Iran's defense minister on Interpol list

As you know the nominee for Iran's defense minister is on the Interpol list, wanted by Argentina for questioning regarding the alleged Iranian role bombings of Jewish centers in that country.

[I had to gigle when the Israelis so self-righteously claimed that the nomination of the defence minister "proves the nature of the regime" in Iran -- nevermind that pretty much every Israeli prime minster has been a well-known terrorists  and war-criminals responsible not just for the massacre of Palestinian villagers, Egyptian POWs, Lebanese civilians and Palestinian refugees, but also European officials..oh, and a hotel-full of Brits.] 

Anyway, a quick trip down memory lane:

8-24-94: (Reuters) - Argentina is admitting to a major diplomatic blunder, all but withdrawing charges that Iranian officials were involved in an anti-Jewish blast that killed 96 people last month. With the credibility of its sole witness in tatters and no other evidence against Tehran, the government told the Supreme Court Tuesday night there were insufficient elements to press the case. Pressed for answers after a previous attack on the Israeli embassy that killed 30 people two years ago went unsolved, Judge Galeano quickly fingered the Iranian officials in the July 18 bombing...

This isn't the first time that Iranians were placed on the Interpol list for their alleged involvement in the bombing. Previously, Interpol had to remove their names when it became clear that Argentina didn't actually have the evidence to back up their claims of Iranian involvement, and the Interpol warrant had been issued improperly. The whole investigation linking Iran to the bombings totally fell apart when it turned out that the investigating magistrate, Judge Galeano, who had indicted Iranians in the bombing had also paid $400,000 to the Carlos Telledin, the witness that implicated Iran -- a car thief who was apparently trying to implicate Nasrin Mokhrati, his Iranian hairdresser/girlfriend in the bombing.

Then there was the allegation by Mesbahi and other "defectors" which also failed to pan out.

Britain arrested Hade Soleimanpour, Iran's former ambassador to Argentina, based on Argentina's claims that he was involved in the bombing, and held him for extradition to Argentina -- except that the Argentinians were not able to provide the minimal degree of evidence tying him to the bombing necessary to support the extradition order (they were only required to show prima facie evidence, which is legally the lowest standard of proof.) The Brits gave the Argentinians two chances to provide this evidence, and they failed to do so both times, and the British released the Iranian ambassador.

So, why is it that the Argentinian prosecutors (and the Israelis and the Americans) who loudly accuse Iran of the bombing, can't actually present any, you know, evidence?

But then, the US and Pro-Israeli lobby kicked in and started a new campaign of trying to link Iran to the bombings, pressing the Argentinians to reopen the investigation. A new prosecutor was appointed, and of course new Interpol warrants were issued under US and Israeli pressure.

So, here we are.

The old issues of newspapers in the US are chock full of the detritus of half-baked conspiracy theories about Iran that started as speculation & finger-pointing, and were embellished through repetition by the pundits and anonymous allegations from Israel and US officials, but which never quite panned-out factually. These sorts of things  occasionally come back into fashion once in while. The claim about Iranian involvement in the Argentina bombings is just one example; allegations about an Iranian involvment in the Pan Am 103 bombing is yet another one.

For other examples: I remember a NY Times headline which practically screamed that Iran shot down TWA 800 off of Long Island in New York. And lets not forget all those "Iranian hit squads" sent to San Diego to assassinate the wife of the Captain of the USS Vincennes whose van was bombed -- and for which a family acquaintance was ultimately suspected. A particular US Congressman was scaremongering about an alleged Iranian plot to crash an airplane into a nuclear reactor in his state, and others are claiming that the Iranians want to explode a EMP bomb over the US to knock out the US electrical grid (naturally, both stand to gain juicy federal contracts to prevent these alleged Iranian "conspiracies.")

These sorts of accusations are not hard to find, nor are they hard to manufacture. They have a way of becoming "truth" through mere repetition, even in the absence of evidence. 

One should also wonder why Iran would want to harm relations with Argentina, which was a major trading partner with Iran (especially in the nuclear power field) just to blow up a building? Who would stand most to gain from ruining that relationship? The Iranians?

But of course, as long as one can rely on innuendo endlessly repeated and embellished in newspaper columns parroting the officials, who needs facts?

Comments

[Pirouz]

You know, Cyrus, to this I would just add the bombing incident that took place in Saudi Arabia during the Clinton administration. Saudi intelligence put the blame on Iran in order to cover up for al-Qaeda, which was the actual culprit. The FBI bought it and sold it Clinton, at what was looking to be an opportune time for reconcilement with the Khatami government. It was a real opportunity that was missed due to the wrongful blaming of Iran for the attack in Saudi Arabia.

This is a good post. I agree, the warrants are politically motivated. Political forces in the West that are opposed to a nmeaningful engagement with Iran find these tactics especially convenient at times like the present.