Episode Info
- Season12
Hosted by Christina Ruffini and Sir Richard Dearlove
Guest
Negar Mortazavi
Negar Mortazavi is an Iranian journalist reporting on the uprising and protests in Iran following a woman's death.
Episode Summary
Hundreds of people in Iran have been killed after the death of a 22-year-old woman sparked the biggest uprising in the country for years. More than 15,000 have been arrested in women-led protests demanding human rights, freedoms - and an end to Iran’s oppressive laws concerning women. The regime has accused the protests of being “foreign-backed riots”, meanwhile, the niece of the Supreme Leader has spoken out against what she described as the “murderous, child-killing regime” in Tehran. One Decision speaks to Iranian journalist Negar Mortazavi to hear more about the situation in the country.
Listen & Subscribe
- Watch on YouTube
- Listen on Apple Podcasts
- Listen on Spotify
Transcript
INTRODUCTION
Mcfarlane: You're listening to a special episode of One Decision. I'm your host, Julia McFarlane. For months now, Iran has convulsed with the most significant anti government protests in recent years, sparked by the death in police custody of a young woman arrested for not wearing her mandatory hijab or headscarf. Mahsa Amini was reportedly so severely beaten by the so called morality police that she suffered an apparently fatal brain hemorrhage. Her death and the deaths of hundreds more protesters, including dozens of children, have unleashed the most serious threat to the Iranian regime since the 2009 protest known as the green movement. And just days ago, even the niece of the supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei called on foreign governments to cut ties with the leadership in Tehran, describing it as a murderous and child killing regime. She has now been arrested. Nargess Mohammadi is an Iranian journalist and host of the Iran podcast. She's been writing about her native country for years. She's now based in the States from where she spoke to us today. I asked her to recap for us how the protest movement started and where she sees it going in the weeks and months ahead.
INTERVIEW
Motevaseli: Gina or Mahsa Amini was a 22 year old Kurdish woman from a small town called Saqqez in Western Iran in the Kurdish area who was visiting the capital, Tehran, with her family. She gets on the metro in downtown Tehran. When she gets off, she's stopped by this notorious force known as the morality police or, quote, unquote, the guidance patrol, who patrol cities across Iran to, quote unquote, guide women on how to dress and how to behave. Women and men, but mostly they pick on women. And she is detained. She is taken to the detention center then ends up in a coma in the hospital and dies. Immediately, the state puts out this narrative that, oh, she had an underlying health condition, she had a heart attack, she just died on her own, she suddenly collapsed. But her family says that she was a healthy 22 year old with no underlying health conditions and that she was essentially killed in the custody of the morality police with violence, and there was a buildup. I want to talk about a couple of other cases before Mahsa Amini. The one before her was Sepideh Rashno, this young woman who gets into an argument on a bus, on a public bus in Tehran with a hijabi woman who's telling her to put on her hijab. Sepideh refuses. And then the hijabi woman says, I will call the IRGC on you. And eventually, the other women on the bus join in. They kick the hijabi woman off the bus, and a few days later, Sepideh Rashno is found and detained and then brought on national television for a forced confession. She has bruises, visible bruises on her body, and she comes on national television essentially confessing against herself, against her behavior, the fact that she was tricked or she was misguided and that she believes in hijab. And then before that, a few months before, there was this image, this very iconic image of a mother who is on the street pushing the van of the morality police saying, please don't take my daughter. She's sick. And the van keeps driving as the mom is trying to push it, and then the mother is sort of pushed to the side, and the van drives away with her daughter in the van. So there's been a buildup of these images of the brutality that witnesses and footages have shown to the population, have created national outrage against this force over the years and especially over the past months, and then it culminated in essentially the killing in custody of Mahsa Amini. That was a spark for what we see now in nationwide anti government movement, essentially a feminist revolution in Iran that was kicked off in the Kurdish area in Kurdistan, but then in Tehran and in every province, over a 100 cities across the country, and it's been going strong for three months now. It's the third month, and over 300 protesters at least have been killed, documented by human rights organizations. 15,000 have been arrested. They face very harsh sentences. A few of them have been handed the execution, the death penalty. But nevertheless, the protesters are just very bravely and courageously staying on the streets, facing bullets and batons, and saying no to the entirety of the system.
Mcfarlane: And what is it about these protests that you think are significant? And also, do you think these are protests that are going to only continue growing momentum or do you expect them to fizzle out? I mean, we saw quite a lot of protests back in 2019. There were some anti hijab, anti IRGC protests back in 2019, but it was mostly an economic dissatisfaction protest when the sellers in the Grand Bazaar in Tehran went on strike. There was, of course, the 2009 protest, the green revolution, and there was a lot of speculation in 2019. Is this going to be like 2009? Is this gonna be another green revolution? And those protests kind of fizzled out. So my question to you is where do you see this current protest going? Where do you see this movement going? Do you think it's going to gain momentum? Do you think it's going to fizzle out? And if not, what makes this time different?
Motevaseli: Well, Julia, as you said, there's been a buildup, a progression of these protests. The 2009 Green Movement was massive. It was massive, millions on the streets, and it was the biggest challenge to the Islamic Republic since the 1979 revolution itself. And then since then, there have been, again, rounds of protests with the students and universities, teachers, union workers. And then in 2019, again, mass protests against the entirety of the system sparked by a sudden hike in fuel prices and in every province, over a 100 cities. Again, a very serious challenge to the Islamic Republic. But one thing that happened is that the system showed that they have the will and the capacity to suppress and to crack down, use very brutal violence, hundreds of protesters killed in a matter of weeks on the street, and they suppressed it. So people go back home, but the grievances are not ending. The demands are not answered. So, again, we saw protests actually 2017, again, 2016 before that, then 2019, another mass round of protests. And since then, there have also been protests after protests, but this time around, this is sort of a culmination of that, and you see an intersectional community of protesters, demographics that are bringing each their own grievances, but also with a lot of overlap to the mix. There's political grievances, economic, social, cultural. You have artists speaking up, filmmakers, athletes, the middle class, the working class, the big cities, the small cities, the religious cities, the non religious cities, the ethnic areas, the minorities, religious minorities, ethnic minorities. So it's a combination and it's also been going on for very long despite the brutality. We hadn't seen this level of brutality in 2009 so immediately. Yes. They cracked down ultimately, but this time around, it's just very brutal, very violent, and the state just seems to be determined to crack down and not give an inch. That's unfortunately another thing that we've seen in their playbook is that they assume that if they give an inch that they'll just have to give up the whole thing. So far they haven't really shown signs of any compromise and that just angers the protesters even more. Every time they arrest someone or they kill someone, it just angers them more.
Mcfarlane: That's really interesting. I was gonna ask, so much of this is framed as a feminist uprising and the hijab as a symbol for a lot of protesters of the subjugation of women, and they want the wearing of the hijab to be optional, to be voluntary. They want to be able to decide whether they want to wear it or not. And that's interesting you say that the regime, they cannot concede on that because they feel it will dismantle the rest of their legitimacy as an Islamic republic if they concede to women on that. I mean, at this point, do you think that would be enough even if they were to row back on that one thing? I mean, is that what the movement is still demanding, or has it now turned into widespread anti government, a wider rejection of the Islamic Republic?
Motevaseli: Well, it's definitely a widespread anti government movement, but at the core of it is also this feminist uprising or this feminist revolution, essentially. And it's not only directed at the hijab or the morality police. That's just the beginning of it. But it's discrimination, state sanctioned discrimination, violence against women in almost every aspect of their life, in marriage, divorce, child custody, inheritance. If you're a professional woman, a married woman, you can't even travel abroad without permission from your husband. So according to law, you have to go get a written permission from your husband to be able to leave the country. And there have been cases, national, very famous cases of, for example, the captain of a national team, a woman, who wasn't allowed, her husband didn't allow her to travel abroad, so was left behind the captain of the team while the team traveled abroad for an important international competition. So it's these stories of this humiliation, of the discrimination, and essentially the feeling of a second class citizen that women have had to deal with over the decades. And also it's a population that's very educated. It's very modern. It's very tech savvy. It's very young. 70% of the population is under 40, and they're just hungry for more rights, for more freedoms, for modernization, and for essentially integration into the global community. And the country has been isolated for decades politically, economically, and socially, and this is just something that's led to sort of what we can see as an almost explosion of this young society.
Mcfarlane: So where do you see this going in that sense? I mean, it's that age old question, what happens with an immovable object coming up against an unstoppable force? 70% of the population is 40, and they hold incredibly sort of opposite views from this old guard, the Islamic Republic. Where do you see this going? What do you think is the future for this protest movement?
Motevaseli: Well, Julia, that's the million dollar question. Right? So I've been asked this on every interview that I've done in the past three months. It's very difficult to speculate. I don't want to speculate with certainty as far as which of these two sides essentially are going to win because both seem, as you said, very determined. It's an unstoppable movement going against an immovable hard wall. I don't know. I don't know. Because, again, as past has shown us, the past rounds of protests against the Islamic Republic is that they have the will to suppress. And in the past, they've shown that they have the capacity, meaning the forces, the brutality, the tools for this violence. They would kill hundreds if they must. They would arrest thousands if they must. They hand them very harsh sentences. But then at the same time, the grievances and the demands are not answered, and they haven't gone anywhere. They've just been piling up and up and up and up on top of each other. And where is that turning point? Where is that watershed moment? I'm not sure. Is this it? I mean, looking at the population, looking at the protesters, the determination, the courage, the bravery, essentially facing bullets, risking your life, risking everything. It seems like this is it. This may be the watershed moment, but will they succeed? Meaning, will they be able to transform this anger and this rage and this movement into power. So the system is dealing with a very serious legitimacy crisis. There's no doubt in that. It's a legitimacy crisis at their hands, and you can't make a legitimacy crisis go away with bullets and batons and arrests and killings. But does this translate into an existential crisis for them? I'm not sure. It's hard to tell. But right now, looking back at the past three months, it just seems like the protesters have become more determined, very brave and courageous, and every time more people are arrested or killed, it just seems like it adds to the rage and to the determination. So it's difficult to predict at this point, but yeah, it's just a very incredible thing to watch from a distance.
Mcfarlane: 100%. It's so interesting because listening to you talk about it, we could just as easily right now be talking about China and the government there, and not just the government in Iran, and some really interesting parallels there. Last week, there was a UN Human Rights Council debate on the protests. I mean, is there anything that the international community can really do? Is there anything that the international community can do to affect the outcome or influence the regime to give some concessions to its citizens? Or do you think this is something that really is the solution, the endgame, the conclusion is something that's only really going to come from within Iran?
Motevaseli: Well, I think it definitely, yes. Change, sustainable long term change definitely has to come from inside the country. I mean, there is no way to impose that form of change unless it's in the form of a military action, a full on war or an invasion. I mean, you can't bomb a regime out of a country. We've seen, for example.
Mcfarlane: I mean perhaps like the lifting of sanctions if they were to bring some of these human rights concessions, you know, just off the top of my head, is there anything that the international community could do to maybe influence the regime's response?
Motevaseli: Well, there's different things that we're hearing from both protesters and activists that have been done or are in the works that have been welcomed. The US government immediately eased some sanctions on the internet. So there's a lot of restrictions as far as what internet tech companies can provide to Iranian users, and the US government provided some exemptions from those sanctions, essentially getting out of the way of Iranians accessing internet while their own government is restricting their access to internet. That was welcomed by internet freedom activists. It wasn't a huge move, but it was nevertheless something that was welcomed, essentially allowing tech companies to provide more services, more applications, and more of their tools to Iranian protesters and users. We also saw the UN Human Rights Council. Essentially, it's a format. It's a naming and shaming situation when world leaders, international organizations talk about these atrocities putting the spotlight on the violence in Iran, shedding light on the plight of the protesters, echoing their voice both in the media, in politics. These are all very important steps. And then having this fact finding, essentially, this mechanism that the UN would put resources and staff to try to look into the violence that's happening in a professional way from a human rights perspective. These are all good steps. Also, when you talk about sanctions, yes, of course, US broad economic sanctions imposed most recently by the Trump administration, the campaign of maximum pressure, has really, research after research showed that has really pressured the population, put the brunt of this economic pressure on the working class, on the middle class Iranians, the vulnerable segments of the population, the women heads of household, the disabled, the patients with special diseases, all of that. So broad economic sanctions have in fact been harmful to the population, if not helpful, and have helped strengthen the more militaristic sort of hard core, as they call it, the hard core of the regime and have weakened the civil society. This is something that civil society activists and leaders have been telling us inside and outside the country. So in that sense, US policy since the Trump administration has also been very harmful to the Iranian public and also to the civil society. And, you know, any form of solidarity or messaging or, as I said, echoing the voices of the protesters is something that they welcome. They're constantly asking for what we're doing right now, talking about it on your podcast. This is all great. It's something that the Iranian protesters are looking for or appreciating, for this to not go away when the news cycle ends, you know, and be buried with other headlines.
Mcfarlane: You have previously spoken about how you consider yourself an exile from your home country, and so much of your work has had to be done from the outside through your own local contacts, through people you know. You have been subjected to awful abuse and harassment for your journalism on Iran. How is that impacting your ability to cover Iran, telling the story and essentially just carrying out your job and your duty as a journalist?
Motevaseli: Thank you for asking that. You know, I hate to make myself part of the story, but unfortunately, I have been made part of it in a way. Like, my own story has been just very similar, it's not only me. A lot of other mostly female journalists, both inside the country, outside the country are subjected to very similar treatments and harassment that essentially brings us to this famous phrase that says journalism is not a crime. So in the country, journalists are being accused of working with intelligence services of the Western governments. They slap these accusations on them of working with the CIA, working with MI6, working with Mossad, just to essentially criminalize their work. And then outside the country, those of us who work in the diaspora or exile, we've been harassed and defamed and attacked by the regime. Our families have been harassed. On the contrary, my loved ones have been harassed by the regime repeatedly because of my work. That's essentially what's pushed me into exile. I have a case with the Revolutionary Guards intelligence, and I fear persecution if I travel back to the country like it's happened to many other journalists, especially dual nationals as an Iranian American. So it's not safe for me to travel there. That's why I consider myself in exile since 2009. I haven't been back. And then outside the country, unfortunately, it's not only the regime, but some of its staunch opponents who are also launching these attacks on journalists, mainly targeting women of Iranian descent, Iranian American, Iranian British, Iranian French, and essentially scapegoating us, shooting the messenger, if you will. And if they disagree with our coverage or with our tone, sometimes I get attacked for things I haven't said. They're like, why didn't you say this and that and that? And it's not just me. It's my friend and reporter at the New York Times, friends at the BBC Persian, at France 24, at a lot of these other outlets who constantly get attacked and smeared with very similar tactics. So they're throwing these smears around that we work for the regime, we lobby for the regime, we are agents of the regime, that now they're saying my family is part of the IRGC, the very family that's been harassed by the IRGC. They're smearing them as working for the IRGC. So it's similar tactics, and it's unfortunately a global phenomenon, but it really impacts your work, it impacts your mental health, it impacts your ability to connect to your sources, it diminishes trust, it also diminishes the years and work that you've put into building a credibility. And it's difficult to cover a subject, a place, a people from a distance, but unfortunately, this is the way a lot of us have to do it because also the regime, the Islamic Republic, doesn't let us travel to the country freely. They don't allow a free flow of information. Even the very few foreign correspondents that are based in the country are very limited at where they can go, what they can report. So it is a situation that the Iranian government has created, unfortunately, but also some in the opposition are just adding to this toxicity and to this, essentially, harassment and hate against many female journalists in the diaspora who are in exile.
Mcfarlane: And besides being completely wrong, it's also totally counterproductive given how important it is for the story to come out, the work of diaspora journalists such as yourself. Nargess, thank you so much for your time. You are host of your own podcast called the Iran Podcast, easily searchable. And so anyone listening who's interested in learning more of the story, do check out Nargess's podcast and keep up with all the latest developments in Iran from there. Nargess, thank you so much for talking to us today. I really appreciate it. Thanks for having me. That's all for this special episode of One Decision. And if you enjoyed this conversation, why not subscribe to our show so you never miss an episode? We drop full podcasts every Thursday with analysis from leading experts, some guests, and my cohost, Sir Richard Dearlove, the former chief of MI6. From me and the team, thank you so much for listening. See you next time.
