Iran Pledge of Resistance » Uncategorized http://www.iranpledge.org Join the movement to stop the next war Mon, 04 Feb 2013 16:27:42 +0000 en hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 Iran War Weekly – February 3, 2013 http://www.iranpledge.org/2013/02/04/iran-war-weekly-february-3-2013/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=iran-war-weekly-february-3-2013 http://www.iranpledge.org/2013/02/04/iran-war-weekly-february-3-2013/#comments Mon, 04 Feb 2013 16:27:42 +0000 admin http://www.iranpledge.org/?p=496   Hello All – Using the annual Munich Security Conference as a platform, it appears that the United States, the EU, and Iran have agreed to meet in Kazakhstan during the week of February 25th to renew negotiations about Iran’s nuclear program.  The actual meeting may not be a done deal, however, as Iran has stressed the need [...]]]>

 

Hello All – Using the annual Munich Security Conference as a platform, it appears that the United States, the EU, and Iran have agreed to meet in Kazakhstan during the week of February 25th to renew negotiations about Iran’s nuclear program.  The actual meeting may not be a done deal, however, as Iran has stressed the need for a realistic agenda for the next meeting, one that would at least end some of the economic sanctions and indicate a willingness to accept Iran’s right under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to enrich uranium as part of a civilian nuclear program.  Despite this caveat, the announcement of negotiations is a welcome breakthrough, as diplomacy has been snoozing since last June, and Iran’s presidential election in June probably means that further negotiations will not be possible beyond March.
The renewed negotiations appear (underline, appear) to have been jumpstarted by Vice President Biden’s announcement at Munich that the United States was willing to meet with Iran if serious negotiations were possible.  Iran has long insisted that direct negotiations with the United States was the key to resolving the many disputes between the two countries, of which Iran’s nuclear program is only one.  Whether Biden’s statement represents a post-election readiness of the Obama administration to negotiate seriously with Iran remains to be seen.
Just as it was impossible for the Obama administration to make any diplomatic moves toward Iran prior to the November election, it will be very unlikely that Iran’s domestic politics will allow much flexibility on its nuclear positions before their June election.  In the good/useful reading below I’ve linked several articles that reflect the fierce political struggles among what used to be considered Iran’s “conservatives,” who, now that there are no longer “reformers” or “liberals” on the scene, have established the main fracture in the Iranian political elite between “traditionalists” and “populists” (e.g. Ahmadinejad).  It is hard to say whether the growing dominance of the “traditionalists” will make a nuclear agreement with the P5+1 more likely.
While diplomatic doors are cautiously opening, Israel’s attack on Syria last week cracks open the door to war with Iran.  As noted below, Iran’s recent statement that it would consider an attack on Syria to be an attack on itself was quickly followed by Israel’s attack on what it claimed to be Syrian weapons bound for Hezbollah.  Whether through accident or design, Israeli military action against Syria that draws in Iran would of course obligate the United States to also attack Iran, with calamitous results.
Once again I would like to thank those of you who have helped in distributing the Iran War Weekly and/or linking it on websites.  Previous “issues” of the IWW can be read at http://warisacrime.org/blog/46383.  If you would like to receive the IWW mailings, please send me an email at fbrodhead@aol.com.
Best wishes,
Frank Brodhead
Concerned Families of Westchester (NY)
 
OVERVIEWS/PERSPECTIVES
The US Needs a Completely Different Approach to Iran
By Flynt and Hillary Leverett, Race for Iran [January 31, 2013]
—- As Washington and its great power partners prepare for more nuclear negotiations with Iran, the Obama administration and policy elites across the political spectrum talk as if America is basically in control of the situation. Sanctions, we are told, are inflicting ever-rising hardship on Iran’s economy. Either Tehran will surrender to U.S. demands that it stop enriching uranium or, at some point, the American military will destroy Iranian nuclear installations. This is a dangerous delusion, grounded in persistent American illusions about Middle Eastern reality. … We return from our latest visit to Iran convinced this is the only way diplomacy can succeed. No one who has walked the streets of Tehran, seen that Iran’s economy is not imploding, and talked with a range of Iranians could think that sanctions – as severe as they are and might become – will compel either Iran’s collapse or its surrender. The only thing that will work is accepting the Islamic Republic and acknowledging its interests and rights – including safeguarded enrichment. http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/01/31/the-u-s-needs-a-completely-different-approach-to-iran/
 
In Which Direction Will the 2nd Obama Administration’s Foreign Policy Move?
By Seyed Mohammad Kazem Sajjadpour, Iran Review [February 2, 2013]
[FB - For those who must wade through US-based “Iran-ology,” I thought this Iranian analysis of the post-election Obama administration tea leaves might be interesting.]
—- The people who Obama has chosen for his new national security and foreign policy teams are characterized by two prominent features. The first feature is the past familiarity as well as ease of contact and interaction between them and Obama. This means that the new people in key posts are familiar with Obama’s ways and, as a result, he will be probably facing fewer problems compared to his first term when dealing with everyday affairs of the United States foreign policy. Their second feature is their good command of internal politics of the United States. This also means that they will face less practical problems both inside and outside the United States. However, despite all the explanation about the behavior and composition of these groups, it should be noted that the US foreign policy is finally implemented within framework of a complex political context.. http://www.iranreview.org/content/Documents/Complicated-but-Innovative-Diplomacy.htm
American and Iranian Apes on a Treadmill
By Paul R. Pillar, National Interest [January 26, 2013]
—- The late Paul Warnke, who was the chief arms control negotiator in Jimmy Carter’s administration, wrote an article in 1975 that was a critique of the U.S.-Soviet arms race and was titled, “Apes on a Treadmill.” Warnke saw the two superpowers as waging an endless competition that was not in either country’s interest and argued that the United States should take the first step off the treadmill. There are many differences, of course, between the U.S.-Soviet competition in strategic arms and the current confrontation between the United States and Iran. The most obvious one, apart from Iran being nothing close to a superpower, is that on the Iranian side there are no nuclear weapons, the regime says it does not want such weapons, and the U.S. intelligence community says the regime has not decided to build such weapons. The nuclear weapons most involved are the ones owned by Israel, which wants to preserve its regional nuclear weapons monopoly. http://server1.nationalinterest.org/blog/paul-pillar/american-iranian-apes-treadmill-8025
 
Waking Up to Iran’s Real History
By David Swanson, War is a Crime [January 11, 2013]
[A review of M. Lachlan White, Waking Up in Tehran: Love and Intrigue in Revolutionary Iran, due to be published this spring.]
—- Waking Up in Tehran is the memoir of Margot White, an American human rights activist who became an ally of pro-democracy Iranian student groups in 1977, traveled to Iran, supported the revolution, met with the hostage-takers in the embassy, became a public figure, worked with the Kurdish resistance when the new regime attacked the Kurds for being infidels, married an Iranian, and was at home with her husband in Tehran when armed representatives of the government finally banged on the door. I’m not going to give away what happened next. This book will transport you into the world of a gripping novel, but you’ll emerge with a political, cultural, and even linguistic education. This is an action-adventure that would, in fact, make an excellent movie — or even a film trilogy.  http://consortiumnews.com/2013/01/11/waking-up-to-irans-real-history/
(Audio) An Interview with Muhammad Sahimi
By Scott Horton [January 25, 2013] – 60 minutes
—- Muhammad Sahimi, political columnist and professor of chemical engineering, discusses how Iran’s religious dictatorship can be traced back to the 1953 CIA coup against Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddeq; the 2009 Iranian election and subsequent crackdown on political opposition; how Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has squandered Iran’s oil revenues and created a kleptocracy; and why the US needs to mind its own business and let Iranians institute their own political reforms.
 
