Transcripts For CSPAN Iran Protests 20180108

Topic this morning and an excellent panel to discuss it. We often have debates on middle east policy on interests and what the u. S. Should do in terms of immediate policy and pursuing its interest, and we often have debates what the u. S. Should do in terms of its values promoting its vision of the good life, its vision of what the world should look like and once in a while an issue that very clearly encapsulates both, and this is one of them. It pertains directly to some of the most important policy issues regarding the middle east in recent years and decades even, with the jcpoa in play, and the president about to make decisions about that. And we also have the issue of democracy in the Islamic Republic of ir follow also with a hash tag, iranprotests, and if youre tweeting about it, please use that hash tag. Were happy to have with us an iraniancanadian filmmaker and activist and reporter for news week for many years from 1998 to 2011. He was incarcerated by the iranian government from june 2009, a time that is reminiscent of this one to october 20, 2009 and he wrote most notably New York Times west seller called then they came for me, it was later a movie was made based on it by somebody you may have heard of jon stewart, it was called rosewater. He founded the iran citizen journalism news site. And its important for people following this and journalism is not a crime and were extremely happy and honored he joined us. With him on the panel will be our very own suzanne maloney, shes the Deputy Director of our Foreign Policy program as well as my colleague at center for middle east policy. Suzanne is our iran expert extraordinaire and energy and gulf energy issues. Among her many achievements, i just want to note two books, in 2008 irans long reach and an excellent book published in 2015 by Cambridge University press called, excuse me, irans political economy since the revolution. She was formerly on the state departments policy planning staff and is now one of our leaders here at brookings and moderating one of the very best we could hope for here in washington. Susan glaser, the chief columnist and host of news new weekly podcast, the global politico, and her list of accomplishments is long, a Founding Editor of politico, editor in chief of Foreign Policy reported from krohning, from tora bora, from afghanistan, from iraq, from the soviet union as cobureau chief in moscow, and for a variety of different outlets, and were extremely happy that youve joined us, susan. So thank you, all. Please join me in welcoming our three panelists to the stage. [applause] well, thank you. Thank you to all of you for braving the cold out here this morning. Were gratefu, and i cant think of a more timely event in 2018. I dont know about you guys, but im exhausted by 2018 already. [laughter] and you know, certainly, its a good reminder, the outbreak of these protests in iran and the question already of what to make of them. I cant think of a better panel to figure that out and, of course, well get to your questions as well, but i think a lot of us are starting out this morning with questions around, first of all, is this panel discussion, is it going to end up being an after action report essentially on a series of protests that are remarkable, but little understood and possibly fizzling out . Or is this the beginning of a new movement that we will be talking about throughout 2018 . So thats a question that i have beginning this conversation and, of course, the timing is remarkable because we are here in washington and once again, we see the convergence of one of our internal Foreign Policy debates. President trump, as you know, faces a deadline next week to once again decide whether or not to certify and ringing to iranian compliance with the nuclear deal and called the fate of that nuclear deal into question with his decision last october, not to certify it, but at the same time not yet to withdraw or to proceed in any other radical way. How, at all, does the outbreak of these protests affect that decision and how do we understand the opaque Trump Administration policies to the middle east, but not exclusively so. What kind of information do we have about the protests . What does it tell us about the state or lack thereof it seemed to surprise just about everybody, not only here in the United States, but arguably even inside iran at this moment. So, what have we learned as a result of this . I cant think of anyone better to start out that conversation than who has deep experience inside iran and the iran wire project he helped to found, providing valuable insights from the country inside whats going on right now. Lets jump into that. We can talk later about the washington piece of this story. Its been incredible to sort of watch not only every middle east hand in washington weigh in with takes and debates and how much were selfabsorbed. Right, suzanne . And we spent half the time, as far as i can tell, reading the critiques, discussing and debating what we did in 2009 and whether or not that was the right thing, as much as discussing what we should be doing in 2018. But what is happening in 2018 . Is this the end or the beginning . Maziar well, thank you so much susan, to organize this and thank you so much for coming. Before that, i just want to say that a lot of people in iran, especially from the government, say that this series of protests was organized were organized by foreigners. If it was so, it was a very bad, you know, decision because it was at the worst time. It was between christmas and new year, where most people were off and journalists were off. I mean, so i think thats it in itself can show it was not organized by foreigners. Whats going on in iran . From what we know, the 28th of december, last thursday, thursday before, the 28th of december there were some demonstrations and there are circumstantial evidence. We do not have concrete evidence yet, that there was a demonstration organized by the government itself and by the hardliners in order to protest against rouhanis economic policies, against poverty and against unemployment. So, about between 2,000 or 3,000 people gathered in the city, iran square, which is marchers square, and id like to translate the names of the places in iran, because they are very symbolic as well when you see the demonstrations on envelope avenue, and people say death to the dictator, and next to the monuments which means freedom monument. So, i think its very interesting to understand what the names of the streets and monuments mean in iran as well. So, there were there was a small demonstration organized by the government in masha, and then on friday, we saw demonstrations all over the country. And then, of course, it became more widespread and two nights ago, three nights ago, i was counting the cities and there were at least 54 cities involved in the demonstrations, some people have said that its up to 70 cities. So, the demonstrations, we do not know exactly, and i think anyone who tells you they know who exactly is demonstrating is lying. No one knows exactly who are the people in demonstrations, but it seems that most of the demonstrations are because of poverty, unemployment, and economic situations. Most of the people who have been arrested during the protests are young. The average age, they say its under the age of 25, either teenagers or in their early 20s. That means that the oldest of the people who have been arrested, they were 17 in 2009. So they didnt even have the right to vote at that time. And many of them did not take part in 2009 protests. So, the there were different kind of slogans chanted during the demonstrations and some chanted about the economy. Some of them chanted against and the first time, they brought out pictures of ayatollah, and commander of the force, which is the extra Territorial Branch of the revolutionary guard, and different groups within iran and outside of iran had their followers in different cities taking part in the demonstration. So thats why you saw that in certain cities they were chanting for the monarchy, the father of the shah and also the crown prince who lives in this area. There were some chants in favor of a city, which is his birthplace. There were some chants just about the economy, and people were saying that we are not it is not political protests, this is only about the economy. So its a very confusing picture that we see coming out of iran, but, it shows that theres a Fertile Ground for protest. Theres a discontent, widespread discontent all across iran and even the government, when you go beyond what theyre saying, you can see that theyre admitting that theres a wide discontent in iran, that can be triggered by anyone, any group, into protest, as soon as theres a measure of the space for people to protest. So, in the last couple of case, we have seen organized demonstrations by the government itself, against the what they call this. And they have narrowed the bandwidth and shut down apps which has been the main way for people to communicate. So, we have seen less protests, maybe in the past couple of days, especially today, there were prayers around iran and demonstrations after the friday prayers organized by the government itself against the quote unquote, sedition, so it will be interesting to see what will happen later on today. Susan no, i think youre right to highlight there are so many different slogans. Theres also the question of is there any leadership this time. In 2009, of course, it was taking place in the context of elections, and the Green Movement had a very specific set of political leaders. It had an apartment apparent set of demands. Id be curious what you make of the political context in which this is occurring. The reformists are in the government and theyre part of the crackdown. Theyre not joining these protests. What do you make of that, suzanne . Suzanne i think thats one of the key differences between whats happening today in iran and what happened in 2009, and there are a number of distinctions that are worth considering and exploring, but the lack of an obvious figurehead, the lack of an organization that is spearheading this, at least in so far as we actually know, that is quite distinct from both 2009 and prior periods of protests, the 1999 student demonstrations in tehran, for example. And it bears noting, of course, that iran has experienced routine demonstrations, labor strikes, periods even of significant unrest that are somewhat localized, over economic grievances, typically, over bureaucrat particular and administrative issues, youll see teachers demand back pay and the labor unions that are active. I think whats interesting about whats happening today is this contagion effect that appeared to happen so very quickly, within 24 hours of the very first protest, whatever sparked that first one, to whatever extent it may have been orchestrated as an attempt to undermine President Trump undermine president rouhani and his economic reform agenda, whatever sparked it, it then morphed almost immediately into places around the country, 24 cities, i think, on day two, and then continued to mushroom and also quickly move from slogans that were focused on economic grievances to what, i think, can only be seen as radical and very deeply alienated slogans about the government. And again, we didnt it happened progressively over 2009, he was there and can speak to it from a firsthand perspective. It took some time and there was, in fact, quite a degree of disagreement among those who were organizing and leading the movement in 2009 about to what extent this should be about asking the government to respect its own rules, to adhere to the constitution or to what extent it was now time to articulate antisystemic, antiIslamic Republic messages. Susan and thats quickly become a very antigovernment, broadbased, kind of they have different critiques or citing different slogans, but it seems that most of the protesters, would you agree, are basically against the government in some broad way. Theyre not asking the government to reform . Maziar no, theyre against the government as a whole. Theyre against the Islamic Republic of iran, theyre against the corruption in the past four decades. Theyre against cronyism thats going on in the past four decades, and they do not distinguish between the reform the reformist and conservatives, they look at them as part of the system. In 2009, the demonstrations that started with a clear objective, to recount the vote. That was it. People, millions of people in big cities were going through the streets, asking where is my vote . Meaning, where are my rights as citizens of this country . The protests were peaceful. The protests were silent, actually. The silence was deafening for the government. And there were clear leaders. There were basically three figure heads. We have the three figureheads for these protests. If those protests for that movement, we can call it the Green Movement, these recent protests they do not have a clear objective yet, there are people around the country who say theyre not happy with the system. They say death to khomeini, death to the revolutionary guard and ive not heard a slogan about what they want, what is the clear objective. That shows the confusion to the iranian people as well. And when you talk to iranians, especially in major cities in a major cities among middle classes, they cannot identify with many of the protesters because they say we do not know what they want. And at the same time, because of the desperate situation of many people around the country, because of the sheer poverty, because there are so many people who have nothing to lose, there is some violence, and there are some people outside of iran who are inciting violence, so theres for example, a person who lives in this country, he has a challenge for people to torch mosques or banks and he has some followers. He has some followers. His name is mohammad asany. Hes a former Game Show Host in iran, a cross between drew carey and howard stern, you imagine, if you have a revolution led by drew carey and howard stern. So, hes that kind of a character, and hes asking people to torch mosques and torch banks, and they do it because theyre desperate for change. And that has alienated many people in iran as well who do not want to be associated with this, because they think that it can lead to iran becoming something similar to syria and the government has been very good in terms of taking advantage of peoples fear for security. Suzanne knows better than i do, that iranians have always fear of lack of security has always been the primary fear for iranians. In the early 20th century when there was chaos in the country and people could not travel between cities, the father of the shah took over the country, he established rule of certain rule of law and the people were happy with his rule for a long time. Then during the 1953 there was chaos on the streets and seemed to be out of control and there was that coup, people do not come to the streets and support him. And at the moment, the government knows that people really fear insecurity in the country. And theyre taking advantage of scenes of violence torching the mosques, violence, slogans, in order to portray these demonstrators as the government calls them 40,000 hooligans who are being manipulated by outside forces. Susan well, thats a very resonant one. Lets talk about the causes and who are these people. You talkedt about how quickly it spread to different cities. One of the things that commentators remarked on it does not appear to be the traditional upper middle class, big city type protests. Its almost like the iranian version of trump country, those who perhaps supported former president ahmadinejad. They are more than working class, lower middle class, smaller cities across the country. Even protests in some of the more religious cities. What do you make of the geographic mac geographic map of these protests . Suzanne is one of the most interesting features of what is happening. So many people who know iran didnt know anyone a part of these pro tests. Its worth noting, the numbers are different this time around from 2009, when the government talked about 40,000 hooligans thats their upper estimate of how many people have been participating in these protests. Even if its off by a factor of 10, its still significantly smaller than what happened in 2009. But, i think its that question of deep alienation among the people who were expected to be the base in terms of the legitimacy of the Islamic Republic which came to power and has consistently sought to enhance its legitimacy with its own people by talking about social justice, by talking about, you know, sort of the disenfranchised, the dispossessed. This was a major theme of the revolution. It has been a major aspect of Economic Policy throughout the postrevolutionary period. If they have lost that constituency, if that constituency feels not just angry at one meter or one faction or one policy, but if they have lost that constituency in a sense that those people are prepared to engage in violence repudiateed to everything about the Islamic Republic, then it has got to be deeply unnerving. As he said, this question of, even if the protests died down, and i think we still have question as to whether that is happening, what is going to be the next part . How can it be anticipated . How can Security Forces and the government try to forestall it . Rounding up student leaders who dont appear to be directly involved. I think what they are trying to society asulate possible and prevent anything from sparking in. Susan that brings us back to this question of the crackdown in the playbook. You can speak to that both with your personal experience in 2009 and, you know, i was struck in personal experience from 2009 as well as what were, you know, leading and observing from the reports out of iran today. Tell us a little bit about your own experience in 2009 and, you know, i was struck in going back and looking at your remarkable memoir, which i recommend to everybody here, then they came for me, there was almost a prepared quality to when they came to arrest you, it appears they had almost instantly from the beginning of the Green Movement protests worked to construct a narrative for how they would communicate about what these protests meant and that it was an outside agitator and that you had been, in fact, designated to play a role in the regimes explanation for what had occurred. Maziar yeah, so i think what happened in 2009 was directly related to what happened in 1997 when there was a pro reform candidate who became president. That took conservatives by surprise, that when people saw any possibility of a peaceful change and a different candidate from the chosen candidate of the Supreme Leader, then they voted for him and they voted for him four years later and he became president. So, during the first four years of this and the second four years, the conservatives, they tried to gather information about the reformers. They tried to look at the paradigms of part of iran, especially former soviet union, how the regimes in those countries crumbled and they wanted to prevent such a thing to happen again. Thats why we saw the mass murder of mass killings of intellectuals, because according to some people who were interrogated at that time, those intellectuals were the leaders of the movements in Eastern Europe and they want today get rid of the future. So, the revolutionary guard between 1997 and 2005, they prepared themselves for another wave of reformists movement. And at the same time, the reformists, they proved to be very ineffective to the point of irrelevance, and people became disappointed in reforms. Thats why many who voted for him in 1997 and wanted change voted for ahmadinejad. And then four years later, we had the Green Movement and the revolutionary guard again had a scenario for the inevitable protests that would happen after rigging the vote. And as you said, their scenario at that time was that these protesters are led by certain people within the Reform Movement who are being directed by foreigners, so, when i was arrested, for example, maybe 90 of my interrogation was not about what i did. It was about what they wanted me to confess, that i had put soandso in touch with foreign embassies. They were asking me to give the details of how i put in with the british embassy, id never met met. And you know, they were saying that other people are confessing, why didnt you confess and you know, so, thats i didnt confess, so i was saved because of that. But this time around, i think the revolutionary guards, the people who are in charge of Iman Khomeini foundation and supporting 10 million families across the country and many imams who pride themselves with being in touch with the poor. Many conservative leaders, religious leaders around the country were surprised by these demonstrations. As a result, we saw that the revolutionary guard came up with this in theory they hadnt 2009 about two or three next ago. Going back to what suzanne said about arresting students, they are using this opportunity in order to settle scores. The revolutionary guard commander implicitly said that ahmadinejad was involved in the new sedition. He didnt mention him by name. He said a highranking former official. His name is mahmoud. He could have said that. Then the revolutionary guards who is an interrogator two nights ago on Iranian Television suggests that it was american, saudi, israeli plans and they come up with this really strange ideas that each social media is playing a role for the american intelligence. That twitter is supposed to be organizing. Telegram is supposed to be a messaging service. So they dont really know as well. Susan theyre struggling for a narrative . Maziar theyre struggling for a narrative. Because they see all these disparate slogans as well. Theyre surprised some of these theyre surprised some of these 40,000 hooligans, efforts in support of the shah. I have not had a chance to ask the revolutionary guard, why do we have 40,000 hooligans in the country . Who are these hooligans . Lets accept there are 40,000 hooligans. How come we have not been able to rehabilitate 40,000 hooligans who are willing to risk their lives to be killed . What is the economic background of these hooligans and who are these people coming to streets . We as journalists are struggling with questions, as you guys in washington are struggling with questions. I think that revolutionary guards themselves, the system itself is also struggling for answers as well. And the answer is not easy. And it is almost impossible for this regime to provide. Because people are protesting against the economic conditions. That has been compiled for the past 40 years. People have different kinds of grievances. You see that there are some ethnic minorities, like arabs. They are protesting in the city that is one of the poorest areas of iran i have ever been too. I have ever been to. There are people in mashat who lost their investments in different banks and pyramid schemes and financial institutions. So there are multilayers of there are different layers of grievances. Susan it is not just you rigged election. Maziar many grievances have to do with the revolutionary guard involvement in Economic Activities in iran. The revolutionary guard are also are not just a military force, they are the biggest industrialists in iran. They have some of the biggest industrial contracts in the country. They are somewhat, the Biggest Industries and some of the Biggest Companies in iran are run by the institutions that are under direct supervision of the Supreme Leader and they can not be fully audited. I recommend suzannes book about the boneyards, the foundations, you can see the depth of corruption. So for rouhani government who, he himself admitted that only 1 3 of the budgets is in my hands. The rest is basically controlled by the Supreme Leader. He can not do anything. Susan your point about rouhani is a good one to pick up on. This question of rouhani perceived certainly