Semira N. Nikou's Blog

Widely Diverse Iranian Views on bin Laden’s Death

May 6, 2011 | 11:15am

Semira N. Nikou

In widely diverse responses, Iran discounted Osama bin Laden’s death while at the same time calling for a faster U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan since the pretext for going to war was eliminated. But officials and media generally did not mourn bin Laden’s passing. Iran’s defense minister charged that the bin Laden operation was not worth the enormous costs financially and in human life during the 10-year war in Afghanistan—and thus was ultimately a failure.

In May 2010, Ahmadinejad dismissed claims that Bin Laden was hiding in Iran by telling ABC news that the al Qaeda leader was in Washington D.C. because bin Laden “was a previous partner of Mr. [George W.] Bush.”

Iran has long had serious differences with both al Qaeda and the Taliban. Iran is a Shiite Muslim State and bin Laden was a member of al Qaeda, an extremist Sunni organization that did not accept Shiism as a valid form of Islam. Al Qaeda has also been responsible for the deaths of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards in Iraq.

But bin Laden’s son and other al Qaeda members also reportedly spent years in Iran—under house arrest, according to some accounts--after fleeing the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan. Iranian officials reportedly wanted to use al Qaeda operatives to pressure the United States to act against the Mujahedeen-e Khalq, the leading Iranian opposition group headquartered in Iraq. After she escaped in 2010, Iman bin Laden, the al Qaeda chief’s daughter, said family members were allowed to live in comfortable conditions but they were not allowed to leave the country.

Below are statements by Iranian officials and individuals on bin laden’s death:

Ahmad Vahidi, Defense Minister

“By announcing the news of bin Laden's death, the United States tried to claim that they have been successful, but with a closer look at news reports and other relevant issues, we notice that this has been a major failure for the Americans.”

"Americans stepped in Afghanistan under the excuse of killing or arresting bin Laden, they came to Iraq with the same excuse. Statistics say one million people have been killed in the region, some 1,000 billion dollars were spent and they imposed 10-year war to the region under the excuse of killing one person."

"They (Americans) inflicted much damage to the region to kill only one individual."

"Why did not they allow to an impartial observer to confirm that the body belongs to Osama Bin Laden." May 4, 2011

Kazem Jalali, member of parliament

"Americans used the life of bin Laden as an instrument and we believe that the issue of terrorism and its spread across the region is rooted in the United States presence in the area. Americas used the terrorists who were trained by them as instrument to fight terrorism."

"Americans should confront state terrorism, best signified by Zionist regime, if they really intend to battle terrorism.” May 3, 2011

Ramin Mehmanparast, Foreign Ministry spokesman

"We hope that this development will end war, conflict, unrest, and the death of innocent people, and help to establish peace and tranquility in the region...This development clearly shows that there is no need for a major military deployment to counter one individual...Iran, as one of the main victims of terrorism, strongly condemns any act of terror in the world including organized terrorism in the Zionist regime [of Israel]." May 2, 2011

Alaeddin Boroujerdi, the head of the parliament’s National Security Commission

“The U.S. only used bin Laden, Mollah Omar and the Taliban as an excuse to invade Afghanistan.”

“Despite the passage of 10 years since the invasion, they have accomplished nothing substantial, and even this latest news is not yet fully corroborated…What is certain is that they used this as a pretext to justify their presence in Afghanistan.”

Javad Jahangirzadeh, member of parliament

“The West has been very pleased with bin Laden's operations in recent years…Now the West was forced to kill him in order to prevent a possible leak of information he had, information more precious than gold." May 2, 2011

Ismail Kosari, member of parliament

"[Osama bin Laden] was just a puppet controlled by the Zionist regime in order to present a violent image of Islam after the September 11 attacks."

"Bin Laden's death reflects the passing of a temporary U.S. pawn, and symbolizes the end of one era and the beginning of another in American policy in the region." May 2, 2011

Alef, website affiliated with conservative parliamentarian Ahmad Tavakoli

"If one looks at Bin Laden's photo carefully, one concludes that he is not dead. Only the mouth and nose of the person shown in the photo agrees with his previous photos. The rest appears to have been modified by Photoshop." May 2, 2011 (The U.S. opted not to release pictures, although photo-shopped pictures of bin Laden did circulate on the Internet.)

Sa’adollah Zare-i, editorial in Farda News, website close to conservative Tehran mayor Mohammad-Bagher Qalibaf

“Obama’s party needed to rectify the reputations of the Democratic Party and the U.S. military’s foreign policy with an apparent successful military operation, in order to avoid [the democrats’] defeat [in the upcoming presidential elections] as much as possible.” May 2, 2011

Read Semira Nikou's chapter on Iran's subsidies conundrum in “The Iran Primer”

Semira N. Nikou works for the Center for Conflict Analysis and Prevention at the U.S. Institute of Peace

Online news media are welcome to republish original blog postings from this website (www.iranprimer.com) in full, with a citation and link back to The Iran Primer website (www.iranprimer.com) as the original source. Any edits must be authorized by the author. Permission to reprint excerpts from The Iran Primer book should be directed to permissions@usip.org

Tags: Afghanistan, al Qaeda, Iran, Osama bin Laden, United States

Iran Media Splits over Intelligence Chief--Part II

April 26, 2011 | 7:48am

Semira N. Nikou

The Iranian leadership split over intelligence chief Heidar Moslehi has spilled over into the media, which has offered widely diverse accounts of his reported resignation—and the political repercussions. The scandal became public on April 17 when President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad reportedly dismissed his intelligence chief, who was then reinstated by the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Some media outlets have openly supported Ahmadinejad and his controversial chief of staff Esfandiar Mashaei, who is reportedly behind the intelligence chief’s forced resignation. Other media have questioned or challenged the president over the firing because of the potential costs to his political relationship with the supreme leader.

Iran’s media has become deeply engrossed in the political scandal, with daily reports for more than a week in most outlets. The press has been engrossed in the long-term implications of the split between the president and the supreme leader as well as on the controversial role of the chief of staff.

The main media outlet supporting Ahmadinejad and Mashaei is the Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA). IRNA has criticized other outlets for running their stories without proper sources and falsely suggesting a rift between the supreme leader and the president.

Media challenging Ahmadinjad and his chief of staff over the resignation include Fars, Mehr News, Iranian Students News Agency, Alef, and Kayhan. In various forms, they have warned the president about the dangers of a split with the supreme leader. These newspapers and wire services have also criticized IRNA for its limited coverage of Khamenei’s decision to keep Moslehi.

In a speech on April 23, Khamenei said he intervened to reinstate the intelligence minister in the name of a “greater good.” His public relations office later criticized IRNA for failing to properly cover the leader’s speech explaining the reinstatement. It asked media outlets not to use IRNA’s coverage of the speech and said that the public relations office was the only credible news source about the supreme leader.

Since April 17, several websites have been hacked, filtered or completely shut down, apparently because of their positions on the controversy over the intelligence chief and the chief of staff. A few websites close to the president and his chief of staff—such as Dowlatyar, Mahramaneh News, Bakeri Online, and Rahva—have been filtered.

In one case, the personal blog of Ali Akbar Javanfekr—the managing director of IRNA, which supports Ahmadinejad and his chief of staff—was hacked with a caricature of the director. It showed him holding a sign that said “Everyone is lying”—but his own nose had grown as long as Pinocchio’s. The post was first featured on Fars News, which criticized the president. Javanfekr’s blog was shut down shortly after.

In a subplot to the political scandal, Gholam Hossein Mohsen Ejei, the attorney general, runs the committee that decides which websites should be officially filtered. But Ejei has his own issues with the president, since he was also abruptly fired as head of the Ministry of Intelligence byAhmadinejad in 2009. “What happened to me was similar to what happened to Moslehi,” Ejei said as the scandal unfolded. “I did not understand why and how I was dismissed. Many officials were not aware…I do not know whether the supreme leader, at the time, was informed of my dismissal, but he was not aware of Mr. Moslehi’s dismissal.”

In another subplot, conservative outlets such as Alef, Raja News, and Jahan claimed that Moslehi’s resignation was linked to his dismissal of an intelligence deputy minister Hossein Abdollahi, who is an ally of Ahmadinejad’s chief of staff.

The following are key quotes from the media.

Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei

“Unfortunately the approach taken by some newspapers with regards to these remarks was suggestive of divide and dispute in the country instead of peace.” Apr. 24, 2011

Hossein Shariatmadari, editor of hardline Kayhan newspaper, appointed by the supreme leader

“The dismissal of Mr. Moslehi from the ministry of intelligence was done under the cover of ‘resignation,’ but then opposition from the exalted leader of the revolution returned him to the ministry.

