Ahmadinejad has said some rather harsh things in regards to Israel but as with much in the Middle East their is a clear double standard in terms of how the international community interprets the words of Israel and the United States versus how the words of the Iranians and Hamas, for example, are interpreted.
Cross Posted @ Voices in the Wilderness
Some of the more publicized threats/sayings of Ahmadinejad:
- Whether you like it or not, the Zionist regime is on the road to being eliminated
- The Zionist regime is a dried up and rotten tree which will be annihilated with one storm
- Calling for Israel to be wiped off the map
As for the first two statements they are clearly more observational than threatening; whether or not you agree with this perspective. The final quote has been used, in some quarters as justification for the worlds hawkish stance (though anyone following events of the negotiations are well aware that long before Ahmadinejad was known to the world the position of the world was hostile)
Truth be told there are many ways, in the current world framework, that Israel can be wiped off the map and not all of them require nuclear or other military strikes. Giving all the land back to the Palestinians for example is one method of wiping Israel off the map. A one state solution would just as likely `wipe Israel off of the map’.
It may be argued that to interpret such tough words in such a simple manner requires a large leap of faith, however, I can just as easily suggest that interpreting current events; Iran’s nuclear program and Ahmadinejad’s recent statements, as a direct threat to nuke Israel is equally ridiculous (and I would be right). To suggest that Iran, who has no history of aggressive wars, will develop nuclear weapons to strike Israel, simultaneously killing a large segment of the Palestinians they are supporting, defines a fairy tale land.
It’s also fair to point out that Iran isn’t without options in terms of military strikes on Israel at this very moment and yet, somehow, they have miraculously refrained from launching a pre-emptive strike on Israel or American forces inside of Iraq or Afghanistan. Logic dictates that the Iranians realize that such a move would equate to suicide for the Islamic Republic. One can thus hypothesize that the same forces that are holding Iran from attacking Israel with their stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons would continue given the status quo (which is to say they are not attacked). To assume that if Iran possessed one or even ten nuclear weapons they would suddenly feel bold enough to attack Israel who has 100 or Americans who have 10000 is absurd on its face. Iranian quotes and statements are never interpreted with these facts. Conversely, it is not outlandish to suggest that the Americans or the Israeli’s who have much more firepower than does Iran would launch pre-emptive strikes on a weaker, more isolated Iran. Even so, American and Israeli rhetoric has not drawn the international condemnation that has seemed appropriate in dealing with Iranian statements.
Well known to the world are Ahmadinejad’s recent statements but much less known, or rather much less reported, are the open, unapologetic threats that Israel has made towards Iran.
- His statements are reminiscent of those voiced by Saddam Hussein. Ahmadinejad will end up like Saddam Hussein
- Ahmadinejad represents Satan, not God
Anyone who was previously unaware of these statements has served me well in pointing out the double standard in terms of dealing with rhetoric. Statements made must be understood in their context. In addition to statements on, “doing whatever it takes to ensure Iran doesn’t get the bomb” Israel purchases large amounts of bunker busters. While it is true that these statements are much more subtle than Iran’s statements they leave no less a hint of threat against Iran.
Because The United States is the world’s only superpower more people the world is familiar with the American statement, “Axis of Evil”, remains one of the most provocative phrases in recent history and there should be no doubt that such a classification was seen, and rightfully so, as a direct threat to its members.
More recently the United States has classified Iran as the greatest supporter of international terrorism and has even leaked information threatening a pre-emptive NUCLEAR strike on Iranian nuclear facilities. The thought of such attacks should have drawn international condemnation giving what we now know about the effects of subsequent radiation and the Bush administrations happy trigger finger.
These statements can and should be treated with much more seriousness that Ahmadinejad’s statements for the simple reason that the United States has a 60 year history of intervening in the affairs of foreign nations and has proved willing to act unilaterally in its military actions. The threats and rhetoric on both sides of the ocean are unhelpful and childish but for some reason this world is filled with respecters of persons, which is to say if you are a powerful nation you can get away with much more than a nation who hasn’t yet achieved equivalent prestige. Between Israel’s bullish aggression on Palestinians, their pre-emptive strikes on Iraq, their in incursion into Lebanon, America’s 60 year history of meddling with foreign governments, coups and its most recent pre-emptive attack on a sovereign nations and Iran’s most recent childish language I would suggest that the latter is the least of the worlds worries.
America, Israel and Iran all have the ability to cause a lot of problems for a lot of people in the world and all three of them are acting like children. Like a parent the international community cannot pick sides. The lack of an honest broker in this matter serves only those who will to be the aggressors.
