The Poison Hemlock Reigns Supreme
Jul 30th, 2010 by pedestrian
Mousavi in parliament. The banners behind him say: “jangh, jangh ta pirouzi” [war, war until victory] And “dirouz Khoramshah, emrou Karbala” [Yesterday (we freed Iranian) Khoramshahr. Today, (we capture Iraqi) Karbala].
————————————
The Iran-Iraq war began on September 22nd, 1980 when formations of Iraqi MiG-23s and MiG21s attacked Iran’s air bases at Mehrabad and Doshen-Tappen (both near Tehran), as well as Tabriz, Bakhtaran, Ahvaz, Dezful, and Abadan – across the Southern and Western borders. Saddam hoped to take advantage of the revolutionary chaos within Iran, and attacked without warning. The conflict ended in August of 1988, and remains one of the longest wars of the 20th century.
Why the war did not end with Iraq’s retreat in 1982 and Saudi Arabi’s promise of $70 billion dollars in reparations to Iran is still a debate very much a taboo in the Iranian press, much like criticizing the supreme leader. From what little does get out we hear two dominant narratives: (1) the war should have ended, the clerics used it to further their dominance and suppression. (2) Saddam was a madman supported by the United States and much of the Arab World and would have attacked again. Iran had no choice but to carry on with the war.
The war went on for another six years, and the story of its ending is tied to one of the most infamous phrases of the post-revolution era: “the poison hemlock“:
The government was no longer able to carry on with the war. Rafsanjani, as head of the war effort, goes to the supreme leader (Ayatollah Khomeini) and informs him that the country can no longer afford to fight a war. He volunteers to appear on TV and announce that Iran will accept a ceasefire. Khomeini can in turn pretend that he had no previous notice of this announcement, and prosecute Rafsanjani. Khoemini agrees to end the war, and writes a letter to the nation declaring that he is “forced to drink the poison hemlock” – that is, accept UN resolution 598 and end the bloody, decade long battle.
After Mir Hossein Mousavi announced his candidacy, on May 24th, 2009, , Hassan Abbasi, a leading “theorist” of the hardliners met with pro-government bloggers and announced: “Mir Hossein Mousav, Hashemi Rafsanjani and Rezaie [the other conservative candidate] formed a deceptive triangle during the days of the holy war and forced Imam Khomeini to drink the poison hemlock.”
He argued that the country was in a good position to fight and win the war (no reference to why it hadn’t for 8 years if it was in such good shape), had all the resources it needed to maintain the war … But that it was Rafsanjani and Mousavi that wanted defeat and “humiliation” for Iran, and thus they “forced” Khomeini into ending the battle.
These arguments have been made continuously since before the election by the hardliners, used to “prove” their point that Mousavi is an agent, wanting to take Iran “towards humiliation and defeat” … just like he wanted Iran to fail in the war with Iraq, they argue.
Now Mohsen Rafiqdoust has come out with similar statements. Rafiqdoust is the former minister of the Revolutionary Guards under Mousavi, and former head of Bonyad Mostazafan (Foundation of the Oppressed). During his time at the foundation, he is infamous for his shoddy business dealings which turned the foundation into a multi-million dollar enterprise.
Funny enough, in the interviews, Rafiqdoust has tried to prove how dedicated to the war he was with statements such as “I would go and confiscate goverment factories and produce weapons there.” He also admits to smuggling “unlawful materials” … but all is ok, because he only did it to support the war. He slams “the government” (Mousavi) however for not being “pro-war”.
He complains the sometime in the middle of the war, Mousavi orderd him to send IRGC trucks from the frontlines to distribute bread and flour among villagers saying: “many of the ministers within the cabinet too just did not have the spirit for war.” He also implies that it was terrible for the government to allocate resources to feeding citizens and attending to their needs when these resources should have all been utilized to fight the war.
Mousavi has finally come out with a response to these allegations. Mousavi states that he “never intended to open discussion about the first decade of the revolution” (most of which he was PM) but that that he may be “forced” to do so in the future.
“That old minister [Rafiqdoust] who knows very well how he was forced on my cabinet, and who knows all too well how much the government’s resources were committed to the war, now comes out and says that if the government’s resources were committed to the war, we would have captured Baghdad. I don’t know who has incited this man to to talk against the very government he worked for, but I know that if he had the government, he would have done to public money, to the property of the oppressed and the poor, the same thing he did to them while he was head of the Foundation of the Oppressed.”
These discussions from the hardliners have been making me queasy from the start. Not because I buy any of it, but because it shows you what warmongering mentality rules over Iran today all too well.
More than two decades later, the poison hemlock of war reigns supreme.
————-
Also see neo-Resistance for a related article: The Iranian Wikileaks: Fars News and Rafighdoost prove why war profiteers who are running Iran today hate Mousavi.
Who would have guessed 20 some odd years later it would be the Americans that delivered Karbala? Amazing.
Ped, this kind of political posturing over war inside Iran doesn’t really phase me. I’m half-American. We Americans totally outdo the Iranians when it comes to partisan political bickering over war and especially advocacy of war, I’m sorry to say.
But Pirouz (talking to your American half): you guys have been invading and raiding the earth for decades now. War talk is half of what your politicians do. We Iranians on the other hand, have lived a relatively peaceful existence, at least with respect to the rest of the world, even if it’s always portrayed as just the opposite.
Look at how much of the discourse on the American election was devoted to national security, war, terrorism, etc, etc. I don’t think even a fraction of that (if any at all) happened in the Iranian presidential debates. (sure, censorship played a role too. For instance, no one could ask about Iran’s support for Hamas, etc. But even with that factored in, I think it was minimal.)
I am by no means a full fledged Mousavi supporter, but I go with him on this all the way. This is just warmongering *&^% and I don’t like it one bit.
Ultra-Nationalism in modern times has been a bane to our existence. I think what is sad is that should we continue on our current course, Iraq will eventually surpass us in the near future.
this paper has been occupying my mind for the past few days………..
America certainly are the biggest supplier of arms….and responsible for appalling war crimes….Kissinger seems to have got of somewhat lightly on one or twenty different occasions……
……and it is shameful how the west turned their back on the chemical atrocities Saddam Hussein was committing on the Iranians………during the Iran/Iraq war
but what happened afterwards…in Iran………is bloodcurdlingly chilling
http://www.iranrights.org/english/attachments/doc_1115.pdf
i’d say mostaz’af = impoverished.
Pirouz,
This bickering is political, in a sense that Rafighdoust is trying to white-wash the dark economics of the IRGC; and justify its dominance, despite parliamentary noise around it. I also suspect (as I commented on Enduring America and never got published), Rafighdoust is informing his armdealer counterparts, that he is again in business, ready to do smuggling business with them, shoudl Israel begin a war.
They didn’t publish it?!!! I sometimes forget or accidentally drop comments.
I’m really scared naj, don’t know why the warmongering *$%# has picked up again, from both inside and outside the country.
Kate, Ervand Abrahamian, the Iranian scholar, also has really thorough writing on this. Yes, we were squeezed to death from both sides :’(
At this point Artanian, I’ll be happy if World War III doesn’t break out in our neck of the woods. I’m not aiming my hopes very high
Indeed Ped while it won’t be WW3, with all the talks of war and the expected Republican (especially the neo-cons) gains in US this fall for the first time since the start of the Iraq war I’m afraid that there is going to be war. It does coincide nicely with the Americans ending their combat mission in Iraq as well this august.
I wonder if Israel would really attack Lebanon and Syria tho and if not will they join us in war against Israel and US should we get attacked as they claimed they would? I hope not since Iranians should defend them selves and not rely/involve foreigners in the defense of our country.
Actually I hope the IRG have plans to make hell in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries since they have been indicating their support for war against us. Also King Abdul saying Iran and Israel are two nations that don’t deserve to exist was unacceptable considering their people history. I don’t know why we even try to aid Arabs, they have and always will hate Iranians, their elite and religious share the same mindset as Saddam.
Sorry for my somewhat irrational post, this subject tends to infuriate me.
Hi Pedestrian and Naj,
I read Naj’s comment on EA 2 days ago via my e-mail subscrption to comments in that thread. There have been lots of glitches with the comments showing up lately. Comments are sent for moderation and don’t show up in the ‘awaiting moderation’ inboxes of the administrators. It happened to one of mine as well.
Here is a link to Naj’s post on EA of 31 July:
http://enduringamerica.com/2010/07/31/iran-analysis-looking-back-on-the-1980s-verde/#comment-65430859
Thanks Catherine!
The biggest problem is that “neocon” is increasingly becoming the entire American political establishment. Republican and Democrat doesn’t really matter anymore.
Just like our political establishment.
Ped: http://sibestaan.malakutonline.org/archives/2010/07/post_824.shtml
the clashes in Lebanon scared the heck out of me today. I wonder if it’s just a start …
“Most analysts agreed that the incident was likely to be contained rather than flaring into an ongoing conflict along the tense border.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/aug/04/lebanon-israel-tree-border-clash
i hope they’re right!
so do I! so do I …
naj, Jami is spot on. I just blame the “akharozamani” Westerners as well – it’s not Ahmadinejad alone. Together, they are taking us straight to hell.