LOOK! A Zionist!

Yesterday, big news happened in Iran. Yahoo.com’s homepage clearly chose the correct story from Iran: that Iran threatened to boycott the 2012 London Olympics because, as Head of Iran’s Olympic Committee Bahram Afsharzadeh so clearly explained, “Zionists have exercised influence in Britain, and according to our information, the summer games logo has been designed by a Zionist organization linked to freemasons.”

However, more important and relevant news was blatantly overlooked by most major news outlets. On February 28, 2011, the official websites of Green Movement and opposition leaders Mir Hussein Mousavi and Mehdi Karoubi stated that they and their wives were taken from house arrest to the maximum security Heshmatiyeh prison in Tehran. Semi-official Iranian news network Fars denied these claims. Green Movement supporters have called for protests every Tuesday until the leaders and their wives are released.

The placing of the Mousavis and Karoubis in prison is one of the most aggressive, targeted moves that the Iranian regime has made, especially considering that Mousavi was prime minister of Iran under Ayatollah Khomeini as Supreme Leader and Ali Khamenei as President. This comes in the wake of brutal crackdowns, the execution of one prisoner every eight hours since January 2011, secret executions of Iranians and foreign nationals, and the arbitrary arrest and detention of over 1,500 demonstrators from the February 14^th and 20^th demonstrations alone.

However, why is it that this story was completely overlooked, and instead Iran made headlines today because of outrageous statements of cooperation between Zionists and Freemasons over an ugly Olympic logo? As brutal and psychopathic as the Iranian regime is, it does understand how to use international media to deflect attention from their serious human rights abuses and systematic repression of the Iranian people. While the rest of the world was preoccupied with ludicrous statements from Afsharzadeh, the regime’s security forces placed the two strongest opposition leaders in prison only weeks after members of the Majles called for their trial and execution.

Hopefully, the rest of the world can focus on the important actions taken by the regime and respond appropriately by demanding that the United Nations establish an independent human rights monitor on Iran in its session this March. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton addressed the House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs on February 28^th, stating:

Here at the Human Rights Council, we are proud to be working with Sweden and other partners to establish a special rapporteur on Iran. Its mandate would be to investigate and report on abuses in Iran, and to speak out when the government there does not meet its human rights obligations. Iranian human rights advocates have demanded this step to raise international pressure on their government.

This will be a seminal moment for this Council, and a test of our ability to work together to advance the goals that it represents. Indeed, every member of this Council should ask him or herself a simple question: Why do people have the right to live free from fear in Tripoli but not Tehran? The denial of human dignity in Iran is an outrage that deserves the condemnation of all who speak out for freedom and justice.

A Tangle in the Loom: WikiLeaks and Iran

The recent thread of WikiLeaks sheds light on a foreign policy problem of nuclear proportions.

In the past week, thousands of important documents and information have been leaked from various U.S. government agencies on WikiLeaks. The leaks are controversial, not only for their sheer number, but for release of cables and conversations between U.S. and very high-ranking officials from other countries. The leaks even prompted Barack Obama to enact new sanctions on Iran today. These sanctions blacklist 10 Iranian businesses connected to the Islamic Republic’s national bank and shipping lines, as well as five executives of these businesses.

On Monday, November 29, 2010, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad referred to the leaked documents as “American psychological warfare that would not affect his country’s relations with other nations.” While Ahmadinejad and his administration might be crediting the U.S. bureaucracy with a bit too undeserved organizational skills by calling the leaks “organized to be released on a regular basis,” the leaked documents definitely confirm prevalent theories about the relations between Iran and its Arab gulf state neighbors and its aspirations for regional hegemony.

It is well-known that Saudi Arabia and Iran are vying for regional hegemony, with Iran’s relative conventional military power and sphere of influence giving it a strong edge over the Saudi kingdom. Not only does this allow Iran to influence the trajectories of Iraq and Afghanistan, thus extending its regional influence, its status as a regional hegemon tips the regional balance of power away from Saudi Arabia and other Arab states that have alliances with the United States. Feeling threatened by such expanding Iranian influence even in the face of decades of sanctions, it is hardly surprising that the Saudi regime harbors strong animosity for the Khamenei’s. However, it was previously unknown that the Saudi-Iranian enmity went so far that Saudi Arabian King Abdullah repeatedly begged the United States to “‘cut off the head of the snake’ by launching military strikes to destroy Iran’s nuclear program,” one of the final pieces of Iranian policy that would enable it to secure the role of an undisputed regional hegemonic power. In order to curb Iranian influence, the United States announced in October of 2010 that it will sell $60 billion worth of military aircraft to the Saudi regime.

Saudi Arabia is not the only gulf state feeling pressure to eliminate Iranian challenges to the current balance of power. King Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa of Bahrain argued in favor of forceful action by any means necessary to eliminate the Iranian nuclear program. Bahrain, a tiny kingdom on the Persian Gulf that is home to the American Fifth Fleet’s naval base, has been feeling Iranian pressure and influence for years. In July of 2007, Iranian advisor to Khamenei Hossein Shariatmadari stated that “The public demand in Bahrain is the reunification of this province with its motherland, the Islamic Iran.” An unnamed senior Omani military official (Oman being the country that helped secure the release of American Sarah Shourd from Evin Prison), is cited in a correspondence as unable to decide which would be worse – “a strike against Iran’s nuclear capability and the resulting turmoil it would cause in the Gulf, or inaction and having to live with a nuclear-capable Iran.” In a December 2005 meeting with American military commanders, United Arab Emirates defense chief and crown prince Mohammad bin Zayed of Abu Dhabi lobbied for American military action against Iran either “this year or the next.” Bin Zayed also expressed fears of a nuclear Iranian state, declaring that “any culture that is patient and focused enough to spend years working on a single carpet is capable of waiting years and even decades to achieve even greater goals.”

While Cenk Uygur, host of The Young Turks, on MSNBC Live is not the best interviewer, the answers provided by Doctors Juan Cole and Trita Parsi in this brief interview are very informative and discuss the fears of changing regional balances of power.

Meanwhile, tensions in the region build as Israeli public opinion and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu perceive a growing, intolerable Iranian nuclear threat. Ehud Barak and prominent members of the Israeli intelligence community argue that Iran is not an existential threat nor is Israel the primary target of Iranian ambitions. Even Syrian president Bashar al-Assad argues that Iran will not use a nuclear weapon against Israel, stating that “an Iranian nuclear strike against Israel would result in massive Palestinian casualties, which Iran would never risk.” However, Iranian weapons purchases from North Korea does little to convince the public and Israeli politicians writ large of this understanding. Netanyahu views the WikiLeaks as something positive for Israel, confirming his suspicions about Iranian nuclear ambitions and showing the extent to which Israel and Arab states share a strong mutual interest in preventing Iranian hegemonic aspirations.

Tensions continue to escalate between these states and power blocs in the Middle East. Yesterday, two prominent Iranian nuclear scientists, both professors at Tehran’s Shahid Beheshti University, were attacked in different parts of Tehran. Assailents on motorcycles managed to attach and detonate magnetized car bombs to the cars of scientists Majid Shahriari and Fereydoun Abbasi, the former killed and the latter injured with his wife. Shahriari was involved in a major project with Iran’s nuclear agency, and Abbasi is a member of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and listed as one of several involved in secret nuclear activity in a 2007 U.N. resolution. Abbasi was formerly an expert for Iran’s Defense Ministry and a top specialist in nuclear isotope separation. The Iranian regime currently blames Israel and the United States for orchestrating these attacks. Intelligence analysts blame Mossad for the 2007 death of top Esfahan uranium plant scientist Ardeshire Hassanpour. In January of 2010, Massoud Ali-Mohammadi was also killed, but it is unclear whether his death was related to his support of Mir Hossien Mousavi or an Israeli/American operation; he also died in a car bombing similar to that of Shahriari.

The WikiLeaks available thus far clearly confirm the fears of Arab gulf states and seem to perpetuate Israeli public opinion and Netanyahu’s threat perceptions of Iran. In moving forward from the latest sanctions on Iran, the United States must decide how to manage these states’ interests to balance with its own in the Middle East and avoid yet another military conflict that would have, in Barak’s words, “unacceptable collateral damage,” on all sides.

Fo-Po Breakdown: Iran, USA, and a tad bit of Turkey

I am aware that this is sort of old news. However, since I have been busy lately and this is still an important on-going problem, I will write my blog post about it anyway. This began as a reaction to an op-ed in the New York Times, by Princeton doctoral candidate Elliot Hen-Tov and Princeton professor of Near Eastern Studies, Bernard Haykel. With the recent tightening of the newest sanctions on Iran this past Thursday, July 1, 2010, it is important to revisit this issue.

First, back to the op-ed from last month. In order to make any real headway on US-Iran relations, it is absolutely essential that each side really understand the other. For prominent scholars of prestigious universities, this also holds true. Which is why this article must be revisited – the Princeton people have it wrong. Their main assertion is that “Iran… stands to lose much influence as Turkey assumes a surprising new role as the modern, democratic and internationally respected nation willing to take on Israel and oppose America.” While parts of this statement are correct, the article represents a flawed understanding of Iranian politics and its relationship to the United States. Principally, it does not really matter for the United States (or Israel for that matter) what type of fiery rhetoric Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad uses – it is generally not directed at American or Israeli audiences anyway. The poll quoted by the authors, although irrelevant to their article, proves this point. The two major regional powers in the Middle East are Saudi Arabia, whose regime is a strong US ally, and Iran, whose regime clearly is not. When Ahmadinejad makes his statements in “support” of the Palestinian cause, he also does so bearing in mind that this can also play on Saudi Arabia’s weaknesses. Iran can claim to be the true supporter of Muslims in peril (despite a substantial number of Palestinians being of Christian or other backgrounds) while simultaneously making the Saudi regime appear weak to its people by alluding to its close relationship to the USA. In this manner, the Iranian regime hopes to remain dominant in the region over Saudi Arabia and the other Arab states.

Ahmadi-casual-Friday-nejad is not some “irrational, rouge leader” as realist IR theory would have us believe. The Iranian government’s support of Israel is mostly a domestic campaign to give the regime the appearance of standing up to the hegemonic rule of the United States and then Israel. Given the vastly superior military forces of both the USA and Israel, Iran would not risk attacking Israel. So, while these authors note that Turkey is seen by Palestinians as a much closer ally than Iran, it is crucial to understand that Iran’s political exploitation of this crisis is mostly for the purpose of bolstering domestic support for the regime and is targeted to domestic and Saudi, not international, audiences.

Secondly, I take issue with the Islam in Turkey being called “more liberal and enlightened.” Again, this is a fundamental mis-characterization of reality. While Saudi Arabia and Iran might be self-proclaimed Islamic states and Turkey a self-proclaimed secular state, the notion that any one regime is any more or less liberal/enlightened than the other is absurd when further examining their actual policies. In Iran, women are obligated to wear hijab at all times; in Turkey, there are laws making it illegal to wear the veil in some public places. Forcing people to appear secular is no better than forcing people to appear pious – these are merely two extreme ends of the spectrum. In a liberal Islam, it would seem that one would have the ability to choose without being compelled towards either end of such a spectrum. Furthermore, the fiercely secular and authoritarian policies enacted by the Turkish government can be just as bad as the authoritarian policies of Iran.

Returning to the sanctions and Turkey’s vote (along with Brasil), it is not really that much “against the United States” for Turkey to vote against the sanctions. The United States, while allies with Turkey, is far stronger allies with Saudi Arabia in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia, with the United States’ help, has stronger military and economic ties to the USA, and it is closer to the other Arab states in the Middle East than Turkey is. With Turkey looking to gain membership to the European Union, it is smart to keep its options open for markets in the Middle East for the EU, but if push came to shove for the United States, I would bet that it would retain Saudi Arabia as its ally over Turkey. Anyway, Iran and Saudi Arabia are focused on each other and Turkey is focused on the EU, so it really does not matter for Iran what Turkey says – although its vote was nice anyway.

As stated in the BBC article, the sanctions imposed in June were not very substantial. This would suggest that the Obama administration is just reacting initially to [uneducated] domestic pressures in Congress to appear to be doing something about the Iranian nuclear program. While it is good that these sanctions were not substantial, it is also extremely damaging to any potential for improving diplomatic relations between the United States and Iran, only serving to prove Ahmadinejad correct when he claims that the United States is really not interested in changing the status quo. Bolstering domestic support for the current Iranian regime is the last thing that the United States should be doing.

In a more recent development, Nom Chomsky acknowledges that Iran poses a serious threat of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, despite citing sources earlier on in the article that discuss Iran’s relatively weak military capabilities; he just proposes different solutions instead of the United States “reinforcing [its] control of the vital Middle East oil-producing regions.” However, with Iran, this is not a valid argument either. Georgetown scholar Mehran Kamrava and University of Colorado professor Nader Hashemi are both of the opinion that Iran does not want to actually acquire a nuclear weapon. If Iran were to obtain the technology and actually produce a nuclear weapon, this would push Iran into a whole new realm of military prowess in which it would find itself on the bottom, easily bested several times over by the United States, Israel, etc. In other words, Iran can be a relatively strong conventional military power in the region, especially when compared to Saudi Arabia’s military on its own (aka minus USA support), but it would lose this advantage if it entered the nuclear arena and would find itself in a situation it cannot win. Thus, even the idea that Iran’s nuclear program to gain such knowledge is the most serious threat is absurd. The best solution would be to focus on finding common ground and interests within the Middle East between Iran and the United States (two really good examples here are Afghanistan and Iraq… hint, hint State Department) and go from here to rebuild diplomatic ties.

Speaking of best solutions, July 1^st was not one of these. The New York Times reports that President Obama signed a law in one of the few moments of consensus in Congress during his administration that “imposes penalties on foreign entities that sell refined petroleum to Iran or assist Iran with its domestic refining capacity. It also requires that American and foreign businesses that seek contracts with the United States government certify that they do not engage in prohibited business with Iran.” As stated several times before, the solution is to OPEN not close relations with Iran. This means diplomatically and economically. As Ahmadi-I-say-crazy-things-that-people-should-not-listen-to-nejad stated on June 28 that he would like to resume nuclear negotiations with the United States in August, giving the United States yet another opportunity to resume meaningful dialogue, the Obama administration missed it again and chose to respond to domestic pressures. This is where the State Department people need to step in and fix it.

Caving into absurd, ill-informed domestic pressures from a Congress that cannot even agree if sick people should get help to be less sick is certain to make the problem worse, not better. The Obama administration needs to focus on its priorities, improve its image in the Muslim world and the Middle East by closing Guantanamo and playing a meaningful role in improving the situation between Israel and Palestinian territories, and respecting the sovereignty of Iran and its government despite the outcome of the 2009 presidential elections. It is certainly not an easy task and will take time to produce the change promised by the Obama campaign, but it will be easier to accomplish with greater understanding of the nuances of regional politics in the Middle East and when the United States takes an active stance by following through on some good faith measures and working with Iran as a regional power in Iraq and Afghanistan. Both the United States and Iran have a lot to gain from improving relations with one another and since the United States remains the global hegemonic power in this system of uni-multipolarity, it must responsibly take the first steps to initiate this process.

Oops! Ahmadinejad's Done It Again.

Iranian "president" Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is back in headlines after the recent protests contesting the legitimacy of his victory in the June 2009 presidential elections. This time, Ahmadinejad is once again touting his denial of the Holocaust. Ahmadinejad is scheduled to address the United Nations General Assembly this Wednesday and Iran, the United States, and other major powers are scheduled to begin negotiations in part addressing Iran's nuclear program. The United Nations will also be determining soon whether or not to enact stricter sanctions against Iran.

As quoted in the Associated Press, "the president's message during his U.N. visit will be 'peace and friendship for all nations, fighting suppression and interaction with all nations in the framework of justice and mutual respect," said a spokesman for Ahmadinejad's office, Mohammad Jafar Mohammadzadeh, according to IRNA.'" A little ironic given the elements of the government that supported Ahmadinejad and the crackdowns on protestors as recently as this past Friday, September 18, 2009...

In the words of Maz Jobrani:

The Moderation of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Some positive signs seem to have been coming from Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad over the past month or so. First, on April 15, he announced that his administration was preparing a new proposal for talks with the West over Iran's nuclear program. Next, when Iranian-American journalist Roxana Saberi was sentenced to eight years in prison on trumped-up charges of espionage, Ahmadinejad urged on April 19 "that the accused...enjoy all freedoms and legal rights to defend themselves and their rights...not be violated." Saberi was released on May 11.

Granted, I don't think that the nuclear proposal was ever completed. And Ahmadinejad's comments on Israel at a UN racism conference caused diplomats from 23 countries to walk out on him. However, his comments seem tamer than normal: Israel is a "cruel and repressive racist regime" as opposed to Israel must be "wiped off the map." He's like a smoker who's gone from two packs a day to a few cigarettes a day; he's not quite there, but he's progressing.

So why are we now seeing the softer side of Ahmadinejad? A combination, I think, of Barack Obama's willingness to engage the Iranians and their upcoming elections. Obama is popular in Iran (so popular that Ahmadinejad is willing to steal Obama's slogan), and Obama's popularity is making it difficult to maintain the hard-line, "death to America" position. Ahmadinejad is adopting a more moderate tack in an attempt to dispel the "view...that [he] was right for Bush, but not right for Obama."

Even if Ahmadinejad is re-elected, it seems that the next president of Iran will be more moderate. This is how foreign relations should be done. And just think how much better off we'd be now if it was done sooner.

Important Headlines for 2-11-2009

While there are a lot of important things happening, these are some recent developments that are pretty important to be aware of and a few interesting things.

First of all, the current Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, stated that Iran is ready for dialogue with the USA as long as it is based on mutual respect. Here are some excerpts of the speech:

"If you really want to fight terrorism, come and cooperate with the Iranian nation, which is the biggest victim of terrorism so that terrorism is eliminated. ... If you want to confront nuclear weapons ... you need to stand beside Iran so it can introduce a correct path to you," he said.

Ahmadinejad said the world was at a "crossroads" because it had been proven that military power has not been successful — a reference to the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

But now, he said, "the world is entering an era of dialogue and intellect."

"The new U.S. government has announced that it wants to bring changes and follow the path of dialogue. It is very clear that changes have to be fundamental and not tactical. It is clear that the Iranian nation welcomes true changes," Ahmadinejad told the crowds at the rally in Freedom Square.

This is crucial as Iran could support the United States in being a stabilizing factor for the crises in Afghanistan and Iraq. Additionally, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced that the USA is very determined to pursue a dialogue with Iran. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is up for election this year and former President Khatami is one of the challengers. For more information, please click here.

A second extremely important development is in the area of health care, specifically in regard to the prevention of HIV being transmitted. Some preliminary trials have found that a microbicide produced by a Massachusetts pharmaceutical company Indevus Pharmaceuticals Inc. slightly reduced HIV infection rates among its trial subjects, where approximately 3,100 women from four different countries participated. Scientists discovered a 30% lower rate of infection among women who used the Indevus-produced gel, however it is important to note that this difference is not statistically significant and that the results could have occurred by change or been the result of other contributing factors. The study has been expanded to include more women from more countries. For more information on this key development in combating HIV/AIDS, please click here.

In important domestic news, a panel of federal judges found that the overcrowding of state prisons violates the inmates' right to adequate health care. State prisons are currently operating at twice their intended capacity and measures to reduce the amount of new prisoners being compelled are being explored so that state prisons would not have to release large numbers of prisoners at once. This decision by the judges is significant as the United States currently imprisons the largest percent of its population than any other country in the world (click here). Land of the free, right? For more information about the judges' decision, please click here.

And yet another instance after the BART subway shooting where California police have shot an innocent person. Daniel Balandran was shot and killed by police gunfire in a shootout at a Papa John's Pizza in Chino, California. Police say Balandran was caught in the crossfire; his lawyer states that he was targeted. For more information, please click here.

Finally, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates annouced a review of the ban on photographing fallen soldiers' coffins, a ban that he himself asked for a few years ago. For more information, please click here.

Headlines 1-26-2009

Here are some important headlines at your disposal.

First, Bolivia is in the process of ratifying a new Constitution. This constitution is supposed to empower Bolivia's Indians. Preliminary vote counts estimate 60% of voters have approved the new Constitution. While the Constitution nationalizes much of Bolivia's natural gas resources and officially recognizes 36 indigenous groups, it is unclear exactly how the implementation of the law will work or how the new Constitution will affect Bolivia, facing a recent economic downturn. Xavier Albó, a Jesuit scholar and linguist, stated that "the new Constitution may be the equivalent of Spain’s Reconquest of the Iberian Peninsula from the Moors in 1492. But instead of the blood spilled in that process, Mr. Albó said, Bolivia is 'advancing in a democratic process that does not exclude or subjugate anyone."' For more information, please click here.

Secondly, Sri Lanken forces state that they have captured the last major base of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE or Tamil Tigers), a group well known for the use of suicide bombings and its own air force. A Sri Lanken military spokesman stated that there were no LTTE leaders captured in the operation while the LTTE has not yet commented on the report. The Sri Lanken military states that they have isolated the LTTE into an area of 155 square miles (about 400 sq. km.) and that the LTTE has approximately 1,000 fighters left after the group's political headquarters were captured on January 2. The leader of LTTE is thought to have fled to Malaysia. For the rest of the article, please click here.

Additionally, Esteghlal, one of Iran's top soccer clubs, held a soccer match between the club's female team and its youth male team. However, as the Associated Press reports, "the first mixed soccer game—females vs. males—since the 1979 Islamic revolution led to swift punishment... as an Iranian soccer club said it had suspended three officials involved and handed out fines of up to $5,000." While a coach and two managers initially denied that the match had taken place, video footage from cell phones was used as evidence against them. In 2006, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad stated that women should and would be allowed to attend soccer games. However, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (the final voice on all matters in Iran) disagreed, forcing Ahmadinejad to revoke his previous statement. For more information, please click here.

In domestic news, the FDA has approved a Californian biotechnology company, Geron, to begin the first-ever human clinical trials with embryonic stem cells. The participants will be patients who have recently suffered severe spinal cord injuries. Researchers are planning to inject the stem cells into the patients' spines and monitor carefully if the procedure is working. For more information, please click here.

In state-wide news, a gunman opened fire on an under-21 nightclub in Portland, Oregon, killing two and injuring several others. Police speculate that it was a random shooting. Among those injured were students, five from other countries. One victim is currently in critical condition, four others hospitalized but expected to live, and two were treated and sent home. The gunman is hospitalized in critical condition. For the article, please click here.

Ahmadinejad Speech and Press Conference

Here is Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's speech to the General Assembly at the United Nations as well as the subsequent press conference.

United Nations address:


Press Conference:

Ahmadinejad on Larry King

This is the interview between Larry King and Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.



He may be the Iranian version of George Bush, however, he makes some valid points amid the rest. One example of this is the double standard of the US calling on the IAEA to do more investigations on Iran than in the history of the organization rather than allowing themselves to be monitored. While Ahmadinejad may not be the best at promoting positive relations between Iran and Israel to say the least, he makes a point that the US avoids which is the plight of the Palestinean people.

While there are some valid points made, Ahmadinejad doesn't disappoint American audiences. His comments regarding Iran's own human rights issues and homosexuality are still as concerning as ever.

So, what's the answer?

Diplomacy. Diplomacy. Diplomacy.

Bomb Iran: Israeli Remix

"ISRAEL will almost surely attack Iran’s nuclear sites in the next four to seven months — and the leaders in Washington and even Tehran should hope that the attack will be successful enough to cause at least a significant delay in the Iranian production schedule, if not complete destruction, of that country’s nuclear program. Because if the attack fails, the Middle East will almost certainly face a nuclear war — either through a subsequent pre-emptive Israeli nuclear strike or a nuclear exchange shortly after Iran gets the bomb." ~Benny Morris

The insanity over Iran continues. The argument over war makes at least two leaps of logic that Joe Klein brilliantly points out here: (1) that Iran would use a nuke against Israel immediately after acquiring one and (2) that diplomacy will not work. Their basic underlying assumption is that the leaders of Iran are batshit insane. True, President Ahmadenijad may say some crazy things, but the real power lies with Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. So let's assume that he's somewhat rational:

(1) Iran has several good reasons not to nuke Israel. Fallout from a detonation within Israel would likely contaminate parts of surrounding Muslim nations--Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, the Palestinian territories--and millions of fellow Muslims would be affected. A nuclear strike would destroy or contaminate the al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem, the third-holiest Islamic site.

(2) Diplomacy and economic sanctions do have an effect against Iran according to the National Intelligence Estimate released last November.

War with Iran, conducted either by Israel or by the U.S., is not the answer. Innocent Iranians would die in an attack; one of the enrichment sites is in the middle of a city of more than one million. A pre-emptive strike would inflame Iranian public opinion against the striker, and bolster Iran's hardline regime. There's no way either nation could be sure that they've destroyed all of Iran's uranium-enrichment sites. Iran will accelerate their nuclear program, and would now have a good reason to use a nuclear weapon when they get one.

Headlines: 15 July 2008

• Army Secretary Asks for Probe of Firing: Gina Grey was fired from her posts as public affairs director of Arlington National Cemetery after she opposed imposing new restrictions on the media's coverage of funerals, even when the families had consented.
• A war that nobody wants but everybody needs: "[War with Iran] may become inevitable due to the fear of peace. After eight years of Bush-Cheney, such is the state of our world." Three lame ducks want one last quack. Apparently they think it won't echo.
• Nozzle Rage!
  

Headlines: 20 May 2008 (and Older)

• 'W,' Oliver Stone's Bush Biopic
  

  A little crass.
  

• Klein on Obama:
  

  A general-election campaign between John McCain and Barack Obama doesn't need any hype. It won't be boring. The question is whether we, politicians and press alike, will grant this election — and electorate — the respect that it deserves.
  

• Make wearing a flag pin the 28th Amendment
  

  And the award for Best Use of Sarcasm goes to...
  

• The Fall of Conservatism
  

  The pendulum swings left? Long, but interesting.
  

• Obama and
  Ahma-gonna-kill-myself-if-the-primary-season-doesn't-end-soon-ijad
  

  Obama said that he would meet with the leadership of Iran, but he never said he'd meet with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. So why does McCain and everyone on the Right say he did? And when is that McCain-Obama foreign policy debate going to be?
  

• Underplayed Story of the Day
  

  Remember when the EPA denied the state of California to legislate its own fuel-efficiency standards? Well, it turns out that, like everything else in the Bush Administration, the decision was based on sound science, and not politics.
  

• Obama Is Expected to Hit a Milestone in Today's Votes
  

  After primaries in Kentucky & Oregon, Obama will have the majority of pledged delegates, which will hopefully trigger a superdelegate-slide in his direction.

Headlines: 29 April 2008

• Democrats Divided Over Gas Tax Break
  

  Clinton wants to suspend the gas tax for the summer driving season. Obama argues that lifting the tax would remove the disincentive to pollute, take away money from maintaining highways, and save consumers little—about $30 over three months. Gonna side with Obama on this one.
  

• Cheney Lawyer Claims "Congress Lacks Constitutional Power" to Investigate VP's Role in Torture Approval
  

  Luckily, Cheney lacks the constitutional power to stay in office past January.
  

• Iranian President's Visit Tests India
  

  Singh welcomes Ahmadinejad to get oil and to prove his independence from the U.S. Not sure how I feel about this.
  

• Georgia "plans war in Abkhazia"
  

  Georgia and Russia point fingers at each other over a tiny breakaway republic no one has ever heard of.
  

• Obama's Wright Response
  

  Obama should clearly repudiate Rev. Wright after his crazy media tour:
  

History 101 - Lessons of the Past

Boys and Girls, today in History 101 we are going to begin with the basics of how to understand historical mistakes and how not to repeat them. Due to recently escalating events in the Middle East, understanding the past mistakes is crucial to resolve conflicts in this region. Our case study for today is Iran. Let's begin with the historical events and then move to their implications in the modern day.

In March of 1951, Mohammad Mossadegh was democratically elected within the political structure of Iran and became prime minister. He enforced the Oil Nationalization Act, which involved the expropriation of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC), a British company that monopolized Iran’s oil. Britain feared that Mossadegh was becoming too closely allied with Iran’s communist party, Tudeh, and that Soviet influence could spread to Iran. In 1952, British officials met with officials from the CIA and expressed Britain’s interest in a participating in a coup in Iran with the United States. In March of the following year, the CIA began to draft a plan called Operation AJAX that would overthrow Mossadegh and his administration through a covert action and establish a government that would cater to the United States and would remain open to British interests. Retired Iranian general Fazlolah Zahedi was chosen to be the replacement prime minister. In May of 1953, CIA officials in Tehran began a propaganda campaign against Mossadegh. On July 1, Churchill approved the final draft of the plan for the coup, and ten days later, U.S. President Eisenhower gave his approval. On August 15, the coup is begun but failed because Mossadegh had advanced warnings of a plot. Zahedi went into hiding and Shah Reza Pahlavi fled to Baghdad. On August 19, Zahedi led the coup while American CIA agents in Tehran created a riot against Tudeh and Mossadegh. The next day, Zahedi became Prime Minister, the Shah reassumed power, and members of Mossadegh’s government were in prison or in hiding. In 1954, the AIOC resumed its operations in Iran. Mossadegh was tried for treason, served three years in prison, and then placed under house arrest until his death on March 5, 1967.

