What is the red line to Iran?

Following Iran’s President Ahmadinejad and Israeli’s Prime Minister Netanyahu’s addresses at the UN (Highlights from the Iranian president’s address can be found on Iran Daily Brief) the question a red line on Iran is being asked out loud or silently by millions of people all over the world. Please fill out our survey at the end of this article.

Israel drew a red line:

Netanyahu made it graphically clear on Thursday where he plans to draw a red line on Iran: Now. Yesterday. The sooner the better.

Obviously, Israel has initially the most to lose when Iran’s “peaceful” nuclear program does go ballistic: Its relatively small size (approx… 8,000 square miles) , its geographic proximity to Iran (approx.. 1,000 miles) coupled Iran’s “special interest” with Israel do not leave room for doubts as to where Iranian missiles will be aimed at first.

“The issue of Palestine is not an argument between one person and another or a conflict created between the followers of one prophet and another…but the dispute over Palestine is a dispute over dominating and managing the world” – President Ahmadinejad.

In fact, Israel, or rather the “fake”, “usurper”, “corrupt”, “arrogant”, “cancerous”, “microbe”, “blood-thirsty”, “uncivilized”, Satan/Devil” (etc…) “Zionist state” makes a major part of Iranian leaders hate-filled speeches which have become the norm while most world leaders keep clucking their tongues and wagging their fingers much to Israel’s discontent.

Ahmadinejad makes it clear repeatedly the he wants Israel “eliminated”, to “be gone”, “wiped out”, “destroyed”, “uprooted”, to “collapse”, to “disappear” while adding his own red line reminding the world that “anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation’s fury”.

Yes, both Iranian and Israeli leaders, understand that pushing the nuclear button is suicidal for both sides much as it was for the US and the Soviet Union during the cold war. Although Israel has never shown suicidal tendencies, these do creep through Iranian leaders’ rhetoric (Global Jihad and the coming of the Mahdi – the Islamic Messiah) and,  more dangerously, through Iranian-backed martyrdom-seeking terrorist groups who could “steal” or obtain a nuclear “dirty” bomb in their bid for a one-way trip to paradise.

If you had any doubts as to Iran’s intents towards Israel, google “Israel Ahmadinejad Quotes” and you might understand why Israel is spooked by Iran having a nuclear weapon.

The UN draws red lines…in the sand:

The UN has repeatedly drawn red lines for Iran which were repeatedly ignored by Iran much like lines drawn in the sand under returning waves.

The IAEA (the UN’s atomic watch dog) reports are filled with red lines concerning Iran’s probably-not-so peaceful nuclear program. These lines include enriching uranium beyond the electricity–production needs (5% while Iran is enriching above 20%), access to the Parchin military base currently undergoing a thorough “nuclear cleaning”, solid and believable answers to queries regarding Iran’s attempts to test nuclear missiles and obtain enriched uranium and in general, an unheeded call for complete transparency and complete acceptance of UN resolutions regarding its program. After years of warnings and reports by the IAEA and numerous conferences with the IAEA and the P5+1 members, Iran keeps on doing what it does best: ignore the red lines, accuse the UN/US/Israel and gain time to continue its agenda.

And why not? Apart from the crippling sanctions which are also ignored by the Iranian government while the Iranian people suffer the worst economy ever, the UN still holds no real threat against Iran so while UN Secretary General Bam Ki-Moon calls for Iran to take “the measures necessary to build international confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature of its nuclear program” and to prove the “solely peaceful intent of its program”, Iran continues to increase its nuclear capabilities daily with no transparency in sight.

Similar red lines have been issued by the Ki-Moon on Iran’s horrid human rights record, lines which are crossed in Iran while the Iranian people paid with their lives, their freedom and their dignity. Ki-Moon personally requested to meet with opposition leaders Mousavi and Karroubi who are still living under house arrest after over 18 months and was met with denial. The suffering of women, religious minorities, gays and anyone who opposes the government or its Sharia laws in Iran is, of course, categorically denied by Iran but their tales are leaking out to human rights organizations and watch dogs and are being retold to the world…and still Iran keeps on doing what it does best: ignore the red lines, accuse the world and gain time to continue its agenda.

With its red lines in the sand repeatedly ignored and the and the upcoming rumbles of a (nuclear) war that will be powered by Islam(ophobia), the UN has to decide whether its next red line to Iran will be its last or lose credibility as a governing body of United Nations.

The US took out its red marker:

Although President Obama is not ready yet to toe Netanyahu’s red line, the US government has made it clear that it will not accept a nuclear-armed Iran nor will it accept overt verbal or military attack on Israel. The US is reaching its red line vis-à-vis Iran in leaps and bounds but it understands fully that once that red line appears, the US will have to “walk the talk” and lead the US into a nuclear confrontation which it definitely and rightly wants to avoid.

So while Netanyahu’s threats of an attack on Iran’s nuclear program echo through the White House walls, the US is striving to find a diplomatic ground to meet Iran on. The problem is, that Iran continues to do what it does best: yes, ignore the red lines, accuse the US and gain time to continue its agenda…not really a confidence builder.

So the US has taken out its big red marker but has still not drawn its red line. The US delegation at the UN boycotted Ahmadinejad’s speech voicing its frustration  that “…Ahmadinejad once again use his trip to the U.N. not to address the legitimate aspirations of the Iranian people but to instead spout paranoid theories and repulsive slurs against Israel.” But there is still no real red line on the nuclear issue.

The US’s red line on Iran threatens to be a major issue in the upcoming presidential debates and elections – an issue which Romney and Obama will have to deal with as part of their pitch to win the votes of the American public which definitely does not want to go to war but most probably are sick of finding themselves threatened directly or indirectly by Iran and a possible nuclear war.

Canada, restated its general well known and anticipated ties with the US and Israel by boycotting Ahmadinejad’s address on Wednesday.

Both the US and Canada understand that once that red line finally is crossed, they will support Israel against Ahmadinejad’s “new world order” while entering their nations into a costly war that could escalate to pushing the red button, knowing that millions of innocent people would die.

Only one virtual red line from Europe:

Judging from the turnout of European delegations at the Ahmadinejad’s speech, Europe is opting for a more neutral, “let’s wait and see” tone with no clear red markers yet in sight.

Britain is the only exception and in fact epitomizes this tone by stating that “Britain sent three officials to the speech. They had been instructed to walk out if he said anything offensive”, “offensive” being the Britain’s red line. And yet, even the racial slur of “uncivilized Zionists” didn’t cross the British red line.

Europe is playing for time which in turn gives Iran more time.

Perhaps it is because no European country is, yet, geographically in reach of a nuclear bomb from Tehran.

Or perhaps it is because they want to distance themselves from their alliances with the US for future leeway to stay neutral when the US asks them to abide these alliances. Or perhaps they have forgotten all the other outrageous accusations Ahmadinejad made in the past – Holocaust denials, 9/11 US conspiracy, cloud/weather sabotage…. Or perhaps, it is simply because Europe is going through so much economically right now that its leaders would rather postpone a decision. Or perhaps they forget that they too fit the “imperialist”, “colonialist” and “capitalist” description of the enemy of Iran’s new world change”.

Or perhaps it is because they do not understand how Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei professed “century of Islam” and “Islamic uprising” are going to affect the EU’s growing problem of Islam(ophobia) in most Western European countries and some specific cities such as Luton, Amsterdam, Malmo and Marseilles. The percentage of Muslims increases in Europe though legal/illegal immigration and relatively higher birth rates – Demographically and Democratically. A red line was drawn with the “burka ban”, pitting civilian law against religious/”sharia” laws.  Fundamental Islamists, people and groups who would welcome a “century of Islam” while staying exactly where they are now, are getting more vocal and more violent.

Or perhaps they seem to forget that the P5+1 members include 3 European states (Britain, France, Germany) who will have to make a decision once that red line is finally crossed. The same states that championed sanctions against Iran.

Whatever the case, European leaders sit, watch for red lines by their allies and wait…nervously.

No red lines by the rest:

China and Russia have been very careful to not draw any red lines of any kind concerning Iran. They are playing their cards cautiously looking out for a game-changing development. Of course, none would like to see a nuclear Iran as a neighbor but they are comforted by their size: they are powerful enough to make Iran want to have them as allies or simply neutral and they are geographically big enough to decrease the fear of a national wipe-out in a nuclear war against Iran. China and Russia are in fact Iran’s red lines.

The rest of the world, including the 120 NAM member states (mostly Asia, Africa, South America), whose rotating president happens to be Ahmadinejad himself, is either neutral (or hoping to stay neutral) or supportive of Iran and/or an “Islamic uprising”.

They too are watching out for red lines by other states before having to decide on which side of the line they will choose to be.

Ahmadinejad’s UN Speech: a dangerous plea for a new world order

In a speech full of hypocrisy and incitement the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had called for a new world order.

After much protest in New York and around the world Ahmadinejad had delivered a 35- minute-long speech to the UN general assembly. Following a long introduction in which Ahmadinejad had both implicitly and explicitly blamed the West for most of the current world problems, he made the Iranian regime’s intention of undermining the UN loud and clear.

Specifically, Ahmadinejad stated that “there is no doubt that the world is in need for a new order”, a new order that is needed according to Ahmadinejad due to the current one being “discriminatory and based on injustice”. Among other reasons for the unjust nature of the current order Ahmadinejad noted that it; is responsible for “oppression and discrimination”, “has been shaped according to selfishness and deception”, and “seeks to expand its domination by spreading discord and conflicts”.

In light of the Iranian regime’s policies and behaviour these claims are hypocritical to say the least. The Iranian regime undertakes oppression and discrimination against its own citizens on a daily basis. Indeed, human rights organisations around the world have condemned the Iranian regime for undertaking many human rights violations ranging from restriction of freedom of speech and movement to the execution of children. Ahmadinejad called upon the UN to “defend human rights”, if the UN is to take this challenge, it should start with taking actions against the same hypocrite who had posed the challenge.

Furthermore, while Ahmadinejad condemned the UN for being shaped according to selfishness and deception, he yet again “forgets” that his regime is one of the most selfish and deceptive regime’s in history. How else, apart from complete selfishness, can one explain the Iranian regime’s insistence to continue its nuclear program even-though the Iranian citizens loose 133,000,000 $ a day due to this insistence. It is not the regime leaders who suffer from this astronomical loss, rather the simple citizens- the regime clearly does not care about its citizens. This nuclear program is also the sight which stands as evidence of the Iranian regime’s deceptive nature. While Ahmadinejad blames the UN for being deceptive, he completely disregards the fact that the Iranian regime is actively trying to deceive the world by cleansing the Parchin nuclear site. Indeed, only recently had the head of Iran’s nuclear agency admitted that Iran lied to the IAEA about its nuclear program.

Moreover,  Ahmadinejad who argues that member states of the UN seek to expand their domination via the spreading of discord and conflicts, conveniently puts a blind eye to the fact that Iran is the world’s foremost terrorism supporter. Apart from financially and politically supporting the murderous Syrian regime, Iran also offers similar assistance (and even to a greater extent) to listed terror organizations such as Hamas and Hizbollah. Not only does Iran support terror organizations world-wide, Iranian forces have taken active parts in terror plots and attacks around the world.

After pointing out the reasons for a new world order Ahmadinejad implies that all 120 non-aligned movement (NAM) member-states hold the same views. Indeed, as the representative of these States, Ahmadinejad had declared the NAM’s readiness to aid the UN in the “essential endeavor” of restructuring the UN. While some of the NAM countries may indeed support the restructuring of the UN, there is no wide agreement within the NAM about the issue. Ahmadinejad has therefor abused his power as the NAM president in order to push forward the Iranian regime’s agenda.

The Iranian regime has therefore been proved as human rights violators, selfish, deceptive , supporters of terror and abusers of power. With this kind of negative record, who in their right mind can allow such a regime to attain nuclear weapons? Indeed, Ahmadinejad ends his speech with stating his hope that the Imam Al-Mahdi will appear soon, an appearance that according to Shi’ism can only occur at the end of time…

Ahmadinejad’s Freedom of Speech

On Wednesday the 26th of September the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will address the UN general assembly in New York. While there is no question that he will undertake his usual anti UN/West/USA/Israel-bashing rhetoric, there is a question what angle/s will this bashing take in this instance?

The Iranian president is (in)famous for his speeches in the UN general assemblies. Some of the most controversial statements uttered by him had included – blaming the US for staging 9/11 (as “an excuse for launching attack on Muslim regions”), denying the Holocaust (“a myth”), and championing human rights for gays (“in Iran we don’t have homosexuals”) and women (“more rights than men”).

These sort of outrageous comments were also seen on other stages. For example; he accused the West of hijacking clouds in order to impose drought on Iran, accused the West of spreading HIV in African countries in order to make money from pharmaceuticals, and claimed the West is to blame for Iran’s drug problems.

Although these claims could be considered comical, they do point towards very important issues. First, these farfetched claims show the depth of obsession (even paranoia) of the Iranian regime towards the West/US/Israel. Second, they reflect the attitude of blaming all the Iranian internal problems on the West, without even a hint of introspection. Third, they point towards the incapability of accepting people who hold different values to them.

With Ahmadinejad’s 8th and final address to the UN general assembly coming up this Wednesday many speculate upon the next outrageous claims that will come out of his mouth. He will definitely attack the UN and its agencies for being “defected” and “illogical”, “one-sided”, “undemocratic”, “sabotagers”, “outdated” etc… aiming for no less than an “overhaul of the global management system”.

Based on Iran’s rhetoric at the NAM summit in Tehran last month, Iran views itself as the hero of the Third World countries against the “Imperialist/Colonialist” forces (guess who…), a champion of Human Rights (Iran is “a pioneer” in human rights), the self-designated leader of the nuclear agenda (supposedly peaceful but definitely not transparent) and the visionaries/instigators/defenders of an Islamic Awakening (“this is the century of Islam”).

As usual, all these themes are thoroughly mixed together into one big messy accusation such as this reaction from Khamenei regarding the infamous and racist “Innocence of Muslims” movie: “Behind this evil move lie the antagonistic policies of the Zionists and the US and other heads of the global arrogance…The prime suspects in this crime are Zionism and the US government…Muslim brothers and sisters must know that this desperate move by the enemies in the wake of the Islamic Awakening is a sign of the grandeur and importance of this uprising and heralds its increasing growth.”.

The reaction to this movie in the Arab streets is nothing to be scoffed upon; two years ago, during the Arab Spring, Arab citizens took to the streets to topple their tyrants, instill democracy and fight for their freedom. Now they take the streets again, with the same violent fervor, in what could be called the Arab Storm, to hunt down and kill innocent Americans disregarding the basic element of freedom of speech. It is not only ironic, but also profoundly sad, that these protesters have gone from fighting for democracy to denying others from some of democracy’s pivots- freedom of speech and expression.

It is these same freedoms that Iranian leaders abuse to vilify the UN/West/US/Israel in ways beyond the rational imagination. Theses Iranian leaders know full well that no Western/American/Israeli mob will try to attack Iranian Embassies for these hate-speeches. It is precisely because of this knowledge that President Ahmadinejad will allow himself to say whatever he wants regardless of how ludicrous, far-fetched, hate-filled, paranoid or weird it may sound.

We cannot change the Iranian diplomatic strategy, but we can certainly change our reaction to it. We are not calling for a violent reaction to Ahmadinejad’s impending hate speech, rather we should be proud that we react peacefully to such rants. We call diplomats attending the UN conference, and indeed people world-wide- turn your backs on Ahmadinejad’s address, protest his presence in New York, take his accusations seriously and convince as many people as you can to do the same.

Iran- attempting to hold the world hostage

On September the 26^th the Iranian and non-aligned movement (NAM) president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will address the UN general assembly.

Considering his speeches in the NAM conference last month, this address will not be the usual UN-bashing rant that Ahmadinejad loves to deliver; rather it will be a speech that takes UN-bashing one step further. Specifically, Ahmadinejad’s speech will reflect the Iranian regime’s quest for a “fundamental change” in the UN structure.

This demand for a structural change will be based upon the Iranian regime’s accusations that the UN is “undemocratic and outdated”, that the UN security council is “irrational and unjust” and boards on “overt dictatorship”, and that the UN’s IAEA purposefully “sabotages” the “peaceful” Iranian nuclear program and more.

The Iranian nuclear program is crucial for Iran’s success in enforcing such a change. Although Iran is sticking to its “we will never develop nuclear weapons since they are a great sin” alibi, its lack of transparency, satellite pictures of nuclear plants and mounting evidence submitted by the IAEA all point to a military-aligned program. Indeed, very recently the IAEA had reported that the Iranian regime is currently cleaning the nuclear site in Parchin from evidence of suspected military-aligned nuclear activity.

It is this military-aligned nuclear program that holds the world hostage and will force a structural change to the UN. The threat of a nuclear Iran strengthens Iran’s call to choose sides: for or against Iran, for or against the UN, for or against democracy. It is this threat that evokes the current world-wide war rhetoric. Furthermore, this war rhetoric is backed by, and fueled by the growing rumble of extreme Islamization. This issue was clearly and bouldly addressed by the Iranian supreme leader Khamenei who stated that “this century is the century of Islam”  (read his whole speech to the “Islamic Awakening and Youth Conference” for a better understanding of the Islamic context).

Statements such as the above are not “only” rhetoric bet are at the basis of spontaneous and planned actions by Muslim fundamentalists and leaders. This action is evident in the growing prevalence of Muslim terror organizations who vow to force Sharia law on the whole world. Furthermore, judging by the extreme reaction of Muslims to the Mohammad-derogating movie even within democratic countries, it can easily be seen that some Muslims take Khamenei’s words into action.

With the eyes of the assembly members and the world upon him, it can be expected that Ahmadinejad will gamble for a majority vote in the general assembly to cancel the UN-forced sanctions upon Iran. Furthermore, he will attempt to enter Iran to the UN Security Council through demanding representation for NAM states (which in this case would be the NAM president-Iran).

It is becoming more and more evident that the 26^th­­ of September will be a turning point in the Iranian quest for nuclear weapons and for restructuring the UN and its agencies. World leaders should not stand aside while Iran lies for time until it will come out of its nuclear closet, admitting proudly that it already has nuclear bombs, disrupting the fragile status quo in the Middle East. The time has come for world leaders to speak up and say “we will not allow Iran to control the world through intimidation” nor “will we support Iran’s attempted coup in the UN general assembly”.

Do the right thing and stand up to Iran on the 26^th­­ of September – History, and your children, will thank you for it.

Iran slams UN as “undemocratic” – and keeps suppressing opposition

During the recent visit of the UN’s secretary general Ban Ki-Moon to Tehran calls were made to let him meet with Iranian opposition leaders. These calls were voiced in the hope that a meeting between Ki-Moon and the opposition leaders would provide a more complete picture of the political landscape and the state of human rights in Iran- one that would be drastically different from the bright image portrayed by the Iranian regime.

The Iranian regime had declined these calls at around the same time that Khamenei had began his strategic attack against the UN, an attack in which he denounced the UN and some of its bodies as “undemocratic”. Specifically, during his opening speech to the non-aligned movement conference in Tehran, Khamenei slammed the “overt dictatorship” of the U.N. Moreover, Khamenei had stated that  “the U.N. Security Council has an irrational, unjust and utterly undemocratic structure, and this is an overt dictatorship”. These statements were echoed regardless of the fact that Ki-Moon was present in the audience.

Khamenei’s statements are ironic if not hypocritical considering the fact that while he was delivering his speech Iranian opposition leaders were (and still are) subject to house arests for a period that already exceeded 18 months.

At this point one should ask; how could a regime who imprisons political rivals consider itself democratic? Furthermore, how does this same undemocratic regime have the audacity to call for revisions in the UN structure under the claim of aspiring for a more democratic UN? Put simply; how could a dictatorship blame the UN for being a dictatorship?

It is important to note that the violent oppression of alternative voices in Iran is not limited to leaders alone – It is well reflected in the long record of abysmal human rights violations undertaken by the Iranian regime. Indeed, only this week David Alton reported in “The Independent” that:

“The Iranian regime has resorted to extreme measures to quell any hint of dissent at home, in particular towards the PMOI, the only viable organized opposition… The Iranian authorities continue the extensive use of the death penalty, with at least 360 executions reported in the country and Amnesty suggesting that there have been over 274 other executions, with many prisoners executed secretly… Since the 2009 uprising, the regime has arrested scores of individuals affiliated with the PMOI, charging each with “ moharbeh” and sentencing them to death…”

Under the above circumstances it should be made loud and clear that the Iranian regime’s calls for a new global order, and its requests to be more involved in the UN and its different bodies, should be put aside at the very least until the regime undertakes concrete actions to insure democratic processes and basic human rights in Iran.

* Source: http://www.naharnet.com/stories/en/51746

The show must (NOT) go on- Ahmadinejad to speak in the UN

After the well rehearsed non-aligned movement (NAM) show in Tehran, the Iranian regime has its eyes set upon a new stage – the United Nations general assembly.

The Iranian regime who during the NAM conference had outwardly shown every intent of hijacking its term as the movement’s president plans to continue their target of undermining the UN from within the UN’s own headquarters. Iran’s president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is due to hold a speech in front of the general assembly on the 26^th of September.

This address to the general assembly comes amidst heightened tensions over the Iranian nuclear program. As can be remembered, the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) quarterly report published towards the end of August had expressed serious concerns upon the Iranian regime’s nuclear program. Among other concerns, the IAEA had reported that Iran had doubled its number of uranium enrichment centrifuges and is actively cleaning up suspected military-aligned nuclear sites.

Adding to these serious concerns is the possibility that Iran had formed a UN-undermining voting coalition during the NAM conference. Indeed, leaders among the world community are worried that Iran has formed a voting coalition which intends to undermine the UN-led sanctions upon Iran. These worries are amplified by the fact that the Iranian regime had outwardly expressed their target of creating a “new world order”, one which is different to the current UN structure.

The Iranian regime claims it is a democracy and that it is “a beacon of hope” to the rest of the world. And yet, this “beacon of hope” does not shine over all of Iran’s citizens: opposition leaders are under house arrest, death penalty rates are soaring (second only to China), the incidence of stoning and flogging as punishment methods is increasing, discrimination on the basis of gender or race goes undisputed, freedom of speech oppression is a given, and countless more human rights oppressing activities do not only occur on a daily basis but are actively supported by law.

It is therefore ironic that although Iran is far from being a model of democracy, Ahmadinejad will probably use the “democracy card” at the assembly in order to bash countries that truly are democratic in their nature. Specifically, in a UN Security councel undermining move, Ahmadinejad will demand equal representation for each UN member state (regardless of their democratic/nondemocratic nature). This will bring to the absurd reality in which the UN security council will not be able to veto a resolution that was voted in due to support from nondemocratic countries. Essentially, nondemocratic countries will be exploiting the democratic tool of voting to promote their nondemocratic agendas.

The Iranian regime should not be allowed to continue its NAM conference show in the UN. A nondemocratic country like Iran should never be allowed to exploit democracy for its own agendas. The world as an audience cannot allow itself to demand an encore of the NAM show.

Put shortly; there is no place for a human-rights-oppressing, war-mongering, military-nuclear-capabilities-seeking country such as Iran in the UN.

NAM Summary: Iran should walk the talk or come out of its closet.

Based on the way Iranian diplomats and leaders talk, one would think that Iranian diplomacy is on the brink of schizophrenia or has a huge closet full of demons it is guarding fervently.

Whenever Iranian leaders talk about ideals such as democracy/human rights/freedom, its nuclear program, global terrorism etc…, one thing is certain: the Iranian leaders and diplomats have learned the talk that appeals the most to a Western audience.

Iranian leaders speak of these ideals with such fervor and conviction that one could be mistaken to believe them. The Islamic Republic of Iran, in Iranian leaders terms is a shining beacon of democracy, the ultimate champion for human rights and dignity, the strongest enemy of nuclear weapons, the leader for peace and love.

In short, the Iranians have learned to talk the Western talk.

But they are far from walking this talk.

At the closing of the 6 day NAM summit in Tehran, the difference between Iran’s talk and Iran’s walk became exponentially larger.

On the nuclear issue, possibly Iran’s highest priority to date, Iran championed the NAM resolution of banning nuclear weapons while urging the development of nuclear power for electricity use.

And yet, UN General Secretary Ban Ki-Moon complained that “they (Iran) were not giving me any concrete answers (on the nuclear issue)”. Calls from the UN and from Western powers for more transparency by Iran on cloudy nuclear issues such as the purpose of the Parchin military base (and it satellite documented clean-up) , the increase of high level uranium enrichment far beyond electrical needs (enough for 5 atomic bombs according to the latest IAEA report , the doubling of centrifuges in the Fordow plant etc…are met with a plethora of evasive responses: outright denials, accusations of Israeli/US motivations/racism, Khameini’s (in)famous “nuclear weapons are a sin” religious decree, finger pointing at Israel nuclear arsenal – any tactic meant to help Iran escape giving “concrete” evidence and the much requested transparency.

Democracy, human rights and freedom were BIG buzz words in Iranian diplomacy during the NAM summit. This is regardless of the fact that Iranian opposition leaders Mousavi and Mehdi under house arrest and that Iran holds one of the worst human records in the world today according to human rights groups such as Amnesty and Human Rights Watch while Iranian Human Rights chief Javad Larijani proudly states “Iran pioneers in human rights in the world”.

However, any critical reports, whether it be on Iran’s nuclear program or human rights have neither steered Iran away from its nuclear ambitions, nor have they brought forth intentions of changing negative human rights actions. Rather, Iran seems to be steaming ahead with its nuclear aspirations and giving little regards to human rights reports.

Indeed, with a democracy-exploiting voting coalition within the UN, and world leaders who fail to speak up against the Iranian regime’s actions, it seems that a nuclear-armed, human-right-oppressing Iranian regime is just around the corner.

Because at the end of the day, Iran is desperately trying to mobilize as many nations as it can against the UN (including the UN Security Council and the IAEA) and against the “hegemony” of Western powers (the US, UK, France etc…and of course, Israel) in order to create a new world order, lift economic sanctions and give Iran much needed time to develop a military nuclear program.

It is somewhat ironic, and concerning, that the nondemocratic Iranian regime is attempting to exploit a democratic tool (i.e. voting) in order promote her nondemocratic agendas. This is even made more ironic, when one considers that if Iran is successful in forming a voting coalition, it will be able to use this coalition to bash truly democratic countries within the UN. We will find out soon enough if Iran’s bet paid off during Ahmadinejad’s address to the UN general assembly during this month.

Iran continues to manipulate during the NAM summit.

Articles from news agencies around the world confirm that Iran would stop at nothing in order to promote its agendas during the non-aligned movement conference taking place in Iran.

Mounting reports from news agencies around the world have stated that the Iranian regime are actively altering the translation of speakers in the summit so that the speakers appear to support the Iranian regime’s agenda.

Most notably, the Iranian regime have alterd the translations of speeches delivered by the Egyptian president Mohammed Morsi and the UN general Secretary Ban Ki-Moon. Morsi, who delivered a strong speech in favour of the rebels in syria and against the Syrian regime, was portrayed as if expressing support for the Syrian regime. Similarly, Ki-Moon who had expressed serious concern about Iran’s nuclear program, was portrayed as if commending the Iranian regime’s cooperation with the UN’s International Atomic Agency.

The Egyptian president’s support of rebels in Syria comes in direct contradiction to one of the main targets of the Iranian regime during the conference- showing the rest of the world that Iran is not as isolated as the West claims it to be. By condemning Syria, a close ally of Iran, the Egyptian president has shown that there are some countries in the conference who do not support Iran. Therefore, purposefully altering Morsi’s speech serves the purpose of conveying unity and support for Iran.

The purpose of altering Ki-Moon’s speech is obvious; the Iranian’s, who are subject to UN led sanctions hoped to show that even the UN’s strongest person is in favor of Iran. By portraying Ki-Moon as an Iranian supporter, the Iranian regime is trying to show that most of the  international community (which Ki-Moon represents) is in favor of the Iranian nuclear aspirations.

It is of the utmost important that more world leaders attending the NAM conference in Tehran will speak up against Iran. This is not only important for condemning Iran’s nuclear aspirations, but also for condemning its preposterous civil rights record and for stopping it from attaining her agendas.