An Anti-Imperialist Case Against Iran’s Nuclear Program

The U.S. military capabilities, personnel and hardware alike, having reached a stalemate in Iraq, are said to be increasingly more likely to be sent on more insane and murderous missions in the region. There have been a growing number of reports of intended attacks on Iranian military forces carried out by the U.S. armed forces, up to and including ‘imminently’, based on two official accusations: the Iranian nuclear ambitions and the Iranian regime’s use of their influence in Iraq.

The number of US-trained Iraqi security forces available to protect the government of Iraq are still lacking a fully beefed up body, but they can suffice for a mediocre administration of a medium-intensity civil war, dragged on for some time to come. Additionally, given the exhaustion state of the official military personnel required to maintain an occupation army, the larger number of unofficial private mercenaries can be increased with no political cost, working in conjunction with local paramilitary organizations. This will provide for an option politically more acceptable to the U.S. citizens’ representatives in the Congress (but not necessarily acceptable to the U.S. citizens themselves). Hence the talk of ‘draw down’ of U.S. forces in Iraq.

In this context, an attack by the U.S. on Iranian military forces, without sending in any troops (the way Cambodia was destroyed mostly), is a likely scenario. This will naturally lead to increased intensification of the ongoing horrid nightmare not only for the Iranian people but the inhabitants of the whole region, for decades to come. The only winners will be the imperialists and their corporations, whichever local bullies survive this hell, and whatever local lackeys imperialists deem valuable as they do their business.

If, after a disastrous invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, the ruling elites in the western countries are still talking openly about further military aggressions, this time against Iran, the western leftists have clearly had less than zero effect on the debates that matter most.

Too late for hard work?

Because of these increasing threats against Iran in rhetorical and diplomatic forms, with the poised fist of the gunboats parked off the Gulf coast directed at the livelihoods of millions of Iranians and Arabs in the region, a sense of panic has beset a lot of us.

In the fog of justifiable panic, some good comrades, friends and allies are prone to (and do) argue the following: Because the Iranian regime is under fire by the imperialists, we must support whatever the mullahs do, unconditionally. That regime is involved in a fundamental conflict with the imperialists, and all other conflicts (those involving the civil and social rights of the Iranian people vis-à-vis their state) must take a backseat to this supreme conflict.

Instead of building real alliances and solidarities between the peoples of the Middle East and the peoples of the U.S., the U.K., France, Germany, Italy, etc., and instead of leading a spirited and effective fight against these western states’ aggressions against the lives and resources of the peoples of the Middle East, these comrades, feeling virtuous on our behalf, ask the Iranian people to likewise push for no demands on their state, either. Worse, our good friends warn, any serious attempt to build social movements for such demands for more civil, human and workers rights is just not a good idea right now. Why? Because, you idiot, it aids and abets the imperialists!

Refusing to do the hard work, some of us have consequently fallen back on ‘my enemy’s enemy is my friend, god be dammed!’ type of thinking; a mentality that, when adopted previously by western leftists, led to their defeat in one battlefield after another during the Cold War; failed to set a different tone for the direction of social change after the Cold War; and will be ineffective in producing any realistic alternatives for peace and justice during these hot war years.

In some permutations of this argument, the line proceeds to discard the great abyss separating the overwhelming majority of the people of Iran from the current government of Iran. Victors write the history, and lazy leftists buy the story.

A fact these leftist friends refuse to see is that the current Iranian regime is in fact the result of the victory of the counter-revolution launched during the very process of the revolution by the traditional ruling classes1: the bazaar merchants and the mullahs, both of whom have been two of the three pillars of the traditional ruling classes (the third being the monarchial dynasties), for at least a millennium. In the process of organizing their counter-revolution, the mullahs stole two of the Iranian left’s most popular slogans: anti-imperialism and support for the Palestinian people. It is the adoption of these two slogans that has since sent knee-jerk leftists off the track and chasing their own tails (not excluding some Iranian leftists).

The Cold War leftist’s arguments find clever (yet strange, coming from the left) twists, when applied to the nuclear program adopted by the Iranian regime for producing energy, a program that is declared by the U.S., British, German, French and assorted lesser imperialists, to be dangerously ambiguous and a cover for development of nuclear weapons, hence their insistence on keeping open the military option for attacking Iran. These leftists apply the inverse logical operation and say that if the imperialists are opposed to the Iranian regime’s nuclear program, then we must defend this nuclear program as a principle.

The argument for an unconditional support of the Iranian regime’s nuclear program asserts that no matter how fundamentally opposed you may be to the current regime, at this unique historical juncture you must support its legal nuclear program; implying, or stating categorically, that if you are against Iranian state’s nuclear plans, you are supporting the imperialists.

Flies in their ointment

The argument for an unconditional defense of the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program, in our view, is fallacious on many levels.

First, and on a legalistic ground (with seriously flawed implications for strategic moves by the left), their argument supports an imperialist-dictated treaty, namely the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NNPT), which has two strategic goals: keeping the monopoly over nuclear weapons by imperialist powers and their allies, as well as ensuring the proliferation of nuclear industry for ‘energy production’. The fact that this treaty is the biggest international lobby on behalf of the operators of nuclear power plants and military contractors seems to have completely gone over the heads of those among the western left who, through their positioning vis-à-vis Iran’s regime, support and venerate the NNPT, and therefore see no need to seriously fight against the nuclear industry in the western countries (particularly, in the U.S.).

Second, this argument has an undertone of wishful thinking, imagining that a nuclear weapon-capable Iran is the only guarantee of a ‘détente’ that leaves the Iranian people free from imperialist harassment. In effect, this argument wishes for and indirectly advocates for a new nuclear arms race, as this is presented to be the only deterrent capable of stopping an imperialist invasion; consequently, this argument calls for an increasing amount of the social resources of Third World nations to be sucked up by a mad proposition.

