Why Defend Iran?

There is no better example of Iranian ass-kissing than this editorial from The Hindu, regarding the release of 15 British sailors. It admonishes the British (and Americans) for the arrogant imperialists they are, while, at the same time, praising Iran for being magnanimous in handling the matter. No surprise given the newspaper’s often pro-Iranian stance, but the last sentence really does take the cake:

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has acted wisely in pardoning the sailors for their intrusion and promising their release. He has also said Iran will be steadfast in defending its sovereignty. Mr. Blair would do well to heed this message.

In turn, Iraq will be steadfast in defending its sovereignty against the many “illegal” incursions made by Iran. It’s well within its rights to do so, is it not? I’m sure The Hindu has heard about Iran meddling in Iraq's affairs but chooses to ignore it: no need for facts to mar a good polemic.

Nevertheless, it helps to list one or two items. First, five Iranian intelligence officers—all alleged members of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards—are currently being held by the U.S. Army for stoking sectarian violence. And second, there is no mention of Iran sponsoring Muqtada al-Sadr, a thug, and the supplying of his openly violent militia, the ill-named Mahdi Army. Given this blatant interference by Iran, both Britain and the United States have no choice but to respond.

The problem with The Hindu is that it considers Iran a saint, when, in fact, it's a sinner.