Iran’s Presidential Election Will Surprise America’s So-Called Iran “Experts”

iranelection

Yesterday, we published our assessment of Iran’s 2013 presidential campaign and what it portends for the Islamic Republic’s political life in the Huffington Post, see here.  We also append our article below.  We encourage readers to leave comments on the Huffington Post site as well as here.  

Iran’s Presidential Election Will Surprise America’s So-Called Iran “Experts”

Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett

This year’s Iranian presidential election is likely to produce a strong political figure who will have a significant impact on the Islamic Republic’s foreign and domestic policies, helping to ensure Iran’s continued internal development and bolstering its regional importance.  Yet every four years, a combustible mix of pro-Israel advocates, Iranian expatriates, Western Iran “experts,” and their fellow travelers in the media try to use Iranian presidential elections as a frame for persuading Westerners that the Islamic Republic is an illegitimate system so despised by its people as to be at imminent risk of overthrow.         

Iran’s election processes, pundits tell us, will be manipulated to produce a winner chosen by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei—a “selection rather than an election”—consolidating Khamenei’s dictatorial hold over Iranian politics.  Either Iranians will be sufficiently outraged to rise up against the system, commentators intone, or the world will have to deal with increasingly authoritarian—and dangerous—clerical-military rule in Tehran.      

But this year’s presidential campaign, like its predecessors, challenges Westerners’ deep attachment to myths of the Islamic Republic’s illegitimacy and fragility.  The eight candidates initially approved by the Guardian Council represented a broad spectrum of conservative and reformist views.  While one conservative and the most clear-cut reformist—neither of whom attracted much support—have withdrawn, they did so not from intimidation but to prevent conservative and reformist votes from being dissipated across too many candidates from each camp. 

Contrary to an engineered selection, Iran is in the final days of a real contest.  Candidates have had broad and regular access to national media, (including the broadcasting of extended videos about each candidate prepared by their campaigns), have advertised and held campaign events, and have participated in three nationally televised (and widely watched) debates. 

High-quality surveys by both Western and Iranian pollsters show that the campaign is having a powerful effect on the eventual outcome.  Western pundits and journalists have regularly identified nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili as Khamenei’s “anointed” candidate and the clearfront-runner.”  But high-quality polls have never identified Jalili as the clear front-runner.  As election day looms, moreover, polls conducted after the final debate show Jalili losing ground to three rivals:  Tehran mayor Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, former Revolutionary Guards commander Mohsen Rezae, and former nuclear negotiator Hassan Rohani (the only cleric on the ballot). 

The data strongly suggest that no candidate will win a majority of votes cast on June 14—meaning there will almost certainly be a second-round runoff on June 21 between the first round’s two best performers.  Among the four leading candidates—Jalili, Qalibaf, Rezae, and Rohani—Qalibaf seems best positioned to make a runoff; more voters now say they will cast first-round votes for him than for anyone else.  As Jalili, Rezae, and Rohani compete, effectively, for the second runoff spot, all three have substantial organizational networks.  But Rezae and Rohani emerged from the debates with rising popular support; Jalili did not.  And Rohani is working to mobilize reformist and centrist voters behind him; former presidents Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani (arguably the quintessential Iranian centrist) and Mohammad Khatami (the Islamic Republic’s only reformist president) have both endorsed him.  Neither Jalili’s runoff spot nor his second-round victory is anywhere close to a “sure thing.” 

More broadly, all four serious contenders have long records of service to the Islamic Republic.  Their dedication to the Iranian Revolution and the political order it created is beyond question.  Yet each advocates a distinctive presidential agenda and leadership style to advance the Islamic Republic’s domestic and international interests over the next several years.  The relevant question is not whether the Islamic Republic meets Western preferences for selecting political candidates—clearly it doesn’t—but whether most Iranians believe they have meaningful choice in this year’s election.  On this point, polls suggest that first-round turnout will be around 70 percent—not as high as 2009’s extraordinary 85 percent, but respectably high compared to previous presidential elections.  Whichever candidate ultimately emerges as Iran’s next president, it will be because he earned the requisite degree of electoral support, not because he was “anointed.”     

And whether the next Iranian president is named Jalili, Qalibaf, Rezae, or Rohani, he will almost certainly prove to be a highly consequential figure in the Islamic Republic’s political history.  The Islamic Republic’s last four presidents—Seyed Ali Khamenei (now Supreme Leader), Rafsanjani, Khatami, and outgoing incumbent Mahmoud Ahmadinejad—were all accomplished figures in office, winning re-election and substantially affecting both domestic and foreign policies.  Yet all four also had to deal with—and were, at times, deeply frustrated by—other power centers in the Islamic Republic’s constitutional order, including the Supreme Leader and the popularly elected parliament. 

This dynamic will continue into Iran’s next presidency.  Since succeeding Imam Khomeini, the Islamic Republic’s founding father, as Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei has ascribed high priority to maintaining balance in the system—balance among ideological factions and among constitutionally defined power centers.  As Leader, Khamenei allowed Rafsanjani, Khatami, and Ahmadinejad to pursue large parts of their self-defined and very different presidential agendas; but he also restrained them when he judged that their initiatives might weaken the Islamic Republic’s identity and long-term security.  Khamenei will continue playing this role after Iran’s newly elected president replaces the term-limited Ahmadinejad in August. 

Parliament will also continue constraining presidential prerogative.  Under speaker Ali Larijani, parliament pushed back with increasing intensity against a range of presidential initiatives and interests during Ahmadinejad’s second term.  For pro-Ahmadinejad Iranians, this was unfortunate; for Ahmadinejad opponents—especially among conservatives—it was gratifying.  The more important point is that this is how the Islamic Republic is designed to function—and almost certainly will function after the next president takes office. 

Americans and most other Westerners have never been able to take the Islamic Republic seriously as a system—one reason successive U.S. administrations have, for three decades, bought into perennially mistaken, agenda-driven claims of the Islamic Republic’s vulnerability and impending collapse.  Westerners must tune out constant efforts to demonize Iran’s revolutionary order if they are to look soberly at the reality of Iranian politics.  For only then will they be able to see the Islamic Republic as a polity with which their own governments can (and should) come to terms.       

–Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett

Share
 

305 Responses to “Iran’s Presidential Election Will Surprise America’s So-Called Iran “Experts””

  1. Kathleen says:

    On NPR’s Diane Rehm show Diane is interviewing Shohreh Aghadashloo talking about her films, books about Iran. Such selective questions by Diane about the Shah, Ayatollah nothing about the U.S. Cia’s overthrow of a democratically elected leader Mossadegh in 53 and how this coup set the stage for the Shah, Ayatollah and completely undermined that Iranian democratic election, rights of women etc.

  2. nico says:

    Repost from previous thread.

    James Canning,

    I never said that zionists have no influence.
    You as many others think that zionism is the number 1 reason. See the link below.

    What I try to convey is that should the Apartheid issue be solved, the western hegemony would not cease.
    And that is clearly because of oil interests as well as an ideological confrontation.
    Truly a civilizational war to impose atheist way of life and the individual being the center of the universe against all that is sacred.
    The western civilization used to free the individual.But at the current state of its evolution, the western civilization is truly transforming individuals into objects and goods to be traded with no limit in term of social degeneration.

    http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/syria-israel-is-losing-the-battle.html

    “It is far from being a secret that both British and French government are dominated by the Jewish Lobby. In Britain it is the ultra Zionist CFI (Conservative Friends of Israel) – apparently 80% of  Britain’s conservative MPs are members of the pro Israeli Lobby. In France the situation is even more devastating, the entire political system is hijacked by the forceful CRIF.”

    “Debka is correct to suggest that instead of “growing weaker, Iran’s Lebanese proxy is poised to open another warfront and force the IDF to adapt to a new military challenge from the Syrian Golan.”Rather than The Gurdian or the Le Monde, it is actually the  Israeli Debka that helps us to grasp why Britain and France are so  desperate to intervene. Once again, it is a Zionist war which they are so eager to fight.”

  3. Smith says:

    With regard to Velayati’s poor performance (except his call for universal healthcare, with which I agree and Iran really needs):

    در آن تخت و ملک از خلل غم بود که تدبیر شاه از شبان کم بود

    ” سعدی ”

  4. Smith says:

    Some words for the next president of Iran:

    شنیدم که دارای فرخ تبار // ز لشکر جدا ماند روز شکار
    دوان آمدش گله‌بانی به پیش // بدل گفت دارای فرخنده کیش
    مگر دشمن است این که آمد به جنگ // ز دورش بدوزم به تیر خدنگ
    کمان کیانی به زه راست کرد // به یک دم وجودش عدم خواست کرد
    بگفت ای خداوند ایران و تور // که چشم بد از روزگار تو دور
    من آنم که اسبان شه پرورم // به خدمت بدین مرغزار اندرم
    ملک را دل رفته آمد بجای // بخندید و گفت: ای نکوهیده رای
    تو را یاوری کرد فرخ سروش // وگر نه زه آورده بودم به گوش
    نگهبان مرعی بخندید و گفت: // نصحیت ز منعم نباید نهفت
    نه تدبیر محمود و رای نکوست // که دشمن نداند شهنشه ز دوست
    چنان است در مهتری شرط زیست // که هر کهتری را بدانی که کیست
    مرا بارها در حضر دیده‌ای // ز خیل و چراگاه پرسیده‌ای
    کنونت به مهر آمدم پیشباز // نمی‌دانیم از بداندیش باز
    توانم من، ای نامور شهریار // که اسبی برون آرم از صد هزار
    مرا گله‌بانی به عقل است و رای // تو هم گله‌ی خویش داری، بپای

    ” سعدی ”

  5. Smith says:

    The western media is going crazy for Roohani. The same way they went crazy for Moosavi before 2009 election. I hope he is soundly defeated with humiliation. Reformists really need for their own sake, another decade of public humiliation in order to learn their lesson. It is too soon for them to come back to power.

  6. Pirouz says:

    Looking forward to voting Friday.

  7. Smith says:

    Nasser says:
    June 13, 2013 at 12:19 pm

    Well, India’s position is not that bad even if it continues to go deeper into the western camp. The reasons have to do with massive Indian population, an improving Indian science and technology and its nuclear status. As long as they can keep their national cohesion (India is one of the most diverse nations on planet), things will only improve for them, also because of the fact that west has decided for India to become a counter weight to China. And this leak, will eventually push India to develop its own internet services, much like China did a decade ago. The question is if Iran will ever do that or will they remain dependent on foreign services as they are now.

  8. Khurshid says:

    Iran Presidential Election 2013 – Q&A with SAEED JALILI

    In addition to pre-debate solo interview and three debates each candidate faced a panel (three members) Q&A session. Questions were about three topics: economy, culture & society, and politics. These were the topics of first, second and third debate respectively. Below is a transcript of the session and my analysis of Jalili’s answers.

    Jalili talked in length about Iran’s foreign policy and nuclear negotiations – I have highlighted the sections related to foreign policy and nuclear issue. It gives a good indication of Iran’s policy thinking on foreign relations and nuclear negotiations with P5+1. I felt it is an important interview and would be of interest to users of this blog including the LEVERETTS. That’s why I translated it from Farsi to English. This one hour long Q&A session was broadcast on 8th June – I think that was the date!!

    I am not a professional interpreter but I tried my best to translate as accurately as possible. Word by word translation sometimes does not make sense, so I added some words – in square brackets – to clarify the meaning. Apologies if the quality of translation is not up to your desired standard. (Note: the transcript covers 98% of the interview. I didn’t translate Jalili’s indirect punching of Velayate because of what the latter said about Almaty negotiations during third debate. Jalili took three punches at Velayate, without actually naming him.)

    Question: What are the capabilities of Iran’s foreign policy for achieving national interest?

    Foreign policy of any country is based on a target, goals and objectives, strategy, rights, and set of values. We have common ground with most of the countries in the world and this can be an opportunity for us. We have lot of mutually shared interests with many countries. On of the problems of our foreign policy was that it interacted with a limited set of countries. It was only 3-4 countries and was mostly western countries. These [western] countries have most differences with us due to different culture, believes, and etiquettes. On the other hand countries with which we have similarities or common ground can be an opportunity for our foreign policy. Mutual interest can be a source of opportunity. Instead of having foreign relations with only those few countries if our foreign relations is build with countries we have most commonalities in various areas such as economy and agricultural than there is lot of engagement, growth and corporation opportunities for our foreign relations. When I was working in foreign ministry we observed that Latin America has common grounds with us in area of international relation – countries like Venezuela, Boliva, Nicaragua and Ecuador. These countries have similar political views as us and you know that these countries defended us especially Venezuela. We used to import vaccine from some European countries at a cost of 4-5 dollars and they didn’t give us technical know-how of these vaccines. Cuba is a country that progressed in vaccine production and knew the technical know-how, it gave us the vaccine with a price of under half a dollar. That was an opportunity for us. The country [Iran] with 15 neighbors gives us a tremendous opportunity. Countries like Afghanistan and Iraq are an opportunity for mutual corporations. The needs of these countries will fulfill our export requirements.

    Question: 9th and 10th governments’ economic plan was focused on reforming areas such as customs, national currency, banking etc. Do you want to continue with reforms in these areas? Do you have any other plans?

    If government wants to implement 5 years or 20 years development plans than first development and management plans needs to be implemented. We have problems in this area. Government should develop regulatory framework which needs to be implemented to administer institutions so that no one can manipulate the system. This will prevent misuse of system.

    In addition, government should increase efficiency of economic institutions i.e. if efficiency of agricultural ministry is increased than farmers will be able to have better output.

    Taxation should be fair. We need progressive taxation system so that fair and just taxation is implemented throughout society. Reform plans needs to be implemented simultaneously so that by the end of stipulated time reform cycle is completed and nation can benefit from it.

    Question: How can revolutionary culture can be exported to other countries?
    Today Iran’s strong and penetrative influence is not because of its military power but rather because of its message – even enemies of Iran admit this. Iran with its cultural message has managed to project power in the region.

    To export revolutionary culture, production of cultural products needs to be publicized , for example, when HAMAS officials, including Mahmud Azhar, visited Iran I asked them if they know about the movie “Bosmondeh” which is about Palestine. HAMAS officials didn’t know the movie, although it was produced 20 years ago. This is due to lack of publicity of revolutionary cultural products – movies and books about sacred defense, important personalities and issues. Government should implement policies for export of revolution. Even in domestic affairs problem of publicity exists. Sometimes, when I go to buy a book from book shops I come across a book which grabs my attention but it turns out that the book was published 8 years ago. This kind of problems is about lack of publicity.

    We should support production of cultural products because we have experts and creative artists, writers, movie directors etc. If we support them then we will have quality products.

    Question: Would you use in your cabinet non partisan experts – those experts who are not affiliated with your support base?

    I do not believe that expert human capital exists only in reformists and principalists. I mentioned this during debates as well. When I travelled to towns and provinces recently I have seen experts in various fields whose potentials need to be used. When a team is formed any person with potentials and skills needs to be brought on board irrespective of political affiliation. For example, I know competent people who are not in contact with me during the election and might be supporting or even voting for someone else but I believe the skills of these people need to be utilized.
    Question: How do we know you will indeed have non partisan people in your government if you are elected?

    A powerful government is one that has its team members who work in coordination and complements each other’s work, not compete or overlap each other’s work. Different ministries should work collectively with coordination for achieving target goals. Only then we will have productive government.

    Question: At present half the population of Iran is concentrated in 25 big cities. Migration from villages to cities has increased. What is your plan for solving this problem?

    Iran has potential for agricultural development. In a trip to an European country which has one fortieth of Iran’s soil but its export is many times of Iran’s petroleum and non-petroleum products. Chunk of its export is agricultural products. Why is this? It’s because that country has developed agricultural sector and villages. In that country you would not see much difference between its capital city and rural areas; only from sign board you would know this is a village or that is a town.

    We have this capacity; we need to develop rural areas. We can move small manufacturers to villages. Farmers need to be supported so that their produce can be transferred to both domestic markets and those of neighboring countries. When rural areas become developed than the problem of migration will be reversed .Government ministries need to be reformed so that their activities do not create problems for rural development.

    Question: Your stated policy is important. Other candidates will say the same but what is your plan to implement these plans?

    Before implementation we need “the will”. For example, we found out that 6 individuals have taken loans worth 5000 million for non-production purposes. How can this happen? When system is reformed then we won’t have these problems.

    Question: Supreme leader has announced that developing nuclear weapons is “haram” (not permissible in Islamic jurisprudence) but despite that threats and pressure has increased on Iran. What is your plan for moving forward in nuclear issue with less expense?

    First, threats itself is a proof that we have produced something important. If it was not important than why would [world] powers try to hinder it? Thus [nuclear issue] it’s an achievement and capacity for country.

    Second, 20% [nuclear] enrichment is our requirement; it is not just for sake of having it. Our 850 thousand patients need this [enriched uranium]. In 1388 [2009] we said give us the fuel, we need it for medicine [production] but they said no. Than we produced [nuclear fuel] and today we have it. Therefore we are facing pressure to meet our needs, 850 thousand patients need it. Radio isotopes have a short life, 5-6 hours. It is not possible to import them.

    Third, it is country’s [Iran’s] right [to have nuclear technology]. Right is not a matter of expense or benefits. For example, how much was the worth of Arvand river that we sacrificed 500 thousands martyrs for it. It was a matter of rights. You have seen that our nation defended its rights. Our defense of Arvand made them realize, for last 25 years, that by military means they can not win against us. [Defense of Arvand] has insured us; same thing with nuclear rights. They should realize that defense of nuclear rights is about defense of our rights. They cannot joke about Iran’s rights. When it comes to rights Iran is serious.

    They once said you [Iran] cannot have centrifuge but now we are producing what ever centrifuge we need – both P1 and P2. We need to achieve our target. We are producing [nuclear material] to generate electricity in Busher [nuclear power plant], to produce medicine, and in agricultural sector. Our technical achievement made them change their excessive demand. For example, in 1388 [2009] they said if you want 20% fuel than do this list of things. Now, 1392 [2013], in Almaty II what do they say? They [P5+1] say things have reversed. Now they say we will do this list of things and you [Iran] just don’t enrich uranium to 20%.

    Question: Dr Jalili, you are right but the question is how do we proceed by incurring less cost [reference to economic and political sanctions; and threat of military intervention]?

    On nuclear issue what were they threatening us with? First, the threat was to hinder our progress. It is not art of diplomacy that when political pressure comes it is transferred to technical level. Threats will end when you hinder it by supporting technical process to achieve its target.

    Second, they wanted to incriminate Iran and we asked agency [IAEA] to give us their questions and we answered all 6 agency questions. This disarmed them [P5+1] and they came to negotiation. In P5+1 talks we said if you want us to commit to more than what NPT stipulates then what are you offering us? This is [an example of] making use of opportunities.

    United States declared before negotiations that it will not participate because Iran does not abide by [UN] resolutions. But later US joined the talks for Geneva-I. From 1387 [2008] till now they managed to pass only resolution 1929 and this resolution was after Tehran declaration. When Turkish Prime Minister, Erdagon, and Brazilian President, Lula, came to Tehran we worked with them from 7 o’clock in the morning until 1 o’clock in the morning and we wrote Tehran declaration. When that happened they realized that they are facing a block – Iran, Turkey and Brazil. Erdagon and Lula showed us Obama’s letter and told us that Obama has authorized them to reach an agreement. On seeing that we negotiated with them [Erdagon and Lula] and wrote Tehran declaration. Isn’t this victory against America? They [United States] had said they have consensus [against Iran] but they failed and went towards unilateral actions. What does it mean? It means they could not build consensus against Iran. Isn’t this threat prevention? Now US threaten Iran with unilateral threats; US was always against Iranian nation.

    When it [US] imposes embargo on passenger planes, when it imposes embargo on medicine, it is natural that it takes steps [to hinder] out those actions that empower Islamic Republic of Iran. So our approach in the areas of politics, rights and technical were correct.

    If I had gone to Geneva 10 times and negotiated we would not be able to build capacity but it was achieved because of people like Dr Shahriari who worked to produce [nuclear] fuel and this was what it strengthen our hand. They [west] are more scared of people like Dr Shahriari than 20% fuel, that’s why they target people like Dr Shahriari. I don’t dismiss their pressures. What are the pressures they are bringing on us? We have achieved capacity in areas they brought pressure on. First they brought pressure on our defense and now we have made most progress in defense area. Then they brought pressure on nuclear area and we became one of 10 nations to achieve nuclear technology. We can change other areas they are bringing pressure on into opportunities. In case of refined oil we achieved sufficiency in oil refining within 6 months and didn’t face any problem in that area.

    In areas of agriculture why should we import 11 million dollar worth of agricultural goods? If we don’t import these goods we can give 11 million dollar to our farmers; that way production of [agricultural products] will increase. Aren’t these valuable achievements? I don’t dismiss that some threats cause some pressure but if we act intelligently we can convert these pressure into opportunities.

    My Analysis – Jalili’s foreign relations outlook is very similar to that of Ahmadinejad’s. During last 8 years Iran pursued a foreign relations policy that materialized its relations with Africa, Latin America and Asia. In this era Iran had its first Iran-Africa summit and build strong relations with countries like Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua, Ecuador and Cuba. Iran’s relations with Venezuela was of such concern to United States that a Wikileaks US embassy cable form Dubai reported grave concern over the relation and wanted to know who in Iran is pushing for cultivating such relations. United States saw Iran gradual relation building with Latin American countries as a source of Iran’s influence in United States back yard which will with time mature to challenge US hegemony in South American continent. United states saw Iranian presence in South America as a challenge US did not face after Monroe Doctrine that literally expelled colonial Europeans from Latin America and made United States the sole hegemonic super power that could loot South American natural resources and dominate its political landscape with US installed puppet regimes.

    Jalili was advocating for a foreign relations policy that would allow Iran to engage with any country based on mutual needs – countries that have common denominators with Iran. This does not mean Jalili was saying that Iran will necessarily have to building relations a country that had commonalities in all areas i.e. economic, political, cultural, scientific etc. but rather Iran should build relations based on areas on which Iran can work with. This gives Iran a lot of flexibility to engage a country A, with which it has only economic mutual interest, based on economics only. With country B, with which it has political commonality, based on politics only and with country C an engagement of both economic and politics because with C Iran has commonality on both fronts. Thus Jalili is in favor of ‘custom build’ foreign policy.
    On economy Jalili talked in terms of “should be done”, ”could be done”, “if done”, and “if implemented”. This shows he is not well versed on economic affairs and his ideas are more from strategic level rather than how policies should be implemented practically. When he was asked specially to address how his plans will be practically implemented he talked about the need of reforming the system. I think Jalilli’s this lack of grasp of economic affairs is due to his background in politics and work experience in foreign ministry. Personally I don’t see anything wrong with a candidate not specializing on a particular field. After all if he is elected he will have a minister of economy who will be in a better position to navigate Jalili’s economic policies.

    However on political affairs he is extremely well versed. I don’t know why he performed so poorly in third debate when he had that quarrel with Velayate regarding Iran and P5+1 nuclear negotiations. If Jalili had said the same things he said in this Q&A session he would come out as a strong candidate from the debate – I suppose long debate session; critiquing multiple candidates; occasional heated exchanges with Velayati, Rohani and Aref; flash lights and cameras; conscious of being live on TV, etc had got on his nerves.

    Afghanistan and Iraq will end up becoming Iran’s biggest trading partners. Iran understands that it has a key role to play in middle east and wants to project its influence through soft power. It sees that the best way to send its revolutionary message – to win heart and minds of people in the region, Muslim world and who ever is willing to listen and understand it – is through soft power cultural products such as movies and books. Iran policy of exporting revolution is not through US style military aggression, illegal occupation of other countries by side lining UN Security Council, but rather through diplomatic engagement between governments and people; through dialogue and artistic work. Thus for building foreign relations with countries and achieving foreign policy goals Iran sees soft power as a far stronger tool than hard power.

    It was clear from Jalili’s interview that Iran will not give up its nuclear right no matter what the costs are. Neither will Iran give in to coercive pressure in terms of economic and political sanctions. Nuclear enrichment facilities is needed in Iran for producing nuclear medicine that have very short half life. It is not even a matter whether Iran can afford to buy nuclear medicine from abroad but rather it is logistically not possible to transport medicine with such short radioactive half life because once purchased by the time it reaches Iran the medicine looses its medicinal value. Furthermore, with economic sanctions imposed on Iran it is not possible for Iran to transfer funds to pay for the medicine even if it wanted to buy it. In addition Iran sees nuclear enrichment capabilities as its natural right given to it by NPT. By drawing an example of Arvand river and Iran’s defense of it against Saddam Hussain’s occupation of the river Jalili demonstrated that Islamic Republic of Iran will defend its people’s need to have nuclear medicine produced in Iranian nuclear facilities at much cheaper price than importing it from abroad and logistical making the medicine available to Iranian patients before the medicine renders itself useless. Furthermore, Arvand river example also demonstrated that Iranian policy makers see nuclear enrichment capabilities as their right and a source of national pride.

    Iran is used to threats from US and its allies. Iran knows that to counter threats against its legitimate nuclear work it needs to work with IAEA within the bound of its nuclear obligation under NPT framework. That way US and its allies will not be able to muster international consensus against Islamic Republic of Iran. Jalili’s pointing out of United States joining the talks after refusing to join indicates that in Iran’s calculation US is defeated in political front. Jalili further amplified US political isolation by stating that US under Obama administration tarnished US image as unreliable and deceitful when Obama back tracked from his written promise of engaging Iran he had given to both Erdagon and Lula. Jalili’s interview showed that Iran’s decision making officials do not trust US has the ability or the will to take decisions to engage Iran on a mutual respect basis. When Jalili said “US was always against Iranian nation” he referred to United State’s illogical decision not to recognize, respect and accept Iranian nation’s will and subsequent establishing of Islamic Republic of Iran based on a value system that is acceptable to most of Iranian nation.

    This interview was important because regardless of who gets elected as Iran’s next president it will not change Iranian foreign relation building strategy through mutual interest and corporation. Since Iran’s foreign policy and nuclear negotiation with P5+1 is crafted by coordination – and input from supreme leader, president, sectary of supreme national security council, and other key policy makers – it will not change over night with the change in president.

    Despite Jalili’s weak economic understanding he showed himself as strategic thinker of foreign relations in this Q&A session. However, I think taking managerial experience and project management skills into account makes Tehran Mayor Ghalibaf as the most likely candidate to win the election. – Iranian press coverage also indicate in that direction. In addition, I agree with Leveretts and PressTv report that presidency will be decided in run off election. It is highly unlikely that a single candidate will be able to attract enough votes to pass run off avoiding 50% vote threshold.

  9. James Canning says:

    Kathleen,

    Are you saying that the overthrow of Mossadegh led to blunders by the Shah, which in turn brought revolution and serious compromises of the rights of women in Iran?

    The mullahs wanted Mossadegh overthrown.

  10. James Canning says:

    Nico,

    I think “Zionist” is too vague a term to have much use. I suggest “Zionist-expansionist”, meaming someone who wants Israel to try to expand its borders into Palestine.

    Zionist-expansionists have far too much influence in the US Congress.

    “Apartheid” is too mushy a term to use to get at the core problem in Israel/Palestine.
    (However, if Israel is so foolish as to refuse to get out of West Bank, then of course the apartheid issue will become huge.

  11. Khurshid says:

    oh no question on nuclear issue did not get highlighted. sorry.Its the last question.

  12. James Canning says:

    Khurshid,

    Regarding expectations Iraq will become a major trading partner of Iran, it is interesting that at this time Iraq imports relatively little from Iran, compared to imports from China or the EU. Or Turkey.

  13. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Bill Clinton on Syria:

    We shouldn’t over-learn the lessons of the past…you’d look like a total wuss…and you would be.

    http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=A2EF6B91-735D-455D-BEDB-3745C577ABEF

    “Nobody is asking for American soldiers in Syria,” Clinton said. “The only question is now that the Russians, the Iranians and the Hezbollah are in there head over heels, 90 miles to nothing, should we try to do something to try to slow their gains and rebalance the power so that these rebel groups have a decent chance, if they’re supported by a majority of the people, to prevail?”

    “My view is that we shouldn’t over-learn the lessons of the past,” Clinton said. “I don’t think Syria is necessarily Iraq or Afghanistan — no one has asked us to send any soldiers in there. I think it’s more like Afghanistan was in the ’80s when they were fighting the Soviet Union … when President Reagan was in office [and] got an enormous amount of influence and gratitude by helping to topple the Soviet-backed regime and then made the error of not hanging around in Afghanistan” to try to cash in on the gains.

    Clinton repeatedly said it would be “lame” to blame a lack of intervention on opposition in polls or among members of Congress.

    If Clinton had ever blamed a lack of action because “there was a poll in the morning paper that said 80 percent of you were against it … you’d look like a total wuss,” he said. “And you would be. I don’t mean that a leader should go out of his way or her way to do the unpopular thing, I simply mean when people are telling you ‘no’ in these situations, very often what they’re doing is flashing a giant yellow light and saying, ‘For God’s sakes, be careful, tell us what you’re doing, think this through, be careful.”

    Clinton continued, “But still they hire their president to look around the corner and down the street, and you just think – if you refuse to act and you cause a calamity, the one thing you cannot say when all the eggs have been broken, is that, ‘Oh my God, two years ago there was a poll that said 80 percent of you were against it.’ Right? You’d look like a total fool. So you really have to in the end trust the American people, tell them what you’re doing, and hope to God you can sell it” and that it turns out okay in the end.

    Shame on Bill…

  14. James Canning says:

    Smith,

    India was a rival to China decades ago, at a time India was not especially friendly with the US.

    China and India continue to have border disputes.

  15. James Canning says:

    Smith,

    Do I understand you to say Iran does not need great economic power, but that Iran does need nukes to threaten other countries in the Persian Gulf?

  16. James Canning says:

    Nico,

    I think you are mistaken to believe Hezbollah wants Israel to be threatened from the Golan Heights.

  17. Smith says:

    Iran has the world’s largest gas reserves, after Russian reserve estimates were downgraded in latest BP world energy reserve estimate manual: http://www.presstv.com/detail/2013/06/13/308845/iran-worlds-top-gas-reserves-holder-bp/

  18. James Canning says:

    Smith,

    Yes, Iran has immense wealth, but comparatively little financial power in global politics.

  19. James Canning says:

    Bussed-I Basiji,

    I think Bill Clinton’s comments on the current situation in Syria were naive. Even foolish.

    Russia has been trying to stop the civil war in Syria, via dipolomacy.

  20. Mohammad says:

    From reasonably reported nationwide polls, it appears that Qalibaf and Rowhani are going to the second round. The poll result reported by Conflicts Forum seems conspicuously unsourced.

    I’m still waiting for recent poll results by reputable, well-known opinion polling organizations, namely ISPA inside Iran and the likes of WPO, Gallup and TFT in the West.

  21. Smith says:

    ^^^^^^ Along with all those fields, Iran should put double efforts to support 3D printing technologies. Iran can become a leader in this field of great importance.

  22. Smith says:

    American gift for next year’s Nowruz, is going to be a blood boiler for Iranians: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2zqy21Z29ps

  23. Nasser says:

    Smith says: June 13, 2013 at 1:23 pm

    Thank you for your response. Let us see how much technology India manages to squeeze out of the Americans. Did they manage to get anything of significance out of the nuclear deal yet?

  24. Smith says:

    Nasser says:
    June 13, 2013 at 3:01 pm

    You are welcome. India already has significant domestic science and technology capabilities. The nuclear deal for India had mostly political benefits. For example now they have been recognized as a nuclear power state even without being party to NPT, so they can import uranium which they could not before. Also it gives India access to western nuclear reactor technologies.

    You can not keep science and technology away from a truly determined nation. If a nation is determined enough, it will eventually break through with or without western help. India knows that, having started to build its domestic science and technology sectors in 1950′s (compare to Iran which started in 1990′s).

  25. fyi says:

    Smith says:

    June 13, 2013 at 3:17 pm

    You are taking these things too seriously; ancient Iran has very little to with contemporary Iran.

    Any way, if I memory serves me, the Great King captured Athens and put it to torch.

    Fall of Man – then and now.

  26. Nasser says:

    Smith says: June 13, 2013 at 3:17 pm

    “The nuclear deal for India had mostly political benefits. For example now they have been recognized as a nuclear power state even without being party to NPT, so they can import uranium which they could not before.”

    - Yes, I remember hearing a lot of noise before about not being able to import uranium from Australia for example.

    I wondered though, couldn’t India get its imports of uranium from Russia and Central Asian States? Of course I understand the value of having diversified sources but India should keep in mind that almost every help of significance they got from the Russians and not the West.

  27. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    June 13, 2013 at 3:20 pm

    You are right, but the majority of people still identify themselves as such. Still I predict a furor, on part of Iranian public upon the release of the film. Which is not entirely a bad thing for IRI. After all, the people who most identify with ancient Iran are the staunch oppositionists of IRI, specially the expatriates. These kind of western acts will only help cure the expatriates delusions with the west and its intentions with regard to Iran.

  28. Smith says:

    Nasser says:
    June 13, 2013 at 3:31 pm

    The new problem is some thing called Nuclear Supplier Group (NSG), which is another colonial imposition by great powers. Through this instrument, they deny any nuclear material to nations they do not like. India became an exception by having its nuclear weapons status officially recognized and granted a special status, enabling them to import from whomever they want.

    What India is suffering from today as in the past, is that it is not part of permanent member of security council so despite its size and political weight still needs great powers to vouch for it. Though it might change in distant future, if security council is expanded. (I also believe that by that time, Iran must be a nuclear weapons state and position itself for a permanent seat if the occasion comes up).

  29. A-B says:

    As complement to Khurshid’s post (June 13, 2013 at 1:24 pm), here’s a video clip of part of what Khurshid highlighted. It was published with subtitle on PressTV:

    http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/06/09/307976/iran-will-defend-nuclear-rights-jalili/

    Great reasoning; independence begins in your mind …

  30. Khurshid says:

    Iran Presidential Election 2013 – Soft war on Iran: Guardian Strikes

    UK Guardian’s pro Rohani chearleading:

    According to a journalist in Tehran, that has changed in the capital. “You will not believe the election buzz in Tehran today. Everyone is talking about elections and who to vote for and everyone is advocating for [Hassan] Rouhani and trying to convince people to vote for him.”

    “According to a journalist…” – who is this ghost journalist?

    “everyone is advocating for [Hassan] Rouhani and trying to convince people to vote for him.” – Everyone ??? How does this ghost journalist talk on behalf of everyone.

    According to another source in Tehran, “The atmosphere just completely changed after Khatami and Hashemi put their support behind Rouhani. People are really excited. Wherever Rouhani speaks there’s a frenzy. Today in Mashhad it was like four years ago with the appearance of Mousavi.”

    “Wherever Rouhani speaks there’s a frenzy. Today in Mashhad it was like four years ago with the appearance of Mousavi.” – Linking Rohani to greens. As I mentioned in a previous post western media is desperately trying to reverse engineer Green into Purple.

    The source continued: “Even those who were undecided or completely set against voting are saying they want to cast a ballot to make sure that anyone like Jalili doesn’t win.”

    “The source…” – another ghost source. This is finest of Guardian’s journalism. Why don’t Guardian amend its name to “Guardian of source”. I bet it does not even have a source; even if they do he/she is probably an living in London for last 35 years and have never being to Iran ever since !!! That explains why is guardian so protective of the source.

    “they want to cast a ballot to make sure that anyone like Jalili doesn’t win.” – sounds familiar? No, let me help: ‘to make sure anyone like Ahmadinejad doesn’t win’, 2009 election.

    “Why should we vote?” one student, Arman, asked rhetorically. “What if it’s all just a joke like last time?”

    “We’ll vote,” 19-year-old Amir said from the adjacent computer terminal. “If they count the votes, then the guy we voted for will be president, and if they screw us again, we’ll take to the streets again. No matter what, we won’t lose – that is, unless we sit at home and let them do whatever they want.”

    “if they screw us again, we’ll take to the streets again. No matter what, we won’t lose” – allegation of FRAUD before even election begins. Reminds me of 2009 again.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/13/iran-elections-rouhani-frenzy

  31. James Canning says:

    Smith,

    To clarify your thinking: You believe Obama is bluffing, and that Iran can proceed with building nukes?

    Or, you expect the next president to be willing to accept Iranian nukes?

  32. Nasser says:

    James Canning says June 13, 2013 at 5:37 pm,

    You are too funny.

    What can they do but accept Iranian nukes? Kiss Tel Aviv and Riyadh goodbye? LOL

  33. Khurshid says:

    Iran Presidential Election 2013 – Soft war on Iran: Telegraph Strikes

    UK Telegraph inciting post election violence in Iran:

    The security preparations have been put in place as it emerged that the most moderate candidate in the field of seven candidates to replace Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was attracting a wave of support.

    “…seven candidates…” ??? – This article is published on 13 June and Telegraph could not even get the number of candidates correct. And it is the first paragraph!!

    The Revolutionary Guards, which report directly to the country’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is using the prisons to hold anti-government activists to prevent them from participating in tomorrow’s presidential election contest.

    “…using the prisons to hold anti-government activists to prevent them from participating in tomorrow’s presidential election contest” – If they are being imprisoned than how will they vote for west’s darling Rohani ??? Didn’t think of that, did you now?

    An internal document from the office of the Supreme Leader passed to the Daily Telegraph by opposition activists contains stern instructions to the security forces to thwart attempts by “enemies” to undermine the leadership.

    How did opposition activists get hold of internal document from SL’s office. How did these activists get access to SL’s office – are they the same invisible Green ghost now turned Purple managed to slip into SL’s office in broad daylight and walk out with documents??

    Observers report that Hassan Rohani, a cleric who is running against an array of loyalists to the Supreme Leader, could force a run-off vote in a second round of elections next week.

    “Observers…” – again ghost observers. Who are these observers? Do they happen to be in London perhaps?

    “….Hassan Rohani…could force a run-off vote in a second round….” – Pro Rohani cheerleading.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/10119208/Iran-sets-up-secret-prisons-ahead-of-presidential-election.html

  34. A-B says:

    The Western aggression against Syria goes through similar phases as the Iran-Iraq war. Maybe the Iran-Iraq war should be considered a [BIG] battle in West’s [century old?] war against Iran, which is still going on. So whether or not the Iran-Iraq war ended in a ‘draw’ is not important but from the appalling behavior of Velayati and other ‘politicians’ of that time (Mousavi, Rafsanjani…) the result of a Syrian victory for a greater liberation of the region should not be squandered by people who not only have proven their incompetence in that past, but are stagnant-reactionary enough to want to repeat it!

    (What did Velayati say when Jalili brought up how poorly the question of war reparation was dealt with ….)

  35. James Canning says:

    On a different (but related, indirectly) topic, I recommend Steve Sailer’s “Does Israel Have a Backdoor to US Intelligence?” at takimag.com June 12th.

    Israeli companies track the great majority of phone calls made in the US. (Thus, they can learn what phone calls an American Congressman or Senator makes, to whom, when, etc etc.)

  36. James Canning says:

    A-B,

    What years was Germany making war against Persia or Iran? Ever?

  37. James Canning says:

    Nasser,

    I take it you also think Obama is bluffing? That Iran can build nukes, target Saudi Arabia?

  38. Khurshid says:

    Iran Presidential Election 2013 – Soft war on Iran: Council on Foreign Relations Strikes

    Ray Takeyh’s flawed analysis of Iran’s 2013 election:

    I suspect the winning presidential candidate will likely be drawn from the conservative/revolutionary wing of this particular slate of candidates.

    Mr Take-away is already predicting fraud in election. Some how the president is pre-selected. BTW, when was the last time United States had 6 candidates competing for presidency?

    …all these candidates intimate that they are prepared to accept restrictions because they place a premium on the country’s economic revival as opposed to its nuclear empowerment. Now, if you read between those lines, it suggests they are willing to be much more accommodating on the nuclear issue.

    “on nuclear program…all these candidates intimate that they are prepared to accept restrictions…” – Mr Take-away please read my English translation of Jalili’s Q&A. I posted it earlier today on this blog. No Iranian president is willing to accept restrictions on nuclear program.

    …the regime has done everything it can to lower voter participation…

    Really Mr Take-away !! You are not watching Iranian TV lately. Are you now? If you did you would know Supreme Leader has been consistently encouraging high voter participation in election.

    http://www.cfr.org/iran/read-irans-elections/p30913

  39. James Canning says:

    Khurshid,

    You should read Jalili’s interview by the Financial Times. Jalili made clear that enriching to 20 is no big deal ffor Iran.

  40. Smith says:

    Nasser says:
    June 13, 2013 at 5:45 pm

    I do not think that is necessary. Just point them towards Roobah-e-pir and Iran can benefit much more strategically and tactically. On five minutes automatic alert. Then make sure the rest of the world knows that you have no nuclear quarrel with anyone else but the oldest enemy of Iran.

  41. fyi says:

    Smith says:
    June 13, 2013 at 9:26 pm

    England did not start as an enemy of Iran; she was in search of trade and markets and her representatives were either met with hostility of with indifference by Safavids and later by other potentates.

    Even during the Qajar times they were willing to cut deals with Iran and have equitable relationship but the more they interacted with Iranian leaders at the time the more it became clear that nothing positive could come out of those cunning orientals who could see no further than their own noses.

    Like the United States, I would think that England became an enemy of Iran when she joined America in destroying Democracy in Iran.

    She later added insult to injury by colluding with US to prevent the Iranian complaint to UNSC regarding chemical weapons attacks on Iranian soldiers and civilians.

    Now of course like the rest of the EU states, she is reprising her role as a co-belligerent against Iran and Iranian people in their economic war.

    She is an enemy, no doubt.

    In fairness, I must add that UK did not expect to find herself in her current position vis-à-vis Iran; she had expected quick victory of sort against Iran (by the Axis Powers).

    When that did not happen – not on the nuclear front, not in Syria, and not in their economic war, she became committed to a prolonged and overt position of enmity that left her exposed, just like US, as an enemy of not just the Islamic Republic but the Iranian people and “Iran” itself (and unforgivable sin for most Iranians).