here in washington, elsewhere outside of iran as, you know, a moderate, at least in the iranian context. We perceived the nuclear deal as an example that would lead potentially to further reforms. One question i have, for both of you is, to what extent are we seeing rouhani and those around him come up to the limits of what incremental within the system reform is possible . You mentioned the soviet union and the regimes studying of the collapse of the soviet union as something to be avoided. I was thinking about a classic late soviet poem, fatal halfmeasures, right . Is that what were looking the at with rouhani, that he basically himself unleashed this because he is not able to deliver fully for people . What do we think, what does it tell us about the future of reform inside of the system . Will it simply be a pretext for more cracking down . Suzanne i would say my theory is that that it is very similar to what you just suggested. That, you know, rouhani was the last best attempt to try to moderate the Islamic Republic. This has been sort of an on going effort really since the birth of the postrevolutionary state when, even baked into the construct of the states there were more moderate and representative institutions and more theological and authoritarian institutions. There has always been this tension and each go around with attempts to create a more moderate path and a more moderate outcome for the Islamic Republic has ended with the triumph and the further domination of the authoritarian forces. So the demise of the provisional government after the seizure of u. S. Embassy in 1979. The attempts by president rafsanjani at the end of war with iraq, as much as rouhani has done to try to reform the economy and bring iran further back into the world, ended badly. The reformist movement, i think in many ways the most ambitious and most optimistic element of reform attempts we have seen within iran during the president of mohamed hatami sought to seek a dialogue with civilization. To emphasize the precepts in the iranian constitution do call for rule of law and representative government. At every point they found themselves outwit, outflanked by the capacity of hardliners to control the coercion, coercive instruments of the state, to use any means necessary to sideline those who were seeking reform. And what weve seen is this sort of successive series of failures. I was, in 2013, optimistic about rouhani. I thought, in fact, this might be a path forward to focus once again on economic reform with at least some social liberalization. To engage with the world in a way to bring irans rehabilitatio, at least partially. He succeeded in the sense he was able to bring about the nuclear deal. That was no small accomplishment from the iranian side. He has run up against the limits of whats possible within the Islamic Republic, because the economic reform package he has been trying to enact and is really necessary if iran is going to create jobs and address the inequality and poverty that has become such an obvious issue over the course of the past week, those are really politically difficult reforms. Theyre structural reforms. Theyre longterm changes that need to be made. At the same time, he has been limited in his ability to attract Foreign Investment at levels sufficient to overcome the problematic business environment, simply because the nuclear deal was a transaction. It wasnt a transformation. It wasnt a wholesale change in irans relationship with the world. It didnt bring about an end to all the restrictions on the iranian economy. It was sold that way to iranians. One of the questions we will all be watching and thinking about to what extent are sort of expectations raised around the nuclear deal . Part of the mix that has created this very radical element that is deeply alienated from the islamic system as a whole. My guess, rouhanis challenges, even if the Security Forces manage to get control rouhanis challenges are greater than ever. There will be greater political division, making his economic division, making his Economic Reforms more difficult. The Political Risk factor and u. S. Policy will loom large for interhavings investors in a way it might not even a month ago. Susan right. You brought up the sort of washington part of this narrative. So, first of all, how have we affected or not affected things so far . You mentioned that already the government has decided to create as part of its narrative this is imposed by the west, imposed by the United States. Another cia plot against the country. When in doubt that is usually a pretty good course for any threatened government in the region, but President Trump made a very decisive move on twitter to jump into the fray here, and weve been having here in washington a debate about president obamas decision back in 2009 not to do that. You said in your own tradition, suzanne, you had vigorous debate even inside your own family whether it was right to intervene publicly in this or not. President trump just, did a very trumpian thing seems to me and jumped right in with his tweets. Did that affect the situation do you think . Did he handle it correctly . Maziar i think he handled it correctly. I know a lot of people dont like trump in this city and in this country, but to the protesters in iran, to the protesters in iran in 2009 or in 2017 and 2018, to sexual harassment, the russian investigation, the health care reform, none of those really matter. They want to hear from the president of the United States, and it was really disappointing for people not to hear from president obama in 2009. For i know that he had his reasons. He didnt want to taint the reputation of those leaders, such as demonstrators. I think that is wrong, because whether obama is quiet or president of the United States is quiet or vocal, they will blame america for everything in iran. I mean thats the easiest, most expedient thing to do for the government, but i think in this case trump was correct in tweeting, and i like what roger klein of the New York Times said, he retweeted trumps tweet for first time and he never thought that he would do that. I think that was a correct decision for President Trump to do that, and i think by the end of the month when there is opportunity to renew some of the waivers or not to renew them, that would be another Good Opportunity for President Trump to act as well. I tweeted this morning, because ive been asked this question several times in the past few days that what should america do . I think there are three things that the United States government should do, which can be quite effective. One is to lift the travel ban for iranians. Because that has created anger and disappointment in the American Government by the majority of iranians. And its really unnecessary, and its wrong to have that travel ban on iranians. The other thing is to not to lift the sanctions, not to renew the sanctions on Iran Broadcasting Corporation and iran ib has been under the direct control of the Supreme Leader. It has been one of the main instruments of suppression in iran. They are, it is not a broadcasting corporation. Even, many iranians dont watch irb anymore. I think it is very important to be able to impose sanctions on them. And also i think it is very important for the United States to condemn violence on both sides. Its wrong for the iranian government to suppress Peaceful Protesters who are just asking for food and for better economy and, even if they are chanting against the government, if they are peaceful, they should not be suppressed. They should be listened. To at the same time, it is wrong for anyone to incite violence. It is wrong for anyone to ask people to go out and torch banks and mosques and destroy buildings, and i think the violence should be condemned and by the United States and international community. Susan so, suzanne, first of all, what do you think will happen here in the washington part of this policy debate as President Trump faces this next round of decision on the Iran Nuclear Deal . They have