Doc's Talk: Iran Continues to Change the Balance of Power in Middle East Support Iranian Opposition Forces

Sunday, March 20, 2011

Iran Continues to Change the Balance of Power in Middle East Support Iranian Opposition Forces

Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely, US Army (Ret)

What is striking about the Chessboard moves by Iran and the current crises in the Middle East (ME), especially in Libya, is that the efforts to resolve it enable Iran to continue to stir the pot unmolested. Iran does not hesitate to state publicly that its vision of the future of the ME is Shiite domination and Iran the dominant hegemonic power. There is a shift of power and the United States is not a part of it. Draw your own conclusions!

In Washington on 17 March 2011 a bi-partisan conference on Capitol Hill, titled, "Iran Rising for Freedom—U.S. Policy Prospects," former top officials of the Obama as well as Clinton and Bush administrations joined senior Members of Congress. They urged the Obama Administration to adopt a new policy in support of Iranians who are demanding change in Iran and remove Iran's principal opposition, the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) from the State Department's list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations. They also called for the protection of Camp Ashraf, Iraq, home to the 3,400 members (including 1,000 women) of MEK. General James Jones, National Security Advisor to President Obama (2009-2010); Governor Howard Dean, Presidential Candidate and Chairman of the Democratic National Committee (2005-2009); Judge Michael Mukasey, Attorney General of the United States (2007-2009); General Hugh Shelton, Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff (1997-2001); Governor Tom Ridge, Secretary of Homeland Security (2003-2005); Honorable Paula Dobriansky, Under Secretary of State for Democracy and Global Affairs (2001-2009); Honorable Louis Freeh, Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation (1993-2001); and Ambassador Dell Dailey, Coordinator for Counterterrorism, Department of State (2007-2009) were among the speakers.

In addition, Representatives Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL); Ted "Judge" Poe (R-TX); John Lewis (D-GA); Darrell Issa (R-CA); Brad Sherman (D-CA); Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX); Judi Chu (D-CA); David Scott (D-GA); and Hank Johnson (D-GA) spoke at the conference.

On the occasion of the Iranian New Year, Nowrouz, General James Jones had the following message for the Iranian people: "I propose three gifts. The first one is successfully delisting the MEK, the second one is insuring the security of the people of Camp Ashraf and the third is to support the popular movement for freedom as expressed by Iranians both inside and outside of Iran." General Jones concluded, "We should remove all shackles that currently impede the human potential that exists to bring about democratic change with regard to the regime that currently governs Iran. We should give the people of Iran the opportunity to get control of their destinies and experience freedom not in ten years or 20 years but beginning this Iranian New Year."

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee (R-Fl), spoke of the need to protect the "wonderful residents of Camp Ashraf." She added, "They deserve our full protection, they've not gotten that from the Iraqi forces, and it is up to us to make sure that the Iraqi Government complies with all of the accords that they have signed; shame on us if we don't hold them accountable." She also reminded everyone that the House Foreign Affairs Committee is "carefully" studying the "important topic of de-listing the MEK."

Howard Dean joined the group and stated that, "The Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, (MEK) is not a terrorist group, and we need to delist them immediately. The MEK is a movement for freedom and democracy in Iran. The MEK has 3,400 brave people who believe in democracy just as firmly as those people in Benghazi, Libya as well as the people in Tahrir Square, Egypt did; hence, we cannot abandon its members in Camp Ashraf, Iraq. If we remove the MEK from the U.S. terrorist list, it will be possible to protect the people of Ashraf."

Representative Brad Sherman (D-CA), Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade said, "In 1997, our State Department was desperate to find a way to create peace and harmony and love between the people of the United States and the mullahs running things in Tehran. So the State Department decided to list the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran [MEK] as a foreign terrorist organization. I have to ask the State Department, how is that peace, love, and harmony thing working out? Have the centrifuges [to enrich uranium] stopped spinning? Have we heard reasonable comments from Ahmadinejad, or instead has this [terrorist designation] been a manifest failure of our foreign policy? It is about time that we examine what the European Union did in 2009, and that was to remove the MEK from its terrorist list."

In part of his remarks, Judge Michael Mukasey stated that, "There is simply no basis in law or in fact for continuing MEK on the State Department's list of foreign terrorist organizations. There are many reasons, including MEK's close cooperation with the United States in exposing Iran's nuclear program for removing MEK from that list. The MEK was kept on the terrorist list, in part, out of fear that Iran would provide Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) and other deadly devices to Iraqi insurgents fighting and killing U.S. troops, and of course the Iranian regime has done that even as MEK has continued to be on the list."

General Hugh Shelton specified that, "The largest organized resistance to Iran's current regime has been declared a foreign terrorist organization by the Department of State. That designation in my opinion was a mistake, one that we should rectify not tomorrow, but immediately." General Shelton added, "To add insult to injury we have Camp Ashraf where [Iraqi Forces] stand by today as the 210 loudspeakers shout out obscenities heard by women and children and just the idea of living with that is something that says we need to take action right now. I would submit today the U.S. should add our leadership to an international effort to go in and protect the people of Camp Ashraf, since a recognized international principle is to protect."

In celebration of the Iranian New Year, Representative John Lewis (D-GA), who is called "the conscience of the U.S. Congress," wished a, "Happy New Year to Iranians in Camp Ashraf and the people in Iran committed to peace and to change," and concluded: "Time is always right to do right. The time is now. Not next week, not next month, not next year, but now."

Governor Tom Ridge stated that, "All the UN resolutions combined would not have the same impact as one decision made by the Obama administration, removal of the MEK from the terrorist list, pure and simple. The MEK is not asking for creation of a no-fly zone or other military intervention on its behalf. It is not asking us to assault the fortress at Normandy. The MEK is only asking to be removed from the terrorist list."

Congressman Ted Poe who has sponsored H.Res.60, "Urging the Secretary of State to remove the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran from the Department of State's list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations," said, "It's time for the UNAMI team under the protection of the United States to be set up permanently in Camp Ashraf to monitor the situation and ensure further violations don't occur against the human dignity."

Ambassador Dell Dailey called on Secretary Clinton "to revoke the designation" of the MEK. "All of the Middle East is erupting and crying for democracy. We must not stand in the way. Immediate revocation [of designation] is essential," he concluded that delisting, "Will tell the people of Iran that the United States is with them."

Ambassador Paula Dobriansky stated that, "The recent uprisings in North Africa drew inspiration from the 2009 democratic protests in Iran... Women and youth are indispensable agents of change; their leadership needs to be recognized and their efforts supported. Maryam Rajavi (whom I, the author, have met personally in France on three different occasions) recognizes in her Ten-Point Plan a future Iran that would be experience political and social gender equality, including equal participation in elections and the abolition of discrimination against women. We must support these women activists. This platform is one that underscores the basic rights not only of women but of all Iranians."

Director Louis Freeh called into question the evidence on the basis of which the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq was designated. "There is absolutely no credible evidence, we think even on a classified basis, which justifies the maintenance of the MEK on the Foreign Terrorist Organizations list. In fact, all the evidence militates against maintaining the terrorist designation. What Secretary Clinton needs to do is delist the MEK, protect the heroes in Camp Ashraf, and make sure that we support freedom in Iran as opposed to standing silent, and by our silence facilitating the murderous persecution by the Iranian regime."

For Iran, Hezbollah serves as a live and successful model for revolutions, one which is reflected in other organizations such as Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and other Palestinian terror organizations, as well as extreme Shiite organizations in Iraq trained by Lebanese Hezbollah. Hezbollah is nourished by the growing strength and power of Iran and draws upon its successes. The Iranians (unlike the United States) are very clever at using proxies to do their dirty work.

It appears that our State Department and White House still remain asleep at the switch while the Iranians are very busy and fastidious in the continued resetting of the chessboard in the Middle East to their liking.

Description: Description: http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/imgLib/20100929_Chess7thSEAL.jpg

Ahmadinejad and the Mullahs seem to achieve some victory on every front weekly in orchestrating the activities in Libya, Bahrain, Lebanon, Egypt and Syria not to mention their support of Hamas, Iraqi Shiites, and the Taliban (and, oh, let us not forget Al Qaeda and the Bin Laden family). Iran has planned a larger, bolder strategy for the demise of Israel and the controlling power.

Russia and China (and their proxy North Korea), somewhat remaining in the background, supply sophisticated technology and military systems to Iran and languishes in the diminution of the United States influence in the Middle East.

Iran has been planning major preemptive actions against Israel from southern Lebanon for many years now and they are now capable of implementing multiple strikes on major Israeli commercial and military airports, facilities/installations, cities, and towns. These strikes will not be the feeble ones of 2006, but far more lethal. Hezbollah and Iran with the help of Syria have effectively set much in place, specifically, a plan that now appears ready for launch. Today, Hamas teams launched 50 missile attacks against Israel. Israel responded with tanks and sir strikes.

Iran, the puppet master has set the chessboard of the Middle East in such a manner that they control almost all of the attack points, and a feckless west is doing nothing thus appearing to have no power to change the tide. The pawns are strong and their ability to move has been changed. The Israelis have been effectively set into a corner, and the west is not a friend anymore. Feeble talks have been nothing less than the usual failure they have always been. The change in the pieces on the Chess Board is virtually complete and the puppet master is winning because of the weakness of the UN and the pathetic, inept leadership of the current White House and State Department.

The chessboard has been set by Iran that now forces Israel to fight a multiple front war with little help expected from the west. If the air attack plan against Iran is launched, then the Israelis must simultaneously fight the Hezbollah forces in Southern Lebanon as well as other attacks emanating from the West Bank and Gaza. Israel understands this is the new chessboard; US authorities do not seem to understand.

Let us bring all the diverse Iranian opposition groups together with a real new breakthrough strategy. We must begin to focus U.S. policy toward Iran in a way that better promotes our national security interests and strengthens our resolve to face this growing threat. We need to applaud Professor Ray Tanter of the Iran Policy Committee for pressing forward on this important issue. My hat is off to Alireza Jafarzadeh as well for his undying efforts to encourage support for the Iranian Opposition.

So the chessboard is set by Iran. They have the puppet strings on all the chess pieces in Afghanistan, Bahrain, Yemen, Iraq, Syria, Venezuela, Libya, Lebanon; all while Russia, the USA, China, and western nations posture. Iran is an adept Puppet Master now and the Chess Master (and we and others have allowed it to happen!).

Next move…. CHECKMATE!

Paul E. Vallely is Chairman of Stand Up America

www.standupamericaus.com

Paul E. Vallely MG, US Army (Ret)

Chairman – Stand Up America

E-Mail: standupamericaceo@gmail.com

www.standupamericaus.com

www.soldiersmemorialfund.org

www.patriotsunion.org

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk