Quantcast
Channel: Respect: SALAM ALQUDS ALAYKUM – سلام القدس عليكم
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 27504

Finian Cunningham: Leader’s Fatwa Against Nuclear Weapons Highly Significant

$
0
0

Finian Cunningham: Leader’s Fatwa Against Nuclear Weapons Highly Significant
TEHRAN (FNA)- In the wake of the new round of talks between Iran and the six world powers in the Swiss city of Geneva, Irish journalist and author Finian Cunnigham says that Iran has adopted sufficient measures to provide transparency in its nuclear program, and now it’s up to the United States and its allies to respond to Iran’s confidence-building measures by lifting the cruel economic sanctions.
“Now, if the Iranian team presents such a roadmap, that is indisputably reasonable and verifiable, then it is incumbent on the Western powers to immediately reciprocate with relieving sanctions. If these Western powers do not reciprocate in a commensurate manner with the Iranian proposals then that is a bad sign that these opponents are not serious about finding a negotiated settlement,” Finian Cunningham said in an exclusive interview with Fars News Agency.
Cunningham believes that the dominant Israeli lobby in the United States is pushing the administration and the Congress to ramp up the sanctions and abandon diplomacy, but the onus is on the wise US politicians and lawmakers to resist the influential Israeli lobby and take up a realistic, conciliatory and constructive approach toward Iran.
He also says that the fatwa (religious decree) issued by Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei can serve as a robust basis for the negotiations between Iran and the six world powers and should be considered an important confidence-building measure adopted by Iran.
Finian Cunningham is an Irish journalist who has worked for 20 years with The Mirror, Irish Times and Independent. His writings appear on several news websites and magazines including Press TV and Strategic Culture Foundation.
What follows is the text of FNA’s interview with Mr. Cunningham.

Q: The United States and its allies claim that they are concerned about Iran’s nuclear activities, fearing that Iran may develop a nuclear weapon one day. Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei has issued a fatwa (a religious decree) against the development of nuclear weapons, saying that it is forbidden according to the Islamic theology. Why don’t the Western powers rely on this important declaration and consider it the most binding confidence-building measure Iran can take?

A: The fatwa issued by Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei against the acquisition and use of nuclear weapons is highly significant – to any reasonable, open-minded person. It is a powerful confidence-building measure. However, the fact that the fatwa has not been taken with the seriousness that it deserves by the US government and its Western allies demonstrates, in my view, the underlying problem that these Western powers are not treating Iran with mutual respect. It seems that the Western leaderships, as distinct from the Western ordinary public, harbor a pejorative view of Iran.
That view is based largely on hostility and suspicion towards Iran, therefore the eminent words of the Ayatollah are not given the attention that they deserve. Recall that the American chief negotiator at the current P5+1 talks, Wendy Sherman, recently made a disgraceful comment before the US Congress in which she said “deception is part of the Iranian DNA”. That disparaging comment about the nation of Iran reflects a lot about the prejudiced and even racist attitude of Western ruling entities.
Another part of the problem is decades of Western propaganda against Iran, which claims that Iran is a supporter of international terrorism and that Iran is a rogue state. The people in positions of power in the US, Britain and other Western states are imbued with this kind of pejorative, institutionalized thinking towards Iran, and therefore any reasonable, dignified statements made by Iran will always be disadvantaged by Western prejudice. This prejudice may be broken down eventually through the force of Iran’s wisdom, but it nonetheless is a factor that militates against efficient negotiations on the short term.

Q: It can be evidently seen that many Iranians are doubtful and uncertain about the future of their country’s talks with the United States, citing the long history of US interference in Iran’s internal affairs and its attempts to destabilize Iran following the Islamic Revolution in 1979. How can the United States win Iran’s trust and present itself as a reliable negotiating partner for Iran?

A: If the US and its Western allies are serious about a peaceful, negotiated resolution of the nuclear dispute, then they are obligated to lift the economic sanctions on Iran in a prompt and commensurate manner.
From my understanding, the Iranian negotiating team, led by Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif and Abbas Araqchi, is presenting detailed and verifiable proposals that will show convincingly that the Iranian nuclear program is for solely peaceful, civilian purposes, which is the inalienable right of the Iranian people.
Now, if the Iranian team presents such a roadmap, that is indisputably reasonable and verifiable, then it is incumbent on the Western powers to immediately reciprocate with relieving sanctions. If these Western powers do not reciprocate in a commensurate manner with the Iranian proposals then that is a bad sign that these opponents are not serious about finding a negotiated settlement. We will have to see what emerges from the latest second round of negotiations in Geneva.  But certainly, in my view, these sanctions are illegal and draconian in the first place because of their impact on Iranian civilians and because of their groundless presuppositions. The moral and legal onus on the Western states is to lift their embargo on Iran at the earliest opportunity. If they do not do this, especially in the light of Iranian efforts to offer guarantees way beyond Iran’s legal obligations, then that is an ominous sign of intransigence and innate hostility on the part of the US and its allies towards Iran.

Q: In the past, the United States explicitly pursued a path of threatening Iran with sanctions and a military strike ahead of each round of nuclear talks. However, it is now showing that it has changed its tone and approach, of course to a minimum degree, and is seemingly taking a more rational and realistic attitude toward the talks with Iran, understanding that negotiations will only bear fruit if they’re done based on mutual respect. What’s your viewpoint on that? Why has this change occurred?

A: I think Iran must proceed very cautiously and skeptically. Yes, indeed, the US and its allies have in effect been waging an undeclared war against Iran for the past 34 years. Think of the economic embargo, the covert Western-sponsored terrorist campaigns inside Iran, the assassination of Iranian scientists, the unlawful detention of Iranian citizens in the US, the continual verbal threats of military attack, including the use of nuclear weapons as per Hillary Clinton saying that Iran would be annihilated if it attacked Israel. All such belligerent, institutionalized thinking on the part of the US political establishment has to be weighed against a very sudden, nascent move towards diplomacy.
The onus is very much on the US and its allies to prove their very belated purported bona fides. One must remain healthily skeptical about the real motives. Could it be that, for example, the US and its allies want to engage Iran in order to facilitate their political agenda for regime change in Syria? Or could it be to cause political fragmentation within Iran by engaging Iranian leadership in a futile negotiation process? All will be revealed in the course of time.

Q: Don’t you consider it an exercise of double standards that Israel, with a confirmed arsenal of nuclear weapons, is immune to the inspections of the IAEA and is not subject to any kind of investigation or punishment because of its underground nuclear activities, while Iran has been bearing the brunt of hard-hitting sanctions because of pursuing a sovereign, peaceful nuclear program?

A: The double standard and moral bankruptcy is glaring like a mid-day sun. It is astounding that such an absurd double think continues to be tolerated by Western states. It is a depressing sign of how much mis-education, misinformation, brainwashing and indoctrination has been infiltrated on the Western public for decades by their governments and media. It is a sad reflection of how unjust this world is when such an outrage against international law and morality is tolerated. Hopefully, that is beginning to change, in part because of Iran’s outreach to the world and because of growing political consciousness among the Western public, which realizes that the genocidal Zionist state of Israel is an affront to international law and morals.

Q: It seems that the Arab states of the Persian Gulf region and Israel are immensely afraid of a possible Iran-West rapprochement and détente and have voiced concern on the talks between Iran and the six world powers. What can be the reasons for this apprehension and uneasiness?

A: The Persian Gulf Arab dictatorships of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates are totally in league with the criminal Zionist regime in Israel. Their combined existence is totally dependent on the suppression of democratic freedom in the Middle East. Given their precarious positions of elite oppression, any opening towards democracy and peaceful relations is a complete anathema to these regimes. They can only survive by perpetuating a state of conflict, sectarianism and strife. Any move to normal, decent and democratic relations must be resisted at all costs by these regimes. That is why the ruling class of these regimes is petrified by a diplomatic process that might result in normalizing relations with Iran. A major part of these rulers’ existence has been predicated on accusations that Iran is a “rogue state” and “a threat”. Well, if that premise is removed then the foundation of these states is threatened, and would likely implode. Iranian development and influence in the region is a threat to their despotism.

Q: The Obama administration pretends to be struggling with the hardliners and the dominant Israeli lobby in the Congress and those who persistently call for sanctions and war against Iran. Now if we come to believe that such frictions between the White House and the Congress are for real, how should President Obama resist the internal pressures and overcome the difficulties that certain elements are creating for him in the path of diplomacy with Iran?

A: This question presumes that the US administration is genuine about a diplomatic rapprochement with Iran. That presumption is debatable. We will have to see what comes out of the current round of negotiations in Geneva.
So far, the Obama administration has not shown much sign that it is willing to stand up to the Israeli regime over the latter’s belligerent assertions and accusations against Iran. Only a few weeks ago, Obama repeated ridiculous and scurrilous claims that Iran “may be one year away from building a nuclear weapon”. At every opportunity, the White House kowtows to Tel Aviv like a pathetic uncle pandering to a brat child.
As you say, the Zionist lobby in Congress and its influence over the 500 or so US lawmakers is immense. This is the product of decades of propaganda and indoctrination. That is why expectations of a diplomatic breakthrough on the nuclear issue with Iran should be tempered with skepticism and realism. The recent diplomatic opening between Iran and the US and its allies is a very worthwhile attempt to break an unnecessary deadlock, a deadlock manufactured by the West and its Zionist lobby – but the process will be arduous. It is like trying to have a conversation with a brainwashed robot. A lot of re-programming and re-learning needs to be done for progress to be made – assuming that the other party is at least open to genuine progress. That remains to be seen.

Q: Iran has offered a proposal to the six world powers, saying that it’s ready to take confidence-building steps and adopt certain measures through providing more transparency in the nuclear activities. However, the Western powers haven’t yet indicated that they’re ready to lift the sanctions, which Iran says is an integral part for any deal to be struck. How should the West respond to the goodwill President Rouhani and his team have shown in the recent months?

A: As mentioned already, the West needs to make amends promptly for its illegal embargo on Iran by revoking these trade sanctions immediately, and especially after Iran presents a foolproof roadmap for verifying its nuclear program.

The Western powers will in that instance no longer have a leg to stand on. They never did. Their case is all based on propaganda and prejudice. If Iran presents an irrefutable case and roadmap showing the country’s nuclear program is civilian and they can prove it so, then the Western powers do not have a leg to stand on for the continuation of their aggressive sanctions. Iran should think about retaining a panel of international scientists and legal experts who can substantiate that the Iranian case is objectively irrefutable. Now, if the West still persists in its games to undermine and hassle Iran that will be proof that these powers are structurally, intrinsically enemies of the Islamic Republic.
Interview by Kourosh Ziabari

Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 27504

Trending Articles