Iran Hardliners Attack Ex-President's Call For Serious Reforms
A prominent Iranian reformist figure says the Iranian regime should be worried as even ex-President Mohammad Khatami says that reformism in Iran has reached a deadlock.
A prominent Iranian reformist figure says the Iranian regime should be worried as even ex-President Mohammad Khatami says that reformism in Iran has reached a deadlock.
The comment by Mohammad Javad Haqshenas comes as several conservative media outlets have attacked Khatami for his statement about the end of hope in reformismand his warning that disillusionment about reforms and the advocacy of regime change might lead to chaos, civil war and bloodshed.
In his statement on Sunday, Khatami had called on the government to meet the people's demands and prevent a revolutionary change.
Haqshenas said in an interview with Rouydad24 that Khatami's statement, which was issued on the 44thanniversary of the 1979 Islamic revolution sends a message that the Islamic Republic cannot be reformed. He added that the regime should take Khatami's statement as a warning and begin to reform itself from within.
On social media many argued that the fact that Khatami, former Prime Minister Mir Hossein Mousavi and former deputy Interior Minister Mostafa Tajzadeh have issued more or less similar statements warning that not reforming the system could lead to havoc was not a sheer coincidence. They suggested that the move was coordinated from within the system to scare the people of the consequences of the Islamic Republic's collapse.
Haqshenas on the other hand argued that reformists were expelled from the system as conservatives took over the executive, judiciary and legislative bodies. By doing so, the hard core of the regime made sure that it got rid of the challenges posed by reformists for good.
Meanwhile, Hossein Shariatmadari, the editor of hardline daily Kayhan said in an interview with the IRGC-linked Fars News Agency that "khatami's statement was no different from the US, UK and Israeli positions in support of recent protests in Iran. "Apart from cutting the throat of the police and attacks on the people in the streets, what have the rioters done that was different from what Khatami is suggesting?" Shariatmadari asked, questioning Khatami's support for protesters.
Resorting to his usual way of distorting the truth and putting words in others' mouth, Shariatmadari also asked: "Isn't it strange that Khatami as a cleric advocates the culture of nudity and supports the protesters' attack on veiled women as a beautiful act and a move toward a better future?" He added that "Khatami has suggested to the officials to be grateful for the rioters' presence in society."
Meanwhile, he once again accused Khatami of being linked to Israel and US entrepreneur George Soros without presenting any evidence.
In another development, conservative daily Resalat charged that Khatami's statement was "the starting point of a new phase in sedition." Sedition is the word Iranian hardliners use for the 2009 post-election unrest that nearly overthrew the Islamic government by rallying over three million people in Tehran against the ultraconservative establishment.
Another hardliner daily that attacked Khatami was IRGC's mouthpiece Javan newspaper that charged,"Regime change is the essence of the statements by Khatami and Mousavi." This comes while Khatami in a very elaborate way expressed his opposition to a regime change in Iran although Mousavi's call for a new Constitution could be easily interpreted as a call for regime change.
Javan wrote that both Khatami and Mousavi demanded regime change, undermining legal institutions in their statements. However, one of them [presumably Mousavi] demanded a hard regime change while the other called for a soft change of the regime. They are the two sides of the same coin."
Condemning violations of human rights and state-sponsored terrorism by the Iranian Government, the bipartisan group of Representatives submitted a resolution on Tuesday, which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs. The motion was introduced by California's Republican lawmaker Tom McClintock and is cosponsored by 165 other representatives.
The resolution “calls on relevant United States Government agencies to work with European allies, including those in the Balkans where Iran has expanded its presence, to hold Iran accountable for breaching diplomatic privileges, and to call on nations to prevent the malign activities of the Iranian regime’s diplomatic missions, with the goal of closing them down and expelling its agents."
It also emphasizes that Washington “stands with the people of Iran who are legitimately defending their rights for freedom against repression, and condemns the brutal killing of Iranian protesters by the Iranian regime; and recognizes the rights of the Iranian people and their struggle to establish a democratic, secular, and nonnuclear Republic of Iran.”
The resolution mentions the popular antigovernment protests in 2017, which resulted in at least 25 deaths and 4,000 arrests, and the protests in November 2019, when about 1,500 people were killed during less than two weeks of unrest, as well as the current wave of protests ignited by the death of Mahsa Amini, a 22-year-old Kurdish Iranian woman who was arrested in mid-September 2022 by the morality police that enforce the regime’s mandatory dress code laws.
Noting that women and youth have led the 2022 protests in Iran to demand social freedom and political change, the resolution describes the uprising as “rooted in the more than four decades of organized resistance against the Iranian dictatorship.” The ongoing unrest have been most recently led by women who have endured torture, sexual and gender-based violence, and death.
It also mentions executions and death sentences in recent months and calls for measures to force the government to cease such repression.
In the 116th Congress, the House of Representatives passed House Resolution 752, "Supporting the rights of the people of Iran to free expression, condemning the Iranian regime for its crackdown on legitimate protests, and for other purposes,” it adds, urging the Administration to work to convene emergency sessions of the United Nations Security Council and to work with United States partners and allies to condemn the ongoing human rights violations perpetrated by the Iranian regime and establish a mechanism by which the United Nations Security Council can monitor such violations.
The resolution also mentions efforts by the international community against the crackdown on dissent in Iran, saying that on November 24, 2022, the United Nations Human Rights Council established a fact-finding mission to conduct an independent investigation into the ongoing deadly violence related to the protests in Iran that began on September 16, 2022. It also mentioned the resolution adopted by United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) on December 14, 2022, to expel Iran from the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) for the remainder of its 4-year term ending in 2026.
Enumerating other actions by the US against the human rights violations by the clerical regime, the House resolution referred to the Department of State’s 2021 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, released on April 13, 2022, which cites that “Iran’s government and its agents reportedly committed arbitrary or unlawful killings, most commonly executions for crimes not meeting the international legal standard of ‘most serious crimes’ or for crimes committed by juvenile offenders, as well as executions after trials without due process.”
“On October 25, 2021, the United Nations Special Rapporteur (UNSR) on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran, Javaid Rehman, told the United Nations General Assembly that almost all executions in the country constituted an arbitrary deprivation of life, noting the extensive, vague and arbitrary grounds in Iran for imposing the death sentence, which quickly can turn this punishment into a political tool,” read the resolution.
The resolution also condemns the Iranian regime’s arbitrary and brutal suppression of “ethnic and religious minorities, including Iranian Kurds, Baluchis, Arabs, Christians, Jews, Baha’is, Zoroastrians, and even Sunni Muslims,” noting that it deprived them of their basic human rights, and has in many cases executed them.
Following about five months of constant antigovernment protests and several rounds of global sanctions, the situation has changed for Iran since negotiations to restore the JCPOA broke down in September. The Biden administration and its European allies have put the talks on the backburner and even President Joe Biden said in early November that “JCPOA is dead.” But what is the alternative for a world fraught with the threat of a nuclear Iran? Many US officials – democrats in particular – believe the Islamic Republic is bad but a nuclear Islamic Republic is even worse.
The head of the UN’s nuclear watchdog, the IAEA, has suggested an alternative agreement to the landmark accord 2015 JCPOA could break the deadlock in talks between Tehran and world powers.
Warning against adopting a defeatist approach to the signatories’ halfhearted efforts to revive the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action at Chatham House in London on Tuesday, Rafael Grossi, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said the coming weeks and months would be crucial in determining the direction the talks take.
“There has been a modification that should have been reported. You cannot go back and right this wrong. The thing is that, of course, with this modification, the facility has new capabilities so we have to inspect more,” he said referring to Fordow nuclear plant, which IAEA says requires increased inspections.
“Europe has been a very strong advocate of JCPOA... Of course, the geostrategic factors are weighing because it's not so far away and the Middle East consideration that we were mentioning is very important. I think in the case of Europe, it is very important that they continue to support us in trying to find a viable way forward — JCPOA or no JCPOA," he said.
“What we need to make sure is that we have the necessary elements to make sure that there is no proliferation, that this [nuclear] program does not cross a line. And that might be through something like the JCPOA or something else. On this I’m neutral,” he said, suggesting that he would be supporting any viable alternative to the deal. “It is the gap that worries me at this point in time because we are losing the visibility and the program continues to work. This is why I need to go to Tehran. We need to talk and we need to do it soon.”
In his State of the Union Address on Tuesday, Biden did not mention Iran; not acknowledging the Iranians demonstrating for an end to the Islamic Republic, neither mentioning the nuclear program, perhaps because the JCPOA policy has failed, and Washington has no idea for a new policy. An article in The Hill on Tuesday called on Biden to pressure US allies “to help them find the nerve and resolve to hold the regime accountable” and “to deploy the measures necessary to shake the Iranian regime.” “Efforts to isolate and punish the regime have been too slow, too weak and too disjointed to stop the carnage,” read the article.
In an opinion piece on Tuesday, Republican representative for Texas Pat Fallon denounced Biden’s Iran strategy that has been centered on reviving the nuclear deal “that enriches a murderous regime” calling it “a strategic folly.” “It is high time for an alternative strategy that takes advantage of the regime’s domestic vulnerabilities to advance US interests and to help quench the thirst of freedom for the Iranian people,” he said. “The Islamic Republic has cast a murderous shadow across the Middle East, and beyond, for decades. Even more recently, thousands of rockets with Iranian origins have rained down on Israeli civilians, with over 100,000 more waiting in Hezbollah’s arsenal. Fanning the flames of civil wars in Syria and Yemen, Iran has established a ring of fire around US partners in the Middle East. Today, the same Iranian weapons used in the Middle East directly threaten European security,” Fallon wrote.
Iranian Australia-based academic Alam Saleh believes that the alternative for a deal with Iran is war and an atomic Iran. He told Etemad daily in Tehran that any agreement is better than no agreement, although even in case of reaching a deal, major Western companies might hesitate to enter the Iranian market as investment would be a risky proposition. "Neither Iran, nor the United States have a plan B that would replace an agreement. An all-out war is the only thing that can replace an agreement and a war is most likely to lead to the emergence of a nuclear Iran."
Given the status of Iran’s domestic and foreign politics, mired with rising inflation and public uproar, the Islamic Republic may give up some of its demands and sit at the negotiation table with a more cooperative spirit this time around.