The meetings come as the Obama administration says it is looking at new ways to pressure Iran over its nuclear program. Addressing the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in Washington on May 15, Treasury Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence David Cohen indicated that Washington would "work to target additional sources of Iranian revenue including the petrochemical sector." "With our colleagues at [the] State [Department], we will maintain a robust outreach effort to foreign governments and the private sector to explain our sanctions, to warn of the risks of doing business with Iran, and to encourage them to take complimentary steps," he said. "We will continue to aggressively implement and target Iran’s proliferation networks, support for terrorism, sanctions evasion, abuse of human rights and complicit financial institutions, and we will continue to work closely with [the U.S.] Congress in each and every one of these endeavors because we know that we share a common objective -- ensuring that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon." Meanwhile, the United States has blacklisted two financial firms based in the United Arab Emirates for dealing with an Iranian bank blacklisted by Washington. The Treasury Department said May 15 that Al Hilal Exchange and Al Fida International General Trading had provided financial services to Bank Mellat. The decision means U.S. citizens and companies are barred from dealing with the two firms. Any assets held by those companies in the United States are now blocked.

Iran's journalists in chains from Committee to Protect Journalists on Vimeo.

You are one of the Iranian regime’s founders and, as such, one of the architects of the system of repression and censorship that has been in place in Iran since 1979. As Ayatollah Khomeini’s successor, you stepped up persecution of journalists and demonized the foreign media and new media. In view of your responsibilities ever since the Islamists seized power in Iran, Reporters Without Borders accuses you of the following crimes: -As head of the Revolutionary Guards (1978-1980), president (1981-1989) and finally Supreme Leaders since June 1989, you are guilty of arbitrary arrests, illegal imprisonment and torture. You are responsible for the disappearance of at least 100 intellectuals, journalists and netizens from 1979 until now. -You participated in the executions of the journalists Ali Asgar Amirani, Simon Farzami, Nasrollah Arman, Said Soltanpour and Rahman Hatefi-Monfared. -You instigated the murders of many other dissident journalists such as Ebrahim Zalzadeh, Majid Charif, Mohamad Mokhtari, Mohamad Jafar Pouyandeh and Pirouz Davani. -You covered up the atrocities that intelligence ministry officials committed in November and December 1998. The deaths in detention of Zahra Kazemi (2003), Ayfer Serce (2006), young blogger Omidreza Mirsayafi (2009) and Sattar Beheshti (2012) are all directly attributable to you. -You have fostered arbitrary rule and impunity. None of the perpetrators of the preceding abuses – including key judicial system ministers and officials close to you (Mohamad Raishahri, Mostafa Pourmohamadi, Golamhossien Mohsseni Ejehi, Ghorbanali Dorri-Najafabadi and Said Mortazavi) – have ever been brought to justice. Worse still, they have been appointed or promoted to senior posts with your approval. -Again, it was you who, on 20 April 2000, gave the order for a crackdown on the reformist press that had emerged in the wake of Mohammad Khatami’s election as president in 1997. Since then, more than 300 news media have been designated as “foreign enemies inside the country” and closed, thousands of pages have been censored and more than 500 journalists and netizens have been arbitrarily arrested, tortured and given very harsh sentences, while many others have had to flee the country. The crackdown is now targeting new media and satellite TV stations that broadcast to Iran from abroad. Your country is currently one of the world’s biggest prisons for news providers. -You are also the inventor of a “Halal” (national) Internet and promoter of a “digital apartheid,” which your regulatory bodies are imposing on the Iranian people. You should be called to account for these gross violations of freedom of information, which contravene article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

In 2009, 475 hopefuls registered as candidates, but the Guardian Council, whose 12 members are either directly or indirectly appointed by the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, only gave its approval to four.

