Joining the CFT; Khamenei's Retreat from Previous Stance

Following a day of intense turmoil, the Islamic Consultative Assembly finally passed the government's proposed bill on joining the 'Convention on Combating the Financing of Terrorism' on October 7. Except for the JCPOA, which sparked significant controversy in the Assembly, it is hard to recall any other bill that has been as contentious as the government's proposal regarding Iran's necessity to join the 'Convention on Combating the Financing of Terrorism.' This controversy was not limited to the Assembly and its members. The Assembly agreed to Iran's accession to the 'Convention on Combating the Financing of Terrorism.' The intensity of opposition to the bill was highlighted by Mohammad Ali Mohammadi Kermani, the interim Friday prayer leader of Tehran, who stated: 'This is a dangerous thing... and it will prevent us from helping Hezbollah, Ansarullah, and others.' Ahmad Alam al-Huda, the Friday prayer leader of Mashhad, went so far as to tell representatives, 'Do not be traitors to your homeland.' Following Alam al-Huda's remarks, Ali Motahari, the Deputy Speaker of the Assembly, stated that threatening messages had been sent to representatives who supported the bill. In a similar reaction, Ayatollah Nouri Hamadani, a government cleric, emphasized that the religious establishment could not remain indifferent to this bill, stating: 'This is a Hebrew, Western, and Arab pact, and the orchestrators of this pact are supporters of America and Israel. This bill does not consider Israel and Saudi Arabia as terrorists. It labels Hezbollah of Lebanon as a terrorist organization.' However, more importantly than all these figures, was Ayatollah Khamenei, the leader of the Islamic Republic, who personally intervened in the matter and went as far as to consider the approval of the bill a sign of 'being intimidated.' He stated: 'Great powers prepare these international treaties based on their own interests and benefits, and compliant or intimidated governments approve these conventions in their countries.' The widespread opposition to the bill stemmed from the fact that if Iran joined this convention, even Iranian banks would be prohibited from providing services to important institutions such as the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Khatam al-Anbiya Construction Headquarters, Imam Hussein University, Malek Ashtar University, Mahan Air, and many other organizations that are listed as terrorist or terrorism-supporting entities. For example, Abdolreza Misri, a member of the Velayati faction in the Assembly, had previously told the representatives, 'According to this convention, the IRGC is a terrorist organization, and we must hand over individuals like General Rezaei, Dr. Velayati, General Qassem Soleimani, and General Wahidi as examples of terrorism to the West. If you can step on the ideals of the revolution, then approve this convention.' Interestingly, Major General Jafari, the commander of the IRGC, had previously raised such speculation. He stated, 'Enemies have come after defense and missile sanctions following the JCPOA, especially targeting the IRGC and the armed forces of the country.' Additionally, in September 2016, Abdollah Ghanji, the editor-in-chief of the Javan newspaper (affiliated with the IRGC), announced that two Iranian banks, Bank Sepah and Bank Mellat, had officially informed Khatam al-Anbiya Headquarters that they would have to stop providing currency services to this headquarters. He said, 'With the sanctions against Khatam al-Anbiya by Mellat and Sepah banks (and possibly several other banks in the future), the results of the JCPOA will become more tangible.' However, despite Khamenei's explicit opposition to the bill, the Islamic Consultative Assembly has now passed the bill for Iran's accession to the 'Convention on Combating the Financing of Terrorism' and will send it to the Guardian Council for review as per the usual procedure. What is important in the process of passing this bill is that Ali Larijani, the Speaker of the Assembly, announced to silence those who cited the leader's remarks in their opposition to the bill that Khamenei's office had responded to the Speaker's letter regarding the four bills by stating that the leader had no objection to their review in the Assembly. Thus, in exactly the same way that the Assembly was able to pass the JCPOA in 20 minutes with the leader's green light, it was able to pass this bill as well, and it became clear that the same leader who previously considered the approval of this bill a sign of intimidation had opened the way for its approval by allowing the Assembly to review this bill. Now, if the approval of such a bill is a sign of a regime being intimidated, he himself has opened the way for the intimidation of the Islamic Republic; otherwise, he could have expressed his opposition to the proposal in the Assembly and permanently blocked its review. In other words, if the approval of this bill is a sign of intimidation, in fact, before the Assembly was intimidated, it is the leader himself who has been intimidated. Now the important question is why Ali Khamenei was opposed to the approval of the bill one day and the next day opened the way for its approval in the Assembly? The answer must be sought in the explicit statements of Mohammad Javad Zarif, the Foreign Minister of the Islamic Republic and the architect of the JCPOA, who during a speech in the Assembly left no doubt about the necessity of joining the convention. He clearly stated in his speech that no expectations for economic improvement should be held from the approval of this bill, but it can be expected that not approving it will certainly add complicated problems to Iran's economy. He said: 'Once again, I emphasize that neither I nor the President can guarantee that joining the bill on the prohibition of financial support for terrorism will solve our problems. However, we can guarantee that by not joining this bill, America will find an important excuse to increase our problems.' This is precisely the point that also convinced Khamenei to abandon his opposition to joining the convention and allow it to be proposed and approved in the Assembly; the very thing he had previously described as a sign of 'being intimidated.'