Breathe in

Out of the Calif's chest

It seems that our Minister of Foreign Affairs has been learning melodrama: his speech, or rather the opening of his speech at the Human Rights Council last Tuesday was quite well orchestrated: he goes to the Podium, pauses, drinks a glass of water, clears his throat, straightens his goatee, pauses again, makes a reference to the heart-breaking individual case of a six-months old infant and then asks for a minute of silence.

And then he makes yet another bold move: requests that during this minute of silence Muslims in the room recite the "fatehe" and starts reciting it under his breath (and it can be slightly heard in the microphone).

(this year, the webcast is a little less practical, so to watch it, you need to go here, then choose the morning session and then go more than 3/4 into the webcast).

Perhaps he was competing with Mr. Ahmadinejad's halo a couple of years ago.

Aside from his blatant untruthfulness concerning Iran's human rights record in the rest of his speech there are a couple of points that can be raised and are a clear reflection of the behaviour of this government:

Firstly, he uses the Persian pronunciation of an Arab word, and therefore refers to "ghazzeh" (instead of Gaza), so that most people, I am sure, must have been wondering what he is talking about;

but more importantly announces that he sacrifices a minute of his speech and then speaks for 20 minutes instead of the allotted 10, thus, in fact, taking 10 minutes of the time of the following speakers.

In Persian one would say that he is making a donation out of the Caliph's chest.

Davos, bis and worse

OK, one more on Davos and then I stop, but there is no way I cannot reiterate how anything can be said and not be challenged, I really wonder what the point is.

Or is it perhaps the Open Forum? Because, I must admit that when Mr. Mottaki and Mr. Hashemi Shajareh had to face Mr. Khalilzad, things were quite different, although the latter go some heat for it afterwards, it seems.

But lo and behold, it was truly painful to hear yet another time Ayatollah Hadavi:

" I suggest it, if the is a group of expertise in human rights, they come and they evaluate the human rights situation in Iran and in the United States and give a neutral report about the situation and you can say the human rights situation in Iran is worse than the human rights in the United States, I would like you to do this, because some of the Americans have done it before and they say that the human rights situation in the United States is worse than the human rights situation in Iran. I am not saying so, a Jewish professor in the United States said it in 2004."

The name of that famous professor will remain forever unknown... and, of course, we will completely overlook all of the UN human rights reports made by experts...

Unanswered in Davos

Mr. Khatami was once more invited to Davos for the World Economic Forum. This time he spoke at the Open Forum.

He has certainly succeeded in establishing himself as one of the darlings of the West and a kind of moderate Muslim cleric that can be talked to.

However, the most painful of all is to hear him make statements such as (I changed a little the words of the translator to make it more accurate):

"But if the intervention of religion in political life would mean to limit life, or if religion would not appreciate the human values, or would like to take away from men freedom which is one of the greatest benedictions of God, that kind of religion and interference would be a loss and the society would never accept it."

or "In the Islamic revolution people demanded freedom, independence and progress based on religion. And this is why an Islamic Republic was established. An Islamic Republic means a democratic government, where women are free, there is freedom of thought, the elections would establish the power, etc. and because people are Muslim the religious values should be present, but these religious values should not contradict these basis."

or "I don't think that in Iran anyone is prosecuted because of his religious beliefs, and if he is, this is wrong."

and that no one can (or wishes to) ask him: Mr. Khatami, you were President of Iran for 8 years, how come these lofty statements were nowhere to be implemented then?

Best time to be forgotten

Although it might have looked as if I had taken long holidays, I am proving the assumption wrong by posting twice (for now) between Christmas and the Gregorian New Year!

However, I have come to realize that this is probably the best time of the year for human rights violators to perpetrate their worst crimes: not many will be there to raise their voices. The other day, I sent an email to the three persons in the Iran team of a big (if not the biggest) human rights organization. A few minutes later I received three similar responses: on holidays until 7 January 2008...

Well, at least Reporters sans frontieres is still alert, but is anyone else worried for Emad Baghi?

A little visit

OK, I know, I have not been blogging for nearly a month now -- call it blogger fatigue, depression about the state of the world, rivalry of Facebook, or a combination thereof. So much had been written about the National Intelligence Estimate and so little about the adoption of the UN General Assembly's resolution on the human rights situation that it seemed pointless to blog about either.

But tonight, I have seen one of the best films of the year. It's not about Iran, and not about human rights. It's about Egyptians and Israelis, peacefully. It's poetic, profound, with a great sense of humour. It's a must see.

No words

I just saw the photos of Zahra Baniyaghoub's funerals and the pain of her relatives is heart wrenching, and there is nothing more to say.

Half of the world

To all those who love Isfahan...

Fart and the temple

As can be seen, I have been reading Mr. Abtahi's blog fairly regularly and although his unfailing support of Mr. Khatami is a little unnerving to say the least, I recently had to admit that I enjoyed some of his posts.

Well, clearly now, they are after him, and I am not surprised because he has been quite critical of some of the political stances taken lately.

For those who cannot read Persian, Mr. Abtahi has been accused by an ultra-conservative site of having his blog designed and run by Baha'is. And in order to make their accusations look credible, the authors of the article included a number of links. Out of curiosity, I tried all of them... and (of course) none of them led to anything that might remotely suggest any link to the alleged designers.

Moreover, there is this box on the side of the article that without showing any name indicates "Age:24" and then what can be assumed to say "Children: no", "Ethnicity: Middle-Eastern", "speak: Persian" (which is not correct English, by the way...), and "Religion: Baha'i" . Now, the form being in English, I really wonder where in the Western world would any form ask for one's religion?...

But my final question is: so what? And even if Mr. Abtahi's website designers are Baha'is, what does it have to do with the way the site is designed or run? Are they running subliminal messages so that everyone reading the blog are going to become hypnotized and convert? Is Mr. Abtahi less of a Muslim cleric because of his webmasters' alleged religion?

Relativity

I must say, I was a little disappointed with the analysis around Mr. Larijani's resignation. It is strange how when one ultra-conservative is replaced by an even more ultra-conservative he suddenly becomes "conciliatory"... Not to mention the fact that the conservative then becomes a moderate.

But a few days ago, I was nicely surprised by Omid Memarian's piece for OSI.

Red and orange

It is the time for harvesting:

Pomegranites

and saffron

A sober reality check

Once again, I am too late for my posts... Last week, Mrs. Ebadi was in Paris saying how US sanctions were bad and Mr. Ganji wrote an Op-Ed in the Washington Post finally explaining why US money was so bad. But then, a friend sent me this and it takes us away from all the rethorics of human rights to what day to day life means in Iran ... particularly if you try to stand up for your rights, whether you be a woman, or part of any other group that would make you less good than the average.

Little stones

It had been too many years since I last tasted Sangak... my favourite -- while watching PBS' programme on Iran.

In perspective

Not having been able to access the internet regularly these days, I was planning to write about the Iranian ridiculous and misplaced pride and my receiving many emails boasting about Doris Lessing being Iranian (right...) but now I have heard that Emad Baghi has been imprisoned...

Useful Dialogue (for once)

Having missed a connection ended-up in one good thing: I flew Air France and therefore got a chance to watch an excellent French film, Dialogue avec mon jardinier (Conversation With My Gardener in English). Simple and yet profound, hitting to the core in impressionistic touches.

I don’t know if the DVD would be available anywhere else than in France … if not, perhaps you might want to book a flight.

Next?

There was indeed much of a hullabaloo at the visit of our President, but after all, it can be summed up in one word: denial. We knew about his first denial, now at Columbia he informed us that there are no homosexuals in Iran, and during his UN press conference he enlightened us with the fact that the Baha'is don't have a Prophet.

Clearly, after all that everyone will believe him when he says that Iran is not trying to get the bomb.

Above and beyond Mr. Ahmadinejad's gesticulations, the issue remains what is going to happen to our country. Initially, Mr. Abdi's recent interview made me quite depressed, then today I read Abbas Milani's excellent piece -- remarkably, they are saying the same thing.

An unhealthy (re)visit

A couple of weeks ago, Ms. Louise Arbour, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, was in Tehran, attending a Conference organized by the Non-Aligned Movement on Human Rights and Cultural Diversity. Those poor diplomats who fought tooth and nail nearly 15 years ago to maintain the universality and indivisibility of human rights at the Vienna Conference, against an Iranian proposal led by no less than Mr. Zarif himself, must really feel let down. One wonders who advises Ms. Arbour. She should know better than allowing herself to be manipulated into what is no small victory for Iran and its likes.

Moreover, I have a question: Did the High Commissioner take this opportunity to condemn the violations in Iran? Well, publicly, she couldn’t really; it would have upset her hosts... However, in her report at the Human Rights Council last Thursday, she indicated that she had raised a few points with her Iranian counterparts (she met with Mr. Mottaki, it seems).

At least the EU (through its Portuguese Presidency) and Canada used the opportunity to say that they were worried about the human rights situation in Iran. Don’t know why it was only the latter who got the brunt of Iran’s response.

Just an ordinary president

When I first started reading Ray Takeyh's Op-Ed, I thought he had learned from Haleh Esfandiari's lessons but no, he remains consistent in advocating Détente with Iran.

However, I was really glad that finally someone was openly saying (to the West) what we all knew: the Islamic Republic of Iran's policy is consistent, whether we have a Rafsanjani, a Khatami or an Ahmadinejad as president.

So I will slightly change Takeyh's conclusion and suggest that rather than raising the spectre of a dangerous and uncontrolled man perhaps one should look at the quite systematic policy of the country's rulers.

PS: for those interested, the text of the poem chanted by Shajarian in my previous post can be found at the end of this article

Point by point

Mourning

Due to a passing, this blog has not been updated. It will eventually resume.