Iran

Say this for George Galloway: every time you think he cannot sink any lower he finds new ways to surprise you. His latest contribution to Press TV, Iran’s propaganda station, speaks for itself. Parody is pointless. Given his history and his paymasters, we would expect him to defend the Assad regime in Syria. Even so, under-estimating his ability to sniff out the true villains is never sensible. Here’s his “analysis” of the use of chemical weapons in Syria: “If there’s been any use of nerve gas it’s the rebels that used it. […] If there has been a use of chemical weapons it was al-Qaeda who used chemical weapons. Who

The installation of Hassan Rouhani as President of Iran next month heralds a new chapter for the country. It is clear that he was elected not only because it was felt — both at the highest levels and by the people — that he was best placed to negotiate with the West on Iran’s nuclear programme but also because he was the candidate most likely to appeal to reform-hungry Iranians. Rouhani is a protégé of the former president Muhammed Khatami, with whom I have had the chance to work. When he was President, I spent a whole day with him meeting political, civil society and religious leaders. Visiting him in

It’s exactly ten years since Iranian dissidents first blew the cover of a secret uranium-enrichment facility under a mountain at Natanz, in a bleak stretch of desert near Isfahan. Ever since, relations between Israel and Iran have headed inexorably towards war. Israeli leaders have insisted that they are ready to launch a military strike — unilaterally if necessary — against Iran if the uranium enrichment continues. Iranian leaders, liberals and hardliners alike, have been equally adamant that the centrifuges will continue to spin. For Israeli hawks like prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the question has been not whether to strike Iran, but when. But in the past few weeks, the diplomatic

I am pleased that Peter Oborne concedes that his co-author David Morrison was ‘foolish’ and ‘clumsy’ in his statements. Perhaps Morrison was indeed attempting ‘to be as accurate as he could about what he understood to be the facts’. But that is a statement about the understanding of Mr Oborne’s co-author, not a statement about the facts. I still cannot see how anybody who accepts that President Ahmadinejad is a Holocaust denier could have said what Mr Oborne’s co-author said last week. To recap, over at the Telegraph last week David Morrison said: ‘I have never come across a statement from Ahmadinejad saying that the Holocaust didn’t happen. He’s said

Has President Ahmadinejad ever denied the Holocaust? David Morrison, co-author with Peter Oborne of a new apologia on the Iranian ‘government’, appears to think that he has not. In a bizarre and disgraceful interview with the Telegraph, alongside his co-author, Morrison recites the main claim of their book – which is that the Iranian regime is not pursuing nuclear weapons. Oborne’s Telegraph colleague Con Coughlin too kindly skewers that claim as ‘delusional’. But even more alarming than that conspiracy theory of theirs is Morrison’s claim (uncorrected by Oborne, the Telegraph’s chief political commentator) that he has ‘never come across a statement from President Ahmadinejad saying that the Holocaust didn’t happen’.

Jack Straw cropped up in the Telegraph yesterday claiming that even if Iran does acquire nuclear weapons it wouldn’t be worth going to war over. This, it will be remembered, is the same man who as Foreign Secretary argued for full-scale military intervention in Iraq to disarm that country of Weapons of Mass Destruction which it turned out not to have. Happily, putting Straw’s advice to the test, this morning’s Telegraph contains information about Iran’s ‘Plan B’ effort to gain nuclear weaponry right under the nose of the international inspections professionals. So it looks like Jack Straw’s best advice may yet work out. And what a legacy that would leave.

The Washington Post has an important story about how the Iranian regime is preparing for post-Assad Syria. The paper reports that American and Middle Eastern governments believe that Tehran is backing a 50,000 strong militia in the hope of keeping Assad in power and, if that’s not possible, defending its interests in the aftermath of his downfall. Iran’s ultimate aim, the paper suggests, is the establishment of a client state on the coast. This would enable it to continue funneling weapons to Hezbollah in Lebanon allowing it to maintain its influence in Lebanese politics and to carry on supporting terrorist attacks against Israel. If the Assad regime does fall, it

Last night’s ceasefire is a strategic failure for Israel. While the end of military action must be welcomed, it is hard to see what Netanyahu has achieved beyond the killing of Ahmed Jabari. Despite a week of tit-for-tat missile fire, Israel secured none of its strategic objectives. In fact, in many cases it actually strengthened Hamas and diminished Israel’s security. Here’s some of the ways in which Israel has been weakened by Operation Pillar of Defence: 1) Hamas was able to break the psychological barrier of attacking Tel Aviv. No one has fired missiles at the city since 1991 when Saddam Hussein tried to undermine coalition forces in Operation Desert Storm.