THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume VIII, Issue # 1, January 2, 2006
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
IRAN MEANS WHAT IT SAYS
By Michael Rubin
IRAN: RULED ABSOLUTELY BY A POLITICAL REGIME CONSISTING OF A FANATICAL ANTI-WESTERN RADICAL
ISLAMIC RELIGIOUS ELITE WITH WEAPONS PROGRAMS DESIGNED TO TURN IRAN INTO A NUCLEAR POWER & WITH A
DETERMINATION TO WAGE WAR AGAINST & DESTROY ISRAEL & THE WEST -- THE IRANIAN POLITICAL REGIME: A
TYRANNICAL, HOSTILE, & AGGRESSIVE REGIME THAT IS AS DANGEROUS AS ITS EXPANDING ARSENAL OF MILITARY
WEAPONS
FULL STORY:
On December 14, 2005, Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad delivered a televised speech in which he called the Nazi murder
of six million Jews a fabrication.
"They have created a myth in the name of the Holocaust and
consider it above God, religion, and the prophets. If someone
were to deny the existence of God ... they would not bother him.
However, if someone were to deny the myth of the Jews'
massacre, all the Zionist mouthpieces and the governments
subservient to the Zionists tear their larynxes and scream
against the person as much as they can."
In October, 2005, he presided at a "World Without Zionism" conference. Banners called for Israel to be "wiped off the map."
The use of English to display the slogans belied the explanation that such rhetoric was meant for internal consumption only.
Ahmadinejad's comments surprised Europe. "It's really shocking that a head of state who has a seat in the United Nations can
say such a thing," said European Commission President Jose Manuel Barrosso. The German Foreign Ministry summoned the
Iranian Chargé d'Affaires to protest the "shocking" remarks.
Europe should not be shocked, however. Ahmadinejad's sentiments were nothing new. Exactly four years before Ahmadinejad's
Holocaust-denial, Expediency Council Chairman ‘Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani took the podium at Tehran University to deliver
the Friday sermon, the official weekly policy statement of the Iranian government. In what should have been a wake-up call for
anyone who believes that the Islamic Republic and the norms of Western society are compatible, Rafsanjani declared:
"If one day, the Islamic world is also equipped with weapons like
those that Israel possesses now, then the imperialists' strategy
will reach a standstill, because the use of even one nuclear bomb
inside Israel will destroy everything…. It is not irrational to
contemplate such an eventuality."
U.S. and European analysts rationalized Rafsanjani's remarks, suggesting that he referred to self-defense only. Tellingly, though,
many Iranian parliamentarians understood the Expediency Council Chairman to mean what he said: Threatening offensive use of
a nuclear weapon.
Iranian figures ranging from Islamic Revolution leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini to current Supreme Leader ‘Ali Khamene‘i
and even socalled moderates like former Iranian President Mohammad Khatami have all called for Israel's destruction. Until
Ahmadinejad, Iranian politicians have played their European counterparts like fiddles. Take Khatami: Addressing the Italian
Parliament in March, 1999, he declared:
"Tolerance and exchange of views are the fruits of cultural richness,
creativity, high-mindedness, and harmony. One must recognize this
opportunity."
Khatami's conciliatory tone, though, was reserved only for gullible foreign diplomats, parliamentarians, and academics. He
spoke with a different voice when addressing his domestic audience. In a televised address on October 24, 2000, for example,
he declared:
"In the Qur'an, God commanded to kill the wicked and those
who do not see the rights of the oppressed…. If we abide by human
laws, we should mobilize the whole Islamic World for a sharp
confrontation with the Zionist regime…. If we abide by the Qur'an,
all of us should mobilize to kill."
Eradication of Israel remains Islamic Republic dogma. The problem is not one of politics, but, rather, one of ideology. This is
where Brussels' strategy falls short.
Take Europe's critical engagement: Between 2000 and 2005, Iranian-European Union trade nearly tripled. During the same
period, not only did Tehran's application of capital punishment double, but the Iranian government spent several billion
dollars on its nuclear program. Iranian officials repeatedly exploit European openness to further revolutionary aims. On June
17, 2002, for example, European foreign ministers agreed to fast track a new trade pact with Iran. European Union officials, like
External Affairs Commissioner Chris Patten, lobbied hard for the deal, arguing, "There is more to be said for trying to engage
and to draw these societies into the international community than to cut them off." Less than a week later, Denmark's Police
Surveillance Agency intercepted Iranian agents seeking to assassinate several prominent Iranian dissidents and journalists.
Likewise, former European Commission President Romano Prodi spent his tenure seeking to bolster economic ties with Iran.
His July, 1998, visit to Tehran broke a long-standing taboo; Iran rewarded the Italian national oil company with a $3.8 billion
gas exploitation deal. The erosion of European pressure on Iran coincided not with the empowerment, but rather the demise,
of the reform movement. The following July, Iranian security forces and vigilantes sacked a Tehran University student
dormitory. The government began shuttering newspapers and arresting journalists. It reversed civil liberties. European
governments chastised the Iranian government gently; to take significant action would endanger commercial contracts. The
Islamic Republic's hierarchy, in turn, dismissed European entreaties and continued on its anti-democratic course.
