1. Home

Tag Archives: Iran

Argentina and Iran have agreed to hold a joint investigation of the terrorist attack on the Jewish Community Center (AMIA) building in Buenos Aires

Published:
The foreign ministers of Iran (left) and Argentina (right) sign a memorandum of understanding to initiate a joint investigation

The foreign ministers of Iran (left) and Argentina (right) sign a memorandum of understanding to initiate a joint investigation

The AMIA building after the explosion

The AMIA building after the explosion

Evacuating the bodies.

Evacuating the bodies.

The Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires after the attack (Photo from tags.walla.co.il)

The Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires after the attack (Photo from tags.walla.co.il)

The Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires after the attack (Photo from tags.walla.co.il)

The Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires after the attack (Photo from tags.walla.co.il)

The seven senior Iranians and one Hezbollah terrorist operative for whom Argentina issued international arrest warrants

The seven senior Iranians and one Hezbollah terrorist operative for whom Argentina issued international arrest warrants


Overview
The Argentinian-Iranian Agreement

1. On January 27, 2013, Argentinian President Christina Kirchner announced that Argentina and Iran had agreed toconduct a joint investigation of the circumstances surrounding the bombing of the Jewish Community Center (AMIA) building in Buenos Aires. The July 18, 1994 attack killed 85 and wounded more than 300 (See Appendix A).

2. In light of the agreement, Argentinian Foreign Minister Héctor Timerman and Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi, who were in Ethiopia for the 20th African Union summit meeting, signed a memorandum of understanding regarding an investigation. The investigation will be carried out by a committee, as yet to be appointed, of international jurists who will be chosen by representatives of both countries, but will not be Argentinian or Iranian citizens. Committee members will be able to meet in Argentina and Iran with anyone mentioned in the materials and question them freely. It was also agreed that the memorandum would be lodged with the secretary general of Interpol, who from the beginning has been involved in the investigation and search for suspects, following an international arrest warrant issued by Argentina which is periodically renewed (Website of the Argentinian President's Office).

3. Relations between Argentina and Iran were frozen after the Argentinian authorities issued international arrest warrants for seven senior Iranians and one senior Hezbollah operative in 2006 on suspicion of involvement in the bombing. In March 2011 the Argentinian daily newspaper Diario Perfil reported that the Argentinian foreign minister had conducted secret negotiations with Iran. Their objective was a deal, in which Argentina would "forget" about the terrorist attacks on the AMIA building and the Israeli embassy in return for improved relations between the two countries. The contents of a secret document were leaked to the newspaper. They indicated that the government of Argentina had expressed its willingness to stall the investigation into the terrorist attacks attributed to Iran in return for a renewal and improvement of commercial relations with Iran (Israeli daily newspaper Haaretz, March 27, 2011). Tehran denied links to the bombing but in July offered talks with Argentina to start "shedding light" on the case (Reuters, December 5, 2011).

4. In September 2011 Argentinian President Kirchner told the UN General Assembly that Argentina was prepared to hold a dialogue with Iran and called on Iran to make good on its offer to help investigate the bombing. She added that it was "an offer to dialogue that Argentina cannot and should not turn down." The Argentinian representative to the UN remained in his seat throughout Ahmadinejad's speech, in which he attacked Israel and the United States. He did not exit the General Assembly to protest the speech along with other UN representatives. According to diplomatic sources, Argentina's motives for rapprochement with Iran are unclear, but it may be an attempt by Argentina to tighten its ties with developing nations.[1]

5. In our assessment, the agreement serves the interests of both countries. It will enable Iran to continue denying its involvement in the terrorist attacks in Argentina, in which senior members of its regime were involved. It will also facilitate Iran's attempts to change its image as a terrorism-sponsoring state and perhaps strengthen its foothold in Latin America. On the other hand, it will enable Argentina rehabilitate its ties with Iran and Iran's allies by taking the issue of the terrorist attacks carried out on Argentinian soil off the international diplomatic agenda.

Israeli Responses

6. The Israeli foreign ministry expressed "astonishment and surprise" at the agreement. Sources within the ministry said that the Argentinian authorities had already indicated that Iran was behind the attack and had even taken the necessary steps with Interpol. The agreement currently signed raised serious concerns that the appointing of a committee whose recommendations were not binding would give Iran the authority to delay the work of the committee indefinitely (Israeli foreign ministry, January 28, 2013).

7. The Israeli foreign ministry also made it clear that Israel's interest in the issue was obvious and understandable, despite the fact that the attack was carried out in Argentina and targeted Argentinians. The Argentinian investigation revealed clear parallels between the attack on the AMIA building and the attack on the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires two years previously. The proven connection between the two attacks gives Israel every right to follow the investigations and expect that both those who carried out the attack and those who sent them be brought to justice. That is especially true since to this day Israel continues to suffer from Iranian-backed terrorism throughout the world (Israeli foreign ministry, January 28, 2013).

8. The Argentinian ambassador to Israel was called to the foreign ministry in Jerusalem for clarifications. He was informed that Israel was both astonished and disappointed by the Argentinian decision to collaborate with Iran. He was also informed that Israel protested Argentina's lack of response when Israel requested information about the new procedure and how Argentina intended to bring the suspects to trial (Israeli foreign ministry, January 28, 2013).

Appendix A
The Bombing of the Jewish Community Center (AMIA) Building in Buenos Aires

9. At 0953 hours (Argentinian time) in the morning on July 18, 1994, a car bomb exploded at the entrance to the AMIA building in Buenos Aires, killing 85 people in and near the building, and injuring more than 300. A large part of the building collapsed and neighboring structures were also damaged. Investigation showed that a Renault van used to carry out the attack, driven by a Hezbollah suicide bomber.  According to forensic evaluation, the van was carrying an estimated 400 kilograms (880 lbs.) of explosives. The evacuation of the bodies took several weeks.

The Bombing of the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires

10. On March 17, 1992, a car bomb driven by a suicide bomber, in our assessment a Hezbollah operative, exploded in front of the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires. It was carrying an estimated 300 kilograms (660 lbs.) of TNT. The explosion caused a large part of the building to collapse. Twenty-nine Israelis and Argentinians were killed and 250 were wounded. The building suffered extensive damage, as did vehicles and other buildings in the area. An organization calling itself the "Islamic Jihad," a fictitious name used by Hezbollah, claimed responsibility for the attack. The organization issued a statement claiming that the attack was revenge for the IDF's killing of Hezbollah leader sheikh Abbas Musawi (the sheikh died in a targeted killing in February 1992, a month before the attack in Argentina).

11. In May 1999, following a formal investigation, the Argentinian high court accused Hezbollah of the attack and issued an arrest warrant for Imad Mughnieh, commander of Hezbollah military-terrorist wing.[2]  An investigation carried out by Israel, whose findings were made public by Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom in 2003, showed that the highest levels of the Iranian regime were aware of Hezbollah's intention to carry out the attack and had in fact authorized Hezbollah to carry it out.

The Argentinian Investigations of the Terrorist Attacks

12. The investigations carried out by the Argentinians had both high points and low points. Initially, during the presidency of Carlos Menem, the investigations proceeded slowly and claims were made that an attempt was being made to obscure the findings and conceal information. When Néstor Kirchner was appointed president in 2003 he promised to reopen the investigations and even called the negligence of the first ones "a national disgrace." While time had been lost, the investigative judges received help from intelligence agencies around the globe. Based on wiretaps and forensic evidence of the vehicles and bombs, they successfully constructed a full picture of the terrorist attacksand the chain of events leading to them, as well as the identities of those who carried them out.

13. On October 25, 2006, Dr. Alberto Nisman, the Argentinian attorney general, along with prosecutor Marcelo Martínez Burgos, revealed the findings of the AMIA investigation, carried out by a specially appointed team. The findings were issued in a report more than 800 pages long and indicated that the investigation had unequivocally determined that the decision to bomb the AMIA building had been made by the leadership of the Iranian regime and that it had been carried out by Hezbollah, which served the Iranians as a proxy for implementing their policies.

14. In light of the report, the Argentinian prosecution asked Judge Rodolfo Canicoba Corral to issue international arrest warrants for seven high-ranking members of the Iranian regime and one senior Hezbollah terrorist operative (Imad Mughnieh), all of whom had been involved in the terrorist attack in Argentina. One of the seven Iranians, some of whom still serve in high positions in the Iranian regime, was Ahmed Vahidi, Qods Force commander at the time of the attack (1994) and today Iran's minister of defense. On the other hand, a warrant was not issued for the arrest of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, even though the 2006 report explicitly stated that he had been party to the decision to bomb the AMIA building, and despite the fact that such a decision could not have been made without his authorization.

Appendix B
Reports Issued by the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center Dealing with the Terrorist Attacks in Argentina

1. November 29, 2012 – Hezbollah: Portrait of a Terrorist Organization. Hezbollah has a 30-year history of terrorist activity in Lebanon, the Middle East and around the globe, directed against Israel, the Jewish people, the United States and the West, pro-Western Arab states and Hezbollah's enemies in Lebanon.

2. August 7, 2012 – The Quds Force, an elite unit of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, spearheads Iran's global terrorist campaign. In our assessment, the terrorist attack targeting the bus of Israeli tourists in Bulgaria was carried out by Hezbollah as part of the Iranian campaign and from their point of view was the most successful to date.

3. August 30, 2009 – The report issued by the Argentinean Attorney General regarding the suicide bombing attack at the AMIA building in Buenos Aires.

4. August 26, 2009 – Ahmad Vahidi, wanted by Interpol for participation in the 1994 terrorist attack in Buenos Aires, is the new designated defense minister of Iran (still unratified by the Parliament). His nomination signals the increasing strength of the Revolutionary Guards and Ahmadinejad’s intention to continue defying the West and subverting the Middle East.

5. April 8, 2009 – Iran increases its political and economic presence in Latin America, defying the United States and attempting to undermine American hegemony. It also foments radical Shi’ite Islamization and exports Iran’s revolutionary ideology, using Hezbollah to establish intelligence, terrorism and crime networks, liable to be exploited against the United States and Israel.

6. November 14, 2007 – Iran as a terrorism-sponsoring state

7. March 28, 2007 – Following an appeal from the Argentinean Attorney General, Interpol issued international extradition warrants for five senior Iranians and one senior Hezbollah operative. The charge was involvement in the suicide bombing attack of the Jewish community center building (AMIA) in Argentina in 1994.

8. April 2, 2007 – Using the Quds Force of the Revolutionary Guards as the main tool to export the revolution beyond the borders of Iran.

9. November 14, 2007 – Iran as a terrorism-sponsoring state: Interpol rejected Iran’s appeal and issued international arrest warrants for five senior Iranians (and one senior Hezbollah operative) who were involved in bombing the Jewish Community Center in Argentina (AMIA) in Buenos Aires in 1994.

10. November 14, 2006 – Argentina accuses Iran of responsibility for the Hezbollah terrorist attack which destroyed Jewish Community Center in Buenos Aires, 1994. The Argentinean Attorney General’s office announced it had found Iran responsible for the terrorist attack and an Argentinean judge issued arrest warrants for seven senior Iranians and one senior Hezbollah member (Imad Mughnieh).

[1]http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/05/us-iran-argentina-idUSTRE7B408T20111205
[2]Imad Mughnieh died in Damascus in 2008.

Related Articles

Spotlight on Iran and the Shiite Axis (September 18 – 25 , 2024)

Spotlight on Terrorism: Hezbollah, Lebanon and Syria (September 16-23, 2024)

Reactions to the Elimination of Ibrahim Aqil and the Top Command of the Radwan Force

Hezbollah Communications Devices Explode

Spotlight on Iran

Editor: Dr. Raz Zimmt

“Iran has to prefer Syria to the Khuzestan region”: Ammar Headquarters chief’s announcement draws angry reactions
  • Hojjat-ol-Eslam Mehdi Ta’eb, chief of the Ammar Headquarters, a think tank affiliated with the radical right wing of the conservative camp, has announced that Iran needs to give more importance to Syria than to the Khuzestan region, drawing strong reactions from the Iranian media and from social networks.
  • In a speech delivered at a conference of Student Basij members, the cleric discussed the developments in Syria and said that Syria is more important for Iran than the Khuzestan region, which lies on the Persian Gulf coast. He referred to Syria as “Iran’s 35th, strategic province”, and said that, in case of a war, Iran has to give preference to keeping Syria over Khuzestan.
  • In response to Ta’eb’s remarks, the Baztab website posted a strong-worded article titled “We will not exchange Khuzestan for anything, not even for Damascus”. The website argued that the remarks made by the cleric serve the extremist groups of the Arab world, which claim sovereignty over some of Iran’s territory. The article went on to say that Iran’s opposition to foreign intervention in Syria does not make it justified to ignore the need to maintain Iran’s territorial integrity or compare Syria to Khuzestan.
  • Most news website readers and social network users also reacted angrily to Ta’eb’s remarks. Many of them mentioned the numerous casualties suffered by Iran while defending Khuzestan in the Iran-Iraq War, and some of them even accused Ta’eb of treason.
  • The storm provoked by the Ammar Headquarters chief’s remarks is yet more evidence of the power of nationalist sentiments in the Iranian public. These sentiments could also be seen in past comments made by web users on controversial statements having to do with the territorial integrity and national-cultural identity of their country.

 

Hojjat-ol-Eslam Mehdi Ta’eb, chief of the Ammar Headquarters, a think tank affiliated with the radical right wing of the conservative camp, has announced that Iran needs to give more importance to Syria than to the Khuzestan region in southwestern Iran, drawing strong reactions from the Iranian media and from social networks.

In a speech delivered at a conference of Student Basij members held in Tehran on February 14, the cleric discussed the developments in Syria and said that Syria is more important for Iran than the Khuzestan region, which lies on the Persian Gulf coast. He even referred to Syria as “Iran’s 35th, strategic province”. Ta’eb said that, if the enemy attacks Iran and wishes to take over Syria or Khuzestan, Iran’s priority should be to keep Syria. The reason, according to Ta’eb, is that, if Syria remains in Iran’s possession, it will be able to reclaim Khuzestan, but if Iran loses Syria, it will not be able to maintain its hold even on Tehran itself.

In his remarks, Ta’eb also discussed the Iranian assistance to the forces that fight at President Assad’s side. He said that the Syrian army was unable to wage war inside the cities, which is why Syria adopted Iran’s proposal and created a militia consisting of 60 thousand Hezbollah members whose mission is to wage war inside the cities.

In another part of the speech, Ta’eb discussed the political and economic situation in Iran. He argued that the main reason for the economic crisis lies in the economic sanctions, and that no Iranian government had ever faced such severe oil export sanctions before. The cleric thus adopted the claim made by the president and his supporters, according to which the economic crisis should be blamed mostly on the international sanctions rather than on the economic performance of the government, as its critics argue.

Referring to the military threats facing Iran, Ta’eb said that the only threat that faces Iran is the “Zionist regime”, which has both the motivation and the capability to attack the country. He stressed, however, that Iran, through Hezbollah, has Israel in a “lock” from which it couldn’t escape during the second Lebanon war. Speaking about the United States, Ta’eb said that it has neither the funds nor the military ability to start a war against Iran (Aftab News, February 14).

The Ammar Headquarters (قرارگاهعمار), headed by Mehdi Ta’eb, was established in early 2011 on the initiative of regime loyalists and pro-Khamenei conservatives affiliated with the radical right wing of the Iranian politics, including clerics, culture activists, Majles members, and Revolutionary Guards veterans. Its creation reflected the need felt by top officials in the conservative religious establishment to mobilize the regime’s supporters in light of the political crisis that broke out after the 2009 elections. Early on, the think tank’s members focused most of their efforts on combating the reformist opposition. Several months after it was established, however, its leaders shifted most of their attention to fighting the “deviant faction”, affiliated with the president and his controversial former office chief Rahim Masha’i.

During the elections for the Majles, held in March 2012, members of the Ammar Headquarters expanded their political activity and worked to push forward candidates belonging to the radical right wing but unaffiliated with the president’s supporters and the “deviant faction”. Key members of Ammar co-founded the Steadfast Front, supported by radical cleric Ayatollah Mohammad-Taqi Mesbah Yazdi.[1]

“Ta’eb’s remarks serve Iran’s enemies who seek to undermine its territorial integrity”

Shortly after the report on the controversial speech delivered by the head of the Ammar Headquarters surfaced, Baztab, a website affiliated with the moderate wing of the conservative camp, posted a strong-worded commentary article titled “We will not exchange Khuzestan for anything, not even for Damascus”.

The website argued that, in his remarks, Ta’eb ignored the possibility that his statement would be exploited by Iran’s enemies who seek to undermine the country’s territorial integrity. Baztab mentioned that such aspirations had been recently manifested at a conference to support the Arab minority in Khuzestan, held in Cairo (see the January 14, 2013 issue of Spotlight on Iran: “Conference in support of Khuzestani Arabs convenes in Cairo during Foreign Minister Salehi’s visit to Egypt, provoking anger from Iran”). According to the website, there are extremist groups operating in the Arab world which for several decades have claimed sovereignty over those regions in Iran where Arabs reside, and Ta’eb’s remarks lend credence to the claims made by these extremist elements.

Baztab said that Ta’eb not only spoke about prioritizing Syria over Khuzestan but also stressed the need to make use of the Basij forces to wage war in the cities of Syria. His remarks come at a time when those media that are hostile to Iran are taking advantage of the “unfounded rumors” about the presence of Iranian Basij forces in Syria to lash out against the country, and just when Iran is making considerable efforts to put an end to the bloodshed in Syria.

Syria’s role in the resistance against Israel cannot be ignored, the website argued, and since the beginning of the civil war in Syria, Iran has stressed its opposition to the intervention of foreign forces in that country and its support for gradual reforms there. However, there is a growing realization even in Iran that solving the crisis in Syria may only be possible by removing President Assad from power, as the talks that Iran has been holding recently with members of the Syrian opposition may indicate.

Iran is opposed to any kind of foreign intervention in Syria, the article said, but this does not mean that Iran’s sovereignty and territorial integrity can be ignored or that Syria can be compared to Khuzestan, a strategic, oil-rich region. The existence of an anti-Israeli government in Syria is an important strategic principle for Iran, but no military, diplomatic, or strategic official will ever suggest giving up even one inch of Iranian soil. Bringing up the issue, even if only as an example aimed to stress the importance of the subject, provokes unnecessary sensitivity. Those who fought in the Iran-Iraq War did not spend eight years on the battlefield to see part of Khuzestan’s blood-soaked soil fall into foreign hands. They fought courageously so that no one would dare set their sights on Khuzestan or any other part of Iranian soil.

What ensures Iran’s fate and superiority in the diplomatic game that it is playing with its enemies in the beginning of the 21st century is not war or weapons but rather intelligence, direction, political knowledge, and bargaining power. The interior and foreign policies as well as the media are better left to those well-versed in political science and international relations, who can turn enemies into friends and avoid unnecessary media scandals instead of instigating nationalist sentiments and foment differences of opinion. Clerics who wish to become involved in foreign policy and national security need to know that expressing an opinion about the country’s territorial integrity and national identity is a more sensitive issue than ones having to do with domestic policy, Baztab concluded.

“We will not give up Khuzestan even in exchange for all of Syria”: web users’ reactions to Ta’eb’s speech

Most news website readers also reacted angrily to Ta’eb’s remarks. Some of them personally attacked the cleric (“Is this a university lecturer or a warmonger and propagator of hatred?”, “Is he Iranian or a foreigner?”). One of the readers suggested sending Ta’eb to fight in Syria at President Assad’s side (“Perhaps we can get rid of him”). A number of readers referred to a hadith attributed to Prophet Muhammad, according to which one’s love for the homeland reflects the strength of religious faith. Speaking about the criticism voiced by Ta’eb against the “deviant faction”, one reader said that, judging by his remarks, he is a deviant himself. Another reader criticized Ta’eb’s statement and argued that the crisis that has gripped Syria for the past two years has had no negative influence on Iran’s security.

In their criticism of Ta’eb, many readers highlighted the numerous casualties suffered by Iran during its war against Iraq, and some of them went as far as to accuse Ta’eb of treason. One reader wondered how the cleric can claim that Syria takes precedence over Khuzestan after eight years of war that saw so many people killed, injured, crippled, and captured. Another reader said that, even if all that Ta’eb meant was to stress how important Syria is for Iran, he would have been advised to use a different example than Khuzestan, which is a symbol of heroism and a monument for the blood of the soldiers who died defending it. He noted that the Iranians will not agree to give up even one inch of Khuzestan—not just for Damascus, but for all of Syria—and that if a war should start against the two countries (Iran and Syria), the Iranians will only be willing to defend their own land (readers’ comments posted on Baztab, February 14).

Ta’eb’s announcement also drew interest from social networks. In the wake of the remarks, an exiled Iranian blogger posted an entry on his weblog titled “The Provinces of the Islamic Republic of Iran”, in which he enumerated Iran’s “list of provinces” in the order of priority that they are normally given in the Islamic republic. The list includes the “provinces” of Palestine, Lebanon, Venezuela, Karbala and Najaf in Iraq, North Korea, Syria, and a lengthy list of countries in Africa (http://harfhaye-nagofte-elham.blogspot.fr/2013/02/). 

The storm provoked by Ta’eb’s remarks: yet another manifestation of the strength of nationalist sentiments in the Iranian public

This is not the first time that Iranian web users have expressed their nationalist sentiments in the wake of controversial statements having to do with the territorial integrity or national-cultural identity of their country. For instance, a conference in support of the Arab residents of Khuzestan, recently held in Cairo, sparked angry reactions from web users who spoke out against expressions of separatism in Iran, lashed out against the Egyptian government and President Morsi, and demanded a strong Iranian reaction against Egypt.

In November 2010 many Iranian web users were angered by the release of a YouTube video containing excerpts from a speech made by Hassan Nasrallah, in which the Hezbollah leader discussed Iran’s Muslim identity and said that its roots are Arab rather than Persian. The release of the video provoked a storm on social networks in Iran and among Iranian exiles.

[1] For more information on the Ammar Headquarters, see Raz Zimmt, The 'Ammar Headquarters and the Challenges of the Iranian Political System, "Iran Pulse", No. 49, 5 February 2012, Tel Aviv University, Alliance Center for Iranian Studies, http://humanities.tau.ac.il/iranian/en/previous-reviews/10-iran-pulse-en/37-iranpulse-49feb5-2012.

Related Articles

Spotlight on Iran and the Shiite Axis (September 18 – 25 , 2024)

Reactions to the Elimination of Ibrahim Aqil and the Top Command of the Radwan Force

Hezbollah Communications Devices Explode

Spotlight on Iran and the Shiite Axis

Iranian subversion in Yemen: A ship with a cargo of arms originating in Iran and en route to the Shi’ite Houthi rebels in north Yemen, was recently intercepted.

Published:
Weapons and military equipment found on board the Jihan 1.

Weapons and military equipment found on board the Jihan 1.

Weapons and military equipment found on board the Jihan 1.

Weapons and military equipment found on board the Jihan 1.

Abd al-Malik al-Houthi, rebel leader, gives a speech on November 3, 2012 (YouTube.com website).

Abd al-Malik al-Houthi, rebel leader, gives a speech on November 3, 2012 (YouTube.com website).

Saudi Arabian forces secure the border with Yemen to prevent Houthi rebels from attacking, November 2009 (Hdrmut.net website)

Saudi Arabian forces secure the border with Yemen to prevent Houthi rebels from attacking, November 2009 (Hdrmut.net website)


Seizure of Weapons

1. On January 23, 2013, the Yemeni coast guard and security services intercepted the Jihan 1, a ship carrying weapons, explosives and military equipment, some of it manufactured in Iran. The ship was en route from Iran and its cargo was intended for delivery to the Houthi Shi'ite rebels in northern Yemen. An announcement issued by the Yemeni News Agency on February 6, 2013, reported that the weapons seized included 122mm Katyusha rockets, anti-aircraft surface-to-air shoulder-launched missiles, RPGs and RPG launchers, Iranian-manufactured night-vision binoculars, ground and naval target-identifying systems with ranges of 40 kilometers (25 miles), sound suppressors for automatic weapons, large quantities of high explosives (RDX and C4), electronic equipment for detonating IEDs, large quantities of ammunition for rifles and DShK heavy machine guns, and additional military equipment (Sabanews.net website).

Weapons and other military equipment seized aboard the Jihan 1[1]
(Sabanews.net website.)  Lower left picture from the Yemensaeed.com website, February 7, 2013.

Weapons and other military equipment seized aboard the Jihan 1 (Sabanews.net website.)

2. The Yemeni ministry of the interior reported that the ship was carrying 40 tons of weapons, shells and explosives. According to a source in the Yemeni administration, the weapons were destined for Sa'ada, the Houthi rebel stronghold (Agence France-Presse, February 9, 2013). The explosives were concealed in 133 plastic containers and the electronic equipment was hidden in ordinary cartons used for spare auto parts (Alsahwa-yemen.net website). On February 2, 2013, sources in the Yemeni administration told Saba, Yemen's official news agency, that in Iran the ship had been transferred to a Yemeni crew of eight who were to sail it to Yemen (Bbc.co.uk website). A member of the American administration, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told a Reuter's correspondent that seizing the weapons had been coordinated with the American Navy and that an American destroyer had been nearby (International Business Times, January 28, 2013).

3. Ali Hassan al-Ahmadi, head of Yemen's national security council, accused Iran of being behind the attempt to smuggle the weapons. He said that smuggling such a large consignment could not have been carried out by ordinary merchants or smugglers, but only by a governmental power. Iran, he said, "insists on damaging Yemen" (Agence France-Presse, February 9, 2013). Yemeni President Abd al-Rabbuh Mansur al-Hadi warned Iran not to interfere in his country's internal affairs (AP, February 9, 2013). Interior Minister Abdel-Qader Kahtan said he hoped Iran would stop "exporting" weapons to Yemen (AP, February 10, 2013).

4. American officials said the weapons on board were manufactured in Iran, and that "the pattern of the shipment matched past instances of suspected Iranian smuggling into Yemen" (ITIC emphasis).[2] According to American officials, the Iranians also have stepped up aid to rebels in the south of Yemen in recent months. Previous shipments, according to the officials, involved mainly money, small arms and explosives.[3] However, asource in the Iranian foreign ministry denied Iran's involvement in the affair (Press TV, February 4, 2013).

The Significance of the Weapons Seized

5. The large quantity of weapons seized, especially the shoulder-launched missiles, could have significantly improved the Houthi rebels' operational military capabilities. In an exclusive interview with the Wall Street Journal, American Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta accused Iran's "paramilitary force" of intensifying its campaign to destabilize the Middle East by smuggling anti-aircraft weapons to its "militant allies." He said that they were a threat to "civilian as well as military aircraft," and were a "dangerous escalation" (ITIC emphasis throughout).[4]

6. Iran regards Yemen as an important factor in its regional policies. It seeks, to establish an Iranian ground and naval presence in the countries and ports of the Red Sea which control the sea lanes from the Persian Gulf to the heart of the Middle East and Europe. In addition, Iran regards Yemen, especially the northern part of the country bordering on Saudi Arabia, as a convenient arena from which to conduct subversive activities against the Saudi Arabians, Iran's main political and religious rivals in the Middle East, while harming the United States' local and regional interests.

7. Iran's support of the Zaydi-Shi'ite Houthi rebels is part of its modus operandi in the Arab-Muslim world, in which it uses local Shi'ite communities for purposes of subversion and terrorism. The Iranian group responsible for those activities, carried out as part of exporting the Islamic Revolution, is the Qods Force, an elite unit within the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guards, Iran's long arm of subversion and terrorism.[5]

8. Iran's outstanding success in integrating a local Shi'ite community into its strategy was in Lebanon, where Hezbollah, founded by the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guards, became a powerful Lebanese and regional force and Iran's preferred proxy. Syria's Alawite regime is supported by Iran and Hezbollah because of its strategic importance (central to which is Syria's membership in the so-called "resistance camp"). However, in addition, religious and sectarian solidarity is not lacking, because Iran and Hezbollah regard the Alawites as Shi'ites. In Iraq Iran successfully established and armed Shi'ite militias which played an important role in fighting the United States and its allies and helped increase Iranian political influence in Iraq "the morning after." On the other hand, Iran's subversive and terrorist activities among the Shi'ites of Bahrain, Azerbaijan, Afghanistan and Pakistan met with difficulties and so far has not succeed in destabilizing the local regimes or in advancing Iranian interests. 

[1] The upper right hand picture was distributed by the Yemini ministry of defense. It shows Interior Minister Abdel-Qader Kahtan (left) and Ali al-Ahmadi, head of Yemen's national security agency (second from left), examining the weapons unloaded from the boat (AP, February 10, 2013).
[2] http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/29/world/middleeast/29military.html?_r=0
[3] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323926104578278231369164640.html
[4] Ibid.
[5] For further information see the August 7, 2012 bulletin “The Quds Force, an elite unit of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, spearheads Iran's global terrorist campaign.”

Related Articles

Spotlight on Iran and the Shiite Axis (September 18 – 25 , 2024)

Reactions to the Elimination of Ibrahim Aqil and the Top Command of the Radwan Force

Hezbollah Communications Devices Explode

Spotlight on Iran and the Shiite Axis

The report issued by Bulgaria about the terrorist attack in Burgas clearly indicates that Hezbollah was involved in its planning and execution.

Published:

The burned-out shell of the Israeli tourist bus at the Burgas airport (Photo courtesy of the ZAKA spokesman, July 19, 2012)
The burned-out shell of the Israeli tourist bus at the Burgas airport (Photo courtesy of the ZAKA spokesman, July 19, 2012)

Overview

1. On February 5 2013, approximately seven months after the terrorist attack in Burgas, Bulgaria issued a report of the results of its investigation of the event. According to the Bulgarian authorities, the investigation clearly indicated that Hezbollah's so-called military wing[1] was involved in planning and carrying out the attack. The Bulgarian minister of the interior, who presented the report to the Bulgarian National Security Council, said that Bulgaria possessed detailed information about the  infrastructure that had planned and carried out the attack. He added that there was reliable, well-founded information linking at least two of the three Burgas terrorists to Hezbollah (Bulgarian News Agency, Sofia, February 6, 2013). The report did not mention Iran, which is behind a global terrorist campaign against Israel, using Hezbollah as its proxy.

2. According to the report, three terrorist operatives were involved in the attack that killed five Israelis and their Bulgarian bus driver. One of the terrorists was killed in the attack. The other two carried genuine Australian and Canadian passports. The Bulgarian authorities did not publicize their names or current places of residence, but did appeal to the Australian security services for help in locating one of the suspects. According to the Bulgarian investigation, the three went from Beirut (where they lived for a period of time) to Warsaw and from there took the train to Bulgaria (New York Times, February 6, 2013). The Bulgarians also stated that the counterfeit identities and drivers' licenses found at the scene originated in Lebanon. In addition, according to the report, the terrorist operatives planned to use a remote control device to blow up the bus five or six kilometers from the airport, while it was en route to the tourists' hotel. However, for an unknown reason, possibly a "work accident," the bomb detonated while the bus was still in the airport parking lot, and one of the terrorist operatives was killed.

3. Rob Wainwright, head of the European police (Europol) said that in his opinion, the conclusion reached by the Bulgarians, namely that Hezbollah was involved in the terrorist attack, was solid and based on evidence. He added that the forensic evidence, intelligence information and previously-used modus operandi all indicated Hezbollah's involvement in the attack. However, he also said that the investigation had not led to Iran or any organization with ties to Al-Qaeda (Novinite News Agency, Bulgaria, February 6, 2013).

Initial Responses to the Report
The United States

4. John Kerry, the American Secretary of State, said in an announcement on February 5 that "The finding is clear and unequivocal: Lebanese Hizballah was responsible for this deadly assault on European soil…The United States is acting decisively and comprehensively to curtail Hizballah’s…actions [throughout the world], and we are prepared to do all within our power to assist the Government of Bulgaria in bringing those responsible for the Burgas attack to justice. We strongly urge other governments around the world – and particularly our partners in Europe – to take immediate action to crack down on Hizballah. We need to send an unequivocal message to this terrorist group that it can no longer engage in despicable actions with impunity"[2] (ITIC emphasis throughout).

5. John Brennan, Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, said in a statement on February 5, 2013, that "The United States commends the Government of Bulgaria for its professional and comprehensive investigation into the barbaric July 18, 2012 terrorist attack in Burgas…Bulgaria’s investigation exposes Hizballah for what it is – a terrorist group…that poses a real and growing threat not only to Europe, but to the rest of the world…The United States will continue to provide the Bulgarian Government assistance in bringing the perpetrators of this heinous attack to justice" (ITIC emphasis).[3]

Europe

6. A spokesman for Catherine Ashton, European Union foreign minister, said that the EU was currently examining a number of scenarios regarding Hezbollah, among them the possibility of adding it to the EU's list of terrorist organizations and initiating legal, political and diplomatic measures against it (Website of the Council of the European Union, February 5, 2013).

7. British Foreign Secretary William Hague called on the Lebanese government to cooperate fully with the investigation, stressing that the EU had to respond strongly to the attack (Website of the British Foreign Office, February 5, 2013).

Hezbollah and Iran

8. Sources within Hezbollah made it clear that the organization did not intend at this point to respond to the Bulgarian accusations. The response, said the sources, would be made by Hassan Nasrallah in a speech delivered on February 16 at the ceremony marking the anniversary of the deaths of Sheikh Ragheb Kharb and Abbas Musawi. However, Hezbollah's deputy secretary general said, without directly mentioning the findings of the Bulgarian investigation, that Israel was waging a "scare campaign" against Hezbollah throughout the world after having failed to overcome it militarily. He said that such accusations did not influence the organization and would not change its agenda, whose first priority was its "resistance to the occupation" (Al-Nahar, Lebanon, February 6, 2013).

9. Gholamreza Bageri, the Iranian ambassador to Bulgaria, denied any connection between Iran and the explosion in Burgas. He added that Iran opposed every form of terrorism, and strongly condemned terrorist activities. He emphasized that Israel's charges against Iran were baseless (Mehr News Agency, February 8, 2013).

Lebanon

10. Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Miqati said that Lebanon was prepared to cooperate with Bulgaria to shed light on the circumstances leading to the terrorist attack. Lebanese President Michel Sulaiman said an agreement had been reached to finishthe discussion of the issue after the relevant documents had been received from the Bulgarian attorney general (Lebanese News Agency, February 5, 2013).

11. The Secretariat General of the March 14 forces (a camp of Hezbollah opponents led by Saad al-Hariri) met to discuss the Bulgarian report and the possibility of including Hezbollah in the EU's list of terrorist organizations, which was liable to damage Lebanese interests. The Secretariat announced that the Lebanese were not prepared to be hostages of Hezbollah and have their own interests confront those of the rest of the world (Al-Nashra, Lebanon, February 6, 2013).

Appendix
Inclusion of Hezbollah in the EU's List of Terrorist Organizations

1. Despite the many terrorist attacks carried out by Hezbollah on European soil, so far the EU has not put Hezbollah on its list of terrorist organizations, although both Britain and the Netherlands have outlawed it in their own countries. The EU's stalling, led by France, is motivated by political considerations, among them the following:

1) The Europeans' concerns that their influence in Lebanon and relations with it might be harmed if Hezbollah were designated as a terrorist organization;

2) In our assessment, although not prominently mentioned in public, the Europeans are concerned about the safety of the UNIFIL forces and the security of various Western targets in Lebanon (with the Iranian and Hezbollah terrorist campaign in Lebanon and Europe in the 1980s still at the back of their minds);

3) Another argument stated publicly is that Hezbollah cannot be designated as a terrorist organization because in addition to what is referred to as its "military wing," it also has a political party which is represented in the Lebanese administration (parliament, government, etc.).

2. Given Hezbollah's active military support for the Assad regime in Syria, and the fear that the Syrian crisis might trickle into Lebanon, in recent months the discussions regarding the inclusion of Hezbollah in the EU's list of terrorist organizations were renewed. A more assertive stance regarding Hezbollah, encouraged by the United States, seems to be growing.

3. That encouragement was marked by the speech given in Dublin by John Brennan, Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, in which he called on the EU to include Hezbollah in its list of terrorist organizations. He called Hezbollah the number one joint American-European security challenge and called on Europe to join the United States as "counterterrorism partners." He said that while Britain and Holland had taken steps against Hezbollah's "destabilizing activities," they were insufficient, and that the rest of the EU should take similar steps. He called on the international community to be aware of Hezbollah's true nature as "an international terrorist organization actively supported by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps – Quds Force" and of its "terrorist and criminal activities," and to make attempts to condemn and disrupt those activities. He added that the European refusal to do so made it difficult for the United States to protect its citizens, and in certain instances had prevented Hezbollah suspects arrested for "plotting in Europe" from being prosecuted on charges of terrorism.[4]

4. It is possible that the findings of the Bulgarian ministry of the interior, which clearly indicate Hezbollah's involvement in the terrorist attack, will strengthen recognition of the need to include Hezbollah in the EU list of terrorist organizations and hasten a European deliberation of the issue. The findings may reinforce the statement made by the Cypriote foreign minister, currently president of the EU, immediately following the terrorist attack in Bulgaria, who said that the EU might change its mind if presented with "tangible evidence" of Hezbollah's involvement in terrorism (Agence France-Presse, July 24, 2013).

5. For an in-depth analysis of including Hezbollah in the EU list of terrorist organizations, see the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center study "Portrait of Hezbollah as a Terrorist Organization."

 

[1] In general the European Union uses the expression "Hezbollah's military wing" to differentiate between what it perceives as Hezbollah's military-terrorist wing, which carries out terrorist attacks, and its "political" wing, which is a part of the Lebanese parliament, and is integrated into the Lebanese administration. In point of fact they are one and the same and there is no difference between the military and political wings. Senior Hezbollah figures have themselves denied that there is a difference between their "military" and "political" wings.
[2] http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/02/203796.htm
[3] http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/02/05/statement-assistant-president-homeland-security-and-counterterrorism-joh
[4] http://london.usembassy.gov/europe070.html

Related Articles

Spotlight on Iran and the Shiite Axis (September 18 – 25 , 2024)

Spotlight on Terrorism: Hezbollah, Lebanon and Syria (September 16-23, 2024)

Reactions to the Elimination of Ibrahim Aqil and the Top Command of the Radwan Force

Hezbollah Communications Devices Explode

Bulgaria reportedly issues an account accusing Hezbollah of the terrorist attack in Burgas

Published:
The Hezbollah attack in Bulgaria

The Hezbollah attack in Bulgaria

The remains of the Israeli tourist bus at the Burgas airport (Photo courtesy of the ZAKA spokesman, July 19, 2012)

The remains of the Israeli tourist bus at the Burgas airport (Photo courtesy of the ZAKA spokesman, July 19, 2012)

The burned-out bus at the scene of the attack at the Burgas airport (Photo courtesy of the ZAKA spokesman, July 19, 2012).

The burned-out bus at the scene of the attack at the Burgas airport (Photo courtesy of the ZAKA spokesman, July 19, 2012).


Overview

1. According to reports based on an article in the Wall Street Journal this past week, this week Bulgaria is expected to release a report about its investigation of the terrorist attack in Burgas. The report is expected to accuse Hezbollah of responsibility for the attack. According to Wall Street Journal, Tsvetan Tsvetanov, the Bulgarian minister of the interior, will update senior members of the Bulgarian government on February 5 and the report itself will be published (Wsj.com website, February 5, 2013). So far we have no further information about the findings of the investigation.

The Attack In Burgas

2.  On July 18, 2012, at approximately 1730 in the evening there was an explosion in an Israeli tourist bus at the airport of the vacation city of Burgas, Bulgaria. It occurred a short time after a plane from Israel had landed. The bus was the second in a line of four waiting to take the Israelis from the airport to hotels in the city. The blast killed five Israeli civilians and their Bulgarian bus driver. The terrorist bomber who blew up the bus was also killed. Thirty-six Israelis were wounded, three of them critically.

3. The terrorist attack in Burgas was another in a series of terrorist attacks on Israeli tourists and representatives around the world (Turkey, India, Thailand, Kenya, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Cyprus). The footprints of the attacks led to Iran and its proxy, Hezbollah. Hezbollah, as usual, denied any connection to the attack in Burgas.[1]

4. Israeli spokesmen, the prime minister among them, repeatedly stated that Israel had reliable intelligence information that Hezbollah had carried out the attack in Burgas ("absolutely rock-solid intelligence," Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu told FOX TV on July 22, 2012). A short time before the attack a Hezbollah terrorist operative was detained in Cyprus. He had been collecting information about Israeli tourist destinations on the island. In addition, Hezbollah has participated in other terrorist attacks as part of Iran's terrorist campaign.

5. The body of the terrorist operative was found near the bus. In our assessment, his death was a "work accident," caused by the bomb's detonating earlier than planned. According to the Bulgarian minister of the interior, the terrorist operative was carrying about three kilograms, or 6.6 lbs., of explosives (Agence France-Presse, July 20, 2012). A driver's license belonging to an American citizen was found. Senior American sources reported that no such license was found in any database in the United States (AP, July 19, 2012). The Bulgarian authorities are of the opinion that the bomber was not working alone and that he had at least one person assisting him and providing him with logistical support. According to evaluations, that person tried to rent a car to drive to the airport (AP, July 19, 2012).

To the Full Document in PDF Format Click Here

[1] For further information see the November 29, 2012 bulletin “Hezbollah: Portrait of a Terrorist Organization.”

Related Articles

Spotlight on Iran and the Shiite Axis (September 18 – 25 , 2024)

Spotlight on Terrorism: Hezbollah, Lebanon and Syria (September 16-23, 2024)

Reactions to the Elimination of Ibrahim Aqil and the Top Command of the Radwan Force

Hezbollah Communications Devices Explode

Spotlight on Iran

Editor: Dr. Raz Zimmt

       "The Islamic republic is looking for a monkey to fly the new fighter plane”: web reactions to newly unveiled scientific achievements
  • The announcement released by the Iranian Space Agency on the launch of Iran’s first monkey into space has drawn considerable interest from the media and social networks these past several days. In addition to expressions of pride in the achievement, there was also criticism of the fact that such enormous financial resources were invested in the space launch at a time that Iran’s economy is in crisis. Some of the news website readers expressed their pride, while others had reservations about the launch and said that it was intended only for propaganda.
  • The doubts raised by media in the West over the reliability of the report on the space launch generated some interest in Iran as well. Earlier this week the Asr-e Iran website criticized the way that the directors of the Iranian Space Agency handled the affair and demanded that they release proof of their claim that the monkey was launched into space and returned safely to Earth.
  • Qaher-313, a new fighter plane with supposedly state-of-the-art technological capabilities unveiled on Saturday, February 2, is also drawing considerable interest online, as are the doubts raised by the West about this other achievement. Once again, expressions of pride over the report were mixed with criticism of the project’s economic justification.

 

The announcement released by the Iranian Space agency on the launch of Iran’s first monkey into space has drawn considerable interest from the Iranian media and from social networks these past several days. In addition to expressions of pride in the scientific achievement, there was also criticism of the fact that such enormous financial resources were invested in the space launch at a time that Iran’s economy is in crisis. The launch of the monkey into space also provoked some mocking reactions, which intensified in the wake of doubts over the reliability of the official report on the issue. The doubts were caused by differences between the pictures of the monkey before and after the space flight.

The report began drawing a great deal of interest from the media, news website readers, and social network users shortly after the release of the initial announcement on the launch of the monkey into space. A number of internet users expressed their pride in the allegedly successful launch and had praise for the Iranian scientists and the scientific achievement that they made. Other internet users, on the other hand, had reservations about conducting a space launch at a time that Iran’s economy is faced with a crisis, and even argued that it was a move intended only for propaganda.

A reader on the Alef website said that it would be better if the ingenuity and impressive capabilities that went into the launch of the monkey into space could also be seen in the sphere of economy and foreign policy. Another internet user commented on the report about Iran’s intention to launch its first astronaut into space in the future, and wondered why sending a man into space is more important than completing all the projects that the government has yet to complete across the country. “What is the point of launching a man into space with conditions being what they are right now?” yet another internet user wondered, claiming that the only purpose of the space launch was to send a message to the West that Iran is capable of carrying out such an experiment even when the sanctions imposed on the country are at their maximum.

The criticism over the considerable cost of the space launch intensified this weekend in the wake of a statement made by Dr. Hamid Fazeli, the head of the Iranian Space Agency, who said that the launch cost around 2 to 3 billion tomans. “Is the launch more important than bread on the people’s table?” one internet user wondered. Another said that launching a monkey into space is a welcome move provided that it does not prevent those in charge of the country from taking care of the important matters facing Iran. Yet another internet user said that the space launch is without a doubt a source of national pride for every Iranian, but wondered if it was appropriate to carry it out at a time that the citizens of the country are plagued by severe economic problems.

Not all internet users joined in the criticism of the cost of the space launch. A number of them said they were satisfied with and proud of the achievement, arguing that it is incorrect to examine every scientific achievement through an economic lens and bring the price of bread into everything. While the government does have to solve the problems of the citizens, one internet user wrote, it also needs to think about the scientific achievements of the country. He noted that not everything should be measured against bread, and expressed his hope that the next government will be able to provide bread as well as guarantee Iran’s dignity. His view was shared by another internet user, who said that it is incorrect to put everything on hold for the sake of bread: the missile industry, the space program, nuclear energy, cinema, soccer, universities, and entertainment centers.

In a response to those who support the launch of the monkey into space despite its high cost, one internet user said that while scientific progress really is important, there is no reason for such heavy expenses and adventurous experiments while the government can’t even guarantee the basic needs of its citizens. Countries with similar levels of technology make the living conditions of their citizens their first priority, he added.

The launch of the monkey, named “Aftab”, also drew satirical comments from internet users. A blogger posted an “exclusive interview” with the monkey, who talked about the experiences he had had during the training period and the space flight itself. The monkey “admitted” that he was forced to volunteer for the mission after being abducted by the Ministry of Intelligence and transferred to Evin prison in Tehran, where he underwent harsh interrogations in which he was accused of being a rabbit. He eventually cracked under the pressure and volunteered “to go out into Islamic space to eliminate the oppressive Israel and the imperialist America”, on the condition that he would be recognized as a “Basij astronaut”.

The monkey went on to say that a considerable portion of his training was dedicated to prayer, fasting, and spiritual strengthening. He was unable to move during his time in space since he was tied to his seat, which is why his routine consisted mostly of praying and listening to speeches given by radical cleric Mohammad Taqi Mesbah Yazdi and Guardian Council chairman Ahmad Jannati. He was also greatly influenced by the sermons of Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami, Tehran’s Friday prayer leader. He added that, at one point, he was unsure whether he was allowed by Islamic law to perform his religious duties during his time in space, which got him into a spiritual crisis. To strengthen his spirit, the ground control station created a live video session with the monkey during which he was read fragments from sermons delivered by two top conservative clerics Ayatollah Safi Golpayegani and Ayatollah Nasser Makarem Shirazi. This put the “light of faith” back in his heart.

When asked about his plans for the future, the monkey replied that there are projects in the works to launch Muslims into space and then to heaven, and also to discover a planet with the right conditions for public prayer. At the end of the “interview”, the monkey said he would like to share several slogans with the readers (in a paraphrase of the slogans commonly heard during the Iran-Iraq War): “The way to Jerusalem goes through Mars”, “War, war, until the conquest of the Sun in space”, “Rocket, rocket until victory”, “God, God, watch over [Ahmad] Jannati until the next galaxy” (http://kerdarnik.blogspot.com/2013/02/blog-post_5091.html).

The daily Qanun also released an “interview” with the space-faring monkey. In the interview, which was then reposted on the Fararu website, the monkey said that it was his economic distress that made him go to space. Even though he has been working for 10 years, he still has no insurance and he hasn’t received a paycheck in 6 months. He couldn’t buy bananas for his family as a result of the price increases. He used to buy bananas for his wife who then made banana milk for their children, but that is not possible anymore. Working in the circus is no longer an option either, he said, because the economic crisis does not allow the people to spend money on circus entertainment. This is why he was forced to go on a mission to space.

When asked whether he would agree to take part in another launch into space, the monkey said that he would not. Given last week’s arrest of several journalists affiliated with the reformists by Iran’s authorities, the monkey suggested sending journalists instead of monkeys next time, on the condition that—unlike the monkey—they do not come back (Fararu, January 31).

As could be expected, the doubts on the reliability of the report about the launch of the monkey into space drew mocking comments from news website readers and social network users. The Asr-e Iran website, too, criticized the way that the directors of the Iranian Space Agency handled the affair and demanded that they release proof of their claim that the monkey was launched into space and returned safely to Earth.

The website said that the very fact that Iran has reached the level of science and technology that allows it to make achievements in space exploration is a source of pride for all Iranians. Even if the recent experiment ended in a failure, there is nothing wrong with that, since malfunctions and errors in experiments having to do with the space industry are commonplace and acceptable even in such countries as the United States, Russia, and China. Iran’s entry into the domain of space is more important than defeat or victory in any particular experiment.

However, Asr-e Iran criticized the way that the directors of the Iranian Space Agency handled Western media reports on the differences between the images of the monkey before and after the launch, which made a top official at the agency go on record on February 3 saying that some of the pictures released by the Western media were archive photos taken during the launch preparation stage of the project, in which a number of different monkeys were used.

The website argued that the launch video posted on the official website of the Iranian Space Agency not only did not put the rumors to rest but quite on the contrary further contributed to the doubts surrounding the issue, since it too shows considerable differences between the pictures of the monkey before and after the space flight. The rumors that have come up on the issue generate doubts over Iran’s technological progress in space exploration and the directors of the agency should therefore release filmed evidence and honestly admit the errors made during their work. They should know that Iran’s acquisition of space technology is much more valuable than these and other similarly inconsequential issues (Asr-e Iran, February 2).

Qaher-313, a new fighter plane with supposedly state-of-the-art technological capabilities unveiled on Saturday, February 2, is also drawing considerable interest online, as are the doubts raised by the West about this other achievement. Once again, expressions of pride over this report by some news website readers were mixed with criticism and mockery. One reader on the Alef website said that it would be better to curb the inflation rate instead of building an advanced fighter plane. An exiled Iranian blogger commented on the newly unveiled fighter plane by posting a report saying that, having successfully completed the experiment of launching the monkey into space and returning it to Earth, and having unveiled the new Qaher-313 fighter plane, the Islamic republic is now looking for a “donkey monkey” to fly the new fighter plane (http://tweatter.blogspot.ca/2013/02/blog-post.html).

Related Articles

Spotlight on Iran and the Shiite Axis (September 18 – 25 , 2024)

Reactions to the Elimination of Ibrahim Aqil and the Top Command of the Radwan Force

Hezbollah Communications Devices Explode

Spotlight on Iran and the Shiite Axis