The US has recently provided the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) with forged documents which it claims to be a sign of Iran's moving toward its so-called “nuclear ambitions”.
This comes amid US sanctions and threats as well as the baseless allegations posed on Iran by Washington in the past three decades. The latest US allegation has been the so-called Iran terror plot of the Saudi ambassador to Washington.
In an interview with Press TV, historian and political commentator Peter Rushton from London shares his ideas about the issue.
Following is a rough transcription of the interview.
Press TV: Peter rushton first to you, how do you explain the recent charges leveled against Iran, on the issues of human rights, the plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador, and of course the IAEA report, coordinated timing to have all this come out in a must time?
Peter Rushton: well, it seems as though as the Russian Diplomats, who spoke on it only within the last couple of days, may have put their finger on what is going on here, when they said the IAEA's own report was designed to achieve regime change, in other words, it was a politicized report, a report heavy on politicized spin and light on fact, it would appear to be that you would have thought supposedly independent authority tasked with such an important job, as preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons, would take that task so seriously, that they would not allow political spin to influence them, but it seems if we are to believe what the Russians have said today and in the last couple of days, that it has been politically spun, Russia and China are both concerned about that, also I am concerned about just as well, especially when you at the document, just looked at that document today, only a 25 page document and I counted more than thirty references in that document to what they call, information supplied by member states. In other words not information has been developed by the experts staff of the IAEA, not by their inspectors, not independently, by supplied somehow by unnamed member states.
Not only are we not told the detail of what this information was, we are not even to be told precisely, which country supplied it. Now I wonder that might be the case, what has the IAEA got to hide, what it won't tell us the country, that supplied it with information, on which it bases such a heavy document, and a document with such extreme potential consequences.
Press TV: I would like to extend on what Hesham Tillawi talked about, to peter rushton, he suggested about this landscape in the Middle East ,that perhaps the United States and some of its western Allies want to shape, some observers say that the new US plan is intended to exert more pressure on Iran, actually stand for the fact that Washington has lost several of its allies in the course of the revolution, in the Arab countries specially Hosni Mubarak of Egypt and that the US wants to turn the balance in its favor, and of course bring along any other countries now that are going to uprising the revolution towards their favor also, now that is the cronies of falling the Middle East, what do you think?
Peter Rushton: yes, I think that the US and Zionist policy in the Middle East has been in crisis in recent months, you can see that the key allies in the region have been struggling. Saudi Arabia is in a state of flux, with one of its key leaders having died recently, and the other apparently the king of Saudi Arabia being on the verge of death; in Bahrain the legitimacy of the regime, that for so long has been a key ally of Britain and America and implicitly of Zionism. The regime in Bahrain is struggling for any sort of legitimacy and is facing a determined and brave effort by its own people to overthrow it, and there is a sense in which American policy is really struggling to remain in control in the region which means by extension that the Zionist policy is struggling as well, it may be that this move by this supposedly independent atomic energy authority is a final throw of the dice, by the Americans by the Zionist to try to regain control.
And you know, if we are to look at reports like this, and if we are to assess the value, we have got to bear in mind the record of the people involved in long term deception operations, we have got to bear in mind that America's key ally Israel for whom, American politicians seem prepared to perform endless services, for their Israeli masters; especially in an election year, they can write the way back to 1946-1948 the very foundation of Israel. The fact that there were key elections in both of those years was a very big influence on President Truman, even in the very foundation of the Zionist state and we can assume that those calculations, those political calculations will lie behind what Obama does as well.
Despite the fact that diplomatically, the commitment, the endless commitment to defending Zionism has been a disaster for Britain and America, it seems an endless commitment, and yet those people, that Zionist regime has such a long record of deception on this very nuclear question, you look back Britain supplied heavy water to the Israeli's in the late 1950s, using forged documents, supplying it via Norway in the mid late 1950s.
In the mid 60s, according to the CIA itself, Israel obtained enriched uranium by theft from the US naval base, and yet these are the people we can certainly assume that the IAEA was relying on, Israeli information, and we are supposed to trust the information, the politically slanted analysis provided by Israel. We are supposed to trust this in this latest report on the Iranian nuclear facilities, despite the fact that Israel has such a long record of deception in this very area of nuclear policy, it has deceived the world for half a century about its own nuclear program. Are we really supposed to go to the brink of war even, or go further with extremely damaging policies of sanctions that will damage ourselves as the Russians and Chinese know, will damage ourselves as much if not more than they damage Iran? We are supposed to do all of that simply on the basis of Israeli supplied intelligence, given the long record of Israeli deception on this very topic.
I think voters in Britain and America would do well to take a long hard look at those politicians who are prepared to give limitless trust to Israel at the expense of their own people.
Press TV: Peter Rushton, Nicolas Sarkozy and Barak Obama that left their microphone on, We heard what they thought of Israel. Obama saying we have to deal with Israel every day! If Iran does not present a threat is the United States willing if Israel is the one pushing this scenario of war onto Iran for the US to put itself on the line in that way or is this a coordinated, cooperated move that they are making all the world back preplanned on Iran?
Peter Rushton: well, as far as the US is concerned, it is very telling that Obama says he has to speak to Israel every day, he has to speak to Netanyahu every day. I expect that has gone for every American president ever since the Israel was founded, then I am sure there is no enormous political pressures on Obama, but equally there is no long term permanent forces within the US military and intelligence establishment who spent their whole careers in close alignment with the Zionist state, and who are not likely to step out of line from it. here in London though, the situation is very different, here in London if there were extreme measures to be planned against the Islamic republic, I suspect it would force a major division within the coalition government here and could even bring the government down, so there is a big difference between British politics in that respect and American politics, because of the circumstances of this coalition government here in England. The conservative party is very closely tied to Zionism, the liberal democrats built a lot of their popular support on standing against the war ….
Press TV: Ok, I do apologies we have ran out of time, thank you historian and political commentator Peter Rushton.