He told FPA members there were three clear current issues in his country: the development of nuclear materials, human rights, and Iran’s regional role. We simply don’t know what the Iranian people think about the nuclear programme, he said, as there had been no discussion about the huge spending involved or its true purpose. Hadi Gaemi said a debate within Iran was needed; western focus was misplaced as Iran was not close to developing a bomb. That focus should be on human rights, holding Iran accountable to its international obligations. The real leverage enjoyed by the West lay in President Ahmedinejad’s desire to restore full relations with the USA, hence the recent agreement in Vienna at the IAEA. In his view, the Revolutionary Guard – who were at the heart of the three big issues - would actually welcome the introduction of sanctions against Iran, as it would enable them to pose as the people’s friends by bringing consumer goods in over Iran’s porous borders.

Hadi Gaemi said the Iranians wanted a process oriented revolution as there had been in South Africa: free elections, free media, respect for human rights. Although there was a possibility that Ahmedinajad could be impeached, or that a full military coup by the Revolutionary Guard could take place, the most likely scenario was for continuing popular protests and the emergence of a more “moderate conservatism” under a new leader.

Tom Porteous of Human Rights Watch said the Islamic Republic faced an unprecedented crisis of legitimacy. There was a big opportunity for positive change as long as diplomatic pressure was maintained on Iran’s fragmented government. President Ahmedinajad had effectively achieved a silent coup: the free flow of information within Iran - and between Iran and the outside world – had been inhibited. The political space that had offered such hope ten years ago had been closed.

--
Christopher Wyld