Iran-U.S.A

[Rasputin]

As entrance to the religious schools and seminaries are open to the general public, advancement is entirely personal; therefore creation of a hereditary elitism or aristocracy of the incumbents is practically impossible. The slow process of ascension in the system may take up to 40 years. The system of progression is not unlike Catholicism however, the greatest difference is the positive ratio of wealth and glitter to the elevation of status in the Catholic Church compared to the negative one amongst the Shiite clergy. The higher an Ayatollah climbs the more his life style is marked by simplicity and abject frugality, especially amongst the Grand Ayatollahs. Another point of difference is that contrary to the Catholicism or the Anglican Church where there is only one Pope or one Archbishop at any given time, in the Shiite sect there are several contemporary Grand Ayatollahs with competing undesignated spheres of influence each comparable if not equal to the other. The Shiite clerics keep a direct and constant contact with their flock by living amongst them and through their particular life style. Throughout history, they have often championed the cause of the people on their conflicts with the secular powers. However following an age old unwritten mutual contract, the secular powers have spread their influence over the masses through the power of the clergy. On occasions, the clergy have successfully challenged kings and sultans while in case of the reverse, it has invariably ended in the detriment of the secular powers. A good example of all characteristics named above is the late Ayatollah Khomeini. Although, during his own lifetime, he reached the apex of power, toppled one of the oldest monarchies in the world, and replaced a ruler, he wore the simplicity and frugality of his life and later his office as a badge of honor. He is the manifestation of the power of the Shiite clerics and the pivotal role they play in the relationship between the secular powers and the populace.

Financially the clerical organization is a self-sustaining independent system. The faithful provide the cost of the running of the system by taxes regulated by the Koran. These taxes are irrespective of the revenues paid to the State. Theoretically Islamic religious taxes amount to a one time Estate Tax equal to 1/5th of any persons estimated wealth and an annual 1/7th income tax. Revenues are paid to the Imam of the local mosques, which after deduction of the expenses of the local network are sent to the Grand Ayatollah who is the accepted Marja’a (source of emulation) of the area. The Grand Ayatollah then decides on the further distribution of the funds. As the revenues are calculated and paid voluntarily by the individuals personally, the collected revenues are an irrepressible and uncontrollable source of income. In other words, the source, the amount, and the end use of the funds are not controllable by any extent of imagination or any outside authority. Considering the number of the faithful and assuming that only practicing believers abide by these taxation laws, the sums collected are still staggering. It also is representative of the strength of the network and the extent of social influence of the Shiite religious establishment. The only factor that plays the role of the checks and balances and prevents concentration of excessive power in one person, eliminating emergence of personal cults is the plurality of Grand Ayatollahs. Depending on the extent of the sphere of influence, powers of each individual Grand Ayatollah is varied. This constitutes a natural flaw in the system and becomes the source of bitter rivalries and behind the scenes backstabbing.

The long and arduous training period of over 40 years for the top clerics, as well as educating them in the fundamentals of the religion, it also provides them with all the tricks of the trade for diplomacy, clean and dirty politics, conspiracies, and the techniques of infighting and eventually doing away with the rivals. History shows that in conflicts between the clerics themselves, almost no holds are barred. If the use of conspiracies, rumor mongering and other less violent techniques are not sufficient to bring the opponent to his knees, the use of thugs and club wielders and in modern times Kalashnikovs and suicide bombers may enter the arena. Thus, Machiavellian mannerism is an integral part of life of the Shiite clerics. In other words, this long and protracted system of training turns them into extremely competent politicians and adversaries with a thorough knowledge of Real-Politics. These characters become most unassailable if one takes into account, the source of the power they wield; it is not granted by man but ordained by God.

It is through these methods that the present Iranian regime has not only succeeded in strangulation of its secular opponents but also has alienated and disarmed the clerical sources of opposition and objection.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the present Iranian Supreme Leader, the virtual source of power and the man who has a finger on the proverbial button and by many is considered to be a Pragmatist mullah, has been through this educational mill and under his benevolent spiritual surface lies a reactionary hardliner. If in the past, he has ever demonstrated any leniency and relinquished some of the restrictions dictated by the Shiite laws, the compromise has been a temporary measure and has been carried out under duress. Ordinarily the decisions have been made for the preservation and good of the theocratic dominance and maintenance of hold of the clerics to the seat of power.

The theocratic regime of the Islamic Republic although on the surface fragmented and polycentric, is a self-preserving and disciplined organization. The regime and its supporting structures are well aware of their public unpopularity. The system is run in a manner that totally excludes any form of outside control or accountability in a country that is relatively wealthy. The elite manage and distribute the country’s wealth and only a small portion seeps down into the society on an according to the need basis. Naturally this type of governance invites corruption. The true followers are rewarded handsomely and the ultimate qualification for becoming included in the inner circle is absolute loyalty. A significant character of the regime is its nepotism where the ruling elite including those who play the role of the opposition are related to one another by blood or by marriage. Ayatollah Khatami, The former reformist president was a close relative of both Ayatollah Khomeini the founder of the republic and Ali Khamenei the present Supreme Leader. Regime’s response in dealing with unauthorized opposition does not spare anyone including the clergy. Clerics like Grand Ayatollah Shari’atmadaari, and Taleghani were two early victims of the regime while Grand Ayatollah Montazeri, the heir apparent to Ayatollah Khomeini has been in house arrest for over 10 years. To discourage opposition the punishments of the dissidents extends beyond the opponents and include his extended family and friends. The combined character of rewarding the followers handsomely and crushing the opposition ruthlessly has created a suffocating atmosphere of subservience that makes any meaningful and effective opposition impossible. However this Machiavellian system of governance is not unique to the Iranian regime. Writing about the lessons learnt form the Cold War Paul Wolfowitz the Assistant Secretary of Defense (2000=2004) recommends; ”....demonstrating that your friends will be protected and taken care of, that your enemies will be punished and that those who refuse to support you will live to regret having done so.”

[Rasputin]

The System of Governance
Like any other country of its size and population a formally structured government runs Iran. The republic has an executive branch headed by the president. The legislative section is the house of deputies called Majlis. The deputies are elected by the people and although the candidates are vetted and selected by the GC, the bills passed by the Majlis do not automatically become law unless approved by the GC,

The Executive branch has no real authority in enforcing decisions beyond running the ordinary daily affairs of the country. The Supreme Leader, in reality is the only person who has the final say in all the major decisions especially matters related to the security and stability of the regime and realm.

For this obvious reason, the presidents of the republic are regarded as the mere lackeys of the Supreme Leader and their public statements regarding national or international polity are to be taken with a fistful of salt unless acting as a feeler or a mouthpiece, leaving room for the Supreme Leader’s eventual change of mind and retraction of a certain policy. A good example for this fact is Mr. Ahmadinejad’s statements regarding the Iranian foreign policy towards Israel and the US. The Supreme Leader Khamenei has tacitly and once openly in 2003 declared his willingness to negotiate with the US and recognize Israel.

Revolutionary Guards and Basijis
Due to the strong ties between the Iranian Armed Forces especially the top brass and the Shah/US establishment, the present regime has never trusted the military from the beginning of their rule. Initially the regime tried to eliminate the Regular Armed Forces by ruthless purges, imprisonment, and executions. However, the Iraq war stopped them cold in their madness and the army, air force and the navy had to be sanctified, and deployed to dam the flood. Unfortunately, even the great show of loyalty and the superb performance of the armed forces did not save them from the continued animosity of the regime. During the post-war years the military has lost its pivotal role and been replaced by a force with absolute and unshakable loyalty to the regime. The new force consists of a regular military and a civilian irregular force. The military part is called the Army of Guardians of the Islamic Revolution or simply Revolutionary Guards (RG). The civilian irregular affiliate is called the Basij Corps. The initial command structure for RG was created in Lebanon where the Resistance groups to the Shah’s regime had formed, trained, and was waiting to enter Iran.

Strangely, the training and management of the RG is copied from those of any of the ideologically based military forces. The structure and training is on line with the ideological training tactics of the German SS. It is formed with the same type of selection, ideological persuasion, and training. RG consists of a section responsible for domestic issues and the other, similar to Wafen SS, responsible for the purely military tasks. This type of organization and selectivity of operations were practiced to perfection during the Iran-Iraq war years.

Military service is mandatory for men in Iran. RG is a selective-voluntary force. Members of the Guard are recruited either from the volunteers with strong family allegiance to the regime or are cherry picked amongst the conscripted. The basis for entrance, which is tested rigorously, is an almost blind ideological devotion to the principles of the Islamic Republic. Strengthening the latter and further indoctrination makes up a fundamental part of the training of the Guards. So far, the regime has not neglected arming the Guard with whatever modern weaponry that it has been able to acquire legally or through open or clandestine arms deals.

In anticipation of the danger of probable foreign attacks against the country and considering the fact that the regime has no intention of any offensive warfare, the weaponry and type of the training is built upon the principles of a defense force with special emphasis on the guerilla type urban warfare. Experts believe that their armament is not up to the par with the military forces of the modern industrial countries. However, what the Guards lack in the modernity of weapons and armaments, they substitute it with a blind faith in a religious ideology that makes them an adversary to contend with. The RG and their tactics have been re-exported to Lebanon and are used by the Hezbollah militias. During the recent conflict, the performance of Hezbollah in Southern Lebanon was a demonstration of these capabilities.

The RG has its own type of Navy and Air Force which is adapted to its requirements. Basij, the civilian or irregular branch that resemble the Hitler Jugend are armed, as well as their belief, with clubs and Kalashnikov. Basijis who started as the teenaged canon fodder with keys to paradise around their necks are nowadays used for the suppression of the internal opposition and are called upon for enforcement of the regime’s extralegal intentions. The influence of the RG does not end with the military matters. Its former and retired members like the retired military of all nations, engage in civilian and political activities. Gradually the names of the former RG officers and commanders are cropping up in almost all levels of the Iranian society including the highest seats of power. President Ahmadinejad is a former RG officer. They are even populating the ranks of the opposition to the regime and dissidents abroad. Mr. Mohsen Sazegara, one of the founders of the RG has managed to include himself amongst the hopefuls like Prince Reza Pahlavi son of the former Shah of Iran and Mr. Hossein Khomeini, the grandson of late Ayatollah Khomeini all being hosted by the American Enterprise Institute, AEI.

Concentration of power in the hands of the R G is a rapidly developing phenomenon in the Iranian political scene. The Guards, who earlier used to be guided, supported and led by the Supreme Leader, are gradually forming their own power center and in an inconspicuous or open fashion express their wishes and draw the lines. These expressions have certain unexpected consequences that are not always foreseen by those occupying the seats of power. This new center has added yet another element to the existing power centers in Iran and has increased the confusion of the pundits debating on the matters related to Iran. Understanding of the role and the goals of this close- knit fanatical group, who often have fought shoulder to shoulder in the trenches of the Iraq War, is an essential element in all calculations related to the political fabric of Iran. Their reaction to any proposal should be taken into account in all equations.

The above named groups make up the power structure and the outward appearance of the regime. The fundaments of regime’s power rests upon the masses supporting them in the urban and rural populations who have benefited most since the takeover of the regime. Provision of amenities, basic education, health care, relative improvement in their economy and the most important, a strong sense of Class Power provide these masses with sufficient incentive to support and provide fodder for the force necessary to defend the regime. This body makes up the majority of the population of the country.

[Rasputin]

The Fault Lines
One of the major achievements of the previous regime was creation and strengthening of the Middle Classes that made up the bureaucratic fabric of the country. It was the disenfranchisement and disillusionment of this class with the former regime that led to the latter’s downfall. In the early days of revolution and shortly thereafter the middle class constituted the engine of the revolution and provided it with the know-how that prevented a total chaos after its success. Realizing the potential power and the laic nature of the class, the regime gradually reduced its powers by a crippling inflation and the divergent curves of income versus living costs. Thus, faced with a constant battle for survival the middle class has turned into an inefficient bystander in the political scene of the country.

Likewise, the potential power attributed to the younger generations of the country is exaggerated. Those of the youth that are educated and have proper connection to the financial, political, and clerical elite, have their umbilical cord attached to the regime and would not be likely to cut the branch they are sitting on. Those less educated, traditionally join the ranks and files of the faithful who historically are attached to the clerical system. These are the bodies that form the Basijis or fill the lines of demonstrations and prayer rallies ordered by the regime for various purposes in the times of need. However, the vast majority of the educated youth with no connections to the elite joins the multitude of the middle class or the unemployed and become engaged in the daily struggle of survival.

The number of youth with extended stay in the parental home is quite high. This group includes mainly the educated unaffiliated youth with high expectations. Unemployment and its consequences are partly camouflaged by the working parents who continue supporting their offspring as long as it takes. The consequence of this extended support is trading of political volatility expected from the youth with the conservatism of the elderly needing stability for survival. One of Ahmadinejad’s election vows, “The Marriage Allowance”, was the grant of financial assistance to the youth who wanted to leave the parental home and start their own.

The most destructive affliction of the unemployed youth is the ease of availability and extensive use of narcotic drugs. Production, use, and distribution of narcotic drugs have skyrocketed during the reign of the present regime. Western style youth culture introduced by the unchecked flow of information through satellite television and internet, combined with unemployment, poverty, easily available drugs and extreme disparity of wealth is a volatile mix that creates its deadly byproducts. Ironically, prostitution in the Islamic Republic has mushroomed to a degree where it has lost its social stigma. Young women are particularly vulnerable. Periodically wrath of the regime descend upon the unfortunate victims. Attacks of hordes of motorcycle riding club-wielding Basijis move them temporarily underground to reappear in even larger numbers shortly afterwards. This apparent lack of success to eliminate drug abuse and prostitution compared with the success achieved in the almost complete suppression of the political opposition seems surprising. However, it is rumored that the regime uses the afflictions of the youth to its own advantage and would rather keep the youth busy with these –in their view -- harmless aversions rather than having them poke their noses in the affairs of the state.

The staggering inflation and the severe disparity between the incomes and the high living costs is a stark reality in Iran today. This reality is synergized by the pretentious show of wealth by those inside the inner circle and their associates and families. This is a clear manifestation of the runaway corruption in the country and a constant national bone of contention. This problem is unique to Iranians because of a peculiar national trait. Contrary to the other autocratic and corrupt societies where the elite live in their own closed communities, Iranians are open, and extrovert people not reluctant to flaunt their wealth.

In the past 27 years, since the ascendancy of the Iranian Ayatollahs to the seat of absolute power, the life style and the status of the clerics have undergone a dramatic change. The windfall of the riches afforded them by the positions they hold has made them rich beyond any extent of imagination. Their actions to spread the so called Islamic Justice and the harsh treatment of the opposition have also alienated them from the ordinary people of the street creating considerable measures of threats to them and their families. These factors have inevitably and increasingly distanced and subsequently separated them from their roots and their traditional power base, the grassroots. As a result they have metamorphosed into the shape and behavior of the autocrats they have opposed for centuries. Simply put the mullahs, intoxicated by the riches and through separation from the masses they once represented, have lost the tools of their trade.

Iranian society, like many other developing countries, accepts a small dose of corruption for support of the daily life. People know first hand that their official wages cover only a portion of the expenses for a frugal daily living. The rate of inflation and the price of commodities combined with the snail pace of adjustment of the wages with the living costs are not compatible with an honest one, or even two-salaried life. It is the massive official corruption for the support of the extravagant and mind-boggling luxuries of a few that has become a thorn on the side of the public. The manifest extravagance and luxurious life of a few is not comparable even with the jet- setter styles of the heady days of the Shahs regime. This is especially conspicuous when it is the traditionally, seemingly poor clergy and their followers and supporters that practice this luxurious unparalleled extravaganza. The people also blame this manifest corruption on foreign business partners of the Iranian officials and accuse them to be as guilty as the men in power. This factor adds to the xenophobia, propagated strangely enough by the mullahs themselves.

The regime is well aware of the rampant corruption of its own creation and has tried to put a stop to it without much success. The latest manifestation of this phenomenon and a sign of national discontent against the show of extravaganza by the “Haves” is the election of Ahmadinejad who is a veteran of Iraq war, a down to earth populist, an unassuming, and a seemingly frugal man by the “Have Not”. As the corruption is deep-rooted and is extremely widespread, Even Ahamdinejad’s efforts to eliminate or at least curb the problem have been ineffective. To mask this inability the president has taken refuge in creating issues that are inflammatory, tinted with demagogy and of a nature not possible to measure. His insistence on Iran’s nuclear program, comments on Israel and further international agitations are smoke screens and are intended to muddy the waters of his so far unsuccessful internal policies.

[Rasputin]

The factors named above may turn out to be the Achilles heel of the regime. Meanwhile the rather simplistic and uninformed western description of the complex structure of the Iranian political scene and the imaginary fault lines described by the pundits are dangerous tools in the hands of the politicians and diplomats dealing with Iran. As mentioned, the complex interdependency of the fabric of Iranian regime, past and present, or the relationships and connections of apparent supporters and opponents of the regime makes their classification in western terms difficult if not impossible. Mr. Rafsanjani, the former president of the republic and the present head of the Expediency Council is named to be the head of the so-called pragmatists. The Supreme Leader Khamenei is in the surface a hardliner; but in reality he is a weight on the scale, to balance the excesses of both sides.

The so-called reformists are made up of a loose group of people that each for reasons of their own opposes the rulers of the day. They all are aware that the causes of the present problems of Iran are not the temporary occupants of the seats of the executive branch but the idea of the “supremacy of the theocrat”, Velayate Faghih. Temporary and loosely connected opposition groups form prior to each election and melt away soon after. Some, especially those that have been driven out from the power, not only are not part of the solution but are the cause. Some vivid examples include Ayatollah Karroubi the former speaker of Majlis, and Mr. Behzad Nabavi, the former minister of heavy industries. Both are known to be corrupt to the core. To this group also belong people like the cleric; Moosavi Kho’einiha with the nickname of “Executioner Mullah”. He is one of the revolutionary prosecutors responsible for elimination of countless numbers of innocents and dissidents. Rafsanjani the Pragmatist is listed in the Fortune 500 magazine as one of the few richest men in the world. Prior to revolution he was a member of a small town pistachio farming family who had turned to become a cleric. He and his family’s present fortune is well beyond the salaries received from their civil service and are suspected to be fringe benefits of the positions they held during Mr. Rafsanjani’s term of office. Mr. Rafsanjani entered the latest presidential elections as a reformist and a pragmatist. He even managed to get into the run up election with Mr. Ahmadinejad. The people rewarded him for his overt corruption by preferring his rival.

What to Do?
In the British government, a seat is reserved for someone who occupies the chair of the Permanent Undersecretary of any given department. These persons, who rarely change, are responsible for the continuity of the basic policies of the realm that do not alter appreciably by the changes inside a particular government or the change of the governing party. Unfortunately, these posts or anything similar to them are not predicted in the structure of the US government. The direct result is that the policies are to be resolved in the span of a president’s term of office, which in realistic terms is quite short. Therefore, chronic and long standing problems like the Palestinian problem or the Iran question is treated in jerky, temporary and a need to act manner. The inevitable result of his mode of operation is the present state of affairs.

Resolution of the Iranian question has several major and essential parts that have to be recognized and addressed accordingly. The first item in the agenda is to understand the fact that the Iranian problem is a slow process and cannot be solved in a term of office of any party or president. Short term solutions have been applied, for instance during the Eisenhower /John Foster Dulles term of office, leading to a coup d’état, overthrow of a democratically elected government and the following disastrous results. Another essential fact is that no matter how the media pundits and some politician in the US try to present “the Iranian Problem” as a conflict between East and West or a Clash of Civilizations and Cultures, deep down it is nothing but a series of rather unfortunate but unresolved and spiraling disputes between the United States and Iran. Each country has its own rightful grievances, each demanding vindication of sorts. These grievances have been continuously aggravated and exacerbated by the events and by ignorance or by people with malicious intentions. A perfect example is the recent court order to confiscate and sell the several thousand years Iranian antiquities lent out by the Government of Iran to the University of Chicago. The aim is to pay for the damages to the families of the victims of a bombing perpetrated by Hammas in Israel, allegedly supported by Iran. Another example is the rumor propagated by a certain newspaper regarding Mr. Ahmadinejad’s decree forcing Iranian minorities to wear identification badges similar to the yellow Jewish star of the Nazi era. The allegation proved to be so outrageous and distasteful that both the culprit newspaper and the State Department repudiated the report, only after it had been blown to extreme proportions by the scandal seeking, news hungry media. The result of these actions and negative propaganda, backfire producing an opposite reaction amongst Iranians and providing the regime with the much needed and undeserved support. As a result, these mostly unintended but sometimes malicious acts produce an escalation of the grievances and fulfill the ill intentions of those with the agenda of keeping the two nations apart.

Iran, the US and Israel
It is of paramount importance to understand that any discussion of politics in the Middle East including Iran is neither accurate nor complete if the role and effect of the Jews as an ethnic group and Israel as a Jewish State is not taken into account. It is also important to note that unlike the US, where the Jewish faith and the State of Israel are intertwined, the view of the people of the region towards the people of Jewish faith living amongst them for centuries is quite different from their views on the State of Israel. On the other hand, no matter how unfair it may sound, it is argued that as Israel is a democratic state and the governments of a democratic country are elected by the people of that country, the people of Israel are collectively responsible for the actions of their government. Obviously this belief does not imply that the all Jews are responsible for the actions of the state of Israel. The whole point of discussion is that as it has been said often enough it is important to re-emphasize that being against the actions of the Israeli government doest not by any mean anti-Semitism.

For centuries and ever since Cyrus the Great, Mordechai and Sarah, Jews in Iran have enjoyed a peaceful coexistence with the Iranians. They are regarded as Iranian and Jews at the same order of preference. This is proved time and again by deeds and not by rhetoric. During the terrible years of Holocaust, when the rest of the world had allowed its conscience to take a 5 years long nap, members of the Iranian Diplomatic Corps persuaded The Vichy regime in France to accept that the Iranian Jews were Aryans of Jewish belief and the Iranian Chargé d’affair in Berlin issued hundreds of Iranian passport for the Jews in Berlin. They are the unsung heroes and unrecognized Schindlers and are well known and loved by the Iranian Jews. Hospitality shown by the Iranians to the Polish and Czechoslovak Jews escaping the Nazi atrocities in their own countries traveling through Iran during WWII has not been forgotten by those who survived the ordeal.

[Rasputin]

Until 1976 Iran’s relationship with the State of Israel was cordial and friendly. Prior to the Camp David agreement between Israel and Egypt, Iran was the only Islamic country that had established diplomatic ties and extensive coöperation with Israel. The coöperation extended to the training of the air force personnel and members of security forces as well as a wide array of financial and construction projects. SAVAK, the Shah’s infamous security police and Mossad, the Israeli secret service had close ties and exchanged information and training techniques freely. This close relationship and mutual cordiality started to wear thin after the Camp David Agreement. Israelis began to withhold certain information vital to the security of the Shah’s regime about the upcoming unrests leading to the overthrow of the Shah. Israel had somehow obtained the tightly held secret of the Shah’s little known fatal illness. This knowledge combined with the fact that the Shah’s government had not sufficiently prepared the country and especially the monarchy for a life after the Shah, was not comforting. Simply put the regime’s suppression of political education and activities leading to establishment of a viable political system backed by the people of Iran were sounding the alarm bells in the corridors of corridors of power in Israel. Israel was getting prepared to loose a friend and fend for itself. However, Israeli politicians understood that the collapse of the regime in Iran was not all bad news for Israel. Israel was aware that the collapse of Iran Israel would become the sole Client State of the US in the region. This was a lifetime opportunity that would not escape the insightful Israeli politicians.

While Iran was at the throes of a revolution, Israel was hurriedly preparing the groundwork to establish and hold this unique and enviable position in the region. Because of the precarious geological situation of Israel in the region this was considered to be a legitimate ambition. Israelis were aware that the other US allies in the region i.e. Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Jordan were not reliable or competent enough to neither vie for the position nor be of any assistance if the need arose. To put the idea in a nut shell, Israel’s ultimate goal was to make her own security appears to be concomitant with the security of the US and become the sole partner and guardian of US interests in the region. This was a major and fundamental shift in the role of Israel and the political landscape of the region.

As time would show, by succeeding in her aims, Israel would be able to push the US foreign policy to her side to an unprecedented degree. To maintain this strategy Israel would not hesitate to use any means including strong arm tactics, even on the US soil, including political action lobbies, political bribery, electioneering blackmail and even espionage against the US. As a result the US would be forced to engage all its political, financial and military might to support the state of Israel. This would ultimately push forward the ultimate Israeli goals laid down by the Zionist founders of the country; Expansion of their country to the boundaries of the historical Israel.

After the Iranian Revolution and disappearance of a heavily depended ally, the US was left practically*** blind and deaf. It was particularly true in case of happenings inside Iran and for that matter the areas including the southern regions of USSR and Afghanistan. As the US spy satellites did not cover the area yet the US had to rely solely on the intelligence provided by Israel with its limited local capability especially inside the USSR. The direct result of this lack of intelligence was the surprise Russian occupation of Afghanistan. After the formation of the Revolutionary government in Iran and its show of hostility towards Israel, especially after the Hostage Crisis, Israel was in full control succeeding to persuade the US foreign policy planners to use Iraq as the most effective antidote against the Revolutionary Iran, the enemy of the US and Israel. Persuading Saddam Hussein, with promises of direct and indirect from the US, proved not to be too difficult. He was still stinging from the humility he had suffered in the Algiers Conference in 1975 at the hands of the Shah by being forced to abandon Iraqi claims to the shipping rights in the Shatt al Arab, the waterway that provides Iraq its only access to the Persian Gulf and constitutes the border between Iran and Iraq. Assuming that he would never find the old enemy in more chaotic and disarrayed condition, Saddam was more than eager to oblige.

With this plan Israel intended to kill two birds with one shot; by keeping the two major and most populous nations of the region busy with one another it would commit them to bleed each other as long as possible and eventually reduce or eliminate any future threats to Israel from one or both countries. To make the playing field even, and drag the conflict as long as possible, Israel’s earliest direct involvement in the conflict was elimination of Iraq’s possible future nuclear capability by destroying OSIRAK, the Iraqi atomic reactor. The next step was persuading the Regan Administration to supply arms first to Iraq and then to Iran. Friends and supporters who were playing on behalf of Israel in the Regan Administration are all familiar names: Dick Cheney, Donald H. Rumsfeld, Paul Wolflowitz, and the incoming Secretary of Defense, Robert Gate. Curiously enough, at the time Israel was one of the handfuls of suppliers of military arsenal to Iran, against the blockade placed on her by the US and the rest of the International community following the hostage crisis. This was a win, win strategy as not only it helped Israel to achieve its goals; it also provided her with the much needed cash from the oil revenues earned by Iran.

[Rasputin]

Ever since, by control of the US foreign policy in the region, Israel has managed to increase the dependency of America on her own position in the region. She has also received increasing amounts of financial and military aid from the US. In spite of regional and international objections to its misdemeanors, Israel has driven the US into embarrassing situations and acquired free hands in the treatment of the people of the occupied territories. Consequently the US has used the greatest number of her Veto powers in the UN to protect Israel, and has paid the price by being at the receiving end of the animosity of the Arab and probably the Moslem world. The latest Veto by the US in the UN Security Council sanctioning Israel for the shelling of civilian homes, resulting in killing of 18 civilians, despite the fact that even Israel has admitted to committing the atrocity has angered the Moslem community the world over. Mr. Kofee Annan, Secretary General of the UN has endorsed the warnings of a group of experts on Palestinian problem as the root cause of the present conflicts between Moslems and the West is significant. Some even assert that even the events of 911, could have been avoided if the US had not been involved in this conflict in such a lopsided manner.

This practical domination of the US foreign policy has been achieved by deep penetration of Israelophiles into the vital organs of the US administration: the Congress; the White House; the State and the Defense Departments during the past two decades (see Mearesheimer & Walt’s paper on the subject). The most conspicuous Israelophiles in the departments of the State and Defense are people like Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith and David Frum, opinion builders like Weekly Standard editor William Kristol, PNAC (Project for the New American Century) director Gary Schmitt, and Carnegie Endowment for International Peace analyst Robert Kagan, think tanks like AEI and lobbying groups such as AIPAC. Most of these men are believed to have dual citizenship of Israel and US and have been around the policy making institutions since the conception of the idea during the Regan presidency. They are assisted by Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and several members of the Congress. Israel has achieved its goals by the use of lobbying, disinformation, large contributions during elections and pure political manipulation of both parties. One of the major aims of Israel and Israelophiles is to work diligently to keep the US-Iranian relationship as frigid as possible. Where by chance or by design the US-Iran relationship has been discussed without the knowledge of Israelophiles, the group have obtained the information through espionage against the US. It is even believed that the recent war on Iraq was originally planned to be the first step of occupation of Iran. However indiscretions committed by Israel, bombardment and killings of civilians in Lebanon, West Bank and the Gaza strip are embarrassing and increasingly putting the US in indefensible diplomatic spots. The recurring and increasingly lame excuses offered, are causing discussions even in the captured and rather intimidated main stream media and the people of the United States. It is encouraging the media to start questioning the wisdom of the blind support of Israel. Even some politicians are paying the price of their close attachment to the Israel lobby. The recent disastrous defeat of Senator Rick Santorum, the third ranking member of the Republican Party hierarchy and the loudest defender of the Israeli policies by a little known democrat are indications not to be ignored.

These suggestions may sound far fetched, conspiratorial and right out paranoid but the course of events and a cursory look at the headlines of the past few months makes these theories easier to fathom. For these reasons, as long as Israel continues to have a stranglehold on the US foreign policy, all US-Iran relations, meetings and discussions must be carried out by people and parties than have a clean slate and have proved to be impartial with no interests other than that of the two nations.

[Rasputin]

Iran’s role in the political arena
The following features grant Iran and Iranians an important geographic and political role in the international scene;

Largest individual coastline in the Caspian Sea;
Strategic location on the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hurmoz, which are vital maritime pathways for the 25% of the world’s crude oil transport;
The second largest oil and probably the largest known natural gas reserves in the world;
Ample supplies of Uranium ( yellow cake) inside the country;
Leader and spiritual home of the Shiite sect in the world
A population of almost 70 millions with a literacy rate of close to 90%, and highest mean level of education in general population, comparable to that of Israel
Homogenous ethnicity compared with neighboring countries in spite of the false publicity to the contrary;
Economic self sufficiency partly by means of access to enormous supplies of oil and natural gas.
Presence of successful and well educated Diaspora spread all over the world with awareness and dedication to their heritage, regardless of their ethnic or religious background, location or citizenship
In view of these facts ignoring a self supporting Iran, with a large educated population, a homogenous non-aggressive country in good standing with the people of the region, a supporting Big Brother figure for the lesser but no less important states in the region, feared and at the same time respected by the neighbors, straddling the two most important oil rich areas of the world is parallel to the same treatment China received until president Nixon reversed the behavior. With the named potentials, Iran has the capability to become a suitable partner for any global power, seeking influence in this uniquely important region. The fact that another power pole, the Shanghai Group -- at least economically if not militarily -- is flirting with the idea is evidently clear. This is a fact that is recognized by the Western Allies of the US, especially by the Europeans.

Unfortunately, at this crucial and pivotal moment, the US polity is being coerced to turn a blind eye to this fact most probably by the Israelophiles in the administration, and the state of Israel through the influence of the Israel Lobbies in the US. This is witnessed by the fact that in the past few months, especially since the temporary occupation of Lebanon, no Israeli politicians, nor their allies in the US, irrespective of their political affiliation, have missed the opportunity of Iran-bashing in their appearances in the media. Their audacity in inserting distorted truth, half lies and misinformation in their statements is astonishing. Even the thought of any US-Iranian rapprochement drives most Israeli politicians and Israelophiles in Washington into a frantic state. It seems that any prospect of a thaw in the US-Iran relations is a state that has to be prevented by all means. What is forgotten is the support that Iran has afforded Israel in the past. During the short period of existence of the Israeli State, Iran is the only Moslem country to have had a friendly relation with her and supported her at the time of her most dire need. Iranian support during the Yom Kippur/Ramadan war is a good example of this fact. The harm done by the present short-sighted actions of those in charge of the US-Israel-Iranian relations is harmful to all three countries especially to the long term interests of the State of Israel. This fact is well recognized by the non-Zionist Israeli intellectuals and those who believe in an Israel that wishes to survive in a potentially hostile environment. Due to the centuries old friendly relationship and co-existence between the Iranians and Jews, a return to this state is what is desirable for both people. Governments come and go however lasting relationships are made by the People. The Iranian community in Los Angeles, a microcosm of Iran as such, is the perfect example of this claim. The main economical pillar of the Iranian Diaspora in Los Angeles is made up of Iranian Jewish immigrants who strongly support the Iranian traditions, culture and structure.

Developments of the recent past like the fall of the Soviet Empire and fragmentation in the political structure of the Central Asia, the predictable increase in the needs of the energy requirements of the eastern half of the world, peaking of the easily obtainable and cheap central Asian-Middle Eastern oil and the inevitable US failure in domination and subjugation of Iraq has brought about new realities. The Tehran regime clearly realizes that the present US administration has decided to disregard the articles of the Algiers Treaty, signed following the release of the hostages. In the agreement the US undertakes to adopt a policy whereby it abstains from any attempt to overthrow the Iranian regime. The use of Regime Change rhetoric by the present administration, holding day-long conferences at its political mouth pieces like American Enterprise Institute, passage of bills in both houses of Congress against Iran, creation of dedicated budgets to finance efforts against Iran, and recent open threats in the use of military force including Nuclear bombs have forced the Iranian regime to adopt countermeasures against these serious threats. The fate of Saddam regime after suffering years of sanctions in spite of compliance with the UN resolutions and his obeying practically all the US demands, compared with the North Korea, has taught Iran the inevitable lesson.

[Rasputin]

The scenario would have been entirely different if the US had succeeded in the Iraq campaign. Obvious evidence to this truth is the Iranian approach to the US in 2003 where the Supreme Leader suggested a normalization of relations with the US, resolution of the Israel-Palestine issue and recognition of the state of Israel. This was a clear sign of the Tehran Regime’s fear from the eventual extension of the conflict to Iran. Neocons did not hesitate to announce to announce these intentions from the rooftops and in their publications including detailed military plans on how and where to attack Iran in a recent issue of the New Republic Magazine. The combination of the arrogance created by the initial military advances and the influence of the Israelophile neocons in the administration succeeded in neglecting this approach by Iran and keeping Iran and the US at an arms length. However the present situation has changed the game plan dramatically. Even the neocons, like Perle, Feith, Adelman are trying to cut the losses, abandon their previous masters ( see interview in Vanity Fair, November 2006) who played into their hands. Relying of the short memory of the people, they are changing horses to join the anti war wave carrying Democrats to victory in the mid-term US elections to follow their own aims under a new roof. Richard Perle who had gone in hiding is featuring in various talk show, ironically the ones with leftist tendencies.

Threats from the US and the presence of 135,000 American troops, the air force bases and the naval fleets in the vicinity during the past 3 years has given the Iranians ample warning to prepare and get ready. They obviously know that they are by no means capable to prevent the eventual hellfire brought upon them by a US air strike. They are making sure that they at least will be able to make life extremely difficult for the troops on the ground inside Iran and for that matter, in Iraq, Afghanistan or wherever else the US interests may be.

A foolish and arrogant attempt in use of force in behest of the biased people inside the administration with agendas of their own might create the Achilles heel of the US interests in the region. Its dire consequences which will involve all of the Western powers may alter the future course of the history. These threats and eventually acting upon them may lead the world to face another polarization of the powers, this time with the bulk of the energy supplies and the number of population tipping the balance eastward.

The art of diplomacy is the ability for compromise, flexibility, hard work and true dedication to finding the root cause of the problems one intends to solve. Impartiality is the ultimate quality of an acceptable and efficient intermediary. Selection and appointment of these key elements is the undisputed duty of the patrons of the involved parties in the conflict, if resolution of the problem is really intended. This duty falls heavier on the shoulders of the party that is holding the stronger hand, in this case the United States. Unfortunately, so far the US has not played the role of an impartial intermediary in the resolution of the problems of the Middle East. A cursory look at the list of intermediaries in the Palestinian- Israeli conflict shows that except for Senator George Mitchell, the rest of those acting on behalf of the US or generally as intermediaries have all been Jewish. No matter how impartial they have tried to act, their faith has made acceptance of their impartiality an impossible task from the Arab point of view. Even in the Iranian conflict the responsibility has so far been carried by people who have had more interest in satisfying the immediate shortsighted goals of their superiors than willingness to find and address the mutual interests of both nations.

In my belief, and as all handbooks in the conflict resolution techniques recommend, the first objective in the resolution of the problem would have to be to find and reveal the points that are of mutual interest for the two parties in the conflict rather than concentrating on the points of their differences. The next obvious step would be to weed out the elements feeding the causes of the conflict or throwing obstacles on the way. This is not an easy task. The US-Iran conflict has been going on for nearly 30 years. The roots of the conflict may be deeply bedded and covered in the dust of history, but the weeding to clean out the outside interests and remove the elements that do not represent the mutual interests of the two nations is the initial step. A closer look at the common regional and international interests of the two nations is their striking similarity. Iran and the US have great overlapping areas of interest in the Middle East. Naturally, since the take over of the US Embassy in Tehran, the Tehran regime is considered a hostile one by the US governments. As a mark of its displeasure, the US government has labeled the regime autocratic, undemocratic, brutal, abuser of Human Rights, usurper of the rights of women and all other nicknames coined for the opponents of the US, countries like the USSR, Communist China, Cuba and Venezuela and people like Joseph Stalin, Vladimir Putin, Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez. On the other hand Iranian regime has a genuine historical fear from the US intervention in the policies of their country. Iranian fears and suspicions are fuelled by US rhetoric about Regime Change and placing Iran in the Axis of Evil. Iranians know that the US has implemented a regime change in Iran before and there is no reason why it might not happen again. In response to the American name callings and behind the scene intrigues Iran respond in her own way by wild demonstrations flag and effigy burnings and calling the US foul names in Iran or by their minions elsewhere in the Middle East.

It is an open secret that openly or discretely, the Iranian regime has suggested direct talks and the US government has bluntly refused the suggestions. The Iranian Regime is aware of the fact that during the past, and even at present, the US has chosen to accept far stranger bedfellows like the Shah of Iran, Suharto of Indonesia, the Saudi Family, Sultan Mohammad of Morocco, Aliev of Azerbaijan, Mubarak of Egypt and Nazarbeyov of Tajikistan but to name a few. The US activities in response to the 9/11 attacks by creating black hole prisons, ghost prisoners, kidnappings, torture, spying on US citizens and foreigners alike and elimination of Habeas Corpus, all in the name of National Security, has emboldened Iran and other oppressive regimes to demand the same rights and apply the same excuses in their indiscretions. They feel that the targeted assassination by use of drones legitimizes their use of less sophisticated but as intelligent and as deadly suicide bombers. They both claim civilian lives and call it a Collateral Damage. The new position of the US has brought her to the same level as the countries who are the US partners hosting the victims of Extraordinary Renditions.

[Rasputin]

Not sounding as an apologist, in spite of all direct and implied accusations hurled at Iran, the present regime, primarily by force and not by choice, allows a remarkable degree of laxity in the issues concerning the country’s minorities and women far greater than some of the countries named above. Except for the MKO, the militant Islamic Marxist group that has claimed many lives by terrorist activities inside Iran, participated in the Iraq War on the wrong side and is listed by the US State Department as a terrorist organization responsible for the murder of American citizens and assassinating American Service Men, the theocratic government has cut quite a lax leeway towards other groups. Iran has allowed women’s participation in the electoral process; it has women and minorities amongst the elected members of the parliament, Majlis, with a woman Nobel Prize winner and a Vice President amongst its ranks.

With sufficient effort all the stumbling blocks mentioned above could be removed, if there are good intentions to do so. At least for the show and with the help of the right group of propagandist and a white wash, Iran could look and smell rosier than at least Pakistan, Jordan, Egypt, Morocco, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. Considering the fear of the Iranian regime and their desire for survival at the seat of power, they will go a long way to remove the sword of Damocles from above their head. After the Invasion of Iraq by the US, they knew that the winning cards were stacked in favor of the US, but the situation has changed since. Iranians feel that the playing field is more level and the two sides may start appropriate negotiations. A number of experts including Ali M. Ansari of the St. Andrews University, Scotland and Rey Tekyeh of Council on Foreign Relations have written and explained these facts to the fullest. I believe that the final main object of the exercise for both sides should be to start negotiations aiming to resolve the old and stale differences and allow Iran to return to her pre-revolutionary Partnership status.

These negotiations must allow face saving solutions for both sides. The least one should expect from these contacts would be to:

Increase control of the US and her Western allies on the disappearing energy sources,
Block the efforts of the emerging Sino, Indian - Russian block from engaging Iran in its ranks,
Provide security for the vulnerable oil rich regimes of the region including, Iraq, Kuwait, Bahrain, UAE, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan,
Decrease or remove the threat of Hammas and Hezbollah to Israel,
Reduce the present dependency on Israel for protection of the Western interests in the region,
Permit the US to have a second source of intelligence from a quarter that is closer to the Islamic Nations and governments of the region,
Permit the US to take a firm and internationally defendable stand when Israel crosses the red line and causes deep embarrassment for the US amongst its friends and allies,
Use the considerable Iranian influence in calming the Iraq situation,
Re-create a solid and rich market for the US industry in Iran,
The instruments to be used for the initial start of these negotiations are the non-aligned, apolitical Iranian Diaspora who have not committed themselves to activities that are considered suspicious by the Iranian regime. They visit their homeland freely and are capable of creating a rapport with the regime. On the American side the State Department has access to a large number of professional diplomats who spent 444 days of their lives in captivity in Iran and naturally established a strong rapport and understanding with their captors. It is important to note that a fair number of the former hostage takers are presently occupying very senior and sensitive posts in the Islamic Republic.

[Rasputin]

Obviously, this is not going to come cheap, as Iran would have certain demands that have to be negotiated and partially met. Iran’s probable demands may consist of;

US guarantee for the security of the regime,
Removal of the sanctions imposed on the country mainly by the US,
Removal of blocks to Iran’s participation in W.T.O,
permission to continue with its nuclear technology program,
Recognition of Iran as a major regional power,
A seat at all the negotiation tables concerning the region.
Considering the present regional conditions all above demands are logical and acceptable. Some of the conditions have already been achieved. In the words of a new study of Iran's foreign relations by the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London, "Iran has superseded [the US] as the most influential power in Iraq." The only sticking point is the Iranian nuclear program. Even this point is in reality not a non-negotiable point as the US has admittedly approved possession of nuclear technology even nuclear weapons by her reliable friends like India, Pakistan and Israel. So far the Iranians have not yielded to the pressures applied on them to abandon their nuclear technology. They have relied on Russia for the continued construction of Bushehr plant which incidentally was started by Westinghouse in 1970s and China for support in the UN. The alternatives are to continue rejection of the Iranian ambitions and accept their possible annexation to the Shanghai Group. or to drop the objections and join them in developing the technology. Evidently the latter alternative has already been suggested by the Iranians. Considering the US situation in Iraq, the developing wedge between the US and some of her European allies this may not be a bad idea after all. US participation in the development of Iranian nuclear technology would at least allow a close control of the ambitions of the Iranians to hold them to their promise of not developing nuclear weapons. In the meantime it will dispel Israel’s anxiety over the issue, if the anxiety is genuine.

The recent midterm election results and the apparent purge of the neocons, is a hopeful sign. However presence of Vice President Dick Cheney inside the administration and election of the ultra-hawkish Independent Democrat Joseph Liebermann in the senate with his finger on the scale to tip the balance are still worrying. Added to these suspicions is the transfer of the neocons’ center of political gravity and activities from Washington to London. Mr. Richard Perle is now agitating and granting interviews from his London Office. Israelis are rightfully worried and are not certain if they would be able to continue enjoy the same preferred relationship with Mr. Bush’s successor. Especially they are not certain if the next president would be influenced by the Evangelical church who think that “supporting Israel is the Foreign Policy of God”

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s hurried journey to Washington less than one week after the midterm elections is the sign that Israel is worried about its position and will try to preserve it by all means. Talk of a preemptive strike by Israel against Iranian nuclear facilities is ripe. Israel is trying to browbeat the US to take the first step but also threatening to strike by itself. Nevertheless, there is a window of opportunity that should be used. One may hope that there is light at the end of the tunnel and the madness of a strike against Iran will be prevented. Iraqi quagmire and the events in Lebanon have clearly demonstrated that military solutions are not viable alternatives especially in the light of the present public mood in the US. No matter how close the relationship, it is the American men and women who put their lives on the line. Israel has not hesitated to cause or allowed attacks on the US and probably would repeat it if she feels threatened or if it would save her strategies. Loss of over 30 US personnel caused by Israeli Air Force planes on the “USS Liberty” an American communication vessel serving in the Mediterranean during the 1967 Six Day war is an example.

[Rasputin]

It is understandable that these suggestions are probably out of the question for the present Stewards of the realm. However, faced with the new realities in the country they may choose other means of solving problems than by letting loose the dogs of war. If the diplomatic solutions prevail and it is implemented by the professional diplomats with a thorough knowledge of the region and experience of the Middle East, it may be the path to salvation.

Obviously for the majority of the Iranians and for the Western interests a democratic and stable form of government in Iran would provide the highly desirable stability and reliability needed in the region. It is superfluous to say that any outside intervention or activity for a speedy overthrow of the Tehran regime would prove to be counterproductive. It is essential that introduction of democracy in Iran is best left to the Iranians as democracy is not an unknown and unpracticed phenomenon in the country. Iranians have been fighting for democracy in their country for a century. It is always the foreign interventions that have foiled these efforts. They plead for non-interference this time around.

In view of these facts it seems that time is ripe for the two governments to accept that they have done enough harm to each other since 1978 and allow reconciliatory attempts come between them.

[Rasputin]

Ted Koppel strikes again, that’s all I could think about last night. But the truth is, I can’t blame him for my sleepless nights. He is an American journalist, and a pretty good one at that. I’m sure it was never his intention to hurt a nation, but rather this was his poor attempt at showing that what a great interviewer such as Mike Wallace can do, Ted can do better.

Watching his program on the Discovery Channel last night, I was reminded of a lesson I learned about journalism at one of my UCSD classes. Our teacher was elaborating on what he considered irresponsible journalism and telling us how much of what gets announced, or is published, has nothing to do with the actual news, which is precisely what sells tabloids.

He gave an example: Should a journalist intend to ruin someone’s image, all he needs is a scandalous headline, because ninety percent of the public will only see and remember that. He can then proceed to report the truth and on page nine prove that the headline was nothing but filthy rumors. Such an explanation will get you off the hook from a legal standpoint, but most people don’t go that far and before the victim knows it, the damage is done.

During the two-hour program, at each commercial break the nasty words, “Iran, the most dangerous nation on earth,” were hammered into my head and the announcement was much too loud to miss. Yet little Ted failed to prove his allegation, nor was he able to give merit to such a proclamation. In fact, it looked as if he had a jolly good time in Iran and seemed to enjoy the Persian hospitality. Unfortunately, for the average American, who only heard bits and pieces of his report, that one phrase summed it up.

A mother of three American born and raised children, I am painfully reminded of when Nightline began. “America held hostage. Day one.” And how it went on for a year to make my American life, and that of a million others, a living hell. For every dollar that Ted Koppel made on his newly acquired fame, an Iranian family in exile suffered some form of abuse. My own children denounced their heritage and at school even pretended to be Christians. My friend’s nine-year0old daughter was called a pig by classmates who teased her on the bus as they all went, “Oink, oink,” sending the child home in tears, and these are among the minor incidents. The stories go on and on, but like all bad incidents, people managed to put it behind them and we all went on with our lives.

It has been a while since anyone heard anything noteworthy from Ted Koppel, so I guess he did need the publicity. Being a smart journalist, he knows exactly where to cash in. He looks back and realizes he was not so great before Nightline and figures he better milk the old subject for all its worth. In Persian, we call this, “Fishing in muddy waters.”

Mr. Koppel knew that his mere sight will provoke enough negative emotions and in fact, it is not surprising that after nearly a decade, when people saw him, they began shouting their old anti American slogans. What does come as a surprise is how hospitable most Iranians were toward a man who had done them grave damage. But I guess they must have thought that, if they treated him with courtesy, it will appeal to his humane side and the man might regret what he had done. In time, those young men and women will realize that when it comes to dollars, some people will even sell their souls.

As much as history proves this to be true, it is still hard to accept how diverse a people can be from their government. All of us, Iranians as well as Americans, can easily become victims of our government’s mistakes, but that is only true if we let it be. A friend called me this morning to say, “I don’t even give it a thought. It’s all about making the Americans hate us enough to justify an attack on Iran.” I only sighed and told her, “Let’s pray that is not so!”

Mr. Koppel’s report reminds me of an old saying I had heard about the British. “They cut your head so gently, you don’t know it until you sneeze and the thing falls off!” Unfamiliar with his background, I wonder if he studied his journalism in such a school.

[Rasputin]

به مناسبت بيستمين سالگرد فاش شدن تماس پنهان ميان دولت ايران و آمريکا، اسنادی در آمريکا منتشر شده است که از دخالت رابرت گيتس، وزيردفاع پيشنهادی ايالات متحده در اين ماجرا حکايت می کند.
اين اسناد را "مرکز اسناد امنيت ملی" (National Security Archive) منتشر کرده که مؤسسه ای وابسته به دانشگاه جورج واشنگتن در آمريکاست.

بنابراين اسناد، آقای گيتس در آن زمان به عنوان يکی از مقامات سازمان اطلاعاتی آمريکا (سيا) در عملياتی پنهان دست داشته است که طبق آن، آمريکا از سويی به صورت پنهان به ايران که آن زمان در قطع رابطه کامل با ايالات متحده قرار داشت و در حال جنگ با عراق بود اسلحه می فروخت و از سوی ديگر به شورشيان مخالف دولت نيکاراگوآ که کونترا نام داشتند برای دستيابی به قدرت کمک می کرد.

هدف آمريکا از فروش سلاح به ايران، جلب کمک اين کشور برای آزادسازی آمريکاييهايی بود که در لبنان به گروگان گرفته شده بودند.

بنابر آنچه مرکز اسناد امنيت ملی آمريکا منتشر کرده، رابرت گيتس در آن بخش از عمليات معروف به ايران - کونترا دست داشته که به نيکاراگوآ مربوط می شده است.

ماجرای ايران - کونترا در ايران به نام رابرت مک فارلين مشهور است که مشاور امنيت ملی رونالد ريگان، رئيس جمهور وقت آمريکا بوده و ماهها پس از استعفا از مقام خود همراه با اليور نورث، عضو وقت شورای امنيت ملی آمريکا سفری پنهانی در بهار 1986 (1365) به تهران کرد تا با مقامات ايرانی ديدار کند.

لو رفتن اين سفر و مطرح شدن آن در مطبوعات جهان به رسوايی بين المللی انجاميد و ايران نيز ناگزير به موضعگيری شد، تا آنجا که اکبر هاشمی رفسنجانی، رئيس وقت مجلس شورای اسلامی در خطبه های نمازجمعه تهران رسماً به معامله تسليحاتی پنهان ميان ايران و آمريکا اعتراف کرد، آن هم در حالی که آيت الله خمينی رهبر وقت جمهوری اسلامی رابطه ميان ايران و آمريکا را به رابطه گرگ و ميش تشبيه می کرد و مقامات جمهوری اسلامی همواره پافشاری می کردند که ايران به هيچ وجه اقلام تسليحاتی خود را از خارج وارد نمی کند.


گروهی از نمايندگان مجلس ايران در قالب سؤال، از علی اکبر ولايتی وزير وقت امورخارجه در زمينه ماجرای مک فارلين توضيح خواستند اما اين اقدام خشم آيت الله خمينی را برانگيخت و برخی از اين نمايندگان همچون جلال الدين فارسی و سيد محمد خامنه ای، برادر بزرگتر رهبر کنونی ايران برای هميشه از صحنه سياسی ايران بيرون رفتند



لو رفتن سفر رابرت مک فارلين و اليور نورث به تهران به مجله لبنانی الشراع نسبت داده می شود که در پی آن، اعضای برخی گروههای لبنانی، حسن صبرا سردبير اين مجله را بشدت مورد ضرب و شتم قرار دادند.

گفته می شود اطلاعات مربوط به ماجرای مک فارلين را سيد مهدی هاشمی، از بستگان آيت الله منتظری، جانشين وقت رهبر جمهوری اسلامی که در سپاه پاسداران به امور مربوط به جنبشهای مورد حمايت ايران در خارج اشتغال داشت در اختيار مجله الشراع قرار داده بود.

سيد مهدی هاشمی به اتهام قتل و توطئه عليه جمهوری اسلامی بازداشت و اعدام شد.

در سيزدهم آبان 1365 که مصادف با هفتمين سالگرد اشغال سفارت آمريکا به دست دانشجويان ايرانی بود، آقای هاشمی رفسنجانی در خطبه های نمازجمعه تهران گفت که نيروهای مسلح ايران از پيش از انقلاب با سيستمهای آمريکايی تجهيز شده و نيازمند لوازم يدکی بودند و همچنين معاملاتی برای خريداری تسليحات از آمريکا پيش از انقلاب صورت گرفته بوده که پول آن از طرف ايران پرداخت شده بوده است.

به گفته آقای هاشمی، آمريکاييها تجهيزات را از راه هوا برای ايران می فرستادند، وی در عين حال آمريکاييها را متهم کرد که به جای تجهيزات آمريکايی، لوازم اسرائيلی به ايران فرستاده است تا به قول وی، ايران را بدنام کنند.

آن گونه که آقای هاشمی گفت، رابرت مک فارلين و اليور نورث نيمه شب در فرودگاه مهرآباد تهران فرود می آيند و خواستار ديدار با وی و برخی ديگر از مقامات بلندپايه ايرانی می شوند.

وی گفت که اين دو مقام آمريکايی يک جلد انجيل که رونالد ريگان به خط خود پشت جلد آن برای آيت الله خمينی يادداشتی نوشته و امضا کرده بود همراه با يک کيک و يک قبضه طپانچه به عنوان هديه برای مقامات ايرانی آورده بودند.

آقای هاشمی رفسنجانی گفت که درخواستهای رابرت مک فارلين و اليور نورث را رد کرد و آنان نيز دست خالی به آمريکا بازگشتند.

در پی لو رفتن ماجرا، گروهی از نمايندگان مجلس ايران در قالب سؤال، از علی اکبر ولايتی وزير وقت امورخارجه در اين زمينه توضيح خواستند اما اين اقدام خشم آيت الله خمينی را برانگيخت و برخی از اين نمايندگان همچون جلال الدين فارسی و سيد محمد خامنه ای، برادر بزرگتر رهبر کنونی ايران برای هميشه از صحنه سياسی ايران بيرون رفتند.

در آمريکا نيز افشای تماس پنهان با ايران به يکی از بزرگترين رسواييهای تاريخ معاصر آمريکا مبدل شد و بر واپسين سالهای رياست جمهوری رونالد ريگان سايه انداخت.

سه هفته پس از آنکه اکبر هاشمی رفسنجانی به معامله پنهان با آمريکا اعتراف کرد، ادوين ميس، دادستان کل ايالات متحده از عمليات ايران - کونترا رسماً پرده برداشت و فاش ساخت که ميليونها دلار از بودجه دولت آمريکا، هزينه اين عمليات پنهان شده است.

بلافاصله پس از اين افشای اين رسوايی، اليور نورث از شورای امنيت ملی برکنار و همراه با برخی ديگر از دست اندرکاران عمليات ايران کوننرا محاکمه شد.

اليورنورث سرانجام به سه سال حبس تعليقی و جريمه نقدی محکوم گرديد.

[Rasputin]

سخنگوى وزارت خارجه آمريكا ايران و سوريه را جزو نيروهاى ميانه*رو براى ايجاد ثبات در منطقه محسوب نكرد.

به گزارش"ايلنا"،"شان مك*كورمك"، دوشنبه به خبرنگاران گفت: آمريكا به فعاليت با نيروهاى ميانه*رو در خاورميانه ادامه مي*دهد اما در حال حاضر، ايران و سوريه جزو اين نيروها محسوب نمي*شوند.
به گزارش خبرگزارى "كونا"، به*رغم درخواست*هاى فزاينده در آمريكا و جامعه بين*المللى براى مذاكره مستقيم واشينگتن با ايران و سوريه درباره مسائل مهم منطقه، مك *كورمك افزود: گفت*وگو سياست محسوب نمي*شود زيرا بايد انتظارات منطقى داشته باشيم كه بتوانيم در مذاكرات به دست آوريم. علاوه بر اين زمانى كه وارد چنين مباحثى مي*شويم براى دستيابى به پيشرفت شرايط تعيين مي*كنيم.
وى گفت: دولت آمريكا در حال بازبينى سياست خود در قبال عراق است. در ضمن كاندوليزا رايس، وزير امور خارجه آمريكا طى چند ماه گذشته بررسي*هاى زيادى در اين باره انجام داده است.
مك* كورمك با بيان اينكه راه*هاى متفاوتى براى تماس با ايران و سوريه وجود دارد، گفت: ما اكنون با ايران روابط ديپلماتيك نداريم اما با سوريه داراى چنين ارتباطى هستيم.
وى تأكيد كرد: ايران و سوريه، هيچ*يك براى ايفاى نقش مثبت و شفاف در تحولات عراق به امتياز نيازمند نيستند، زيرا به نفع آنهاست كه در مرزهاى خود، عراقى باثبات، صلح*آميز و شكوفا داشته باشند.
مك*كورمك گفت: اين شهروندان عراقى و مسلمان هستند كه در خشونت*ها كشته مي*شوند، بنابراين معتقديم كه كشورهاى مسلمان به پايان خشونت*ها و ايجاد ثبات بيشتر و شكوفايى در عراق علاقمند هستند. بنابراين آنها براى ايفاى نقش مثبت به امتياز نياز ندارند.
وى مدعى شد: ايران براى همكارى در زمينه مسأله هسته*اى خود يا اوضاع عراق، هيچ تمايلى از خود نشان نداده است، بنابراين مذاكره به خاطر مذاكره، به هيچ نتيجه*اى منجر نمي*شود و هيچ مشكلى را حل نمي*كند.

[Rasputin]

بوش درآستانه ورود به جلسه سران ناتو
شرايط امريکا برای گفتگو با ايران
پايان دخالت در عراق و لبنان، آغاز توقف غنی سازی

سايت زی نيوز- 28 نوامبر

تالين- استونيا- درآستانه اجلاس سران پيمان نظامی ناتو در "ريگا" پايتخت ليتوانی، بوش بار ديگر مصاحبه ای کرده و بار ديگر پيشنهاد رسمی اخير احمدی نژاد و تلويحی علی لاريجانی دبير شورای عالی امينت ملی جمهوری اسلامی را برای مذاکره رد کرد و گفت: تا ايران غنی سازی را متوقف نکند و دست از دخالت در عراق برندارد هيچ ديداری ممکن نخواهد شد. اين گفتگو در "تالين" پايتخت "استونيا" با بوش و در آستانه حضور در کنفرانس سران ناتو انجام شد.

بوش گفت: رهبران ايران بسيار دقيق از شرايط ما برای گفتگو اطلاع دارند و می دانند چه بايد بکنند تا چنين ديدار و گفتگوئی ممکن شود.

نه ما و نه ديگر کشورهای جهان نمی توانيم بپذيريم که ايران به سلاح اتمی دست يابد و سپس با تهديد جهان باج خواهی کند و حق سکوت طلب کند. نمونه آن لبنان است.

رهبران ايران و دولت سوريه اکنون مشغول تضيف دولت لبنان هستند و از افراط گرايان حمايت می کنند، زيرا می دانند که لبنان دموکراتيک بزرگترين شکست کسانی است که از افراط گرائی حمايت می کنند.

همزمان با انتشار اين مصاحبه، وزيرامورخارجه سوريه در ملاقات با مسئول بخش خاورميانه اتحاديه اروپا در فنلاند گفت: ما ميدانيم چه کسانی در اوضاع لبنان دخالت می کنند. فرانسه و امريکا. تمام طرفين بايد لبنان را ترک کنند تا مردم لبنان خود تصميم بگيرند.