The US’s demonization of Islamic Iran

Zafar Bangash

Safar 11, 1428 2007-03-01

Reflections

by Zafar Bangash (Reflections, Crescent International Vol. 36, No. 1, Safar, 1428)

Muslims struggling for peace and justice will continue to face many challenges, but perhaps none more difficult than the propaganda against them in the West. Even as the lies spun by the Western media, in cooperation with their governments, about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in 2002-2003 have been exposed, more lies are churned out against Iran. Its peaceful nuclear programme is being projected as a threat to world peace, while the US has assembled an armada in the Persian Gulf to threaten and possibly attack Iran. The fact that the consequences of such an attack would be catastrophic not only for Muslims but also for the West is being played down. Few in the West have pointed out the hypocrisy of US threats to use nuclear weapons to prevent Tehran from “acquiring” such weapons. Iran’s repeated denials and the International Atomic Energy Agency’s failure to find proof ofTehran’s wrongdoing are considered irrelevant. Nor is much said about Israel’s nuclear weapons or the US’s plan to provide nuclear technology to India, which has not signed the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.

In the long list of US allegations, the latest relates to Iranian weapons “found” in Iraq based on the usual “anonymous” US sources. This is presented as evidence of Iran’s meddling in Iraq’s internal affairs. That Iraqis and Iranis share common religious, cultural and historical experiences is brushed aside by the Americans, who themselves have meddled murderously in Iraq’s affairs for decades. The invasion of Iraq in 2003 was illegal and the US occupation is opposed by virtually all Iraqis; but few in the US know this, thanks to their mendacious media.

There is an even more insidious campaign underway: the demonization of Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmedinejad. He is accused of having stated that Israel should be wiped off the map. While there is nothing inherently sacred about any state—after all, theSoviet Union, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia have all disappeared in the last two decades—the quote attributed to him is neither new nor accurate. In a speech he delivered at a conference in Tehran in October 2005, he quoted Imam Khomeini’s statement that said, “the Quds occupying regime will disappear from the pages of time.” President Ahmedinejad repeated this statement while also refering to the disappearance of the Soviet Union. This misquoted sentence has been repeated endlessly to create the impression that Iran poses an immediate, genocidal threat to Israel and its Jewish population. That numerous Israeli leaders have made far more serious threats against Iran is considered of little consequence.

There is a clear pattern to US propaganda. When the US plans to attack a country, it first launches a campaign of demonization of its leaders. In Iraq, Saddam Husain was projected as “the new Hitler”, although only after he invaded and occupied Kuwait in August 1990. Until then, he was a trusted friend and ally. Now this same provocative label is being applied to President Ahmedinejad. The US has turned propaganda into an art-form.

There is a clear pattern to US propaganda. When the US plans to attack a country, it first launches a campaign of demonization of its leaders. In Iraq, Saddam Husain was projected as “the new Hitler”, although only after he invaded and occupied Kuwait in August 1990. Until then, he was a trusted friend and ally. Now this same provocative label is being applied to President Ahmedinejad. The US has turned propaganda into an art-form.

Iran’s real fault is that its people overthrew a corrupt and brutal US-backed dictatorship 28 years ago. The Shah was maintained in power because he did the West’s bidding—pumping as much oil as the West demanded and using that money to buy outdated weapons from the West. After the victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran in 1979, the US tried every trick in its arsenal to undermine the Islamic state, without success. These ranged from attempting military coups and using its agents within the government—Bani Sadr, Sadeq Qutbzadeh et. al.—to the campaign of assassinations in which thousands of people, including leading figures of the Revolution, were martyred. One of the ironies of current US policy is that while the state department maintains the Mujahideen-e Khalq Organization on its list of terrorist organizations, its members are protected by the US military in Iraq and given weapons and training to carry out terrorist attacks inside Iran.

The question now is whether the US will attack Iran, and if so, when? An attack on Iran has been on the US agenda for a very long time; what is less certain is the timing. With scepticism over Washington’s allegations against Iran growing in light of the Iraqi allegations and the unmitigated disaster that Iraq has become, there are serious divisions within the US establishment on this issue. While Bush and his neocon allies would like to shoot their way out of Baghdad by bombing Iran, other members of the establishment see this as dangerous adventurism. They are not concerned about the plight of the victims of their aggression; their concern springs from the fact that such an attack would have catastrophic consequences for US interests in the region. With anti-US sentiment reaching unprecedented levels all over the world, and Bush’s domestic approval ratings plummeting, many Americans are suggesting that prudence would be wise.

Are Bush and his neocon allies likely to heed such advice? That depends on whether they are capable of making rational judgements. On past performance, it would not be sensible to expect very much. Tehran would be well advised to prepare for the worst-case scenario, and demonstrate their readiness publicly, in the hope that Iran and the US can still be saved from the neo-cons’ stupidity.