EU-3 negotiations with Tehran have followed a similar pattern. European diplomats project desperation. They assume the
sincerity of Europe's partners and constantly strive to find the magic formula which will enable the Ayatollah's to abandon
their nuclear future. When British Foreign Minister Jack Straw assures the British public and the Iranian government that,
under no circumstances, will force be used in the current dispute, he emboldens his Iranian adversaries to filibuster.
European diplomacy will fail for two reasons: First, the Islamic Republic's nuclear drive is motivated by domestic politics, not
security concerns which diplomacy can address. Both anecdotes and covert opinion polling regularly find 80 percent of
Iranians to have lost faith in the Islamic Republic. Iranians do not believe reform possible, but rather hope for systemic
change. The vast majority are analogous to those in the Soviet Union who did not merely want glasnost but rather sought
an end to Communist domination. Ten percent of Iranians would follow the Khatami's reformism. These are the Iranian
equivalent of Mikhail Gorbachev's proponents. The remainder believes in Ahmadinejad's hardline vision. They are the true
believers, akin to the die-hard Stalinists who opposed reform to the end.
These true believers and ayatollahs are faced with a booming population increasingly hostile to their rule. They hold the
Islamic Republic's theocratic tenets above the popular will. Herein lies the nuclear card: If the Islamic Republic achieves
nuclear capability, it can do whatever it wants domestically, without fear of outside interference. It can, for example,
deploy its Revolutionary Guard tanks against student protesters. It can liquidate political prisoners, as it did in 1989.
European diplomats often speak of pursuing a China model, in which they would encourage Tehran's economic
liberalization first. But Iran is not China. Demography matters. If the European Union tries to treat Iran as it has China,
Europe should prepare for ten Tiananmen Squares.
The second reason European diplomacy is doomed to failure is the Revolutionary Guards. Inward looking and ideological,
the Revolutionary Guards are the Islamic Republic's elites. Established by Ayatollah Khomeini, because of his distrust of
the ordinary Iranian military, Revolutionary Guard units are the trusted guardians of Iran's most sophisticated weapons
systems and sensitive programs. European diplomats may drink grape juice together with their Iranian counterparts in
Vienna, but Iranian diplomats simply have no knowledge of or influence over the Islamic Republic's nuclear program. The
Iranian Foreign Ministry is not in the chain of command. Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah ‘Ali Khamene‘i, the only
personality in Iran with the power to make binding decisions, has shown no willingness to engage, let alone sit down with,
European leaders.
In recent years, the Revolutionary Guards — the prime backers of Ahmadinejad — have expanded their influence in Iran.
The Supreme Leader has appointed Revolutionary Guard heads to the leadership of the Revolutionary Foundations, the
uniquely Iranian institutions which monopolize import-export, the oil industry, and any significant hard currency earner.
The Guards have managed to scuttle signed contracts allowing Turkish and European firms to operate cell phone networks
and the new Tehran airport. It is this ideological and xenophobic core which controls both Iran's nuclear industry and its
missile programs. Ahmadinejad's Holocaust denial and threats to "wipe Israel off the map" are the ingrained ideology of
the Guards. Recent apocalyptic references by Ahmadinejad — who may just believe that he can hasten the return of the
Hidden Imam, a Messianic Shi‘ite figure, through the cleansing action of violence and war — should frighten all
Europeans. Diplomacy assumes sincerity of all partners, but Ahmadinejad shows every indication of wanting war, not peace.
Political problems can be resolved through diplomacy, but the ideological underpinnings of a hostile regime cannot. Pol Pot
could not be dissuaded from genocidal xenophobia. Gamal Abdul Nasser would never abandon Arab nationalism. Saddam
Hussein defiantly upholds the principles of his tyrannical rule, even after his ouster from power. The Iranian leadership is no
different. No amount of diplomacy will convince Iran's clerical leadership to abandon tenets and policies they see rooted in
their own interpretation of Muslim theology. The Iranian leadership is as dangerous as its expanding arsenal. But, at least with
Ahmadinejad's candid commentary, European officials can see the Islamic Republic for what it is, rather than what they wish
it to be.
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
The Middle East & the Problem of Iran
Islamism & Jihadism -- The Threat of Radical Islam
Page Three
Page Two
Page One
War & Peace in the Real World
Page Two
Page One
Islamist Terrorist Attacks on the U.S.A.
Osama bin Laden & the Islamist Declaration of War
Against the U.S.A. & Western Civilization
Islamist International Terrorism &
U.S. Intelligence Agencies
U.S. National Security Strategy
Michael Rubin, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, is Editor of the Middle East Quarterly. His most
recent book is Eternal Iran: Continuity and Chaos (Palgrave, 2005).
The foregoing article by Michael Rubin was originally published in Tyzden (Slovak), January 2, 2006, and can
be found on the Internet website maintained by the Middle East Forum.
Republished with Permission of the Middle East Forum
Reprinted from the Middle East Forum News
mefnews@meforum.org (MEF NEWS)
January 2, 2006
Return to Top of Page
Go to the WEBSITE INDEX
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
Most Recent Articles
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume VIII, 2006
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS
POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE
Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy
INDEX FOR THE ENTIRE WEBSITE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues