Presents

What the United Nations Does on the Holiest Day
of the Jewish Calendar, Yom Kippur:

Provides a global platform to encourage hatred and violence against the Jewish State

October 9, 2008

Geneva, the Durban II “anti-racism” conference Preparatory Committee

Watch video here.
Durban II: A Conference to demonize Israel
October 9, 2008: The planning committee of an “anti-racism” conference listens politely to the racism coming from the Syrian Arab Republic, and BADIL, a Palestinian NGO

EYEontheUN videos are produced by Anne Bayefsky and Lana Zizic.

Antisemitism at the UN under the guise of “combating racism”

Iran - a Vice-President of the Durban II PrepCom - thinks the antisemitism expressed by the Iranian President is not relevant

October 10, 2008

Geneva, the Durban II “anti-racism” conference Preparatory Committee

Watch video here.
More attempts to silence NGOs

October 6, 2008: Anne Bayefsky (Joint Statement of the Hudson Institute, the Touro Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust, and the International Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists)

EYEontheUN videos are produced by Anne Bayefsky and Lana Zizic.

Full Asian text:  http://blog.unwatch.org/wp-content/uploa…
CONTRIBUTION OF THE ASIAN REGION TO THE DURBAN REVIEW CONFERENCE, 8 OCT 2008

Selections:

From preamble:

Recalling the 2001 Tehran Declaration and Programme of Action by the Asian Preparatory Meeting… [This text contained the most vitriolic language against Israel.]

From operative section:

18. Recognize Jerusalem as a city of reverence and religious sanctity for three major religions of the world and call for an international effort to bring foreign occupation, together with all its racial practices, to an end, especially in holy shrines dear to the three religions;

19. Reaffirm that a foreign occupation founded on settlements, its laws based on racial discrimination with the aim of continuing domination of the occupied territory, as well as its practices, which consist of reinforcing a total military blockade, isolating towns, cities and villages under occupation from each other, totally contradict the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and constitute a serious violation of international human rights and humanitarian law, a new kind of apartheid, a crime against humanity, a form of genocide and a serious threat to international peace and security;

26. Express deep concern at the plight of Palestinian refugees and displaced persons who were forced to leave their homes because of war and racial policies of the occupying power and who are prevented from returning to their homes and properties because of a racially based law of return, and recognize the right of return of the Palestinian refugees as established by the General Assembly in its resolutions, particularly resolution 194 (III) of 11 December 1948, and call for their return to their homeland in accordance with and in implementation of this right;

27. Re-emphasize the responsibility of the international community to provide international protection for the Palestinian people under occupation against aggression, acts of racism, intimidation and denial of fundamental human rights, including the rights to life, liberty and self-determination;

68. Express deep regret the practices of racial discrimination against the Palestinians as well as other inhabitants of the Arab occupied territories which have an impact on all aspects of their daily existence such as to prevent the enjoyment of fundamental rights, express our deep concern about this situation and renew the call for the cessation of all the practices of racial discrimination to which the Palestinians and the other inhabitants of the Arab territories occupied by Israel are subjected;

69. Reiterate that the Palestinian people continue to be denied the fundamental right of self determination and urge member States to look at the situation of Palestinian people during the Durban Review Conference and implement the provisions of DDPA with a view to bring lasting peace in the Middle East;

***

THE UN WATCH asks  UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and rights commissioner Pillay  to denounce denounce now this vitriolic Asian text accusing Israel of “apartheid and genocide.”

Geneva, October 10, 2008 — To prevent the derailing of a world conference on racism, independent human rights group UN Watch today called on UN chief Ban Ki-moon and rights commissioner Navi Pillay to immediately denounce a submission by Asian states that accuses Israel of “racial practices” against Palestinians, “a new kind of apartheid, a crime against humanity, a form of genocide,” as well as “aggression, acts of racism, and intimidation.”  (See full text below.)

“The Asian submission for the Durban 2 declaration reproduces almost verbatim the vitriolic incitement and hateful rhetoric of demonization that was produced at the Tehran planning meeting at the 2001 lead-up to the original Durban debacle,” said Hillel Neuer, executive director of the Geneva-based UN Watch.

“This was the poison that with supreme diplomatic efforts was mostly removed from the final Durban declaration — only after European states showed their readiness to walk out — but was adopted by the non-governmental forum, in a text that High Commissioner Mary Robinson summarily refused to forward to the UN, and which was denounced again last week by High Commissioner Pillay as a betrayal of the anti-racism cause.”

“The key lesson learned from 2001 was that the UN’s highest officials cannot stay silent until the very end, but must rather act immediately to denounce the language of incitement and demonization as soon as it rears its ugly head,” said Neuer.

“The fingerprints of Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who openly calls for the destruction of a UN member state, are all over this text. Governments and UN officials who want to safeguard the principles of human rights and the anti-racism cause must speak out forcefully, and fast,” said Neuer.

“French President Nicolas Sarkozy, the U.K., the Netherlands and other states have expressly warned that a repeat of the 2001 hateful rhetoric would force them to walk out of the April 2009 conference, and so the 53 Asian states who did this now bear full responsibility for the consequences of their provocation. Those who will suffer, however, will be the world’s millions of victims of racism and ethnic intolerance, from Darfur to Chechnya to Tibet.”

***

www.SustainabiliTank.info suggests humbly that during the time that Jerusalem was in Arab hands it was not a city equally accessible to all religions. Since the end of the British Mandate, it was only with the Israeli Government reclaiming its Capital of yore that the city is equaly accessible to all religions and the present circumstances in the Islamic world are no show of confidence that such freedom is possible under any other rule - be assured that also not if it were a UN city. 

