The Language of Genocide
By Alan Simons
DECEMBER 1, 2008 – On June 26 2006, jewishinfonews reported that the Iranian Research and Technology Minister Mohammad M. Zahedi, during a visit to Indonesia, said his country was ready to cooperate with other Islamic countries in development of advanced technology, including nuclear technology.
‘We are ready to cooperate with all Islamic countries on advanced technology, including nuclear because knowledge about nuclear power is also advanced technology,’ Zahedi said during a visit to Indonesia’s Bandung Institute of Technology (ITB).
Two years later, on June 20, 2008 I reported that Tehran had offered to share its nuclear experience with Syria. The offer came from Iran’s ambassador to Syria, Sayyed Ahmed Moussavi. He cited July 2008 as the date for their officials to meet. As reported at the time by DEBKAfile’s military sources:
Iran’s willingness to defy its obligations under the non-proliferation treaty by offering a nuclear capability to Syria across the border from Israel brings Tehran’s threat to wipe Israel off the map much closer to home. It is a mark of contempt for Washington and the US-led Western sanctions.
This past Sunday, November 30, 2008 Iran continued on its quest to share its nuclear development by proposing Persian Gulf states form a consortium for developing nuclear power plants in the region.
‘The proposal was made by the head of the Iran Atomic Energy Organization Reza Aqazadeh in his address to the opening session of the first International Seminar on Nuclear Power Plants, Environment and Sustainable Development,’ reported the Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA).
Aqazadeh has reportedly been encouraging participants in the two-day seminar to form a consortium to construct and develop light water nuclear power plants in the region.
‘Iran is ready to provide very soon a comprehensive plan for the proposal if it were approved in generalities by the Persian Gulf littoral states,’ Aqazadeh stressed.
The participants in the two-day seminar are to discuss the need for nuclear energy as a replacement, setting up nuclear power plants as a national strategy, nuclear power plants and global energy market, development of nuclear energy and sustainable development and nuclear energy.
And what will America’s response be to all of this? Let us look at what Melanie Phillips recently had to say in the Spectator:
The Iranians are amongst the most shrewd and sophisticated strategists around. They can see that the election of Obama is a signal of American weakness. The question no-one can currently answer, however, is whether President Obama will now repudiate his history and turn through sheer force of circumstances into a centrist and war leader – which would be remarkable but by no means unprecedented — or will remain true to his radical past. Upon the answer to that question, the ability of the free world to defend itself against the onslaught now depends.
And how does Israel’s relationship with America fit into all of this? Well, according to Phillips she says, ‘all the evidence to date suggests he [Obama] will throw Israel’s security under the bus while appeasing the enemies of the free world.’
Former Iranian President Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani stated that Iran believed it would come out the winner. ‘In a nuclear duel in the region, Israel may kill 100 million Muslims,’ Rafsanjani said. ‘Muslims can sustain such casualties, knowing that, in exchange, there would be no Israel on the map.’
The language of genocide
Rafsanjani expanded on this doomsday calculus in an oft-cited Friday prayer sermon in Tehran on December 14, 2001, noting ‘the use of a [single] nuclear bomb in Israel will leave nothing on the ground,’ whereas an Israeli strike on Iran ‘will only damage the world of Islam.’ Rafsanjani said that Israel would be ‘removed from the region and the world of Islam [as] extraneous matter’, and that ‘those who have gathered together in Israel would one day be dispersed again.’ This is not the language of mutually assured destruction or deterrence. This is the language of genocide.
The clarity of Iran’s threats should not be dismissed as mere exaggeration or wishful thinking. A nuclear-ready Iran is likely to goad Israel into launching a pre-emptive attack, after it has dispersed its nuclear material to ensure that it survives the strike. If the regime feels threatened-from domestic dissent, or foreign attack-the risk of nuclear miscalculation is enormous.
Only one Iranian nuclear-tipped missile needs to penetrate Israel’s Arrow anti-missile defenses to devastate Israel’s highly concentrated population. Even a cowed Israeli leadership, deterred from pre-emptively attacking Iranian nuclear sites, can be expected to unleash its nuclear arsenal, in a tragic re-enactment of the Jewish defenders at Masada 2,000 years ago, who preferred suicide to surrendering to the Roman legion.
Have a good day.
(Photo credit: zvis.com)