By Ed Hale

Part I of III

As United States 2008 presidential candidates John McCain and Barack Obama bickered over how they would “handle the Iran threat” in their first debate on Friday night, citing erroneous facts and competing with one another on who would hold out the longest from engaging in diplomatic talks with Iran, a small group of one-hundred and fifty American citizens representing fifty of the country’s most prominent peace and human rights groups were busy talking to the world’s media about the two-hour private meeting they held with the Iranian President two days prior.

The meeting – which was not revealed to the media until the next day to assure the safety and security for those in attendance – took place on Wednesday September 24 at the Grand Hyatt Hotel in New York City during the 63rd annual United Nations General Assembly Meeting. The goal of the meeting was “to introduce President Ahmadinejad to the peace community in the United States and to illustrate how this sector of civil society works to oppose war and the use of violence to resolve differences,” said the meeting’s facilitator, Mark Johnson, Executive Director of the global Fellowship of Reconciliation, the world’s oldest peace organization.

In an exhilarating live experiment in civilian diplomacy in action, the ballroom of the Grand Hyatt Hotel was transformed into a veritable who’s who of some of the most outspoken and prominent members of America’s peace, anti-war, and human rights organizations, including Medea Benjamin of A Global Exchange, Jodie Evans of Code Pink and Women for Peace, Brian Becker of the ANSWER Coalition, yours truly representing PeaceWithIran.com, and Leslie Cagan of United for Peace and Justice. There were also representatives from Physicians for Social Responsibility, the Mennonites, the Lutheran Peace Fellowship, American Friends Committee on National Legislation, and the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, among many others. American citizens flew in from almost all fifty states to hold the private meeting with President Ahmadinejad in an effort to begin the process of what many consider long overdue open dialogues with Iran regarding how our two nations can work peaceably together to secure more peaceful relations with one another.

The issues raised during the two-hour plus talk, many considered vital for the future security of both the United States and Iranian citizenry, revolved around how the countries can begin putting aside their mutual distrust of one another in order to move forward in peaceful negotiations; both the US and the Iranian government’s recent crackdown on human rights, freedom of assembly, and dissidents; the current US occupation of Iraq; Iran’s controversially viewed policy toward Israel; their treatment of women and other minorities; the difficulty on both sides of obtaining visas to visit either country. Of course the big issue of the moment, will Iran accept a compromise on its nuclear fuel enrichment program, was also addressed.

Read the rest of this entry »

Dear Campaigner for Peace with Iran,

The Tehran Peace Museum and the Society for Chemical Weapons Victims Support
(SCWVS) are planning a candlelight vigil at 19:00 local time (10:30 EST) on September 21
to commemorate the UN-designated International Day of Peace. The organized event is a
historic first in Iran, where tensions with the United States are causing serious anxiety.
Please see the forwarded attachments for event details.
On behalf of the Tehran Peace Museum and the Society for Chemical Weapons Victims
Support (SCWVS), the Campaign Against Sanctions and Military Intervention in Iran
(CASMII), Fellowship Of Reconciliation (FOR), Payvand and Iranians For Peace (IFP) invite
your antiwar group to act on September 21 in solidarity with the nascent Iranian peace
movement. The Museum was established a year ago, inspired by a Dayton Peace Museum
director whose trip to Iran was arranged by the Fellowship of Reconciliation. Earlier this
year, CASMII-US and Physicians for Social Responsibility organized a U.S. speaking tour for
representatives of SCWVS. We hope peace and justice groups like yours will help build on
these and similar successes.

We ask that people of conscience in your circle respond to active outreach among Iranians
and connect with the September 21 event there. Although this is late notice, we hope you
can arrange a candlelight vigil with a few or a few dozen others in your community that
evening.

Even a smaller gesture from Americans, such as announcing news of the Tehran ceremony
in your next newsletter or at your weekly local peace vigil, will uplift our Iranian partners
in peace. They tell us so. Please check the attachments for event details and consider
sending a message of support now to the lead international organizer in Tehran, Dr.
Shahriar Khateri, at khateri@scwvs.org . Thank you very much.

The Folly of Attacking Iran: Lessons from History

Remember Iran, the greatest threat to Western civilization since, well, Iraq? The posturing conservatives who dominated America’s foreign policy for most of the last seven years pretended the only approach that ever could or should be pursued toward the mullahs would be isolation, confrontation and, what the hell, annihilation. Who can forget the oft-repeated campaign mantra of Sen. John McCain that the only thing worse than going to war with Iran would be a nuclear-armed Iran?

Well, it turns out that a lot of things are worse. It’s funny how a reassertive Russia armed with some 10,000 all-too-real nuclear weapons puts the theoretical menace of Iran’s as yet non- existent arsenal in perspective. But, looking ahead, what’s more curious still is that a new administration–maybe even McCain’s–may start looking for ways to work with Iran to help balance Russian power.

For centuries, whenever Russia has thrashed around in the Caucasus or in Central Asia, the Persians have been among the first to feel the bear’s hot breath. The kingdoms of Georgia, one may recall, were vassals of the shahs before they were taken by the tsars in the early 19th century. Imperial Russia kept pushing decade after decade until its troops occupied even the Iranian city of Tabriz. In the 20th century, the Soviets repeatedly tried to establish variations on the theme of a Persian Socialist Republic. That’s the kind of history the millennially minded Iranians keep in mind.

It’s true that over the last 20 years, Tehran’s relations with Moscow have been much more cooperative. The Persian pariahs would take any friends they could get. But those were the decades when Russia’s sphere of influence was shrinking–and the Russian move into Georgia is a clear signal those days of timidity are over.

History, especially Caucasian, Caspian and Central Asian history has restarted with a vengeance. The dynamics of confrontation and conciliation in Iran’s neighborhood are now every bit as complicated as they were in the 19th century, when an expanding Russian empire came up against the intrigues, alliances and sometimes overt military actions of imperial Britain in the rivalry that became known as “The Great Game.” What’s needed as we start reshaping American policy to fit the new circumstances is a reality check or, perhaps better said, a realpolitik check.

Over the short run, the mullahs will reap several benefits from Russia’s play in Georgia and Western reaction to it. “If you are no longer the greatest threat du jour then you are off the hook,” says Vali Nasr, an Iran scholar affiliated with the Council on Foreign Relations. Given the diplomatic standoff between Moscow and Washington, it will be much harder to enforce U.N. Security Council sanctions leveled against Iran for pursuing its nuclear-enrichment program. Further tightening the screws will be all but impossible. At the same time, the likelihood of American-led or supported military action against Iran is also diminished. It was never a good idea, and now it would be a very dangerous distraction for the already depleted U.S. military. Israel, however worried it may be, will have to understand that.

If Iran is not already working at full speed to develop nuclear weapons (it insists its intentions are entirely peaceful), it could be expected to pick up the pace now, and not least as a deterrent to Russian expansion in its direction. On the other hand, if it pushes too hard and too fast, Moscow may start to see nuclear-armed mullahs as a dangerous distraction, and Tehran would have to take into account the possibility that Russia, in its new and aggressive posture, would act directly and ruthlessly to eliminate the threat. Under current circumstances, who would come to Iran’s defense? Even if the Iranians decide to slow down their nuclear program, or stop it, they will have to worry about Moscow’s long-term designs on oil and natural-gas deposits around the Caspian Sea, where Russia already has a fleet and already disputes Iran’s claims to a large portion of the resources beneath the water.

The incoming American administration could “play on those kinds of fears and take advantage of the opportunities,” says Nasr. “But to play that kind of game you need a lot of clarity of vision.” That hasn’t really been the hallmark of the Bush administration, nor of McCain’s rhetoric, nor of Barack Obama’s talk about talking. Indeed, the basic policy framework of the United States is built on fundamental contradictions. “We talk as if Iran is the biggest threat, but we act as if Russia is,” says Nasr.

Thus Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice signed a deal with Warsaw on Tuesday to put part of the American ballistic-missile shield in Poland, having long asserted that the purpose was to thwart Iran. But, um, Iran has no intercontinental ballistic missiles. Its attempt to launch a rocket into space over the weekend appears to have quite literally fizzled. Moscow, meanwhile, has hundreds of perfectly serviceable ICBMs. (We sometimes send our own American astronauts to the International Space Station on Russia’s reliable rockets.) It’s hardly surprising the Russians think the purpose of the American missile shield is to eliminate what’s left of the old strategic balance and give Washington a potential first-strike capability against Moscow. That sort of confrontation, if overplayed, could slip toward the Strangelovian standoffs of the cold war or, conceivably, something worse.

In fact, the new Great Game, like the old one, will be a long narrative of intrigue and confrontation in which there is no sudden or decisive resolution. Realism will dictate efforts to improve relations with states on Russia’s periphery whether or not their ideologies are compatible with American democratic ideals. Another Iran scholar, Gary Sick at Columbia University, believes the policymakers remaining in the Bush administration have actually come to understand this, albeit very late. “After 9/11 their world view was that the United States had limitless power,” says Sick. “I don’t think they believe that anymore. And if you really believe you have to husband your power in ways that are more cost effective, you have to change our approach to Iran.” It won’t be easy. The Iranians are hard bargainers with regional ambitions of their own, but they are not irrational, and their primary interest is security. Oddly enough, Washington may find that the U.S. benefits by helping them feel safer, not more threatened.

Read original article here: www.newsweek.com/id/154523

By: Nahal Mishel-Ghashghai

My name is Nahal. Nahal in Farsi (the language of Iran) means a seedling, a little tree. In many ways I still feel like a little tree, young, alive, ready to poke around and grow into my full potential.

I was born and raised in Iran. I came to the US when I was 19 to finish my college education and for various reasons decided to live here. I’ve now lived longer in the US than I have in Iran and consider the US “my home” and Iran my “birth country”. I love both countries.

In all my years of living in the US and throughout all the political ups and downs between the US and Iran, I’ve never once experienced hostility or prejudice towards myself or my family. Perhaps it is because I really like all people and do my best not to have prejudice towards any one in particular. I believe that deep down inside, we are all very similar and want similar things, health, happiness, peace of mind, safety and comfort for ourselves and our loved ones.

I believe people of different cultures, backgrounds and upbringing can live side by side in harmony when we respect and appreciate both our similarities and differences.

I believe increasing compassion in the world, even one person at a time, is the key to creating peace.

An act of kindness, a smile, a wave, a helping hand, no matter how small, cracks open the door to compassion and the reward is the wonderful “feeling good inside”.

I invite you to try this. Do a good deed for someone today without any expectations, and know that you are adding to the collective compassion and moving one step closer to a peaceful world. Imagine if every person on the planet did this!

Nahal is a former Microsoft Engineer and currently an Avatar Master who lives in Seattle and teaches the Avatar Course all over the world. Look for her on MySpace or Facebook for contact

The Iranian human rights lawyer Shirin Ebadi talks to David Batty about the regime’s abuse of its population - and how the west needs to abandon the threat of war if it wants to win over Iran’s people and bring change

David Batty
guardian.co.uk, Friday June 13 2008

Shirin Ebadi at a media forum in Germany this month. Photograph: Felix Heyder/EPA

The Iranian human rights lawyer Shirin Ebadi is not a woman easily stopped in her tracks - she has been held in jail and faced repeated death threats, but continues to speak out against the abuses of the theocratic regime. On the doorstep of the BBC’s Bush House in central London, though, an American tourist waves the Nobel peace laureate and her entourage aside, complaining loudly: “Do you mind? We’re trying to take a picture!”

It serves, perhaps, as a reminder for Ebadi - who has spent the day being treated like a VIP by the BBC World Service - of the challenge she faces in attracting western interest to her cause.

With the international community fixated on Iran’s nuclear ambitions, Ebadi says there is dwindling scrutiny of human rights in her homeland, and the hardline president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has taken advantage of this to increase repression.

“Since the world started focusing on the nuclear programme, the human rights situation in Iran has worsened every day,” says Ebadi, who won the Nobel prize in 2003.

Read the rest of this entry »

Attention PeaceWithIran.com users,

Sister Ellen Francis from the Episcopal Order of St. Helena’s Convent in Augusta, Georgia has officially begun a weekly “fast for peace” in regards to Iran and the United States and Israel. Sister Ellen Francis is an American who has traveled the world for peace and human rights activism for many years. She had the privilege of living in Iran for ten years and since then has made many more trips there for civilian diplomatic reasons. I had the honor of going on one such trip with Sister Ellen Francis in March of this year. As one can read from my own personal blogs about the trip, it was a once in a lifetime experience that I will not soon forget. Not only did I gain tremendously as a person from the trip culturally, I believe we made amazing progress as a group in our collected goal of fostering more peace and harmony between the people of the United States and Iran.

As one can clearly see from this website and so many others, there are hundreds of thousands of people all over the world who are taking pro-active steps of action to not only assure that a few ignorant people who happen to currently work for us (think “government employees”) don’t needlessly attack the people of Iran militarily, but are also working to actually create and foster more peace and harmony between our two countries - which is at the end of the day what everyone says they want. Right?

Even the worst of them, the absolute most treacherous, murderous, and caniving monsters in the world today - (think Bush Jr. and Sr., Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Libby, Limbaugh, Rove, the Clintons, many of the current “Ayatollahs” serving in the government of Iran, et al. - for more detailed information on the history of some of these heinous names, start your research by studying the Project for a New American Century here), claim that they are “working towards peace.” The problem is that it is hard sometimes to see the logic of a few people’s methods - such as bombing other countries as just one example or sponsoring terrorist acts as another. But at the very least we can agree that “peace and harmony between our countries” is what everyone “claims” to want.

Sometimes it is more obvious when someone’s actions are more aligned with “working towards peace.” The work of groups such as The ANSWER Coalition or UFPJ or Amnesty International or Star’s Edge are all good examples of this. They actually walk the talk. Many more organizations exist and can be found on the TuneInTurnOnHelpOut.org website. Many examples can be found in groups that are even smaller all over the world… sometimes just the actions of ONE.

One such example comes in the form of a beautiful person by the name of Sister Ellen Francis who has begun a weekly “fast for peace with Iran campaign.” I am inspired, moved, and challenged by Sister Ellen Francis’ bold commitment. More information can be found on her own personal blog and in the letter she sent in this week re-printed below. If you want to join her please feel free to visit her blog and email her. And let us know here at PeaceWithIran.com if you also plan on participating.

As always, keep those articles, blog posts, lecture and event notices, activism updates, and other interesting items pouring in - and most importantly keep up the real world actions for peace. Everyday. Do something.

Sincerely,
The Raconteur

Dear Ed,
I’ve started the fast, and am feeling really good. I’ve posted a notice on my blog (ellenfrancis.blogspot.com), and also some advice about fasting. I think that the prayer is the most important part, and that people could join in just doing that, or fasting from one type of food, or partial fasting for part of the time. Maybe on another day, too — Wednesday is the best day for me since it’s our “day off” here in this convent.

Just think of all the people in the world for whom fasting isn’t an option but a WAY OF LIFE.

Isn’t it great that The Call Iran Project in Washington went so well? Carah Ong posted a notice about it on the Fellowship Of Reconciliation Iran listserve.

So let me know if you’d like to join in some way, and I’d be really happy for the publicity through the PeaceWithIran website. The more the merrier, and the more powerful we will be! I’m going to write an article for the Episcopal Peace Fellowship newsletter and maybe for our newsletter too. A few people have left comments on my blog.

Yours in Peace,
Sister Ellen Francis

We did it! We talked to Iran and our hotlines had no preconditions!