already, this week, imposed a new set of sanctions that relate to companies and entities involved in the development of ballistic missiles, and so what do you think is going to happen here on that end . And tell us your perspective, which is interesting, on this rear view mirror fight were having whether obama screwed up in 2009 . Suzanne ill start with the last question, because i have thought about it. I defended the Obama Administration at the time and continued to for a long time, and i understand the calculations that went into that decision, which everyone perhaps all the way up to the president himself has later regretted. Secretary clinton has come out and described this as one of the greatest regrets of her time as secretary of state, but i think it was a reasonable calculation at the time based on both the sense that an american embrace of what was at that moment the serious, legitimate, opposition uprising that ever really, we had ever encountered in iran since the earliest years of the revolution, that anything that we did that could hurt it needed to be avoided, and so the do no harm principle perhaps applied at that time. The Obama Administration also was clearly focused on the nuclear issue, which was a crisis, a bipartisan crisis here. It was not sort of a strange fixation and felt that weighing in was going to in some way complicate the prospects for finding a diplomatic resolution to that crisis, and that, in effect, was a higher priority in the sense of serving the interests of the iranian people and the people of the region as well as u. S. Interests. So i understand what motivated it. I think it made sense in the context. I dont think that, you know, it is defensible in retrospect, because it didnt succeed. It didnt protect the protesters and leadership from taint and allegations that they were somehow in the americans pocket. It didnt really advance opportunities for protests, because america was somehow on the sidelines, and it didnt really facilitate any diplomatic progress. There were early talks in the weeks after the start of the Green Movement that initially appeared optimistic, but you know, it took a number of additional years and a lot more sanctions pressure before we were able to get to the negotiations that could in fact produce the nuclear deal. So i think the Lesson Learned from that experience is we should never stay on the sidelines. It is the obligation of the United States, quote, unquote, leader of the free world, to the extent we still aspire to that position, to speak on behalf of those asking for a better life and condemn violence against them. I think, while i would prefer some more scripted, President Trumps tweets that might be in a little bit more persuasive, i think it is the right instincts to be out in public on this i would like to see more from european governments that have been a little bit more reticent. Susan let me press you on the trump thing. Your point is welltaken, maziar, about the swamp here in washington broadly speaking is not a huge fan of President Trumps tweets when it comes to Foreign Policy interventions. Do you think it really accomplished anything constructive, suzanne . You made sort of an allusion to this, but clearly the Trump Administration, not just the president himself has deemphasized and democracy and promotion of democracy around the world as well as human rights. It is not been a feature of this administrations Foreign Policy. Weve seen the president himself lavish praise on autocrats in the region. It seems he is very openly taken the side of saudi arabia around the regional enemy and adversaries. So you know, is this undermining potentially american promotion of democracy by simply appearing to opportunistically use this kind of rhetoric only when it is involving one of your weve always been opportunistic in the way weve tried to advance democracy the middle east. As much as it would like that to change, i wont can that solely on the Trump Administration. I would prefer a policy that was more evenhanded across the region that appreciated the risk of authoritarianism outside of iran, but to the extent we are focused on this moment in iran, i think it is right for the american president to be speaking words of support for those who go out to the streets. They pay attention, they listen. Accosted by individuals who said, where were you . Where was your government in 2009 when we needed you . Dont think it wouldve made the difference in terms of the outcome then, and i dont think it will make a difference in terms of the outcome now, but sometimes we have to do what is simply the right things to do to help those who are actually taking a risk. Ou both mentioned the have to emphasize hypocrisy is not only the monopoly of the American Government. We are good at it, though. Actually, not really. [laughter] the iranian government would win a gold medal. They are shedding tears for protesters in ferguson, for manyle, while denying people in their own country, their own citizens of basic rights. The are talking about atrocities in palestine while they have been totally silent about what has happened in chechnya and the muslims in china. We are talking about hypocrisy, of course we have different standards for the United States, that we have to always remember that the other side is not that innocent, as well. That is in a slump point, im glad you brought it up, i want to open this up to questions, but we havent talked about the role around policy in its own region and the hypocrisy it talked about. What role it mightve played in the protest. Immediately saw questions being raised about the millions or billions of dollars spent by the on, citing basically civil war in syria, the involvement in human and lebanon. The question of whether this is a backlash to that, and number two, perhaps even the reforms inside of saudi arabia, some people have suggested have caused iranians to look critically at their own country when it comes to how repressed women continue to be, for example, so im curious about the role you both think iranian adventurismcy, abroad, has played in the backlash that home. People saying you are spending this money elsewhere in the middle east come how does it make iran great again . One of the slogans of , i dies in every city for iran. But we also have to remember, what iran is doing now is very policy to the shahs before the revolution, which was very similar to the israeli Foreign Policy, which was support, you have to and have good relations in order to keep the enemy away from your , heers and you have to take have to have alliances and thats why israel has good relationships with other countries in order to contain the surrounding areas. Somehow following that idea, and has also intervene in other countries before the revolution. But the problem is the fact that the way that they are doing that , bragging about this intervention, its very different from the shelf the shah. Unemployed, one out of seven iranians live under the poverty line. When they see that, iranians are helping the lebanese whose houses were destroyed by israel, it creates a resentment, a presentment a resentment in their own government and also in what is happening, and when you look at one of the more sophisticated arguments in terms of what is happening in syria helping the is regime to torture and gas its own people, that creates resentment in their own government and in what is doing in the region. Does itcreate mean they will do the same things at home as well to suppress the outbreak of civil war . Is the message, you dont want what is happening in syria to happen here . I think this time, people bye come to the streets, but the government count, 21 people have been killed in the last seven days. There might be more, usually there are more, and the government statistics, but i think this time, we have seen people who have no fear, nothing to lose, who come to the streets. According to the government, and the government again, 40,000 hooligans came to the street. Hooligans have nothing to you to lose. They