The Mossad Wants Ahmadinejad?

[Catz Part Deux]

Mossad Head: Ahmadinejad Good for Israel - Jeffrey Goldberg

"The reality in Iran is not going to change because of the elections. The world and we already know [Iranian President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad. If the reformist candidate [Mir Hossein] Mousavi had won, Israel would have had a more serious problem because it would need to explain to the world the danger of the Iranian threat, since Mousavi is perceived internationally arena as a moderate element...It is important to remember that he is the one who began Iran's nuclear program when he was prime minister."

Jeffrey Goldberg responds:

I understand his point, and yet am repulsed by it at the same time, perhaps because I care mainly about which Iranians have the bomb, rather than whether Iran has the bomb. Maybe this is naive -- and maybe I'm caught up, as a suspected neocon fellow traveler, in the excitement of watching Middle Easterners attempting to free themselves from such an obviously tyrannical regime -- but I have to think that the people flooding the streets in protest are not the sort of people who would want to see their country enter a nuclear confrontation with Israel. Not, God forbid, because they like Israel, but because they're rational enough, and interested enough in the betterment of their own lives, to demand a government that puts a limit on Iran's foreign adventures. I recognize that the people of Iran do not currently shape their country's nuclear policy -- and their country's policies to Israel and the West -- but one can hope for better days, when they do.

The most powerful part of these protests, so far, is individual Iranians engaging with people from around the world, and realizing that these people hope the best for the people of Iran...that people around the world WANT THEM TO BE FREE, and are willing to help as they can. That individuals in America and the rest of the world CARE about the people of Iran, and want them to succeed.

 

[tlmorg02]

I certainly think it is a wonderful thing. I am so happy that people are finally able to realize that Iran should be free, even if in doing so they still do not love Israel. This is nothing against Israel, but people deserve freedom whether their culture, principles, religion, and ideas match yours or not.

This type of world outlook is what the U.S. needs. Many were angered that after pushing for democratic elections in Palestine, that Hamas won many seats, but that is democracy! People in other parts of the world will not always act as the U.S. and other Western nations would like, but that does not mean that they should not be free.

 

[Voidwar]

Many were angered that after pushing for democratic elections in Palestine, that Hamas won many seats, but that is democracy!

Or proof that peace was sought prematurely.

 

[tlmorg02]

Or proof that peace was sought prematurely.

Not at all. There are two-types of cultures in this world ultimately: liberal democracies which stress individualism, and what I term familial-cultures which stress the tribe, family, or nation. Familial cultures stress collectivism and their thoughts and principles are very counter to Western individualism, that is why peace between Israel and Palestine is so difficult. Israel is a Western liberal democracy and Palestine is a familial culture. Rather than mesh, their principles clash in every way.

Take, for example, the case of the thread in regards to the Palestinian family killing their son. In liberal democracy we see this as unthinkable, but our ideology of individualism tells us to value our children over our nation. In Palestinian culture, they see their dilemma as a group problem that must be faced for all Palestinians, therefor they felt that by killing their son, they were helping all Palestinians.

 

[donsutherland1]

Catz Part Deux,

From a foreign policy standpoint, Israel would prefer a moderate and democratic Iran. However, Israel does not view either Mr. Ahmadinejad or Mr. Mousavi as being able to provide such governance, especially as Ayatollah Khamenei wields the real power within Iran.

The Mossad believes that the harsh rhetoric spouted by Mr. Ahamadinejad makes it easier for the international community to see a clear picture of the threat posed by Iran's nuclear program. The softer language and greater ambiguity that might be provided by Mr. Mousavi could hinder that process and perhaps even buy Iran the time necessary to develop a nuclear weapons capability.

One should remember that Mr. Mousavi did not commit to ending Iran's nuclear program or at least ending its enrichment activities. Furthermore, he was the one who restarted Iran's nuclear program after it had been ended following the fall of the Shah. Until there is credible evidence to back it up, one cannot be sure that Mr. Mousavi would be willing to make the compromises necessary, much less would have the capability of doing so while Ayatollah Khamenei retains the ultimate authority. Thus, from a public relations standpoint, Mr. Ahmadinejad is better. But that's only a public relations standpoint.

Personally, I hope that the Iranian people's will is respected and Mr. Mousavi takes office. However, I do not believe that such a development would immediately lead to a significant softening of Iran's positions. That will require time, but it could mark the start of a gradual democratic transformation in Iran. In the meantime, the challenge ahead for Europe and the U.S. with respect to Iran's nuclear program would remain formidable, especially if Ayatollah Khamenei retains the ultimate authority.

 

[Voidwar]

Not at all.

100%

If you have read Hamas's Charter, and have any common sense at all, then you can easily see, that Israel sought peace before they were done killing their intractable permanent enemies.

The fact that the palestinians voted terrorists into power means they are not done with their terror, and that means they have not been punished so severely that they will do ANYTHING for peace, like admit they are wrong, or killing all of Hamas, or like fighting to the death in their own streets to stop a Katyusha attack being launched from their own hood.

Its not a matter of cultures, its a simple matter of reading the Hamas Charter and counting vote tallies. The Palestinians voted terror into power, and this voting dynamic should be altered from the outside, by the IDF, via simple attrition.

 

[tlmorg02]

Catz Part Deux,

From a foreign policy standpoint, Israel would prefer a moderate and democratic Iran. However, Israel does not view either Mr. Ahmadinejad or Mr. Mousavi as being able to provide such governance, especially as Ayatollah Khamenei wields the real power within Iran.

The Mossad believes that the harsh rhetoric spouted by Mr. Ahamadinejad makes it easier for the international community to see a clear picture of the threat posed by Iran's nuclear program. The softer language and greater ambiguity that might be provided by Mr. Mousavi could hinder that process and perhaps even buy Iran the time necessary to develop a nuclear weapons capability.

One should remember that Mr. Mousavi did not commit to ending Iran's nuclear program or at least ending its enrichment activities. Furthermore, he was the one who restarted Iran's nuclear program after it had been ended following the fall of the Shah. Until there is credible evidence to back it up, one cannot be sure that Mr. Mousavi would be willing to make the compromises necessary, much less would have the capability of doing so while Ayatollah Khamenei retains the ultimate authority. Thus, from a public relations standpoint, Mr. Ahmadinejad is better. But that's only a public relations standpoint.

Personally, I hope that the Iranian people's will is respected and Mr. Mousavi takes office. However, I do not believe that such a development would immediately lead to a significant softening of Iran's positions. That will require time, but it could mark the start of a gradual democratic transformation in Iran. In the meantime, the challenge ahead for Europe and the U.S. with respect to Iran's nuclear program would remain formidable, especially if Ayatollah Khamenei retains the ultimate authority.

As usual Don, your insights are great and your reasoning spot on. I agree that Mr. Mousavi is a harder figure to paint as a threat, but he may also be easier to work with as time progresses. I think and hope that Khamenei's days are numbered, but one never really knows.

 

[Catz Part Deux]

I have to say that I also agree with Goldberg's perspective. I used to see Iranians as these frothy nutbags, but I think that there is a huge sector of the IRanian population who doesn't want the rabid frothing right in control anymore, and really, never did.

 

[tlmorg02]

100%

If you have read Hamas's Charter, and have any common sense at all, then you can easily see, that Israel sought peace before they were done killing their intractable permanent enemies.

The fact that the palestinians voted terrorists into power means they are not done with their terror, and that means they have not been punished so severely that they will do ANYTHING for peace, like admit they are wrong, or killing all of Hamas, or like fighting to the death in their own streets to stop a Katyusha attack being launched from their own hood.

Its not a matter of cultures, its a simple matter of reading the Hamas Charter and counting vote tallies. The Palestinians voted terror into power, and this voting dynamic should be altered from the outside, by the IDF, via simple attrition.

Yes, they elected terrorism and yes the charter calls for the destruction of Israel, but eventually the Palestinians will recognize that with democracy they can choose peace, and they will. It appears crazy to you and is by Western standards, but to a familial culture it makes perfect sense. I assure you that China and other Asian nations would understand completely, though they already understand that Hamas is not good for Palestine.

 

[gunner]

Catz Part Deux,

From a foreign policy standpoint, Israel would prefer a moderate and democratic Iran. However, Israel does not view either Mr. Ahmadinejad or Mr. Mousavi as being able to provide such governance, especially as Ayatollah Khamenei wields the real power within Iran.

Very true, but having a more moderate like Mousavi may help bring a little diplomacy rather than the antagonistic rhetoric spouted by Ahmadinejad. Conversely, may be Israel are happy having a hardliner as the front-man, to keep international pressure in tune.

The Mossad believes that the harsh rhetoric spouted by Mr. Ahamadinejad makes it easier for the international community to see a clear picture of the threat posed by Iran's nuclear program. The softer language and greater ambiguity that might be provided by Mr. Mousavi could hinder that process and perhaps even buy Iran the time necessary to develop a nuclear weapons capability.

Or placate the wests offer of diplomacy and international aid. I strongly believe popular public opinion wants to see real change, bringing Iran out of the international wilderness.

from a public relations standpoint, Mr. Ahmadinejad is better. But that's only a public relations standpoint.

I,d say he a public relations disaster [on a global scale] hence, as it seems, public dissatisfaction with his tenure thus far.

Personally, I hope that the Iranian people's will is respected and Mr. Mousavi takes office. However, I do not believe that such a development would immediately lead to a significant softening of Iran's positions. That will require time, but it could mark the start of a gradual democratic transformation in Iran. In the meantime, the challenge ahead for Europe and the U.S. with respect to Iran's nuclear program would remain formidable, especially if Ayatollah Khamenei retains the ultimate authority.

I agree, if he manages to overturn the vote, we can only hope for a more accepted, integrated Iran.

Paul

 

[donsutherland1]

As usual Don, your insights are great and your reasoning spot on. I agree that Mr. Mousavi is a harder figure to paint as a threat, but he may also be easier to work with as time progresses. I think and hope that Khamenei's days are numbered, but one never really knows.

Thanks for the kind words.

While I believe Mr. Mousavi's becoming President might strengthen the nascent reformist led by Iran's rising generation of youth, the greatest gain would be symbolic. I don't believe his leadership would produce any dramatic break from the current framework of governance in which the unelected conservative clerics dominate Iran's elected government.

So long as Ayatollah Khamenei retains ultimate authority over Iran's elected government, Mr. Mousavi's latitude for reform would be minimized, much as former President Khatami's was. Were Mr. Ahmadinejad to retain the presidency, prospects for near-term reform would be even dimmer.

At this time, I don't believe the current protests will substantially weaken the share of authority that is vested in Iran's unelected clerics. Nevertheless, I do believe some degree of erosion is possible as some divisions among the clerics manifest themselves due to the public's discontent. Over time, that erosion create an environment that helps set in motion changes that lead to a gradual increase in the authority of Iran's elected government vis-a-vis the unelected clerics. That process will likely be slow and it is not completely assured. Substantial institutional barriers i.e., Iran's Revolutionary Guard and related militias, could impede the pace of change.

In the medium-term, the transition of power from the older conservative clerics, of which Ayatollah Khamenei is one, to a fresh generation may have a greater impact on Iran's political trajectory than what is going on at present, particularly if Mr. Ahmadinejad retains power (still more likely than not). Before then, more of Iran's youth will be coming to maturity and that development should continue to strengthen pressures for reform, especially if status quo policies fail to produce the jobs, increases in living standards, and overall satisfaction that Iran's people desire.