Q&A
Aaron David Miller, Karim Sadjadpour, Robin Wright
{
"authors": [
"Karim Sadjadpour"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "menaTransitions",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "MEP",
"programs": [
"Middle East"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"Middle East",
"Iran"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
The Continuing Opposition Movement in Iran
The Obama administration is trying to reconcile its continuing diplomacy with the Iranian regime and its desire to show support and solidarity for the demands of the Iranian people.
Published on Jan 15, 2010
Source: CNN
Welcome both you gentlemen to the program. I want to ask you, Hooman, about this issue of the parliament censuring Saeed Mortazavi, the dreaded prosecutor-general. What do you make of that, the significance of it?
HOOMAN MAJD, AUTHOR, "THE AYATOLLAH BEGS TO DIFFER": Well, I think it's very significant, particularly now. In the last week or so, the government seems to have backed off many of its accusations against the opposition, that they're fomenting a velvet revolution. They're even not using the word anymore, "velvet revolution."
AMANPOUR: Where do you get that from?
MAJD: They're not using "fetneh." (ph) From talking to the opposition in Tehran, people in the opposition, and -- and following what's going on in Tehran through contacts there. They've stopped even using the word "velvet revolution."
I think there's a -- there's a realization that they're going to have to deal with some of these issues that have been brought up by Mousavi, Karroubi, and Khatami. I think -- and Rafsanjani, as well. One of them is the prison abuse. And I think parliament and, of course, Ali Larijani, the speaker of parliament, is no fan of Ahmadinejad's and is, although a conservative, generally opposed to Ahmadinejad and opposed to his government.
So I think you're going to see some more of this, and it's not really going to be scapegoating. It's going to be pretty intensive.
AMANPOUR: And, Karim, you know, obviously, there's a lot of wishful thinking when it comes in certain quarters to projecting what people would like to see happening in Iran. People are trying to figure, is there a winner? Is there a loser? What's going to happen? Today, how do you analyze what's going to happen?
KARIM SADJADPOUR, CARNEGIE ENDOWMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL PEACE: It's obviously difficult to say, Christiane. Iran is not a monolithic society. That being said, I think many people predicted back in June that these protests would fizzle out after a few weeks. They said the protestors are only the urban elite in northern Tehran, they're disunited, and they're not going to go anywhere. And I think, six months later, we see that these protests actually transcend socioeconomic classes and they remain strong.
And I remember your guest, Professor Marandi, said six months ago that the protests were going to be dead.
So I think that -- I wouldn't -- I am less confident that Hooman -- than Hooman is that we're seeing some types of conciliation. I think that the demands of the opposition have only hardened with time.
AMANPOUR: Well, have they? I'm interested in you saying that, because, in fact, it seems that Mr. Mousavi, after the Ashura demonstrations and on January 1st, his latest pronouncements have stopped calling for a change of government and for an overthrow of Ahmadinejad. Am I right?
SADJADPOUR: Yes. Yes.
AMANPOUR: And do you believe the people and the opposition are calling for a revolution?
MAJD: I don't believe that the opposition is calling for -- the organized opposition, the opposition that we know, Mousavi, Karroubi, and Khatami, are calling for a -- they're certainly not calling for a revolution. They've made it very clear that they're not calling for a revolution, including Khatami's latest statement from a couple of days ago.
So I think that -- and in demand that you were talking about, to have a new election, that demand has gone away, although he did refer to free elections, so the implication is that they do want free elections, and they want them sooner, rather than later, for -- for the presidency.
I -- I don't think that -- I think that Mousavi and Karroubi and Khatami -- now, if you believe that they are the leaders of this movement - - some people disagree that they're the leaders anymore -- but if you believe that they are -- and I tend to believe that they still are -- they do want to have reform, they want to have change, they want to have free elections, they want to go back to the principles of the constitution and the Islamic republic. And I think the majority of the supporters certainly feel that way, too.
AMANPOUR: So more of a civil rights movement...
MAJD: I believe it is that.
AMANPOUR: ... than a revolution?
MAJD: That's how they're determining it. That's how they're analyzing it, yeah.
AMANPOUR: Well, this is interesting, Karim, to ask you, because you're obviously in touch with a lot of the American policymakers. And clearly, many of them, as I say, there's a lot of projection, a lot of wishful thinking, hoping that they -- the government won't have to make the hard decisions, the people of Iran will. How is this going to affect U.S. policy, particularly right now when the nuclear issue is coming up yet again, in fact, this weekend?
SADJADPOUR: Christiane, I don't think anyone in Washington believes that the collapse of the Islamic republic is imminent. I think people take what's happening in Iran seriously. They think the regime is in a state of crisis. But I think the Obama administration is going to move forward with diplomacy. The door of dialogue is going to remain open with Iran on the nuclear issue, on issues like Afghanistan and Iraq.
But they also want to reconcile that with show of support and solidarity for the demands of the Iranian people. Hooman mentioned the term civil rights movement. I think that the Obama administration is looking at this within the context of a civil rights movement. They're not looking at it as a potential revolutionary moment.
But I think, Christiane, they want to be on the right side of history. President Obama has said this many times over about being on the right side of history. And I would argue -- and I think I would argue and feel confident in saying that the vast majority of Iran's very youthful population believes that the regime is on the wrong side of history.
AMANPOUR: OK, well, then let me ask you, Hooman, if the United States wants to be on the right side of history, what is it going to do? Because sanctions seem to be the next step; at least that's what they're preparing at the U.N., it seems. And are they going to be crippling? Are they going to be targeted? How are they going to not hurt the Iranian people?
MAJD: Well, it appears that they -- they -- the administration has backed off the crippling sanctions, as Hillary Clinton once talked about, so now it's about targeted sanctions and targeting the Revolutionary Guards and the Basij forces. But the problem with that is that it does hurt ordinary Iranians, because the Revolutionary Guards are involved in every business. I have friends in Iran, family in Iran who are businessmen, but they have to have partners in the -- or they do have partners in the Revolutionary -- they -- they will be affected.
And these are not people who are in the administration of Ahmadinejad or even pro-Ahmadinejad. They're actually anti-Ahmadinejad people, but that's the way the -- the tentacles of the Revolutionary Guards are spread far and wide throughout business.
So I don't know that you can do any -- you can impose any kind of sanctions that will not affect Iranian people. And every opposition leader has come against sanctions, so...
AMANPOUR: All right. On that note -- and we're going to continue to follow this. We'll talk to you again at another time. Thank you so much for being with us, both Hooman Majd and Karim Sadjadpour.
About the Author
Karim Sadjadpour
Senior Fellow, Middle East Program
Karim Sadjadpour is a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, where he focuses on Iran and U.S. foreign policy toward the Middle East.
- What’s Keeping the Iranian Regime in Power—for Now
- How Washington and Tehran Are Assessing Their Next StepsQ&A
Aaron David Miller, David Petraeus, Karim Sadjadpour
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- A New Generation Takes Power in NepalArticle
The incoming government has swept Nepal’s election. The real work begins now.
Amish Raj Mulmi
- Operation Epic Fury and the International Law on the Use of ForcePaper
Assessing U.S. compliance with the international laws of war is essential at a time when these frameworks are already fraying.
Federica D’Alessandra
- Moldova Floats a New Approach to Its Transnistria ConundrumCommentary
Moldova’s reintegration plan was drawn up to demonstrate to Brussels that Chișinău is serious about the Transnistria issue—and to get the West to react.
Vladimir Solovyov
- Iran Rewrites Its War StrategyCommentary
In an interview, Hamidreza Azizi discusses how Tehran has adapted in real time to the conflict with the United States and Israel.
Michael Young
- Japan’s Security Policy Is Still Caught Between the Alliance and Domestic RealityArticle
Japan’s response to U.S. pressure over Hormuz highlights a broader dilemma: How to preserve the alliance while remaining bound by legal limits, public opinion, and an Asia-centered security agenda. Tokyo gained diplomatic space through an alliance-embracing strategy, but only under conditions that may not endure.
Ryo Sahashi