Tuesday, June 10—Call-in to Congress for Diplomacy with Iran

This is a national action organized by the Campaign for a New American Policy on Iran (www.newiranpolicy.org). Communicating with our representatives is an essential component of our representative democracy! Remember: of the people, by the people, for the people!

*When you call, ask for the aide who handles international affairs or foreign policy. Tell them you’re calling to encourage the Senator or Representative to: (1) Work for direct, unconditional, and comprehensive talks between the U.S. and Iran; (2) Remind them that the U.S. and Iran share common interests in a stable Iraq, Middle East and Afghanistan. (3) And emphasize that just as the U.S. pursued negotiations with North Korea and Libya it’s now time to talk with Iran.

Capitol Switchboard at (202)224-3121 (Also, this toll free number is mentioned in publicity for the event: 800- 788-9372).

Originally Published in truthdig here

The failure by Barack Obama to chart another course in the Middle East, to defy the Israel
lobby and to denounce the Bush administration’s inexorable march toward a conflict with
Iran is a failure to challenge the collective insanity that has gripped the political leadership
in the United States and Israel.

Obama, in a miscalculation that will have grave consequences, has given his blessing to
the widening circle of violence and abuse of the Palestinians by Israel and, most
dangerously, to those in the Bush White House and Jerusalem now plotting a war against
Iran. He illustrates how the lust for power is morally corrosive. And while he may win the
White House, by the time he takes power he will be trapped in George Bush’s alternative
reality.

“Humanity Does Not Change”

There is nothing in human nature or human history to justify the idea that we are
progressing morally as a species.

We need to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan. We need to stay the hand of Israel, which is
building more settlements—including a new plan to put 800 housing units in occupied
East Jerusalem—and imposing draconian measures to physically break the 1.5 million
Palestinians in Gaza. We need, most of all, to prevent a war with Iran.
House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers, in a letter to President Bush on May 8, threatened
to open impeachment proceedings if Bush attacked Iran. The letter is a signal that
planning for strikes on Iran is under way and pronounced.

“Our concerns in this area have been heightened by more recent events,” Conyers wrote.
“The resignation in mid-March of Admiral William J. ‘Fox’ Fallon from the head of U.S.
Central Command, which was reportedly linked to a magazine article that portrayed him as
the only person who might stop your Administration from waging preemptive war against
Iran, has renewed widespread concerns that your Administration is unilaterally planning
for military action against that country. This is despite the fact that the December 2007
National Intelligence Estimate concluded that Iran had halted its nuclear weapons program
in the fall of 2003, a stark reversal of previous Administration assessments.”

The administration, in rhetoric that is eerily similar to that used to build the case for a war
against Iraq, asserts that the Iranian Quds Force is arming anti-American groups in Iraq
and providing them with high-tech roadside bombs and sophisticated rockets. It
dismisses the National Intelligence Estimate conclusion that Iran suspended its nuclear
weapons program. The White House has not provided evidence to back up its claims. I
suspect it never will. And when Israel’s Deputy Prime Minister Shaul Mofaz tells the Israeli
newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth an attack on Iran is “unavoidable” if Tehran does not halt its
alleged nuclear weapons program, what he is really telling us is we should prepare for war.
Conyers’ threat is too little too late, especially if the Bush White House, possibly assisted
by Israel, launches airstrikes on some or all of 1,000 selected Iranian targets in the final
weeks of the administration. But it is an effort. Conyers tried.

This is more than we can say for the presumptive Democratic nominee. Obama went
before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) on Wednesday and said he will
stand with the right-wing Israeli government, even if this means backing an attack on Iran.
“As president I will use all elements of American power to pressure Iran,” he said. “I will
do everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Everything in
my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Everything.”
Obama went on to blame the Palestinians for the conflict, although the ratio of
Palestinians to Israelis killed in 2007 was 40 to 1. This is an increase from 30 to 1 in 2006
and 4 to 1 in 2000-2005.

