Tehran’s apologists seem to have taken their public advocacy effort to the next level. We’ve already noticed; the media’s a bit slower to come around.
Take “the Ambassador” – Hossein Mousavian, former nuclear negotiator and currently Tehran’s most hyperactive (and well-traveled) spokesperson. His unwavering position (here, here and here), in a nutshell: remove the sanctions and pave the way to an Iranian nuclear military capability (preferably under international auspices).
These are repeated in his recent piece of commentary in The Guardian, which would make for truly boring reading if it weren’t for an interesting twist: This time he threatens the international community.
“Promoters of further sanctions, isolation and other punitive measures aim to make war with Iran inevitable. But such a war would make the US war in Iraq look like a walk in a park.”
Over to Mousavian’s by-now familiar supporting cast. Consider Reza Marashi, who first received the ‘Iran Media Focus Transparency Test’ about a month ago. In his recent FP piece,he rightly recognizes the weight of the challenge facing the west, and the US in particular:
“Iran is critical to solutions for no less than seven U.S. national security challenges: nuclear non-proliferation, energy security, Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, counterterrorism, and Arab-Israeli peace.”
Just one problem: Marashi conveniently forgets to mention that Iran is making itself critical to these areas by promoting factors detrimental to stability. That’s the trick: create the monster, then kindly offer to restrain it.
Then there’s what could be a new spin: accuse the IAEA of focusing too much on Parchin. Tehran’s efforts to promote this line are now being followed by the likes of scientist/propagandist (see my previous article) Yousaf Butt and the pro-Iran crowd’s favorite nuclear engineer Robert Kelly. Considering that Tehran is hiding incriminating evidence regarding Parchin, not difficult to understand why Butt et al doth protest so much.
And remember Kaveh Afrasiabi, the Ahmadinejad loyalist? He echoes Butt in the Asia Times and attempts to discredit David Albright, a major contributor to the current nuclear crisis debate and one of the most well respected physicists in this particular field:
Instead of “normalizing” Iran’s nuclear dossier, as called for by that Workplan’s concluding paragraph, the IAEA since then has been obsessive regarding “the possible military dimension” of Iran’s nuclear program, citing “credible” intelligence, such as with respect to the suspected buildings at Parchin Military complex, a site visited twice in 2005 without finding anything suspicious. Yet, Albright and his colleagues have seized on Parchin as if a veritable “smoking gun” has at long last been discovered that substantiates the suspicions of weaponization.
Again Parchin, what a coincidence… 2005 was eight years ago, Mr. Afrasiabi. That is not transparency. The satellite images analyzed and released by Mr. Albright’s ISIS suggest that another visit is long overdue.
“A doctoral researcher at the School of Oriental & African Studies, University of London; Editor of the Iranian Review of Foreign Affairs; and a former Newsroom Editor for Press TV.”
Editor for Press TV? Now that’s experience in objectivity!
Not all is bad news. While our old friend Trita Parsi gets his causation all muddled up, at least he finally agrees on something with Iran Media Focus – in this HuffPost article, in which he recognizes that the Iranian regime is indeed dragging its heels to buy time.
On a more upbeat note: turns out there are Iranians actually in the know and brave enough to truthfully discuss what they know. Former Foreign Ministry official Ahmed Hashemi, for example, who composed a powerful piece reflecting his first-hand experiences with senior Iranian decision makers:
“During my four and a half years as an employee of the Iranian foreign ministry, I learned beyond doubt, that my country’s participation in talks is purely a stalling tactic. Having fled to Turkey to seek political asylum, I know that I’m far from the first Iranian to try and warn the world of Tehran’s determination to obtain weapons of mass destruction.”
This revelation, inexplicably, received much less media exposure than the ramblings of Ambassador Mousavian and friends.
Why would that be?