  42. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    June 13, 2013 at 10:13 pm

    Yep. But Iranians can not forget almost 3 centuries of British conspiracies and enmity from Herat war to humiliating terms of anglo-Iranian oil company to occupation of Iran to now. UK was an imperial power, and sometimes I wonder how Iran never became a colony as its eastern, western and southern lands became. Through the process of balancing British conspiracies, and saving itself from becoming a colony, Iran had to pay a hefty price by both losing land and resources. Qajaris were incompetent, no doubt. While the western world (plus Japan and Russia) were busy building their science and technology foundations, these guys were busy doing corruption and inventing sex toys. Iran is not itself blameless, but if Iran had one single enemy in the past 3 centuries, it was UK. I have no doubt about that. And I believe this will remain so, for foreseeable future.

  43. Unknown Unknowns says:

    Smith says, “The question is if Iran will ever do that or will they remain dependent on foreign services as they are now.”

    I have been assured by someone who is deeply involved in the construction of that sort of IT infrastructure that Iran has indeed been working on this program for years and is “in the final stages” of the program’s bearing fruit. (His company builds infrastructure technologies which enable companies line Pars Online (an ISP) and Iran Cell and Hamrah-e Avval (cell phone providers) to operate.)

  44. Nasser says:

    Smith,

    - Didn’t Iran officially state that she doesn’t intend to field missiles with ranges greater than what she currently fields (~2500 km)? I hope that was a lie.

    - I know that the Americans and the West cares a great deal about the Israelis and their Najdi friends and so taking them hostage with nukes should provide Iran with enough security for the medium term. This is definitely within Iran’s capacity and so I have advocated for it.

    - How much of a technical hurdle is it to build credible ICBMs? Does Iran have the adequate infrastructure to accomplish this within a decade or so?

    - My understanding was that the Russians have exerted a great of pressure on Iran not to make any more public missile tests (they don’t want to give Washington any pretext for their ABM shield in Europe) and have been spearheading the notion that Sejil is still in its prototype phase and hasn’t entered production. And Iran has been pretty quiet since then.

  45. Nasser says:

    fyi says: June 13, 2013 at 10:13 pm

    “In fairness, I must add that UK did not expect to find herself in her current position vis-à-vis Iran; she had expected quick victory of sort against Iran (by the Axis Powers).”

    - Can you elaborate on this? Did they really expect a nation with quite significant resources and with very genuine security concerns to fold so easily?!

    Didn’t they like the Americans want to gradually wear down Iran and soften her up for war at a later date?

    I can understand the Indians expecting no one to stand up to western diktats for long but the Brits (or the French) must have known that the world has changed since 1953.

  46. Unknown Unknowns says:

    An example of election “SMS’s” (text messages), received last night:

    Quote

    sms-e Kathrine Ashton be Jalili:
    “Sa’idam, bahashun kal-kal nakon. Mobaraket bashe, golam!”

    Unquote

    Translation: “Don’t bicker with them, my [beloved] Sa’id! Congratulations [on your (imminent) victory], flower of mine [heart]!”

  47. Unknown Unknowns says:

    Needless to say, on the power of that sms, I have changed my vote to Jalili :D

  48. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    As usual most polls are Tehran-centric. The polls I have seen that include towns and villages have Jalili and Ghalibaf around 28-30% and Rohani around 23%.

  49. M.Ali says:

    Khurshid,

    I agree. Specially, look at this quote,

    ““We’ll vote,” 19-year-old Amir said from the adjacent computer terminal. “If they count the votes, then the guy we voted for will be president, and if they screw us again, we’ll take to the streets again. No matter what, we won’t lose – that is, unless we sit at home and let them do whatever they want.””

    “screw us again”? “we’ll take to the streets again”? This guy is 19! Four years ago he was 15! How was he screwed when he didn’t even vote last time?

    What rubbish

  50. A-B says:

    The ‘reformist’ Rohani seems as reactionary as Velayati, in relying on old methods that maybe worked at a very critical moment (when Iran was politically much weaker) which can now in retrospect be used as a lesson not to repeat. They are as ‘reformists’ as the Obamites; hence the Western establishment’s love for them and their proneness to corruption.

  51. Sineva says:

    Nasser says:
    June 14, 2013 at 1:32 am
    If iran wished to do this it certainly could.With the sejil missile iran showed that it had mastered the art of casting large solid fuel motors and staging.At the moment iran seems content to improve the capabilities of its existing missiles with improved guidance and accuracy and improved warheads and penetration aids to overcome the potential tho` still limited threat from abm systems like thaad and arrow.If iran did decide to become a nuclear armed state its first job would be to produce a warhead that could fit on to its current missile arsenal only after that would it look at designing a new long ranged missile most likely an irbm first to hit targets in europe followed by an icbm to hit targets in the us,a possible short cut would be cruise missiles fired from irans kilo submarines,this is where nuclear or nuclear assisted propulsion could come in handy

  52. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    A-B-jan,
    This is the fundamental problem with liberals in Iran. They rely on akhunds like Hashemi, Khatami, Karroubi and now Rohani. It’s just ass-backwards.

    Wouldn’t it have been nice if the reformists after the Hashemi admin had been led by people like Gharazi- someone even I could imagine getting behind if it became necessary.

    They are not the majority in Iran and they think by throwing a mullah in front they can fool the rest. And these 3rd rate mullahs who can’t compete with the Imams, Shahid Motahari’s, Khamenei’s and Shahid Beheshtis of the world look for sheep-like devotes to fullfil their worldly desires for money and wealth.

    And then a clean, intelligent serious guy like Jalili who has dedicated his life to Islam and Iran has to be spoken down to by weasels like Velayati and Rohani who were drinking coffee with Mitterand when he was in the war.

    God is witness.

  53. M.Ali says:

    And they get surprised when they lose. they are reformists, but what exactly do they want to reform when all they have is referring back to 8 years of Rafsanjani and 8 years of Khatami?

    Is this the progressive reformist approach, lets go back to the 90s?

  54. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Think about it for a moment: some of those voting for Rohani who have a problem with Islam and the Islamic Republic are voting for an 64 year old turbaned bearded rohani- whose called “Rohani” for God’s sake!- so he can rid them of sharia and Islamic government.

    If this isn’t called “stupidity”, I don’t know what is.

  55. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Supreme Leader’s comments while voting this morning:

    اخيراً شنيدم كه از شوراى امنيّت ملّى آمريكا كسى گفته كه ما اين انتخابات ايران را قبول نداريم. خب به درك كه قبول نداريد! اگر قرار بود ملّت ايران منتظر بماند كه شما چه چيزى را قبول داريد و چه چيزى را ميل داريد، آن‌طور عمل بكند، كه كلاهش پسِ معركه بود. ملّت ايران نگاه ميكند ببيند خودش چه چيزى را احتياج دارد و مصلحت او در چيست، آن را دنبال خواهد كرد. ان‌شاءالله كه خداوند متعال به امروزْ براى ملّت ايران بركت بدهد؛ و كمك كند به ذهنها و دلهاى مردم كه آنچه شايسته‌ى آنها است، آنچه مطابق با شأن ملّت ايران است، آن ان‌شاءالله پيش بيايد.

  56. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Hmmm…how to translate “be darak!”

  57. A-B says:

    Yes, BiB-jan; they are mullah ‘action figures’, made in the US; passive as a toy in the hands of the West.

    Remember how Hillary Clinton openly became a fan of ‘old school mullahs’ (of course, not those they assassited or attempted to assassinate) when she labeled Iran a “Military dictatorship”?

    In Iran’s stand-off with the gang of 5+1, the West’s ‘issues’ are: Iran’s entitlement to enrich uranium at all, fabricated blue-print of ‘magical bombs’, access to off-limit military sites like Parchin, and why Iran has fortified her nuclear installations in Fordo so that the West can’t destroy them more easily. And these morons squabble that the ‘failure’ in the talks is because of what somebody in Iran said something to a nobody in France; the country led by a vile CIA-goon Sarkozy who openly threatened to attack Iran. I mean, not even the Western media, that wouldn’t waste any opportunity to blame Iran for the stalemate, bother to mention these ‘revelations’.

  58. Mohammad says:

    BiBiJon,

    I think this is the most crucial point in the Al-Akhbar article:

    The Iranian government, good or bad, suffers acutely from an inability to communicate its value propositions to the wider population. Which really, quite frankly, cripples it when faced with the well-oiled spin-machines of hostile Western and Arab states seeking to vilify the Islamic Republic.

    Bussed-in Basiji, Re June 14, 2013 at 3:46 PM

    Can you point me to the “nation-wide” polls where Jalili had more than 20% of the total votes? Although I have seen nation-wide polls where Jalili was in the second (and apparently he has slid down since, losing grounds to Rowhani), he was never in the 20s.

    And frankly, though I will probably not vote for Rowhani, I believe that he would be a successful president. He seems adept at walking the fine lines in order to bring together different factions, though I’m concerned about his ability to appeal to the lower, poorer classes whom Ahmadinejad successfully wooed at the expense of the upper middle class. But I’m sure that we can’t afford yet another divisive figure for a yet another 8 years. Though Jalili is not divisive, I think he won’t be able to get the support of the technocrat, educated classes whom we need in the face of economic problems.

  59. Neo says:

    Bussed-in Basiji says: June 14, 2013 at 5:16 am

    So well said B-i-B! Their stance is just baffling.

  60. BiBiJon says:

    M.Ali,

    I saw this tweet and remembered your musings about the ironies and inconsistencies of western ‘journalists’ take on Iran.

    https://twitter.com/ThomasErdbrink/status/345449948025847808

    NY Times’ reporter is freely roaming around Tehran, asking strangers who they voted for, and without fear of repression they answer: didn’t vote for the “anointed one.”

  61. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    A-B-jan,
    I don’t care Jalili or Ghalibaf- just get rid of the old farts Rohani, Velayati, Rezai. Enough already.

    Mohammad-jan,
    Global Info poll sent to Jalili supporters via sms- 20,000 random phone calls last 3 days, 50 cities 100 towns and villages:

    Jalili 29.8%
    Ghalibaf 28.9
    Rohani 23.6
    Rezai 9.8
    Velayati 6.5
    Gharazi 1.4

    I would just like to point out that some Rohani people are unfortunately doing a disservice- like what happened last time- by raising expectations and talking about things like “land-slide”.

    Like I said, my guess is Ghalibaf Jalili Round 2.

    Tomorrow we will all be wiser.

    As far as “educated technocrats” they are who got us into trouble in the first place. Remember what Rahbar said recently about “technocrats” and when he told them 18 years ago to do something about our dependence on oil.

    “Educated technocrats” is a euphemism for “secular west-oriented”- yes we even have such akhunds in Iran, imagine.

    Like I said, as long as those who want less Islam and more west keep voting for 3rd rate akhunds they are not gonna get anywhere.

  62. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Any suggestions for translating “be darak” anyone?

  63. fyi says:

    Bussed-in Basiji says:

    June 14, 2013 at 9:23 am

    “Go to Hell”.

  64. fyi says:

    Smith says:

    June 13, 2013 at 11:04 pm

    You miss my point; that English were imperialists is established fact; what is not so well understood was the weakness and decay at all levels of Iranian society; Iran could not compete with England at any level you care to mention – getting walked all over are the wages of weakness in international arena.

    Iranians (and most other non-European) world were clueless about empircial sciences and there was no intellectual framework or even movement that could connect them from the legacy of Ibn Sina and others to the contemporary world.

    England was indifferent to Iran; the single most powerful enemy of Iran during the last 200 years was Arab Nationalism which found its expression in the Ba’ath state in Iraq – in my opinion.

  65. fyi says:

    Nasser says:

    June 14, 2013 at 1:39 am

    My sense of it has been that Axis Powers, as well as India, expecting a short war and a quick victory.

    The assumption and expectation of “Quick victory” through various sorts of “Shock & Awe” unerlies all of their strategic undertakings.

    The 4-year election cycle in Axis Powers states also makes it imperative to formulate, plan, and execute policy within that 4-year interval.

    As to why they under-estimated Iran, my guess would be that they did not listen to teh advise of competent individuals who knew more than Policy Principles about Iran or the Middle East.

    [I read in FP of a US analysts that went around telling Americans leaders to not go into Lebanon assuming all Muslims are Evil and all Christains are Good. He was ignored.]

  66. Unknown Unknowns says:

    Bussed-in Prof and fyi:

    If the context was something like, “Chi? Raft Amrika? Be darak ke raft!”, then yes, it would be something like “What? He went to the US? To hell with him then!” But in this context, I would have translated it as something like “Who gives a hoot [whether the US deems our elections to be legitimate or otherwise?]” (You must change the syntax in order to convey the sense of the expression.)

  67. Mohammad says:

    Bussed-in Basiji,

    Thank you for your kind reply. Was the poll conducted by the Jalili campaign itself? Any idea on who conducted the poll?

    As on the technocrats, I disagree to some extent. Not all technocrats are secular or West-oriented. My main concern are those relatively religious educated people who are on the brink of becoming totally hopeless about the future and disengaged with the government. We might disagree with them, but we can’t ignore them. I saw many in the aftermath of the 2009 election who used to be loyal Muslims and supporters of the Islamic Republic, but turned their back on the IR because of some extreme words and actions. Though they were an absolute minority among the population, they were a sizeable minority among the educated people and they were media-savvy, so they began preaching against the IR.
    As Qalibaf has said in his campaign slogans many times, having a competent, well-managed, inclusive government is a prelude to proving that an Islamic government can be economically successful (note: I will not vote for Qalibaf though I do think he’ll be a successful president). To do that, we should be more embracing of those non-secular educated people who are not as religious as we might prefer, so as to not make them more secular. Even secular people can be coopted if we are sophisticated and far-sighted enough. Don’t forget that Imam Ali’s government tolerated the corrupt elite until they actually picked up arms.

  68. fyi says:

    Mohammad says:

    June 14, 2013 at 11:19 am

    Just copy the US bankruptcy law; it will go along way towards economic development in Iran by taking the fear of failure out of business ventures.

  69. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Mohammad-jan,
    Points well taken. Remember Hashemi kissed western ass- on the urging of technocrats- and got and an international arrest warrant. Khatami kissed western ass- on the urging of technocrats- and got’axis of evil’.

    Case closed.

  70. Mohammad says:

    And, foolhardy posturing during Ahmadinejad got us our first negative GDP growth rate in nearly two decades. Under Khatami, we our hand was freer than now to help Hezbollah and Hamas. “Axis of Evil” was a rant, it doesn’t merit attention. US presidents tend to make such outlandish comments. What I care for, is our ability to project power and become a role model for Muslim and Third World nations. We have to be united and economically calm at home to project power abroad. To do that, we have to coopt our technocrats.

  71. Kathleen says:

    This morning on MSNBC Chuck Todd’s program he strongly inferred that the last Presidential elections in Iran were fixed. He repeated this myth several times. MSM doing the bidding of the U.S. government and the I lobby.

    So amazing how many times talking heads like Todd and others will repeat “Assad is killing his own people” But these same individuals fail to really report in any way about how many Iraqi people etc that the U.S. has killed. Such a horrific and deadly contradiction

  72. masoud says:

    Be darak:
    To hell with it

  73. fyi says:

    Kathleen says:

    June 14, 2013 at 12:04 pm

    What do you expect when the “top” is degenrated; in the words of Ambassador Bhardakumar:

    “The entire moral edifice on which Obama built up his presidency and the values he espoused at the core of his “audacity of hope” when he began his long march to the White House five years ago – transparency, accountability, legitimacy, multilateralism, consensus – lie exposed today as a pack of lies.”

  74. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Mohammad-jan,
    If having Hezbollah kick US/Saudi ass in Syria and Hamas bomb Jerusalem isn’t “projecting power” and being a “role model” for Muslims and 3rd world nations- I don’t know what is.

    It’s called “hard power”- I think you have been listening too much to this “soft power” b.s. that Khatami talked about because he didn’t have the courage for jihad. He didn’t even have the courage to stand up to his own wife. Toro khoda velemun kon.

    We are in a war with America which they started because we kicked out their stooge- do you remember Mohammad-jan? We are in a war. As Shahid Ahmadi Roshan’s mother said: Our war with the superpowers is not about bread, it’s about sharaf and azadi. Remember sharaf Mohammad-jan?

    Hashemi kissed western ass and got an arrest warrant. Khatami kissed western ass and helped US in Afghanistan and got axis of evil and even more increased sanctions.

    Case effin closed.

    Also, never in the history of Iran in 2,500 years has an administration built so much infrastructure for the people as the Ahmadinejad admins did. Negative GDP is not important compared to that. Right?

    In other words, we disagree on fundamental matters.

  75. Smith says:

    Nasser says:
    June 14, 2013 at 1:32 am

    - I do not think Iran has said such a thing. In fact during a TV interview an Iranian General upon the question of existence of plans for making longer range missiles, remained quite and refrained from answering. It is safe to assume, that atleast some level of work is in progress.

    - Saudis are nothing. It would be a big mistake to take them on directly and publicly. Not good for Iran’s image both in the world and among Muslims to do such a thing. Saudis can be deterred when their masters are deterred. The official line of Iranian state is the liberation of Palestinians and the dismantling of Bantustans, as well as demise of the fascistic components of the regime there. Much like South Africa. This can only be done by continuous deligimization of its state. Not by nukes. Iranian nukes in future have three primary purposes: 1)National pride 2) Defense against any force trying to put Iran’s ultimate security in jeopardy 3) Strategic leverage for national benefits

    Only UK fits the 3rd category. It is small, manageable, and isolated geographically. And it is White with a very heinous colonial past in four corners of the world. It will put immense pressure on British. Will French side with them and risk an angry nuclear Iran during a nuclear exchange? Will US stand to last minute with them? Will their allies be with them for the next 5 decades, centuries? What price will UK have to pay to its allies for their loyalty for five centuries? As an added benefit, the British are cool people. They know the art of diplomacy better than anyone else. It is good to have such an enemy as opposed to a mindless one.

    - Building ICBM are quite a difficult job. But Iran is upto mark since they already proved that they have the technical understanding of the job (sat launcher basically is an ICBM technically speaking). If Iran puts the resources into the job, it can make ICBM, no doubt even before the end of this decade.

    - My understanding is that, Russia does not have as much influence in Iran. I think, and here I am speculating, Iran has hit a technological barrier in its missile development. Going from MRBM to ICBM is very difficult. A whole set of new technologies have to be developed. There are some indirect indications for this hypothesis (some satellite photos show that Iran has had some test failures, though not publicly announced by Iran).

  76. Smith says:

    M.Ali says:
    June 14, 2013 at 3:56 am

    Their understanding of democracy is one of “if we win” it is and if not, then it is not democracy. Khatami/Rafsanjani crowd at their best.

  77. fyi says:

    Smith says:

    June 14, 2013 at 12:46 pm

    I agree with the gist of your last paragraph; unless Russia or China help Iran there is long hard slog ahead – scientifically and technically speaking.

    On the other hand, nuclear reactors, nuclear bombs, ICBMs etc. are all 1950s and 1960s technologies – so I expect Iran to be able to master them eventually.

    A lot of it really is a problem of manufacturing the precision parts in quantity.

  78. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    June 14, 2013 at 9:41 am

    You are right to some degree, though I beg to differ on some points, respectfully. I guess one of the reasons Qajar failed to understand the importance of a national push for sciences, was their non-confidence on Iranian nation being capable of making all those “great” things from west. This was a recurrent theme among Iranian leaders and intellectuals up until Iranian revolution of 1979. Basically the cream of the society had accepted that they are inferior to west on every level and there was no hope to catch up or to lead the world. The primary cause of weakness of Iran was its aversion to domesticate modern sciences. Except perhaps for Mr Amir Kabir and then Mr Khomeini. Though lately Ahmadinejad did alot too, to rekindle the fire of “We Can”.

    I do not think, there exists anything as Arab Nationalism. Hafiz/Assad Syria is also a Baath state. One became an enemy of Iran upon the order of US, the other remained a staunch ally (during the war, Iranian planes used to transport tanks and towed artillery and ammo from Syria to Iran-Now Iran is giving back what it took from Syria in those 8 years). It is more accurate to say Wahabism to be the enemy of Iran. But then the advent of Wahabism power is new. I would say they became seriously powerful with US help since 1970′s.

  79. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    June 14, 2013 at 11:22 am

    If only they had the brain to do it.

  80. Smith says:

    Mohammad says:
    June 14, 2013 at 11:39 am

    I do not think the situation is as simplistic as that, unfortunately. The current economic conditions are the product of the past several centuries of mismanagement. It is not about Ahmadinejad or Khatami. The septic tank that was holding all the crap of these many years has been ruptured by American sanctions. It is time to clean up the smelly stuff and start new without a septic tank by building a proper waste processing and recycling plant. Keeping the sepsis and trying to hide it, will not work anymore.

  81. Smith says:

    Kathleen says:
    June 14, 2013 at 12:04 pm

    We frankly do not care what Americans think anymore. They had their chance (several dozen times in the past one century). They screwed it up.

  82. Nasser says:

    Dr. Cordesman on Syria

    http://csis.org/multimedia/video-us-policy-options-syria

    “..This a threat to our entire strategic position in the Middle East and it cannot be separated from what is happening in the Gulf. Because potentially you are creating a bridge between Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, that affects the Gulf as well as the Levant.”

  83. Nasser says:

    George Friedman and Robert D. Kaplan on the Rise of Sectarianism in the Middle East

    http://www.stratfor.com/video/george-friedman-and-robert-d-kaplan-rise-sectarianism-middle-east

  84. kooshy says:

    Smith says:
    June 14, 2013 at 1:09 pm

    This is how US/West concerns about Iran is viewed in Iranian Media

    http://www.farsnews.com/plarg.php?nn=457934&st=883385

    After 60 years of imperialism and direct US animosity against Iranians no one should blame them.

  85. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    June 14, 2013 at 12:50 pm

    That is exactly how it is. Though there will be no help from China/Russia. Such technologies, are kept always close to the chest. With regard to ICBM, the most important things are going to be composite materials specially for solid rocket motor casings and its precision castings. The aerospace industry is learned by trial and error. I expect many failures on the way. But it is doable. In such technologies, the tolerances are quite tight. As for nuclear sciences, it demands a much higher understanding of physics than many other areas. IR-40 will be the test bed, for Iran’s domestic physics. Then I guess it would be IR-360. What is important is to believe in Iranian nation and bankroll such projects. These are more important than bread and butter. Even if a nation is going to be starved, such projects have to continue (unlike what Roohani thinks).

  86. James Canning says:

    Smith,

    Once again, you in effect argue that Iran has no need for financial power. Or, that financial power should be given lower ranking in importance, than offensive nuclear striking power. Correct?

  87. James Canning says:

    Kooshy,

    You don’t mean “60 years of American animosity toward Iran”, do you?

    And I am sure you are well aware Iran’s religious leaders wanted Mossadegh overthrown.

  88. James Canning says:

    Nasser,

    Do you regard it as significant, that most Alawites in Syria do not regard themselves as Shiites?

  89. Smith says:

    Unknown Unknowns says:
    June 14, 2013 at 12:36 am

    I really hope so. I have heard such stories as you said in the past 10 years, that I frankly can not trust them anymore. There is alot Iran can learn from how China and Russia having understood the fallacy of depending on American internet services, developed their own over the past 10-12 years. For example there was this project in Iran of packaging the open source Linux OS in Farsi for Iranian market.

    It was a noble idea, as Windows is inherently unsafe. The budget for this “national” project of immense importance was lower than the price of a decent home in Tehran. With such level of financial commitment, expecting things will change is really a fool’s dream. I guess, just to recreat the essential web services only for Iranians such as search engine, email, facebook, youtube, twitter etc with a decent quality and dependability along with a complete e-government services will need at the very least several billion dollars of investment.

    Currently, I do not see such level of commitment on the part of Iranian government. And since the private sector is discouraged and even disallowed to take part in developing such services, I have not much hope for an thriving Iranian IT infrastructure in this decade. At least not until serious policies are rolled out over the matter.

  90. James Canning says:

    Smith,

    You actually believe American public opinion is not of any particular consequence? In matters related to the Middle East and Iran? Amazing.

  91. James Canning says:

    Smith,

    You think Iraq was “ordered” by the US “to become an enemy of Iran”?

    Amazing.

    Saddam Hussein was a megalomaniac. True?

  92. Smith says:

    “This is how US/West concerns about Iran is viewed in Iranian Media”

    This war waged by west on Iranian people is not going to be won by cartoons. It needs serious effort in building ideological frameworks, science and technology foundations and a governing structure based on people’s aspirations and dreams.

  93. James Canning says:

    Smith,

    You actually believe Iran can and should build nuclear weapons, in order to be able to threaten Britain?

    Amazing.

  94. kooshy says:

    Looks like this guy prefers and feels more safe using Verizon specially when he is talking to his wife, at least Obama knows what they are talking about, but does he know what Obama says to his wife, I don’t believe the subject is about CHANGE at least not for now. I am so proud seeing big line of Iranians at the polling stations regardless of how and who they vote they made Iran much stronger regardless off the result.

    https://twitter.com/MehrnewsCom/status/345528079264931840/photo/1

  95. Smith says:

    Nasser says:
    June 14, 2013 at 1:11 pm

    It is the west trying its utmost to make this a sectarian war inside Islam. As fyi, have said numerous times, we can only hope for God to turn their tricks against them. There really is no other hope. The west is immensely more powerful and has too many proxies and levers it can pull, unfortunately as compared to Iran. In God we trust, should be the moto of Iranians in these matters.

  96. fyi says:

    Nasser says:

    June 14, 2013 at 1:10 pm

    Yes, there is now a new jointed-ness between the strategic theatres of Levant and Persian Gulf.

    I would go futher and state that there is a jointed-ness among the following theatres:

    Levant, Mesopotamia, Persian Gulf, Hindu Kush.

    And at the core of which is the Islamic Republic of Iran.

    That is why Axis Powers are adamant and insistent on the desrtuction of the Iranian power.

    They can no longer dominate at acceptable costs.

    What we need is a strategic accomodation between the United State and Iran so that people in these theatres can be born, live their lives in peace, and die and give rise to a new generation.

    Absent such an accomodation, there will be more war and more bloodshed; many of the victims will be nominal friends of the Axis Powers.

  97. kooshy says:

    Smith says:
    June 14, 2013 at 1:47 pm

    “This war waged by west on Iranian people is not going to be won by cartoons. It needs serious effort in building ideological frameworks, science and technology foundations and a governing structure based on people’s aspirations and dreams.”

    Yes you are correct Iran would need both, strong technology advancement and a just ideology, but more importantly would need to know how to use both effectively as soft power tools (haven’t done that bad during past 8 years).

    If Iran don’t confront the west with a sound street level accepted ideology, and don’t attempt to expose and use the western racism, double standards and hypocrisy against them, no matter how advance technologically she may be, even with nuclear bombs Iran will end up like USSR. Iran and the world need to brake the glass image that the west has made of herself to herself and the rest of the world that is do able and in works.

  98. Nasser says:

    fyi says:

    “What we need is a strategic accomodation between the United State and Iran so that people in these theatres can be born, live their lives in peace, and die and give rise to a new generation.”

    - Yes of course such a thing would be desirable and save many lives but the fact is that there is no indication that the US is contemplating such a move. People like the Leveretts will continue to be ignored it seems to me.

    For a long long time I used to blame this on Iranian diplomatic ineptitude. I now realize how foolish I have been and understand that the US is thoroughly implacable and what they desire is as you describe: “the destruction of Iranian power.”

    So the only responsible course of action left for Iran is to work hard to increase her national power and adequately arming herself so that she can protect herself and her allies from Axis powers and their local allies.

  99. fyi says:

    kooshy says:

    June 14, 2013 at 2:15 pm

    Iranians only need to stand for Peace and Progress and Islam; Axis Powers are already standing for Death & Destruction.

    That is enough.

  100. nico says:

    James Canning says:
    June 14, 2013 at 1:49 pm

    “Smith,You actually believe Iran can and should build nuclear weapons, in order to be able to threaten Britain?Amazing.”

    Th UK nuclear submarines are stationning off the Iranian and Syrian borders.
    Obviously, there is a need for Iran to comtemplate the opposite.

    You could say that neither the UK or other countries should have nukes.
    That is only true in your lalaland.

  101. nico says:

    James Canning,

    As I previously stated, the UK needs to be broken between China, Rusdia and Iran, each part with one or several foreign military bases.
    You know for the UK to be protected against foreign powers and obviously against their iwn foolishness.

  102. Nasser says:

    Smith,

    - I have advocated for taking Israel and the Saudi Royals hostage because that is something that seems very doable with Iran’s current capabilities. These targets fall within Iran’s current missile range and Iran would only need a modest arsenal of bombs with moderate yields to threaten them: Again very doable.

    All Iran would need to do is make an atmospheric test over somewhere in the Indian Ocean and people will make their own conclusions. No need for public threats to the Saudis.

    - What you suggest seemed to me just too ambitious. But you are very convincing my friend! :)

    The only contention I will make is that if Iran points ICBMs towards London, France and probably US would become involved too. They would never be reassured with Iran’s words that the missiles aren’t pointed at them or wouldn’t accidentally drop on Paris instead of London.

    - Two questions: Do you think with your missiles at “five minute automatic alert” there is no need to invest in SLBMs (for a while at least)? What kind of yields would those bombs need to have?

  103. Nasser says:

    I am sure many on this forum have already read this but it still seems relevant to the discussion we are having:

    http://www.ewi.info/system/files/IransBallisticMissilePotential.pdf

    Note: At least one of the authors of this piece does have an interest in hyping up Iran’s capabilities and the threat it poses to the West. I however still believe it be a worthy read.

  104. nico says:

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_Iranian_presidential_election,_2013

    It seems rohani and qalibaf will the ones in the run off.

    Rezai being the wild card.

    Jalili seems out.

    Wait and see the surprise

  105. Smith says:

    Nasser says:
    June 14, 2013 at 2:57 pm

    - In my view it would not be necessary. Both those nations have internal cracks in their societies which do not allow them to raise to the level of power, Iran can attain. Making them strategic enemies of Iran only lowers Iran’s global power in future. They have just to be dealt with as ideological proxies. Anomalies of current political structure of the world. Nothing more. Iran’s capabilities will eventually increase so judging Iran’s power tomorrow with yesterday’s tools is, in my understanding a fallacy. Pakistan, India and North Korea have proved that acquisition of nuclear weapons without simultaneous acquisition of ICBM capability does not bring much global power.

    - Great nations must have great ambitions. Iran must set out for a global power status, a seat at the unofficial world governing council. Iran’s international problems will not go away, until Iran has become a global power. Today US and France might stand with UK. Tomorrow who knows. The strategic nuclear game is played like this. Unfortunately the state of man, has necessitate it. WE MUST EITHER ACCEPT TO LIVE EQUAL WITH EACH OTHER, OR THIS PLANET MIGHT HAVE TO COME TO END.

    - SLBM’s play two parts in nuclear doctrine. The first is with quick offensive capability from almost any place on earth. I do not think Iran will be interested in that. The second role for them is the second strike capability. Iran will be interested in such a capability though not entirely necessary. Countries that can make ICBM can also make SLBM, as they are modified version of ICBM. The hard part is not the SLBM, but making nuclear submarines that carry them. As for the yield, the bigger the better. Iran’s nuclear capability must rest on thermonuclear weapons with yields around a megaton. Lower yields are tactical but bigger yields is needed for strategic force projection. It is a long road for Iran ahead. I estimate that Iran should set the goal of having 3000 nuclear warheads in order to become a true global power. If this road is to be taken over a period of 30 years, that necessitates production capability of over 100 per year, which means having at least a dozen large plutonium producing reactors.

    PS. It is really interesting to see the British asss burning and fuming even upon the mention of Iran dreaming to become like UK having the nuclear and missile capabilities. Their racist hypocrisy is now wide open for every one to see.

  106. nico says:

    Smith says:
    June 14, 2013 at 3:18 pm

    “Iran must set out for a global power status”

    Obviously Iran has only the choice to be a nothing or a world global power.
    There is no way in the between.
    Iran is in a such strategic position that does not allow it another way.

  107. Smith says:

    “Obviously Iran has only the choice to be a nothing or a world global power.”

    The axis powers left Iran no other choice.

  108. nico says:

    Smith says:
    June 14, 2013 at 3:18 pm

    Beyond strategic location, scientific progress, manpower potential and ideological power.
    There are oil and gas.
    However some smart english man thinks it is unimportant…
    And others think the hydrocarbon depletion is some kind of conspiracy theory.

    “BP sees its first ever global gas reserves decline”
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/12/bp-reserves-idUSL5N0EO1I720130612

    “The downgrade left Iran at the top of the table of the world’s largest gas reserves holders for the first time in decades, with its broadly unchanged reserves of 33.6 trillion.”

    “BP upgraded reserves for both Iran and Iraq by several billion barrels and kept them at their No.3 and 4 global spots, respectively. Venezuela and Saudi Arabia kept their first and second places with no major revisions over the year.”

  109. nico says:

    Smith says:
    June 14, 2013 at 3:31 pm

    ““Obviously Iran has only the choice to be a nothing or a world global power.”

    The axis powers left Iran no other choice.”

    What I conveyed is that western enmity is bound to Iran potential.
    As such, the axis powers have no choice other than anihilate Iran to keep their supremacy.

    One could tell that supremacy is not mandatory.
    4 hundred years of western history speaks otherwise.

  110. Mohammad says:

    fyi,
    June 14, 2013 at 11:22 am

    You hit the nail on the head. I believe that we can easily fend off sanctions by aggressive efforts to ease doing business.

    Bussed-in Basiji,
    June 14, 2013 at 12:45 pm

    I’m not for “kissing Western ass”, I’m for sensible, predictable, non-divisive politics and governance using our best trained human resources. I’m all for well-planned infrastructure building which doesn’t fuel inflation. That way, we won’t even need the lifting of sanctions to reach economic prosperity. It also helps us to project power in the long run; our ability to help our Lebanese and Palestinian allies during their recent defensive wars against the Zionist Regime, and Syria against the takfiri-Western alliance has been a direct consequence of the economic, scientific and technological infrastructure developed during the last two and a half decades, not merely last 8 years. With a negative GDP growth, we will be pressed to lower the financing for our infrastructure, our military and our allies.

    And, soft power is indeed more essential than hard power. The Islamic Republic has relied on its soft power to win hearts and minds inside Iran and throughout the Islamic World. The war of wills is a mixture of hard and soft wars.

    Smith,
    June 14, 2013 at 1:08 pm

    While it’s true that our current development level is a product of historical events, we could have been much better with a more rational, predictable and non-divisive administration in the last 8 years. I reckon that we could have had the same current level of nuclear advancement with less sanctions and without negative GDP growth rate, if we had managed our economy well and were more creative in our diplomacy (especially taking public diplomacy much more serious). While I don’t blame Ahmadinejad for all our problems, and I applaud him for appealing to and striving to serve the poorer classes, I think that overall, he has unwillingly undermined them and the whole Iran in the long run by failing to manage the bureaucracy well and by being divisive, not caring enough for the opinion and support of the educated classes. I hope our next president has the best of both worlds: caring for the opinion and support of all societal classes, repairing our image abroad while sticking to our inalienable rights and national interests.

  111. Khurshid says:

    Iran Presidential Election 2013 – Soft war on Iran: Robert Fisk Strikes

    Robert said the following about Iran’s election:

    The Iranian election remains not an election but a competition between clerical favourites. – A British will always be a British!!!

    http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/robert-fisk-ahmadinejads-successor-is-supposed-to-be-chosen-by-the-people-not-guardians-8651026.html

  112. Khurshid says:

    Iran Presidential Election 2013 – Soft war on Iran: Telegraph Strikes

    British Telegraph declares Rohani as wining !!!

    Mr Rowhani’s campaign manager, Mohammad-Reza Nematzadeh said: “From what we are hearing, by God’s grace and with the people’s support, he is leading in all the country, down to the level of villages.”

    If Mr Rowhani gets what is seen as a suspiciously low vote, it could spark street protests.

    Reza Esfandiari, an Iranian living in Britain, said the reformist movement had taken a “massive gamble” in backing Mr Rowhani. “Rowhani has succeeded in winning over many Mousavi supporters and is actually promising all sorts of reforms, much of which he cannot possibly keep,” he said. “If he wins, they become relevant again in Iranian politics. If he loses, they become completely irrelevant and the reform movement faces political oblivion.”

    Vote counting has barely started and Telegraph clown declares Rohani as winning !!! Its absurd. But again what else can be expected from democratically free western press.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/10121692/Iran-election-reports-of-late-surge-for-more-moderate-candidate-Hassan-Rowhani.html

  113. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Mohammad-jan,
    You should have become a presidential candidate. You say things that sound great- I mean how could anyone disagree?

    The problem is that certain things can’t happen together at the same time.

    Right now this very moment the fact that Hezbollah kicked US/Saudi ass in Qusayr has helped us a lot more on the sanctions front than anything Rohani, Larijani or Jalili have said to the westerners- friendly or unfriendly- in the last ten years.

    And yes it has to do with many factors- including some that you mentioned- but unfortunately with people like Hashemi, Khatami and Rohani he have only seen kar shekani in similar situations, you know kinda like Bani Sadr in the old days.

    SL ordered commandos into Bosnia and they fought and won and some were martyred.

    How’s that for “projecting power”? I mean Bosnia is almost the heart of Europe, right? How’s that for being an example for Muslim and 3rd world nations?

    Of course “technocrats” told Hashemi it’s better to abandon any political, cultural and economic follow up in Bosnia after this great military victory as a way to curry favor with the west. So we abandoned Bosnia. Khak tu sareshun.

    You know Mohammad-jan just a real-life experience and example we had, not future pie-in-the-sky.

    Shame on Akbar and all he got for “currying favor” was an international arrest warrant, remember Mohammad-jan?

    3rd rate mullahs enamored by the west are not to be entrusted with our national security.

    That’s the lesson of our lives, right?

  114. Khurshid says:

    Iran Presidential Election 2013 – My favorite Election Photo

    The lady in pink

    http://english.farsnews.com/plarg.php?nn=M1634.jpg

  115. James Canning says:

    Bussed-In basiji,

    You are arguing Hezbollah was fighting the US, in Syria the other day? Wrong.

  116. James Canning says:

    Khurshid,

    Is Robert Fisk wrong to suggest no president will be elected in Iran unless the clerics favor him?

  117. James Canning says:

    Nico,

    The “Western powers” have no “need” whatever, to “annihilate” Iran. Idea is preposterous.

  118. James Canning says:

    Smith,

    You actually advocate destruction of the planet? I doubt Hezbollah thinks that is a good programme.

  119. James Canning says:

    Nasser,

    You don’t think Hezbollah worries just a bit, that a stray Iranian missile aimed at Tel Aviv, might hit the southern suburbs of Beirut?

  120. James Canning says:

    Smith,

    The “West” is NOT waging war on the Iranian people. Full stop. Nor is Russia, or China “waging war” on the Iranian people.

  121. nico says:

    James Cannings ays:
    June 14, 2013 at 6:53 pm

    “Nico,The “Western powers” have no “need” whatever, to “annihilate” Iran. Idea is preposterous.”

    I am stuck by your argumentative answer built upon reason, logic, and long time reflexion.
    Facts on the ground for decades prove you simply wrong.
    Does the Iran-Irak war speaks to you ?

    But you know I am not surprised by the so british perfidious assertions.
    Look at that : http://news.yahoo.com/britain-lobbies-nuclear-export-group-admit-india-205000097.html
    UK courting India to build up a friend against China.
    And when the time is right they will push India to fight a war with China. Like in the Iran-Irak war.
    Perfidious that is the name.
    There is truly nothing good to expect from UK, nothing.
    With that I totally differ from fyi.

  122. James Canning says:

    Nico,

    Iranian blunders brought on the idiotic Iraqi attack on Iran.

    A little more caution in Iran, in 1979, and the war might not have happened.

  123. James Canning says:

    Nico,

    Britain does not want India to have bad relations with China. Britain, the US, Russia, and Japan, need to work with China to get rid of NK nukes.

  124. Smith says:

    “Does the Iran-Irak war speaks to you ?”

    The only way to avert more wars and genocides is to point a few hundred nuclear ICBMs at England on five minute automatic alert. This will “restrain” their genocidal tendencies and will go a long way in taming this beast. They made their worst wrong decision by choosing the people of Iran as their enemy and waging war to pulverize Iranian people. This scenario is not now a matter of if. It is happening as we speak.

  125. Smith says:

    Finally UK after months of persistence, pushed US to arm the terrorists in Syria. I am amazed by the thirst of British for blood and human agony. Genocidal. I can say only this.

  126. nico says:

    Smith,

    “Finally UK after months of persistence, pushed US to arm the terrorists in Syria. I am amazed by the thirst of British for blood and human agony. Genocidal. I can say only this.”

    All too true.
    I watched a tv show today with the former french ministry Roland Dumas, turned anticolonial once retired.
    He clearly stated that the Syrian issue was designed before 2011 by UK.

  127. kooshy says:

    Erin Burnett from CNN who’s reporting from Tehran on elections there, in one of segments from Tehran said, here in Iran people are worried that they are constantly under surveillance, I just wished one could ask her if they are worried to be under surveillance by their own government or yours (US) but more importantly after the Verizon’s gate this week, shouldn’t people here in the US also share this felling with their Iranian counterparts.

    Smith- this kind of hypocrisy should be exposed, to be effective it should be bluntly exposed in the face of US citizens, making them distrustful of the regime in DC, same thing this regime tries to do with Iran.

  128. Smith says:

    “…here in Iran people are worried that they are constantly under surveillance…”

    Let’s not lie. That is very much true. Iranians are the most spied on people on planet earth: http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2013/6/8/1370715185657/boundless-heatmap-large-001.jpg

    Of course Iranian state does not have 0.00000000000000001% of American capability in this regard.

    Exposing hypocrisy? Then what? These are bunch of imperial colonialists. It is not because they are not informed. It is because they want it that way. The only way to prevent it, is by being immensely powerful on global scale. Otherwise, these beasts will eat you alive. Then they will also blame you for it. Americans gave up long ago on who is running their government as long as they enjoy being the super power, enjoy the booty, and get satisfaction by exercising naked power over other human beings and nations. It matters not to them how many will be killed by their actions.

  129. Nasser says:

    Smith says:

    “Americans gave up long ago on who is running their government as long as they enjoy being the super power, enjoy the booty, and get satisfaction by exercising naked power over other human beings and nations. It matters not to them how many will be killed by their actions.”

    - YES!!!

  130. Nasser says:

    Smith,

    Why are you so forgiving of the French?

  131. Smith says:

    Nasser says:
    June 14, 2013 at 8:34 pm

    I am not exactly forgiving. They are also the same. Almost. But they still have a bit more humanity left in them. Renault is still making cars in Iran. They might go out tonight. But that says, they do not want permanent enmity with Iran. Though Rahbari had said recently that French are going towards the direction of enmity. So it is up to them really. As a global power, Iran shall not care for dignity of these genocidal imperialists.

    It would be better to look east and take care of oppressed in the world. That is where, Iran as a global power should derive its dignity. Not from French, not from Americans and not from British. These all had their chance. But the British are occupied 24/7 with Iran, conspiring against her day after day. Look at Syria and their support for terror there. US wanted to give up Syria. French were half hearted. But the British are tirelessly lobbying for Syrian blood and misery in order to damage Iran. Left to themselves, both French and Americans might forget Iran. But the British still regard Iran as their “sphere of influence”. Some body should tell them that the great game is over.

  132. kooshy says:

    Smith says:
    June 14, 2013 at 8:25 pm

    Trust is directional between the citizen and their governments, usually citizen starts losing trust and dissent away when their government no longer can deliver. In turn regimes lose trusting their citizens and start surveillance when they no longer can rely on citizen’s trust. That is the stage we are in now, at this stage the US governments is more scared of US citizens than a few years back, like during Watergate. Citizen’s distrust ties up the government’s maneuverability. US/UK are not exception in this regard, like every other country here no one cares what the US government is doing to other people in other countries, but everywhere people care how they are treated and trusted by their own government including in US and UK.

    I don’t know how much people in Iran are under surveillance, but I know Iran is been under direct threat for 34 years, besides Iran is not claiming to be the beacon of democracy and the only shining light on the hill either? I remember when Regan use to say this garbage in this country it was deeply believed here that all is now gone, ask around. To me that is a good start.

  133. masoud says:

    Mohammad says:
    June 14, 2013 at 3:46 pm

    What are you talking about?

    One faction or another of these ‘reformist’ you seem so enamored with had been in power in Iran for two whole decades. Most of the time, they had a stranglehold on the the country, despite their legendary fractiousness. Why did they get voted out? No reformist faction or politician has ever had the balls to address this question. No reformist faction or politician has taken it’s leaders to task for their attempted electoral coup of 88. How the hell can we expect the reformists to manage Iran’s position in the world properly, when they seem incapable of relating to such broad swathes of domestic public opinion, or even internalizing the notion that they don’t have a god given right to rule Iran? To this day, these opportunist, traitorous, scum do all the dog whistling they can to imply to their base that the only reason their not in office is because of electoral fraud. Putting questions of basic intelligence aside, who can trust them to run the country fairly?

    Iran GDP growth over the first six years of Ahmadinejad’s administration was quite high, higher than during the Khatami administration. And inflation only moderately worse than the Khatami administration. Remember, during the two decades of reformist rule, Iran had very minimal restrictions in operating on the world stage, while Ahmadienjad’s admin had to put so much of it’s energy adapting to quickly escalating sanctions. Also, the nineties was a much bigger decade in terms of global GDP growth than the two thousands. Their karnameh’s are not even remotely comparable. This is not even counting the massive investments in infrastructure, the historic structural adjustments made, or the fact that Iran’s Gini coefficient has gone from 0.42 to 0.36.

    Of course the usual reformist talking point is to point to the sanctions, as if their own poor management of world affairs wasn’t the primary cause of the situation. They like to advance Western talking points about how Ahmadinejad smells bad and says mean things. They actually believe these talking points more than Western policy makers.

    The reformists relate to to the West the same way a battered wife would to an abusive husband. It doesn’t matter how many times you get punched in the face, the only fathomable response is to smile back. They even internalize the justifications for it, and exert indefatigable efforts to ‘make the relationship work’. What they don’t seem to understand is that the more you act like a battered wife, the more likely you are to be treated like one. And whenever you are forced to separate the unhappy the couple before it the relationship blossoms into a homicide case, the battered wife will blame you for enraging her love’s moods, and protest that you are actually the real reason the relationship failed, and if she just had a little bit more time to work on him…

    It’s would be one thing if this was just a kinky fetish of a particularly perverse intellectual movement. But these people actually want to run a country this way, and will scream bloody murder when the country rejects their approach. That’s just unacceptable.

  134. masoud says:

    So, the Canadian government in recent years has become even more Zionist than most of Europe. Reza Pahlavi recently addressed parliament, and got written up in our boot licking, subservient press as Iran’s Shah-in-Waiting. The government recently hosted a ‘global dialogue on the future of Iran’,designed to coincide with the presidential election campaign, and packed with the usual collection of monarchists, terrorists, and reformist starlets.

    What’s funny is that they had organized a campaign to monitor Iranian election violations. They had hired rogues gallery of election scientists and ‘Farsi language experts’ to sift through the massive title wave of data they anticipating. They had even commissioned a website to receive election report violations, complete with an interactive election violations map.

    The last time the map actually worked, it displayed thirteen reports for all of Iran, one of them being a post on Jalili’s Facebook page. The map seems to no longer be functioning. I wish I had bothered to take a screen shot.

    https://theglobaldialogue.ca/?lang=en

  135. Smith says:

    British press has been going crazy for Roohani since before election. Now with the first results in, BBC is ecstatic and going super crazy for Roohani. Khoda khair koneh. In engilisah vel kon nistan. If Roohani wins, I will be deeply disappointed.

  136. Dan Cooper says:

    Untold Truths about War on Iran :

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkbvd9p1lDw

  137. masoud says:

    It seems Rouhani is at 49%.

    Why? A theory:

    In the press conference, the election official explained that they were going about things in an extremely careful manner. That they would not risk sacrificing accuracy for speed.

    Combined with the slow pace of the release of information, this likely means that they are only releasing the results after forms filled out by the monitors have been couriered to the ministry and aggregated by hand. They are not releasing electronically collected data.

    This means that results closest to the Interior Ministry’s actual geographical location would be the firs to received and begin to be processed.

    We’ll find out soon enough.

  138. fyi says:

    Dr. Cordesman on US Options in Syria:

    http://csis.org/publication/syria-need-decisive-us-action

    God truly turned their tricks against them; they are now damned if they do and damned if they do not.

  139. kooshy says:

    Looks like Rohani may win if he is over 50%, currently looks like the total of the other 5 is less than Rohani’s

  140. masoud says:

    kooshy says:
    June 14, 2013 at 11:48 pm

    We have at most 2% of results in. And we don’t know from which areas.

  141. Nasser says:

    “Looks like Rohani may win if he is over 50%, currently looks like the total of the other 5 is less than Rohani’s”

    - Even his agony does not compare to mine:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ko_U6XzL6e0&list=PLV8xTjzeKMh7BtUNfcUqYPAiedODzAurR

  142. kooshy says:

    گفتني است از مجموع 58 هزار 764 صندوق راي تعداد 5 هزار و 876 صندوق راي شمارش شده است که از اين ميزان کل‌آرا 3 ميليون 24 هزار 434 راي و آراي صحيح 2 ميليون 927 هزار و 547 راي است.
    Masoud they already have counted 10% of the ballot boxes if this continues Rohani may win with just 50%+1 or go to runoff with a strong momentum that can’t be recovered even with combined votes of
    Vlayati and Jalili, and a usual lower turnout, Rezai’s vote will split, I am not too optimistic I think the conservatives made a big mistake.

    http://www.yjc.ir/fa/news/4425314/اعلام-آخرين-نتايج-راي‌گيري-از-5-هزار-و-876-صندوق-آراي-تفکيک-شده-6-نامزد

  143. Sineva says:

    James Canning says:
    June 14, 2013 at 6:59 pm
    Well you could have fooled me because its the iranian people who are bearing the brunt of these sanctions and they appear to be aimed at making the iranian people suffer.You sound just like the western leadership when you say that james,its phony when they say it and its just as phony when you say it.I think the wests attitude towards the suffering that the sanctions cause was best summed up by a certain madeline albright:”we think the cost is worth it”,but then their not the ones paying the cost now are they james?

  144. kooshy says:

    Even if all these results are from Tehran, Ghalibaf shouldn’t have shown such a poor result, unless up to now they just have counted all the boxes Rafsanjani’s friends dropped their ballots in.

    This doesn’t look good, if Rafsanjani and co. win this election this time they are going to challenge SL and take the country to a different type of crises.

  145. Pirouz says:

    Not good? Mistake?

    Come on, guys. The Iranians have spoken. If it is to be Rouhani, it is to be Rouhani.

    Heck, I voted this morning for the man.

  146. Smith says:

    It seems to be four years of slavery ahead. But then it is all because of conservatives themselves. For the past two years, the conservative majles did every thing in its power to undermine the conservative president to the point that his performance got affected. Let’s see if this conservative and corrupt majles will be able to do 10% to Rouhani that they did to Ahmadinejad. For God’s sake, there was a global financial crunch and the harshest sanctions in history. But no, majles had to pressurize Ahmadinejad. Then these bums, were not smart enough to leave the scene and create a momentum like reformists did. Even Gharazi stayed in. Shameful. Iranians should now remain vigilant 24/7 for the next four years so that this Akhond does not go and sign Additional Protocol in dead of a rainy night.

  147. Smith says:

    And it is increasingly looking that there will be no second round. The Akhond is winning. Unbelievable. I was thinking if there was a second round, all conservatives to go and kiss Ahmadinejad’s feet and beg him to endorse Qalibaf for second round. Ahmadinejad still commands lots of votes. He has gone down abit over the past 2 years, but still. If this election was held in 2011, and Ahmadinejad had endorsed a candidate, there was no way an Akhond like Roohani could win. Now though it seems that it is time to remain vigil. I do not trust this guy one bit.

  148. masoud says:

    kooshy says:
    June 15, 2013 at 12:23 am

    This is all very speculative, but an answer could be that Rouhani’s much talked about last minute momentum ate primarily into Ghalibaf’s lead.

    On the other hand, many of the polls that were presented in the media showed most people being undecided until the last moment. Maybe it was Rouhani’s lucky day.

    Again, we’ll find out soon enough.

  149. masoud says:

    Pirouz says:
    June 15, 2013 at 12:30 am

    Not good? Mistake?

    Disaster.

  150. M. Ali says:

    Pirouz is right. I voted Ghalibaf, but if Rouhani wins, then I’m happy, because thats what the majority wanted.

    However, the same thing happened with Mousavi, he was in the lead at first, then started dropping. I wonder if its going to happen the same way this time and if people will cry fraud if it happens.

  151. masoud says:


    According to the sixth statement of the election headquarters of the Interior Ministry, the results were gained out of the 6,387,317 valid votes from a total 6,598,300 votes counted so far.

    The latest results of the vote counts are as follows:

    Hassan Rohani: 3,219,322,

    Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf: 1,095,671

    Saeed Jalili: 868,301

    Mohsen Rezaei: 708,941

    Ali Akbar Velayati: 412,941

    Mohammad Gharazi: 82,141

    There’s about 200,000 ‘invalid’ votes, whatever that means(Aref/Haddad-Adel?). That’s actually an incredibly high number.

    If my theory is right, and the proportions are going to change in favor of more conservative candidates, the absolute latest this can occur is when we top 10 million total votes counted.

  152. masoud says:

    M. Ali says:
    June 15, 2013 at 1:33 am

    Actually, Mousavi was never ahead, he just claimed to be.

    Ahmadinejad was in the lead in all stages, with his lead being slightly eroded over time. But then again there were only four updates then, with the very first report representing a much higher number than we now currently have.

  153. Sineva says:

    James Canning says:
    June 14, 2013 at 6:52 pm
    And no american president will be elected unless he has the backing from one of the two main parties

  154. kooshy says:

    masoud says:
    June 15, 2013 at 1:24 am

    Masoud Jan

    So far the only good news is that there was 80% turnout meaning 40 million votes for the IRI and its constitution, which means votes to approve ayatollah Khamenei as the leader, but I am sure like during Khatami, Mossavie these guys will challenge his authority, that will be taken advantage of in the west and weaken Iran, Tarita (or) was already twitting on this regard today. So I hope your theory is right although not very optimistic.

    Ali Jan

    I have nothing to oppose the majority vote, but I have all the rights not to like it and say I don’t like it, as I see it on this moment and time.

  155. Sineva says:

    James Canning says:
    June 14, 2013 at 7:44 pm
    No james it was saddams blunders that did that,he stupidly underestimated iran thinking that the chaos caused by the shahs removal and the purging of the military had badly weakened iran and that all he had to do was attack,I suppose in someways its not so different to the thinking of the saudis and qataris about syria,in both cases they badly underestimated their opponents and overestimated their own abilities,its an old story

  156. kooshy says:

    Here you go this Traita(or) is already looking for upcoming problems with SL

    Trita Parsi @tparsi

    “Rouhani-Khamenei relationship is complex. Rouhani’s book reveals differences with Khamenei and was partly a critique of him #IranElection”

  157. masoud says:

    Trita Parsi ‏@tparsi 3h

    If Rouhani wins, the biggest winner is the Iranian people. Biggest losers are Khamenei, Netanyahu, and DC neo-cons. #IranElection

  158. masoud says:

    Trita Parsi ‏@tparsi 3h

    Did Iranians vote to legitimize the regime? No. Most voted cause its lowest risk path to get change. http://www.newstatesman.com/2013/06/ayatollahs-get-rumbled … #Iranelection

  159. masoud says:

    Trita Parsi ‏@tparsi 2h

    @Ibishblog @lrozen obviously, #iran won’t turn into sweden next week, but there is more nuance than to think nothing can happen till SL dies

  160. masoud says:

    Trita Parsi ‏@tparsi 2h

    @Ibishblog @lrozen if Rouhani wins, there’ll be a lot of changes at the top, not just the president. That can create openings. #IranElection

  161. masoud says:

    Wow, Trita is thoroughly disgusting

  162. M. Ali says:

    If Rouhani wins, the west will talk about how it was a vote against Khameini, etc, etc. If Khameini was terrified and hated Rouhani and friends so much, he would have said so. Khameini has emphasied again and again that his only desire in the election is the people to get involved and participate in the elections.

  163. Unknown Unknowns says:

    Just announced (10:45 AM Tehran time)

    Out of 8,050,738 valid votes (from 14,603 ballot boxes the total of which is 130,000):

    Rowhani: 4,125,032 (51.24%)
    Qalibaf: 1,341,947
    Jalili: 1,056,327
    Rezai: 902,121
    Velayati: 521,097
    Qarazi: 104,214

    No word as yet to the crucial information as to where these ballot boxes are coming from.

    * If we assume that the distribution is evenly spread throughout and is representative of the entire country – a highly unlikely scenario in my estimation – then all is lost and the neo-liberal economy will be back with Rowhani.

    * If we assume that the distribution is somewhat evenly spread throughout and is somewhat representative of the entire country, then Qalibaf will gain enough to eke out a run-off, in which Rowhani will win. Also a highly unlikely scenario in my estimation.

    * If we assume that the 14,603 ballot boxes from a total of 130,000 are overwhelmingly from Tehran and Karaj, which seems likely, then the reformists and conservatives or “principalists” are almost neck and neck (51/49) on their home turf, where they should be getting at least 75% of the vote. (Rowhani is the only reformist candidate, and all other votes will go to his opponent in a run-off). IF this is the case, then, ironically, the Rowhani lead is actually indicative of a humiliating defeat. Again, IF this assumption is correct, then, as the votes from the rest of the country come in, Rowhani’s lead will drop to below 35%, and he will face Qalibaf or Jalili, more likely the latter, who will pull off a resounding defeat of Rowhani next Friday, inshallah.

  164. kooshy says:

    *” If we assume that the 14,603 ballot boxes from a total of 130,000 are overwhelmingly from Tehran and Karaj,”

    UU Jaan

    If this is the case can you explain why the Ghalibaf’s (the mayor of Tehran) vote is so low (less than 1 to 3 to Rouhani) where people have seen his great work building up Tehran unless you say the don’t want to see him leave being mayor of their city, this doesn’t make sense, but like you I hope you are right.

    I totally didn’t expect this I tend to agree with smith partly is Majlis and I think partly are the sanctions people are voting their pockets.

  165. masoud says:

    Does anyone have any theories as to the abnormally high number of invalid ballots?
    If these are intentionally ruined ballots representing a protest vote, it might lend support to the theory that the numbers so far come from Tehran.

  166. nico says:

    Nasser says:
    June 14, 2013 at 8:34 pm
    “Smith,Why are you so forgiving of the French?”

    France, like Germany is a defeated nation which lost its struggle against the anglo-saxons.

    France retains a zone of influence in Africa, like the US in Latin America and the British in the ME and Indian subcontinent.
    France is focusing its dominance and colonial relation with Africa.

    Regarding Iran and the ME, UK is obviously the evil mastermind and rotten US consigliere of all dominance policies.

  167. Unknown Unknowns says:

    Kooshy jaan:
    If my assumption is correct, Qalibaf’s low vote in Tehran is explained by the fact that this is a national election and Tehranis like him as their mayor, but have shown up to vote to ensure the liberal candidate gets in the national seat, not the conservative Qalibaf. I don’t see a contradiction there.

    Also, I can state from personal experience (last night) that the types of people who had shown up to vote in my district of Darrous (which is mixed with religious people as well as extremely westoxicated types) included many who I know watch nothing but satellite and whose sources of “news” is BBC Persian and VOA. IN other words, these people showed up contrary to the orders of their foreign brain-washers because it is important for them to try to get the rifRafsanJohnny contingent back into office.

  168. Khurshid says:

    James Canning says:
    June 14, 2013 at 6:52 pm

    Khurshid,

    Is Robert Fisk wrong to suggest no president will be elected in Iran unless the clerics favor him?

    First: Yes, Robert is wrong because Rohani is not favored by most clerics.

    Second: British are not in a position to point finger at Iran when in UK nobody can become the British Prime Minister WITHOUT BEING WHITE. Please don’t say this is not true because poll done in UK after Obama became the president showed that A NON-WHITE can never become British prime minister because UK is institutionally Racist!!!!

    Why Robert Fisk and others like him don’t fix RACIST British system first ????

  169. Khurshid says:

    Its too early to say who will win because vote counting is not finished yet. You are still a long way to go. I agree fully with UNKNOWN UNKNOWNS that “No word as yet to the crucial information as to where these ballot boxes are coming from.”

    I simply don’t believe that smaller towns and rural areas have voted for Rohani.

  170. M. Ali says:

    IF the votes are from Tehran, then at least one thing will be certain, and that is, Ghalibaf will receive a humilating defeat. If Ghalibaf receives low votes form Tehran district, there is a small chance he will increase it outside.

    Also, Rowhani has a better chance than Mousavi in getting the non-Tehran vote. If a 50 year old farmer looks at older, cleric, Rowhani, and young Jalili, and young Ghalibaf, it wouldn’t be surprising if his vote goes to Rowhani.

    Finally, Rowhani can certainly depend on the minorities vote.

    If Rowhani wins in the first round, then this is sort of what happened in 2005 elections, where the Reformists were extremely confident and comfortable, and Ahmedinijad slipped past them. The reformists then had lost touch with the people. This time around, have the conservatives lost touch?

  171. Unknown Unknowns says:

    The ballots counted so far are most likely from Tehran and Karaj. No doubt, in the weeks leading up to the election, a decision was made at the Vezarat-e Keshvar (Ministry of the Interior) that faxed and emailed (scanned summary sheet) result tallies would not be included in the announcements, and that only tallies of ballots that the Ministry has *in hand* (i.e., in safe keeping and available in the event of irregularities and the need for recounts, etc.) shall be used in the hourly announcement updates. Go Jalili!

  172. M. Ali says:

    Another update:

    Rohani: 5,300,633
    Ghalibaf: 1,582,724
    Jalili: 1, 298, 597
    Velayati: 620,908
    Gharazi: 124,199

  173. masoud says:


    According to the eighth statement issued by the election headquarters of the Interior Ministry, the results were gained from the total 9,859,142 valid votes counted in 18,180 polling stations.

    The latest results of the vote counts are as follows:

    Hassan Rohani: 5,003,633

    Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf: 1,582,724

    Mohsen Rezaei: 1,298,597

    Saeed Jalili: 1,229,151

    Ali Akbar Velayati: 620,908

    Mohammad Gharazi: 124,129

    Rohani lead fell to 50.75 from 51.24

  174. M. Ali says:

    Forgot to mention, Rezaei was 1,298,597, and Jalili was 1,229,151, so Jalili dropped to 4th.

