Russia, Germany, America And Iran: Those Ruling Iran Are Not Politicians But Rather A Radical Religious Group
31 January 2013
By Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed
In Munich, officials from several global superpowers
met, and Iran was on the lunch menu. Sergei Lavrov,
Russia's foreign minister and Iran's ally, defended
the Islamic Republic and warned of a plan to attack
it. He said that during Russia's meetings with the
Gulf states over the years they have searched for a
possibility to hold a security conference
incorporating the permanent UN Security Council
members, the European Union, and perhaps the
Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe.
He asserted that this proposal still stands. Lavrov
was keen not only to take into consideration the needs
of Gulf states, but also Iran's legitimate interests,
for Tehran fears for its own security and has twice
been attacked without provocation, at least according
to the Russian minister.
As for Germany, a key state in the Iran negotiations,
its foreign minister supported the idea of resorting
to dialogue again. Guido Westerwelle said: "?2013 is
the decisive year on Iran, especially for political
reasons . . . Let us be very frank, we did not have
progress in the last 12 months, so it is obvious that
we have to use this year."? Westerwelle warned that
Iran's nuclear program would not only affect Israel's
security, as the US and Europe believe, but it would
also affect the makeup of global and regional
security. Last year the German foreign minister spoke
of the race that would break out in the Middle East if
Iran were to acquire nuclear weapons.
US vice-president Joe Biden's statements during the
conference were well documented in the media. Yet
perhaps what was most significant was what Biden did
not say. The US vice president made no reference to
the military option and did not threaten to use it.
Instead, he retreated from previous US stances and
spoke at length about the peaceful solution. He told
the Munich security conference, "There is still time,
there is still space for diplomacy backed by pressure
to succeed. The ball is in the government of Iran's
court . . . We have made it clear at the outset that
we would be prepared to meet bilaterally with the
Iranian leadership, we would not make it a secret that
we were doing that, we would let our partners know if
that occasion presented itself." The Russian says we
must trust and respect Iran; the German wants to
resume dialogue without conditions, and the American
has increased the incentives in the hope that the
Iranians will stop their activities voluntarily.
We know Iran's behavior since the beginning of the
1980s; it only retreats when it senses a serious
threat against it. This is why Tehran never comes near
Israel and why it was afraid of antagonizing former US
president George W. Bush. Now, the Iranian leadership
is interpreting the current US policy and realizes
that America would not dare commit a military strike
against it no matter what, even if it builds a nuclear
weapon. Thus, Iran will continue working on its
nuclear weapon and when it finishes the regional
situation will become more complicated and Iranian
threats will increase across the world.
Let us keep in mind that those ruling Iran are not
politicians but rather a radical religious group that
has wreaked havoc in the region for thirty years. When
it becomes nuclear, it will be impossible to deter it.
Al Rashed is the general manager of Al -Arabiya
television. He is also the former editor-in-chief of
Asharq Al- Awsat, and the leading Arabic weekly
magazine, Al Majalla. He is also a senior Columnist in
the daily newspapers of Al Madina and Al Bilad. He is
a US post-graduate degree in mass communications. He
has been a guest on many TV current affairs programs.
He is currently based in Dubai.
From Consul To Terrorist: The Only Faction Active oOn The Scene Because Everybody Else Has Left The Arena :: EsinIslam The Muslim World Portal For Islamic News And Opinions
From Consul To Terrorist: The Only Faction Active oOn The Scene Because Everybody Else Has Left The Arena
14 January 2013
By Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed
As soon as I heard the name Iyad Ag Ghaly in relation
to the events in Mali I began to wonder if this could
be the same man from the same country? Could it really
be him? Iyad Ag Ghaly heads up the military operations
of armed terrorist groups in northern Mali; whilst
there was a man with the same name who served as
Mali's consul in Jeddah. I called some friends and
confirmed that Iyad Ag Ghaly is indeed the same man
that I met at Jeddah's Hilton hotel less than three
years ago.
We are facing a truly strange world where those who
are legitimate today could be fugitives tomorrow.
At the time, I knew-from those who had dealt with
Ghaly as a Tuareg tribal chief and diplomatic
consul-that he was the best source to find
intermediaries to negotiate the release of hostages
taken in the Azawad region. Now, he is said to be
commander of the Ansar Dine movement fighting the
Malian army, as well as international French and
African forces.
When I read a profile about him in yesterday's Asharq
al-Awsat newspaper, I was even more confused, for this
stated that he was close to Libyan dictator Muammar
Qadhafi who reportedly sent him to fight in Lebanon.
Yet, Ghaly only recently displayed extremist
tendencies.
This kind of confusion and uncertainty has become
quite common as shown by the emergence of extremists
like Tarek al-Zomor and Mohamed al-Zawahiri on Egypt's
political scene. So how did a man like Iyad Ag Ghaly
turn from being a moderate Sunni Muslim to an
extremist armed fighter? Is it rational to suppose
that a man in his fifties, like Ghaly, should suddenly
become radicalized? This is truly hard to believe. I
sense that this may be some kind of political maneuver
where politicians have pretended to adopt extremist
ideologies in order to recruit impulsive youths. These
politicians provide these youth with funding under the
pretext of ?religious duty?, convincing them to
sacrifice their lives for a false cause in return for
a place in heaven! Since there is a general
international lack of will to fight anywhere in the
world, the French-alongside a few African states-will
fight this war on their own before realizing that
desert wars never end and withdraw. What makes matters
more complicated is that conflicts that involve
religious slogans and tribal powers can last for
decades without any side being defeated.
Our problem with those who are keen on fighting these
extremists, like the French today and the Americans
yesterday in Afghanistan and perhaps tomorrow in
Syria, is their inability to understand the
fundamental nature of the problem. These extremist
groups represent the smallest part of the equation;
rather the greatest and most important challenge is to
confront extremist ideologies. Had the West, as well
as the Arab countries involved and other relevant
parties invested their money and effort in fighting
extremist ideologies, this crisis might have come to
an end. Instead they spent billions of dollars on tens
of thousands of soldiers, advanced weaponry, and
combat drones managing to eliminate a number of Al
Qaeda's leaders; however Al Qaeda's ideology remains
the same and in fact continues to spread like a
disease. Most people find it easier to jump to easy
conclusions by laying the blame on one group or
another like Sunnis, Shi'ites, clerics, or even
religion as a whole; however all these groups were
present prior to this and were never a source of
trouble.
We are living in a different world in which political
powers are establishing and nourishing extremist
ideologies and generations. These politicians have the
project, the expertise, and the will to propagate such
extremist ideology and they are practically immune to
punishment because the wrong parties are always held
accountable. Who could have imagined that Mali would
become an international battlefield after Afghanistan?
The West is repeating the same mistake in Syria by
allowing it to fall prey to extremists who are
emotionally manipulate the general public under the
pretext that they are their only source of salvation
from the tyranny of the Assad regime. In reality, they
are the only faction active on the scene because
everybody else has left the arena.
Al
Rashed is the general manager of Al -Arabiya
television. He is also the former editor-in-chief of
Asharq Al- Awsat, and the leading Arabic weekly
magazine, Al Majalla. He is also a senior Columnist in
the daily newspapers of Al Madina and Al Bilad. He is
a US post-graduate degree in mass communications. He
has been a guest on many TV current affairs programs.
He is currently based in Dubai.