The latest wave of arrests began on January 27, what is now called "Black Sunday," when authorities detained at least 14 journalists affiliated with reformist news outlets. In all, at least 19, including Rouh, have been detained in the past five weeks. At least five are still being held, along with dozens of other journalists who have been held for months or years. Two weeks ago, the Iranian Intelligence Ministry threatened even more arrests in a claiming the journalists were part of a spy ring affiliated with the BBC. The Iranian government has frequently made such baseless accusations as an excuse for repressing local dissidents. Iranian human rights groups fear that some of the journalists have been forced to give false confessions as part of the spy investigation. Iran has maintained a revolving-door policy for imprisoning journalists, freeing some detainees on furloughs even as new arrests are made. In its December 2012 prison census, CPJ found that Iran was the world's second-worst jailer of journalists, with 45 journalists imprisoned in reprisal for their work. The threat of imprisonment has led scores of Iranian journalists to flee into exile in recent years.

With the May 8 deadline to register for the June 14 election fast approaching, about a dozen people have thrown their hat into the ring, but none are considered to have much support. Iranian media say the names viewed most favorably by the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei are believed to belong to two conservative political factions, which have formed rival coalitions. The coalitions have said they would back a single candidate for president to avoid dividing the conservative vote—but have yet to say who. It isn't yet clear whether Iran's reformist faction will nominate a candidate. Reformers, sidelined and imprisoned under Mr. Ahmadinejad's tenure, remain divided on whether they should boycott the vote.

Iranian media and pundits have speculated that a last-minute surprise could come from two former presidents, Mohammad Khatami and Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, both seasoned and pragmatic politicians with formidable bases of support. Neither has given a decisive answer to whether he will run. Mr. Rafsanjani was quoted last week as saying, "I haven't yet said if I will come or not." Mr. Khatami's close aides say that his candidacy is conditional on guarantees from Mr. Khamenei that he would ease restrictions on the reformists. That includes releasing prisoners and ending the house arrest of Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi, two men who ran in the last presidential election and became leaders of the Green Movement opposition.

One potential candidate everyone is watching: Esfandiar Rahim Mashaei, the top adviser to the current president and a controversial figure in his own right. Many view him as Mr. Ahmadinejad's choice so as to guarantee a continuation of his policies and legacy. But in a jab meant for those around the supreme leader, he said, "People don't like to be told all the time what to do and how to behave. The people themselves know very well which direction is wiser, more powerful and more influential." Ironically, Mr. Mashaei is gaining ground with some young and secular Iranians, who previously backed the Green Movement, because he is perceived as willing to stand up to Mr. Khamenei, and has advocated nationalism over Islamist identity. "I will vote for Mashaei," said Hoda, a 24-year-old graduate student in Tehran who didn't give her name and counts herself as a Green Movement supporter. "Why shouldn't we take advantage of someone standing up against the clergy?"

"Whomever the next president is, he has to obey the orders of the supreme leader and Islam," said Hojatolislam Ali Saeedi, a cleric who represents Mr. Khamenei in the Revolutionary Guard Corps, according to Iranian media reports.

In a recent action, on April 15, 2013, authorities summoned Reza Shahabi, a union leader, back to Evin prison, in Tehran, to complete his six-year sentence for “propaganda against the state” and “collusion against national security” after granting him leave to get medical treatment. Shahabi was treasurer and member of the Syndicate of Workers of Tehran and Suburbs Bus Company, an independent trade union repeatedly targeted by the authorities.

Labor activists who are currently in prison for peacefully exercising their right to peaceful assembly and association include: Reza Shahabi, Afshin Osanloo, Shahrokh Zamani, Mohammad Jarrahi, Behrouz Alamehzadeh, Behrouz Nikoufard, Alireza Saidi, Ali Azadi, Ghaleb Hosseini, Pedram Nasrollahi, Rasool Bodaghi, Abdolreza Ghanbari, Mehdi Farhi-Shandiz, Sharif Saedpanah, and Mozafar Salehnia. Afshin Osanloo, who has been in prison on false charges for more than three years now, has not been allowed medical leave even though he suffers from injuries sustained as a result of torture during interrogations in Evin and Sanandaj prisons. Others, like Behnam Ebrahimzadeh, Behzad Farajollahi, Khaled Hosseini, Vafa Ghaderi and Khalil Karimi are currently out of prison on medical furlough or bail.

For example, activists told Human Rights Watch that the Saveh and SAFA Rolling and Pipe Mills Company suspended payment of wages to 2,300 of its workers for three months at the end of the Iranian calendar year, March 2013, and that workers involved in a road construction project in Kohgiluyeh and Boyer-Ahmad province had similarly not been paid for seven months. About 80 percent of workers are working under temporary, short-term or at-will employment arrangements, which severely restrict their benefits and provide little protection from summary firings by business owners, labor activists say. The situation is particularly dire for the most vulnerable workers: women, children and Afghan migrants. Women are often the first victims of mass layoffs by companies, activists say, in part because of costs associated with providing health insurance and maternity leave. Labor activists say that some companies have sought to shirk their legal responsibilities to female workers by pressuring them to promise they will not get pregnant as long as they work for the company. The number of child workers under age 15 has also increased, in contravention of article 79 of Iran’s labor law which prohibits employing anyone under that age, according to the official Iranian Labour News Agency. According to figures published by Iran’s parliamentary research center in September 2012, more than 90 percent of the 3.25 million children out of school were working.

Mansour Osanloo, the leader of Tehran's bus workers' union and one of the most respected labor leaders in Iran, recently stated that "the conditions for regime change exist today in Iran." It is not clear whether there will be a replay of the revolution that overthrew the Shah or whether the labor movement will play a definitive role. However, the Islamic Republic's suppression of labor rights and its poor handling of the economy can only lead to greater instability for the increasingly beleaguered regime.

RFE/RL: Why did you decide to leave Iran? Kouhyar Goudarzi: I faced many problems and limitations. I was jailed, my friends and family were pressured because of me, I was banned from studying at Sharif University. In addition, I had two more reasons why I decided to leave. I needed to be able to work in an academic environment, and it was difficult for me to see that I was caught in the monotony that we are all facing in Iran. RFE/RL: How did you leave the country? Goudarzi: I left the country with the help of human smugglers. It took me about eight days to reach Turkey from northwestern Iran. It was a very difficult time. RFE/RL: To what extent do you think the Iranian government has been successful in its campaign to silence dissenting voices? A number of activists remain in prison, some have been released on high bails, and others such as yourself have been forced to leave the country. Goudarzi: To some extent, I think that’s true. But [the establishment] has not managed to silence all voices because being affected by certain conditions doesn’t necessarily mean defeat. In some period of time you might see ups and downs, but what is important is the continuation of a process and that it moves toward improvement. But one must acknowledge that, for a number of reasons, civil society is in a state of desperation and that the establishment has managed to instill fear and silence dissent through measures it has taken...by inducing into the public consciousness that dissent and civil disobedience have a heavy price. RFE/RL: You paid a high price for your activities. You were expelled from university, you faced prison and beatings, and, as you mentioned earlier, your family also faced pressure -- namely your mother, who was sent to prison for several months. Goudarzi: Yes, my mother was arrested last year to increase pressure on me. Also because [the authorities] wanted to increase the price of informing [the public ] about the plight of political prisoners. When I was in prison previously my mother gave many interviews about the conditions I faced and my hunger strike. She had, in a way, become a model for the families of other political prisoners on how to inform others about their [loved ones] and not allow their rights to be violated. My mother was jailed for eight months in Kerman [in southeastern Iran] and before that in the Information Ministry's detention center. A court sentenced her to 23 months in prison for the interviews she gave, which were described as propaganda against the state, and also for insulting Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei in her [diary]. They had taken her private [diary], read it, and based on that charged her with insulting the supreme leader. RFE/RL: Where is your mother now? Is she still in Iran? Goudarzi: My mother is in Kerman. Her prison sentence was changed to a financial penalty by the appeals court and she was released. RFE/RL: I’d like to ask you a question about the international sanctions against Iran. You were in Iran until very recently and you experienced the impact of the sanctions and of inflation on daily life. To what extent are people blaming the government for the difficult situation they’re facing and to what extent are they blaming the United States and other countries that have imposed crippling sanctions against Iran over its sensitive nuclear work? Goudarzi: The effects of the sanctions are, indeed, visible in the daily life of Iranians. You see how the quality of life of Iranian families is worsening sharply. Families are forced to give up some of their basic needs to secure some of the other more important needs they have. The conditions are getting worse day by day because of inflation. It’s getting increasingly difficult for people to pay for food, housing, transportation, and health services. I haven’t heard people talking about foreign pressure in relation to the current situation. Most people complain about the inability of the government to control prices. Some believe the source of the problem is the nuclear issue. What I find interesting is that with the increase of the economic pressure, people are becoming more focused on finding ways to make a living, instead of becoming more interested and concerned about politics and expressing discontent.

