Iran anthology: extracts from my last articles
domenica 4 ottobre 2009 English 1 commento
An atomic Iran: many words, few resultsIl Giornale, October 2, 2009
[…] Solana has announced that within three weeks, Iran is supposed to allow the IAEA to visit the Qom site, the one that had remained concealed so far.
Iran and the USA met for a direct talk late in the morning, after the so much awaited talks with the 5+1 group in Geneva on October 1. The head of the US delegation was William Burns, the Undersecretary of State for political affairs. This was a sign of courtesy on the part of the United States, that had not directly met the Iranians for thirty years. But also a risk. In fact, notwithstanding the ultimatum-like tone used by Obama in Pittsburgh, the State Department spokesman Crowley had already played it safe, explaining that the USA «would not immediately give its opinion on Thursday». And he added: «We will see how the meeting evolves and we will assess Iran’s will to commit itself on the themes on the agenda», assuming that the government needed some months to evaluate all the results of the talks.
But "months" is the very time swamp that Ahmadinejad needs to complete the bomb: by now it has at least 8000 centrifuges, in addition to unknown number of hidden ones. All the experts agree that the D-day is not very far away. With his proposals, Ahmadinejad is trying to buy time and not to reach an agreement: the day before he had declared that his Country was willing to speak about everything provided that this would be done in the framework of “global disarmament”. And he had proposed that a third country enrich the uranium needed by Teheran. Very good ideas only if we were not aware that tackling the issue of global disarmament would take much longer than the time necessary for Iran to finalize the enrichment of uranium; and that the level of enrichment could never be guaranteed by a third country if there are still hidden plants such as the one recently discovered in Qom, that can further enrich the already enriched uranium, a technique that can mislead even the strictest investigations by the IAEA.
The British Foreign Minister David Miliband warned Iran «not to take respect for weakness», but the talks have already taken the “faster but not too much” pace; the pace Teheran likes. Both the USA and Europe, let alone the old friends Russia and China, seem completely bogged down in Iran’s chitchat. But the scenario is very alarming indeed. Robert Gates, the American Defense Secretary warned about this danger; and half of the world echoed his fear during the G20 Summit: by now there are no longer any doubts about Iran’s will to build the bomb.
On October 28, while Israel was celebrating the Yom Kippur, Iran provocatively launched its Shahab 3 missiles that have a range of 2500 kilometers and the ability to hit any Arab capital and most European cities. Again this showed the aggressiveness of this Country, which reiterated its mortal threats against Israel and the denial of the Shoah, thus challenging the Christian culture and reaffirming the ultimate predominance of Islam. Our good manners are for Iran only an invitation to complete its nuclear plan.
Ahmadinejad’s friends are now in Sweden
Il Giornale, September 25, 2009
On the opening stage of the 64th session of the UN General Assembly, Obama stirred the political waters whose ripples managed to move the Russian giant: President Dmitry Medvedev, moved closer to the American President and conceded that “sanctions rarely produce positive results, but in some cases, they are inevitable”. It is easy to argue that this change is probably due to the decision to give up the missile shield in Eastern Europe. That is, in the end, notwithstanding the extended hand policy, Obama is now playing it safe with his hands. He was responding to Iran’s negative response on rediscussing his atomic program - «forget about it», had already stated Ahmadinejad - and time constraints.
It seems that many have listened to him and that, by now, the White House and the most influential Governments are correcting their lenient attitude toward Iran. The French President Sarkozy clarified this concept very well during the Security Council meeting, when he recalled the heavy and evident danger that Iran may become if its nuclear program is successfully implemented.
While the Russian President Medvedev was changing his approach, 12 countries, including Italy, left during Ahmadinejad’s speech, when he reiterated the well-known theory of the Jewish plot to dominate the world, the genocide of the Palestinians, the racism of Israel and its inhuman policies leading to the extermination of women and children. In the interviews generously given before his speech at the UN, he had already talked about the Shoah. Moreover he had mentioned again his determination to wipe out Israel on Friday September 18, during the “Jerusalem day” organized in Teheran to celebrate the holy City, which is obviously meant to be judenrein.
But the Swedish representative decided to remain in the hall to listen to Ahmadinejad. In fact, he had already shown his colors when he had invoked the notion of “freedom of speech” to reiterate the typical blood libel in his daily paper Aftonbladet, which stated that Israeli soldiers kill Palestinians to steal their organs. Instead Italy, France, Germany, Denmark, Hungary, the U.K. together with the US, Canada, Argentina, Australia and New Zealand walked out. He remained seated to listen while Ahmadinejad demonized Israel and applauded the transparency and legitimacy of his election.
The conceptual revolution in Netanyahu UN speech
Published in “Shalom” monthly, October 2009
When Netanyahu intervened at the UN General Assembly on Thursday October 24, he made a bold conceptual revolution. For the first time, he openly attacked the UN and linked together four themes. First, he traced back the horror of the Shoah, presenting a series of documents to show its historical truth – with a student’s modesty that was criticized by some people. Secondly and unexpectedly, he linked the denial of the Shoah to the report issued by the UN Commission led by judge Goldstone, who is investigating the war in Gaza. Given the bias the UN has always had vis-à-vis Israel, the Commission reproduced its negative myth. Indeed, it produced a blood libel, creating a connection between the very idea of Israel and indiscriminate and senseless attacks against the innocent Palestinian population and the concept of war crimes. He then dealt with the hot issue of Iran, that while it is building the atomic bomb, it vomits all-out extermination threats against the Jewish people and reiterates the denial of the Shoah; and finally he concluded with the issue of peace and appealed to the world to remove the causes that prevent it, i.e. the continuous danger for Israel’s security and the culture of hatred against it, that the Islamic world has spread since1948.
These four themes are intertwined in a crucial tangle that is the survival and the life of the Jewish people, the interconnection between the end to the continuous criminalization of Israel and the possibility to make peace with the Islamic world.
Netanyahu adopted an innovative approach: at last he denounced – without fear and reverence – the UN indecent behavior, that is the regulated and epitomized institutionalization of hate attitudes vis-à-vis Israel and double standards. "Shame on you" said Netanyahu to the countries that remained in the General Assembly hall while Alhmadinejad delivered his indecent sermon. Therefore, shame on that institution that issued one third of its Security Council resolutions to condemn the Jewish State, while the crimes in Chechnya, Sri Lanka and Sudan only deserved a fraction of its attention. The Goldstone Commission is a real scam and authorizes the use of asymmetrical war in the world, deciding that it is possible to use civilians protect oneself and therefore to kill. The report plays in the hands of Ahmadinejad, Hamas, and the Hezbollah and of Syria, but it paves the way also to Libya, Pakistan and to the whole anti-Western world. Confronted with reiterated hatred and threats, how could Israel decide to put its hands up and to give the Palestinians more land in exchange for other qassam missiles?
And so Netanyahu’s theorem boils down to the word peace. If peace is to be implemented it is necessary to change the UN.
lunedì 5 ottobre 2009 22:37:46
Dear Fiama: We have multi national corporations who’s taxes and fees are supporting the economy of the western governments. The governments in turn have to help them make more money to pay more taxes and create more jobs. The alliance of the two creates and supports regimes like Islamic republic in Iran because a democratic regime who is answerable to the people can not make such deals and will not buy rockets and other amunitions for the Hamas and Hezbollah. That is how dictators and oppressors stay in power and have been empowered to commit crimes against humanity. Manda Zand Ervin