    Only one thing has been constant in Iranian elections. The Iranians don’t care about all the blogs, debates, analysis, or whatever all the experts and opinionated people (us included) predict. Come election day, they vote in huge numbers, as always, and the results are unexpected.

  175. masoud says:

    1. This is the first time Rouhani has lost ground.
    2. Velayati is doing even worse than Gharazi. Good for Gharazi.
    If this was about foreign policy Velayati would be doing better, because he has more or less the same stance as Rouhani.
    This is about identity politics.

  176. M. Ali says:

    Khurshid,

    “Second: British are not in a position to point finger at Iran when in UK nobody can become the British Prime Minister WITHOUT BEING WHITE”

    Also, one more thing to be added. The Prime Minister, unlike the Iranian President, IS NOT VOTED BY THE PEOPLE. The people vote in members of the Parliament, and the party that has the most seats chooses the Prime Minister. Imagine if this was the system in Iran, where basically two powerful political groups (the same two groups for decades) would choose the country’s prime minister. The western news and Iranian diaspora professors at UK and US universities would mock us for the farce of the democracy we were having.

    How many people voted for Cameron?
    How many people voted for Iran’s past and current president?

    And tell me which is more democratic. Fix your system, then talk about ours.

  177. M. Ali says:

    “Velayati is doing even worse than Gharazi. Good for Gharazi”

    What are you talking about? Gharazi is not even doing good as the invalid votes!

    Velayati is almost 5 times Gharazi’s votes. Not that either matter. Gharazi has talked about managing the post and telecommunication departments, lets see if he even receives the amount of votes equal to the total employees of those governmental companies.

  178. masoud says:

    Rezaie increased his count dramatically. I think this means that the data dumps we are getting are not evenly distributed throughout the country. This election is progressing like in 2005. Remember Karroubi’s ‘I went to sleep, and they stole the elections’ line?

    Rezaie did make his fair share of appeals to minorities. Maybe his increased fortune means we are approaching the end of Tehran votes.

  179. Nasser says:

    Smith says: June 14, 2013 at 3:18 pm

    I apologize in advance for repeating some of my old talking points but there are some new posters on this forum and possibly lurkers that may not have viewed our previous discussions.

    You say: “Pakistan, India and North Korea have proved that acquisition of nuclear weapons without simultaneous acquisition of ICBM capability does not bring much global power.”

    - I totally agree with this statement. But these states did still manage to increase their security.

    I think my disagreement with you is over the fact that we have different time frames and I believe Iran has more immediate security concerns to address. I believe Iran can pursue these lofty goals (which will take time) once it puts itself and its allies out of immediate danger.

    In fact I think you have changed your previous position. If I recall correctly you argued like I did that Iran should go nuclear as soon as it becomes possible to do so. You further opined that Iran should announce her intention to go nuclear on a Wednesday so the next day of the tests can be a public holiday and Iranians can enjoy a long weekend. LOL Remember that?

    - My proposal wasn’t meant to address Iran’s striving for global power status (a worthy long term goal I wholly agree) but rather to address the needs for her basic physical security (in my opinion, an immediate necessity).

    - As we discussed before I believe Iran faces very real threats of an aerial assault from the US led Western alliance, potentially a loss of some of her economically most important territories, a prolonged conventional war with one or more of her neighbors, nuclear bombardment of one or more of her cities, and nuclear blackmail.

    Also consider that there are people residing outside of Iran (not just Shias) that rely on Iran for their security. These people turn to Iran out of desperation but as cruelty of fate would have it they are targeted with greater ferocity by the West precisely because they are Iranian allies.

    I talked before about creating an actual Shia Crescent. Combining the resources of Iran and Iraq would greatly augment Iranian/Shia power and form the foundation for real developments in various fields. You have argued that this already exists. I am sorry but I disagree with this. That is because Iran cannot do as it pleases in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. Furthermore there are populations residing within these territories that are hostile to Iran and Iran’s enemies thus can use them to undermine Iran’s position. (No need to look further than Syria to see this in action.) A modest arsenal of nukes would secure Iranian position in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon and if necessary Iran’s allies can suppress hostile populations within those territories with much greater impunity. These are not trivial things. You think Syrian civil war could have came about if Iran and by extension Assad had nuclear deterrence?

    - Taking the Israelis and the Saudis hostage will put Iran out of this immediate danger and secure her position within the region. This is quite easily achievable I believe. Out of a population of ~20 million, the Saudi clan consists of less than a million I believe. And we all know Israel can’t take casualties. I figure a modest arsenal of nukes; say about 10-20, twenty kiloton bombs augmented by a lot of decoys should allow Iran to take them hostage the same way North Korea has taken Seoul hostage. I know Americans that probably care more for Tel Aviv and Haifa than they care for New York or LA. And God forbid; I really really hope this doesn’t come to pass but if necessary, those same missiles can be turned eastward for deterrence.

    Iran needn’t even make loud public threats. Put a nuclear missile in one of your ships, sail it far south somewhere into the Indian Ocean and detonate it. People know about Iran’s ballistic missile capabilities and now people will know that Iran can create warheads of sufficient yields (to at least threaten the Israelis and Saudis) too.

    - I am surprised that you of all people are so concerned about loss of prestige and possible condemnation this might bring Iran. Didn’t you post a global poll a few days ago indicating how Iran is almost universally resented anyway? Many will I am sure attribute this to British and American propaganda efforts but I believe this is because people despise weakness. I think people are tired of Iran making threats against powerful entities without having the means of backing up those threats. Iran’s acquisition of nukes would invigorate her allies and the people of her one neighbor that is potentially of most consequence (Pakistan) supports the idea of Iranian nukes even more than the Iranian themselves. And people that already hate Iran can go on pouting for all I care.

    - But even though what I suggest you may consider modest, there are domestic opponents within Iran that are determined to prevent even this much from happening. There is no point in addressing those among them that are weak of mind, incapable of logic, moralistic idiots who put too much faith in the global community. But there are I would argue two types of arguments that are raised that need to be addressed.

    One argument is that Iran is already is in the possession of a “Japan option” and thus can consider herself out of danger. I believe these people to be dangerously deluded. I do not define the ability to create one or two nuclear devices (not even a warhead or credible weapon) in six months to a year to be equivalent of a “Japan option.”

    The second argument would unfortunately gain more credence from your proposal. The argument is that Iran needs a truly awesome arsenal of nukes to be even reasonably safe. This is an impossible task they would argue. Iran cannot create a hundred thermonuclear tipped ICBMs in time before being detected and attacked; possibly nuked. It would thus be safer to forego nuclear weapons altogether they would argue.

    - So in conclusion I would say that I don’t agree with your recommendations per se but rather I have a different time frame in mind and thus disagree about what incremental steps Iran should take. I believe when Iran is in a position to create a modest arsenal of nuclear warheads in secrecy, it should immediately go nuclear. This would allow Iran to consolidate her regional gains and attain some safety for herself and her allies. Iran can then pursue loftier goals (which will take decades) from a more secure position and with greater means at her disposal.

  180. masoud says:

    M. Ali says:
    June 15, 2013 at 4:03 am

    You’re right. When I read the vote tallies, I thought it showed Velayati with 62 thousand.
    I think my point about this being identity politics rather than foreign policy stands though.

  181. M. Ali says:

    “I think my point about this being identity politics rather than foreign policy stands though.”

    Well, of course, as it always has. Thats why brand marketing is important. I mean did you watch Velayati’s docuemntaries? It was horrible. It was just footages of the revolution and the war. How many votes do you think that will receive?

  182. M. Ali says:

    Latest:

    Rohani: 6,049,655
    Ghalibaf: 1,844,463
    Rezai: 1,518,964
    Jalili: 1,400,712
    Velayati: 729,44
    Gharazi: 143,301

  183. M. Ali says:

    The latest surprise is that Rezai is closing on Ghalibaf.

    Imagine if this hits the second round and it becomes Rowhani vs Rezai!

  184. Unknown Unknowns says:

    This just in:

    Total valid votes: 11,686,139
    Rowhani: 6,049,655 (51.77% holding steady)
    Qalibaf: 1,844,463
    Rezai: 1.518,964
    Jalili: 1,400,712
    Velayati 729,044
    Qarazi: 143,301

    21,376 of 58,000 polling stations (36.86%)

    If the 89% attendance rate is accurate and there are approximately 51 million eligible voters, that means that 40,800,000 votes can be expected. The above latest info is based on a vote count of 12,091,669, which is 29.63% of the expected turnout of 40.8 million, distributed in 36.86% of the polling stations. This means that my assumption (third scenario) was wrong, and that Rowhani’s support is holding much steadier. But it probably also means that he will still not be able to maintain his 50%+1 vote majority, and that it will go to a runoff. Interesting to see also that Jalili has been bumped off by Rezai. This latest update notwithstanding, I still maintain that the conservatives should win in next Friday’s runoffs. But it is still too early to tell whether Rowhani will be running against Rezai, Jalili or Qalibaf.

  185. M. Ali says:

    UU, where did you get the 89% attendance rate? Is this rumored or was it officially announced? Seems TOO high.

  186. Unknown Unknowns says:

    89% is a typo. That was meant to read 80%.

  187. masoud says:

    M. Ali says:
    June 15, 2013 at 4:12 am

    I’ve enjoyed your reviews of the various campaign movies, but haven’t had enough time to watch nearly as many as you did.
    Were Rouhani’s movies really that much better than all the others?

  188. Rick says:

    kooshy, masoud,

    parsi apparently hate netanyahu, warmongers etc but at the same time talk like one, hes obviously a very confused man.

  189. M. Ali says:

    Same question, UU.

  190. M. Ali says:

    masoud, I think Rouhani’s wasn’t as good as Aref’s or Ghalibaf’s (in my opinion), but I would certainly understand how it could attract many votes.

    On the other hand, documentaries from Velayati, Haddad-Adel, and Gharazi were not just bad, but were rubbish.

    I thought Jalili’s was also weak, with Rezaei being better than I expected.

  191. masoud says:

    M. Ali says:
    June 15, 2013 at 4:12 am

    Digression:
    I didn’t watch Velayati’s or Rouhani’s documentary. They wouldn’t be good for my health. But I remember you talking about how Velayati’s was highlighting his opposition to Bani Sadr. That was likely about taking pot shot’s at Ahmadinejad.

  192. masoud says:

    M. Ali says:
    June 15, 2013 at 4:28 am

    Jalili’s second documentary was pretty bad.

  193. M. Ali says:

    No update since 12pm. Is everyone at the electrol office having lunch? This is stressful, update us!

  194. Karl.. says:

    Reformists seems to win, how come!? We have always heard by west that Iran dont accept reformists and that the elections in Iran is fraudlent!

  195. M. Ali says:

    Rohani: 8,439,530
    Ghalibaf: 2,560,383
    Rezai: 2,101,330
    Jalili: 1,890,462
    Velayati: 977,765
    Gharazi: 196,922

  196. Khurshid says:

    M. Ali says:
    June 15, 2013 at 5:58 am

    it is interesting to see Rezai leading Jalili at this point – a long way left before counting is complete.

    BTW, I also feel the stress when election committee goes quite for a while. But listing to radio Javan is helping me keep calm. Radia Ava is also good.

  197. Khurshid says:

    At this point I have to say THANK YOU to presstv for its live coverage of election since yesterday.this will make it harder for western media machine to say that there was not enough voter participation in Iran’s election.

  198. Karl.. says:

    Well maybe I was wrong, in second voting Qalibaf will win over Rohani I guess, will this prompt protests like 2009 you think?

  199. M. Ali says:

    Karl, I think with the figures we are seeing now, if it goes to second round, its possible Rowhani will easily win. Its possible a certain percentage of Rezaei’s votes will shift to Rowhani, and I bet that maybe a small percentage of Jalili, Gharazi, and Velayati will not vote in the second round. And the third point being that the second round might bring out some of the sulking reformists out of the woodworks to vote in the second round.

  200. M. Ali says:

    Rowhani: 11,754,13
    Ghalibaf: 3,494,938
    Rezai: 2,723,202
    Jalili: 2,593,169
    Velayati: 1,405,543
    Gharazi: 276,499

    سیدمحمدغرضی: 276هزار و 499راي

  201. Sineva says:

    Nasser says:
    June 15, 2013 at 4:07 am
    The problem with iran trying to build a nuclear deterrent is that it would have to kick out the inspectors to do it and politically this would be very expensive as it would appear that the usraelis had been right about iran all along,trying to do it in secret under the noses of the iaea runs the same risk,another option is to have large stockpiles of 20% and 40-50%[naval propulsion] enriched and a clear message to the west that any military action will result in irans immediate withdrawal from the npt and the commencement of a crash bomb program,now for this to be credible iran would need a lot of spare enrichment capacity say several fordows ie sites that could keep operating even if under attack.The west is not stupid it knows that there is really very little it can do to stop iran from building a nuclear arsenal if that is what iran decides to do

  202. kathlyn says:

    بازخواني/بازگشت جريان هاشمي، كمترين هزينه حذف مشايي از انتخابات

    کدخبر : 80699863(3371939)
    تاریخ مخابره : ۱۳۹۲/۰۳/۲۵
    زمان مخابره : ۱۲:۵۰
    سرویس خبر : سياسي- ساير-

    تهران- شبكه ايران، دوهفته قبل سخنراني دكتر عبدالرضا داوري در جمع حاميان مهندس مشايي را منتشر كرد كه وي در جريان آن ضمن پيش بيني شكست سعيد جليلي، كمترين هزينه حذف مهندس مشايي از انتخابات را بازگشت جريان حامي هاشمي رفسنجاني به قوه مجريه اعلام كرد. داوري در سخنان خود پيش بيني كرده بود كه حسن روحاني به احتمال زياد در همان دور اول پيروز خواهد شد.

    به گزارش گروه فضاي مجازي ايرنا اين مطلب بخشي از گزارش شبكه ايران با عنوان بازخواني / دكتر داوري ۲ هفته قبل چه پيش بيني كرد؟ است كه به بازخواني سخنراني عبدالرضا داوري در جمع حاميان مهندس مشايي پرداخته است.

    متن كامل اين گزارش به شرح ذيل است:
    شبكه ايران / بر اساس نتايج اعلام شده توسط وزارت كشور، دكتر حسن روحاني با كسب بيش از ۵۰ درصد آراء پيشتاز انتخابات رياست جمهوري است. شبكه ايران، ۲ هفته قبل سخنراني دكتر عبدالرضا داوري در جمع حاميان مهندس مشايي را منتشر كرد. آقاي داوري در اين سخنراني ضمن پيش بيني شكست سعيد جليلي، كمترين هزينه حذف مهندس مشايي از انتخابات را بازگشت جريان حامي هاشمي رفسنجاني به قوه مجريه اعلام كرد. داوري در سخنان خود پيش بيني كرده بود كه حسن روحاني به احتمال زياد در همان دور اول پيروز خواهد شد. متن سخنان دو هفته قبل دكتر داوري در ادامه آمده است:

    دكتر عبدالرضا داوري، مدير مسئول روزنامه شهروند و مسئول كميته رسانه دفتر هماهنگي ستادهاي مردمي مهندس مشايي، روز پنج شنبه در جمع گروهي از فعالان رسانه اي و وبلاگ نويسان حامي دولت ، ضمن تحليل آخرين وضعيت انتخابات رياست جمهوري ۲۴ خرداد گفت: حذف مهندس مشايي از گردونه رقابت انتخابات رياست جمهوري، فرصت بي بديلي در اختيار جريان هاشمي قرار داد تا پروژه «هاشمي ۲» را با محوريت حسن روحاني كليد بزنند.
    به گزارش خورشيد، وي افزود: در پروژه «هاشمي ۲» از حسن روحاني خواسته شده ميان سختي معيشت مردم و سياست خارجي ارتباط برقرار كرده و انتخابات رياست جمهوري را به رفراندوم تغيير سياست خارجي تبديل كند تا بر موج برآمده از معادله «تحريم – تورم» سوار شده و كار انتخابات را در همان مرحله اول به پايان برد.
    مدير مسئول روزنامه شهروند در ادامه اظهار داشت: پروژه «هاشمي ۲» طي چند روز آينده با حمايت هاشمي و خاتمي از حسن روحاني و انصراف محمدرضا عارف به نفع او در ازاي واگذاري منصب معاون اولي دولت بعدي ، وارد فاز جديدي خواهد شد.
    وي افزود: البته اعلام رسمي الگوي «روحاني رييس جمهور-عارف معاون اول» و انصراف محمدرضا عارف به نفع حسن روحاني تا زمان بهره گيري عارف از حداكثر ظرفيت هاي تبليغاتي صدا و سيما به منظور هم افزايي با روحاني به تعويق مي افتد تا عارف بتواند سبد راي خود را به روحاني انتقال دهد.
    عبدالرضا داوري گفت:در همين فاصله حسن روحاني مواضع راديكالتري اتخاذ مي كند تا بتواند با تصويرسازي از خود به عنوان نماد جانشيني «هاشمي-خاتمي» ، سبد راي هاشمي و خاتمي را به سبد راي خود انتقال دهد.
    وي اظهار داشت: باتوجه به حذف هاشمي و مشايي و پيش بيني مشاركت انتخاباتي ۶۰ درصدي، حسن روحاني با يك راي متوسط ۱۴ تا ۱۵ ميليوني كه با حمايت تمام قد هاشمي و خاتمي از وي، برايش دور از دسترس نيست به راحتي و بدون مشكل، انتخابات را خواهد برد.
    مدير مسئول روزنامه شهروند افزود: متاسفانه هيچ يك از كانديداهاي مقبول شوراي نگهبان ، توانايي مقابله با موج پروژه «هاشمي ۲» كه طي روزهاي آتي بلند مي شود را ندارند.
    عبدالرضا داوري گفت:كمپين انتخاباتي سعيد جليلي با تحليلي غلط و بدون توجه به گذشت زماني ۸ ساله و فارغ از تحولات عميقي كه طي دو دوره رياست جمهوري اخير در محيط داخلي و خارجي كشورمان روي داده است ، تلاش دارد تا با تصوير سازي «احمدي نژاد ۸۴» از سعيد جليلي به رقابتهاي انتخاباتي وارد شود و همين بي توجهي به محيط واقعي رقابت ، پاشنه آشيل اين جريان خواهد بود.
    وي افزود: «احمدي نژاد ۸۴» چهره اي مردمي خارج از مناسبات حقيقي قدرت بود كه توانست در برابر «هاشمي رفسنجاني» كه در آن زمان به عنوان نماد اقتدار در جامعه شناخته مي شد قرار گيرد و همين دوگانه مردم-اقتدار بود كه حماسه سوم تير ۸۴ را رقم زد.
    مديرمسئول روزنامه شهروند در ادامه گفت:سعيد جليلي به هيچ عنوان نخواهد توانست دوقطبي ۸۴ را در برابر حسن روحاني ايجاد كند چون امروز مردم ايران نمي توانند سعيد جليلي را به دليل حضور در راس دبيرخانه شوراي عالي امنيت ملي و مسئول ارشد پرونده هاي امنيتي كشور، فردي خارج از مناسبات حقيقي قدرت بشناسند حال آن كه حسن روحاني ۸ سال از عرصه رسمي قدرت دور بوده و با رد صلاحيت هاشمي هم دور بودن او از قدرت باور پذيرتر شده است.
    عبدالرضا داوري افزود: در واقع سعيد جليلي در موضع اقتدار و پاسخگويي ، به ويژه در موضوع تحريم ها قرار گرفته است، حال آن كه حسن روحاني در موضع مطالبه گري انتقادي ، خارج از ساختار رسمي قدرت قرار دارد.
    وي گفت: به همين دليل اعتقاد دارم كمپين انتخاباتي سعيد جليلي، كاملا در پازل مطلوب پروژه «هاشمي ۲» قرار گرفته است ، چون به دليل جايگاه حاكميتي سعيد جليلي ، كمپين انتخاباتي او به جاي حركت به سمت سوم تير ۸۴ و ارائه بديل احمدي نژاد، به سمت دوم خرداد ۷۶ و ارائه بديل ناطق نوري حركت مي كند!
    عبدالرضا داوري افزود:ساير كانديداهاي مورد تاييد شوراي نگهبان يعني قاليباف ، ولايتي ، رضايي و غرضي هم تضاد بنيادي با گفتارهاي انتخاباتي حسن روحاني ندارند با اين تفاوت كه حسن روحاني به دليل حمايت سياسي و لجستيك از سوي شبكه وسيع هاشمي رفسنجاني و ايفاي نقش «هاشمي ۲» در عرصه اي بدون رقيب جدي، دست برتر را در برابر همه آنان خواهد داشت.
    مدير مسئول روزنامه شهروند اظهار داشت: تنها فردي كه مي توانست معادلات كنوني حاكم بر انتخابات را دگرگون كند و زمين بازي انتخابات را به جايي ديگر انتقال دهد ، مهندس اسفنديار رحيم مشايي بود كه با شعار ادامه راه احمدي نژاد گره خورد و جامعه چهره اي مظلوم ، مردمي و خارج از مناسبات رسمي قدرت از او مي شناخت كه با گفتماني فراگير ، تمام ظرفيتهاي مردمي هدفگذاري شده در پروژه «هاشمي ۲» را به سبد گفتمان انقلاب اسلامي باز مي گرداند.
    عبدالرضا داوري افزود: تصوير اين هماني «احمدي نژاد-مشايي» چنان ظرفيت عظيمي را در عرصه انتخابات آزاد مي كرد كه پروژه «هاشمي ۲» در همان گام اول زمين گير مي شد و اكنون با حذف مهندس مشايي از انتخابات ، اين فرصت از دست رفته است .
    وي گفت: با اين مقدمه اي كه عرض كردم معتقدم كمترين هزينه حذف مهندس مشايي بازگشت جريان هاشمي به راس دولت است كه با ادامه روند فعلي شك نكنيد حسن روحاني پيروز انتخابات در همان مرحله اول خواهد بود.
    مديرمسئول روزنامه شهروند اظهار داشت:كساني كه طي ۲ سال اخير با منحرف خواندن حاميان دكتر احمدي نژاد و مهندس مشايي و اتهام زني هاي كذب و ناجوانمردانه ، زمينه حذف و ردصلاحيت مهندس مشايي را هموار كردند بايد بدانند كه با اقدامات خود زمينه بازگشت سازشكاران و تجديدنظرطلبان به راس قوه مجريه را مهيا كردند و موجبات عقب گرد نظام در دهه پيشرفت و عدالت را فراهم ساختند.
    عبدالرضا داوري در پاسخ به سوالي كه در اين شرايط چه بايد كرد؟ گفت: واقعا چه كار مي توانيم بكنيم؟ امروز جريان حاميان دكتر احمدي نژاد و مهندس مشايي نه تنها از ميدان مسابقه اخراج شده اند و از روي سكوها بازي را تماشا مي كنند بلكه حتي يك بوق هم به دستشان نداده اند تا اين جريان از همان سكوها بتوانند بر روند مسابقه اثر گذار شوند!
    وي افزود:در صحنه كنوني انتخابات و به دليل حذف مهندس مشايي و بازي غلط و شكست خورده كمپين انتخاباتي سعيد جليلي ، تنها راهبرد ما «مشاركت غير فعال» است . يعني در انتخابات شركت مي كنيم و راي مي دهيم اما به نفع هيچ يك از كانديداها فعاليت نخواهيم كرد ، چون معتقديم ظرفيت منحصربفرد جريان حاميان دكتر احمدي نژاد و مهندس مشايي نبايد در عرصه رقابت كنوني كه سرنوشت آن محتوم و قطعي است و بدون مهندس مشايي هم نمي توان اين سرنوشت را تغيير داد ، دچار فرسايش شود.
    عبدالرضا داوري در پايان گفت: ما معتقديم ظرفيت جريان حاميان دكتر احمدي نژاد و مهندس مشايي بايد براي ماه هاي پس از انتخابات كه فصل دفاع واقعي از مردم و انقلاب و ولايت در برابر اقدامات تجديدنظرطلبان است حفظ شود تا بتوان با بهره گيري از ريشه هاي مردمي و وجهه ملي و جهاني دكتر احمدي نژاد و مهندس مشايي از آرمانهاي انقلاب و مطالبات مردم دفاع نمود.
    سيام(۱)**۹۲۵۰

  203. BiBiJon says:

    M. Ali says:
    June 15, 2013 at 7:32 am

    Thanks for the updates.

    Special note to Michael Slackman, Glenn Kessler, Ali Ansari, Walter Mebane, Benjamin Roukema, Bernd Beber, Alexandra Scacco and anybody else who’s going to put their BS speculation in the service of rank cultural prejudice:

    Don’t make a fool of yourselves this time around.

    http://brill-law.com/iran2009election-100710.pdf

  204. M. Ali says:

    Latest:

    Rohani: 14,020,139
    Ghalibaf: 4,369,985
    Jalili: 3,163,211
    Rezaei: 3,129,444
    Velayati: 1,673,200
    Gharazi: 326,105

  205. M. Ali says:

    The invalid votes seem to be very high this time around,

    Total votes counted so far: 27,594,719
    Valid Votes: 26,682,084

    Invalid Votes: 912,635

    Thats more than 3% and whatever the results of the election, needs to be relooked at again, to see what exactly where the reasons for it being invalidated. Were they blank, had names of candidates not part of the process, were they written incorrectly (that is, the name of the candidate not matching their assigned number), were it because of some administration error, etc.

  206. Karl.. says:

    masoud,

    Trita parsi every now and then cries out against sanctions and warmongering but in then in the next article he talk like a neocon hawk, he cant be taken serious.

  207. kooshy says:

    One conclusion one can draw from this recent Iranian election is, that the Iranian strongly don’t believe in separation of church and state, I hope expatriate Iranians stop claiming that majority of Iranians are or want to be secular, if it was so why would Iranians technically 4 out of five elect clergies their president.

    It looks (I believe) that in villages and poorer areas when choice is between a person dressed as a clergy and one in slickly suit, the clergy is more trusted.

    BIB / UU any take on that ?

  208. M.Ali says:

    Anyone with a tiny brain would know that Iranians are religious people.

  209. BiBiJon says:

    Just Busssed in:
    ===============

    1734 Fars – The Basij has issued a statement congratulating the Supreme Leader and the Iranian people for carrying out a glorious election, saying that the 24th of Khordad (June 14) was a political epic and a day that will be recorded in the annals of the Revolution:

    The presence of millions of Iranian men and women throughout the world at the ballot box and the maximum participation of the wise and aware Iranian nation has once again proven to the world the righteousness of the sacred system of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the deep bond between the ‘Ommat’ and ‘Imamate’ [Islamic people and their religious leaders]. The 24th of Khordad (June 14) was a political epic and a day that will be recorded in the annals of the Revolution, as it thrust the vote of confidence of the people for their Iranian Islamic electoral system in the face of those lying Western claimants of freedom and liberal democracy, highlighting the deep bonds and affection of the Ummat for the Velayat.’

    حضور میلیون‌ها مرد و زن ایرانی در سراسر جهان در پای صندوق‌های رای و مشارکت حداکثری ملّت آگاه و هوشیار، بار دیگر حقانیت نظام مقدس جمهوری اسلامی ایران و ارتباط عمیق امت و امامت را بر جهانیان ثابت نمود. 24 خرداد روز حماسه سیاسی و روزی ماندگار در صحیفه انقلاب گردید تا رای اعتماد آحاد مردم را به نظام انتخاباتی ایران اسلامی را به رخ مدعیان آزادی و لیبرال – دمکراسی دروغین غرب کشیده و انسجام و همدلی توده‌های ملت و عشق و علاقه وافر امت به ولایت را بنمایاند. …

    From http://iranelectionday.tumblr.com/

  210. masoud says:

    The big question now will be whether a ‘majority’ will be declared on the basis of valid votes or total votes.

  211. masoud says:

    Scratch that last question.

    From the website BiBiJon linked to above:

    1306 Fars: Interior Ministry Election Office General Director Hossein Ali Nuri says total votes cast are what is used to determine the victor (i.e. the winner has to get over 50% of all votes cast, not over 50% of all valid votes cast). Another Fars article, citing the Constitution’s Article 117, also says this.

  212. M.Ali says:

    Latest:

    Total Votes: 32,189,621
    Valid Votes: 31,106,865

    Rouhani: 16,413,281
    Ghalibaf: 5,73,652
    Jalili: 3,665,234
    Rezai: 3,593,507
    Velayati: 1,969,351
    Ghazari: 391,840

  213. M.Ali says:

    Rouhani is still right on the border at 50.9%.

    Jalili and Rezai are neck to neck.
    The invalid votes are still at 3% with count of 1,082,756

  214. masoud says:

    Principlists can’t lay this disaster at the feet of too many candidates. They can lay it at the feet of the over greedy ambitions of the candidates they did have.

    Out of eight candidates in the race, seven were completely negative about the the last eight years. One was sometimes neutral. Everyone was too busy piling on the current administration to call out the reformists on some of their most glaring lies.

  215. M.Ali says:

    Its announced! Rohani has won!

    Congratulations to all Iranians.

  216. Khurshid says:

    Iran Presidential Election 2013 – Rohani elected Iran’s new President

    Finally official result is declared. Rohani has indeed won with a wide margin.

  217. M.Ali says:

    My choice was for Ghalibaf, but I’m satisfied and I hope that Rohani makes the best use of the intelligent people available.

  218. Anonymous Lurker says:

    Masoud, yes and more than that; whatever Ajad’s shortcomings – how many of his terms’ achievements were lauded? The principalist camp should have run on the simple promise of more of the good stuff and less of the bad.

    Will there be a political reckoning of those who contributed to this failure?
    so busy trying to bring down Mahmoud they delegitimized the whole faction

    In the end the Rahbar said a vote of any of the qualified eight was a vote for the system

  219. Karl.. says:

    West will spin this like, “oh iranians were so fed up with that crazy ahmadinejad – iranians indeed want more western-like society, we were right”

  220. BiBiJon says:

    Masoud and Anonymous Lurker,

    I think they don’t understand Ahmadinejad’s appeal to the working/rural classes. Ali Larijani in 2005 proved being ‘in’ gets you nowhere.

  221. masoud says:

    Turnout was only 72.
    If the intention was to create a ‘political epic’, I think we have to admit that the nizam failed, coming in at 13 percent below the precious mark.

  222. Nasser says:

    Mr. Ahmedinejad should run in 2017 or else we will stuck with this for 8 years. The losers deserve a lot of blame for not seeking Ahmedinejad’s endorsement.

  223. masoud says:

    Can you imagine Khatami as secretary of the national security?

    I’m gonna sick up.

  224. Khurshid says:

    Iran Presidential Election 2013 – Final thoughts on Election

    Based on performance in the debates Qhalibaf was the strongest candidate. It seems debates did not have much impact on public choice of president.

    Rohani seems to be elected based on his promise to remove or reduce sanctions and improve Iran’s relations with international community particularly with US and EU. However, I must point out that US will not lift sanctions because US has gone through extreme lengths to put sanctions in place – this is according to Susann Maloney and Kenneth Pollack of Saban Center (American Enterprise Institute).

    On P5+1 negotiation, US and EU will once again will ask/demand Iran to suspend uranium enrichment because Iran suspended enrichment during reformist era before – Rohani was the head of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council back than.

    I just hope Rohani does not spent time wiping out non-reformists/ non-partisan people from ministries. I also hope he can deliver on the economy because if he fails than in four years time when it comes to re-election he will have tough time convincing Iranians that reformers are capable of leading Iran into brighter future.

    I extend my congratulation to all Iranians. I also extend congratulations to non-Iranians who are not hostile to Iran because it is an Islamic republic and have monitored this year’s election.

    Finally, I like to say thank you to Flynt Leverett and Hillary Leverett for providing this blog for Iran related discussion. I also like to thank the users of this blog for their contribution in Iran’s election coverage.

  225. Persian Gulf says:

    Congratulations to president elect Rohani, his fans and Iranian people. Wish him the best in his new position.

    Sounds like Ahmadinejad knew his guy won’t be elected. Hence the reason for his silence. Only damaged Rafsanjani in the last chance he got.

  226. masoud says:

    One lesson we’ve learnt:
    If you don’t like what’s on offer, you should at least show up to the first round and cast a spoiled ballot.
    If Ahmadinejad had asked his supporters to do this, we at least would have had a run off.

  227. Karl.. says:

    The pro-israel hawk Meir Javedanfar and WAPO get totally proven wrong. Hilarious and typical. Proves how wrong so called western “iranian experts” are on Iran. Read article below.

    http://www.moonofalabama.org/2013/06/ahmadi-bye-bye-rowhani-hi-hi.html

  228. masoud says:

    Useless statistics:

    Rouhani attracted 5.24 million note voters than Mousavi did. If we assume these were all swing voters who voted for Ahmadinejad four years ago, an subtract that from the 24.6 that he got we are left
    With 19.2 million.

    That is to say, a unified, anti-reformist candidate would have won if turnout was as big as it was four years ago.

  229. M.Ali says:

    One of the winners in all of this is Ahmedinijad. By not supporting anyone, he didn’t “lose” and by taking the hits from the conservatives, it wont be seen as he is being a principalists. He was the rebel, non-elite President once in, and he remained so now that he is leaving.

  230. masoud says:

    ‘note voters’ should be ‘more voters’ in previous post.

  231. Nasser says:

    Once again the West is provided with some political cover to climb down from their high horse and come to some form of accommodation or temporary cease fire with Iran.

    Not gonna happen! They are fully committed to Iranian destruction.

  232. kooshy says:

    Masoud Jan

    The most important lesson on this election for the west and the region is, that the presidents of Iran are elected fair and square by Iranians and not by some US planer in DC. Congratulations to all Iranians and the presidents elect Mr. Rohani

  233. Photi says:

    Congratulations to President Hassan Rohani on his election victory. May God grant him the wisdom and guidance to lead his nation with dignity and vision.

    V Live long and prosper.

  234. James Canning says:

    Financial Times reported yesterday that Venezuela is now selling about twice as much oil to China and India, as Iran.

  235. James Canning says:

    Kooshy,

    I agree. The Iranian president was not chosen by someone in Washington.

  236. James Canning says:

    Nasser,

    When you refer to “the West”, it appears you in fact mean Israel and the Israel lobby.

  237. James Canning says:

    Khurshid,

    You appear to say China and Russia will accept Iranian enrichment to 5% but the US, France, Germany, Britain will not. France apparently is the country most vigourously opposing any Iranian enrichment. (This may be cover for Israel lobby in the US, however.)

  238. James Canning says:

    Sineva,

    China and Russia apparently are not willing to accept Iranian stockpiling of 20% U. I take it you are aware of this?

  239. Karl.. says:

    James,

    Russia nor China have never even tied 20% enrichment with sanctions nor any alleged “stockpiling”, why are you making up things for?

  240. James Canning says:

    Zbigniew Brzezinski said this week the notion that undemocratic governments should be overthrown is foolish. Or words to that effect. Referring to Syria, and Obama’s disappointing decision to have US supply some weapons to insurgents.

  241. BiBiJon says:

    James Canning says:
    June 15, 2013 at 2:00 pm

    Can you check with Hague about this.

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/former-french-foreign-minister-the-war-against-syria-was-planned-two-years-before-the-arab-spring/5339112

    In an interview with the French TV station LCP, former French minister for Foreign Affairs Roland Dumas said:

    ‘’ I’m going to tell you something. I was in England two years before the violence in Syria on other business. I met with top British officials, who confessed to me that they were preparing something in Syria.

    This was in Britain not in America. Britain was organizing an invasion of rebels into Syria. They even asked me, although I was no longer minister for foreign affairs, if I would like to participate.

    Naturally, I refused, I said I’m French, that doesn’t interest me.’’

  242. James Canning says:

    BiBiJon,

    I have assumed for years plans were in formation for insurgency in Syria. This is one reason I condemned George W. Bush’s failure to pressure Israel to accept peace deal offered by Syria in 2008.

  243. James Canning says:

    BiBiJon,

    My concern (re: failure of Israel to accept Syria’s offer of peace in 2008) was that proponents of keeping the Golan Heights would seek to overthrow the Syrian gov’t, if a good opportunity presented itself.

  244. BiBiJon says:

    James Canning says:
    June 15, 2013 at 2:39 pm

    Can you specifically ask Hague about this part: “This was in Britain not in America. Britain was organizing an invasion of rebels into Syria.”

  245. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    I congratulate Mr. Rohani and his supporters on this victory and I pray for his success.

    I also congratulate the awesome people of Iran who stuck their inky index finger into the eye of the great satan.

    “…onrooz dar jebhe ba chehre-ye khaki, emrooz paye sandughe ra’ ba angoshte jowhari…”

    Supreme Leader’s message on this great national “epic” (for Farsi readers):

    پیام به مناسبت حضور حماسی مردم در انتخابات ریاست جمهوری یازدهم
    http://farsi.khamenei.ir/message-content?id=22939

  246. fyi says:

    All:

    Reformist is a meaningless appellation in Iranian context; the Tehran City Council was all “Reformist” and could not function.

    Mr. Rouhani, in my opinion, is neither a reformist nor Mr. Rafsanjani’s man.

    You must assume that he is his own man and will act his own beliefs.

  247. James Canning says:

    BiBiJon,

    You are of course aware of close ties between Britain and Qatar, UAE, Saudi Arabia.

    And of Sunnis (and others) in Lebanon, who think Hezbollah’s power may be too strong.

    And you are aware of William Hague’s effort, with the Saudis and Qataris, to induce the Syrian government into undertaking some reforms. This effort obviously bore some relationship to problems with Iran.

  248. James Canning says:

    BiBiJon,

    Bear in mind Obama was very reluctant to get involved in the insurgency in Syria.

  249. Smith says:

    First congratulation on Iranian nation upon successful completion of yet another election. Though I do not favor Roohani but him and his reformist supporters, also deserve congratulation on winning and on running a very cunning campaign (note that we are not like greenies taking to street and burning private and public property, we are civilized, unlike them).

    Some resultant points:

    1- It is futile to damage your own guy in the hope of winning the next election. Disowning Ahmadinejad was the biggest mistake conservatives did over the past 3 years. He was their guy and public was not fooled one bit, by all the drama the conservatives made around him in the hope of winning the election. He like anyone else had his own faults, but conservatives should have worked with him to minimize those issues rather than against him. The corrupt majles is alot to blame. The price for this mistake is the return of Rafsanjani/Khatami/Greenies to Pasteur House. Reap what you sow.

    2- It is high time for conservatives to go to drawing board and see, what went wrong where. Otherwise in a couple of year, they will lose Majles too and even subsequently Assembly of Expert with huge implications for future of Iran. This is not yet finished. Reformists have come back with much more experience this time. Their unity is even stronger now.

    3- From the votes it is clear that near to 3% of votes were invalid. While some 1% of invalid votes are expected due to various genuine reason for example mistakes by voters but approximately 2% excess in this matter means that the invalid votes were make intentional by the voters. Before the election, large amount of propaganda through propaganda TV/Radio channels and internet resources was beamed into Iran, encouraging the voters to invalidate the votes in order to “invalidate” IRI structure. This two percent, can be safely and confidently assumed to be the ones who are against IRI and took action to put IRI at referendum through this election. I would estimate, probably some 2-3% more are also against IRI but did not care to go to pain to come and invalidate the votes (passive anti-IRI people and people who do not believe in voting at all). This means under 5% of Iranians are IRI as a legitimate system. It is now clear, that they are only a small fringe group. There are higher percentage of people who do not endorse political structures in western democracy. So all the talk of majority of people in Iran being against IRI is crap. This amount of antagonism is really expected. After all Iran was a monarchy for thousands of years and IRI is new. But expect this antagonism to become smaller over time and disappear by mid of this century, as the monarchism support did in France and other places.

    4- The voter turnout was a bit less than last election. But this is normal. Still, Iran’s turn out was twice bigger than almost any other western democracy. At any time there are several issues impacting the turnout from weather to statistical randomness. But another observation of mine also put into context two other issues, first is the lower turnout of Iranians voting outside of Iran which was high last time (due to various factors from western propaganda they are exposed to eg.). Here other instances also played their role, eg. closure of Iranian embassy in Canada and UK, where huge numbers of Iranians live. Also it has become difficult to vote in western countries as alot of western sponsored anti-IRI groups of every shade and shape from terrorist MEK to monarchists surround the embassies and polling stations, so it was natural for alot of Iranians not feel comfortable to vote. Another solid reason for the lower turn out was the disorientation of Ahmadinejad core supporters. A huge factor that put the reformists in winning seat.

    5- While all candidates had equal TV time for their ads, one man among them had more. That was Roohani. Alot of people in Iran watch BBC Persian, and this propaganda channel was vouching for this man continuously, it had its effect at least partially.

    6- It is also proven that people like Jalili do not bring votes. Despite almost ecstatic support for him among hard core conservatives, his result is really a pity. When you go on national TV and say, women should be content with motherhood while the men go around running nuclear reactors, you should not expect votes. At least not from half of the society. Even if he meant this as an innocent thing trying to raise the status of motherhood, this was not the way. The proper way would have been to promote motherhood by bringing in generous state support for mothers, their health, their finances, and their maternity leaves. Not by choomagh. Also Akhmoo people do not win votes. It is a lesson, the conservatives should learn.

    7- It is also time to congratulate Ahmadinejad for running one of the smoothest and impartial elections, Iran has ever seen. This is no small feat. Here again Ahmadinejad has set a benchmark for other governments to follow.

    8- Another important point here, being that independent candidates do not win much votes as Gharazi showed. For all the talk and criticism of American politics, we are watching a two party system developing in Iran, very much similar to democratic and republican parties in US. In such a system it is a folly to go to an election with 4 candidates. If you want to win, you must have a single candidate pushing for the party and the party pushing for him. Reformists have learned that. Conservatives are in disarray. It is not clear if they have really learned it now. But I hope they have.

    9- The constitutional court of Iran (Guardian Council) should also be congratulated for having done its job. If this entity was not in Iran, we would have had foreign lobbies from India to Israel buying up candidates and funding them as it is happening in US. So here is another lesson for Americans with regard to Iran’s election: If you want to be truly free, set up a constitutional court and screen the candidates to see whether they abide by the constitution of United States.

  250. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    masoud-jan,
    “Khob be darak keh qabul nadarand!”

    Yes I agree usulis have nobody to blame but themselves.

    Heads are already beginning to roll. This is a good chance to get rid of the old farts.

    My suggestion is we start with Jenab Doctor Velayati, you know just get out the frustrations out a little…

    Something to cheer you up: Hassan Rohani’s real name is “Iraj”.

    As Rohani said in the debates: “man chiz-ha-i tu in sine daram!” (hahaha)

    “Dar khedmat hastim” in the next four years.

  251. BiBiJon says:

    James Canning says:
    June 15, 2013 at 3:14 pm

    Hang your head in shame James. 90,000 dead, property destroyed, and on and on. al-UKaida started something she cannot finish and so now jerking US chains with CW that nobody believes. And you want me to believe UK was doing Qatar/Saudi bidding?

    When Obama decides its time to ‘Eisenhower’ France/UK/Israel, books will be written, and UK will be out of ME for good.

  252. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Bill Clinton calls him a wuss for not doing more in Syria, Bill Maher says he looks like a …. obeying Bill Clinton. Just can’t get a break…

    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/maher-tears-into-panel-over-syria-intervention-foreign-policy-cant-be-do-what-we-want-or-we-bomb-you/

  253. Smith says:

    Nasser says:
    June 15, 2013 at 4:07 am

    I still believe that Iran should have nuclear weapons yesterday. The situations you put out are not mutually exclusive. Iran can go nuclear and keep increasing its nuclear capacity and global power status. As can be seen with regard to Pakistan/India/N.Korea unless you do not have massive nuclear power, the nuclear status only gives regional strategic protection and not much global outreach. Iran’s problems are unfortunately global.

    I am not concerned about “loss of prestige” as I have made clear somewhere above. As fyi, pointed out, Iran should just stand by the side of peace and prosperity defending this. There is nothing to be gained by becoming another imperial power.

    With regard to nuclear brinkmanship and strategic leverage, there is no such thing as “Japan option”. You either have it or you do not. Japan itself is under US nuclear umbrella.

    A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. Lao-tzu

    Every nuclear power big or small started with one nuke only. Iran is no exception. There is going to be one, then two, then 100 then 3000. The question is if you want to build the first one. Or rather taking the first step.

    As Rahabari himself admitted, they can not stop Iran if Iran wanted to build nukes. As you can see, the situation has now changed. Look at Syria. All they can do is to support terror there.

    The arguments that you put are pretty much similar to what a virgin puts forward. It is really laughable, but you have to do it the first time however unperfectly and try to improve from there. If you are scared and never initiate then things will never go forward and you will go extinct.

  254. nico says:

    Bussed-in Basiji says:
    June 15, 2013 at 3:39 pm

    “Bill Clinton calls him a wuss for not doing more in Syria, Bill Maher says he looks like a …. obeying Bill Clinton. Just can’t get a break…”

    It is widely believed that Bush started the US imperial project, while it is in fact Bill Clinton who oversaw the real start of the procesd with such war as Yugoslavia.
    That was under Clinton terms that the US truly degenerated with the end of the Glass Steagal act, the end of laws against media concentration, the Irak genocidal embargo with the famous albright’s “it was worth it”.
    It was under Clinton that Greenspan destroyed the western ginancial system.
    It was under Clinton that US job offshoring raised sharply.

    That was under Clinton that the US made the policy choices we see the results today.

    My opinion is that Clinton was worst than Bush and leagues above Obama.

  255. Smith says:

    M. Ali says:
    June 15, 2013 at 4:01 am

    The position of prime minister in a non-constitutional monarchy such as England is only of a peasant servant taking orders from the monarch. He is only there to run the day to day affairs of state just like the Vazir in ancient Iran. His position is not because of a democratic process but in order to free up the monarch and the royal family to enjoy themselves without any public accountability in matter of state responsibilities.

    Otherwise British prime minister does not set out British strategic goals and neither he has power over British nuclear weapons.

    British naval commander, the most important strategic force of UK had said as much about British nuclear weapons:

    “You have to remember that actually prime ministers give direction, they tell the chief of the defence staff what they want, but it’s not prime ministers who actually tell a sailor to press a button in the middle of the Atlantic. The armed forces are loyal, and we live in a democracy, but actually their ultimate authority is the Queen.”

    So much so for democracy. It is basically a sham.

  256. nico says:

    fyi says:
    June 15, 2013 at 3:13 pm

    “All:Reformist is a meaningless appellation in Iranian context; the Tehran City Council was all “Reformist” and could not function.Mr. Rouhani, in my opinion, is neither a reformist nor Mr. Rafsanjani’s man.You must assume that he is his own man and will act his own beliefs.”

    It only takes to read Rohani bio to see that he is a man of the system.
    For 20 years he fought against the shah.
    He joined Khomeini in France before the revolution.
    He was elected or appointed to near all the most important position of power in Iran during the last 30 years.
    He even was the SL appointee at the guardian council !
    Last but not the least he is a clergyman.

    I fail to see what kind of structural reform he could bring that could not be brought by the principlists.
    To my understanding he would implement another shade if the same Iran politicy.
    Exactly the same as republicans and democrats in the US.

    But obviously, I am not an expert. Thus it would be great to get experts pov.

  257. BiBiJon says:

    In other Syria news …
    =======================

    Despite al-UKaida’s all out effort

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-15/syrian-army-captures-damascus-suburb-near-international-airport.html

  258. Pirouz says:

    Masoud,

    72% is still a high figure, much higher than so-called “experts” here were expecting.

    Also, the precedent established of Rasfanjani being disqualified has ramifications for any Ahmadinejad candidacy registration in 2017.

  259. Smith says:

    White House congratulates Iranians for choosing Roohani. That says alot, doesn’t it?

  260. Kooshy says:

    Bussed-in Basiji
    June 15, 2013

    Something to cheer you up: Hassan Rohani’s real name is “Iraj”.

    BiB Jaan

    اول كه با أون استراتجيت ما رو كذاشتي سر كار

    Years a go Norizadeh aka pakbakhteh during the 78 demonstrations was claiming Rohani’s real name is Frydoon Khoban

    I think on Glasgow dispute
    I read that his degree is in the name of Frydoon

    I think toady I had enough surprise for one day can’t use no more.

    Cheers

  261. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    nico,
    Like Michael Moore used to say: Bill Clinton is the best Republican president we ever had.

    kooshy-jan,
    Get ready for 4 years of fun…

  262. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    UU, kooshy, masoud,

    Like our new president I’m thinking about changing my name as well…from “Bussed-in Basiji” to “Khob Be Darak!

    What do you guys think?

  263. James Canning says:

    Smith,

    You contend Britain is not a constitutional monarchy?

    Amazing.

  264. James Canning says:

    BiBiJon,

    I have consistently deplored the civil war in Syria.

  265. James Canning says:

    The head of the Henry Jackson Society in Britain is pushing for Western military intervention in Syria. Henry M. Jackson (Washington State US Senator) employed many of the original neocons (who advocated using American power to protect Israel).

  266. Pirouz says:

    Election result is something of a Churchill being passed over by voters in favor of Atlee moment, in Iranian politics, we’ll have to see.

    On a personal level, quite pleased with the result.

  267. Nasser says:

    Meanwhile in Pakistan:
    http://presstv.com/detail/2013/06/15/309219/29-die-in-day-of-carnage-in-quetta/

    Condolences to the family of all these poor victims. And many were injured.

  268. Kooshy says:

    This one is funny BBC now claims the reason for high turnout is that people were asked to come to vote even if they don’t like their system but they like thier country, but if that is the case why they should give legitimacy to a governing system they don’t like that is runing the country they like. This could be the case in UK there people don’t like the monarchy but like their country UK so they say no problem for the love of the country I will put up with the rich blood suckers.

    GAV do you have an answer to that, or you need get that cleared with Willy Hague before you can reply without adding the usual 20% line

  269. Kooshy says:

    Bussed-in Basiji says:
    June 15, 2013 at 5:56 pm

    “Like our new president I’m thinking about changing my name as well…from “Bussed-in Basiji” to “Khob Be Darak!”

    “What do you guys think?”

    BiB Aziz

    All indications are that the line really works magically, since yesterday when ayatollah Khamenie used it the regime in White House has decided to accept the decision of the Iranian people. Next I hope someone will use this sane exact line in next nuclear negotiations if there are any.

  270. kooshy says:

    Notice how everyone in BBC channel 4 is wearing purple ties or the set decoration is colored in Rohani’s purple I wonder if he is elected president of UK. Or the British are trying to send a message to Iranians (one wishful message like he is our person)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnGfauEfVho

  271. fyi says:

    nico says:
    June 15, 2013 at 4:27 pm

    It is my opinion that Iran does not need structural reform in her constitution; she needs to fully realize the capacities inherent in her constitution.

    Stalin called the 1936 USSR Constitution the most democratic in the world; the reality was very different indeed.

    A simple restoration of the electoral law – which the Second Majlis had changed – can go along way to address the alienation of certain classes of voters in Iran.

    [MP in Second Majlis: "If we do not do this (alter the existing electoral law to require outward conformance to Islam) we will not get elected.]

  272. Empty says:

    James Canning says: June 15, 2013 at 6:20 pm “You contend Britain is not a constitutional monarchy? Amazing.”

    Who says it isn’t? Don’t you pay attention to them, James. Not only Britain is a constitutional monarchy, its constitution is of the best kind: by all accounts a royal constitution….

  273. Smith says:

    Empty says:
    June 15, 2013 at 11:03 pm

    Was eating when reading your comment. Almost choked. Thanks for threatening my life.

  274. Smith says:

    ^^ Still can not stop laughing.

  275. Kooshy says:

    Gav James

    Don’t you think Willy Hague should were a purple tie to work today, he can show his solidarity with Iranian voters. Obama can’t do that because they are going to think he is a LA Lakers fan instead of Rohani fan.

  276. M. Ali says:

    Here is some of my comments regarding why I think the losing candidates didn’t do so well,

    1) Jalili: His strategy was completely wrong from the get go. He branded himself too much as a conservative, that he came across as an ULTRA-conservative. Ahmadenijad never appeared like that. Remember 8 years ago, before election, he would talk about things like, “Is a few loose hair the real problems of our youth?”. By talking about the morality laws in such a manner, he seemed less scary to a big portion of the population. He wasn’t liberal to scare away the older conservative parents, but he wasn’t also coming in to take Iran to a much more conservative era, so he didn’t scare away the slightly liberals either.

    He also had a charming, everyday man way of talking that Jalili should have learned from Ahmadenijad by working so closely with him for so many years. One thing I told my wife was how much these candidates used words like “leza” (therefore) which is extremely formal and never really used in day to day talks. Ahmadenijad usually stayed away from words like that.

    Plus, Jalili was the only one I noticed that caused certain people to be scared of him being president, there were people who said things like “anyone but Jalili” which they didn’t say about the other candidates.

    Ghalibaf: Ghalibaf had two big disadvantages against him. One was him being connected to Sepah and him being involved in the 1999 university protests.

    Being part of Sepah will help a person rise in politics but I do not think it will ever win the hearts and minds of the voters.

    And whatever his involvement in the protests as the chief of police, it will forever leave a black mark in him with the university students of today, even today university students of today weren’t there back then.

    I talked to young people who didn’t even consider Ghalibaf for thinking of him as a big, tough Sepah guy with a baton on his hand to club kids with. This is the image that has been formed for Ghalibaf and might take forever to change.

    Rezaei: HIs main disadvantage is like Ghalibaf, he being Sepah. I don’t think we will ever have a Sepah man being voted in office. I think this might be actually good for Iran in the long run. People don’t seem to trust the army to get involved in politics, and this could help us ward of coup detats. In neighbouring countries, the army politicians sometimes come to save the day (like Pakistan’s Musharaf)

    Velayati: Who exactly did Velayati really expect to attract? The 60 year olds who remember the good ol’ revolutionary days?

    Haddad-Adel: The fact that principalists were putting someone like Haddad-Adel forward shows the wide gap between them and the voters. In his documentary, he sold himself as the “quiet man”. Since when was being “the quiet man” such a strong selling point for a president?

    Gharazi: Such self-dillusion. From the first moment he opened his mouth, it was obvious this guy would be a punchline to a joke.
    Smith said thta Gharazi lost because he was an independant. No,Smith, Gharazi lost because when you watched him, you felt the guy had lost his way and wandered by mistake to the IRIB studio and was just sittinga nd talking like your grandfather might talk to you. Can you even watch him and imagine him being president? No one in Iran apaprently could except for the few thousands taht voted for him, and which I strongly feel were giggling to themselves while writing it, feeling it would be a fantastic joke if he wins.

    Aref: Some good thoughts in his head, but two things that seemed to be missing from him,
    Testicles
    Charm

  277. M. Ali says:

    Lets not forget that Rohani won because he kept saying that Rafsanjani and Khatami backed him. Iranians like familiarity, that is why I think Presidents always stay the full 8 years. We talk about change, but when the choice comes, we like things to remain the same as much as possible.

    By linking himself to familiarity, Rohani could attract some votes.

    But instead of referring to one’s possible puppet master, I think in the future, candidates should come forward and slightly copy America’s mode and have candidates talk about their possible team before election day. Imagine if one of the candidates went, this is my vice-president, in field of economy, I’m putting this guy in charge, in foreign policy, its going to be this guy. It would have been more powerful, because if the candidate’s teams each had 1-2% fanbase, that could have been significient at the end.

  278. A-B says:

    **Sorry for the offensive language**

    BiBiJon says:
    June 15, 2013 at 2:17 pm

    Although disgusted, but not at all surprised, by the message of the Roland Dumas quote, I couldn’t help chuckling when reading “Naturally, I refused, I said I’m French, that doesn’t interest me.’’ But since I was in my disgusted mode, I thought: the [French] turd is telling the [British] turd “but I wear perfume”. Yes, the French [turd], is not only involved in Syria, but prefers to spread its stench on Libya, Mali, Niger or Cote d’ivoire. Of course, they, like the rest of the Europoopeans, care about the big stinking racist doo-doo they made in the ‘Middle East’ they call Israel.

  279. M. Ali says:

    So I look at Rohani’s election website, rohani92 dot com, and look at the section with the “Congratulatory Messages” and it seems it shows from all the candidates, from head of majlis, from Banki moon, etc, but one person is missing.

    Congratulatory mesage from our CURRENT President, Ahmadenijad. Ahmadenijad made a statement congratulating Rohani, and its childish that Rohani’s party didn’t mention it.

    My optimism is slightly wavering.

  280. Karl.. says:

    So US/Israel that pays hundreds of millions to cause unrest in Iran cant even get iranians to protest and riot? Big failure.

  281. Karl.. says:

    I also wonder if Rohani lets say would speak in the UN, would then west departure from the room as with Ahmadinejad? Would Rohani presidency ease the tensions? I mean we have been hearing Ahmadinejad is Hitler, how will west, Israel be able to do the same with “reformist” Rohani?

  282. nico says:

    James Canning says:
    June 14, 2013 at 7:44 pm
    “Nico,Iranian blunders brought on the idiotic Iraqi attack on Iran.A little more caution in Iran, in 1979, and the war might not have happened.”

    Most disgusting comment based on racist, supremacist and exceptionalist believes.
    Who is the most to blame, the Saddam drug dealer in the street or the UK mafia boss/pupeeter in his nice office at the top of a skyscrapper ?
    Obviously, there is hierarchy in crimes. And the UK are at the very top of it.

    Please spare me with your financial time presstitute comments and literature.
    That is good enough for british supremacist and exceptionalist, but sure you will never see real news like that in such propagandistic rag :

    ‘UK planned war on Syria before unrest’
    http://edition.presstv.ir/iphone/detail.aspx?id=309276

  283. nico says:

    James Canning says:
    June 14, 2013 at 7:44 pm
    “Nico,Iranian blunders brought on the idiotic Iraqi attack on Iran.A little more caution in Iran, in 1979, and the war might not have happened.”

    Frankly such statement as this, coming from a british who is not the worst specimen of his kind 100% justifies Smith position regarding Iran needing to point ICBM at UK in order to avoid UK meddling in the region.
    Actually you are far from the wirst, and your stance is still depictable.

  284. nico says:

    False or true ?
    What is it worth ?
    Likely propaganda.
    All opinion welcomed.

    “Iran will be sending a first contingent of 4,000 Iranian Revolutionary Guards to Syria to support President Bashar al-Assad’s forces against the largely Sunni rebellion in the civil war in the country.”

    http://news.yahoo.com/iran-send-4-000-troops-aid-assads-forces-091413438.html

    First question that co.es to mind : how possibly Iran could send 4000 troops and support them ?
    Through Irak ?
    Should this happen, it could only be done with Irak official involvement.
    Is some kind of official or at least formalized resistance axis taking shape ?

    Difficult to believe at the current juncture.

  285. M. Ali says:

    Is the Ministry of Interior going to publish the results per city like they did 4 years ago? I loved looking at the numbers

  286. nico says:

    Impressive infrastructure achievements.
    http://www.zawya.com/mobile/default.cfm/actstory/sidZAWYA20130613040651

    Sure it does not please axis powers that an independant country to achieve such.

    Iran is defintely on the right path to join the industrialized countries.

  287. Rd. says:

    Kooshy says:

    “Don’t you think Willy Hague should were a purple tie to work today,

    France, UK seek ties as Teheran celebrates Rohani win

    http://en.trend.az/regions/iran/2161969.html

  288. Karl.. says:

    Of course its not true that Iran will send 4000, yes 4000 soldiers, and even the absurd claim that Iran will take Golan back from Israel.

    Remember this comes one day after the celebration of iran’s new leader. Go figure who want to paint Iran negatively when west might be more welcoming to Iran?
    Yes Israel.

  289. nico says:

    Karl.. says:
    June 16, 2013 at 9:40 am

    That is also my opinion
    Coming from a British paper, no need to say that it is entirely controlled from UK.

  290. Rd. says:

    Karl.. says:

    ” Would Rohani presidency ease the tensions?”

    You could say, Iranians know carpets and they know how to pull one from under someone’s feet!!!!

    The core principals of IRI will not change. As fyi suggest, the sanctions are not likely to go away.. A monkey wrench has been thrown into the equation. Will have to wait for the dust to settle.

    In the mean time, when playing that strategic game of two players on the board, some time you can give the impression of letting the opponent into your house..

    I. Foresight, which looks a little into futurity, and considers the consequences that may attend an action [...] II. Circumspection, which surveys the whole Chess-board, or scene of action: – the relation of the several Pieces, and their situations [...] III. Caution, not to make our moves too hastily (Ben Franklin)

    It is funny how Wikipedia starts by describing chess by; “This article is about the Western board game.”!!!!!!! Of course you have to go way way down to find the history
    “The earliest evidence of chess is found in the neighboring Sassanid”

    These people are their own worst enemy.. You just have to give them a lil’ and let their self centered impression take over.

  291. masoud says:

    Bussed-in Basiji says:
    June 15, 2013 at 5:56 pm

    Go for it.
    I’m thinking of changing mine to “chiz-ha-i to in sine”

  292. jay says:

    Rd. says:
    June 16, 2013 at 9:30 am

    The country some people claim wants “good relations” is the same country that planned the overthrow of Assad during the time it was sending envoys to Syria to ask for friendly relations. That country is UK.

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/former-french-foreign-minister-the-war-against-syria-was-planned-two-years-before-the-arab-spring/5339112

    Iranians will not fall for that!

  293. fyi says:

    nico says:
    June 16, 2013 at 7:19 am

    It is useless; a common feature of the English historical writing is the contempt they show to others while their own history is above reproach.

    So everyone makes blunders except England.

    But, of course, Iraq in 2003, Suez in 1953, World War II, World War I and not Syria are not US’s blunders; not at all.

  294. nico says:

    fyi says:
    June 16, 2013 at 11:42 am

    Yes, obviously the Germans and the japanese were butchers and the anglo-saxons were the innocent victims.

    What a joke.

    Like Mister Canning stating that the 2 states solution in palestine is possible.

    Ridiculous delusion from exceptionalist mind.
    It is somewhat a neurotic illness embeded in the western collective subconsciousness.

  295. James Canning says:

    Nico,

    You are of course aware every Arab country has endorsed the “two-state solution”, to Israel/Palestine problem. EVERY Arab country. Even Iraq under Saddam Hussein.

  296. James Canning says:

    fyi,

    Much of the best analysis of English (and British) blunders comes from English (and British) historians.

    Read William Dalrymple.

  297. James Canning says:

    jay,

    Hamas tried to talk Bashar al-Assad into making reforms. So did Saudi Arabia. And Qatar. Iran warned the Syrian government it needed to institute reforms.

  298. James Canning says:

    Karl..,

    Yes, I do agree with you that Israel will be eager to smear Iran, and to do its best to prevent any improvement in relations between Iran and the West, and Iran and the P5+1.

  299. James Canning says:

    Nico,

    True or false: after the revolution in Iran in 1979, the Iranian leaders destroyed the Iranian air force.

    After the revolution in Iran, Iranian leaders threatened revolution in a number of neighboring countries. True?

  300. M.Ali says:

    False.

    False.