VIDEO: Iran is at crisis point

Yesterday, there was a major debate in Parliament, on Iran's nuclear weapons programme. As I wrote on PoliticsHome, Iran is at crisis-point.

You can read the text of my speech below:

Robert Halfon (Harlow): I congratulate again my hon. Friend the Member for Basildon and Billericay (Mr Baron) on securing the debate. Although I disagree with everything that he has said, I am grateful to him for challenging my views and those of others who oppose his motion.

 I have three fundamental points to make. First, my hon. Friend said that there is no smoking gun, but I shall argue that there is a big smoking gun and that Iran is building a nuclear bomb; secondly, the nuclear programme is not a response to sanctions, as it was happening already; and, thirdly, we cannot be sure that if Iran had a bomb it would not use one either directly or through one of the many terrorist organisations that it supports. It is worth examining those points in turn.

1) First, is Iran building a nuclear bomb? The International Atomic Energy Agency report of November 2011 states clearly that Iran has acquired the knowledge, technology and resources to create a nuclear bomb within months. Its main findings, to quote section G, paragraph 43, are that Iran has procured “nuclear related…equipment and materials”; acquired “nuclear weapons development information and documentation from a clandestine nuclear supply network”; and worked “on the development of an indigenous design of a nuclear weapon including the testing of components”.

 Putting that aside for one minute, what do Arab nations in the region say? They are in no doubt about what the Iranians are planning. As far back as 2008, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia urged the United States to “cut off the head of the snake” by halting Tehran’s nuclear programme.

Last week, I was in Kurdistan in northern Iraq. The Kurds know all too well what a nuclear Iran would be like and are incredibly concerned about the implications. That is what is at stake in the region.

2) Second, nuclear ambition was not a response to sanctions; Iran already had it. We cannot appease Iran or hope for moderates to emerge within the regime. The United Nations sanctions began in 2006 in response to Iran’s refusal to suspend uranium enrichment. As far back as 2002, the National Council of Resistance of Iran revealed Iran’s secret nuclear programme, much of which was later admitted to by the Iranian leadership on state television.

Iran has repeatedly dismissed calls to negotiate. President Ahmadinejad now insists that his nuclear programme is unstoppable. The only time when Iran suspended uranium enrichment, co-operated with the UN and signed the full non-proliferation treaty was in October 2003. Why did it do that at that time? Because a quarter of a million western troops had just toppled Saddam Hussein in Iraq and were close to Iran’s western border. As soon as that threat diminished, Iran returned to its nuclear programme, which has led us to the point that we are at today.

3) Thirdly, we cannot be sure that Iran would not use a nuclear bomb. Iranian leaders have made numerous statements calling for the destruction of the state of Israel and the Jewish people. Just last week, the Iranian website Alef published an article by Khamenei’s strategy chief, Alireza Forghani, detailing plans for the extermination of Israel. As British newspapers have reported, the dossier even pinpoints the housing estates with the highest concentration of Jewish people. That piece, which is now being run on most state-owned sites in Iran, states that because of the United States’ presidential election, the time for Iran to strike is now.

 Last week, Iran’s Ministry of Defence announced that it had tested a two-stage ballistic missile that could deliver a nuclear bomb. Earlier this month, the Deputy Prime Minister of Israel said that he had intelligence showing that that missile has a range of 6,200 km—enough to hit the United States and the United Kingdom.

I have described Iran before in this House as the new Soviet Union of the middle east: it represses its people at home and has expansionist aims abroad. It is widely recognised as the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism. It provides support to insurgent groups in Iraq and Afghanistan that have attacked and killed British troops. A nuclear Iran does not just mean a nuclear Iran; it means a nuclear Hezbollah, a nuclear Hamas and so forth. As the former Iranian President, Ayatollah Hashemi Rafsanjani, said, the “application of an atomic bomb would not leave anything in Israel”.

But the extremists in charge of Iran see their conflict as not just with their neighbours, but also with the west. That is why they threatened to bomb Turkey last year. In 2006, Hassan Abbasi, the head of the Iranian doctrinal centre for strategic studies, said: “Britain’s demise is on our agenda”. He added: “We have a strategy drawn up for the destruction of Anglo-Saxon civilization…we must make use of everything we have at hand to strike at this front by means of our suicide operations or by means of our missiles.”

In conclusion, the Foreign Secretary has described the Iranian nuclear threat as the "new cold war". The situation may be worse than that because in the past, nuclear deterrents worked because of mutually assured destruction—MAD—and the clear lines of communication. However, for MAD to work, one has to be sane and the Iranian regime has shown itself not to be with its constant human rights abuses, its attack on the British embassy and its support for terrorism. Let that be a lesson for the free world.

 As I have mentioned, I was in Kurdistan last week near the Iranian border. I met Iranian Kurds who are persecuted by the Iranian regime. They knew the reality of a nuclear Iran, and they said that the only way that things would change was if there was regime change there. They asked: Why the west had not done more to support democratic and opposition movements, which would have made some difference and perhaps helped to facilitate regime change?

Finally, I wish to quote Niall Ferguson, who wrote recently in Newsweek:

“War is an evil. But sometimes a preventative war can be a lesser evil than a policy of appeasement. The people who don’t yet know that are the ones still in denial about what a nuclear-armed Iran would end up costing us all.”

by Robert Halfon - Working Hard for Harlow.

Opposing the appeasement of Iran

On Monday there will be an important debate on Iran. John Baron MP has tabled a Motion opposing - under almost any circumstances - military action against Iran.

If passed, this would mean that the UK or Nato could not take action even if Britain was attacked by the Iranian Regime.

As I have written before on my Blog, Iran is the new Soviet Union of the Middle East. It represses its citizens at home and has expansionist aims abroad. The regime funds and supports terrorist movements around the globe and has been active in undermining stability in Afghanistan and Iraq - by supporting the insurgents. Iran's Leaders have also often declared their willingness to destroy the State of Israel. A nuclear Iran would pose a huge threat to not just the Middle East - but across the world.

With a number of other MPs, I have tabled an alternative to John Baron's Motion. As you can see, the amended Motion is signed by all-parties, including the former Tory and Labour Defence Secretaries.

You can see the Motion and Amendment below and HERE.

Main Business

1 BACKBENCH BUSINESS (unallotted day) [Until 10.00 pm]
IRAN
Mr John Baron
That this House believes that the use of force against Iran would be wholly counter-productive and would serve only to encourage any development of nuclear weapons; and calls upon the Government to rule out the use of force against Iran and reduce tensions by redoubling diplomatic efforts.

As an Amendment to Mr John Baron's proposed Motion (Iran):
Sir Malcolm Rifkind
Sir Menzies Campbell
Mr Bob Ainsworth
Richard Ottaway
Rory Stewart
Robert Halfon

Other MPs have since signed the Amendment:
Mr Stephen Dorrell
Malcolm Bruce
Dr Thérèse Coffey-
Mr Dave Watts
Albert Owen
Alun Michael
Andrew Miller
Jim Sheridan
Steve Rotheram
Mr Jim Cunningham
Lindsay Roy
Sir Bob Russell
Jacob Rees-Mogg
Bob Stewart
Mr Bernard Jenkin
Margaret Beckett

Line 1, leave out from 'House' to end and add 'supports the Government's efforts to reach a peaceful, negotiated solution to the Iranian nuclear issue through a combination of pressure in the form of robust sanctions, and engagement led by the E3+3 comprising the UK, US, France, Germany, China and Russia; and recognises the value of making clear to Iran that all options for addressing the issue remain on the table.'.

VIDEO: Urgent Question on Iran

Today I asked an urgent question in Parliament, about the military build-up in the Strait of Hormuz.

As I said to the Foreign Secretary, Iran is at crisis-point. It is the new Soviet Union of the Middle East. It supports terrorism, undermines democracy, and is trying to stop the Arab Spring in Syria.

But now we are threatened by an Iranian nuclear bomb, which risks the security of the Gulf States, Israel, and the whole region. Two weeks ago, Iran admitted it has begun enriching high-grade uranium.

The regime now threatens to close the Strait of Hormuz - which represents more than 20 per cent of internationally traded oil.

The UK Government could not have done more to try to contain this problem - with unprecedented action to isolate Iran’s financial sector, and the extra EU sanctions imposed this week by the Foreign Secretary. But the question must now be asked - are we facing the prospect of a nuclear dictatorship in the Middle East?

Today I asked the Foreign Secretary: "Will my Right Honourable Friend set out to the House what military action Britain is planning in the Strait? Will he explain what will happen, if these latest economic sanctions don’t work? And what more is being done to bring Russia and China to the UN table?"

Most would accept that Britain has shouldered its fair burden in tackling dictators. But it seems clear that the free world must send a message to Iran, that if they continue with their nuclear plans it will lead to military action.

No one wants war. But tragically, it is looking increasingly possible.

As The Times said today: “One of the greatest civilisations in history has been superseded for a generation by an extremist regime perpetrating repression at home and aggression beyond its borders.”

To see the Foreign Secretary's reply, watch the VIDEO above.

by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com

William Hague seeks to extend sanctions against Iran

Foreign Secretary William Hague, is rightly calling on the EU for tougher sanctions against Iran. This cannot come soon enough: Iran continues to crush internal dissent, to prop up the brutal Assad regime in Syria, supports and finances the Hamas and Hezbollah terrorist organisations - and is on the threshold of having the nuclear bomb. A tougher punitive sanction regime is needed to try and stop the regime in its tracks - if we are to avoid military action to neutralise Iran's nuclear capability.

You can see more by clicking on this weblink:

PlayPolitical.com - Conservative Party


by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com

Is Iran declaring war on the West?

In a pre-Christmas debate on Iran in the House of Commons, I described Iran as the new Soviet Union of the Middle East.

And for good reason: the regime gives financial backing to terrorist organisations such as Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon, actively supports the Assad Dictatorship in Syria, and ruthlessly deals with dissent from her own citizens. The country is also on the verge of developing a nuclear bomb.

The last few days have seen Iran step up the 'Cold War' with the West. First; by threatening to Block the Straits of Hormuz - which could threaten a world-wide oil crisis. The Straits represent 35% of the world's oil-shipments by sea - 20% of the global oil trade. Second; by testing long-range missiles - which, according to the Iranian Fars News Wire - is a new tactic "designed to prevent any movement in the strait of Hormuz if the Iranian navy so desires".

The French Foreign Ministry describes the missile tests as:

a very bad signal to the international community. We want to underline that the development by Iran of a missile programme is a source of great concern... That is why Iran is prohibited from pursuing any activity on ballistic missiles capable of delivering a nuclear warhead per a U.N. Security Council Resolution".

President Obama has described any closure of the Strait as 'unacceptable'.

P.S. You can read more HERE and HERE.

Iran: the new Soviet Union of the Middle East

Yesterday in Parliament, there was an urgent debate, about the serious threat of Iran building a secret nuclear weapon.

This is deeply worrying: not only for the Iranian people, who are denied their basic democratic rights and freedoms, but for the entire world.

I made a short speech about this, which follows below:

Robert Halfon (Harlow): I welcome this debate because, contrary to what has just been said, I believe that Iran is in essence the new Soviet Union of the middle east. It supports terrorism. We know well its strong backing of Hezbollah in Lebanon. It supplies Hezbollah with the missiles and the finance that it needs to destabilise the region and to fire attack missiles on Israel. Iran also supports Hamas, and we know what Hamas has done in Gaza, overthrowing the more moderate Palestinian Authority, running a totalitarian mini-state known as Hamastan in Gaza, stopping moves towards peace and regularly firing missiles on Israel.

Iran has also undermined democratic states. Not long ago it fired missiles on to the Kurdish regional Government. It is supporting the Syrian Government of President Assad and his crackdown on the recent anti-Government protests. It has provided the Syrian authorities with equipment, advice and technical know-how to help curtail and monitor internal communications. It has provided material assistance in the form of riot and crowd dispersal material, as well as military training for Syrian troops. Hamas, Hezbollah and Syria are in essence proxies for Iran. We well know that Iran has sent suicide bombers into Iraq and attacked our troops.

All this would be bad enough were it not for Iran’s nuclear programme. As has been said, the development of the nuclear bomb in Iran is incredibly concerning. The IAEA report has been highlighted and clearly shows that Iran has been covertly developing the technology needed to weaponise nuclear material. If we think the current Iranian regime is extreme, its so-called more moderate predecessor said that it would be okay to use a nuclear bomb in the middle east against Israel, because if a few million are killed in the process, it does not matter for the wider good.

Jeremy Corbyn: The hon. Gentleman mentioned nuclear weapons. Does he not have concerns that Israel has 200 nuclear warheads and is not a signatory to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty? Does he not think a nuclear weapons convention including Israel would be a helpful step forward in the region?

Robert Halfon: I am happy for any nuclear convention to reduce nuclear weapons in the middle east, but the crucial point that the hon. Gentleman misses is that Israel is a democracy and Iran is a dictatorship.

Mike Freer (Finchley and Golders Green): I agree with my hon. Friend. May I point out that it is not Israel which has threatened to wipe its neighbour off the face of the earth? Is that not the key point in this?

Robert Halfon: My hon. Friend, who is a strong supporter of Israel, is exactly right.

The one difference between Iran and the Soviet Union is that, when the Soviet Union and the west had nuclear weapons, we lived under the doctrine known as MAD, mutually assured destruction, and for MAD to work one had to be sane, but the sad fact is that Iran does not have that level of sanity, given that, as my hon. Friend says, the President often says that he wants to wipe Israel off the map. We know how the regime behaves from its recent treatment and trashing of the UK embassy, from its taking of American hostages and from its many other human rights abuses.

The hon. Member for Islington North (Jeremy Corbyn) mentioned the abuse of trade unionists and the imprisonment of women, an issue that The Times has highlighted so well, so I strongly welcome the fact that the Government have brought in the tough measures before us. This is the first time the UK has used such powers to cut off an entire country’s banking sector from our financial sector, and that is hugely important not just because of the hoped-for effect of stopping the Iranian nuclear regime, but because of the message that it sends to other tyrannical regimes throughout the world—that Britain will not be weak, but be strong and do everything it can to stop the actions of such dictators.

Although I strongly welcome these tough sanctions and praise the Treasury for having the courage to introduce them, I note that we may be too late. Iran is not far off acquiring a nuclear bomb, and we—perhaps not this country itself, but NATO—may need to take further military action to rid the world of that bomb, to put pressure on the country’s evil regime and to bring about a true democracy, with the rule of law, freedom and everything that the Iranian people deserve.


by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com

More news on Bahais

Following my meeting last week with Bahais from Harlow, you may be interested to see THIS article on the Freedom Today Blog.

Supporting the Bahais

Most people are aware of the true nature of the Iranian Government:  Islamist, fundamentalist, authoritarian, and soon to acquire nuclear weapons.  What is less well known, is the Regime's treatment of its religious minorities.

The suffering of religious groups like the Bahais, was brought home to me when I recently met a number of Iranian Bahais who live in Harlow. They came to Parliament to describe to me about the persecutrion of the Bahais. One Harlow resident, Mali Vojdani's niece had even been in an Iranian prison for three and a half years - simply because of her religion (she has only just been released).  Other Bahais have been imprisoned, tortured and some murdered.  There are still thousands of innocent people being persecuted by the Iranian regime, because of their faith. This includes Bahais, Jews, Christians, and many others."

For this reason, I tabled a Commons Motion, signed by twenty four MPs, in an effort to ensure that Parliamentarians and the Government are made aware of what is happening to the Bahai people:

EDM 1053 – submitted by Robert Halfon MP

That this House expresses grave alarm at the news of the trial and sentencing of the Bah’ leadership in Iran; notes that Mrs Fariba Kamalabadi, Mr Jamaloddin Khanjani, Mr Afif Naeimi, Mr Saeid Rezaie, Mrs Mahvash Sabet, Mr Behrouz Tavakkoli and Mr Vahid Tizfahm are members of the informal leadership known as the Friends that co-ordinate the activities of the Bah’ community in Iran; further notes that the defendants were each sentenced to 20 years in prison in a brief trial with limited access to legal counsel; urges the Government to seek from the Iranian government guarantees for the safety of these individuals;calls for their immediate unconditional release; registers deep concern at the mounting threats and persecution of the Iranian Bah’ community; joins in the condemnation of the persecution of the Bah’ faith; and supports freedom of religion as a basic human right under international law.

All the Bahais I have met - in Harlow and outside are peaceful, decent people, who deserve to practice their religion without fear of oppression.  I intend to highlight the trial and sentencing of the Bahai leadership in Iran, and am urging the Government to seek guarantees from the Iran Government regarding their safety and he is calling for their immediate unconditional release. Freedom of religion is a basic human right under international law.
I will do all I can to support Harlow Bahais, and look forward to their new year celebrations at the end of March.

P.S.  You can read more details HERE.

P.P.S. The picture shows me with the Harlow Bahais, at Parliament.

by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com

Tony Blair's right about some things

I must admit that I bought the Blair memoirs today (half-price) and watched his BBC interview with Andrew Marr. I am also not afraid to say - even as a staunch Conservative - that I do have some admiration for the former Prime Minister.

Tony Blair was a brilliant Politician in that he transformed the Labour Party, was a great orator and knew how to win elections. But, he was a much worse Prime Minister. He failed to stand up to Gordon Brown, and as a result, important public sector reforms were carried out half-heartedly, if not shelved. He also was unable to convince the British Public about the Iraq war, partly because there was too much 'spinning' - as to what was really going on - from his Downing Street henchmen. Blair did have the grace to acknowledge that in the early years he 'tried to please all the people all of the time'. This had been a mistake and inevitably politics was about difficult choices - many of which people would either support or oppose.



Nevertheless, on TV, Mr Blair was right about a number of things: He reminded the world about the threat of Iran and of extreme Islamism. I agree when he said that military action against Iran may be necessary, in order to stop the fundamentalist regime from acquiring the bomb. He was correct also in stating that Islamist fundamentalism is the major threat of our time: the West had to confront it rather than appease it.

The former PM, also said some important things about the future of the Labour movement. Urging the party not to go back to election defeat 'default mechanism' and revert to 'old Labour', he pleaded with his former colleagues to continue to be radical and embrace public sector reform. Of course, the Labour party are doing the exact opposite: opposing cutting the deficit, setting themselves against change to public services and opposing the people power reforms of local democracy and the big society. Whilst Tony Blair moves towards the centre right of British politics, Labour continues to move leftwards.

by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com

Not a good time to be a dog in Iran

Not content with stoning women to death, arresting dissenters, issuing edicts on men's haircuts, and developing weapons of mass destruction, Iran's fundamentalist Islamist regime has now issued warnings that pets are no longer to be allowed. In a weird linkage between Islamism, Maoism and Stalinism, pet pooches are deemed to be 'bourgeoisie' and symbols of decadent Westerners. It is interesting just how much cross-over totalitarian ideologies do have - and how similar the language.

What is even more bizarre about this latest 'ruling' is that it appears to have been issued by Grand Ayatollah Nasser Shirazi, who has an office in Harrow, North London of all places. Good to know what kind of people we allow to have offices in this country.

The lunacy and extremism of the Iranian fundamentalist regime continues to manifest itself to the world. Sooner or later action will have to be taken to stop President Ahmadinejad from having his finger on the nuclear trigger.

You can read more about this HERE (behind the Times paywall).

by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com

The seamless link in the chain of Holocaust denial starts with the stolen sign in Auschwitz and ends with Ahmadinejad

I mentioned in a previous blog posting, on 25 November, that - through the Holocaust Educational Trust - I had been privileged to meet, Mr Ben Hefglott, a Polish survivor of the concentration camps. After the war was over, Mr Hefglott subsequently became a British Olympic Athlete.

I thought of this great man when reading that the sign above the entrance to Auschwitz 'Arbeit Macht Frei' (work sets you free), had been stolen.

The gates to Auschwitz stood as a testament to the nature of the Nazi regime, and 'Arbeit Macht Frei' represented the means by which the Nazis manipulated the power of words for their own ends.

I have little doubt that the sign was taken by those who wish to deny away the Holocaust - something that has become ever more common place. But this wanton act should not be seen in isolation.

If Holocaust deniers were confined to a handful of Neo-Nazis that would be bad enough. Unfortunately we now have a commentariat and rulers of major countries (such as President Ahmadinejad of Iran), making Holocaust denial a major industry.

The seamless link in the chain is thus made starting in Auschwitz: some thugs steal a major symbol of the concentration camp, some so-called historians try to establish an intellectual framework around the denial, whilst totalitarians around the world are given the armour in which to proclaim the Holocaust is a lie.

But, however many symbols of the genocide are stolen, however many revisionists books are written, as long as we have the testament of survivors like Mr Hefglott, the truth will never be vanquished. 'Truth Conquers All' are three words which will triumph over 'Arbeit Macht Frei'.


Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

The brutalities of the Iranian Islamist regime

If you have any doubts about the true nature of the regime in Iran, read this article in The Times today. It will make you weep. It shows how ruthless the regime has been in eliminating opposition to President Ahmanidejad - and explains why despite 'fixing the election', the Iranian 'Twitter' Revolution was crushed.

And this so-called Government is on the threshold of having a nuclear weapon capability. Worried? We all should be.

By Rob Halfon ~ Working hard for Harlow, Hastingwood, Nazeing, Roydon & Sheering. http//roberthalfon.blogspot.com

From the frying pan into the fire

I have written this article for the Conservative Home website and thought you might like to see it:

Although I yield to no one in my enthusiasm for 'the Twitter Uprising', we should not get too carried away with the idea that Presidential Candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi, is some kind of Ghandi type figure, about to bring unbridled freedom in Iran.

It is true, he supports some domestic reforms, and some relaxation of strict Islamist laws (all of which is welcome), but the question is, where does he stand on the fundamental issues?

The signs are that Mr Mousavi, would not be much different from what has gone on before. He helped create the feared Ministry of Intelligence and Information (which ruthlessly targets oppositionists). There is also a fair amount of evidence that he helped found Hezbollah and was on its leadership Council during the 1980s – including arranging funding. Unsurprisingly, Mr Mousavi has been a major proponent of calling for Hezbollah to be used as an attack force against Israel, and his views on Hamas are not thought to be much different.

It is worth remembering also Mr Mousavi, was Prime Minister of Iran during the purge of 1988, when many thousands of 'political' prisoners were killed, on the orders of Ayatollah Khomeini.

Mr Mousavi's term as Prime Minister saw renewed hostility towards America and his establishment of the Iranian chemical weapons programme. His government brought nuclear centrifuges on the 'open market' thus setting in train the nuclear armament programme that is close to completion today. I mention the above, not to put a dampener on the remarkable events in Iran, just to show that the outcome may not be quite what we wish for.

Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

The Twitter Uprising

What is happening in Iran is truly remarkable. The Iranian Public have refused to accept the results of the recent Presidential Election. And no wonder: it is likely that the election result was falsified by hard-line Islamists to stop the reformist Candidate, Mir Hossein Mousavi being elected.

The current 'President' Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is regarded by many, as a major source of instability in the Middle East, and an extremist determined to impose his Islamist world-view across the globe. Not only has he called for the destruction of Israel and denied the Holocaust, his Government supports and funds Islamist terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah.

It is not surprising therefore that 'President' Ahmadinejad - alongside the Iranian Mullahs (who have huge power in the political system) - is desperate to hold onto power.

Yet, thanks to Twitter and imaginative use of the Internet, the Iranian public have been able to defy the Mullah's Dictatorship, organise protests and demonstrations, defying Government censorship of TV and attempts at Internet jamming. Some clever younger internet users have even been able to mount a 'reverse jamming' by hacking into and blocking Government run websites. Most importantly, the use of Twitter, other social networking sites, and blogging, have enabled the Iranian people to inform the world, what is really going on. Whether or not this uprising succeeds against this fanatical and brutal Regime remains to be seen. But one thing is for sure : the power of the internet is a great weapon against the power of dictators.

P.S. As I write this, I have just heard that the Government has fired on demonstrators.