Elections in Iran – Part V: The Waning of the Protest Movement

Elections in Iran – Part V: The Waning of the Protest Movement  By: A. Savyon* Iran|#529| June 29, 2009

SUBSCRIBE | UNSUBSCRIBE | DONATE | CONTACT US

MEMRI | MEMRI TV | THE MEMRI BLOG | MEMRI ECONOMIC BLOG | JIHAD & TERRORISM THREAT MONITOR PROJECT  TURKISH MEDIA PROJECT | IRAN BLOG | ARAB MOVIES BLOG | ARAB MUSIC BLOG | ARAB LITERATURE BLOG

Two weeks after the elections, it seems that the Iranian regime has managed to suppress the protest movement. This report examines the reasons for the waning of this movement. 1. Violence by the Regime In attempt to quell the protests, which were mostly peaceful, the Iranian regime has employed brutal violence. IRGC and Basij units, some of them in plainclothes, used both cold weapons (clubs and knives) and live fire against the protestors. In addition to employing violence against the demonstrators in the streets, the security forces also raided student dorms, especially in Tehran; arrested protesters, political activists, journalists and intellectuals; and persecuted owners of homes from which the call of "Allah Akbar" was heard in the nights. The heads of the regime made threats against anyone who participated in the demonstrations, blocked websites and media outlets supportive of the protest movement, and waged a media campaign against this movement by describing the protestors and their leaders as hostile elements collaborating with Iran's enemies. Permits for political and party activities were revoked, and a special court was establish to prosecute the protestors. 2. Unlike Some of the Demonstrators, the Protest Movement Leaders Never Advocated a Regime Change in Iran; Their Campaign Is Part of a Struggle between Two Streamswithin the Regime The leaders of the protest movement, Mir Hossein Mousavi, Mehdi Karroubi and Mohammad Khatami, called on the demonstrators to keep their protests peaceful, and stated that they would negotiate with the regime to attain their goals, which are the holding of a new election or the establishment of a committee of ayatollahs, acceptable to all sides, to examine the election results. Unlike some of the protestors, these leaders are not interested in a change of regime in Iran, and have never called to topple Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.(1)       It should be noted that Khatami and Rafsanjani, who stayed behind the scenes of the protest movement, have not managed to recruit the support of any senior ayatollah against Khamenei. Hashemi Rafsanjani, who is the second most powerful figure in the regime and heads two of its most important bodies (the Experts Assembly and Expediency Council), has never purported to lead a movement presenting an alternative to the regime. Despite his blatant disagreements with the Supreme Leader, he hasn't openly challenged the latter's decision to accept the election results, though, according to reports, he has sought to recruit senior ayatollahs to join his camp within the regime. 3. Absence of International Support The policy of the West during this crisis has been one of non-intervention in the events in Iran. Conclusion: The events in Iran following the elections were a public outburst of rage that encompassed many sectors of Iranian civil society. This outburst was made possible by the emergence of a comprehensive national common denominator, namely anger over the rigged elections. The protestors sought a leadership, but did not find one. The regime's power and brutal suppression of the protests, the absence of a religious leadership, and the silence of the world meant that the protest movement could not maintain its momentum, and started to crumble after two weeks. However, it is safe to assume that another, more effective, protest movement will arise when the necessary "ingredients" are present, namely – a public of protestors, a compelling ideological agenda presenting an alternative to the regime, a religious leadership that will head the movement and will be willing to pay the price, and international support. It can also be assumed that the present Iranian protest movement is likely to impact the Sunni Arab societies in the countries neighboring Iran, which are also no strangers to election fraud.  Now that the regime has managed to quell the protests, its various elite groups are busy trying to mediate between its two competing streams, both of which are conservative and accept Khamenei's authority.(2) The desire for reconciliation is clearly evident in Rafsanjani's recent public statement – his first in the last two weeks – in which he declared his loyalty to Khamenei (who has his "unending affection"), and adopted the line of Khamenei and Ahmadinejad that foreign elements were behind the protest movement.(3) *A. Savyon is Director of the Iranian Media Project. Endnotes: (1) The leaders' position was expressed, for example, by Mousavi's supporter Majlis Member Ghodratollah Alikhani, who cried out emotionally during a recent Majlis session, "We are all sons of the Revolution!" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFiv361ycpQ .   (2) See MEMRI Inquiry and Analysis No. 522, "Elections in Iran – Part II," June 9, 2009, http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=countries&Area=iran&ID=IA52209.  Since Khamenei stressed, in his June 19, 2009 Friday sermon, the importance of all the leaders to the regime,  the regime's various elites and mechanisms have been working to appease the disgruntled presidential candidates and offer a solution to the crisis. Among the figures undertaking this effort are Ayatollahs from Qom, such as Mousavi Ardabili, Sobhani and Javadi-Amoli, as well as Majlis Speaker Larijani who has established his own committee for resolving the conflict, members of the Guardians Council and others. On Khamenei's June 19 sermon, see MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 2413, "Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in a Tehran Friday Sermon: In Every Election There Are Winners and There Are Losers," June 21, 2009,http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=countries&Area=iran&ID=SP241309. (3) ILNA (Iran), June 28, 2009, Mehr (Iran), June 27, 2009.