dont care if they will be killed or not, they have nothing to lose. I want to get back to one of the questions you posed and i inadvertently dr. Earlier, the policy response. Irans regional adventurism plays into the Trump Administrations rationale for the opposition to the nuclear deal, and i can october, the declined to certify iranian compliance largely because of this conviction that Everything Else iran is doing, it is somehow invalidating even whatever Technical Compliance there may be with the terms of that agreement. Over the course of the next 10 days, we will see the expiration of the waivers and suspensions of all of the u. S. Tensions that were required u. S. Sanctions that were required under the deal and the president will have a much more meaningful opportunity next week even compared to october. He will have an opportunity to continue to abide by the nuclear deal, to take action to do so, and extending the waivers. Or to explicitly pull the United States out of the deal and decline to continue the actions that in fact are in compliance. Technical, but fundamentally, what the president does next week will determine whether or not we are in compliance with the nuclear deal. I think at this stage, it is very difficult to predict how he will react. There is an effort underway to craft Bipartisan Legislation on the hill that might great some sense that the president has infected achieved his aim at the certification, and that might give him an excuse to continue the waivers, that was sort of the game plan. But they wont have the legislation ready and passed before and next week. Even if they did, would that be sufficient . Is this confirmation of trumps own narrative that the regime is fundamentally one that should not be dealt with, and iranians themselves are saying it as well . My guess is he continues the waivers, that the nuclear deal continues for another three months, but i think even that uncertainty is going to further erode Business Confidence in iran, further complicate their economic rehabilitation, and with that let me make a final point. There are a lot of people out there, including in this country but certainly many in iran who think trump has somehow helped to precipitate the events in iran i not abiding by the deal. That is not true. We have done everything we are supposed to do. We have kept to the letter of the law on the nuclear deal, we relieved all of the sanctions, weights or suspended all of the relative sanctions. Createhavent done is new opportunities for iran, and that is something the Obama Administration was clearly torn about in its final months after the implementation of the deal. I think it is important to narrative being fostered mostly by iranian leadership, that somehow this is ,ll the United States fault destroyednited states the iranian economy, it is fundamentally not true. Microphones, the only thing i would say is identify yourself and please make it a question so that we can get the benefit of their talk. In the back. Thank you. Comments two pieces of comments and information. Just one question. Truly is, whether it is the curse of geography for the iranian people. It comes to the question of the about union, the policy the green belt for iran, and how do you differentiate between 2009 Green Movement demonstration as opposed to what is now . The Green Movement was basically after getting another religious and whond to power, used to be a Prime Minister during the time of suppression and opposition. During this time, people are not asking for any more mullahs. They want food on the table, freedom and security. Have you differentiate . There are actually, talking about doing away with the islamic system. Why the position doesnt to that, i am baffled. I think we spoke to this a little bit, if you want to elaborate on the key difference from 2009. I think we talked about it. Ok. More questions, please make it a question. Ok. Information identify yourself. Gavin. So much information in the media around the middle east in the last decade or so that i have been conscious of politics. It seems there is so much information that people form an opinion before they form any real come historical understanding or context around an issue, the average individuals. If you were to explain the middle east and iran to a child or someone who did not have an , howon on the subject would you give the most basic understanding to someone who really did not understand any of the topics at all . Describe brainu surgery to a fouryearold or fiveyearold . Very difficult, if the complicated question. We are joking, but it is a complicated question. Fouryearold children and people who think as a simple as children should not be in charge of making politics. We need more sophistication and understanding of the complicated history and complication of different people involved and different interests, and because of geography, as that lady said, all of that has to be understood by someone in order to make the right decision. Unfortunately, especially in the past few days, weve seen many people who have very simple answers that may be a child can understand, but those answers are usually wrong, because they are simple. I think simplicity and Simple Flying things really fear is not the answer. You wanted to ask a question . Many of the cases of democratization saw flexors salt fractures that precipitated the fall, particularly in the soviet union. Differencech of a between what we now call the reform flank and the more radical flank . What is the chance of these demonstrations would later feet into a true fracture of the iranian public . A really interesting question, although i think here the analogy might diverge a little bit in the sense that one of the defining characteristics of the political establishment of postrevolutionary iran is that it is fractured. And so further schisms certainly can happen, and we saw this after 2009, a really important schism that for a time appeared to be putting into question the legitimacy and continuing functionality of the iranian government. They managed to come back together after 2009. There was even to some extent something of a coalition around president rouhani. He was elected not just because he was a good campaigner, not just because he managed to come as a longtime relative conservative, coopt reformist slogans and appeal to people who have been disaffected in 2009, but he also benefited from elite someone whoin which was persona non grata from 2009, a leader and kind of figurehead for the Reform Movement, came together with a number of more centrist conservatives to kind of manage the machinations around the elections in a way that would benefit rouhani. It was actually some consolidations within the establishment that led to the rouhani victory, and that came only four years after the most serious i serious uprising and splintering we had seen in many years. Think, these development the question developments call into question how the elite relate to one another. You have reformists who are, if anything, as alienated and dumbfounded by what is happening on the streets as the hardliners. They are not rushing to the barricades and endorsing what is happening. In part because some of the slogans are explicitly targeting them and saying we dont want any of you, throw all the bombs out, as another scholar said this week. Im not sure if actually of the elite will be the fatal flaw for the Islamic Republic because it has been part of the context since the beginning. I think in terms of comparing iran and the soviet union, one of the clear similarities is the allocation of the state resources to security and military. That is what led to the demise of the soviet union. Because every resource in the country was allocated to security, intelligence. After the syriza protest, i think that will happen in iran, as well. There will be more Intelligence Officers trained, there will be more Police Presence and guards in the different cities, especially cities that saul protests. Aw protests. Hat sw ve seenwe increase in smaller cities around the country. At the same time, we will see more protests by citizens as soon as there is a measure of Space Available to them beard to them. It could be demonstration after a football match. Iran is going to be playing in the world cup this summer. Theyre going to play at least three matches, portugal, spain and morocco. If they beat spain, imagine if they beat spain or there is a draw, there will be demonstrations. Part of that will lead into a test against the government. , as weight be a funeral saw a couple of years ago, there will be a funeral of not a very popular figure, innocence, a very bad figure. [laughter] imagine if Michael Bolton dies, there will be a demonstration after his funeral. That happened in iran two years ago. Nobody knew who he was. To a funeral led and protest. That is how iranian revolutions started. In 1978, february, 1978, whennuary there was a critical article about khomeini in the news paper newspaper. There were funerals for people who have been killed, every 14 days, there were demonstrations, and that led to 1979s revolution. Im not saying this will lead to a revolution, but im saying that there are similarities between what happened then and now and the soviet union. My name is adam. Panelists tohe speculate if and how and to what degree the conservative elements of the iranian power structure are capable of and inclined to reform for their own survival. In other words, or honey rouhani tried it, these are the elements that blocked him. That in a possibility this moment of self reflection and analysis, they say, look, we have to loosen up or take some measures to prevent this from happening again . Rather than do it with the iron fist, they find some other more evolutionary way to do it in terms of changing the economy, etc. I know its a longshot, but is it possible . Great question. I was talking to an analyst a few months ago, and according to him, who is very close to the reform camp, according to him, the best scenario for iran would be something as you suggested, that a group of revolutionary guards, a group of reformists come together and understand that in order for the regime to survive to a certain extent, they have to understand that making money is better than making war and chaos, and then they have to do something against their radical elements within the revolutionary guard, against some of the more ideological cohorts. But that will require a certain action, and as and him server, and he but as an observer, and he has someone in iran who has a good knowledge of what is going on, he would not see that at the moment. But that can happen. It has happened before in different countries, some groups of officers and revolutionaries, they see the situation is not tenable and they have to do something radical and they do it. We will see. At the moment, i dont think the people would be happy with reforms. At the moment, i dont think rouhani is capable of creating reforms. Going back to history, rouhani was the first person who called in september 1978. He has been part of the system since then, and before that, he was a revolutionary. It is very difficult to expect all of a sudden this other way. Its not happen. Not going to happen. But there is some logic, they have to understand the situation is not tenable. After he isn even dead. I think its an interesting question and interesting scenario. I guess my response is, it is conceivable, but it would require transformation in terms processes ofnd the government and the manner in which the Islamic Republic conducts itself at home and within the region. Ill think iran needs revolutionary change, but evolutionary change is not going to be enough. People are fed up. It may only be 40,000 this week,ut 40,000 over time particularly with other precipitants, can turn into 400,000, and 4 million very quickly. Have this ate least 25 year experiment with trying to reform iran through economics, through political and social efforts, and it has always proven insufficient. Each time, conservatives have offed off have peeled and been supportive of at least some aspects of reform, that fundamentally there is an unwillingness of the core of the do this. There are other elements to the ideology that are fundamentally fixed at this point. Unless there is a willingness on the part of the conservative front to rethink the core elements of the ideology, i think reforms will continue to prove insufficient. The frustration is going to build up, and the question is going to be, can the Islamic Republic survive . A ghost back to my recommendation of condemning violence it goes back to my recommendation of condemning violence. Persuading different regime members to jump ship, they have theree some assurance will be no retaliation or violence in the future. I think it is only through peaceful, nonviolent resistance that we can see a Better Future for iran, and for that to happen, we need some people within the regime to jump ship and change their positions. With violence, when people call for the execution of the revolutionary guard or clerics, that cannot happen. There was a please we ran in political that said the Islamic Republic was doomed. It was written by your husband, suzanne. He made the point that the crackdown is inevitable, more or less. ,hat the cycles we have seen reform followed by reaction, mean the regime is in cable fundamental is incapable fundamentally of change. Where do you come down on this . I have been in a different place than my husband, including right at this moment, where he is speaking across town. That i would say this. At a time where many people in town, in this town, were comfortable with the conventional wisdom that the regime is stable, the country is a realdated, there isnt possibility of anything revolutionary taking place, there were people in this town who were the opposite and often condemned as people who knew nothing about iran, despite the fact that they have greater capabilities in that regard than they are often credited with. I guess for i came down i come down is i think were seeing the end of the latest howrms episode, i dont see there is a different strategy of evolutionary change that satisfies iranians at this time. Think it has to be some kind of transformation. Ideally, if we understand what iranians as a whole broadly would prefer, it would be to some extent gradualist. But has to be transformational, it cannot be biting around the edges. Fundamentally, i dont think that is consistent with the Islamic Republic as we know it today. You think about iran, iran has an incredible young population, phenomenal resources, people who are well educated, literate, engaged with the world. This is a powerhouse country in every respect except for the fact that it is led by a really problematic government. It has these fundamental to decadeser the last two about the nature it has had these fundamental debates over the last two decades. There is a hundred year push for accountable government. There is a huge amount to be optimistic about with respect to iran, but it has not come to bear, it has not borne fruit under the Islamic Republic. The Islamic Republic has in many ways i think sacrifice so much of what could make iran great again. I dont know that iran will ever find a nelson mandela, but it needs Political Leadership that can help lead the country to a Better Future. I think we have time for one or two more questions. Hello. Im with the u. S. Mission on International Religious freedom. You brought up earlier some of the different layers that have fed into the protests, including different ethnic groups from border provinces. Weve not seen as much going on in other areas. Im wondering if you could speak a little more about that aspect and how it has played in and why it has not taken off more. To tell you the truth, i do not know one the demonstrations have been where they have been. I dont think anyone has provided the answers. We look at the map of demonstrations, we dont see that many similarities between different groups. If, according to according to some people, the demonstrators are poor or oppressed, there are no more poor or oppressed people then people in those areas. We have seen demonstrations in those areas, we have seen violence by people, but my guess is that because of the , the spiritual leader of the sunnis in that area, many ,eople respect him in that area and he has been under a lot of andsure by the government different intelligence apparatus in iran, maybe that has played a role, maybe he has asked them not to protest. Thats the only thing i can provide. Map. T is a puzzling when you look at it, people talk about unemployment, yes, there is a high rate of unemployment in all of the cities demonstrations have happened, but there are cities in iran with higher rates of unemployment and we have not seen demonstrations in those cities. Ok. In the very back. You, my name is tom, im a graduate student. Earlier, we talked about how the protests had singled out support for what is happening in syria, yemen in iraq. What might the implications be for the rivalry with saudi arabia . I think the iranian government most probably will stop bragging about its yemen andin syria, iraq. , this braggingy is relatively new phenomenon. At to 10 years ago, we did not hear much about the force or the commander of the force, but it is only after their victories in thatand alliances in iraq the iranians have started to talk about the extraterritorial involvement. Especially in the past two years , with the victories theyve had in syria and sending troops, not only iranian but afghan and shias toi she is iraq, that they asserted to brag about involvement. Scalek they will start to back their publicity about that, but i dont think theyre going to scale back their real engagement in those countries. I think we will see less of natural law and hezbollah and the shrine defenders, as they call the people in syria. I dont think they are going to scale back real support. Speculation, same which is that fundamentally, irans regional activities have survived even at times of significant economic pressure. You did not see iran retrench from the region during the worst period of multilateral sections on iran. Is an expense the state cant bear. They will need to shift their posture as they need to move money and devote more resources to domestic priorities in the aftermath of these protests. I do think the optics may change. , there issome studies a wonderful book on the revolutionary guard, and it has suggested there was a deliberate attempt to publicize the victories over isis precisely because iran would like much of the rest of the world, including who was slow to pick up on what was going on with the group, and the guard needed to reestablish their own bona fides at home. This was done on the cheap, not just financially but in terms of iranian goods on the ground. Iranian boots on the ground. Forcesing much larger drawn from iraqi militias and hezbollah. Most interestingly, these shrine defenders, the brigades of whoan and pakistani shia have been mobilized, they had populatione iranian in terms of casualties of war. More recently, there has been more publicity around and support for those noniranians fighting these battles. There have been public funerals for afghans killed in syria, khamenei has in place the families. Has embraced the families. It has been talk of support for the survivors of those killed in those actions. Happening willis cause some kind of a shift in the way the leadership talks about these engagements. I think we have time for one more question. Last question. Right here in the front. Hello, i am marina, a freelance journalist. My question is about the role of the royal family of iran. Effigy several times mention that the protesters, although we cant precisely narrowed down be,tly their motives might we can see that they are poor and have nothing left to lose. Yet i heard you say there is an the sloganssome of were calling for members of the royal family. If that were to actually evolve further, can you tell us whether societyk all of iranian would have an appetite for a return for a modern monarch . I can say that all of Iranian Society does not have an appetite for the royal monarchy to return. Some people are nostalgic about that era. There are people who are image theyowards the have of the shah and that iran thewell respected around country. That image is not accurate, many people were not well off and there was a lot of suppression and oppression going on, otherwise we would not have had a revolution in 1979. That whoever is dynasty has a role in the future of iran, like many other countries we have seen. But i dont think the majority of iranians want to return to pre1979 revolution time and have a monarchy. That is not in the cards now. This is an element of the slogans, is this even a surprise . It was a surprise. That said, you can always find reservoirs of nostalgia. Particular, the founder of the dynasty always seem to command a great deal of interest in respect among ordinary iranians in the sense that he is someone who is seen as kind of a father of the nation and managed to assert control at a time of chaos and threat. And to some iranians, the prospect of a great man who could do the same at a similarly insecure time is appealing. Think that translates any real prospects of any kind of monarchy, but i think it underscores the slogans, the fact you have heard people chanting monarch slogans underscores that at least among the current protests, there is some agreement about what they dont like, but very little positive agenda or forward agenda they are aligned around. That in many ways is parallel to what happened in the mobilization that led up to the 1979 revolution. There was a very clear sense of agreement among the revolutionaries about removing the shah. There was no clear agreement about what would come next. If we ever get to a revolutionary period in iran, we are not there yet, i think building a positive agenda will be a crucial factor to ensuring there is any kind of Better Future. There is a sentiment among many iranians to reject everything that this government stands for, that includes the Islamic Republic, they want to return to another era, they reject islam itself. There is a big Movement Toward zoarastrianism, or they are just not religious anymore. Also, i think there is an image. There is another group involved , althoughrotests that i think it is a cult and they are capable of running anything, including the country, there are some support for them, and that is merely the responsibility of the iranian government, because they killed so many of their members in the beginning of the , maybe 10,000, and imagine 10,000 families have lost someone. In many cases, they were tortured to death, in many cases there were no Court Hearings for the people. Lost a memberhave among the family. The government has pointed out, pointed this out as well. Arrested, there are some people whose relatives were executed. That to the list of grievances the iranians have, as well. I have to say, i guess we will have to reconvene a year from now at the beginning of the 40th anniversary of the revolution and see what the year brings for us. I want to thank both of you for aarting off 2018 with welltimed conversation around significant events happening in iran today. Thank you and thank you to all of you. [applause] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2018] announcer monday, a conversation about inflation and financial policy. It is hosted by the former federal chair b online cspan. Org and on the free cspan radio app. Smaj talking with res sexual offenses act, then a and on the protests situation in iran. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2017] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] this week on q and a, meijer inc chairman, hendrik meijer, talks about arthur vandenberg, the man in the middle in the middle of the 20th century. 20th century. Brian hendrik meijer, author of senator arthur vandenberg, the man in the middle of the 20th century