The Latest from Iran (28 April): Making a Date

2130 GMT: Controlling the Teachers. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty summarises the pressure by Iranian authorities on teachers ahead of Teachers Day on 2 May.

This includes the arrest of two senior members of Iran's teachers union, Ali Akbar Baghani, and spokesman Mohammad Beheshti Langarudi, warnings to activists in several cities, including Tehran and Tabriz, not to take part in any protests, and fines and arrests for demonstrating. It is reported that several blogs and websites on teachers' issues have been blocked.

NEW Iran Document: English Text of Mousavi-Karroubi Meeting (26 April)
NEW Iran: President Ahmadinejad’s Joke of the Day
Iran’s Detained Journalists: EA’s (Vicarious) Confrontation with Foreign Minister Mottaki
Latest Iran Video: Mousavi & Karroubi Meet (26 April)

Earlier this week, the Coordinating Council of the Teachers Trade Unions called for a hunger strike on Teachers' Week (May 2-8) to protest prison sentences and death penalties handed out to teachers. Four teachers are reported to have been jailed in recent months and at least one, Kurdish teacher Farzad Kamangar, is facing the death penalty.


2045 GMT: Corruption Watch. Conservative member of Parliament Ali Motahari has criticized Iran's judiciary for lack of independence and nepotism.

Motahari told the Iranian Students News Agency that, in corruption cases involving relatives of top officials, prosecutors are seeking permission from the officials themselves before even investigating.

1600 GMT: Oil Squeeze Posturing. In an interview with Khabar Online, Ali Vakili, the managing director of Iran's Pars Oil and Gas Company, has warned Royal Dutch Shell and Spain's Repsol that they must declare if they plan to pursue a project, agreed in 2007, to develop liquefied natural gas in the South Pars field.

Shell recently announced that it is suspending all involvement in the project.

Vakili insisted that Iran can develop the South Pars, having overcome financial obstacles, and that it has the necessary technology.

1530 GMT: We've posted a special separate entry: the English translation of Monday's discussion between Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi.

1245 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. The lawyer for reformist politician Mostafa Tajzadeh has said that Tajzadeh has not yet reported to prison to begin his six-year sentence: “My client was admitted into a hospital in Tehran because of his disc problem (in his back)....During the past 2 days, my client was expected to introduce himself to the prison to continue serving his prison term; however, this has not happened....As soon as his physical condition improves, he will present himself to the authorities.”

0845 GMT: Corruption Watch. Mardomsalari newspaper frets that corruption has become a political issue and warns that "justice" should end it once and for all before foreign ennemies can take advantage of the situation.

0830 GMT: The Subsidy Battle. While there has been a general between Parliament and President over the subsidy cut and spending plans, the fight over implementation continues.

Maintaining that Iran's political, social and economic situation cannot cope with a shock, MP Ahmad Tavakoli has written Ahmadinejad with three propositions: 1) no across-the-board rise in prices, 2) provision of reliable data on familiy's income, and 3) gradual implementation of the plan. ()

0810 GMT: Culture Wars. Rah-e-Sabz claims there will be increased pressure from the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance upon people, especially women, to "satisfy the Supreme Leader" on the eve of the election's anniversary on 12 June. The website alleges there are "serious plans" for reeducation from kindergarten to university.

As if to prove the point, Kayhan proclaims that "bad hijab" has to be fought everywhere, from schools to offices.

0755 GMT: Does the Regime Need Legitimacy? An interesting debate, as reported by Rah-e-Sabz: the Supreme Leader's deputy to the Revolutionary Guard denies it is necessary to rely on people's votes, while Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi insists that the Government does precisely that.

0750 GMT: (More) Persistence. Reformist MP Rasul Montajabnia declares that hardliners cannot become an alternative to reformers and replace them: "We are alive."

0745 GMT: Continuing the Labour Theme. Rah-e-Sabz, anticipating May Day, reports that workers' incomes have suffered in the Iranian New Year. There are widespread dismissals and threats to dismiss those who "do not work enough". Meanwhile, protests have increased over the lack of accepted unions and organisations.

Reformist member of Parliament Hajsheikh Alikhani has insisted the government "doesn't give a damn about workers' problems".

0740 GMT: Awards. Hassan Karimzadeh from the banned newspaper Etemade Melli has won 1st prize in the World Press Cartoon competition.

Mahdi Razavi has been given an award by an Italian panel for his No War photograph.

0735 GMT: Labour Watch. Iran Labor Report offers a full summary of preparation for a "Labor Week" around May Day: "The experience of last May Day’s brutal clampdown...has prompted most independent labor organizations to call off May Day gatherings. Instead, they are encouraging workers to celebrate the occasion in small numbers at factories and shop-floors.

0730 GMT: Mahmoud Visits New York? A blog on the Foreign Policy website claims, from "senior UN officials and diplomats", that President Ahmadinejad has requested a visa to attend a high-level conference next week at United Nations headquarters to review progress on the 1970 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

0725 GMT: Not Worried (Really). The "hard-line" newspaper Kayhan has asserted that any Iranian using Haystack, the software developed by Austin Heap to allow access to the Internet while avoiding surveillance, will be tracked down by Iranian authorities. Kayhan claimed that the Green Movement is advising followers not to use the software.

0720 GMT: Persisting. The two major Iranian reformist organizations, Islamic Iran Participation Front and Mojahedin of Islamic Revolution, announced that they will continue their activities despite the recommendation of Parliament's Article 10 Commission for the dissolution of the parties. Both factions called for a public hearing in order to defend all their activities.

Leaders of the two organizations have written to the Commission maintaining that the dissolution lacks “legal justification.”

0420 GMT: Time will tell, but Tuesday appeared to be a day to mark in this lengthening crisis. The building series of statements from opposition figures, notably Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi, culminating in the emergence that, yes, the two men had met on Monday and, yes, they had called for a demonstration on 12 June, the anniversary of the election.

We'll wait a day or two for follow-up before attempting an analysis, but the obvious issue is whether --- after 2 1/2 months of relative passivity since the 22 Bahman (11 February) moment --- those challenging the regime can seize the initiative.

That follow-up has already begun. Mehdi Karroubi, in comments posted on Mihan News, has set out and defended his political approach, working with a cross-section of opposition groups: "I have talked to a lot of leftists. They did not become Muslim, and I didn't become a Communist." The message is not only for the regime, but for the Green Movement: secular and religious can co-exist in the demand for justice and rights in the Islamic Republic.

The Karroubi-Mousavi accompanies other signs of a renewed challenge to the Government. A Street Journalist has published an English translation of the joint resolution, with 15 demands, issued by a coalition of Iranian labour groups.

Elsewhere, reformist MP Jamshid Ansari has declared that, contrary to its claims, Parliament has not initiated an investigation into the attack on the dormitories of Tehran University on the night of 14/15 June.

In a debate with fellow MP Gholamreza Mesbahi Moghaddam at Tehran University, Ansari said, “You should not expect any report from the Parliament regarding this matter because no committee has been assigned to this task, neither by the Speaker nor by the Parliament.”

The raids by security forces killed several people and caused extensive damage, two days after the elections and hours before the mass march on 15 June.

Afghanistan: Death And The Prices We Pay for Intervention

Stephen Walt ,  writing on Foreign Policy about the recent Wikileaks release on the killing of civilians in Iraq in 2007 by US forces, touches on the idea that massacres like the one in the Wikileaks video are to be expected as part of the price of our interventionist policies:

Notice that I am not suggesting that the personnel involved failed to observe the proper "rules of engagement," or did not genuinely think that the individuals they were attacking were in fact armed. Rather, what bothers me is that they were clearly trying to operate within the rules, and still made a tragic error. It reminds us that this sort of mistake is inevitable in this sort of war, especially when we rely on overwhelming firepower to wage it. When we intervene in other countries, this is what we should expect.

Afghanistan: The Humanity Missing From Our Debate

It's an excellent point, but unfortunately it's too easily dismissed with the old "war is hell" cliche, as in this piece from Bouhammer:

Soldiers cannot get wrapped around every single life they are forced to take by virtue of being in combat. Soldiers (and I use soldiers generally describing all service-members), use dark humor and take it all in stride when they have to take lives. They can’t be effective by getting wrapped around the axle over taking human lives. So what you hear in this video is soldiers being soldiers. Nobody likes killing innocents, especially children and that is evident when the soldiers on the ground immediately start calling for a MEDEVAC to come get the wounded children.

Clearly not everyone sees killing people as an unacceptable price of war, particularly when it's soldiers doing it. Bouhammer simply took Walt's adviceand expected the horrible deaths as a natural result of the policy.

But there is a bit more to the price of war than just the loss of lives. So let's get a little cold-hearted for a moment and just accept that we need to murder these people as part of our strategy. Even if we're OK with that, the price of this strategy is still astronomically expensive.

Let's start just with the cost of transporting supplies to our troops. Not the supplies themselves, just the cost of transporting them. Tom Engelhardt explains:

Believe it or not, according to the Washington Post, the Defense Department has awarded a contract worth up to $360 million to the son of an Afghan cabinet minister to transport U.S. military supplies through some of the most dangerous parts of Afghanistan – and his company has no trucks. (He hires subcontractors who evidently pay off the Taliban as part of a large-scale protection racket that allows the supplies through unharmed.) This contract is, in turn, part of a $2.1 billion Host Nation Trucking contract whose recipients may be deeply involved in extortion and smuggling rackets, and over which the Pentagon reportedly exercises little oversight.

That'sthe US taxpayer, paying $2 billion just for trucks run by corrupt warlords and Taliban interlopers who will use them to smuggle  God knows what, possibly drugs or guns used to kill our soldiers. Lovely. But we have to pay that, because in order for our war strategy to work we've got to have soldiers in "some of the most dangerous parts of Afghanistan".

That's just for the trucks. How do we get the supplies on to those trucks? Well, they come through an airbase in Kyrgyzstan. The price for that is the usual support for a police state dictator and paying rent with US taxpayers' money. And that price is about to go up:

The news of ongoing unrest in the central Asian republic has been received with concern by Washington. The U.S. embassy in Bishkek said it was "deeply concerned" about "civil disturbances" in the country, in a statement released on Wednesday.

Saying that the situation in Kyrgyzstan was "still very fluid", John Kerry, the chair of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, expressed "regret for the loss of life" in the country and called on all sides to be "calm and refrain from violence". He called upon Kyrgyz parties to address the "underlying political, economic and social issues" in a "transparent process that brings stability and fundamental rights to all."

The U.S. State Department said that transport operations at the Manas military installation outside Bishkek have been "functioning normally." The U.S. military has used the base over the past several years as a staging post for its operations in Afghanistan. Despite the call for the base’s closure by opposition leaders reportedly in charge now, it remains to be seen whether the new government will take practical steps toward that end.

There are worries in the U.S. that the new opposition-led government may increase the rent for Manas base by renegotiating the terms of its agreement with the U.S., according to Foreign Policy’s Cable blog. Such a renegotiation, Cable said, may offer Russia an opportunity to influence an agreement over the base.

So our pet dictator was ousted in a violent uprising (I won't get into the awful stuff he did to deserve that here), and now the new opposition government is going to be raising the rent, if not evicting us completely. This also apparently gives Russia, who we desperately need in other matters like the Iranian nuclear file, a bargaining chip to play against the US.

But the cost goes beyond rent or trucks or anything you can put a dollar sign on. We're also actively working to subvert European democracies as part of the cost of our war:

A newly leaked CIA report prepared earlier this month analyzes how the U.S. Government can best manipulate public opinion in Germany and France -- in order to ensure that those countries continue to fight in Afghanistan. The Report celebrates the fact that the governments of those two nations continue to fight the war in defiance of overwhelming public opinion which opposes it -- so much for all the recent veneration of "consent of the governed" -- and it notes that this is possible due to lack of interest among their citizenry: "Public Apathy Enables Leaders to Ignore Voters," proclaims the title of one section.

We're paying the CIA to figure out how to screw over the voters of France and Germany, and I wouldn't be surprised if the same chicanery was happening in American politics. We're way past blowing taxpayer funds and into the territory of destroying our own national values. And for what? Who actually stands to benefit from all of these prices that we're paying?

Afghan President Hamid Karzai has slammed Western backers for the second time in a week, accusing the United States of interference, The Wall Street Journal reported Sunday.

In a private meeting with up to 70 Afghan lawmakers Saturday, Karzai also warned that the Taliban insurgency could become a legitimate resistance movement if foreign meddling in Afghan affairs continues, the Journal said, citing participants in the talks.

During the talks, Karzai, whose government is supported by billions of dollars of Western aid and 126,000 foreign troops fighting the Taliban, said he would be compelled to join the insurgency himself if the parliament does not back his bid to take over Afghanistan's electoral watchdog

That's right, we're paying a couple billion to Taliban warlords over here, propping up a police state over there, subverting democracies all over the place, and all for a corrupt mountebank like Karzai who wants to join the Taliban. And remember, I'm just picking examples out of thin air here; the cost of trucks, the Kyrgyz airbase, the CIA memos. These aren't even the total cost of the war which will wind up costing in the trillions.

Let's go back to Walt's piece:

It reminds us that this sort of mistake is inevitable in this sort of war, especially when we rely on overwhelming firepower to wage it. When we intervene in other countries, this is what we should expect.

See, Americans do expect these costs. They understand the cliches that "war is hell" and, indeed, expensive. But Americans do question why they're paying these costs only to prop up criminals like Karzai. Why are we paying billions to Taliban smugglers and police states and anti-democratic intelligence operations just to build a country for a guy who wants to join the Taliban? And he's the best thing we've got over there, we've been there for over 9 years, there is no one else.

Americans aren't opposing the cost of this war because they magically turned into pacifist hippies, they oppose the cost because we're paying for nothing over there. The best case scenario for the current price we're paying is we shell out trillions in deficit money, leave our soldiers to keep dying and killing innocent civilians for the next few years, subvert democracies worldwide, and destroy our own national values. All so Karzai will maybe not join the Taliban. Whatever goals we have in Afghanistan are simply not worth the price we're paying.

Josh Mull also writes for The Seminal and Rethink Afghanistan.