Friday, February 29, 2008

Op-ed columnist: No to pinko pro-Iranians

Haroun Muhammad, in his regular op-ed in Al-Quds al-Arabi, says the Ahmedinejad visit to Baghdad really puts the cap on a strategy of collaboration between America and Iran with respect to controlling Iraq. He cites the fact that the Americans continue, in their day-to-day activities, to regard the Iran-oriented Shiite parties as their natural allies; he reviews statements of Wayne White and others to the effect the Americans deliberately opened the Iran-Iraq border following the 2003 invasion; and he talks about covert Iranian activities since then targeting in particular those who fought in the Iran-Iraq war; and so on.

The specific problem with the visit is that this could be seen as a declaration of victory by Iran, in which Ahmedinejad in effect says to the Iraqi people: What we were unable to accomplish on our own (vis a vis Iraq), Bush has given us for free. Moreover, we move freely in the region as we see fit; America, itself, has used us to frighten our neighbours and sell them weapons for billions of dollars, and we have used America to expand our influence and our reach.

His point is that honorable Iraqis see the coming Ahmedinejad visit as completely unacceptable, and instead gain from it insight into the nature of this Iran-America collaboration.

To those who say he has revolutionary Iran all wrong, Haroun Mohammed says this:
We hope no one from among the know-it-all theoreticians, servants unfortunately of the nationalists and the leftists, comes to us and says: Don't mix up Iran of the revolution, friend of the Arabs, with imperialist America enemy of the Arabs. Because the answer is very simple: Of course such a mix-up would be a mistake. Our fellow-feelings with Iran would defend it in any confrontation between Iran and the United States, should such a thing occur. But [we are talking about] Iran in the Iraqi situation [where Iran is] a saboteur and conniving with the occupation, and the only country that expressed satisfaction with the occupation, sending its people and its agents on the backs of the tanks or following them...
It would be interesting to know more about the know-it-all theoreticians he is talking about, but for the moment I highlight this passage merely to point up a somewhat familiar set of cross-currents: Theoretical sympathy with a revolutionary and anti-imperialist regime, along with concrete opposition to its interference in our affairs.


Anonymous Alamet said...

OT, and you may have already seen news of this, but:
Cairo to host Iraq reconciliation conference in March
"Cairo will be hosting an expanded conference on dialogue and national reconciliation in Iraq on March 25," Falih al-Fayyad, the chairman of the supreme board for dialogue and national reconciliation, told Aswat al-Iraq – Voices of Iraq – (VOI).
"The meeting would be attended by figures in parliament and the political process as well as other parties that still reject entering into the process," Fayyad said.
He pointed out that the Cairo conference "will be held under the auspices of an international dialogue foundation and an Italian peace institute," adding the meeting "resumes other conferences held in Istanbul, Beirut and the Dead Sea with the aim of sustaining national reconciliation in Iraq."
Fayyad did not rule out the conference would be attended by Baathist figures.
"I extended invitations during the previous conferences to figures who belonged to the (dissolved) Baath party," he said, rejecting, however, "any dialogues with people still representing the Baath."

5:23 PM  
Blogger Shirin said...


10:19 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home