On Plugged In…
Widespread Anger in Iran…
after Tehran admits…
Iranian missiles downed…
A Ukrainian passenger jet…
killing all 176 souls on board.
Police respond
With tear gas…
And live ammunition
At anti-government protesters…
Some chanting…
“Death to liars.”
Others urging the Supreme Leader…
- to step down…
((4:38 Morgan Ortagus))
“We want the regime to know that we are watching and that the world is watching.”
Is it still business as usual for Iran?
Or could this be the start…
Of something bigger?
On Plugged In:
“Turmoil in Iran”
Welcome to Plugged In. I'm Greta Van Susteren.
Iran says it has arrested those responsible for shooting down the Ukrainian passenger jet and vows to punish anyone involved in what it calls a “painful and unforgivable mishap.”
At first, the Iranian government denied any responsibility for downing the plane calling the accusations Western propaganda.
The cover-up and now admission has put Iran's government under intense pressure both at home and abroad.
VOA's Henry Ridgwell reports, it is not clear whether growing unrest inside Iran could lead to bigger anti-government demonstrations.
(IRAN CRISIS FALLOUT)
((NARRATOR))
Risking their lives to stand against the government. Dozens of protests erupted across Iran in recent days. Acts of defiance captured on mobile phones and posted on social media.
This footage appears to show a female protestor in Tehran Sunday with gunshot wounds. The government denies using live ammunition.
In another video, a protestor addresses the crowd: ‘They lied to us through all these years’ he says, ‘they treat us like donkeys.’
Another shows a protestor tearing down a poster of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani – seen by many as a national hero - who was killed in a U.S. drone strike earlier this month.
Iran responded to Soleimani’s killing with missile strikes on two military bases used by American and Western forces in Iraq.
Shortly after those missile strikes, a Ukrainian airlines jet was accidentally hit by a missile just after it had taken off from Tehran’s airport early Wednesday.
For three days Iran denied it had shot down the plane. Mounting evidence from crash investigators led the Iranian government to change its story – and the elite Revolutionary Guard Corps admitted it had fired the missile that brought down the plane.
That triggered widespread public anger. Vigils for the crash victims soon turned into anti-government protests. Demonstrations spread to other cities including Isfahan, Amol, Rasht, Gorgan and Sanandaj.
U.S President Donald Trump tweeted support for the demonstrations -- and warned Tehran against what he called ‘another massacre of peaceful protestors.’
Iran’s government appears to be lurching from one crisis to the next: first the U.S. killing of its top general…
…and then growing global condemnation over its handling of the plane missile strike. Now Iran is facing growing pressure from its own people. ((Henry Ridgwell, for VOA News, London.))
(Toss to correspondent Carla Babb)
Now that Iran has struck back with cruise missiles at US troops in Iraq - what is next for American forces in the Middle East?
Iraqi lawmakers angry that the US killed an Iranian general on Iraqi soil are demanding that the U-S pull all its troops out of Iraq.
But US military officials rre not likely to agree to doing that, at least not any time soon.
VOA Pentagon Correspondent Carla Babb joins us with an update on the status of US forces in the Middle East.
(Carla Babb Interview)
GVS: Nice to see you Carla.
CB: Thank you for having me.
GVS: Okay, first Iran. Iran denied shooting down that airliner. How did the US know that Iran had done it?
CB: Well, the US has these capabilities where they can detect when missiles are launched. They have these same capabilities with North Korea for example. They can monitor and detect in seconds. And so they knew that they launched missiles. They also have different methods which they may disclose that had been able to give them advance warning as well. They've been following the movements of some of these missiles. And so they knew when the attack was going to happen. That's why there were troops hunkered down in those bunkers. When Al Assad was attacked, when Erbil was attacked. And then that's how they also were able to know that missiles were launched at this plane. Were they the same missiles? No, that's not, that's not the same thing.
GVS: Well there seems to have been two missiles. The latest report was it’s not just one…
CB: I can confirm that from military sources. Definitely were two used. These were SA-15’s. Russian SA-15’s surface to air. These were not the missiles, the ballistic missiles that were used to target the bases. This is part of their missile defense system that they use so they were able to take two surface to air missiles on this Ukrainian plane. And we don't know why at this point we just know that they were on high alert and a mistake was clearly made.
GVS: Iraqi lawmakers have expressed anger at the United States because of killing the Iranian general on Iraqi soil. And they say US forces out. Not likely to happen in the near future?
CB: Well there's been a non-binding resolution. And the caretaker Prime Minister has also tried to act on the nine month, non binding resolution. But what US officials told me is that no US troops are going out of Iraq. There has to be a binding resolution in place and even after that, that would take many months to negotiate the presence that the US would keep in Iraq because they say that they were there to fight, Islamic State and to help train Iraqis.
GVS: What's the number, or estimated number of American troops there?
CB: Well, they still say about 5200 troops are in Iraq currently. It fluctuates from time to time given the situation but that's why, remember as we were talking about it last week, we brought about 4000 US troops into Kuwait, to help with security but they didn't go into Iraq directly because of those agreements that we have with Iraqi officials.
GVS: That killing of Soleimani, that had been planned for some time. It wasn't sort of impulsive as a reaction to the killing of the American defense contractor, right? This has been an ongoing goal of the United States?
CB: Well it's interesting, it depends on how you word it to officials because Secretary of Defense Mark Esper just said that the Soleimani strike was not authorized months ago. But I was speaking to a source that said it was created as an option, several months ago - actually back in June, when Iran targeted a drone, an American drone. Now the President did not consider that option because no American lives were killed, that was his red line have been told by officials is. He didn't even consider that option until an American was killed, and then that on top of the imminent threats that these officials are saying, were happening is the reason that he decided to launch that strike.
GVS: I make the assumption that there are a lot of plans on the shelf, all over the world for different things and military might do. But in order to get Soleimani, we had to know where he was. So was he tracked for some time? I take it they didn't just begin tracking him after the President decided, this would be the time that he would give the order.
CB: Clearly, I mean we have eyes in the skies. When the military said they have eyes everywhere in the skies - it's not everywhere but there are specific targets that they're constantly looking for. And that was the struggle when the United States said that they were stopping some of their Islamic State counter operations and some of their training, because they did had to move some of the drones that were being focused on Islamic State to protect the forces in Iraq and around the Middle East. But yes, he is one of those targets that was clearly being watched and they were looking at his movements very closely.
GVS: There's been some discussion that’s now been de-escalated, and then of course there's some of that think that perhaps after Friday's prayers, that there may be a call to re-escalate it on the side of the Iranians. And nobody knows for sure, you know what's gonna happen in the future but what is the readiness of the United States? What are the assets it has in the area?
CB: Well, the United States is still postured the way it was. I've been told, we have, there are 70,000 US troops. They brought in an additional 4000 to Kuwait, there were…
GVS: Just since this Soleimani shooting, killing?
CB: Since the attack on the embassy, they’ve brought in additional 4000. And I also know from a senior US defense official that there were, you know, less than a hundred, maybe less than 50 brought in from soldiers running from Italy to protect the base and they went to an undisclosed location. But there was concern that there could be an attack on the embassy in Beirut as well. And we know by, many officials have said that there were concerns that there was going to be attack on the embassy in Baghdad, potentially even blowing it up. So because of that, they've postured themselves. But they haven't brought any more in. And like you said, maybe that's to show that the United States wants to de-escalate. Because the president, clearly sounded like he wanted to de-escalate. However, there have been two attacks, since all this happened.
GVS: Is there any dialogue going on between Iran and the United States? I mean, the way the United States appears to have gotten warning before the two bases were shelled. But any, any dialogue going on behind the scenes?
CB: Publicly none that we know about. Because the United States has not been talking with Iran, although the United States has offered to talk with Iran. Iranian officials have said they, they're not interested in talking.
GVS: Did the US have notice before these missiles were shot at those two bases?
CB: Well, again, it depends on who you ask. So, I have heard from a very senior US defense official that Secretary Esper was not notified by the Iraqis. In fact the Iraqis were trying to notify the Americans, were trying to notify the Iraqis about this attack because they had found out through intelligence. There are rumors that the Iranians gave the Iraqis notice. I cannot speak to that because my sources have not confirmed whether or not that is true. It's possible that the Iraqis were trying to reach out and didn't get to Secretary Esper in time. But there was a lot of intelligence that was in place to know what was going on with the Iranians, even though there's no dialogue.
GVS: Carla,Thank you. Carla Babb VOA Pentagon correspondent.
(Protests Timeline)
The current anti-government protests in Iran are not the first protests to rock Iran's ruling regime.
But the protests are among the largest since pro-reform rallies swept the country more than ten years ago.
On June 12th – 2009, just hours after polls close, Iranian officials declare hard-line candidate Mahmoud Ahmadinejad re-elected president of Iran. Supporters of rival candidates take to the streets. At least 30 people killed in the massive protests that follow. More than 1000 arrested.
In 2011 the government of Supreme leader Ali Khamenei turns the tables on anti-government protesters declaring a “Day of Rage” against opposition leaders - leading to the arrests of protest and opposition leaders - including Mir Hossein Mousavi - former prime minister of Iran and popular leader of the Green Movement. The government quells dissent by shutting down access to social media.
In 2017...With food prices rising and Iran’s economy in freefall from international sanctions - popular protests erupt in more than 70 towns and cities. At least ten people are killed, hundreds more are arrested in violent protests.
2019...More unrest follows, this time public outrage over a sharp increase in fuel prices. Reports suggest more than 100 people killed in security crackdowns.
And in January this year – 2020, anger erupts once more in Tehran after the US admits to killing revered general Qassem Soleimani. Days later - more outrage. This time, directed toward Iran’s leadership after its delayed admission to firing the missile that took down the Ukrainian passenger jet, killing all aboard - the majority of them, Iranians.
(Interview Barbara Slavin)
Whether the latest anti-government protests lead to reforms in Iran remains to be seen.
But my next guest says history shows that external pressure rarely ever produces regime change unless that outside pressure is combined with engagement.
Barbara Slavin is Director of “The Future of Iran Initiative” at the Atlantic Council.
She is a columnist for the Al-Monitor's "Pulse of the Middle East."
A career journalist - Ms. Slavin has written articles and books on US-Iran relations..
(Barbara Slavin Interview)
GVS: Welcome to Plugged In.
BS: Thank you very much.
GVS: I hate to get over my skis and jump way ahead but is regime change in your mind, a likely possibility in the near future?
BS: In the near future, I don't think so. I think actually actions taken by the Trump administration are probably pushing off chances for regime change. When a country is under threat, under existential threat, as Iran feels it is now from the United States, it tends to make more hardline factions stronger, it tends to make a regime more rigid. So I think it's very unlikely that it's going to lead to regime change in the near future.
GVS: I found it fascinating but obviously from a you know, troubled point of view, is that right after the, the killing of Soleimani, there was Death to America basically the protest was anti United States. Then, almost instantly when that plane went, was shot down, and the Iranians were said to have been lying about it, suddenly it flipped right away. it became anti regime, Death to the regime.
BS: You know it's possible for people to dislike both the Trump administration and their own government. So I think what we saw in the initial demonstrations was a kind of nationalistic outpouring, whatever we may think about Qassem Soleimani he was considered to be a hero to many in Iran who did his killing outside the country, fighting ISIS, rather than repressing people inside. Also the way he was killed, arriving at Baghdad airport by an American drone. I think, when you combine that with threats that President Trump had made toward Iran’s cultural sites, remember his comment about 52 sites, including cultural sites that might be under attack, I think this caused a genuine outpouring on the part of many people.
GVS: but it flipped so quickly.
BS: Well, what happened was a terrible tragedy. 176 people killed, many of them graduate students, Iranian graduate students from elite universities on their way back to Canada. and the government lied about it for three days and pretended that they were not at fault. The people who are demonstrating now are somewhat different constituency. Many of them are at Iran's elite universities, and people, one of them near Kabir University, put out a statement actually the other day in which they basically said, Look, the United States is the cause of a lot of misery and instability in this region and we don't approve of what they are doing. But we don't want to be lied to by our own government and this government has to change.
GVS: in 2012 the protests were about Ahmadinejad reelection—
BS: 2009
GVS: or 2009. And then we've had protests about bread prices, fuel prices and now this. and it just seems that you know there's such growing unrest. and then you've got sanctions which which appear to be, have crippled the economy.
BS: Yeah, there, there are different constituencies that are that are objecting about different things. The demonstrations last year, were primarily working class lower middle class, who were hit very hard by a sudden decision to raise the price of gasoline. Now we're seeing more upper middle class, these people are more like those who demonstrated in 2009, who were angry because their votes had not been properly counted and because they didn't think Ahmadinejad deserved to be reelected. So they're different segments of society. Sometimes there's overlap, sometimes there isn't. I think it's fair to say that this government in Iran is not very popular. The question is whether policies, taken by the Trump administration are actually shoring up that regime, rather than undermining it.
GVS: Well, I think that you know it's a terrible thing about how that shooting down of that airline certainly shifted the narrative, you know how different I think that we things we've been just talking about, but for that.
BS: Yes indeed, and in an odd way, it may actually stave off further unrest between the US and Iran because the focus in the country now is so much on this tragedy. and I think the Supreme Leader of the country will be addressing that. And the need for at least, temporarily, a little bit more accountability on the part of the government.
GVS: what is sort of the economic situation inside Iran now with those sanctions?
BS: it's terrible, the GDP is contracting by about 10% this year, there's a lot of unemployment. inflation is over 40%, the currency has really collapsed. Iran is in terrible economic distress.
GVS: So how does the regime survive?
BS: Well, it has a loyal base, which it can count on. And as I wrote in my piece for the Atlantic Council, as long as the security services remain loyal to the government, as long as we don't see any cracks in the security services, then the regime will survive. When Iran had a revolution in 1979, members of the police, the army were defecting in droves. They did not, they refused to open fire on their own compatriots. We're not seeing that now.
GVS: why not?
BS: I think because a lot of people are uncertain about what would follow this government. And because they've been through the experience of a bloody revolution in their lifetimes. and they know that it causes chaos. and I think 10,000 people were killed during the 1978-79 revolution. As bad as this government is they don't want to see chaos.
GVS: is there a way to describe how the people in Iran feel about the Iranian deal?
BS: Well, most of them looked at it as something that was going to improve the economy, open up the country, allow foreign investment. they were very very thrilled by it. And those expectations have been completely dashed by the US decision to quit it.
GVS: plus it, there has been some criticism that the money that was unfrozen in connection with it, that it didn't go to the people but that it was…
BS: Yeah, I think that's a very hard argument to make. I think the money was going into a lot of places. and we should remember that Iran's regional posture doesn't cost a lot, much in, in, in monetary terms. It's based on shared ideology and worldview between Iran and groups like Hezbollah.
GVS: So if you and I were talking, two months from now, what would the conversation, what do you think the conversation be?
BS: I think it's going to be more protests in Iran, I think there's going to be more unrest. Unfortunately, I don't think the Trump administration is going to change its policy of maximum pressure, which has not produced a new nuclear deal and has not produced stability in the Middle East.
GVS: but course now the Europeans are calling for a mediation on the Iranian deal as well which I'll get to in a minute anyway –Barbara Slavin, thank you very much.
BS: You're very welcome.
GVS: Barbara Slavin, Foreign policy expert at the Atlantic Council.
(ANALYSIS PKG)
The anti-government protests that erupted after Iran admitted to shooting down that commercial plane appears, at least for now, to have deflected public anger away from the Trump administration's targeted killing of Iran's top general...
While analysts say it is unlikely these demonstrations could spark a larger revolt, recent events in Iran reflect underlying discontent over increased repression and economic decline, fueled by U.S. sanctions. VOA's Brian Padden explains..
(Temper’s Flaring)
((NARRATOR))
While protests showed hundreds of students denouncing Iran's Islamist leaders, analysts say it is too early to tell if this is the beginning of a popular uprising.
((Michael O’Hanlon, Brookings Institution))
"“My expectation is that the demonstrations, however large they may be, are really not huge and are really not likely to metastasize a lot more."
((NARRATOR))
The mostly student-led protests followed Iran’s admission...
... that it mistakenly shot down a Ukrainian airliner (last Wednesday, 1/8) after takeoff in Tehran, killing all on board.
This week Iran announced the arrest of several people in connection with aircraft's downing. The accidental shooting took place on the same night the Iranian military launched a retaliatory missile strike against a U.S. military base in Iraq for the targeted killing of Qassem Soleimani, a top Iranian general.
Video widely shared on social media showed demonstrators in tearing down Soleimani's picture and fleeing tear gas fired by police. Numerous protesters have been arrested.
The protests broke out after a massive funeral for Soleimani where mourners called for revenge against America.
The latest anti-government protests follow those November, after the government announced a 50 percent increase in gasoline prices. In some, security forces fired on unarmed demonstrators.
((William Wechsler, Atlantic Council))
"The regime has a great history of cracking down hard whenever threatened. And it is yet to be seen whether these protests in any way can overcome that kind of threat."
((NARRATOR))
The U.S. sanctions imposed to force Iran to curb its ballistic missile program and end support for militias in the region have caused significant economic pain - which is fueling unrest. But analysts say the sanctions have also increased anti-American sentiment.
((Ali Vaez, International Crisis Group))
"The Iranians feel that they're stuck between a very aggressive United States and a very repressive Islamic republic, that basically none of these governments really care about them."
((NARRATOR))
Tehran for its part remains defiant, announcing it will no longer adhere to the nuclear deal restricting enriched uranium development, a move that could trigger renewed international sanctions.
((Brian Padden, VOA News Washington))
(BIG PICTURE)
In any discussion about Iran, there are many factors to consider. From Nuclear weapons - to Israel - to Saudi Arabia - to Iranian proxy forces and more.
For a look at the big picture and how events in Iran might impact the United States and the rest of the world - we are joined by Jon Alterman.
Mr. Alterman is director of the Middle East Program at the Center for Strategic & International Studies.
He also served as a member of the Policy Planning Staff at the US State Department.
He is an expert on Global Security issues and geo-strategy.
(Jon Alterman Interview)
GVS: Welcome to Plugged In.
JA: It's good to see you again Greta.
GVS: Can you tell me -what's the sort of the big picture? How’s this going to- what's recently happened in Iraq between Iran and United States- and of course Iraq’s in there too. How does this impact the entire region?
JA: I think the broader issue, which the region was focused on before and I think is more focused on now, is what's the US role in the region going to be in five years, 10-years time? I think the President has in many ways followed the initiatives of the Obama administration to try to reduce the American role. American allies in the region are hoping the US will stay put and the Iranians are focused as they were before the death of Qassem Soleimani on pushing the Americans out. It seems to me that the big picture struggle remains on the one hand, how can they keep America in the region? And on the other hand, domestically, how can governments improve their own performance, the governance inside the region, to make lives better for Arabs and Iranians and Turks and others. And to me it's become a combination of the external role. They want the US there, in many cases governments do, and the internal world, how can we do a better job with an increasingly young and impoverished population?
GVS: What about Israel?
JA: I think Israel in many ways has peeled itself off from the region, in terms of economic development, in terms of investment, in terms of the way its economy works. In terms of security, Israel is as many Israelis call it an island, and it feels removed from a lot of the trends in the region.
GVS: Jon, besides, Israel, there's also the discussion of the Iranian deal that the United States has pulled out of. And now, Germany, France, and the UK have triggered a settlement or a negotiation, part of the deal about Iran because Iran says it's going to continue to enrich uranium. So where does that bring us, on the whole nuclear weapons program discussion?
JA: I think frankly, it puts us into a crisis for the next 10 months. I don't think the Europeans really want to completely walk away from the Iran nuclear deal, the JCPOA, because their deep conviction is that Iran is much better dealt with through a negotiated deal where they have responsibilities, where the world can hold the Iranians to their responsibilities, rather than Iran totally unchanged. So I think they're looking for more tools to try to rally the world to get the Iranians to comply. But I don't think they're going to want to re-impose sanctions after this review period is over. I think it's 35 days. I think they're going to keep kicking the can down the road, see what happens the next presidential election in the United States and see where to go now.
The Iranian see the nuclear deal see the possibility or proliferation, as another tool with which they can increase the pressure on the Europeans and the Iranian strategy has often been,If you want us to behave, you have to engage with us if you want us to behave, you have to give us sanctions release. And if you're not going to do those things we will misbehave more. They're trying to calibrate the misbehavior so they don't have an armed confrontation with the United States and trying to figure out just where the President's red lines are I think they're pretty comfortable they know where the red lines are. And now I think over the next 10 months the Iranians are going to be trying to increase the pressure rather than be on good behavior.
Gvs: One of the problems with the sanctions though that also impacts you know, Germany, UK and France and many of their corporations or businesses, not just so isolated. The sanctions are a real problem whether or not those stations are able to work something out with Iran or not they've still got to worry about the United States and its position.
JA: They do worry about the sanctions and they have been careful to comply with the sanctions. I think there's a broader Iranian goal which is frankly shared by the Chinese and the Russians to change the international financial system in the longer term. So the United States can no longer unilaterally, bring the world to sanction a country. I think over the next year two year three years you're going to see the Iranians the Chinese and the Russians moving to try to move that goal along as well.
GVS: How important was Soleimani in this whole discussion? I mean, how important was he to the Iranians and we know how vicious was he?
JA: Look, on the one hand, he was effective at doing what he was trying to do. He built up these proxy forces. He was in many ways a diplomat and a soldier and a spy all wrapped up into one. The organizations that he created persist. So by killing Soleimani, you don't eliminate these organizations. And the Iranians have a lot of levers they can pull throughout the region, not so much to get things done but to remind people of their ability to punish, remind people of their ability to disrupt and persuade people that you're much better off engaging with Iranians, than not engaging with the Iranians. He thought that it was necessary sometimes, for not only combatants to die but for civilians to die. And you could argue that there are lots of people in many governments who have felt war is hell. And you are fighting a war there's no question in my mind that the Iranians have felt they've been fighting an existential war for 40 years. And all of this is excused. There are all kinds of good reasons for Americans and Israelis and Iraqis and Saudis and others to say this guy was a murderer.
GVS: And we just have 30 seconds left. Does Iraq really want the US troops out of there?
JA: I think Iraq is of two minds about it. There are a lot of people who feel they really want the Americans at least to balance against the Iranians, but the politics may overtake them. It feels to me like the politics in Iraq are beginning to solidify behind the idea that all foreign troops should leave. The real foreign troops are going to be the American troops and Allied troops. The Iranians are in a much more subtle zone, a gray zone. And I think I my bet would be that in, in the next year to 18 months - the Iranians will have much more influence than the United States does, and the US will have much less.
GVS: John Alterman, thank you. Director the Middle East program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.
(GOODBYE)
That's all the time we have for today.
Stay Plugged In by liking us on Facebook at Voice of America.
You can also like my Facebook page at facebook-dot-com-forward-slash-Greta. And follow me on Twitter at Greta.
Thanks for being Plugged In!