Speaker Sheldon Silver announced today the introduction of a bill (A.6855) that builds upon the Iran Divestment Act by prohibiting domestic insurers from including as admitted assets investments in any company engaged in investment activities in Iran. Admitted assets, which are defined in the state Insurance Law, are investments included on an insurance company's financial statements. Admitted assets are used to determine an insurance company's solvency and, therefore, its ability to pay claims. "While I hope this legislation further encourages divestment in Iran, it is my primary purpose to protect policyholders by making certain that the investments of our domestic insurers are financially sound," said Silver. "Investments in a nation as volatile as Iran, a nation that is developing nuclear weapons and has threatened to use them against Israel and the West, a nation that brutally oppresses its own people, a nation that sponsors terrorism worldwide, should never be considered a sound investment." Currently, domestic insurance companies could have in their portfolios shares in certain companies that invest in Iran. This bill would protect citizens by regulating the investments of insurance companies in New York. Making certain that insurers invest in companies who in turn invest and support entities that are financially sound is good for the state and good for policyholders. This measure would guarantee that investments made by domestic insurance companies in entities that invest in the Iranian energy sector are non-admitted assets. Insurers would be required to determine what investments, transfers, or other transactions have been made with companies included on the list of entities that invest in the Iranian energy sector maintained by the state Office of General Services (OGS). As of March 1, 2014, and annually thereafter, insurers would be required to provide the Department of Financial Services with the list of such investments and transactions. The Iran Divestment Act, sponsored by Speaker Silver and signed into law last year, conforms New York State's procurement practices to authorization granted by the federal government. It allows states to use their procurement powers towards halting the development of nuclear weapons in Iran. It requires the State Office of General Services (OGS) to create a public list of individuals or companies that invest an excess of $20 million in goods, services or credit in the Iranian energy sector. Entities on the list are prohibited from entering into or renewing contracts with New York State and local governments. The provisions of the act were later expanded to apply to SUNY, CUNY and state and local public authorities, as well as state agencies and local governments. "This legislation would prohibit investments made by insurance companies in certain companies that do business in Iran from being considered an admitted asset. It is important for New York policyholders to be assured that insurance products sold in New York are backed by sound and secure investments," said Assemblyman Chuck Lavine. The Iran Divestment Act is similar to legislation in California. Laws with the same purpose are in effect in Florida, Maryland, New Jersey, and Indiana and have been introduced in several other states including neighboring Connecticut. It was conceived with the aid of the Jewish Community Relations Council of New York. "Once again, Speaker Silver has demonstrated that the State of New York will do everything in its power to isolate the Iranian regime and prevent it from achieving nuclear weapon's capability. By throwing the weight of New York State behind growing national and international efforts to stop Iran, we stand here confident in our knowledge that our representatives are on the right side of history," said Michael S. Miller, executive vice president and CEO, Jewish Community Relations Council of New York. In 2009, at the direction of State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli, more than $86 million in New State Common Retirement Fund investments were divested from nine companies that were linked to business activities in Iran and Sudan. The Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability and Divestment Act was signed into law by President Barack Obama in July 2010, blocking any companies that are linked to Iran's regime from winning contracts with the federal government.

