Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad persists in his obsessive hate speech against Israel, including declarations that border of Holocaust denial. While his first statements might have been attributed to political inexperience, their repetition—and harshness— demand a deeper look to evaluate their roots and aims. In fact, the extreme rhetoric may suggest some calculated policy, even if is not easy to decipher its true purposes.
It a way, according to some logic, it may not be in the interest of Iran or Ahmadi-Nejad to attract public opinion worldwide to Iranian extremism. If Iran’s central objective is believed to be buying time until it acquires a nuclear capability, such declarations contradict this goal. Also, it might have been expected that Ahmadi-Nejad who was elected on the promise to improve the lot of the underprivileged would have concentrated on domestic (socio-economic) issues rather than on an anti-American or anti-Israeli campaign. Moreover, with the American forces so close to its borders (on east and west) and its influence encircling Iran all over, he could have been expected to care more about his “near abroad” instead of hoisting the anti-Israel flag and questioning the Holocaust
Yet, Ahmadi-Nejad has instead taken every opportunity upon his entering office to voice extremist views.
• On October 26, he presented his vision of a world without Israel or the U.S., and urged that Israel be wiped off the map of universe (see previous report).
• On December 8, during the Islamic Conference Organization in Mecca, he complained that since the west was responsible for what some describe as “the Holocaust,” the Palestinians should not be asked to pay the price. “Some European countries,” he said, insist “that Hitler killed millions of innocent Jews in gas chambers, although we don’t accept this claim. If the Europeans are honest, they should give some of their provinces in Europe—like in Germany, Austria or other countries—to the Zionists and the Zionists can establish their state in Europe.”
• On December 15, he went further in endorsing arguments raised by Holocaust deniers, even if not fully supporting them. They have invented “a legend” under the name “Massacre of the Jews,” he said, which they hold higher than God, religion and the prophets. He asked: “Why are you using those killings as a pretext to come to the heart of the Islamic world and dear Palestine and impose a phony Zionist regime?” he propose that “if you have committed a crime, it’s good if you allocate a part of your country or Europe, America, Canada, or Alaska to them so that they can establish a country for themselves.”
• On January 1, 2006, he continued: there are different interpretations to what occurred in World War II. The Holocaust—a story that has never been substantiated—was the historical basis that Europe has invented for founding Israel. Even according to this interpretation, founding Israel was another step in Europe’s scheme of ethnic cleansing. Finally, if Holocaust did take place, why should the Palestinians pay for their crimes?
The following are plausible explanations for such extreme assertions. Although their mixture provides the pretext, the contribution of each of them is hard to determine.
• Deep anti-Israeli and anti-western sentiments: The immediate explanation for such statements is simply a sincere belief in the need to eliminate Israel. In this way, Ahmadi-Nejad follows his pledge to revive early revolutionary creed of Ayatollah Khomeini. In fact, over time, there were some cracks in this wall of hostility. Some Iranians, using a well-known Persian phrase, argued that Iran should not be “a bowl that is warmer than the soup”–more Palestinian than the Palestinians. Such an alternative thought that began with the Oslo process (and even earlier with the 1991 Gulf war, Madrid conference and the collapse of the USSR), was reversed since 2000 (the crackdown on the pro-reform camp and the Palestinian Intifada). While radical attitude prevailed all along, the collapse of the pro-reform camp, made extremism more prevalent. With Ahmadi-Nejad’s victory—which completed conservatives’ takeover—such voices are reinforced.
• Deep anti-Jewish belief: Hand in had, there are strong sentiments against Jews (even if not necessarily against the Jews in Iran) in Iranian leadership. In fact, Khomeini’s ideology as developed prior to his taking power was distinctly anti-Jewish. On the very first page of his book “The Islamic Republic” (1970) he pointed out: “Since its inception, the Islamic movement has been afflicted with the Jews, for it was they who first established anti-Islamic propaganda and joined in various stratagems, and as you can see, this activity continues down to our present day.” Even if Khomeini became a bit more circumspect in his rhetoric after seizing power, anti-Jewish literature, including the infamous “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” continued to be published in Iran. Persian-language editions were even displayed recently at the Frankfurt Book Fair. Prominent Holocaust deniers are invited to Iran and offered a platform to spout their views. And the press is full of reports in a similar vein. Ahmadi-Nejad may have been influences by such arguments, and by giving vent to them, may influence younger Iranians.
• Belief in Iranian strength: The American complication in Iraq and the growing oil incomes may contribute to a perceived sense of strength. Under such circumstances, Ahmadi-Nejad may believe that he can promote his “solution” through the use of force. As one whose world-view was largely formed by the experience of the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988), he apparently thinks that war can accomplish the aims that diplomacy fails to achieve. Finally in this regard, as a newly elected official, he may not be aware of the limits of Iran’s power—which led veteran politicians to adopt more pragmatic attitudes upon transferring from opposition to power.
• Radicalism is a convenient tool to consolidate his power: Ahmadi-Nejad may also hope to consolidate his political position at home by giving voice to widely-held views on Israel. Although such an attitude involves some risks, he clearly made his presence noticed—at home as well as abroad. Also, although he was elected on a platform of domestic reform, domestic problems continue to proliferate. Diverting attention away from economic issues toward an external enemy may serve to mollify public opinion.
• A Tool for Islamic Leadership: Also, he may expect to promote Iran’s leadership position in the Islamic world by voicing such opinions and taking lead in supporting the Palestinian cause. Such harsh anti-Israeli statements may even serve to pacify suspicions among neighboring Muslims about Iran’s nuclear program. No less important, whether consciously or not, such declarations may be directed to transform Iran’s nuclear plane into an Israeli problem. In such a case, they may believe, Europe and the world may be more tolerant towards its nuclear plans.
• Religious Devotion and Mystical Belief: Another explanation may lie in the mystical belief in a divine mission and heavenly oversight which seem to characterize Ahmadi-Nejad’s recent statements. An Iranian website has published a transcript and video recording of Ahmadi-Nejad in which he reportedly claims to have felt ‘a light’ while addressing world leaders at the UN in September. According to this source, he had said that someone there, possibly from his entourage, told him “When you began with the words ‘In the name of God’ … I saw a light coming, surrounding you.” Ahmadi-Nejad—according to the same source—said that he sensed a similar presence: “I felt it myself, too, that suddenly the atmosphere changed and for 27-28 minutes the leaders could not blink,” the transcript continues. “I am not exaggerating … because I was looking. All the leaders were puzzled, as if a hand held them and made them sit. They had their eyes and ears open for the message from the Islamic Republic.” Although circles close the president deny the accuracy of the report, his repeated reference to the expected-hidden Imam is indicative of such deep belief. Thus, for example, he concluded his speech at the General Assembly with a call to God to hasten the return of the Twelfth – hidden – Imam in order to fill this world with peace and justice. In a similar line, his government has reportedly approved significant amounts to reconstruct and maintain sites associated with the Twelfth Imam, such as the well in Jamkaran (near the holy city of Qom), from where the Imam was believed to have disappeared over a millennium.
Whatever the precise mixture of these elements, the combination of extremist ideology—coupled with mystical belief—and potential nuclear power seems to face the external world with a serious challenge. This certainly calls for Israeli concern. Yet, Israeli harsh and public anti-Iranian rhetoric does not seem lead to resolution of this problem. Israel should not help Iran to turning the Iranian nuclear issue into an exclusively Israeli problem that necessarily requires a solution “made in Israel.”
JIME Center.All rights reserved.