I was a guest last week on the BBC World's Have your say programme, talking about Iran, Syria and Israel's nuclear programmes. Predictably, the other guests were all Pro-Israel Jewish Americans, but I think I didn't do that bad in challenging their usual self-fulfilling prophecy. Does anyone know if a transcript is available?
Here is the official BBC description of the show:
Does every country have the right to be nuclear? (Listen to the entire show - MP3 file)
25 April 2008
America has accused Syria or developing a reactor with North Korea's help. If it was there, it's not anymore as Israel bombed the site. Syria says the accusations are nonsense. But what of the principle here... Why shouldn't Syria or any other country develop nuclear facilities whether for weapons or energy? 45 african countries have expressed their desire for nuclear power... Would you oppose them getting it?
Duration: 51mins | File Size: 24MB
In order to know more about Mehdi Khalaji and why the infamous Israeli-lobby's think-tank, WINEP, has hired him, here is a paragraph from his latest Policy paper, published online by WINEP:
For the president, the Hidden Imam sanctions his aggressive and defying policy toward the West. More worryingly, certain Shiite traditions state that the Imam’s return will come at a time of world chaos, and Ahmadinezhad seems at times to promote chaos for that end. Meanwhile, for the Supreme Leader, there is no theological or ideological restraint for producing weapons of mass destruction or waging offensive wars. While Iranian diplomats repeat that according to Islamic law it is prohibited to kill innocent civilians or produce nuclear weapons, the theological views of the Supreme Leader are not consistent with this claim.
If you are a Jewish Iranian, living in the U.S. from the age of 6, it is very likely you don't like Ahmadinejad. So of course you would like to show how you hate him and how he is such a liar and how evil the entire government he represents is, in any way you can.
So you decide to attack one of the only positive angles Iran has been reported: Sex-change. And why not connect it to Ahmadinejad's speech in your city's university, Columbia, where he said in Iran homosexuality doesn't exist the same way it does in the U.S. (We all know the united Republican/Democrat anti-Iran front translated that to a denial of homosexuals in Iran.)
Tannaz Eshaghian's 'Be Like Others' (or 'Transsexual in Iran,' as BBC titled it) is a well-made documentary, but it is dishonest and unfair.(Watch it on iPlayer) It basically try to say being gay in Iran is so hard that forces gay men to go through the brutal process of sex-change. So even though the Islamic Republic look surprisingly cool with transsexuality on the surface, it is actually killing scores of gay men by separating them from their family, forcing them into a constant struggle of identity, inflicting physical and psychological pain on them -- and turning them into prostitutes, in the end.
But this is not exactly what every viewer would see in the film. They might ask, for instance, if being gay is so hard, how come Ali (Anoush's boyfriend) doesn't feel marginalized, isolated, or even under any kind of pressure?
Ali likes Anoush even before Anoush does the sex-change operation and while he still has male sexual organs. So if Iran is so cruel to homosexuals and hangs them, how come Ali is still not only walking, but working as a hairdresser and even is so comfortable with his name, face and identity be revealed by the film?
Ali's character, in my mind, is the most important one in the film and he is the one that undoes the main message of them film. He is a living evidence of how homosexuality exists in Iran and how and why it is tolerated, and Eshaghian fails to bring it into her core message of the film.
He shows how homosexuality, as a social phenomenon, doesn't exist in Iran because the lines between being straight and gay has historically been blurred in the Iranian culture. Sexuality has never been forced into strict categories in Iran and this could be quite related to what Judith Butler argues in her work.
But the film is also dishonest in details. The most important part, which is also central to the core of the message, is when she shamelessly mistranslates the young cleric who defends sex-change operations. He says transsexuality has nothing to do with homosexuality which is "immoral and irreligious". But guess how it is translated by Eshaghian to twist his logic: "something unnatural and against religion." Wow!
I don't want to get into the list of funders and producers of the film. But I can't resist the temptation of raising two questions. Especially given the continuous anti-Iran propaganda the BBC Two has produced and showed in the past few years.
a) Why Alexandra Kerry's name (Yes, John Kerry's daughter), as a co-producer is missing from the BBC credits?
b) Why the name of another co-producer, Ilan Ziv, an Israeli film-maker and producers with such films as Human Weapon (on the history of suicide bombing traced back to Iran), People Power (on 'non-violent revolutions around the world' with insight from Gene Sharp, 'a leading expert on non-violent struggles') is also removed from the BBC credits?
Three months in the wonderful SOAS' MA programme as the Film and Media centre, I can say the most important thing I've learned so far is summarised in two readings:
Both are challenging the notion of the society as a systematic, coherent and total(ised) entity, as well as demystifying the concept of masses, as a de-historised, finalised, totallised, passive and easily controllable concept.
Basically, unlike what a lot of media theories constitute, media can't simply control the masses, even though the elite who runs the media tend to think so.
A great recent example to me is a new poll (I know that polls are not reliable for the same reason that there is no such thing as masses, accorind at least to Baudrillard) that shows two third of the Israelis are not yet bought into the idea of the necessity of attacking Iran; and all this despite such severe and ongoing propaganda against Iran in Israel by almost all the media outlets.
That doesn't mean activists should not resist the process of hegemonic articulation according to the interests of the rich and the powerful in any given society. But they (or maybe I should say we here) should all be aware that putting all our energy in countering these processes of articulation is as ineffective on the public opinion as the attempts by those who run the media.
Mehdi Khalaji, an Iranian 'expert' at the Washington Institute for the Near East Policy (WINEP) has now officially filed a libel and defamation lawsuit against me in Canada and has claimed $2,000,000 damages. َQuite a modest champion of free speech, isn't he?
Why? Because I've been very critical about him serving the likes of Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, James Woosley and the rest of those filthy warmongers at the Washington Institute for the Near East Policy (WINEP), which was established by and is strongly associated with the Israeli Lobby's in the United States, according to Mearsheimer and Walt. As a result, I have written that Khalaji, an advoacte of the economic warfare against Iran, is a traitor to his people and his country, as a result.
The new claims are again based on the same mistranslation of my writings on him which I exposed and refuted in length a while ago, when he threatened my hosting company (Florida-based Hosting Matters) that led them to promptly terminate the accounts I had with them.
Now apparently, with the backing of his friends at the Israeli lobby's think-tank, he is trying to bankrupt me by starting this silly legal procedure.
I would appreciate it if you could spread the word in your blogs or websites and also if you've got any tips on the right organisation or lawyer to approach. One way would be obviously Digging it.
Here is the full text of the claim if you like to see.
Here is also again his claims and my refutation. I wonder if the court had accepted the claim in the first place, had it known it was based on aa mistranslation of my writings:
These defamatory statements by Hossein Derakhshan directly and by innuendo:
a) state falsely that our client is a traitor to the government and people of Iran;
Mehdi Khalaji is hired by a think-tank, created by the Israeli lobbying group in the US (AIPAC)[1] and has openly advocated for military action[2] or economic sanctions[3] to overthrow the government of Iran[4]. Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz and James Woolsey, all strong advocates for regime change in Iran[5][6], are on its board[7].
Washington Institute for the Near East Policy (WINEP), Mr. Khalaji works for[8], has a clear agenda against Iran and that makes Mr. Khalaji, an Iranian citizen, a 'traitor' based on the definition of the word. (The American Heritage dictionary defines 'traitor' as “One who betrays one's country, a cause, or a trust.”[9])
b) state falsely that our client has worked for U.S. Vice-President Cheney's office; and by innuendo is a dupe or puppet of the U.S. government;
Mistranslated. The correct translation is that Mr. Khalaji “indirectly” and “through WINEP” gives advise to vice-president Cheney's office.
WINEP's director, Robert Satloff says that its products have been made accessible to “high-level Washington-based officials, prominent journalists, and senior diplomats.”[10] Vice-president's office is surly where many “high-level Washington-based officials” work and therefore WINEP's products, that includes Mr. Khalaji's contribution, reach Mr. Cheney's office.
There are also strong ties between WINEP and Cheney's office. For example, John P. Hannah, a deputy director of WNEP now serves[11] at a high position at the vice-president's office since 2001.
c) state falsely that our client has counselled the Vice-President of the United States of America to bomb our client's former offices in Iran;
Mistranslated. What I have written is that it is Mr. Cheney who wants to bomb Iran[12], not that Mr. Khalaji advises him to do so. Mehdi Khalaji has worked [13] as a section editor in a newspaper, titled Entekhab run by Taha Hashemi, a cleric appointee[14] of Ayatollah Khamenei in a government-funded organization related to the Qom's clerical school.
Mr. Khalaji wrote later in an article for the BBC Persian that the publishers of Entekhab had the personal support of Ayatollah Khamenei for the newspaper.[15]
A military attack on Iran surly could also destroy the building of Entekhab newspaper in central Tehran, where Mehdi Khalaji was once working.
d) state falsely that our client has counselled the Vice-President of the United States of America to bomb our thousands of men, women and children;
Mistranslated. Again, what I have written is that it is Cheney who wants to bomb Iran, not that Khalaji advises him to do so. Obviously thousands of men and women and children would be killed in a military strike against Iran.
e) state falsely that our client counsels enemies of Iran and of humanity;
Based on its output, it's clear that WINEP does not have a friendly policy toward Iran and openly advocates for regime change. So they are enemies of Iran and Khalaji counsels them.
Given the grave consequences of the illegal US-led invasion of Iraq, I believe those who supported and administered that invasion are enemies of humanity. At least two of these people, Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle are on WINEP's board where Khalaji counsels and WINEP had repeatedly and openly supported the invasion.[16]
f) incites others to follow the defamer Hossein Derakhshan's lead by spitting in our client's face;
Mistranslated. The correct translation reads “I don't know what name you want to give this conscious intellectual contribution by Mr. Khalaji to the most merciless and dirtiest enemies of Iran and humanity. But I know that if someday I face him in person, instead of saying hello, I will through a big spit on his face.” There is nothing inciting others to do anything here.
g) state falsely that our client holds and publicizes the belief that political change is not possible from within Iran;
This is not false. Mehdi Khalaji finishes his presentation at the AFPC meeting with the following paragraph in which he bluntly rejects the possibility of reform (5' 55 form the video)[17]:
“The majority of people might not be [unclear word] to the political agenda of the government, but instead suffer from its policy and restrictions upon social freedom without possessing any concrete effective means for any change or reform. Idealism has been reconstructed not only in terms of government's perception of politics, but also in terms of citizens public ambitions. Thus, the regime seems to be more solid and stable as ever before. Therefore the prospect of the prospect for political change is dark.”
Moreover, in an interview with Radio Zamaneh he adds “well, for me the Islamic Republic is similar to Dariush Mehrjooie's film, 'Ejarehneshin-ha.' The owner of the building... doesn't permit any minor changes... Then what will happen? The whole building collapses.”[18]
h) state falsely that our client struggles to converse and express himself in the English language;
Mistranslated. Correct translation reads “Mehdi Khalaji, while sweating to read smoothly from the English translated text of his article.”
But it is true that Mr. Khalaji has problems, at least in terms of reading, pronunciation and intonation. The recorded video of his speech (mentioned above) clearly shows that Khalaji mispronounces or struggles to read and pronounces many words including 'entirety,' 'unprecedented' and ' judicial.'
i) state falsely that our client counsels the government of the United States of America to choose military action and economic sanctions against Iran, over and instead of diplomatic talks;
Mistranslated. The correct translation reads that Khalaji “tried to show why political change from within is impossible in Iran and therefore the U.S., in order to remove 'the increasing threat by Iran against world piece' should not negotiate with Iran. Instead, through economic sanctions (or implicitly even through military invasion if its it was feasible.)”
Khalaji said these words in a conference to an audience at the AFPC, not to the government. I didn't quoted from him, but sumerised in my own words what could he ultimately mean by his speech.
The words in quotation mark ('the increasing threat by Iran against world piece') refers to a widely used theme by the media and the politicians and by doing so I'm trying to mock the sterotypical aspect of those words.
j) state falsely that our client's academic research paper are in reality thinly veiled instruction manuals on how to locate and attack the weaknesses of the legitimate government of Iran;
In May 2006, Mehdi Khalaji says to a Wall Street Journal reporter “Western countries must push the internal conflicts inside the Iranian government.”[19]
In July 2007, in an article published on WINEP's website, Khalaji writes:
“For the West, there are many advantages if Iran's leadership is weakened by internal disputes. Such an Iran would be busier domestically and therefore less able to concentrate on foreign adventures. It would also be more aware of its weaknesses and therefore more likely to compromise. To be sure, a weak Supreme Leader would presumably have less authority to impose difficult compromises on objecting factions. That, however, seems like a price worth paying in order to see a less powerful revolutionary leadership.“[20]
k) state falsely that our client is a proponent of, and openly supports, civil unrest, revolution and a regime change in Iran through the use of the military, and violence if necessary; and
Mistranslated. I never implied Khalaji supports violent change. It is Khalaji's employer, the Washington Institute, who has advocated regime change through violence.
In February 2007, Jeffery White, a defence fellow at the Washington Institute, writes[21]:
“The choices for dealing with the Iranian challenge, both in and outside Iraq, are not clear, and the consequences of making the wrong choices are dire. But by the time the choices are clear, it will be too late for anything but acquiescence to the presence of a nuclear-armed Iran driven by hostility toward the West -- or a war to prevent it. “
But in his interview with Radio Zamaneh he explicitly advocates for a 'fundamental change', defining it as the removal of Ayatollah Khamanei, the Supreeme leader of the Islamic Republic, in a similar fashion to non-violent revolutions in Eastern Europe. He then adds that this fundamental change is “impossible without foreign assistance.”[22]
l) clearly evidence a personal vendetta being waged by Hossein Derakhshan against our client, under the guise of alleged "commentary."
Before Khalaji started working for the Washington Institute, I had written positive posts about him and his writings. [23] [24]
But since he started working for the neo-conservative Washington Institute with its clear agenda to overthrow the Islamic Republic, even through military action if necessary, I have been critical about Khalaji's contribution to such entity. The same way I have been critical of Mohsen Sazgera who was a fellow there before Khalaji. [25]
I have never met Khalaji and never had anything personal against him, either in public or private and what I have written about him is only based on his work.
At the same time, I am a established commentator on Iranian affairs. Aside from my bilingual blog that I have written in the past six years, I am a columnist for The Guardian[26], Washington Post[27] websites. My writings have also appeared on The New York Times[28], International Herald Tribune[29],, BBC News[30], Die Zeit[31], etc. and I have been interviewed by various print or broadcast media on Iranian affairs. [32]
- ^ http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/mear01_.html
- ^ http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC05.php?CID=2520
- ^ http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC04.php?CID=257
- ^ http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/download.php?file=Soref2006.pdf
- ^ http://www.antiwar.com/lobe/?articleid=4200
- ^ http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3422.htm
- ^ http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC11.php?CID=133
- ^ http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC10.php?CID=33
- ^ http://www.answers.com/topic/traitor
- ^ http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC11.php?CID=21
- ^ http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/2926
- ^ http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/18834.html
- ^ http://news.gooya.eu/politics/archives/2007/04/058513.php
- ^ http://www.shareh.com/new/persian/magazine/hawzah/61/01.htm
- ^ http://www.bbc.co.uk/persian/iran/story/2005/08/printable/050803_mj-mkhalaji-qom-press.shtml
- ^ http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC05.php?CID=1486
- ^ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAhLUjGPJ8Y
- ^ http://www.radiozamaneh.org/special/2007/04/post_188.html
- ^ http://www.opinionjournal.com/wsj/?id=110008382
- ^ http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC05.php?CID=2638
- ^ http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC05.php?CID=2567
- ^ http://www.radiozamaneh.org/special/2007/04/post_188.html
- ^ http://i.hoder.com/archives/2003/08/030805_007814.shtml
- ^ http://i.hoder.com/linkdooni/2004_03.html
- ^ http://i.hoder.com/archives/2005/03/050322_013794.shtml
- ^ http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/hossein_derakhshan/index.html
- ^ http://blog.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/hossein_derakhshan/
- ^ http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/28/opinion/28Derakhshan.html
- ^ http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/01/30/opinion/edhossein.php
- ^ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4947354.stm
- ^ http://www.zeit.de/2005/27/Iran
- ^ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hossein_Derakhshan#References
To be honest, with Bernard Kouchner's Cheney-style remarks, I suspect Sarkozy has paved the way for some sort of Israeli lobby to the French foreign policy machine, which I think is unprecedented.
This blog post, that I just found, gives more detail: Bernard Kouchner: Israel Got Lucky
Reports on an increased possibility of a US attack on Iran are raising some serious concerns. But I don't think it is anything but a psy-op, possibly this time by the liberals to frighten and provoke the Iranian government either to give up the enrichment or to do something stupid that could become a pretext for the more severe UN sanctions.
There is absolutely nothing Bush could gain from such attack and this is not something that only the liberals are saying. But even the most radical but realistic anti-Iranian policy makers in Israel, such as Avigdor Liberman, or in Washington, such as Patrick Clawson, acknowledge the fact that military attack is neither going to stop Iran from its nuclear programme, nor will it weaken or destabilise the government in any way.
And then it's also the Iranian response that could actually destabilise the markets everywhere leading to a serious energy crisis that could anger the EU, China and India and widen the split between the U.S. and the rest of the industrial world.
Knowing all this, Iran has carefully been censoring any news about an imminent attack to undo the psy-op and at the same time, all Iranian opposition, even Reza Pahlavi, have repeatedly said they were against military attack and now have no choice other showing some public contempt to save their integrity.
I suspect soon the U.S. would have no choice but to accept a nuclear Iran, the way Israel, according to senior strategist Ephraim Kam, is ready (PDF) to do so.
It is time to let the world know about Ephraim Kam's report which I am surprised why the Anglosaxon media has never paid enough attention to.
In case you haven't read it, here is the most important part of it:
Living with a Nuclear-Enabled Iran
The conclusion is threefold:
- The United States, Israel, and other countries must do their utmost to prevent Iran from achieving a nuclear capability, since once Iran has nuclear weapons it will be much harder (and militarily impossible) to effect any rollback and disarm it.
- The military move must be included in steps to be considered, both as an option in itself and as a means of increasing pressure on Iran.
- At the same time, these countries will have to prepare for a scenario in which Iran obtains nuclear weapons, all the while maintaining efforts to block this very outcome.
In preparing for this scenario, Israel must:
- Strengthen its deterrent capability towards Iran. Israel currently has limited deterrence against Iran's recourse to conventional weapons and terrorism, based on its strategic capabilities and its relations with the United States. This capability may ebb if Iran obtains nuclear weapons. Therefore, Israel must use the years until Iran attains nuclear capability and take additional steps to bolster its deterrence against a nuclear attack, including: convincing Iran that a nuclear attack on Israel may fail because of Israel’s anti-missile system; strengthening its deterrent credibility against the Iranian regime, and convincing Iran that should Israel be attacked with nuclear weapons, it would retain a response capability that would exact a heavy price from Iran.
- Strengthen strategic cooperation with the United States against Iran. Israel's aim is that the US administration will make it clear to Iran that any Iranian nuclear attack on Israel or its other allies will be viewed as an attack on the US itself, which would force it to act without reservation and with its full strategic strength against Iran. Israel will have to reexamine the possibility of bolstering its deterrent capability by entering into a defense treaty with the United States and/or joining NATO at the appropriate time.
- Take steps, in collaboration with the United States and other countries, to limit risks – beyond the threat of a nuclear attack – resulting from Iran obtaining nuclear capability.
- Reexamine its policy of nuclear ambiguity. Israel would be best served by maintaining nuclear ambiguity, but it is possible that conditions will emerge that will force it to relinquish this policy, such as the conduct of the Iranian regime, its need to increase its deterrence and clarify its red lines, or potential channels of communication with Iran on the nuclear issue.
- Consider the possibility of agreeing to the idea of a nuclear weapons-free Middle East, as a means of preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear arms or of disarming Iran.
- Examine the possibility of a peace agreement with the Syrian regime, at the right time and with conditions that are acceptable to Israel, in the hope that this leads to limiting Syria's close ties with Iran and an end to its military support of Hizbollah. If there is a possibility of a peace agreement with Syria, which would entail further warming of Israel’s relations with other Arab countries, the effect of Iran’s militant approach will also be reduced, and there may even be dialogue between Israel and Iran. But even if such dialogue does not develop, it will be hard to assume that under such regional conditions Iran would decide to launch a nuclear attack against Israel.
Can Israel live with a nuclear Iran? Possibly, but it is hard to anticipate this situation. Certain conditions – some of which are not yet extant – may help to soften this reality, and reduce the Iranian threat and the uncertainty that it contains.
These include:
- Collecting credible intelligence that Iran is not planning to use its nuclear weaponry against Israel.
- Obtaining a clear American obligation to retaliate against Iran with a nuclear strike should Iran use nuclear weapons against Israel.
- Arriving at an assessment in Israel that is based on clear, credible indicators that Israel's strategic capability effectively deters Iran from recourse to nuclear weapons.
- Seeing more moderate officials join the circle of decision-makers in Iran.
Finally, if Iran obtains nuclear weapons, this would obligate Israel to try to build up a stable deterrent capability against Iran, which will prevent unintentional deterioration to nuclear confrontation. As yet there are no accepted rules of behavior in a nuclear environment between Israel and Iran, there is no communication and no dialogue, and there is insufficient understanding of the set of considerations and the decision-making processes of the other side. Such uncertainty is liable to increase the risks of miscalculation, overreaction, escalation of crises, and difficulty stopping deterioration in time.
Israel thus has a critical need to try to build channels of direct communication with Iran. Even if indirect, these could allow fostering rules of the game and pursuing confidence building measures in a nuclear environment and help guard against nuclear deterioration. Assuming that Iran is also interested in preventing miscalculations by the US and Israel, which may lead to deterioration and heavy internal damage, the possibility of generating such channels of communication, possibly via European governments, is not unreasonable.
Watch me on Uvda, an Israeli TV show that did a short piece on my visit. And leave your comments here too. Oh, to buy an I love Tehran t-shirt, go to its official website.
To know more abuot my visit to Israel, please check out these articles:
After my last year visit to Israel, a few individuals started to run an ugly and personal smear campaign against me. This includes some Iranians and their friends in Canada and Israel.
I always had the suspicion that given my clear and eclectic political positions, the only way for the Iranian intelligence service to discredit what I’ve started both in terms of blogging movement and also the Iran-Israel friendship project, would be something very cheap and very personal.
They started with spreading rumors that I’m either gay or bisexual, that I’ve been terribly unfaithful to my ex-wife, that I steal money from my friends, that I work for the Islamic Republic and they pay for my travels, that I’ve lied about being googled at the US border and banned from entering, that I’ve lied about being detained and questioned and forced to sign apology during my last visit in Iran in Summer 2005, etc.
Before my recent visit to Israel, one of these former-friends, for example, had started calling various security and academic contacts in Israel to stop me from entering Israel for the second time and speak at Ben Gurion University. On the basis that she knows through her Iranian friends that I work for the Islamic Republic.
A mix of jealousy, sexual tension, rivalry, and repressions have connected these former-friends to do something that people who’ve blocked my website for almost two years now and detained and harassed me last time in Iran wish to do. They’re being used by them to damage my credibility.
Another former-friend, Nikahang Kowsar, has gone as far to write for a disgraceful neo-conservative news website that pushes for military action against Iran to bring a monarchist government headed by Reza Pahlavi. (An older article published by the same website calling for my arrest) A long piece on how and why he thinks I work for the Islamic Republic, based on my writings, biography and history.
But few know these facts about Mr. Kowsar, the writer of that article:
Now after my second successful trip to Israel, I’m sure you would soon hear more rumors like what I mentioned earlier. Be prepared. The Iranian intelligence service is very good in using this kind of methods to discredit people it doesn’t like or trust.
The interview with Jerusalem Post is also online now. The title is "Iran-Israel Interface" and it's written by Abraham Rabinovich. The piece requires some minor corrections though that I hope to correct later.
But I also put it here, in case they remove it from their website.
Abraham Rabinovich
THE JERUSALEM POST
Jan. 18, 2007
The threats of mutual destruction wafting between Israel and Iran were drowned out this week by an Iranian Shi'ite, Hossein Derakhshan, walking the streets of Tel Aviv with "I love you Teheran" emblazoned on his T-shirt.
The 32-year-old former journalist, now resident in Canada, has undertaken a campaign to show Israelis and Iranians the human face of the people they may be contemplating nuking.
Derakhshan, who addressed a conference on "Reform and Resistance in the Middle East" at Ben-Gurion University last week, is credited with having popularized the concept of the Weblog in Iran, a phenomenon which reached an astonishing scale. During his recent visit, he established contact with Israelis willing to reach out via the Web to counterparts in Iran and break through the crust of governmental hostility separating them.
According to speakers at the Ben-Gurion conference, some Israelis and Lebanese used blogs to communicate with each other even as the bombs fell during last summer's war, apparently the first such use of blogs between enemy populations in wartime. Derakhshan's aim is to establish a dialogue between Iranians and Israelis to prevent the bombs from falling.
He first visited Israel last year and subsequently posted photographs and videos of Israel on his Farsi-language blog, which is seen by some 20,000 Iranians - those with the know-how to bypass the filter Iran has placed on his blog (hoder@hoder.com) and those to whom he sends the blog content in the form of e-mail.
"Those were the first videos any Iranian has been able to see about ordinary daily life in Israel," he said in an interview. "I want to humanize Israel for Iranians and tell them it's not what the Islamic propaganda machine is saying - that Israelis are thirsty for Muslim blood. And I want to show Israel that the average Iranian isn't even thinking about doing harm to Israel. I want them to see Iranians who don't look like [President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad."
For all his good intentions, Derakhshan is not your run-of-the-mill peacenik. He opposes, for environmental reasons, Iran's public drive for nuclear energy. But he supports, for strategic reasons, Iran's secret drive for nuclear weapons. "We need it as a deterrent." Not against Israel, he says, but against the United States, which in 1953 organized a coup in Teheran and whose military presence is amply visible all around Iran today.
In addition, says Derakhshan, Iran is surrounded by other potentially hostile entities. Iranian diplomats have been killed in recent years by Sunni extremists in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and Iranians harbor deep hostility towards the Sunni regime in Saudi Arabia which has acted brutally towards Shi'ite pilgrims during the haj.
ALTHOUGH HE admits in his blog to being an atheist, drinking liquor and enjoying an occasional joint, Derakshan surprisingly favors continuation of the Islamic republic in Iran, although in more enlightened form. "I support any government that attempts to marry democracy and religion." In a deeply religious region like the Middle East, he says, attempts such as Turkey's to subjugate religion result in its forcing its way to the surface in contentious ways.
He views Israel as an example of a democracy that has successfully integrated religion into its national fabric.
According to Derakshan, Iran is seeking to adapt Islam to modern ways. Blogging, as it happens, is one example. In the seminaries in the holy city of Qom, he says, clerical students are taught how to create Web pages.
Although a reformist, he is opposed even to non-violent resistance. "The system in Iran is democratic enough to permit change through elections." Former president Muhammad Khatami was brought to power by reformists, but they grew impatient at the slow pace of change and boycotted the last presidential elections in an attempt to deny the government legitimacy. However, this only brought Ahmadinejad to power. The reformers learned their bitter lesson, as shown in last month's elections in which Ahmadinejad supporters were savaged by a large turnout. "We can gradually change Iran. We are already doing it."
Ahmadinejad, notes Derakhshan, was elected on a platform that was entirely domestic. "He made no mention of Israel or nuclear weapons. Nothing. It is because of his failure to cut unemployment and improve the standard of living, which he promised to do, that he has lost his popularity, even among the uneducated, even among the religious. The government is simply mismanaged. The people he brought in have little experience, and he himself never had a major managerial position."
The president, he said, has limited powers and must defer to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei on the most important decisions. "He has no control over the army, no control over the state media. And it is Khamenei who chooses the three key ministers - foreign, intelligence and oil."
Derakhshan denies that Ahmadinejad is intelligent, even though he ran rings around a 60 Minutes interviewer on American television last year and fenced ably with members of the Council on Foreign Relations during his visit to New York. "He's street smart and has good social communication skills," says Derakhshan, who trained as a sociologist in Iran. "He relates easily to people on a personal level. But he doesn't have the intellect to convince people who can think. He can't respond to sophisticated questions."
Because of his blogs, Derakhshan has been marked by Iran's intelligence service for arrest if he returns, but he remains an Iranian patriot. "Iran is deliberately misrepresented by the Western media." If there is a war between Iran and the United States, he says, he would fly home to fight for his country.
THE SON of a rug manufacturer in Teheran, Derakhshan began playing with video games as a teenager and was among the first generation in his country to take up computers. He began writing a weekly computer column for a widely read reformist newspaper. It was so popular that it became a daily column. It was the attack on the World Trade Center in 2001 that alerted him to a dimension he had not considered before.
"Two weeks after 9/11, I discovered the New York-based blogs describing people's feelings there. I started my blog to show the amazing potential of this new media."
He was flooded with e-mails from Iranians asking how to start their own blogs. He explained how to find free on-line services for making English-language blogs and how to adapt them to the Farsi language. Since then, an astonishing 700,000 blogs have appeared in Farsi, of which an estimated 40,000-110,000 are still active.
Unlike satellite television, which is officially banned in Iran, blogging is encouraged by the government. Even Ahmadinejad has a blog. "It's trendy," says Derakhshan. Only about 100 high-profile Farsi blogs are filtered by the authorities, who cannot possibly cope with the mass of blogs on the Web. There is no attempt to block Western blogs, he says. Even Hebrew-language newspapers and The Jerusalem Post can be read on Teheran screens.
When not traveling, Derakhshan produces two blogs a day - one in Farsi and one in English. "I'm more of an activist in my Persian blog - I push a reformist agenda - and more of an observer in English."
Five years ago, he moved to Canada where he married an Iranian woman, whom he subsequently divorced. He earned a living as a journalist and by creating Web sites. His blog is written from there.
During his two-week stay here, Derakhshan pursued a number of ideas with people who expressed readiness to join in his project. These include:
DERAKHSHAN ENVISIONS such activities carried out at the expense of those involved or with small-scale donations. "I've had so much positive reaction since my last trip to the idea of connecting Iranians and Israelis."
He recently set up a Web site as a focus for these activities. Called Teheraviv.com, it is still empty, but he hopes to begin filling it with content shortly.
The average Iranian student, says Derakhshan, sees no threat from Israel and does not take seriously statements about a possible Israeli attack on Iran. "They know that Iran is not a real threat to Israel and that Ahmadinejad has limited power. If Israel attacks Iran, I think people would see it as done at America's behest."
That average Iranian student, he said, is not very sympathetic toward the Palestinians and the Arab world in general, which supported Saddam Hussein during the eight-year-long Iraq-Iran war. The older generation of Iranians still remembers normal relations with Israel during the time of the shah. There may still be some who remember Israel's extensive aid in reconstructing Iranian villages destroyed in massive earthquakes. There is even pride in a native-born Iranian having been chosen as Israel's president. The one black mark against Israel is its alleged training of the shah's secret police in torture techniques.
Before departing Israel in midweek, Darakhshan celebrated his 32nd birthday in what he described as "the coolest bar in Tel Aviv," on Rehov Lilienblum, where he had a haircut in a side room at 10 p.m.
Said the Iranian activist: "Tel Aviv is a city I could live in. It's a mix of Middle East and European values and lifestyle. If Iran opens up a bit more and could have public bars, Teheran would beat Tel Aviv."
Does he think he will see peace between Israel and Iran in his lifetime?
"In five years," he says.
Meron Rapoport from Haaretz interviewed my after the conference in Beer Sheva and today the piece he has written is published in the newspaper.
The title is "King of the Iranian bloggers (English version)," but I had no role in choosing this title. I know some people would soon start blaming me for this. But I repeat that, like the title Blogfather, these titles are given by journalists, not me. Please don't hold it against me.
For those who speak Hebrew, this is the Hebrew version, with a horrible photo on it.
King of the Iranian bloggers
By Meron Rapoport
Last Update: 12/01/2007 11:56
Hossein Derakhshan's T-shirt is the only thing that gives him away. "I love Tehran," it says. Actually the shirt is the only thing that would lead one to guess that the affable, young-and-restless technology aficionado is not from here. He's from Iran, and proud of it. He was born in Tehran, grew up there and thinks it's the most fantastic city in the world. Even today, even now. Because even though Derakhshan cannot live in Iran at present, he is still an Iranian patriot. He despises Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, but admires Khomeini; he's a total atheist, but thinks that an Islamic republic is the solution for the future; he's a friend of Israel, who thinks that Ahmadinejad's anti-Israeli policy is the leader's stupidest mistake, but he's also an enthusiastic supporter of the Iranian nuclear program and believes it would be very good for Iran to have an atom bomb. Good for Iran - and good for Israel.
Based on all we think we know about Iran, Canada-based Derakhshan ought to be totally out of the ordinary, an endangered species. He's a journalist who never misses an opportunity to say that his president is stupid, a well-known blogger who preaches to a cyberspace that is free of censorship and oversight. But these two qualities, explains Derakhshan, are not unusual in Iran. The Iranian press slaughters Ahmadinejad on a daily basis, and blogs are a big hit. Some 700,000 bloggers are active in Iran today, he estimates, from radicals who curse spiritual leader Ali Khamenei to madrasa students in the holy city of Qum. Even Ahmadinejad himself started his own blog a little while ago.
It's not by chance that Derakhshan speaks about blogs as if he were talking about religion. Dr. Michael Dahan of Sapir Academic College, who studies the phenomenon of blogs in general and of those in the Middle East in particular, says that Derakhshan could be considered the spiritual father of the bloggers in Iran. This is the man who also found a technological solution to writing blogs in Farsi and also gave the blogger movement its ideological cast - promoting a free space for discussions about everything that's happening in Iranian society.
Thus, it was not surprising to find him as a guest at the conference held this week at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in Be'er Sheva, entitled "Reform, Opposition and Conflicts in the Middle East." Derakhshan spoke during the session led by Prof. Yoram Meital about "Blogging as a Realm of Opposition in the Middle East." Derakhshan's visit to Israel, his second within a year, had two purposes: to show his Iranian readers that Israel is not an enemy, and to explain to Israelis that the terrible image they have of Iran is distorted and without connection to reality.
Two freest countries
Hossein Derakhshan was born into the Islamic Revolution. He is 31, meaning he was four years old when millions of Iranians toppled the shah's regime and eagerly welcomed Khomeini upon his return from exile. Derakhshan grew up in a religious family and received a religious education, though this did not stop him from working at one of the popular liberal newspapers, Asr-e Azadegan (Hour of Liberation). The newspaper was closed under the reformist president Mohammed Khatami, but Derakhshan easily found work at another paper. In 2000, his wife received a visa to emigrate to Canada and Derakhshan emigrated with her (they have since divorced).
Even though the newspaper where he worked closed, Derakhshan describes the press in Iran in a surprisingly positive light. "During the time of President Khatami, the conservatives feared that the reformists were really America's emissaries, who wanted to topple the regime without a battle, and therefore they closed down newspapers then," he explains. "Today, this fear has passed. Except for criticism of the spiritual leader Khamenei, you can write criticism of anyone. The press is so rough on Ahmadinejad that not long ago, he went to Khamenei and complained to him about the criticism. Khamenei told him that it was true that he was getting some harsh criticism, but that there was nothing to be done about it, that that's how the game works."
With the exception of Israel, asserts Derakhshan, Iran is the freest country in the Middle East. He cites a recent event at Tehran University, where the students greeted President Ahmadinejad with boos, and one student even burned a picture of the president right in front of him. Not a single student was arrested. "You couldn't do that in any other Middle Eastern country," he says.
His description of life in Tehran is surprising, too. "I love Tehran," says Derakhshan, who has made his home in Toronto in recent years, but also travels frequently in Europe. "It's a huge, lively and varied city that's alive 24 hours a day. The restaurants are open until four in the morning." In fact, it's rather similar to Tel Aviv, he says, in terms of both architecture and character. "Young people in Tel Aviv and Tehran are listening to the same music and using the same drugs."
But don't get the wrong idea. Derakhshan does not think that Iran is a paradise. And he has plenty of reason for feeling this way. Before he left Tehran, he was summoned for questioning by the security forces and forced to sign a document of apology for things he'd written against the regime. In 2001, shortly after he immigrated to Canada, he began writing his blog, entitled "Editor: Myself" (at www.hoder.com).
For several years, it was the most popular blog in Iran, until the authorities decided to block access to it two years ago. This happened after he violated one of the iron rules of the Iranian press: It is forbidden to express criticism of spiritual leader Khamenei. "I wrote a post entitled 'Khamenei: A Well-Meaning Dictator,'" Derakhshan recounts. "I actually wrote pretty good things about Khamenei, but ever since then they've blocked my blog."
Expanding space
What matters most to Derakhshan is that bloggers have managed to create a steadily expanding space for public discussion. A space where supporters of reforms can exchange views, but also argue with conservative bloggers, who are also very active on the Web. And all of this space, which has no center and no hierarchy, says Derakhshan, is protected by the government.
Despite all the problems, Derakhshan believes in the Iranian revolution, in Khomeini and the Islamic republic. It's odd to hear such things coming from a young man who looks thoroughly Western, sitting on the lawn at Ben-Gurion University on a warm afternoon, but this is what he says.
"Khomeini's revolution is as important as the French Revolution," he maintains. "The central ideas of Khomeini were equality and independence. I believe in them. I used to be more critical of the idea of an Islamic republic. Today I think that this is a post-modernist idea, that it's a correct idea. I'm an atheist, I don't care at all about Mohammed and about religion, but it's impossible to disqualify religion like they did in Turkey. It doesn't work, and it leads to counter-reactions. Religion is an organic part of our society. It needs to be given a new interpretation. This is what Iran is offering the Muslim world."
What about equality? I wouldn't imagine that women in Tehran often use that word to describe the regime.
Derakhshan: "True, women are forced to wear a hijab, but that's only an external matter, it's only part of the story. Women in Iran have a much greater presence in society than women in other Middle Eastern countries. In Parliament, for example, in public positions. The marriage laws have also changed a lot in women's favor in the past 15 years, as a result of the ceaseless efforts of the women's organizations."
As for Ahmadinejad, Derakhshan says that he, like many Iranians, is embarrassed by the president "the way a lot of Americans are embarrassed by Bush." Ahmadinejad was elected on the basis of promises to improve the standard of living, Derakhshan explains, but instead all he does is talk from morning till night about Israel, about Holocaust denial and nuclear capabilities.
Derakhshan is convinced that the Iranian public is either put off by these things or simply not interested in them. He says that the Iranian public is not hostile toward Israel. Perhaps even the opposite. "The Iranians remember that the Palestinians supported Saddam Hussein when he fought against Iran," he says. "And some also remember that Israel tried to transfer arms to Iran in the Iran-Contra episode, and that's something in Israel's favor."
He adds: "You have to distinguish between rhetoric and actions. Iran has no desire to destroy Israel. If it did, Tehran would have permitted Hezbollah to use long-range rockets against Tel Aviv in the last war. Ahmadinejad is not Hitler. The one who controls the army is Khamenei, and he is not pleased by Ahmadinejad's declarations. Iran and Israel have a common interest: They live in a region controlled by Sunni Muslims."
And Derakhshan has yet another surprise up his sleeve: His opposition to Ahmadinejad's policy doesn't mean that he's opposed to the Iranian nuclear project. On the contrary, he believes that it would be good for Iran to have nuclear arms. Only with them can it protect itself from its threatening neighbors: nuclear Pakistan, Iraq and the whole Sunni Middle East. And Israel, too, will benefit from an Iran that is strong and secure, he says.
And what if Israel attacks the Iranian nuclear facilities?
"Then it will be seen as the long arm of America, and the attitude toward it will follow accordingly."
The night before my birthday, I was in Tel Aviv. I had just discovered the coolest bar in Tel Aviv (Okay, one of the coolest) on Lilinblum, called The Gallery, a couple days before. They were so open and nice and we immediately became friends, with Bozi and Amir, the managers and even some regular costumers.
And all this was after I told them everything about my background as an Iranian and my TehrAviv project: to connect the two people of Iran and Israel through unconventional cultural exchanges and joint projects.
Let me give you an example: How about getting some Israeli DJs remising old Iranian pop-songs and start playing them in Tel Aviv clubs and making them available online for download; and some Iranian DJs remixing old Israeli popular songs and play them in Iranian parties in Tehran?
Anyone I've talked to so far, either in Jerusalem or in Tel Aviv, or even in the beautiful, sophisticated and cosmopolitan Beer Sheva, has liked the idea and shown interest in helping it somehow.
No wonder after I got a Spanish-style haircut at 10 PM by Amir at the back of The Gallery, which also is a hair styling shop, they got us all to drink a shot of Arak to my birthday. We smoked a joint together and submersed with Thom Yorke's Eraser, which we were all equally obsessed about.
Check out the BBC News front page and you'll find my piece on my Israel visit as part of their coverage on Iran this week.
Here's whatFor me, an Iranian raised in post-revolutionary Iran, Israel has always had three great qualities: unknown, forbidden and therefore extremely intriguing. That's why I finally decided to visit Israel.
But unlike all Iranians who have visited Israel, I decided to publicise my visit to the 20,000 daily readers of my blog - even though I knew I would not be able to go back to Iran again.
I had a mission, though, which would make the risk worthwhile. I wanted to break the stereotypical images both governments use to advance their radical policies.
I'm leaving Israel tonight for Sweden. This visit was short and I was quite busy during the whole time. Busy interviewing people or being interviewed! Especially after I extended my stay.
I met a lot of influential Iranians in the city and talked to many of them, which was the main purpose of this visit. Also managed to meet many Israelis in different contexts, which was equally important for my purpose: countering the simplistic and distorted image of Iranian people in Israel and Israelis in Iran.
Others whom I couldn't meet in person, I reached thought media. Israeli and some European media showed a lot of interest in a non-Jewish Iranian visiting their country. On the other side of the story, despite a huge interest, I only had my own blog to cover it.
Obviously, no one inside Iran dared mentioning it. But I was a bit surprised how the foreign-based Persian speaking media ignored the trip. Aside from the Persian section of the Israel Radio, no one contacted me. Even the usual suspect, Radio Farda, with its pro-American, pro-Israeli, anti-Islamic Republic attitude.
The reason? I guess my anti-Bush , anti-Khamenei, pro-reform politics is too complicated for the simple good vs bad politics most Iranians, especially those in exile, are used to.
However, I don't get a chance to see much of even Tel Aviv, let alone Israel, which I hope I can make up for in further visits.
This visit was a very good introduction to Israel, a name I couldn't even find in the maps when I was in Iran. It now exists for me and now I'll be able to come back and visit it calmly.
It'll take a couple weeks until I use all material I've produced here, including photos, audio interviews, videos and other observations. This is not very easy, especially when you have different audiences in two languages. But thanks to your generous support (you can still contribute for the rest of this project, if you haven't yet) I'll hopefully be able to finish it.
All this was impossible without the help of two special individuals: Professor David Menashri from the Iranian Studies Center at the University of Tel Aviv, and Lisa Goldman, my Canadian-Israeli friend who took a lot of time showing me around, explaining basic stuff about the city and Israel, and introduced with to a lot of her friends. She was also a very patient and generous host.
To know how Canadians are proud of their Citizens in a global perspective, let me inform you how interested the CBC in interviewing me.
Two journalists from the CBC radio, yesterday, emailed me and asked my contact information to talk to me. About my taboo-breaking visit to Israel which could have almost been impossible, had I not had a Canadian passport, and had I not met another Canadian who lived in Israel in London?
No, you're absolutely wrong. They have no idea what a blog is, let alone be interested in achievements by their citizens.
Two Canadians, meeting in a blogging conference in London, UK, getting together in Israel, making bridges between people in two talked-about. All because of having a Canadian citizenship. Wouldn't this make a fantastic Canadian story?
I know. It's not their fault. They're just Canadian.
To be honest, I'm very disappointed with the Canadians, in general.
The funniest thing happened yesterday on a mini-bus on my way from Jerusalem to Tel Aviv, on one of those yellow mini-buses. You can't believe this happening, even in Toronto.
Out of the 6,7 people who got on the mini-bus, three were Iranians, including me. I guess you could conclude that Israel has the biggest ratio of Iranians to the whole population after, let's say, Iran.
In his second blog entry, Cafe Ginsburg, the first blog written by an Iranian who lives in Israel in Persian, has attracted nearly 70 comments.
The blog, written by, Farhad Moradian, is also doing very well in terms of the number of visitors. A daily average of over 1,300 is pretty impressive.
Last night's meeting with over fifty Tel Avivians went very well and I guess it was really effective in the way they now view Iran and its cultural and political complexities.
Please read Lisa's take on yesterday's events, including that meeting.
It's very difficult to cover a trip for two or three groups of audiences (Iranians, Israeli s, and Westerners) in two languages. Most of the material I'm producing these days is Persian and it's hard to keep up with in the English one.
However, if you'd like to know more about what I'm doing these days in Israel, Lisa Goldman, my gracious and patient host, gives a nice account of this visit from her point of view.
By the way, English is my second language and writing is much easier for me in Persian than in English.
Some people keep forgetting that Iran and Israel are closer than ever to a war. And this is exactly why I'm here.
I, as the peace activist who wants to make bridges and the citizen journalist who wants to humanize both sides for one another have not chosen to focus on the Palestinian-Israeli issue. Because it's a very complicated issue that I don't have enough expertise to explore, let alone comprehend and report about. I don't know any of the two languages of the two sides and haven't read enough to even have a specific opinion about the conflict and take sides.
Does it mean that I don't care it? Does it mean that I think Iran-Israel conflict is more important than Palestine-Israel? Of course not. But when I have limited resources (knowledge, time, and money), it's my right to chose my focus.
In the past few days, I've meet with many Iranian-Israelis and have recorded extensive interviews with then in Persian. About their life in Iran, in Israel, and their hope and plans for the future. I'm going to meet a few more and interview them too. This is one side of the story.
But in terms of what the Israelis think about Iranians, I still need to work more. So far I've talked to a lot of people and they've all been very friendly and nice, even after hearing my name and where I come from. But I'm going to Jerusalem today and possibly Ramallah to talk to more people and get more reactions.
If I can manage to get into the Palestinian Authoritiy territories, I'll still focus on my main question which is about Iran, not Sharon, or settlements, or Hamas, etc. I'll ask the ordinary Palestinians about how they perceive Iran and its leaders and what do they think about Iran-Israel relationship.
This would particularly be interesting when asked from Hamas supporters or members, If I can get to talk to any. It will show how much influence Iran, as many claim, has among Hamas supporters and members on the ground.