Rooyesh

The Washington Post reports on its website momentum is building behind an academic boycott of Iran to pressure the government to free imprisoned American scholar Haleh Esfandiari, who was jailed in Tehran’s notorious Evin Prison on May 8 after more than four months under house arrest. The Middle East Studies Association of North America, which has 2,700 members worldwide, has written to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad warning that the detention of scholars has triggered “grave concern” and that Esfandiari’s imprisonment has sent a “chilling message to scholars throughout the world.” Esfandiari is director of Middle East programs at the Smithsonian’s Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

“Harassment and detention of scholars is always cause for grave concern, but in this case it should be noted that the scholar in question is widely respected both for her knowledge and ability to provide clear and dispassionate analysis,” the letter added. It also charged that Iran’s action against the 67-year-old grandmother, who was visiting Iran to help her ailing mother, 93, violates the republic’s constitution because she has been denied legal counsel. MIT professor Noam Chomsky also issued a statement yesterday calling Esfandiari’s detention “deplorable” and warned that the action by Iran’s intelligence ministry was “a gift” to American policymakers trying to organize support for military action against Iran. “Now is a time for diplomacy, negotiations, and relaxation of tensions, in accordance with the will of the overwhelming majority of Americans and Iranians, as recent polls reveal,” Chomsky said. “The intolerable treatment of this highly respected scholar and human rights activist severely undermines the efforts of those who are seeking peace, justice and freedom in the region and the world.” In his popular blog, University of Michigan Middle East expert Juan Cole said that he canceled plans to attend a conference this summer in Iran because of Tehran’s imprisonment of Esfandiari and called on other academics to do the same. “Everyone should be outraged about this story. Her arrest should be an issue for everyone who believes in human rights, in academic freedom, and in women’s rights,” he wrote. Cole also suggested that academics and others protest in front of Iranian diplomatic missions. Although the United States broke off diplomatic relations after the 1979 seizure of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, American academics have been frequent visitors to conferences in Iran. “Academics may now feel they are put at risk, but if you have a fellow academic who is highly respected and is being held prisoner for promoting the very contact that Iran has been seeking, that is perfectly good grounds for not going to a conference there,” said Gary Sick of Columbia University and a former member of the National Security Council under presidents Gerald R. Ford, Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan. Iranian prison authorities allowed Esfandiari a one-minute telephone call to her mother yesterday, according to her husband, George Mason University professor Shaul Bakhash. Esfandiari could say only that she was waiting for clarification of her situation. Iran’s judiciary said last week that she was being investigated for “crimes against national security.”

Washington’s Arab allies harshly criticized Iran’s growing influence in the Middle East, telling the country’s top diplomat at a high-level conference Saturday that it must stay out of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and be more open about its nuclear ambitions. Dominating many discussions at the World Economic Forum was the deadly violence between the Fatah Palestinian faction and Hamas militants, which has helped stall a Saudi Arabian-sponsored plan for peace between Israel and the Palestinians.

Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said the plan would flounder partly because Israel has no intention of striking a peace deal, but Arab countries focused their criticism on Iran. “We had some 130 plans in the past 30 years, but none of them were realized because of the approach of the other side (Israel),” Mottaki said during a panel discussion. “Besides, we do not see any chance for the success of the Arab peace initiative because it fails to address fateful issues, like the capital of a Palestinian state and the right of return for some 5 million refugees.” Former Saudi ambassador to Washington Prince Turki al-Faisal scolded Iran, however, saying that the predominantly Persian country had little to do with Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking. “It’s an Arab issue and should be resolved within the Arab fold,” he said. Jordanian Prime Minister Marouf al-Bakhit was even more blunt, saying: “The Iranian foreign minister was wrong when he said there were 130 plans on Palestinian-Israeli peacemaking … The Arab peace plan is the first of its kind. It presents a clear and detailed path to peacemaking.” Mottaki insisted that his country’s goal was to help the resolve the Middle East’s concurrent crises, which he blamed on the U.S. and Israel. “Iran was always part of the solution to the crisis in the region. We have been in contact with governments in Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan,” he said during the panel on Mideast security and stability, which also included Afghan President Hamid Karzai. His words seemed unlikely to assuage many of the 1,000 forum participants, a great number of whom are political and business leaders from moderate Arab countries with strong military and diplomatic ties to Washington, and increasing worries about Iran’s rising regional influence. The U.S. accuses Shiite-ruled Iran of helping train and arm Shiite militias and some Sunni insurgent groups in Iraq. Arab countries on the Persian Gulf fear that rising Washington-Tehran tensions could turn explosive and they would be caught in the middle. Mottaki said Iran planned to tell the United States during a May 28 meeting between the countries’ ambassadors in Baghdad that its policies in Iraq were “wrong” and have led to failure, comments that set the stage for a potentially unproductive discussion. Both Iranian and American officials have said that the talks in Baghdad will be limited to Iraq’s security situation and will not delve into the diplomatic deadlock between the two countries over Iran’s nuclear program, which Tehran says is for peaceful energy generation, and the U.S. calls camouflage for weapons development. Bahraini Crown Prince Sheik Salman bin Hamad Al Khalifa called for Iran to be more open about that program. “Iran should work in partnership with its neighbors and not at their expense,” Al Khalifa said. “Iran can develop its technology for peaceful purposes, but that must be in a clear and transparent manner.” Abdulaziz Sager, the chairman of the Gulf Research Center in Dubai, also said Iran has not been forthcoming about its nuclear ambitions. “We have serious problems with the Iranian government in this region,” said Sager, who was part of the second panel with Mottaki. “We do not wish to see this sort of attack,” said Sager, who cautioned that better relations did not appear on the near horizon. “We would like to see normalized relations, but unfortunately, since Ahmadinejad came, they keep sending wrong signals.” Source: Time

In its website the Indepedent (UK) reports the US Army tried to kill or capture Muqtada al-Sadr, the widely revered Shia cleric, after luring him to peace negotiations at a house in the holy city of Najaf, which it then attacked, according to a senior Iraqi government official. The revelation of this extraordinary plot, which would probably have provoked an uprising by outraged Shia if it had succeeded, has left a legacy of bitter distrust in the mind of Mr Sadr for which the US and its allies in Iraq may still be paying. “I believe that particular incident made Muqtada lose any confidence or trust in the [US-led] coalition and made him really wild,” the Iraqi National Security Adviser Dr Mowaffaq Rubai’e told The Independent in an interview.

It is not known who gave the orders for the attempt on Mr Sadr but it is one of a series of ill-considered and politically explosive US actions in Iraq since the invasion. In January this year a US helicopter assault team tried to kidnap two senior Iranian security officials on an official visit to the Iraqi President. Earlier examples of highly provocative actions carried out by the US with little thought for the consequences include the dissolution of the Iraqi army and the Baath party. The attempted assassination or abduction took place two-and-a-half years ago in August 2004 when Mr Sadr and his Mehdi Army militiamen were besieged by US Marines in Najaf, south of Baghdad. Dr Rubai’e believes that his mediation efforts - about which he had given the US embassy, the American military command and the Iraqi government in Baghdad full details - were used as an elaborate set-up to entice the Shia leader to a place where he could be trapped. Mr Sadr emerged as the leader of the Sadrist movement in Baghdad at the time of the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003. It had been founded by his father, also a cleric, who had confronted Saddam’s regime in the 1990s and had been murdered by his agents in 1999. Its blend of nationalism, religion and populism proved highly attractive to Iraqi Shia, particularly to the very poor. Although Mr Sadr escaped with his life at the last moment, the incident helps explain why he disappeared from view in Iraq when President George Bush stepped up confrontation with him and his Mehdi Army militia in January. Dr Rubai’e said: “I know him very well and I think his suspicion and distrust of the coalition and any foreigner is really deep-rooted,” and dates from what happened in Najaf. He notes that after it had happened Mr Sadr occupied the shrine of Imam Ali in Najaf as a place of refuge. Dr Rubai’e had gone to Najaf in August 2004 to try to mediate an end to the fighting. He met Mr Sadr who agreed to a set of conditions to end the crisis. “He actually signed the agreement with his own handwriting,” said Dr Rubai’e. “He wanted the inner Najaf, the old city, around the shrine to be treated like the Vatican.” Having returned to Baghdad to show the draft document to Iyad Allawi, who was prime minister at the time, Dr Rubai’e went back to Najaf to make a final agreement with Mr Sadr. It was agreed that the last meeting would take place in the house in Najaf of Muqtada’s father Mohammed Sadiq al-Sadr who had been murdered by Saddam’s gunmen with two of his sons five years before. Dr Rubai’e and other mediators started for the house. As they did so they saw the US Marines open up an intense bombardment of the house and US Special Forces also heading for it. But the attack was a few minutes premature. Mr Sadr was not yet in the house and managed to escape. Although Dr Rubai’e, as Iraqi National Security Adviser since 2004 and earlier a member of the Iraqi Governing Council, is closely associated with the American authorities in Baghdad, he has no doubt about what happened. He sees the negotiations as part of a charade to lure Mr Sadr, who is normally very careful about his own security, to a house where he could be eliminated. “When I came back to Baghdad I was really, really infuriated, I can tell you,” Dr Rubai’e said. “I went berserk with both [the US commander General George] Casey and the ambassador [John Negroponte].” They denied that knew of a trap and said they would look into what happened but he never received any explanation from them. The US always felt deeply threatened by Mr Sadr because, unlike the other Shia parties, he opposed the occupation and demanded that it end. There were two attempts to crush his movement in 2004, neither of which was successful. The first, at the end of March, began with the closure of his newspaper and the arrest of one of his close advisers. A warrant for Mr Sadr’s own arrest was issued. A US general said his only alternatives were to be killed or captured. The US authorities appeared to have little understanding of the reverence with which the Sadr family was regarded by many Iraqi Shia. The crackdown provoked a reaction for which the US was ill-prepared. The Mehdi Army, though poorly armed and untrained, took over part of Baghdad and many Shia cities and towns in southern Iraq. The US had to rush troops to embattled outposts. A second crisis began in Najaf in August and this time the US and the recently appointed government of Iyad Allawi appear to have decided to smash Mr Sadr and his movement for ever. But they dared not assault the shrine of Imam Ali, one of the holiest Shia shrines. Other Shia parties suspected that once Mr Sadr was dealt with they would be marginalised. The crisis was finally defused when Grand Ayatollah Ali al- Sistani, after undergoing medical treatment in London, returned to Najaf and negotiated an agreement with Mr Sadr under which he withdrew but did not disarm his forces. The attempt to kill or imprison Mr Sadr was first revealed by Dr Rubai’e to Ali Allawi, the former Iraqi finance minister, who gives an account of what happened in his recent book The Occupation of Iraq: Winning the war, Losing the peace. Dr Rubai’e said this weekend in Baghdad that he stands by his account given there. He does not think the Americans were planning to kill him along with Mr Sadr because he had a senior American officer with him almost all the time. Muqtada al-Sadr is one of the most extraordinary figures to emerge during the war in Iraq,a pivotal figure leading a broad-based political movement with a powerful military wing. The appeal of the 33-year-old Shia cleric is both religious and nationalist. He is regarded with devotion by millions. He is also a survivor and an astute politician who has often out-manoeuvred his opponents. The US and Britain have repeatedly underestimated the strength of his support. The al-Sadrs are one of the great Shia religious families. His relative, Mohammed Baqir al-Sadr, was the founder of a politically active Shia movement and was executed by Saddam Hussein in 1980. Muqtada’s father Mohammed Sadiq al-Sadr in effect founded the Sadrist movement in the 1990s. Finding he could not control him, Saddam Hussein had him murdered with two of his sons in Najaf in 1999, provoking widespread rioting. To the surprise of all, the Sadrist movement re-emerged with Muqtada at its head during the fall of the old regime. In April 2003 it took over large parts of Shia Iraq. Its base was the vast Shia slum, renamed Sadr City, that contains a third of the population of Baghdad. The US and its Iraqi allies regarded Muqtada as a highly threatening figure. Paul Bremer, the ill-fated US viceroy in Iraq after the invasion, detested and unwisely under-rated the Sadrists. When he moved against them in April 2004 he was astonished to see them take over much of southern Shia Iraq in a few days. Muqtada took refuge in Najaf. There was a heavy fighting in August 2004 when the US made an all-out effort to eliminate Muqtada and his movement. Once again he survived, thanks to a compromise arranged by Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani. His movement became less confrontational. It took part in the elections in 2005, winning 32 seats out of 275. The Mehdi Army was viewed by the Sunni as an organisation of sectarian death squads. The US began increasingly to confront the Sadrists. But they were an essential support of the Iraqi government, making it difficult for the US to move against them. When the reinforced US forces in Baghdad did threaten the Mehdi Army, Muqtada simply sent his militiamen home, and disappeared from view.

Tourist attractions have long been trumped by traffic jams and choking pollution as Tehran’s defining hallmarks. Now London-style sightseeing buses are to offer street tours in an effort to transform the image of a city described by the Lonely Planet Guide as Iran’s “big, loud, chaotic, vibrant and ugly beating heart”.

Tourism chiefs believe that behind the fumes and often characterless modern buildings lies a capital rich with religious, cultural and architectural heritage From Thursday, a fleet of red-painted buses will provide tours covering attractions such as the sprawling market bazaar, former imperial palaces, museums and assorted religious shrines. Sights on the itinerary include the carpet museum and Niavaran and Sa’ad Abad palaces, used by the last shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, before he was toppled in the 1979 Islamic revolution. Special religious tours will visit pilgrimage sights such as the Shah Abdolazim shrine, dating back to the ninth century and honouring a descendant of the prophet Muhammad who reputedly fled to Iran from Medina to escape persecution. Organisers adopted the scheme after studying tourism in Britain, France, Spain and neighbouring Middle Eastern countries. Masoud Gholami, general director of Ganjineh Banader, which runs the tours, said the idea was inspired by bus tours popular among visitors to London. Initial tours will be aimed largely at domestic tourists, although guides will be fluent in English and other languages. The first bus tours will take place in single-decker coaches. Old double-deckers that have been out of regular service for decades are being converted into open-air buses. New twin-deck buses will also be built to offer tours during the summer. On days when pollution is at dangerous levels, there will be closed buses.

Source: Guardian

Financial times reports Iran took its diplomatic offensive to the Middle East’s business and political elite at the the weekend, deploying its politicians at a high-profile conference to make its case as it fights off international pressure over its nuclear programme. Iranian officials, including Manouchehr Mottaki, the foreign minister, were present for the first time at the World Economic Forum conference at the Dead Sea Resort in Jordan attended by business and political leaders, including Israeli delegates. Tzipi Livni, Israeli foreign minister, however cancelled her attendance.

Seeking the support of ordinary Arabs and Muslims with anti-Israeli slogans has been a cornerstone of Iran’s foreign policy under President Mahmoud Ahmadi- Nejad. But the strategy has infuriated Arab governments, and intensified suspicions of Tehran’s intentions at a time when its influence in the region has grown. This has led Iran to step up contacts with Arab rulers. Mr Ahmadi-Nejad has travelled to Saudi Arabia and most recently to the United Arab Emirates – the first trip by an Iranian president since the 1979 Islamic revolution. In March, Iran sent its foreign minister, as an observer, to the Arab League summit in Riyadh. “Iran is trying to take advantage of every opportunity to make its case and it knows that the Arab world is more receptive to its message,” said Mohammed Ali Abtahi, the former Iranian vice-president. “Iranians have something in common with the Arabs – they are both against Israel’s nuclear programme.” Abdelaziz al-Sager, head of the Dubai-based Gulf Research Centre and a critic of Iran, said Tehran’s active diplomacy was also aimed at a domestic audience. “They want to send the message that we’re active and that we’re neutralising the Gulf.” The Iranian efforts has not assuaged the concerns of Arab regimes, which see many of its regional policies at odds with their own. Shia Iran meanwhile suspects its Sunni Arab neighbours, all allies of the US, of working to undermine it. But the dialogue with the region has, at least temporarily, eased Shia-Sunni tensions, and put Arab rulers on the spot, prompting many to declare opposition to US military strikes on Iran over its nuclear programme. “The Iranians waste no opportunity to make their voices heard, but they still have a difficult case to sell,” said Ayman Safadi, editor of Jordan’s al-Ghad newspaper.