Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
06IRANRPODUBAI19
2006-12-13 13:52:00
SECRET//NOFORN
Iran RPO Dubai
Cable title:  

REFORMISTS STRIKE DISSONANT CHORD

Tags:  PGOV PREL IR 
pdf how-to read a cable
null
VZCZCXRO3981
PP RUEHBC RUEHDE RUEHKUK
DE RUEHDIR #0019/01 3471352
ZNY SSSSS ZZH
P 131352Z DEC 06
FM IRAN RPO DUBAI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 0032
INFO RUCNIRA/IRAN COLLECTIVE
RUEHAD/AMEMBASSY ABU DHABI 0017
RUEHDIR/IRAN RPO DUBAI 0025
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHINGTON DC
RHEHAAA/NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL WASHINGTON DC
RHEFDIA/DIA WASHINGTON DC
S E C R E T SECTION 01 OF 03 IRAN RPO DUBAI 000019 

SIPDIS

NOFORN
SIPDIS

LONDON FOR GAYLE; BERLIN FOR PAETZOLD; BAKU FOR HAUGEN; PARIS
FOR WALLER

E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/13/2016
TAGS: PGOV PREL IR
SUBJECT: REFORMISTS STRIKE DISSONANT CHORD

REF: A. RPO DUBAI 18

B. RPO DUBAI 8

RPO DUBAI 00000019 001.2 OF 003


CLASSIFIED BY: Jillian L. Burns, Director, Iran Regional
Presence Office, Dubai, UAE.
REASON: 1.4 (b),(d)


S E C R E T SECTION 01 OF 03 IRAN RPO DUBAI 000019

SIPDIS

NOFORN
SIPDIS

LONDON FOR GAYLE; BERLIN FOR PAETZOLD; BAKU FOR HAUGEN; PARIS
FOR WALLER

E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/13/2016
TAGS: PGOV PREL IR
SUBJECT: REFORMISTS STRIKE DISSONANT CHORD

REF: A. RPO DUBAI 18

B. RPO DUBAI 8

RPO DUBAI 00000019 001.2 OF 003


CLASSIFIED BY: Jillian L. Burns, Director, Iran Regional
Presence Office, Dubai, UAE.
REASON: 1.4 (b),(d)



1.(S/NF) Summary: Two recent conversations with active Iranian
reformers yielded diametrically opposed views on what the US
should do about Iran. An Iranian political activist and former
MP recently told IRPOffs that US military intervention was the
only way to guarantee positive change in Iran, explaining his
views why the Iranian people would welcome such a step. He said
the reform movement was dead and that elections would bring no
substantive change. By contrast, a current reformist MP said
that coordination between reformist groups on the Tehran
municipal election list demonstrates that reformers can regroup
and regain support when President Ahmadinejad's policies drive
the country into the ground. He acknowledged, however, that
change will come a millimeter at a time. With the ongoing
violence in Iraq, Lebanon, Israel, West Bank, and Gaza, he
opposed aggressive action against Iran at this time,
particularly in light of Iranian involvement in all those
conflicts. On the other hand, he advised against dialogue with
Iran at this time, given the current conviction among some
officials that Iran has gained the upper hand. Both Iranians
laid out their cases logically and without hyperbole. The call
for military intervention and the advice against dialogue both
represent minority views among our interlocutors. End summary

2.(S/NF) In recent, separate conversations, two Iranian
pro-democracy intellectuals presented starkly different views of
next steps on Iran. The first is a law professor, a former MP,
and an outspoken activist who was arrested, reportedly tortured,
and given a suspended sentence for insulting the Supreme Leader
and propagandizing against the regime. He is appealing his
sentence. The second interlocutor is a current reformist MP who
is outspoken in the Majles with his criticism of government
policy.

Reform movement - dead or alive?

--------------

3.(S/NF) During the Khatami presidency, the professor said, the
conversation used to be about reform, but people grew
disappointed by the cowardice of Khatami and in the reform
movement he led. The source claimed people have now given up
hope on reform and think regime change is the only option. He
was previously a supporter of a referendum for Iran but thought
the time for that initiative had passed. In his view,
evolutionary reform is possible in Iran, but it would take at
least 10-20 years. If in the meantime, however, Iran acquires a
nuclear bomb, the government will consolidate its power, ending
the possibility of reform. He is convinced that Iran aims to
build a nuclear bomb and says -- without claiming any insider
information -- that he agrees more with Israeli than US
estimates, putting the timeframe at six months to three years.
In his view, the US should act within this short window.

