These words are destined for the history books.
They were uttered by Ahmet Davutoglu, the Turkish foreign minister, during a recent visit to Tehran.
Other than such brilliant luminaries as Syrian president Bashar al-Assad, Venezuelan leader Hugo Chávez, and North Korea's new strongman, Kim Jong Un, few world leaders today would echo Davutoglu's views.
But then again, as chief architect of Turkey's "zero problems with neighbors" foreign policy, he also got Syria wrong. With his encouragement, and as a 2010 Congressional Research Service report documented, the Turkish government moved closer to Assad, conducting joint military exercises, lifting visa requirements, and creating a bilateral strategic council, led by its prime ministers.
Only after Assad brutalized protesters, killing, imprisoning, and torturing with abandon, did Turkey reverse course. That the Syrian leader's true nature should never have been in doubt obviously escaped Davutoglu.
Pace Davutoglu, Iran is a serious threat -- and getting more so.
It has declared a readiness to close the Strait of Hormuz, which, in 2011, accounted for an estimated 35 percent of oil worldwide transported by tankers, demanding the U.S. naval fleet not reenter the waterway.
It openly defies the UN Security Council, not to mention the International Atomic Energy Agency, with its nuclear program.
It menaces neighboring Arab countries, some of which have bluntly called for an iron-fist response to Iran's belligerence.
It has been accused by the Obama administration of collaborating with Mexican drug cartels to plan the assassination of the Saudi ambassador in Washington.
It calls for a world without Israel.
Its defense minister is wanted by Argentine authorities, and the subject of an Interpol "red notice," for his complicity in terrorist attacks in Buenos Aires that killed 115 people and injured hundreds.
It supports Assad's crackdown in Syria that has resulted in well over 5,000 deaths to date, and arms Hezbollah, which undermines Lebanese sovereignty by creating a state within a state.
And it stomps on the rights of its own people, as evidenced by the massive repression of those challenging the rigged June 2009 elections.
Now imagine this regime with nuclear-weapons capability. And remember that the power of the bomb comes not just from its use, but also from its mere possession.
The looming question is what to do about the Iranian threat.
Well, it would be nice to think that talks could dissuade Tehran from moving ahead, and, yes, the door should always be ajar, but, frankly, a serious deal is hardly in the offing.
For one thing, negotiations have been tried before by the major countries, to no avail, while Iran has bought precious time for its nuclear program.
And for another, Iran has doubtless learned something from two countries in particular.
The first is North Korea.
Having the bomb and keeping everyone guessing about what it's capable of doing has gained Pyongyang negotiating room. Despite critical statements from Western capitals, the fact is that everyone is tip-toeing, at times kowtowing, for fear that the North Koreans might actually unleash havoc against Japan, South Korea, or U.S. troops stationed in the area.
The lesson for Tehran? Having the bomb offers unique leverage and power.
The second is Libya.
If Muammar Gaddafi had not yielded to the Bush administration in 2003 and abandoned its nuclear program, he might still be in control today. Would NATO forces have attacked Libya in 2011 were he in possession of a fearsome retaliatory capacity? Doubtful.
The lesson for Tehran? Give up your nuclear program and you may end up like Gaddafi.
So what to do?
First, keep all options on the table -- and mean it.
Iran must be convinced that when the U.S. and others say it, they're not bluffing. Indeed, it's the very possibility of conflict that may be the most effective recipe for avoiding it.
Second, continue to ratchet up the sanctions against Iran, especially where it hurts most -- banking and energy. And keep pressing major nations like China, India, and Russia to exercise global responsibility by not undercutting the measures adopted by the U.S., Europe, Australia, Canada, Japan, and others.
Yes, we may feel some economic pinch as sanctions increase and energy prices temporarily rise, but if we're not prepared to pay any price for stopping the Iranian bomb, how serious are we?
(Apropos, if the Iranian threat to close the Strait of Hormuz is not a wake-up call to Americans to get really serious -- and fast -- about our own energy security, what is?)
Meanwhile, the impact of existing sanctions is already being felt by the Iranian economy, as the precipitous drop in the value of the Iranian rial suggests.
Third, whoever is engaged in the stealth campaign to slow down the Iranian nuclear and ballistic missile programs, please don't stop.
You have had some spectacular successes, and I'm sure we don't know the half of it. Iran has had to deal with repeated mysterious industrial accidents, faulty equipment, disappearing scientists, and computer viruses. It has also had to shift more of its finite resources simply to protecting its assets, while some may be wondering if it's worth the risk to life and limb to continue their nuclear work.
Fourth, let's recall that the "Arab Spring" began in a non-Arab country, Iran, in 2009.
Though the regime may have suppressed popular protests, there remains widespread opposition to a government that has delivered little on the "promise" of the Iranian revolution.
Tapping into the regime's lack of legitimacy should be an element in the effort to stop Iran in its tracks.
And fifth, turn Iran into a political pariah.
Its leaders shouldn't have the luxury of traveling abroad so easily. Why aren't more countries downgrading their diplomatic ties with Iran? Let's shout from the rooftops those countries and companies continuing to conduct business as usual with Iran, exactly the kind of publicity they don't want.
There may be no foolproof way of stopping Iran, but more can be done.
Surely history has taught us that when repressive regimes believe they have the tide of history, airtight ideology, and higher authority on their side, they shouldn't be underestimated.
The Turkish foreign minister might, but the rest of us must not.
For more information, visit ajc.org.
They spread lies about the Turkish victims, of the Gaza Freedom flotilla massacre, claiming they had fired "automatic weapons."
"When Israeli commandos boarded the ships, they were met with violence from a supposedly non-violent group, including gunfire from automatic weapons and attacks with knives and axes. Several Israelis were wounded. As a result of the clash triggered by the pro-Hamas group, a number of them were killed or wounded in the confrontation."
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ajc-condemns-free-gaza-flotilla-for-provoking-tragic-violence-95254969.html
After all, Turkey-under-Islamists:
- Sent an aid-less "aid ship" full of 600 Islamist militants to Hamas in Gaza;
- Threatens Syria, after "fraternizing" with then Assad regime;
- Continues to blockade Armenia (a country which never threatened -- let alone attack -- Turkey);
- Continues to occupy 40% of Cyprus (a EU member), in order to "defend" the Cypriot Turkish community (originally 18% of population);
- Continues to stimulate Turkish settlement in Cyprus. Turkish settlers already outnumber the original cypriot Turks;
- Threatens both Cyprus and Israel with respect to the exploitation of natural gas from the continental shelf between trhe two countries, despite the fact that the gas is clearly NOT in Turkey's continental shelf.
- Continues to oppress the Kurds in Occupied Kurd Territories;
- Launches frequent raids over the border with Iraq, "in pursuit" of Kurdish nationalists -- these raids are conducted on the territory of a sovereign state and have resulted in numerous civilian casualties.
In fact, the only neighbor with whom Turkey-under-Islamists has "zero problems" is -- predictably -- mullahs' Iran...
Escalation of US Iran military planning part of six-year Administration push - and continuing...
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/Iran_The_Road_to_Confrontation_0123.html
Time Line "The Axis of Evil"
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/Timeline_new2_0125.html
Where there is a will there is a way.
Haven't you noticed to coordinated ad campaign to get us to hate and fear Iran?
I wonder if he listened to Fred Zakaria yesterday on CNN where a panel of experts on Iran were debating the issue. The only panelist, among the four who was making similar accusations as the author was a journalist from the Jerusalem Post. However, he could not respond to any questions asked by the other three panelist who were debunking his accusations. The story is the same here.
No Iran is no threat, the US knows it, Israeli intelligence knows it, the countries in the region know it, the Europeans know it, Russia and China know it etc...The only reason we are attempting to do another Iraq redux is because Israel will not allow any other country in the region to be a regional power, with or without nukes. As for the US heck why not tap into the second largest gas reserves in the world and the 4 largest producer of petroleum. In fact gas will be the heart of the world's energy needs in the next decade and Iran will surpass Saudi Arabia's largest oil field due the combination of having both gas and oil. No other country in the region possesses both at such high quantities. We are not even speaking about the other natural resources that the country nor its geostrategic positionl.
Any country that threatens to close the Strait of Homuz is a threat to the world's oil supply. They ARE developing a nuclear weapon. Once they get a nuke, they will be able to threaten the world's oil supply at anytime, driving up the price of oil and ruining the world's economy. Their location on the Gulf is what makes them so dangerous.
You can say the US should do this or that regarding energy (and I totally agree with you on them), but the fact is that it will take time to do those things. The US cannot sit by and allow Iran to dictate the price of oil in the meantime. Even the Chinese are pulling back from Iran, cancelling about half of their usually month purchase.
Europe and much of the Arab world, led by the Saudis, are concerned with what Iran is doing. The Saudis have already pledged to increase their output to keep the supply of oil constant in case Iran's oil is taken off the market (for whatever reason).
1. What do you call a country who forces the rest of the world to impose an oil embargo on another country; an embargo which is the life line of that countries 75 million people?
2. What do you call imposing sanctions on a countries entire financial institution including it's central bank? What would call if China imposed sanctions on the Federal Reserve?
3. What do you call countries who have been threatening a preemptive attack on a country with no evidence to support their allegations?
The rhetorics coming out of Iran are directly in response to US imposed sanctions and attempts to strangle Iran economically as well as calls by both the US and Israel for preemmptive attack on Iran.
These sanctions are a prelude to war and anybody who doesn't see them must have been sleeping for the past 20 years.
If the US doesn't like to receive a harsh response in reaction to its provocative and aggressive actions, then maybe it should learn what good diplomacy means as opposed barrel of the gun diplomacy
The people of Saudi Arabia are not concerned, its the Royals - and maybe you want to check out Prince Bandar and his dirty work.
Iranian Mullahs have created economic havoc in Iran because of their investment in terrorist groups surrounding Israel and developing a nuclear program. Let us be realistic about this, the technology has been around for years and it won't be long before Iran has nuclear capability with necessary delivery systems to be extremely threatening to Russia, China, and other locations including the Middle East. If other Arab nations feel threatened by these developments, why aren't they taking action? Wasn't that an Iranian backed group that attacked Hejira worshipers at the Kaaba a few years ago? Why didn't the Saudis declare war against Iran then?
(2) Your characterization of the Muslims Brotherhood is totally wrong
(3) Egypt nor Turkey has expressed any interest in "being a major player in Islam"
(4) Iran was an economic basket case for a long time before the "Mullahs" ever took over, and they have certainly not helped things. However their support for Hezbollah and Hamas has nothing to do with their economic problems.
(5) The Saudis are big trouble makers themselves - most of the insurgents who went into Iraq to kill Americans and Iraqi Shia came from Saudi Arabia.
So you're pretty much wrong on every count!
Talking with reporters about the memo on Apr. 26, 2007, several weeks after it had been captured, Gen. David Petraeus conceded that it did not show that any Iranian official was linked to the planning of the Karbala operation. When a journalist asked him whether there was evidence of Iranian involvement in the Karbala operation, Petraeus responded, "No. No. No… [W]e do not have a direct link to Iran involvement in that particular case."
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/10/17-5
2. The Khobar Tower incident
"Saudis Tried to Pin Khobar Bombing on Iran"
This is the first of a five-part series, "Khobar Towers Investigated: How a Saudi Deception Protected Osama bin Laden." The series was supported by the Fund for Investigative Journalism.
http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/06/investigating-khobar-towers-how-a-saudi-deception-protected-bin-laden/
3. Just like the recent ridiculous plot of used car salesman's plot and IRGC to assassinate the Saudi Ambassador in the US. You are not hearing about it anymore are you?
4. The debunked plot to pin Iran to the Buenos Aires bombing
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-gareth-porter/the-1994-buenos-aires-bom_b_82725.html
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/147846-Another-Neocon-Attempt-to-Frame-Iran-Falls-Apart
If there is no negotiation there is one other option. War!