This logic also cannot explain the case of Pakistan, a nuclear weapons-capable nation, which is a virtual slave to the designs of the imperialists. Pakistan, currently run by a sycophantic regime inseparable from imperialists, is not safe from the insults thrown it by the U.S. ruling elites and their representatives, every so often reminding the Pakistani regime of how much of a slave they are in the eyes of the U.S. ruling classes (I am referring to Barak Obama’s prescription for invading Pakistan should the need arise to ‘fight terrorism’ there).

Third, this argument is anti-environmentalist, and goes against the stance normally taken by the western left with regards to the need for a ban on nuclear industry as a whole, on environmental grounds. The fact that Iran’s nuclear energy is to be provided by a nuclear plant constructed over a period of thirty-some-years, in haphazard fashion, by different companies and countries at different points, in Bushehr, which is located on tectonically active plates, should alarm all anti-nuclear writers and activists wherever they may be. Any leftist, who, in standing with people’s health and well-being, must by tradition strive to present a materialist outlook and analysis, yet fails to take this geological fact into account, is not only an ignorant leftist but is an irresponsible advocate.

Fourth, given that most western leftists have little problem foreseeing the very probable harms of the nuclear industry in their own backyard, one can only conclude that racism may have something to do with their line of thinking when they ask us to tolerate all the ills of an industry that has hardly been an accident-free, healthy and safe alternative for providing energy in the west. This thinking must pre-suppose either that our environment is not worth keeping clean or that Iranians have not ‘developed’ enough to be worried about a clean environment. Like all good, obedient subjects, we are merely pawns in the mental schemes of what these leftists (much like their rightist counterparts) wish to happen in our world.

The argument is indicative of a defeatist mentality that can only wish for a better world in its own backyard yet at the same time, ironically, cannot even imagine a different world possible for us lesser peoples in the Third World.

Instead of leading a spirited tactical (yet strategically-oriented) fight against the nuclear industry in the U.S. and against the use of depleted uranium in munitions used in Iraq and Afghanistan __ an act by the U.S. armed forces and weapons manufacturers that constitutes a crime against humanity, a war crime, is actionable in an international tribunal, and which should be used to call for legal mass mutinies by the armed forces serving in Iraq __ in short, instead of strategically joining other international forces calling for a Nuclear-Free World, these ‘leftists’ would instead have us read the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty very carefully, wherein we can find the particular clause pinpointing the right of signatory nations to master the enrichment cycle!

We are forced to ask in bewilderment: Since when have such trivialities bothered the imperialists? Since when have imperialist invasions been based on conscionable, altruistic reasons to do with legalities?

The Left currently has little impact on the actually existing political reality, so the only things we can bring to the political table are ideas: questions, critiques, persuasive explanations, occasional inspirations, maybe some good suggestions, and if we are spirited enough, some fun and delight; and in all these, we most definitely must stick to our principles.

Now, since we are in the realm of ideas, why be so stingy? Where has your imagination gone? Why be so morose? Why not wish for environmentally healthy, socially just, empowered Third World societies capable of putting up a real fight against the imperialists, in full international solidarity with each other and with the working peoples of the First World?

Fifth, and finally, those arguing in support of Iranian regime’s nuclear program are not only capitulating to an imperialist-dictated frame of debate, they aid and abet a theocratic regime so reactionary that it stones human beings, while buried waist-deep, to death; for the ‘crime’ of loving another human being.

If you want to defend the people of Iran (which is what we have been doing), do so based on principles and not based on some realpolitik knee-jerk, bankrupt Cold War mentality that ends you up in bed with reactionaries.

Our argument

To push aside diversions, let me state that those of us Iranian socialists, who oppose a nuclear energy program in Iran, speak from a clear and unambiguous anti-imperialist stance. Wars, and very specifically imperialist wars, are universally launched by the ruling classes, and are done so only for the benefit of the ruling classes, while all the harm and injuries to the flesh, mind and the spirit, and all the economic costs are borne by the working peoples of the warring states. Wars are therefore to be universally opposed and condemned. Further, we declare that the true reason for the current threats of (or actual) military attacks on Iran by the U.S. forces have as their political objective the subduing of an independently minded Iranian government in pursuit of its own strategic goals, which do not necessarily coincide with the strategic interests of the people of Iran.

Our opposition to imperialism and imperialist wars is based on our standing with the health and well-being of the people, their interests, their security and their freedom from harassment, and does not require us to side with any regime, be it the Islamic Republic’s regime, or Saddam’s, the Taliban or any other local bully. Further, we believe that Third World/South/What-have-you people, whose political and civil rights have been disappeared and been victimized and oppressed by their states, are in turn more likely to be victimized by the imperialists.

A halt to all nuclear activities in Iran is a very reasonable proposition, due to the dangerous confluence of the following three factors, simultaneously and structurally (down to geologically) operative at the location of the nuclear power plant-to-be:

1. Nuclear energy production, per se, has inevitable harmful by-products, including an extremely poisonous radioactive waste that cannot be got rid of. Ever. A threat that, through leakage and its resulting contamination, can lead to environmental contamination capable of lasting not just decades, but thousands of years, accompanied by genetic mutations leading to fatal deformities,

2. Geology, which dictates that the location of Bushehr’s nuclear plant will be subject to numerous earthquakes in its lifetime; earthquakes of varying magnitudes, historically as strong as magnitude 7.6 (with the likelihood of even stronger ones), and

3. Iranian government’s incompetence and endemic corruption, which dictate a complete and total lack of transparency and lack of people’s right of oversight over the government’s handling of all procedures involved in the production of nuclear energy.

Some will point out that incompetence and lack of transparency are regular currency in the U.S. and the European countries as well. I agree and hasten to add: That is exactly why you had the Three Mile Island and the Chernobyl nuclear accidents. We don’t want to have the same disasters, having only hundredths of the socially available capabilities to recover from such monstrous eventuality.

Others may paint a picture of us espousing Orientalist misgivings, pointing to our argument as an indication of our lack of faith in the competence and intelligence of Iranians as a whole. We assure you that as Iranians we believe in our own intellectual brilliance and are quite aware of our capabilities. As a good friend likes to remind, U.S. and other western engineering corporations are happily gobbling up the best of our minds, enriching themselves greatly in the process; NASA enjoys the capabilities of Iranian chief engineers and technicians daily; and our ancient know-how in trade has given you the e-Bay!

We are arguing that the current regime is incompetent therefore (or is it, because?) maximally secretive, and dangerous to our people. And there will be no recourse to justice in Iran should any nuclear accidents happen, nor will there be meaningful relief. But, this is not the entire point.

Besides being a very inefficient and capital-sucking way of producing energy (see Wasserman’s Nuclear Surge,, the nuclear industry is, again, a gigantic producer of a particular form of waste that never goes away and is extremely toxic. There really is no safe way of getting rid of this kind of garbage. At this moment in our history we do not have this toxic madness besetting our environment with ravages without cures. Such is not a ‘cost’ we consider ‘worth it’ (whatever ‘it’ is supposed to be). We would like to keep our environment clean and our people as healthy as our resources allow.

Iran has access to a vast and endless alternative source of power: solar energy. The right engineers can do the rightful calculations, but I am sure cultivating solar panel farms can easily match (if not surpass) the energy needs that a horribly wasteful and waste-producing nuclear industry can never match.

The Maoist concept of ‘major versus minor conflicts’ simplifies matters greatly, which must be practical for lazy thinkers, especially in difficult times. But it is an erroneous concept since the major (or the ‘primary’) conflicts between the imperialist powers and the peoples of the Third World, as well as the major conflict between imperialists and their own people, are fed and reinforced daily by the minor (‘secondary’) conflicts between Third World peoples and their local bullies. Neither of these conflicts can be dismissed by wishful thinking, ‘resolved’ one at the expense of the other. As much as it is true that the freer we are from imperialist harassment the better we can fight our local bullies, it is equally true that the freer we are from local bullies the better we can defend ourselves against the imperialists.

To emphasize a point that Cuba with all her troubles and shortcomings has been proving, the only defense against imperialism, in the first, second … and the final analysis, is empowered people, both in the belly of the beast (and subordinate associates) as well as all around the subjugated world.

A nuclear-free Iran not only removes a clear excuse for the imperialist posturing against Iran, in the long run it guarantees a life there free from toxic threats to the livelihoods of millions of people inhabiting the area in the vicinity of Bushehr’s larger region, which includes not only Iranians, but people in all the Arab countries on the southern coast of the Gulf, plus its entire ecosystem; a life free from the potentiality of millions of cases of cancer, birth deformities, and the complete destruction of entire ways of life among the local peoples inhabiting the shores of the Persian-Arabian Gulf and the adjacent regions, and all points downstream.

23 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. gerald spezio said on October 18th, 2007 at 9:18am #

    Christopher Hitchens, a preening and pompous public “intellectual” with a booze damaged brain, knows how to deal with the swarthy un-poetic Muslim trash.

    Hitchens calls upon every shred of his humanistic and literary training to devise a workable strategy for saving well-spoken civilized humanity.

    Hitchens would have somebody from the murdering classes murder everyone of the fundamentalist, pig-headed, and un-poetic Muslim bastards.

    Hitchens would prefer a big strong masculine type with good diction for the murdering.

    I understand that as a young and sober man, Hitchens was a great fan of the Rubyiat of Omar Khayam.

    In the 12th century the wise and eternal Persian/Iranian poet wrote;

    There was the door to which I found no key.
    There was the veil through which I could not see.
    Some little talk of of both Me and Thee.
    And then no more talk of Thee and Me.

    The wonderful people of Iran/Persia are the descendants of the wise 12th century poet, Omar Khayam.

  2. Binh said on October 18th, 2007 at 10:12am #

    With half the American navy off the coast of Iran and the threat of an attack on the horizon, Mr. Fiyouzat makes the case not against an American attack, but against Iran’s nuclear program!

    Whatever his subjective intentions, objectively he’s playing into the hands of Condi Rice, Cheney, Giuliani, McCain, and Clinton, all of whom agree that Iran cannot have nuclear power and that they will launch a war to stop it.

    Iranian anti-imperialists and socialists have a duty – defend the country against a U.S. attack and criticize Iran’s rulers within that context. It does the Iranian left no good to say “Iran should not have a nuclear program, it’s wrong for x, y, and z reason” when the bombs are raining down on said nuclear facilities and civilian targets.

    Arguments like this help the Ahmadinjead’s make the case that the left is soft on U.S. imperialism.

  3. Rick said on October 18th, 2007 at 1:00pm #

    Whether or not Iran has a nuclear program, a U.S. attack on Iran would still be a war of aggression and, hence, wrong.

    I think going on and on about the pros and cons of Iran’s nuclear program misses the top reason for a U.S. attack on Iran. The U.S. government wasn’t complaining about Iran’s nuclear program when it was created by its trusty ally the Shah. So it’s pretty easy to dismiss Washington’s current saber rattling over Iran’s nuclear program as opportunistic grandstanding.

    Iran’s real transgression in the eyes of Washington is its defiance of its old U.S. master and its independence. While the average American, and the Great Thinker President, might not be very good at history, I guarantee you that people who think about U.S. foreign policy in Washington haven’t forgotten about the overthrow of the U.S. backed Shah and the taking of the U.S. Embassy that followed it. Such defiance cannot be tolerated and allowed to stand without some kind of U.S. retaliation. U.S. backing of Iraq’s invasion of Iran in 1980 failed to get the job done, so the U.S. government is going to have to do the dirty work this time to get back at Iran once and for all.

    Whether or not Iran has a nuclear program, Washington has a score to settle with Iran and will eventually settle it with a military assault of some kind. It won’t be an invasion, but a bombing campaign similar to the first attack on Iraq in 1991.

  4. Thomas Victor said on October 18th, 2007 at 11:10pm #

    Right at the start the article talks about “the great abyss separating the overwhelming majority of the people of Iran from the current government of Iran. “.

    That’s rubbish.

    Ahmadinejad was previously the democratically elected Mayor of Teheran and then became President by winning the presidential election.

  5. gerald spezio said on October 19th, 2007 at 5:23am #

    Thomas, dead giveaways in every paragraph.
    Triple-talking spooks everywhere.

    C’mon guys at DV, on occasion you must be sitting on your brains and enlightenment heritage.
    DV has still done more to publicize the Zionist machine, but it will never be enough as long as the murder continues.
    We are all complicit.

    This is about pre-meditated murder, and those who would type and snigger to condone that murder.

    Tens of thousands of healthy young people are studying communications and peeyar – destroying their brains …

    And we thought that most psychology was fabricated baloney.

  6. sijepuis said on October 19th, 2007 at 6:37am #

    Gerald Spezio wrote: “Who is Reza Fiyouzat. working for?”

    That was the first question that came to my mind, too! — But, hey, were we not treated to this article, or one much like it, a few months ago? It seems that Mr Fiyouzat is being trotted out once again …

    Two observations. First Mr Fiyouzat, probably happily settled in an affluent American suburb, neglects to mention that Iran is in a tight spot with regard to energy, importing as much as 40% of its petrol, for lack of sufficient internal refining capacity. Although I agree with the author that nuclear energy ought best be avoided, whenever possible, the fact is that as signatory of the NNPT, Iran has every legal right to pursue nuclear technology. In fact, co-signatories of the treaty are compelled, by law, to assist one another in matters of nuclear technology.

    Clearly the NNPT needs to be revised and enlarged so as to corral most particularly the presently nuclear-armed nations that have refused to sign the NNPT [suivez mon regard] and to review the world’s actual needs in terms of nuclear power. In the mean time, the war mongers’ argument against Iran, of breach of international law, not only fails legal scrutiny but reveals dark motives.

    Secondly, Fiyouzat overlooks the repeated, direct threats that are being made to Iran’s security. He must know as well as any that his country of origin is being threatened with pre-emptive nuclear strikes, NUCLEAR STRIKES. The mere thought ought to have Fiyouzat, and his fellow “Iranian Socialists”, screaming bloody murder.

    So, yes, this looks like a cheap intelligence job, which would explain why it has been brought back in a renewed repeat.

    I’m grateful to note that DV readers are seeing through the bull.

  7. Keyvan said on October 19th, 2007 at 10:28am #

    The fact is that the poverty of political discourse and culture expressed in this series of commentary befits the so-called US Left.
    There is no discussion, just the most atrocious labels: that Reza is an Agent, lives in Suburbs, that he is a Monarchist,… shame on you cultural terrorists!
    The Iranian people have had a Consttutional revolution in 1906, they deserve to have control over their public, political as well as nuclear technologies. Who are you to say they don’t? They deserve to know about alternative sources of energy, and they have every right to do away with the worst form of government: Theocracy!
    And they don’t need you bigots to know that they are under the most vicious threat from a US admin that is an international criminal gang of torturers, military dealers and murderous cowboys. But just because they are under a serious threat, they will not goosestep under the Mullahs. They took care of a puppet, corrupt Monarchy, and they definitely WILL get rid of this super corrupt theocracy. The IR of Iran has already changed identity many times in the past 28 years to fend off the glorious fight of women, intellectuals, writers and political and Human rights activists. The criminal US threat will NOT stop them from getting their rights, and making IR more irrelevent in their lives.
    Let it be known that Independent Iranian environmentalists in Iran have been fighting to protect peoples resources from Caspian to the Gulf for decades, and they have an ally in Mr. Fiyouzat.
    Shame on you all, but your level of discourse and debate clearly shows why you are such a small clique of useless pseudo-intellectuals babbling insults to anybody who yanks your mental chains for a bit. How can you ever dream to affect US public views on such grave matter,-Iran,- with such cultural poverty?
    I thank DV for publishing this article, and admire Prof. Fiyouzat for not giving in to verbal terror of a few bankrupt e-thugs.

  8. Shabnam said on October 19th, 2007 at 11:10am #

    Mr. Reza Fiyouzat
    has brought back his futile discussion on “IRAN” nuclear program and not against all nuclear states and as a result makes him suspicion.
    Iran nuclear energy program is used because the “Iranian socialist” abroad have been disappointed to mobilize the left in the west on their side to cooperate with the “secularist” fascists in Washington and Tel –
    aviv against the “Islamic” government to help them to establish a “secular socialist” government in Iran while they are living and building their lives for the past 34 years in the western countries and have no clue neither about the suffering of the Iranian people during the Iran-Iraq war nor the present condition under tight economic sanction and tremendous amount of hardship inflicted from the Zionst/Imperialist camp worse than fascists, on everyday lives of Iranian people and the threat of nuclear holocaust over their head because they want to pursue their rights under NPT to enrich for their fuel, less than 5 percent, to be independent scientifically and secure their investment in billion of dollars because they have been betrayed many times in the past by the west and have lost billion of dollars as a result of this betrayal.
    This self centered “socialist” who talked about:

    “Refusing to do the hard work,….. a mentality that, when adopted previously by western leftists, led to their defeat in one battlefield after another during the Cold War; failed to set a different tone for the direction of social change after the Cold War..”

    refuse to see that majority, at least the Iranian “socialists”, have fallen into the Imperialist/Zionist camp and are cooperating with the imperialist’s organizations such as NED, Open Societies, Alliance, freedom house, and…” and attacking the Iranian regime on program such as “Voice of America”, BBC and other programs like it and some of them like Khanbaba Tehrani, and people like him who are sitting with former Maoist and now close associates of the Zionists, Abbas Milani, with the “philosopher” who advocates “Open societies and its enemies,” Abdulkarim Suroush at the Hoover Institute and talking about “democracy” to make themselves available in case the Imperialist/Zionist are looking for Chalabi or Makiya, who was associated with the Trotskyite left “socialist”, type to bring “democracy” to Iran and wants us to believe his line of argument. He writes:

    “In the process of organizing their counter-revolution, the mullahs stole two of the Iranian left’s most popular slogans: anti-imperialism and support for the Palestinian people. It is the adoption of these two slogans that has since sent knee-jerk leftists off the track and chasing their own tails (not excluding some Iranian leftists).”

    Mr. Fiyouzat: you may fool others, certainly not me. At the time of “Iranian students movement” abroad that students were working against the Shah in US, where you were involved Mr. Fiyouzat, the Iranian students did not have that much information on Palestinian struggle. Sometimes you could have seen half or one page article but you did not have organized talk or workshop on the question of Palestinians. This position was true with the American left as well, because they saw, wrongly, Palestinian struggle as a nationalist movement in nature and therefore they thought, at least this was their excuse, it didn’t deserve their support. Another reason for this neglect was the dominant presence of “Zionist left” at the leadership position of these parties and therefore, they were thinking about the interest of Israel rather the genocide of Palestinian people. They did whatever was necessary to keep their members ignorant on the question of Zionism and its atrocities against the Palestinian. It was the work of Edward Said and others on question of Zionism and the struggle of Palestinian people who put their agenda on the map.
    With all fairness you can not say by any means the Islamic Republic stole this from the “left.” It is absolutely laughable. I used to read the Iranian newspapers and “ettelaat” where the “socialist” found these newspapers insignificant, these newspapers were writing so many articles on the question of Palestine which I did not see in the so called the Iranian left journals, who were copying quotes after quotes from Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky and some group from Mao without that much understanding at the campuses or the coffee houses of the Western countries. The question of Imperialism slogan, as you should know, was debated in 1976 and decided to abandon this slogan because some of the Iranian left believed: “Down with Imperialism” does not bring American supporters and make American nervous therefore it was abandoned. These days the Iranian left use this slogan to show that the Iranian regime is intolerant, to turn the opinion of the people in the western societies against the Iranian government because it is still popular with some fraction of the society in Iran.
    Mr. Fiyouzat you should be honest with yourself. How many Iranian “socialist” preach anti Imperialist slogan?
    I am sure you read Iranian opposition sites. Tell me honestly how many Iranian “socialist” are concerned with the Imperialist/Zionist war? This type of thinking has been abandoned by majority of the Iranian left and what has remained is ANTI IRANIAN GOVERNMNENT even at the time of massive attack by the Imperialist/Zionist camp for no reason. Are you aware that the Kurds calling “voice of America” and telling the American guest who is from the state department that you GIVE US ARMS AND WE THE KURDS WILL FIGHT FOR YOU, YOU JUST INVATE. Are you aware of that Mr. Fiyouzat?
    Iran Nuclear energy program is legal and the enrichment is Iran’s right. If nuclear energy is bad then should be bad for every single country on the planet. I think it is ingenuous to use the “environment friendly” mentality of some of the “left” group in the west to mobilize people against the Iranian government so you and your insignificant group get a chance to establish your “secular socialist” in Iran where has no support, at least for time being, because you and people like you have done nothing except empty words for the Iranian people. On the other hand the regime that you want to get rid off with “An Anti-Imperialist Case Against Iran’s Nuclear Program” slogan has produced tangible results that affect the life of Iranian people under tremendous hardship, economic embargo, threat of nuclear holocaust and invasion yet you and self centered people like you do not hesitate to use the available space repeatedly try to break the unity of all who cherish humanity against barbarism and the atrocities of the Zionists-Imperialist camp to get attention to your futile argument .

    You write:
    We assure you that as Iranians we believe in our own intellectual brilliance and are quite aware of our capabilities. As a good friend likes to remind, U.S. and other western engineering corporations are happily gobbling up the best of our minds, enriching themselves greatly in the process; NASA enjoys the capabilities of Iranian chief engineers and technicians daily; and …)

    While you are so proud of Iranian with their intellectual brilliance and capabilities who are improving the imperialist know how, NASA, to advance their weapon of mass destruction so they can eliminate the people of the “peripheries” easier and faster why don’t you want a nuclear energy program that brings clean energy and other benefits to Iranian people. Iran population is over 70 million and deserves to have a better life and clean environment with its own intellectual brilliance and natural resources. Why Iran should beg other countries for its fuel? How many countries with nuclear program have you seen is being attacked? None.
    It is racist to imply that the Iranians cannot be trusted with nuclear technology and it is Islamophobic when the same thing is suggested by an Iranian “socialist” who wishes to have a secular government
    in Iran based on such a futile argument as “earthquakes”. How many earthquakes have you seen in the United States for the past 30 years? More than one. One earthquake is enough
    To send your argument down the tube, forget about Japan, Brazil and others.
    It is everyone’s duty to be united against any attack militarily or economically. We should demand from the war criminals that remove the economic sanction which has brought tremendous suffering to
    Iranian people live in Iran. The rich are not affected, it the middle class and the poor who suffer everything from this illegal genocides.

    You and people like you should join the world community and support the right of the Iranian people and condemn and boycott those countries with their vicious plan trying to harm Iran.

  9. gerald spezio said on October 19th, 2007 at 12:58pm #

    Committee for the Present Danger is an Israeli propaganda website.

    An expatriate Iranian whore/typist, Akbar Atri, has a “piece” entitled Soidarity with Iran fro the WSJ on Oct. 15, ’07.


  10. Shabnam said on October 20th, 2007 at 11:12am #

    This article is posted again, has been posted on July 24, 2007, as well, because the Iranian secular “socialists” believe that if Iran masters the technology, it would be very difficult for them to overthrow the government and therefore their FANTSY of establishing a secular socialist government goes down the tube. They are so desperate to use any means to advance their agenda at the expense of Iranian people. No one takes them seriously for good reasons.
    However I don’t understand why Mr. Mike McMilan using this space irresponsibly and instead of “add to the discussion”, he copies article which is not even related to this issue and paste it here to widen and extend his campaign of Anti IRAN propaganda to this website.
    This article has been copied and pasted already in the “Add to the discussion” section under another article with the title “Venezuela and Revolutionary Moralism” by Peter LaVenia dated October 18, 2007. Apparently, Mr. McMilan, has gone out of VIDEOS and now pasting the same article at the end of other people’s posts to spread, in his mind, anti Iran propaganda to serve the war machine of the enemies of humanity, the ZIONIST-IMPERIALIST camp.

  11. Shabnam said on October 20th, 2007 at 11:14am #

    I am sorry about the name. I mean MILE McNIVEN

  12. Mike McNiven said on October 20th, 2007 at 11:41pm #

    A non-zionist/ non-Israeli /non-imperialist position of
    U.S. progressives on things nuclear:

  13. David Short said on October 21st, 2007 at 8:27pm #

    Reza Fiyouzat, you make some good points, but one is left with the feeling that you might be attacking straw men, due to the lack of references in your piece. Who are these leftists siding with the régime and its nuclear ambitions? You make it sound as though such allegiance is the norm among the left. If it is so, then surely it should be childsplay to provide countless examples of articles such opinions.

    I have only seen people attacking Western hypocrisy and defending Iranian rights under international law. I have never seen a progressive arguing that Iran actually should build such dangerous power stations, or defending the theocratic nature of the régime.

    Provide references or be suspected of attacking a straw man.

  14. Shabnam said on October 21st, 2007 at 8:40pm #

    To readers of this site:

    MIKE MCNIVEN is a pro Israel, Pro Zionist and Anti Iran Propagandist who uses this site to link to the same article “Congressman Kucinich Must Find a Better Role Model than Bob Ney” that has posted many times in the past few months. Mike McNiven is a propagandist who Jamie, the rabbit Zionist, thanks him many times for his opinion.
    This article is written by an Iranian charlatan who spreads lies about “Iran Lobby” and portraits those who criticizing Bush administration for his fascist policy on Iran which is a Zionist policy, part of “Iran Lobby”. Please read a few lines from the article that McNiven gives a link to:

    “An alarming resemblance exists between Ney’s advocacy of Tehran over the past decade and Congressman Dennis Kucinich’s (D-Ohio) advocacy of Tehran now. On August 1, 2007, Baztab, the Farsi language web site controlled by the former commander of the revolutionary guards, wrote an article about Kucinich’s “lonely battle” in opposition to sanction efforts against the Iranian regime.4
    Kucinich and Ney’s support of Tehran’s ayatollahs is quite similar in method and substance. They both call for engagement with mullahs; They both vehemently fight against any type of sanction against the mullahs; They both oppose human right statements against Iran by the congress; They both associate with the same known mullahs’ proxies in the US; And they both side with Iran when it comes to Iran’s anti Israeli rhetoric.”

    Mike McNiven, A Zionist pro Israel who has disguised himself as pro Iranian people brings videos made by the monarchists, puppet of the Zionists who are cooperating with the fifth columnists, the Zionists, to help them to take power in Iran. People like Michael Ledeen and Kenneth Timmerman are part of Zionists who are working towards this goal, to bring the Shah’s family back who serves Israel.
    Hassan Daioleslam, the writer of this article which is given by Mike McNiven, the Zionist, attacking both Bob Ney and Kucinich as “Iran Lobby” and saying that both Kucinich and Ney do not want more sanctions against Iranian people to strangulate their economy and kill more children, like Iraqi children, so they may be forced to transfer the power to puppet of the Zionist that Mike McNiven represents.

    Please expose the Zionists who are sent to progressive sites to preach and spread anti Iranian people propaganda and harm the fragile movement of Anti Zionist so they can kill more Iranian children like Iraqi children to smoothen the path for further action.

    Shame on the disguised Zionist. We will not going to be silent and will expose them every time the smell is too strong to be tolerated.

  15. Keyvan said on October 21st, 2007 at 11:51pm #

    Shady conglamorates (Bonyads) under IRGC and Theocrachiks, with no public accountability and control, run huge parts of Iran’s economy; another major part is under mega-capitallists, most of them Mullahs that have monopoly over political power as well. It is a very corrupt economy divided between State and Mullah Capitalists. According to IR own records, the divide between rich and poor in iran is many times larger than what it was under the puppet traitor Shah.
    There has been torture, imprisonment and murder of independent activists, thinkers and leftists (even 13 year olds) for many decades in Iran. The Khavaran cemetary has graves of thousands of political prisoners that were leftists, nationalists or simple secular anti-Imperialists. A Nurenberg trial will one day bring justice to IR butchers.
    There are no free elections in Iran, all candidates are hand-picked by an Oligarchy of clergy. Ahmadi represents the Bonyads, the armed forces, simply all ideologically rigid and non-private (but not publicly controlled) agencies of political and economic power.
    The left in Iran lives on, had a huge hand in overthrow of the Puppet, and is strong in all forms, among journalists, students and ordinary people. The theocracy was super brutal but could not execute all leftists, or all the ideals of Socialism and genuine democracy.
    IR of Iran has kept quiet on North Caucusus Muslims to Russian atrocities, in Chechnya, Ingushettia and Daghestan, and is now making deals with Putin, and many of these poor people have iranian heritage or linkage. Tehran Theocracy will also sell Lebanon and Afghan people the moment the right forces are in power in US. Khatami wanted to make a grand deal in 2003, but Bush, drunk with his ‘mission accomplished’ in Iraq, refused!
    The US threat against Iran is real, but the dark and unpopular nature of IR among the majority of Iranians is real as well. People will fight for theit homeland if attacked, but that does not change the ultra-rightist nature of all factions of the current Iranian regime. Iranians will fight, and no foreign influence, Zionist, British, will ever diminish the intensity of this fight if US attacks Iran.
    Now, if Mr. McNiven was the devil himself, a card carrying Mossad agent or whatever, he is printing articles with CONTENT, there are POINTS to be discussed, argued, and refuted if one disagrees with it.
    A person is only making personal attacks, one negative label after label. I remember IR Guards in the 1980s in Iran Universities started with labels (‘enemies of God’) with whomever disagreed with them and then executed people based on labels.
    One can be very anti-war, against Bush war drumbeats and criminal intentions without slavishly adoring a brutal and criminal Theocracy.
    This is the only way to truly serve the interests of Iranian and other oppressed people around the world.

  16. AJ Nasreddin said on October 22nd, 2007 at 7:48am #

    Guys, don’t be so harsh. Reza Fiyouzat probably did it for the money. If you can write like him, please apply by filling out the following application:

    Have a nice day. 🙂

  17. reza said on October 22nd, 2007 at 5:48pm #

    People with little logic require a lot of noise, baseless accusations and outright shameless lies to push aside reason.

    You can sholooqhesh koni all you want, Shabnam, but you’re making yourself dizzy, without persuading anyone. But, then again, maybe you are paid to storm the barn; so, if it’s paying your bills, keep rocking, sister!

    Intelligent socialists don’t find it necessary to remind everybody that they are anti-imperialists/anti-Zionists with every thing they utter, nor with every dump they take. It’s taken for granted. But, since I have affection for disabled people, for those who like to act blind and willfully deaf, my anti-imperialist stance was clearly stated.

    The noise-makers, however, don’t like to learn that Iranian people’s fight for democracy is, and must be, as has always been, and will be, for the foreseeable future, simultaneously a fight against imperialism. We, the people of the Third World, are in the same position as are African Americans; their fight too is simultaneously against colonialism/racism and for justice and true democracy, in the belly of the beast. One fight cannot be separated from the other. It is the same for us, and it is an ongoing struggle. Imperialism/colonialism don’t take breaks.

    As to the question of imperialists using the nuclear issue as an excuse to attack Iran … If imperialists want to attack, they’ll attack us. It has NOTHING to do with the nukes (that too is stated clearly in the article). They didn’t attack us in 1953 (when they overthrew our democratically elected government) because we had nukes; they attacked us for different reasons (and NOT because Mossadegh was a commie-lover). They didn’t attack Vietnam because they had nukes. They don’t attack and savage the Palestinians daily for the past sixty years because they have nukes. WAKE UP!!

    So, when they attack us in Iran, what are they going to hit first? WAKE UP!!

    Believe me, when the enemy has TEN THOUSAND nuclear warheads, having a few is no deterrent. Like Chirac said, even if a few are launched, within minutes Tehran’d be bombed back to the Stone Age. And nobody’s that stupid; least of all the mullahs. But, if there’s a live nuclear power plant (way down south, mind you, away from the seat of power), all the enemy has to do is drop a mini-nuke and let all hell loose.

    What we DON’T want, under any conditions __ just as the government in Iran should not want this either __ is a glowing radioactive zone stretching for hundreds of miles.

    Those who prefer to make believe (that imperialists need legitimate excuses to attack us lesser peoples) forget that imperialism NEVER LEAVES. We are ALWAYS under attack. Imperialism, when we are friendly to it and welcoming, attacks our livelihoods through its beloved corporations; something, I believe, the proponents of a ‘normalization’ actually wish for; meaning, they like it if imperialists should ‘normalize’ relations and allow ‘investments’ for ‘development’; nothing to do with looting the national goods of the Iranians; but, the ‘nice way’!

    Now, who’s the pro-imperialist?

    Make all the noise you want. Noise doesn’t change reality.

  18. Mike McNiven said on October 23rd, 2007 at 12:09am #

    In one day, you wrote two contradictory comments! Above, based on your personal experience, you charged Mr.Fiyouzat with getting money from US gov.; and with regard to the Mr.Wasserman’s piece on the dangers of nuclear reactors you made the below comment! So, if an Iranian scholar/activist say that there are green alternatives, he is corruptly wrong, but, when the same words are said by an American activist, they are correct! What gives? Are you colonized? Have a nice day. 🙂

    “AJ Nasreddin said on October 22nd, 2007 at 7:06 am #
    …By the way – did anyone hear about green alternatives, like solar energy, being stopped from export to developing countries? “

  19. Mike McNiven said on October 23rd, 2007 at 12:23am #

    The anti-imperialist/anti-capitalist/anti-zionist, pro-Palestinian Rights editor of Counter Punch, Alexander Cockburn, chose the following article, last September, for the worldwide readers of his site:

  20. AJ Nasreddin said on October 23rd, 2007 at 7:20am #


    Sorry if my sarcasm isn’t clear. I’ve been around a bit and have seen the world. If you heard so much doublespeak, you’d be cynical about most anything. I’m an American, but after living abroad and seeing all the tricks my government plays to get what they want, I’m a bit skeptical of most people’s intentions – it’s just become a matter of habit.

    If Iran wants nuclear power, it’s not because they need the energy. If Iran really wanted clean energy, they’d go solar or something. Truth is that they want bombs – the political reality dictates that they be able to make their own bombs. Even if they can’t make a bomb, that DU, as the Americans and Brits have shown, comes in handy when you need to make a hole in armour plating!

    I’m not saying Reza is pro-American or even anti-Iranian. I get the strong feeling that he doesn’t like the current government in Iran – and that’s enough for him to get money from the State Department. He doesn’t have to be wholly on the American side to be useful – his voice can still be used for Bush’s nefarious plans.

    Have a nice day. 🙂

  21. AJ Nasreddin said on October 23rd, 2007 at 7:23am #

    By the way, I have seen people say almost anything for some cash.

