The issue of purchasing weapons from the occupying regime in Jerusalem

Jamaran wrote: Years have passed since the adoption of Resolution 598 and the end of the imposed war, but questions still remain about the cause and reason for the war, the postponement of the adoption of international resolutions, etc. On this occasion, on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of the Sacred Defense, we are determined to provide appropriate answers to some of these questions. The issue of purchasing weapons from the occupying regime of Jerusalem is one of the key and important questions, the answer to which we have found in the book Questions and Answers (Iran-Iraq War), which we review here:

The fact is that no government, individual, or institution has presented a valid document in this regard, but there has been a rumor that Iran received weapons from the occupying regime of Jerusalem or through it during the war, especially at the end of the war, which it used in the war against Iraq.

The main root of this rumor goes back to the McFarlane affair, during which the US government began a series of moves in order to change its policies to get closer to Iran. By sending McFarlane, Reagan’s national security advisor, to Iran, it sought to expand its influence in Iran and thereby facilitate the release of Western hostages in Lebanon.

US officials believed that due to the nature of the Islamic Revolution and its popularity among the Palestinian and Lebanese people and groups, Iranian officials had the ability to influence Palestinian and Lebanese militant groups. In this case, given Iran’s need for Western weapons, American and Western hostages could be released by sending quantities of weapons to Iran. It is said that during this program, a number of arms dealers acted as intermediaries and sold quantities of weapons to Iran. On the other hand, since Iran procured its weapons and equipment from the open global market, it is likely that among the arms dealers and traders there were people who had connections to the occupying regime in Jerusalem, and Iranian buyers bought weapons from them without knowing this. It is even possible that the occupying regime in Jerusalem established a connection with the arms dealers in order to discredit the country’s officials and pretended that they had the support of the Israeli government.

In this situation, Israeli and American sources published rumors about this in international publications and media, none of which have any evidence. If we accept that these rumors are true and that Iran has purchased weapons from a number of Jews, it must be said that

First, the fact that these dealers are Jewish does not mean that they are Zionists.

Second, Iranian buyers did not pay any attention to who they were buying weapons from, and only the quality and cheapness of the weapons were of interest.

Thirdly, the connections of these individuals with other countries and intelligence organizations had no connection with the arms buyers.

Fourthly, if the Iranian buyers had suspected that these individuals were affiliated with the regime occupying Jerusalem, they would never have attempted to purchase arms from them. Finally, how could Iran, considering that it considers itself the motherland of Islam and supports the interests of Muslims everywhere in its foreign policy, purchase arms from a government that has usurped Muslim lands and that Iran has not recognized that country? Wouldn’t this damage Iran’s image? Obviously, the existence of such a connection between the regime occupying Jerusalem and Iran is unimaginable, and as mentioned and for the reasons mentioned, the news about Iran purchasing arms from the regime occupying Jerusalem is a complete lie.

Excerpt from the book Questions and Answers (Iran-Iraq War); Center for War Studies and Research; Farhad Darvishi; pp. 124-125

نویسنده: