The USA Owes an Apology to the Iranians and to the World
Submitted by Ali Sina on Mon, 06/08/2009 - 06:05
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
PDF version In an article entitled OBAMA WRONG ON IRANIAN COUP Dr. Judith Apter Klinghoffer, an affiliate professor at Haifa University, said Obama was wrong to apologize for the 1953 Coup against the the democratically elected prime minster of Iran Dr. Mosaddeq and accused that great man of being a dictator. Obviously JAK’s views were distorted because her source was not a fair and unbiased source. She relied on the opinion of a monarchist. In the following article, I intend to show that the monarchists were the very reason the Islamic Revolution became a reality.
The following is the truth about what happened in Iran 56 years ago and why the USA owes an apology, not only to the Iranians, but to the world.
In 1949 the Majles (Iranian Parliament) approved the First Development plan for the country. This plan called for comprehensive agriculture and industrial development. It was to be financed in large part from the oil revenue. The Iranians however, were aware that the Anglo Iranian Oil Company, (AIOC) owned by the British, paid a lot more tax to the British government from their oil revenue than what the Iranians received from royalty. To add insult to injury the company did not hire Iranians as technicians. The idea was to keep the Iranians dependant on the British expertise.
These unfair treatments and insults led to anti British sentiment among the educated people who demanded that Iranian oil be nationalized.
This sentiment figured prominently in the election of the Majles in 1949 and the nationalists became determined to renegotiate the AIOC agreement.
AIOC slightly improved the offer, but it was too little. The new terms did not include the 50/50 profit sharing provision that was part of other Persian Gulf oil concessions. Mossaeq rejected the draft agreement proposed by AIOC.
The British failed to realize the growing strength of nationalist sentiment of the Iranians in the new Majles. Finally, AIOC agreed to 50/50 profit sharing, but by then the sentiment to nationalize the oil had become so widespread that when Razmara, the appointed prime minster of the shah opposed nationalization on technical grounds, he was assassinated by a Muslim terrorist.
[caption id="" align="alignright" width="210" caption="Dr. Mosaddeq"]
[/caption]
Mosaddeq offered to hire the British technicians and pay them more than what they earned, but the British Government prohibited them to work for Iran and when they left, the oil Industry came to standstill. Britain also imposed a worldwide embargo on the purchase of the Iranian oil. In September 1951, Britain froze Iran's sterling assets and banned export of goods to Iran. Britain challenged the legality of the oil nationalization and took its case against Iran to the International Court of Justice at The Hague. The court ruled in Iran's favor, but the British government remained vindictive.
The Persians' anti British sentiment was the result of how the Brits treated them. In the pursuit of their selfish interests the Brits can be vicious. They can disregard any norm of morality and fairness. The Opium War in China is a good example. It is unbelievable that the British who are so emasculated that cannot repell a bunch of rag headed Jihadists from their own country, until not long ago were the blood suckers of other nations. Anyone believes in Karma?
The enmity of the British government towards the Iranian people continues to this day. When the Islamic revolutionaries took the American embassy workers that led to the USA boycott of Iran, the regime of the mullahs could not have survived long had it not been for the British and other European countries’ continuous dealings with the Islamic Republic. By undermining the boycott the British even stabled America in the back. The Brits have a reputation of unfairness that is hard to ignore.
With the oil embargo, the economy in Iran began to suffer, nonetheless Mosaddeq’s popularity kept growing. Everyone, from the nationalists to the pro Soviet Toudeh communists, and the Islamists rallied behind him.
Was Mosaddeq’s widespread support a threat to the West? Hardly! Many European countries that are part of NATO, like Italy and France, had strong communist parties who sometimes became part of a coalition government, throughout the Cold War. Why the presence of a few communists in the Iranian political landscape should have been the cause of alarm? Then again, doesn't democracy mean that every man should be allowed to exprss his views freely? Even Israel, from where JAK howls has many communists. In fact it was a Jew who invented this damn ideology. That was an excuse. The real intention was access to cheap oil.
The communists in Iran, although well organized, were few in number. Iran was certainly not in any danger of becoming a communist country. Communists were atheists and this did not settle well with Iranians. If America was worried about the Soviets’ invasion of Iran, the right thing was to support Mosaddeq, help Iran’s oil industry and nurture its fledgling democracy. Had this been the case, today Iran would have been a democratic country and a prosperous ally of the USA, like Japan, South Korea and Germany.
Mossaeq’s popularity made the shah wary. The shah and his father were despots. They did not like competition. They had disregarded the constitution, amassed all the powers in their own hands and had made the ersatz Majles pointless. Mosaddeq had a different vision for Iran. He wanted to revive the mashrooteh, (constitution) that was adopted in December 30, 1906 that made Iran a constitutional monarchy and a parliamentary democracy. This is how monarchies in democratic countries work. In democratic monarchies the military is under the command of the prime minster and not the king. In democracies, monarchs have no power. All the powers are in the hands of the democratically elected PMs.
In the summer of 1952, the Shah refused the prime minister's demand for the right to appoint the minister of war. Mosaddeq resigned, three days of pro-Mosaddeq rioting followed, and the shah was forced to reappoint him to head the government. This was the only democratice government Iran has ever had.
Why the prime ministers of Spain, Britain, Sweden or other monarchies, where the prime minster is the head of the government are not called dictators and why when Mosaddeq wanted to act in accordance to the constitution he is called a dictator? It is this double standard that has made the Iranians furious and resentful of the West.
In August 1952, the Majles gave Mosaddeq full powers in all affairs of government. In 1953 Mosaddeq received a mandate from a plebiscite to dissolve the Majles. The Majles was not fully representative of the people. Many MPs were appointed by the Shah. Mosaddeq’s vision was to create a legislative body similar to those in democratic countries.
