Iran extends a conciliatory hand to the US: Parliamentry speaker (Dr. Ali Larijani) in Munich Security Conference

Larijani's statement is important because 1) it is presented by Iran's Parliament Speaker. In terms of power, he can be considered equal to Ahmadi-Nejad; 2) He is an opponent of Ahmadi-Nejad. In protest to Ahmadi-Nejad's blabbers, he quit his job as the chief negotiator of Iran's nuclear Dossier; 3) He is a likely candidate for Iran's upcoming Presidential Election, and he will most likely win. 4) (and most importantly ;), he will have my vote. Yes he IS a conservative; but right now Iran needs a conservative.

I invite you (especially if you are Barak Obama!) to read all of this; but for those short in time, I provide color coding! If you are still short of time, the core of his message is:
America, we are extending a hand. Just come to the table, recognize us as a regional power, drop the Carrots and Sticks language, and we will be your regional ally!

[pleasantries]

"I wish to thank the chairman of the conference and Germany's honorable government.

I am coming from a region where in the past three decades, especially in recent years, has witnessed most of the wars and conflicts: The Western probed attack of Saddam on Iran and 8 yeas of bloody war, and then two Western wars against Saddam for invading Kuwait, and then occupation of Iran that has left more than 800,000 dead and injured. And then the war in Afghanistan; and the Israeli war against Lebanon and now against the brave and innocent people of Gaza. These wars were waged for different reasons, but the main excuse was fight against terrorism and weapons of mass destruction.

The question is, in these wars, that only Iran lost 250,000 soldiers, has the region improved? Has terrorism diminished? Or were atomic weapons found in Iraq?

Upon occupation of Afghanistan, the US claimed that fight against drugs, against terrorism and capturing the leaders of terrorists were there main objectives. Which objective has come true? In 2001, drug production in Afghanistan was about 200 tons. In 2008, it is over 8000 tons. The fight against terrorists has turned into the comedy of NATO members doing secret deals with their leaders that have lead to escape of several prisoners. And the terrorist leaders are where they were. So what was accomplished?

Recently, the new President of the Us said that he has sent his Middle East envoy to listen, not to dictate.

Ladies and Gentlemen:
This is the first positive sign that illustrates the misguidedness of previous strategies that imaginary theories about the Middle East worsen the security angles. Cultural specifics and regional hardships must be looked at more carefully.
[Naj: below he lists some of America's wrongdoings]
Now I want to present some of the regional talks which I hope you will pay attention to:

-The American Coup of 1953, toppling Mosadegh's regime and restoring the Pahlavi dictatorship held Iran back for many years and led to torture and death of many an Iranian activist.

- In 1979, America's General Huyser had planned another coup, which was countered by Imam Khomeini's foresight.

- After the victory of revolution, American embassy assisted and coordinated separatist movements and terrorism against revolutionary figures. The evidence for these actions is available.

- America provoked Saddam into attacking Iran and during 8 years of war did not deny him any military aid.

- America confiscated Iran's assets at the onset of revolution.

- America canceled its nuclear contract with Iran and did not even honor their contract to provide nuclear fuel for Tehran's reactor.

- After 9-11, On the premise of fight against terrorism and weapons of mass destruction, America invaded Iraq and Afghanistan ruining both people's lives in the region and the lives of American Army.

- The 33 day Israeli war against Lebanon was designed by American assistance. But it was an illusion to break people's spirit.

- The unjustified 22 day massacre in Gaza was assisted by America and although it turned into a human tragedy, despite all claims of human rights, America did not react in concern.

- With regards to Iran's nuclear dossier, America has been non-cooperative and obstructive.

And many other issues.

Now, do you expect these pains to go away with a change of language and a different conversational tone? Or do you thinks it is important to accept mistakes and change strategies? The reason why despite America's obvious errors the situation has not escalated into a regional nightmare is because of the wisdom of Ayatollah Khamanei, who controlled the conditions and calmed the situation.

Mr Chairman, dear attendants :

Unfortunately, these mistakes stem from an illusion after the industrial revolution in Europe that the Orient is slumbering and needs to be colonized. Then they established the Western hegemony; and prescribed the theory of "balance of fear" to deter the competition. This is how the cold war came about.

We are now in a different situation.

First, the Theory of unilateralism is invalid. [no clue what "theory of yek-janebe garayee" means!!] ...
Second, The Orient, from china to Malaysia to Turkey to Iran to Egypt to the Middle East has a different condition now. A denial of the awakening of Islamic countries does not solve any problem!

We need a logical, fair and realistic theory to establish lasting stability.

Friends, terrorism and expansionism are the two sides of the same coin. They are the chicken and the egg problem. The age of Western control over the East has come to an end. The Oriental man is no longer a second-rated human. The discussions around the terrorism problem, as well as the existing situation in India, Pakistan and the Middle East show that the approach to date has been wrong; and has turned the region into a dynamite warehouse.

Can we accept that Israel, with 2-3 million population be given 200 atomic warheads, plus advanced missiles and air defense, but to tell 1.5 billion Muslims that they do not have the right to nuclear knowledge for energy production and peaceful purposes?

Can anyone accept that 5 million Palestinians are driven from their land and home and be wandering the world, when collecting people from different corners of the world to populate Israel?

By accusing Hamas to terrorism, you cannot change the facts. Hamas election by people's vote and under watch of international monitors was faced with illogical reaction of a few of Western countries. They [the Western countries] remained silent even when the head of the Parliament and the Palestinian representatives were arrested [by Israel]. Of course, in recent days, I have been hearing that some of European leaders are suggesting that the reality of Hamas needs to be accepted. Although late, but this is a valuable change.

By insulting Hizbollah, you cannot change the facts. Hizbollah, as part of the Lebanese ruling system is deeply entrenched in heart and intellect of the Lebanese and people of the region. Crushing them exacerbates the hatred for America and Israel.

Many use the media to portray a violent and warmongering image of Muslims.

The question is, did Muslims play any role in the 1st or 2nd world war? Other than having been part of the victims? Islam respect the followers of Moses and Jesus and promotes respectful coexistence of all religions.

Dear attendees,

The theory of balance of fear was designed by America and Europe, after the second world war to control different powers. the mere fact of existence of weapons of mass destruction and their showcasing against each other is a sign of the failure of humanity. it means no trust exists. Isn't this more similar to wolves' life that the life of human's?

To date, all that has been said about disarmament has been just parole and no action. Today, the world no longer needs preaching. It needs to see the act of disarmament by big owners of the WMD. But Iran, neither had WMD in its defense doctrine, nor is seeking it. We despise having to live under the shadow of the WMDs because we are still faced with the reality of our victims of the chemical attacks by Saddam during the war. Most those weapons were given to Saddam by the Western countries. We reiterate that are against the principle of Islam.

But Iran's nuclear issue is different. We have reached our state of knowledge under the Non-Proliferation Treaty and withing the Agency's framework. Our resolve came about after the American and European countries canceled their nuclear contracts with Iran.

I have been involved in solving Iran's nuclear issue and after some time I have come to the conclusion that the controversy has no legal basis whatsoever, but is resulting from a certain mentality.

Sometimes it was said: "You don't have nuclear weapons now, but you may get it in future." do you think such a logic has any place in a sane running of the world?

Sometimes it was was: "by achieving nuclear technology, Iran is throwing the region out of balance." This is while Iran has never been aggressive against anyone; and considers attacking other countries against the principle of the Islamic revolution. Besides, even if this were the case, is the regional balance a principle that we ALL have to agree with? All countries can compete in reaching technological achievement. Recently, I hear that they have shown concern that Iran has sent a satellite to the space. Is a satellite a WMD too? On the other hand, how come this balance of power is not a concern with regards to the American uni-polarism?

During nuclear negotiations, we have stated several times, that in order to ease the world concerns, we are willing to organize our nuclear activities within a consortium composed of several other countries. If a country's after the bomb, she will neither propose such initiatives, nor will it be a signatory to the NPT. As did Israelis. In fact, these Western dual standards raise suspicion. During the Gaza war, Israel has been using phosphorous bombs. An Israeli General announced that they have mistakenly used the phosphor bombs. Does the world accept this? In Davos Conference, Mr Perez stated taht before the savage bombardment of innocent children, they phoned them to inform them of bombardment. Does anyone believe this? Maybe that kid was not home to hear Mr Perez's call. But the world did not take a stance against this.

Another example of this double standards is that America attacked, killed and mimed the people of one region, on the charges of terrorism; while on another side of thw world, it legitimized a terrorist group [referring to removing MKO from the terrorists list. The MKO is an armed 'resistance' group who assassinated Americans in mid 70s; participated with Saddam's forces in war against Iran; and assassinated several important religious and government figures after revolution]

Sometimes they talked about solving the problems internally, but then they began talking about Carrots and Sticks and referring Iran's case to the security council and issuing resolutions!

Ladies and Gentleman:
The Carrots and Sticks policy is obsolete; and no one really pays attention to it.
Current changes in the world and the prospect of 21st century demands a new model, and the old definitions of security are no longer efficient. The 21st century is the century of advance and sophisticated structures, strategies and realities with new players.

The Islamic Republic of Iran is ready and capable to , in cooperation with other countries of the world, open logical windows to the peace and stability of the region.

We believe in common and longterm benefits and cooperations, in energy and economy, with other countries.

America had destroyed many bridges in the past few years. But the new administration can rebuild them. But new bridges must be build according to new and pragmatic strategies based on mutual respect, and not the politics of Carrots and Sticks!

The world is prudently watching the changes in America and hopes that the changes will be strategic and not tactical.

In this new strategy, several factors are critical:
1) Taking a multilateral approach to free itself from the defective circle of unilateralism.
2) Instead of focusing on arms race for WMD, focusing on an international theory of security.
3) In regional security, emphasize the internal security; instead of building military bases in countries that will make the problem circular and make them target of further terrorism.
4) instead of imposing disparate and non-practical models, realistically consider the cultural, political and economical characteristics of each region and respect the theory of coalition between regional and international actors.

Intervention in social engineering in different parts of the world, and enforcing discordant models leads to further miscalculations that will exacerbate instability and diminish security."

Translated from Persian by Naj: neoresistance-at-gmail-DOT-com, Please contact me if you quote/use this.
Source:http://www.isna.ir/ISNA/NewsView.aspx?ID=News-1285887&Lang=P
News code: 8711-11527