| 
 Al-Jazeerah History
 
 Archives
 
 Mission & Name
 
 Conflict Terminology
 
 Editorials
 
 Gaza Holocaust
 
 Gulf War
 
 Isdood
 
 Islam
 
 News
 
 News Photos
 
 Opinion 
	
	
	Editorials
 
 US Foreign Policy (Dr. El-Najjar's Articles)
 
 www.aljazeerah.info
 
	  
           |  | 
 Britain's Bovver-Boy Hague Loves Putting the 
	  Boot Into Iran: When Will he Give Israel the Kicking it Deserves?
	 By Stuart LittlewoodRedress,
      Al-Jazeerah, CCUN, March 26, 2012 
 
 Stuart Littlewood argues that British Foreign Secretary 
	  William Hague’s determination to condemn the Iranian people to economic 
	  hardship, his keenness to escalate tension with Iran, and his eagerness to 
	  do Israel’s bidding by creating an environment conducive to aggression 
	  against Iran, mean that he has become the UK’s biggest liability.
 
 UK Foreign Secretary William Hague has worked himself into a lather 
	  over Iran's blocking of a Foreign Office website. He says:
 
		I condemn this action by the 
		Iranian government. ‘UK for Iranians’’ was launched to reach out to 
		Iranians, explaining, discussing and engaging with them on UK policy.
 We have no quarrel with the Iranian people... At the launch of our 
		website, I celebrated the links between the UK and Iran, and the 
		richness of Iran’s culture... It is not just Iranians who are the poorer 
		for their government’s censorship, but the rest of the world. We will 
		continue to look for opportunities to engage with the Iranian people, 
		confident that Iranians are outward looking and deserve the same 
		freedoms that others enjoy around the world.
 
		
			| 
				
					| “For months Mr Hague worked overtime to force the people 
					of Iran into misery, poverty and isolation by imposing a 
					battery of 'unprecedented' sanctions.” |  |  What a hoot! For months Mr Hague worked overtime to force the people of 
	Iran into misery, poverty and isolation by imposing a battery of 
	"unprecedented" sanctions. He then campaigned to have these measures 
	intensified, and to hell with the consequences – for them and for us.
 Hague, with his pro-Israel affiliations, is simply not the right person 
	to engage with the Iranians or anyone else in the Middle East.
 
 “UK 
	for Iranians'” looks like a clone of America’s “virtual embassy”, which is 
	also beamed at the Iranians. It too was blocked back in December. The 
	British website says things like:
 
		The UK would welcome 
		improved relations with Iran. We have shared interests in a wide range 
		of issues, including a stable Afghanistan... However, the UK and many 
		other countries have serious concerns about the Iranian government’s 
		policies: its failure to address serious international concerns about 
		its nuclear programme; its support for terrorism and promotion of 
		instability in its region; and its continued denial of the human rights 
		to which its own people aspire and which Iran has made international 
		commitments to protect... I suspect the only people in the UK who have concerns about Iran's 
	policies are the Israel flag-wavers and Washington lapdogs that infest our 
	parliament.
 On the touchy subject of diplomatic relations the website 
	has this to say:
 
		Since an attack by 
		government-sponsored militias on the British embassy in Tehran on 29 
		November 2011, the British embassy in Tehran and the Iranian embassy in 
		London have both been closed. This does not amount to the severing of 
		diplomatic relations in their entirety. It is action that reduces our 
		relations with Iran to the lowest level consistent with the maintenance 
		of diplomatic relations... It was Hague's decision to shut down the British embassy in Tehran and 
	eject the Iranians from London. He had not in any case maintained a full 
	diplomatic presence in Tehran and the embassy operated at chargé d'affaires 
	level for several months after the previous ambassador left. Perhaps they 
	couldn’t find a new ambassador who was willing to jump through Hague’s 
	foreign policy hoops. So now we do business with Iran through a third-party 
	country, Germany.
 So much for the desire to improve relations, reach 
	out, engage, share interests, talk over "serious concerns" and so forth.
 
 Aiming a final kick our diplomatic service, Hague says:
 
		The international community 
		has lost confidence that Iran’s nuclear activities are for exclusively 
		peaceful purposes... We are clear that we have no quarrel with the 
		Iranian people. The responsibility for any impact on the population lies 
		with the Iranian government and their failure to meet the requirements 
		of the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] Board of Governors and 
		to comply with mandatory UN Security Council resolutions. The Iranian 
		government can choose to act to bring sanctions to an end at any point. In other words, we turn the screws but the screams are not our fault – 
	just like it wasn’t our fault when we did the same in Iraq for 12 long 
	years, starving their kids, before delivering shock’n’awe and wholesale 
	destruction.
 Hague said in his Middle East statement on 9 November 
	2011: “Iran’s actions not only run counter to the positive change that we 
	are seeing elsewhere in the region; they may threaten to undermine it, 
	bringing about a nuclear arms race in the Middle East or the risk of 
	conflict".
 