PLO and Fatah Officials: Hamas is Responsible for the Deaths of Its People

	Special Dispatch | No. 2164 | December 29, 2008 Palestinian PLO and Fatah Officials: Hamas is Responsible for the Deaths of Its People
	SUBSCRIBE | UNSUBSCRIBE | DONATE | CONTACT US
	MEMRI | MEMRI TV | THE MEMRI BLOG | MEMRI ECONOMIC BLOG | ISLAMIST WEBSITE MONITOR PROJECT TURKISH MEDIA PROJECT | IRAN BLOG | ARAB CULTURE BLOG
	Along with expressing solidarity with the Hamas casualties in Gaza, PLO and Fatah officials criticize Hamas for its contribution to the escalation that led to the Israeli attack. They blamed Hamas for not listening to PLO's call to prolong the tahdiah, for not preparing properly for the possibility that Israel would attack, and for combining its government functions with its resistance activity, which made it vulnerable to an attack on its institutions. Hamas, for its part, accused the PLO and Fatah of collaborating with Israel. The following are excerpts from statements and articles in the Palestinian media: Abu Mazen: We Told [Hamas] - "Don't End the Tahdiah" In his visit to Egypt, PLO Chairman Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) placed the responsibility for the Israeli attack on Hamas, saying, "We called the leaders of Hamas, and told them both directly and directly, through Arab parties and non-Arab parties. We talked with them on the phone. We told them, 'Please, do not end the tahdiah.'"(1) Nimr Hammad, an advisor to Mahmoud Abbas, said: "The one responsible for the massacres is Hamas, and not the Zionist entity, which in its own view reacted to the firing of Palestinian missiles. Hamas needs to stop treating the blood of Palestinians lightly. They should not give the Israelis a pretext." He called upon the leaders of Hamas to stop carrying out "operations which reflect recklessness, such as the firing of missiles."(2) Director of the Palestinian TV & Radio Authority: Hamas is In the Grips of Megalomania Bassem Abu-Sumayyah, director of the Palestinian TV & Radio Authority and columnist for the PLO daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, reiterated the accusation that "Hamas blocked its ears… They should have had even a little bit of political and security sense, and not left the people wandering, and losing their way, getting killed and injured. It is clear that Hamas was struck by megalomania since they took over Gaza, which blinded them so they would not listen to any advice. Hamas behaved like a superpower, as if they have weapons and means like Hizbullah in Lebanon, and as if they can conduct a war like the July war [of 2006]. Hamas's people thought they have a number of missiles that can enable them to prevail in a war of such size."(3) Palestinian Columnists: Hamas Could have Prevented the Bloodshed Editor of the PLO daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida Hafez Al-Barghouthi criticized Hamas for not prolonging the tahdiah, and for kidnapping Gilad Shalit: "Prolonging the tahdiah was a supreme national interest. Why hasn't [Hamas] prevented the aggression and the massacre? How many times have we written, and President Abu Mazen has declared, that these missiles [that Hamas is firing at Israel] as ineffective and contrary to the supreme national interest. Even Hamas saw them as contrary to the supreme national interest at the time of the tahdiah. We said, also, that the kidnapping of the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit cost us 500 casualties in one year."(4) Columnist Muwaffaq Matar called for creating an internal Palestinian investigation committee, and blamed Hamas for being responsible for the deaths of Palestinians in Gaza: "Will we learn the lesson, or are our leaders going to run away from bearing responsibility, as they usually do? If we believe in the value of men and in humanity, we should establish a Palestinian investigative committee that will reveal to the Palestinian people what happened, and why over 200 people have lost their lives and 750 have been injured within one hour, even though the calls for war, the speeches and the statements [in Israel], were abundant a week before the tahdiah ended… What did the commanders in Gaza expect? That the commanders of the Israeli army will let them know what is the zero hour, so that they will remove their people from the military and security headquarters?... This bloodshed and horrible destruction of our national institutions could have been prevented. It only needed political courage, moral wisdom, and adherence to the aspirations of the Palestinian people to live securely and in freedom and independence."(5) Hamas has to Choose Between Being a Government and Fighting Its Resistance Activities Abdallah Awwad, columnist for the PA daily Al-Ayyam, argued against Hamas' attempt to be both a government as well as a fighting resistance: "The Israeli incursions after 2000 [during the Al-Aqsa Intifada] and the destruction of the PLO headquarters were enough [for the PLO] to see the incompatibility of being a government at the same time as fighting the resistance… We are paying the price of stupidity, and the maniacal love of being rulers, that has nothing in it except for hollow slogans. [A choice must be made to be] either a government or a resistance. When the two are combined, it gives the occupying power easy targets… The example of the destruction of the PLO headquarters in the West Bank during the Intifada should have sufficed… What happened in Gaza demonstrates that the lesson was not learned. Instead of disappearing under the ground, which is the basis for any resistance, Hamas personnel remained exposed in the open… This destructive formula contained within it a premise that the occupation will not dare to carry out a bloody attack on Gaza."(6) Endnotes: (1) Al-Hayat Al-Jadida (PLO), December 29, 2008. (2) Al-Akhbar (Lebanon), December 28, 2008. (3) Al-Hayat Al-Jadida (PA), December 29, 2008. (4) Al-Hayat Al-Jadida (PA), December 28, 2008. (5) Al-Hayat Al-Jadida (PA), December 28, 2008. (6) Al-Ayyam (PA), December 28, 2008.

Open Letter to Syrian President Assad: Shake Hands with Olmert and Greet Him with "Shalom"

Let us hope that President Al-Assad is reading the newspapers these days, or at least that his advisors are. A peace with Syria is an essential ingredient to a comprehensive Middle East peace, and if Assad can see that it's worth his country's while to get back with the Turkeys and USs of the world and get away from the hardline Iranians, the better off the world at large will be.

Randy Shiner

In an open letter posted July 8, 2008 on the liberal Arab e-journal Elaph, the prominent liberal Arab intellectual Lafif Lakhdar urges Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad to cut his ties with Iran, embrace domestic reforms, and follow in the footsteps of Egyptian president Anwar Al-Sadat in making peace with Israel. Following are excerpts:( 1)

Turkey and France Have Opened the Door to Peace with Israel For You

"To the Honorable President of the Syrian Republic: "The prime minister of Turkey's Islamic government, Mr. Tayyip Recep Erdogan, has opened the door to peace with Israel for you. And the French president, Nicholas Sarkozy, has tried ever since his election, and is continuing to try, with difficulty, to open another door to extract Syria from the regional and international isolation into which [your] poor diplomatic decision-making has brought it.

"[This poor decision-making has ranged] from encouraging the infiltration of terrorists into Iraq to prevent its rebuilding to drowning Lebanon in problems and blood, and en route obstructing [the creation of] Palestinian national unity among Hamas, Fatah and all the Palestinian factions, under one authority and one military command - which is a prerequisite for increasing the possibility of resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict through the emergence of a Palestinian state - this state that everyone has heard about but no one has seen. It is a known fact that no national liberation movement that is divided against itself has ever achieved its objective. "

Obstructing the resolution of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is not merely a tactic to get the Golan back, but has a strategic component as well. [Syrian] president Hafiz Al-Assad's 1973 speech still rings like a slap to my ears: 'There is no Palestine,' he said; 'Palestine is southern Syria.' "I once said to Mr. Nabil Sha'ath, at the Center for Palestine Studies... 'Palestine is trapped between the mandibles of Greater Israel and Greater Syria... may Allah come to your aid.' "In order not to slam shut the two doors of hope that have opened before you, you must sincerely and responsibly manage to confront four great challenges: 1) correcting the error of [your] strategic alliance with Iran; 2) [arriving at] a final abandonment of [your] attempt to regain control of Lebanon; 3) regaining the Golan; and 4) [achieving] domestic reconciliation."

Your "Greatest Error... Was the Strategic Alliance with Iran's Inflammatory Extreme Right-Wing Religious Government"

Mr. President: The crux of politics today is for the politician to understand exactly in what world we live. We live in a world that changes at the speed of light, and in which the dangers are increasing. The true politician is one who tries to adapt to this world as it is, not as he would like it to be.

"Therefore, perhaps the greatest error in [your] diplomatic decision-making was the strategic alliance with Iran's inflammatory extreme right-wing religious government.

"The contemporary international diplomatic lexicon recognizes only the government of the center: center-right and center-left, alternating peacefully in government. Other governments are shunned and have no future. "...This alliance was accomplished with the Islamic Republic of Iran's most delirious and isolated government, domestically and abroad, to the point that one does not know whether to laugh or cry at [Iranian] President Ahmadinejad's hallucinations of the imminent return of the Hidden Imam, who from this time forth, according to the Iranian president, formulates 'Iran's domestic and foreign policies.'

"The funny thing is that the Majlis ([Iran's] parliament) debates in all seriousness on hallucinations like these. One ayatollah said: 'Far be it from the Hidden Imam that a policy leading to 20% inflation be set!'

"Former French foreign minister Doust-Blasy records in his memoirs that he and the German foreign minister could not believe their ears when President Ahmadinejad told them, at a private meeting in New York, that 'the world is in need of chaos.' He did not add, of course, that the chaos is a sign of the return of the Hidden Imam, who will achieve a 'divine victory' over the enemies of the Islamic Republic of Iran!

"The alliance of Syria - militarily weak and in a state of economic collapse - and Iran is like one drowning man calling on another drowning man for help. Unless the moderate Iranian elite get rid of Ahmadinejad and the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) and Al-Quds Brigades government, and their policies of aggression, Iran may one day find itself standing alone in a fateful confrontation with the world. And Syria may thus find itself in the same dark tunnel as its ally Iran.

"The Syria-Iran alliance is not a matter of predestination. Syria can find a preferred alternative in the Gulf petrodollars and in the investments of international companies that were, and continue to be, capable of development in Southeast Asia, India and China.

"It seems that Syria intends to emulate Iran in the matter of nuclear weaponry, which your father, president Hafiz Al-Assad, with his far-reaching vision, rejected - aware that [this weaponry] is not usable in the closely adjacent countries of the Middle East, except in the event of collective suicide... This is an extreme case - the case of existential threat - in which Syria is very unlikely one day to find itself.

"Mr. President: The Syrian-Iranian alliance entails [a Syrian] alliance with Hizbullah, the most extreme and delirious of Iranian parties in Lebanon in matters of military decision-making and achieving 'divine victory' - with the blessings of the Hidden Imam.

"You can now transform this disadvantage into an advantage. Particularly if a government formed from the alliance of Mohammad Khatami's reformists and 'Ali Akbar Hashimi Rafsanjani's moderate conservatives replaces Ahmadinejad's government in Iran, [this alliance] can help disarm Hizbullah, whose weapons hinder the Lebanese government from [exercising a] monopoly on the legitimate use of force. This would transform [Hizbullah] into a political party with no claim to controlling Lebanon by force of arms.

"Such a wise decision would require you to convince some in Damascus to put out of their minds the idea of Lebanon as a 'milk cow' - and, beyond that, to encourage them to get used to full recognition of the state of Lebanon, and to draw international Syrian-Lebanese boundaries, and to [establish] mutual diplomatic relations.

And, finally, to put to an end, once and for all, to the chain of assassinations of Lebanese presidents, leaders, intellectuals, and journalists that has been going on since the 1970s. "Such courageous decisions as these are sufficient for Syria to escape its regional and international isolation, and perhaps to find a Lockerbie-type solution to the international tribunal [for the Al-Hariri assassination] that is such a nightmare for your regime."

"You Will... Not Regain the Golan by Waging a Proxy War Via Hizbullah or Hamas" or Via a Syria-Israel War

"Mr. President: You will in all probability not regain the Golan by waging a proxy war via Hizbullah or Hamas, and you are even less likely to do so via a Syria-Israel war, whose only certain outcome would be the overthrow of your regime.

"A realistic regional and international policy may - rather, will - regain it. The means of salvation are before you - mediation between you and [Israeli Prime Minister Ehud] Olmert, by the Islamic leader of Turkey, Erdogan. Try to transform him from mediator to arbitrator in direct negotiations between the two of you. His friendship with both Syria and Israel qualify him for this task.

"Erdogan, who strives for stability and peace in the Middle East, is a better option for you than Ahmadinejad, who advocates jihad and martyrdom and threatens the region with nuclear convulsions.

"The policy of [the late Egyptian president Anwar Al-]Sadat, of 'breaking down the psychological barrier' between Egypt and Israel, could be a good example for you on the same path leading to Syrian-Israeli reconciliation. The landing of the Egyptian president at Ben Gurion Airport had global media reverberations [as great] as if he had landed on the surface of Mars. [Moshe] Dayan confessed to him during the Camp David negotiations, 'You, sir, are more popular than all of us in Israel.'

"In this way he regained the Sinai, and lightened the burden of arms buildup that had bled the Egyptian economy - as is the case with the Syrian economy today. Try to be the Sadat of Syria - attaching no importance to the taboos that forbid communication with and greeting the enemy, inherited from the customs and religions of primitive tribes and totemism, which were haunted by obsessionive neurosis. Also, initiating peace with the Jews and Christians is proscribed and criminalized by the Islamic jurisprudence of al-wala' wa'l-bara' [the doctrine that Muslims may only associate with and have allegiance and loyalty toward other Muslims].

"Your refusal to shake hands with Olmert, even though both of you were sitting at the same table, is a primitive vestige of this obsessive neurosis. Modernity has established, upon the ruins of these ossified taboos, the principles, laws, and customs of civilized, flexible, and humane behavior that regulate protocol relations among officials - and they do not proscribe an offer on your part to shake hands with Ehud Olmert.

"But the recovery of the Golan will require even more than a handshake. It requires you to say 'Shalom' to him with enthusiasm, and it may be that he will answer... with the same greeting or better, saying 'Salaam.'

"Such an affecting, human scene would be broadcast by the media to every home in the world, and would give you symbolic capital, of which you are in direst need, and perhaps will motivate some of the Israelis who would have voted 'No' on returning the Golan to change their minds.

"There is no place for sticking to insignificant formalities when the signing of a lasting peace is at stake - with all that it symbolizes and all that it promises of peaceful coexistence and cooperation in all fields...

"It is inappropriate that strategic thinking exhaust itself with obsessive formalities. Rather, it must address the basic issues directly, for the day after peace is signed: cooperation on economic, water resource, technological, scientific, petroleum and gas, cultural, and especially educational issues.

"Israel's curricula and teaching methods, and the competence of its teachers, are among the best in the world, whereas education in most of the Arab countries, including Syria, is poor and sterile. Throughout 5,000 years of history, the Middle East has known only wars, interrupted by brief periods of peace that coincided with brief periods of economic prosperity.

"New applied technologies can make economic prosperity permanent, and they can make peace permanent as well - as in the case of the European Union, among its modern, secular, and democratic countries...

Domestic Reform: "Begin by Freeing the Prisoners of Opinion"

"Mr. President: Let us imagine that all of the relevant sides play out their roles in this optimistic scenario perfectly. No doubt you will ask yourself: What good will it do me to gain the world and lose my people?

"One who formulates a realistic foreign policy would do well to complement it with a domestic policy that is no less realistic, with which you can remind your people, who fear raids by the security agencies, of the salad days of the Damascus Spring.

"Begin by freeing the prisoners of opinion, and even the Islamists whose hands are not stained with blood - and don't forget the members of the Damascus Declaration, who have committed no crime except calling for 'the normalization of Syrian-Lebanese relations' - something something that the writer of these lines also demands.

"Let the Kurds exercise their cultural rights freely, and speak, sing, and write in their language. Recognize their full citizenship and nationality under the International Convention for the Protection of Minority Rights.

"Extend compensation to the families of the 17,000 Islamists who have 'disappeared' since the 1970s. Likewise, compensate the families of the Lebanese and Palestinians who met the same fate.

"And this is really astonishing: How does Syrian law pardon or allow for mitigating circumstances to the perpetrators of 'honor crimes' - [a practice] which the Prophet of Islam outlawed and nullified in the third year of the hijra, in surah 24 of the Koran - while at the same time ratcheting up the punishment for democratic intellectuals and defenders of human rights?"
Endnote:(1) www.elaph.com, July 8, 2008.

"The Right Place to Fight Terrorism... Is the [Terrorists'] Sanctuaries... in Pakistan"

"The Right Place to Fight Terrorism... Is the [Terrorists'] Sanctuaries... in Pakistan"


To view this clip, visit http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/1813.htm.

Hamid Karzai: "The problem of terrorism, as it is affecting Afghanistan, is not entirely an Afghan problem. As a matter of fact, a greater part of this problem is a regional problem, and a greater part of this problem is unfortunately coming to us from Pakistan. So the Americans, the international coalition - when they say they are continuing to work in Afghanistan, and yet the security is not there, they are right, because they have not gone to the right place to fight terrorism."

Interviewer: "Which is?"

Hamid Karzai: "Which is the sanctuaries that the terrorists have in Pakistan."

Interviewer: "But Pakistan, actually, recently... I have noticed that there is a very strong declaration from the Afghan government against Pakistan. You have accused the Pakistani government of being behind your attempted assassination, the last one, and the most dangerous thing is that you have threatened that you would go behind the borders just to find Al-Qaeda, and Taliban as well, which means you will go to Pakistan. Right now, Mr. President, if you don't have the power to secure the situation in Afghanistan, do you think you have the power to go behind the border?"

Hamid Karzai: "When I said that Afghanistan would go in self defense beyond the Durand Line, [it] was in response to a statement that came from terrorist networks from Pakistan, from someone called Baitullah Mahsoud - you must have heard of him, and from someone called [Maulana] Fazlullah. They declared that they would cross the border and come into Afghanistan, to kill Afghans and the international troops. Now, for me, the president of a sovereign country - when there is a threat issued to me beyond my borders by someone, what is my responsibility?"

"When the Afghan People Decide to Defend Themselves, They Always Win"

Interviewer: "That's right, but the question is: Do you have the power? Can you do it?"

Hamid Karzai: "The power is the power of the government, of the institutions of the government, and of the people. Afghanistan is known in history - and Afghanistan has proven that in history - that when the Afghan people decide to defend themselves, they always win - as we have always won.
[...]
"Why did the international community come to Afghanistan after 9/11?"

Interviewer: "Why?"

Hamid Karzai: "Because they were threatened. The Twin Towers were blown up. A lot of innocent lives were lost. It was a great tragedy for all of us, not only for Americans, but for the whole world. Muslims died, Christians died. Every other nationality died. They felt that the source of that problem was in Afghanistan, so they all came here, first of all, to free themselves of the threats of terrorism, and in the process, to help Afghanistan to regain its independence and to rebuild. And the Afghan people joined hands with them in order to get liberated from the oppression of Taliban and Al-Qaeda. Because of that, Al-Qaeda and the Taliban were driven out of Afghanistan in less than a month and a half.

"But then, why are we still fighting terrorists? If the Afghan people are friendly and want the rest of the world to help them, then what is the problem in Afghanistan? Who is fighting the Afghan government and the international community? If the war is in Afghanistan, and if we are not winning this war, that means there is something wrong in Afghanistan, and then, in that case, it becomes an internal matter for the Afghan people.

"Therefore, we would not need the pressure of the international community in Afghanistan for our internal problems. Then, the Taliban is an internal problem of Afghanistan, and I should sit down with Mullah Omar, find him somewhere, talk to him, and resolve it.

"But if the problem has tentacles, roots, beyond the borders of Afghanistan, if the international community, the international press, and the governments say that there are sanctuaries beyond our borders, in another country, namely, in Pakistan, if the tribal territories of Pakistan are sanctuaries to terrorists, to training grounds, to suicide bombers and their training, which some officials of the government of Pakistan admit and talk about...

"In that case, it is needed, for the security of Afghanistan, for the security of Pakistan, and for the success of the international community, to wage the struggle against terrorism in the right place - that is, the sanctuaries of terrorists beyond the Afghan borders, in Pakistan.
[...]

"This war against terrorism will never be won by bombing Afghan villages. The war of terrorism is not in the Afghan villages."

Interviewer: "Is it in Pakistan?"

Hamid Karzai: "It is in the sanctuaries of terrorists."

Interviewer: "Right now, Mr. President, you are saying that the coalition forces did not do what they should do in Pakistan, while the Western media in general are actually saying: 'No, Mr. Karzai does not do the job well in Afghanistan.' So who do you think we actually should..."

"If [The International Community Says That] Karzai is Not Doing the Job Well In Afghanistan, Then [It] Is Saying That It is an Afghan Problem - [And] In That Case, [It] Has No Business in Afghanistan"

Hamid Karzai: "If Karzai is not doing the job well in Afghanistan, then the international community is saying that it is an Afghan problem. In that case, the international community has no business in Afghanistan, and they'd better leave - if it is an internal Afghan problem."

Interviewer: "But you think it is not an internal, but an international problem..."

Hamid Karzai: "It is an international problem, in which Afghanistan has been suffering the most, and unless the international community focuses in the right place... Afghanistan too is a sovereign country. If they can go with their planes and bomb Afghan villages in pursuit of terrorism, they should do the same in any other sovereign country.
[...]

"I've been trying to find the Taliban and talk to them for the past six years. This is an extremely important question. In Pakistan, the government of Pakistan can find Baitullah Mahsoud and talk to him. They can find Mullah Fazlullah and talk to him. They can find Mangal Bagh and talk to him. They can find Mullah Fazlullah and talk to him, and Mullah Omar of Pakistan, and talk to him. But where do I find the Taliban leaders to talk to them? How can I find Mullah Omar? Where is he?"

Interviewer: "Where is he, do you think?"

Hamid Karzai: "That is the question."

Interviewer: "I am asking you as the President of Afghanistan."

Hamid Karzai: "That is the question. If I know where he is, I will go and talk to him."

Interviewer: "Where do you expect him to be right now?"

Hamid Karzai: "He is not in Afghanistan."

Interviewer: "How are you so sure... You have mentioned before, Mr. President, that even Bin Laden is not in Afghanistan."

Hamid Karzai: "He is not. Surely."

Interviewer: "What is your proof?"

Hamid Karzai: "I am sure if he were here, I would have found him."