Archive for the ‘Iran’ Category

Anatomy of a Lie: How Iran Covered Up the Downing of an Airliner – The New York Times

When the Revolutionary Guards officer spotted what he thought was an unidentified aircraft near Tehrans international airport, he had seconds to decide whether to pull the trigger.

Iran had just fired a barrage of ballistic missiles at American forces, the country was on high alert for an American counterattack, and the Iranian military was warning of incoming cruise missiles.

The officer tried to reach the command center for authorization to shoot but couldnt get through. So he fired an antiaircraft missile. Then another.

The plane, which turned out to be a Ukrainian jetliner with 176 people on board, crashed and exploded in a ball of fire.

Within minutes, the top commanders of Irans Revolutionary Guards realized what they had done. And at that moment, they began to cover it up.

For days, they refused to tell even President Hassan Rouhani, whose government was publicly denying that the plane had been shot down. When they finally told him, he gave them an ultimatum: come clean or he would resign.

Only then, 72 hours after the plane crashed, did Irans supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, step in and order the government to acknowledge its fatal mistake.

The New York Times pieced together a chronology of those three days by interviewing Iranian diplomats, current and former government officials, ranking members of the Revolutionary Guards and people close to the supreme leaders inner circle and by examining official public statements and state media reports.

The reporting exposes the governments behind-the-scenes debate over covering up Irans responsibility for the crash while shocked Iranians, grieving relatives and countries with citizens aboard the plane waited for the truth.

The new details also demonstrate the outsize power of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, which effectively sidelined the elected government in a moment of national crisis, and could deepen what many Iranians already see as a crisis of legitimacy for the Guards and the government.

The bitter divisions in Irans government persist and are bound to affect the investigation into the crash, negotiations over compensation and the unresolved debate over accountability.

Around midnight on Jan. 7, as Iran was preparing to launch a ballistic-missile attack on American military posts in Iraq, senior members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps deployed mobile antiaircraft defense units around a sensitive military area near Tehrans Imam Khomeini Airport.

Iran was about to retaliate for the American drone strike that had killed Irans top military commander, Gen. Qassim Suleimani, in Baghdad five days earlier, and the military was bracing for an American counterstrike. The armed forces were on at war status, the highest alert level.

But in a tragic miscalculation, the government continued to allow civilian commercial flights to land and take off from the Tehran airport.

Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh, commander of the Guards Aerospace Force, said later that his units had asked officials in Tehran to close Irans airspace and ground all flights, to no avail.

Iranian officials feared that shutting down the airport would create mass panic that war with the United States was imminent, members of the Guards and other officials told The Times. They also hoped that the presence of passenger jets could act as a deterrent against an American attack on the airport or the nearby military base, effectively turning planeloads of unsuspecting travelers into human shields.

After Irans missile attack began, the central air defense command issued an alert that American warplanes had taken off from the United Arab Emirates and that cruise missiles were headed toward Iran.

The officer on the missile launcher near the airport heard the warnings but did not hear a later message that the cruise missile alert was a false alarm.

The warning about American warplanes may have also been wrong. United States military officials have said that no American planes were in or near Iranian airspace that night.

When the officer spotted the Ukrainian jet, he sought permission to fire. But he was unable to communicate with his commanders because the network had been disrupted or jammed, General Hajizadeh said later.

The officer, who has not been publicly identified, fired two missiles, less than 30 seconds apart.

General Hajizadeh, who was in western Iran supervising the attack on the Americans, received a phone call with the news.

I called the officials and told them this has happened and its highly possible we hit our own plane, he said later in a televised statement.

By the time General Hajizadeh arrived in Tehran, he had informed Irans top three military commanders: Maj. Gen. Abdolrahim Mousavi, the armys commander in chief, who is also the chief of the central air defense command; Maj. Gen. Mohammad Bagheri, chief of staff of the Armed Forces; and Maj. Gen. Hossein Salami, commander in chief of the Revolutionary Guards.

The Revolutionary Guards, an elite force charged with defending Irans clerical rule at home and abroad, is separate from the regular army and answers only to the supreme leader. At this point, the leaders of both militaries knew the truth.

General Hajizadeh advised the generals not to tell the rank-and-file air defense units for fear that it could hamper their ability to react quickly if the United States did attack.

It was for the benefit of our national security because then our air defense system would be compromised, Mr. Hajizadeh said in an interview with Iranian news media this week. The ranks would be suspicious of everything.

The military leaders created a secret investigative committee drawn from the Guards aerospace forces, from the armys air defense, and from intelligence and cyberexperts. The committee and the officers involved in the shooting were sequestered and ordered not to speak to anyone.

The committee examined data from the airport, the flight path, radar networks, and alerts and messages from the missile operator and central command. Witnesses the officer who had pulled the trigger, his supervisors and everyone involved were interrogated for hours.

The group also investigated the possibility that the United States or Israel may have hacked Irans defense system or jammed the airwaves.

By Wednesday night, the committee had concluded that the plane was shot down because of human error.

We were not confident about what happened until Wednesday around sunset, General Salami, the commander in chief of the Guards, said later in a televised address to the Parliament. Our investigative team concluded then that the plane crashed because of human errors.

Ayatollah Khamenei was informed. But they still did not inform the president, other elected officials or the public.

Senior commanders discussed keeping the shooting secret until the planes black boxes the flight data and cockpit voice recorders were examined and formal aviation investigations completed, according to members of the Guards, diplomats and officials with knowledge of the deliberations. That process could take months, they argued, and it would buy time to manage the domestic and international fallout that would ensue when the truth came out.

The government had violently crushed an anti-government uprising in November. But the American killing of General Suleimani, followed by the strikes against the United States, had turned public opinion around. Iranians were galvanized in a moment of national unity.

The authorities feared that admitting to shooting down the passenger plane would undercut that momentum and prompt a new wave of anti-government protests.

They advocated covering it up because they thought the country couldnt handle more crisis, said a ranking member of the Guards who, like others interviewed for this article, spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. At the end, safeguarding the Islamic Republic is our ultimate goal, at any cost.

That evening, the spokesman for the Joint Armed Forces, Brig. Gen. Abolfazl Shekarchi, told Iranian news media that suggestions that missiles struck the plane were an absolute lie.

On Thursday, as Ukrainian investigators began to arrive in Tehran, Western officials were saying publicly that they had evidence that Iran had accidentally shot down the plane.

A chorus of senior Iranian officials from the director of civil aviation to the chief government spokesman issued statement after statement rejecting the allegations, their claims amplified on state media.

The suggestion that Iran would shoot down a passenger plane was a Western plot, they said, psychological warfare aimed at weakening Iran just as it had exercised its military muscle against the United States.

But in private, government officials were alarmed and questioning whether there was any truth to the Western claims. Mr. Rouhani, a seasoned military strategist himself, and his foreign minister, Javad Zarif, deflected phone calls from world leaders and foreign ministers seeking answers. Ignorant of what their own military had done, they had none to give.

Domestically, public pressure was building for the government to address the allegations.

Among the planes passengers were some of Irans best and brightest. They included prominent scientists and physicians, dozens of Irans top young scholars and graduates of elite universities, and six gold and silver medal winners of international physics and math Olympiads.

There were two newlywed couples who had traveled from Canada to Tehran for their weddings just days earlier. There were families and young children.

Their relatives demanded answers. Iranian social media began to explode with emotional commentary, some accusing Iran of murdering its own citizens and others calling such allegations treason.

Persian-language satellite channels operating from abroad, the main source of news for most Iranians, broadcast blanket coverage of the crash, including reports from Western governments that Iran had shot down the plane.

Mr. Rouhani tried several times to call military commanders, officials said, but they did not return his calls. Members of his government called their contacts in the military and were told the allegations were false. Irans civil aviation agency called military officials with similar results.

Thursday was frantic, Ali Rabiei, the government spokesman, said later in a news conference. The government made back-to-back phone calls and contacted the armed forces asking what happened, and the answer to all the questions was that no missile had been fired.

On Friday morning, Mr. Rabiei issued a statement saying the allegation that Iran had shot down the plane was a big lie.

Several hours later, the nations top military commanders called a private meeting and told Mr. Rouhani the truth.

Mr. Rouhani was livid, according to officials close to him. He demanded that Iran immediately announce that it had made a tragic mistake and accept the consequences.

The military officials pushed back, arguing that the fallout could destabilize the country.

Mr. Rouhani threatened to resign.

Canada, which had the most foreign citizens on board the plane, and the United States, which as Boeings home country was invited to investigate the crash, would eventually reveal their evidence, Mr. Rouhani said. The damage to Irans reputation and the public trust in the government would create an enormous crisis at a time when Iran could not bear more pressure.

As the standoff escalated, a member of Ayatollah Khameneis inner circle who was in the meeting informed the supreme leader. The ayatollah sent a message back to the group, ordering the government to prepare a public statement acknowledging what had happened.

