Attack on physicians under the pretext of Israel
The cyber attacks on an official position of the country that had been completely inactive for the past three years peaked again yesterday under the pretext of attacking physicians for Israel, apart from hardline politicians who have a separate argument. These attacks are unprecedented but competitive. Recognized Twitter users have been trying since yesterday to popularize hashtags like ‘impeach physicians.’
In addition to President Mohammad Javad Zarif, the strategic deputy of physicians and Foreign Minister Seyyed Abbas Araghchi were also targeted in these attacks. Bloomberg had referred to Iran’s readiness to reduce tensions with Israel in its headline, a matter that was quickly denied by our country’s Foreign Minister.
What did the physicians say?
Disputes, insults, and extensive attacks on physicians were due to these few sentences. Let’s help each other interact and not fight. Let’s not solve issues with missiles and weapons that can be resolved through dialogue.
We are ready to put down all our weapons as long as Israel does the same. An international organization should come and ensure the region’s security. It’s not even necessary, we can secure our own safety.
But this part of the President’s speech was ignored, yet no one should come armed against another and tell the other side that you have no right to even build a missile.
Analysis of the President’s speech by experts
Two well-known foreign policy experts analyzed the President’s remarks. Hassan Beheshtipour wrote in a Telegram note that when we listen to the audio file, we see that the President’s discussion is not about reducing tensions with Israel. The physicians are talking about disarmament on both sides. This statement does not mean readiness to reduce tension; it means the opponent’s propaganda for disarmament using the theory of zero-sum balance.
The physicians actually raise the issue of an impossible suspension, which is not acceptable to Israel at all because Israel’s survival is expansionist and pursues this policy by relying on possessing various deadly weapons. Therefore, it is a kind of tactical propaganda for disarmament by the opponent, as everyone knows that Israel will never agree to disarm. Please pay attention to this important issue.
For several decades, the theory of a nuclear-free Middle East has been raised by Iran, Egypt, and several other countries in international forums. Why is Israel not held accountable?
Because this criminal regime has more than 200 nuclear warheads and the Middle East is free of nuclear weapons, meaning the disarmament of Israel’s atomic weapons, and it is clear that they will never accept this plan.
But why does the other party constantly raise this plan in international forums? It is to prove that Israel’s propaganda about concerns of nuclear threats is a lie, because if Israel was truly concerned about nuclear threats, it would accept a nuclear-free zone.
Based on this, rest assured that the discussion here is not about Mr. Pizkishan’s disarmament of Iran against Israel, but rather about tarnishing Israel’s propaganda and showing that this regime, for its survival, relies on weapons and by no means accepts disarmament.
The only criticism that can be made of Mr. Pizkishan’s statement is that he should have used the term ‘establishing a zero nuclear balance’ instead of the general term ‘disarmament’.
Another foreign policy expert, Reza Nasri, also writes that the president refers here to the double standards applied in the West regarding the actions of Iran and the Israeli regime. They want Iran not to help resistance groups but arm Israel to the teeth.
Iran is asked to dismantle its peaceful nuclear program, but Israel can possess nuclear weapons and threaten others with them.
Iran is asked to halt its missile program, but Israel can have any weapons it wants in such a context. It says we are ready to put all our weapons aside as long as Israel does the same. The purpose of this statement is to show the irrelevance of Western expectations and has no connection to reconciliation with Israel.
