Iran is the Greatest Threat to the West and the Arab Countries (not particularly to Israel)

Iran is not Israel’s real problem. Iran is a greater threat to the West and then the Arab nations around her.

Preview and History

The history of the Persian Jews has been uninterrupted for over 2,500 years. It is a Mizrahi Jewish community in the territory of today's Iran, the historical core of the former Persian Empire, which began as early as the 8th century BCE, at the time of captivity of the ancient Israelites in Khorassan (eastern Iran).

As of 2005, Iran had the largest Jewish population in the Middle East outside of Israel. A larger population of Iranian Jews reside in Israel with the President of Israel Moshe Katsav, the Defense Minister, former Chief of Staff Shaul Mofaz, Ex Air-Force  commander Dan Halutz  and Israeli hip-hop star Kobi Shimoni (Subliminal) being the most famous of this group.

Relations between Iran and Israel have alternated from close political alliances between the two states during the era of the Shah to hostility following the rise to power of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.   Upon its establishment in 1948 and until the Iranian Revolution in 1979, Israel and Iran (ruled by the Pahlavi dynasty) enjoyed cordial relations. Iran was one of the first nations to internationally recognize Israel, and was considered Israel's closest Muslim friend.  After the second phase of the 1979 Iranian Revolution which witnessed the establishment of the Islamic Republic, Iran withdrew its recognition of the state of Israel and cut off all official relations. However, Iran is said to have purchased weapons valued at $2.5 billion from Israel through third party intermediaries during the Iran-Iraq war during the 1980s and the 1990s. This has been alleged to have been part of the Iran-Contra scandal.  In 1998, Israeli businessman Nahum Manbar was sentenced to 16 years in prison in Israel for doing business with Teheran, and in the course of the investigation, "hundreds of companies" were found to have illegal business dealings with Iran

Israel also had dealing with Hizzboulah for exchanging their kidnapped officer and other missing soldiers. Dealing with Hizzboulah may also initiate indirect channels of communication with Iran.

Iran’s History - Successive Empires:

The Persian Empire was a series of historical empires that ruled over the Iranian plateau. The political entity which was ruled by these kingdoms is the country now known as Iran (literally "Land of Aryans"). Generally, the earliest entity considered a part of the Persian Empire is Persia. Some of the important periods of the Persians empires are listed below:

Achaemenid dynasty (648–330 BC): United Aryan-indigenous kingdom that originated in the region now known as Fars and was formed under Cyrus the Great.

Sassanid Empire (AD 226–650):  The Sassanid (or Sassanian) dynasty was the first dynasty native to the Pars province since the Achaemenids; thus they saw themselves as the successors of Darius and Cyrus. They pursued an aggressive expansionist policy. They recovered much of the eastern lands that the Kushans had taken in the Parthian period. The Sassanids continued to make war against Rome; a Persian army even captured the Roman Emperor Valerian in 260.  The Sassanid Empire, unlike Parthia, was a highly centralized state. The people were rigidly organized into a caste system: Priests, Soldiers, Scribes, and Commoners. Zoroastrianism was finally made the official state religion

The Safavid dynasty (15-18 Century): Links medieval with modern Iran. The Safavids witnessed wide-ranging developments in politics, warfare, science, philosophy, religion, art and architecture. But how did this dynasty manage to produce the longest lasting and most glorious of Iran's Islamic-period eras

Qajar dynasty, ruling from 1779 to 1925: Persia found relative stability in the Qajar dynasty, ruling from 1779 to 1925, but lost hope to compete with the new industrial powers of Europe; Persia found itself sandwiched between the growing Russian Empire in Central Asia and the expanding British Empire in India. Each carved out pieces from the Persian Empire that became Bahrain, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and parts of Afghanistan.

Iran was left unprepared for the worldwide expansion of European colonial empires in the late 18th century and throughout the 19th century.

Period after World War I:  By World War I, Iran was not the world power it had once been. It had become a tool in the political battles of other empires. In 1919, northern Persia was occupied by the British General William Edmund Ironside to enforce the Turkish Armistice conditions and assist General Dunsterville and Colonel Bicherakhov contain Bolshevik influence in the north. Britain also took tighter control over the increasingly lucrative oil fields. In 1925, Reza Shah Pahlavi seized power from the Qajars and established the new Pahlavi dynasty. However, Britain and the Soviet Union remained the influential powers in Iran into the early years of the Cold War. United States helped the Shah to stay in power until his dynasty demise in 1979 after the Iranian revolution and the creation of the Islamic Republic of Iran.   Islamic republic theoretically is a state under a particular theocratic form of government advocated by some Muslim religious leaders. In an Islamic republic, the laws of the state are required to be compatible with the laws of Sharia, Islamic law, while the state remains a republic.

In summary we can say that the successive states in Iran prior to 1935 can be collectively called the Persian Empire.  From 1979 it became the Islamic Republic of Iran, practically speaking, a historical empire stripped out of its original glory and it historical past.

The new Islamic regime objectives:

1.      Rebirth of the Persian Empire which will control the whole Moslem world and perhaps the west in the future.

2.      Abolition of the monarchies of the Middle East regimes.

3.      The re­gime's desire to hide its Shiite identity so that it can claim the leadership of radical Islam.

4.      The re­gime's desire to hide its non-Arab identity so that it can claim leadership of the Middle East.

5.      Re-direction of pan-Arab nationalism movement and pan-Arab Sunni Islamism

In the Islamic Republic of Iran (established in 1979), the president and members of the legislature are elected by direct vote of the citizens (although many westernized and pro-monarchy Iranians object to these elections as a means of legitimately choosing leaders). Iran's Islamic republic is in contrast to the constitutionally democratic and partially secular state of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (proclaimed as an Islamic Republic in 1956) where Islamic laws are technically considered to override laws of the state, though in reality they rarely do.

Today, the creation of an Islamic Republic is the rallying achievement for Islamists all over the world. However the term itself has different meanings among various people. Many proponents of Islamic Republics advocate the abolition of the monarchies of the Middle East, regimes which they believe to be overly secular or otherwise destructive to Islam.

If Israel was not in the middle-east, the energy of pan-Arab nationalism movement, which dominated Arab politics in the post-war era, would have been directed against two other neighbors: Turkey and Iran.  Even today, the Arab League claims that the Turkish province of Iskanderun is "usurped Arab territory" and regards the Iranian province of ????? ' Arab hind."  Both pan-Arab nationalism and pan-Arab Sunni Islamism are as much mortal foes for Iran as they are for Israel.  If Israel will not exist the Arabs objective will be to get rid of Iran (non Arab Shiites who are not “real Moslems”).

Iranians Ethnic Groups:

Persian 51%

Azeri 24%

Gilaki and Mazandarani 8%

Kurd 7%

Arab 3%

Lur 2%

Baloch 2%

Turkmen 2%

Religions:

Shi'a Muslim 89%

Sunni Muslim 9%

Zoroastrian, Jewish, Christian, and Baha'i 2%

 

Iranian society is composed of only 51% ethnic Persians. The Shi’a Islam is the only common denominator that exists in Iran. Without Islam they have a great chance of instability due to ethnic composition of Iranian society.

Most Arabs are Sunni who do not like Shiites because they believe they are not true Moslems.  Iranians are mostly Shiites, non-Arab (not considered real true Moslems by the Sunni Moslems, which are about 85-90% of Moslems).  Iran is interested in having Israel as a cause to unite its own people and then unite the Moslem world while redirecting their anger toward Israel.

Why does Iran now have a face-off war of words with Israel?

Recent Declarations of Iranian Leadership:

·         Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenai explained in Jan. 2001 that 'the foundation of the Islamic regime is opposition to Israel, and the perpetual subject of Iran is the elimination of Israel from the region.'

·         Khamenai said in a recent sermon that 'the cancerous tumor called Israel must be uprooted from the region.'

·         In Dec. 2001, former Iranian President Hashemi Rafsanjani called the establishment of the Jewish state 'the worst event in history,' and declared his intention to decimate Israel, clarifying that 'one [nuclear] bomb is enough to destroy all Israel,' and that 'in due time, the Islamic world will have a military nuclear device.'

·         Iran’s President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has challenged the reality of the Holocaust and said that Israel must be “wiped off the map.”

Israel is the easiest target to direct the energy of pan-Arab nationalism and anti-west sentiments. Israel is also a subject that unifies the Arabs.  Arabs see Israel as a western entity planted in the Middle East with western support. The Arabs see Israel as a western plot, an idea of which interpreted differently, is in essence anti-west sentiment redirected toward Israel. 

Iran in realty does not want the destruction of Israel or its removal from the middle-east. Israel’s existence is important for Iran’s goals and in truth; Iran does not want Israel to be annihilated. According to Iran’s President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Jews have to return to their original countries. Iran does not want the several hundred thousands of Iranians Jews returning to Iran.  Iran knows exactly what the composition of Israel’s population is. Iran has about 25,000-35,000 Jews living in its borders. Bringing more Jews to Iran and then the rest of Mizrachi Jews to the Arab world is not a real objective neither perceived by the Iranians nor accepted by the Arab countries of the middle-east. Furthermore, Iran’s President understands that without Israel, Arab anger would have been directed against Iran (and Turkey).  Also, tough rhetoric against Israel (sub-consciously against the west), will present Iran as a leader of the Moslems while causing the Moslem world to forget that Iranians are non-Arabs Shiites. In other words, Iranians are neither Arabs nor “real Moslems”.  What he says in public is just “show business”.

As a main motive to unite the Moslem world and as a theocracy with a fundamental lack of accountability, Iran's nuclear program brings the free world's several great nightmares. WMDs falling into the hands of Islamic terrorists and a loose extremist state with nukes hoping to achieve its past glory as an Empire.

Israel’s Past Actions

The West’s interest was always to keep the flame in the Middle East so the Moslem’s anger will be focused on Israel.  In fact, part of Israel's problems now and in the past, stem from the failure of its successive leaders to steer the country clear of other middle-eastern quarrels, and the lack of understanding of western objectives in the Middle East.

In successive wars during the Cold War, Is­rael destroyed the Soviet-built arsenals of sev­eral Arab countries. That helped protect Washington's Arab allies against aggression by pro-Soviet Arab powers — and thus kept the Soviets from gaining indirect con­trol of the region's vital oil re­sources.  Israel also taught Washington ways to build new weaponry to fight soviet hardware. In addition, Israel taught the Pentagon generals strategic modern fighting schemes against Soviet made hardware and fighting schemes against middle-east powers.

In 1981, Israel knocked out the French-made Iraqi nuclear-weap­ons center, even though Saddam Hussein was making that bomb to drop on Teheran. The Israeli action helped the major powers avoid ca­tastrophe in a region vital to their interests. Is­rael's reward? Being described by Jacques Chirac, then mayor of Paris, as "a criminal state."  Washington, Israel’s ally joined the nations condemning Israel.

Possible Actions by Israel

Patrick Clawson, an Iran expert who is the deputy director for research at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and who has been a supporter of President Bush. “So long as Iran has an Islamic republic, it will have a nuclear-weapons program, at least clandestinely,” Clawson told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on March 2nd. The key issue, therefore, is: “How long will the present Iranian regime last?”

Some claim they've found the perfect solution to Iran's nu­clear ambitions. It's simple: Is­rael attacks the Islamic Repub­lic to destroy much of its nuclear infrastructure, setting the bomb project back by a decade, time for a more re­sponsible regime to emerge in Teheran. This would please the Europeans, because it would remove the spotlight from their ap­peasement policy, which is partly responsible for the crisis. They could shake their heads in a "told you so" gesture at the mullahs, and feel glum about their ability to stand above dirty games played by "immature powers" such as the Islamic Republic and Israel. The Americans will also be happy (who clearly lack a policy on Iran).  The Arab states also will be happy because Israel took care of the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran.

Russia will also be happy. Hostility to its neighbor is deep-felt in Iran, which lost territory to Russia in bitter wars with the Czars. By the middle of this century, Iran's population will outnumber Russia's. A nuclear-armed Islamic Iran would emerge as an even stronger player.

Former members of the Russian military have been secretly helping Iran to acquire technology needed to produce missiles capable of striking European capitals. The Russians are acting as go-betweens with North Korea as part of a multi-million pound deal they negotiated between Teheran and Pyongyang in 2003. It has enabled Teheran to receive regular clandestine shipments of top-secret missile technology, believed to be channeled through Russia. As in 1981 when Israel knocked out the French-made Iraqi nuclear-weap­ons center and then was scolded by the French, so it may be the same that when Israel knocks down the Russians Hardware, it will be scolded by Russia. Behind the curtains, France was very happy, so will be Russia.

The EU-3 nations of Britain, France and Germany -- which have negotiated with Iran in hopes of reaching a resolution -- together with the United States must work to persuade other nations to join their stance, said Merkel.  "And we will certainly not be intimidated by a country such as Iran," she said.  However, these nations will not do anything. They will wait for the US or Israel to do their job.

Implications of Israel’s Attack

The implications of this analysis is an emerging picture of Israeli raids on Iranian nuclear facilities resulting in three advantageous outcomes: damage to Iranian nuclear ambitions, the possibility of taking politically popular military action in southern Lebanon, and the involvement of US forces in weakening Iranian military capabilities. 

An Israeli attack could well drag the United States in, with consequences for longer-term US/Israeli relations.

Furthermore, Israeli planners would recognize that any major raids on Iran would be seen from Teheran as being done in conjunction with the United States, and there would most likely be Iranian retaliation against US forces in Iraq, or against oil-supply routes from the region. Either eventuality would necessitate a strong US military reaction that might weaken Iran.

Should America attack or Israel? Even a basic description of what will be entailed in a United States military operation against Iran is enough to sound a note of caution in Washington, and this might be what is prompting the back-channel talks that seem to be underway. Moreover, this brief litany omits other possible Iranian responses such as withdrawal from the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty; redevelopment of the damaged nuclear facilities to include a clear-cut weapons program, perhaps located in deep underground shelters; and encouragement of paramilitary actions against Saudi, Kuwait or United Arab Emirates oil facilities, potentially producing chaotic activities on world oil markets. Iran could also make life in Iraq even more difficult for United States forces.

If America does not strike, Mofaz is saying, Israel will. Yet, as that could produce the same results as an American attack, without the same assurance of success, Bush may have to restrain Israel, if he does not want a wider war.

Michel Samaha, a veteran Lebanese Christian politician and former cabinet minister in Beirut, said that the Iranian retaliation might be focused on exposed oil and gas fields in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates. “They would be at risk,” he said, “and this could begin the real Jihad of Iran versus the West. You will have a messy world.”

To be sure, Israel should make it clear that it would retaliate with double force against any attack. But it should also remind those urging it to act that the Islamic Republic's policies, in­cluding its quest for nuclear weapons, repre­sent a threat not only to Israel but to many other nations in the Middle East and beyond.

"When I despair, I remember that all through history the ways of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants, and murderers, and for a time they can seem invincible, but in the end they always fall. Think of it – always."
- MAHATMA GANDHI

Reporter: Albert Talker

Written by: Albert Talker

References: