The Devil Will Act According to His Nature

A quote from Spengler in The Asia Times, 30 October 2007

Rafsanjani's dialogue with Berlin was the last, best hope of the anti-war faction in the West. One winces at the chagrin of the German partner in this relationship, given that Rafsanjani likes the Germans because he admires what Adolf Hitler did to the Jews of Europe. On October 5, Rafsanjani told Iranian television in a clip posted by MEMRI:

Europe resolved a great problem, the problem of the Zionist danger. The Zionists constituted a strong political party in Europe and caused a lot of disorder there. Since they had a lot of property and controlled an empire of propaganda, they made the European governments helpless. What Hitler and the Nazis did to the Jews of Europe at that time was partly due to these circumstances with the Jews. They wanted to expel the Zionists from Europe because they were always a pain in the neck for governments there ... Their first goal was to save Europe from the evil of Zionism, and in this they have been relatively successful.

The leading Iranian "moderate", in short, is just as much the Islamo-Nazi as the Holocaust denier Ahmadinejad. Rather than deny the Holocaust, Rafsanjani applauds it. Reportedly, Rafsanjani believes that the threat of military confrontation of the West makes a bad gamble of Iran's nuclear development program, unlike Ahmadinejad, who is happy to take the risk.
Deals with the devil simply do not work, even in the ethically challenged world of foreign policy. The devil will act according to his nature, whatever bargain one attempts to make with him.

Why, you ask...?

@ Kapitein A


I would have thought that the answer to your question is obvious from the title "The Devil will act according to his nature".   In this piece we are shown a glimpse of the nature of the 'leaders' that we are dealing with.


It is interesting to read your comments about the broader context of Spengler's articles and in particular the specific one from which this excerpt was taken.  Nevertheless, this specific excerpt - assuming it is a correct one - illustrates very clearly the depth of anti-semitism that is Rafsanjani's, or at least it illustrates the willingness of an Iranian top leader to use such a degree of misinformation (e.g. "...they made European governments helpless etc...) and jew-hatred  for internal consumption.    This was supposed to be a statement to Iranian television.  It is unlikely that he would talk to westerners in such a disgusting way.  So it is another typical example of a muslim leader saying one thing at 'home' (for local consumption) and another elsewhere (for international consumption).

So, contrary to you, I think this excerpt was very "constructive", because it reveals to us  (as if that would still be necessary!) the nature of the 'beast' that we are dealing with, so to say.   I am amazed that you can casually dismiss this. If you dispute the veracity of this excerpt, that would be one thing, and you should do so then explicitly.  But dismissing it, assuming that it is factually correct, is irresponsible, for it would reveal a clear refusal on your part to learn from the past.  The sort of thing Ransanjani is saying, we have seen it all before, closer to home in Europe. And the results of casually dismissing the evil nature of opponents, we have seen that too before...    

Why This One?

Spengler has written quite a few articles on the coming conflict with Iran, and has set forth strong and well-supported arguments in these. However, the basis for his opinion has very little to do with anti-Semitism. In fact, the article from which this excerpt was taken has more to do with recent appointments in the Iranian government and their impact on Iranian policy regarding the nuclear programme. Moreover, this article merely builds upon earlier ones detailing Iranian social, economic and political trends that point to coming aggression.


Spengler has been relatively careful to bypass Tehran's views on Judaism and Israel, and his section on Rafsanjani's clear anti-Semitism was only an after-thought as Spengler appears to believe that diplomatic solutions to the problem are now impossible. Spengler regularly mentions Jews and Judaism in passing and, although he has claimed to be religious only, probably is one himself. However, his analysis of Iranian affairs is well-informed, thoughtful and interesting, irrespective of whether one agrees with him or not. Furthermore, he is fairly objective, which is why I strongly feel that this quote on the Brussels Journal is out of context.


Taken out of context, this statement merely ranks with many made by pundits about Iranian government members, vilification which even if true, is not constructive in the least.