In the lead up to a likely resumption of Western “diplomacy” with Iran, conducting an interview with Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki, with questions designed to elicit substantive and revealing responses, could potentially yield real benefits for the international community. The prominent German newsmagazine Der Spiegel had an opportunity to conduct such an interview today. But Der Spiegel opted, instead, to engage in an egregious exercise of agenda-driven, ideologically-loaded journalism, see the full interview in Der Spiegel here or here for the reprint in the Tehran Times.
The questions that Der Spiegel posed to Foreign Minister Mottaki were, with few exceptions, not formulated to elicit meaningful, substantive responses. We reproduce below the first fifteen of these “questions” (we put the word “questions” in quotation marks because, as you will see, Der Spiegel did not punctuate most of their interviewer’s statements to Mottaki with question marks):
1) Mr. Foreign Minister, you are the senior diplomat of the Islamic Republic of Iran. You represent a nation that prides itself on a cultural history stretching back more than 2,500 years. Don’t you find it shameful that people are stoned to death in your country?
2) It isn’t a matter of legal subtleties. Stoning is a glaring violation of universal human rights. It’s barbaric.
3) We are not talking about murder, for which the death penalty by hanging is imposed in Iran, but about the stoning of adulterers. International human rights organizations report that there have been seven cases in the last five years alone.
4) The names of 14 other potential stoning victims are also known. This places Iran on the same level as countries like Somalia and Afghanistan when it was under Taliban rule.
5) (interrupting Mottaki)…the impending stoning of Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani …
6) Will you lobby for Ashtiani not to be stoned?
7) This case is only one example of Iran’s contempt for human rights. Iran, which executed 400 people last year, is second from the top of the list of countries that still impose the death penalty—behind China, with a population 20 times as large.
8) But it isn’t just criminals who are executed. Death sentences are also passed against political prisoners.
9) The large wave of arrests after the reelection of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad last June shows that your legal system is political. Thousands have been arrested since then. The revolutionary courts have imposed long prison sentences on people whose only offence was to oppose the president.
10) For the West, but also for millions of people in Iran, the most recent election was a huge fraud.
11) The victims of your legal system included highly respected people like Mohammad Ali Abtahi, vice president under the former reformist President Mohammad Khatami, Mohammed Atrianfar, an adviser to Khatami’s predecessor, Hashemi Rafsanjani, and the well-known journalist Issa Saharkhiz, who was arrested after an interview with SPIEGEL.
12) But those were extorted confessions.
13) The charges included contact with the West. What’s wrong with that?
14) Isn’t the crackdown by the security apparatus a sign that the Ahmadinejad government is finished, and that the only way it knows to stay in power is to use repression?
15) Ahmadinejad came into office five years ago promising to fight mismanagement and corruption. But the situation has only worsened under his leadership. The inflation rate is estimated to be at least 25 percent, and half of Iranians live at or below the poverty level.
Mottaki manages to make some interesting points in the course the journalist’s “questions”. But it is only with the sixteenth “question” that the journalist actually raises a substantive issue regarding the Islamic Republic’s foreign policy: “The United States and the EU, in particular, have implemented sanctions that go beyond the United Nations Security Council resolutions. They are now affecting the important oil industry and gasoline imports. Were you surprised by the Europeans’ tough approach?”
In response to this question—and several (highly charged) follow ups—Mottaki offers interesting observations about the Iranian view of sanctions and the Islamic Republic’s approach to upcoming discussions about its nuclear program:
“Europe will undoubtedly suffer more under the new sanctions than we will. Europe will be the big loser in relation to this policy. We already reduced our trade relations with Europe considerably in recent years. We now produce some of the goods ourselves, and we have found new suppliers for the rest. We’re not concerned about our supply of gasoline and other energy sources…If [the German] government is not interested in expanding and deepening our relations, Iran doesn’t have to run after it. We think it’s beneath the dignity of the German people to support a certain US policy. My recommendation is for Germany (to pursue) an independent policy…I would like to direct a comment at your foreign minister, Mr. (Guido) Westerwelle, and his European counterparts: We don’t want more than what is our right. We have created this right without outside assistance. And I think the best thing now would be to recognize this right, within the framework of the appropriate provisions and regulations…
We want to talk to the so-called Vienna Group about the exchange of fuel: We deliver low enriched uranium in return for 20 percent enriched fuel for our research reactor in Tehran. The negotiating partners are France, Russia, the United States, Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna. There are also proposals to include Turkey and Brazil in these talks…[On uranium enrichment,] we want to talk, but first the structure of the group, which consists of the five permanent members of the Security Council plus Germany, must be changed. Other countries must be added to the group. The talks can then be resumed with this new structure.”
Der Spiegel’s interviewer, however, seems reluctant to be drawn into a potentially serious discussion about Iranian foreign policy. Again, he tries to go on the attack:
“SPIEGEL: In other words, Iran is continuing to try to stall for time. You are aware that there is a substantial risk of a military strike against your nuclear plants?
Mottaki: You cannot disregard a country’s rights and force it to make compromises. We are determined to defend our right. Anyone who attacks Iran will regret it.
SPIEGEL: There are growing calls in Israel for a military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities—with or without Washington’s approval.
Mottaki: Israel has been talking about this for years. The Zionist regime knows exactly what fate awaits it here. The regime would be putting its own existence at stake with an attack.
SPIEGEL: You would attack Israel?
Mottaki: I have just told you what would happen.
SPIEGEL: Your first reactor, in Bushehr, is scheduled to go online on Sept. 26 after more than 30 years of construction. Do you really want to see the Israelis reduce it to rubble?
Mottaki: Do you have evidence that Bushehr will be attacked? How probable do you think such an attack is?
SPIEGEL: The likelihood is considered high.
Mottaki: We don’t see this likelihood.
SPIEGEL: Do you want to ignore reality? Don’t you recognize the military threat? Don’t you see the worldwide protest against the impending stoning of Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani?”
We will refrain from speculating about what Mottaki thought about the abrupt segue from the risks of a military confrontation over Iran’s nuclear activities to the Ashtiani case. We simply note his response:
“What is the point of these questions? You would be better advised to listen to us. It was our interpretations of the situation in this region that have proved to be right. We predicted that the United States would capitulate in Iraq, and that’s what has happened. Instead, you are playing the human rights game. You ask me about the possible killing of a human being. But you show no sensitivity for the many, many people that are being killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. How long does the West intend to live with this contradiction?”
Der Spiegel’s interviewer tries one final time to put Mottaki on the defensive. We will let you judge how well he did:
“Spiegel: [N]ow the Ashtiani case has caused an international reaction. And the international community is extremely alarmed in light of Iran’s nuclear activities. It seems to be one minute before midnight.
Mottaki: No. On my watch it’s one o’clock, and precisely at that moment the Bushehr nuclear power plant, which was originally supposed to be built by the Germans, will be loaded with Russian fuel rods.”
–Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett
Nasser,
Your extraordinary dislike of Iran clouds all your arguements.
Liz,
“I’m not an Iranian, but my husband is.” – My sympathies.
“It’s a fantastic place.” – Do the Basij have him locked up and forcing you to say this?!
“and Pakistan. lol” – I am puzzled. Please explain how you got this from a link to the Iranian Business Council of Dubai? http://www.ibcuae.org/
- Do visit Kuwait sometimes, you will notice what a well run country looks like. As for Pakistan it is responsible for over 100 million people more than Iran and without oil but its military capabilities dwarfs those of Iran; so props to them.
and Pakistan. lol
I’ve been to all the countries around Iran, except for Kuwait, Afghanistan, and Turkamanistan and Iran is the best. Sorry.
I’m not an Iranian, but my husband is. It’s a fantastic place.
Liz,
“If you open your eyes, you will see that you are talking about an Iran that doesn’t exist. Those of us who live in the country, know differently.”
- I thought you didn’t live in that country! You said: “I’m not Iranian and I think you’re incorrect.” Well then I was wrong about that.
But when you have had enough of your socialist paradise you can always escape to this better place across the Gulf. http://www.ibcuae.org/
Nasser,
If you open your eyes, you will see that you are talking about an Iran that doesn’t exist. Those of us who live in the country, know differently.
Iranian@Iran,
“By the way, Iran does have a deep water port.”
- I will repeat this for the 10th time in case you missed my earlier posts. Chabahar is NOT connected to the main transportation networks. Iran is trying to connect it via railways because it is really really reallyyyyy far from the northern cities so roads alone make no sense and thus Iran will continue to pay Dubai in port handling fees. Bandar Abbas and Bandar Khomeini are pretty pathetic.
“Iranian is right to say that Iran has achieved much much more than the UAE.”
- Iranian’s and your argumentative style can be described as such: When presented with evidence that contradicts your position you would shut out your eyes, put your hands in your ears and shake your head violently while screaming Nooooooo. But that doesn’t make you right.
“Its universities are full of bright minds and it is they who have made all of the technological achievements that we have seen over the past 2 decades.”
- You can keep repeating this over and over again if that makes you feel any better. I am equally strong in my conviction that reverse engineering a bunch of obsolete weapons from the 70s is not technologically impressive and if I was running a country I would much rather have access to all the modern weapons that the (P)GCC countries have. And I would also reiterate my position that there must not be any intelligent people left in Iran because no sensible person believes in a guy who claims to be “God’s representative on Earth.” Haha I can’t even say that without laughing; other people in the world stopped believing that divine right of rulers nonsense a few centuries ago.
Nasser:
I think you know quite well what I mean. Iranian is right to say that Iran has achieved much much more than the UAE. Its universities are full of bright minds and it is they who have made all of the technological achievements that we have seen over the past 2 decades. By the way, Iran does have a deep water port.
Iranian@Iran,
How does that constitute an abuse? I pointed out the fact that despite Iranian’s claim of Iran having EVERYTHING, it has to pay Dubai each year in port handling fees because Iran doesn’t have a deep water port. Iranian further claims that no one moves to the UAE willingly and whoever’s there have been brought over as slaves. So, I pointed out that many entrepreneurs from all over the world (including some very wealthy Iranian businessmen) are there willingly and Dick Cheney certainly haven’t been brought over as a slave! I further highlighted the fact that Iran has one of the highest brain drains in the world to which Iranian countered by denying ALL these well established facts and making the silly argument that Iran suffers from no brain drain because Iranian herself decided to stay put! Well, if repeating a slogan (“Iranian is right, you are wrong, Iran is the greatest country in the world, it has EVERYTHING”) over and over again and denying all evidence to the contrary is your idea of having an intelligent argument I am forced to assume that you guys leaving Iran would result in no brain drain and all the intelligent people have already left that place.
Nasser:
Abuse doesn’t strengthen your arguement. Iranian is correct and I think you should accept the facts.
“I live in Iran and I’ve lived here on and off for almost 2 decades. I think you really don’t know much about the country.”
- Iranian, I don’t think you leaving would actually constitute a brain drain.
These are my words.
Iranian says:
September 2, 2010 at 5:02 am
Nasser,
“Personally, I don’t know anyone who wishes to move to the UAE. The UAE is a slave state that has roughly two million slaves from Pakistan, The Philippines, and Bangladesh. What does it produce? Does it produce medicine? Has it developed in the field of nanotechnology, stem cell research, and satellite technology? Does it produce its own food? Does it have a high-tech industry? Does it make any of its weapons or doe it just send billions of dollars of oil money to buy American weapons? Does it have a high ranking university?
Iran has all of these and more.”
Nasser,
I live in Iran and I’ve lived here on and off for almost 2 decades. I think you really don’t know much about the country.
Liz,
“…and if Iran was so mismanaged, it would not have made all the advances that it has made despite war, pressure, and sactions. Again I don’t know anyone who wishes to live there. One of the great things about Iran is that there is a degree of social justice. It’s one of the few places that I know of where there are very few homeless people.”
- Can you please tell me what advances you have in mind? Iran has taken a Great Leap Backwards imo, you’re of course entitled to yours. Economic indicators though tend to support my position. Like how Iran’s main source of income, its oil production has decreased significantly from 6 mbd pre revolution to 3.8-4 mbd today. But if you find it to be such a socialist utopia why don’t you just move there? Cuz those that can leave! It has one of the highest brain drains in the world.
“There aren’t 400,000 very wealthy Iranians in the UAE…Again I don’t know anyone who wishes to live there.”
- I refuse to comment on this further seeing how you are already so very knowledgeable about the place. Yes I am being sarcastic.
Nasser,
There aren’t 400,000 very wealthy Iranians in the UAE and if Iran was so mismanaged, it would not have made all the advances that it has made despite war, pressure, and sactions. Again I don’t know anyone who wishes to live there. One of the great things about Iran is that there is a degree of social justice. It’s one of the few places that I know of where there are very few homeless people.
Liz,
“…but Iran is quite wealthy…”
- It is a horribly mismanaged third world country with a lot of potential. Per capita income of $ 4,800, that is not the indicator of a wealthy country.
“Personally, I don’t know anyone who wishes to move to the UAE.”
- The former Vice President of the United States Dick Cheney. 400,000 very wealthy Iranians. I am sure these people weren’t forcefully brought over as slaves! And Iran doesn’t have a deep water port and has to pay Dubai every year for port handling fees.
Sorry Nasser, but Iran is quite wealthy and in any case you didn’t give a suitable answer to Iranian who said:
“Personally, I don’t know anyone who wishes to move to the UAE. The UAE is a slave state that has roughly two million slaves from Pakistan, The Philippines, and Bangladesh. What does it produce? Does it produce medicine? Has it developed in the field of nanotechnology, stem cell research, and satellite technology? Does it produce its own food? Does it have a high-tech industry? Does it make any of its weapons or doe it just send billions of dollars of oil money to buy American weapons? Does it have a high ranking university?
Iran has all of these and more.”
buddy bolden,
Why did you leave out the rest of my sentence? Which in its entirety reads: “The people of Dubai will not turn against Makhtoum like how the ungrateful population of Iran foolishly turned on the Shah and brought in Khomeini if that is what you mean by rigid.” Do you still disagree? Then, do you think it would be wise for the people of Dubai to turn on Makhtoum? Do you think Khomeini was a better alternative to the Shah? If the current government is so much more competent than the previous one why do you suppose Iran’s per capita income is so much lower today? Why is it that oil production pre-revolution was 6 million barrels per day whereas today it is only 3.8 bmd?
Nasser:
“like how the ungrateful population of Iran foolishly turned on the Shah ”
While we may disagree on some points, I usually find your posts worth reading and certainly worth thinking about.
This sentence, though, leaves me absolutely bewildered.
“The role of Dubai is similar to the one that Hong Kong played for PRC for decades.”
Good analogy but that’s still no excuse for Iran having such crappy port facilities.
Nasser & Fiorangela:
The role of Dubai is similar to the one that Hong Kong played for PRC for decades.
It dulls the sanctions and gives everyone “plausible deniability”.
The legal situation in Dubai is unlike the Western United States in mid to late 1800s where a man’s word was his bond.
There is no Rule of Law there only influence and connections.
Excellent place for murky deals.
Fiorangela,
“Nasser, I asked my Iranian friend (PhD in Economics from MIT)if it was a good idea to invest in Dubai. He said it would be an extremely risky and ill-advised move…”
- His compatriots tend to disagree with him. There are some 400,000 Iranians said to be living in Dubai; by all accounts a very wealthy population. Iranian officials tend to view Dubai as their little Switzerland of sorts and use it to steal billions from Iranian public coffers. Maybe your friend has some advice on how to reverse the enormous brain drain and capital flight from Iran rather than bad mouth a prosperous neighbor.
imho, thank you for your detailed response.
“I don’t want to go in detail in this matter but first, bombing Iran out of hell from thousands feet above can hardly be a durable solution bringing political stability (given that a ground invasion is out of the question). Also, before attacking a country, the US used to weaken it, so to limit their casualties.”
- The article was very clear that the goal of an attack would not be regime change or political stability but to destroy Iran ala Gulf War Iraq: “If regime change happens as a consequence, great, but that is not the primary goal. Defanging the Iranian state is.” The article also pointed out that ground invasion would be avoided to limit casualties. If an attack is limited to an air campaign Iran can’t be expected to cause much casualties given the fact that it doesn’t have an air force and Russia hasn’t sold it any advanced air defense systems. The First gulf war caused hardly any casualties and it was against a country that wiped the floor with Iran for eight years.
“Now going back to Iranian capabilities versus Persian Gulf Arab states including Saoudians, is comparing apples with apples. In this, I very much doubt the sophisticated arms these countries keep buying from the US can in any way help them to resist any Iranian potential threat in the first place. Having them is not enough. Have they the knowledge and personals to use them ? I very much doubt. They don’t even think about it and for good reasons. Don’t you think attacking a 70 million people’ nation by those small monarchies is a kind of foolish ? If it can be an indication, Iranians resisted Iraq in that war in which almost all the planet sold weapons to Iraq with financial backing of all the Persian Gulf monarchies, at a time Iran was weak, its army decimated by continual purge and with just 40M inhabitants.”
- The Gulf countries have very capable air forces! Iranian military is basically set up as a large infantry force suitable for depth defense of its territory. The Gulf countries have access to all the modern weapons they could wish for while Iran basically has a bunch of reversed engineered weapons from the 70s which they somehow claim to indigenous lol.
Iranian,
“Personally, I don’t know anyone who wishes to move to the UAE. The UAE is a slave state that has roughly two million slaves from Pakistan, The Philippines, and Bangladesh.”
- You left out virtual slaves from India, Srilanka, Nepal that I can think of at the top of my head. This is not just the case for the UAE but all Arab gulf countries except for Iran and Iraq (the two poor countries in the region). But you must realize that export of migrant workers are really encouraged in many places like South Asia and Philippines because the economic situation at home is so bleak and many people come here willingly (though they can’t always leave willingly given passport seizures and withheld wages). The rich Gulf countries are low on population and need labor and South Asia has nothing but people.
- As to noone wanting to move there Dick Cheney would disagree with you :) There are also many entrepreneurs from these countries (slaves from the uneducated lower classes usually) that move there to take advantage of more liberal business environment. When I last visited the place I ran into many Indian businessmen that preferred the business environment there to their native land. Lastly let’s not forget the wealthy Iranian business community there.
“What does it produce? Does it produce medicine? Has it developed in the field of nanotechnology, stem cell research, and satellite technology? Does it produce its own food? Does it have a high-tech industry? Does it make any of its weapons or doe it just send billions of dollars of oil money to buy American weapons? Does it have a high ranking university? Iran has all of these and more.”
- In the Middle East-North Africa region UAE has the third highest GDP (behind only Saudi Arabia and Iran). When you take into account its small population I think that is pretty remarkable. Other than Abu Dhabi the other six emirates have very diversified economies and there are a lot of manufacturing happening there. UAE’s sovereign wealth fund has invested in many of the sectors you have mentioned.
- I will tell you what Iran doesn’t have. It doesn’t really have a deep water port (Chabahar is not connected to the main transportation networks) and thus has to pay millions in port handling fees to Dubai each year!
Nasser, I asked my Iranian friend (PhD in Economics from MIT)if it was a good idea to invest in Dubai. He said it would be an extremely risky and ill-advised move because Dubai has no institutional structure to protect investments, contracts — it’s a wild wild west, without a stable system of laws and adjudication and resolution of inevitable disputes. Dubai is a bubble economy — bright shiney things and everybody happy and rich while the bubble stays inflated.
You’re so enamored of the middle class, Nasser, but what happens to the less well-off? Do you drive them over a cliff? Adam Smith understood that the entire society had a right to a certain level of economic well-being, and that an economic system could not consider itself complete if it didn’t include all levels of the society. Smith was a philosopher and a Christian, and tried to weave Christian principles into his economic thinking. My understanding of Islamic finance (in theory) is that it attempts to wring out more of the temptations to greed that capitalism is prey to.
imho,
The technological advances made over the past 30 years in Iran (especially the last 20) are extraordinary and they really can’t be denied. When the UAE’s oil money finishes, the UAE wealth will end as well.
The capabilities developed by Iran are quite real. These are things that as Iranians we see on a daily basis. Iranian cinema and TV is also something that has risen dramatically over the last three decades. Though only the “darker” movies get prizes in the west.
Iranian:
“Personally, I don’t know anyone who wishes to move to the UAE. The UAE is a slave state that has roughly two million slaves from Pakistan, The Philippines, and Bangladesh. What does it produce? Does it produce medicine? Has it developed in the field of nanotechnology, stem cell research, and satellite technology? Does it produce its own food? Does it have a high-tech industry? Does it make any of its weapons or doe it just send billions of dollars of oil money to buy American weapons? Does it have a high ranking university?
Iran has all of these and more… Thanks to the revolution I must add”
Although I agree with you on the kind of state are UAE and other Persian Gulf monarchies, I wouldn’t bet that much on the real Iranian capabilities you cited. However, I must admit that some indirect consequences of that so-called revolution, were on the art ground. I take my hat off to the Iranian cinema and underground music (no I’m not talking about those cheap Californian bands) that showed how genius they are in such a constrained environment. Actually, I wonder if it could have happened otherwise. Thanks to mullahs ?
Nasser,
“What was different about this article and it puzzled me somewhat is that Mr. Friedman seemed to overly exaggerate Iran’s military capabilities. Stratfor and the Leveretts have pointed out several times that regardless of what you make of Iran’s intentions, that country has very limited force projection capabilities and therefore not really a threat to its neighbors. Iran’s armor is obsolete, their navy includes a bunch of civilian speed boats, they DO NOT have an air force in any meaningful sense, and the biggest accomplishment of their defense industry has been reverse engineering a bunch of obsolete weapons from the 70s. The Gulf Arab countries and Saudi Arabia in particular have very capable air forces. Let’s not forget that Iran is also surrounded by Turkey, Pakistan, Russia, Israel all of whom can beat the living daylights out of Iran in less than an afternoon. Given all these I was surprised why Stratfor has seemed to reverse its position on Iran’s military capabilities.”
The Stratfor two-sided articles are aimed each at different purposes and different audiences. When, they said The Iranian military capabilities are no match for US, the objective was to reassure the US (and Israeli) audience that an attack is very possible and also probable, the same old “All options all on the table” BS.
On the other hand, when they over emphasize the Iranian capabilities, the propaganda is directed to the Arab Persian Gulf monarchies so they buy multi billion dollar weapons to counter the so called Iranian threat.
BTW, is it not strange that Stratfor article appears just before the USATODAY article (the link I provided) talking about that huge US-Iraq arms deal ?
I agree with you that the Iranian military is no match for US’. But that is not the point. I don’t want to go in detail in this matter but first, bombing Iran out of hell from thousands feet above can hardly be a durable solution bringing political stability (given that a ground invasion is out of the question). Also, before attacking a country, the US used to weaken it, so to limit their casualties. This is not the case for Iran (maybe the sanctions are aimed at that but not sure they work without Chinese and Russians on-board). You have to remember that the pain threshold isn’t the same for the two parties as Iranians keep saying. I don’t think American public can afford the loss of 10K US marines in such an adventure.
Now going back to Iranian capabilities versus Persian Gulf Arab states including Saoudians, is comparing apples with apples. In this, I very much doubt the sophisticated arms these countries keep buying from the US can in any way help them to resist any Iranian potential threat in the first place. Having them is not enough. Have they the knowledge and personals to use them ? I very much doubt. They don’t even think about it and for good reasons. Don’t you think attacking a 70 million people’ nation by those small monarchies is a kind of foolish ? If it can be an indication, Iranians resisted Iraq in that war in which almost all the planet sold weapons to Iraq with financial backing of all the Persian Gulf monarchies, at a time Iran was weak, its army decimated by continual purge and with just 40M inhabitants.
