Post #6 Iranian Authorities Arrest Filmmaker Who Supported Opposition

Click here to read the New York Times article "Iran Arrests Filmmaker Who Backed Opposition", written on March 2nd.
Prominent Iranian filmmaker Jaffar Panahi, along with his wife, daughter and 15 other guests, were arrested last Tuesday.
Panahi has supported the opposition movement in Iran, as well as having had appeared at international film festivals outside of Iran wearing a green scarf, which is considered the trademark colour of the opposition party.
Prosecutor General Abbas Jafari Dowlatabadi said that Panahi had been arrested for committing "certain offenses" that were not related to his "profession or politics" but did not elaborate on any more specifics.
Panahi's arrest is the latest in what appears to be a pattern of arrests by the government in which they arrest prominent figures who support the opposition movement. Last December, Shahram Nazeri, a famous singer was briefly detained, and in January, Mehraneh Atashi, a well-known photographer and her husband were arrested with no explanation given for their arrests.
Iran is reported to have released a dozen detainees last monday, in order to relieve some pressure from human rights activists. But it is also believed that a huge number of people are still held within the prison system for dissent again the government. The Human Rights Activists News Agency reported that five followers of the Bahai faith were sentenced to ten-months in prison for spreading "propaganda against the regime."
Also on Tuesday, one of the 20,000 people arrested in Tehran on February 11, when the government stopped an opposition rally, gave new insight into his capture. The prisoner said that he was held "with 50 others, in a 130-square-foot cell where he said his cellmates were ruthlessly beaten."
This relates to what we've been learning in Comparative Government largely in terms of legitimacy and citizen's rights. If the Iranian Government continues to arrest people for no reason, or simply for disagreeing with the government, the country's legitimacy is bound to falter, which will also occur if the citizens are beaten when they are arrested, as reported by one of the prisoners.

Grade this post
Photo Courtest of Wikipedia

Post #6: U.S. Enriches Companies Defying Its Policy on Iran

Click here for a link to the March 6th, 2010, New York Times Article, "U.S. Enriches Companies Defying Its Policy on Iran." Despite Washington's efforts to discourage investment in Iran, the United States has awarded billions of dollars in grants, contract payments, and various benefits to American companies who have done business in Iran. This includes the $15 billion given to companies who ignored American law through investments bolstering the development of Iran's gas and oil reserves. With the current nuclear crisis, the Obama administration is currently trying to pass more United Nations sanctions against Iran. Its seems as if both the Bush and Obama administration sent conflicting messages when it comes to making economic deals with Iran, by rewarding companies whose monetary interests oppose American security goals. Most of these companies are in the oil or automobile industries, linked to the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, Obama's focus in his proposed sanctions. The companies making business deals with Iran have reaped a variety of benefits, including close to $4.5 billion in loans from the Export-Import Bank, which underwrites the export of American service and goods, and over $500 million in grants for research. Recently, many companies have chosen to pull out of Iran due to pressures by the United States, anti-terrorism campaigns by shareholders, and the obstacles involved with doing business with the Iranian government. Some, however, including 49 of the 74 companies identified by The New York Times staff, continue to do business with Iran. The United States' most powerful tool in cracking down is the Iran Sanctions Act, which punishes foreign companies which invest over $20 million in a year to develop Iranian gas and oil fields. Due to fear of angering American allies, however, this law has never been enforced. In addition, nineteen states have rules preventing or discouraging pension funds from investing in companies which perform business in Iran. Representative Ron Klein, a democrat from Florida and a member of United Against Nuclear Iran, is trying to make legislation federal and claims that "we need to send a strong message to corporations that we’re not going to continue to allow them to economically enable the Iranian government to continue to do what they have been doing." The Iran Sanctions Act currently stands as the United State's "unused tool." This law enables the president to enact a series of punishments against offending companies, but is difficult to enforce. John R. Bolton, the secretary of state and United Nations ambassador during the Bush administration, claims that failing to enforce the law sent a "signal to the Iranians that we're not serious" and ruined the credibility of the government when it later threatened action. As of late, 50 lawmakers from both parties convinced Obama and the State Department to begin a preliminary investigation of a list of companies that had violated the law by making deals with Iran. Many competing interests seem to be at hand. For example, among the list of companies is the Brazilian energy conglomerate Petrobras, which received a Export-Import loan of $2 billion last year for the development of an oil reserve. Despite American requests, Petrobras had previously invested millions in the exploration of Iran's oil prospects. At the same time, the Export-Import Bank loan could promote American job creation and develop oil sources outside the Middle East. Last year, the Obama administration received correspondence from Petrobras confirming its end of work in Iran. Ten days later, however, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad visited Brazil and created a partnership involving the share of technical expertise on energy projects. This visit upset American officials who claimed that it lent international legitimacy to the Iranian president and undercut efforts to pressure Iran in reguards to its nuclear program. Due to Brazil's rotating seat on the Security Council, the partnership has complicated the American actions at the United Nations. Last week, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, the president of Brazil, confirmed his opposition to the sanctions proposal by warning that "it is not prudent to push Iran against a wall." Despite questions of national security, Iran presents opportunities for profits. Auto companies, such as Mazda, and aviation and aerospace companies have made billions through federal contracts in Iran through loopholes. As it stands, companies can invest in Iran through foreign subsidiaries controlled by non-Americans. Senator Bryon L. Dorgan, a democrat from North Dakota tried to close this loophole, but was unable to overcome business opposition. William A. Reinsch, president of the National Foreign Trade Council, strongly opposed Mr. Dorgan's bill to end this loophole. While Reinsch argues that ending trade with Iran will result in replacement by foreign competitors, and claims that "its those workers who will pay the price," Hans Sandlberg, vice president of Atlas Copco, a Swedish company says its sales of construction and mining equipment to Iran are stunted by American business, but would gladly choose amiable American relations over trade with Iran. This article is important because it involves the legitimacy of both Iran and its president and the balance between economic advancement and national security.

Click here to see the picture, thanks to riacale of flickr!


"Grade this post"

Click here to read the Economist article "Sanctions on Iran: And the price of nuclear power?". This article discusses how Iran continues to defy the international community by further enriching uranium. The article talks about how it is becoming harder and harder for countries to say Iran simply wants to make fuel for nuclear power. That combined with Iran's suffering economy and mismanaged oil investing and development may cause Iran to have to start importing oil. Other countries in the region might replace Iran's oil production and make sanctions less painful for countries like China who get oil from Iran. Russia recently didn't sent a shipment of advanced anti-aircraft missiles to Iran, who it sells weapons to. The United States has been leading countries from not trading with or financing things in Iran, which is both hurting Iran and starting to transition them out of global trade. With Iran already falling out of the global economy, economic sanctions will be less painful for the international community and will also hurt an already struggling Iran. This will also affect Iran's domestic politics, causing more resentment towards the government and their president Ahmadinejad. In 2005 the United States Treasury Department banned a bank that was helping with North Korea, therefore causing foreign banks to stop dealing with North Korea. The same thing has been applied to Iran, making over 80 foreign banks stop working with Iran, causing all sorts of problems for Iran. This is important because it shows how much damage economic sanctions can do. Economic problems can affect government legitimacy, public policy, international trade, and global security. Public opinion in Iran will most likely change if their economy worsens. Money seems to be the determining factor in Iran's nuclear ambitions. Grade this post.

Post #5: Iranian Authorities Arrest Sunni Militant Leader

Click here to read the BBC News Article "Iran Jundullah leader claims US military support", written on February 26th.
Iranian Stave Television has released a videotaped statement of recently arrested Sunni militant leader Abdolmalek Rigi, in which Rigi claims that he recieved support for his actions from the United States Government. Rigi was the leader of Jundullah (translated as 'Soldiers of Allah'), a Sunni militant group founded in 2002 to defend the Baluchi minority in south-east Iran. The group has been linked to a variety of attacks throughout Iran, including one in October 2009 that killed 31 people, including six top Revolutionary Guard commanders.
Rigi was captured on February 23, while on a flight from Dubai to Kyrgyzstan.
In the video Rigi claims that contact with the US was made after the November 2008 election, and took place in Quetta, Pakistan. Rigi alleged that the US promised to aid Jundullah through cooperation, as well as providing weapons, equipment, and a base, as well as freeing prisoners.
It is unknown whether or not Rigi made the statements under duress, but the US has denied any accusations of assissting Jundullah.
Iran, which is predominately Shia, has linked Jundullah to al-Qaeda, which is predominately Sunni, as well as to Pakistan, Britain, and America.
This relates to what we have been learning in Comparative Government because it deals with how Iran treats its ethnic and religious minorities, as Jundullah is a Sunni militant group in a Majority Shi'a country, created in order to bring attention to the treatment of an Iranian minority group. There is also the question of whether or not Rigi was forced to make his statements under duress, which relates to the country's treatment of its prisoners. Lastly, it deals with Iranian foreign policy as Iran has accused Pakistan, America, and the United Kingdom of working with Jundullah.


