US Congressman Urges Transparency Regarding Iran Envoy Malley
Brian Mast, a Republican member of the US Congress, called for transparency regarding the case of Robert Malley, the suspended US special envoy for Iran.
Brian Mast, a Republican member of the US Congress, called for transparency regarding the case of Robert Malley, the suspended US special envoy for Iran.
In an interview with One America News Network, Mast criticized the US government for not shedding light on the events that led to Malley’s suspension, noting that he was “quietly” removed from his position earlier this year.
Iran International broke the news in late June that Malley’s security clearance had been revoked and he was no longer acting as US envoy, but the State Department has remained tight-lipped about the details of the case. Critics of the administration and US lawmakers have demanded answers, but so far the administration has refused to provide details.
Mast stressed that the US government did not notify the Congress about revoking Malley’s security clearance, adding that the affair was discovered “by accident.”
He called Malley “an Iranian sympathizer working to be soft on Iran” and pointed that Malley championed Washington’s adoption of “soft policies” towards a state which urges the destruction of the United States and Israel.
The congressman also referred to the case of Ariane Tabatabai, a former associate of Malley and the current Chief of Staff for the Assistant Secretary of Defense, who has had close ties with the Iranian regime.
Tabatabai was alleged to be part of a network that tried “to gain influence to top US diplomats and convince them to be soft on Iran,” Mast went on to say.
Iran International’s exposé, Inside Tehran’s Soft War: How Iran Gained Influence in US Policy Centers, and its twin report by Semafor, Inside Iran’s Influence Operation, prove the existence of the “Iran Experts Network”, whereby members acted as agent provocateurs of the regime.
Mast pointed out that according to the information revealed, Tabatabai “was directly reporting to the Iranian foreign ministry.”
He added that in order to obtain a security clearance, one is needed to disclose all their ties with foreign countries.
There is still no information whether Tabatabai has informed the authorities about her interactions with the Iranian government, Mast stated.
He further called Iran’s influence campaign “a serious problem” and urged the Biden administration to address it with transparency.
Mast, a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, also accused Tehran of having a hand in Hamas October 7 deadly attack on Israel, which claimed the lives of 1,400 mostly civilians and left thousands injured in the single most deadly day for Jews since the Holocaust.
Mast’s remarks came four weeks after top US Republicans at the Senate and the House opened dual probes into Malley's links to the secret Iranian influence network.
At the same time, House Committee on Oversight and Accountability Chairman James Comer (R-KY) and Subcommittee on National Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs Chairman Glenn Grothman (R-WI) also raised concerns about the Administration’s use of officials with sympathetic ties to the Iranian regime to negotiate with Tehran.
Also on October 24, America First Legal, a group of conservative lawyers, announced that it had launched a probe into the activities of a pro-Iran influence network in the United States which can pose a threat to the American national security.
"It is of paramount importance that the truth about the role that Iranian assets may have played, and may continue to be playing, in formulating US policy be brought to light," said Reed Rubinstein, the group’s senior counselor.
“There are stringent laws regarding hijab. We will confront those who do not comply with the rules of hijab and deal with them,” Ahmad Rastineh told Rouydad 24 news website Wednesday.
Rastineh, who is a member of the ultra-hardliner Paydari Party, which was behind a recent hijab bill, claimed that observance of hijab has improved in the past couple of months in comparison with the time that followed last year’s nationwide protests. Rastineh is a member of parliament’s cultural committee.
The bill, approved by the parliament last month, faced an unexpected rejection from the Guardian Council, a potent constitutional body responsible for vetting all legislation. The Council returned the bill to the parliament for amendments, citing formal shortcomings in the text, including the ambiguity of terms like “unchastity” or “corruptness.”
Some analysts viewed the Council’s rejection as an effort to refine the legislation for greater precision, dismissing any correlation with public discontent. Others speculated the Council might be wary of escalating public dissatisfaction before the upcoming parliamentary elections in March, possibly seeking to postpone its final approval.
Rastineh’s remarks over the matter seem to confirm the authorities’ fear of causing further alienation among the population.
"Some misinterpretation hindered the law's implementation. Some believed it would polarize Iranian society and lead to division. They assumed there was substantial demand for freedom in women's dress code, but we observed it was only a minority," asserted Rastineh, accusing authorities of succumbing to the "psychological propaganda" of those opposing mandatory hijab.
The reality on the ground contradicts Rastineh’s claim that abidance by hijab has improved. Images posted on social media suggest more and more women appearing in public across the country without covering their heads despite being often targeted by hijab enforcers and other consequences including loss of their license to work.
Many celebrities who had removed their hijab during the Woman, Life, Freedom protests have refused to wear it again even at the cost of being banned from working.
Not only women who wore the hijab in public to stay away from trouble, but also some women who had always covered their heads and even worn the long black veil by choice, are now saying they no longer believe in it.
Among the latter was a former state television presenter, Fatemeh Kia-Pasha, who used to appear on air wearing the ‘chador’ long veil.
Kia-Pasha who had not been on air for a couple of years, about a year ago began posting photos and videos of herself on Instagram wearing headscarves that covered all her hair.
In a post two weeks ago, the twenty-six-year-old former presenter said she had been wearing the chador by choice but no longer believes in it. The reason she still wears the headcovering in the photos she posts on her Instagram page is out of respect for her mother who believes in the necessity of wearing the hijab, she wrote.
While Kia-Pasha does not appear to have flouted the hijab as a political statement, other women such as Sedigheh Vasmaghi, a prominent Islamic scholar and politician, have stopped wearing the hijab in public as a strong political and religious statement.
Vasmaghi, 63, recently removed her headscarf after decades and even challenged Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s hijab edict, by arguing that there is no foundation in the Quran or the Sharia for such an edict.
Khamenei said emphatically in an April 4 speech that “based on Sharia and also politically”, discarding hijab is haram (sinful).
The goal is to assess how individuals' lifestyles align with the broader culture of the Islamic Republic, their media consumption patterns, their inclination toward foreign-based media for news and information, and their utilization of communication tools.
Certain lawmakers with access to the complete bill contend that the proposal extends beyond mere lifestyle monitoring, resembling more of a surveillance initiative aimed at individuals and their private lives.
According to reports, 162 of the parliament’s 290 members have voted for the bill, 10 members opposed it and another ten abstained. However, it is not clear where the other 108 members of the parliament stand. That is a large number and could indicate serious but otherwise silent opposition to scrutinising people’s private life.
While the bill was being discussed at the Majles during previous months, Iranian media including Tejarat News, suggested that the government was going to monitor individual Iranians’ presence and activity on social media.
The Iranian regime began restricting access to the Internet as early as 2002, when it began to block independent news websites and many other sites it deemed religiously forbidden.
Since 2009, the Iranian government has progressively imposed restrictions and outright bans on social media platforms. Their concern primarily lies in the potential use of these platforms for organizing and mobilizing groups of people against the regime. The Iranian government has grown more apprehensive due to several rounds of nationwide protests since 2017, recognizing the pivotal role of social media in disseminating and fuelling dissent. Their response to this challenge has largely involved the arrest and, on occasion, even the killing of social media activists.
The government also began a serious clamp-down on Internet access by reducing connectivity and banning all social media outlets, while promoting homegrown platforms, though unsuccessfully. While Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, President Ebrahim Raisi and most top officials use platforms such as Twitter (X) and Instagram the government bars ordinary Iranian from using them.
The plan to monitor the people’s lifestyle is part of the country’s controversial five year development plan, which has not been endorsed by the Majles yet, but in a strange way, article 75 of the plan has been approved.
The Majles has called for "Ongoing monitoring and assessment of key indicators related to general culture, lifestyles, media influence, and communications" in Iran, to be conducted through online means.
According to Tejarat News, this involves gathering data on people's social media usage, as well as comprehensive details of their lives, including travel patterns, shopping behaviors, and even the specific food items they purchase from online supermarket websites. This data will then be cross-referenced with individual Iranians' information maintained by the Statistical Center of Iran, a government agency associated with the Planning and Budget Organization.
While the Majles was approving the bill, lawmaker Gholamreza Nouri Ghezelcheh pointed out that such a monitoring is against Article 25 of the Iranian Constitution which bars the government from spying on citizens’ private lives. He warned that any study of lifestyle should not include the private lives of citizens and invasion of their privacy.
Majles Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf concurred that any investigation into people's private lives would require permission from the prosecutor. He emphasized that this law should not be exploited to encroach upon individuals' privacy. However, he did not specify whether there was a mechanism in place to prevent the government from infringing on its citizens' privacy. Another lawmaker, Moineddin Saeedi, expressed concerns about the public's sensitivity to their privacy and anticipated a negative reaction.