Also, we’re talking here about potentials. As you know, American doctrine in this region was based on balancing powers between Iran and Iraq.
Nasser, you named countries like Turkey and Russia. I don’t think they can enter into the equation as far as Persian Gulf is concerned. So, absent a powerful Iraq, Americans can first sell billions of dollars of weapons to the Gulf states (that they’ll themselves use them anyway in case of a war – they just need to deposit them somewhere near the battle ground).
Second and most important in my view is that not only they now have a good pretext to sell huge quantities of weapons to Iraq but because Iraq is not yet able to have a real army to defend its integrity, is a kind of invitation to American forces to stay there. This is why (with many other reasons) I don’t think Americans will leave Iraq in 2011. BTW, you can see who benefits the most with a weak Iraq… Selling huge amount of weapons is an indication that Americans are there to stay for long (as in Japan and Korea).
Some say (including James Canning in another thread) that the Iraq war wasn’t because of oil. How is it possible to not see so many indications showing it was, from Bush&Cheney families relationship with big oil to the diminishing reserves.
Out of 6 gallons of oil used in the world, only the equivalent of 1 gallon comes from newly found oilfields. In order to maintain the current consumption, new oilfields equivalent to the entire Saoudian oild fields must be found in 20 years. And don’t count on OPEC reserve estimations that are only aimed at rising the quota of each nation in order to sell more oil.
What Americans have done in stationing in Iraq is like saying to Europeans and Chinese: look, don’t even think about dumping your dollars or beginning a war cause we can close the oil valves in a minute. Without secured oil resource an army is obsolete. Almost all the wars in 20th century were because of oil including first and second WW. Americans don’t even need to boost the Iraqi oil production for now. Just being present there is enough a message. If you remember about the end of Iran-Iraq war, they began what was called the tanker war. At this point and only years after the beginning of the war, US and European navies entered the scene by escorting the tankers. The culmination was the shooting down of the Iranian civil airbus plane by USS Vincennes (apparently a mistake -gimme a break- for which Americans never apologized and Vincennes officers were awarded medals) to show that oil circulation is untouchable. Few weeks after that crime Iran accepted the cease-fire.
Thanks to the Revolution I must add.
Nasser,
Personally, I don’t know anyone who wishes to move to the UAE. The UAE is a slave state that has roughly two million slaves from Pakistan, The Philippines, and Bangladesh. What does it produce? Does it produce medicine? Has it developed in the field of nanotechnology, stem cell research, and satellite technology? Does it produce its own food? Does it have a high-tech industry? Does it make any of its weapons or doe it just send billions of dollars of oil money to buy American weapons? Does it have a high ranking university?
Iran has all of these and more.
Nasser: I appreciate the length of your response, and the experiences behind them. Thank you for it.
Castellio,
“The community values of Islam can be a firm foundation for a sane future… but destroy the community values and end up either with Dubai or Saudi Arabia: rigid class structures where values are perceived solely as an impediment to modernization or useful to keeping everyone ignorant. Dubai or Saudi Arabia need not be the choice.”
- Ask any person from the Middle East, doesn’t have to be an Arab: would you rather live in Dubai or in Iran? What do you think the answer will be? Everyone wants to emigrate to Dubai, no one really cares for Iran. Dubai is considered the modern day jewel of Islam. When you begin to consider starting out how far behind Dubai was to Iran the transformation seems even more striking. So I really don’t understand your condescending attitude towards that place. The people of Dubai will not turn against Makhtoum like how the ungrateful population of Iran foolishly turned on the Shah and brought in Khomeini if that is what you mean by rigid.
“The “socialist” movements in the middle east (Egypt is a good example) faltered in their popular appeal, at least in part, due to their secular approach. They were no friend of the Muslim Brotherhood. You are aware of at least some of that history, aren’t you… at least a little? If now, in the union movements of Egypt, there is a relatively small movement to ally forces between the socialists and the MB, given a common foe… do you really think that alliance will last?”
- The brotherhood has a nasty habit of assassinating (or trying to) Egyptian presidents and thus tends to make quick enemies of whoever is the ruler of Cairo that day be it Nasser, Sadat, Mubarak and whoevers next; this is not about ideology. My point was that the Muslim Brotherhood is populist and tends to primarily draw its support from the lower strata of society. It promises “economic justice” and tries to empower the lower classes. The Justice and Development Party in Turkey as the name suggests also tends to be big on that “economic justice” thing. That is why I called these Islamist movements “socialistic”. I suppose fyi has a more apt term in “egalitarian”. If you are one of those European types and that term socialism is sacred to you or something like that and I have offended you by not using the dictionary definition then I am sorry. But you are dismissing the similarities in these mass movements and agitation from the lower ranks of society simply because the Middle Easterners are religious and the Europeans were secular.
“And I imagine that your understanding of the middle class of Egypt is rooted in the higher middle class, if I can use that term… and yes, I have had many such conversations… and I agree there is disdain for the pious peasants… but that hardly makes the disdain appropriate or far-sighted.”
- If you read my original post you would notice that I was responding to a post by fyi and I tried to contrast the attitudes of the middle classes of the three most populous countries in the region Egypt, Turkey, and Iran.
In Iran the middle class wanted to be “far-sighted” and cared deeply about the impoverished masses and ended up relinquishing power to the lower classes. They thus shot themselves in the foot because those impoverished lot were also religious crazies. They turned on their once allies and imposed an alien way of life on those better cultured people. As fyi notes such “egalitarianism of Islam was transformed into a form of egalitarian envy of and tyranny over people with higher Intellect and nobler spirits by the common people.” The people of Northern Tehran regret this now and educated kids often ask their parents what the hell they were thinking when they did their revolution. They hate how a hillbilly like Ahmedinejad controls the minutia of their lives.
I was pointing out that the middle classes of Egypt and Turkey tend to view the empowerment of the lower classes and Islamism as a “packaged deal”. If they drew any lessons from Iran it is this. They say once you empower the lower classes get ready to impose Shariah, get ready to clad your daughter in a black hefty bag and have every minutia of your life dictated to you by some village yokel. That is Islamism to them. They thus back the status quo authoritarian regimes, dictatorial though they may be because they fear the alternative would be far far worse. The debate in Turkey on religion and secularism is more about class than religion per se. A woman in a headscarf for example is seen to be from a lower section of society; that is really more of a class thing than a religious thing. Westernized Turks thus back the military as sort of a protector of their type as a check against such unchecked populism that might bring in the wrong type of people. The Mubarrak regime similarly enjoys support because the Middle Class fears what the Islamic Brotherhood would bring.
Nasser writes: “Which strata of society do you suppose the Muslim Brotherhood gets it support from?” as if, since the strata is lower, it must be “socialist”. But that’s such an historical fallacy.
Nasser:
The “socialist” movements in the middle east (Egypt is a good example) faltered in their popular appeal, at least in part, due to their secular approach. They were no friend of the Muslim Brotherhood. You are aware of at least some of that history, aren’t you… at least a little?
If now, in the union movements of Egypt, there is a relatively small movement to ally forces between the socialists and the MB, given a common foe… do you really think that alliance will last?
And I imagine that your understanding of the middle class of Egypt is rooted in the higher middle class, if I can use that term… and yes, I have had many such conversations… and I agree there is disdain for the pious peasants… but that hardly makes the disdain appropriate or far-sighted.
The community values of Islam can be a firm foundation for a sane future… but destroy the community values and end up either with Dubai or Saudi Arabia: rigid class structures where values are perceived solely as an impediment to modernization or useful to keeping everyone ignorant.
Dubai or Saudi Arabia need not be the choice.