If the UNSG does not speak up on the Durban issue, this endangers not just the Jewish people, but the basic credibility of the UN itself - the international marshmallow when the topic is Human Rights versus the Power of Arab League Oil Money.
=================

News Resources - Israel and the Mideast:

• Gaza Tunnel Owners Register with Hamas, Get Electricity
  Owners of the scores of tunnels running under the Gaza-Egypt border have registered with the Hamas authorities, pledged to pay workers’ compensation and hooked up their operations to the electricity network. In one place, dozens of large tents, each marking a tunnel work site, were pitched just yards from an Egyptian watchtower beyond the border wall. Hamas inspectors are notified of each delivery and check it on site. Officials from the municipality of Rafah confirmed they supervise tunnel operations. (PMC-PA)
• Rise in Number of Israeli Arab IDF Recruits in 2008 - Yoav Stern
  The number of Israeli Arab Bedouin recruits to the IDF has increased dramatically in the first nine months of 2008. The number is estimated to have increased by 50 to 100 from the beginning of the year, bringing the total number of recruits in 2008 to some 300. The rate of non-Bedouin Arabs’ recruitment has also increased in recent years. The law exempts non-Druze Arab citizens from compulsory military service.
  Lt. Amir Juamis, 27, of Beit Zarzir, who commands a military team, was asked how he feels about fighting with his people on the other side of the border. He said: “A terrorist is a terrorist. Islam doesn’t say you have to kill. He comes to kill here and can kill a Jew or an Arab. It’s my duty to prevent that.” (Ha’aretz)
• Iranian Boy to Undergo Surgery in Israel - Nurit Felter
  A 12-year-old Iranian boy suffering from brain cancer is scheduled to arrive in Israel on Friday for emergency surgery. The boy, who already underwent surgery in Tehran, was later admitted to a Turkish hospital. The Turkish doctors suggested the family seek medical assistance in Israel, and so they did, through Israeli liaison Jacob Levin. “When a child’s life is at stake, religion and origin play no part,” said Interior Minister Meir Sheetrit. “If we can help, we are more than willing to do so.” (Ynet News)

Global Commentary and Think-Tank Analysis (Best of U.S., UK, and Israel):

• The President Who Will Deal with Iran - Michael Gerson
  Economic downturns are wrenching but cyclical. Nuclear proliferation is more difficult to reverse, creating the permanent prospect of massive miscalculation and tragedy. America’s next leader may be known to history as the president who had to deal with Iran. Former chief UN weapons inspector David Kay says the Iranian regime is about 80% of the way toward its nuclear goals - perhaps two to four years from “effective, deployable weapons.”
  Kay believes that by simply saying a nuclear Iran is unacceptable, America is set up for a choice between “suicide” (a disastrous military attack on Iran) and “humiliation” (a galling acceptance of the unacceptable). Instead, Kay calls for a new round of “skillful diplomacy” to persuade Iran to stop at what he calls “virtual capability” - a global recognition that it could produce nuclear weapons in short order, without all the drawbacks caused by actually producing those weapons.
  Kay seems resigned to a policy of containment - holding Iran directly responsible if it transfers nuclear weapons to terrorists, providing nuclear guarantees to our friends in the region so they don’t feel pressured to develop their own. The problem with this approach? Iran may be a different proliferation threat from any we have faced before. The regime cultivates ties to violent nonstate proxies in Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan and the Palestinian territories. Iran’s religious radicalism introduces an unpredictable element of irrationality. The writer, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, served as a policy adviser and chief speechwriter to President George W. Bush from 2000 to 2006. (Washington Post)
• Iran’s Political Motivation for Ridiculing the Holocaust Again - Richard L. Cravatts
  Iranian and Arab Holocaust denial has been growing in incidence, and particularly as part of Ahmadinejad’s strategy. The Muslim world has taken this revisionist effort to another level: accusing Zionism of creating and perpetuating the Holocaust lie for the express purpose of justifying Israel’s creation and the subsequent subjugation of the Palestinians.
  Muslims want the occurrence of the Holocaust to be proven false to eliminate the cataclysmic social and political event that led the world to accept and endorse the creation of the Jewish state. It is also politically expedient to position the Palestinians as the ultimate victims among victimized peoples, and this is much easier without the inexpressible evil of the Holocaust as core element of Israel’s tragic heritage. (History News Network)
• Islamic Leaders Seek to End Jewish Sovereignty in Israel - Ron Ben-Yishai
  An examination of the words uttered and written by the leaders of Iran, Hizbullah, Hamas, and even Syria, easily reveals their aspirations. Their strategy has a clear and defined long-term objective - bring about Israel’s end as a sovereign Jewish entity - as well as two intermediate objectives.
  The first midterm goal is to make Israeli society crumble on the inside, in a bid to prompt Jews to emigrate and undermine their motivation to defend themselves, to the point where one military blow (either nuclear or conventional) would suffice to achieve the final objective. The second midterm goal is to gradually minimize Israel’s territory, in a manner that would turn our population into a convenient and concentrated target for mortar shells, rockets, missiles, and terror attack, while making it difficult for the IDF to offer protection. This territorial objective also has a religious aspect: Liberating every centimeter of land, which in their view belongs to Muslims. (Ynet News)
• UK Prime Minister Lauds Israel as “Symbol of Hope” - Jonny Paul
  British Prime Minister Gordon Brown paid tribute to the tenacity and achievements of the Jewish people on Monday and said that Israel is “a symbol of hope from which all the world can learn.” Brown told the United Jewish Israel Appeal, “For 2,000 years, until 1948, the persistent call of the Jewish people was ‘next year in Jerusalem.’ For 2,000 years there was not one piece of land anywhere in the whole world that you could call your own.”
  “For 2,000 years you had history but not a home. For 2,000 years you lived in the artistic and cultural and intellectual and scientific and political realm of every continent but you had no home. For 2,000 years you endured pogroms in so many countries, then the horror of the Holocaust - which is the shame of mankind - because you had no home yet for 2,000 years, yet nothing - no prison cell, no forced migration, no violence, not even the Holocaust itself - could ever break the spirit of a people yearning to be free.”
  “What remarkable achievements Israel has achieved,” he said. “A history of ingenuity that is a lesson to the boundless capacity of mind and spirit. Eight citizens have already been awarded Nobel prizes. In Israel today, there are more hi-tech industries, more symphony orchestras, more universities and research institutions than countries that are 100 times the size of Israel. The language of the Bible made the living tongue again, so your story, the story of Israel, is the symbol I identify with as a symbol of hope from which all the world can learn.” (Jerusalem Post)
• The Financial Crisis and the Arab World - Jonathan Spyer
  The seven stock markets in the oil-rich Gulf states shed around $150 billion of their capitalization in the course of the past week. The Arab world may well prove particularly vulnerable to the world economic downturn since a disproportionately large amount of Arab wealth is invested in global stock markets. The Kuwait Investment Authority, for example, placed a $2b. investment in Merrill Lynch last year. Merrill Lynch, of course, no longer exists. Instead of investing in education and in industry, money has been gambled on the stock markets, or invested in glittering real-estate projects, built by foreign labor and using foreign know-how. The writer is a Senior Research Fellow at the Global Research in International Affairs Center, Herzliya. (Jerusalem Post)

In the midst of the War on Terror, the George Bush administration granted protected status to members of the Iranian terrorist organization Mujahedin-e Khalq in Iraq, reportedly due to the calculation that their terrorist services could be used against Tehran. This was in spite of the fact that the group was on the State Department’s list of terrorist organizations and that President Bush had pointed to Saddam’s patronage of the group as evidence for Iraq’s support of international terrorism. Now, however, the Iraqi government is taking control of the Mujahedin’s camp in Iraq and will likely expel them – but no country is willing to take them.

In this op-ed published yesterday in the Washington Times, I argue that the best way of defeating this anti-American terrorist group is not by protecting its members, but by helping the rank and file break from this cult-like organization.

Sincerely,
Trita Parsi, PhD
 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008…

The Bush administration inherited many of Iraq’s problems when it invaded that country, including an Iranian terrorist organization funded and armed by Saddam Hussein, the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MKO). Though in the midst of a war on terror, the Bush administration chose in 2003 to protect 3,000 of the organization’s militants and house them in a camp given to the group by Saddam — Camp Ashraf just north of Baghdad.

Ever since, the fate of this State Department-listed terrorist organization has been unclear. Hated by Iraqis for its involvement in Saddam’s crimes against the Iraqi people, the Baghdad government wants to expel the group. But no country is willing to take them.

Though the Iranian government wants to put the group’s leadership on trial in Iran, it seems less interested in the organization’s rank and file. The European governments have little interest in taking in 3,000 battle-hardened Muslim militants, fearing that they will use Europe as a base to plan and execute further terrorist attacks.

The U.S., on the other hand, has already contradicted its own principles by giving preferential treatment to an organization on the State Department’s terrorist list — even though President Bush himself pointed to the organization’s patronage under Saddam Hussein as evidence of Iraq’s support for international terrorists in his speech to the United Nations in September 2002.

“Iraq continues to shelter and support terrorist organizations that direct violence against Iran,” President Bush said. To complicate matters further, if reports that the U.S. has used MKO terrorists for cross-border raids into Iran are true, then Washington certainly doesn’t want these militants to end up in Iranian hands.

Washington seems doomed if it does, doomed if it doesn’t.
Members of the terrorist organization have protested outside the White House this past week, angered by the Bush administration’s decision to hand over Camp Ashraf to the Iraqi government. The government of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki will surrender the MKO members to Tehran, they argue, who in turn will imprison and execute them.

Though approximately 500 MKO fighters have been repatriated to Iran and no reports of abuse have emerged according to the International Committee of the Red Cross, which oversaw their return, sending rank-and-file Mujahedin members to Iran against their will would be irresponsible.

Hated by the Iranian people for having fought on Saddam’s side in the Iraq-Iran war, the Iranian Mujahedin is understandably fearful of the fate awaiting them in Iran. After all, the Iranian government systematically violates the human rights of journalists and union leaders alike, let alone anti-Iranian terrorists.
Yet, contrary to the protesters outside the White House, the issue is not a choice between freedom in Camp Ashraf and captivity in Iran.

The Mujahedin is not an effective opposition to the unpopular government in Iran as the organization’s defenders in Washington claim, but a politico-religious cult that brainwashes its members, places children of Mujahedin members with other families in order to prevent parents from defecting, and who according to Human Rights Watch, maintains control by torturing its rank and file. “Members who try to leave the Mujahedin pay a very heavy price,” according to Joe Stork of Human Rights Watch.
Its involvement in terrorism is undisputed. It assassinated several Americans in Iran in the 1970s. It supported the taking of the U.S. Embassy in Iran and blasted Ayatollah Khomeini for releasing the American diplomats in 1981, arguing instead that the hostages should have been executed. It made a pact with Saddam Hussein in the 1980s and fought alongside his army against their Iranian countrymen. Later in the 1990s, they became Saddam’s most trusted henchmen, tasked with quelling Kurdish and Shiite uprisings against the Iraqi dictator.
According to defectors, Mujahedin members in Camp Ashraf celebrated the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
In 2003, French authorities descended upon the Mujahedin headquarters in France, arresting the leader of the cult, Maryam Rajavi. Immediately, zealous Mujahedin members staged hunger strikes and several set themselves ablaze. Hardly the behavior of a democratically oriented opposition group.

But the vast majority of the Camp Ashraf residents are not so much members of a terrorist cult as they are victims of it. The camp is itself a prison. It may have provided Mujahedin militants with protection against ordinary Iraqis who sought to avenge their relatives killed by the Mujahedin at the behest of Saddam Hussein, but the prison has primarily enabled the leaders of the terrorist organization to prevent the rank and file from defecting.

Rather than debating where to expel the Mujahedin terrorists, help should be provided to the rank and file to break with the cult and make free choices about their future. It’s the only humanitarian solution to this dilemma - and one that defeats rather than protects this anti-American terrorist group.

*Trita Parsi is the author of “Treacherous Alliance — The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran and the U.S.”, a Silver Medal Recipient of the Council on Foreign Relations’ Arthur Ross Book Award, the most significant award for a book on foreign affairs.

Israel builds its first ‘eco-friendly’ town.
By David Shamah
October 05, 2008

 http://web.israel21c.net/bin/en.jsp?enDi…;

It’s one thing to adopt environmentally conscious behavior, such as recycling, taking public transportation, and saving water or electricity. But that’s not enough for the future residents of the now developing community of Nurit. They plan to live green.

That’s because the Mt. Gilboa town of Nurit is set to be the first planned, eco-friendly community in Israel, with infrastructure and services designed not just to encourage, but to actually enforce environmentally responsible behavior. If you’re planning on living in Nurit, says Danny Atar, chairman of the Gilboa Regional Council, you’re by definition willing to go out of your way to save water, avoid excess waste, and in general reduce your carbon footprint. “Otherwise, Nurit is not for you,” he says.

The idea for Nurit stemmed from discussions conducted by Gilboa Regional Council officials nearly a decade ago, as they were seeking to build tourism in the area, as well as comply with new government requirements to introduce environmentally responsible educational programs and activities.

“We are also considering putting up a new town to attract more residents here from the center of the country, and the whole project just sort of made sense,” Atar tells ISRAEL21c. “Thus was Nurit born.”

***

First homes ready in a year:

And, after intense study and consultations with environmental experts around the world, the town is ready for prime time; work has begun on infrastructure, and the first 100 homes will be ready next year. By 2012, there will be 400 families living in Nurit, Atar says.

Located on Mt. Gilboa itself, Nurit will take advantage of the mountain’s wind and sun to generate power, and will install dozens of wind turbines and photovoltaic (PV) solar panels, enough to provide electricity for all the public buildings in Nurit - and then some.

“We recently got approved for a program by the Israel Electric Company, where residents and public buildings will be able to mount solar PV units on their roofs and sell the electricity to the IEC,” says Atar.

“Together with turbines to generate electricity from wind, we expect that the electricity we generate will be enough to light most of the schools, offices, streetlights, and park lights in Nurit - as well as save homeowners money on their energy bill, since they can get credits for the power their roof PV systems generate that they don’t use, selling it back to the IEC.” Atar says.

The regional council has a program that provides loans for residents to buy and install the PV panel setup, or residents can design the systems into their construction plans, he adds.

Trees as cooling canopy:

Residents will also be asked to grow tall, leafy trees around their homes, creating a natural “cooling canopy” that will help cut down on the need for artificial cooling and heating systems, “saving electricity and reducing pollutants in the atmosphere,” Atar says. And, residents will be asked to build their homes using effective insulation systems, to further reduce the need for air conditioners or heaters. “We hope to be able to limit the use of artificial heating and cooling solutions to the hottest or coldest days of the year,” Atar says.

Nurit residents will be required to save water - naturally. “In theory, Israel gets more than enough rainfall, but much of the rain is lost to evaporation or runs off to the sea,” Atar says. “We are requiring all residents to build rain collection systems and mini-reservoirs to store rainwater. The water will then be funneled into the town reservoir, allowing us to cut down significantly on our use of water from Mekorot, which is drawn from either the Kinneret or Israel’s underground aquifers.”

With the Kinneret [the Sea of Galilee] at an all time low, and Israel scrambling to build desalination plants to make up for projected water shortages, Nurit’s efforts could serve as a model for other, non eco-friendly communities as well.

Saving rainwater is important, but saving “gray water” is even more important, say many environmentalists - and Nurit is requiring all homeowners to install a gray water collection system, which will store waster water from dishwashing, bathing, and other non-sewage (”black water”) sources.

The storage of gray water entails building a separate drainage system, which funnels the water into a tank - and is then used for a variety of purposes, such as watering gardens, decorative fountains, etc. “No one in Nurit will be permitted to use fresh water to water his or her lawn,” Atar says. “Residents will use gray water to water their lawns and run watering systems for plants or orchards.”

Unfortunately, Nurit won’t be able to encourage its residents to trade in their cars for commuting by train, because there is no Israel Railways line in the area, at least for now. But the town will have a complete complement of local and inter-city bus service for those who need to travel. Actually, it is expected that most of Nurit’s residents will work in the area, either at home businesses, in tourist-oriented services such as bed and breakfasts or restaurants, or at one of the industrial zones in the area.

“Many of the homes have been zoned for use as businesses as well, so a resident can operate a small business in their backyard,” Atar says. “There is an industrial zone three minutes out of town, mostly with light manufacturing or agriculture industry allied services. And tourism in this region is expected to skyrocket when regular horse racing begins at the Afula Hippodrome, only a few minutes from here,” he adds.

Nurit is open to anyone willing to live by the town’s eco-friendly ethos - and many Israelis are willing, apparently, because there is already a long waiting list for lots.

“We’ve already got about 700 families who have made a deposit to get into the lottery for a chance to buy a plot, with more signing up all the time,” Atar says. “The lots, which will have extensive infrastructure to support the gray water drainage and reservoirs system, cost $120,000 to $150,000 - not particularly high for people coming from the center of the country, where many of the Nurit hopefuls come from, and certainly not expensive, when you consider the cost of the infrastructure.”

Most applicants are from big cities - Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, Haifa and its suburbs. A few people from the kibbutzim in the area have signed up as well, but the majority are new to the lower Galilee. Which already makes Nurit a success, as far as Atar is concerned. “This is a beautiful part of the country to live in, and thanks to Nurit, hundreds of families are going to get the opportunity to find out just how beautiful it really is,” Atar says.

His Excellency Manouchehr Mottaki, Foreign Minister of the Islamic Republic of Iran since 2005, has come now for the third time to The Asia Society during the September - October period of the UN General Assembly In New York City.

Last year I had the opportunity to ask him about about Climate Change and why Iran, with its great scientists, and people involved at the UN level, does not embark in a leadership position in the area of renewable energy rather then striving for nuclear energy incurring only indignities. Others asked him about Iran’s stand on Israel.

This year - none of the above. One question from the floor asked about Israel - but was answered in the general line of the presentation - without the question been tackled at all. The Moderator was illustrious US Career Ambassador Frank G. Wisner, who served as impeccable host, presenting lots of compliments to his guest and making sure he is very comfortable. Further, The Asia Society simply managed to put the press away in a back room, and without the Q & A period reaching out to them - that is except the literally last question which asked about the possibility for regional negotiations in the crucial Middle East problem.  And the answer to that question was then submerged under the previous line of presentation that exposed beautifully the way Iran wants to be seen. No mention was made of the name Israel also in this  answer by the Minister.

The reality is  that many in Iran like actually some of the cocoons  created via the 1980 revolution that came as a reaction to some real injustices its people incurred from the hand of the US CIA when it undid the Mohammad Mosaddeq  April 28, 1951 – August 19, 1953 regime for its nationalization of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC) and reinstated the  Shah who returned  on 22 August 1953, from the brief self-imposed exile in Rome. Also, some in the US Administration feared that Mossadeq was, or would become, dependent on the pro-Soviet Tudeh Party, at a time of returning Soviet influence, and too close for comfort to have the cold War Tectonic Plates reach towards the Saudi and Iraqi oilfields.

The extent of the US role in Mossadeq’s overthrow was not formally acknowledged for many years, although the Eisenhower administration was quite vocal in its opposition to the policies of the ousted Iranian Prime Minister. In his memoirs, Eisenhower writes angrily about Mossadeq, and describes him as impractical and naive, though he stops short of admitting any overt involvement in the coup.

Eventually the CIA’s role became well-known, and caused controversy within the organization itself, and within the CIA congressional hearings of the 1970s. CIA supporters maintain that the plot against Mosaddeq was strategically necessary, and praise the efficiency of agents in carrying out the plan. Critics say the scheme was paranoid and colonial, as well as immoral.

In March 2000, then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright stated her regret that Mosaddeq was ousted: “The Eisenhower administration believed its actions were justified for strategic reasons. But the coup was clearly a setback for Iran’s political development, and it is easy to see now why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America.” In the same year, the New York Times published a detailed report about the coup based on alleged CIA documents. For his sudden rise in popularity inside and outside of Iran, and for his defiance of the British, Mosaddeq was named as Time Magazine’s 1951 Man of the Year. Other notables considered for the title that year included Dean Acheson, President Dwight D. Eisenhower and General Douglas MacArthur.

In early 2004, the Egyptian government changed a street name in Cairo from Pahlavi to Mosaddeq, to facilitate closer relations with Iran.

 Now, these last few paragraphs, obviously, do not come from the monologue of Minister Mottaki, but I thought to bring this up because otherwise the show at the Asia Society cannot be understood, and the Ministers personality grasped.

***

The literally last question mentioned above, that came from the back-room filled with people from media was added when the announced “last question” that came from a lady sitting at the front-right table, clearly laudatory asked, “for those of us interested in the understanding of the history of the Middle East, when did Iran invade last one of its neighbors?”  The clear short answer was - “not in our lifetime.”

***

Had be given to me the opportunity to ask a question - what I had in mind was something like this:

“In light of what your excellency has said in regard to regional solutions for regional problems, and in light of justifiable aspirations by Iran to become an Asian powerhouse, what is your reaction to the Bahrain proposal at this year’s High-Level Meeting of the UN General Assembly, when Bahrain suggested the creation of a new UN organization comprising ALL STATES OF THE REGION - that wasinterpreted as meaning a Middle East organization that includes Israel?” This is exactly the most wanting direct question that was not put before our guest.

***

From The Speakers Profile and The Internet:

 Manouchehr Mottaki was born  May 12, 1953 in Bandar Gaz, in the northern Iranian Province of Golestan, and went to school there. Bandar-Gaz, during the Reza Shah Pahlavi rule, was an important city in the north with a national railroad and “several infrastructures.” It was considered  a transit bridge to the Soviet Union. After graduation, he joined the army and as per national plan joined the public education program by which was conducted by the government. He went to Khorasan province and established a school in a poor village around Mashhad, and taught there. After his service in the army, since he was interested in social and political issues, he decided to travel abroad both for experience and study. At that time India was a popular academic destination for young Iranians. So he traveled and studied for a few years in India, before the revolution in Iran.    He holds a bachelor’s degree in social sciences from Bangalore University in India (1976). Mottaki also holds a master’s degree (MA) in international relations from the University of Tehran (1996).

 After the 1980 revolution, he was elected by the people of his home town and the neighboring cities as the first parliament representative and assigned by the other representatives as the head of the national security and foreign policy committee due to his politic and diplomatic talents. During his years in Majlis (Congress) and effective collaboration with the foreign ministry, he was employed then by the ministry after parliament.  Or, he made thus his career within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs during 24 years of continuous presence in different positions through  the Majlis (Parliament)..

He served thus as member of parliament in the first Majlis, head of seventh political bureau of Foreign Ministry (1984),

Iran’s ambassador to Turkey (1985),

Foreign Ministry’s secretary general for Western European affairs (1989),

Deputy Foreign Minister - first for international affairs (1989) and then  for legal, consular and parliamentary affairs (1992).

 Iran’s ambassador to Japan (1994),

Advisor to foreign minister (1999),

Deputy head of Culture and Islamic Communications Organization (2001)

Chief of the Foreign Relations Committee of the 7th Majlis National Security and Foreign Relations Commission (2004).

During the 2005 presidential election, he was the campaign manager of Ali Larijani, the right-conservative candidate.

President Mahmoud Ahmadi-nejad, in 2005,  appointed him to the position of Foreign Minister of the Islamic Republic of Iran in 2005.

 

Mottaki quotations:

“Referring the case to the Security Council would be a lose-lose game, and we would prefer that this game does not happen. We see a win-win situation, that is where the EU and international community have confidence and the Islamic Republic of Iran reaches its legitimate right.”

“The Islamic Republic pays great cost to control and prevent transfer of narcotics to West.

“We do not accept global nuclear ‘apartheid’ and scientific ‘apartheid’.

“All voluntary measures taken over the past two-and-a-half or three years have been halted and we have no further commitment to the additional protocol and other voluntary commitments.”

“We should try to cool down the situation. We do not support any violence.”

“Nobody can remove a country from the map. This is a misunderstanding in Europe of what our president mentioned.”

“The time for using language of threats is over, it’s time for negotiation. We express our readiness for negotiations based on justice and a comprehensive compromise. We want to peacefully solve the problem.

“Nuclear weapons are not in Iran’s defense doctrine.”

“The issue is quite simple. We would like to enjoy our membership as well as the other members of the [Nuclear] Nonproliferation Treaty. The country has followed the rules and regulations of the [International Atomic Energy Agency] and wants to keep its rights.”

***

The Foreign Minister’s Introductory Presentation Before The Asia Society, Thursday, October 2, 2008:

Mottaki started by saying that since our last meeting here (2007), we had three events:

(1) The enjoyable visit of members of this Society in Tehran - he hopes this is a start for more such exchanges. This as a better way for mutual understanding - Scholars, Tourists, Students in such exchanges create the possibility to have more realistic picture of each other.

 

(2) LEBANON: A solution of more then 30 months of crisis was achieved after being initiated by different parties. Foreign Minister Mottaki wants to talk about how it was achieved - because the process is as important as the results.

It was a regional-based solution for the Lebanon crisis. The decision was that it has to be a solution based on votes by a 50+ plurality of all groups in the country - all groups in the country come to the table and a consensus is built - that was the tone of the Lebanon Policy agreement.

On the second day of the negotiations in Doha, at 2:30 AM, the feeling was that it all collapsed the negotiations were locked. Amr Moussa, the Secretary General of the Arab League said go ahead, but others opposed. Mottaki was in contact with Doha and Beirut and  at 9 AM they took up the issue again, and it was settled after a day of negotiations by 9 PM.

One learned that use of force should expect a reaction from the other side. Then also that territorial integrity is an integral part of any solution. These lessons apply whenever you have conflict - this clearly also in the Georgia - Russia case.

 

(3) GEORGIA: The areas are already affected by crisis - energy, transportation, security.

The crisis started by use of force based on wrong information and miscalculation. The latter by not expecting reaction.

The second point is territorial integrity.

Its the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia now, before it was Kosovo, Does it result from the same policies? If so, are there other areas where action led to reaction? If Yes - What are these?

On the second day of the Georgia case there was an agreement signed with Poland. If this signing of the agreement with Poland has become another step, should we look for reaction in Syria? in Venezuela?

What is NATO going to do?

Iran is a neighbor of Azerbaijan and Armenia - so there is a regional concern and Iran has to take part in the initiatives - parallel with Europe. So he went to the region and to Berlin. Is NATO moving to accept Georgia as a member?               The interesting question is then the borders.

***

 

Now it was the turn for Ambassador Frank G. Wisner to take his position as moderator and conversation partner.

He has retired from the US Foreign Service in 1997 with the highest rank - that of a Career Ambassador, but continued to be involved in special positions like the Special US envoy for the Kosovo Final Status (December 2005 - March 2008).  Now he is in the private sector.  In his career postings he was Ambassador to India, the Philippines, Egypt, Zambia… among other appointments, he was also Under Secretary of Defence for Policy.

He started by saying that Iran is a great nation that commands and deserves respect - yet for many of us it is difficult to see how Iran chooses to challenge the international community. How do you square your requirement for respect with a confrontation attitude he then asked the Minister.

Mottaki, who made his introductory presentation in English, but now used a translator for the conversation part of the event, started to smile.

His answer was: A very nice gathering and behavior - my response - What we see is  selective dealing and approach - and double standards.

Back in the 80s we extensively talked up issues. I suggest how the first Iraq war was dealt with and the second war - the war of Saddam against Kuwait. In all  these the underlying issue is the occupation of foreign lands. {I assume he means the Iraq war against Iran as the first war and the war of Iraq on Kuwait as the second war}  Back then the heated discussion was having a cease-fire not a settlement. So the first step is a cease-fire, another first step is withdrawal. We wanted to have the an “a” inserted so that it is clear that a withdrawal comes after the cease-fire. See, using “oil-for-food” money - even now a percentage goes to Kuwait, this while for 4 years we were engaged in lengthy negotiations that were ordered by the UN. Two Assistant Secretary-Generals that dealt with this are present here - they remember those negotiations. Sometimes just to keep things going we had to put proposals on the table. We felt these were in Iraq’s favor and Iraq asked - what do you pay us to accept?

On the nuclear issue - at the end of the day - it is officials of one country … But Islamic and Sharia teachings say that atomic bombs have no place in our defense.we also contend that nuclear weapons are nomore effective. Also military powr has lost effectiveness.

I outlined new agreements for the IAEA last year. 1,5 years ago, in Madrid, we said to the Agency we will give the right answers to the IAEA questions. Then the US turned over questions to the IAEA and they posed them to us. The agency said they have other questions and we started answering them one by one. For each set of questions they sent us a written letter that they accepted the answer as adequate. What expectations should Iran have? We expect the 5+1 to thank us for these efforts to answer all questions. We expected that at the September meeting to be told by the Agency that they put aside all questions, but they provided a second US set of contentions.

They were supposed to bring up questions in one set of timetable. These questions went beyond the timetable. but we accepted.

These questions, like the previous are baseless, we will not agre to the US directed routes. I believe if we continue the negotiations we will reach a point of agreement that will lead to action.

 

{All the above sounded to me like a reprise of the 1001 Nights stories - this time from Tehran. I wonder how many people in the room accepted these, though, as I remarked at the beginning of this article, I am probably one of the most inclined to allow some slack to the Iranians because of past US behavior - but this story contained really too much rope. It did not inspire safety at all.}

 

Now Ambassador Wisner had one more short question he said. The elections in the US. “Do you see from Iran’s point of view an opportunity for dialogue? What will be the modalities for negotiation?

A. A US President will have to reach out including the Middle East. If there are changes in the White House we will intently consider them. We take note of comments made by previous Presidents, who are not in power anymore, also candidates not yet elected. Comments made, promises given by them cannot yet be seriously considered. We have to wait and see.

As for an interest section, there is only stories in news media.

 

***

Q&A from the floor:

Answer On Israel of sorts:  Iran US relations are dependent on a number of issues. Unilateral Vs. Policies in the Middle East have complicated the situation. NO MENTION OF ISRAEL IN THE ANSWER.

 

Answer on Nuclear In The Middle East:  Atomic weapons cannot provide security. We all heard that the US had enough to destroy Russia. It helped in the balance of fear.

Six years have passed from the day your troops have entered Iraq - they have not succeeded. Why could not atomic weapons help in Afghanistan and Iraq? This year the 13th anniversary since the Islamic revolution in Iran.

if I were to list our grievances against the US it will be a long long list. Had we a nuclear bomb, could that have changed your actions in Iraq?

In tandem with development on hardware side, the software side. The US is not lacking in modern weapons, also in its economic might (except for the present problems). No serious changes will occur in the US. The problem is - insufficient reasoning to convince the international public opinion.

 

Answer to the last question on the Middle East: We go about our business about our nuclear problems. We provided the answers.

if a person is asleep- how hard you knock, it will not help. The US cannot accept Iran’s peaceful proposals because once they accept they will not be able to stay in this position.

US intelligence agencies announced that Iran does not work on nuclear bomb, but the uS did not accept. I know of five different reports. I think it is high time for them to accept this.

The 15 years they were against my country. What is wrong about changing policies - and see what was wrong for their country?

 

 

Report: Top Syrian officer killed in Damascus explosion.
London-based al-Sharq al-Awsat newspaper says senior military officer is among 17 fatalities of car bomb which rocked Syrian capital. Attack believed to be meant for city’s intelligence services building
Roee Nahmias, September 28, 2008, Israel News.
A high-ranking Syrian military officer was killed in the car bomb explosion which struck Damascus on Saturday, the London-based Arabic-language newspaper al-Sharq al-Awsat reported Sunday.

Seventeen people were killed Saturday morning when a car bomb exploded in the Syrian capital. The blast, which Syria’s interior minister dubbed a “terror attack”, occurred at an intersection leading to the Sit Zeinab shrine, popular with Shiite pilgrims from Iran and Lebanon.

According to the al-Sharq al-Awsat report, the car bomb was meant to hit a Syrian intelligence services building, located near Damascus’ international airport, where Syria’s “Palestinian directorate” is believed to be located.

Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem was quick to assign blame Saturday, saying Israel was the one which stood to gain the most from the attack.

“Unfortunately, in the years following the American war on terror, terror has managed to spread even further. Such incidents can take place anywhere and do not indicate that there was a security breach,” he said.

The terror attack in Syria was condemned by the US, Europe and the Arab world.

Opposition website: Syria blast may be ‘work accident.’
Syrian opposition website suggests Damascus explosion may be result of security forces’ mishap; Lebanon PM condemns attack as ‘terror crime’

The Damascus blast that left 17 people dead earlier Saturday may have been a result of a “work accident” by Syrian security forces, an opposition website reported. A local resident told a website reporter the car bomb that exploded in the Syrian capital may have been meant to explode in Iraq or Lebanon.

The opposition website reported that Syrian television images make it appear that the explosion took place in a building belonging to the security establishment. However, at this time the reports are mostly speculations and the cause of the blast remains unclear.

Meanwhile, Syrian opposition figures told Ynet that the explosion may in fact be a staged incident aimed at heightening fears of a growing radical Islamic threat, thereby presenting the Syrians with a pretext to deploy troops in Lebanon.

Saturday evening, senior Lebanese figures, including Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, condemned the explosion. The Lebanese PM issued a statement saying that “this crime is despicable and unacceptable.”

Siniora referred to the blast as a “terror crime” and said such incidents must be rejected, particularly when they take place in an Arab capital.

According to television reports, the car that exploded in Damascus Saturday was rigged with at least 200 kg (440 pounds) of explosives, and also injured 14 people.

 The reports also said that “an investigation by the Syrian Counter-terrorism Unit was underway to identify the attackers.”

————-
Olmert to visit Russia next week: Shortly before leaving office, prime minister scheduled to leave for Moscow for meeting with Russian President Medvedev. Leaders expected to discuss Russia’s arms supply to Syria, Iranian nuclear threat and Israeli-Palestinian peace process.
Roni Sofer, September 29, 2008,  Israel News.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is scheduled to leave for Moscow next week for a meeting with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev.

The outgoing prime minister’s trip is planned for next Monday and Tuesday, following an invitation extended to Olmert by Medvedev.

The two leaders are expected to discuss a number of issues, including Russia’s arms supply to Syria, Moscow’s objection to additional sanctions on Iran and Israel’s peace process with the Palestinians.

Sources in the Prime Minister’s Office said the meeting had been planned for some time, after several phone conversations between Olmert and Medvedev after the latter took office.

The officials stressed the Russian president was aware of the political situation in Israel and of Olmert’s resignation, as well as the attempts to form a new government headed by Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, but that he insisted on inviting the Israeli prime minister to Moscow nonetheless.

Israel and Russia disagree on a number of issues, including Syrian President Bashar Assad’s attempts to purchase advanced arm systems, including the S-300 – a land-air system which may threaten Israel Air Force planes in longer ranges. This system may also threaten Israeli aircraft flying over Lebanon.

Another issue on the agenda is Moscow’s objection to a fourth round of sanctions on Iran in response to the Islamic republic’s ongoing nuclear plan.

The Russians are also interested in helping advance the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, although their offer to host the negotiations as part of the Annapolis peace conference was rejected so far.

In light of the expected timetable for the establishment of a new government, this will likely be Olmert’s last visit abroad as prime minister.

————-

Military Aid: Syria-Russia naval cooperation grows: Russia says it is renovating Syrian port for use by its fleet; two countries’ naval chiefs meet, Associated Press.

    Russia announced Friday it was renovating a Syrian port for use by the Russian fleet in what could signal an effort for a better foothold in the Mediterranean amid the rift with the United States over Georgia.

***

Syria was Moscow’s strongest Mideast ally during the Cold War. The alliance largely waned after the 1991 fall of the Soviet Union, though Russia has continued some weapons sales to Damascus. Syrian President Bashar Assad has increasingly reached out to Russia recently, including Seeking weapons and offering broader military cooperation.

‘Great geopolitical significance’  - The two countries’ naval chiefs also met in Moscow on Friday and discussed “further strengthening mutual trust and mutual understanding between the two states’ fleets,” A Russian naval official, Igor Dygalo, told Itar-Tass. The Tartus renovations could signal an intention to have a long-term Russian naval presence there.

In late August, Russia’s ambassador to Damascus, Igor Belyev, said that Russian ships already patrol the area, but “a new development is that the Russian presence in the Mediterranean will become permanent.”

Syrian media made no mention of the Russian announcement Friday, and Syrian officials could not be reached for comment.

Russian military experts said Tartus would be a considerable boost for operations in the Mediterranean. “It is much more advantageous to have such a facility than to return ships patrolling the Mediterranean to their home bases,” Former Black Sea Fleet commander Adm. Eduard Baltin said, according to the Russian Interfax-AVN service. The former first deputy commander the Russian Navy, Adm. Igor Kasatonov, said Tartus “is of great geopolitical significance considering that it is the only such Russian facility abroad.”

***

Somali Pirates’ Unexpected Booty: Russian Tanks.
By Nick Wadhams / Nairobi Friday, Sep. 26, 2008

The pirates who seized a Ukrainian freighter on Friday may have netted one of their biggest prizes in more than 15 years of terrorizing the Somali coastline — the vessel was carrying 33 T-72 battle tanks to Kenya.

It appears almost certain that the pirates had no idea of the cargo aboard the Belize-flagged Faina, which Ukrainian Defense Minister Yuri Yekhanurov told the Interfax news agency was being sold to Kenya. He said the cargo included grenade launchers and ammunition. Hours after the hijacking, Russia announced it was sending a warship from its Baltic Fleet to patrol the Somali coast.

Attacks on cargo vessels along the Somali coast have spiked recently, with at least 14 ships and 300 crew members currently held by pirates in lawless Somalia, according to the London-based International Maritime Bureau (IMB). But the seizure of the tanks also raises questions about their ultimate destination and purpose: The Kenya office of the Seafarers Assistance Programme said the ship had picked up its cargo of military equipment in the Baltic Sea and was sailing to Mombasa. Kenyan government spokesman Alfred Mutua said his government had purchased the hardware. “The cargo in the ship includes military hardware such as tanks and an assortment of spare parts for use by different branches of the Kenyan military,” he said in a statement.

A French intelligence official tells TIME that the hijackers probably had no clue about the Faina’s cargo, and might find they “might get more than they’d bargained for” — and would probably try to ransom the shipment back to the freighter’s owners. “They see a ship out there alone, consider the surrounding conditions favorable, and they move,” the official explained. France has been closely involved in trying to beef up patrols in the Gulf, even introducing a resolution to the U.N. Security Council.

Experts believe that the pirates may not have the capacity to offload the cargo — and there may not be much local interest in tanks, anyway. They’d be quickly noticed in Somalia, and their destination would reveal the identity of anyone financing the hijackers.

It wouldn’t be the first time that pirates in Somalia may have stumbled upon a cargo that was bigger than they could imagine. Last August, pirates seized the MV Iran Deyanat, a ship owned by the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines. Somali officials contend that the ship had been carrying weapons destined for Islamic insurgents, a claim denied by Tehran. Ironically, the activities of the pirates may be lifting the lid on the illicit trade in weapons around the Horn of Africa.

But for the pirates of Somalia, it was just another working day — the Faina was the third ship taken in the course of a week in an area about 200 miles off Mogadishu, suggesting an advanced detection capability on the part of the pirates. The Faina is a huge, well-protected vessel, underscoring both the audacity and capability of the buccaneers.

“It is an astonishing ship to take, and it defeats a number of the previously held conceptions that they’d go for slow-moving ships,” James Wilkes, managing director of the London-based Gray Page Limited, a maritime consulting group in London, told TIME. “This ship is built like a castle; how they managed to make it stop, I don’t know. I can imagine that they possibly laid quite a bit of weapon fire on the ship.”

Some reports have tied the pirates to the Islamic insurgents battling the Ethiopian- and U.S.-backed Transitional Federal Government in Somalia, but experts say no concrete evidence has emerged to back this claim. Wilkes and others say the hijackers are more likely simply in the increasingly lucrative business of demanding — and receiving — ransom payments from shipowners.

“If there was another alternative, the owners would not pay, but right now there is no alternative,” says Cyrus Mody, a