Four years later, two of the candidates are still under house arrest, hundreds of political activists are in prison and hardly any of those behind the killing of dozens of protesters have faced investigation or trial. On 23 May the Guardian Council, all 12 members of which have been either directly or indirectly appointed by the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, will announce which candidates have been permitted to run in this year's poll. For the Islamic Republic, which is governed under a mixed clerical and parliamentary system, the elections are seen as key affirmation of the system's legitimacy, however flawed the process may be.

This is the first time in almost two decades that, instead of two main conservative and faction reformist faction, at least four factions will compete for the presidency. Traditional conservatives: Members of this faction adhere most closely to the Supreme Leader's school of thought, and many of them have expressed an interest in running for president. If the Speaker of the Parliament, Ali Larijani, the Supreme Leader's chief advisor, Ali Akbar Velayati or the mayor of Tehran were to run for president, they would representing the traditional conservatives. This faction controls most of the state institutions and constitutes the most powerful tendency within the establishment. President Ahmadinejad was believed to belong to this group until about two years ago, when differences in opinion between him and the Supreme Leader surfaced. Ahmadinejad is hoping to send his aide to office Right-wingers: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his allies now belong to this faction following the deterioration in his relations with Ayatollah Khamenei, caused by a dispute over Mr Ahmadinejad's attempt to dismiss one of his cabinet ministers. A populist with radical opinions, many think that President Ahmadinejad would try almost anything to hold on to power. He may attempt to persuade his right-hand man, Esfandyar Rahim Mashaei, to put himself forward as a presidential candidate in a move reminiscent of Russia's Vladimir Putin and Dmitry Medvedev alternating power-sharing scheme. But if Mr Mashaei were to fail to gain the required approval of the Guardian Council, the president would possibly opt for another ally such as Ali Nikzad, the minister of housing, who has supervised popular state-financed homebuilding projects. Centrists: Members of this faction gather around former President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. They are mainly technocrats who want an open economy and moderate foreign policies. In recent years they have moved closer to the reformists. Iran's former nuclear negotiator Hassan Rouhani belongs to this group. Reformists: Members of this faction believe that change should come from within the regime. The most prominent leader of this group is the former president, Mohammad Khatami. Reformists are typically more politically moderate than members of the other factions. Opposition leaders, Mir Hossein Mousavi, and Mehdi Karoubi, both currently under house arrest, belong to this group. In recent weeks, a number of prominent reformists have been calling on Mr Khatami to run, but he has made no public statements one way or the other. If Mr Khatami were to decide against running, other lesser known members of this group would likely try their chances.

Nuclear program: Iran's nuclear policy, like any other national security policy, is determined not by the president but by the Supreme Leader. But the president's general foreign policy could have an impact upon the outcome of the negotiations with Western powers over Iran's nuclear programme.

Regime supporters: These are people who are either financially dependent or ideologically attached to the regime's ruling conservative faction. They regularly take part in state-organised marches and would typically vote for the Supreme Leader's preferred candidate. Ahmadinejad supporters: People who would vote for Mr Ahmadinejad's chosen candidate because they appreciate his populist rhetoric and admire his boldness and willingness to stand up to the Supreme Leader. Reformists: These are people who believe democratisation is possible under the current regime. They believe in political participation under any circumstances. They will vote for the candidate who carries the clearest hope for reform. Boycotters: This group is expected to form a higher proportion of the electorate than before. Many of them voted for reformist candidates last time but accused the government of "stealing" their vote by rigging the elections. They say they would only vote if Mr Mousavi and Mr Karoubi are freed and a fair election is guaranteed. Floating voters: By definition, anything that happens between now and 14 June can affect this group's decision as to whether they vote at all, and who they vote for.