Israel and Deciphering the 9th of Dey Epic
[IRD introduction: with its demonstration on the Day of Ashoura on December 27, 2009, the Green Movement shot itself in the foot –fatally. A sacrosanct day for the Shi'a, Ashoura was assumed to be off-limits, not to be confused with politics. The most violent clashes between the protestors and the security forces occurred on this day, which resulted in eight casualties. Accused with violating the sanctity of Ashoura, the Greens had to witness massive demonstrations held across the country three days later -on 9th of Dey 1388, December 30, 2009, a blow powerful enough to silent the protestors for one year.]
In Tel Aviv, during the 2006 Herzl Conference on Israel’s security challenges, the participating politicians and military officials expressed concerns regarding Iran’s military strength. The former head of Mossad Shabtai Shavit claimed that Israel has been in its safest state of security since 1948 and there are no imminent military threats from Israel’s Arab neighbors. Yet, 33 days after his announcement the country came under attack from Lebanon and the Zionist regime suffered its worst military defeat in its history. In essence, this war burst the Israeli Army’s myth of invincibility, demonstrated Hezbollah’s military supremacy and validated its ability to change political affairs in the region.
In June 1967, in less than 6 days, the Israeli army occupied over 80 thousand square kilometers of the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Negev, the Sinai Desert, Sharm el Sheikh, the Golan Heights and el-Arish. Following its defeat in 2006 war, the Israelis identified Hamas and Hezbollah as an extension of Iran’s military and claimed that Iran’s threat has reached Israel.
Perhaps the slogan “No to Gaza, no to Lebanon” which was chanted during the international Quds Day of 2009 by some people [i.e. the supporters of the Green Movement] in Iran was part of a Zionist plot to cut the Islamic Revolution’s ties with anti-Zionist movements; by infiltrating and influencing different social layers in Iran. The Quds Day enjoys great significance amongst many Muslim and non-Muslim countries. Unfortunately, what occurred in 2009 during the international Quds Day in Iran, is in the same vein with anti-revolutionary movements such as Banisadr’s [the first president of the Islamic Republic of Iran who later defected to Paris] and the Mojahedin-e Khalgh [MEK] terrorist group.
The 2009 corrupt [Green] movement would certainly have not taken place without the backing of American and the Western media. Essentially the US, the Zionist regime and the West believe that economic sanctions and military intervention in Iran will not benefit them in halting Iran’s nuclear program. Therefore, they have adopted two additional agendas to transform the Iranian culture from within. In a published journal on 17th June 2009, Efraim Kam, a prominent member of the Institute for National Security Studies of Israel explicitly pointed out: “Any changes in the power structure in Iran has a direct affect on Israel’s national security.” Therefore, the presidential elections in Iran in 2009 was the impeccable opportunity for the US and Israel to permutate the structure of Iran’s government from conservative, religious and faithful figures to pro-West personalities. Regardless, their efforts failed.
During the presidential Election Day in 2009, hundreds of Western media, united and on standby, were ready to portray a tarnished image of Iran’s presidential election. In a collective effort, all of the major news networks reported of fraudulent activities in Iran’s presidential election, expecting the elections to be cancelled, and to create political erosion by creating two opposing political poles in the country. But in an epic response in December 30, the Iranian people responded by expressing their willingness to protect their fundamental beliefs and religious faith. Present in the scene as always, Iranians demonstrated their support of the Islamic Republic and pushed back the Israeli plots to change Iran’s government.
It seems that the public’s epic response on December 30 was similar in spirit to Iran’s response during the Iran-Iraq War. Just as people’s rise to action during the 8-year war defeated the nation’s foreign foes, the December 30 response isolated Iran’s domestic enemies. Israel quickly deciphered Iran’s message and realized that it cannot penetrate the social fabric of the Islamic Republic, which is led by the Supreme Leader. Failing to impose change from within the governing body of Iran, West is now increasing pressure by added sanctions. There are discussions about introducing sanctions on Iran’s oil, the main source of Iran’s vast wealth, which the Iranian government uses to drive progress and promote its policies. A threat to Iran’s oil exports is essentially a threat against the regime of Iran.
Israel has proposed sanctions on Iran’s oil while simultaneously military intervention on Iran is being considered. This will bring unknown security consequences to the Zionist regime. Assassinating Iranian nuclear scientists and increased intelligence activities are in line with Israel’s physical and psychological war on Iran. Iran’s armed forces’ infiltration into American spy agencies as well as the landing of the US drone reveals the hidden side of Iran’s armed forces’ strength. As a result of the Iran-Iraq War, Iran started the mass development long-range missiles. The Shahab 4 in particular has a range of 2000 to 2500 kms and the capability to carry warheads. These missiles can be used to target the heart of Israel.
The US and Israel have come to the conclusion that Iran has many solutions in defending itself. Western military experts believe that in addition to heightened deterrent power, the Islamic Republic of Iran is also highly capable of deflating any foreign attack. This has led the US and Israel to once again consider less tangible attack options to cause erosion in Iran’s social fabric. Using psychological methods, they aim to create a gap between Iran’s government and the people.
The process of taking advantage of opposition political figures in Iran was initially kicked off by trans-regional powers. The American and Israeli media displayed a keen interest in covering the heated presidential debates and election in 2009. Openly favoring one candidate [Mir-Hossein Mousavi] over his [main] opponent [Mahmoud Ahmadinejad], the Western media prematurely and falsely announced him as the winner of the presidential election. Considering the potential of the domestic followers of Iran’s enemies, this type of false advertising caused a wave of disorder and confusion, labeled as a war between [the wealthier] north of Tehran and its south by the foreign media.