“[The question people have] is that with what explanation can the imposed presence of this gang beside the president be justified and why doesn't Mr. [President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad, as someone for whom the people voted under the belief that he is an unquestioning follower of the leader, cut off the hands of this deviant gang of infiltrators?” Editorial in Keyhan, Apr.19, 2011

Ali Akbar Javanfekr, managing director of Iran’s official news agency, which has supported the president

“For the politically informed it is evident that a change in such a strategic ministry as the Intelligence Ministry, cannot be carried out without coordination between the president and the leader of the Revolution. And such report that the president should take a decision that is overruled by the leader after two hours is not logical. It only aims at weakening the position of the president, the leader and the leadership.” Apr. 18, 2011

Mahramane News editorial, website close to Esfandiar Rahim Mashaei

“Why has [Esfandiar] Rahim Mashaei become the sole political problem these days? Have our other problems been solved?...The supreme leader would have named this year that of ‘battle with Mashaei’ not the year of ‘economic jihad,’ if Mashaei was the country’s main problem.” April 20, 2011

Read Semira Nikou's chapter on Iran's subsidies conundrum in “The Iran Primer”

Semira N. Nikou works for the Center for Conflict Analysis and Prevention at the U.S. Institute of Peace

Tags: Ahmadinejad, Intelligence Minister, Khamenei, Media, Moslehi, President, Supreme Leader

Iran Splits over Intelligence Chief--Part I

April 25, 2011 | 10:37am

Semira N. Nikou

In an unusual public spat, Iran’s top two leaders have split over the future of intelligence chief Heider Moslehi. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad reportedly wanted him sacked and accepted Moslehi’s resignation on April 17. But Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei overruled the president—first in a letter to Moslehi and then in a public address--effectively rebuking the decision and even announcing that he was praying for Moslehi.

The supreme leader tried to end the controversy in a speech on Apr. 23, 2011. Khamenei said he does not intend to interfere in political disputes but with Moslehi’s resignation “a greater good had been ignored.” The leader also criticized the media for inflating the story and for reporting a rift within Iran’s leadership.

The public spat is important--and unusual--for several reasons. The first is that it reveals the conflict over the control intelligence ministry--a critical ministry in dealing with both domestic tensions and Iran’s escalating showdown with the outside world. The second is that the flap has been so public in normally secretive Iran, rippling into media splits as well. Pro-Ahmadinejad media outlets initially refused to report on Khamenei's rejection of Moslehi's sacking and it was only after Khamenei's official letter to Moslehi was published in other outlets that they acknowledged Khamenei's order. The third is a subplot centered around the president’s controversial chief of staff, Esfandiar Rahim Mashaie.

Iranian media reports imply that Mashaie, a potential contender in the 2013 presidential election, had urged the president to fire the intelligence chief, at least partly over his assessments the Intelligence Ministry. Mashaie is related to Ahmadinejad through the marriage of their children and is a major influence on the president.

In the past, Khamenei has provided critical support for Ahmadinejad. The leader was decisive after the disputed election results of the 2009 vote, when the opposition charged massive fraud. The supreme leader sided with the president and allowed security forces to brutally repress street protests by millions of Iranians in several cities for six months.

Iran’s supreme leader traditionally approves key posts, such as the intelligence and foreign ministry posts. The supreme leader did not interfere when Ahmadineajd sacked Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki in December 2010.

Parliament has even been sucked into the dispute, with more than 200 members signing a statement April 20 urging the president to adhere to the supreme leader’s order. Senior ayatollahs also pressed the president to accept the leader’s instructions.

The political skirmish between Iran’s top religious and political authorities comes at a particularly awkward time. The regime faces serious internal discontent on both political and economic issues as it nears the second anniversary of the disputed presidential election and with parliamentary elections looming early next year. The region is also in turmoil over pro-democracy protests; Syria, Iran’s closest Arab ally, faces unprecedented internal unrest.

It is not yet clear how the president will manage his relationship with intelligence minister. Moslehi did not accompany the president and the rest of cabinet ministers in the government's provincial trip to Kurdistan on April 20.

The following are public comments by key politicians on the Moslehi affair.

Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei

“Look at the foreign media propaganda about this matter and how they have created a controversy; [They] claim that a split and dual government has been created in the Islamic Republic, and the president is not obeying the leader.”

"I won't allow, as long as I'm alive, the slightest deviation in the great movement of the people of Iran toward its ideals."

"In principle, I have no intention to intervene in government affairs ... unless I feel an expediency is being ignored as it was the case recently." Apr. 23, 2011

“I ask you to put more effort than before in carrying out important missions inside and outside the country…Do not allow even the smallest weakness in carrying out the legal duties of that important organization. I pray for you...and all of my dear revolutionary children in the Intelligence Ministry.” In a letter to the intelligence minister, Apr.19, 2011

The parliament’s letter to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

"Replacing the intelligence minister…under the current sensitive circumstances is not at all in the country's interests. Thank God the supreme leader resolved the problem with his wisdom. To the parliament, Mr. Moslehi continues to be the (intelligence) minister. You are expected, in adherence to the supreme leader, to end the enemies’ abusage by explicitly supporting of the respectable intelligence minister.” Signed by 216 members of the 290-seat parliament Apr. 20, 2011

Ayatollah Abolqassem Khazali, a prominent conservative cleric

“Mr Ahmadinejad should follow the leader's orders and not allow certain circles to influence him.” Apr. 20, 2011

Hussein Naqavi, member of parliament

“The parliament expects nothing but total obedience to ... the order without any question. (The Leader) is above the three branches of power and the executive branch is defined under the Supreme Leader." Apr. 20, 2011

Mohammad Ali Abtahi, vice president under reformist President Mohammad Khatami

"One of the usual accusations against the reformists was that of dual governance. [The hardliners] accused the reformists [in the administration of President Mohammad Khatami] of sending signals to the world that the positions of the supreme leader and the president were different.... The recent events…are more than ever an indication of dual governance—from an administration that came to power through the slogan of support for the leader.” Apr.19, 2011

Read Semira Nikou's chapter on Iran's subsidies conundrum in “The Iran Primer”

Semira N. Nikou works for the Center for Conflict Analysis and Prevention at the U.S. Institute of Peace

Tags: Ahmadinejad, Intelligence Minister, Khamenei, Mashaei, Moslehi, President, Supreme Leader

Iran Backs Libyan Rebels, Chastises West Over Oil, Bahrain

April 5, 2011 | 12:00pm

Semira N. Nikou

Libya’s rebellion has put Iran in an awkward position. Tehran has tried to balance support for the Libyan opposition, which it views as part of a region-wide “Islamic awakening,” with rejection of the NATO-led military strikes.

Iranian officials charged that the U.N.-endorsed military intervention on humanitarian grounds is hypocritical and part of a secret Western agenda. Tehran opposes any military intervention in the Middle East, even if in Iran’s interest, because of the precedent it sets. Iran also opposed the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq, despite the fact Saddam Hussein was Iran’s main adversary in the region.

In his Nowrouz (New Year) speech last month, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei charged that the United States and its allies were motivated by interest in Libyan oil. Iran’s foreign ministry spokesperson said that coalition was pursuing a new form of colonialism.

U.S. policy on Bahrain, where the ruling al Khalifa family has forcefully crushed the predominantly Shiite protest movement, has fueled Iran’s anger. Unlike Libya, the United States has used quiet diplomacy to mediate with the Sunni monarchy. The U.S. Fifth Fleet is based in Bahrain.

Bahrain is a country of greater strategic importance to Iran than Libya, and the plight of its largely Shiite population has been a sensitive issue inside Iran. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad complained of a “double standard” during a telephone conversation with U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon.

Iran and Libya have maintained diplomatic relations since the 1979 Iranian Revolution. Libya is one of the few Arab countries that supported Iran during the Iran-Iraq War (1980-88), and both have denounced Israeli actions at the United Nations. Qaddafi congratulated Ahmadinejad on his victory after the disputed 2009 presidential elections.

Libya has not been critical in Iran’s foreign policy, although the two countries did take steps in recent years to extend bilateral ties. Iran’s foreign minister visited Tripoli in 2010 to discuss economic ties, including joint oil and gas projects.

The one constant tension between Iran and Libya has been the mysterious disappearance of Lebanese Shiite leader Musa al Sadr, who was born in Iran. In 1978, Sadr disappeared during an official visit to Libya, which created tensions in relations between Tehran and Tripoli. Sadr’s niece is married to former Iranian President Mohammad Khatami.

In March 2011, Sadr’s family speculated that the religious leader might still be alive and imprisoned in Libya, a claim that played a central role in Tehran’s denunciation of Qaddafi’s recent crackdown on the opposition.

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei

"The United States and its western (allies) claim they want to defend the people by carrying out military operations or by entering Libya... You did not come to defend the people, you've come after Libyan oil."

"Iran utterly condemns the behavior of the Libyan government against its people, the killings and pressure on people, and the bombing of its cities... but it (also) condemns the military action in Libya." New Year (Nowrouz) speech on March 21, 2011

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

"The intervention of some European countries and America in the regional nations increases concern and makes circumstances more complicated."

