Shooting statements
Once again, the Iranian president's comments on Israel have sparked controversy. Rasha Saad reviews the implications
The Iranian president has done it again. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has caused a political controversy that has made headlines worldwide following his fiery comments on Israel and the Holocaust during last week's Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) in Mecca.
During an interview on the sidelines of the conference, Ahmadinejad said that if the West really wanted to make up for the Holocaust, Israel should be moved to Europe. "You oppressed them, so go ahead and give part of Europe to the Zionist regime and let them establish any government they want. We would support it," he said.
"So, Germany and Austria, come and give one, two, or any number of your provinces to the Zionist regime so that they can create a country which all of Europe will support and the problem will be solved at its root."
Ahmadinejad had caused a similar uproar in October when he said that Israel should be "wiped off the map." An angry reaction from Europe was generated along with the United States and Russia, an ally of Iran. British secretary of state for foreign and commonwealth affairs, Jack Straw, said that the words of Ahmadinejad "have no place in a civilised political debate". Germany was the staunchest critic, with Chancellor Angela Merkel describing the remarks as "totally unacceptable" and the German government announcing that it would protest to the Iranian ambassador. Germany is reportedly pushing for a joint declaration of condemnation by European countries during this week's EU summit.
Needless to say, the comments triggered a great deal of speculation. This time, however, those who had argued that Ahmadinejad's inflammatory remarks may have been due to his lack of experience did not receive much support. Instead, analysts agreed that Ahmadinejad is well aware that his words will cause anger in the West. Their argument is that the Iranian president expressed these comments specifically during the Islamic Conference in order to enhance the image of Iran as the only country that can stand against the West and that dares to expose the involvement of the West with Israel.
By reviving the tough language of the Islamic Revolution, analysts believe, Ahmadinejad is also courting Iranians at home with the aim of enhancing his image as a political leader.
Nor is the Iraqi perspective far from Ahmadinejad's calculations. According to analysts, he might attempt to take the lead in a battle that is neither in Israel or Iran, but in Iraq. According to analyst Mohamed Al-Ashhab Iraq has "become the world's laboratory: starting from banned US weapons to extremist sectarian fights. Everyone is taking their chances and the outcome is completely unknown, this is a situation which has not occurred since World War II."
According to analysts, it is clear that Ahmadinejad is deliberately demeaning Israel, assuming that the Western countries might finally understand that they have to deal with Iran with a different mentality, whether concerning its location, its role in the Middle East, or its nuclear programme.
Through these provocative remarks, Al-Ashhab argues, the Iranian president is sending a clear message that Iran is no ordinary player in the regional arrangements in Iraq and the Middle East, but "a main and pivotal player whose cards are divided between its controversial nuclear dossier and its growing influence in Iraq."
The controversy over Ahmadinejad's verbal attacks against Israel has cast a shadow over crucial negotiations between the EU-3, Britain, France and Germany, and Tehran over Iran's nuclear fuel programme that is taking place on 21 December.
Meanwhile, Tehran is rallying behind the Iranian president, with Iranian officials expressing their surprise that the international community has so vehemently condemned Ahmadinejad's remarks.
"I'm surprised by the reaction to these comments. The president's statements were clear: if the Europeans have treated the Jews badly, they have to compensate at their own expense, not at the expense of the region," Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said.
One of Iran's top religious leaders, Ayatollah Mohamed Emami Kashani, while addressing the weekly Friday prayer congregation at the Tehran University campus, commended Ahmadinejad for "echoing" at the OIC summit the very same concerns that Supreme Leader Ali Khameini had raised at the OIC summit in Tehran five years ago.
Ayatollah Kashani criticised the Western media for its prejudice towards Ahmadinejad, and went on to convey great appreciative words for Ahmadinejad's government, which he said was "wise enough to run the country". He expressed confidence that Ahmadinejad's leadership would "spare no efforts in meeting the problems of the people and in advancing the country and the society to a higher level".
The whole Iran-Israel saga, however, did not draw any reaction from the Arab world. While the timing and convenience of Ahmadinejad's words were debated, Ahmadinejad's argument is hardly a surprise to the Arab audience.
Abdul-Wahab Badrakhan wrote in the London-based newspaper Al-Hayat that the American-European West have spent the last five decades covering up for Israel's crimes and supporting countless illegal and inhumane violations which have been used to implant Israel in the middle of the Arab region. "After the Arabs stopped fighting it [Israel] and even stopped condemning its existence, the Iranians extract slogans, considered outdated and obsolete, to remind the West and Israel that the historical facts do not match up with the image they have been portraying and which they work hard to sustain."
Concerning the political "civilised" debate, according to Jack Straw's definition, Badrakhan argued that the Arabs have, in fact, tried out such approaches. In 2002, the Arabs adopted a peace initiative in the Beirut Summit which Israel reacted to by re-occupying the Palestinian territories and committing more massacres. "Straw or the US president or any Western leader did not point out that Israel's behaviour was not at all civilised. Nor did any of them refer to the racist fence as uncivilised and worthy of condemnation, highlight that it should be dealt with under the seventh article of the UN charter." Even worse, Badrakhan added, Israel has been rewarded with recognition, especially in a speech voiced by the UN secretary-general who declared that the justification for Israel's existence is the Nazi Holocaust. "Ahmadinejad's statements might deserve Western condemnation, but it is difficult for the Arabs to endorse this condemnation -- even if they did not line up in support of the Iranian president."
weekly.ahram.org.eg |