The impact of the 1953 coup in Iran is extremely significant in assessing today’s strained relations with Iran. After the coup, Shah Reza Pahlavi regained power and became a puppet of the United States. Due to Iranians’ contempt for Pahlavi, a revolution broke out in 1979 that placed Ayatollah Khomeini in power. On November 4, 1979, militant students occupied the American embassy in Tehran and held 52 Americans hostage for 444 days. The United States ended diplomatic relations with Iran on April 7, 1980. The Islamic Revolution in 1979 established the system of government Iran has today as well as gave way to the fundamentalist and conservative ideas embodied by the current Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Iran’s statements to the United States in regard to its nuclear program are clearly a reaction to the history of American and western manipulation in Iran as well as in the rest of the Middle East. As a result of American Cold War policy, Iran has a government the United States deems undemocratic and the country is impoverished due to control and manipulation of its economy and natural resources by the United States and its greatest ally, Britain. As Madeline Albright stated in March of 2000, “The Eisenhower administration believed its actions were justified for strategic reasons. But the coup was clearly a setback for Iran’s political development and it is easy to see why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America,” (Risen, How a Plot Convulsed in Iran in ’53 [and in ’79]).

With President Bush and Ahmadinejad’s hostility towards one another and Bush’s current regime change policies as exhibited by the invasion of Iraq, an American-led regime change in Iran appears more likely to occur, given that the tensions between each nation are similar to what they were in 1953. Such action would create further instability in the region as well as destroy any hope of improving relations and resolving conflicts diplomatically. Currently, Ahmadinejad has angered the United States and other nations such as the United Kingdom with its developing nuclear program. The United States wants Iran to abandon its program while Iran insists that the program is simply for peaceful energy uses. However, with the capture of an Iranian diplomat on February 4, 2007 by uniformed gunmen in Baghdad, his accusations of torture, as well as the capture and release of fifteen British sailors recently, tensions continue to escalate and, due to historical policies, Ahmadinejad is not willing to efficiently compromise and Bush is refusing to pursue any diplomacy with Iran.

This tension is especially significant given the foreign policy of the Bush administration. Diplomacy between the United States and Iran is gravely needed in order to establish trust, improve relations, and to reach a compromise. "JustForeignPolicy.org" says it best:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJRcOF7rEfQ


Now go tell Mommy and Daddy what you learned in school today.


************************

Works Cited/Consulted

Ahmadinejad’s ‘Gift’ to Britain. The WEEK. Volume 7, Issue 305. April 13, 2007. Page 4.

Barth, Linda. Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishers, 2003. Pages 37 – 42.

Buncombe, Andrew. Freed Iranian Diplomat Claims He was Tortured by the CIA in Iraq. April 9, 2007. The Independent. April 10, 2007.

Gasiorowski, Mark J. Mohammad Mosaddeq and the 1953 Coup in Iran. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 2004. Pages 227 – 246.

Iran. October 2006. U.S. Department of State. April 11, 2007.

Iraq: Should the War Have an End Date?. The WEEK. Volume 7, Issue 305. April 13, 2007. Page 6.

Oren, Michael B. Power, Faith, and Fantasy: America in the Middle East 1776 to the Present. New York: Sike, Inc., 2007. Pages 479-483, 544-549.

Risen, James. How a Plot Convulsed in Iran in ’53 (and in ’79). 2000. The New York Times. April 10, 2007.

Secrets of History: The CIA in Iran. 2000. The New York Times. April 10, 2007.

Zabih, Sepehr. The Mossadegh Era: Roots of the Iranian Revolution. Chicago: Lake View Press, 1982. Pages 20 – 32.