|
Weekly Commentary
Tehran Ends 2004
with a new Record in Rights Abuse
Earlier this week, the United Nations General Assembly denounced
Iran for public executions, torture, arbitrary sentencing,
flogging, stoning and systematic discrimination against women in
law and practice. The resolution expressed concern at the
"worsening situation" regarding freedom of opinion and
expression, and freedom of the media, "especially the increased
persecution for the peaceful expression of political views,
including arbitrary arrest and detention without charge or
trial."
The document, the 51st UN censure of Iran, deplored the
execution of children under the age of 18 in violation of
international standards.
Human rights organization have issued scathing reports about
Tehran’s appalling rights record, such as issuing decrees to
stone to death of 13-year old schoolgirls and mentally-disabled
women, as well as public hanging of teenagers.
The Human Right Watch reported this week, “The Iranian judiciary
is using threats of lengthy prison sentences and coerced
televised statements in an attempt to cover up its arbitrary
detention and torture of internet journalists and civil society
activists.” Since September, more than 20 internet journalists
and civil society activists have been arrested and held in a
secret detention center in Tehran, the report said.
Amnesty International also issued an Urgent Action this week to
save an Iranian woman from being stoned to death for adultery.
Hajieh Esmailvand’s sentence was upheld by the Supreme Court and
her unnamed co-defendant is at risk of imminent execution by
hanging, according the press release.
AI reported, “The Iranian Penal Code is very specific about the
manner of execution and types of stones which should be used.
Article 102 states that men will be buried up to their waists
and women up to their breasts for the purpose of execution by
stoning.” Article 104 states, with reference to the penalty for
adultery, that the stones used should “not be large enough to
kill the person by one or two strikes, nor should they be so
small that they could not be defined as stones.”
In short, although the mullahs’ regime continued rights
violations brought more international censures in 2004, Tehran
continued its barbarity with impunity.
The systematic and brutal suppression of dissent is the mullahs’
main instrument to preserve their reign of terror in Iran.
Without it, the mullahs stand little change in the face of an
increasingly restive population.
Nevertheless, by claiming that there is no “visible opposition,”
Tehran’s apologists argue that the only option is to preserve
the status quo. In truth, however, this is only a cover for
justifying the appeasement of a terror-sponsoring tyranny with
which the Europeans have struck lucrative business deals.
The other lie Tehran, its apologist in the EU and its few
friends in Washington policy circles perpetuate is that with the
political death of Khatami’s “reformist” faction, the democracy
movement has also died, degenerating from a dynamic political
movement into apathy and passive opposition.
The fact, however, is that the democracy movement was not the
brainchild of Khatami or his faction, but a by-product of a
century-long struggle against despotism in Iran. The mass graves
in Iran and the walls of hundreds of dungeons in Iran’s
notorious prisons are a testament to the national courage and
spirit of resistance among Iranians.
The world community must stop turning a blind eye to the
mullahs’ continued rights violations and crackdown on
dissidents; it should initiate a diplomatic offensive instead.
The outside world must condemn unequivocally every arrest,
public execution, stoning, and any other case of rights abuse.
Tehran must be made to pay for its atrocities.
Western embassies in Iran must raise their voice and take action
in response to the suppression of dissidents and other kinds of
right abuses. Their presence in Tehran, rather than facilitating
commerce at the expense of Iranians’ national welfare, must be a
source of diplomatic support for the democracy movement there.
As Washington works to formulate a new Iran policy, it must make
support for Iranian dissidents working to unseat this regime the
centerpiece of its policy. To this end, limiting Tehran’s
capacity to muzzle the opposition will go a long way to enhance
the Iranian people’s chance of toppling this murderous regime.
Return to Top
The Boston
Globe (Editorial)
December 22, 2004
Iranian meddling
IT MAY be a positive sign that when campaigning began for
elections scheduled for Jan. 30 in Iraq, the first hot-button
issue raised by Iraqi politicians was the specter of Iranian
influence.
US officials as well as Arab leaders are breaking no new ground
when they warn in public about Iranian meddling in Iraq. They
are fearful of Tehran for geopolitical reasons. They don't want
Iranian-style theocracy to spread beyond Iran's borders.
But it is an exhilarating novelty for Iraqis to be open about
such a politically sensitive subject without fear of being
tortured or killed.
Campaigning for the new National Assembly alongside Prime
Minister Iyad Allawi last Wednesday, Iraq's interim defense
minister, Hazem Shaalan, suggested that parties represented on
the electoral list of the United Iraqi Alliance -- a list
compiled primarily by religious Shi'ites loyal to Grand
Ayatollah Ali Sistani -- might be soft on national security
because they are in thrall to Tehran.
"When we arrested the commander of Jaish Mohammed" -- one of the
terrorist gangs operating in Iraq -- "we discovered that the key
to terrorism is in Iran, which is the number one enemy for
Iraq," Shaalan said. The connection between this particular
terrorist group and Tehran may or may not be authentic. But the
political spin of the minister's accusation shows that many
people in Iraq harbor profound fears of Iranian influence.
That fear has less to do with ethnic or sectarian animosity than
with Tehran's political system. According to Shaalan, the
Iranians "are fighting us because we want to build freedom and
democracy and they want to build an Islamic dictatorship and
have turbaned clerics to rule in Iraq."
Even if Shaalan was exaggerating when he called the United Iraqi
Alliance's list of candidates "an Iranian list," parties on that
list do have links with Tehran, and some of the candidates --
opponents of Saddam Hussein -- had fled into exile in Iran. So
the threat of Iranian meddling in the politics of a post-Ba'athist
Iraq is real. Iranian agents and influence-buying funds from
Tehran have been circulating in Shi'ite areas of southern Iraq.
However, the best antidote to imposition of the Iranian system
in Iraq is the cleansing effect of democratic debate…
Return to Top
The Sunday Times
December 19, 2004
Iranian links
undermine mullah's drive for power
An alliance of religious parties that want to turn Iraq into an
Islamic state is facing a growing challenge in the country’s
election and is accused of having secret links with Iran. As
campaigning was launched last week, a coalition of leading
Shi’ite parties called the United Iraqi Alliance began as firm
favourites for the poll on January 30.
At least 60% of Iraqis are Shi’ites. With much of the Sunni
population threatening to boycott the election, the coalition
that was pulled together on the orders of the revered Shi’ite
cleric Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani has looked unbeatable.
Last week there was evidence that even in the Shi’ite heartlands
— including the second city of Basra — the coalition is far from
unshakable. It is being undermined by fears of Iranian influence
and tribal loyalties to local candidates.
The coalition is spearheaded by the formerly Tehran-based
Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI) whose
leader, Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, spent years in Iran. It also
includes the Iraqi branch of Hezbollah, which is close to the
Iranian Revolutionary Guards, and the Iraqi National Congress
whose leader, Ahmed Chalabi, was accused by American officials
of helping Iranian intelligence, a claim he vigorously denied.
Most Shi’ites are determined that the vote should go ahead
regardless of Iraq’s insurgency. After centuries of domination
by more educated Sunnis, they believe their time has come. While
they remain loyal to Sistani, it is unclear how far that
allegiance will translate into support for Iranian-backed
religious parties demanding much stricter Islamic laws.
As registration closed for candidates, it emerged that at least
eight coalitions will oppose the United Iraqi Alliance, in
addition to 73 other independent parties. Among the main
challengers is the Iraqi List, led by Iyad Allawi, the interim
prime minister.…
Many citizens oppose such shows of force and are furious to see
pictures of Ayatollah Khomenei, the late revolutionary Iranian
leader, displayed in a police station. “How can they revere
someone who put this city under siege and bombed us?” asked one
unemployed engineer, referring to attacks on Basra in the
Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s.
As one senior British Army officer said last week: “In Basra,
Iran is seen as shorthand for anything bad. Every crime or
explosion is blamed on an Iranian outsider. Yet one way or
another so many people have Iran in their background. It’s going
to be a big factor here.”…
Return to Top
|
