An Argument against Ronen Bergman’s 'The Secret War with Iran' – 18

Iranian journalist and expert Abbas Salimi Namin has disproved the claims and opinions of Israeli analyst Ronen Bergman in the book ‘The Secret War with Iran’. ‘The Secret War with Iran’, written by renowned Zionist journalist Ronen Bergman, was published in 2008 by Simon & Schuster publishing company in the United States.

Born in 1972, Bergman is a graduate of Tel Aviv University in the Middle East political relations. He is a famous Zionist journalist and analyst in the military and security fields who has worked with Israeli newspapers ‘Haaretz’ and ‘Yedioth Ahronoth’, American dailies and weeklies such as ‘The New York Times’, ‘Newsweek’, ‘The Wall street Journal’, and British media groups including ‘The Guardian’ and ‘The Times’.

Bergman has been interested in topics relating to the enemies of the Zionist regime (particularly Iran, Hezbollah and the Palestinian resistance groups), as well as subjects on the history of the Israeli regime’s assassination operations, which are cited in his recent book ‘Rise and Kill First’.

In an interview with Persian TV channel ‘Iran International’, Bergman has pointed to the Iranian nuclear program and the issues surrounding it -particularly the Zionist regime’s secret attempts to halt the process of nuclear activities in Iran and assassinate Iranian scientists. He has also cited ex-CIA chief Michael Hayden as saying that the assassination of nuclear scientists is the best way to impede Iran’s growing process in that field, and has implicitly held Israel responsible for it.

In the book ‘The Secret War with Iran’, Bergman has written a history of encounters between Iran and the Zionist regime, while the bulk of the book relates to the Lebanese Hezbollah -Iran’s main ally in the battle against the Zionist regime since its formation until the 33-day War- focusing on the role of Martyr Imad Mughniyeh.

His book also includes sections about the final years of the Pahlavi regime and victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, short periods of the war imposed by the Ba’thist party of Iraq on Iran (focusing on the McFarlane affair), Iran’s role in supporting the Palestinian groups, and the Iranian nuclear program.

Bergman’s multiple undocumented and untrue comments as well as personal and purposeful analyses (with the main purpose of displaying Israel’s power, especially in a competition with the US) that have repeatedly come in his book make a critical review of the book necessary for Iranian readers.

Director of the Iran History Studies and Compilation Bureau, Abbas Salimi Namin, has written an extensive criticism in a book about ‘The Secret War with Iran’. Born in 1954, Salimi Namin is an experienced journalist and a renowned Iranian researcher in history and political sciences who has published many articles and books.

About ‘The Secret War with Iran’

Part 18:

I volunteered to fight in Operation Fath ul-Mobin. Due to my cultural background, I was named director of promotional affairs at one of key units in the operation. The reason was clear. If, as Bergman claims, Iranian combatants had been fooled and were used as tools, they could not have resisted an armed-to-the-teeth invader for even one hour. What undid all Zionist plans and predictions was the Iranian nation’s exemplary growth during anti-dictatorial and anti-colonial struggles. Misperception of this political maturity and the wrong imagination that before the Islamic Revolution the national independence-seeking movement could have been suppressed by adopting certain measures led to the 1980 coup and subsequently the military invasion of Iran. The important point in the plotting for all these coups was the planned murder of Imam Khomeini. The head of the regional office of Mossad in Tehran has impudently expressed regret that the Imam was not assassinated. “Another point to mention is the question many, including me, ask about learning from Iran’s Revolution and the emergence of Khomeini. Everyone, either Iranian or Western, tried to change the historical trend in Iran when it was still possible to be done. Was it not necessary to “silence” Khomeini first and eliminate him to prevent the Revolution? Let me say it frankly. Wasn’t it necessary to destroy him? No sound mind would have grieved Khomeini’s elimination. The fallout from driving him out in any way possible would have been less significant than the catastrophes he caused.” (Big Satan, Small Satan, Eliezer Tsafrir, translated by Farnoosh Ram, Autumn 2007, Ketab Corps., Los Angeles, pp. 505-6)

Therefore, how have the Zionists, who have openly regretted not having assassinated Imam Khomeini before the victory of the Iranian nation, had the chance to unseat the nascent establishment in Iran but missed it? Those who stood against Saddam and drove him out of Iranian territory had started political activism under the leadership of Imam Khomeini in 1963. They had become steadfast during the imposed war. Therefore, the national unity built over Imam Khomeini’s leadership put an end to the US, British and Zionist dominance on Iran and then disgraced their agent in the war on Iran. Mossad’s representative has acknowledged this fact: “The following day, i.e. December 11, 1978, was Ashura. Just its name was enough to cause a shockwave by events that were likely on that day…At least two million attend this massive demonstration. There was no need for election and referendum to gauge the popularity of government or opposition. Instead of casting ballots into boxes, people had come in person to vote…To have an impression of this historically unprecedented demonstration in Iran, which might be unrivaled even in the history of nations, I plucked up my courage and joined the rally…The big population was like a moving monster. From every class you may imagine was in attendance: religious fanatics with or without beard, rich and poor classes, engineers, teachers, lawyers, businesspersons, students, schoolchildren, doctors and nurses, housewives, retirees, i.e. a big tribe nurtured by Khomeini.” (Ibid, pp. 244-246)

Of course the glorious unity of Iranians from all walks of life was really a giant monster for the Zionists. It was not just a referendum negating the Pahlavi dictatorship; rather, it constituted a clear concept for this insatiable community. Such unrivaled unity and solidarity was symbolized more beautifully in the wake of Saddam’s invasion. For this reason, arms and aid were delivered to Baghdad in a bid to pin down Iran and shatter Iran’s national resistance. But it was not very effective and Iran was put on a more offensive position. Meantime, Iran stepped up its combined defensive operations, i.e. asymmetrical and classic battles. Naturally as the battle for the liberation of occupied areas took a more classic form, the necessity of supplying spare parts for heavy arms became more serious. But it has to be noted that at this stage, Iran had left behind the phase of pinning down invaders and entered the offensive phase. Therefore, when the issue of military component supply was raised in 1981, Iran felt no threat from invaders (as Bergman acknowledges). Rather, the invaders were digging trenches, creating minefields, laid booby traps and installed several rows of razor wire to repel attacks. Iran’s efforts to procure components and equipment on the black market have played well into the hands of scenario makers. Because in the Western official market, no commodity with military use was sold to Iran, the country had to make its purchases on the black market. It has also to be taken into account that Jewish tycoons are running such businesses. Therefore, they tried their best to mete out dishonest and fraudulent treatment to Iran, particularly at the beginning when Iranian officials lacked enough experience. Bergman has noted some of these instances of fraud: “The first deal was carried out through one shrewd Iranian arms dealer via French intermediaries. The dealer bought 250 tires for Phantom jet fighters, along with communications equipment, 106mm recoilless guns, mortars, and ammunition, all from Israel. He paid $2 million up front. The goods were shipped via Lisbon. It turned out, however, that he was bilking his Iranian customers. He charged them $56 million, and promptly disappeared. But this scam did not shut the pipeline down; and orders from Iran kept on coming.” (Chapter 3, p. 57)

The author continues to write about mechanisms of delivery of purchases to Iran, naming it Operation Seashell. “Khomeini’s regime openly endorsed the destruction of Israel, yet there were enough people in Israel who thought they should sell arms to him, in secret, for the operation code-named “Seashell” to be born… Secrecy demanded that a complex airlift operation be devised, carried out entirely at night in unmarked aircraft to ensure that neither Israel nor Iran would be associated with it. Piniol managed to get officials of the Argentinean airline Transporte Aereo Rioplatense (TAR), some of them based in Miami, to assign an aircraft to the operation… To finalize the operation, a meeting was held at IAI headquarters on July 15, 1981, to discuss what the “top-secret” minutes of the meeting described as “The order of the Elul company in the matter of Seashell.”… The Iranian impresario behind Operation Seashell was a man whose name crops up frequently in the secret wars between Iran, Israel, and the West: Dr. Sadeq Tabatabai, a distant relative of Khomeini and one of his confidants in sensitive matters. It was he who ordered the Iranian purchasing agents to contact Piniol. On April 7, 1981, Tabatabai wrote to Koffer Holdings, Piniol’s straw company in Jersey, and made clear that Iran would be the end user of the goods to be supplied. He identified himself as a representative of the “Defense Council” of the revolution.” (Chapter 3, pp. 56-60)

Bergman has offered his own description of Iran’s black market arms purchase in a bid to justify his own scenarios. Several points should be reflected upon in this regard:

1. Iran’s purchase of military components on the dates mentioned by Bergman date from the time the invader had been pinned down and Iranian troops were on the offensive. Therefore, the allegations of sparing Iran a major defeat by supplying components are unfounded.

2. Without Iran knowing, Israel was arranging arms deals behind-the-scenes in a bid to take into his own hand all the transactions, whose reasons will be discussed later on.

3. The Zionists receive arms aid from the US on a regularly annual basis, but some of these weapons become unusable several years after. Then, they recoated the arms and sent it anew on the black market as newly manufactured weapons. Unfortunately Iran was deceived into buying such arms.

4. Among components Iran purchased on the black market, there was no Israeli equipment or component. Despite Bergman’s allegations, Iranian officials were extremely sensitive to this issue. Furthermore, defenders of the country countered any such error. During the 8-year Sacred Defense by Iranian nation, nobody could produce such a case to discredit Iran, particularly because Saddam liked very much to find such a pretext to harm Iran’s credibility.

5. Jewish and non-Jewish dealers, who often received US-made equipment and components secretly from Israel and sold to Iranians, were fully controlled by the Zionists. Therefore, they proceeded with their anti-Iran policy. Therefore, in many cases, they received money for some equipment and then they disappeared suddenly as they did not want to supply the arms to Iranian defense forces.

6. In many cases, the Zionists used to renovate outdated commodities and sell them as new ones. This tactic was carried out even when Iran held direct talks with the Americans on securing the release of American hostages held in Lebanon in return for US arms sale to Iran. A stopover in Israel of the plane carrying McFarlane gave the Zionists a good chance to replace new components with outdated ones.