NEGOTIATIONS ABOUT IRAN’S NUCLEAR PROGRAM
Official Says Iran Is Open to New Round of Nuclear Talks
By Steven Erlanger, New York Times [February 3, 2013]
—- Iran’s foreign minister said Sunday that his country was open to a renewed offer of direct talks with the United States on its nuclear program and looked favorably on a proposal for a new round of multilateral nuclear negotiations on Feb. 25 in Kazakhstan. But the Iranian official, Ali Akbar Salehi, does not have the power in the Iranian system to decide these matters on his own, so his comments were viewed by European and American officials as more atmospheric, designed for the trans-Atlantic audience at the Munich Security Conference, than definitive. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/04/world/middleeast/irans-foreign-minister-calls-for-new-round-of-nuclear-talks.html?_r=0&pagewanted=print
 
Low Chance for Nuclear Deal Before Iran’s 2013 Presidential Election
By Mohammad Ali Shabani, Lobe Log [January 30, 2013]
—- After the nuclear talks between Iran and the P5+1 (the United States, Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany) in Moscow last June, dialogue at the senior political level was put on ice due to the American presidential vote. Eighty-five days have passed since the re-election of Barack Obama, and high-level talks between Iran and the P5+1 have yet to resume. There are many reasons for this. ,,, The most important factor affecting Iranian behavior, however, is how it has entered its election cycle. Tehran is filled with debate and rumors about likely presidential candidates and what they’ll be able to do after assuming office. Western policymakers would be wise to recognize that all politics is local and show an understanding for how the Iranian presidential elections may slow down dialogue. www.lobelog.com/low-chance-for-nuclear-deal-before-irans-2013-presidential-election/
The Iranian Nuclear Program is Speeding Up
Iran Is Said to Be Set to Accelerate Uranium Enrichment
By Alan Cowell, New York Times [January 31, 2013]
—- Iran has told the United Nations nuclear supervisory body that it plans to install more sophisticated equipment at its principal nuclear enrichment plant, a diplomat said on Thursday, enabling it to greatly accelerate its processing of uranium in a move likely to alarm the United States, Israel and the West. Currently, Iran uses less reliable IR1 models developed in the 1970s, but has been reported for several years to be trying to enhance its enrichment capability with newer centrifuges developed domestically from technology initially acquired from Pakistan. The Associated Press quoted a diplomat in Vienna as saying Iran had told the I.A.E.A. it planned to install over 3,000 of the IR2m centrifuges in addition to thousands of the older models at Natanz. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/01/world/middleeast/iran-is-said-to-be-set-to-accelerate-uranium-enrichment.html?ref=world&_r=0
Diplomats: Iran Prepared to Up Nuclear Program
From the Associated Press [January 31, 2013]
The Iranian Nuclear Program is Slowing Down
Israel: Iran slowing nuclear program, won’t have bomb before 2015
By Sheera Frenkel, McClatchy Newspapers [January 28, 2013]
—- Israeli intelligence officials now estimate that Iran won’t be able to build a nuclear weapon before 2015 or 2016, pushing back by several years previous assessments of Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Intelligence briefings given to McClatchy over the last two months have confirmed that various officials across Israel’s military and political echelons now think it’s unrealistic that Iran could develop a nuclear weapons arsenal before 2015. Others pushed the date back even further, to the winter of 2016. http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/01/28/181276/israel-iran-slowing-nuclear-program.html#storylink=cpy
Phantom Menace: The Iran Nuke “Threat”
By Ben Schreiner, Counterpunch [January 30, 2013]
IRANIAN POLICIES AND PERSPECTIVES
Ahmadinejad to make first Egypt visit by Iran head in decades
From Reuters [February 2, 2013]
—- Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will visit Cairo next week, becoming the first Iranian president to travel to Egypt since Iran’s 1979 revolution ruptured diplomatic ties between the two most populous countries in the Middle East. Ahmadinejad will head Iran’s delegation to a summit of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation in Cairo, said Amani Mojtaba, head of Iran’s interest section in Cairo, which it maintains in the absence of an official embassy. http://news.yahoo.com/ahmadinejad-first-egypt-visit-iran-head-decades-162747693.html
 
Report: Ex-Iran FM Mottaki slams Iran negotiating team
By Laura Rozen, Al-Monitor [January 30, 2013]
—- Former Iranian Foreign Minister Manoucher Mottaki has reportedly delivered a stinging assessment of Iran’s nuclear negotiating team. He cast Iran’s negotiators, in comments reported by Iranian news site Baztab, as amateurish and given to posturing, more obsessed with what city to hold nuclear talks, than in making diplomatic progress that could help relieve economic hardship suffered by the Iranian people.http://backchannel.al-monitor.com/index.php/2013/01/4232/ex-iran-fm-mottaki-slams-iran-nuclear-negotiating-team/#ixzz2Jrx8S6cp
 
Iran’s Coming Presidential Election (June 2013)
Changes To Iran's Election Law Seen As Attempt To Prevent Ahmadinejad Influence
By Golnaz Esfandiari, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty [Janaury 30, 2013]
---- Iran's Guardians Council has approved changes to the country’s election law that significantly diminish the government’s authority over elections. A Guardians Council spokesman said the new law stipulates that elections will be run by a new central election board made up of representatives from the three branches of power, as well as seven "national, political, social, and cultural" figures.  Previously, the Interior Ministry was tasked with organizing and overseeing all elections. Now it will play a much smaller role. The changes, which come as the Islamic republic prepares for a June 14 presidential vote, appear to be a preemptive move to prevent President Mahmud Ahmadinejad from using his office to manipulate the vote. http://www.rferl.org/content/changes-iran-election-law-power-struggle-ahmadinejad-khamenei/24888075.html
 
Iran Cracks Down on Journalists Ahead of Elections
By Omid Memarian, Al-Monitor [January 29, 2013]
—- Fourteen journalists in Iran were arrested this weekend [Jan. 26-27], and while Iranian officials say the mass arrests were not a result of the reporters’ “journalism activities” but security-related, reporters inside the country tell another story. … All 14 journalists belonged to the so-called reformist camp. The raid is considered the most aggressive crackdown on independent media since the 2009 presidential election, which was followed with the arrests of hundreds of reformist journalists and political activists, many of them still in prison after receiving long-term prison sentences. http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2013/01/iran-newspapers-14-reformist-journalists-arrested.html#ixzz2JVMFrxVR
 
Iran’s Parliament Sacks Another Ahmadinejad Minister
By Jason Rezaian, Washington Post [February 3, 2013]
—- Iran’s parliament Sunday voted to impeach the country’s labor minister, the ninth minister from President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s cabinet to be sacked during the president’s second term in office.
Sunday’s proceedings represent a dramatic escalation in the long-standing power struggle between Ahmadinejad and the speaker of Iran’s parliament, Ali Larijani.
Iran and Argentina Rapprochment
Argentina and Iran agree to interrogate suspects in Jewish center bombing in Teheran
From the Associated Press, [January 27, 2013]
Israel Rebukes Argentina for Deal With Iran to Investigate ’94 Attack
By Isabel Kershner, New York Times [January 29, 2013]
ISRAELI POLICIES AND PERSPECTIVES
Introduction
—- Although Iran and its nuclear program were barely visible in Israel’s recent election, Prime Minister Netanyahu immediately announced that the priority of his new government will be to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.  He seized on the IAEA announcement that Iran was installing a new generation of nuclear centrifuges (article above) to stress the urgency of Israel’s situation, ignoring the simultaneous statements by Israeli Iran watchers that Iran had slowed its nuclear program (article above).
Netanyahu’s posturing adds another piece to the puzzle of what was the meaning of Israel’s attack on Syria last week.  For the first few days the front-burner question was what actually happened.  Now that it is clear that Israeli planes attacked several targets in Syria, the next questions are why and why now?  The standard answer – to prevent advanced weapons from reaching Hezbollah – is presented in several of the articles linked below.  But I was struck – as was Paul Woodward in his article linked below – that the Israeli attack came immediately after Iran had stated that any attack on Syria would be considered an attack on Iran itself.  Is Israel trying to provoke Iran into attacking it, so that an Israeli attack on Iran would be justified as self-defense, and the Americans would be forced to intervene on the side of Israel? We shall see.
Another piece of Israeli weirdness re: Iran last week was its support (and origination?) of the claim that there had been a giant explosion at Iran’s Fordow nuclear enrichment plant.  Within 48 hours everybody but the Israelis had announced that the story was a hoax; but why would Israeli get behind such an easily disprovable hoax unless a) it had really bad intelligence? or b) it simply didn’t care that the hoax would be unmasked quickly and its exponents discredited?  Myself, I’m baffled.
 
The Israeli Attack On Syria
Is Israel baiting Iran?
By Paul Woodward, War in Context [January 31, 2013]
—- Last week, Ali Akbar Velayati, an aide to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, declared that an “attack on Syria is considered attack on Iran.” Yesterday, in a dangerous act of brinkmanship, Israel called Iran’s bluff.
But Israel doesn’t want to be perceived as risking provoking a war and so it portrayed its air strike on Syria as an imperative act of self defense necessitated by Syria’s alleged attempt to transport Russian-made SA-17 missiles to Hezbollah in Lebanon.http://warincontext.org/2013/01/31/is-israel-baiting-iran/
Israelis: Missiles were at Syrian military base when aircraft struck
By Sheera Frenkel, McClatchy Newspapers [January 31, 2013]
—- The anti-aircraft missiles that were the target of a disputed Israeli airstrike on Syria this week were on a military base outside Damascus and had yet to reach the highway that leads to Lebanon when they were destroyed, two Israeli intelligence officials familiar with the air assault told McClatchy on Thursday.
The officials differed on the details, with one saying that the convoy carrying the missiles was parked at a military base in the Jamraya district outside Damascus, while the other said the convoy was in the process of being moved from the base to the highway. But both agreed that the location of the base, less than five miles from the Lebanese border, made Israeli officials unwilling to wait any longer to attack.
 
US Green Lit Israeli Attacks on Syria, Approves Future Strikes
By Jason Ditz, Antiwar.com [February 2, 2013]
—- More and more confirmations are coming across the media that the White House not only green lit Israel’s Wednesday attacks on Syria, but that they have offered a blanket approval for future strikes.
The Wednesday attacks targeted several different sites in Syria, and the Syrian government has shown footage of the aftermath of an attack on a military research facility, one which experts claim was regularly visited by Russian military personnel. … Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta has become the first administration official to go on record about the attacks, saying that the US “fully backed” Israel in attacking Syria, adding that the US was concerned about possible transfers of anti-aircraft weapons because they might be used against “civilian aircraft.” http://news.antiwar.com/2013/02/02/us-green-lit-israeli-attacks-on-syria-approves-future-strikes/
 
Also useful/interesting – Jason Ditz, “Obama ‘Green-Lit’ Israeli Attack on Syria,” Antiwar.com [February 1, 2013]http://news.antiwar.com/2013/02/01/obama-green-lit-israeli-attack-on-syria/; and from War in Context “Syria Parries Israel With Verbal Strike,” [January 31, 2013] http://warincontext.org/2013/02/01/is-israel-heading-towards-yet-another-war/
The “Fordow Explosion” Hoax
Israeli Officials Peddle False Stories of Explosion in Iran
John Glaser, January 28, 2013
—- Did Israeli government officials aggressively promote an unsubstantiated story about an explosion at an Iranian nuclear facility? According to Ali Gharib at The Daily Beast, yes. He writes that it is “an object lesson that shows just how far some press—and even Israeli government officials—have gone down the rabbit hole on Iran issues by propagating a story reported on a conspiracy website.” Reports have been circulating for days claiming there was such an explosion at the Iranian enrichment facility at Fordow. It might have just disappeared, but Israeli officials started pushing the story in the press, without citing any evidence, of course. http://antiwar.com/blog/2013/01/28/israeli-officials-peddle-false-stories-of-explosion-in-iran/
Also useful/interesting – Jason Ditz, “IAEA: No Sign of Explosion at Iran Enrichment Plant,”  Antiwar.com [January 29, 2013]http://news.antiwar.com/2013/01/29/iaea-no-sign-of-explosion-at-iran-enrichment-plant/; and Zachary Keck, “Iran’s Fordow Nuclear Site “Explosion,” The Diplomat [January 30, 2013] http://thediplomat.com/flashpoints-blog/2013/01/30/irans-fordow-nuclear-site-explosion/?all=true
 
SANCTIONS AGAINST IRAN
Executive Orders and Legislative Acts Regarding Current Iran Sanctions
[A comprehensive list, with links to the documents, from 1984 to date.]
The United States Could Be Violating Its Own Iran Sanctions
By Brian Fung, The Atlantic [January 31, 2013]
—- It’s hard to think of another case where sanctions have had such drastic effects on a country’s economy so quickly. Iran used to export 2.14 million barrels of oil every day; that was two years ago. Now that number stands at some 890,000. … But despite the U.S. campaign to marginalize Iran, a new report suggests Washington may be unwittingly undercutting its own efforts by buying up Iranian oil — a clear violation of the sanctions prohibiting almost all economic activity with the pariah state. http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/01/the-united-states-could-be-violating-its-own-iran-sanctions/272714/
 
Et Tu, Karzai? Afghanistan Violates US Iran Sanctions
By Nick Schwellenbach, WhoWhatWhy [January 30, 2013]
Iran crude oil exports rise to highest since EU sanctions
From Reuters [January 31, 2013]
—- Iran’s crude oil exports in December leapt to their highest level since European Union sanctions took effect last July, analysts and shipping sources said, as strong Chinese demand and tanker fleet expansion helped the OPEC member dodge sanctions. Exports rose to around 1.4 million barrels per day (bpd) in December, according to two industry sources and shipping and customs data
CIVIL WAR/INTERVENTION IN SYRIA
Syria: How We Can End the Bloodshed
By Jonathan Steele, The Guardian [January 31, 2013]
—- The motives behind Israel’s attack on Syria on Wednesday are still as obscure as the nature of the target. But two things seem clear. It was related to Israel’s long war with Hezbollah in Lebanon rather than any desire to intervene in the fighting in Syria. Yet the attack was also a reminder that Syria’s turmoil is having dangerously unpredictable consequences across the region. Finding a viable political solution is therefore all the more urgent. So it was good to hear that Moaz al-Khatib, who leads the Syrian National Coalition – the group of exiles who support armed intervention against the Syrian government and are backed by western and Gulf Arab states – now advocates talks with Basher al-Assad’s people. This is not the view of French, British and US leaders or most of Khatib’s Syrian colleagues, who talk vaguely of a political outcome but only mean Assad’s unilateral surrender. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/31/syria-israel-attack-political-solution
The US and Syria: Six lessons from the past
Marwan Bishara, Aljazeera [January 29, 2013]
—- “If the United States drew back from military intervention because of… congressional second-guessing and Soviet bluster, the Turks… refused to demobilise the 50,000 troops they amassed along their Syrian frontier.”  These words read as though they’re from the morning’s paper. But this scenario played out in 1957 in Syria. Washington had finally backtracked on instigating another coup d’état after its covert plans were exposed. It would have been the fifth attempted coup, successful or otherwise, since Syrian independence a decade earlier. … Unfortunately, America rarely remembers how much Washington has mucked around in other countries even though there are valuable lessons to be learned from past experiences. http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/01/2013129111028388160.html
(Video) Syria and the US: The complicity of silence
From Aljazeera [Empire] [January 30, 2013] – 50 minutes
(Video) Who supports who in Syria?
From Aljazeera [Inside Syria] [January 27, 2013] – 25 minutes
—- We look at how support for the regime and the rebels has ebbed and flowed and how it is impacting the battle for Syria.www.aljazeera.com/programmes/insidesyria/2013/01/2013126125733749625.html
]]> http://www.iranpledge.org/2013/02/04/iran-war-weekly-february-3-2013/feed/ 0 Iran War Weekly September 16, 2012 http://www.iranpledge.org/2012/09/18/iran-war-weekly-september-16-2012/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=iran-war-weekly-september-16-2012 http://www.iranpledge.org/2012/09/18/iran-war-weekly-september-16-2012/#comments Tue, 18 Sep 2012 17:32:35 +0000 admin http://www.iranpledge.org/?p=494 In 1947 the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists first placed a clock on its cover, with the hands at seven minutes before midnight.  Nuclear war was that close, the atomic scientists thought.  And over the past 65 years the hands of the clock have moved back and forth, from two minutes before midnight (1953) to 17 [...]]]>

In 1947 the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists first placed a clock on its cover, with the hands at seven minutes before midnight.  Nuclear war was that close, the atomic scientists thought.  And over the past 65 years the hands of the clock have moved back and forth, from two minutes before midnight (1953) to 17 minutes before midnight (1991).  There is no similar clock counting down war against Iran, but if there were, the hands moved back a few minutes this week.

I base this guestimate on several indicators.  The first is the clear rejection by President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton of Israeli president Netanyahu’s demand that the United States set “deadlines” or “redlines” beyond which it would not allow Iran’s nuclear program to proceed.  A second and related indicator is the further isolation of Netanyahu from the growing antiwar consensus (or at least no war without the United States) among Israel’s political and military elite.  The US political elite also spoke out against war this week, as instanced by a New York Times editorial and by a report on the “cost-benefit” of war that was signed off on by many foreign policy heavyweights from years past.  (Needless to say, no one from the political elite seems to have objections in principle to attacking Iran– the illegality of such an act is not even discussable – but pragmatic considerations, the impact of US economic warfare against Iran, etc. suggest delay and caution.)  And finally, as the New York Times lead story today suggests, the United States political leadership is preparing itself for a prolonged siege of US interests in the Middle East; and perhaps this is not a good time to start another war there.

Each of these “indicators” is discussed in good/useful articles linked below.  Among the links to good/useful reading about other main events from the past week, I have included a set of readings about the UN’s IAEA follow-up to its recent negative report condemning Iran’s cooperation regarding its nuclear program; an interesting critique of the weak legal basis for IAEA proceedings against Iran by Dan Joyner; a link to this week’s report on the cost-benefits of war with Iran and some useful comments on the report; good overviews of the failures of US policy toward Iran by William Greider and David Bromwich; a link to a comprehensive report by the Congressional Research Service on sanctions against Iran; and several commentaries on David Makovsky’s recent article in The New Yorker about the relevance of Israel’s 2007 attack on Syria’s alleged nuclear site as a model for what might be done against Iran.

For those who would like user-friendly daily updates re: Iran and Syria, I recommend the Campaign Against Sanctions and Military Intervention in Iran (CASMI) [UK] – http://www.campaigniran.org/casmii/, and Syria Comment (now back up and running) – http://www.joshualandis.com/blog/.

Once again, I appreciate the help that many of you have given in distributing the Iran War Weekly and/or linking it on websites.  Previous “issues” of the IWW can be read at http://warisacrime.org/blog/46383.  If you would like to receive the IWW mailings, please send me an email at fbrodhead@aol.com.