"The double standard action of the Western countries in Bahrain and Libya and their silence towards the atrocities of the Zionist regime against the innocent Palestinians shows their contradictory performance in the world." Quoted during a phone conversation with U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, April 3, 2011

Ramin Mehmanparast, foreign ministry spokesman

"These countries enter usually with seductive slogans of supporting the people but they follow their own interests in ruling the countries and continuing colonialism in a new form."

Quoted in the Iranian Students News Agency (ISNA), March 20, 2011

Ali Larijani, speaker of parliament

“The West, and specifically the United States, has deceived people in the past with democracy and human rights slogans, but now it is evident that what is of importance to them is oil and the interests of corporations.”

“The United Nations issues a resolution in support of the people of Libya and engages in widespread attacks against the Libyan regime, while in Bahrain they do the exact opposite. They tell the Saudi army and other Arab countries to enter the country in support of the Bahraini regime…The question is that if the United States and the West want to support the opposition, then why are Gaddafi's bases targeted by aircraft and missiles under the pretext of supporting revolutionary people while the revolutionaries are being repressed in Bahrain?” Quoted in the Iranian Students News Agency (ISNA) March 26, 2011

Editorial in Sobh-e Sadeq (newspaper linked to the Revolutionary Guards)

“The best choice for solving the Libyan crisis is the continuation and perseverance of the peoples movement, and pressure on the Qaddafi regime without military expeditions to this country. This way the Libyan people can determine their destiny without foreign intervention.”

April 3, 2011

Editorial in the semi-official Mehr News Agency

“The recent upheavals have shown that the dictators of the Arab world do not want to learn from the past. All of them—from the Al-Khalifa’s in Bahrain, Ali Abdullah Saleh in Yemen, and Muammar Gaddafi in Libya—have chosen a destiny similar to the grim fate of Saddam [Hussein].” March 31, 2011

Iran's National Human Rights Committee

"Iran's National Human Rights Committee denounces brutal and inhumane acts of Libyan government against its oppressed and defenseless people and extends sympathy with victims and those harmed following violence." March 18, 2011

Read Semira Nikou's chapter on Iran's subsidies conundrum in “The Iran Primer”

Semira N. Nikou works for the Center for Conflict Analysis and Prevention at the U.S. Institute of Peace

Tags: Bahrain, Iran, Libya, Musa al Sadr, NATO, Oil, Qaddafi, U.N., U.S.

Iran Warns Gulf on Bahrain

March 24, 2011 | 1:33pm

Semira N. Nikou

After weeks of relative silence, Iran has become increasingly outspoken about Bahrain’s political crisis since Saudi Arabia deployed troops to back up the beleaguered monarchy on March 14.

Iran has long had political, strategic and religious interests in Bahrain, more so than any other Gulf sheikhdom. The island nation was sporadically part of Persia as far back as the sixth century B.C. and, most recently, was part of Iran’s Safavid Empire in the18th century. The al Khalifa royal family became rulers of Bahrain in 1820 and the kingdom became a British protectorate in 1861.

Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi ultimately gave up Iran’s historic claim to Bahrain in 1970, shortly before the island nation gained independence from Britain in 1971. But roughly 70 percent of Bahrain’s population is Shiite, which is also Iran’s state religion. In 1981, Bahrain uncovered a nascent coup plot which it linked to Iran and the Islamic Front for the Liberation of Bahrain which was based in Iran. On March 20, 2011, King Hamad bin Isa al Khalifa said that Bahrain had foiled an "external plot" against Bahrain and other Gulf emirates that had been in progress for three decades.

From 1989 to 2005, Iranian Presidents Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani and Mohammad Khatami worked to improve relations with the Gulf states, including Bahrain. But under the presidency of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (2005--), a number of Iranian officials provocatively have laid claims to the kingdom, heightening regional tensions.

In 2007, Hossein Shariatmadari, an adviser to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and editor of the conservative daily Kayhan, said that the “province” of Bahrain needed to be reunified with its “motherland,” meaning Iran. Ali Akbar Nateq-Nouri, a former parliamentary speaker and adviser to the supreme leader, also said in 2009 that "Bahrain was the fourteenth province of Iran until 1970.” Despite the Iranian Foreign Ministry’s claim that the media had misinterpreted the statements, Bahrain suspended negotiations over a gas deal that would have enabled Iran to export one billion cubic feet of natural gas to Bahrain per day.

Bahrain and its Arab allies in the Gulf Cooperation Council, especially Saudi Arabia, harbor deep suspicions about Iran’s long-term intentions. Last week, Bahrain expelled Iran's charge d'affairs; Iran then expelled a Bahraini diplomat.

The looming question in the Gulf is whether Bahrain’s crisis will evolve into of a proxy showdown between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Compounding the tension are U.S. interests. Manama is the headquarters for the of U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet.

Here are some recent statements by Iranian officials:

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei

"Of course, bitter events which take place against the people in certain countries - against the dear people of Bahrain, in Yemen and in Libya - do not make our New Year pleasant and makes one not fully enjoy it. We hope that God almighty provides them with hasty relief and punishes the enemies of the nations."

"We don't distinguish between Gaza, Palestine, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Bahrain and Yemen. We have supported Palestine for 32 years, and they are not Shiites. It is not an issue of Shiites and Sunnis... It is the protest of a nation against oppression."

“[Iran] supports all the popular movements which are under the slogan of Islam and (seeking) freedom." New Year (Nowrouz) speech on March 21, 2011

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

"This [Saudi] military invasion was a foul and doomed experience. Regional nations hold the U.S. government accountable for such a heinous behavior."

"I caution those who have deployed military forces in Bahrain to take lessons from the fate of those rulers of the region who invaded their neighboring countries in the past.”

"Learn from the fate of Saddam Hussein [who also used his military to] confront the people of a neighboring country." March 16, 2011

Ali Akbar Salehi, Foreign Minister

"How can one accept that a government has proceeded to invite foreign military forces for the crackdown of its own citizens?" March 15, 2011, in a letter to the United Nations, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), and the Arab League

“We expect the Bahraini government to deal with people’s demands prudently and respect people’s right to pursue their demands through peaceful means.” March 13, 2011

Ramin Mehmanparast, Foreign Ministry spokesman

"After the illogical and incomprehensible actions of the Bahrain government, especially expelling one of our diplomats, as a reprisal the attaché at Bahrain's embassy has been summoned and told that one of the embassy's diplomats must leave Iran."

"Responding to the legitimate demands of the population guarantees the stability and permanence of governments, while the repression of peaceful protests and illogical actions only aggravate the crisis and deepen wounds.” March 20, 2011 “The presence of foreign forces and interference in Bahrain’s internal affairs is unacceptable and will further complicate the issue.”

“People have some legitimate demands and they are expressing them peacefully…It should not be responded to violently.” March 15, 2011

Ahmad Vahidi, defense minister

“[The decision to send foreign forces to Bahrain was a] strategic, political, and national mistake...that disrupts the region's security and stability...." If these "unlawful acts become normalized, the region will turn into a center of hostility, conflict, and incendiaries, the flames of which may extend to the region's nations." March 16, 2011

Ali Larijani, speaker of parliament

"The entering of foreign forces into Bahrain will complicate the situation in the region and make it difficult to find a solution to the ongoing crisis in the country."

“It is crystal clear that this aggressive action was carried out with the support of the United States and in the wake of Gates' trip to the country, and regional nations reserve the right to hold the United States accountable for any violence or massacre committed [ in their countries ] to this moment.” March 15, 2011

Hossein Amir Abdollahian, Foreign Ministry director-general for Persian Gulf and Middle East affairs

"The peaceful demonstrations in Bahrain are among the domestic issues of this country, and creating an atmosphere of fear and using other countries' military forces to oppress these demands is not the solution.”

"It is expected that the demands of the Muslim people of Bahrain ... be seriously considered by the authorities and that they prevent the situation from becoming more complex by making right decisions and not allowing foreign interferences in Bahrain." March 14, 2011, interview with Fars News Agency

Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, chairman of the Guardian Council

"Brothers and sisters [in Bahrain] resist against the enemy until you die or win." March 18, 2011

Read Semira Nikou's chapter on Iran's subsidies conundrum in “The Iran Primer”

Semira N. Nikou works for the Center for Conflict Analysis and Prevention at the U.S. Institute of Peace

Tags: Bahrain, Iran

The Islamists Are Coming

The Islamists Are Coming, edited by Robin Wright, surveys the rise of Islamist groups in the wake of the Arab Spring. Often lumped together, the more than 50 Islamist parties with millions of followers now constitute a whole new spectrum—separate from either militants or secular parties. They will shape the new order in the world’s most volatile region more than any other political bloc. Yet they have diverse goals and different constituencies. Sometimes they are even rivals.

New Articles Archive

Robin Wright's blog

What the world will learn from Iran's election

United States Institute of Peace

The Iran Primer