Mr. Rouhani briefed a few senior members of his government. They were rattled.

Mr. Rabiei, the government spokesman who had issued a denial just that morning, broke down. Abbas Abdi, a prominent critic of Irans clerical establishment, said that when he spoke to Mr. Rabiei that evening, Mr. Rabiei was distraught and crying.

Everything is a lie, Mr. Rabiei said, according to Mr. Abdi. The whole thing is a lie. What should I do? My honor is gone.

Mr. Abdi said the governments actions had gone far beyond just a lie.

There was a systematic cover-up at the highest levels that makes it impossible to get out of this crisis, he said.

Irans National Security Council held an emergency meeting and drafted two statements, the first to be issued by the Joint Armed Forces followed by a second one from Mr. Rouhani.

As they debated the wording, some suggested claiming that the United States or Israel may have contributed to the accident by jamming Irans radars or hacking its communications networks.

But the military commanders opposed it. General Hajizadeh said the shame of human error paled compared with admitting his air defense system was vulnerable to hacking by the enemy.

Irans Civil Aviation Agency later said that it had found no evidence of jamming or hacking.

At 7 a.m., the military released a statement admitting that Iran had shot down the plane because of human error.

The bombshell revelation has not ended the division within the government. The Revolutionary Guards want to pin the blame on those involved in firing the missiles and be done with it, officials said. The missile operator and up to 10 others have been arrested but officials have not identified them or said whether they had been charged.

Mr. Rouhani has demanded a broader accounting, including an investigation of the entire chain of command. The Guards accepting responsibility, he said, is the first step and needs to be completed with other steps. His spokesman and lawmakers have demanded to know why Mr. Rouhani was not immediately informed.

Mr. Rouhani touched on that concern when he put out his statement an hour and 15 minutes later. The first line said that he had found out about the investigative committees conclusion about cause of the crash a few hours ago.

It was a stunning admission, an acknowledgment that even the nations highest elected official had been shut out from the truth, and that as Iranians, and the world, turned to the government for answers, it had peddled lies.

What we thought was news was a lie. What we thought was a lie was news, said Hesamedin Ashna, Mr. Rouhanis top adviser, on Twitter. Why? Why? Beware of cover-ups and military rule.

More:
Anatomy of a Lie: How Iran Covered Up the Downing of an Airliner - The New York Times

Arabs prioritize key ties with U.S. against Iran in reacting to Trump peace plan – Reuters

RIYADH/CAIRO (Reuters) - Arab powers appear to be prioritizing close ties with the United States that are vital to countering Iran over traditional unswerving support for the Palestinians in their reaction to President Donald Trumps Middle East peace plan.

U.S. President Donald Trump shakes hands with Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during a joint news conference to announce a new Middle East peace plan proposal in the East Room of the White House in Washington, U.S., January 28, 2020. REUTERS/Joshua Roberts

At a White House event on Tuesday with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Trump proposed creating a Palestinian state but demilitarized and with borders drawn to meet Israeli security needs, while granting U.S. recognition of Israeli settlements on occupied West Bank land and of Jerusalem as Israels indivisible capital.

The plan diverges from previous U.S. policy and a 2002 Arab League-endorsed initiative that offered Israel normal relations in return for an independent Palestinian state and full Israeli withdrawal from territory captured in the 1967 Middle East war.

Saudi Arabias response exemplified the careful balance now required from Gulf Arab monarchies, Egypt and Jordan which rely on U.S. military or financial backing and find themselves aligned with the United States and Israel in confronting Iran.

The Saudi Foreign Ministry expressed appreciation for Trumps efforts and support for direct peace negotiations under U.S. auspices. At the same time, state media reported that King Salman had called the Palestinian president to reassure him of Riyadhs unwavering commitment to the Palestinian cause.

Egypt and Jordan, which already have peace deals with Israel, as well as Bahrain, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) used similar language that swung between hope for re-starting talks and caution against abandoning long-held stances.

Despite Palestinians rejection of the plan and boycott of Trump over perceived pro-Israel bias, three Gulf Arab states - Oman, Bahrain and the UAE - attended the White House gathering in a sign of changing times.

In a bitterly divided Arab world, backing for Palestinians has long been seen as a unifying position but also often a source of internal recriminations over the extent of that support, especially as some states have made independent, pragmatic overtures to historical adversary Israel.

Trump and Netanyahu praised the UAE, Bahraini and Omani ambassadors for attending the White House announcement: What a sign it portends - I was going to say of the future - what a sign it portends of the present, Netanyahu said to applause.

Critics were less kind, condemning the envoys presence as a shameful abandonment of the Palestinian cause.

No government or ruler wants to be seen to sell Palestine so cheaply and hand Netanyahu such a victory and, in fact, end up footing the bill, said Neil Quilliam, senior research fellow at Britains Chatham House think-tank.

At the same time, all states except perhaps Egypt are dependent upon the U.S. and will not risk angering Trump, given his propensity to act like a petulant child.

Saudi King Salman has previously reassured Arab allies he would not endorse any plan that fails to address Jerusalems disputed status or Palestinian refugees right of return, amid perceptions Riyadhs stance was changing under Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who is close to Trumps son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner, the plans main architect.

Palestinian officials say Prince Mohammed, the de facto Saudi ruler, has pressed Abbas in the past to support the Trump plan despite serious concerns. Saudi officials have denied any differences between the king and crown prince.

Naif Madkhali, a prominent Saudi who tweets often in support of the government, blasted Trumps plan: No and a thousand nos, he wrote under the hashtag #Down_with_the_deal_of_the_century.

In Bahrain, which hosted a U.S.-led conference last June on the Palestinian economy as part of Trumps broader peace plan, opposition groups came out strongly against the proposal.

Whoever today gives up the Holy Land of Palestine will tomorrow give up his land in order to preserve his seat, tweeted Waad party leader Ibrahim Sharif. Treachery is a stab in the back and is not a point of view.

Any change to the consensus on refugees right of return to what is now Israel and the Palestinian Territories would reverberate loudest in Jordan, which absorbed more Palestinians than any other country after Israels creation in 1948.

Palestinians, which by some estimates now account for more than half of Jordans population, hold full citizenship but are marginalized and seen as a political threat by some people of Jordanian descent.

The biggest risk is to Jordan, where sentiment towards the issue and rising levels of discontent converge, said Quilliam.

Analysts predicted most Egyptians would reject the plan but not present a problem to President Abdel Fattah al-Sisis government, which has already cracked down harshly on dissent.

I feel angry and helpless as an Egyptian, an Arab, a Muslim and above all a human... prominent blogger ZainabMohamed wrote of Trumps plan.

The Palestinian Foreign Ministry criticized Arab countries after their generally positive comments on Trumps plan.

Following the revelation of details of the American-Israeli conspiracy, it is unacceptable to hide behind ambiguous and murky statements in order to escape confronting this conspiracy, it said in a statement.

However, a spokesman for Abbas said later he had received calls from Saudi King Salman and Lebanese President Michel Aoun supportive of the Palestinian position.

Reporting by Stephen Kalin in Riyadh, Lisa Barrington and Alexander Cornwell in Dubai, Amina Ismail and Ulf Laessing in Cairo, Nidal al-Mughrabi in Gaza and Ali Sawafta in West Bank; Writing by Stephen Kalin; Editing by Mark Heinrich

The rest is here:
Arabs prioritize key ties with U.S. against Iran in reacting to Trump peace plan - Reuters

Iran’s Khamenei vows ‘satanic’ US peace plan will not be realized – The Times of Israel

Irans Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Wednesday denounced as satanic a US plan for solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and predicted that Muslim nations will undoubtedly prevent the proposal from being put into practice.

US President Donald Trump unveiled his long-awaited peace plan at the White House on Tuesday.

To the dismay of US politicians, the satanic, evil US policy about Palestine the so-called Deal Of The Century will never bear fruit, by the grace of God, Khamenei wrote on his official Twitter account.

Get The Times of Israel's Daily Edition by email and never miss our top storiesFree Sign Up

About the Jewishization of al-Quds and saying it should be in the hands of the Jews, theyre talking foolishly and unwisely, he said, using an Arabic name for Jerusalem.

The issue of Palestine will never be forgotten, Khameini continued. The Palestinian nation and all Muslim nations will definitely stand up to them and not allow the so-called Deal Of The Century to be realized.

US President Donald Trump andIsraeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahuparticipate in a joint statement in the East Room of the White House, in Washington, DC, on January 28, 2020. (Sarah Silbiger/Getty Images/AFP)

The plan grants Israel much of what it has sought in decades of international diplomacy, namely control over Jerusalem as its undivided capital, rather than a city to share with the Palestinians. The plan also lets Israel annex West Bank settlements.

Turkeys President Recep Tayyip Erdogan also rejected the Trump proposal, saying, The plan to give Jerusalem to Israel is absolutely unacceptable.

However, the US Gulf state ally Qatar said it welcomed the US efforts to broker longstanding peace, while warning that it was unattainable without concessions to the Palestinians.

The Palestinians angrily rejected the entire plan.

This conspiracy deal will not pass. Our people will take it to the dustbin of history, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas said Tuesday.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas gestures as he delivers a speech in the West Bank city of Ramallah following the announcement by US President Donald Trump of the Mideast peace plan, January 28, 2020. (ABBAS MOMANI/AFP)

As part of the plan, future Palestinian statehood would be based on a series of strict conditions including requiring the future state to be demilitarized.

The plan also lets Israel annex West Bank settlements and would also end hopes for a so-called right of return. Palestinians who fled or were forced out when the Jewish state was created in 1948, and their millions of descendants, would no longer have a case to go back.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who stood alongside Trump in the White House as the US leader presented the plan, immediately declared his support for the scheme.

Link:
Iran's Khamenei vows 'satanic' US peace plan will not be realized - The Times of Israel

‘They wanted to believe in Khomeini’: Book shows how Iranian mullahs manipulated Western media and ‘secular left’ to win in 1979 – Washington Examiner

Iranian Ayatollah Ali Khomeini and his media-savvy allies duped Western journalists and intellectuals into supporting his rise to theocratic tyranny, according to a new history.

He had manipulated the secular left and the Islamic modernists, as a vehicle, and he would dispose of them at the moment of his choosing, Kim Ghattas writes in Black Wave, a new survey of the four-decade rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran.

That reflection caps Khomeinis meteoric rise from a tired exile in Iraq to the pinnacle of political power in Tehran. He was propelled, in part, by the gullibility of prominent French thinkers and Western journalists who were horrified by the brutality of the Iranian monarchy but failed to recognize the irredeemable monster who had come to live among them in the four months prior to the Iranian revolution of 1979.

They wanted to believe in Khomeini, the sage under the apple tree, Ghattas writes of Frances leftist intellectuals.

Their support played a crucial role in swelling Khomeinis international influence in the waning days of the monarchy, as the shahs security services were blamed for a deadly theater fire and came under increasing pressure for other human rights abuses.

In Neauphle-le-Chateau, over the course of a four-month stay, he would give 132 interviews and become the face of the revolution, recognized throughout the world, she writes. The seventy-six-year-old cleric was invigorated.

Ghattas, a longtime BBC journalist who is now a senior fellow at the Carnegie Institute, wrote Black Wave in an effort to explain what happened to us? That is, how did the more vibrant Middle East that older generations can still remember degenerate into the violence and chaos that she witnessed as a child born in Beirut during the Lebanese Civil War? The tendency for Western media to project their own beliefs or preferences onto people who they dont understand is one of the answers that emerges from her exploration of that large question.

The strategy was twofold: radical, reactionary messages for inside Iran, carefully curated words for Western ears, she observes in the book, which was released Tuesday.

Khomeini didnt have the public relations savvy to execute that plan on his own. Abolhassan Bani-Sadr, a close ally who would emerge as the first president of the Islamic Republic of Iran prior to his own exile, managed his public image carefully.

Banisadr translated (and sometimes purposely mistranslated), adding context and rounding the edges for sensitive western reporters, Ghattas writes. The resulting impression was that of an ascetic sage who had no interest in politics and would 'spend the rest of his days in a seminary in Qom' once his goals of removing the shah and returning to Iran had been achieved.

This image held great appeal among Frances leftist intellectuals, who nurtured their own charming self-image as a revolutionary force.

Hugely influential in shaping public opinion, they were anti-establishment, anti-power, and anti-imperial, Ghattas writes. They wanted to believe in Khomeini, the sage under the apple tree.

They would soon be undeceived. I will decide the government, a government for the people, Khomeini said after arriving in Iran on Feb. 1, 1979.

That declaration was at odds with public image he cultivated while living in France in the fall of 1968, and it soon became clear which version of Khomeini the theocratic tyrant or the meek sage reflected his true ambitions.

The executions began just before midnight on February 15, on the roof of the school: four leading generals were shot, after a summary trial in which they were accused of treason and mass murder, the book said. Photographs of the four generals' bodies in a pool of blood, blindfolded, their hands tied behind their backs, were splashed on the front pages of newspapers the next day, making international headlines. There was no more pretending.

See the original post:
'They wanted to believe in Khomeini': Book shows how Iranian mullahs manipulated Western media and 'secular left' to win in 1979 - Washington Examiner

‘My Iran’ Spotlights 6 Women Photographers Telling the Story of Their Country – Georgetown University The Hoya

Six women use the power of their camera lenses to illustrate the societal change in Iran since 1979. With a focus on what it means to be a woman living under an oppressive regime, Hengameh Golestan, Newsha Tavakolian, Shadi Ghadirian, Malekeh Nayiny, Gohar Dashti and Mitra Tabrizian use powerful images that play with color, setting and expression to give American viewers a look into Iranian life before and after that landmark year. The exhibit, entitled My Iran: Six Women Photographers, is on display at the Smithsonian National Museum of Asian Art until Feb. 9.

Golestan opens the narrative in March 1979, planting viewers right at the flashpoint of the Iranian Revolution, which saw a dramatic change in cultural life within Iran. Golestan, 27 years old at the time, depicts womens resistance to the imposition of policies that diminished their role and status in society.

An untitled photo from Golestans series, Witness 1979, depicts a dense crowd of impassioned women, just before they were legally required to wear hijabs in public, bracing the cold and the snow to express their defiance toward the revolution in protest. Caught mid-sentence with their fists raised, the energy of the crowd in the black-and-white image is palpable, compelling and remarkable as compared to the realities of life for Iranian women today, where their role in society is subjugated.

The explicit displays of freedom and civil disobedience that make up Golestans collection stand apart from the portrayals of modern-day Iran that Dadhti and Ghadirian have to offer, yet those portrayals also convey a degree of discontent and protest, albeit more subtly.

Ghadirians untitled series from 1999 creatively stages modestly dressed young women in the style of 19th-century portraits. The sepia tone and dated backdrops of the portraits contrast with the objects the women are holding, like a Pepsi can in one and a newspaper in another. These symbols of modernity contrast with the vintage, creating an eerie effect of a country stuck in the crossroads between two time periods.

Amidst the traditional elements of the portraits, little present-day props and signs of western influence cleverly indicate small acts of rebellion. Though obviously different in composition and mood from Golestans Witness 1979 images, the rebellious spirit within these artists has not disappeared.

Unlike Golestan and Ghadirian, Gohar Dashti was born after the Iranian Revolution, and the most historic and formative event of her lifetime was the Iran-Iraq War. Her work is centered on the persistent legacy of that conflict and introduces another layer of complexity to the exhibit with photo series such as Slow Decay and Iran, Untitled.

An untitled photo from Iran, Untitled in 2013 shows 11 women, head to toe in black, seated on a couch in the desert. The far-away shot expresses the desolation of the womens surroundings. Their expressions are somewhat unreadable; most are looking away from the camera, others faces are obscured by large sunglasses and a few look down to read the books in their laps. Each appears to be in her own world, highlighting the social isolation of women in Iran. With attention to these details, Dashti packs her photography with profound meaning and commentary.

Nearly 40 years later in the modern day, the most recent look at life for Iranian women is Tavakolians Blank Pages of an Iranian Photo Album. Tavakolians focus with her work is social documentary. Her portrayals of marginalization and resilience in photos like Somayeh resemble the themes conveyed in Dashtis photography. Somayeh depicts a young woman situated among gray, barren branches with a cold and impersonal-looking city in the far background.

Perhaps the most stylistically creative of the collections belongs to Nayiny, who uses digitization to combine photos from her own family albums with other images and different backdrops in abstract, visually dynamic ways. She combines old and new by injecting people from the past into modern settings. Nayinys approach looks admiringly to the past as compared to some of the others critiques in the exhibit of both the past and present.

My Iran, though focusing largely on the experiences of Iranian women, also gives attention to broad issues affecting Iranians both inside and outside of Iran, such as migration. Tabrizians Border expertly captures the pain associated with leaving ones homeland, even though staying would mean tolerating oppressive rule.

All six photographers present compelling images which work together to fill out a complete and multi-dimensional picture of their Iran, their home. They highlight moments in modern Iranian history that defined culture and society with attention to the experiences of women over time Iranians who have left their home and Iranians wistfully looking to the West as a better future. The narrative they collectively weave, though embedded with moments of pain and loss, ultimately expresses courageous resilience and hope for the future of women in Iran.

Link:
'My Iran' Spotlights 6 Women Photographers Telling the Story of Their Country - Georgetown University The Hoya