DOCSLIB.ORG

Reformist Islam Versus Radical Islam in Iran

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Reformist Islam Versus Radical Islam in Iran THE BROOKINGS PROJECT ON U.S. RELATIONS WITH THE ISLAMIC WORLD WORKING PAPER Number 4, November 2010 REFORMIST ISLAM VERSUS RADICAL ISLAM IN IRAN Mehrangiz Kar at BROOKINGS THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION 1775 MASSACHUSETTS AVE., NW WASHINGTON, D.C. 20036-2103 www.brookings.edu THE BROOKINGS PROJECT ON U.S. RELATIONS WITH THE ISLAMIC WORLD WORKING PAPER Number 4, November 2010 REFORMIST ISLAM VERSUS RADICAL ISLAM IN IRAN Mehrangiz Kar at BROOKINGS Saban Center or Project on U.S. Relations with the Islamic World (IWR) Working Papers present prelim- inary conclusions or work-in-progress based on research by Saban Center (IWR) scholars. Working papers are meant to stimulate de- bate and discussion on difficult policy questions. As with all Brook- ings papers, Working Papers do not necessarily reflect the views of the Saban Center, the Brookings Institution, or the Institution’s board of trustees. All Saban Center (IWR) Working Papers are available online at www.brookings.edu/sabancenter, and comments are welcome. Other Saban Center (IWR) Working Papers include: The Conquest of Muslim Hearts and Minds? Perspectives on U.S. Re- form and Public Diplomacy Strategies by Abdelwahab el-Affendi Arab and American Think Tanks: New Possibilities for Cooperation? New Engines for Reform? by Ezzat Ibrahim The Interplay Between U.S. Foreign Policy And Political Islam In Post-Soeharto Indonesia by M. Syafi’i Anwar R EFO R MIST I SLAM VE R SUS R ADICAL I SLAM IN I R AN T HE S A BAN C ENTE R FO R M IDDLE E AST P OLICY AT BROOKINGS II About the Author Mehrangiz Kar is an Iranian scholar, activist, she was convicted and sentenced to four years’ im- writer and lawyer specializing in women’s rights prisonment on charges of acting against national and family law. Kar is internationally renowned security and disseminating propaganda against for her writings and activism in defense of women’s the Islamic regime. Kar was later released on bail and human rights. She is the recipient of several hu- and her sentence was reduced. In recent years Kar man rights awards, including the National Endow- was a Scholar at Risk Fellow at Harvard Univer- ment for Democracy’s Democracy Award (2002), sity, Wellesley College’s Newhouse Center for the Ludovic-Trarieux International Human Rights Humanities and a Ford Foundation Visiting Fellow Prize (2002) and the Human Rights First Award with the Project on U.S. Relations with the Islamic (2004). She is on the board of a number of inter- World in the Saban Center for Middle Policy at the national organizations such as the Advisory Com- Brookings Institution. In 2009, she was a Visiting mittee of Human Rights Watch on the Middle East Fellow at the University of Cape Town where she (2000-2011). Kar came to world-wide attention works on public law and transitional justice. Cur- in 2000 when she was imprisoned for expressing rently, she is a Fellow at the Dubai Initiative at Har- critical views about Iran’s legal system while at an vard John F. Kennedy School of Government. international conference in Berlin. In January 2001 R EFO R MIST I SLAM VE R SUS R ADICAL I SLAM IN I R AN T HE S A BAN C ENTE R FO R M IDDLE E AST P OLICY AT BROOKINGS III REFORMIST ISLAM VERSUS RADICAL ISLAM IN IRAN ne of the many paradoxes of Iranian politics is Beginning with the Constitutional Revolution in Othe role of the clergy as both a supporter and 1906, members of the clergy have lent crucial sup- an opponent of social movements. Iran has a long port and leadership to movements for political re- tradition of clerical involvement in popular freedom form. Most notably, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini movements, dating back to the Constitutional led the freedom movement in the Islamic Revolu- Revolution of 1906 and earlier. However, there tion of 1979, which ended Iran’s monarchy under exists an equally long tradition of influential clerics the Shah. Even under the Islamic Republic, clerics standing in the way of liberal movements. This have played an important role in challenging the historical clash between the conservatives and the religious government. Mohammad Khatami, also reformists among the Iranian clergy lies at the heart a cleric, was at the forefront of the reform move- of the internal struggles that have gripped Iran since ment in 1997. Most recently, clerics such as the late the foundation of the Islamic Republic. Ayatollah Hossein-Ali Montazeri, Ayatollah Yousef Saanei and Hojjatoleslam Mehdi Karroubi sup- The theoretical differences between the conserva- ported the Green Movement that emerged during tives and the reformists raise existential questions the presidential elections on June 12th, 2009. about the nature of Iranian society. Are people primarily bearers of divine duties, or holders of in- For generations, while Iranians have formed their alienable rights? Is Islam compatible with democra- freedom movements with the support of the cler- cy? Can interpretations of Islam be altered to adapt gy, it has also been true that other clergy members to societal conditions? The fights over such theo- have stood in the way of such efforts. The Islamic retical issues have expanded into practical clashes Revolution of 1979 produced two distinct groups between the clerical factions over such issues as hu- of clerics: those who support the promotion of civil man rights, women’s rights, and political and press society and those who do not. This split between freedoms. As Iran continues to reel in the politi- moderate and radical factions within the clergy be- cal crisis that began with the disputed presidential came more pronounced in 1997 under Mohammad election of June 12th, 2009, the clash between the Khatami’s reformist government and led to a wide- conservative and reformist clerics remains central to spread political crisis that reached a boiling point every development in Iranian political society. in June 2009. As this paper will demonstrate, the 2009 election is a testament to the significant role Iranian freedom fighters have allied themselves that religious scholars on both sides have played with the clergy dating back more than a century. and will continue to play in determining Iran’s R EFO R MIST I SLAM VE R SUS R ADICAL I SLAM IN I R AN T HE S A BAN C ENTE R FO R M IDDLE E AST P OLICY AT BROOKINGS 1 political landscape. Now that more than a year has monarchy no longer exists, a desire to stand above passed since the 2009 election, the clash between the the law still remains among Iran’s leaders. Under- two views remains. As this crisis continues, religious standing the lasting impact of traditionalism and scholars will play a central role in the political trans- authoritarianism is critical when identifying why formations that will determine the future of Iran. Iran has failed to establish a legally based political framework. These lost opportunities have become BACKGROUND the primary markers of Iran’s recent history. A Nation Caught in an Ongoing Conflict Each of the historic events intensified the impor- between Modernity and Tradition tance of investigating the clash between the mod- erates and radicals for a better understanding of The contemporary debates on the role of Islam in Iran’s history in the last thirty years. The clergy’s Iranian politics are informed by five major histori- support has been seen as crucial when the general cal episodes: the Constitutional Revolution in 1906, public wishes to speak in favor of democratic ide- the White Revolution in 1963, the Islamic Revolu- als. Although an Islamic government has reigned tion in 1979, the Reform Movement in 1997, and over Iran for the past thirty years, its moderates and most recently, the Green Movement that emerged radicals have continued to butt heads, and such on- in 2009. Much of the contemporary history of Iran going debate within the heart of the Islamic regime is a narrative of clashes between aspirations for and has opened up the political space for the general obstacles to political participation. Iran’s conflict public to voice their opinions and needs. between modernity and tradition has led to dra- matic consequences, including two revolutions. The CLASH OF THE TWO ISLAMIC VIEWS change from an autocratic system to a constitution- IN IRAN AFTER THE 1979 ISLAMIC al monarchy in 1906 was the central achievement REVOLUTION of the Constitutional Revolution that lasted from 1905 to 1911. During this revolution, reformers in- The moderate and hardliner views of Islam that sisted on the creation of political frameworks based have been at odds in the political structure of Iran on legal premises, resulting in the formation of con- since 1979 and continue to play a part in the pres- stitutional documents. The second constitution was ent political unrest. The definitions provided will created after the Islamic Revolution of 1979. help to assess the role that they each have played in political changes. I will also identify some of the Each of these constitutional documents partially renowned theorists and experts of each view. Final- succeeded in serving reformers’ goals to limit state ly, I will address several instances in which moder- authority and to protect political liberties. How- ates and hardliners have negotiated and, at times, ever, the 1906 constitution, while progressive on reached compromise. paper, failed to defend these goals in practice. At the time, political liberties in Iran were held back Foundation of the Two Islamic Views: Extremist by a deep sense of traditionalism that was difficult and Moderate to overcome, and the royal powers refused to con- cede any of their authority.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • IRAN April 2000
    COUNTRY ASSESSMENT - IRAN April 2000 Country Information and Policy Unit I. SCOPE OF DOCUMENT 1.1 This assessment has been produced by the Country Information & Policy Unit, Immigration & Nationality Directorate, Home Office, from information obtained from a variety of sources. 1.2 The assessment has been prepared for background purposes for those involved in the asylum determination process. The information it contains is not exhaustive, nor is it intended to catalogue all human rights violations. It concentrates on the issues most commonly raised in asylum claims made in the United Kingdom. 1.3 The assessment is sourced throughout. It is intended to be used by caseworkers as a signpost to the source material, which has been made available to them. The vast majority of the source material is readily available in the public domain. 1.4 It is intended to revise the assessment on a 6-monthly basis while the country remains within the top 35 asylum producing countries in the United Kingdom. 1.5 The assessment will be placed on the Internet (http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/ind/cipu1.htm). An electronic copy of the assessment has been made available to the following organisations: Amnesty International UK Immigration Advisory Service Immigration Appellate Authority Immigration Law Practitioners' Association Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants JUSTICE Medical Foundation for the care of Victims of Torture Refugee Council Refugee Legal Centre UN High Commissioner for Refugees CONTENTS I SCOPE OF DOCUMENT 1.1 - 1.6 II GEOGRAPHY 2.1 - 2.2
    [Show full text]
  • Wir Sind Die Medien
    Marcus Michaelsen Wir sind die Medien Kultur und soziale Praxis Marcus Michaelsen (Dr. phil.) promovierte in Medien- und Kommunikations- wissenschaft an der Universität Erfurt. Seine Forschungsschwerpunkte sind digitale Medien, Demokratisierung sowie die Politik und Gesellschaft Irans. Marcus Michaelsen Wir sind die Medien Internet und politischer Wandel in Iran Dieses Werk ist lizenziert unter der Creative Commons Attribution-NonCom- mercial-NoDerivs 4.0 Lizenz (BY-NC-ND). Diese Lizenz erlaubt die private Nutzung, gestattet aber keine Bearbeitung und keine kommerzielle Nutzung. Weitere Informationen finden Sie unter https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.de/. Um Genehmigungen für Adaptionen, Übersetzungen, Derivate oder Wieder- verwendung zu kommerziellen Zwecken einzuholen, wenden Sie sich bitte an [email protected] © 2013 transcript Verlag, Bielefeld Die Verwertung der Texte und Bilder ist ohne Zustimmung des Verlages ur- heberrechtswidrig und strafbar. Das gilt auch für Vervielfältigungen, Über- setzungen, Mikroverfilmungen und für die Verarbeitung mit elektronischen Systemen. Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deut- schen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über http://dnb.d-nb.de abrufbar. Umschlagkonzept: Kordula Röckenhaus, Bielefeld Umschlagabbildung: Zohreh Soleimani Lektorat & Satz: Marcus Michaelsen Druck: Majuskel Medienproduktion GmbH, Wetzlar Print-ISBN 978-3-8376-2311-6
    [Show full text]
  • The IRGC in the Age of Ebrahim Raisi: Decision-Making and Factionalism in Iran’S Revolutionary Guard
    The IRGC in the Age of Ebrahim Raisi: Decision-Making and Factionalism in Iran’s Revolutionary Guard SAEID GOLKAR AUGUST 2021 KASRA AARABI Contents Executive Summary 4 The Raisi Administration, the IRGC and the Creation of a New Islamic Government 6 The IRGC as the Foundation of Raisi’s Islamic Government The Clergy and the Guard: An Inseparable Bond 16 No Coup in Sight Upholding Clerical Superiority and Preserving Religious Legitimacy The Importance of Understanding the Guard 21 Shortcomings of Existing Approaches to the IRGC A New Model for Understanding the IRGC’s Intra-elite Factionalism 25 The Economic Vertex The Political Vertex The Security-Intelligence Vertex Charting IRGC Commanders’ Positions on the New Model Shades of Islamism: The Ideological Spectrum in the IRGC Conclusion 32 About the Authors 33 Saeid Golkar Kasra Aarabi Endnotes 34 4 The IRGC in the Age of Ebrahim Raisi Executive Summary “The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps [IRGC] has excelled in every field it has entered both internationally and domestically, including security, defence, service provision and construction,” declared Ayatollah Ebrahim Raisi, then chief justice of Iran, in a speech to IRGC commanders on 17 March 2021.1 Four months on, Raisi, who assumes Iran’s presidency on 5 August after the country’s June 2021 election, has set his eyes on further empowering the IRGC with key ministerial and bureaucratic positions likely to be awarded to guardsmen under his new government. There is a clear reason for this ambition. Expanding the power of the IRGC serves the interests of both Raisi and his 82-year-old mentor, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader of the Islamic Republic.
    [Show full text]
  • IRAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY the Islamic Republic of Iran
    IRAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Islamic Republic of Iran is a constitutional, theocratic republic in which Shia Muslim clergy and political leaders vetted by the clergy dominate the key power structures. Government legitimacy is based on the twin pillars of popular sovereignty--albeit restricted--and the rule of the supreme leader of the Islamic Revolution. The current supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was chosen by a directly elected body of religious leaders, the Assembly of Experts, in 1989. Khamenei’s writ dominates the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government. He directly controls the armed forces and indirectly controls internal security forces, the judiciary, and other key institutions. The legislative branch is the popularly elected 290-seat Islamic Consultative Assembly, or Majlis. The unelected 12-member Guardian Council reviews all legislation the Majlis passes to ensure adherence to Islamic and constitutional principles; it also screens presidential and Majlis candidates for eligibility. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was reelected president in June 2009 in a multiparty election that was generally considered neither free nor fair. There were numerous instances in which elements of the security forces acted independently of civilian control. Demonstrations by opposition groups, university students, and others increased during the first few months of the year, inspired in part by events of the Arab Spring. In February hundreds of protesters throughout the country staged rallies to show solidarity with protesters in Tunisia and Egypt. The government responded harshly to protesters and critics, arresting, torturing, and prosecuting them for their dissent. As part of its crackdown, the government increased its oppression of media and the arts, arresting and imprisoning dozens of journalists, bloggers, poets, actors, filmmakers, and artists throughout the year.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 June 8, 2020 to Members of The
    June 8, 2020 To Members of the United Nations Human Rights Council Re: Request for the Convening of a Special Session on the Escalating Situation of Police Violence and Repression of Protests in the United States Excellencies, The undersigned family members of victims of police killings and civil society organizations from around the world, call on member states of the UN Human Rights Council to urgently convene a Special Session on the situation of human rights in the United States in order to respond to the unfolding grave human rights crisis borne out of the repression of nationwide protests. The recent protests erupted on May 26 in response to the police murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota, which was only one of a recent string of unlawful killings of unarmed Black people by police and armed white vigilantes. We are deeply concerned about the escalation in violent police responses to largely peaceful protests in the United States, which included the use of rubber bullets, tear gas, pepper spray and in some cases live ammunition, in violation of international standards on the use of force and management of assemblies including recent U.N. Guidance on Less Lethal Weapons. Additionally, we are greatly concerned that rather than using his position to serve as a force for calm and unity, President Trump has chosen to weaponize the tensions through his rhetoric, evidenced by his promise to seize authority from Governors who fail to take the most extreme tactics against protestors and to deploy federal armed forces against protestors (an action which would be of questionable legality).
    [Show full text]
  • Rouhani: Delivering Human Rights After the Election
    Rouhani: Delivering Human Rights June 2017 After the Election Iranian President’s Pathway to Fulfill His Promises Center for Human Rights in Iran (CHRI) New York Headquarters: Tel: +1 347-689-7782 www.iranhumanrights.org Rouhani: Delivering Human Rights After the Election Copyright © Center for Human Rights in Iran Rouhani: Delivering Human Rights After the Election Rouhani’s pathway to fulfill his promises: Utilize his power, negotiate the system, hold rights violators responsible, engage and empower civil society June 2017 The re-election of President Hassan Rouhani on May 19, 2017 was due in large part to the perception by the Iranian citizenry that his government would do more to improve human rights in Iran than his rivals—an outcome clearly desired by a majority of voters. During Rouhani’s campaign rallies, not only did he make explicit references to issues of political and social freedom and promises to uphold such freedoms in his second term, his supporters also repeatedly made clear their demands for improvements in human rights. Despite Iran’s tradition of giving the incumbent a second term, Rouhani’s re-election was uncertain. Many Iranians struggling with high unemployment and other economic problems did not see any improvement in their daily lives from Rouhani’s signature achievement—the nuclear deal and easing of interna- tional sanctions. Yet even though the other candidates offered subsidies and populist proposals, and Rouhani’s economic proposals were modest, he won by a large margin—far greater than his win in 2013. In addition to his rejec- tion of populist economics, Rouhani was the only candidate that talked about human rights—and the more he focused on this issue, the more his support coalesced and strengthened.
    [Show full text]
  • Setback for Iran's Opposition: Khamenei's Hardline Reinforced
    PolicyWatch #1630 Setback for Iran's Opposition: Khamenei's Hardline Reinforced By Mehdi Khalaji February 12, 2010 A few hours after the official demonstration marking the February 11 anniversary of Iran's 1979 Islamic Revolution, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei stated, "Was the presence of tens of millions of motivated and aware people in the festival of the thirty-first anniversary of revolution enough to awaken [to their mistakes] the internal enemies and deceived individuals who sometimes hypocritically speak of 'the people'?" Khamenei had spent months worrying that the opposition Green Movement would hijack the anniversary. Yesterday, he seemed to regain his self-confidence by proving that he could manage Tehran's streets. In light of this development, how will the Supreme Leader deal with both Iran's political crisis and the nuclear dossier? What Happened on February 11 By controlling a huge city like Tehran on such a sensitive day, Khamenei proved his operational capabilities as commander-in-chief of the armed forces. A few days before the anniversary, the regime clamped down on all communication channels, from internet to cell phones to satellite television, interrupting them or placing them under surveillance in order to diminish the opposition's ability to organize protests. It also raised the level of intimidation, making daily arrests of political and student activists as well as ordinary people and publishing wanted posters of individuals who had participated in the December 2009 Ashura demonstration. Meanwhile, the streets in which opposition protests were supposed to take place were closed twenty-four hours beforehand. Even as the pro-regime demonstration unfolded, hundreds of thousands of Basij militiamen and Revolutionary Guards (some deployed from other cities) were able to control the city, assaulting Green Movement demonstrators as soon as they shouted antigovernment slogans.
