Iran Election Guide

Donate to EAWV





Or, click to learn more

Search

Entries in Christiane Amanpour (2)

Tuesday
Jan192010

Israel and Gaza: Tzipi Livni "For Israeli Soldiers, I Will Go to Europe"

On Monday, the former Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni appeared on CNN's Amanpour guest. Livni defended the Gaza War Operation Cast Lead because it "regained deterrence" to Israel and stated that the blockade on Gaza will continue as long as there is no official representative of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip:  "Gates are open to Gazans when it comes to humanitarian needs".

Speaking about the arrest warrant issued for her by a British court because of Gaza, Livni said that she is willing to travel to any part of Europe as a "test case" for IDF soldiers to travel and see the free values of the free world.
AMANPOUR: Tonight, on the one-year anniversary of the end of the war in Gaza, we look at the troubled Middle East peace process, which President Obama has also made a center point of his foreign policy.

And from Jerusalem, we have an exclusive interview with Tzipi Livni, head of the Israeli opposition party Kadima. She had served as foreign minister during the previous Israeli administration throughout the Gaza war.

Ms. Livni, thank you for joining us from Jerusalem.

TZIPI LIVNI, FORMER FOREIGN MINISTER, ISRAEL: Thank you.

AMANPOUR: Let me ask you, it's a year since the Gaza war. There's still a huge amount of controversy over it. What about lifting the Israeli blockade on Gaza? How come that hasn't happened one year later?

LIVNI: The idea of the military operation was in order to stop terror. And there is no dispute today, especially not in Israel, that the operation in Gaza regained deterrence. And Israeli civilians that couldn't live in the places which are close to Gaza Strip can live and have peaceful life.

AMANPOUR: So does that mean that the blockade will stay on?

LIVNI: The blockade on Gaza -- yes. But it's important to say that, when it comes to humanitarian needs, the gates are open.

AMANPOUR: Obviously, there's some humanitarian aid getting in, but there's, for instance, construction materials, all sorts of things that it needs to stand on its feet are not getting in. But I want to ask you, should Israel now, a year later, negotiate a full cease-fire with Hamas in exchange for lifting the blockade?

LIVNI: No, I don't think so. Basically, Hamas doesn't represent the national aspiration of the Palestinians. I believe that Israel needs to re-launch negotiations with Fatah, with the legitimate Palestinian government, with those who represent the legitimate aspiration of the Palestinians for a state of their own.

Hamas represents extreme religious ideology. Religious conflicts are unsolvable. And in this region, when the division is between extremists and moderates, we need to act in a dual strategy, on one hand, to act against terror, not to give legitimacy directly or indirectly with Hamas, to Hamas, and to continue the dialogue with the moderates, with the pragmatic leadership of the Palestinians.

AMANPOUR: You know the Palestinians say that a complete halt to settlement activity is -- is vital. You know the president, Barack Obama, and this U.S. administration started by saying that a condition would be a complete halt to Israeli settlement activity. What do you make of the fact that the U.S. President Obama made that his initial condition? Now it's no longer a condition.

LIVNI: Listen, it's not for me -- you know, to make opinions on this. But just to give you an example about the situation that we had about a year ago, we had negotiations with the Palestinians. We built trust. They understood that the Israeli government -- anyway, the former Israeli government -- wanted to achieve peace, and we are willing to make the concessions which are needed in order to do so.

And we believed that this is -- this is the same -- or this is what the Palestinians are standing, also, in order to end the conflict.

AMANPOUR: Do you think it could be done in two years?

LIVNI: So talking about...

AMANPOUR: If it starts, do you think negotiations can end in two years?

LIVNI: Less than that. Oh, yes.

AMANPOUR: Like Mitchell said?

LIVNI: Oh, yes. I think that -- I don't want to -- to refer to timeline. I mean, I negotiated with the Palestinians for nine months. And we had some achievement in this negotiation.

