New Light On Iran's Human Rights Violations

Heshmat Alavi

Two of the major crises the international community is currently engaged with are terrorism and nuclear proliferation. Iran, in particular, is negatively involved in both fields, being known as the central banker of international terrorism, and suspicious for its own controversial nuclear program at home parallel to its nuclear/missile collaboration with North Korea.

As these subjects are of significant importance and deserve even more attributed attention, what must not go neglected is the fact that Iran is taking advantage of such circumstances to continue an equally important campaign of belligerence against its own people. The scope of human rights violations carried out by Tehran is continuously on the rise, with the ruling regime interpreting the mentioned international crises as windows of opportunity to extend its domestic crackdown.

And yet, a promising report issued from the United Nations has shed very necessary light on a specific dossier Iran has gone the limits throughout the past three decades to cloak. In 1988 the Iranian regime carried out an atrocious massacre sending tens of thousands of political prisoners to the gallows. Unfortunately, the world has until recently remained silent in this regard.

Twenty nine years after the atrocious carnage, Asma Jahangir, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Iran, issued a report on September 2nd for the first time referring to the massacre of over 30,000 political prisoners, mostly members and supporters of the Iranian opposition People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK).

This document, coupled with a note by UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and presented to the UN General Assembly, has for the first time specifically attributed a number of articles to the 1988 massacre. Thousands of men, women and juveniles were sent to the gallows, and buried in mass, unmarked graves, all according to a fatwa, or decree, issued by the deceased Iranian regime founder Ayatollah Khomeini.

Raising the stakes to a level Tehran has sought to avoid through the years, this damning UN report has called for an independent and thorough inquiry into these crimes to unearth the truth of the atrocities carried out in the summer of 1988.

Activists and the Iranian Diaspora have for 29 years focused their measures on presenting evidence of the killings. This has finally been acknowledged in this UN report.

“Between July and August 1988, thousands of political prisoners, men, women and teen-agers, were reportedly executed pursuant to a fatwa issued by the then Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khomeini. A three-man commission was reportedly created with a view to determining who should be executed. The bodies of the victims were reportedly buried in unmarked graves and their families never informed of their whereabouts. These events, known as the 1988 massacres, have never been officially acknowledged. In January 1989, the Special Representative of the Commission on Human Rights on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran, Reynaldo Galindo Pohl, expressed concern over the “global denial” of the executions and called on Iranian authorities to conduct an investigation. Such an investigation has yet to be undertaken.”

The atrocities, of such grave nature, rendered a major rift amongst the regime’s leadership and highest authorities. The late Ayatollah Hossein-Ali Montazeri, then Khomeini’s designated successor, expressed his opposition to the killings and the massacre came back to haunt a presidential hopeful in the most recent such election held back in May.

“In August 2016, an audio recording of a meeting held in 1988 between high-level State officials and clerics was published. The recording revealed the names of the officials who had carried out and defended the executions, including the current Minister of Justice, a current high court judge, and the head of one of the largest religious foundations in the country and candidate in the May presidential elections. Following the publication of the audio recording, some clerical authorities and the chief of the judiciary admitted that the executions had taken place and, in some instances, defended them.”

I am a political/rights activist focusing on Iran & the Middle East. I also write in Al Arabiya English, and contributed to The Hill, Algemeiner and Raddington Report. I tweet @HeshmatAlavi

Iran: Plight Of Political Prisoners Signals Regime Turmoil

Heshmat Alavi

Iran is currently striving to manage a number of increasingly painstaking dilemmas. International spotlight is again on Tehran’s nuclear program, with the United States demanding United Nations inspectors be granted access to its military sites.

Equally troubling is Iran’s collaboration with North Korea to pursue their nuclear ambitions and ballistic missile capabilities. Such dossiers are enough to undermine the spirit of the JCPOA, Tehran now also considers its meddling in the Middle East indispensable in its effort to establish a regional empire reaching the Mediterranean.

As a result, receiving far less attention than it deserves is Iran’s Achilles Heel: human rights violations.

Despite pledges of reforms provided during May’s presidential election season, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has presided over more than 100 executions during the month of July alone. His first tenure, from 2013 to 2017 witnessed over 3,000 being sent to the gallows despite numerous calls for at least a temporary cessation.

Iran on the path of North Korea

By Keyvan Salami

Iran can enrich uranium within five days if the U.S. imposes more sanctions on Iran, Ali Akbar Salehi, Iran's atomic agency head, warned this week. He claimed that Iran could achieve 20% enriched uranium in five days – a level at which it could then quickly be processed further into weapons-grade nuclear material.

