Sunday, September 29, 2013

Unfair, Unjust and Illogical Accusation.

In response to my latest article titled "Rouhani's Statement about the Holocaust and Christiane Amanpour's big misinterpretation", someone has left a comment for me and accused me of being a Zionist apologist. In response to this unfair, unjust and illogical accusation, I have to bring the attention of the readers to some important issues as follows.

Firstly, If I was a Zionist or Zionist apologist, I would have said it loudly, clearly, openly and bravely; because I'm not scared of neither you nor anyone else nor the God in the world, particularly when it comes to an important issue such as expressing my ideas and opinions.

Secondly, I'm an independent and neutral analyst, which moral and ethical values have enormous and unlimited considerations for me. I analyze different issues particularly with regard to the Islamic Regime based on my academic knowledge and some decades political activity background. In this respect, I don't blend my personal preferences such as my nationality, emotion, religion (Although, I'm an atheist) or something else in my analyses. If I let some of my personal preferences would influence my analysis, the result of my research would certainly lose its neutrality, authenticity and trustworthiness. This is something that I as an analyst would always do my best to totally avoid it. This is my motto. For example, when I see a group of people are suffering; my duty, my moral consideration and my responsibility as an ordinary human being force me to help them as much as I can; no matter those people are atheists, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, etc; no matter those people are Asians, Africans, Europeans, Americans or some people from the Middle East. In any of these issues, I do my best to stand in the right side of the history and fulfill my duty and moral considerations. As such, I don't care if anyone disagrees or dislikes my opinion or my behavior. Because misassumption or misunderstanding of others are not my businesses. Such people should understand that before some issues such as nationality, race, religion  and beliefs: We are human beings and we should have the same and equal rights and duties.              

Thirdly, I publish small part of my assumption about different events in this simple weblog. I defend my assumptions and analyses with full authority and responsibility to the death; unless someone would show me with some logical and scientific arguments; of course in a polite manner and without any unjust and unfair accusation that I'm wrong or my assumption is irrelevant.

Fourthly, the readers of this simple weblog should understand that I am an analyst. You as the readers might agree or disagree with my opinion; you are free to ignore, or criticize my arguments in a logical and scientific manner as much as you want. In this respect, I really appreciate your comment as well as your criticism. But, please bear in mind that I am not a Hollywood movie director or a movie star, who try to use every trick in order to appease large numbers of people.     

Fifthly, the readers should understand that my intention about the article " Rouhani's statement about the Holocaust and Christian Amanpour's big misinterpretation" was not an analysis about the domestic or foreign policy of Israel. Instead, in this article, I tried to disclose Iran's new tactic; the way that Iran tries to once again deceive the whole world; the method, which Iran tries to use it in order to preserve Asad's regime and simultaneously continues with its nuclear activity secretly, the same as Iran has done it in 2003. Moreover, in this article, I tried to illustrate how some people in the media intentionally or unintentionally would help Iran in this matter. This is something that I have anticipated in my previous short notes such as: 1- Are you expecting that Khamenei's long term special representative solve your problem with Iran? and 2- Mr. Jack Straw should watch this video clip.

Sixthly and finally, before throwing any unjust and unfair accusation to someone like me, please hire a neutral professional translator and an reliable Iran analyst and let these experts (not an Iranian regime's apologist) translate and analyze Rouhani's statement for you.

In the final part I remind you to an important point. I fully aware that a nuclear weapon would give us (as Iranians) an extraordinary power not only in the critical and strategic region of the Middle East, but also in the international arena. This advantage would be beneficial for us particularly after the collapse of the Islamic regime. In this respect, I can close my eyes to Iran's nuclear activity in my analyses; I can ignore this part of Iranian regime's activity by writing about some another unimportant issues. But from the bottom of my heart, I don't like to see one day, you will wake up from sleep because of the vibrations of Iran's nuclear bomb test. Because I know that the current Iranian regime is not a normal and reliable political system, which could be trusted in this particular and important issue. Because I know a nuclear weapon in the hand of current political system in Iran is equivalent to total destruction of not only the lives of Iranian people but also millions of people around the world. Thus, be careful about the new moves of the Iranian regime.     

M. Sirani                      29.09.2013

Saturday, September 28, 2013

Rouhani's Statement about The Holocaust and Christiane Amanpour's Unblievable Misinterpretation.

I had a busy schedule in the last couple of days; otherwise I would have written this short note earlier. However, today I had the opportunity to double check Rouhani's statement about the Holocaust. In this respect, I wrote down Rouhani's statement word by word in Persian and couple of times check it with its English translation published by CNN. There is a total misinterpretation in CNN's translation in this important remarks.

Whether Christiane Amanpour has intentionally misinterpreted Rouhani's statement about the Holocaust; whether Christiane Amanpour does not have proper knowledge about Persian language are not my goal in this short note. These are some issues, which should be judged by either CNN broadcasting company or CNN's viewers. However, here below is the exact translation of Rouhani's statement about the Holocaust, word by word, which has been published in Fars News website an Iranian official news agency. It should be mentioned that usually I don't trust Iran's news agencies and their analyses. But in this particular matter, as i couple of times checked, the Fars News has exactly and precisely translated Rouhani's statement word by word, as he said during this interview.

Rouhani's statement in exact English translation about the Holocaust is as follows.
Rouhani's: "I have said before that I am not a historian and historians should specify, state and explain the aspects of historical events, but generally we fully condemn any kind of crime committed against humanity throughout the history, including the crime committed by the Nazis both against the Jews and non-Jews, the same way that if today any crime is committed against any nation or any religion or any people or any belief, we condemn that crime and genocide. Therefore, what the Nazis did is condemned, (but) the aspects that you talk about, clarification of these aspects is a duty of the historians and researchers, I am not a history scholar."     (Farsnews, 2013)
There are some important points in Rouhani's statement noted above. Firstly, Rouhani does not use the term "Holocaust" in his statement. He uses some words such as crime against humanity, genocide, and crimes, which have been committed by the Nazis, but he never uses the term "Holocaust" in his remarks.

Secondly, the most important issue with regard to the Second World War is the scale and scope of the crimes that the Nazis have committed. We should bear in mind that nearly 20 million people were killed during the Second World War. Most of these people were killed in the battle during those horrific years. But the most important issue is that among those large scale victims, just 6 million innocent Jews were mass murdered by the Nazis during the Second World War. The term "Holocaust" defines this barbaric and inhuman act of the Nazis against a particular group of people; it describes the mass murder and genocide of 6 million innocent Jews; it refers to large scale destruction of Jews people by the Nazis during the Second World War. In this respect, no matter who we are or what type of nationality we have; not matter we are atheist, Muslim, Jew, Buddhist or Christian; not matter, we are agree or disagree with the domestic or foreign policy of Israel; no matter we are historian, researcher or not; we cannot deny the Holocaust as a horrific historical event. The Holocaust is a devastating historical event, which happened during the Second World War. Thus, we, as neutral human beings should strongly condemn all the crime that the Nazis committed  against Jews and other people around the world, including the Holocaust itself. The tricky point is here that Rouhani the same as Ahmadinejad stands in the state of denial about this event and totally ignores this historical fact by saying that some Jews and non-Jews were killed by the Nazis, but this is the responsibility of historians and researchers to evaluate the scope and dimension of these crimes.

At this juncture, I would like to ask Christiane Amanpour a simple question as follows. Ahmadinejad also claimed that we know some Jews were killed during the Second World War. But let us perform a research to find out how many Jews were killed, as Ahmadinejad stated. Let us perform a research to find out that the story of murdering of 6 million Jews during the Second World War is a true or a false story, as Ahmadinejad claimed. In this respect, what is the difference between Ahmadinejad's statement and Rouhani's recent remarks about the Holocaust?

As noted above, in fact, Rouhani repeats exactly Ahmadinejad's argument about the Holocaust but with another words. Ahmadinejad denied the Holocaust with some other words; Rouhani also denies the Holocaust by saying "what the Nazis did is condemned, (but) the aspects that you talk about, clarification of these aspects is a duty of the historians and researchers, I am not a history scholar". 

In the final part of this short note, some questions are still unanswered. These are the questions that the readers of this short note should deeply think about them and find reasonable and logical answers to them.

Why Christiane Amanpour misinterprets Rouhani's remarks in this matter? Why Christiane Amanpour tries to fabricate a false and fake picture from Rouhani by this unbelievable misinterpretation? What type of goal is Christiane Amanpour pursuing by this big misinterpretation?

*** Notification: The Islamic Regime has unfiltered CNN in Iran since today. I don't know how long this unfiltering will continue, but this event shows that there is some correlation between misinterpretation of Rouhani's statement about the Holocaust and CNN's unfiltering in Iran. Shall we call that a secret deal? or a present in response to Rouhani's statement misinterpretation by CNN? 

M. Sirani                                   28.09.2013


Rouhani's English remarks ("013). URL<:>. Accessed on: 28.09.2013


So far, Iran is The Real Winner in Both The Syrian Conflict and Nuclear Negotiation.

In the recent General Assembly of the United Nations, Iran was/is the real winner with regard to the two concepts of 1- the Syrian conflict and 2- Iran's nuclear activity. This simple statement will be proven in the future.

In terms of the current civil war in Syria:            

Iran = 1                              The International Community = 0

In terms of the Nuclear Activity:

Iran = 1                               The International Community = 0

M. Sirani                             28.09.2013

Tuesday, September 24, 2013

Are You Expecting that Khamenei's Long Term Special Representative Solve Your Problem With Iran?

Some claim that Rouhani couldn't hand shake President Obama because of the opinion of the hard

liners in Iran. Some others claim that Rouhani is in the beginning of a positive road and he needs time

to deal with hard liners in Tehran. In response to these claims, I have to pose some questions

including: Do you know that before the presidency position, Rouhani was special representative of

the Supreme Leader Khamenei within Supreme National Security Council for many years? Do you

know (Since 1997 up until this moment as far as I know)  Hassan Rouhani was and still is a member

of the Expediency Discernment Council? Do you know that the Supreme Leader Khamenei

personally appoints all the members of the Expediency Council among his close and trustworthy


Some other analysts  simply compare Ahmadinejad with Rouhani and claim that Rouhani is better

than Ahmadinejad. Such a comparison simplifies the analysis about the Islamic Regime and its

moves. Moreover, this type of methodology is totally wrong, based on many reasons. This is the fact

that both Ahmadinejad and Rouhani were and are the puppets of the Islamic Regime system.

However, there are some differences between these two persons, which should be mentioned.

Ahmadinejad did not have any academic knowledge about the International  Law or International

Relations. Therefore, he couldn't perform a logical or I might say a normal speech during an event at

the international level for example. But, Rouhani and Zarif have this type of background; they have

enough skill to address an issue in such international events. Moreover, we should bear in mind

that before presidency position, Ahmadinejad did not have any high ranking official position or a

close relationship with the Supreme Leader within the structure of the Islamic Regime in comparison

with Rouhani and Zarif. Furthermore, the Supreme Leader Khamenei did not appoint Ahmadinejad

for a high profile position within the Islamic Regime before his presidency. But as I noted above,

Hassan Rouhani has been appointed by the Supreme Leader for different high ranking positions in

Iran. In fact, in many occasion, Hassan Rouhani has been Khamenei's special representative within an

important entity in Iran.

Considering these brief information, still you are expecting that Rouhani change the course of the Islamic Regime in a positive manner with regard to the current tension in Syria, Iran's nuclear activity or Iran's expansionist behavior abroad? Rouhani has been and still is a special and trustworthy representative of Khamenei in the different important entities within the Islamic Regime and you are hoping that he performs a positive change in the regime? 

My condolences to those shallow minded scholars, analysts and policy-makers, who believe that Rouhani will change the course of the Islamic Regime.

M. Sirani                          24.09.2013

Monday, September 23, 2013

Khatami's Article in the Guardian is Another Iran's Trick (We should not repeat the Munich Agreement).

Iran is desperately trying to save Syria. In doing so, Iran has developed a new plan. As I mentioned in my previous short notes, this plan is Iran's nuclear activity. In this respect, Iran tries to make a superficial deal with the West with regard to its nuclear activity. as such, Iran might agree to decrease the scope of its nuclear activity to some extent. Consequently, the West would lift some of the sanctions, while behind the scene, Iran would continue to its nuclear development in another secret plant. In this respect, Iran would be able to completely divert the attention of the international community from Syria into its nuclear negotiation for a while. Khatami's article published in the Guardian and other statements of Iran's policy-makers should be understood in this direction. From different angles, with various methods, Iran's policy-makers including Khatami Iran's former president try to create an unrealistic image that Rouhani is the only golden opportunity for the West and the West should use it; otherwise, not only the Middle East but also the whole world will collapse. In this respect, Iran tries to push the West to accept a deal through an invisible and indirect coercive policy tool.

The international community should not fall in Iran's trap. I repeat my previous argument; this is a historical moment to create a buffer zone in Syria;to dismantle Hezbollah; to paralyze the Islamic Regime of Iran abroad. If we don't use this opportunity, without any doubt, Iran would attain the nuclear weapon somewhere in the close future. Should this happen, no one, no international authority, no super power would be able to control Iran's behavior at the local, regional and international levels. We should not repeat the Munich Agreement twice.

M. Sirani                           24.09.2013   

Saturday, September 21, 2013

Mr. Jack Straw Should Watch This Video Clip.

In an interview, Mr. Jack Straw the former British Foreign Secretary gives credit to Iran's current president and claims that Hassan Rouhani is a moderate politician. Because Rouhani stopped Iran's nuclear activity in 2003 by a simple telephone call to Tehran, as Mr. Jack Straw states. There is, however, a video clip of Rouhani on YouTube, which completely refutes Jack Straw's statement in this matter. In this video clip, Rouhani explains, how Iran's nuclear activity have had enormous positive developments in 2003 and 2004. During this interview, Rouhani clearly explains step by step how Iran developed Yellowcake, Heavy-water reactors; Increased the numbers of centrifuges in its nuclear plans through those years (Iranian calendar 83-84), while Mr. Jack Straw was optimistically thinking that Iran has stopped its nuclear activity.

I hope some neutral person translates this video clip for Mr. Jack Straw.

M. Sirani                              21.09.2013

Friday, September 20, 2013

You Are Falling in the Trap of Iran and Losing the Battle in Syria. Are You Aware of That or not Yet?

This is the most shocking event in my entire life, when i see how the Iranian Regime can deceive a scholar like Fareed Zakaria, an journalist like Christiane Amanpour and a politician like Jack Straw with just some simple moves and words.  We know,  Russia has been assisting Asad's regime from different angles, but the international community is losing the battle in Syria, due to Iran's tactics and maneuvers. These types of tactics and moves are not Russian. If we review the behavior of Iran in the past 34 years, we see that the Islamic Regime has used these types of maneuvers in different occasions, whether in the domestic or international arena. As such, the Islamic regime has managed to survive for so long.

In order to paralyze the Islamic Regime and Hezbollah, we should create a buffer zone in Syria. We should cut the free highway of Iran-Iraq-Syria-Lebanon in Syria. If we manage to do that, we can gradually dismantle Hezbollah in Lebanon. Otherwise, we cannot impose anything at all to this clero-totalitarian regime in a fundamental and constructive manner (I emphasize in a fundamental and constructive manner).  

The map below is a clear illustration about Iran's activities and plan in the Middle East and part of Africa.

 Figure 1: Iran’s activities in the Middle East (Sirani, 2012).
Red Arrows: Iran’s offensive activities in the Middle East.

Green Arrows: Saudi Arabia’s activities against Iran.

Black Lines:  Iran’s final plan for the Middle East.

As illustrated above, Iran has successfully occupied a free highway from its territory towards the borders of Israel through Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. In the southern part of the map, Iran has been increasing its influence in Yemen, Somalia, Djibouti, Eritrea and Sudan. The emergence of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt was a pleasant event for Iran, which later was shattered by the move of the Egyptian army. In sum, this is the plan of Iran and Qasem Soleimani for this part of the Middle East. I don't want to exaggerate, but as I follow the news, I have come up with the idea that the international community need a comprehensive lecture about some issues such as: the structure of power within the Islamic Regime, Iran's plan for the Middle East and North Africa and Iran's tactics and maneuvers. I'm pretty sure about this statement based on many reasons. 

M. Sirani                                             20.09.2013           

Thursday, September 19, 2013

A Hidden Fact About Iran's Current President Hassan Rouhani and Iran's New tactics.

Once again, the Iranian regime is trying to deceive the world with different tactics. One of these tactics is the notion that the Foreign Ministry has become the responsible entity for nuclear negotiations within 5+1 group. This move along with some other tactics such as releasing some political prisoners, flexibility in negotiation and wishing Jews a blessed New Year have created an unrealistic image that Rouhani is going to change the course of the Islamic regime in different aspects. In response to these optimistic views, some important issues should be mentioned.

1- During Ahmadinejad's presidency, Supreme National Security Council was Iran's responsible entity with regard to the nuclear negotiations within 5+1 group. In those years, Hassan Rouhani was the Supreme Leader's special representative within Supreme National Security Council. In other words, what Iran proposed during the past couple of years within 5+1 group, was the exact decisions of Rouhani and his master the Supreme Leader Khamenei and nothing else. The tricky point is here. Now, Rouhani has become the president and the Foreign Ministry has become the responsible entity for the nuclear negotiations. To put it simply, Rouhani has removed the responsibility of this important issue from Supreme National Security Council (Where he worked before) and has given that to the Foreign Ministry (Where he has fully control now). Moreover, we should bear in mind that both Rouhani and Zarif have enough academic background in the International Law & policy and International Relations studies. From this, we can deduce that during Ahmadinejad's presidency, Rouhani & Zarif & Velayati were the main advisors of the Supreme leader and designed Iran's foreign policy and nuclear negotiation. Presently, The same people i.e. Khamenei and his advisors Rouhani & Zarif & Velayati are responsible for those issues. The only thing that has changed is that both Rouhani and Zarif have taken new official positions in the Islamic Regime. That's why Rouhani claims that he has the full authority about the nuclear negotiation; because he was and is the Supreme Leader's representative; because he was and is one of the main decision makers with regard to Iran's nuclear activity.

This simple explanation should trigger a question in the curious mind as follows. Would this artificial change be identified as a positive and fundamental change in Iran's foreign policy?
Honestly, I don't understand why some people are so optimist about Rouhani's statement in this matter. It seems these people have no idea about the structure of power within the Islamic Regime.

2- Releasing the so-called political prisoners: All the prisoners, which have been released yesterday are the reformists and proponents of Mir Hussein Mousavi, Iran's former Prime Minister. In other words, a powerful faction within the Islamic Regime, which presently has the power, has released some members of other factions of the Islamic Regime from prison. Those real political prisoners, who want to overthrow the Islamic Regime are still in the prison and not a single one of them has been released.

3- Peaceful Nuclear Activity: Rouhani has claimed that Iran's nuclear activity has peaceful nature. This simple sentence has shocked some shallow minded people around the world and has been recognized as a positive change in Iran's foreign policy. The questions is: what did Khamenei, Ahmadinejad, Jalili and some other Iranian officials repeatedly tell us during the past couple of years that this statement of Rouhani has been identified as a sign for a positive change?

All noted above were just some examples, how Iran tries to deceive the world by some artificial moves. What is the plan of Iran at this critical historical moment?

This is my prediction:
At the present time, Iran is under enormous pressure with regard to two important issues. The first important issue is the current conflict in Syria particularly the recent chemical attack and its possible consequences. The second issue is the nuclear negotiation with the West. Both these issues are important for Iran and the Islamic Regime would do its best to protect and preserve its position in both matters. Iran would neither lose Syria nor its nuclear activity. In other words, Iran cannot withdraw its support from Syria and at the same time, cannot shut down all its nuclear activity. But, there is a middle way, which Iran can preserve both issues. In order to do that, the policy-makers in Iran have come up with a new tactic. The tactic is that Iran would try to divert the mind of the West and the international community from Syria at this critical moment into another important issue. This important issue would be Iran's nuclear activity. In this respect, Iran might agree to stop its 20% uranium enrichment process or moreover, Iran might agree to decrease its nuclear activity in some of its nuclear plants. Should this happen, Iran does not lose anything at all and it can continue with its nuclear activity secretly, for example in a hidden plant, the same as Iran has done it up until this moment. This move, in return, would be beneficial for Iran, because the West would remove some of the sanctions. This nuclear negotiation is time consuming; it is a diplomatic marathon. However, this plan would offer Bashar Asad, Iran and Russia to reorganize themselves better with regard to the current tension in Syria. This event, consequently, might give an opportunity to Iran and Russia to pass this critical stage in Syria without any serious struggle with the West. Iran's new superficial moves in the domestic and international arena should be understood in this respect and nothing else. 

M. Sirani                               19.09.2013

Once again, Iran is going to deceive the world and win the battle in both the Syrian conflict as well as its nuclear dispute with the West.

Wednesday, September 18, 2013

You are losing the Battle in Syria because of Iran.

This is the fact that Russia has paralyzed the Security Council; Russia has been giving highly developed weapons to Syria. But, the international community is gradually losing the battle in Syria because of the types of tactics and performances of Iran. Given the fact that Iran was going to lose Syria, due to the chemical attack and possible military attack of the US and France, Iran has begun to play with a new card and that is the nuclear negotiation within 5+1 group. In this respect, Iran would create a new dilemma and diplomatic marathon for the international community; but on the other hand, Iran would save its geopolitical and strategic interests in Syria. Good method for buying the time. In terms of diverting the mind of people whether in domestic or in the international arena, Iran is the master in the world.

M. Sirani                          19.09.2013 

Tuesday, September 17, 2013

The Next Moves of Russia and Iran With Regard to the Current Tension in Syria. (A Warning)

Iran and Russia are trying to use the current chemical event in Syria as a tool and change the course of Syrian conflict in their favors. So far, Putin's plan has prevented the US and France to launch a military strike on Syria. What would be the next move of Russia and Iran? As it appears, Russia and Iran are planning to do some deal with the West. This deal might apparently be beneficial for the West, but in reality it pursues the main goal of Iran and Russia in the final stage. In other words, this deal is a type of trap for the West and nothing more. This is the story.

Sergey Lavrov has begun with a rumor that Iran might be agree to stop its 20% uranium enrichment activity. Regarding this issue, some officials in Iran have also claimed that Iran is ready to find a quick diplomatic solution for its nuclear activity within 5+1 group. In addition, both Iranian and Russian officials have recently claimed that Bashar Asad is not an important issue for them. From these two events, we can predict the next moves of Russia and Iran.

In the first step, somewhere in the near future, Iran might agree to stop its 20% uranium enrichment activity temporarily (A type of superficial incentive). This event would create an image in the West, that things are getting well in Iran and the West might reach a diplomatic solution with Iran in this matter somewhere in the future. Should this happen, the West would remove some of the sanctions on Iran. Moreover, the West might remove the military option against Syria from its agenda. Up until this stage, the whole event would be beneficial for Iran in different terms.

In the next step, Iran and Russia might agree to remove Bashar Asad from the power. This event might happen in the next conference in Geneva or after the conference. The West would welcome this proposal and identifies it as a positive progress. However, removing Bashar Asad from the power is just a superficial tactic; because both Russia and Iran would not change anything at all with regard to the current political system in Syria. In other words, Russia and Iran would not allow anyone to conquer their economic, geopolitical and strategic opportunities in Syria. However, by this move, Iran and Russia would create huge fragmentation within the West block and within the Syrian opposition groups.

In sum, following and implementing these events would offer Iran and Russia enough time and opportunity in order to reorganize themselves and would be ready for further developments, whether in Syria or whether in 5+1 group with regard to Iran's nuclear activity. To put it simply, if the UN and the West don't pay attention to these types of tactics, Russia and Iran would be the final winners of the game not only in Syria, but also in the nuclear negotiation within 5+1 group.

M. Sirani                                 17.09.2013           

Monday, September 16, 2013

The UN Should Immediately Deploy Its Experts to The Site of Chemical Attack Near Damascus.

Today, the United Nation chemical weapons inspectors confirmed that the banned chemical nerve agent sarin were used in Damascus on Aug. 21, 2013. At this stage, the UN should perform two moves. Firstly, the UN should signs the CWC treaty with the Syrian authority. During this short period, Syria is also giving the list of all its chemical weapons and their depots to the UN. Thereafter, the United Nation Security Council should immediately draft a resolution and without any delay, deploy its experts to the site of chemical attack to identify the perpetrators of this horrific act. The perpetrators of this inhuman act should face a lawful and fair trial, no matter, who they are, or what types of official positions they have. The justice must be served. This is a legal, regular and standard procedure, which Russia and China cannot stop it by their vetoes within the Security Council. This issue should not be a problem for Asad's regime as well, due to the fact that Bashar Asad and other Syrian officials constantly claim that the Syrian opposition was responsible for this horrible act!!! So simple, we can paralyze the liar in the international arena; so simple, we can absorb the public opinion. 

M. Sirani                             16.09.2013   

Saturday, September 14, 2013

The Facebook Page of Iran's Current Minister of Foreign Affairs has Been Hakced!!!

Today, in an interview with Tasnim news agency, Mohammad Javad Zarif, Iran's current minister of foreign affairs claimed that his Facebook page has been hacked. The reporter asked Zarif: Some of the posts published in your Facebook page are strange and to some extent contrary to the interests and agendas of the Islamic Republic of Iran. In response, Zarif stated that he has not written and published these posts. Furthermore, Zarif claimed that his Facebook page has been hacked. 

I hope those journalists, who would try to portray an unrealistic image about the Current president of Iran i.e. Rouhani and its cabinet would pay good attention to the nature and agenda of the Islamic Regime and do not let be easily deceived by some simple words of the policy makers in Iran.

M. Sirani                                  14.09.2013


Wednesday, September 11, 2013

Some Possible Consequences of A Limited Military Strike on Syria.

This is an important issue, which the policy-makers in the US should think about it. In case of any military strike on Syria, the US might probably lose Russian's support within 5+1 negotiation with regard to Iran's nuclear activity. Moreover, Russia might decide to arm Iran with S-300 missiles in retaliation with the US attack on Syria. Furthermore, and again in retaliation, Russia might decide to assist Iran to build a nuclear weapon. A nuclear-armed Iran would create a buffer zone close to Russia in the strategic part of the Middle East. Such a situation would be beneficial for Russia in different aspect. As an example, a nuclear-armed Iran for Russia would be something like nuclear-armed North Korea for China, in the sense that anytime, China faces a conflict with the West, suddenly, out of the blue, North Korea tests a nuclear missile. By this, I don't want to say that all these events will occur in case of a military strike on Syria. But these are important issues that the policy-makers in the US should think about them, when it comes to the type of respond to the recent chemical attack in Syria.

M. Sirani                                 11.09.2013 

Monday, September 9, 2013

Before Any Military Strike, We Should Think About The Existance of Massive Chemical Weapons in Syria.

Its seems some people have not paying attention to the essence of my previous short note about the type of respond to the current chemical attack in Syria. Let me make some points perfectly clear:
My previous short note is just a small part of my plan for the Syrian civil war and still I have not revealed what would be the end point of my plan. Moreover, I don't have any sympathy at all neither for the Islamic Regime nor for Asad's Regime and I strongly believe that both of these totalitarian regimes should be overthrown without any doubt. Furthermore, I believe not only those, who were behind this chemical attack, but also those who were responsible for the killing of more than 100,000 innocent Syrian people should face a serious, fair and lawful justice, no matter who they are or what type of official positions they have.

But there is one issue, which deeply concerns me and that is the existence of massive chemical weapons in current chaotic Syria. This is an important issue and it seems that the current US administration does not pay enough attention to it. As it openly appears, the US and its allies have decided to launch a small and short military strike on Syria. Should this happen, I'm pretty sure that the US and its allies would do their best to paralyze the Syrian military forces from different angles during this short military strike. At the same time, we should bear in mind that the US and its allies would not be able to damage or destroy the massive chemical weapons existed in Syria during this military strike. In other words, these chemical weapons would remain in Syria at a critical and chaotic period of time; when Asad's regime is going to collapse; when the Syrian security forces have lost most of their authority and power in the country; when there is a serious vacuum of power in Syria; when there are some terrorist groups in Syria, which do their best to get access to every opportunity including access to these chemical weapons.

Bearing in mind these possible issues and events, the US administration should focus on some important questions as follows.
1- In such circumstances, who or which authority would be able to protect and control these chemical weapons from the hands of different terrorist groups in Syria?

2- What would the US and its allies do, if (I emphasize IF), Asad's regime or some faction within the Syrian military forces would intentionally allow some of these terrorist groups get access to these chemical weapons?

These are the serious issues that the US administration should think about them. We should also bear in mind that we are not talking about the possible occurrence of an event within the EU or the US itself; we are talking about the possible occurrence of a serious threat in a chaotic country like Syria, in a vulnerable region like the Middle East, which is struggling with different terrorist groups from every corner. Thus, we should be logical and reasonable and think about the consequences of our action. We should not repeat the same mistake that we did in Afghanistan, where we armed some Mujahidin with the Stinger missiles to use them against the Soviet troops, but later these weapons were handed to Al-Qaida and Taliban and were used against us.

To put its simply, the wrong tactic and strategy used during the military strike on Afghanistan have spread the wave of terrorism in some areas in the Middle East.  But presently, an early military strike on Syria would spread the chemical weapons in the hand of some terrorist groups in the Middle East.

Therefore, I believe the US and its allies should find a fundamental solution for the massive chemical weapons existed in Syria, before taking any military action on this country. Otherwise, we will face a serious threat somewhere in the future in the vulnerable and chaotic region of the Middle East. In this respect, the US closest ally in the Middle East, i.e. Israel would be the first victim. In sum, we should be smart and do not throw ourselves in another unnecessary and unknown black hole in the international system by performing a wrong move. 

M. Sirani                            09.09.2013


Friday, September 6, 2013

A Plan That Might Save The World From An Additional Disaster.

How should we deal with the recent chemical attack in Syria?

The G20 summit in Russia ended without any agreement among the world leaders with regard to the Syrian conflict. Part of the disagreement at this stage derives from different opinions between the US and Russia over the recent chemical attack in Syria and how the international community should deal with this horrific and inhuman act. This event, however, has fragmented the international community into three different groups as follows.

1-     A group of countries such as the US, France, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, which claims that the international community should launch a military strike on Syria because of this chemical attack. Among this group, the two countries of the US and France have decided to unilaterally launch a military strike on Syria somewhere in the near future.

2-     A group of countries such as Russia, China, India, Argentina and South Africa, which are against any unilateral military action against Syria. Among this group, Russia has openly announced that it will fully assist Syria in case of any military strike without U.N. Security Council backing.

3-     A group of neutral countries such as some members of the EU, the Arab League which claim that any decision in this matter should be made within the United Nation Security Council.

These differences have dragged the international community into another deadlock. This issue raises some questions as follows. What should we do? How would we be able to break the current deadlock and at the same time respond the alleged chemical attack in an appropriate manner based on the current international laws, rules and norms? How would we be able to ease the tension in Syria? And finally, is there any other plan, which would be able to address all the questions mentioned above in a proper way? Regarding the current deadlock in the Syrian crisis, I have developed a plan, which might address all the issues mentioned above. Before I proceed further, however, I have to admit that this is the first draft; as such, it might need more improvement and modification.

- The First Draft of the Plan:  

The plan includes different steps. All these steps should be performed and implemented parallel to each other by a joint committee consists of some representatives from the members of the United Nation Security Council, the Syrian government, the United Nation and possibly a representative from a neutral country like Norway for example; otherwise, we would end up in another dead-end alley in this crisis.  

1- First step: The joint committee would establish a temporary ceasefire between Asad’s regime and the opposition in Syria up until the end of this plan. The establishment a ceasefire is not an easy task, but it is not impossible (I fully aware that the terrorist groups are exception in this matter and they don’t follow this process). By this move, we can decrease the collateral damage and the new waves of refugees and internally displaced people.  

2- The second step: The US and France would agree to postpone their unilaterally military strike on Syria up until the end of this plan.

3- The third step: The Syrian government, in return, would agree to fully cooperate by all means with the joint committee from the beginning up until the last step of this plan without any delay, sabotage or nonchalant attitude.

4- The fourth step: Both the Syrian government and the opposition blame each other for the recent chemical attack. In this respect, the joint committee would deploy some experts to visit the chemical attack sites, in order to identify the perpetrators of the chemical attack.

5- The fifth step: The Syrian government would agree to extradite the perpetrators (no matter who they are) to the joint committee, if the committee found out that Asad’s regime has been behind this horrific act. The perpetrators of this horrible act should face a fair and lawful justice (I fully aware that Syria has not accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of ICC or ICJ). 

6- The sixth step: The existence of massive chemical weapons in Syria is a serious threat for the Syrian people and the international community, particularly at this critical moment; when the country is experiencing a devastating civil war; when different terrorist groups have involved in this civil war. Moreover, the Syrian authority should understand a simple fact that it cannot use any of these chemical weapons against its opponents or enemies under any circumstances. Any attempt at this direction is equivalent with massive and broad military intervention  on Syria and consequently the collapse of Asad's regime in less than a month. In such a event, the two super powers of Russia and China would not damage their reputation in the international arena by helping Asad's regime. Thus, it would be wise to get ride of these weapons of mass destruction. At this step, the Syrian authority would agree to destroy all its chemical weapons under the observation of some representatives from the joint committee (I fully aware that Syria is not a member of CWC). 

7- The seventh step: The two countries of Russia and China would agree to neutrally cooperate with the joint committee from the beginning up until the last step of this plan. Russia and China, moreover, would agree to don’t paralyze the Security Council by their vetoes, if Asad’s regime doesn’t fulfill its responsibilities based on all policies mentioned above. To put its simply, by this move, the Security Council would be free to take any reasonable and necessary action against the Syrian regime, based on the international law in case that Syria doesn't cooperate (Effect on Public Opinion).  

By implementing these steps, we would be able to save the world from another additional catastrophic event. As explored above, through this plan we would be able to:

1-     Ease the tension to some extent at the local, regional and international level.

2-     Perform the justice with regard to the perpetrators of this inhuman and barbaric act.

3-     Minimize the serious threat of the massive chemical weapons accumulated in Syria.

4-     Break the current deadlock in the international system.

5-     Increase the level of cooperation between the states in the international arena.

6-     Empower the authority of the United Nation and its powerful entity i.e. the Security Council.

7-     Teach a good and clear lesson to possible violators of the international law and rules in an appropriate and lawful manner.

8-     Decrease the collateral damage and the new waves of refugees and internally displaced people in Syria.

9-     Facilitate a basic foundation for a diplomatic solution for the Syrian crisis.

This was brief explanation about this part of my plan for the Syrian civil war. Unfortunately, I cannot disclose the whole plan in this weblog; but I’m ready to present it to an official and reliable type of authority in order to save the lives of millions Syrian people. In the final part, we should bear in mind that any military intervention at this stage not only does not solve the conflict; instead, it would intensify the scope and dimension of this conflict into other areas in the Middle East. Thus, let us be reasonable; let us do not make another hasty decision; let us be smart, brave and use this disastrous event and turn it into a golden historical event, which is beneficial for all of us in the long term. In sum, I believe that following this plan and one month delay for a military strike on Syria do not damage the credibility of any state or anyone. We should bear in mind that: there is always room for a military intervention at any moment, but there is not always a possibility for a diplomatic solution at any moment.

M. Sirani                                    07.09.2013



Thursday, September 5, 2013

How Does the Iranian Regime Deceive The World?

It really shocks me, when I see how the Iranian regime can deceive some shallow minded people by some simple moves. Some examples of these types of moves are as follows.

1- Iran`s foreign ministry has become the responsible entity to follow the nuclear negotiation within 5+1 group. This simple move has created a misassumption among some shallow minded people that Iran is moving toward a some type of reform with regard to its nuclear activity.

2- Iran`s second move is Rafsanjani's recent statement, which it claims that Asad's regime is behind the recent chemical attack in Damascus. This statement has created a misassumption that Iran would withdraw its support for Asad's regime.

3- Zarif , Iran's foreign minister condemns the holocaust and send Jews new year's greeting on twitter.

By these types of moves, the Iranian regime cause doubt and misassumption between its enemies and opponents. This issue, as a result, would cause more fragmentation and disagreement among Iran's enemies and opponents. This event, as a result, would offer Iran enough time to follow its path again. The rest of the story is clear.

This is the story. Briefly, Iran knows that the Syrian civil war has reached a critical point, due to the recent chemical attack in Damascus. Moreover, Iran knows that sooner or later the US would launch a limited but an extensive and comprehensive military attack on Asad's regime military forces. The US involvement in this battle, without any doubt would lead to the collapse of Asad's regime somewhere in the near future. Iran's new moves could be understood in this respect. By these moves, Iran tries to buy the time in order to save its strategic points I.e. Syria and Hezbollah, in the Middle East.

These shallow minded people should also pay attention to some other issues including:

1- Hezbollah has recently deployed 10,000 members to Damascus to defend Asad's regime in case of the US military strike.

2- Qasem Soleimani, the Commander-in-Chief of the Ghods Force has issued an order that Iran's close allies and proxies should attack to every US facility in Iraq, Lebanon, Afghanistan, Pakistan, case of the US military strike on Syria.  

Important point: Part of the reason that the cooperative efforts of some countries such as the US, The UK, France and the 22 members of Arab league have not been able to defeat Iran in Syria , after two and half years struggle, lies in this matter. With all due respect, this is a fact, you don't have enough knowledge about these types of Iran's tricks and tactics.

M. Sirani                    05.09.2013