On November 4, 1979, Iranian Islamic militants and radical Moslem students climbed over the wall of the U.S. Embassy compound in Tehran, invaded the buildings, and took the staff hostage for 444 days. They burned the U.S. flag and replaced it with the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) flag. The 52 hostages were led away blindfolded with their hands bound. This is one of the darkest and most shameful pages of Iran’s recent history, bestowed upon Iran and Iranians by the Islamic government of Iran.
This was also the beginning of the IRI’s active involvement in international terrorism.
Now those same Islamic militants and radical Moslem students (those same hostage takers and criminals) were not prosecuted in the courts of law for breaking international laws and for torturing the American staff. No. Instead, these “reformists” (as they are now euphemistically called) now work as key members of Mr. Khatami’s government. For example, Mr. Kharrazi, the IRI Foreign Minister. Next, Khatami’s first female VP, Ms. Masomeh Ebtekar, who served as the spokeswoman for the hostage-takers during those dark days of 1979. Next, Musavi Khoeiniha, today’s reformist in the IRI Majles (parliament). Next, Mr. Asgari, Senior member of the Tehran City Council. Next, Mr. Hajjarian. Next, Mr. Abbas Abdi. Next, Mr. Asgar-Zadeh. Next, Mr. Ali Akbar Mohtashemi, etc., and many, many more.
For Mr. Khatami, taking hostages, torturing, breaking international laws, etc., are obviously acceptable qualifications—perhaps job prerequisites!
During the last 22 years the Islamic Government of Iran has been the world’s most active terrorist government, both internally and internationally. (Please see the enclosed article “U.S. Reports on World Terrorism,” dated April 30, 2001.) The Hizbollah (“Party of Allah”) is the brainchild of Ali Akbar Mohtashemi, the IRI’s Ambassador to Syria (1982–1983). And since then, the IRI has been supporting this terrorist organization with more than 2000 IRI revolutionary guards, the needed weaponry, and an unlimited budget. But the Hizbollah is not the only terrorist organization that receives IRI support. Add to the list the Islamic Jihad, the Islamic Amal, etc. All are being supported and promoted by the Islamic Government of Iran.
Let’s take a look at “some examples” of their terrorist activities:
- In April 1983 they truck-bombed the U.S. Embassy in West Beirut. Seventeen of the 63 people killed were Americans.
- On 23 October 1993 Islamic Jihad militants truck-bombed the U.S. Marine headquarters at Beirut International Airport, killing 241 troops, and the French paratroopers in the Bir Hassan district, killing 59 soldiers.
- A similar explosion, caused by another Islamic Jihad activist, destroyed the Israeli military headquarters in Tyre leaving 60 people dead.
- And so on, and so on, and so on, …
Starting two months ago, the IRI has actually set up an extensive photo gallery in Tehran. The “artwork” there is rather exclusive—a display of the results of the terrorism activities of the Hizbollah, Amal, etc. Obviously, something the IRI is very much proud of!
This information is nothing new for the U.S. Government. The U.S. Government is well aware of these goings-on, and as a result considers Iran the key promoter of terrorism worldwide.
Has anything changed? Let’s take a look …
Hypocrisy in Action
Since the September 11th tragedy and the subsequent U.S. activities in Afghanistan, the Bush Administration has opened a series of direct dialogues with the Islamic Government of Iran in an effort to include Iran as a potential element of its coalition of supporters against terrorism. Very recently, the Bush Administration also stopped the lawsuit of the American hostages against the IRI Government in the Unites States. Why? Why this sudden shift in policy? Why this change in attitude?
Perhaps the U.S. Government is changing its policy toward the terrorist IRI Government because:
§ The Islamic Government of Iran has been transformed into a new beast almost overnight! (Hardly!)
§ The Islamic Government of Iran has stopped its criminal activities—both its crimes in Iran against the Iranian people and its crimes against other innocent people worldwide! (Please!)
§ A divine order from above has cleared the Islamic Government of all its wrongdoings in the past! (Amen!)
§ The prayers of the U.S.-based oil companies to reestablish political ties with the IRI are finally being answered! (Good grief!)
And of course the hypocrisy continues … The Islamic Government of Iran, in spite of its usual slogans of “Death to America” or “America the Great Satan,” has been very openly active in its correspondence with the U.S. Witness the recent meetings of American officials with Kharrazi the Foreign Minster and Nejad Hosseinian the IRI’s U.N. Representative.
Some Realities, Sad but True!
Many Iranian leftists who have lost their leftist Mecca in recent decades have been transformed into “IRI reformists.” These individuals play a special role in supporting the criminal government of Iran by promoting the notion that an open U.S. relationship with Iran will actually help the democratization process of Iran.
These individuals are either fooling themselves, fooling others, or perhaps both. The fact that the U.S. and the British governments collectively destroyed the most important democratic movement in Iran in 1953 by toppling Dr. Mosadegh’s government via a CIA-funded, CIA-designed coup d’etat is very well known. In the last 50 years the U.S. and the British governments have been supporting one of the most oppressive governments in the world (i.e., the Saudi government). Why? (Think “oil profits”!) For the sake of oil profits, the U.S. and the British governments protect all the other oppressive governments in the Middle East. After all, these same governments need oil profits so that they can purchase billions of dollars in weaponry. And wasn’t it the U.S. government that provided the Iraqis with satellite pictures of Iranian army movements during the 8-year war? This assistance, by the way, contributed to more than 600,000 Iranian deaths, more than 1 million Iranians injured, and more than $400 billion of destruction of Iran’s infrastructure.
Sad, yes. (True too.)
The Shameful Old and New World Orders!
Consider the history of colonialism … the Spanish, the Portuguese, etc., in the 15th century and the Dutch East India Company in the 17th century. And by World War II, the British, the French, etc., continued where “old style colonialism” left off. A new “world order” started after World War II when traditional colonial domination and direct control of the Third World was no longer possible for a variety of reasons. First, the United Nations and similar organizations were promoting human rights; second, governments worldwide were becoming signatories of the Human Rights Declaration. Obviously, signing such a declaration while practicing slavery would have been very embarrassing for the British and other governments.
The British and Russian plan to divide Iran into several pieces after World War II was rejected and stopped by the United States, itself a country that defeated the colonial domination of the British 200 years earlier. In response, to continue its colonialism and oppression of weaker nations, the same British government promulgated a new doctrine called “The New World Order.”
Listen as Winston Churchill outlines this New World Order and describes its infrastructure:
“The government of the world must be entrusted to satisfied nations, who wished nothing more for themselves than what they had. If the world-government were in the hands of hungry nations, there would always be danger. But none of us had any reason to seek for anything more. The peace would be kept by peoples who lived in their own way and were not ambitious. Our power placed us as above the rest. We were like rich men dwelling at peace within their habitations.”
And now listen as Noam Chomsky (leading intellect and MIT Professor) takes Churchill’s prescription to task:
“Removing the remaining veil of delusion from Churchill’s prescription, we drive the guidelines of world order: the rich men of the rich societies are to rule the world, competing among themselves for a greater share of wealth and power and mercilessly suppressing those who stand in their way, assisted by the rich men of the hungry nations who do their bidding. The others serve, and suffer.”
This British-designed and British-executed doctrine, along with complementary short- and long-term strategies, has created the current unbalance in the world that will have further interruptions and challenges for everyone. In 1977, Zbigniew Brzezinski (former National Security Advisor in the Carter administration) introduced the Green Belt Policy . Referring to the Islamic Green flag, he proposed and tried to implement the creation of a series of Islamic governments along the Southern borders of Russia to isolate Communist Russia from the warm waters of the Persian Gulf and also from the oil-rich regions of that area. He also used the concept of Islamic fundamentalism as an important ideological weapon against communism to further prevent the dissemination of leftist ideas in the Middle East.
These types of short-term and naďve ideas, along with Britain’s continuous efforts to create various doctrines to oppress the Third World, needs to be stopped in order to initiate any long-term, meaningful strategies for resolving Third World problems.
