Broadcast 28 February on Iranian state satellite TV (IRINN)

Announcer: America's military occupation of Afghanistan following the 11 September terrorist attacks on the pretext of controlling and destroying al-Qaeda not only failed to solve the problems of the suffering people of Afghanistan, but in many cases it even created more serious problems for them.

Although bringing down the Taliban and bringing in a new government was considered desirable for the people of Afghanistan, America's inability to solve this nation's basic problems has created extensive malfunctions, and we are constantly seeing new unrest, the return of the Taliban and increased poverty and suffering for the people of this country.

Political Affairs Expert Motefaker: America's military presence in the region was based on American economic and political objectives and policies. Other issues are impossible.

Therefore to confront Russia, China and the Islamic revolution America had to take over Afghanistan, which is the secluded heart of this region, in order to establish sufficient control over the region's oil wells, the changes in the region and also to get close to the borders of China and Russia in order to be able to control this region in the future.

This was not possible non-militarily and therefore America decided to take over this region and Afghanistan militarily. It emphasized a military presence first for the expansion of NATO, second to implement the policies of the Greater Middle East and third to confront the Islamic revolution that originated in Iran.

Announcer: America's problem in Afghanistan is that it tries to solve problems militarily and with NATO intervention. Yet the roots of many of Afghanistan's problems are not military and need various multifaceted solutions.

Despite many promises to rebuild this country, America has not yet met many of its commitments, and instead it is trying to send more forces to this country. Yet the political, social, economic and cultural problems of the people of Afghanistan, the weakness of the central government along with the reassertion of power by the Taliban and the forces of al-Qaeda are indications of the lack of success by American forces with their mission in this country.

Motefaker: Basically the USA works on the basis of a military system. Since America first took power its economic, political, cultural and social interests have been based on military measures, military plans and militarism.

This type of outlook led to a new point of view in the world, and especially in the Middle East. Most of the oppression against the people in the region and especially the Muslims was done by the Americans and their soldiers.

Announcer: America's interventionist policies in the region and the efforts by this country to sow discord among neighbors in the Middle East, and the intensification of disagreements among ethnic and religious groups exacerbate these frustrations.

To justify its presence in the region and pursue its overall objectives, the American government needs to show that there is unrest and to have affairs be in disarray.

Public unhappiness with America in the Middle East, especially in Iraq and Afghanistan, are indications of this nation's dishonesty and its inability to advance its objectives.

Motefaker: Statistics, figures, studies and views show that America has not acted successfully. The security problems in Afghanistan have not been solved because there are still slaughters and clashes. On the other hand the economic problems in Afghanistan have not been solved and the resources for wealth production in Afghanistan have not changed. Narcotics, the production of narcotics and smuggling still make the greater part of Afghanistan's economy, and the Americans themselves play a role in the production, transfer and sale of narcotics.

Announcer: What is clear is that despite all the activities of the ISAF forces in Afghanistan, terrorist activities in this country increase day by day and most of this country is still controlled by the Taliban.

It appears that giving more prerogatives to this country's government and making a bigger effort to solve its existing economic and social problems would be more effective in controlling affairs than increasing military forces.

Broadcast 28 February on Iranian state satellite TV (IRINN)

The remarks by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov concerning the American missile defense shield which said the claim by the Americans justifying the establishment of a missile base in Europe is without basis, were the first official position taken by a high Kremlin official in opposition to the missile defense system.

Previously the Russian deputy foreign minister and the commander of Russia's missile forces saw the American government's program to install guided missiles in Poland and the Czech Republic as a threat to Russia's national security and warned about targeting and attacking these sites.

This type of position conveyed by Lavrov to the American secretary of state is considered another point undermining relations between Russia and the United States, in such a way that it could contribute to a decline in relations between Russia and America with the continuation of American actions and Russian reactions.

Of course the harsh reaction by Russian officials to the plans of the American government is not limited to missile defense programs. Previously Moscow expressed concern and then gave a warning about America's efforts to expand NATO's activities and military operations to the East.

At the recent Munich meeting Russia's President Putin expressed concern about America's monopolistic policies and warned about the expansion of NATO's acvtities to the East. He even warned about efforts by some American government leaders to interfere in Russian affairs, and some of the media reported this as the beginning of a new East-West Cold War.

Broadcast 28 February on Iranian state satellite TV (IRINN)

Broadcast 27 February on PARS Satellite TV (Los Angeles)

Behnruz Souresrafil began his program today with this commentary:

Today, this very day, the very moment I am speaking with you, in my view the Free World, or what is known as the Free World and is in any case still famous, does not exist. There is no such world, there is no such camp.

In truth Europe has made itself the captive of Islamic Fascism, a capitive of anti-American feelings and once again a capitive of antisemitic feelings.

If there are two nations left in the world that may have a hope of saving themselves and through whom there may at some unknown time in the future be a hope of saving the people of the world, those two nations are America and to a lesser extent, Australia.

Today, in my view another Yalta has taken shape. Just in the last few days, after some diplomatic deal-making, both at the table and behind the scenes, unfortunately the American government, the only nation left that holds out hope for supporting the people of Iran, has given in to the leader of Islamic Fascism, meaning Iran and today's Islamic Republic.

Fifth column elements from the Islamic Republic, but not just them, have been able to convince the American government that there is no use, it must abandon this fight and surrender to the circumstances. We do not know more than this and it is not clear what will happen.

