WikiLeaks logo
The Global Intelligence Files,
files released so far...

The Global Intelligence Files

The Global Intelligence Files

On Monday February 27th, 2012, WikiLeaks began publishing The Global Intelligence Files, over five million e-mails from the Texas headquartered "global intelligence" company Stratfor. The e-mails date between July 2004 and late December 2011. They reveal the inner workings of a company that fronts as an intelligence publisher, but provides confidential intelligence services to large corporations, such as Bhopal's Dow Chemical Co., Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and government agencies, including the US Department of Homeland Security, the US Marines and the US Defence Intelligence Agency. The emails show Stratfor's web of informers, pay-off structure, payment laundering techniques and psychological methods.


Released on 2012-06-18 08:00 GMT

Email-ID 5426952
Date 2009-07-28 14:00:12
So no real answer on their particular involvement in Iran situation.

Marko Papic wrote:

I have translated the email that leader of CANVAS sent to me on Iran.
Most of it is just his musings on the revolution. He gets into some
pretty tactical thoughts at the end, about what the revolutionary
movement must now evolve into in order to be effective. Remember, these
guys are expert revolutionaries, so he is getting into some pretty
theoretical stuff on what is needed.

However, he has opened communication with us on this and has given me
contacts of CANVAS's Middle East crew. He is asking for comments on his
thoughts below and any questions we may have. So I am particularly
forwarding this email to Reva and Kamran and want you guys to think of
"what now" questions that I can send to CANVAS and their crew.

SOURCE DESCRIPTION: Founder/Leader CANVAS (Serbian NGO for revolution
export... ex-OTPOR)

Dear Marko,

We had a series of meetings about the situation in Iran, while the
revolution was going an and afterwards. I don't know what "comrade"
Ackerman is doing in Bahrain, we have until now worked with Iranians in
other places, mostly with women rights groups and legal professionals
but also with emigres, so we have solid sources and our "rough" analysis
would go something like this:

- If we place Iran in Serbian context than the 1992
anti-Milosevic protests would be a much better parallel than the 96/97
[MP: note... the 1992 protests COMPLETELY collapsed] simply because
following the 1996 stolen elections the opposition managed to force
Sloba in February 1997 to accept their win and get leadership in 30
districts/cities, therefore gaining important material resources and
learning what it took to lead government office, not to mention that it
afforded the opposition "space" in local media which eventually turned
to be crucial in 2000.

- From the view of "Pillars of Support", standpoint that
Stratfor has already looked at in detail, the main crack has already
happened in the most important pillar, and that is the Supreme Council.
Although Moussavi and Rafsanjani have not (as the American media
expected them to) stepped up when crackdown began, fearing on one part
for their own safety, conflict and division between the two streams of
thought are going to continue to simmer. As evidence of this we have the
resignation of one of the ministers and negotiators for the nuclear
program, probably the most vital point of Iranian foreign politics.

- On the foreign scene Iran is going into a defensive. On the
regional level, Lebanese Hezbollah has decided to stay in opposition and
is losing part of support of Iranian security apparatus, considering
that most of the security apparatus is now concentrating internally.
Will this lead to a long period of stability in Lebanon/Syria remains to
be seen. A-Dog's foreign policy game in which the Cold War like role of
Putin/Russians was to "bring Iran to the table" while US "sells" Central
Europe and leaves Russia to strengthen in Georgia and Ukraine is now out
the window. We also can't discount the effect that the regolution has
had on American public opinion, particularly among the Democrats for
whom Chavez and A-Dogg were in part "robin hood" characters that
antagonized the Bush administration. Now, Democrats are unified
following the revolution and blood shed behind the concept of supporting
pro-democratic movements in Iran.

- As for the concept of Power in Numbers, A-Dog has a much
slimmer pool of support following the revolution. The generation that is
getting closer to voting is in this young nation now a post-Islamic
Revolution generation and is obviously far less open to conservative and
traditional influences.

- From the perspective of crystallizing of an anti-regime
movement there are several aspects:

1. Are the "liberal demonstrators" ready to demonstrate in unity and
following nonviolent discipline?
2. If number 1 is fulfilled are the demonstrators ready to go through
the "survival" phase (low risk tactics like using symbols, colors,
sms, virtual communication, ringtones, etc.) then following that the
"engagement phase" (registrations, recruitment of members in low
risk tactics, strategic planning) and "engagement phase" (building
of campaigns towards common goals, commemorating anniversaries such
as the death of Neda, until a hypothetic referendum as some sort of
a goal.)

Important answer to whether the movement is ready for this strategizing
is also whether there is a build up of identity going on.

I am putting my colleagues who work in Middle East and Iran and have
contacts there (*****, ***** and ****) to cc of this email, as well as
our long time friend ***** who works for Freedom House and who over some
virtual channels was to us the most confident source until now.

I hope this is useful for you... Hello from "hellishly hot" Belgrade,


Lauren Goodrich
Director of Analysis
Senior Eurasia Analyst
T: 512.744.4311
F: 512.744.4334