Personally I think that the report is mind-blowing. Not because the information is new (we have tried to give most of this information to different stakeholder-states, including the U.S. for some years now), but rather because the report clearly reveals that the U.S. is very well aware of Iran’s military activities, but at the same time the U.S. seems completely lost regarding how to thwart Iran’s efforts to attain nuclear weapons and become the dominant military power in the region.
Just a couple of days ago Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the United States Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a forum at Columbia University that “Iran getting a nuclear weapon would be incredibly destabilizing. Attacking them would also create the same kind of outcome.”
It is quite obvious that the Obama administration essentially has no strategy for dealing with Iran; they are only pondering two alternatives attacking Iran (which they are not really thinking about) and letting Iran attain nuclear weapons and hope for the best.
But there is a third alternative that would benefit everyone, and that is to support and empower Iran’s democratic and secular opposition in order to bring about regime change. But it seems that the Obama administration doesn’t even consider this as an alternative.
]]>
At the same time as the Islamic Republic of Iran sends millions of dollars to extremist Arab organizations in Lebanon, Palestine and Iraq the Arab population of Ahwaz in Iran suffers extreme poverty and discrimination.
The Islamic Republic of Iran portrays its self as the champion of Arab rights in all of the above-mentioned countries, but the Arab population of Iran faces discrimination and violence in all spheres of life. Every year hundreds of Arab-rights activists are imprisoned, tortured, raped and executed in Iran just because they raise their voices about the gross living conditions of Arabs in Iran.
The province of Khuzestan, which has an Arab majority, produces the majority of Iran’s oil, but none of the benefits of the oil reach the people living in the region. The Islamic Republic of Iran drains Khuzestan of its riches and systematically oppresses the Arab population, only to send its oil profits to Arab-extremists in other parts of the region.
This kind of policy is expected from the regime in Tehran, but what strikes Arabs in Iran as strange is that no Arab country or organization raises their plight or objects to Iran’s treatment of their kinsmen.
Pictures showing the living conditions of Arabs in Iran:
]]>
The Obama administration’s Iran policy has failed dramatically. Obama’s efforts to engage the regime in Iran failed, its efforts to pressure Iran on the nuclear issue are failing and has even led to a potential conflict with China. The EU follows suit. But a noteworthy change is that the IAEA, after that El-Baradei left the agency, has stepped up its pressure on Iran. But this will not change Iran’s policy to pursue nuclear weapons, because the framework in which the agency works makes it possible to manipulate.
Efforts to impose sanctions on Iran (especially in its “crippling” form) will most probably fail; China and Russia will hinder any such efforts. A military attack, especially if it only targets Iran’s nuclear plants, will also fail and could even lead to strengthening the regime. The IAEA’s new approach could help the U.S. and its allies to put more pressure on Iran, but it in the end it will not bring about any real change.
As for the self-described experts proposal to unconditionally engage Iran, one can only hope that the proposal is rooted in some kind of ultra-radical realism and that the individuals working for this approach are not stooges of the Islamic Republic. The proposal to ignore Iran and hope that the problem will wither away is quite amusing but not a practical.
The mistake that both governments and pundits in the West does in regard to Iran is that they change their policies and views based upon social and political changes in Iran, which they often misunderstand or misinterpret due to lack of understanding and information about the reasons behind these changes. A very recent example is that when the expected demonstrations on the anniversary of the 1979 Revolution in Iran didn’t turn out to be as large and as violent as expected, pundits and so called experts declared the opposition movement, that staged several anti regime demonstrations after the June 2009 presidential elections, dead.
Assuming that the regime has total control and that there will be no more demonstrations because the regime managed to prevent large demonstrations on the anniversary of the revolution is wrong. The opposition will grow and become more effective.
Even though the first demonstrations began as a reaction to the election fraud that took place during the Presidential election, the actual reason behind the demonstrations was a deep-rooted dissatisfaction with the rule of the Islamic regime.
Realistically, the only chance that Iran’s nuclear program is halted is if the regime is changed and the system of the Islamic Republic is changed into a secular and democratic system of government.
The fact that the demonstrations have not spread to regions in which Kurds, Balochs, Arabs, Turkoman and Azeris are in majority is the largest problem that the movement faces. These nationalities fear that their legitimate demands will not be met if individuals that are loyal to the Islamic Republic comes to power.
But as the demonstrations have continued and the real demands of the people in large cities like Tehran have become similar to those of the different nationalities, the possibility that these nationalities will join the demonstrations have increased dramatically.
For this to be possible, the struggle of the freedom-seeking people of Iran needs the support of governments that have a direct interest in removing the current regime. This support should not be short termed and it should not depend on the current regimes willingness or unwillingness to negotiate about its nuclear program.
Western governments should support the opposition morally, politically and in any other way that could help the democratic opposition to overthrow the Islamic Republic. Regime change will not only be in the interest of the people of Iran, but it will also bring about stability in large parts of the Middle East and it will also be in the direct interest of Western states.
]]>
The Middle East Institute will host Carol Prunhuber, my colleague Sharif Behruz who works as the PDKI’s U.S. representative and my brother Idris Ahmedi for a lecture about the political, social and human rights status of Iran’s Kurds
Read more on the MEI’s website – Prunhuber will speak about Kurd leader Abdul Rahman Ghassemlou whose untimely assassination by the Iranian regime twenty years ago robbed the Kurdish nation of one of its most prominent and forward-thinking leaders. Her recently published book The Passion and Death of Rahman the Kurd: Dreaming Kurdistan (iUniverse, 2010) situates the life and political struggle of Ghassemlou in the wider Iranian political context. Sharif Behruz will address the impact of Iran’s Green Movement on minority groups like the Kurds and the need for Iran’s opposition to be more inclusive in order to gain significant political ground. Idris Ahmedi will discuss contending perspectives on the future of Iran with respect to its ethnic diversity. Is diversity a threat to Iran’s territorial integrity, or a facilitator to the rise of meaningful democracy?
]]>Regarding the Israel-Palestine conflict. Our party has traditionally supported the Palestinian peoples right to self-determination and we believe that a two-state-solution would bring about the end to some of the political and military tension in the Middle East.
Regarding the Kurdish peoples/organisations relationship with Israel, most of what is being claimed is conspiracy theories and manufactures rumours for political purposes. But it is important to underline that there are over 60 000 Kurdish Jews living in Israel, and it is natural that they have a close relationship with Kurds in Kurdistan and the Diaspora. Furthermore, the Kurdish people, unlike some other nations in the region, have never had any animosity against the Jewish people or the state of Israel, on the contrary the Kurdish Jews are highly respected and loved by their fellow Kurds.
But the notion that the Kurdish people (or some Kurdish organizations) and the state of Israel is conspiring against some or all of the states in the region is just ridiculous. Our party certainly does not receive any military or financial support from Israel.
Regarding our position on armed struggle. We do not reject armed struggle, but as a political principal we believe that all conflicts should be solved peacefully. Unfortunately, the Kurdish people in Iranian Kurdistan, and other parts of Kurdistan, have been forced to take up arms against different regimes that have oppressed and subjected the Kurdish people to all kinds of violence.
Our party has since its establishment in 1945 believed that it is the Kurdish peoples natural right to have an armed force to protect the Kurdish people from both external and internal enemies, and this belief was the main reason why our party was the first Kurdish political party to establish the Kurdistan Peshmerga Forces in 1945.
Since then our Peshmerga Forces have fought for the rights of the Kurdish people and will continue to do so in the future. But it is important to underline that the Peshmerga Forces have never engaged in military attacks against any military or political entity outside of Kurdistan, our Peshmerga Forces have only responded militarily when the Kurdish people have been attacked.
For example, the Peshmerga Forces have never attacked any military positions in Iran, despite the fact that the Peshmerga Forces could easily have done this in the past and could do so in the future. The war against the Islamic Republic only began when Ayatollah Khomeini declared a “Holy War” against the Kurdish people and sent almost a quarter of a million armed soldiers and paramilitary forces to suppress the Kurdish peoples desire to attain autonomy and democracy.
With that said, we would restart an armed struggle if we believed that it was in the interests of our people, but at the moment we think that there are other opportunities that are less costly in terms of human lives that are worth pursuing.
]]>Read – US investigates nuclear trigger as Tehran damns bomb ’scenario’
Read – US House passes Iran sanctions bill amid nuclear row
Read – Iran’s Mottaki defiant on UN nuclear sanctions threat
Read – Iran will not bow to sanctions
Watch – Iran’s Smoking Gun:
Iran has grown bolder during the last couple of years and, the latest evidence of this is Iran’s proxy war against Saudi Arabia in Yemen. Iran has become a threat for both large and small Sunni Arab countries, which has brought about an arms race in the region.
Read – Saudi Arabia, long the major arms-buyer in the region, is now being overtaken by relative minnows such as the United Arab Emirates as they share their neighbour’s fear of the growing military strength of their Shia neighbour.
Related videos:
It is quite absurd to expect anything else from Iran, they will prolong this Cat and Mouse game as long as they can, and the U.S. only seems more and more desperate by refusing to accept the reality that Iran will not go along with he p5+1 proposal to send large portions of its uranium to Russia and France.
But as always, the possibility of new sanctions is always in the air, and new meetings are planed to talk about how to handle Iran. The whole Iran nuclear deal is becoming more and more ridiculous, everyone knows that Iran won’t go along with Western demands, but the U.S. and its allies insist on grasping for straws.
]]>Since the establishment of the Islamic Republic, the theocratic regime in Tehran has pursued an aggressive foreign policy to spread the Islamic Revolution outside of its borders. During the past 30 years, Iran has armed, funded, supported and in some cases even established extremist Shiite organizations all around the world in its attempt to garner more influence around the world.
For example, the Iranians don’t hide their support for Hezbollah in Lebanon and other Shiite groups in the Middle East like the Sadrists in Iraq. Iran is also arming and supporting different extremist organizations in Afghanistan, including Iran’s former archenemy the Taliban’s.
Some Western analysts argue that Iran is doing this because it feels threatened by Western Powers; this line of thought is completely wrong. With a mix of misguided thoughts of the time when Persia was a large empire and a strong belief that the Islamic Republics version of Islam should be spread around the world, Iran is attempting to obtain regional supremacy, and if possible to even become a global super power.
]]>