However, the world will begin difficult times. When I say the world, I really mean the world. While charlatans such as Mr. Al Gore, who has just won an Oscar, is filling the minds of many people with rotten and outdated theories such as global warming, the world will be experiencing a long and cold winter in the clutches of Islamic Fascism. With all of this deceitful beating of war drums, the sending of American naval vessels and aircraft carriers to the Persian Gulf, the quarrels and fights in the American Congress over sending a few thousand more American soldiers to Afghanistan--where in truth the Taliban are also getting the upper hand--unfortunately despite all of these things, America has surrendered.

Talks will soon begin between America and the Islamic Republic, first between the ambassadors of these nations, Iraq, Syria, Iran and America in Iraq and later the foreign ministers of these nations. In my view, and forgive me if I am speaking to you hopelessly, the Islamic Republic will build the atomic bomb, Israel will suffer the greatest damage in its history in savage warfare, and these Iranians who are supposedly fighting this regime, who have disgraced themselves in these three or four years, must prepare themselves for a harder, longer fight that will require even greater will and resolve, of which I am not able to see much evidence.

After this gloomy introduction ...

Broadcast 27 February on Iranian state satellite TV (IRINN):

Announcer: During his round of visits to the nations of East Asia Dick Cheney, the American vice president, is consulting with and justifying to these nations Bush's strategic plan in Iraq. Cheney is visiting Japan, Australia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Oman and Singapore. He is seeking in some way to convince the leaders of these nations that Iraq's salvation depends on this plan. This plan has not been welcomed by the nations of the Middle East.

The experts believe that even though Cheney tried to study the crisis in the region in these nations and to show that America makes no secret of its concern about the threat of terrorism, the realities show that America is seeking to convince its old allies to get closer to them.

Voice of interpreter as Cheny is shown speaking at podium: If we are unable to settle on a unified approach with our allies, we will have no choice but to reevaluate our view of these nations.

Announcer: The spread of unrest in various parts of Pakistan and Afghanistan has prompted the Democrats, after cutting off military aid, to turn to Pakistan. Therefore Cheney warned during this trip that if Islamabad is not able to reduce the threat of Al-Qaeda, Washington's aid will be cut off.

Pakistan's officials do not believe that America has done a good analysis of the realities in the region.

Voice of interpreter as Pakistani Foreign Minister Khurshid Mehmood Kasuri is speaking: Conditions in the region and especially the border areas between Pakistan and Afghanistan, are traditional and so complicated that America has no desire to confront them.

Announcer: Cheney went to Pakistan at a time when British Foreign Secretary Margaret Becker was holding talks simultaneously with Pakistani officials. The simultaneous trips by Beckett and Cheney to Pakistan show that Washington and London are worried about the changes that are taking place in this region.

Beckett is not optimistic about what is happening.

Voice of interpreter as Margaret Beckett is speaking: Afghanistan and Pakistan are unable to cope with the elements of unrest, and this concern will continue to exist.

Announcer: Beckett, whose country has the second largest major foreign military group in Afghanistan, went to Islamabad to discuss the situation in Afghanistan.

On the other hand Cheney's visit to Kabul after Washington's decision to reinforce its forces in Afghanistan, was made in anticipation of Taliban attacks in the coming weeks. American forces in Afghanistan are to be increased soon from 23,000 to 27,000. It is said that the Americans have decided to use the narcotics weapon for their own political objectives, because they believe that they can use the revenues from narcotics smuggling, especially to equip the insurgents, and therefore Washington can lead this group.

The unexpected trips by Cheney and Beckett simultaneously to Afghanistan and Pakistan show the frightening situation that exists in the region between these two nations. After five years of military occupation, these two nations are without the most elemental degrees of security. Where does the problem really lie?

Broadcast 27 February on Iranian state satellite TV (IRINN):

Broadcast 26 February by the Iranian state satellite TV (IRINN) English News:

The announcer mentions the "monafeqin." The is the Persian word for "hypocrites" and is the Islamic Republic's way of referring to the Mojahedin-e Khalq (sometimes referred to in English as the MEK). The Mojahedin have opposed the Islamic Republic almost since its inception and have conducted a number of attacks and assassinations against the Iranian government and its officials. They do receive US support and have a representative organization in the USA called the National Council of Resistance.

Broadcast 26 February on Iranian state satellite TV (IRINN):

Broadcast 23 February on Iranian state satellite TV (IRINN):

Announcer: The meeting of the diplomatic Quartet concerning the changes in Palestine ended without any result and the participants announced that before deciding on the revocation of the diplomatic and economic sanctions against the Palestinians they will wait for the formation of a united national Palestinian government.

This was this group's second meeting this month, attended by Russia, the EU, America and the UN. Despite this, after two hours of negotiations the participants were unable to reach an agreement on the division of power between Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and the Hamas movement.

Political Affairs Expert Qadiri-Abyaneh: The Quartet is mostly determined to act in Israel's interest and to disregard the rights of the Palestinians. This has always been the policy of Europe and America, and their actions are therefore in this framework. B

Before they begin negotiations, they want the new government of Palestine to recognize the Zionist regime officially and to endorse previous agreements. ... Why did they fight? Why did they even come to the negotitations if they were going to accept the road map?

On the one hand they do not accept the proposal from the Palestinians that they recognize the government of Palestine officially.

