I have many reasons to be concerned about Iranian policy, starting with its role in Iraq, where Iran feeds religious strife, as well as its greed, not ambitions, in the Gulf and its continued occupation of the Emirati islands. This in addition to the regime's support of subversive activities in many distant Arab countries, and the fact that it has become a military dictatorship, when it previously had, since 1979, enjoyed political support and subsequently, the legitimacy to rule Iran. Nevertheless, the above outline of the reasons for concern does not include the Iranian nuclear program, which the Mahmoud Ahmadinejad government claims is peaceful. In truth, I hope that the latter is lying, that the program is indeed a military program, and that Iran has as many nuclear bombs as Israel possesses, if not twice as many. I am not here in the course of extolling anyone, and I ask Arab countries that are concerned by the Iranian nuclear program, why were they not concerned over many decades by Israel's nuclear program, nay its nuclear arsenal? How do these countries explain the fact that the Iranian program prompted them to seek similar programs, when they never felt the need for such programs to confront Israel's? All Arab countries are required to enter the nuclear age, and if a small country like the United Arab Emirates has begun taking strides down that path, then the large Arab states must also seek to acquire nuclear capabilities, even if they are oil-producing countries, because oil will not last forever, and alternative fuels must be sought out. Before I carry on, I want to note down here the West's accusations against Iran of supporting terrorism: What concerns me here, in regards to this issue, includes Hamas and Hezbollah, the two national liberation movements confronting Israeli terrorism. In the Middle East, there is only one terrorist party that spawned all other forms of terrorisms, and that party is the state of Israel itself and its criminal occupation policy. What I have said so far is that the reasons for my concern regarding the Iranian policy are many. However, these do not include the nuclear program or the country support for freedom fighters. Yet, these two issues are the ones behind the campaign orchestrated by Israel, the Jewish Lobby and the Likudnik neo-conservatives, aimed at imposing sanctions and an embargo against Iran to halt its nuclear program, or at conducting a military strike against it if does not halt its program. All the known supporters of Israel are urging for action against Iran. In fact, these same individuals had supported all American and Israeli wars against Arabs and Muslims in the past, and then they have the audacity to call for war based on suspicion, while Israel possesses a nuclear arsenal and its government is extremist and fascistic, and does not hesitate to use military force each day against women and children. For instance, arrogance alone explains the calls by Reuel Marc Gerecht and Mark Dubowitz to impose sanctions against Iran in the name of the Iranian people, or in other words, putting the Iranian people under siege and starving it and then claiming that this will benefit them. Specifically, they called for a gasoline embargo on Iran, a country that imports 40 percent of its gasoline needs. I do not know how the Iranians would benefit from walking, unless this is considered exercise. Gerecht and Dubowitz are Likudnik enemies of Arabs and Muslims, and the same applies to the extremist Daniel Pipes who is also calling for a strike against Iran. However, my best argument against a strike is that the politically ignorant and mentally retarded Sarah Palin proposed that President Barack Obama declare war against Iran to restore his popularity. Wars are not waged on suspicion. In truth, the Japanese director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Yukiya Amano, announced that the agency is ‘concerned' that Iran is continuing to engage in undeclared nuclear activities, and that the Agency is seeking clarifications. This is perhaps what caused the recent Likudnik campaign and the demand to impose sanctions or wage war against Iran. However, declaring war requires certainty, and not just concerns. Also, assessing the results of the war is considered as important as discussing the war itself. In fact, air strikes against the Iranian nuclear facilities will have limited results, according to the U.S Defence Secretary Robert Gates himself, who said that such strikes might delay the Iranian program for several years, but will not eliminate it. Furthermore, not all the locations of the Iranian nuclear facilities are known, and hence, the success of any strike will be partial. Nonetheless, any strike will inevitably lead to a surge in oil prices, and complicate the efforts to resolve the global financial crisis. This is not to mention that as a result, the Iranians will rally around the regime, which is opposed by at least half of the population at present, and that Israel will get involved in military confrontations with Iran's allies, such as Hezbollah and Hamas. This is in addition to the United States becoming accused of waging a fourth or fifth war against Muslims, even if Israel was to conduct the military strike instead. In the end, I do not know what is more cause for concern: the reckless and extremist Iranian policies, or the even more extreme policies of those calling for new sanctions or war against Iran, which will only exacerbate the crisis rather than resolving it. [email protected]
