| |
|
|
 |
|
Iran's President Threatens Israel with Annihilation |
|
|
|
|
Tuesday, 01 November 2005 |
 Iran Policy Committee press release
31 October 2005
Contact: Prof. Raymond Tanter
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
The President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, called for the annihilation
of the State of Israel. Speaking on Wednesday, 26 October 2005 to a
“World without Zionism” conference attended by some 3,000 students who
chanted “Death to Israel” and “Death to America,” Ahmadinejad conjured
up his vision of a world at war. Using a variety of negative terms to
describe Israel, he grouped it and the United States as being a part of
an ideological war between the “Arrogant World Order” and “Islamic
rule,” adding that, “Very soon, this stain of disgrace [Israel] will
vanish from the center of the Islamic world—and this is attainable.”
Ahmadinejad stated that, “Our dear Imam [The late Ayatollah Ruhollah
Khomeini, founder the Iranian Revolution] said that the occupying
regime [Israel] must be wiped off the map, and this was a very wise
statement.”
Ahmadinejad’s behavior takes on an even more sinister cast because he
repeated his threats against Israel on the day the clerical regime in
Tehran calls “Qods Day,” (Jerusalem Day). Islamists who rule Iran
designated Qods Day as the last Friday in the Muslim holy month of
Ramadan, which fell this year on 28 October 2005. Ayatollah Khomeini
used Qods Day to rally the Revolutionary Guards and street militia to
frenetic displays of hostility toward Israel, and the current Supreme
Leader, Ali Khameini, has directed his president to revive and go
beyond the earlier practice.
Ahmadinejad’s threats to wipe a country as small as Israel literally
off the map must raise urgent concern about Iran’s nuclear weapons
progress. Consider revelations by the pro-democracy Iranian opposition,
the Mujahedeen-e Khalq (MEK) and its associate coalition umbrella
group, the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), about Iran’s
clandestine nuclear weapons program. The MEK/NCRI revelations,
consistently corroborated over the past three years, have brought to
public awareness Iran’s uranium conversion facilities at Isfahan;
enrichment activities at Natanz, with thousands of centrifuges awaiting
installation; heavy water facility in Arak; and deep underground
tunnels to hide Iran’s nuclear program from the prying eyes of the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
As October comes to a close, there are also claims by a German monthly
magazine that Iran has been allowing more than two dozen senior al
Qaeda leaders, including three sons of Osama bin Laden, to roam freely
about Tehran. If true, these revelations deepen concern about the
Iranian regime’s intentions, given its increasing military
capabilities.
A suicide bombing in Israel came just hours after Ahmadinejad’s call
for violence: Five Israelis were killed by a suicide bomber from the
terrorist group, Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ). This group is almost
totally dependent upon Iran for financial and logistical support and
took part in the Jerusalem Day Rally in Tehran at which Ahmadinejad
repeated his threats against Israel.
Add to these examples of Iran’s continuing support for terrorism the
early October 2005 issuance of a direct threat to the United States and
its allies by Brigadier General Muhammad Kossari, who heads the
Security Bureau of Iran’s Armed Forces: In a statement of 11 October,
Kossari warned that Iran had identified “all the weak points of our
enemies” and had suicide operation volunteers “ready to strike at these
sensitive locations.”
The escalating rhetoric from Tehran coincides with the consolidation of
power under the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei since the June
2005 assumption of the presidency by Ahmadinejad. Consequently, there
has been an increased role for members of the Islamic Revolutionary
Guards Corps (IRGC), which now controls all principal levers of power
in Iran. The IRGC has responsibility for Iran’s nuclear weapons
programs and Shahab missiles. The result is greater repression at home
and greater risk-taking abroad.
The Middle East Times of Egypt acknowledged that Ahmadinejad’s
“comments have been hugely damaging for Iran, already under intense
Western pressure over its nuclear energy program—suspected as being a
cover for weapons development—and facing the prospect of seeing the
issue referred to the UN Security Council.” And an editorial in Egypt’s
Al-Ahram states that if the Iranian president feels concerned about the
Palestinian lands, “then it is best for him to stop interfering in
Iraq’s internal affairs.”
One theme from the Arab press is that Ahmadinejad has simply restated
the doctrine of revolutionary Iran under Ayatollah Khomenei. But
Ahmadinejad’s threats go well beyond those of Khomenei’s empty threats
of the 1980s; with Iran’s military buildup and nuclear weapons
programs, Ahmadinejad’s threats have a credibility Khomeini’s lacked 25
years ago. Ahmadinejad even threatens moderate Arab leaders. On Sunday,
30 October, he said that those Islamic state leaders who acknowledge
the sovereignty of the Israeli State, following the withdrawal from the
Gaza Strip, would stand against the Islamic world.
But official reaction from the Arab world to Ahmadinejad’s threats
against Israel is so muted as to imply support. According to numerous
media reports, many senior officials from Arab countries, when asked by
journalists about their reaction to Ahmadinejad’s statements, declined
to comment.
A notable exception among Muslim voices comes from Maryam Rajavi,
elected President of the Iranian Resistance. Madame Rajavi described
Ahmadinejad’s remarks about Israel as incitement to war: “From the
onset of Ahmadinejad’s Presidency, the Iranian Resistance warned that
the mullahs had made the decision to step up suppression of the Iranian
people and…war against the international community.” Rajavi said.
• In the event Ahmadinejad fails to cease repeating unacceptable
threats, the United Nations should follow up on its 28 October
Resolution that said: “The Security Council condemns the remarks about
Israel attributed to Mr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, president of the Islamic
Republic of Iran.”
• If Tehran does not respond appropriately to the UN Security Council
Resolution of 28 October 2005, which condemned Ahmadinejad’s threats
calling for the destruction of the State of Israel, Professor Raymond
Tanter, Co-chair of the Iran Policy Committee and also with Georgetown
University, stated that, “The Security Council should consider adopting
measures under Chapter Seven of the Charter, which would make it
obligatory on all Member States to comply.”
• “An American diplomatic initiative to Iran is the wrong signal at the
wrong time to the wrong country,” stated Professor Raymond Tanter. “It
would be a humongous mistake to show weakness to the Iranian regime
that would further embolden Tehran, which under Ahmadinejad is a threat
to Israel, the United States, and moderate Arab leaders,” Tanter added.
• “Offering to engage in U.S. back-channel negotiations with Iran would
be a major mistake, for it would send a counterproductive signal that
would encourage Supreme Leader Khamenei and President Ahmadinejad to
continue consolidating their power and not only making, but perhaps
acting upon, additional threats to Israel and the United States,”
stated Clare Lopez, Executive Director of the Iran Policy Committee and
former CIA officer.
• “Rewarding this regime with a U.S. back-channel diplomatic approach
after it has made so threatening and destabilizing a statement will
just encourage the regime. Not reacting strongly enough to the Iranian
challenge is just like not reacting strongly to al Qaeda in the 1990s…
it encouraged al Qaeda to do more and will have a similar effect on the
Iranian regime. We need to learn and then incorporate into action the
lessons from our past mistakes,” said retired Navy Captain Chuck Nash,
a co-Chair of the Iran Policy Committee.
• “A political solution in Tehran based on the Iranian opposition would
provide a shot in the arm for failing diplomacy and delay consideration
of more forceful options, which seem increasingly appropriate in light
of Ahmadinejad's call to eliminate Israel,” stated Bruce McColm,
co-Chair of the Iran Policy Committee and former Executive Director of
Freedom House. “The United States should empower the democratic Iranian
opposition by delisting the Mujahedin-e Khalq, and thereby tighten the
political screws on the regime,” added McColm. |
 Go To Top
|
|
English
Francais
Deutsch
Italiano
العربيّة