The British sought the US president, Harry Truman’s help to depose Mosaddeq. Truman did not agree. The British decided to do it on their own. Mosaddeq learned about their plot and kicked them out of the country closing down their embassy. The Brits then waited until Dwight D. Eisenhower became POTUS and convinced him that Iran is becoming a communist country. Eisenhower, accepted the view of the British government, and In June 1953, he approved a British proposal for a joint Anglo-American operation, code-named Operation Ajax, to overthrow Mosaddeq. The CIA operative Kermit Roosevelt traveled secretly to Iran to coordinate plans with the shah and the Iranian military, led by General Fazlollah Zahedi.
On August 13 the shah replaced the elected Mosaddeq with Zahedi as the PM, making it clear that he had no regards for democracy and the vote of the parliament. Mosaddeq refused to step down and arrested the shah's emissary. The shah fled the country, and Zahedi went into hiding.
[caption id="" align="alignright" width="203" caption="Shaban bimokh stabbed Dr. Fatemi, after he was arrested and while his hands were tied by the Savak the dreaded Shah's secret police. "]
[/caption]
Roosevelt then distributed a large sum of money among the hooligans headed by a ruffian gang leader known as Sha’ban Jafari, nicknamed Bimokh (brainless) to riot, and loot, and cause instability in a country already reeling under the blow of the British imposed oil embargo. Bimokh and his gang of thugs, supported by the pro-shah army units defeated Mosaddeq's forces that were composed of the people and the intellectuals, and on August 19 the shah returned to the country.
Mosaddeq was sentenced to three years' imprisonment for trying to overthrow the unconstitutional monarchy, Because of his popularity he was kept under house arrest in his village (Ahmad Abad) outside Tehran until his death in 1967. His minister of foreign affairs, Hosein Fatemi, was sentenced to death and executed. Hundreds of National Front leaders, the party of Mosaddeq, Toudeh Party officers, and political activists were arrested; and many of them were sentenced to death. Shahpour Bakhtiyar, the man whom the shah appointed as his last prime minster to save the monarchy from the Islamic Revolution, spent years in the prisons of the shah.From 1953 to 1979, the shah ruled with iron fist in Iran quashing every voice of dissent, jailing and executing, according to the monarchists’ own data, "no more than" 3400 dissidents. Although this number pales in comparison to the number of people the Islamic regime has killed, which is at least a hundred fold larger, it still amounts to more than 2.5 executions per week for 26 years.
The aspiration of the Iranians for democracy was nipped in the bud by the USA government. The anti western sentiment that ensued was a natural and justified reaction to the injustices that the British and the USA had inflicted on the Iranians.
By suppressing the voices of dissent and by jailing and executing the nationalists and the intellectuals, while leaving the mullahs free to do as they wished and even by paying lip-service to Islam, such as funding the construction of mosques, publishing the “Aryamehr Quran” and making a show of going to hajj, the shah left no other door open for the Iranians to strive for their freedom except through the mosques. He eliminated all potential political leaders leaving a vacuum of power. As the result, when in 1979 an incognito cleric called Khomeini launched his open opposition to the shah, all Iranians, from the Islamists to the nationalists and the communists supported him. The question was not whether he is the right man – he was the ONLY man.
The shah was afraid of the Islamists. White ruthless to the nationalists and the communists, he was pusillanimous towards his real enemies. Even when in 1979 the Islamists under the order of the present Supreme Leader, locked the doors of a theater and burned 400 people alive, the shah who was told who were the perpetrators, did not dare to name them, to the point that people thought it was he who did it. Dictators are indeed cowards. The Islamic Revolution did not happen because the Iranians wanted Islam, but because they wanted to get rid of a despot king who was the stooge of foreign powers and honestly believed that Iran is his inherited hacienda.
The ripple effect of the Islamic Revolution was far reaching and lasting. Its success inspired the Muslims around the world to once again use Islam as a tool for their political goals. Success to Muslims is elexir. The Islamists went to Afghanistan to defeat the Soviets and the Islamic jihad, after remaining dormant for six centuries, raised its ugly head again.
America does not owe an apology just to the Iranian people, but to the world, including the 3000 Americans who were killed in September 11, 2001 and thousands of American soldiers who fell in Lebanon, Afghanistan and Iraq. America owes an apology to all those hundreds of thousands of victims who perished since 9/11 in more than 13,000 Islamic terrorist attacks throughout the world.
The rise of Islamic terrorism is the direct result of the success of the Islamic Revolution in Iran. This is something even Osama bin Laden has acknowledged. That revolution would have never happened had America not overthrown the democratically elected prime minister of Iran and had not installed a puppet king, a man who was as inept as he was a despot.
Political mistakes can happen and they are forgivable. The invasion of Iraq can be described as a well intentioned mistake. However, it is difficult to forget and forgive, when political mistakes are motivated by greed and malice. America owes an apology to the Iranians and to the world. The nightmares of Islamic terrorism are American chickens, that have come back to roost, half a century after they left home.
___________ Added later. In response to this article, Dr. Judith Klinghoffer who wrote a message (below comment # 12) that I had not written anything to refute her claim about “Mosaddeq’s manipulation, then suspension of the elections. Nor did you prove that he did not rule by “emergency decree” as Mubarak is doing during the past decades and Indira Gandhi did for a few years in India (no Indian would call her rule democratic,“ I did some more research and found the very informative and shocking facts. New York Times reporter Steven Kinzer in his book All Shah’s Men, reveals how the CIA destabilized and overthrew the democratically elected government of Dr. Mosaddeq. How it was done? Here is the transcript of the first few minutes of Kinzer's interview.1. STEVEN KINZER: The story of how the C.I.A. overthrew the government of Iran in 1953 is really an object lesson in how easy it is for a rich and powerful country to throw a poor and weak country into chaos.
2. The C.I.A. sent one of its most adept operatives, Kermit Roosevelt, the grandson of President Theodore Roosevelt, to Iran with the mission of organizing the overthrow of the government.
3. One reason I was so interested in writing this book is that I have always asked myself, how do you go about overthrowing a government? What do you do? Suppose that you are sent to a country with that mission. What do you do on the first day? How do you start and then what do you do? Well, now I know.
4. Kermit Roosevelt set about trying to create chaos in Iran. He was able to do that very quickly by a series of means.
5. The first thing he did was, he started bribing members of parliament and leaders of small political parties that were a part of Mosaddeq’s political coalition. Pretty soon the public started to see the Mosaddeq’s coalition splitting apart and people denouncing him on the floor of parliament.
6. The next thing Roosevelt did was start bribing newspaper editors, owners and columnists and reporters. Within a couple of weeks, he had 80% of the newspapers in Tehran on his payroll and they were grinding out every kind of lie attacking Mosaddeq.
7. The next thing Roosevelt did was start bribing religious leaders. Soon, at Friday prayers, the Mullahs were denouncing Mosaddeq as an atheist enemy of Islam.
8. Roosevelt also bribed members of police units and low-ranking military officers to be ready with their units on the crucial day.
9. In what I think was really his master stroke, he hired the leaders of a bunch of street gangs in Tehran, and he used them to help create the impression that the rule of law had totally disintegrated in Iran. He actually at one point hired a gang to run through the streets of Tehran, beating up any pedestrian they found, breaking shop windows, firing their guns into mosques, and yelling—“We love Mosaddeq and communism.” This would naturally turn any decent citizen against him.
10. He didn’t stop there. He hired a second mob to attack the first mob, to give people the impression that there was no police presence and order had completely disintegrated. So, within just a few weeks, this one agent operating with a large sum of cash and a network of contacts and various elements of society, had taken what was a fairly stable country and thrown it into complete upheaval.
As you see the parliament was no longer a legitimate parliament. Everyone had become a fifth column. While Roosevelt had remained in the shadow, Mosaddeq knew that the integrity of the parliament and the press had been undermined. How could people who supported him start all of a sudden attacking him? Would an election in such time been legitimate? Was the parliament legitimate? Mosaddeq was a patiort and he did the right thing.
Therefore comparing Dr. Mosaddeq with Hussni Mubarak and Indira Gandhi betrays the lack of knowledge of the subject about which Dr. Klinghoffer opines.
You can read more about it here http://www.democracynow.org/2004/3/5/how_to_overthrow_a_government_pt
Please also watch Steven Kinzer's interview.
Or listen to him
Now that the facts are known I urge Dr. Judith Klinghoffer to correct her article and inform her readers of the truth. I do that always when I stand corrected. It does not diminish me at all to admit I was wrong. ___________Ali Sina is the author of “Understanding Muhammad: A Psychobiography of Allah’s Prophet,” and the founder of Faith Freedom International, the movement of ex-Muslims who strive for democracy and the secularization in Islamic countries.
Great article, I see the
Great article, I see the rotten policies of the British, Americans, the Shah, in 1949-1979. And its results today.
H.G. Wells in his great history-books said in 1923 already that Democracy needed well-informed citizens. So the point made early in the article about "mobocracy" also registers with me. This point in particular is so agonizing to me, because simply exporting democracy isn't it. I suppose we must endeavor also to get people, women as much as men, to get a reasonable education, to let them be literate and a little bit interested and well informed about the world.
Also in India they groomed a
Also in India they groomed a religious party called Muslim League to pursue its divide and rule policy. That party was used to create riots. In 1946, the muslims under the patronage of Muslim League undertook calcutta direct action day, they killed some 50,000 hindus, hindus also retaliated and killed 6,000 muslims.
The pakistan (a muslim country ) was created brutally by muslims and british helped it in every way. Some 10,00,000 innocent hindus and sikhs were butchered by muslim mobs in pakistan especially in punjab area of pakistan.
After that british always favoured pakistan and despised Hindu India, as it was hindus and sikhs 99.9 % who faught for independence and died.
India's maximum revenue is wasted in countering the Islamic terrorism from pakistan
British have cared so much to pakistan that many pakistanis started migrating to Britain in droves. Now after some 60 years they are tasting the muslim problem, which they very happily utilized against India. Infact the muslims especially from pakistan are growing at an alarming rate and are highly radical.
In fact many pakistanis brain are so much twisted that they think taliban is made by hindus and all terrorist attacks in pakistan is done by hindus , jews and americans. See this article in dawn:
http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakis...
Also they could have made jews and christians only settle in Israel and kicked muslims to current jordon at this time. They kept the problem open.
Western world has fallen on
Western world has fallen on materialism and there craze for OIL is so high that they have kept a blind eye to Islam. Approx 90 % of human rights issue are due to muslims, 8 % due to communism and 2 % others.
Now with surge in muslim demographics the whole survival of western world is at stake. The muslims will never forget the Crusades and the colonialism and when they will have the numbers they will show the future generation of western people the muslim cruelity. The apologists will not find the moderate muslims when hair trigerring riots will happen. They will taste the so called hijacked islam like that of hamas, hizbolla, taliban, kashmir militants and other terrorists in other countries.
In many places to catch a monkey they make a cage and place nuts inside and a small hole by which unclinched hand can be inserted, when a monkey inserts its hand and closes his fingers with nuts, it cant remove its hand from the cage and a bell in the cage starts making noise and the hunter easily catches the monkey. Similarly western world should not give so much importance on oil and should tackle Islam head-on.
Good insight to what actually
Good insight to what actually led to the islamic revolution in Iran. Hate blinds, so does greed. Only the Brits matched the greed of muslims. Well oil is not that cheap, it comes along with islamic terrorism.
What I like about Ali Sena is
What I like about Ali Sena is he unravels truth and exposes it when it matters the most. American government was definitely responsible for the rise of Islamic terrorism. Initially they supported Saddam Hussain to fight against Iran. Then as documented by Ali Sena, they played politics in Iran to overthrow a democratically elected leader. They supported Taliban (in fact created it along with ISI of Pakistan) in their fight against the then Soviet Union. Now US is calling for fight against Islamic terror. I hope US administrators realise their mistakes soon and finish off Islamic terrorism soon.
The greed of the western
The greed of the western people is the root cause of all the problems all over the wrold and now the greedywesterners have realised that too much of greed is too bad. What is needed is a compassionate capitalism and middle of the road policies.
islam is one extreme and US is the other.There will be tensions and islam has to succumb.But the American greed can bring about the fall of the great satan.
Moslems may be stupid and may be willing to die in millions, but are willing to kill too for islam.That's where the problem is.No body is willing to either kill or die for capitalism and so inspite of the superior fire power, west is being brought to it's knees.
Thx, Ali. I never really knew
Thx, Ali. I never really knew the story. Very interesting. Dwight Eisenhowe betrayed Israel as wel.. in 1956.
Yes! certainly the USA has
Yes! certainly the USA has done great harm to Iran and the world in general by toppling Mossadeq, but the current wave of jihad is as I see it the result of a Islamic reformationmovement more than a hundred years old.
Iran may be have been an inspiration, but the "second coming" of Islam, I think, derives from the progress of the world. The muslims have known for some time, that they must either knock over civilization or abandon Islam altogether.This knowledge has until recently only been instinctively. But now this knowledge is recognized and is driving muslims into desperation.
And the paradox is that more and more muslims abandon Islam as it gets incresingly potent. Many muslims think Islam creates the perfect society and when the jihadist come to power in their different homelands (which will happen soon in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Egypt, Somalia, Turkey and Uzbekistan) they find out the hard way about what Islam really is.
Many of the muslimimmigrant enclaves in Europe will also soon be governd by shariaimposing criminalgangs whose only exscuse to merciless rule their fellow umma members will be islam. I as a european look forward to this, although I may not survive the following chaos, but it will certainly awaken the european populations who for too long has ignored the dangers of Islam. Europe will fight back and win even if our intelligensia never wakes up.
So there is a big wakeup call about Islam coming to muslims and nonmuslims alike!
When this great wave of Sharia and jihad falls back into the see, as every attempt to conquer the world does, Islam is done for.
Well said # 6. proudkafir ; I
Well said # 6. proudkafir ; I agree with you . Greed will bring down both the vile cults Islam as well as Christianity politics.
Some xian cretins here have
Some xian cretins here have been making some points continuously that India should thank Britain. It is this kind of British scum that they want to thank. Britian did not mess with just Iran, they messed with India, China, African countries and every country colonial country under their rule.
Karma pays with interest. This is my own personal experience as well. Americans unknowingly paid their government through tax for their activities and they are reaping the consequences. Britain and all of Europe (who support xian terrorist activities through missionaries or any form of terrorism) as well will pay for their deeds.
@ DEMSCI you are right. only
@ DEMSCI
you are right. only a well informed and educated person has the right to criticize
You have written nothing that
You have written nothing that demonstrates that I lied or misrepresented the facts as they regard Mosaddeq's manipulation, then suspension of the elections. Nor did you prove that he did not rule by "emergency decree" as Mubarak is doing during the past decades and Indira Gandhi did for a few years in India (no Indian would call her rule democratic. They called the era a suspencion of democracy). You merely posted an unrelated article about his activities.
You may suggest that because so many Iranians were illiterate, they did not deserve to vote or that Iran was not ready for Democracy. But that is a different argument which could be currently applied to many countries. Illiterate does NOT necessarily mean ignorant or vice versa. The Iranian voting pattern was not much different than that of the British parliamentary elections until the mid nineteen century reform acts. By the way,the majority of the British people were illiterate in the 1870s. So, democracy preceded literacy.
Either way, Obama was wrong - Mosaddeq did not head a "democratically elected government" and your calling me names or denigrating the information sources, does not change that basic fact.
@CONTINUUM1 I was watching
@CONTINUUM1
I was watching this BBC documentary, Partition-the day India burned. They(brits) were very opportunist. They were like leeches. I also watched the way these muslim mobs started mass butchering of hindus in Kolkata on the direct action day.
These muslims are such a problem here, they never take pride in being Indians, they never understand its glorious past. They do not think how to empower their motherland. Perhaps its the Islamic way which is hindering the development, take for instance Sania Mirza, poor girl is scared of playing tennis in her own country. Now her ranking is consistently dropping.
haindavakeralam.com/HkPage.as
haindavakeralam.com/HkPage.aspx?PAGEID=8772&SKIN=W
Pakistan is also a victim of terrorism, stupid!
08/06/2009 04:59:52 HARAN.B.R
Hafiz Mohammed Saeed, the Chief of the terrorist organization Jamaat-ud-Dawah, who was also the mastermind behind the 26/11 Mumbai attack and against whose involvement the Indian government had given Pakistan incontrovertible evidences and proofs, was set free by the Lahore High Court last Tuesday, after nearly six months of house arrest. The High Court felt that there was no concrete evidence to extend his detention and hence ordered for his immediate release.
In the aftermath of the 26/11 Mumbai attack, India had demanded the extradition of Hafiz and also former ISI chief, apart from asking Pakistan to crackdown on JuD (LeT). The US for its part gave an ultimatum of 48 hrs to Pakistan government to raid the JuD HQs and arrest the culprits. Even while yielding to the pressure, Pakistan played a silly game of telling the world that President Zardari received a threatening call from Pranab Mukherjee, which later turned out to be a hoax, and attempted to ready its Armed Forces.
As India quickly pointed out that Pakistan was trying to divert the world’s attention from its involvement in Mumbai attack, one of its nuclear scientists, Dr Samar Mubarakmand, audaciously threatened India through a selective media leak, saying Pakistan had the capacity to nuke all cities in India and that it could be done within ten minutes as their missile systems were kept ready for any eventuality.
The US and the European Union, in support of India, strongly criticized Pakistan for aiding, abetting and promoting terror. The US even talked of imposing sanctions on Pakistani officials like former ISI chief Hamid Gul and others, who have had links with LeT, Taliban and Al Qaida. It is reliably learnt that some former ISI and Army officers have been helping all three terror outfits in their operations in Afghanistan, Kashmir and elsewhere. But finally US’ tantrums turned out to be tokenism and mere “lip service.”
Though the UN declared a ban on Jamaat-ud-Dawa, the US and UK simply asked Pakistan to cooperate with India in its investigation in order to bring the culprits to book. Since then, Pakistan has been defiant to the core, putting its foot down and influencing the world community to accept its stand. In contrast, India has been literally begging for support, refusing to realise that whether it is US or UK or China, each would act only in its interests.
Despite being a victim of terror for years, India doesn’t seem to have learnt its lessons properly. Instead of teaching lessons to Pakistan, it attempted to convince US and other nations seeking their cooperation to pin down Pakistan. Ironically those very same nations have been helping Pakistan, to achieve their self interests! In January 2009, Home Minister Chidambaram went to US with a huge dossier on Pakistan, and the UPA government also held discussions with the Chinese Vice-Foreign Minister, who visited India then. The end result was a big ZERO; Pakistan won the so-called diplomatic war! Its friendly relations with China and UK continued; it got more aid from US.
At this juncture, it would be pertinent to remind ourselves the first warning issued by US President Obama to Pakistan immediately after taking charge: “the $ 11 million dollar aid given by Bush administration was not for military upgradation, but a ‘conditional’ one for fighting against terror and Pakistan’s performance against terror would be monitored.” It was reliably learnt then that the American establishment had short-listed 20 senior level officers of the ISI and the Pakistan Army, who have been aiding and abetting the terror outfits for years. Incidentally, though India’s list was bigger, all names were present in the US list figured in India’s list as well!
Meanwhile, though Pakistan accepted the validity of the first ‘dossier’ given by India and constituted a three member committee to probe the Mumbai terror attack with a commitment to try those involved, nothing constructive came out of it; US too lived neither up to its commitment nor to India’s expectations. In fact, after Pakistan’s offensive against the Taliban, US immediately disbursed $110 million in the name of welfare aid for the displaced people.
Even now, after the release of Hafiz Saeed, Washington pretended to be unhappy and President Obama’s special representative Richard Holbrooke stated that US was “disturbed” by the news! But, soon afterwards Holbrooke changed his stance and termed the release as “Pakistan’s internal matter”! Assistant Secretary of State Philip J Crowley also made it clear that US wanted to make sure Pakistan was acting aggressively against extremist elements (read Taliban) and added that US was involved in intensive dialogue with Pakistan on its military needs. Even as he was talking about US’ readiness to help Pakistan enhance its military capabilities, Obama’s administration is believed to have decided to grant another $200 million to Pakistan following the anti-Taliban operations.
Immediately after his release, Hafiz Saeed condemned Pakistan Army’s offensive against the Taliban and avowed that his terror activities against India would continue, particularly in Kashmir. As if this was not enough and knowing India would be outraged, Pakistan Prime Minister Gilani came out with a damning statement asking “Indian occupying forces” to stop repression and human rights abuses in Kashmir, and offering “political, moral and diplomatic” support to the people of Kashmir to exercise their right to self-determination.
Gilani had the audacity to ask India to create a conducive atmosphere for a final settlement to the Jammu & Kashmir dispute. India once again exposed its weakness, with External Affairs Minister S M Krishna saying: “Kashmir was part of the composite dialogue which we had initiated with Pakistan, and the responsibility of creating conducive climate rested with Pakistan.” It is unfortunate India didn’t have the guts to question Gilani on his outrageous statements, which have the intention of not only diverting India’s attention from the release of Hafiz, but also attempting to spite India.
As the Congress-led UPA government has a childish habit of looking up to the US for making each and every move vis-à-vis Pakistan, we can rest assured it would do the same now. History has shown that US always safeguarded its own interests by helping Pakistan while restraining India and forcing it to engage in dialogue with Islamabad. Even in the present circumstances, especially with regard to the 26/11 Mumbai attack, US has not been sincere in backing India, and Barack Obama has surpassed his predecessor George Bush. Bush at least refrained from interfering in India’s Kashmir policy, but Obama seems to be having a ‘special’ agenda, as evidenced by the wrong signals emanating from his side. Pressure is likely to be more on India to give more concessions to Pakistan and start the so-called peace talks early.
Meanwhile, credible inputs have come from intelligence agencies that the LeT and JeM are planning major strikes across India, including Kashmir and South Indian cities. It is reported that groups of Jihadis (25 terrorists in each group) have been ordered to infiltrate the borders and strike at the earliest. If Pakistan showed audacity in perpetrating terror against India, India exposed naivety in identifying the terrorists as ‘non-state’ actors, as if ‘state actors’ (Pakistan government) were not involved. India didn’t even have the brains to understand that non-state actors could not act without the knowledge and support of state actors!
Immediately after the release of Hafiz Saeed, External Affairs Minister S M Krishna doubted Pakistan’s “seriousness” in fighting terror, and Home Minister P Chidambaram questioned its “commitment” to investigate the perpetrators of the Mumbai terror attack. OK, but what about the ‘seriousness’ and ‘commitment’ of the UPA government? What is the response of the Prime Minister to the release of Hafiz and the statement of his Pakistani counterpart?
“Pakistan is also a victim of terrorism, stupid!”
As a matter of principle U.S.
As a matter of principle U.S. president should not apologise to other countries or individual for mistakes done by his predecessosr. In that case he has to apologise for institution of slavery, colonisation of Philippins, to Central America, policy of many U.S presdents, Cuba, and for its interference and murder of Allende of Chile.Dont forget China, opium war and ofcourse A-bomb.
Just it happens to be Iran, Ali makes exception for that "appeaser" or "psychopath" Obama. Ali does not like any other apology by Obama.He forgets that it was cold war days and in those days U.S. policy was governed by likes of secretary Dulles.
If Mossdegh had stayed in power,, sooner or later wave of Islamization would have toppled him. Because of its peculiar history, geopolitics Iran would not have developed as " Secular Tureky" of Kamal Pasha. Mullas were against modernisation, did not matter if it was done by Shaha or Mossdegh.
@ Demsci: Indeed! We do not
@ Demsci: Indeed! We do not have true democracy, only mobocracy:(
@ JAH: The article does not speak anything about the prophecies of Mohammed or Jesus. So what is the point of speaking about them here?
JAH PLEASE....Muhammed is not
JAH PLEASE....Muhammed is not predicted in the Bible at all Not in the OT and not in the NT. Prophets in the OT were jews and the prophets that were predicted by all the prophets in the Bible were jews. What you are claiming is a big muslim lie. What you are refering to are muslim sources and they are absolutely not reliable. You can read the Bible until your eyes turn red but you will not find a prediction about muhammed at all
#15 idesinger I do not give a
#15 idesinger
I do not give a damn about Obama. This buffoon is not the POTUS. He is a usurper and nothing that he says or does matter because he is illegitimate.
I am stating a fact that it is important to recognize the past errors and apologize for them. That apology must come from a real representative of the Americans not a con man impostor. It must be objective and not motivated by one's own hatred of America, as is the case with this charlatan.
Ali only appeaser or people
Ali only appeaser or people with leftist leaning wil apologise for that coup in Iran which displaced elected Iranian priminister Mosadegh.
To millions of American Obama is president.
No real republicanl POTUS either Bush, Maccain or Palin,, Gingrich or Limbaghs of this world will ever apologise to Iranian people. They look it from cold war view point.
No real republicanl POTUS
In other words, Americans (people or government) do not give hoots about people of another country as long as they have their agenda fulfilled.
I responded to Dr. Judith
I responded to Dr. Judith Kinghoffer in an addition I made at the end of my article. Please read it and click on the links to listen. They will shock you. I did not know that myself until i had to do some research to respond to Dr. Klinghoffer.
I think India is facing
I think India is facing similar problems. All the media outlets funded by American money (christist followers) has successfully maligned BJP and Hindutva, as an evil force. I hope majority Indians wake up. Money works. Simple divide and rule policy of British.
democracynow.org/2004/3/5/how_to_overthrow_a_government_pt
STEVEN KINZER: The story of how the C.I.A. overthrew the government of Iran in 1953 is really an object lesson in how easy it is for a rich and powerful country to throw a poor and weak country into chaos. The C.I.A. sent one of its most adept operatives, Kermit Roosevelt, the grandson of President Theodore Roosevelt, to Iran with the mission of organizing the overthrow of the government. One reason I was so interested in writing this book is that I have always asked myself, how do you go about overthrowing a government? What do you do? Suppose that you are sent to a country with that mission. What do you do on the first day? How do you start and then what do you do? Well, now I know. Kermit Roosevelt set about trying to create chaos in Iran. He was able to do that very quickly by a series of means. The first thing he did was, he started bribing members of parliament and leaders of small political parties that were a part of Mossadegh ‘s political coalition. Pretty soon the public started to see the Mossadegh ’s coalition splitting apart and people denouncing him on the floor of parliament. The next thing Roosevelt did was start bribing newspaper editors, owners and columnists and reporters. Within a couple of weeks, he had 80% of the newspapers in Tehran on his payroll and they were grinding out every kind of lie attacking Mossadegh . The next thing Roosevelt did was start bribing religious leaders. Soon, at Friday prayers, the Mullahs were denouncing Mossadegh as an atheist enemy of Islam. Roosevelt also bribed members of police units and low-ranking military officers to be ready with their units on the crucial day. In what I think was really his master stroke, he hired the leaders of a bunch of street gangs in Tehran, and he used them to help create the impression that the rule of law had totally disintegrated in Iran. He actually at one point hired a gang to run through the streets of Tehran, beating up any pedestrian they found, breaking shop windows, firing their guns into mosques, and yelling—“We love Mossadegh and communism.” This would naturally turn any decent citizen against him. He didn’t stop there. He tired a second mob to attack the first mob, to give people the impression that there was no police presence and order had completely disintegrated. So, within just a few weeks, this one agent operating with a large sum of cash and a network of contacts and various elements of society, had taken what was a fairly stable country and thrown it into complete upheaval.
Its well known fact tthat
Its well known fact tthat president of Chile Allende was killed bby CIA.
Here they had good reson. Allende was communist. Still no need to kill him, After messing up economy he would have been out of power. But cold war warriors dont think in that term.
One can cite many such example of coups in central america. Once American establishment of cold war days made up its mind that to let go one country means whole world will succumb to communism, they used all their force to dislodge that government.
U.S. of 50s was in state of cold war . This state would last till US started doing business with China. To US of those days Iran was communist country under Mosadegh. His nationalization of oil companies was proof positive.. It was a big taboo for U.S. in those days.
You can come up with many
You can come up with many reasons idesigner. No matter how many reasons you come up with, what US did is utterly evil to achieve whatever hidden goals it had/has and/or whatever goals you/government want us or others to believe.
I am not defending any
I am not defending any government.
So far apology goes, next thing is monetary compensation and many in U.S. will oppose such move.
During cold war both blocks did awsome things. So far U.S. is concerned we all expected lot better than comminist block.
Then both need to pay for
Then both need to pay for what they did. if there is justice in this world, then the weak should be compensated.
continuum wrote: Then both
continuum wrote:
Then both need to pay for what they did. if there is justice in this world, then the weak should be compensated.
The only people who should be apologizing and compensating people are the people who are responsible for committing those atrocities.
The blacks were liberated from slavery over a 140+ years ago with the help of free blacks and white people. Other then that there is nothing else we can do but move forward and try to build relationships and live in harmony with one another.
We should also do the same thing with Iran by liberating the people from the grasp of Islam and go after the dictators who commit atrocities against their own people.
Other then that I don't believe the U.S. citizens should compensate people for something they had not part of and why should I have to compensate the descendents of slavery since non of my ancestors ever took part in that heinous deed ( the only members of my family who were present in the U.S. when slaves were freed was my grandmothers family and they were Russian and Hungarian immigrants ) The rest of my family from my father's side immigrated to the U.S. after the civil war and my mother is from Honduras.
#23 “To US of those days Iran
#23
“To US of those days Iran was communist country under Mosadegh. His nationalization of oil companies was proof positive.”
That is nonsense. So if you refuse your property being stolen from you, you are a communist?
In a way I am beginning to
In a way I am beginning to believe in Karma though I am a hard core atheist. During the cold war, America made a huge mess in Latin America to the point that there was almost no hope for economic upliftment of the people apart from American largesse which was usually ursurped by the small group of elites. So, to seek a better life dozens of millions made their way into the USA either legally or illegally. Today this traffic still flows in similar direction. The previously pro-American elite is still sitting on the Latin American wealth. And America is stuck with millions of illegal immigrants. Also, the Latin population is sky rocketting while the people who produced the masterminds of the cold war have become a dying breed counting the days when they would become first a minority and then extinction. Karma....what an irony.
Nice Article Mr Sina. US has
Nice Article Mr Sina.
US has dubious distinction when it comes to foreign policy. The only time they got their foreign policy right was during WWI and II. This was not because they were thoughtful, but becuase USA had more people from Britain and France. Therefore being with Allied forces was no brainer. Let's look at major US foreign policies since WWII
1) Cold War - greatest disaster.
2) Korea - Korean people are still suffering.
3) Cuba
4) Vietnam - 43,000 US soldiers died, so did millions of vVetnamis.
5) Bangladesh - US supported genocide of 10 million Bengali Pakistanis. Yes ten million. This will dwarf Hitler's.
6) Afghanistan - Frankenstein called Taliban was created by USA itself.
To how many nations would USA apologize to?
America has tried to protect
America has tried to protect people but have been blamed for everything. Today, Americans will not help anyone because as I see people dont appreciate it. If one helps another, cant they just say thanks and not use kindness for weakness. Most of the Americans were raised as Christians, and such are told to share. They died in WW1 and WW2, Korean War, Vietnam War, only to be blamed for all of their problems. Americans have saved Muslims from Europe to Africa to the Middle East and all we get is blame.
Christians saved Blacks from slavery only to be blamed for every bad thing that happens when it was Arab and African Muslims who sold them to Europeans.
America bombed Japan, rebuilt it, Germany, and rebuilt it, and people like Wright and Farrahkan blamed America who kept them from becoming brown lampshades and speaking Japanese and German.
DRACULA defeated Turkish Muslims drank their blood and disappeared. Count Vlad Dracula.
We should also do the same
Most definitely.. whomever commits atrocities should pay for the crime.
It does NOT matter whether US citizens were ignorant. The country as a whole benefited from these atrocities and the country as a whole is then responsible for letting it happen and benefiting from it directly or indirectly.
Great Essay, Ali Sina! Again,
Great Essay, Ali Sina! Again, well-written! As far as I can see, in History there was and there is always a nation and a group of people who exploits the others. Humans are naturally-born oppressors. Some people never had the chance to abuse the others, as some others had/have their chance. Take, for example, in cronological order, these people: romans, goths, MUST-APES , portuguese/spaniards, english(exploiting portuguese and other european countries), americans, chineses (I believe the chineses would be much worser than americans in exploiting and abusing of economical power,only MUST-APES surpass everybody, being the leaders in exploitation) , or take the african continent, where only bushmen and pigmies thrived until bantu people exploded in population, or Aztecs who were oppresors from other people, or aboriginal peoples, both in Australia and in New Guinea, hunted down by MUST-APES and english. The fact is, everybody wants to exploit the other, regardless of its situation and /or fragility. Unfortunately, it's part of Man.
I mean Man, not MUST-APE, as they are najis, apes and chickens, worse than humans.
Dear Ali Sina ! This is one
Dear Ali Sina ! This is one of your brilliant articles which illustrates your very deep understanding of the political history and your very sophisticated analysis of the roots of Islamism as we are facing today! As you have pointed out one of the great idiots of this century was Ron Reagan who in the name of fighting communism encouraged Isamic fundamentalism in Pakistan ,Afganisthan and all our the world and has come to haunt us now!. He was the one who used Saddam Hussain in his war against Iran which led to the deaths of millions of people in that region ! Yet lot of Americans think that Reagan was a great national hero! That is because most American's knowledge of world events is abysmal!
God save America from ignorance!
Now it is China's turn to
Now it is China's turn to produce fake drugs and label them "Made in India". Read the story in detail http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/China-passing-off-fake-drugs-as-Made-... ..THIS IS HOW PROXY BATTLES ARE WON IN POLITICS.
Wonderful exposee by Ali.
Wonderful exposee by Ali.
Mo would have made a good cia
Mo would have made a good cia director if alve today! Even oh bow mama would have been scared of hin!
Mohammad the director of CIA and JC the director of FBI.What do you think?
My last day in the USA, nice
My last day in the USA, nice trip. Hasta La Vista America, I go back to my motherland now. It was nice meeting you!
After reading the whole
After reading the whole article and the comments I am left with the question of perspective. So often I spoke to culture-relativists who say in essence the same as so many Muslims; you tell me anything in regard to intentions to exploit, oppress people or bad or stupid behavior in past and present of Muslims. Then I can match EVERYTHING you say with the same done or intended by Westerners or by Buddhists/ Hindus if I think or search long enough. With Culture-relativists and Muslims you hear a lot of Tu Quoque-fallacy. It sometimes seemed that in this article and the comments they are proven right.
And the Culture-relativists and many Muslims indeed often ask us why we bother or ascribe sinister motives to what we say. So what I am after now is the perspective; are some cultures still better than others or are all the same? Why do we bother?
I think Ali Sina is
I think Ali Sina is absolutely right. The USA owe an apology to the people of Iran for overturning the democratically elected government of Persia 56 years ago.
But not only Iran, the whole middle east would be a different place, if the great country of Persia were a vibrant democracy. Iran has a great tradition that has generated many contributions both in the arts and sciences. Ever since the persian "tales of one thousand and one nights" were translated into European languages, they have caught the imagination of innumerable artists all over the world. Ever since the ghazales of Hafez were made known to the west, they have had a profound influence on the poetry thereafter. Since I live in germany, I may only name the likes of Platen, Rückert and Goethe who immitated Hafez.
A vibrant, wealthy and powerful Iran would make a huge difference. The people of the middle east would no longer regard Islam as the solution to their plight. Instead, the shining beacon of Iran would be seen as their role model. Many liberal - in the true sense of the word! - Iranian intellectuals live in the west, in particular here in Germany, who contribute to their host countries. In fact, the leaders of the central council of ex-muslims of germany - an organization for protecting muslim apostates - is headed by the brave Iranian, Mina Ahad. I truly hope the upcoming elections in Iran will change Iran and reformers like Mr Mousavi are elected into office. I pray for the people of Iran.
Regards,
kikl
Ibrahim, God speed and bon
Ibrahim,
God speed and bon voyage. I trust that you will still have access to FFI in your country. I've mostly enjoyed your posts so may you keep on trucking.
>38. ibrahim Says:
>June 9th, 2009 at 7:52 am
>My last day in the USA, nice trip. Hasta La Vista America, I go back to >my motherland now. It was nice meeting you!
...."bribing newspaper
...."bribing newspaper editors, owners and columnists and reporters… bribing religious leaders….bribed members of police units and low-ranking military officers….bribing members of parliament and leaders of small political parties” Many Iranians saled Iran for money, it seems.
Dear Ali Sina, Dr.
Dear Ali Sina,
Dr. Klinghoffer is right. And the picture you give of these events seems to come from a leftist, anti-american book. It is simplistic and false. The Iranian society was much more divided than you say . Money is not an esplanation at all..There were stong communists and Islamists factions. USSR was watching , ready to intervene. Who removed the Shah sixteen years later ? Islamists and communists. They don’t surged from nothing.
Why the Savaks? Not to oppress people but to fight communists and islamists who wanted the power. They say that the regime was corrupted ? Is the actual regime much more better ? Both regime are iranian not British or American. The Shah is not the cause of all iranian’s misfortune. All Iranians are. They are not victims. Mossadegh became an hero, a man greater than he was when Iranians needed a marthyr to unite themselves against the Shah and now against the Americans and Britishs. It is so comforting to be the poor victims. It would have been the paradise if only…..
The Shah was giving all what Iranians are reventicating today in the steets but, unfortunately, he had no choice to become more and more authoritative in front of the demagogic and fierce ennemies of his liberal regime. The communists and the Islamists united their power to oust the Shah and once the Shah gone, they fight for the power. We know who won.The Iranian people is the victim of himself much more than the victim of “others”.Americans, Britishs, Russians had economic and geopolical interests in Iran. This is clear. It was since the cold war. But there were Iranians looking to the West, others looking to the East, others longing for a pure islamic regime, others for a pure communist regime, others for a bizarre blend of communism and islamism, etc. The real cause of Iranian’s misfortune is their struggle one against others, like everywhere.
British economic sanctions after the nationalisation without compensations of oil companies and their illwill certainly harm Iran and made the situation worse but it does not explain all. Iranians didn’t even have the technology and the technicians to exploit their resources. The Shah dismissed Mossadegh and he had the right to do so. All Iranians were not behind Mossadegh. And those who were against him were all not paid for. .Etc. etc.
Ali, it would be interresting to hear you again on that subject. I know that I am a little bit provocative here but I judge it necessary if we realy want to know the reality, not the mythts. I am sure that it is more complex and less comforting than you said. And I am sure that it is not the cause of the rise of Islam and terrorism but only an opportunity among many others. After all, who acclaimed Khomeiny by millions ? The iranian people. He just have what he wanted : Islam. No more no less. We call that “responsibility”. People had been fooled ? Not sure at all. They just dreamed in color. They blackened the Shah and dreamed of the paradise it would be without him.