that it will begin developing its Caspian oilfields within the next two years, despite the fact that the five states bordering the sea have yet to agree on a territorial treaty. In addition, the construction of a pipeline from Iran’s Caspian port of Neka to Tehran will enhance the country’s export ability.

The Chief of Iran’s Caspian Oil Co., Mohammad Hossein Dana, announced June 25 that Iran will proceed with plans to extract oil from offshore fields, scrapping a policy of non-development that had been in place. Dana said that the new policy was necessary to reduce the chances of Iran losing potential investors and customers. He indicated that competition among the Caspian littoral states – Azerbaijan, Iran, Kazakhs............

http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/business/articles/eav081903.shtml

IRAN: Khatami: Avowal of failure

President Mohammed Khatami acknowledged last week that he had failed to fulfill pledges to the young voters who elected him to introduce more social and political freedoms.
“These days, it is difficult for me to speak because I feel the convictions that I held, what I said and expressed with sincerity and what people believed, have not been achieved”, the president said in a speech.
Khatami, first elected in 1997 thanks to a massive youth vote, stressed the importance of living up to young people’s expectations and warned that ignoring them would exacerbate the social crisis in the republic.
“Not taking into account young people and their expectations, and using religion and values to marginalize [others] causes massive problems in our society.
“Our society wants freedom, independence and progress while taking into account religious values, but this does not mean setting up a religious aristocracy”.
The remarks were a veiled swipe at Islamic conservatives in the regime who control the courts, the army and security apparatus and the top state arbitration bodies, which have repeatedly undermined the reform efforts of Khatami’s government.
“I am faithful to my commitments even if the difficulties make it seem that I have abandoned them”.
Frustration at the failures to reform the system culminated in June when students staged 10 days of anti-regime demonstrations to express anger at the deadlock between the reformist-dominated Parliament and conservative-dominated state bodies.
About 70 percent of the Iranian population is aged under 30.

A last stand?
The conservative-dominated Council of Guardians -- which oversees the religious and constitutional propriety of all legislation -- last week struck down three pieces of reforming legislation passed by Parliament.
Two would have authorized the government to sign UN conventions, one being the UN’s 1979 convention on women’s rights, the other an international agreement banning torture. The third would have abolished the Council’s right to vet candidates for political office.
Reformists accuse the council of disqualifying reformists for flimsy reasons, and wanted to end its screening of candidates before crucial legislative elections early next year and presidential polls in 2005.
Many saw the bills as a last-ditch attempt to assert Khatami’s embattled position in the face of entrenched conservatives.
Theoretically the bills must return to Parliament until the two sides can agree. But in the event of a protracted dispute between the two bodies, the conservative Expediency Council, Iran’s supreme political arbitration body, will decide on the matter. That is a recourse to which Khatami is strongly opposed.
Some reformers have proposed instead to call a referendum, which would require Khamenei’s approval, or else stage a mass walk-out from their posts and plunge the regime into a crisis of legitimacy.
Reformists fear that unless they can restore confidence among voters, next February’s parliamentary elections could see a very low turnout of the kind seen during this year’s municipal polls -- which were won by conservatives.
The bill on the women’s rights convention did not even amount to full endorsement of the accord.
As a sop to conservatives, the measure excluded from adoption any clause of the convention which was perceived as not compatible with Islam, and ruled out arbitration of its implementation by the International Court of Justice in The Hague.
But even this sparked charges by conservatives that the Khatami Administration was undermining the strict interpretation of Islamic law which had been the basis of all legislation since the 1979 revolution.
“Unfortunately, Parliament has passed a bill that has at least 90 points against Islam”, a leading conservative thinker, Ayatollah Mohammad Taghi Mesbah Yazdi told seminary students in the clerical stronghold of Qom.
The Qom-based conservative faction, Followers of the Imam and Leader, had launched a campaign to have the Council of Guardians, reject the bill.
But the bill’s supporters argued that it was the very conservatism of some of the leading clergy that had forced them to resort to international law to win women their rights.
“If the clergy had already evolved Islamic law as it affects women, we wouldn’t need to join this convention... Unfortunately, we are still stuck with laws that date back some 70 years”, according to MP Jamileh Kadivar, a leading women’s rights advocate.
Speaking before the bill was quashed by the Council, she said its acceptance might even strengthen the Islamic regime by easing some of the human rights criticism fuelling Western hostility to a government which Washington terms part of an ‘axis of evil’.
“For years, the international community has dubbed Iran a violator of women’s rights, so passing the bill could stop international objections to Iran...”
But the reformers themselves are divided over the effectiveness of a purely nominal signature of the convention, in which all of its provisions are made subject to vetting by the conservative-controlled judiciary for their conformity with Islamic law.
For woman MP Akram Mosavari-Manesh, the exclusion poses no problem as she insists none of the convention’s clauses run against Islamic teaching.
“The spirit of the conventions tries to eliminate discrimination against women and therefore could not be considered anti-Islamic”.
But other women’s rights campaigners argued that the bill would have had little impact without subsidiary legislation to end the systematic discrimination faced by Iranian women in both civil and criminal courts.
Under Iranian law, women receive only half the amount of ‘blood money’ and inheritance as men, and only in rare cases is custody awarded to wives in divorce cases.
“The passing of the bill is not enough, since we have to witness changes to our legal system”, said, Haleh Keshavarz, one of the few Iranian women to have forged a successful career as a lawyer.
“Since there are inequalities between men and women concerning blood money, child custody, inheritance and divorce, once we have joined the convention, they will then have to be changed in accordance with society’s needs and Islamic teachings”.

http://www.mmorning.com/ArticleC.asp?Article=494&CategoryID=6

Japan to Proceed With Talks on Iran Oil Field, FT Reports

Aug. 20 (Bloomberg) -- Japan is still in talks with Iran to develop the country's Azadegan oil field despite U.S. opposition to the investment because of concern that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, the Financial Times reported, citing an unidentified Japanese government official.

Tokyo considers the issues as separate though it is trying to persuade Tehran to sign an additional protocol of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the paper said.

Japan will push ahead with talks on the Azadegan oil field if its development is commercially viable, the FT said.

Iran's oil minister, Bijan Namdar Zanganeh, has said he wants to reach an agreement with Japan this year to develop Azadegan, Iran's biggest oil find in 35 years. Analysts estimate the deposit may have as much as 6 billion barrels of recoverable oil.

Japan in June missed a deadline for signing an agreement with Iran after the U.S. opposed Japanese investment in the field. Iran denies Washington's charge that it is developing nuclear weapons.

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000101&sid=ajLRTCVNYWVE&refer=japan

http://famulus.msnbc.com/FamulusIntl/reuters08-19-053900.asp?reg=MIDEAST

This thread is now closed.

Join Us at the Iranian Alert -- August 20, 2003 -- LIVE THREAD PING LIST

Live Thread Ping List | 8.20.2003 | DoctorZin

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