4.(S/NF) In contrast, the MP said reformers were gaining ground
in Iran, albeit one millimeter at a time. As proof, he cited
the success of 18 reformist parties agreeing on a common list
for the Tehran municipal elections, in contrast to the
conservatives, who have multiple competing lists. He noted,
however, the possibility of fraud distorting the results of the
election. The MP thought the December 11 student demonstration
against Ahmadinejad at Amir Kabir University was particularly
significant, occurring during election week. He saw little
significance, however, in the Assembly of Experts election. In
the long-term, he thought that Ahmadinejad's policies were so
ill-conceived they would eventually lead to the country to a
dead-end, to the advantage of reformers. He said that while it
was true the Iranian people were disappointed in Khatami, they
now see that it can get a lot worse, noting that Khatami's
presidency gave people a standard for comparison to conservative
presidents.

5.(S/NF) The professor maintained that elections in Iran have no
legitimacy or import. It makes no difference who wins the
Assembly of Experts election or municipal elections; there will
be no change. He dismissed talk of rivalry between
arch-conservative Ayatollah Mesbah-Yazdi and the Supreme Leader
or between Ahmadinejad and former presidential candidate, now
mayor of Tehran, Mohammad Baqer GHALIBAF. He didn't dispute the
rivalries but said one in office meant no qualitative difference

RPO DUBAI 00000019 002.2 OF 003


over the other. When asked whether the goal of the IRGC was to
support the clerical government or draw power from the clerics
to themselves, again he saw little difference between the two
groups. In fact, he said some non-clerics were worse than the
clerics, such as Minister of Culture Saffar Harandi.

Regime change or change from within?
--------------

6.(S/NF) The professor maintained that the only option that the
Iranian government fears and the only one that would likely be
effective is outside military intervention. Iran, he said, has
braced itself to endure any form of economic sanctions for at
least a decade. Furthermore, Iran has allies, such as China,
Japan, Russia, and Europe to help mitigate the impact of
sanctions. In any case, he argued, sanctions are an ineffective
diplomatic tool that take at least 10 years to be effective, if
ever. In his view, the US has no option on Iran but military
action. Unlike North Korea, Iran wants to be a regional and
international power, and it would use its perceived
invulnerability once armed with a nuclear bomb to assert its
influence.

7.(S/NF) When asked if outside military intervention would
provoke a nationalistic backlash, the professor said no. He
said the Iranian government was so unrepresentative of Iranian
culture that Iranians would not rally around it. Later in the
conversation, he estimated that currently only 10 percent of the
Iranian population support the government. He claimed to be
well-placed to take the pulse of the population, through his law
clients, his students, and his contact with the agricultural
sector (he owns a farm). (Note: Many IRPO interlocuters have
given similar estimates -- 10-15 percent -- for the percentage
of the Iranian population that supports the government.
Endnote.)

8.(S/NF) The professor also maintained that US aggressive action
against Iran would not be viewed as neo-imperialism, noting that
the only legitimate elections in the region have been held in
Afghanistan and Iraq following US invasions. These elections,
he said, belie the accusation of imperialism. At the same time,
the professor maintained that the US push for democratization
across the region is flawed as it will only allow greater public
support for Islamists, citing the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.
The majority of Iranians are pro-American -- he said certainly
60 percent, perhaps as high as 70 percent -- largely because the
government is against America, unlike in Saudi Arabia or Egypt
where the reverse was true. (Note: An Amcit journalist
recently in Iran told IRPOff that in his view, Iranians are
pro-Americans but not necessarily pro-US policy, comparing
current Iranian public opinion to Saudi views six years ago.
The professor mentioned that support for the Palestinians and
the establishment of a Palestinian state was prevalent in Iran
but noted the Iranians don't like paying for it. Endnote)

9.(S/NF) The professor was dismissive of the ability of
expatriate Iranians to effectively spearhead change in Iran,
although he indicated that coordination among expatriate groups
was better than before. At one point he suggested a type of
government in exile, along the lines of the Iraqi National
Congress. He claimed his own intention was to continue to work
for change from inside Iran.

