Iran's Ayatollah Montazeri urges open politics

Iran's Ayatollah Montazeri urges open politics

LONDON, January 28 (IranMania) - Iran's top dissident cleric Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri has urged Islamic republic officials to release political prisoners and open the political arena to opponents of the regime, AFP reported.
"Now that the country faces international pressure, is it not better to avoid extremism and open the political space?" Montazeri asked in a Friday meeting with members of an NGO to defend prisoners' rights.

"Unfortunately there are still academics, students, intellectuals and ordinary people jailed for false or political reasons. The wise thing to do is to release them in these sensitive times," he said according to a statement obtained by AFP.

Iran is under mounting international pressure over its controversial nuclear programme. In December the UN Security Council passed a resolution imposing sanctions on Iran for its repeated refusal to suspend uranium enrichment.

"Unfortunately we do not use our opponents, among whom there are committed people and experts, under the pretext that they are not insiders," he said.

"I hope the officials wake up before it is too late and stop monopolization" of power."
It is the second time this month that Montazeri, who was once appointed to succeed the founder of the Islamic revolution Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, is criticising Islamic republic policies.

He hit out at President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad over his handling of foreign and domestic policies including Tehran's nuclear drive -- joining critical voices from conservatives and reformists against the president after his allies were defeated in December 15 key elections.
One of the main architects of the Islamic republic, 84-year-old Montazeri was tapped as the successor Khomeini but fell from grace in late 1980s after he became too openly critical of political and cultural restrictions.
He was put under house arrest in 1997 and was freed in January 2003 on health grounds.
American officials describe those measures as purely defensive. “We are definitely looking to protect our interests in the Persian Gulf, in Iraq itself, and to protect the lives of our soldiers,” said Mr. Burns, who insisted that there was no effort to stop Iran from ordinary exchanges with Iraq.

Yet administration officials clearly worry that the Iranians may not back down, and that a confrontation could build up — especially if a midlevel American commander or a member of Iran’s military or paramilitary forces in Iraq miscalculated. Both Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates have warned against that risk, officials say.
Administration officials say that while all of Mr. Bush’s advisers have signed on to the strategy of more forceful confrontation with Tehran, there is considerable debate about how far to push it. Some Iran experts at the State Department have warned that encounters between Americans and Iranians inside Iraq could strengthen the hand of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad by allowing him to change the subject from his failure to produce jobs and the rising cost of nuclear defiance.

Over the longer run, there is a continuing debate about whether military action may some day be necessary to set back Iran’s nuclear activities. For now American officials say they do not believe they have a good set of targets or the ability to contain Iran’s reaction. “It’s not a question of ideology,” one senior military official said, refusing to talk on the record about military planning. “We simply don’t have the forces to deal with the reaction. They’re busy.”
At the Pentagon, military officials say there are still arguments over the rules for confronting Iranian operatives. Are they legitimate targets simply because they are identified as part of Iran’s military? Or do American forces need evidence that they are importing weapons or sowing chaos? Publicly, officials say the answers to those questions are classified. Privately, a senior official said, “It’s all still a matter of debate.”

In coming weeks, administration officials say, more escalation is likely. The Iranians have told the International Atomic Energy Agency that they will announce in February that they are beginning industrial-scale efforts to produce uranium. It will probably be years before they can produce enough fuel for a bomb.

But the debate over whether the United States should stick to diplomacy or take more forceful action is bound to begin right away, and will sound familiar. Democrats, even while accusing the administration of failing to engage with Iran, are positioning themselves to sound tough.
“To ensure that Iran never gets nuclear weapons, we need to keep all options on the table,” former Senator John Edwards recently told an Israeli security conference. “Let me reiterate, all options.”

For Mr. Bush, this is not only about options but about legacy. Already bloodied in Iraq, he will come under increasing pressure to show that he has not left the United States weakened in the Middle East. He does not want to be remembered for leaving Iran more powerful than he found it when he came to office.