TEHRAN (Tasnim)– The Zionists hindered efforts by Iran to purchase military hardware on the black market to prevent any arms reinforcement of Iran while they stonewalled dialogue aimed at securing the release of Western hostages held in Lebanon in return for the supply of military equipment to Iran.
Iranian journalist and expert Abbas Salimi Namin has disproved the claims and opinions of Israeli analyst Ronen Bergman in the book ‘The Secret War with Iran’. ‘The Secret War with Iran’, written by renowned Zionist journalist Ronen Bergman, was published in 2008 by Simon & Schuster publishing company in the United States.
Born in 1972, Bergman is a graduate of Tel Aviv University in the Middle East political relations. He is a famous Zionist journalist and analyst in the military and security fields who has worked with Israeli newspapers ‘Haaretz’ and ‘Yedioth Ahronoth’, American dailies and weeklies such as ‘The New York Times’, ‘Newsweek’, ‘The Wall street Journal’, and British media groups including ‘The Guardian’ and ‘The Times’.
Bergman has been interested in topics relating to the enemies of the Zionist regime (particularly Iran, Hezbollah and the Palestinian resistance groups), as well as subjects on the history of the Israeli regime’s assassination operations, which are cited in his recent book ‘Rise and Kill First’.
In an interview with Persian TV channel ‘Iran International’, Bergman has pointed to the Iranian nuclear program and the issues surrounding it -particularly the Zionist regime’s secret attempts to halt the process of nuclear activities in Iran and assassinate Iranian scientists. He has also cited ex-CIA chief Michael Hayden as saying that the assassination of nuclear scientists is the best way to impede Iran’s growing process in that field, and has implicitly held Israel responsible for it.
In the book ‘The Secret War with Iran’, Bergman has written a history of encounters between Iran and the Zionist regime, while the bulk of the book relates to the Lebanese Hezbollah -Iran’s main ally in the battle against the Zionist regime since its formation until the 33-day War- focusing on the role of Martyr Imad Mughniyeh.
His book also includes sections about the final years of the Pahlavi regime and victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, short periods of the war imposed by the Ba’thist party of Iraq on Iran (focusing on the McFarlane affair), Iran’s role in supporting the Palestinian groups, and the Iranian nuclear program.
Bergman’s multiple undocumented and untrue comments as well as personal and purposeful analyses (with the main purpose of displaying Israel’s power, especially in a competition with the US) that have repeatedly come in his book make a critical review of the book necessary for Iranian readers.
Director of the Iran History Studies and Compilation Bureau, Abbas Salimi Namin, has written an extensive criticism in a book about ‘The Secret War with Iran’. Born in 1954, Salimi Namin is an experienced journalist and a renowned Iranian researcher in history and political sciences who has published many articles and books.
Read more
About ‘The Secret War with Iran’
Part 31:
Chapter VIII
Legend has it that wolves sleep collectively in a circular shape with open eyes so that each of them would be safe from being mauled by others. Chapter 8 of Bergman’s book is reminiscent of this legend. If we believe some American officials’ account of the McFarlane scandal that they were seeking to boost a specific group in Iran with a view to changing the course of the Islamic Revolution after the departure of its founder, how could an opportunity created for resolving a humanitarian issue grow into a political scandal for the White House? In other words, how was the “Irangate” scandal developed? What was the role of the Zionists and the Americans therein? Dozens of other questions have remained unanswered.
When we closely examine the lines followed in this chapter, we find out that one of Mr Bergman’s objectives has been to further complicate the issue in a bid to further lay the blame on the US for this historic failure; exactly the same approach pursued in analyzing the Islamic Revolution. But evidence says otherwise. In any case, emergence of issues rooted in the ferocious nature of the rich resulted in the failure of a political tendency in Iran. Furthermore, with the small information leaks, the hypocrisy of Capitalist leaders and their offspring, i.e. racist base, emerged to show to what extent they behave like wolves.
In a bid to divert minds away, the author has released the contents of tape recording the conversation between Iranian arms dealer Manouchehr Qorabnifar and Amiram Nir, the Israeli prime minister’s counterterror adviser and the initiator of the second and decisive stage of the Iran-contra affair. Bergman offers a psychological assessment of an ordinary and insignificant conversation. “…the audiotape, which has not been played since then—is being disclosed here for the first time— the excitement and the eagerness for action, for involvement in a great operation, for effecting a major strategic change are evident in one of the two voices. In the other, the cunning and slickness stand out. The conversation was between two men from different sides of the Mediterranean Sea, who for a period of time had the world as their playground, world leaders as their puppets, and one of the juiciest scandals in recent American political history on their hands.” (Chapter 8, p. 142)
An insignificant and routine conversation is interpreted as if decision-makers involved in this scandal were functioning within these limits. That is while neither of the parties involved in the effort to secure the release of hostages in return for military equipment – i.e. Iran and the US – trusted Qorbanifar. Furthermore, the Americans were not optimistic about Amiram Nir either. Not much information is released about why Washington was unhappy with him; however, the level of unhappiness with Amiram was such that Bergman implicitly interprets his death as suspicious, says he had information which would be perilous to the US president and he was finally killed in a GMT-operated aircraft.
Now one has to see if the Americans had a run-in with the representative of the Zionists or the behavior of rulers of Tel Aviv. Then American president had described the Israeli treatment of the Irangate scandal as “rogue”. “The man who would become president in January 1989, and serve until he was succeeded by Bill Clinton, has always insisted that he was unaware of the “rogue” Iran-contra operation.” (Chapter 8, p. 161)
The author provides details to disprove this accusation: “Important point: When I used the word “we” Fuller (assistant to Bush) wrote “they” as if it was Israel I was talking about, although at the outset I had made it clear to Bush that I was speaking on behalf of the joint American-Israeli team, about both of our efforts and actions, according to North’s request (to update Bush). Later, Bush asked how the work was divided up and what Israel’s role was…. I do not see the logic that says that complying with the request of the United States and carrying out logistical steps that enable the United States to avoid exposure mean that Israel conducted the operation and ran it and dragged the United States behind it.” (Chapter 8, pp. 161-162)
As acknowledged by Amiram, the Americans first had the impression that they would be able to handle the issue they had initiated as the Zionists had no role in it. In other words, Iran would have never joined the project if the slightest sign of Israel’s involvement had been found. That is why Nir had a fake US passport. Therefore, in a project in which even Israel’s name could not be mentioned, the Zionists took everything in their own hands by exploiting the name of the US.
On the issue of obtaining help from Iran to resolve the crisis in Lebanon, Washington had allowed the Israelis to have a representative under US cover in a bid to ensure them that nothing would be decided against them. But giving such privilege further unveiled the ferocious nature of the Zionists and the Americans lost control of affairs. Prices were multiplied, the US-made equipment was transferred to occupied territories to be replaced with outdated ones. Such wolf-style nature further discredited the US and derailed the negotiations aimed at improvement in ties between Iran and the US. Was it the Americans who in their first experience of dialogue with an Iranian party following the Islamic Revolution, made the wall of mistrust taller rather than make it shorter? The author seeks an answer to this question while exonerating the representative of Israel: “When it came out that the huge profits that Oliver North had garnered by overcharging the Iranians had been used to fund the contras, there was outrage in Congress…Reagan’s spokespersons hurried to blame Israel and specifically Nir.” (Chapter 8, p. 162)
Referring to defective hardware, the author tries to exonerate the Zionists or at least presents the US as complicit. “On May 22–24, spare parts for the Hawk missiles and 504 TOWs were flown into Israel, to replace those that had been sent to Iran. To the amazement of IDF officers who checked the consignment, it turned out that not only had Israel tried to supply Iran with faulty equipment, but the United States was trying to do the same thing to Israel. The TOWs had passed their use-by date and would have been a danger to anyone who fired them.” (Chapter 8, p. 159)
The authenticity of such allegation is in doubt as the US has been spending several billion dollars in cash and arms annually to boost the occupiers of Palestine and therefore it would not take any action in conflict with its major policies unless the final destination for these arms has been Iran. However, the author is accusing the Americans of having committed this act of trickery in a bid to give a normal picture of the Zionists’ rogue act. The author has already narrated the story such that it is not clear who had ordered such an act in Israel. “The first shipment, in August 1985, consisted of 504 TOW antitank missiles, taken from Israeli stockpiles. The next contained eighteen Hawk antiaircraft missiles, which later turned out to have been faulty after one of them exploded on an Iranian launcher. Altogether, the Iranians had the feeling that the Israelis were trying to hoodwink them. Time and again they received consignments of missiles whose use-by date had expired, or which simply nose-dived off the launchers. To this day, there is an open argument in Israel as to who gave the order to load junk missiles onto the Iran-bound cargo planes.” (Chapter 8, p. 149)
In this passage, the author has juxtaposed several untrue allegations: 1. Iran never entered into any talks or deals with the occupiers of Palestine, the Zionists instigated black market dealers to harm ties with Iran (we discussed it in previous chapters). 2. The author’s scattered allegations that Israel prevented a downfall of Tehran during the Saddam invasion of Iran contradict the aforesaid acknowledgment. The Zionists hindered efforts by Iran to purchase military hardware on the black market to prevent any arms reinforcement of Iran while they stonewalled dialogue aimed at securing the release of Western hostages held in Lebanon in return for the supply of military equipment to Iran. 3. Mr. Bergman claims it is not clear who had ordered replacement of new equipment with old outdated ones. This untrue claim is while the issue was not limited to loading; rather, a center had been set up in the occupied territories to paint and package outdated and even rusted US military hardware. Therefore, it was not done by a single unknown person. The US has been supplying significant consignments of arms to the Zionists for years now. Naturally, after several years the unused equipment has to be annihilated. But the Zionists distributed these hazardous arms on the market through dealers and such arms were sent to Tehran in return for the release of hostages. The Americans assert they had loaded newly-manufactured arms, but Israel had replaced them under the pretext of reloading. The Zionists, including Mr. Bergman, say the US and the Zionists had committed this mischievous behavior vis-� -vis Iran.
No comments:
Post a Comment