Best wishes,
Frank Brodhead
Concerned Families of Westchester (NY)

WHAT ABOUT WAR?
Why War with Iran Would Spell Disaster
By Murtaza Hussain, Aljazeera [September 12, 2012]
—- War with Iran would be no quick and clean affair, as many senior political and military figures have pointed out it would make the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, which cost trillions of dollars and the lives of thousands of soldiers and civilians, seem like “a cakewalk”. The fact that it is becoming increasingly likely, inevitable in the eyes of many, and that it is high on the agenda of so many leading political figures warrants exploration of what such a conflict would really entail…. Not a war of weeks or months, but a “generations-long war” is how no less a figure than former Mossad chief Efraim Halevy describes the consequences of open conflict with Iran. http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/09/201291194236970294.html

No Rush to War
Editorial, New York Times [September 14, 2012]
—- There is no reason to doubt President Obama’s oft-repeated commitment to keep Iran from having a nuclear weapon. But 70 percent of Americans oppose a unilateral strike on Iran, according to a new poll by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, and 59 percent said if Israel bombs Iran and ignites a war, the United States should not come to its ally’s defense. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/15/opinion/no-rush-to-war.html?ref=opinion

Poll Shows Overwhelming US Opposition to Attacking Iran
By Jason Ditz, Antiwar.com [September 11, 2012]
—- A new poll conducted by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs shows an overwhelming opposition to the idea of attacking Iran among American voters, with 70 percent saying they are opposed to the idea of a unilateral US attack on Iran. The poll showed a declining number of Americans considering Iran’s civilian nuclear program a “threat” to American interests, and solid majorities opposed US involvement in an Iran war authorized by the UN or in joining an Israeli attack on Iran. http://news.antiwar.com/2012/09/11/poll-shows-overwhelming-us-opposition-to-attacking-iran/

Who’s Got the Nukes?
By William Greider, The Nation [September 12, 2012]
—- Israel’s prime minister is provoking another political dust storm over Iran’s nuclear ambitions, but US news stories once again fail to mention awkward facts that are the true linchpin for this threatening crisis. Israel itself already has the Bomb. It developed its own nuclear weapons several decades ago, but has never officially admitted as much. And unlike other nuclear powers, Israel has never signed anti-proliferation treaties, nor has it submitted its nuclear arsenal to regular inspections by international authorities. Everyone knows this, at least the government officials on all sides do. Yet there seems to be a media taboo against sharing the information with the American public. Americans have a huge and dangerous stake in the matter. If things go wrong and Israel launches a pre-emptive unilateral strike against Iran, it would probably provoke retaliatory war-making by Iran. Like it or not, the United States could be pulled into yet another war in the Middle East to defend our ally. Shouldn’t people hear the whole story before the shooting starts? http://www.thenation.com/blog/169883/whos-got-nukes#

IRAN’S NUCLEAR PROGRAM
IAEA steps up pressure on Iran with condemnation of its nuclear defiance
By Scott Peterson, The Christian Science Monitor [September 13, 2012]
—- The board of the UN nuclear watchdog in Vienna voted nearly unanimously today to condemn Iran over its nuclear program, with the US and Western allies bringing Russia and China on board. The 35-member governing board of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) expressed “serious concern that Iran continues to defy” UN Security Council sanctions that require a halt to enrichment, and the resolution of outstanding questions about possible nuclear weapons-related work. The participation of Russia and China – which have shielded Iran from sanctions in the past – adds further pressure on Iran, but may have been more aimed at showing Israel that there is big-power unity behind a diplomatic, not military, solution to curb Iran’s nuclear progress. Still, compromise language meant to bring Russia and China along meant the text also supported the “inalienable right” of all signatories of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes – a key inclusion for Iran. http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2012/0913/IAEA-steps-up-pressure-on-Iran-with-condemnation-of-its-nuclear-defiance

Also useful – “U.N. Agency Rebukes Iran for Failing to Cooperate,” from Reuters [September 13, 2012] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/14/world/middleeast/un-nuclear-watchdog-passes-resolution-on-iran.html?ref=world&pagewanted=print; and John Glaser, “IAEA Chief ‘Frustrated’ Over Delays in Iran Site Access,” Antiwar.com [September 10, 2012] http://news.antiwar.com/2012/09/10/iaea-chief-frustrated-over-delays-in-iran-site-access/

The IAEA Applies Incorrect Standards, Exceeding its Legal Mandate Regarding Iran
By Dan Joyner, Arms Control Law [September 13, 2012]
—- But the [IAEA Director General’s] report doesn’t stop there. It continues on to then apply two separate and additional legal standards and make two additional assessments based upon them. These separate and additional legal standards are:
1)      “The absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran”; and
2)      “That all nuclear material in Iran is in peaceful activities.”
So that got me to thinking, where do these other two legal standards come from? It is an important question, because essentially these two standards, together with the first clearly applicable standard, are the legal standards that the IAEA has been using as its scope of mandate for investigation and assessment regarding Iran’s compliance with its safeguards agreements for at least the last six years or so. http://armscontrollaw.com/2012/09/13/the-iaea-applies-incorrect-standards-exceeding-its-legal-mandate-and-acting-ultra-vires-regarding-iran/

Iran was forced to enrich 20% by the US – Former Iran nuclear negotiator
By Cyrus Safdari, Iran Affairs
—- Seyed Hossein Mousavian’s informative lecture on Iran nuclear issue in the Common Wealth Club in San Francisco, on C-SPAN, in which he points out that Iran was forced to enrich uranium to 20% to make its own fuel for a medical reactor that treats cancer patients, when the US interfered in Iran’s attempts to simply buy the necessary fuel as usual… I should point out that there was no “non-proliferation” goal served by this US interference in the purchase of fuel rods for this reactor. … So in short, by interfering with Iran’s purchase of fuel for this reactor, the US actually managed to push Iran closer to nuke-making ability by forcing Iran to learn to enrich uranium to 20% purity. And though Iran has repeatedly offered to cease 20% enrichment if it is only allowed to buy the fuel once again, the US has consistently refused this and other Iranian compromise proposals. So now we have to ask ourselves: Why did the US adopt this policy? http://www.iranaffairs.com/iran_affairs/2012/09/iran-was-forced-to-enrich-20-by-the-us-former-iran-nuclear-negotiator.html

US POLICIES AND PERSPECTIVES
Is there no Plan B on Iran?
By David Bromwich, Mondoweiss [September 11, 2012]
—- It looks very much as if Barack Obama has no Plan B for dealing with Iran. The tightening sanctions and the crowding of U.S. war ships into the Persian Gulf almost constitute a siege. In addressing the Israeli interest, some of it conveyed directly by Netanyahu and Barak, much of it by the Israel lobby, President Obama has placated again and again–though without twitching at the precise moment or in the precise way demanded by Israel. He has signaled that what they want concerning Iran is what he wants also. Has Obama then put off a war in the fall by committing us to war in the spring? … It is amazing that in the three years since the failure of his short-winded negotiations with Iran in fall 2009 (not the “hands-on” negotiations he promised in 2008), this president has not worked so much as the length of one speech to try and build an alternative consensus for containment. The materials for such a consensus now exist outside Congress. http://mondoweiss.net/2012/09/is-there-no-plan-b-on-iran.html

Obama Rebuffs Netanyahu on Setting Limits on Iran’s Nuclear Program
By Mark Landler and Helene Cooper, New York Times [September 13, 2012]
—- President Obama on Tuesday rejected an appeal by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel to spell out a specific “red line” that Iran could not cross in its nuclear program, a senior administration official said, deepening the divide between the allies over how to deal with Iran’s nuclear ambitions. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/14/world/middleeast/obama-rebuffs-netanyahu-on-nuclear-red-line-for-iran.html?_r=1&hp

Also useful – John Glaser, “Clinton: US ‘Not Setting Deadlines’ for Iran,” Antiwar.com [September 10, 2012] http://news.antiwar.com/2012/09/10/clinton-us-not-setting-deadlines-for-iran/; and Fariden Farhi, “Red lines or deadlines?” LobeLog [September 10th, 2012] http://www.lobelog.com/red-lines-or-deadlines/

US Leads Unprecedented War Games Exercise in Strait of Hormuz
By John Glaser, Antiwar.com [September 15, 2012]
—- Battleships, aircraft carriers, minesweepers and submarines from 25 nations are swarming into the Persian Gulf, in the largest such military exercise ever undertaken in the region, as concerns of a looming Israeli strike on Iran still linger Countries leading the massive war games exercise include the United States, Britain, France, Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Fleets of warships will flood the Strait of Hormuz, the important waterway through which 40 percent of the world’s seaborne oil passes, as a show of force to deter Iran from trying to close the straits or retaliate against US assets in the region, even in response to an unprovoked Israeli strike. http://news.antiwar.com/2012/09/15/us-leads-unprecedented-war-games-exercise-in-strait-of-hormuz/

(Video) Targeting Iran – Video: Iran war games
From Aljazeera [December 3, 2011]

Scowcroft, Brzezinski call for clear thinking on military action on Iran
From War in Context [September 13, 2012]

http://warincontext.org/2012/09/13/scowcroft-brzezinski-call-for-clear-thinking-on-military-action-on-iran/

Also useful – Gary Sick, “Weighing Benefits and Costs of Military Action Against Iran,” Gulf 2000 [September 15, 2012] http://garysick.tumblr.com/ (a summary of the report and commentary from this Columbia University scholar); and for the report itself, “Weighing Benefits and Costs of Military Action against Iran,” [September 11, 2012] http://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/weighing-the-benefits-and-costs-military-action-against-iran.

SANCTIONS AGAINST IRAN
Iran Sanctions
By Kenneth Katzman, Congressional Research Service [September 13, 2012] – 84 pages
—- The principal objective of international sanctions—to compel Iran to verifiably confine its nuclear program to purely peaceful uses—has not produced that outcome to date. Since late 2011, a broad international coalition has imposed progressively strict economic sanctions on Iran’s oil export lifeline, producing increasingly severe effects on Iran’s economy. Many judge that Iran might soon decide it needs a nuclear compromise to produce an easing of sanctions, because the energy sector provides about 70% of Iran’s government revenues. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RS20871.pdf

Sick of Sanctions
By Trita Parsi, The Daily Beast [September 12, 2012]
—- America might one day soon wake up to find it’s lost the Iranian people. Recent developments point to a shift in the balance of anger among Iranians—a shift that likely will be detrimental to America’s interests. Not only could the factors driving these changes sour the goodwill enjoyed by the U.S. in Iran, but they will likely also harm President Obama’s chances of softening Tehran’s position on issues like the nuclear standoff with the West. It may sound like a cliché, but the Iranian people really matter. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/09/12/sick-of-sanctions.html

Also useful – Cyrus Safdari, “History repeated: Why Iran sanctions will backfire on the hapless Obama administration,” Iran Affairs [September 15, 2012] http://www.campaigniran.org/casmii/index.php?q=node/12932

Iran develops ‘economy of resistance’
By Najmeh Bozorgmehr, Financial Times [September 11, 2012]
—- Iran is reducing its dependence on oil by developing an “economy of resistance” to circumvent international sanctions over its nuclear programme, according to a senior regime adviser. Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of the Expediency Council – which drafts the country’s macro economic, political and cultural policies, told the Financial Times that the country would focus on developing self-reliance. http://www.campaigniran.org/casmii/index.php?q=node/12926

ISRAELI POLICIES AND PERSPECTIVES
Israeli Sharpens Call for United States to Set Iran Trigger
By David E. Sanger and Isabel Kershner, New York Times [September 11, 2012]
—- Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel inserted himself into the most contentious foreign policy issue of the American presidential campaign on Tuesday, criticizing the Obama administration for refusing to set clear “red lines” on Iran’s nuclear progress that would prompt the United States to undertake a military strike. As a result, he said, the administration has no “moral right” to restrain Israel from taking military action of its own. …In demanding that Mr. Obama effectively issue an ultimatum to Iran, Mr. Netanyahu appeared to be making maximum use of his political leverage at a time when Mr. Obama’s Republican opponent, Mitt Romney, has sought to make an issue of what Mr. Romney says is the administration’s lack of support for Israel. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/12/world/middleeast/united-states-and-israel-engage-in-public-spat-over-iran-policy.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp

Also useful – Marsha B. Cohen, “Israeli PM Launches Verbal Attack on US,” LobeLog [September 11th, 2012] http://www.lobelog.com/israeli-pm-launches-verbal-attack-on-us/; Barbara Slavin, “Netanyahu’s Ultimatum Misreads US Attitudes,” Al-Monitor [September 12, 2012] http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2012/al-monitor/netanyahu-ultimatum-misreads-moo.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter; John Glaser, “Barak Says Iran War Last Resort, in New Moderate Approach,” Antiwar.com [September 10, 2012] http://news.antiwar.com/2012/09/10/barak-says-iran-war-last-resort-in-new-moderate-approach/; also by John Glaser, “Netanyahu Deputy Breaks With Prime Minister’s ‘Red-Line’ Views on Iran,” Antiwar.com [September 14, 2012] http://news.antiwar.com/2012/09/14/netanyahu-deputy-breaks-with-prime-ministers-red-line-views-on-iran/

The One Where Israel Bombed Syria
By Ali Gharib, The Daily Beast [September 10, 2012]
—- A Middle Eastern country covertly develops their nuclear program. Worried at the specter of losing its neighborhood nuclear monopoly, Israel pressures the U.S. to carry out a strike to destroy the nuclear reactor. When the U.S. balks, Israel goes it alone. And succeeds. This is not the story of a future Israeli strike against Iran; this is Israel’s attack on a Syrian nuclear reactor in 2007. This week in the New Yorker, David Makovsky leverages interviews with top Israeli and American officials to put together a granular account of the back and forth between Israel and the U.S. about what was happening at a suspected reactor site in the Syrian desert, and what to do about it. There is, however, an Iran connection: Makovsky tries to draw lessons for Iran from the Syria raid. But it doesn’t pan out the way he might hope. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/09/10/the-one-where-israel-bombed-syria.html

Israeli Official Cites 2007 Syria Strike to Justify Attacking Iran
By John Glaser, Antiwar.com [September 11, 2012]
—- An Israeli official on Monday cited a 2007 airstrike on a Syrian nuclear reactor to justify another unilateral attack on Iran’s nuclear program if the US maintains its position of not backing action now.  “President [George W.] Bush did not agree to the United States taking part [in the 2007 raid], but in any event the right step was taken,” Environment Minister Gilad Erdan said on Israel Radio. Israelis like to cite two previous so-called “surgical strikes” on nuclear reactors of opposing states to justify a similar attack on Iran in the current context. One on Iraq’s Osirak reactor in 1981 and the other on Syria’s suspected site in 2007. Both examples are misleading. http://news.antiwar.com/2012/09/11/israeli-official-cites-2007-syria-strike-to-justify-attacking-iran/

Also useful – Jacob Hale Russell, “Israel’s Strike on Syrian Reactor Offers Few Lessons on Iran,” Al-Monitor [September 14, 2012] [interview with Makovsky] www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2012/al-monitor/qa-with-david-makovsky.html; and John W. Farlely, “New Yorker Magazine Concocts Case for Bombing Syria,” Counterpunch [September 12, 2012] http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/09/12/new-yorker-magazine-concocts-case-for-bombing-syria/.  The New Yorker article is available on-line only to subscribers, but a summary of it can be read at http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/09/17/120917fa_fact_makovsky

We Must Make a Moral Stand Against any British Involvement in an Attack on Iran
By Abbas Edalat, Huffington Post [September 13, 2012]
—- If reports in yesterday’s Daily Mail are to be believed, Sir John Sawers was forced to make a special secret trip two weeks ago to Israel in a desperate bid to prevent this country from carrying out its most recent threats to launch a unilateral strike against Iran’s nuclear targets. Apparently, the British government decided to call in its top spymaster for this special mission as it had been sufficiently convinced by Netanyahu’s increasing determination to go it alone against Iran. http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/abbas-edalat/british-involvement-iran_b_1880048.html

]]> http://www.iranpledge.org/2012/09/18/iran-war-weekly-september-16-2012/feed/ 0 Iran Pledge of Resistance: Time to Kick Into Gear http://www.iranpledge.org/2012/08/30/iran-pledge-of-resistance-time-to-kick-into-gear/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=iran-pledge-of-resistance-time-to-kick-into-gear http://www.iranpledge.org/2012/08/30/iran-pledge-of-resistance-time-to-kick-into-gear/#comments Thu, 30 Aug 2012 18:30:20 +0000 admin http://www.iranpledge.org/?p=491 The drumbeat for war has gone through a cycle of loud notes and silence for years, but the rhythm seems to be a little different this time. The Israeli government continues to make serious threats against Iran with a recent report in the Israeli Times stating that Netanyahu, “is determined to attack Iran before the [...]]]>

The drumbeat for war has gone through a cycle of loud notes and silence for years, but the rhythm seems to be a little different this time. The Israeli government continues to make serious threats against Iran with a recent report in the Israeli Times stating that Netanyahu, “is determined to attack Iran before the US elections.”

There has been escalation in more than rhetoric in Israel. Gas masks have been passed out in Jerusalem and authorities tested a new

Please Donate!

text-messaging system for alerting Israelis to incoming rockets.

The Israeli government may be trying to increase pressure without real intent to attack or the attack may come at any time. Unfortunately, both the U.S. and Israeli governments have talked about attacking Iran for so long that at some point they will feel compelled to do so to maintain credibility. Either way, we must be proactive in our stance to prevent an attack on Iran and if an attack/war happens we must be ready to stop it.

Iran Pledge of Resistance endorser Veterans For Peace is taking action to build international pressure to stop Israel and the U.S. from attacking Iran.  With the Non-Aligned Movement meeting in Tehran August 29-31, Veterans For Peace is urging the organization of 120 nations not formally allied with any major power bloc to take steps to deter the Israeli and American  threats of war against Iran over its nuclear enrichment program. Read the appeal to the Non-Aligned Movement here.

It is time to kick organizing and education efforts in to gear. The IPOR endorsing organizations are meeting soon to develop an action plan. More information about that as it becomes available.  Until then please promote the pledge to get new signers. Also don’t forget to check out our site www.iranplede.org for updates about the situation. Please donate to IPOR to help us hire a coordinator in this most critical time.

In Struggle

Michael McPhearson

]]> http://www.iranpledge.org/2012/08/30/iran-pledge-of-resistance-time-to-kick-into-gear/feed/ 0 Unlike Bush, Obama Is Selling Israel the Planes and Bombs to Attack Iran http://www.iranpledge.org/2012/04/13/unlike-bush-obama-is-selling-israel-the-planes-and-bombs-to-attack-iran/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=unlike-bush-obama-is-selling-israel-the-planes-and-bombs-to-attack-iran http://www.iranpledge.org/2012/04/13/unlike-bush-obama-is-selling-israel-the-planes-and-bombs-to-attack-iran/#comments Fri, 13 Apr 2012 23:07:50 +0000 admin http://www.iranpledge.org/?p=445 Orginally posted here WASHINGTON – Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu requested the United States approve the sale of advanced refueling aircraft as well as GBU-28 bunker-piercing bombs to Israel during a recent meeting with Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, a top U.S. official said on Tuesday. The American official said that U.S. President Barack Obama instructed Panetta to work [...]]]>

Orginally posted here

WASHINGTON – Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu requested the United States approve the sale of advanced refueling aircraft as well as GBU-28 bunker-piercing bombs to Israel during a recent meeting with Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, a top U.S. official said on Tuesday.

The American official said that U.S. President Barack Obama instructed Panetta to work directly with Defense Minister Ehud Barak on the matter, indicating that the U.S. administration was inclined to look favorably upon the request as soon as possible.

During the administration of former U.S. President George Bush, the U.S. refused to sell bunker-penetrating bombs and refueling aircrafts to Israel, as a result of American estimates that Israel would then use them to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Following Obama’s entrance into the White House, however, the United States approves a string of Israeli requests to purchase advance armament.

Diplomatic cables exposed by the WikiLeaks website exposed discussion concerning advanced weapons shipments. In one cable which surveyed defense discussions between Israel and the United states that took place on November 2009 it was written that “both sides then discussed the upcoming delivery of GBU-28 bunker busting bombs to Israel, noting that the transfer should be handled quietly to avoid any allegations that the USG is helping Israel prepare for a strike against Iran.”

Another issue raised during Obama’s Monday meeting with Netanyahu was the Syrian crisis. Netanyahu pointed out that Israel feared that chemical and biological weapons from Syrian army stockpiles could end up in the hands of Hezbollah or other terror groups.

A top U.S. official indicated that the United States recently discussed the issue with Turkey, Israel, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia, in an attempt to prepare for the possibility that a collapse of the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad would endanger the country’s WMD stockpiles.

At this point the American administration does not possess information that indicates that chemical or biological weapons were passed from Syria to Hezbollah.

Netanyahu and Obama also discussed the ongoing diplomatic crisis between Israel and Turkey. The United States feels that, amid ongoing unrest, that there existent a supreme interest to rehabilitate Jerusalem-Ankara ties. Obama told Netanyahu at the meeting that an effort should be exerted to reconcile between the two states.

]]> http://www.iranpledge.org/2012/04/13/unlike-bush-obama-is-selling-israel-the-planes-and-bombs-to-attack-iran/feed/ 0 A Message of Peace & Friendship from Iran http://www.iranpledge.org/2012/03/26/a-message-of-peace-friendship-from-iran/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=a-message-of-peace-friendship-from-iran http://www.iranpledge.org/2012/03/26/a-message-of-peace-friendship-from-iran/#comments Mon, 26 Mar 2012 15:53:19 +0000 admin http://www.iranpledge.org/?p=245 Leila Zand, Program Director, Middle East & Civilian Diplomacy, Fellowship Of Reconciliation, shared this letter from a friend in Iran. Originally posted here and here. To all the wonderful peacemakers in national peace conference To all of our brothers and sisters in the beautiful world We are sending you the message of peace and friendship from [...]]]>
Leila Zand, Program Director, Middle East & Civilian Diplomacy, Fellowship Of Reconciliation, shared this letter from a friend in Iran. Originally posted here and here.

To all the wonderful peacemakers in national peace conference

To all of our brothers and sisters in the beautiful world

We are sending you the message of peace and friendship from Iran, the land of love and poetry, friendship and roses.  Iran, a country that has not initiated any violence on another nation in the past 200 years, but unfortunately has been the subject of such violations many times in her recent history.

In the past 30 years the loving people of Iran have experienced all kinds of difficulties; revolution, sanctions, war and terrorism.  Iran has also taken sweet, strong beginning steps towards democracy.  We Iranians have had the experience of revolution.  We know that real change will not occur through a sudden move, with violence.  We know that real change will come from within, from each one of us, Iranians.  We have learned this lesson and paid a very high price for it.  That is why we are strongly opposed to any violence, or pressure for change, including regime change, through the direct or indirect intervention of foreign powers.  We are proudly and persistently working hard to reach the level of democracy we deserve and desire.   Any attack on our beloved Iran will destroy all our work; any violence imposed on our mother land will eclipse our efforts, efforts of a 100 years, a 100 years of the hard work of generations.  A war on Iran is a war on a nation’s desire for democracy.  A war on Iran is a war on human history, a war on a culture of peace and a war on a people who have never appreciated violence.

Dear fellow American peace lovers, please deliver our message to your politicians.  We are not just a piece of land.  We are not oil.   We are not nuclear sites.  We are not evil.  We are women, men, children.   We are people with dreams, jobs, families, with a baggage of 5000 years of experience.   When we talk about war we know what we are talking about.  We have heard the shrieks of missiles.   We have smelled the gunpowder.   We have run for shelters.   We have seen pieces of a human body in top of our trees and on our roof tops.   We have lost loved ones.  We know what war means.  War was behind our windows.   We experienced war in our back yard. For my generation, killing, bombs, missiles, chemical weapons and terrorism is not just in Hollywood; is not a computer game; it is real.   And that is why we don’t want evil to knock on our door again.  We don’t want war.

Iranians has experienced 30 years of sanctions that were imposed on them in the harshest way.  Discussing and deciding on “crippling sanctions” is one thing.   Living with them is another.  Your government thinks they can bring our governments to its knees with these kinds of pressure.  They are dead wrong.   Your government is sanctioning Iranian children, workers, women, students, activists, but not the government.  Your government is targeting Iranian people, who are disconnected from the circles of power.  Those who live in the bountiful land of Iran pay the price; they suffer the most from these sanctions.

My American sisters and brothers let me say one last word on “crippling sanctions”.  The People of one of the wealthiest countries in the world can hear the breaking sounds of their backs under the economic pressure.  How long we can we continue to tell to our children that we don’t have bread to eat? Please help us to find a way to explain sanctions, nuclear, 5+1, IAEA and NPT to our little children who want and deserve to live like your children.

Don’t let the history repeat itself.   Don’t allow the scenario that caused Iraq to lose more than half a million children because of punitive sanctions repeat here in our beautiful Iran.  Sanctions will not stop the government from following their planned policy.  Sanctions destroy people’s lives. Today, as I am writing to you, there is a strong need for medicine, food, clean water and even toys for little children.   Today we are talking about precious human lives.  Today is the day to rethink, rebuild and get back to the most important role of our life, that of a loving human being.

 

]]> http://www.iranpledge.org/2012/03/26/a-message-of-peace-friendship-from-iran/feed/ 1 Iranian Women Speak Out Against War http://www.iranpledge.org/2012/03/18/iranian-women-speak-out-against-war/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=iranian-women-speak-out-against-war http://www.iranpledge.org/2012/03/18/iranian-women-speak-out-against-war/#comments Sun, 18 Mar 2012 22:28:20 +0000 admin http://www.iranpledge.org/?p=136 ]]>

]]> http://www.iranpledge.org/2012/03/18/iranian-women-speak-out-against-war/feed/ 0 Pledge of Resistance, by Robert Naiman http://www.iranpledge.org/2012/03/14/why-we-need-an-iran-pledge/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=why-we-need-an-iran-pledge http://www.iranpledge.org/2012/03/14/why-we-need-an-iran-pledge/#comments Wed, 14 Mar 2012 02:25:10 +0000 admin http://www.iranpledge.org/?p=51 In the 1980s, during Reagan’s war in Central America, there was a movement called the Pledge of Resistance. The basic idea was that you sign a pledge that if Reagan invades Nicaragua, you’re willing to get arrested in mass civil disobedience. Of course, people involved in the Pledge of Resistance did not just sit around [...]]]>

In the 1980s, during Reagan’s war in Central America, there was a movement called the Pledge of Resistance. The basic idea was that you sign a pledge that if Reagan invades Nicaragua, you’re willing to get arrested in mass civil disobedience. Of course, people involved in the Pledge of Resistance did not just sit around waiting for Reagan to invade Nicaragua to take action. They lobbied Congress to cut off funding for the US-organized Contra terrorists who were killing Nicaraguan civilians; they wrote letters to the editor; they gave talks in church basements; they organized material aid to Nicaragua; they opposed Reagan’s air war in El Salvador and US military aid to the death squad government there. The pledge was to “resist” US “intervention” in Central America by all the nonviolent means at our disposal, but the willingness to participate in mass arrests in the event of a US ground invasion was a fundamental animating idea.

We need a Pledge of Resistance now to prevent a war with Iran. If members of Congress know that if they refuse to pledge to vote against war with Iran, their district offices are going to be occupied, that they and their staffs are going to be dogged at every public appearance, that their names are going to be mud in local media, support for another war will evaporate.

Moreover, a pledge to resist “all options are on the table” will allow local activists to force a national discussion which traditional, establishment media have so far largely excluded: the one in which proposed cuts in domestic spending and proposed military spending are examined on the same chalkboard, so everyone can see and discuss the trade-offs that are implicit in the choices that are being proposed. This dialogue will allow antiwar activists to pursue the holy grail of antiwar activism: connecting the cost of the endless war with cuts in domestic spending for human needs.

Sign up for the Iran Pledge to withdraw all support for military action with Iran.

Edited and revised from an article in TruthOut about cuts in Social Security - Pledge of Resistance by Robert Naiman.

]]> http://www.iranpledge.org/2012/03/14/why-we-need-an-iran-pledge/feed/ 0