[15:20:00]

So it's not a -- not a matter of time. It's a matter of an understanding of by both sides, by both leaders, that time works against those who believe in two states for two peoples, that we cannot afford a situation in which the conflict transfers from -- or being transferred from a national conflict to a religious one, that we cannot afford to give excuses for radical elements in the region to recruit or to have more support in different part of this -- of this region.

So I believe that this needs to be started now, and the question of timeline is less important, as long as the two leaders -- two leaderships understand that time is of the essence.

AMANPOUR: OK.

LIVNI: There is no need to -- you know, to waste more time or to have a dialogue for a dialogue. It's time for decisions.

AMANPOUR: Let's go back to the Gaza war a year ago and the fallout from that. You've said the blockade will continue. As you know, the Goldstone report has said that Israel used disproportionate force and has called for an inquiry and has called for Israel to -- to -- to sort of hold accountable those who were responsible. Why is it that Israel will not hold a public inquiry? And do you think that it should?

LIVNI: Basically, I cannot accept any comparison between Israeli soldiers and these terrorists. I mean, there is no -- and this is something that Goldstone made in his report.

During the operation in Gaza -- and, as you mentioned, I was a decision-maker there -- and we took all the necessary steps in order to avoid civilian casualties, even though it's not easy when this is highly populated place, when terrorists hiding among civilians.

AMANPOUR: Ms. Livni? Why is it that Israel has not held and has not made any move to hold a public inquiry, a public investigation into these allegations? Even your own ex-justice minister, Barak, is saying that there should be such a probe of some sort. Why not?

LIVNI: There are -- there are different views on this in Israel, and I think that there is now a process of decision-making in the current Israeli government whether to take this or not.

But since I was there during the operation and I know what was done and the -- well, it's the military, and it's not public inquiry, but they checked all the different cases that also Goldstone referred to. And it's important for me to say whether there's going to be or not going to be an inquiry. The morality of the Israeli soldiers, for me, it's not in question.

Since I'm not going to accept all these comparisons between Israeli soldiers and terror, I think that this is part of the answer that Israel needs to give publicly.

LIVNI: But as I said before, there is now the internal discussion on this, in Israel, and the only question for me is whether this kind of an inquiry can give the support and can defend Israeli soldiers when they leave the state of Israel and visiting other places.

AMANPOUR: Well, I was going to ask you -- let -- let -- let me ask you, because there was an arrest warrant potentially out for yourself. Israeli leaders, even Defense Minister Barak have been likened to war criminals. There's a controversy going on in Turkey right now. Are you worried that, if you leave Israel and come to London or other such places in Europe, that you could be arrested?

LIVNI: Well, yes, this -- it's not -- it's not my worry on a personal basis. In a way, I would like this to have, in a way, maybe even a test -- a test case, because I'm willing to speak up and to -- to speak about the military operation in Gaza Strip to explain that Israel left Gaza Strip, we dismantled all the settlements, we took our forces out, Israel was targeted, we showed restraint, and at the end of the day, we needed to act against terror, and are willing to say so, including any court in London or elsewhere. But...

(CROSSTALK)

AMANPOUR: So you're saying you're willing to be arrested as a test case?

LIVNI: For me, this is not a question. I mean, yes, the answer is yes. I am -- I know that the decisions that we made were crucial to give an answer to Israeli civilians that couldn't live in the south part of Israel and later or even also in different parts of Israel. It was part of my responsibility, and this was the right answer. And I'm willing to spend for (ph) these reasons and to explain this to -- to the world and to any court.

But part of our responsibility is also to give -- or to defend the Israeli soldiers and officials that worked according to our decisions in the government. And if an inquiry helps them, this is fine, so I can support an inquiry, as long as this helps them.

It's not about me.

[15:25:00]

It's about the Israeli soldiers, because I want them to leave Israel and to feel free to visit different parts of the world according, you know, to -- like any -- like any other citizen of the free world and any other soldier...

AMANPOUR: OK.

LIVNI: ... and fight for the values of the free world in different parts of the world.

AMANPOUR: On that note, Tzipi Livni, head of the Kadima Party in Israel, thank you so much for joining us.

LIVNI: Thank you. Thank you.
Tuesday
Jan052010

Latest Iran Video and Transcript: Haghighatjoo and Marandi on CNN (4 January)

On Monday CNN framed the Iran story by interviewing Fatemeh Haghighatjoo, a former member of Parliament who is challenging the system, and Seyed Mohammad Marandi, a Tehran University academic who defends it. The transcript below the video also includes the comments of former State Department official Ray Takeyh:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6r0U1tB5U0[/youtube]

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN ANCHOR: Tonight, has Iran's opposition movement crossed the point of no return? And is the Islamic republic struggling to survive? We'll examine what is next for Iran.

Good evening, everyone. I'm Christiane Amanpour, and welcome to our program.

For the past week, Iran has again been plunged deep into crisis, with the outcome far from certain. On the holy day of Ashura last Sunday, Iranian security forces used bullets and batons to suppress the biggest anti-government protest since June. At least eight protestors were killed, including one who died when a police van reportedly ran over him, as you can see in these images.

Now, the government says that that van was stolen. Nonetheless, demonstrators vented their anger against Basij militiamen, burning their motorbikes, attacking their buildings, shocked that such a crackdown could happen on Ashura.

Government supporters, for their part, were also outraged that the opposition had turned Ashura into a day of political protests, and so hundreds of thousands of them came out three days later. We'll talk with a former Obama administration official about what all this means for the U.S. in a moment.

But we start with some prophetic words from an Iranian woman, a member of parliament who told me 10 years ago that Iran's conservative leadership was out of touch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FATEMEH HAGHIGHATJOO, FORMER IRAN PARLIAMENT MEMBER (through translator): The Koran gives us freedom of choice. If the conservatives want to disagree with the idea of personal freedom, then they are against the essence of the Koran. But unfortunately, the conservatives are doing this in order to maintain their own power.

AMANPOUR: What happens if you don't get what you want?

HAGHIGHATJOO (through translator): The reform movement of President Khatami has started, and it cannot go back. How many people can the conservatives throw in jail? They can't jail the whole population of Iran.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: That was 10 years ago. Today, Fatemeh Haghighatjoo lives in the United States after being forced to resign for her outspoken challenges to the regime. And now a visiting scholar at the University of Massachusetts in Boston, she joins me here in our studios.

And from Iran, Mohammad Marandi, head of the North American Studies program at the University of Tehran.

Welcome, both of you, to this program.

Let me ask you first, Mrs. Haghighatjoo, what is your reaction to what you told me 10 years ago? You basically said then that the government can't arrest everyone.

HAGHIGHATJOO: First of all, good evening, and thank you very much for having me here. As I said 10 years ago and still I am saying, the government is not able to arrest all population in Iran. People of Iran need fundamental change in the country, and I am so optimistic that they will see this change in the country in future.

AMANPOUR: And change for you means what exactly?

HAGHIGHATJOO: Change -- change for me, that means people could see their freedom in the country. They -- this diversity in the country, in the population could be seen inside the power structure in the country. And also the portion (ph) of the government is important for people of Iran.

AMANPOUR: Let me turn to you, Mr. Marandi. Thank you for joining us. It looks like the situation has really reached a turning point here, particularly with the events of Ashura and then the competing protests -- or, rather, counter-demonstrations -- on Wednesday. Many here in the United States are calling this a game-changer. How do you see it from there?

MOHAMMAD MARANDI, UNIVERSITY OF TEHRAN: Well, I think that the -- the so-called opposition -- I say so-called, because there is no monolithic opposition, and there is no monolithic conservative or principlist movement. There are many different political groups in Iran that have different agendas.

But I think that the opposition that protested on Ashura made a very major tactical mistake by -- by carrying out, by being very brutal towards the police on that day, and also by carrying out these protests on a day of public mourning.

And I think that there was a major backlash on Wednesday when probably the largest gathering of people in protest of Mr. Mousavi and the green movement in Tehran's history, really, gathered on Wednesday. They were -- I think that was a defining movement. I think Mr. Mousavi, his letter that was written the day after the anti-Mousavi demonstration, revealed that he, too, was a bit rattled.