Last week, Iranian president Hassan Rouhani announced that Iran could abandon its nuclear agreement with world powers "within hours" if the United States imposes any more new sanctions.

"If America wants to go back to the experience of imposing sanctions, Iran would certainly return in a short time – not a week or a month, but within hours - to conditions more advanced than before the start of negotiations," Rouhani told a session of parliament broadcast live on state television.

In response, U.N. ambassador Nikki Haley said Iran should not be allowed "to use the nuclear deal to hold the world hostage."

The Obama administration argued that there was no better alternative to its controversial nuclear agreement with Iran.  The argument was that the deal is good, as it potentially delays Iran's ambition to acquire nuclear weapons for at least ten years; it requires Tehran to reduce its stockpile of enriched uranium by 98 percent, disables the Arak facility from producing weapons-grade plutonium, reduces the number of centrifuges by two thirds, converts the Fordow facility into a research center, and allows for unprecedented intrusive inspections.

In addition, the deal would lengthen, from a few months to a year, the time frame in which Iran could reach the breakout point, providing the U.S. more time to act, even militarily.  Finally, the Obama administration suggested that a more prosperous and secure Iran might give up its drive to obtain nuclear weapons and may even become a constructive player in the community of nations.

Two years after the deal, the question is, will those claims still hold?  Did the deal "potentially" delay Iran's ambition to acquire nuclear weapons for at least ten years?  And did it make Iran "more prosperous and secure to give up its drive to obtain nuclear weapons and may even become a constructive player in the community of nations"?

The reality is that the deal not only has not curbed Iran's ability to obtain nuclear weapons, but also granted billions of dollars to Iran's malicious activities.  Two years after the deal, it is Rouhani who is confessing to this fact and saying Iran is capable of reaching the same point and even "conditions more advanced than before the start of negotiations" in a matter of few days.

"In an hour and a day, Iran could return to a more advanced [nuclear] level than at the beginning of the negotiations," Rouhani told a parliamentary session.

At the same session, a new bill was passed, a testament to the hollow claims of Iran's change of behavior as "a constructive player in the community of nations." 

In retaliation to new U.S. sanctions, with lawmakers chanting "Death to America," the state's military budget will be increased by almost $500 million, and $260 million will be pumped into the missile program alone.

A further $300 million will be added to the Quds Force's budget.  The bill charges the government to confront "threats, malicious, hegemonic and divisive activities of America in the region."

One might argue that their action is in reaction to new U.S. sanctions.  This might be true, yet it doesn't change the fact that Iran has maintained its capability of advancing its nuclear program, as Rouhani acknowledged.

The Iran apologists' take from Rouhani's threat is more concessions and to stop placing pressure on Iran.  A realistic approach, however, would be to take Rouhani's words seriously and put more pressure on Iran to halt its nuclear program once and for all.

Iran is following the same path as North Korea, and the nuclear deal with Iran must not fool us into imagining that the Iranians have stopped their ambition of becoming a nuclear power.

For the mullahs in Iran, the atomic bomb is the only guarantor of survival.  That is why they will never relinquish their ambition of becoming a nuclear power.

The only means to stop Iran is to support the Iranian people and their organized opposition for a regime change

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/08/iran_on_the_path_of_north_korea_.html#ixzz4qebQflxM
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

MICHAEL REAGAN: THE FOLLIES OF APPEASEMENT

By Michael Reagan
  
Record Courier, Aug. 14, 2017 - Haven’t we learned yet that appeasement doesn’t work? I’m not talking about when the weak-kneed leaders of Britain and France went to Munich in 1938 and essentially gave Czechoslovakia to Hitler to buy a brief period of peace before Europe and the rest of the world went to war.
I’m talking about our more recent dealings with Russian, Iran and North Korea.

We’re in the trouble we’re in with North Korea today because of our continual policy of appeasing the thugs who rule that oppressed and starving Communist paradise.
Most people don’t remember, but we started appeasing North Korea’s dictators in the 1990s when Jimmy Carter was out office and still felt he needed to play global peacemaker.
Carter went to North Korea behind the back of the sitting president, Bill Clinton, and sat down to negotiate a deal to stop them from building nuclear weapons.
He promised North Korea leaders two nuclear reactors and $5 billion in aid if they’d agree to the no-nukes deal and Clinton, not wanting to embarrass a former Democrat president, approved the deal.
Of course it took North Korea about 24 hours to break their promises.
They’ve been working on their nukes ever since, and our presidents have been appeasing them ever since — when they’re not busy appeasing Iran’s religious thugs or Russia’s virtual dictator, Vladimir Putin.
Remember Iran and its nuclear program? Remember how President Obama and everyone on the left fell over each trying to appease the ayatollahs?
How’s that been working out?
Obama basically told the Iranians “We don’t want you to have nuclear weapons today, but it’ll be OK for you to have them 20 years from now — when I’m out of office and it’ll be some other sucker’s problem.”
Now we have Iran and North Korea helping each other perfect their nuclear weapons programs.
And let’s not forget how well our policy of appeasement worked with Russia.
In 2009, President Obama pleased Putin by scrapping the Bush administration’s proposed missile defense system in Poland. In 2014, the Russia army invaded Ukraine and Russia was becoming the regime in Syria’s best friend and military benefactor.
Now we’re at a boiling point with North Korea and it makes for a very, very, very scary world.
You hope and pray we have the right people in office to make the right decisions and not go off the rails.
People are always praising my father for winning the Cold War without firing a shot or blowing up the world.
But he was able to defeat the Evil Empire with diplomacy because when he was dealing the Soviets the word “appeasement” was never in his vocabulary.
His way of describing his negotiating policy vis-a-vis the USSR and its nuclear arsenal was — “We win, they lose.”
I’m fearful, as many people are, by what might happen if we learn that the North Koreans truly have developed miniaturized nuclear weapons that could ride on their primitive ICBMs.
But I’m also concerned that we’ll just appease them again and we’ll find ourselves in this same scary spot next week or next year.
What we need to do is follow my father’s example and get “appeasement” out of our vocabulary.
While we practice smart diplomacy, we need to start putting anti-missile defense systems in areas the Russians or Chinese don’t like, like in South Korea — and too bad if it makes them nervous or mad.
As for President Trump, he needs to get off building a border wall and start building a homeland missile defense system that will protect us from the rogue powers our appeasers have turned into world powers.

Michael Reagan is the son of President Ronald Reagan, a political consultant, and the author of “The New Reagan Revolution” (St. Martin’s Press).

Before Anyone Further Appeases Iran...

By:Heshmat Alavi

The pro-Iran deal camp is recently making much noise about how the Trump administration and critics of the pact, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), are making rightful complaints of the text failing to address Iran’s destructive belligerence in the Middle East.

These are valid concerns, considering the fact that even if the deal remains intact come October’s decision by President Donald Trump to find Iran in compliance or not, the mullahs are hell-bent to continue wreaking havoc and expanding influence across the region.

The pro-Iran deal camp claim Washington has no evidence to hold Tehran in violation of the JCPOA terms. Not true.

• Tehran has exceeded its heavy water production cap, necessary for a plutonium nuclear bomb,
• testing more advanced centrifuges,
• illicitly procuring highly sensitive nuclear and ballistic missile technology in Germany, according to Berlin’s intelligence services,
• surpassing its uranium enrichment cap, another key non-compliance factor

The pro-JCPOA camp also argues this deal has prevented Iran from becoming the next North Korea. This is partially true and misleads only the uninformed reader. A deal very similar to the JCPOA, led by the Clinton administration, was signed with North Korea and ended up in dismal failure. This left the world with a rogue state now equipped with at least 20 nuclear bombs, intercontinental ballistic missiles and the technology to miniaturize a nuclear warhead in its payload.

While the JCPOA was intended to keep Iran away from nuclear weapons, why shouldn’t Washington lead the West in demanding Iran curb its further belligerence, such as advances in its ballistic missile drive, increasing executions and atrocious human rights violations, and stirring mayhem in the Middle East?

JOHN BOLTON: EVERY TIME YOU HEAR NORTH KOREA THINK OF IRAN

JOHN BOLTON: EVERY TIME YOU HEAR NORTH KOREA THINK OF IRAN

by JOHN HAYWARD

 Former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton talked about North Korea’s Fourth of July missile test launch on Thursday’s edition of Breitbart News Daily with SiriusXM host Alex Marlow.

Bolton said intercontinental ballistic missiles are a goal North Korea has been working towards since the early 1990s, as part of the outlaw regime’s quest for “deliverable nuclear weapons,”

but it was still surprising to many observers that a missile with true intercontinental capability was successfully launched this week.

“It’s capable of hitting Alaska. It can’t hit the Lower 48 yet, but that’s only a matter of time,” he said. “The only other thing we need to find out, and I don’t want to be on the receiving end of it, is whether North Korea has miniaturized its nuclear devices – of which it’s already detonated five – to the point they can put it under an ICBM nose cone.”

“I’ve been talking about this for 20 years, and so have many other people. And yet, for the last three U.S. administrations – eight years of Clinton, eight years of Bush, eight years of Obama – people have tried to negotiate with North Korea to talk them out of their nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs. It’s failed consistently for 25 years,” he said.

“That’s why Trump has inherited this mess. The issue is whether he can find a way out of it, or whether he succumbs to what I know the State Department, and much of the Defense Department, and much of the intelligence community are telling him: just keep doing what we’ve been doing before. Because that will result in a nuclear North Korea,” Bolton warned.

“And by the way, you can already see the mainstream media and academia preparing us to live in a world where North Korea has nuclear weapons,” he added, citing a New York Times op-ed to that effect from Wednesday.

Bolton judged that Japan would continue to be a reliable ally against North Korea’s nuclear ambitions, since the Japanese are well aware their cities lie within range of North Korea’s missiles. On the other hand, he said “all of the evidence points to China and Russia as, at best, turning a blind eye to what the North has been up to, and more likely facilitating the North’s nuclear and missile programs.”

He said his support from China and Russia was kept low-profile to avoid sanctions, but there was no way to conceal that China supplies North Korea with much of its oil and food, giving Beijing more than enough leverage to halt Pyongyang’s nuclear missile program if it truly wanted to.

“China is playing a double game. They say they don’t want the North Koreans to have nuclear weapons but they haven’t shut it down,” Bolton charged. “It’s a very dangerous situation. Nobody should underestimate it.”

“One other point I would make: Every time you hear the words ‘North Korea,’ think of the word ‘Iran,’” he added. “Because whatever North Korea can do, Iran can do the next day by sending them a check in the appropriate amount. We have stovepiped these two nuclear proliferation threats for a very long time. We need to stop doing that because every day that goes by brings us closer to the day when one or both of them can hit the United States.”

Bolton cited North Korea’s five known nuclear test detonations, and its successful test of ballistic missile technology, to say it is a “more imminent threat” than Iran, but stressed that North Korea and Iran have been working “extremely closely on ballistic missiles” since the Nineties, “and there’s every reason to think they have worked extremely closely on the nuclear program as well.”

“It wouldn’t surprise me if a big chunk of Iran’s uranium enrichment program is not in Iran, where we know where it is, but under a mountain in North Korea,” he said. “We have very poor intelligence on North Korea, so it’s a big advantage for Iran to work with them.”

“When the Israelis destroyed that reactor in Syria in September 2007, it was being built by North Koreans,” he recalled. “Well, who paid for that? North Korea doesn’t do anything for free. I doubt that Syria had the resources to do it. Quite likely it was Iran. When that reactor was found by the Israelis and destroyed, the lesson I think to Iran was, ‘Build it someplace where the Israelis can’t find it.’ That’s why they may well have turned to North Korea.”

Bolton noted that U.S. and South Korean military officials have been warning for the past year that North Korea was on the verge of developing missiles that could hit the West Coast of the United States, perhaps as early as 2018.

“In public testimony three or four months ago now, the head of the U.S. Strategic Command told Congress that the only thing he had any doubt about was whether North Korea had fully conquered the miniaturization tasks to take a nuclear device and make it small enough to put under an ICBM nose cone. So even just three or four months ago, he didn’t have any doubt about the range,” he noted.

“There are a lot of other technical steps to overcome here. You can put the nose cone and the warhead up, you can bring it back down, but it’s a pretty rocky ride. You have to make sure that the warhead will detonate at the appropriate time,” he explained.

“We don’t know whether the North has mastered that technology, but I would be very cautious about intelligence that says they can’t do this, and they can’t do that, and they can’t do the other thing, because the first American reaction to this launch was ‘it was an intermediate range ballistic missile, not an ICBM,” and we were wrong. And we didn’t detect this one before the launch. I think we’ve had enough lessons in intelligence being imperfect,” he said.

“Don’t count on our lack of knowledge meaning that the North doesn’t have the capability,” he advised. “They may well have the capability. We may simply not have detected it.