as
A high-ranking diplomat of the Iranian regime has officially been convicted of plotting a terrorist attack in the heart of Europe. The verdict that was handed down by a Belgian federal court on Thursday is the strongest official confirmation that has ever been presented regarding the overlap between Iran’s terrorist activity and its diplomatic networks. In its wake, the international community must seriously reconsider its approach to the Iranian regime’s affairs and take proactive steps to prevent the emergence of new terrorist threats.
The principal defendant in the Belgian case, Assadollah Assadi was employed as third counsellor at the regime’s embassy in Vienna in 2018 when he smuggled 500 grams of the high-explosive TATP onto a commercial flight from Iran, then handed it off to a pair of co-conspirators at a meeting in Luxembourg. The bomb was fortunately intercepted by Belgian law enforcement before the terrorists were able to cross into France where they planned to bomb the annual “Free Iran” gathering organized by the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI).
While Belgium quickly determined that Assadi had been operating upon the direction of high authorities in the Iranian regime, the NCRI was soon able to clarify that the orders had come from the regime’s Supreme National Security Council following input from both the regime’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and President Hassan Rouhani.
The implication of both these figures flew in the face of optimistic Western narratives regarding divisions between a hardline faction associated with Khamenei and a so-called “moderate” faction associated with Rouhani. This in turn undermined the praise that some Western officials had heaped upon Rouhani’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, but it also helped to make sense of the fact that the 2018 terror plot had been channeled through a prominent Iranian embassy, where no major operations would be undertaken without the awareness and consent of the Foreign Minister.
As well as establishing that Assadi was not acting on his own initiative, the Belgian investigation determined that his activities in Europe extended far beyond the specific plot in question. Documents recovered from his vehicle showed that he had visited operatives in at least 11 European countries, often providing them with cash payments for as yet unknown services, and had taken notes about various points of interest including those associated with the support of terrorist proxies like Hezbollah.
This information goes to show that the case at hand is not entirely resolved, while the involvement of the regime’s figures like Rouhani and Zarif raises questions about the quantity and scope of other networks that may be operating under the leadership of other diplomat-terrorists like Assadi. These concerns were underlined by British Member of Parliament Matthew Offord on Thursday in comments he delivered as part of an online conference organized by the NCRI in order to discuss the conclusion of the terror case.
“Following today’s verdict, it would be a mistake to think this case is now over and closed,” he said. “The case is now open because the real perpetrators are free among the Iranian leaders in Tehran.”
.@Offord4Hendon: Following today’s verdict, it would be a mistake to think this case is now over and closed. The case is now open because the real perpetrators are free among the Iranian leaders in Tehran. #EUTime4FirmIranPolicy #Iran https://t.co/tPmSoeOgX5
— NCRI-FAC (@iran_policy) February 4, 2021
Offord was one of more than two dozen lawmakers and foreign policy experts from across Europe and the Americas who took part in that conference. All of them highlighted the importance of viewing Thursday’s verdict as a steppingstone toward broader efforts to hold the clerical regime’s officials accountable for this and other instances of terrorism and political violence.
Many speakers underlined that the logical first step in that effort involves the enforcement of consequences for Javad Zarif. Ingrid Betancourt, a former Columbian presidential candidate, declared that Zarif “must understand that he is not welcome in Europe” and that “our leaders and government must refrain from inviting him to Europe to talk.” Similar demands were expressed by other participants in the NCRI conference who oppose the Western policies toward the Iranian regime, with many urging a general downgrade in both diplomatic and trade relations.
Last month, two public statements – one from the International Committee in Search of Justice and one from a coalition of more than 50 members of the European Parliament – insisted that a 1997 statement from the Council of the European Union made it incumbent upon the multinational body to take just such an action in response to signs that Iran has failed to “respect the norms of international law” or to “refrain from acts of terrorism.”
Both statements rightly called for the international community to present the Iranian regime with clear conditions for the future restoration of normal relations. Specifically, they demanded that Tehran provide clear evidence it has dismantled its terrorist networks and has made a firm commitment to never again pursue terrorist objectives on European soil.
Clearly communicating this ultimatum would be a promising start to an overall shift toward more assertive policies toward the mullahs’ regime. And whether or not a given policymaker or government actually expects the regime to comply, everyone who participated in issuing this demand would be poised to similarly follow up with scrutiny for the regime’s officials and institutions, potentially leading to the expulsion or prosecution of those who currently aspire to be the next Assadi.
