Ahmadinejad Makes The Case for Human Rights and World Peace in Newsweek

Flush with confidence after the publication of the NIE, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wrote an article in this week’s Newsweek entitled “An Arrogant Approach: The Danger of Unilateralism-for the United States and the World.” It is a prime example of a proponent of Jihadi Islam attacking the West with its own terms and values- multilateralism, human dignity, and “global, sustainable peace and security”. Like many others who share his worldview, Ahmadinejad understands that the West’s media is an effective, available means of weakening its resolve.

In the name of God the compassionate, the merciful: the international community has moved away from peace, security and justice due to the mismanagement of some of its actors. Yet the expectation of a world marked by security and tranquillity endures.

After the end of the cold war and the regional confrontations emanating from bipolar competition, many hoped there would be a beautiful spring in international relations, as a multilateral system emerged that offered equal opportunities to all members of the international community. It was hoped that the new world would enable all nations, in light of universally accepted humane norms and mutual respect, to advance together, eradicate poverty and injustice, and set aside bitter memories of the past that were nothing but war, bloodshed, violence and tension.

Those hopes were dashed by the United States and its leaders, who adopted a new and aggressive approach. Their assertion of unchallenged global leadership-and the inability of the international community and the United Nations to challenge it-frustrated hopes for a stable and peaceful world. Instead, once again we witness the re-emergence of a system that produced nothing but tension and insecurity.

“Absolute unilateralism” by the United States is the salient element of the new system adopted by the U.S. government toward world development. It has prevented the American people from playing their proper role in eliminating tyranny and violence and in helping bring peace, justice and security. Why should the prestige of the great American people be tarnished by the selfish and bullying ambitions of their government, whose negative role is clearly visible in many current conflicts, especially in the Middle East?

The worst example of this approach was the U.S. attack on Iraq and its catastrophic consequences. What was the crime of the 700,000 Iraqis, mostly women and children, who have died since, or of the many more that have been disabled, injured and displaced? On the basis of what international norms and rules can the U.S. government justify its actions over the past four and a half years there? Who should be held accountable for the destruction and oppression of the Iraqi people?

The contradictory policies of the U.S. government make it difficult to believe in its good intentions. The United States supported the despotic regime of Saddam Hussein-a regime that imposed a war on Iran for eight long years with U.S. support, costing both nations hundreds of thousands of lives. Saddam’s regime attacked Iran and even its own people with chemical weapons supplied by the United States and Europe.?It is one of the bitter ironies of our time that after openly supporting the heinous regime, America then attacked Iraq under the pretext of eliminating its weapons of mass destruction, shed the blood of hundred of thousands, and sold this invasion as a victory to the world as well as its own citizens.

As the result of its mismanagement of the crisis and the continuation of its hegemonic and unilateral policies, the United States now faces a deadlock in Iraq. As long as this approach persists, there will not be a clear path out of the present problems there, which mainly grip the innocent Iraqi people.

Only reasonable methods-like adopting an exit plan, transferring power to the Iraqi government, avoiding divisive policies toward Iraqi groups, accepting the blame and ceasing to point the finger at others- will allow the United States to extricate itself from its predicament. The people of Iraq, despite their religious and ethnic differences, have lived together and next to Iranians peacefully for centuries. If the shadow of occupation were lifted from Iraq, they would be able to guide their country toward security, stability and progress.

The heavy shadow of America’s unilateralism is also visible on the unresolved question of Palestine, which is one of the gravest tragedies of the 20th and 21st centuries. The U.S. government has succumbed to the demands of the Zionists and the Zionist regime. This is a lethal ailment that afflicts U.S. administrations. The American people do not like to see their leaders fall captive to the Zionist network. Surely the American people would prefer U.S.-inspired policies to those perpetrated by the Zionists. No fair-minded American is happy with the present situation. Regrettably, despite the objections of some of America’s elite, personal and political interests-especially those of the present administration-have prevented any action to counter this fatal disease. So long as this situation persists, we will see tyranny and injustice in the region. The U.S. government will bear the heavy responsibility for the Zionist regime’s massacre of Palestinian women and children in their homes and territory.

Ever since the victory of the Islamic Revolution, the attitude and the approach of the U.S. government toward Iran has also been coercive and unilateralist. America’s policy toward Iran’s peaceful nuclear program is the most important aspect of this approach. Iran is a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency and a signatory of the Nuclear NonProliferation Treaty. It therefore has the right to nuclear fuel cycle technology for peaceful purposes. Yet America, which itself produces nuclear fuel and has a large arsenal of nuclear weapons, has opposed the production of nuclear fuel by Iran for peaceful purposes and under the IAEA inspection. Indeed, the United States has tried to politicize the Iranian nuclear issue and has enticed and threatened other countries into exerting pressure on Iran. How is it that the same country that used the first atomic bomb, killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people, and that is presently spending billions of dollars for the production and testing of the most advanced and destructive armaments, behaves this way toward Iran’s peaceful nuclear program? The IAEA has repeatedly declared that there is no evidence that Iran has diverted its nuclear program to military ends, and the Islamic Republic has allowed free access to the Agency’s inspectors.

Iran’s nuclear program is supported by the entire Iranian nation, at home and abroad. Opposition to this peaceful program will alienate the Iranian people and strengthen their determination to continue it and to reject the illegitimate and illegal demands of the U.S. government.

Resorting to outdated policies such as making threats and imposing sanctions will only lead to more lost opportunities. America’s current policies will only increase the hatred of nations toward its administration and further isolate its regime from the world. Friendship with the Iranian people and with all people of the world is a major asset that the U.S. government has deprived itself of.

I think the common denominator of all these problems is distance from religious values, ethics and spirituality. With such distance from ethical and spiritual values, human dignity, love and kindness-which are the common elements of all great Abrahamic religions-and humanity’s moral, material and civic achievements have been jeopardized. The best way to avoid the deadlock is to emphasize common values and the natural desire of all human beings for perfection, benevolence, justice, brotherhood and kindness. These values can help us find solutions to all problems facing humanity. Global, sustainable peace and security will be realized only through the establishment of true justice and brotherhood. How can we expect to reach sustainable peace and security by humiliating others and acting in ways that depart from ethical and spiritual values?

Among the comments following the article on the Newsweek website was this gem, one of the weakest excuses I have seen for Ahmadinejad’s Holocaust denial.

Comment: In the hysteria over Ahmadinejad’s Holocaust comments it seems to have been forgotten that he really began making them in earnest at the time of the Muhammad cartoons brouhaha.

People rioted in protest over the insults. In the “West” people were bemused over Muslim reaction.

Ahmadinejad THEN thumbed his nose at the state civil religion of Israel – The Holocaust.

I don’t know of any riots over Ahmadinejad’s defamation. I have seen, however, kilo-tons of sabre rattling propaganda
for war against Iran and they almost invariably quote “quotes” attributed to Ahmadinejad relating to the Holocaust.

“Muslims riot, Christians and Jews make war”

6 Responses to Ahmadinejad Makes The Case for Human Rights and World Peace in Newsweek

  1. Michael B says:

    Well, he knows his audience, knows it better than it knows itself.

  2. fp says:

    The west is so desperate for “peace” that it’ll swallow anything. When the target audience is ignorant and unable to reason, it is gullible and it buys anything.


  3. Michael B says:

    Posted today, this brief by David Harris of AJC demonstrates the gravitas, the soberness of mind and the purposefulness, with which Ahmadinejad/Iran needs to be considered. That brief is focused on the NIE, but the subject is all of one piece. That Harris’s sober approach and articulations serve as a contrast with the sundry opinings among the hoi polloi is not surprising, that it serves as a contrast with the Dept. of State, the CIA, the “intelligence community” at large and others in high places of responsibility and authority in the U.S. is a cause for marked concern.

    I can’t say with certainty, but the authors of the NIE have most likely evidenced themselves as execrable actors rather than sober minded analysts. Harris is more diplomatic than that, as he should be, but it’s as if those actors are getting their script from Robert Redford and Keystone Cops styled ideologues and Hollywood at large; in sum reflecting a superfluity of superfical egos and presumptives.

  4. fp says:


    ignorance and inability to reason are two of the most dangerous things working against the US.

  5. Eliyahu says:

    I got something for you to ponder, fp. How about considering the effect of hard rock music –& related forms of noise– on the ability to think, and to feel sensitively? Methinks that hard rock coarsens thought and feeling. Here I’m sort of following Plato who stressed the importance of music in developing his philosopher-kings. I’m probably insulting some otherwise decent folks by what I’ve said. Sorry if anyone is offended. But what do you think of this Platonic notion, fp? Has hard rock aided in the West’s intellectual decline, in your view?

  6. fp says:

    the forms of so-called modern music including hard-rock and rap, are a consequence of the dumbing down of society.

    the music i grew up was the pop of the sixties, which included rock. it was nothing like the crap that they call music today.

    as i matured i went for classical music. but i can still listen to sixties pop, while i cannot stand anything current.

    the point is that inability to think and modern “music” are reflections of the same decline of knowledge and reason.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *