I disagree. Power in Iran cannot be measured in Western terms. Ideology, religion and political power are intertwined to the point where a political leader (such as the Shaw) can be usurped from within. It is an unstable environment that cannot safely support the acquisition of nuclear weapons. History is full of pivotal leaders who amassed great power by creating a popular will to do so.
Magiver I think the division of power in Iran is more solid than you make it to be. The current president doesn’t have the popularity to break the current deadlock… nor do other groups. At least that is the impression I have.
Naturally decades from now it might be different and I would agree that in the long term Iran having nukes isn’t a good idea. I just don’t see how it can be justified right now without the US and Europe breaking their own rules.
I really am not in disagreement with how the status quo of Iran is viewed. I look at the current Iranian President from a future perspective. Hitler was a private in the army who eventually built his political empire on the bones of the vanquished.
Hitler got a divided and frustrated Germany… so you might have a point. I just don’t think this current guy has the chutzpah to do it. Some other might.
Still the issue of how do you manage to avoid Iran getting nukes without being VERY hypocritical ?
A good point but if any Islamic nuclear state is likely to end up in fundamentalist control it is Pakistan. Which is a good reason not to go murdering innocents in bombing raids. Whatever minor triumph this entails, even ignoring the innocent deaths, it just digs a grave for the current regime.
As the recent episode with CNN has shown, trying to translate a poetic language like Farsi can prove problematic. If you understood Farsi and spoke English fluently, then you would have heard this during the President’s speech:
The West has been promoting a fact. This is the holocaust of the Jews. If this is fact, then why do they not take responsibility for it? Why do the Palestinians pay the price for the actions of the Europeans.
If you were to translate it literally, you would have understood that he called it a myth, but a native speaker understands that he was not questioning the holocaust, per se. He was saying that the West continuously tells us that the holocaust occurred but they do not take responsibility even though they know it to be true. He was neutral, at worse. He never denied it.
The Iranian government reiterated the misunderstanding but it did not get much attention
I’ve no cite handy, but yes, it has been widely reported, so it shouldn’t be difficult to find. Also, the powers of the former Iranian president, have been expanded precisely to keep a closer check on the current one. So, it seems that they’re more warry of him than they are of his predecessor, who notoriously had a number of disagreements with the more conservative clerics (he’s himself a cleric).
I don’t know what are the disagreements from an ideological point of view, but I understand he’s not considered to be fit for the job, and in particular regarding diplomatic issues.
Wow, could the West have gotten it all wrong?
Can you point to the part of the Al-Jazeera article that shows Iran denies the holocaust occurred? Because I’m becoming convinced that hasn’t been said at all. Rather, it seems the translation employs ‘myth’ to suggest narrative or legend rather than fictitiousness.
"In a speech broadcast live on state television on Wednesday, Ahmadinejad told a crowd in the southern city of Zahedan: "They have fabricated a legend under the name Massacre of the Jews, and they hold it higher than God himself, religion itself and the prophets themselves.
“If somebody in their country questions God, nobody says anything, but if somebody denies the myth of the massacre of Jews, the Zionist loudspeakers and the governments in the pay of Zionism will start to scream.”*
I dunno, Sevastopol, if “fabricated”, “legend” and “myth” (as reported by Al-Jazeera) don’t convince you that Iran’s prez is denying the Holocaust, you’re engaged in some pretty strenuous denial yourself.
Ah, but the Interior Minister quoted in the article does not seem to be aware of what his own country is doing:
However, this is in direct contradiction to the Foreign Minister who announced, almost exactly one month later, Iran plans Holocaust conference.
Oh, I don’t know about that.
During his presidential campaign, Ahmadinejad was backed by powerful conservatives and second-generation revolutionaries known as the Abadgaran, or Developers, who have a strong influence in the Iranian parliament. Ahmadinejad also is widely believed to have the unspoken endorsement of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Hoseini Khamenei.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/iran/leader_ahmadinejad.html
Not at all. “fabricated a legend” means what it says. It doesn’t mean ‘fabricated the holocaust’. It’s the myth they’ve made of it that I read as fabricated, not the historical event. This seems to me not only a proper reading of that statement, but the best reading of it.
Contrariwise, had Iran wished to deny the holocaust, or had it done so, then there are much more plain ways of saying so; shorter and less ambiguous words. Yet I’ve seen no evidence of such.
A nuclear-armed Iran is worrisome as enough radical elements exist in a position of power in the government to make the Iranian governments less easy to predict in terms of pragmatism. Frankly I still wouldn’t be worried about a “first strike” on Tel Aviv, but I would be worried that they would panic more easily than some other governments.
As to inevitability, it means just that. I don’t believe the Iranian nuclear program can be stopped by less than either a full invasion or maybe a sustained and very heavy aerial bombardment ( we’re not talking a few surgical strikes here ). As has been pointed out Iran’s nuclear program is dispersed and somewhat hardened - destroying it is simply not going to be easy and I don’t think it’s going to happen. Even if it did, it won’t eliminate Iran’s will - if anything it will strengthen it. Eventually they’ll rebuild and start all over and one of these days they will in get there. Where there’s a will ( and resources which Iran has ), there’s a way.
- Tamerlane
No disagreement that Pakistan is a serious problem. That operation was probably supported (tacitly) with the understanding that failure would fall on the US. Not sure how much more damage it can do to the regime since the President gets attacked on a regular basis.
Looking back on the last Iranian election shows that the ruling mullahs are willing to fix an election. The conclusion drawn from that is a desire for a puppet head of state under the guise of a democratic election. Any statements made by the President of Iran have the de-facto approval of the religious leaders who put him there. It also affords them a mouthpiece they can dispute publicly (for show) and yet still get the message out.
What would Arabs know about Farsi?
It is important to remember that there is a difference between denying something and investigating the actual nature of the event. It is absolutely fair to question the facts when it was determined that the Simon Wiesenthal Center had doctored photographs and that embattled Jewish scholars have questioned the magnitude of the numbers.
Only those with something to hide would deny a review of the facts surrounding a historical event.
Maybe there is something to this linguistic misunderstanding hypothesis.
I checked with an unimpeachable Farsi scholar (he works down at the local kebab joint) and it turns out that one notorious speech by Iran’s president was mistranslated, i.e. this one:
“There is no doubt that the new wave [of attacks] in Palestine will wipe off this stigma [Israel] from the face of the Islamic world.” Recalling the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, leader of Iran’s Islamic revolution, he (the president) said: “As the imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map.”
It turns out that Pres. Ahmadinejad was actually joking with the crowd about a little accident he had at lunch. Seems he was chowing down on falafel (the Ayatollah’s favorite recipe) while poring over a map of the Mideast, when some garbanzo beans spurted onto his nose. As he was wiping off his face, a couple drips fell down onto Israel, which he at first indignantly took to be new settlements. But he realized his mistake once he wiped off the map.
See? Joke! Hah!
Quite a kidder, that President is.