What the US Owes Iran
Ryan Cooper / The Week
(March 12, 2021) — When campaigning in 2020, Joe Biden promised that he would make every effort to re-join the Iran nuclear deal. But some 50 days into his presidency, progress is stalled, and the deal is reportedly on the verge of collapse.
Now that he is president, Biden should grant Iran broad sanctions relief immediately, both as a show of good faith and for the sake of humanitarian relief, as part of negotiations to rejoin the deal. The US has inflicted terrific damage on the Iranian government and the Iranian people, which badly exacerbated the carnage of the coronavirus pandemic there. America owes it to them.
The diplomatic sticking point here is that Biden is insisting on Iran fully recommitting to the deal before any sanctions are lifted, while Iran is asking for the opposite. As Biden wrote in a CNN op-ed in September last year, “If Iran returns to strict compliance with the nuclear deal, the United States would rejoin the agreement as a starting point for follow-on negotiations.” By contrast, Iranian President Rouhani said Wednesday: “America was first in breaking with the agreement and it should be the first to return to it.”
Any case for which of these two positions is correct must depend on one’s view of diplomatic history and the broader strategic context. On the first point, it is absolutely inarguable that the United States has been badly in the wrong. Iran joined the nuclear deal in good faith, and was living up to its end of the bargain when President Trump abruptly betrayed that trust in 2018 (apparently because of a vindictive hatred of everything President Obama did and the encouragement of various deranged warmongers). Trump proceeded to assassinate Iranian leader Qassem Soleimani — who was roughly akin to being both secretary of state and chairman of the joint chiefs — on Iraqi soil, no less. That infuriated both Iranian and Iraqi leaders and sparked a cycle of tit-for-tat violence that continues to this day.
When Trump reimposed sanctions on Iran, that basically wrecked its economy. Inflation spiked, and severe shortages of numerous goods quickly developed — especially medical supplies. This terribly worsened the coronavirus pandemic there, as hospitals struggled to treat COVID-19 patients without proper protective gear or vital equipment. Certainly thousands have died as direct result of American acts.
Moreover, Iran has a lot of historical reasons to distrust America. In 1988 US forces shot down an Iranian airliner and killed 290 people. The US supported Iraq with money, training, and diplomatic cover when it invaded Iran in 1980, leading to eight years of gruesome trench warfare that eventually killed somewhere between 300,000 and a million Iranians. And, of course, the CIA backed a coup in 1953 against the democratic government of Iran, after which its people endured 20 years of brutal dictatorship.
Finally, on the question of the strategic context, the plain fact is that Iran barely matters to serious US interests, no matter how you define them. It’s a medium-sized, medium-income country halfway around the planet. It produces roughly a quarter as much oil as America itself. It has shown no inclination to strike at US forces except those that are right on its doorstep (for no good reason), shooting at its top officials (also for no good reason). Imagine how Americans might feel if Iran had massive military outposts in Canada and Mexico all across the length of those two borders, was strangling our economy with sanctions, and occasionally blew up members of Biden’s cabinet.
In short, there is every reason on Earth to cut Iran some slack. America broke its promise — as Biden himself wrote, Trump “recklessly tossed away a policy that was working to keep America safe,” — and so America should demonstrate some good faith. It’s literally the least we could do. And contrary to arguments from bloodthirsty imperialist warmongers, doing so would actually help the US by reducing the likelihood of getting bogged down in another unwinnable war 7,000 miles away.
It’s not hard to see why the Biden administration is hesitating here. The reason is the imperialist DC Blob that has been hell-bent on war with Iran for years, and the lobbying efforts of Israel and Saudi Arabia. Those forces are very influential in Congress, which is why senators grilled Wendy Sherman, Biden’s nominee for deputy secretary for state, about her role as chief negotiator for the nuclear deal during her recent confirmation hearing. Biden himself has long been implicated in this dynamic.
Biden’s recent decision to let Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman skate on assassinating Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi illustrates this perfectly. His op-ed on Iran is full of stern language about the “challenges the regime in Iran poses to America’s security interests[.]” But with Saudi Arabia we have an “ally” that is objectively harmful to US interests (even their oil is a massive net negative because of climate change), up to and including ordering the brutal murder of a prominent legal US resident for criticizing bin Salman’s repressive dictatorship. Yet because bin Salman has spread hundreds of millions of dollars in legal bribes around D.C., and because a great many American elites are preposterously credulous and/or corrupt, he gets away with it.
All this is a test case for Biden’s declared intention to chart a new course in foreign policy. For that to happen he will sooner or later have stand up to the imperial war machine, and the corrupt hired guns of foreign countries that want to treat the US military as their own personal plaything. If he won’t do that, his record on foreign policy will look basically similar to Donald Trump’s.
The US Should Pay Iran Reparations
David Swanson / World BEYOND War
(February 4, 2021) — Why would I say such an outrageous, treasonous, delusional, OBVIOUSLY-funded-by-Putin thing? Am I hoping to enrage war-crazed sadists who’ve seen too much television “news”?
Not at all. I want them to still be around when I say that it would actually be preferable for the United States to pay reparations to the entire rest of the earth.
Well, then, why would I say such a thing, and exactly what type of mental disorder would allow me to believe the Iranian government to be saintly perfection?
Ah, that’s the key question, isn’t it? Because, as we all know, in every court that has ever ordered anyone to compensate someone else, it’s been necessary to prove that the someone else was a flawless embodiment of paradise. Proving that someone was harmed has never been relevant at all. Nope. The burden of proof has always been on the victim to show that they have never once done any unpleasant thing to anyone. This is why reparations and compensation and restitution never ever happen. In fact these things don’t even exist as concepts. If they did, the following story might matter.
In the 1720s, the newspapers of the colonies that would become the United States wrote positively about the Persian Empire, that place that 2500 years ago held some 60% of humanity. Various US “founding fathers” like Thomas Jefferson sought models in Persian history. From the 1690s to 1800s, based on their school books, US children were unlikely to think of “xylophone” with the letter “x” and likely to think of “Xerxes.” In a staple of US education for generations, Abbott’s Histories, four non-Westerners were included. Three of them were Xerxes, Cyrus, and Darius. Examples from Persian history were tossed around in Congressional speeches. US towns named themselves (and they still are named) Media, Persia, Cyrus.
From the 1830s to 1930s Presbyterian missionaries from the United States lived and raised families in Persia with the goal of converting Christians there to a preferred flavor of Christianity. In that, they largely failed, but they succeeded in providing schools, medicine, and generally positive ideas about the United States.
From the 1850s to 1920s Persian newspapers promoted the United States as a model. Right up through the 1940s the Iranian government generally sought greater US influence in Iran, and the US government usually refused, usually contemptuously.
Iran, from the 1820s on was forced by Russia and Britain and other European nations into a cycle of debt and concessions. It was principally as an alternative to Russia or Britain that Iran was attracted to the United States, or at least to the idea it had of what the United States was. In 1849, with the United States never having had an ambassador in Iran, Iran began secret (don’t tell the British!) talks with the US minister in Constantinople. In 1851 they signed a Treaty of Friendship, Commerce, and Navigation. It was incredibly fair and respectful by comparison with European treaties with Iran, but it was never ratified. To my knowledge Iran did not ask a single Native American nation what good ratifying it would have done. In 1854, the Shah of Iran asked the United States to put US ships in the Persian Gulf and US flags on every Iranian ship, but the US government wasn’t interested. It wasn’t until 1882 that the US Congress could be persuaded to send any US representative to Iran, and then only because a key Congress Member had a sister there as a missionary and potential victim of “Mohammedan fury.” That representative would not be called an ambassador, due to Iran not being a European country, but his arrival in Tehran in 1883 was cause for a major celebration. Five years later, Iran sent its first envoy to Washington, where the US government generally refused to pay any attention to him and US newspapers were so cruel to him that he resigned after nine months.
In 1891 Iranians publicly rebelled against the Shah’s awarding of a tobacco monopoly to the British. In 1901, for 20,000 pounds, the Shah gave a Brit the right to drill almost anywhere for oil for 60 years. Meanwhile, in 1900 a new minister began representing Persia in the United States and significantly increased trade between the two nations, especially in Persian carpets. The Persian pavilion at the 1904 St. Louis World’s Fair was a great success (and gave the US the waffle cone).
In 1906 Persia saw a major popular uprising, including widespread use of the sit-in as a tool of nonviolent action (hey, Iran-hating auto worker with a good salary, I’m looking at you), and won the creation of a representative parliament. In 1907, Russia and Britain sought to divide Persia into zones for their respective control. The parliament (Majles) resisted, and the Shah tried hiring bands of thugs to instigate a coup against the Majles. The nation descended into civil war. In 1909 an American named Howard Baskerville became a hero still honored in Iran when he was killed by the royalists.
In 1909 the Majles asked the United States to provide a treasurer-general to oversee the nation’s finances. W. Morgan Shuster got the job. He became more than an accountant. He became a leader of the constitutionalist resistance to the efforts of royalists to overthrow the Majles. In this, he was not acting on behalf of the US government. When Russian forces demanded Shuster’s ouster, the Majles wrote to the US Congress for help, but Congress had no interest (it did get a good laugh). A violent coup followed. Shuster was out. A Russian puppet government was in. Back in the United States, Shuster was a star. Persian fashion was hot. The US Post Office took its motto from Herodotus’ description of the postal system of the Persian Empire. But actual Persia was of no concern.
When Europe launched the insanity of World War I, Persia declared neutrality. This was simply ignored by both sides, which proceeded to use the place as a battlefield and to cut off supply lines, resulting in some 2 million Persians starving to death or dying of disease. When Christians massacred Muslims, with the complicity of US missionaries, the good impression those missionaries had made for decades were ruined. Persia nonetheless kept asking the US government for help and for the return of Shuster. In 1916, the Shah asked permission to hide in the US legation and to fly the US flag from the Imperial Palace — both of which requests were turned down. At the end of the war, Persia hoped for some justice out of the negotiations in Paris, but was shut out by British maneuvering, including bribing the Shah. This left Iran without the chance to have its hopes in Woodrow Wilson shattered like the rest of the world’s, blame going instead to Britain. The US minister in Tehran handed out a public statement claiming that the United States had tried its best to get Persia included in the Paris Peace Conference. The country was shut down by pro-US riots. Read that last sentence twice.
The secret dealings of Britain with Persia, behind Wilson’s back, was a key argument in the US Senate for refusing to join the League of Nations. Persia offered the United States oil and continued to implore it to become more involved, but the US government had a higher priority, namely not offending the British. In 1922, the US State Department sent a new financial advisor, but he was no Shuster. When a US oil company was finally chosen to work in Persia, it immediately was hit by the Teapot Dome scandal, and those plans collapsed. Then, in a case of mistaken identity combined with insane murderousness, a mob beat a US consul to death, and the US government insisted that three boys be killed as compensation, and so they were.
Iran kept reaching out to the United States, turning over its archaeological efforts to Americans, welcoming new missionaries and their schools. Up through 1979, many Iranian government officials were graduates of a US missionary school called the Alborz School.
The Shah flirted with Nazism. The theories of an “Aryan” (Iranian) origin of a superior Nordic race — theories largely of US origin — were used by Nazi Germany to appeal to Iran. Yet Iran still declared its neutrality during the sequel to WWI, and it still didn’t matter. The Soviet Union and Britain invaded. Iran, of course, asked the US government to object. The US government, of course, ignored this. During the war, in fact, Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin used Tehran as a place to meet while doing their best to ignore the fact that anyone lived there. Stalin was effectively the host. Even the Shah was not invited to a birthday party for Churchill. But when the Great Men left, Roosevelt sent the Shah a note saying he hoped the Shah would someday visit Washington. The Shah clung to that hope and pushed to make it real for years after. Meanwhile some 30,000 US soldiers were in Iran from 1943 to 1945 with the usual drunkenness and rape and Apartheid flaunting of wealth in the face of hunger that has been the trademark of US bases around the world from that day to this.
Once the two world wars had ended, Iran began a golden age of democracy and relative well-being. It wouldn’t last long. In 1947, an Iranian democracy movement asked if it could hold a sit-in demonstration at the US embassy as a symbol of democracy. It was of course told to get lost. The US Ambassador from 1948 to 1951 had extremely Churchillian attitudes toward the irrational natives, who were of course incapable of and unready for democracy. He and the Shah got on well. It was in 1949 that the Shah finally got his first of many visits to the United States, land of democracy. In 1950, Iranians learned of US complicity in British manipulation of their government, and persisted in criticizing the United States in tones of shock and disappointment, using all the language of straying from principles that is so routine in this-is-not-who-we-are speeches from US politicians. Then the Iranians, despite Britain and the United States, elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh.
For the first time in forever, an Iranian representative government had represented the wishes of the Iranian public, not those of a king or his foreign sponsors and handlers. This outrage was not to be tolerated. Mossadegh, like most Iranians, believed that Iranians, rather than Britain, should profit from Iranian oil. He nationalized the oil, and his fate was sealed. But before it was, he would appeal in every way he could to the world and to the United States. He compared his actions to the Boston tea party. He traveled to New York and eloquently won his case at the UN Security Council. He immediately headed for Philadelphia to pose with the Liberty Bell. He got himself made Timemagazine man of the year. He also negotiated with the US to allow Britain to still play a major role in Iranian oil, but Britain threw that idea in his face. The oil was, after all, a British possession that had somehow found it way under Iranian soil. Gallup found that a full 2 percent of the US public thought the US should take Britain’s side against Iran. My guess is that’s about the percentage of the US public that now know that the US did just that.
Kermit Roosevelt, grandson of Teddy, claimed he and the CIA overthrew the Iranian government using $60,000. Norman Darbyshire of Britain’s MI6 claimed he spent over 1.5 million pounds and drafted the coup plans and assassinated the Mossadegh-loyal chief of police and talked Roosevelt out of quitting when their coup first failed. Col. Stephen J Meade of the CIA, who was also involved in the 1949 coup in Syria that is largely erased from coup histories even by those who know about Iran 1953, claimed he was the US partner of Darbyshire in planning the whole thing. Indisputably this coup required electing Churchill in the UK and Eisenhower in the US, and Eisenhower appointing the Dulles brothers, who began planning the coup with the British before Eisenhower was inaugurated. It also required that Eisenhower, having campaigned on Cold War anti-communism, believe or pretend to believe his own propaganda and the ridiculous notion that Mossadegh was a commie sympathizer.
The coup at first failed, looking even less competent or threatening than the Beer Belly Capitol Putsch of 2021 in Washington. The Shah, whom the failed coup intended to install as dictator, looked ridiculous fleeing to Rome. But mobs on the streets and a visit of 28 tanks to Mossadegh’s house did the trick. Iran was liberated! The Shah returned! Democracy was out! Quoting Jefferson would now be left to various other Untermenschen banned from the Paris Peace Conference, such as Ho Chi Minh. Freedom was on the march! The Shah was empowered, armed, and turned into the world’s top weapons customer, and the United States into the world’s top weapons dealer. A philanthropic operation called SAVAK was established under the tutelage of the CIA and later the Mossad, specializing in torture and murder. All was right with the world, and the US government was finally paying attention to Iran and funneling money into it. A leader even came to visit Iran for the first time (not counting FDR visiting Stalin), and it was Vice President Richard Nixon.
The Shah’s dictatorship learned well, bought weapons, provided oil, and even created a “two-party system” so ridiculously copied from the US model that Iranians referred to them as the party of “Yes” and the party of “Yes, Sir.” US influence was finally in Iran as a reality rather than a dream. By 1961, there were 5,000 Americans living in Iran, and Hollywood was all over the cinemas and televisions, Newsweek and Time on the news stands. Many were less than pleased at finally having gotten what they’d spent so long asking for. Saying that out loud could get you killed, which may have been a big part of the problem. In 1964 the US got a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) to give US troops immunity for crimes in Iran. Many were enraged. But someone fearlessly spoke against that basing SOFA, a man known as Ayatollah Khomeini.
When the United States elected Jimmy Carter president, the Shah worried momentarily about the “human rights” rhetoric, until realizing it was just for show. The weapons kept flowing as before. Carter even visited the Shah and toasted him as an “island of stability” one week before he was overthrown by a revolution with the slogan “Death to America’s Shah.” The revolution, however, was mainly nonviolent. The Shah was not killed. He spent the better part of a year searching the globe for someplace to live. When Carter let him into the United States, Iranians feared the worst. They did not believe the Shah needed US medical treatment, because the Shah had hidden the fact that he was ill. They did believe that the United States would use its embassy in Tehran, as it had done 26 years earlier, to overthrow the Iranian government and re-install the Shah. So, Iranian students broke in and took over the US embassy, creating a hostage crisis, ending Jimmy Carter’s presidency, and initiating Day 1 of the history of US-Iranian relations in US media, for whom nothing prior to the hostage crisis ever happened. Iran, in 2021 US cultural understanding, came into existence in 1979.
In 1980 the despotic ruler of neighboring Iraq, a man who had been brought to power with US assistance, Saddam Hussein, invaded Iran. The Iranian revolution, begun as a coalition including leftists and liberals as well as the religious, now moved in the direction of resembling what it had overthrown. It did so in the name of unity and survival. Ronald Reagan’s government aided both sides in the war, hoping to damage both sides and make money from both sides. Both sides unnecessarily prolonged the war. Both sides committed horrors. Iranian-backed militias blew up US Marines in Lebanon. The US helped Iraq know where to bomb people, and helped Iraq acquire and get away with using chemical weapons. The US also secretly sold weapons to Iran, because, just like the Israeli government, the US government had an agenda often at odds with its own propaganda. You, dear reader, are supposed to go on hating Iran and adoring Reagan, and quoting Reagan on “not dealing with hostage-takers,” but the reality was Reagan selling weapons to Iran to try to free hostages in Lebanon and to get money for a war in Nicaragua that Congress had forbidden him to fight. The Bush Senior government finally persuaded Iran to get those hostages freed, by making promises it immediately and casually broke, without so much as an “I’m sorry.” In fact, when the US shot down an Iranian passenger plane full of men, women, and children, Bush announced that he would never apologize for anything and didn’t care what the facts were.
He and every other US president since has, however, very much cared what Israel wanted. Iran offered the US an oil deal in 1995 and Israel killed it. On September 11, 2001, while people across the Middle East cheered, Iranians mourned. The President of Iran offered to come to the site of the World Trade Center and condemn such barbarism. His offer was of course dismissed out of hand. Iran offered to assist the United States with its war on Afghanistan, and that offer was quietly accepted, used, and forgotten. Bush Junior then declared Iran a member of an Axis of Evil with the nation that had waged war on it, Iraq, and a nation it had virtually nothing to do with, North Korea. In 2003, Iran offered to negotiate away its nuclear program, to allow full intrusive inspections, to accept a 2-state solution in Palestine/Israel, and to keep participating in the “war on terrorism.” Iran was told to go Dick Cheney itself.
Since 1957, the United States had been providing Iran with nuclear technology. Iran has a nuclear energy program because the US and European governments wanted Iran to have a nuclear energy program. The US nuclear industry took out full-page ads in US publications bragging about Iran’s support for such an enlightened and progressive energy source. The US was pushing for major expansion of Iran’s nuclear program just before the Iranian revolution of 1979.
Since the Iranian revolution, the US government has opposed Iran’s nuclear energy program and misled the public about the existence of a nuclear weapons program in Iran. This story is well-told in Gareth Porter’s Manufactured Crisis.
When the United States assisted Saddam Hussein’s Iraq in a war against Iran in the 1980s, in which Iraq attacked Iran with chemical weapons, Iran’s religious leaders declared that chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons must not be used, even in retaliation. And they were not. Iran could have responded to Iraqi chemical attacks with chemical attacks of its own and chose not to. Iran says it is committed to not using or possessing weapons of mass destruction. The results of inspections bear that out. Iran’s willingness to put restrictions on its legal nuclear energy program — a willingness present both before and after any US sanctions — bears that out.
When the Soviet enemy disappeared, new ones were quickly found. According to both former NATO commander Wesley Clark and former UK prime minister Tony Blair, the Pentagon made a list of several nations’ governments to be overthrown, and Iran was on it. In the year 2000, the CIA gave Iran (slightly and obviously flawed) blueprints for a key component of a nuclear weapon. In 2006 James Risen wrote about this “operation” in his book State of War. In 2015, the United States prosecuted a former CIA agent, Jeffrey Sterling, for supposedly having leaked the story to Risen. In the course of the prosecution, the CIA made public a partially redacted cable that showed that immediately after bestowing its gift on Iran, the CIA had begun efforts to do the same for Iraq. In 2019, Sterling publishing his own book, Unwanted Spy: The Persecution of an American Whistleblower.
I can only make sense of one reason why the CIA hands out blueprints for nuclear bombs (and in the case of Iran planned to deliver actual parts as well). Both Risen and Sterling claim that the goal was to slow down Iran’s nuclear weapons program. Yet we now know that the CIA had no solid knowledge that Iran had any nuclear weapons program, or if it had one how advanced it was. We know that the CIA has been involved in promoting the false belief that Iran is a nuclear threat since the early 1990s. But even assuming that the CIA believed Iran to have a nuclear weapons program in 2000 (which the 2007 US National Intelligence Estimate would later claim had been ended in 2003), we have not been offered any explanation of how providing flawed blueprints could have been imagined to slow such a program down. If the idea is supposed to be that Iran or Iraq would simply waste time building the wrong thing, we run up against two problems. First, they would likely waste vastly more time if working without plans, as compared to working with flawed ones. Second, the flaws in the plans given to Iran were obvious and apparent.
When the former-Russian assigned to deliver the blueprints to the Iranian government immediately spotted the flaws in them, the CIA told him not to worry. But they didn’t tell him that the flawed plans would somehow slow down an Iranian nuclear weapons program. Instead they told him that the flawed plans would somehow reveal to the CIA how far along Iran’s program was. But how that would happen has never been explained either. And it conflicts with something else they told him, namely that they already knew how far along Iran was and that Iran already had the nuclear knowledge that they were providing. My point is not that these assertions were true but that the slow-them-down rationale was not attempted.
One never wants to underestimate incompetence. The CIA knew next to nothing about Iran, and by Sterling’s account was not seriously trying to learn. By Risen’s account, around 2004 the CIA accidentally revealed to the Iranian government the identities of all of its agents in Iran. But incompetence does not seem to explain a consciously thought-out effort to distribute nuke plans to designated enemies. What does seem to explain it better is the desire to point to the possession of those plans, or of the product of those plans, as evidence of a hostile threat of “weapons of mass destruction,” which, as we all know, is an acceptable excuse for a war.
That we are not entitled to find out, even 20 years later, whether giving nuke plans to Iran was incompetence or malevolence, or to ask Bill Clinton or George W. Bush why they approved of it, is itself a problem that goes beyond incompetence and into the realm of anti-democratic tyrannical governance by secret agencies.
We have no possible way of knowing a complete list of countries the US government has handed nuclear weapons plans to. Trump tried giving nuclear weapons secrets to Saudi Arabia in violation of the Nonproliferation Treaty, his oath of office, and common sense. The silver lining is that whistleblowers on giving nukes to the Saudis have apparently been listened to by certain members of Congress who have gone public with the information. Whether the difference is the individuals, the committees, the sides of Capitol Hill, the party in the majority, the party in the White House, the involvement of the CIA, the general culture, or the nation being given the keys to the apocalypse, the fact is that when Jeffrey Sterling went to Congress to reveal the giving of nukes to Iran, Congress Members either ignored him, suggested that he move to Canada, or — with horrible timing — died before doing anything.
Ignoring Iran was a long Congressional tradition before the establishment of the tradition of claiming Iran is a threat to the world. Now lying about Iran is a major industry. The United States now imposes deadly sanctions on the entire nation of Iran, in violation of the Geneva Conventions. Iran made an agreement for more thorough inspections than any other nation on earth to get sanctions relief. The United States violated and tore up the agreement, and now says that Iran had better change its ways if it wants the agreement back.
There are, not one, but two Iranian shah dynasties with descendants in the United States awaiting their turns.
One includes Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, the son of the last dictator whom the United States imposed on Iran from 1953 to 1979. Pahlavi lives in Potomac, Maryland, (across the river from Langley) and openly advocates for an overthrow of the Iranian government (because 1953 has worked out so well?) or, as the Washington Post puts it, “runs an advocacy association that is outspoken about the need for democracy in his home country.”
Yet Iranians — like either saints or an abused spouse, you decide — persist in declaring their openness to negotiating with the US government. I, for one, apologize and propose reparations. At the very least, end the sanctions!
Much of what I’ve described above can be found in America and Iran by John Ghazvinian. I also recommend watching a movie called Coup 53.
Posted in accordance with Title 17, Section 107, US Code, for noncommercial, educational purposes.