    [Show full text]
  • Codebook Indiveu – Party Preferences
    Codebook InDivEU – party preferences European University Institute, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies December 2020 Introduction The “InDivEU – party preferences” dataset provides data on the positions of more than 400 parties from 28 countries1 on questions of (differentiated) European integration. The dataset comprises a selection of party positions taken from two existing datasets: (1) The EU Profiler/euandi Trend File The EU Profiler/euandi Trend File contains party positions for three rounds of European Parliament elections (2009, 2014, and 2019). Party positions were determined in an iterative process of party self-placement and expert judgement. For more information: https://cadmus.eui.eu/handle/1814/65944 (2) The Chapel Hill Expert Survey The Chapel Hill Expert Survey contains party positions for the national elections most closely corresponding the European Parliament elections of 2009, 2014, 2019. Party positions were determined by expert judgement. For more information: https://www.chesdata.eu/ Three additional party positions, related to DI-specific questions, are included in the dataset. These positions were determined by experts involved in the 2019 edition of euandi after the elections took place. The inclusion of party positions in the “InDivEU – party preferences” is limited to the following issues: - General questions about the EU - Questions about EU policy - Questions about differentiated integration - Questions about party ideology 1 This includes all 27 member states of the European Union in 2020, plus the United Kingdom. How to Cite When using the ‘InDivEU – Party Preferences’ dataset, please cite all of the following three articles: 1. Reiljan, Andres, Frederico Ferreira da Silva, Lorenzo Cicchi, Diego Garzia, Alexander H.
    [Show full text]
  • ESS9 Appendix A3 Political Parties Ed
    APPENDIX A3 POLITICAL PARTIES, ESS9 - 2018 ed. 3.0 Austria 2 Belgium 4 Bulgaria 7 Croatia 8 Cyprus 10 Czechia 12 Denmark 14 Estonia 15 Finland 17 France 19 Germany 20 Hungary 21 Iceland 23 Ireland 25 Italy 26 Latvia 28 Lithuania 31 Montenegro 34 Netherlands 36 Norway 38 Poland 40 Portugal 44 Serbia 47 Slovakia 52 Slovenia 53 Spain 54 Sweden 57 Switzerland 58 United Kingdom 61 Version Notes, ESS9 Appendix A3 POLITICAL PARTIES ESS9 edition 3.0 (published 10.12.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Denmark, Iceland. ESS9 edition 2.0 (published 15.06.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Croatia, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden. Austria 1. Political parties Language used in data file: German Year of last election: 2017 Official party names, English 1. Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (SPÖ) - Social Democratic Party of Austria - 26.9 % names/translation, and size in last 2. Österreichische Volkspartei (ÖVP) - Austrian People's Party - 31.5 % election: 3. Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (FPÖ) - Freedom Party of Austria - 26.0 % 4. Liste Peter Pilz (PILZ) - PILZ - 4.4 % 5. Die Grünen – Die Grüne Alternative (Grüne) - The Greens – The Green Alternative - 3.8 % 6. Kommunistische Partei Österreichs (KPÖ) - Communist Party of Austria - 0.8 % 7. NEOS – Das Neue Österreich und Liberales Forum (NEOS) - NEOS – The New Austria and Liberal Forum - 5.3 % 8. G!LT - Verein zur Förderung der Offenen Demokratie (GILT) - My Vote Counts! - 1.0 % Description of political parties listed 1. The Social Democratic Party (Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs, or SPÖ) is a social above democratic/center-left political party that was founded in 1888 as the Social Democratic Worker's Party (Sozialdemokratische Arbeiterpartei, or SDAP), when Victor Adler managed to unite the various opposing factions.
    [Show full text]
  • Report on the Situation of Human Rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran, Prepared by the Special Representative of the Commission on Human Rights, Mr
    UNITED NATIONS E Economic and Social Distr. GENERAL Council E/CN.4/1996/59 21 March 1996 ENGLISH ONLY COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS Fifty-second session Item 10 of the provisional agenda QUESTION OF THE VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS IN ANY PART OF THE WORLD, WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO COLONIAL AND OTHER DEPENDENT COUNTRIES AND TERRITORIES Report on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran, prepared by the Special Representative of the Commission on Human Rights, Mr. Maurice Copithorne (Canada), pursuant to Commission resolution 1995/68 of 8 March 1995 and Economic and Social Council decision 1995/279 of 25 July 1995 CONTENTS Paragraphs Page I. INTRODUCTION................... 1- 26 4 A. Position of human rights in the world today . 3 - 6 4 B. Special Representative’s sources ...... 7- 10 5 C. Activities of the Special Representative . 11 - 16 6 D. Correspondence ............... 17- 18 7 E. Underlying questions ............ 19 7 F. Preliminary comments on the Special Representative’s visit to the Islamic Republic of Iran .......... 20- 26 8 GE.96-11290 (E) E/CN.4/1996/59 page 2 CONTENTS (continued) Paragraphs Page II. LEGAL SYSTEM................... 27- 57 9 A. Rights of an accused ............ 28- 29 9 B. Court system ................ 30- 35 10 C. Selection and training of judges ...... 36- 40 11 D. Clerical courts ............... 41 12 E. Punishments ................. 42- 50 13 F. Independent Bar Association ......... 51- 54 14 G. Atmosphere of the law ............ 55- 57 15 III. STATUS OF WOMEN ................. 58- 64 16 IV. THE FATWA AGAINST SALMAN RUSHDIE......... 65- 67 17 V.
    [Show full text]
  • The Iran-USA Crise a 52’ Documentary Directed by Ben Salama & Naoufel Brahimi El Mili Produced by Kuiv Productions
    444 days The Iran-USA crise A 52’ documentary Directed by Ben Salama & Naoufel Brahimi El Mili Produced by Kuiv Productions PROVISIONAL DELIVERY : OCTOBER 2020 Summary A 444-day ordeal for American diplomats taken This film tells the story of events which unfolded hostage in Tehran, 444 days of humiliation for the from 4 November 1979 to 20 January 1981, a defining world’s greatest power, the United States, and 444 episode of the last half of the 20th century, and one days of fanaticism for the Iranian Islamists who were which marked the beginning of the conflict between imposing their will on their country and the world. the United States and its former ally, Iran. Writers’ note The American hostage crisis in Iran was an episode seize exclusive political power. of heightened tension in international relations The second event was the signing of the Camp David between the United States and Iran, which began on Accords on 26 March between Egypt and Israel 4 November 1979 and ended on 20 January 1981. For – the date on which Egyptian Islamists turned to 444 days, or nearly 15 months, 56 American diplomats radical struggle against Anwar Al-Sadat. The latter and civilians were held hostage by Iranian students in was assassinated in October 1981 in a spectacular the U.S. Embassy in Tehran. operation, whose mastermind was none other than This hostage-taking was part of a long series of events Ayman Al-Zawahiri, the current leader of Al Qaeda. that reshaped first the Arab-Muslim world, and then On 20 November 1979, hostages were seized in later the rest of the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Shia-Sunni Sectarianism: Iran’S Role in the Tribal Regions of Pakistan
    SHIA-SUNNI SECTARIANISM: IRAN’S ROLE IN THE TRIBAL REGIONS OF PAKISTAN A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of The School of Continuing Studies and of The Graduate School of Arts and Sciences in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Liberal Studies By Shazia Kamal Farook, B.A. Georgetown University Washington, D.C. April 1, 2015 Copyright © Shazia Kamal Farook 2015 All Rights Reserved ii ABSTRACT SHIA-SUNNI SECTARIANISM: IRAN’S ROLE IN THE TRIBAL REGIONS OF PAKISTAN SHAZIA KAMAL FAROOK, B.A. MALS Mentor: Dr. John Esposito This thesis analyzes Shia-Sunni sectarianism in the northern tribal areas of Pakistan, and the role of Iran in exacerbating such violence in recent years. The northern tribal regions have been experiencing an unprecedented level of violence between Sunnis and Shias since the rise of the Tehreek-e-Taliban militant party in the area. Most research and analysis of sectarian violence has marked the rise as an exacerbation of theologically- driven hatred between Sunnis and Shias. Moreover, recent scholarship designates Pakistan as a self- deprecating “failed” state because of its mismanagement and bad governance with regard to the “war on terror.” However, the literature ignores the role of external factors, such as Iranian’s foreign policy towards Pakistan playing out in the tribal areas of Pakistan in the period since the Soviet-Afghan War. Some of the greatest threats to the Shia population in Pakistan arise from the Islamization policies of General Zia-ul-Haq in the 1980s. Policies in favor of Sunni Islam have since pervaded the nation and have created hostile zones all over the nation.
    [Show full text]