AMANPOUR: OK, well, let me ask you this. You say that they were outraged, the government supporters, and yet the protestors -- and as you know, very huge sections of the international public opinion were outraged that the Iranian forces used deadly force, gunfire, against the protestors. I mean, does this not really challenge now the authority of the government?

MARANDI: Well, first of all, the -- the protest -- the demonstration in Tehran, it was -- was not necessarily pro-government. It was pro- Islamic republic. And many critics of the government but who are opposed to Mr. Mousavi participated. As I said, it was a huge rally. But they were not -- it's not a monolithic group on any side of the political equation that we can talk about easily.

But I think that the outrage here was that -- that the MEK terrorist organization, which although officially banned by the United States, it is being supported by the United States under different names, they were involved in Tehran, according to their own statements, and they were -- as you can see in the footage -- they attacked police stations...

AMANPOUR: Which we'll show right now.

MARANDI: ... when a police officer was blinded -- sorry?

AMANPOUR: We're just showing that pictures as you speak.

MARANDI: Right. In any case, I can't hear you very well, but they attacked police stations, they destroyed public property, and they attacked police officers. And at the same time, as I said, it was a day of mourning. Ashura is the anniversary of the martyrdom of the grandson of the prophet of Islam, and it's a very holy day in Iran, and that didn't go down well with a majority of Iranians who saw these protestors clapping and whistling and so on.

But I think that, in general, the protests -- the counter-protests, the protest that was critical of Mr. Mousavi on Wednesday, was itself a turning point.

AMANPOUR: Well, let me ask you then, Mr. Haghighatjoo, you are in the reformist camp, obviously. Do you believe that there are violent elements taking part in your demonstration and in your movement? Is that a concern?

HAGHIGHATJOO: You know, what I am going to say is the people of Iran (inaudible) Green movement wanted, you know, requested, demand peacefully without violence. Unfortunately, the government forces try to pull people toward violence. And I would consider (inaudible) scenario by the government, they try to make these crash between -- clash between people in both sides.

And if you look at, since disputed election in June 12 to now, we will see that this protest was silent protest, and that shows that people wanted to do -- to request (inaudible) demand peacefully. But, unfortunately, the government, you know, especially on day of Ashura, you know, acted very violently, bloody against people and protests.

AMANPOUR: OK. Let's move -- since we're trying to figure out what's next, let us ask now about these steps that Mr. Mousavi has put out towards resolution. Now, I'm going to read them off here on our screen. He says, "First of all, the Iranian administration should be held accountable. Secondly, there should be new and clear election laws. Then, there should be the release of all political prisoners, free and informed media, and finally, recognition of legal demonstrations."

Mr. Marandi, do you think there's any chance the government is going to agree to those five ideas that Mr. Mousavi has put forward?

MARANDI: Well, I think the problem is that the government sees things in a different light from Mr. Mousavi. And as I said, there are very many different political factions at play, both in the government and in the opposition.

AMANPOUR: Right, but these seem to be -- this seems -- these seem to be clear requests that seem to manifest themselves under, in fact, the Iranian constitution. Is there any feeling that the government is willing at all to meet Mousavi halfway? Or is this going to be a continued confrontation?

MARANDI: Well, I think that after the anti-Mousavi protests throughout the country on Wednesday, Mr. Mousavi's position has been severely weakened, and I think that is partially reflected in his letter. But I also think that the government is not going to release people, for example, who've blinded police officers or abused police -- police officers and so on.

I do think that there are moves to, let's say, move -- go back to more openness, but I think that the major problem, really, is that Mr. Mousavi has affiliated himself with a more extreme faction within the reformist movement. Even people like Mr. Sahobi (ph) have spoken about how the green movement is moving towards violence. And I myself have experienced death threats every time I come on television to talk about these issues. So it is a reality.

But a lot of the more mainstream reformists, they are moving away from Mr. Mousavi, for example, Mr. Tabesh (ph), who is the head of the reformist faction in parliament.

So there are very sharp internal debates in Iran about policy, about politics, about many issues in the country, but I think that the government and many political factions in the country are no longer willing to discuss serious issues with Mr. Mousavi anymore.

AMANPOUR: OK. We want to show some pictures that we have up on our wall, pictures of Mr. Mousavi receiving condolences when his own nephew was gunned down on the day of Ashura. And I want to ask you (OFF-MIKE) is there, do you believe, a split inside the factions in -- in Iran? Mr. Marandi has talked about people moving away from the reformist movement. Is this true?

HAGHIGHATJOO: No. I wanted to say that, if we have really -- if the government (inaudible) for green movement, then we will see people would side with Mousavi or would side with government. I disagree with Mr. Marandi's analysis regarding weakening Mousavi's position, because the government, you know, try to bring (inaudible) by paying money in some place, by bringing paramilitia to the city, by bringing student from school to the (inaudible)

And I would say this is not pro-government demonstration. Let's see. If the government allow...

(CROSSTALK)

AMANPOUR: So you're talking about competing rallies to see whose are bigger?

HAGHIGHATJOO: Yes, yes, and then we will see what we're going on. And then the second issue, unfortunately, I -- unfortunately, I don't think so the government and the supreme leader is going to accept Mousavi's fair position, because, you know, they think they can control issue. Unfortunately, their -- their solution is wrong solution. And this is not real answer to the crisis.

AMANPOUR: One final question to Mr. Marandi. You know, so much has been made and so many fears raised about the actual security of the reform leaders, the opposition leaders, such as Mr. Mousavi and Mr. Karroubi. I've been told that actually a decision has been made to step up their security by the Iranian government. Does that ring true to you? Do you think that they're going to try to make sure no harm comes to those principal figures?

MARANDI: Yes, I think so, especially since his nephew was killed under very suspicious circumstances. He was not killed in the demonstrations themselves. And the fact that he was singled out and assassinated, I think, is something that the many people in the political establishment find suspicious, and they -- they believe that perhaps terrorist organizations were behind it to increase tension in the country.

I also believe I -- I should add one final point, and that is that, within Iran itself, there are -- we shouldn't be speaking about the government and the opposition, because within the, let's say, the conservative groups or the principlist movements, there's no consensus. And the same is true with the reformists. Many key reformists have come -- distanced themselves completely with Mr. Mousavi and the green movement, especially since Mr. Mousavi has more and more aligned himself with -- or at least silently accepted the support of Western, American-backed television stations being broadcast into Iran, as well as former shah supporters and the MEK terrorist organization.

AMANPOUR: OK, Mr. Marandi. What do you say as a final word against - - you know, many people in Iran, obviously, are trying to discredit the reform movement, saying that they're agents of -- of -- of foreign countries. What do you say to that?

HAGHIGHATJOO: Unfortunately, this is analysis of the government and pro-government, you know, people. This is not...

MARANDI: I didn't...

(CROSSTALK)

MARANDI: ... for the government or Mr. Ahmadinejad.

HAGHIGHATJOO: Sorry. No reformists in the country will, you know, take (inaudible) Mousavi (inaudible) everybody support Mousavi. After Mousavi's statement, we see many people outspoken to support Mousavi's statement and all reformists, such as (inaudible) Mujahideen and also outside of the country, opposition and Iranian people who just (inaudible) for the country support Mousavi's current position.

AMANPOUR: All right. And we will talk to you again another time. And you, too, Professor Marandi. Thank you both very much for joining us.

MARANDI: Thank you.

AMANPOUR: And when we return, is the turmoil in Iran an opportunity or a challenge for the U.S. president, Barack Obama?
...
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: What's taking place within Iran is not about the United States or any other country. It's about the Iranian people and their aspirations for justice and a better life for themselves. And the decision of Iran's leaders to govern through fear and tyranny will not succeed in making those aspirations go away.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: So that was President Obama just a few days ago. We're joined now by Ray Takeyh, former Obama administration official on Iran and now continuing with the Council on Foreign Relations, joining me from Washington.

Mr. Takeyh, thank you for joining us. You probably heard our other two guests, and we're just particularly playing that sound bite from President Obama. Has he stepped up his rhetoric? And why is he doing that now?

RAY TAKEYH, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, SENIOR FELLOW: Well, I think it's inevitable as the situation in Iran deteriorates and as you have a greater degree of human rights abuses and government forceful suppression of the dissent movement that the United States and the president would react in this such manner. It's inconceivable for me -- for the president not to have done so, particularly strong language in terms of depicting Iran as -- as a tyranny.

AMANPOUR: What does that mean, then, for his desire to continue or to try to hold the door open for negotiations?

TAKEYH: Well, I'm not quite sure if the two are incompatible. You can have negotiations with Iran, as the United States has had negotiations with many adversarial countries, while also at the same time disapproving of the internal practices of those regimes, now, whether that was the Chinese government or -- or other such non-representative states.

I -- I think you can do both of them, but the president and the United States will have to stand up and declare that some of the behavior of the clerical regime is unacceptable, but also be open to negotiating some sort of a restraint on Iran's nuclear program, which also violates Iran's international obligations.

AMANPOUR: So you talk about the nuclear program. A deadline has come and come for Iran to respond to the -- to the proposals of the West. Iran is now putting its counterproposal.

TAKEYH: Right.

AMANPOUR: Where do you think this is headed in the -- in the immediate term?

[15:20:00]

TAKEYH: Well, I suspect, in the immediate term, the United States and its allies will try to ratchet up economic pressures on Iran, particularly targeting the Revolutionary Guard organization and its business -- business enterprises, maybe even some aspect of the Iranian petroleum sector, so you begin to see intensification of economic pressure on Iran in the hope that external pressure, combined with internal pressure, will cause Iran to adjust its behavior...

(CROSSTALK)

AMANPOUR: This is a tried and true -- Mr. Takeyh, this is a tried and -- some would say -- not so true method, that sanctions and pressure haven't really worked. Why would it be different this time?

TAKEYH: Well, it may not be different this time, but the idea is that you have a greater degree of international cooperation, particularly with a greater degree of assistance from Russia. That may be more hopeful than real, but that's essentially what the -- what the assessment is today.

Now, second of all, is the Iranian government internally is rather weak and vulnerable and it may seek some sort of an agreement abroad to at least mitigate international pressures.

I mean, as I said, this is -- this is a theory. And like most speculative ideas, we'll see how it pans out in practice.

AMANPOUR: You wrote an analysis on what was going on, and you basically compared the revolutionary situation back in '79 to what's going on right now, in that both seem to have, let's see, uncertain responses to the challenges of the regime. Do you think the government -- go ahead.

TAKEYH: Well -- well, it's important to suggest that history doesn't always repeat itself, actually, as a matter of fact, seldom repeats itself. Some of the challenges that the Islamic republic faces today are not dissimilar to the challenges that the monarchy faced. But the situations are also different.

I think the Iranian government at this point, for instance, if the supreme leader was receptive to some of the proposals made by Mr. Mousavi, you could perhaps see some sort of a peaceful resolution for this. But however it comes about, in terms of internal compromise, the supreme leader would have to accept that his power will be diminished, and I'm not quite sure if he's ready to do that.

AMANPOUR: Now, you heard what Mr. Marandi, who supports the Islamic republic, said in terms of saying that it's -- you know, the reform movement is fractured, that, you know, they're agents of the -- of international entities. What is the analysis inside the -- inside the U.S. about the strength of the reform movement?

TAKEYH: Well, in my view, that -- the -- the opposition movement is somewhat incoherent. It doesn't have a central nervous system. It doesn't even have an identifiable set of leaders or even a coherent ideology. It is a protest movement.

But it's been a peculiar protest movement in a sense that it has sustained itself. And the longer it sustains itself, the more ideology and so forth and even leadership will suggest themselves.

And whether they're agents of the West and that sort of a thing, that's just obviously nonsense. And I'm not sure if that rhetoric really impresses anyone. It certainly convinces no one.