The Birmingham Post – As Iran’s stance becomes increasingly hostile towards the West, Lord Corbett of Castle Vale, argues the country’s leaders are raising their voices to veil their own fears.
Since Iran’s unelected ‘Supreme Leader’, Ali Khamenei, appointed Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to the post of president, dealing with the threat posed by the fundamentalist regime has challenged the international community.
President Ahmadinejad has ranted and raved about wiping Israel off the map, his regime sponsors terrorism and foments crises in Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine, and it pursues nuclear weapons. At home, the level of oppression has reached unprecedented levels, with hundreds of Iranians, including child offenders, having been executed during 2006.
So why is it that the mullahs do not abandon their support for terrorism and play a constructive role in the Middle East? More importantly, why do they not suspend their nuclear activities, even for a short period, despite all of the incentives offered to them? This inflexibility appears inexplicable in light of the consequences for Iran, including tougher sanctions, further isolation, and ultimately a potential military confrontation with the West.
Logic suggests that any step back in their oppressive policies at home and confrontational policies abroad would have even graver consequences.
The mullahs have in an ironic way learned lessons from the last years of the Shah’s rule. Following his election in 1977, US President Jimmy Carter called on the Shah to respect human rights and allow freedom of assembly. In response, the Shah reigned in his security forces who until then had been given carte blanche to arrest, imprison, torture and even execute dissidents, as a means of controlling the populace.
The consequences were immediate. The slight relaxation in the level of oppression was the crack the Iranian people needed to secure their revolution.
The Shah oppressed the Iranian people through the imprisonment of a few thousand dissidents and the execution of a few hundred. In contrast, the mullahs have imprisoned hundreds of thousands of dissidents and executed more than 120,000. This illustrates the level of discontent.
According to the regime’s own surveys, more than 94 per cent oppose the entirety of their regime and there were more than 4,000 anti-regime protests and demonstration during 2006.
The EU still believes it can convince Iran to desist from its present course. In this state of delusion, the EU "engaged" with Iran over its nuclear programmes, buying the regime five years to advance their programmes after the main opposition coalition, National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), blew the whistle on Iran’s 18-years of deceit.
The West also handed Iraq to the Iranian regime on a plate, initially turning a blind eye to the thousands of Revolutionary Guards and mullahs who spilled across the border in the immediate aftermath of the war in Iraq. Since then, Iran has managed to dominate the country by funding and arming Shi’ite militia responsible for widespread bloodshed across Iraq, including attacks on British troops.
However, in June 2006, 5.2 million Iraqis signed a statement declaring, "Iran’s rulers want to dominate this part of the world and have turned Iraq into a hunting ground and the frontline of their war with the international community in a bid to curb the struggle for democracy against dictatorship in this country before it reaches Iran."
Last month, Iran’s main opposition and the largest member organisation of the NCRI, the People’s Mojahedin Organisation of Iran (PMOI), revealed details of 32,000 Iraqis, including government officials and members of the security services, who were on the payroll of Tehran. These individuals included officials of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, an Iranian formed and financially supported Iraqi group.
Interestingly, the 5.2 million Iraqis added, "The solution and the only encouraging prospect for neutralising these threats come through eviction of the Iranian regime from Iraq and recognition of the status of the PMOI, which is the principal bulwark against the Iranian regime’s interventions."
Yet, in an act of appeasement not seen since the Munich Agreement with Hitler’s Germany, the West proscribed the PMOI at the behest of Tehran. The EU even promised, in 2004, that if Iran complied with the West’s nuclear demands, it would "continue to regard the PMOI as a terrorist organisation". This was the greatest gift to the mullahs and denies the Iranian Resistance the recognition it demands and deserves.
On December 12, 2006, the European Court of Justice handed down a landmark judgment which annulled a decision by the EU in 2002 to proscribe the PMOI and freeze its funds. Declaring the actions of the EU unlawful, the ECJ stated that the PMOI’s rights to a fair hearing and effective judicial protection were infringed.
Yet, despite all of the threats posed by the Iranian regime, the Foreign Office, hell bent on appeasement, has shamefully persuaded the EU to defy the ruling of the ECJ, infuriating Parliamentarians across Europe.
As the dust settles from Mr Ahmadinejad’s empty mouthings, the signs of defeat are becoming clearer for him and his fellow Revolutionary Guards commanders. On the nuclear front, the UN Security Council has applied sanctions, which will only toughen as Iran refuses to comply with UN demands. In Iraq, the US and Britain are finally confronting the Iranian regime by targeting its agents responsible for the supply of money and arms to Shi’ite militia.
Now is the time for the West to put an end to its failed policy of appeasement by de-listing the PMOI, at a stroke helping the fledgling Iraqi democracy and giving new hope to those yearning for democracy and human rights in Iran. In pursuit of this goal, a cross-party group of 35 MPs and Peers, including former Ministers, have taken the unprecedented step of beginning legal proceedings against the British Government.