In September 2010, Ahmadinejad criticised the Palestinian Authority for agreeing to renew direct peace talks with Israel; the Iranian President called on the Palestinians to continue armed struggled, even though the overwhelming majority in the occupied territories want peace with Israel. This subversive attitude from Iran is the unreconciled problem that lurks within the plans for a two state solution.
Israeli’s will be held hostage if Iran gained weapon-grade nuclear capability; and so will Palestinians. I’m a friend of Palestine and a proud advocate for their statehood, but it cannot occur without the Iranian question being solved. How can a peaceful Palestine prosper, when the Iranian regime finance pro-Islamist Hamas, hell bent on the destruction of its neighbour?
The 2009-10 Iranian election protests, which the Stop the War coalition turned a blind eye and refused to condemn the shooting, mass rapes and torture of their contemporaries, displayed the true totalitarian nature of Ahmadinejad. Alas, though, moral equivalence was drawn between Western governments and past-extreme regimes – not Iran, who is actually committing atrocities. Ignoring the immoral position and vituperative rhetoric of the anti-war crowd, I ask them one question;
Which is easier to solve, a nuclear or non-nuclear Iran?
Before you provide an appropriate answer, allow me to provide you with two points for your consumption and accommodation for a possible answer. In 2006, the President of Iran spoke about the prophecy of Ezekiel and called on God to send Hidden Imam, or Mahdi, to Earth. According to Islamic traditions, the Hidden Imam will return to signal that start of the End of Days; later, that year, Ahmadinejad informed the world that “We are ready for the end of days.”
A theocracy, lead by a Messianic President who thinks the world is about to end, might acquire a nuclear weapon.
IAEA concluded that Iran continues to defy UN Resolutions and is failing to cooperate fully. In September 2011, the agency points to possible military dimensions to the Iranian programme and the increasing concerns of the Agency. Yet, Iran is treated as an innocent party being exploited by imperialists. But this is an argument, in which, Britain cannot be on the wrong side of history.
If Iran constructs a nuclear weapon then a two-solution is dead. Children in Ramallah will not fulfill their aspirations of freedom, liberty and statehood. The citizens of Tel Aviv will be under a contentious threat of a direct nuclear strike and the people of Tehran shall remain hostage to a prophecy driven President.
I shall end, yet again, asking the same question. Which is easier to solve, a nuclear or non-nuclear Iran?