To the Editor:
Our prime minister recently demonstrated the perfect definition of hypocrisy, one day blasting Iran verbally and diplomatically in bizarrely radical and apocalyptic terms, and the next smiling his Cheshire smile while signing a trade agreement with China. China, which invaded and occupied Tibet in 1949 and imposes a devastating program of cultural genocide on the Tibetans and Muslim inhabitants in the west of the country, as well as human rights abuses too numerous and well-known to list here, is now an even closer friend. I am glad that Mr. Harper was not burned by a Tibetan monk self-immolating during the ceremony.
It takes only a cursory reading of history to know that Iran, which has not attacked another country in hundreds of years, is a victim of the West. Early in the 20th century, a weak Iran was divided by Russia and Britain. This enabled British Petroleum to exploit Iranian oil at a piratical price. When a democratically elected, secular government threw out BP, the CIA overthrew the government of Iran and installed a friendly dictator (the shah) complete with a dreaded secret police.
How can Iran forgive or forget the million dead or the many thousands who still suffer from the poison gas attacks (gas manufactured with chemicals supplied by Britain, the U.S. and Germany) when Saddam, supported by the West, invaded? During that war, a U.S. cruiser shot down an Iranian passenger jet, killing 290 innocent civilians. Tick-tack-toe. Iran has much to fear as she looks to the east and to the west at the neighbors invaded and destroyed by the Western powers. American journal Foreign Affairs had a cover article this spring, “Why Iran Should Get the Bomb”, suggesting an Iranian bomb would bring stability to the region. Countries would leave each other alone.
Before we take sides in a terrible war, we need to be very clear on Iran’s policy towards Israel. It does not recognize a theocratic state that illegally occupies Palestinians lands and continually harasses, intimidates and invades its neighbors. It has not made a specific threat, unlike the U.S. and Israel, which have repeatedly threatened unprovoked attacks on Iran. In playing to their base, Iran’s current unfortunate leadership makes incendiary comments about Israel, which we need take no more seriously than American claims to spread democracy. The world knows that it would be suicidal to attack Israel. We demonize the Iranian leadership (hopefully not their wonderful people who are the ones who would do the dying) but you cannot point to one action which one would call crazy.
What might it be called when leaders act contrary to the best interests of their own country in the service of a foreign power? Not quite treason, but what? Why would Canada, apparently out of the blue, sever relations with Iran? The only answer can be that Netanyahu picked up the phone and ordered it. To paraphrase Bob Dylan, now I can’t think for you, you have to decide whether Harper and Baird are really on our side.
(One more thing: For those of you who care only about the economy, think about this. Iran will fight — hard. Some analysts believe the effect on energy prices of an attack could tip the fragile world economy into depression.)
Erickson