10.(S/NF) By contrast, the reformist MP said that, despite his
dislike for the government ("Ahmadinejad is crazy"),now is not
the time for US aggression against Iran or a regime change
policy. With the ongoing conflicts in Iraq, Lebanon, Israel,
West Bank, and Gaza, a new conflict would be too dangerous,
particularly in light of Iran's hand in all of these places. He
argued that democracy should be allowed to evolve internally in
Iran. He accused the government of trying to close off
information to the Iranian people, in order to make them
ignorant and impose "Islamic-Fascism," but predicted they would
fail For instance, he said the Majles was reducing press
coverage of its deliberations. According to the MP's math,
two-thirds of the population fall into the educated class --
implying they were immune from such efforts -- and one-third
into the "poor" class. Of that "poor" class, some support the
government for its religious ideology, some for its populist
economic promises. When those promises don't pan out, that
support would dissipate. He also claimed that only 10 percent
of the population were hard-core supporters of the government.

Both agree US correct to depose Saddam Hussein
-------------- -

RPO DUBAI 00000019 003.2 OF 003



11.(S/NF) Both the professor and the MP were supportive of US
decisions to invade Iraq. The professor, however, thought the
US had made mistakes in Iraq after the invasion, particularly
disbanding the Iraqi army. In any case, he added, the situation
in Iraq is very different from what the situation in Iran would
be after an attack. He claimed the majority of the violence in
Iraq is not directed at the US but is the result of an internal
power struggle. Unlike in Afghanistan (or Iran),the aim of the
Iraq invasion was not just regime change but also a power
redistribution away from the minority Arab Sunnis, towards the
majority Arab Shia and the minority Kurdish Sunnis, implying
there was no issue of redivision of power in Iran. This shift
away from minority rule is the root of the violence in Iraq, he
said, and he criticized the US for not making this clearer in
its public rhetoric.

12.(S/NF) The MP declared his happiness that Saddam was gone,
having lost 12 members of his family in the war. He criticized
the Iraq Study Group report, because he believed it implied that
getting rid of Saddam had been a wrong decision. In fact, he
lamented that the ISG's conclusions bolstered the Iranian
government's self-confidence for the central role it proscribed
for Iran in regional matters. He believed the ongoing violence
in Iraq was the unavoidable aftermath of ending a dictatorship.
He also felt that Iran does not have the same kind of ethnic
problems as Iraq. He opposed the notion of US dialogue with
Iran at this time, when some Iranian officials feel they have
gained an upper-hand in the region. Instead, the US should
continue to put pressure on the government and to engage the
Iranian people, making clear to them the US will not trade human
rights to make a deal with the government.

13.(S/NF) Comment: Both interlocutors are serious political
actors from the reformist camp, with the difference that the
former MP broke with the system (although he is still allowed to
teach and practice law),and the current MP continues to walk a
fine line, although he doubts he will be allowed to run again.
On the subject of US military intervention, we occasionally meet
Iranians living inside Iran who support it. An ongoing contact,
a Tehran businessman, recently repeated the same plea to IRPO
director. An Iranian-American who recently traveled to Iran
said a friend of his, a businessman with large government
construction contracts, had told him a US invasion was the only
path to change in Iran. This sub-source predicted 20,000 US
soldiers would die in the conflict, but "there was no other
choice." The professor, however, did not offer a clear
description of what he envisions happening post-conflict.
Separately, the MP did not substantially engage on the nuclear
issue or its impact on evolutionary trends. He appears to be
counting on Ahmadinejad's flawed policies to lead to the
downfall of conservatives. Overall, the majority of our
interlocutors warn against foreign intervention, saying it would
drive Iranians closer to their government, allowing it to
further consolidate its power. The majority of our
interlocutors also see merit in dialogue between the two
countries, but there is a prevalent nervousness that we will
"sell out" democracy activists to get a deal on the nuclear
issue and regional conflicts. There also remains the sense that
no group wants another to get the credit for breaking the thaw
between the US and Iran.
BURNS