Sweden Legitimates Iranian Genocidal Regime

In an interview that ran in today’s Jerusalem Post, Dr. Diana Gregor discusses European Union compliance with Iranian sanctions. Gregor is an Austrian journalist and researcher whose work focuses on Iran’s relations with Europe as well as Iran’s terrorist endeavors in the Middle East. She is currently associated with Realite-EU, a think tank and press information resource “concerned with the growing threat of Iran and extremism in Europe and the Middle East.”

When asked if the EU has a unified position on Iranian nuclear development, Gregor replied this is not the case and that there are contradicting positions among EU nations regarding sanctions. “Some are pushing for Iran sanctions and their proper implementation, and others are advocating against restrictions.”

In enumerating the “driving forces behind a ‘slack’ position toward EU sanctions against Iran” Gregor tops her list with Sweden: 

-“Sweden has distinguished itself as one of the EU nations most opposed to sanctions against Iran and has constantly worked to weaken the sanctions put into effect by the international community. After the new round of sanctions was agreed upon in June 2010, Sweden called for decreasing the severity of EU sanctions. Swedish firms are involved in Iran’s energy sector with private companies selling equipment and spare parts to Iran’s oil industry. Sweden’s ambassador was among the few Western diplomats who attended [Iranian President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad’s inauguration in June 2009.”

It should be noted that at the time Sweden held the position of the presidency of the EU, and could have made a strong statement for human rights by refusing to attend.

Of course the ambassador who attended the Ahmedinejad inauguration was taking instructions from the head of Sweden’s Foreign Ministry, Carl Bildt. (This is the same Bildt who ran to the airport to greet the Flotilla “protest tourists” after they successfully got themselves arrested in Israel while attempting to help deliver Turkish jihadists and a relatively small cargo of mostly useless and used aid and medical supplies to Gaza.)

 

Surprisingly, even Swedish parliamentarian Urban Ahlin, a member of the Social Democrats, condemned the decision to send a representative to the inauguration:

-"This was an excellent opportunity for Sweden, as current holder of the EU presidency, to show solidarity with the people who have been fighting for free and fair elections in Iran, and that chance was wasted,"

Yet Bildt defended the decision to send the ambassador to the inauguration in New Age fashion, stating "It is clearly better to be present than to be absent." A spokesman for the Foreign Ministry expanded on the rationale for the decision claiming that:

"Participation in an official ceremony [the Ahmadinejad inauguration] does not mean that we support this government or its actions. As the [EU] presidency, it's important to keep open our channels of communication.”

This is really an interesting take on diplomacy. In this mindset, if a regime is responsible for election fraud, murdering political protesters, threatening genocide against Israel, and developing nuclear capabilities while denying access to UN inspectors, the correct policy is to give them full legitimacy in the diplomatic sphere. Pathetically Sweden isn’t the only entity with this policy:

“In April 2010, Iran won a four-year-seat on the UN Commission on the Status of Women, a UN body, which promotes gender equality. In Iran, women are subject to some of the worst human rights abuses across the globe. They are required to be covered from head to toe in public and may be beaten for dressing in an ‘immodest’ manner.”

It is likely that Sweden is one of the non-“spiteful” states to be invited to a nuclear inspection show which Iran will put on soon for the international community. As Iran’s Press TV reported on Thursday:

-“Spiteful states, including the US and certain European countries, will never be invited to Iran to inspect the country's nuclear facilities,”

This was stated by Avaz Heidarpour, a member of the National Security and Foreign Policy Commission of the Iranian Parliament, who also noted that:

-“The decision would also disgrace certain countries, including the US, France and Britain, [and] stated that only those countries would be invited to Iran that have reflected “correct” reports on the nuclear case. If these countries show their sincerity in their reports and avoid issuing false and political reports, we will definitely invite them as well,” he said.

Isn’t it interesting that the Iranians won’t meet with nations which hold positions Iran disagrees with? That instead they must be “disgraced”? Yet Sweden’s Foreign Minister Bildt feels that the supreme principle is “communication”. It seems that while Sweden is interested in talking, it’s less interested in what’s being said.

The prediction here is that Sweden will participate in the bogus inspection tour in Iran in the near future. While Bildt maintains an interest in talking, one of the many taboo topics which will not be discussed is Iranian aspirations to commit genocide against the Jewish state. And that makes Bildt a phony humanitarian, and a real racist.

What the Swedish government fails to notice is that engagement and disengagement from diplomatic discourse are the mechanism used by the Iranian regime for buying time.

By: Chanah Shapira