http://www.salon.com/writer/glenn_greenwald/
January 11, 2012 "Salon" -- Several days ago I referenced a controversy
that arose in 2007 when the law professor and right-wing
blogger Glenn "Instapundit" Reynolds criticized President
Bush for not doing enough to stop Iran's nuclear program and
then advocated that the U.S. respond by murdering that
nation's religious leaders and nuclear scientists. "We
should be responding quietly, killing radical mullahs and
Iranian atomic scientists . . . ," he argued. The backlash
against Reynolds' suggestion was intense, especially among
progressive writers.
Back then, I wrote about Reynolds' suggestion several
times, but I was far from alone. Law Professor Paul Campos
wrote a column in the Rocky Mountain News denouncing
Reynolds for publicly advocating "murder," which, he pointed
out, is exactly what this would be given that the U.S. is
not at war with Iran (he went on to suggest that targeting
civilian religious leaders and scientists would still be
murder even if the U.S. were at war with Iran); Campos
added: "government-sponsored assassinations of the sort
Reynolds is advocating are expressly and unambiguously
prohibited by the laws of the United States." Law Professor
Kevin Jon Heller documented with absolute clarity that such
assassinations would be illegal in the absence of a formal
war.
But the angriest reactions came from progressive
bloggers, who widely denounced Reynolds as "contemptible"
for suggesting this; one progressive writer, Lindsay
Beyerstein, was horrified that one could even suggest such a
thing, explaining that she "despair[s] for our society when
it's necessary to supply a rigorous analytical exposition of
why our government shouldn't have scientists and religious
leaders whacked." Scott Lemieux railed against what he
called Reynolds' "kooky scheme for illegal death squads" as
"crackpot," "dumb" and "nuttier than a Planters factory."
And Kevin Drum, then of Washington Monthly, went the
furthest of all - in a post he entitled "Terrorism" -
branding the killing of Iran's scientists as "Terrorism":
"I imagine a lot of people agree with [Reynolds],
but his recommendation really demonstrates the moral knot
caused by George Bush's insistence that we're fighting a
"war on terror." After all, killing civilian scientists
and civilian leaders, even if you do it quietly, is
unquestionably terrorism. That's certainly what we'd
consider it if Hezbollah fighters tried to kill cabinet
undersecretaries and planted bombs at the homes of Los
Alamos engineers.
If you think Iran is a mortal enemy that needs to be
dealt with via military force, you can certainly make that
case. But if you're going to claim that terrorism is a
barbaric tactic that has to be stamped out, you can hardly
endorse its use by the United States just because it's
convenient in this particular case.
What is most amazing about all this is that, a mere three
years later, some combination of Israel and the U.S. are
doing exactly that which Reynolds recommended. Numerous
Iranian nuclear scientists are indeed being murdered".
In January, 2010, a remote-controlled bomb attached to a
motorcycle killed Masoud Ali Mohammadi, 50, who "taught
neutron physics at Tehran University." In November, 2010,
two separate car bombs exploded within minutes of each other
on the same day, one that killed nuclear scientist Majid
Shahriar and wounded his wife, and the other which wounded
another nuclear scientist, Fereidoun Abbasi, along with his
wife. Then, in July of last year, Darioush Rezaei, 35, was
shot dead and his wife was wounded by two gunmen firing from
motorcycles outside of their daughter's kindergarten; Rezaei
"did his doctorate in neutron transport - which lies at the
heart of nuclear chain reactions in reactors and bombs" and
"was a member of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, the
country's official atomic energy commission."
And now, yet another Iranian scientist has been killed.
According to Iranian media, a 32-year-old university
professor, Mostafa Ahmadi-Roshan, died when an assailant
riding on a motorcycle attached a magnetic bomb to his car,
which then detonated and killed him. According to The
Washington Post's Thomas Erdbrink, a conservative news
outlet in Iran reported that the young scientist "was
believed to be involved in procuring materials for Iran's
main nuclear enrichment facility in Natanz."
What's most remarkable here is to compare the boisterous,
furious denunciations of the mere suggestion by a blogger on
the Internet that Iranian scientists be killed, versus the
relative silence in the face of its actually being done in
real life, now that the corpses of murdered Iranian
scientists are beginning to pile up. Does anyone doubt that
some combination of the two nations completely obsessed with
Iran's nuclear program - Israel and the U.S. - are
responsible? (U.S. officials deny involvement while pointing
the finger at Israel, whose officials will not comment but
"smile" when asked; the CIA has "targeted" Iran's scientists
in the past, several of whom have disappeared only to end up
in U.S. custody, including one who "resurfaced in the United
States after defecting to the CIA in return for a large sum
of money"). At the very least, there has been no
denunciation from any Obama officials of whoever it might be
carrying out such acts.
I have no doubt that Professors Campos and Heller would
apply the same legal rationale now that it's actually being
done, but what about the progressives who so stridently
denounced Reynolds? Does Lemieux still believe that whoever
is responsible - Israel, the U.S., or some combination - is
guilty of dispatching "illegal death squads"? Does
Beyerstein still "despair for our society" that such acts
could even be contemplated? Does Drum still believe that
whichever political leaders are responsible for these
killings are Terrorists; specifically: if, as is widely
assumed, the Israelis are responsible, does that mean that
Israel is a Terrorist state, and if U.S. agencies are
complicit in some way, does that mean President Obama is a
Terrorist, a state sponsor of Terrorism or, at the very
least, a supporter of Terrorism?
In general, the American covert war against Iran is
extraordinarily dangerous and probably illegal (it's
certainly unauthorized), but in particular, the
assassination of Iran's scientists is just reprehensible.
Now that it's actually happening, one wishes the reaction to
it were even partially as aggressive as it was when a
right-wing blogger suggested it.
* * * * *
UPDATE: This morning, Haaretz has a timeline of what it
calls "Mysterious deaths and blasts linked to Iran's nuclear
program" - and by "linked to," they mean: "aimed at" (h/t
James Carter). It includes the murder of these scientists as
well as various explosions killing many people. If you
removed the proper nouns from this timeline (Iran,
Ahmadinejad, Natanz), very few people would have any doubt
that this is Terrorism.
UPDATE II: The right-wing religious extremist Rick
Santorum said previously: "On occasion scientists working on
the nuclear program in Iran turn up dead. I think that's a
wonderful thing, candidly"; he added: "I think we should
send a very clear message that if you are a scientist from
Russia, North Korea, or from Iran and you are going to work
on a nuclear program to develop a bomb for Iran, you are not
safe." This is how he justified all that:
"If people say, "well, you can't go out and
assassinate people" - well, tell that to Awlaki. OK, we've
done it. We've done it to an American citizen, so we can
certainly do it to someone who's producing a nuclear bomb
that can be dropped on the state of Israel . . .".
We better hope and pray Rick Santorum never becomes
President or else the legal prohibitions against
assassinations will simply be ignored and that will become
standard American policy - oh, wait. Meanwhile, long-time
commenter DCLaw1 poses this question:
"Even for people who don't believe the US has
anything to do with the assassination of Iranian
scientists, just flip the scenario: how would they react
to news that Israeli scientists were being systematically
murdered, and Iranian officials just smiled and acted coy
when asked about it? What would they say about that, and
what would they say the US and Israel would be justified
to do in response?"
To answer that, just consider the consensus outrage that
spewed forth when it was claimed (ridiculously) that Iran
was sponsoring a Terror plot on U.S. soil to have a failed
Texan used car salesman to hire Mexican drug cartels to kill
the Saudi ambassador: Terrorism!
UPDATE III: Lemieux responds by saying: “If the United
States was involved in the killings — and we should stress
the ‘if’ here — the Obama administration’s actions were both
illegal and immoral, for the same reasons stated in my
earlier posts.” Similarly, Drum strongly implies that he
believes the assassinations are Terrorism. Meanwhile,
Professor Campos, writing on the blog where Lemieux writes,
tries to explain to Lemieux’s angry commenters what the
point is of asking these questions and what the benefit is
of hearing denunciations not only when a right-wing blogger
proposes it, but also when it’s done in reality (in
comments, David Mizner attempted the same).
For its part, the U.S. denied involvement in today’s murder
and said they “strongly condemn all acts of violence,
including acts of violence like what is being reported
today,” while ”in Israel . . . the denial was much more
vague. Brig. Gen. Yoav Mordechai, the Israeli military
spokesman, wrote on his Facebook page that ‘I don’t know who
took revenge on the Iranian scientist, but I am definitely
not shedding a tear,’ Agence France-Presse reported.”
Nonetheless, “Theodore Karasik, a security expert at the
Institute for Near East and Gulf Military Analysis in Dubai,
said the assassination fit a pattern over the past two years
of covert operations by the West and its allies to ‘degrade
and delay’ Iran’s nuclear program.”
UPDATE IV: Beyond what’s discussed here, John Glaser looks
at the publicly available evidence, including what has been
reported in The Guardian and Der Spiegel, regarding who is
likely behind this spate of killings of Iranian scientists.
_________________________________
Glenn Greenwald is a former Constitutional and civil rights
litigator and is the author of two New York Times
Bestselling books on the Bush administration's executive
power and foreign policy abuses.
|