 Yet, according to the US intelligence community Iran 
	hasn’t got an active nuclear weapons programme and Israeli intelligence 
	agrees. Only a few weeks ago the director of the US’s National Intelligence 
	Agency, James Clapper, reported: “We assess Iran is keeping open the option 
	to develop nuclear weapons… We do not know, however, if Iran will eventually 
	decide to build nuclear weapons...”
 
 Why is Hague so focused on Iran 
	when Iran’s close neighbour Israel is the one with a runaway, unsafeguarded
	
	nuclear weapons programme?
 
		
			| 
				
					| “Hasn't it occurred to Hague that Israel's huge arsenal 
					of weapons of mass destruction – nuclear, chemical and 
					biological – and it's refusal to end the illegal occupation 
					of Palestine are what's really undermining positive change?” |  |  UN Security Council Resolution 487, in 1981, called on Israel “urgently 
	to place its nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards”. Israel has ignored 
	it for 30 years. Hasn't it occurred to Hague that Israel's huge arsenal of 
	weapons of mass destruction – nuclear, chemical and biological – and it's 
	refusal to end the illegal occupation of Palestine are what's really 
	undermining positive change?
 Furthermore, as the BBC
	
	reported, back in 2009 the IAEA called on Israel to join the 
	Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), open its nuclear facilities to inspection 
	and place them under comprehensive IAEA safeguards. "Israel refuses to join 
	the NPT or allow inspections. It is reckoned to have up to 400 warheads but 
	refuses to confirm or deny this."
 
 It is the only state in the region 
	that is not a party to the NPT (Iran is). It has signed but not ratified the 
	Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty. As regards biological and chemical 
	weapons, Israel has not signed the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention. 
	It has signed but not ratified the Chemical Weapons Convention.
 
 So, 
	Hague is kicking the wrong target. He needs to propel the toe of his bovver 
	boot into the US-subsidized backside of the Zionist entity. That’s where 
	unprecedented sanctions are need.
 
 They are conspicuously absent when 
	they would be so easy to apply.
 
 And I'm still waiting for answers to 
	simple questions I put to Mr Hague through my MP, who is one of his faithful 
	lieutenants in the Foreign Office. They include...
 
		What concrete proof is there of Iran's military application of 
		nuclear technology? 
		Why isn’t Hague more concerned about Israel's nuclear arsenal, the 
		threat it poses to the region and beyond, and the mental state of the 
		Israeli regime? 
		How many times has a British foreign secretary visited Tehran in the 
		32 years since the Islamic Revolution? 
		Did Mr Hague make any effort to go and talk before embarking on 
		punitive sanctions? 
		By pulling our people out of Tehran and throwing Iran's people out 
		of London Mr Hague has shut the door on diplomacy. How can he now 
		communicate effectively with a people he pretends to “have no quarrel 
		with” but seems determined to goad into becoming an implacable enemy? And in an exchange of words the other day about the British government's 
	obscenely greedy tax on motor fuel – it levies a 130 per cent surcharge (in 
	duty and value-added tax) on the ex-refinery price – the MP in question 
	tried to persuade me that by December the measures his administration had 
	taken would save motorists GBP 144 filling up the average family car.
 It's a claim that will astonish British motorists who have watched with 
	alarm as prices at the pump rocket and are likely to go higher, ditto energy 
	prices as a whole. The government’s policy of making bitter enemies where we 
	need to have friends and forcing up the price of crude, is hurting us as 
	well as the Iranians and is already causing catastrophic damage to British 
	industry and hardship for families and pensioners.
 
 I told the MP I 
	hoped he wasn’t going to lecture us again on how the only way to defend our 
	national security was to declare economic war on Iran and its people and 
	threaten ultimately to vaporize their women and children and reduce their 
	homeland to rubble. Nearly everyone by now knows it's poppycock. Mr Hague, I 
	said, “seems to have a thirst for aggravation, has assumed the role of 
	Europe's bovver-boy and right now is probably this country's biggest 
	liability".
 
 |  |  |