Image courtest of BBC News
Grade This Post

Post #5: Another Puzzle After Iran Moves Nuclear Fuel

Click here to read The New York Times article, "Another Puzzle After Iran Moves Nuclear Fuel," dated February 26, 2010. When Iran was discovered building a nuclear enrichment plant last September, no one would have predicted that Iran would transfer its entire stock of fuel to an above-ground facility. Two weeks ago, however, Iran moved the entirety of its fuel above ground, resulting in much speculation and debate regarding the country's intentions. Current theories suggest that Iran was trying to goad the Israelis into an attack or looking to win greater concessions in negotiations with the West. The Obama administration is subscribing to the idea that Iran had simply run out of storage space below ground. Much confusion continues to surround the issue. Since October, unexpected events have occurred beginning with President Ahmadinejad's move away from a deal with the West and culminating with Iran's declaration that it will soon manufacture 10 new plants, a number far exceeding its capacity, and its refusal to respond to inspectors about potential weapon development. In addition to evaluating Iran's technical abilities, the United States is trying to understand Iran's political goals. This whole debate was sparked by a sentence in the International Atomic Energy Agency's latest report claiming that Iran had transported 4,300 pound of uranium to a small storage plant above ground for enrichment to 20 percent. Americans continue to remain distant due to the issue's reliance on three uncertainties: the possibility of an Israeli attack leading to a Middle Eastern war, or an end to enrichment via sanctions and diplomacy, and the question as to who has control of Iran's nuclear program. One speculation that has had much consideration is the idea that the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps is hoping for an attack to bring together the country after months of violence and protest by Iranian citizen's, culminating in the renouncement of the Nuclear Noproliferation Treaty. Others support the theory of brinkmanship and believe the Iranians are hoping to use threats to gain greater concessions from Western powers. Some claim that the move was just a mistake or that Iran had no other choice. Regardless of the cause, the Obama administration is set on preventing military action by the Israelis. This article is important because it deals with both international relations and diplomacy, as well as the legitimacy of the Iranian government.

Thanks to geographyphotos of flickr for the image!

"Grade This Post"

Week #5; Iran's Leader of Opposition Assails "Cult" of Rulers

To read the full New York Times Article click here. On February 11th the opposition party in Iran attempted to hold a protest but very few people showed up due to government crackdowns and the thousands of government forces that had been bused in. This has led an opposition leader, Mir Hussein Moussavi, to very critically and publicly say that Iran was being ruled by a dictatorial "cult" and the week before another opposition leader Mehdi Karroubi called for a gauge of the government's popularity through a national referendum which the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei responded to by saying that there would be no compromise with any opposition. This article relates to what we have been learning about in Comparative Government because it demonstrates how the government is using any means necessary to gain legitimacy among the people.

**Thankyou to the New York Times for the picture.

"Grade This Post"

Article #4 Ayatollah Khamenei Denies Nuclear Weapons Development Claims

Click here to read the BBC News Article 'Iran's supreme leader denies nuclear report claims', from February 19th. Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khameini has told Iranian media outlets that any consternation about the possibility of an Iranian nuclear weapon's program were unwarranted and "baseless", because Iranian beliefs "bar us [Iranians] from using such weapons".
The Ayatollah's statement comes a week after Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced at a rally celebrating the 31st anniversary of the Islamic Revolution, that Iran had successfully made its first batch of 20% enriched uranium. The enriching of uranium to 20% is regarded as a major step in the creation of weapons grade uranium.
Iran's increased and continued insistence that it have its own nuclear program has alarmed the International Atomic Energy Agency, as well as the P5+1 (US, UK, China, France, Russia, and Germany).
The P5+1 and the IAEA have threatened further sancions against Iran if the country continues to fail to comply with the United Nations over its nuclear energy program.
The Ayatollah's statement regarding Iran's weapon program coincides with the launch of Iran's first domestically produced destroyer, the Jamaran (named after Ayatollah Khomenei's hometown), the ship is equipped with a variety of weaponry and detection software.
The IAEA plans to discuss Iran's energy program from March 1-5, at a meeting between the agency's 35 members.
This article relates to what we are learning because Iran's continued disregard of warnings from both the UN and IAEA call its legitimacy into question. If Iran continues enriching uranium, more sanctions will likely be placed upon the country, decreasing its legitimacy in the eyes of other country's and well as possibly decreasing the likelihood of reaching an agreement in regards to Iran's energy program.