Iran Elections Resources

TALKING POINTS and WEB LINKS: Iran Election

• Iran’s Presidential election took place last Friday, June 12, with a large turnout of voters.
• The main contenders were incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and challenger, former Prime Minister Mir Hossein Moussavi.
• After the vote, both sides immediately claimed victory. The Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Khamenei declared Ahmadinejad the winner.
• Massive protests broke out in Iran’s capitol city, Tehran. Hundreds of thousands are estimated to have protested. Protests were largely peaceful, but riot police beat protesters with batons and dispersed crowds with tear gas. Some demonstrators lit fires in Tehran.
• The Basij, a volunteer paramilitary group, opened fire into a crowd of protesters killing at least 1 and injuring several others.
• Ahmadinejad largely ignored the protests, shutting down media coverage.
• Iranians got the word out on what was happening using “new media” like twitter and facebook and blogs.
• Ayatollah Khamenei back pedaled from his original statement that the election was fair when he ordered a 10-day review of the election, a process that usually takes only 3 days.
• Protesters were emboldened by Khamenei’s call for an inquiry into the election.
• The Obama Administration has expressed concern at the situation in Iran but has been very careful about picking a side politically. MORE OBAMA COMMENTS HERE
• International Response:
• German Chancellor Angela Merkel said there were signs of irregularities in Iran’s presidential election and urged a transparent examination of the results.
• United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon is urging Iran’s leaders to respect the will of their people as they investigate allegations of fraud in the election.

National Iranian American Council Blog

New York Times online Iran Page:

The Lede New York Times blog: Updates on Iran’s Disputed Election

The Huffington Post Iran Updates (Video): Live-Blogging the Uprising

Patrick Disney:

"On Iran, the Power of Obama's Silence" (by Patrick Disney, Huffington Post, 6/14/09)

Trita Parsi:

“How Diplomacy with Iran Can Succeed” (by Trita Parsi, Huffington Post, 6/11/09)

“Congress-Ahmadeinjad Secret Love Affair Continues” (by Trita Parsi, Huffington Post, 6/11/09)

Stephen Zunes:

“Has the Election Been Stolen in Iran?” (by Stephen Zunes, Alternet, 6/13/09)

“Iran’s Stolen Election Has Sparked an Uprising – What Should the U.S. Do?” (by Stephen Zunes, Alernet, 6/15/09)

Robert Naiman:

“Based on Terror Free Tomorrow Poll, Ahmadinejad Victory Was Expected” (by Robert Naiman, Huffington Post, 6/15/09)

Farrah Hassen:

“Lifting the Veil” (by Farrah Hassen, Institute for Policy Studies, 6/4/09)

IPS staff page

Robert Dreyfuss:

“Iran’s Ex-Foreign Minister Yazdi: It’s a Coup” (by Robert Dreyfuss, The Nation, 6/13/09)

“Iranians Poised for Change” (by Robert Dreyfuss, The Nation, 6/12/09)

“Dennis Ross’s Iran Plan” (by Robert Dreyfuss, The Nation, 4/8/09)

Getting to Zero

Nuclear Strategic Posture Review

Report Findings: The GOOD

• The report stresses the essential need for U.S. leadership on nuclear issues
• The report urges the U.S. and Russia to reduce the size of their nuclear arsenals
• The report underscores the importance of sustaining and strengthening the global nonproliferation regime
• The report calls on the U.S. to demonstrate that it relies less than ever on nuclear weapons for political and military purposes
• The report insists that maintenance and modernization of the U.S. nuclear stockpile should occur within the constraints of existing U.S. policy
• The report states that the U.S. should reaffirm its Article VI Non-Proliferation Treaty commitment to move toward complete and total disarmament “directly and forcefully”

Report Findings: The BAD

• The report fails to recommend ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT)
• The report greatly overstates the degree to which extended nuclear deterrence, the nuclear umbrella that the U.S. extends to protect its allies, is a key factor driving the size and characteristics of the U.S. nuclear arsenal
• The report presents an imbalanced assessment of the Stockpile Stewardship Program and the Life Extension Program, a science-based effort to maintain confidence in the safety and reliability of the nation’s nuclear arsenal absent nuclear testing
• The report paints a misleading picture of the modernization programs of Russia and China in relation to U.S. efforts to maintain its deterrent
• The report’s assessment of the key threat to U.S. national security does not warrant the large role that it continues to assign nuclear weapons

“Final Report of the Congressional Commission on the Nuclear Strategic Posture of the United States” (by Kingston Reif, The Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, May 6, 2009)

Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty

3 Pillars – Non-Proliferation, Disarmament, Peaceful Use of Nuclear Energy

Wikipedia on NPT

“Our Best Weapon Against Nuclear Proliferation” (Partnership for a Secure America, May, 2009)

Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty

Comprehensive Nuclear-Test Ban Treaty Organization

Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty text

“The Logic of the Test Ban Treat” (by Daryl Kimball, Arms Control Association, May 2009)

“A Strategy for Achieving Senate Approval of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty” (by John Isaacs, The Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, April 15, 2009)

START Talks

The Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty or “START” will expire on December 5^th of this year. Both the U.S. and Russia have committed to completing an updated treaty for arms reduction by December of this year.

“Obama Administration is Bringing Nuclear Arms Control Back” (by Mary Beth Sheridan, Washington Post, May 8, 2009)

“ANALYSIS – Russia-U.S. ties have tentative start” (by Sue Pleming, Reuters, May 6, 2009)

“START Follow-On Treaty and Further Nuclear Reductions: Where are we?” (by John Isaacs, The Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, April 13, 2009)

High-Alert Nuclear Weapons: The Forgotten Danger (by Steven Starr, Scientists for Global Responsibility, October 2008)

MORE on Nuclear Weapons, Nonproliferation and Disarmament

President Obama: 100 Days of Significant Progress (by John Isaacs, The Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, April 28, 2009)

“Is the Next Defense Budget a Stimulus Package?” (by Frida Berrigan, New America Foundation, March 12, 2009)

“Catastrophic Climate Consequences of Nuclear Conflict” (by Steven Starr, International Network of Engineers and Scientists Against Proliferation, April 2008)

Nuclear Darkness & Global Climate Change: The Deadly Consequences of Nuclear War (website of Steven Starr)

WMD Report Card: Evaluating U.S. Policies to Prevent Nuclear, Chemical & Biological Terrorism Since 2005 (Partnership for a Secure America, 2008)

“Pakistan nuclear projects raise U.S. fears” (by Simon Tisdall, Guardian, May 3, 2009)

“Gates on Nuclear Disarmament: Not So Fast” (by Nathan Hodge, Wired, May 4, 2009)

Columbia's Internally Displaced Persons

Colombian Policies

With four million internally displaced people, Colombia is home to the
Western Hemisphere’s greatest humanitarian crisis, and ongoing conflict
has forced half a million people to flee to neighboring countries. Taking bold action to change U.S. policy in Colombia would mean:

• Ending all military aid to Colombia
• Using U.S. influence to promote a negotiated end to the conflict
• Prioritizing social and humanitarian funding for internally displaced persons and refugees, and supporting victims’ efforts to find truth and obtain justice and reparations
• Forging economic relationships that protect and create opportunities for small farmers, the rural poor, and endangered workers, rather than passing a free trade agreement capable of pushing Colombia’s poor further into poverty
• Ending fumigation and forced eradication programs that have pushed thousands of farmers from their lands without reducing coca production
  

