Another Iranian Nuclear Scientist Assassinated
Yesterday, a young Iranian nuclear scientist, Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, was killed while on his way to work in north Teheran. The car in which he was driving exploded; a bomb had apparently been attached to the car with a magnet by a passing motorcyclist. Roshan was identified by the Mehr News Agency as the deputy director of commercial affairs at the Natanz uraniam enrichment plant, where he was in charge of buying equipment and materials.
The Americans were quick to disavow any connection to the hit, with Hillary Clinton "categorically" denying not only this killing but “any United States involvement in any kind of act of violence inside Iran.”
The prevailing assumption is that this and the other assassinations of nuclear scientists that preceded it (as well as the explosions and cyber sabotage that have targeted the Iranian nuclear program over the past two years) are the work of Mossad, either with the tacit support or in direct defiance of the United States. It could be the work of Greens inside the country, formerly non-violent but pushed too far (a theory held by Michael Ledeen at Pajamas Media). Some of the scientists could even have been targeted by the Iranian government itself, since they were known to have sympathized to some extent with the opposition. “I think there is reason to doubt the idea that all the hits have been carried out by Israel,” Karim Sadjadpour, an Iran expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, told The New York Times. “It’s very puzzling that Iranian nuclear scientists, whose movements are likely carefully monitored by the state, can be executed in broad daylight, sometimes in rush-hour traffic, and their culprits never found.”
Iranian score-settling might explain a few of the killings, but it doesn't explain the broader campaign -- not that it matters. Either the Americans are already waging a war of a new, more surgical kind with the intention of disrupting Iran's nuclear program, or someone else -- someone with chops -- is operating with the same strategic interests in mind. All the will-they-or-won't-they armchair pontificating about American and Israeli military intentions vis-a-vis Iran might already be beside the point.
Haaretz published a list today of mysterious deaths and explosions linked to Iran's nuclear program. Here they are, in reverse chronological order:
- Yesterday (January 11, 2012): Nuclear scientist Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan is killed by a bomb.
- December 11, 2011: An explosion at a steel mill linked with Iran's nuclear program kills at least seven in Yazd.
- November 28, 2011: An explosion rattles Isfahan in western Iran, where a critical nuclear facility is located.
- November 12, 2011: A huge explosion at a military arms depot near Teheran kills 17 Revolutionary Guards as well as a senior military figure considered to be a central actor in Iran's missile program.
- July 23, 2011: Dariush Rezaeinejad, a young member of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, is gunned down by two men firing from motorcycles. Rezaeinejad was a PhD student involved in developing high-voltage switches, which are used to set off the explosions needed to trigger nuclear warheads.
- May 24, 2011: An explosion causes a fire at an oil refinery during a visit by Ahmadinejad. He is not injured, but one person is killed and six others wounded.
- November 29, 2010: Majid Shahriyari, a nuclear engineer, is killed when his car explodes. On the same day, Fereydoun Abbasi-Davani, a nuclear scientist sanctioned by the UN, is wounded by a car bomb.
- January 12, 2010: Massoud Ali Mohammadi, a professor and nuclear scientist, is killed in a bombing outside his home in Teheran. Haaretz notes that Mohammadi had publicly backed opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi in the presidential election, and his name was on a list -- published on pro-reform websites before the election -- of university teachers who supported the opposition.
- Comment (100)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments :
May '10
Re: Another Iranian Nuclear Scientist Assassinated
Brandon, we know the language in the US Constitution involving a declaration of war, though the term "declare war" has clearly been relegated to the ash heap of history here, as the AUMF equivalent version of Congressional approval now has replaced it (yes I know Ron Paul's arguments, I consider John Yoo and Richard Epstein to be more able Constitutional scholars). What is the Israeli law on being in a "state of war"?
I must say, though, that is the first time that Glenn Greenwald- whose article I read the other day when it was linked by my most left-wing nutty FB friend- has been cited here as a worthy authority on the veracity of classified US intelligence, constitutional law, international law, and US security. A sudden rehabilitation from his historic moonbattery!
I encourage everyone to buy and read (well, first buy Judith's new novel!) John Yoo's Crisis and Command. It really provides an excellent history of the way isolationist and idealistic US presidents such as Jefferson and Madison found it necessary to "betray" their principles to effectively fulfill their responsibilities in office when faced with the reality of the need to protect this country.
May '10
Re: Another Iranian Nuclear Scientist Assassinated
Instugator
Dude, recycling Ron Paul's 1953 Iranian apology is sooo pulsus a mortuus equus.
You missed the whole point, which is that you are making a strange justification for terror that would lead to consequences and actions you would condemn.
It's not a question of discriminating. It's a question of justifying one evil with another.
That all depends. Just yesterday, Jeffery Goldman (who is very hawkish) admitted "that advocates of an attack on Iran today would be exchanging a theoretical nightmare -- an Iran with nukes -- for an actual nightmare, a potentially out-of-control conventional war raging across the Middle East that could cost the lives of thousands Iranians, Israelis, Gulf Arabs and even American servicemen."
Far from stopping Iranian attempts to procure a nuclear weapon, these attacks will plunge us into a senseless war.
May '10
Re: Another Iranian Nuclear Scientist Assassinated
Does it matter? The point is that it must be clear to Iran, and the world, that the two are at war. It is amazing how, after speaking a little legalese and giving props to certain Constitutional authorities here on Ricochet (as if there aren't other scholars who disagree), you make it seem like an obscure point. Declare War. It's not that difficult.
Edited on Jan 13 at 9:18amMay '10
Re: Another Iranian Nuclear Scientist Assassinated
Ron Paul's whole point is that this "equivalent version" is dangerous as it facilitates never-ending war and makes it too easy to engage in it for little reason. That's why he continually harps on the need for formal declarations of war (not because there is no legal way to squirm out of it).
Aug '10
Re: Another Iranian Nuclear Scientist Assassinated
@BrandonZ "You missed the whole point..." No, I didn't. You call it terrorism, I am calling it legitimate targeting in a de facto war, one which predates Iran's pursuit of the bomb - your insistence on the magic words doesn't affect the status quo in the slightest. "It's a question of justifying one evil with another" and "Two wrongs don't make a right" - Actually there is a case where two wrongs make a right. The concept is called 'reprisal'. Generally the reason it is held to be 'right' is that it compels the offending party to return to accepted norms within the law of war - but that is off topic. Right now Iran is pursuing a nuke, next week they may close the straits of Hormuz - in either case we didn't bring it on ourselves - and quoting Ron Paul doesn't help your case.
Oct '10
Re: Another Iranian Nuclear Scientist Assassinated
Selective, precise targeting of an enemy’s S&T capability (including the human brains propelling it) is not terrorism. Scientists and technicians helping to make fissile material and nuclear weapons are a legitimate target when the nation-state employing them has threatened to wipe you off the map. Terrorism is the deliberate targeting of non-combatants and those not otherwise contributors to a nation-state’s war-making capacity. A general commitment to abiding by legal norms and notions, such as formal declarations of war, does not also bind one to a suicide pact. There is no legal precept or ethical norm that requires you to be dead before you can take positive—even violent—actions toward self-defense.
May '10
Re: Another Iranian Nuclear Scientist Assassinated
Read this.
May '10
Re: Another Iranian Nuclear Scientist Assassinated
Based on the information provided in the comment above, and other material I've been reading, I'm going to revise my earlier statement. If you remember, I theorized the Israeli motive was to push Iran into war while still looking like the aggrieved party. The goal, ostensibly, is to get the United States to do the heavy lifting against Iran.
I think I got the goal correct. I might have underestimated the method though. Rather than looking like the aggrieved party, Israel may just be trying to draw an even greater wedge between the United States and Iran so that any small overtures that are, in fact, made for diplomacy will ultimately fail. The article I just posted gives a glimpse of this strategy, as does this opinion piece.
The theory has a lot going for it. Either way, I hope some of this new evidence, particularly in the article above, puts to rest any claims that Israel (if the perpetrator) is not acting untoward or committing/sponsoring acts of terror.
Edited on Jan 13 at 6:48pmDec '11
Re: Another Iranian Nuclear Scientist Assassinated
I would be surprised if we(the US) or Israel wasn't behind these attacks. I think it goes according to our(US, Israel, and some other powers) style, in that we use so much finesse that it is almost obvious that we did it because no one else would be able to get away with it with practically no evidence. Personally I would try to off almost all of their physicists, chemists, and professors(with such knowledge that would be useful in making an atomic bomb) in one fell swoop. There will almost certainly be a war a result but the damage from the brain drain resulting in this method would be immense(It would take decades for them to recover at least). However I guess their method is good if you don't want a war, my method is more of an opening salvo to a preemptive strike(personally if it is Israel I think that my method would probably suit them better in the long run).
Aug '10
Re: Another Iranian Nuclear Scientist Assassinated
Brandon Zaffini: ...I theorized the Israeli motive was to push Iran into war while still looking like the aggrieved party. The goal, ostensibly, is to get the United States to do the heavy lifting against Iran.
I think I got the goal correct. I might have underestimated the method though. Rather than looking like the aggrieved party, Israel may just be trying to draw an even greater wedge between the United States and Iran so that any small overtures that are, in fact, made for diplomacy will ultimately fail. The article I just posted gives a glimpse of this strategy, as does this opinion piece.
Here I thought we disliked conspiracy theories @ Ricochet.Oh well.
No Brandon - Israel will act unilaterally (as they have done in the past) if necessary.
The US hasn't been close to Iran since they invaded our Embassy - President Obama's protestations to negotiate without preconditions notwithstanding.
Drive a greater wedge.... <snort, cough, snort again>
Dude, you are killing me - it isn't a wedge between us now, it is a Triganic Pu (or at least a ningi)
Oct '10
Re: Another Iranian Nuclear Scientist Assassinated
I read the opinion piece you linked, Brandon. It’s drearily predictable conspiracy dribble. I recommend you focus on one thing these conspiracy theories all have in common vis-à-vis tyrannical foreign states and ask yourself “why?”
This is the unsupported assumption that a “hard line faction” and its opposite are struggling for supremacy in the tyranny’s far-off capital. There’s no meaningful evidence for these factions, yet their presumed existence governs the Left’s policy proposals and conspiracy theories like yours. Both assume some group in the tyranny’s seemingly unified leadership yearns—just like they do!—for “peace.” Always some nefarious Western intelligence faction is in either explicit or implicit (seldom specified) alliance with the hardliners, and thus commits some horrible act just to derail negotiations which the tyranny’s ‘softliners’ desperately desire. Those execrable warmongers in the West (e.g., Neocons) prevent the tyranny’s soft faction—which happens to think just like us Lefties—from reaching the sunny uplands of coexistence. In none of these tyrannical regimes do we find reliable, clear evidence of a hard-soft faction line existing. Of course, that just confirms the conspiracy, right? And around goes the Hamster wheel.
May '10
Re: Another Iranian Nuclear Scientist Assassinated
The opinion piece was really just an interesting side note. The really important stuff was here, which I assume neither you nor Instugator read. It's not a conspiracy theory, as you would quickly see by reading it. Rather, it distorts your black-and-white picture of the middle east. It's much easier to think that Israel can do no wrong and Iran can do no right. The truth is much more complicated than that (and you don't need to believe that Iran is actually "good" and like "us liberals" to recognize this salient fact).
May '10
Re: Another Iranian Nuclear Scientist Assassinated
Now the Wall Street journal is picking up the theme, confirming that the U.S. has been seeking to relieve tensions while Israel has been taking a different tack.
Please don't merely respond with, "that's a conspiracy theory."
It's not a conspiracy, first of all. It's an analysis based on actual fact. Argue with the facts if you wish.
Oct '10
Re: Another Iranian Nuclear Scientist Assassinated
Brandon Zaffini
The opinion piece was really just an interesting side note.The really important stuff was here, which I assume neither you nor Instugator read. ... It's much easier to think that Israel can do no wrong and Iran can do no right.
The article you cited is now not important? Do you get tired moving the goal posts this often?
Bad assumption about the other article; I read it and wonder why it’s so significant to you. The long dark hall of mirrors and smoke that is intelligence operations makes for interesting reading. But what does that story have to do with the question of whether it’s right or wrong for Israel to cause assassinations of Iran’s nuclear scientists? Apology in advance if I missed it, but what's your response to earlier posts: the legal precept or ethical norm that requires Israel to wait for nukes to obliterate Tel Aviv? Why shouldn't Israel's defense include offensive actions designed to eliminate an existential threat before it transpires?
Thanks for the homily about a complicated world, but nothing said here requires one to think Israel is always right and Iran only in the wrong.
Oct '10
Re: Another Iranian Nuclear Scientist Assassinated
Brandon Zaffini: Now the Wall Street journal is picking up the theme, confirming that the U.S. has been seeking to relieve tensions while Israel has been taking a different tack.
Please don't merely respond with, "that's a conspiracy theory."
It's not a conspiracy, first of all. It's an analysis based on actual fact. Argue with the facts if you wish.
OK, let’s stipulate what anyone able to read a newspaper can readily conclude: the governments of Israel and the US have divergent views on how to secure the peace … active measures vs. collaborative sanctions, if you’ll accept that shorthand. What of it? What does that prove accept that Lefties are in charge in Washington and Realists in Jerusalem? It doesn’t strike me as odd that those actually within the arc of Iranian missiles might have, shall we say, an elevated appreciation of the stakes.
You seem to assume that somehow if one can apply rhetoric like "seeking to relieve tensions" then magically what's behind it is a more effective policy. You might have forgotten that 'relieving tensions' was not so effective in the run-up to WWII; Jews have not.
May '10
Re: Another Iranian Nuclear Scientist Assassinated
This discussion is going nowhere. You keep pointing to the "existential" threat that Iran faces, yet you have scant evidence of this fact. What evidence do we have?
Seymour Hersh explains that the recent IAEA report uncovers no new evidence, relying instead on tired information found in 2003. Additionally, we know that Iran is enriching uranium at 19.75percent, which is far below the 95 percent needed to make atomic weapons. Also, the U.S. intelligence estimate still agrees that Iran is not making them, and that they haven't been for a decade.
Let's also remember that Iran is not run by Ahmadinajad, whose words have grossly been taken out of context (I've pointed out this fact too many times to count), but by religious clerics, which means a consensus has to be reached on policy and different policy views are highly likely. cont...
Edited on Jan 14 at 7:58amMay '10
Re: Another Iranian Nuclear Scientist Assassinated
So let's discontinue the "wipe off the map" comments. Even Israeli leaders are admitting that a nuclear Iran is probably not an existential threat. Good grief. Additionally, Iran hasn't been nearly as aggressive historically as many suppose. Iran, this past century, has not attacked without being attacked and they have not occupied any other nation's land. Compare that with the record of U.S. or Israeli hostilities.
So Iran probably does not have weapons, and if they did, it's not the calamity the media is making it out to be. What would be much more dangerous, and foolhardy, would be to engage Iran in a war that would destabilize the whole area and probably make things more difficult for Israel in the long run.
In the context of these facts (and they are facts), I am shocked that assassinations of Iranian scientists (some of these assassinations having killed innocent bystanders) is condoned and excused. Even evidence that seals the deal on Israeli activity in promoting and participating in terrorist activities--and also shows a willingness on their part to blame it on the U.S.--is met with a shrug and a "so what"? Unbelievable.
Edited on Jan 14 at 8:24amOct '10
Re: Another Iranian Nuclear Scientist Assassinated
You’re right. And all your “facts” are exactly as you say. Terribly sorry to have misrepresented Dear Ahmadinejad; can’t wait to see the clarification he’s bound to release any day now. In fact, let’s postpone this discussion. We’ll resume it when Hamas, Hezbollah, Fatah and the Islamic Republic of Iran issue unambiguous statements that convey the following message: “The Zionist Entity is, in fact, the State of Israel, a legal and legitimate government which, along with its citizens, enjoys the inalienable human right to exist.” I'm sure there's a faction within each of those organizations drafting the requisite press release right now. Check back here later …
Aug '10
Re: Another Iranian Nuclear Scientist Assassinated
HVTs
You’re right. And all your “facts” are exactly as you say. Terribly sorry to have misrepresented Dear Ahmadinejad; can’t wait to see the clarification he’s bound to release any day now. In fact, let’s postpone this discussion. We’ll resume it when Hamas, Hezbollah, Fatah and the Islamic Republic of Iran issue unambiguous statements that convey the following message: “The Zionist Entity is, in fact, the State of Israel, a legal and legitimate government which, along with its citizens, enjoys the inalienable human right to exist.” I'm sure there's a faction within each of those organizations drafting the requisite press release right now. Check back here later … · Jan 14 at 8:36am
Concur.
Maybe I'll just wander over to Rick Santorum's marriage thread.
Oh, nice title to that article, False Flag - heh. Too bad it is relatively meaningless - spies lie - water is wet. So what?
Re: Another Iranian Nuclear Scientist Assassinated
Do you know what surprises me? In all this speculation, no one has pointed out that no one has the first clue who was behind that assassination. Israel and the US are far from the only countries with the motive. But other countries are far more likely to have the means. No one has even suggested--anywhere, to my knowledge!--that Turkey and Saudi Arabia--both--have the motive and the means. Which country is really most likely to be able to infiltrate an assassin into Iran? Forget the superhero-Mossad fantasies and just think this through as a practical problem.
Not everything is about America and Israel. It really isn't.