|
Nothing New In The Iranian Role: Tehran Regime
Intervention
16 November 2009 By
Elias Harfoush
Iran has revealed the role that it plays in supporting
the Houthi rebellion in Yemen, via statements made by
its foreign minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, when he said
that he is ready to cooperate with Yemen to restore
its security! How can Iran achieve security in Yemen,
and who can it pressure in order to achieve this, if
it is not connected with the Houthi movement, as it
claims?
The same role was revealed by the regime in Tehran in
the recent parliamentary elections in Lebanon. Supreme
Leader Ali Khamenei did not hesitate at the time to
assure that Iran would “defeat America in Lebanon.” It
is an excellent and noble goal, and easy to achieve
thus. But how can the Iranian regime defeat “the Great
Satan” in Lebanon, with the “Lebanese” party concerned
with achieving this defeat denying night and day that
it is not tasked with achieving Iranian desires? How
can the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad,
believe that the victory of Hizbullah and its allies
in these elections, as he hoped, would change the face
of the region, if this party were not the one
responsible for achieving the program of “change” that
serves Iranian interests?
The Yemeni government hesitated before accusing Tehran
of direct involvement in supporting the Houthis. It
said first that the rebels were obtaining support from
“Iranian parties,” without accusing the Tehran regime
of direct involvement. However, the Houthis’ incursion
into Saudi Arabia and their strike against the Saudi
armed forces, which did their duty in restoring Saudi
sovereignty over its land, prompted the Iranian regime
to reveal its true role in supporting the Houthi
rebellion from the outset. Thus, the Iranian foreign
minister believes that the Saudi forces’ defense of
its territory is considered “intervention in Yemen’s
domestic affairs.” Saudi officials, however, have
repeatedly affirmed that the conflict is within Yemen,
and is in their view an internal matter. It would have
been better for Iran to take the same position and let
the conflict remain a domestic one, between the
government in Sanaa and those it believes are
rebelling against its authority. Is this not what was
said by the secretary general of Hizbullah, Sayyed
Hassan Nasrallah, in his recent speech, that there was
a “fire” (as he said) in the north of Yemen, “which
some are trying to give a sectarian cast, and it is
not thus, because it has a political character.” Fine.
Who gave this conflict a sectarian cast? Would it not
have been better to leave politicians and those
responsible for Yemeni affairs to solve it, since the
conflict is a domestic one? Isn’t true intervention in
the affairs of Yemen and the region represented by the
covert threat by Manouchehr Mottaki to Saudi Arabia,
when he said “the smoke that is coming from the
killing will reach it too”?
The Iranian role in Yemen is not new or surprising for
those who follow the Tehran regime’s behavior in the
region. It used to be said that the Shah of Iran
wanted to play the role of “the policeman of the
Gulf.” What can be said today about the role of the
current Tehran regime, which wastes no opportunity to
cause trouble with the neighboring countries of the
Gulf, and the entire region? If Iran says that it
supports the resistance in Lebanon and Hizbullah in
the face of Israel, what is the justification for its
intervention in Yemeni affairs by supporting the
Houthi rebellion, if the sectarian impulse isn’t the
only justification of this intervention?
This support has become the quickest road to
dismantling the countries of the region and planting
the seeds of internal strife in them, from Lebanon to
Iraq, and in some countries of the Gulf…. and now, in
Yemen. The Shiites have always been a central part of
the fabric of this region. Thus was their past, and
their future. However, when the Iranian regime turned
them into mere “bases” for the extension of its
regional influence, they were not serving them as much
as providing opportunities for their insulation within
a closed circle that cuts them off from their
surrounding environment, and puts them in the position
of being accused of following policies that do not
serve the country whose nationality they hold, or the
surrounding environment in which they live.
EsinIslam.Com Add Comments | |