Mr. Hart, on Oct 19 1997 you wrote to me,

Dr. Ghitis, Re: your Post #4845 in "Peace Talks, I can only agree with your views on Iran's designs. I found them amazing: have you read or written on this specific subject?

Dear Mr. Hart, you must have realized that I consider Iran within her rights to do so. These are political realities of the time; after the present one comes to its eventual end, others will appear, to be tackled by that generation. I believe that Iran is today's 'common danger.' My entirely private intention is to help preempt Iran in her game, by harping on the subject. I'll feel at least that I tried.

Having been around as long as you have, you are certainly aware of the "Balance of Power" in international politics. My concern here is the implications to it, should Iran do any more to influence the Israeli/Palestinian landscape.

As stated in my published view: Iran is exploiting the situation for her strategic ends. The 'landscape' is just a platform for her designs of taking over Lebanon --and then Syria-- utilizing Lebanese Islamists as the proxy. Lebanese people, guided by the Hizbulla fighters (ignorant of their role until the appropriate time) will do the job, with no need to sacrifice Iranians. The balance of power to be concerned about here is between Syria and Iran, as both of them are well aware.
Assad is personally in need to make peace with Israel. He will yield (as a 'peace-loving' gesture) on the Golan, because eventually he will need to destroy the dangerous --for him-- Iran's Islamist infrastructure in Lebanon.
In contrast, Iran's ayatoolas have no personal stake; they follow the very-long term purpose written in the succinct Khomeini's blueprint. Therefore, a settlement of Syria (read: Assad) with Israel must be delayed for Iran's ayatoolas' (read: Khoumeini) purpose of taking over Lebanon's governance by proxy. The recent showdown of Lebanese armed carriers against the Islamists in Beirut should not have been considered as a surprise: it was a 'test' ordered by Teheran to watch the Lebanese government's reaction, and the Islamist' s counter-reaction. Assad was reciprocally interested. He and the ayatoolas play a cat and mouse game in Lebanon's territory.

Mr. Hart: Your support in the fight against the 'Useful-Idiot Syndrome' among Arab and Jewish 'thinkers' and against the 'Those-Jews Syndrome' among many walks of the political spectrum --but mainly among the more educated and therefore more easily influenced young idealists-- would be of positive impact in opening eyes to the fact that minds are tuned to the wrong issue of 'Peace in our time.'

Would the International planners allow aggressive moves by Iran?

International? I wonder if they have a notion on this subject. Nothing doing: Iran is not planning wars, she is only showing that she will cause severe harm to those who pretend to being in their right to disallow an entirely political maneuver bereft of visible inimical intentions against other peoples. That's the beauty of Khomeni's legacy.

Do you feel that Iran would do anything "crazy" just for their own ego, or for religious purposes?

The concept of "Iran," is to be contrasted with "the ayatoolas" or "Khomeni's legates." No individual egos. No religious motivations, which are already entirely invested. 'Crazy' acts are well rehearsed acts committed by ostensibly Palestinian terrorists. No Iranian hand-prints: gloves on hands.
Iran's clerecy very-long-range strategy will dictate very different tactics, in the possible future absence of a Middle East conflict platform.

Mr. Hart, now it is your turn to enlighten me about you and your organization.

Dr. Ghitis, I would like to add:
Iran has never agreed on the Oslo Agreement. Iran seemingly is very much against it. What do you feel their agenda to be?

Once you read my comments above, you'll understand my position.

I do know that the 'Internationalists' are very cautious and careful how they handle the Iran situation. They want Iran to do well and be well. There are important vested interest there. However, when the child steps far enough out of line, SMACK, SMACK!!!

Not to worry, she will do well, no occasion for smacking. The century knocking on our door will be in great part Iran's. The historical determinant? Great Persia under Islam. I wouldn't be surprised if Iran's name is changed for "The Islamic Republic of Persia."