The Islamic Government Reformist Movement
The IRI has its reformist wing and its conservative wing—two wings, just like any other vulture. Collectively, these two wings make up of the Islamic Government of Iran. Each wing has a specific function. The reformist side focuses on showing the IRI in a good light. (The “new and improved IRI”!) And the conservative side focuses on oppressing any democratic and secular movement in Iran. And of course the President’s job is to provide the people with limited social freedom (boys and girls can hold hands while wearing Islamic clothes) and at the same time to provide the conservative side with all the tools necessary to oppress those same innocent people. In all the Iranian uprisings in the last 4 to 5 years, Mr. Khatami has continuously named those who demonstrated for political freedom as gang of hooligans. More Iranian writers, journalists, and students have been killed, tortured, flogged, and jailed under Khatami’s “reformist” regime than at any another time in the last 22 years.
Solution for Terrorism and Cost of Democratization
Before suggesting a solution for worldwide terrorism, we need to identify the real objective of any potential strategies. Is the U.S. simply interested in a short-term strategy to merely ease the pain of the September 11th tragedy? Or is the U.S. really planning to address worldwide terrorism and solve this problem gradually but completely through a long-term strategy? Each strategy, the short-term and the long-term, has its own associated cost and challenges.
Short-Term Strategy: The current tactical approaches (such as bombing an extremely poor nation like Afghanistan and accidentally killing more innocent people) might make some people feel a little bit better for a while. This might also show the world that America’s military forces can punish those who conduct terrorist activities against the U.S. and its allies (Europe, Israel, etc.). But these short-term solutions will guarantee further imbalance in the world and additional terrorist activities with more casualties and destruction some time in the future. And as these terrorist groups and the governments that support them become more sophisticated, the Western World will pay a much higher price! As always, there is a price for everything!
Long-Term Strategy: Promoting the democratization process without the use of force.
The oppressed freedom-seeking people of Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, etc., can change their oppressive governments and start the democratization process in their countries without any direct help or external military force.
What they do need is moral support—moral support from the U.S., major European countries, and Japan (G-8 Countries) via a comprehensive political and economic boycott of these oppressive governments. If the world community (especially the G-8) would openly condemn the barbaric behaviors of these governments, they will have a major impact in encouraging the freedom-seeking people of these nations.
Using its economic and military might is not enough. The U.S. must also use its moral strength in supporting Human Rights consistently worldwide to encourage freedom among these nations. And those governments that violate these moral principles should be condemned openly and boycotted by the U.S. and its allies. But practicing a uniform worldwide principle-based policy will be a major paradigm shift for the U.S. and its G-8 allies. Obviously, the U.S. government knows that Islamic Iran is the number-one promoter of terrorism worldwide and therefore boycotts Iran economically. How ridiculous, then, to have its staunch allies (French, Germany, etc.) do a flourishing business with Iran and, perhaps worse, give Islamic leaders the red-carpet treatment! These principle-based policies need to be consistently practiced by the key economic powers in order to see any meaningful change in the Third World. We can consider this paradigm shift as the “Newer New World Order.”
This is not going to be easy. This is not going to be cheap. This is not going to be supported by big business and multinational corporations very easily. The price of oil will go up temporarily. Initially, there may be even an oil shortage. Many billion-dollar contracts that are in the works might not be signed immediately or might be altered. But these are short-term potential problems. Eventually all those nations will need the Western World to help build their countries and their economic infrastructure, purchase their oil and gas, and collaborate with them in the world economy in a fair and just manner.
In order to minimize the initial potential chaos and the potential interruption of the world economic, a step-by-step plan can be implemented by starting this process in one key country such as the Islamic Republic of Iran. This plan requires the full support of the G-8 countries in totally isolating Islamic Iran both economically and politically. With the efforts of the Iranian people (inside Iran and worldwide), the current Islamic system can be changed and can be replaced by a multi-party secular democratic system that respects the rights of the Iranian people as well as international laws.
This does not mean simply changing the color of the current Islamic government or creating a “new and improved” version of the Islamic system. This does not mean a gentler Islam. This does not mean support for a smiling president and a system that has no respect for the rights of its people. This does not mean signing a series of under-the-table oil contracts with Islamic Iran and allowing the IRI to further oppress the Iranian people. This does not mean further hypocrisy and deceit.
This basically means implementing a comprehensive plan with the full support of the G-8 nations to support the democratization of Iran by boycotting the Islamic Republic of Iran and separating it from all the financial and economic channels of the world and allowing the Iranian people once and for all to establish the well-deserved democratic system that they have been fighting for since Iran’s constitutional revolution almost 100 years ago.
Maybe it is naďve to assume that the Western World is actually interested in eliminating the governments that promote terrorism. Maybe it is naďve to assume that G-8 actually cares for the oppressed people in Iran and the rest of the world. Maybe their master plan has no provision for democracies in the Middle East. But one thing is certain: The history of mankind has proven over and over again that the oppressed nations will prevail and that those who support the oppressors will pay the price! The choice is clear.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Monday April 30, 2001
U.S. Reports on World Terrorism
By GEORGE GEDDA, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - Iran was the most active sponsor of terrorism worldwide last year, offering assistance for groups opposed to Israel and to peace between Israel and its Arab neighbors, the State Department said Monday. Still, Secretary of State Colin Powell (news - web sites) gave an upbeat assessment of the struggle against terrorism worldwide, saying that international cooperation ``is increasing and it is paying off.'' Powell commented as the State Department released its annual report on terrorism. A department official said Iran has been the most active state sponsor of terrorism for about a decade, although some annual reports stop short of officially making that designation.
Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps and the Ministry of Intelligence and Security ``continued to be involved in the planning and execution of terrorist acts and continued to support a variety of groups that use terrorism to pursue their goals,'' the report said. ``Statements by Iran's leaders demonstrated Iran's unrelenting hostility to Israel,'' the report said. ``Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei continued to refer to Israel as a 'cancerous tumor' that must be removed.'' Powell's analysis of the overall situation was more positive than in past years. As examples of progress, he cited the tightened U.N. Security Council sanctions against Afghanistan (news - web sites), which harbors Osama bin Laden (news - web sites), who is wanted for the bombings of two U.S. embassies in East Africa in 1998.
He also pointed to the trial and conviction of a Libyan intelligence officer in the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, and continued progress in the investigation into the bombing of the USS Cole (news - web sites) last October in Yemen. That incident killed 17 American sailors and, according to the report, accounted for all but two of the Americans who died in terrorist incidents in 2000. Powell told reporters that ``state sponsors of terrorism ``are increasingly isolated. Terrorist groups are under growing pressure. Terrorists are being brought to justice. We will not let up.'' The number of anti-U.S. attacks rose from 169 in 1999 to 200 in 2000, the report said, largely because of an increase in pipeline bombings in Colombia. These attacks, though numerous, rarely result in casualties. Nations that repeatedly provide support for actions of international terrorism are required by law to be placed on the State Department's terrorism list. Pakistan is not on the list, but the 91-page report said the United States has been increasingly concerned about reports of Pakistan's support for terrorist groups in Kashmir (news - web sites).
Edmund Hull, the top official in the State Department's counter-terrorism office, suggested to reporters that Pakistan has been able to remain off the list because of its cooperation with the United States on a number of terrorism cases. The countries on the terrorism list are Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Cuba, North Korea (news - web sites), Syria and Libya. Hull noted that the United States has initiated a dialogue with Sudan based on evidence that the East African country has demonstrated a ``serious intent to get out of the terrorism business. ''In 1998, President Clinton (news - web sites) ordered the bombing of a pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum on suspicion that it was involved in the production of materials used for terrorist activities. Hull praised Greece for increasing counter-terrorism cooperation with the United States, and he also noted that Greek authorities have also tightened counterterrorism laws. But he said Greece should not rest until they start making arrests and convictions concerning a terrorist group that has a 25-year record of avoiding official punishment.
According to the report, the largest geographical decrease in terrorist attacks occurred in Western Europe, where the total declined from 85 to 30, owing to fewer attacks in Germany, Greece and Italy as well as to the absence of any attacks in Turkey. The report said terrorism by Palestinian groups opposed to the peace process increased during Israeli-Palestinian clashes that began in September. The report does not make judgments about Israeli actions during this period even though the United States has criticized the ``targeted killings'' of some Palestinian officials. Asked about the distinction, Hull said some acts fall into the terrorism category while others are considered human rights violations and, accordingly, are treated differently.
Copyright © 2001 by Farhad Mafie. All rights reserved. Any reprint of this article must bear this notice. For information, contact Farhad Mafie at Mafie@worldnet.att.net or at (949) 851-1714.