Announcer: These changes are taking place at a time when America and the Zionist regime do not desire unity among the Palestinian groups and regard the Mecca agreement as insufficient. They unilaterally expect these groups to accept all the international community's conditions.

This committee has stipulated as requirements for the beginning of diplomatic relations with the autonomous Palestinian organizations the official recognition of Jerusalem's occupier regime, the condemnation of violence and the acceptance of previous agreements by the Palestinians with the Zionist regime, including the road map.

Qadiri-Abyaneh: The other laws have been observed in the UN. Nations have the rights to freedom and security. They have the right to be independent in their own countries, but the Quartet does not emphasize these issues.

Political Affairs Expert Shaykh ol-Eslam: It is a red line for us that Israel should ever be recognized. The important thing is this very issue that we do not acknowledge Israel's right to exist. This is hard for the Israelis and the others. They are putting pressure on this very point. In other words they are using economic and political sanctions and a great deal of propaganda pressure.

They are trying to bring down the Palestinian government because it does not recognize Israel's existence. Europe is continuing the same thing. This is exactly what the Americans are trying to impose on the government of Palestine through the Quartet.

Announcer: This is at a time when the American government's recent efforts to hold the three-way meeting between Rice, Olmert and Abbas with the objective of finding a final solution to the Palestinian question and to form two independent Palestinian and Zionist nations have been nothing but repetition.

Rice's remarks after meeting with Abbas were indicative of this reality, because she acknowledged the likelhood that the White House would not officially recognize the future unity government of Palestine, and in so doing she effectively announced America's final position on solving the Palestine problem.

Shaykh ol-Eslam: It appears there is a plot between the Americans and the Israelis not to allow the Palestine unity government to form. The important thing here is the agreement within Palestine that if a unity government is formed there is no necessity or commitment to recognize Israel. This is the same conditions under which the resistance is continuing.

Announcer: In reality, these conditions will give the Zionist regime the opportunity to define the independent government of Palestine based on its own criteria, in such a way that the future government of Palestine's prerogatives will be more limited than they are now.

It is natural that in such a process the formation of a Palestinian government without the benefit of an armed force or an independent foreign policy, without granting the right of return to 5 million Palestinian refugees and an ambiguous future for Jerusalem, which could solve the Palestine problem at its roots.

Therefore Rice's trip to the region and her two- and three-way meetings with the leaders of Palestine and the Zionist regime was merely a propaganda and political maneuver which was for domestic consumption by the American Republican Party and the triumvirate of Dick Cheney, George Bush and Condoleeza Rice.

Broadcast 23 February on Iranian state satellite TV (IRINN):

Broadcast 23 February on Iranian state satellite TV (IRINN):

Announcer: Recent measures by the Zionist regime in violating the Al-Aqsa Mosque have been met by extensive opposition and protest by the world's Muslims and international organizations and institutions. This issue has shown that the Al-Aqsa Mosque, as the Muslim world's first shrine, has an important and valuable place in the Muslim world and in the nation of Islam.

The vast extent of the protest front against the Zionist regime occupiers have caused this regime to stop its violations of the Al-Aqsa Mosque. Despite this, the Zionist regime's fixed and lasting policies of violating this sacred site have cause international organizations to make efforts to prevent these measures by this regime, such as the emergency meeting of the Islamic Conference Organization.

Yet international public opinion in the Muslim World expects the Islamic Conference Organization, which was basically formed to support and defend the Al-Aqsa Mosque, to act more quickly to prevent measures by the Zionists, and to take international action in places such as the UN to inform the international community of the destructive policies of the Zionist occupiers in Jerusalem.

In any case it is expected that the emergency meeting of the Islamic Conference Organization in Jedda Saudi Arabia will be a step in this direction.

Broadcast 23 February on Iranian state satellite TV (IRINN):

Announcer One: At the end of a round of consultations with certain European officials in Germany, this week the secretary of our country's Supreme National Security Council went to Rome and Austria. In addition to talks with officials from these two nations, he discussed Iran's nuclear case with the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Announcer Two: Before this trip, officials from our nation's diplomatic apparatus reported the beginning of negotiations. The meeting between Larijani and El Baradei took place at a time when some Western parties, and especially America, actually damaged the IAEA's professional credibility by presenting Iran's case to the Security Council.

Announcer One: After the talks with El Baradei, Larijani said "the various parties want the negotiations to begin and our view of these measures is positive."

Political Affairs Expert Shaykh ol-Eslam: Any solution other than talks will be in no one's interest. As for the question of how we should discuss this issue and to what conditions we ought to agree, our views are quite clear.

We do not accept suspension. For their part, they are making every effort to prevent us having nuclear energy. We are trying to make the world understand that we want to create energy and they can also participate. In my view, our logic will ultimately prevail.

Broadcast 22 February on Iranian state satellite TV (IRINN):

Announcer one: The recent terrorist operations in Zahedan in which several security forces and members of the public were killed revealed the various perspectives that exist concerning the planners and supporters of terrorist operations such as this.

Of course the evidence obtained shows that the research on the involvement of foreign agents in these operations is correct.

Announcer two: The recent terrorist operations in Zahedan can be evaluated from several angles. The first inference is that the motivation for the terrorist operations in the Province of Sistan va Baluchestan must be seen as the goverment of the Islamic Republic of Iran's effort and determination to fight narcotics smuggling. At the present time, in view of the extent of the transport and smuggling operations, most of the cost of this effort is borne by police, the security forces and the people of Iran.

In this light, in view of the successes achieved in putting down the region's rebels and smugglers and the conduct of the necessary operations in various parts of the province and at its borders, the designers of blind terrorist operations intend to target government operations against smugglers of opiates.

Among the points worthy of reflection in this regard is the approach taken by Westerners, who consistently express concern about their own borders and call upon nations, especially Iran, to take the necessary measures to block the transit of narcotics. However they themselves are unwilling to guarantee reciprocal measures.

The recent terrorist operations in Zahedan emphasize the point that at least with respect to issues related to narcotics, Westerners, and especially Europeans, must consider themselves responsible with regard to such incidents and to make necessary aid available to Iran.

The second inference about the recent terrorist operations in Zahedan is the alignment of the propaganda of Westerners who reinforces these attacks on the people and officials of Iran, who are accordingly terrorists in the eyes of the West. The important question is, who are the real victims of terroristism?

The West, in giving sanctuary to the Mojahedin-e Khalq terrorists and providing them with military, media and financial resources, are behaving in contradictory ways before world public opinion and the desires of the people of Iran. At the present time public opinion is asking, how is it that the West maintains silence about individuals such as Abdul-Malik Rigi, the leader of the Zahedan terrorist operation and who is not unlike Bin Laden, Zarqawi and Zawahiri, instead of condemining them?

Voice of interpreter translating statement by White House Spokesman Tony Snow: I have no information about these terrorist operations in Iran.

Other than America, which opted for silence with regard to the Zahedan terrorist operations, the European Union and the UN, in a reaction that shows a new turn in these two international institutions, condemned this terrorist act.

Voice of interpreter translating statement by Italian Foreign Minister Massimo D'Alema: We condemn the terrorist attacks Wednesday in Zahedan, because such measures are not justifiable and the perpetrators must be punished.

Announcer Two: Based on the documents found in the team houses and with the members of terrorist Rigi groups, it became clear that they are getting the things they need from English and American sources.

*************************************

On 14 February the Christian Science Monitor published a report on this incident. Read it here.

When Noam Chomsky analyzes US policy he usually doesn't have much to say about Islam in relation to the Middle East. In an extensive interview published today in the Asia Times he speaks just a little about Shia demographics, but leaves all the other Muslim political issues, claims and campaigns untouched. He concentrates instead on comparing US foreign policy with Mafia practices. He's been quoted on Iranian state satellite TV a number of times because they like what he says. Read it here.

According to Amir Taheri, Iran and Syria are waiting for George Bush to leave office, at which time they will be better able to promote their own vision of the Middle East. Read it here.

Broadcast 20 February on Iranian state satellite TV (IRINN); George Bush, Uncle Sam and the American GI are all lampooned here:

Broadcast 16 February on Iranian state satellite TV (IRINN):

Announcer: Few people might have thought that about 150 years after the opening of the world's first subway, now beneath many of the world's cities there are many metro lines that have taken on the task of moving an astonishing number of urban residents from place to place, providing speed, comfort and security in the transportation network.

Interviewer: How much do you use the metro?

Passenger: I usually use it three or four times a day.

Passenger: Little. I don't use it much.

Passenger: Once a day.

Passenger: I use it every time I want to go into town.

Passenger: I use it every day.

Dr. Montazeri: The Metro Company goes back a few years; it began early in 1987 when Iranian engineers began to implement the designs they had. They began building tunnels and stations, and over time various sections went into operation. In the year 1998 the Tehran-Karaj line went into operation, Line 5. In 1999 part of Line 2 went into operation. Now as I am speaking to you we have three working metro lines, two lines within the city, Lines 1 and 2. Line 1 goes from the north at Mirdamad Street towards His Holiness the Imam's Shrine. Line 2 goes from the Darvdasht-Tehranpars Section and intersects with Line 1 at His Holiness the Imam Square and continues in the direction of Sadeqiyeh for 20 kilometers.

Line 1 is about 26 kilometers and we are operating the Tehran line from Mehrshahr to Khodro. With the secondary lines we are presently operating about 90 kilometers.

Announcer: The transportation routes in a city with heavy traffic like Tehran are the top priority of city managers in every period. In previous years many solutions have been devised for this problem, from electric buses to the new rail project, but one of the best operations has been the creation and development of the metro, which has been able to transport citizens at the lowest cost in a giant city such as Tehran.

The Tehran metro, with the operation of just 3 of its 8 planned lines, daily provides about 1.2 million urban rides. Each metro line is the equivalent of a 15-lane freeway. In other words the two metro lines in the north and south of the city of Tehran, which go in two directions, have the transport ability of a 30-lane freeway.

It is predicted that by the year 2021 Tehran's population will reach 12 million, and this will cause a striking increase in the number of vehicles and intra city trips. Therefore the best way to transport passengers in the great city of Tehran will be high-capacity trains.

Tehran Metro

Dr. Montazeri: Future plans, God willing, will include expanding the northern line towards Tajrish Square, about the 8.5 kilometers. I said that at the present time we are operating as far as Mirdamad Station. God willing the line will go into operation from Mirdamad to Tajrish in various phases over a distance of 8.5 kilometers.

Presently we have about 50 stations and God willing there will be more. In addition to expanding northern line to Tajrish, and our eastern line will go from Darvdasht-Tehranpars for about 8.5 kilometers, and construction is underway on these two segments. We hope that within the next year and a half we will put both of these segments into final operation. This is the short term.

For these two 8.5 kilometer segments we hope to complete operations within the next three years. As I said, we are hoping as these segments are made ready over time we will make use of them.

Announcer: The metro is capable of transporting 2,000 people in a single trip in the shortest amount of time. While the increase in the number of vehicles will cause heavy congestion in the cities, accidents, increased travel time, toxic pollution and increased noise, based on the findings of a study that has been conducted, the use of the metro in the year 2005 has had more than 4,700 billion rials in positive economic effects.

It is estimated that every metro trip saves $.167 in fuel consumption, and calculating each dollar at 8,000 rials, in this way a total of 588 billion rials has been saved in expenditures from the nation's resources.

The development of the Tehran metro, by preventing wasted time for Tehran's citizens, has saved about 1,012 billion rials.

Broadcast 20 February on Iranian state satellite TV (IRINN):

Broadcast 19 February on Iranian state satellite TV (IRINN):

Announcer: One of the fruits of the boycott in our country is the realization of the strategic slogan "we can do it." The result has been the acquisition of new technologies in industry, and especially the nation's aircraft industry.

Day by day this boycott has increased the abilities of specialists, especially Ministry of Defense specialists in the nation's aircraft industries sector, and this has produced a maturity in the air fleet that approaches self-sufficiency.

Military Officer: We believe that defense power is based on today's power. In other words if we want development and progress, which are among our revolution's principal slogans, if we want political, social, economic, and military defense development, we must pay special attention to scientific power.

Announcer: Specialists in the Ministry of Defense and Armed Forces Logistics air industry, who previously overhauled and rebuilt a giant 747 aircraft, achieved another success by rebuilding one of the largest helicopters in use by the nation's armed forces.

Military Officer: In our helicopter building industry, just in the last year about 10,000 parts have been made domestically. In reality we have more than 16 types of Western-style helicopters. Thanks to our capable specialists and experts, all of these types of helicopters are undergoing basic repairs in the helicopter manufacturing complex.

Thanks to the efforts of these dear ones we are able to do all the maintenance on all of these types of helicopters in the various sectors, with their various missions. In addition to the 16 types of helicopters I mentioned, we have a 17th type of helicopter, which has good capabilities in various types of work that it does for us, and its repairs are done here.

Announcer: When this line went into operation all phases of repair and maintenance for Helicopter 1171 including all basic body repairs, the fuel system, the rotor system and the rotor propulsion system were done.

Engineer: One of the characteristics of this maintenance line we are seeing today is that it is operated by the local people, meaning that in reality we are using the capability that now exists and for whatever we had from the West, we are using our own capabilities. We have tried to adapt whatever parts we need to the requirements for eastern helicopters.

Announcer: At the present time a significant portion of the helicopters in the armed forces are of the 1171 type. The construction of more than 4,000 types of very complex parts for various types of helicopters by Ministry of Defense specialists is another indication of the capability of Iranian specialists.

Engineer: The important thing is that we are creating this capability. The fact that we do no rely on outsiders to keep our defense capability current at all times is a prime value for us. However you know that making basic repairs on any unit costs more than 8,050,000 tumans, but we have the ability here to do basic overhauls on five helicopters per year.

Announcer: Putting the armed forces helicopter repair line into operation will increase the scientific and specialist capabilities of Ministry of Defense and Armed Forces Logistics specialists, and it will also increase operational capabilities of the helicopter fleet of the Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

According to Taheri's analysis, the US has various options short of going to war with Iran. Read it here.

The Guardian reports today that Mosen Rezai's news site has been blocked to Iranian users. Read it here.

Excerpts from an 18 February broadcast on Iranian state satellite TV (IRINN):

Interviewer: Thank you very much. I would like to know the background and the reasons for the Mecca agreement.

Middle East Affairs Expert Haji Najari: After the Hamas victory in the Palestine elections, which was really a symbol of the victory of revolutionary and Islamic thinking in Palestine, America and the Zionist regime were unable to tolerate the formation of a revolutionary Islamic goverment that adheres to its fundamental principles of not recognizing Israel and the Zionist regime.

For this reason from the very first days sanctions, an economic embargo and economic pressures on the Hamas government began and intensified in subesequent years. By cutting off aid to the Hamas government and the Palestine revolutionary forces, they were trying to prevent the formation of a revolutionary government.

However, despite their efforts and on the other hand thanks to the support the government of the Islamic Republic and the region's other revolutionary regimes have given to Mr. Haniyeh's government, America and this Zionist regime have not been successful in this effort.

Interviewer: What is the outlook for the unity government?

Najari: The outlook depends in one sense on whether or not the nations who were in attendance at the Mecca conference will be able to keep their promises. Naturally they were not happy about the clashes between the Palestinian forces, the Arab and Muslim forces. One of the basic areas for reinforcing this government is stopping the clashes. Naturally if this is done it will provide a context for better tolerance.

If the aid continues and this goverment is formed, in view of the fact that with its understanding of the Zionist regime Hamas has stood by its principles and in view of the end of the economic embargo and the delivery of aid, this will create conditions in which Palestinian goverment will overcome its internal conflicts, which are its most important problem.

In recent months we have seen demonstrations and strikes by workers in the Palestinian government within the occupied territories; if this aid continues, naturally the government will be able to take the first steps and will be able to succeed with its principles and aspirations.

On the other hand it is possible that due to international agreements there will be pressure on Hamas which Hamas will divert to the Palestinian Parliament for making decisions about its international relations and its relations with the Zionist regime.

Interviewer: Thank you very much. One of your most important issues is thus overcoming Palestine's domestic problems, and then the formation of the government.

Interviewer: Thank you very much. One of your most important issues is thus overcoming Palestine's domestic problems, and then the formation of the government.

Najari: Naturally it is like that. When this government is formed in the region with authority, and when the anxiety that naturally exists among Muslims is reduced, this in itself will reinforce the Islamic movement in the region. It is for this reason that Ms. Rice, despite initial impressions, opposed with her presence the formation of a national unity government and sought to implement the failed roadmap agreement, an agreement for whose failure Israel itself played the primary role!

Interviewer: What is your assessment of the objectives of Ms. Rice's trip to the region?

Najari: In reality Ms. Rice has four basic objectives for her trip to the region. One objective is the Palestine question and the changes that have occurred in the region, to which I will refer later. Ms. Rice's second objective pertains to the changes that have occurred in Lebanon. Her third objective has to do with the problems that have arisen in Iraq, and the next issue is the nuclear case that is before the Security Council. In reality these are the four objectives that can be examined with regard to Ms. Rice's trip to the region.

Ms. Rice's trip to the Palestinian occupied territories is really a trip to give American support for the Zionist regime. You know that the first position that was taken, without much serious study, was taken in opposition to the formation of a national unity government.

Of course it was possible to understand beforehand that when the Mecca Conference was held and the Mecca agreement was being made, considering the relationship Saudi Arabia has with the US, the Americans knew about the agreements before they were made.

One might ask, why did this happen? This takes us back to the issue that originally brought about its formation. If the Mecca Conference had not been held and if the agreement had not been made, with the progress Hamas forces had made within the occupied territories, naturally the Abu Mazen group or the Palestinian Working Group would not have been formed, and Hamas would have won a decisive victory!

Thus this was the first step in stopping Hamas, and of course it was stopped. Of course it made positive achievements in ending the fratricide among the Palestinians, and in reality contrary to the wishes of the Zionist regime and the Americans, the Palestine went back to an issue between Palestine and the Zionist regime. This was the first step.

However they thought the next step would be to convince Hamas to accept the Zionist regime, but this brought no result. In other words after the Mecca agreement, despite the fact that this agreement included international commitments, after the Mecca Conference Mr. Haniyeh offically announced that Hamas does not recognize Israel.

Interviewer: One of Ms. Rice's conditions was that the Zionist regime must be recognized officially.

Najari: Yet this is not a condition! When this issue was turned over to the Palestianian Parliament it was really a way of running away that was naturally put in front of the resistance forces to get through this phase for the the creation of stability and security, and in reality it was important to make the national unity government effective.

While we are in these civil wars many of the Fatah forces are reconciling with the Hamas forces, and this shows that there has been a change within the Fatah. If the national government is able to succeed in solving the internal problems in view of those basic issues that Mr. Haniyeh and Hamas are pursuing and if this government is able to succeed, in reality this will be an important achievement in Palestine. It will be important that they were able to make positive and important achievements and to bring a revolutionary government to power with the support of the people, without recognizing the Zionist regime.

This would really be a change, even though we have acts of sabotage at the outset. For example if you look at the road map, there was American and especially Zionist pressure in designing the road map, and here the issue of understanding the Zionist regime arises.

Yet you see that the first ones to undermine this agreement were the Zionists themselves. With the creation of the Jewish settlements and the creation of that giant wall they really negated the road map. Yet a few years after the road map Ms. Rice is calling for its implementation again!

In our belief, Ms. Rice has nothing to say on this trip. She has come to the region solely to encourage governments, to pressure and even coopt moderate Palestinian forces to create support for the changes she wants because even the Arab nations in the region who support America cannot tolerate a continuation of this situation, because it has become clear that contrary to their occasional slogans, in these clashes they have aligned themselves with the Zionist regime to put down the Hamas forces using the resources provided by some of the Arab nations such as Egypt.

In any case in view of the influence of the Palestinian movement in reinforcing the Islamic movement in the region they have no choice but to abandon the Palestinain movement in the region.

Another of Ms. Rice's objectives for her trip to the region is connected to the Palestine question. In Lebanon America's gains in isolating the Hezbollah have been defeated. This was an historic defeat after the Lebanon war where they tried to isolate the Hezbollah, but with the vigilance of the Hezbollah and the other forces that were cooperating with them, not only were they unsuccessful doing this, they were obliged to accept many realities.

We are seeing that many nations in the region and the superpowers are trying to maintain the situation somehow and keep the Hezbollah from achieving further successes in the region.

Likewise, with regard to the Islamic Republic's nuclear case, and this in itself is a more serious topic where Ms. Rice is seeking to defeat the Islamic Republic of Iran's strategy for achieving its objectives with its peaceful nuclear program.

Interviewer: Thank you very much Mr. Najari!

Broadcast 17 February by Iranian state satellite TV (IRINN):

Announcer: Although since the time of the collapse of the former Soviet Union in the early 1990s America's effort to establish a monopolar system has received serious opposition from international centers of power, the existing indications show that this opposition has increased more than ever. What is the nature of this trend and how is it that America is facing more international opposition every day?

This week, meaning Wednesday, New Delhi, the capital of India, is witnessing a three-way meeting between the foreign ministers of Russia, India and China. This meeting is being seen in most political and expert circles as a symbol of the opposition of international powers to America's domination-seeking and unilateral policies.

What is clear is that White House efforts to create and establish a mono-polar system in international affairs with American hegemony and domination is seriously opposed by world public opinion, the great international powers and most of the nations of the world. With the passage of time, as the threats and challenges to the international system due to America's unilateral policies have ecome clear, opposition to this approach has increased more than ever.

The effort to align the three important powers India, Russia and China in this framework is praiseworthy. The question now is, what role will the alignment of the three aforementioned powers play on the international scene in reigning in America's crisis-causing unilateral policies and orientation?

Political Affairs Expert Vaezi: The measures the White House has taken and the efforts the Europeans are making to to promote them are aimed at comprehensive Western world domination. This has increased the axiety of powerful nations such as China, Russia and India. They see the solution as cooperaton with one another. Their first step at the present time is the three-way meeting between the foreign ministers of India. Russia and China. and in this regard they issued a very important statement and later these three nations will advance their relations.

In recent months in view of the efforts the Islamic republic has made and the message the Islamic republic sent to Russia, the extent of Russia's influence in international affairs has increased. It wants to play a greater role in Middle East developments and to increase its relations with nations in the region.

Announcer: In recent years especially, since the neo-conservatives came on the job in America, this nation has leaned more than ever towards the use of individuals and violent and military measures. The consequence of that has been the spread of America's military presence in parts of the world and the imposition of war and the provocation of slaughters by nations.

The continuation of this trend will cause more damage and casualties in nations that have been attacked and occupied, while irreparable damage has been done and will be done to international peace and security. Likewise, the negative consequences of this American militaristic orientation has damaged the standing of international organizations and marginalized them, reducing the effectiveness of collective action for achieving peace and security in international affairs.

An important point in this area is that America, in pursuing its unilateral policies, has gone to the point that it has tried to turn international organizations into implements for advancing its mistaken policies in international affairs.

The question is, what measures must be taken to block American objectives and make international organizations reclaim their real standing?

Political Affairs Expert Vaezi: Some European nations are unhappy with the international structure are trying in a coordinated and comprehensive measure that will both reform the structure of the UN in the interest of all the nations of the world and that will truly prevent measures, mostly being taken by the Americans, aimed at politicizing international institutions and organizations.

Many experts believe that America's policies are unfortunately causing unrest so they they will be able both to implement their own policies and to persuade other powers to cooperate with them It is essential that the world's large nations take effective and serious measures against this.

Announcer: Adopting a path in opposition to the White House policies for making war and crisis is something that is essential more than anything else as a means of maintaining international peace and security. In this regard it is the duty of all the nations and organizations of the world to defend the legal principles and criteria of international relations.

Broadcast 17 February by Iranian state satellite TV (IRINN)

Announcer: While the European Parliament has issued a resolution condemning unauthorized secret American CIA military flights in this union's air space, at the same time the an EU report published in the newspaper "The Independent" states that 13 nations from this union, including England, Germany and Italy, cooperated in the transport and torture of these defendants, managed secretly by the CIA network.

The publication of this report shows that the European governments, contrary to their ideological exterior in which they oppose America's inhumane policies, in practice, by cooperating extensively with the CIA, have in practice created conditions for the extensive violation of the rights of defendants by the CIA, so that in England alone 170 of the nation's airports have cooperated in the transport of defendants to secret CIA prisons.

More than anything else, this shows the West's contradictory double-standard with respect to the matter of human rights. It must be said in this regard that America more than any other Western nation is both a defender of human rights and at the same the principal violator of those rights.

The published realities with respect to the torture and torment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad and the horrifying detention center at Guantanmo reveal the essential falsity of the claims by the Americans in the defense of human rights.

Another important point is that the cooperation of nations such as England with the CIA's inhumane operations on European soil and the condemnation of these measures by this union's member nations has shown the existing breach between the nations that lean towards America, especially England and other goverments and the pivotal nations of the union. This could become a new challenge to the process of reinforcing alignment in the European Union.

Broadcast 17 February on Iranian state satellite TV (IRINN):

Announcer: With the implementation of Iraq's security plan, a great step will be taken towards providing Iraq's security and the elimination of insurgents and terrorists from this nation.

At the beginning of its implementation, this plan came with numerous problems and challenges, some of which were overcome through the intervention of Iraqi political and security officials.

Based on the Baghdad security plan which began late last week, in accordance with a confidential sheduled plan all parts of the Iraqi capital will be searched and cleared of terrorists. Sources in Baghdad say that this security plan is intended to confront terrorists from the beginning of Iraq's occupation until now, and the extent and number of its participants are indications of this.

Although the American army has anounced it will only play a supporting role in this plan and will act in full coordination with Iraq's government, the signs and indications suggest that the lack of coordination between the American army and Iraq's security forces is being discussed among Iraq's government leaders as the most important challenge to this plan.

For example, before the al-Maliki government announced this plan officially the American army had already reported the start of the plan, which displeased Iraq's military commanders. This kind of disconnect exists more or less in other sectors as well.

While Iraqi forces have formed the core of the Baghdad security plan, in taking measures not coordinated with Iraq's security forces, American army commanders have tried to play the determining role. Yet based on previous agreements, American forces were to appear only in a role supporting Iraq's army.

Another problem with the implementation of Iraq's security plan is disclosures by American army commanders and military spokesmen on the pretext of clarifying its various phases. Terrorist knowledge of its confidential aspects undermines the plan's effectiveness in certain locations searched by the Iraqi army.

The disclosure of such things at a time when the al-Maliki government had begun the countdown to the start of the plan has prompted severe protest and criticism of the government of Iraq in the Parliament, to the point that the chairman of the National Security Committee in the Iraqi Parliament said that to succeed this plan must be completely confidential. Unfortunately however, before the plan began many of its details were revealed in the media.

Iraq's Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said concerning America's premature revelation of the plan: The government of Iraq and Iraqi commanders are seeking to keep this plan confidential, but many of its details have been given to the media. We regret this and are concerned about it.

Before this, in justifying this plan's implementation American military commanders and political leaders staged confrontations with religious groups and sects; this provoked harsh reactions from Iraq's Shia and Sunni leaders.

Ultimately however, with with the insight and determination of Iraq's political and security officials, this problem will be overcome to a significant extent.

Broadcast 16 February by Iranian state satellite TV (IRINN):

IRINN Doesn't Always Know its Enemy

On 13 February Senator Joseph Lieberman was identified as Senator Richard Lugar in a Persian caption during an anti-US editorial piece.

Broadcast 15 February on Iranian State Satellite TV (IRINN):

Broadcast 15 February on Iranian State Satellite TV (IRINN):

Announcer: While the Americans have tried with the presentation of some evidence to accuse Iran of interfering in Iraq, America's Joint Staff Chief General Peter Pace made the sensible declaration that there is no evidence of Iran's interference in Iraq's affairs. What is the real reason for these positions taken by other American officials?

For more than a month, meaning since 11 January when American forces kidnapped 5 Iranian diplomats in Irbil, Iraq, American officials have tried to design and implement a new phase in the psychological war against the Islamic Republic of Iran, have tried to pass the responsibility for their defeat in Iraq to other nations, including Iran.

In this area America's military and political officials in Iraq have tried to present what they think is evidence of Iranian intervention in Iraq by exhibiting weapons and munitions. Yet these measures by the American government have been seriously opposed within America by members of Congress.

Representatives of the American Congress have sharply criticized the positions of the American govvernment and have accused Bush, this nation's president, of taking steps for another adventure in the region.

The conflict between the American Congress and government has risen to the point that Bush has been obliged to reject any kind of decision to attack Iran and to declare in Congress that reports about this are propaganda from his opponents.

Yet at the height of efforts by American officials to build a case against Iran, General Peter Pace, the American military chief of staff, took a different approach and denied there is evidence of Iranian intervention in Iraq's affairs. The question is, what is the reason for the contradictory positions being taken by American officials about Iran?

Political Affairs Expert Sadatian: The opportunites that have arisen for the Democrats to make use of the disputes in the region in their own interest have prompted them to put greater pressure on the Republicans and Mr. Bush. For this reason due the greater attention that they are paying to Iran they are faced with greater limitations. The limitations the United States is facing are that it wants to get an international consensus against Iran, but in the present circumstances it cannot announce this.

It is on this account that on the one hand it takes a soft line with moderation but on the other hand we see that they have retained their hard-line positions. This is the reason for the conflicts we are seeing in America's positions toward Iran. On the one hand they are trying to adhere to their hard-line positions without the slightest deviation, and if they succeed in this they will take the next steps.

Announcer: What is clear is that the American government and president have understood the point that they are frustrated and decisively defeated in Iraq and they are now attempting to find a way out of the quagmire in Iraq by accusing other countries.

This situation has caused basic problems for American officials in their efforts to design scenarios for psychological warfare against other countries such as Iran. They presented evidence in this area that later proved to be unfounded.

Just a few days after the exhibition of the evidence for the American claims in Iraq it became clear that the mortar rounds on display were produced in Pakistan. Likewise the Austrian company that the Americans accused of sending weapons to Iran and Iraq announced that has not sent any weapons to Iran.

What is America's strategic problem in Iraq then, that has so frustrated and challenged American officials?

Political Affairs Expert Sadatian: In circumstances where he has lost the two houses of the US Congress, these pressures have weakened, but the overall policies the Americans are pursuing make the American presence in the Middle East region necessary and essential, and we see that in view of all their policy problems they are seeking to increase their forces. They have obtained the agreement of Congress and have requested a budget so that by September next year they will be able to add at least 20,000 more troops to their forces in Iraq.

Announcer: In any case, America's situation in Iraq is so complicated and critical that America's psyhological warfare tactics against other nations will not be able to same this country easily from the Iraq mess.

**************************************************************

It is interesting to me that this TV editorial makes no mention of the Qods force, which figured so prominently into the Bush press conference yesterday. The Los Angeles Times had a lot to say about that force today.

Former presidential candidate and IRGC commander Mohsen Rezai's news site Baztab reports in Persian today on a European press interview with Ali Akbar Velayti, who is a former Iranian foreign minister and current foreign affairs consultant to supreme leader Ali Khamenei. Velayati says the recent Tehran conference on the holocaust, which he did not attend, was not intended as a denial of the holocaust, but merely as an occasion to "study the realities."

Velayati also told an interviewer there is still a need to keep the Hezbollah armed in Lebanon because of the Israeli presence in the Cheba Farms border region, and that is why Iran opposes the UN resolution calling for their disarmament.

This interview appears to be part of an attempt by Iran's higher authority to reduce the damage its president is causing with his public comments