An Argument against Ronen Bergman’s 'The Secret War with Iran' – 24

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 24:

The answer to this question is known to both sides because cosmopolitan forces whom the Zionists organize within a freemason framework are mainly faithful to the Zionist lobby in the world. Therefore, during the reign of the US, Britain and the Zionists on Iran, such persons had surrounded and served them. While Iran was close to implosion, they saw it as the island of stability. The fact is that they imagined Iran likes these people and they were totally unfamiliar with the source of resistance against foreigners and developments in any society. As much noteworthy is that Palizban, like Sha’ban Jafari, was among key factors in the Zionist-plotted coups following the Islamic Revolution. “In the wake of the 1979 events, Palizban was active for several months among Turkmens and Kurds. He finally fled via Turkey’s border to Italy and started working with Shapour Bakhtiar (the Shah’s last prime minister). After some time, he fled to Iraq and sought to unite Kurdish, Lor, Turkmen and Baluch tribes and those who had fled before being seized by revolutionaries, and organized a thousands-strong army and finish the job.” (Ibid, p. 123)

These confidants of the Zionists, backed by Saddam, did their best to hire as many mercenaries as they could; however, they failed to achieve any concrete result in the face of the firm will and determination of the brave Iranian nation. Two points should be taken into consideration; first, Saddam started extensive behind-the-scenes cooperation with the Zionists immediately after the Islamic Revolution; second, the Baghdad ruler’s enmity had nothing to do with the stances adopted by Iranian officials, as some may allege. Rather, he first backed coup attempts, but after they failed, he was encouraged by supporters of Zionists to invade Iran. The Iranians who just bore the title of Iran and had in fact served foreign governments did not shy away from serving Saddam in his Zionist-backed attempt to deny Iran its independence by joining his aggression on Iran. Therefore, one reason for which the Zionists failed was their permanent collaboration with those who were ready to betray their own nation just for financial interests. The same fate befell these racists in Lebanon. The Phalange movement presented Israel with an entirely wrong image of the Lebanese. However, Mr Bergman has admitted to this fact in Chapter 4. “Israel’s intelligence agency was dominated by messianic types who had seen what they wanted to see.” (Chapter 4, p. 76)

With a brief reflection, it would be easy to identify the very nature of Lebanon and to know if the Phalange movement could present a real image of these cultivated people. If negative (which it is), why were the Zionists dependent on them to such an extent then? The reason is that putschists, occupiers and generally domineering powers always look for unfaithful persons who would be convinced easily. Despite all support provided by the West and 18 years of all-out backing by the Zionists, the Phalange movement has virtually vanished and has no longer any place in Lebanon’s political sphere. While on the contrary, despite all opposition by sympathizers of the racist Zionist front against Hezbollah, this movement’s role is becoming more decisive day after day not only in Lebanon, but also among Palestinians.

Israel has for decades been trying hard to tie the Lebanese resistance to outside borders in a bid to defame the resistance movement that shamefully drove the Zionist regime and its supporters, i.e. the US and France, out of Lebanon. But what has it achieved in consequence? As noted, resistance is a social phenomenon. Before a nation as little as Lebanon itself deeply believed that it had to end 18 years of shameful occupation, no other nation’s support could have motivated them to counter the most criminal community mankind has ever seen. In a bid to strike fear into the heart of Resistance forces, Bergman has highlighted one of the most disastrous cases of the Zionists torturing the Lebanese. That is enough to show why the Lebanese people were motivated to put an end to 18 years of occupation. It is true that Iran felt morally, humanely and religiously obligated to aid the oppressed nation of Lebanon, but aid even several hundred bigger could never convince a nation to choose such a hazardous way. Bergman has sought in vain to downgrade the high status of resistance forces in Lebanon by describing them as mercenaries of Iran. But that is in total conflict with realities on the ground because throughout history some mercenaries have helped domineering powers, thereby humiliating their own homeland. That is while those who embrace resistance bring honor and dignity to their nation. For instance, Phalange activists were Lebanese mercenaries on Zionist payroll. Israel sought in vain to upgrade them in Lebanon. But resistant forces conquered every heart and mind among Lebanese people and grew specifically popular in the Arab and Muslim world. The significant difference between resistance fighters and mercenaries lies in the fact that the latter pursue foreign interests while the former, along with other resistance groups in Lebanon, fight for national interests.

Bergman has resorted to superficial fabrications in a bid to portray Lebanon’s resistance as submissive to Iran. For instance, the Americans and the French had come to Lebanon under the cover of UN multinational forces to indirectly support the Israeli occupation of Lebanon. Therefore, resistance forces had to fight occupying Zionists on one front and drive their sympathizers out on the other. These apparently neutral forces were forced under heavy blows to quit Lebanon. That is exactly why the Zionists lost their occupation support and had no option but to pull out of Lebanon after 18 years. However, Bergman’s fabrication is interesting to review. 

“Before the attacks, the U.S. National Security Agency had monitored messages cabled from the Iranian Foreign Ministry to the Iranian Embassy in Damascus, in which Tehran requested that a large-scale attack be mounted against the Americans. To finance the operation, the sum of $25,000 was transferred to that embassy. The NSA also picked up phone calls from the Revolutionary Guards in Baalbek requesting a green light for the attacks from the embassy in Damascus. These intercepted messages, however, offered no information about the planned time of implementation, the exact target, or the nature of the operation.” (Chapter 5, p. 94)

What is the author’s imagination of his readership? If Iran wanted to interfere with this issue would it use primitive devices to be easily bugged? In order to explain why the Americans have refused to make any evidence of Iran’s involvement public, Bergman puts it: “Robert Baer, a longtime CIA operative, says that the CIA has concrete evidence that Yasser Arafat was involved in the planning of the three 1983 Beirut attacks. This information, Baer says, was never published because of the agency’s desire to maintain a working relationship with the PLO.” (Ibid, p. 95)

Was forcing the exit of occupiers of Lebanon so difficult for Hezbollah, which has nurtured even more prominent figures than Imam Moughniyeh, to be forced to seek Iran’s assistance? A nation that chooses to safeguard its dignity will not spare any costs.

Let’s review the remarks by the Israeli intelligence agent in charge of Moughniyeh’s file.

“He (Barkai) was in charge of the Moughniyeh file, among others, and offered this assessment of Moughniyeh before the Damascus hit: “His is one of the most creative and brilliant minds I have ever come across. He is a man with deep understanding, an excellent technical grasp and leadership ability. Unfortunately, a mixture of personal and geopolitical circumstances led him to channel his outstanding talents into the path of blood and destruction and to make him into such a dangerous enemy.” (Chapter 5, p. 88)

Mossad would judge Mohsen Fakhrizadeh just like Imad Moughniyeh in the future. To know why such great persons prioritized freedom and independence and what they bestowed upon mankind could not be said in words. But doubtlessly, without the Zionists’ excessive demands and domineering attitude with regard to occupying Lebanon with the support of Capitalist advocates, such thinkers as Imad Moughniyeh could take effective steps in favor of public welfare.

Bergman concludes this chapter with deep regret over failure to find any effective way to contain the sacrifice of faithful persons like Moughniyeh.

“…alas. No effective way of combating suicide terrorism has been found, and suicide bombing has had a decisive influence over political processes around the world. Attempts to profile suicide bombers are doomed to failure—the bombers come in all sorts, from poor to wealthy, illiterate to educated. In short, with Moughniyeh’s leadership, the age of modern terror took a devastating turn in the early 1980s. Israel, in particular, was desperate to do something about this.” (Chapter 5, p. 98)

What has pushed the Zionists to the finish line is nations’ awareness of racism and racial discrimination. Therefore, as much as Israel commits more crimes to align other nations with its occupation, such awareness will become deeper and resistance to the occupiers of Palestine will get tougher. Therefore, the main problem with the Zionists today is the change in the scene of confrontations. They no longer deal with formerly corrupt governments; rather they are faced with firm wills that have been born out of rebellious nations.