FYI writes: “Socialism is not the right word; egalitarianism is more apt.”
Community values are a blessing.
Castellio,
“The Muslim Brotherhood as a hotbed of socialism? Now that’s just funny… where does Nasser get his information?”
Where do you get yours? Which strata of society do you suppose the Muslim Brotherhood gets it support from? Ever been to that country? Ever had a conversation with an educated Egyptian from a well off family? If you did you would have noticed how much they look down on those pious peasants.
James Canning,
“I wholly agree with you the Stratfor analysis is rubbish, and an oblique promotion for foolish additional squandering of American tax dollars on unnecessary weapons.”
The main point of the article was that an air campaign would be militarily easier for the US than the delicate and messy counter insurgency operations it is currently engaged in. Eric Brill and others have argued the same thing on this forum before if I remember correctly. I usually agree with your analysis but I am not sure how you can factually disagree with that point.
imho,
I posted the article precisely because Stratfor had a different take on Iran than before. Hence the title: “RETHINKING Options on Iran.” Stratfor has previously argued that threats of interdiction in the Persian Gulf is almost tantamount to a nuclear credibility on Iran’s part and should deter attacks. Stratfor also always maintained and I agree with them that Iran’s naval capabilities are actually very limited and they PROBABLY wouldn’t be successful in their efforts BUT that is not a risk the US is willing to take. So an attack without a major provocation is very unlikely.
What was different about this article and it puzzled me somewhat is that Mr. Friedman seemed to overly exaggerate Iran’s military capabilities. Stratfor and the Leveretts have pointed out several times that regardless of what you make of Iran’s intentions, that country has very limited force projection capabilities and therefore not really a threat to its neighbors. Iran’s armor is obsolete, their navy includes a bunch of civilian speed boats, they DO NOT have an air force in any meaningful sense, and the biggest accomplishment of their defense industry has been reverse engineering a bunch of obsolete weapons from the 70s. The Gulf Arab countries and Saudi Arabia in particular have very capable air forces. Let’s not forget that Iran is also surrounded by Turkey, Pakistan, Russia, Israel all of whom can beat the living daylights out of Iran in less than an afternoon. Given all these I was surprised why Stratfor has seemed to reverse its position on Iran’s military capabilities.
Given all of Iran’s weaknesses it is really surprising and yes annoying why they keep employing such extreme rhetoric and overly antagonize powerful countries like the US and Israel. I think Mr. Friedman is correct when he says that US can just lose it and ground Iran to dust if it wanted to even more so than what it did to Iraq and Serbia and it will be far easier to do than the delicate work of counterinsurgency the US is currently engaged in. I think sometimes when you are faced with really stubborn people that won’t listen to logic they have to be smacked really hard till they come to their senses. That is what Sherman did to the Southerners and the US did to the Serbs.
frontierville secrets,
The two titans of American TV journalism, Edward R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite, did not have to contend with a system where the narrative is controlled by Jewish financiers.
Fiorangela,
I wholly agree with you the Stratfor analysis is rubbish, and an oblique promotion for foolish additional squandering of American tax dollars on unnecessary weapons. Is Stratfor just a lobby shop for the armaments manufacturers?
imho,
The Saudis consistently say that Israel’s oppression of the Palestinians is the primary threat to peace in the Middle East. And what “fear” of Iran’s military should be felt by the Saudis? None? Any Shia disaffection and unrest would be a greater problem, by far, if Israel launches an insane attack against Iran.
Castellio:
Socialism is not the right word; egalitarianism is more apt.
The roots are in the idea of a (Religious) Commonwealth.
The Muslim Brotherhood as a hotbed of socialism? Now that’s just funny… where does Nasser get his information?
Nasser:
Iranians nag a lot and much of their complaints is at the level of “Why in God’s Name the sky is blue?”
I think that subsidies are endemic to much of the world: fuel subsidies exist in China, in India, in South Africa and elsewhere. Likewise for food.
I think snactions and the expansion of the population is forcing the government of Iran to dilute subsidies. They no longer can afford it. At the same time, that will cause the determinism of oil tyranny to come to an end.
The Revolt of the Masses has been a constant for the last 300 years – first in Western and Central Europe and now among Muslims.
Nasser, quoting Georg Friedman’s tired pseudoanalysis: the kind of war the United States excels at fighting. No conventional land invasion, no boots-on-the-ground occupation, just a very thorough bombing campaign. If regime change happens as a consequence, great, but that is not the primary goal. Defanging the Iranian state is.”
1. Some American bubbleheads are aware of Friedman/Stratfor’s agenda — mostly, to sell “cutting edge analysis” that’s as sharp as last week’s Gillette blade, and to use that dull blade to appeal to masses of duller knives to yearn for war, death, destruction, which suits Friedman’s real constituency, the arms merchants, just fine:
” “Fear is a very dangerous thing,” said British Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin after World War I. “It is quite true that it may act as a deterrent in people’s minds against war, but it is much more likely to act to make them want to increase armaments….”
David Petraeus and Robert Gates have been using “fear of Iran” to hawk US military hardware to Saudi and Emirate deep -pocket princes, most notably at the annual Manama Dialogs, since at least 1999. Both gents are please with their progress so far: $18 billion in sales to UAE in 2007; $30 billion in 2009. For the US to “defang” Iran would be utter folly; it would kill the goose that lays the golden egg.
2. Stratfor’s last sentence is the tell card: it reveals what US does WORST: understand the strategic situation, respect the national sovereignty, abide by the standards its insists others commit to, namely, the rights of people to choose their own government. It is not for the US or any other over-weaponized under-controlled racist and elitist regime to “defang” states that are not an imminent threat to the aggressor. That’s what the United Nations is all about; Stratfor appears to have failed to consider that organization in its analysis.
Nasser,
thanks for the link but I think the Stratfor analysis is wrong on several points. However, I agree with it, as I always though, that Saoudis are much more concerned by Iran (its military, its Shia card to incite uprising in other Persian Gulf states, its century rivalry with Arabs, etc.) than Israel.
Don’t forget that Ahmadinejad’s rhetoric is against Arab monarchies, verbal attack against Israel being only a means of this political calculus.
Iranians, despite their threat will never block the strait of Hormuz as they didn’t during their war with Irak. Doing this is shooting on their feet because this would also play economically against them.
The huge amount of military equipment sold to Israel, UAE, Saoudis and now Iraq (http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2010-08-31-Iraq-arms-deal_N.htm) was only possible thanks to the Iranian strength on their conventional military besides the fact that that threat is also over-emphasized. So the -false- perception of this threat must be there even if Iranians will not play offensive and their doctrine against overwhelming US force is on counter insurgency. The idea of Iranians attacking Kuwait and not stop there (as Saddam did) but getting south to Arabia is simply ridiculous and just a propaganda.
As for Iraq, first, after several months from elections, they can’t yet form a new government which indicates Iranians somehow are still pulling the strings. Second, I very much doubt that the US will leave Iraq in 2011.
US human rights? Obama didn’t even mention the hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis in his speech.
Stratfor has put up another article on Iran: http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20100830_rethinking_american_options_iran
“The United States is very good at gaining command of the air and attacking conventional military capabilities (see Yugoslavia in 1999). Its strategic air capability is massive and, unlike most of the U.S. military, underutilized. The United States also has substantial air forces deployed around Iran, along with special operations forces teams trained in penetration, evasion and targeting, and satellite surveillance. Far from the less-than-rewarding task of counterinsurgency in Afghanistan, going after Iran would be the kind of war the United States excels at fighting. No conventional land invasion, no boots-on-the-ground occupation, just a very thorough bombing campaign. If regime change happens as a consequence, great, but that is not the primary goal. Defanging the Iranian state is.”
The Der Spiegel interview shows Mottaki to be reasonable, as has Ahmadinejad on the occasions I have seen him interviewed. We are paying a price for an incompetent (or ideologically slanted) media which results in a terribly uninformed public. Not a good place to be for the US. The answer to the question in the title of the blog post is a clear no! It should be obvious to all that we are not acting in good faith with regards to Iran. Where are Edward R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite when you need them?
And regarding Hillary “we can obliterate Iran” Clinton… “The most powerful nation in the known universe is sending into the most important negotiation of our times a person who is not prepared for the task by experience or intuitive skill, and who is known to be emotionally and career-wise beholden to Israeli interests.”
…Well said by Fioangela Leone!
But let’s not forget the other person who is “career-wise beholden to Israeli interests”, that would be the gentleman in the Oval Office.
“…why the audicity and the audacity of empowering the lower classes. Next thing you know they’ll want to earn equal wages for equal work, and have a say in their own governance. Fie! Nevahh!”
My assertions are not as preposterous as you claim, there are many people in the Middle East region that feel that way but you wouldn’t know that from your little American bubble. The Egyptian middle class seems to agree with me and back the Mubarak regime against the Muslim Brotherhood. The aversion to Hizbollah in the richer parts of Lebanon has more to do with class warfare than just ethno-religious differences. Secular Turks hailing from the Western parts of Turkey dread the Islamists lest some village yokel imposes their way of life on them; the military is a barrier against such unchecked populism. In their neighboring country they have seen a hillbilly like Ahmedinejad dictate a way of life to the better cultured people of Northern Tehran. Unlike those countries, the middle class of Iran were infected with silly notions of communism and anti Westernism and shot themselves in the foot. Other well off people in the region WILL NOT make that mistake, they back the regime that looks after their well being and provides stability.
most assuredly so, Nasser; why the audicity and the audacity of empowering the lower classes. Next thing you know they’ll want to earn equal wages for equal work, and have a say in their own governance. Fie! Nevahh!
sheesh. undoubtedly your excrement is nonmalodorous.
kooshy, what to do? just watch idly as history crashes down around us? I at least want to go down protesting.
fyi, thank you for the explanations. The connection of the Abrahamic religions to Zoroaster is one of organized religion’s most carefully guarded secrets. Are you aware that Charles Colson runs his prison ministry on the concept of “what you think is what you say, and what you say is what you do,” which is another way of saying, “Good thoughts, Good Words, Good deeds.” The ironic part is that Colson created his prison ministry to “claim souls for Christianity,” the souls of prison inmates who were converting to Islam. The bottom line, in politics and in aberrant religion, is “Who’s in charge.” Neither Jesus nor Zoroaster sought to take charge of other people’s lives, but urged each man to accept responsibility for his own integrity.
fyi,
“And over the centuries, this latent egalitarianism of Islam was transformed into a form of egalitarian envy of and tyranny over people with higher Intellect and nobler spirits by the common people.”
Ah, really well said! Islam is a socialistic disease and I think the empowerment of the lower classes in Iran has been a real tragedy for that country. The middle classes of Egypt and Turkey seem to realize this and thus back whoever opposes the Islamists no matter how ruthless they may be, whereas the Iranian middle class turned against the Shah.
Speaking of socialist policies, why do you suggest that Iran can rid itself of those wasteful subsidies? The regime seems to justify its credibility with a sort of quasi socialist message. Also, once you have given the Iranians something it is nearly impossible to take it back. Take for example the ridiculously cheap prices of gasoline which increases Iran’s dependence on imports and forces it to forego valuable foreign currency earnings. Iranian sense of entitlement is so strong that they consider it to be their “god given right” and any effort to raise prices are met with riots.
Fiorangela,
Great post. And I assume Morgenthau and Levey would not be concerned about sanctions avoidance carried out by Israel. Hypocrisy and gross stupidity are the order of the day.
fyi,
I agree the quality of the Chinese goods will improve over time. I think a considerable problem arises in oil and gas production where the quality difference is substantial (between European and American, compared to Chinese).
How many thoudands of jobs in “the West” are lost because the policy toward Iran is so foolish?
Fiorangela Leone:
Muslims insist that Quran is the Word of God. (Christians insist the Jesus himself was the Word of God.)
But not all that is part of Muslim practice can be traced to the Quran.
Male circumcision –as a sign of covenant with God – is nowhere to be found in the Quran but it is so much part of Muslim practice that without it a male cannot claim to be a Muslim.
The idea of not losing one’s self-control is nowhere in the Quran and yet it is an integral part of Muslim ethos.
By the same token, male or female homosexuality, drug use, and pedophilia have not been condemned in the Quran and thus there are divergent views on those topics. (At least male homosexuality is condemned in the Leviticus and Deuteronomy, if my memory does not fail me.)
It is in this way that parts of Sharia can exist without reference to the Word of God – it exists on the basis of the Quran, the practices of the Arabs, and the Judaic precepts of Talmud (much of which had come from Zoroastrian Priesthood)
Islam, like Reality, is Integral. It does not accept separation between various spheres of life. It is for this reason that in Islam separation of the Church and the State (Politics) cannot obtain.
In Christianity, there is the famous Hadith of Jesus who stated: “Give that which Caesar’s to Caesar and that which is God’s to God.
Islam is a simple religion (compared to Christianity, or Hinduism).
It is a religion for the common people.
It originated within people with a strong sense of egalitarianism.
And over the centuries, this latent egalitarianism of Islam was transformed into a form of egalitarian envy of and tyranny over people with higher Intellect and nobler spirits by the common people.
In Christianity, the unresolvable argument between Reason and Faith, between Athens and Jerusalem, has been going on for almost 2000 years. In Islam it died some time in the 12 Century of the Christian Era.
One contributor was Mr. Ghazzali who advised Muslims that they did not need to think, that Reason only misled them from the straight path; a thoroughly acceptable position for a lazy population.
This is what we are facing among the Muslim people, the inability or unwillingness to think. That is, the desire to put their minds on auto-pilot and follow whoever tells them what and how they should think.
To this, you must add that for 3000 years, in the Near East, no one’s life, property, or honor of their women and children has been safe and secure for any length of time.
Significantly, the theoretical basis for the change in Sharia only exists within Shia Islam and if there is any hope of for the future it lies in the experiment called Islamic Republic of Iran.
It is only in Shia Islam too that you find any delicacy of feeling and emotional life.
Sunni Islam is barren and breft of both.
Fiorangela
“What could possibly go wrong?”
Nothing – I also did listened to the NPR report this morning, when it came to mention that Clinton doesn’t have the negotiation experience of HK and JB, I thought well so what, since we have such skilled experienced reporters and the media which can convince the majority of us to believe the night is a day and the day is a night, and are now congratulating us that yes we can, we won the Iraq war, did we really?, they are convincing us that yes we did, and we even should call President Bush and congratulate him for the surge which made this great victory possible, so why one would be worried if Clinton may fail, when we all can be easily convinced that she is the virtual winner. You see as it was said “reality is now what we make” at least the virtual one.
James Canning:
The polciy makes sense if your aim is to keep Iran down and do not expect anything yes.
Your are correct about the Chinese goods – some are fine and some are not. We have to use their shoddy trains in Iran while we much would have preferred the German and American trains and locomotives.
This is the price we have to pay.
There is no other way.
Overtime, we expect the Chinese goods to imporve.
I am German. I stopped reading the SPIEGEL 10 years ago. Why should I pay for the same kind of propaganda I can see on TV every day?
James Canning, ah, yes, those sanctions. So necessary to achieve whirled peas.
Apparently whirled peas are not kasher.
Israel A Significant Importer, and re-Exporter, of Iranian Goods, Contrary to US Sanctions
”The Americans can afford to do things that others can’t.” Catarivas explains that as a small country dependent on foreign trade, Israel needs to separate politics and economics and refrain from economic boycotts. “In the same way that we are outraged against attempts to boycott us , we’re the last ones that should support boycotts of any kind,” he adds. . . .
“The exquisite lobby of Bank Leumi’s management building on Yehuda Halevy Street in Tel Aviv accentuates the contrast between the ancient and pastoral nature of the restored Mani House, and the modern pace of life. Perspiring men in button-down shirts walk quickly past the 1930s-style porch, and conversations on mobile phones reverberate in the impressive space. Heels click on the gleaming marble, and one after another the senior bank officials enter and go up to their offices, which overlook the Tel Aviv cityscape.
It is interesting to consider what the late judge Malkiel Mani would say, if he knew that the directors of the bank—the shares of which are still held by the state—were scurrying about on marble that was quarried in Iran.
Bank Leumi was among the first in Israel to purchase the Iranian Gohare stone, which is named after the ancient city of Gohar-Tappeh in Iran, and quarried mainly in Isfahan, in central Iran. The marble stone, the hues of which combine beige and gray, became popular among Israeli architects, and was soon purchased by many traders in Israel, along with other Iranian marble stone.
But how did marble reach Israel from Iran, a state with which trade is barred by law? Through the ultimate transit station — Turkey. The stone slabs arrive in containers marked “Made in Turkey,” accompanied by Turkish documents, and easily pass through customs agents at the ports. This is only one of the methods for camouflaging the country of production, for goods coming from countries with which Israel does not have trade relations. This does not refer only to marble: Other products also make their way to Israel in a similar fashion, including textile, carpets, candy and of course pistachios.
Readers should be aware that, in compliance with the wishes of the Jewish community in New York City, Robert Morgenthau’s office levied fines on at least ten international corporations, mainly BANKS, like Leumi, that “camouflaged” their transactions with Iran. The fines — which Mayor Bloomberg called “windfalls,” amounted to about a billion dollars and were split amongst the US Treasury, NY state treasury, and NY City treasury.
In addition, Stuart Levy, an ardent Israelist, travels about the globe tirelessly, twisting the arms of companies and banks that do business with Iran, threatening them with fines for so doing, and exerting efforts backed by the bona fides of the US government Department of Treasury, to constrict Iran’s economy and to punish international corporations that do business with Iran.
What’s wrong with this picture?
Fiorangela,
Iran is obliged to replace German, Italian and other industrial machinery and equipment sources with Chinese, sue to the sanctions. The Iranians obviously have no option even though they much prefer the higher quality obtained from European sources, which the sanctions now deny them access to.
fyi,
When you say the West has a meaningful policy toward Iran, surely you do not mean it makes good sense.
kooshy:
West has a meaningful policy in regards to Iran; deterrence, containment, economic warfare, and information war.
Just look at the French and their tiny outpost in the persian Gulf.
I do not think these types of policies will realize US & EU aims but they cannot but try, can’t they?
Persian Gulf – hysterical fears of a declining housing market are amusing. It’s not a “declining” market, it’s a correcting market; trees don’t grow to the sky and no country can sustain tulipmania housing prices. If you bought a house at the peak of the bubble, prepare to get hurt or plan to live in it for the next 20 years. It’s not that complicated.
otoh, C Span conducted a discussion of Chinese economic relations with US and provided some very interesting information: one intriguing comment suggested that Chinese actions withdrawing money from US financial system had more to do with US financial meltdown than did the collapse of the housing bubble and the financial shenanigans engaged in by AIG and Goldman Sachs et al. :http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/id/232025 China’s Economic Power.
On a related note, Tehran Times reports that Iran-China trade is at $30 billion annually and in five years will reach the $50 billion mark, up from $3.5 billion ten years ago. “Mehdi Ghazanfari pointed out that Iran and China have enjoyed meaningful relations with one another which have been stable and significant throughout the past.”
Sanctions? Iran don’t care about no stinkin’ sanctions.
kooshy,
Some of the concern voiced in the “West” for civil rights in Iran, is genuine, but most of it is in effect a red herring intended to distract attention from Israeli oppression of the Palestinians.
Fiorangela,
Let’s remember that Hillary Clinton had a good deal of sympathy for the Palestinians, back in the early days of the Clinton administration. Jewish financiers subsequently made it clear to her that getting a senate seat from New York, and perhaps getting into the White House, required condoning Israeli oppression of the Palestinians – - no matter how much damage that oppression did and does to American interests in the Middle East.
fyi, My Italian-American father served in the US Navy and left part of his body in Sicily, fighting in Patton’s campaign.
This morning, NPR reported that Hillary Clinton will conduct negotiations at the US State Dept between Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestine’s Mahmoud Abbas. The report highlighted the fact that Clinton has very little negotiating experience.
Imagine that. The most powerful nation in the known universe is sending into the most important negotiation of our times a person who is not prepared for the task by experience or intuitive skill, and who is known to be emotionally and career-wise beholden to Israeli interests.
What could possibly go wrong?
On the other hand, Netanyahu is so impotent that he is incapable of sanctioning a rabbi who has published a book that “encourages the murder of goyim,” and Abbas represents only the American wing of the Palestinian people, so maybe Clinton will find some common ground after all: none of the parties has any integrity.
With lack of having a meaningful policy for Iran, If the west wants to once again move and focus the Iran agenda on Iran’s human rights issues, Iran and Iranians not only should welcome this new initiative by the west, but they must also draw the discussion to a much broader international treatment of human rights in which the west and particularly US is more globally not only accused but actually admitted to many various mistreatments of people around the glob , and still refuses to accept international organizations like ICJ.
What it shouldn’t be allowed, is using the human rights as a tool to pressure Iran for west’s political proposes, unless the west is willing to discuss this as an international issue in which their human rights mistreatments (current and past) is also open and on the table for discussions. Would US, France, Germany etc. agree with that I doubted.
Chris,
Considering the thousands of Palestinians and Lebanese civilians Israel has slaghtered over the past 30 years, it indeed is a spectacle for the Israel lobby to try to focus attention on Iran, on the issue of denial of human rights! Murderous rampages are just part of what Israel does, in the ordinary course of its business.
Fiorangela Leone:
In WWII, Italians were known for their excellence in (Military Engineering).
There are grave sites of Italian soldiers in Russia and Ukraine – do not know if they are consecrated now or not.
Imho,
I agree with you that most Americans are not even aware they are barraged with propaganda, courtesy of most US newspapers, TV news, etc.
Pirouz,
I concur completely: Mottaki is a class act! And he does not just run through a set of talking points, the way Hillary Clinton does.
Bravo! As I previously indicated in the prior post, Spiegel’s interview with Mottaki was larded with neocon rubbbish.
Ahmadinejad told Russia Today a while back that he had gone to New York City six times, and each time the same questions were put to him, none of them seriously bearing on relevant foreign policy issues.
friends used to tease my Italian self, offering to sell me a World War II era rifle, “never fired, only dropped once.”
eh.
We Italians are lovers, not fighters.
“…finest combination of reason and restraint and integrity…”
The gutting started with Reagan, the man so many Americans loved and admired.
link http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/id/232041
several of the questions from the audience were as ignorant as we’ve come to expect from MSM, but the panel was superb, of the finest combination of reason and restraint and integrity. That’s what I used to think America stood for; we Americans need outside influences such as Muslims and Middle Eastern cultural influences to bring us back to who we ought to be.
Fiorangela Leone:
“Word” and not “word”.
But your point was also emphasized in the Ancient Zorastrian spiritual exercise:
“Good Speech, Good Deed, Good Thought”
Fiorangela Leone:
Ordinary people in Germany are tired of paying money to Jews, to Gypsies, and now to Greeks and assorted others.
They want to put the NAZI past behind them and I agree with them.
The war ended 3 generations ago.
Even in the Bible the vengence of God ends after the 4-th generation.
I just listened to a panel discussion featuring James Zogby, Salam al-Maryati of Muslim Public Affairs Council, Azizah Al-Hibri, Chair, Muslim Women for Human Rights. They talk about the ways non-Muslims as well as some Muslims, and especially the main stream media, distort and Luntzize Islam and Muslims in the US.
The hour and a half conference was balm to a brain weary of der Spiegel-ish propaganda.