“I will bring to the White House an unshakable commitment to Israel’s security. That starts
with ensuring Israel’s qualitative military advantage, …” Obama told AIPAC. “I will ensure
Israel can defend itself from any threat, from Gaza to Tehran. …”
Obama spoke about Israelis whose houses were damaged by the crude rockets, most
made out of old pipes, fired from Gaza on Israeli towns. He never mentioned the Israeli
siege of Gaza, the world’s largest open-air prison, or that Israel was deploying fighter jets
and helicopters to attack densely crowded refugee camps with missiles and iron
fragmentation bombs or that it had cut off food and fuel. He ignored the steady expansion
of Jewish settlements on Palestinian land. He called for Jerusalem to become the
“undivided capital” of the Jewish state, erasing Arab East Jerusalem from the map in
contravention of international law. East Jerusalem, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip are
internationally recognized as occupied Palestinian territories, which Israel took over in
1967. Obama’s stance is the moral equivalent of assuring the Johannesburg government
during the apartheid era that one would support their repressive efforts to punish the
restive blacks in the townships.

The deterioration of the conflict in Israel, which would be accelerated by airstrikes on Iran
and an ensuring regional war, will propel us into the Armageddon-type scenario in the
Middle East relished by the lunatic fringes of the radical Christian right. And so, with
Obama’s enthusiastic endorsement, we barrel toward a Dr. Strangelove self-immolation.
No one will be able to say we did not go out with a spectacular show of firepower, gore
and death. Our European and Middle Eastern allies, who are numb with consternation over
our death spiral, are frantically trying to reach out to Tehran diplomatically.

The instant we attack Iran, oil prices will double, perhaps triple. This price increase will
devastate the American economy. The ensuing retaliatory strikes by Iran on Israel, as well
as on American military installations in Iraq, will leave hundreds, maybe thousands, of
dead. The Shiites in the region, from Saudi Arabia to Pakistan, will see an attack on Iran as
a war against Shiism. They will turn with rage and violence on us and our allies. Hezbollah
will renew attacks on northern Israel. And the localized war in Iraq will become a long,
messy and protracted regional war that, by the time it is done, will most likely end the
American empire and leave in its wake mounds of corpses and smoldering ruins.

The Israeli leadership, like the Bush White House, is increasingly bellicose and threatening.
The Israeli prime minister, after a 90-minute meeting with Bush in the White House on
Wednesday, said the two leaders were of one mind. “We reached agreement on the need to
take care of the Iranian threat,” Ehud Olmert said. “I left with a lot less questions marks
[than] I had entered with regarding the means, the timetable restrictions and American
resoluteness to deal with the problem. George Bush understands the severity of the Iranian
threat and the need to vanquish it and intends to act on the matter before the end of his
term in the White House.”

This time around, unlike about the war with Iraq, the Washington bureaucracy, loathed by
the Bush White House, did not remain silent and complicit. The National Intelligence
Estimate on Iran’s nuclear program released last Dec. 3 distinguished Iran’s enrichment of
uranium at Natanz and Arak from its formal nuclear weapons program, which it said had
halted in 2003 after the American invasion of Iraq. Adm. Fallon, who put his country and
his integrity before his career, spoke out against a war with Iran, tried to stop it and lost
his job as the head of CENTCOM. He has been replaced with Gen. David H. Petraeus,
whose devotion to his career admits no such moral impediments.

” … There is no greater threat to Israel or peace than Iran,” Obama assured AIPAC. “This
audience is made up of both Republicans and Democrats. And the enemies of Israel should
have no doubt that regardless of party, Americans stand shoulder to shoulder in support
of Israel’s security. … The Iran regime supports violent extremists and challenges us
across the region. It pursues a nuclear capability that could spark a dangerous arms race
and … its president denies the Holocaust and threatens to wipe Israel off the map. … [M]y
goal will be to eliminate this threat.”

Barack Obama, when we need sane leadership the most, has proved feckless and weak.
He, and the Democratic leadership, is as morally bankrupt as those preparing to ignite our
funeral pyre in the Middle East.

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama on screen receives applause during
his address before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee Policy Conference 2008 in
Washington.