Iranian Protests Return Despite Officials' Warnings

On the tenth anniversary of student protests that were brutally crushed, thousands of Iranians returned to the streets in defiance of the corrupt presidential elections.

Golnaz Esfandiari in Radio Free Europe:

Despite warnings from Iranian authorities, including the governor of Tehran, thousands of people took to the streets of the capital on July 9 to mark the anniversary of the 1999 student uprising and to protest against the results of the June presidential vote.

At one of a handful of locations where rallies took place, protesters chanting "Allah Akbar" (God is great) and "Death to the dictator" clashed with police forces who beat them and used tear gas to disperse them.

The violence broke out as the demonstrators headed toward Tehran University to mark the anniversary of the student unrest that was brutally crushed by the authorities 10 years ago.

The rally took place despite a warning early on June 9 from the governor of Tehran Province, Morteza Tamadon, that security forces would crush any attempt to protest -- whether to mark the anniversary of the 1999 student demonstrations or to continue the protests that erupted following the June 12 presidential election.

One student activist who expected a brutal police reaction told RFE/RL he decided to join the march because he believes "it is necessary" to keep protesting against the result of the election.

The demonstration was the first major public gathering in Tehran in the last 11 days.

The current instability of the government in Iran is driving Israeli and American concerns over the likelihood that Iran will produce a nuclear bomb in the imminent future. Herb Keinon in The Jerusalem Post:

Both the US and Israel believe Iran has the technical capacity to build one nuclear bomb within a year if it decides to do so, but both countries also believe the chances that Teheran will indeed make that decision are slim, according to assessments made known to The Jerusalem Post.

According to these Israeli assessments, there is not much difference now between the US and Israel regarding a timeline for a "worst case scenario" on Iran's development of a bomb. At the same time, both Jerusalem and Washington currently believe that "worst case scenario is not likely to materialize."

The assessments come in the wake of comments made Sunday by US Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to the effect that Iran could be as little as a year away from completing a nuclear bomb, while Mossad head Meir Dagan recently surprised many by saying Iran won't have a nuclear weapon until 2014.

"I would be careful about all the declarations on this matter," said one senior government official who deals with the issue, adding that a decision by Teheran to go full throttle toward the building of a bomb was dependent on numerous different decisions the government would have to make, and which it had simply not yet made.

Some American and Israeli experts have long argued that, rather than pushing for a bomb the moment they can, the Iranians may want to gain the potential capacity, over a longer period, to build an entire nuclear arsenal - and then stay weeks or months away from final bomb-making but ready to make the ultimate push should they so choose.

The international community, meanwhile, signaled on Thursday that it was still keeping its eye on the nuclear issue, with the G-8 leaders giving Iran until late September to accept negotiations over the issue.

From an Israeli perspective, the senior government official explained, the G-8 deadline included both positive and negative aspects.

On the positive side, there has been a degree of concern in Jerusalem since the events that followed the June elections in Iran that the international community would try to push back the timetable on the nuclear issue until the dust cleared in Teheran.

The G-8 statement, the official said, strengthened the sense in Jerusalem that the international community was sending a message that "time is of the essence," and that international stocktaking of Iran's position on the issue would take place regardless of Iran's internal situation.

On the negative side of the ledger from an Israel perspective, however, was that the G-8 deadline was also a sign the international community was sill locked into "engagement" mode, dashing any thinly held hope in Jerusalem that the Iranian regime's brutal repression of the protests there would lead toward immediate sanctions.