“In the beginning was the word, and the word was with god . . .” Gospel of John, 1,1
“Who sins not with his tongue sins not at all.” -St. John Chrysostom
I would so wish to see Zogby’s group and other Muslim groups with which he is allied, join forces with Iranian advocacy groups like NIAC and CASMII.
Persian Gulf:
For almost 20 years Paul Sweezy, the Marxist economist, warned of the (some would say cancerous) growth of the Finance Sector in US in the editorial pages of the Monthly Review.
Later, coming from a different economic orientation, Patrick J. Buchannan also warned of the consequences of “selling American jobs abroad to finance the military”.
When a conservative and a leftist agree on something you must pay attention.
But American leaders did not.
The problems US face will take a decade or longer to resolve.
They ruined their own country, no doubt.
Fiorangela Leone:
All countries in the Western Hemisphere are more violent than countries in the Old World, so to speak.
The number of murders, each year, in the Los Angeles county, is more than that of entire Italy – a country of 70 million.
Just look at what is transpiring in Mexico.
fyi – re Shoah: see Despite reparations paid to Jews in excess of $60 billion, tens of thousands of Holocaust survivors live in poverty
A comparison of US – Iran – Israel rates of crime and imprisonment is instructive: Iran has the lowest numbers and percentages in all three categories; Israel is a close second, US has the worst record: US has twice the percentage of homicides as does Iran, and US prison population is about 1.5 times greater (proportionally) than Iran’s.
It’s hard to interpret statistic regarding Israel; one never knows if Arab Israeli are included or if Arabs in occupied territories are included. Arab Israelis are residents in Israel but not citizens of Israel — they do not have citizenship rights, receive inferior education, services, employment opportunities, housing, etc. Palestinians — persons living in occupied territories — are NOT Israeli citizens nor are they ‘residents’ in Israel. Israel holds somewhere around 11,000 Arabs, some of them children, in Israeli jails; many have been held for years, without charges and without access to legal process.
It is indeed dreadful to stone a person to death. Almost as inhuman as spraying a child with white phosphorus then turning away while the child rushes to the nearest water source to try to wash away the burning, which only increases his torment.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/LI01Dj01.html
Norman Robbins:
Mr. Ahmadinejad is only saying what hundreds of millions of Muslims (and possibly hundred of millions of non-Muslims) think; that Shoah is fabrication used for justification of the theft of Muslim/Palestinian lands.
I would not be surprised if 99 % of Muslims believe that and that 2/3 of Muslim leaders do not believe any of that.
West has lost Muslims on Shoah, etc.
I would say the US human rights record is far worse than Iran’s. For western countries supporting racism and carrying out mass murder or shock and awe is the norm.
Frank Luntz, the professional message maker, maintained “It’s not what you say; it’s what people hear that matters”. I strongly suspect that the majority of readers of the Spiegel interview will remember ONLY that Iran crazies are at it again, stoning some poor woman, period, and will probably not even read on to or listen to Mottaki’s reasonable responses. This, as intended, will add to other “news items” that keep up the image of Iran’s government as irrational, not subject to reasonable negotiations, and likely to take unprovoked violent action. As readers of this blog know, Iran’s own human rights violations and some of Ahmadinejad’s gratuitous statements (e.g. questioning the holocaust) reinforce this impression.
We all are aware of and have used arguments to counter the belief of many mainstream Americans that Iran is irrational. My question to the Leveretts and to the readers of this blog is: In your experience, which if any of these arguments or lines of discussion have actually changed anyone’s mind?
But this is precisely the point being made: people who stone people are not human, they are sub-human. So, bombing the nuclear facility and killing many of them does not matter since they are sub-human anyway.
Cyrus:
After 1979, the Iranian people and their leaders entered into a fantasy project which was the construction of an Islamic (Shia) Utopia.
That project still animates many people in Iran – both in the leadership positions and among the public, although not as much as before.
You will have to wait another 20-40 years before that project is finally given-up and buried.
At such time, Iran will still be a bastion of Shia but her leaders and people would have finally grasped the impossibility of their Utopian project.
In the meantime, more people have to suffer these fools.
Look guys, as well as Mottaki et al do in these sorts of attack-interviews, the fact remains true that someone was sentenced to stoning in Iran, and that should simply not be the case. You can’t complain when you hand over such a wonderful PR tool to the likes of Der Spiegel if they then proceed to use it against you. Iran could do much to stop shooting itself in the foot.
Mottaki really slapped him down. The 3 o clock comment was sheer genius. Shame on Der Spiegal.
The interview is a symptom of the EU attitude to undeveloped countires. In my judgement, about 50% of the EU citizens think of themselves as morally superior people to the rest of mankind.
Used to be that in US, when talking to a typical man or woman, you must agree with them that their country is the best in the world. In EU, you have to agree with them that they are superior human beings.
In neither case dissent is an option (to them).
At the end of he interview it says: “Interview conducted by Dieter Bednarz.”
Is that not the case?
Iran has shown time and again it can play in the Big League, and win a few matches too…
Definitely this poor manner of a journalist is no match for a statesman the weight of Mottaki.
And finally, to call a spade a spade, the name of the interviewer, Mr. Aslon Arfa.
Guess the origin?
I’ll give you a hint: it’s not German.
I just read the interview. WOW. It just shows that the western media has no credibility.
The reporter definitely knew that Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani was not going to be stoned. This is all just to put pressure on Iran.
The subtext here is that it is acceptable for Israel to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities but it is unacceptable for Iran to stone someone to death. Which of these actions will cause great death and destruction? Which is really barbaric? The West also kills people, sometime innocent people. Have forgotten about Ahmadou Diallo?
This is one clever way the Israel lobby and their stooges change the subject of issues in order to leave out the real issues. With the human rights mess Israel has created in Gaza, it just unbelievable that supporters of the regime will want to complain about the human right situation in Iran.
Pirouz_2: “Spiegel” is the perfect example of the “free press” in the west! Spiegel, BBC, CNN, FOX, etc. etc. are exactly AS INDEPENDENT AS the Fars news agency, nothing more and in all due fairness nothing less.
Well said.
I’d add that, since Iranians know how valuable is Fars news agency, they’ve learned to look elsewhere for real news and analysis. Unfortunately, this is not the case of western people and specially Americans who even don’t know they’re under the strongest propaganda ever. Things are slowly changing thanks to Internet but again they are also doing a good job on disinformation in that medium and also Joe Liberman is passing a law to shut it off (no joke) whenever they “decide” there is any national security risk.
Having read the entire transcript it seems that Spiegel aspires to producing interviews of the quality and style of BBC’s Hardtalk. But this was a lame-duck excuse for a tough, probing interview. It appears to have escaped Spiegel’s attention that when Hardtalk asks tough and/or impertinent questions drawn from the public domain, the interviewee is allowed to answer them without being cut off.
Spiegel produces some good work from time to time but this was an unusually juvenile and lacklustre effort from a journal of Spiegel’s reputation.
Hardly surprising though. Germany is one of the circa 2 dozen countries referred to by James Petras as Zionist Occupied Governments. His essay on the subject didn’t spell out the entire list but they outed themselves at Davos, or some such international congress, when they boycotted and/or walked out on Ahmadinejad’s address at Israel and ZOG America’s bidding.
Asia Times published an interesting piece from a writer with the pseudonym Axel Brot three years ago called “The re-engineered Ally” outlining the disconnect between the German people and their government.
Spiegel is probably still making up its mind whose side it’s on.
I am sometimes dissapointed in Mr. Mottaki’s performances in front of western media. He really hit this one out of the ballpark though.
“Spiegel” is the perfect example of the “free press” in the west! Spiegel, BBC, CNN, FOX, etc. etc. are exactly AS INDEPENDENT AS the Fars news agency, nothing more and in all due fairness nothing less.
The interview is a joke. I fail to understand how anyone can say Spiegel has credibility or is reliable.
One must admit, that Mottaki is a class act. I was pleased he was asked to continue through President Ahmadinejad’s second term in office.