Seven Steps to a Just and effective U.S. Policy

1. Use U.S. Aid and Leverage for Human rights and the rule of Law. The United States should take a principled stance in favor of protecting human rights and strengthening the rule of law in Colombia. This requires a decided shift in U.S. diplomacy to a tougher approach that helps Colombia end impunity, protect human rights defenders, preserve the judiciary’s independence and strengthen its capacity, and improve the security forces’ human rights performance. U.S. policy must insist that the Colombian government fully dismantle paramilitary networks and support victims’ efforts for truth, justice, and reparations.
2. Actively Support Overtures for Peace. Now is a moment when careful, renewed efforts to achieve peace could progress. In a war that threatens to go on indefinitely, the immense suffering of the civilian population demands that Colombia, its neighbors, and members of the international community, including the United States, take risks to achieve peace. The United States must make clear its desire to see a negotiated outcome in the near term, support the involvement of mediators who can lay the groundwork for face-to-face dialogue, and back the Organization of American States and other regional forums that strengthen regional cooperation. Actively supporting peace also means that the United States cannot continue endlessly bankrolling war.
3. Support expansion of the Government’s civilian Presence in the countryside. The key to peace in Colombia lies in governing rural zones in ways that address poverty and inequality. The U.S. government should reconfigure the Colombia aid package to focus on strengthening Colombia’s civilian government, particularly its attention to the rural population. This assistance should include alternative development and rural development programs, expand access to justice, and strengthen local governments’ capacity to deliver basic services. But U.S. aid is a temporary fix that should be designed to be phased out. U.S. policy should encourage the Colombian government to devote budget resources to and deliver sustainable, accountable basic government services to poor rural conflict zones.
4. Protect the rights of Internally Displaced Persons and refugees. Colombia is second only to Sudan/Darfur in the number of internally displaced people (IDPs). The United States must make prevention of displacement and protection of IDPs a top priority. The U.S. government can help prevent displacement by insisting that the Colombian government dismantle paramilitary networks and that Colombia’s armed forces respect the distinction between combatants and civilians. It should increase aid providing durable solutions for IDPs and refugees and encourage the Colombian government to abide by the Constitutional Court’s landmark decision about its responsibilities to IDPs. U.S. policy should urge the Colombian government to insist upon return of land illegally held by demobilized ex-combatants.
5. Protect the rights of Afro-Colombian and Indigenous communities. The U.S. government should protect Afro-Colombian and indigenous communities that have been disproportionately affected by displacement and the ravages of war, with special attention to their vulnerable land rights. It should encourage the Colombian government to complete land titling for Afro-Colombian communities, call for full return of land to displaced communities, and guarantee that U.S. aid projects are not carried out on land obtained by violence. U.S. policymakers should use the human rights conditions in U.S. law to insist that the Colombia’s armed forces not violate these communities’ human rights and land rights.
6. Ensure that trade Policy Supports, Not Undermines, Policy Goals towards Colombia. The United States should insist on progress in respect for labor rights, especially in reducing violence against trade unionists and ending impunity in such cases, prior to any vote on a trade agreement. Any trade agreement should protect the livelihoods of Colombia’s small farmers and make the reduction of poverty a central goal. This is not just a question of fairness: it ensures that a trade agreement will not undermine major U.S. policy goals, such as reducing small farmers’ dependence upon coca and poppy, helping the government establish governance in the countryside, and ending the conflict.
7. Get Serious—and Smart—about Drug Policy. The United States is overdue for a major course correction in its drug control strategy, in Colombia and the Andean region. The U.S. government must stop bankrolling the inhumane and disastrously ineffective aerial herbicide spray program, which has only served to deepen small farmers’ reliance on crops for illicit use. With the goal of gradual and sustainable reductions in coca growing, the U.S. government should invest in alternative development programs designed and carried out in close coordination with affected communities. Drug enforcement efforts should focus higher up the distribution chain, disrupting money laundering, and apprehending violent traffickers and organized crime bosses. Most importantly, the administration and Congress should make improved access to high-quality drug treatment in the United States the centerpiece of American drug policy, with ambitious increases in funding for services and research. Without such a commitment to reducing demand for illicit drugs here at home, even the best efforts in Colombia will make little difference in either country.
   

A new direction in U.S. policy towards Colombia that:

• Stops Endlessly Bankrolling War and Uses U.S. Influence to Promote Peace. In a war that threatens to go on indefinitely, the immense suffering of the civilian population demands that Colombians take risks to achieve peace and the United States lends its weight to this effort. Actively supporting peace also means that the United States must stop endlessly bankrolling war and should instead provide social and humanitarian assistance to Colombia’s 4 million internally displaced.
• Supports Victims’ Efforts to Find Truth, Justice, and Reparations. Armed actors from all sides have terrorized civilians with heinous crimes like disappearances, kidnappings, and massacres. In many cases, when someone has decided to speak out, they’ve simply been assassinated. The United States must stand by and empower the truly courageous individuals—human rights defenders, victims, judges, prosecutors, union leaders, and countless others—who are the driving forces for a more just and peaceful Colombia.
• Strengthens Respect for Human Rights by Ending Impunity. According to recent news reports and documentation by human rights groups, in recent years the Colombian army has carried out hundreds of extrajudicial killings of innocent, unarmed civilians. The United States must enforce the human rights conditions in law and demand justice in these cases.
• Ensures that Trade Policy Supports, Not Undermines, Overall U.S. Goals. Colombia remains the most dangerous place in the world to be a trade unionist. The United States must insist that those who kill or threaten trade leaders are brought to justice. We should also make sure that our trade policies protect and create opportunities for small farmers, the rural poor, and endangered workers, rather than driving these groups into further poverty.
• Rethinks Drug Policy. It’s time to end the harmful aerial spraying program that has pushed thousands of farmers from their lands without reducing coca production. Instead, we should be investing in drug prevention and rehabilitation programs to reduce demand for drugs here at home.