  22. Shabnam said on October 23rd, 2007 at 10:48pm #

    When someone begins his paragraph with a big word such as ‘logic’ and charges others with baseless accusation that he condemns in the previous line, and then I know I am not dealing with a ‘logical’ person. People with ego don’t have enough confidence in themselves or “goods” they are trying to sell thereby they try to influence others with words bigger than their mouth. What is ‘intelligent socialists’? Do we have ‘stupid socialists’? I hope you don’t mean socialists are inherently more intelligent than others. Only those with ego can make such a stupid distinction.

    You write:
    “Intelligent Socialists don’t find it necessary to remind everybody that they are anti imperialists/anti-zionists with every thing they utter,.. It’s taken for granted.”

    Let me tell you I do not agree with you. You and the organization that you are involved with, The Unity of the Left, * cleverly utter Anti Imperialist message every time they turn, but hesitate to do the same with Zionism and its critics of Israel do not include the word ‘Zionism.’ This clever line of dealing with Israel are pushed by those hidden Zionists and their followers, among them the Iranian left, for the past fifty years and is prevalent among the sell out Anti war movement in US including the UFPJ and ANSWER and is popular with individuals including Chomsky and Phyliss Bennis of UFPJ. Your group has no objection to Zionism as long as Israel stops their “militarist aggression in the region and against Palestinians” ** but at the same time your hatred against anything ISLAMIC present you as Islamophobic because your group utter “ Anti-Imperialism must be accompanied with the opposition to Iran’s ISLAMIC regime and reactionary groups associated with it.” Thus you cleverly bring the slogan of:
    “NO TO IMPERIALIST WARS NO TO IRAN’S ISLAMIC REGIME” which is also, cleverly if I may say, adopted by the Zionist dominated Anti War movement such as UFJP which has been criticized by many Iranians from all walks of life and they did not sign their petition and demanded modification, but the same petition was signed BY NOAM CHOMSKY.
    According to your organization’s publication, The Unity of the left, where Ms. Yassmine Mather is one of your spokesperson, has been kicked out of the majority of anti war movement demonstrations and recently from CASMII because of your misleading slogan.
    Your prejudice against anything Islamic, including Hezbollah, is troublesome and when you preach: “We, the people of the Third World,…..their fight too is simultaneously against colonialism/racism and for justice and true democracy…” shows your hypocrisy.

    Your hatred of Hezbollah, is supported by the Lebanese people regardless of their political or religious affiliation, at this juncture is unacceptable. Your organization writes: “We will name and shame those organizations that collude with Hezbollah to attack our political rights; we will continue expressing our demands and our slogans in anti war protests.” Of course rejection of your position by the political organization of the Anti- war movement happened in Europe thus we are talking about Hezbollah of Lebanon.
    In another article of your organization with title “political Islam’s relation to Capital and class’ by Ardeshir Mehrdad and Yassamine Mather on Islamists:
    “The spokes people of world imperialism cannot claim innocence as they denounce the dangers of ‘Islamic fundamentalism’ and warn of ‘fanaticism’ endangering the security and stability of world civilization. They know better than anyone that the global capitalist system has itself created the conditions for Islamic fundamentalism and fanaticism.”
    If you believe that the ‘political Islamic movements’ are the product of the global capitalist system then why not direct your hatred, at least at this critical moment that Iran and the region is under attack by the most savage army and personnel in the history of mankind, against the zonist – imperialist forces and not against Iran. You with your misleading slogan are creating tension, confusion and as a result indecisiveness.
    You are correct when you write ‘If imperialist want to attack, they’ll attack us. It has NOTHING to do with the nukes.” However you are wrong when you assume we have no option but defeat. That’s why you think your futile argument about IRAN NUKE does not make any difference for those who want to attack humanity. You ought to know that Imperialists are not as ‘irrational’ as you think thus “if they want to attack they will.” They act according to their own rationality. They spend billion of dollar to sell their lies to the ignorant citizens. It is our duty to understand the priorities and necessities of the current situation and act accordingly to minimize the danger which is coming from the most SECULAR, brutal and ruthless capitalists who want to destroy us all. That’s why it is utmost important to reach the people of the world and inform them that this is not their interest and ask for their cooperation not by signing stupid petition, rather bringing in economic loss for the capitalist forces in form of STRIKE.
    I think you should WAKE UP from your futile FANTASY that you can defeat the global capitalist system by going after the Islamic Republic at this time. The struggle of the Iranian workers, teachers, and…., is not due to their love for ‘intelligent socialism’ rather they want to improve their economic power. You should demand from the imperialist/zionist to remove the sanction and to get out of the way and stop going after India, China, Turkey, Germany and other countries whenever Iran wants to engage in a lawful economic activity with other countries and remind them that their action is AGIANST THE INTERNATIONAL LAW. Iran needs to create jobs for its educated labor force then you will see less complains and more activities towards improvement of the civil society and creation of an environment towards secularism and democracy. People need the least basics to fight for democracy. No one can build democracy on empty stomach and democracy needs its own institutions. Iranina people are fighting for their rights. That’s why the rootless imperialist-zionist try to strangulate Iran with economic sanction and destabilize the society by funding groups and creating phoney “minorities” to serve its goal of dividing Iran into pieces and putting one against the other to weaken the country thereby able them to control and dominate Iran and to create puppets for illegitimate state of Israel according to “A clean break’.
    I think it is the time that you and people like you stop fooling yourself and joint the international community and arrange strike in those major countries that are part of the machine war once a week on Tuesday or any other day to bring economic loss to the capitalists to make it expensive if they dare to harm Iran. Iran should use technology including nuclear energy in order to meet its energy requirement to support its economic development. Nuclear power creates jobs for Iranian scientists and technicians and creates other related industries. It makes it dangerous because Iran has been denied scientific help by its enemies. Iran is signatory to NPT and should receive help from the agency. There are more than 400 nuclear plants are operating in 25 countries around the world and more countries want to have their own reactor.

  23. Shabnam said on October 24th, 2007 at 8:37am #

    Please print my 10/23/2007 post, reply to Mr.Fiyouzat . Thanks