Ahmadinejad: "US Trying to Prevent the Mahdi's Return"

Yossi Melman reports in today's Haaretz (in Hebrew, no English version) that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told families who lost loved ones in the Iran-Iraq War that the main purpose of the American invasion of Iraq was to prevent the return of the Mahdi, the Shi'ite messiah. He quotes Iranian news agency Tabnak, which reported Ahmadinijad said the following:

"It is true that the forces of arrogance (the Americans) have their eyes on the [Iraqi] nation's oil and other treasures, but behind all this there is a hidden reasoning and they are working in accordance with it, although they would never admit to it in public. However, we have obtained documents of theirs. They came up with this plan (the invasion and occupation of Iraq) to prevent the coming of the hidden imam, and they also know that the Iranian nation is preparing for this event and will be his ally when he appears." (Note: I'm translating from Hebrew, which itself is a translation, and probably a translation of a translation).

Melman points out that Ahmedinijad is a follower of Masbah Yazdi, who believes Muslims must pave the way for the Mahdi's return. This is a view the Iranian Ayatollahs see as heresy.

Some experts believe that Ahmedinijad's belief in the return of the Mahdi is the main reason he wants to have nuclear weapons. Messianic Shi'ites believe that when he returns there will be a bloody war between the Shi'ites and their enemies. Sounds pretty much like the Christian Armageddon.

Scary stuff.

The Turkish-Armenian Dilemma

The non-binding Armenian genocide resolution set to come before the United States House of Representatives has the odd quality of being totally right and totally wrong simultaneously. It is right because the Armenian genocide should be recognized as such. Not many outside of Turkey dispute this. Why is it wrong? Because it comes at a very bad time.

Democrats are shooting themselves in the foot, as would the United States as a whole. Rep. Adam Schiff of California, the resolution's author, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi are making Democrats vulnerable to accusations of not caring for US troops in Iraq. Pissing off Turkey right now is a bad move, even though it is immoral not to recognize one of the first genocides of the 20th century.

Now there is indication the House resolution may be dead because of the backlash. This is good, for now. This should come up again when the United States is out of Iraq and Afghanistan and doesn't depend on Turkey for logistic support, and when a Turkish invasion of Iraqi Kurdistan wouldn't be such a threat to Iraqi stability. Maybe if most countries of the world agreed to recognize the genocide, Turkey would not be able to punish anyone for such a move.

Both the United States and Turkey come out bad from this affair. Turkey brazenly decided to impose sanctions on Armenia, punishing it for lobbying in favor of the resolution. Punishing the descendants of the genocide is shameless. Turkey should definitely be rebuked for that.

Turkey also should be rebuked for how it dragged Israel into this. Their foreign minister was here last week and he demanded that Israel prevent Congress from adopting the resolution and said that it would not only harm relations with the United States, it would also harm relations with Israel. They didn't say the same thing about relations with another American ally, the UK. Why? I guess because the Brits don't control America, but the Turkish government thinks that Israel, through the vast Jewish conspiracy, could get Congress to vote any way the Elders of Zion want. Fuck them. The foreign minister also threatened that the Jewish community in Turkey would suffer from a backlash if the genocide were recognized. If Israel had any guts we'd say, "you know what, if that's how you're trying to fight this - with anti-Semitic threats, we might as well adopt our own resolution recognizing the Armenian genocide".

The President Who Cried Wolf

In hindsight, going to war in Iraq was a grave mistake. Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction. There's nothing new or groundbreaking about that statement.

Now the world is abuzz with talk of Iran developing nuclear weapons. A lot of people feel like this is deja vu all over again, and in a way they are right. President Bush and most of the presidential candidates seem to be on a war footing with Iran, but people don't believe the WMD argument anymore. Bush used it up in 2003 and it turned out to be false. Why believe in the Iranian nuclear threat this time around?

I believe Iran is developing nuclear weapons. I admit I believed the same thing about Iraq four years ago, but this time around I'm more convinced. For one thing, Ahmedinijad has made several statements about Iran's nuclear program, though he claims it is for peaceful purposes. Why does this oil rich country need nuclear power? Have the ayatollahs suddenly become environmentalists? Second of all, a lot more countries are warning of Iranian nukes than there were countries that supported an invasion of Iraq. Changes of leadership are not the only cause of this major difference. Both France and Germany have said they are truly concerned.

President Vladimir Putin is trying to play against the United States and Europe in this matter. He's shortsighted here. Though he acknowledged Iranian nukes would be a threat to Russia, he doesn't think they are being manufactured. He thinks it is in Russia's best interest to side with Iran on this issue, but that is extremely dangerous for his country, exactly because Iranian nukes are also threats to Russian national security.

Having said all this, I still oppose a war against Iran at this point. A war is the second worst option on the table, only being better than letting Iran get nukes. A war would be disastrous for everybody. Even with a large international coalition, such a war would be devastating to many countries and wouldn't assure the destruction of Iran's nuclear program. The United States military is stretched thin and Israel would be bombarded by missiles from the east and north, courtesy of Iran and their Lebanese subsidiary, Hezbollah.

The best option is harsh sanctions until Iran allows sufficient inspections. This is the only option that would avoid disaster, but countries like Russia and Venezuela are making the success of such a move doubtful.