Iran International
Iran Human Rights (IHR) says analysis of protester deaths and eye injuries reveals that women’s eyes and faces were intentionally targeted during last year’s protests.
In a new report, the Oslo-based non-profit based its argument on statistical data gathered about the protests that began in mid-September 2022 and spread across the country. “Women made up 9% of slain protesters and 28% of those who sustained eye injuries,” the report said.
Security forces in Iran use a shotgun shell known as ‘bird shot’ with small metal pellets that is less likely to kill from a distance but can indiscriminately blind people in a crowd. In November 2022, dozens of ophthalmologists warned against the use of shotgun ‘birdshots’ and other projectiles by Iran’s security forces that they said had blinded over 500 protesters since mid-September.
The number of injured men and women should be proportionate to those who participated in the protests if the shootings were not intentional, IHR director Mahmoud Amiri-Moghadam told Iran International.
“In Mahabad, 15 percent of those killed are women, while more than half, i.e. 56 percent of eye injuries, were sustained by women,” he said, adding that these figures can only be explained by assuming that security forces intentionally targeted women’s faces and eyes.
“[This shows that] an order had come from above to torture these women and ruin their lives, teach them a lesson to cover their faces and heads for the rest of their lives. I think this shows the seriousness of these crimes, even more serious than we thought because it is a pre-planned, targeted crime, far more serious,” he said. “What they did to women by shooting them directly in the face and eyes was not just inflicting bodily harm, it was also a kind of mental and physical torture, and their goal was to terrorize them.”
Intentional aiming at protesters’ faces and tens of cases of serious eye injuries was first reported during a crackdown on water protests in Isfahan in December 2021.
To justify shooting pellets and plastic bullets at protesters which in hundreds of cases caused serious eye injuries, even blindness, authorities argue that security forces were forced to shoot at protesters to stop them from causing harm to others or damaging public property.
The organization has published 95 cases of eye injury and blindness from last year’s protests with names, photos and injury descriptions. Amiri-Moghadam says documenting what happened to the wounded is difficult because they and their families are threatened by security and intelligence bodies. “In 43 cases, we withheld the names.”
Intentional targeting of genital areas was also reported in 2022 protests.
“The international community has formed a fact-finding committee, but what they can do is limited because they are not allowed entry into Iran. What they can do depends on how much documentation they can get. What these eye victims did is important for preventing the repetition of these crimes in the future,” he said.
According to Amiri-Moghadam, the international community will find making more concessions to the Islamic Republic difficult if the fact-finding committee comes to the conclusion that a crime against humanity has been committed and they will be pressured to demand accountability from the leaders of the Islamic Republic.
The Khabar Online website in Tehran has reported a debate between the two academics: Bijan Abdolkarimi, a lecturer on philosophy, and Alireza Shojaivand, a professor of sociology at the Students' House. It appears that many other academics in Iran share Abdolkarimi's critical perspective on the situation.
Abdolkarimi said that he has sent a written version of his criticism to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Shojaivand, on the other hand, charged that some of the regime's critics fabricate comments about the situation's volatility.
He argued that the societal agitations function like a fever, serving as indicators of underlying issues and warning signals for everyone. Abdolkarimi used the same analogy to emphasize that denying these problems could potentially lead to the spread of infection within society.
Abdolkarimi mentioned that he had sent a written version of his criticism to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.
Shojaivand, on the other hand charged that many critics portray the agitations as signs of social collapse. However, he noted that while they point out the problem, they often fall short of offering solutions. He even accused some critics of exacerbating societal agitations.
Abdolkarimi largely agreed with Shojaivand's views but disagreed with the accusation against some critics. He also cautioned his fellow academic about polarizing academia by dividing it into two opposing groups: opposition and regime supporters. He stressed that “both of these groups are valuable assets for the country,” also suggesting that laymen may understand societal issues better than experts.
Abdolkarimi stressed that "when people feel a state of strangulation in the society, experts and politicians need to look for the root cause of that feeling." The academic mentioned that he provided his views two months ago when a government body called on a hundred experts to discuss the situation concerning an approaching crisis on the anniversary of Mahsa Amini's death. However, he expressed uncertainty about what happened to his contributions.
Abdolkarimi criticized both the critics, whom he referred to as "the opposition," and the other side of the argument, which he called "the revolutionaries," for lacking a theoretical foundation in their narratives. He also noted shortcomings in the foundational idea of the Guardianship of the Jurisconsult -or the institutions of the Supreme Leader - which underpins the Islamic Republic's political structure.
Abdolkarimi further criticized the Iranian government for politicizing almost everything, furthering an ideological policy, opposition to modernity and other problems including populism, the gap between the people and the government, authoritarianism, and a militarism that hand over the universities and even football clubs to the revolutionary guards (IRGC).
Abdolkarimi further criticized the Iranian government for politicizing nearly every aspect of society, promoting an ideological policy, opposing modernity, and facing issues such as populism, a growing gap between the people and the government, authoritarianism, and involving the Revolutionary Guard in institutions like universities and even football clubs.
He acknowledged that the Islamic Republic faces a succession crisis but warned against oversimplifying the prediction of regime collapse. Shojaivand mentioned he had answers to these issues but preferred to discuss them in another session. For the time being, he pointed out that there are people in Iran unhappy with the government's performance, but this doesn't necessarily turn them into opposition members. Additionally, he cautioned against misinterpreting the regime's willingness to engage in global processes as authoritarianism.