Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ankara: Iran's Share In Linking Terrorism To Islam Is Tremendous

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ankara: Iran's Share In Linking Terrorism To Islam Is Tremendous

    IRAN'S SHARE IN LINKING TERRORISM TO ISLAM IS TREMENDOUS

    Today's Zaman
    Nov 21 2012
    Turkey

    At a time when the world is discussing if Islam is indeed a religion
    promoting terror, Today's Zaman Editor-in-Chief Dr. Bulent KeneÅ~_
    has pointed to Iran's share in causing Islam to be associated with
    terrorism, which he described as "colossal." According to KeneÅ~_,
    Iran's terrorist activities are mainly what justifies simultaneous
    reference to Islam and terror. Since Iran has been marketing its
    revolution as "Islamic" and justifies everything it does with reference
    to Islam, Iran's terrorist activities have come to be attributed to
    Islam, KeneÅ~_ has argued.

    KeneÅ~_, known for his publications on Iranian politics, has recently
    released his second book, "İran ve Terrör" (Iran and Terror). In
    his first book, "Iran: Tehdit mi, Fırsat mı?" (Iran: A Threat or an
    Opportunity) KeneÅ~_ discussed the place of Iran in Turkish foreign
    policy. Now, in his second book, he explains how the administration
    in Tehran has resorted to terrorist methods such as exporting its
    revolution to other countries and destroying its dissidents after the
    revolution in 1979. Like his first, KeneÅ~_'s second book, derived
    from his doctoral dissertation at the Middle East Studies Institute of
    Marmara University, has been published by the TimaÅ~_ Publishing House.

    We discussed the connection between Iran and terrorism with KeneÅ~_,
    a hot topic in world politics.

    Your second book is about post-revolution Iran's terrorist attacks
    against the regime's opponents and its efforts to export its revolution
    to other countries. How could Iran attain this dynamism hot on the
    heels of the revolution?

    This energy essentially comes from the revolutionary romanticism
    of the early days of the revolution. As the revolution became more
    institutionalized over time, it started to pay greater and more
    pragmatic respect to balance. Initially, it was suggested that the
    Iranian revolution was not only a Persian/Shiite revolution, but that
    it would inspire all the world's downtrodden. But the revolution
    failed to maintain this vibrant dynamism. Today, it is hard to say
    that Iran is trying to export its revolution to other countries. But
    this does not mean Iran is not laboring to boost its influence and
    spread its Shiite mentality in a more realist manner. The difference
    from the early years of the revolution is that Iran now takes into
    consideration relations with its neighbors as well as the global and
    regional balance.

    In your book, you discuss how Iran assassinated several dissident
    Iranian figures in foreign countries. These include at least six cases
    of assassinations conducted in Turkey until 1989. Do you think Iran
    is still maintaining similar secret service activities?

    The assassinations against opponents of the Iranian regime -- including
    dissident Kurdish leaders in Berlin and former Prime Minister Shahpour
    Bakhtiar in Paris -- are proof of Iran's state-sponsored terror. These
    were purely cases of summary executions.

    These acts not only destroy dissidents physically, but also help to
    intimidate other dissidents. Since Iran has made terror an official
    policy employed to silence opponents, it has become a country which is
    primarily associated with terrorism in the international arena. Today,
    terrorism has acquired a different dimension. The lives of the leading
    figures of the Green Movement, which claims that the 2009 elections in
    Iran were fraudulent, are being threatened. This new style can still
    be considered part of Iran's terror. The manifestation abroad of this
    new style is that Iran exerts pressures on the groups who criticize it
    through its fifth column activities. For instance, there are numerous
    Qom- or Tehran-affiliated websites and news agencies in Turkey. When
    you criticize Iran, you are quickly targeted by these media outlets.

    You receive threats through social media; you may even face character
    assassination. This, too, is terror. Iran benefits from environments
    where freedoms are liberally enjoyed, like Turkey, where it can
    leverage psychological operations.

    Is there any concrete evidence indicating Iran is committing
    state-sponsored terror?

    There are many examples. The most remarkable of these is the killing
    of Iran's dissident Kurdish leader at a restaurant called Mykonos
    in Berlin in 1992. Following the assassination, German authorities
    conducted an in-depth investigation under the Mykonos case and
    concluded that the murder was committed by the Iranian Secret Service
    at the behest of the administration in Tehran. After a three-year
    investigation, a Berlin criminal court held that the assassination
    had been decided by an Iranian "Special Affairs Committee," members
    of which included Iran's spiritual leader Ali Khamenei, President
    Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velayati
    and Ali Fallahyan, the head of the secret service. In addition, some
    of the people who were suspected to have been involved in the attacks
    against the Jewish Community Center in Argentina in 1994, which killed
    80 people, were later promoted to high-profile positions within the
    state. For instance, one of them was appointed as an ambassador to
    a country in Africa.

    Isn't it a bit unfair to put all the blame for terror activities
    around the globe on Iran?

    Absolutely not. In my book, I defend Iran from various angles. I am
    not an anti-Iranian person. Iran was accused of masterminding several
    assassinations to curtail the flourishing democratic Islamic movements
    in Algeria and Tunisia. These claims were not true. Likewise, in
    the unsolved murders against Ugur Mumcu, Bahriye Ucok, Ahmet Taner
    KıÅ~_lalı and several other Kemalist/secularist intellectuals
    in Turkey, Iran was the usual suspect. Yet, as we find out today,
    these assassinations had actually been masterminded by certain
    clandestine networks nested within the state like Ergenekon --
    a clandestine organization burrowed within the state trying to
    overthrow or manipulate the democratically elected government--
    in an effort to create certain threat perceptions in the society.

    In particular, in the post-9/11 world, more frequent references were
    made linking Islam and terrorism. But, before the collapse of the Twin
    Towers in a terrorist attack, Iran had launched a number of violent
    attacks across the globe. What is Iran's share in the formation of
    the global urge to describe Islam as a religion promoting terror?

    Iran's responsibility in this respect is of course colossal. Iran's
    terrorist activities are mainly what justify simultaneous reference to
    Islam and terror. Since Iran has been marketing its revolution as an
    "Islamic" revolution and justifying everything it does with reference
    to Islam, Iran's terror activities have come to be attributed to
    Islam. The occupation of the US Embassy in Tehran, the strengthening
    of Lebanon's Hezbollah, the bloody attacks against French and
    American soldiers and diplomats in Lebanon, the bombing of several
    oil facilities in Saudi Arabia, several cases of kidnapping people
    and hijacking airplanes, and the suspicion of Iran's involvement in
    a number of Western targets around the globe have helped people's
    minds equate Iran with terror, and Iran with Islam, and eventually,
    Islam with terror.

    Despite the fact that the revolution in Iran had dominantly Shiite
    and Persian roots, we see that Tehran managed to exercise a certain
    clout over certain Arab Sunni movements such as Hamas and the Muslim
    Brotherhood (MB). How can this be explained, given their ethnic and
    religious differences?

    A major reason for this was that there had been no alternative source
    in the Middle East that could offer support to Islamic movements.

    There had been no model regime other than Iran that had an
    anti-imperialist discourse, advocated solidarity with the
    downtrodden and claimed to have undertaken a revolution on behalf
    of Islam. For this reason, Iran has come to serve as a model for
    Islamist opposition. These organizations [Hamas and the MB] opted for
    entertaining close ties with Iran for its backing, despite pragmatic
    diversities. But in cases of the slightest conflict, Iran has been
    quick to react harshly against these organizations. For instance,
    when Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal referred to the Persian Gulf as
    the "Arabian" Gulf at a meeting, Iranian media networks launched a
    campaign against him. In this context, Hamas' invitation to Turkey
    in 2006 was important.

    Three types of radicalism on the rise in the region Can we say that
    these trends still continue in our time?

    Just like the MB, the radical Islamist movements of Turkey have tended
    to take Iran's revolution as a model. In other words, Iran's influence
    had been supra-sectarian. Yet in the Iranian political sphere, the
    Shiite vein will dominate in any conflict between Shiism and Islamic
    values. By the same token, if Persian geopolitical interests clash with
    Shiism, Iran tends to give priority to its national interests over its
    sectarian values. For instance, as regards the Azerbaijani-Armenian
    conflict, Iran lends support to Armenians, not Azerbaijanis, despite
    the presence of established religious and cultural proximity with
    Azerbaijanis. As the concrete examples of these preferences are also
    observed by Sunni Muslims in Iraq, Lebanon, Syria and elsewhere,
    Iran's influence in these groups has started to wane. Yet it is hard
    to say that this influence has completely ceased to exist.

    If Iran continues to back Shiite radicalism, as it is doing regarding
    the Syrian crisis, do you think Sunni groups will tilt toward other
    extremes like Salafism or Wahhabism?

    There are certain signs for such a shift. For example, no one would
    expect Salafis to emerge as the second biggest party out of the
    elections in Egypt, but they took the world by a big surprise to
    win the second slot after the MB. In the face of the expansion of
    Iranian Shiism after the occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq, there
    is a radical Sunnism on the rise. Thus, there is the risk that the
    energy accumulating across the Muslim world, which can be tapped into
    to promote change and transformation, may be wasted in a potential
    Sunni-Shiite conflict. In addition, there is also rising Jewish
    radicalism in the region. Today, we are witnessing the right-wing Likud
    Party shifting toward the extreme right and its coalition partners
    moving further in the same direction. All these extremist movements
    promise nothing but more than bloodshed and strife in the region.

    http://www.todayszaman.com/news-298753-irans-share-in-linking-terrorism-to-islam-is-tremendous.html

Working...
X