Comments
An Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson in Teheran has ‘categorically' rejected any accusation of the country's involvement in the blast that occurred in New Delhi on February 13, caused by a magnetic explosive device stuck on an Israeli embassy car.
He has called it a ‘part of the propaganda war' on the part of the ‘Zionist regime'. Notably, he has neither condemned the incident nor specifically ruled out complicity by Hezbollah.
Whether or not the Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson was simply being true to the age-old dicta of deniability and denial in respect of espionage and covert operations, there is no question that the motor cyclist who stuck the explosive device on the rear part of the car when it stopped at a traffic signal has shown truly deadly sense of anticipation and alacrity, and literally got away with it.
He, and his companion(s), if any, must have certainly rehearsed the performance of the task taken up by, or entrusted to, him or them on a number of earlier occasions, for making himself or themselves sure of the identities of both the car and the occupants.
One can presume that the intelligence and investigative agencies of both India and Israel would have got hold of the footage of the CCTV attached to the private residence near where the vehicle stopped pertaining to, say, a week previously, in order to get a clearer picture.
OPEN CHARGE
Meanwhile, I see no reason at all why official circles in India should have been so very squeamish and coy about even mentioning, let alone admitting, the possibility of any pro-Iran connection with the blast. The unerring choice of the fourth death anniversary of Hezbollah leader, Imad Mughniyah, who died in a similar explosion, and the neat orchestration of explosions adopting identical modus operandi in places as far apart as Tbilisi, New Delhi and Bangkok, could not have been an accident or coincidence.
Mark you, the Israeli intelligence organisation, Mossad, is one of the world's smartest, and the official and open charge by Israel that Iran was behind the serial explosions deserves due credence and weight. Preliminary investigations in Thailand have already led to the detention of two Iranians, with a third suspect, also an Iranian, known to have fled to Malaysia.
Iran might or might not have had a direct hand in the outrage, but it will be naïve to dismiss the likelihood of terrorist cells making their way into various countries to pursue Iran's avowed goal of wiping Israel off the face of the earth. They surely are not going to be concerned about adhering to the niceties and decencies of international relations or trade interests between Iran and any other country in which they are determined to hit Israeli targets.
GAUNTLET THROWN
In the absence of precise information on the affiliation of the culprits, the needle of suspicion has been pointing to Hezbollah. It is strange that none of the reports about the blast has mentioned another shadowy and elusive outfit, Islamic Jihad Organisation (IJO), which used to be very much in the news during the 1980s and 1990s, particularly at the time of the 1983 bombing of the US Embassy in Beirut and 1992 attack on the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires.
It was said to be a cover name used by the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (Pasdaran), and distinct from Hezbollah which was often in the dark as to what IJO was up to. The investigating agencies had better dust up the dossiers about this organisation as well for any leads they may provide.
What has happened in Bangkok, New Delhi and Tbilisi has to be set against the gauntlet thrown by Iran at Western powers by unveiling the headway it has made in developing its nuclear technological capabilities, in violation of the resolutions of the International Atomic Energy Authority. In the light of these happenings, India needs to undertake an unblinkered review of its relations with countries which suffer from morbid hang-ups derived from fundamentalism of whatever complexion. It should not allow itself to become dependent on such countries for any of its needs. Its relations with them should be correct, cordial but guarded.
Comments
COMMENT NOW
Comments
Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.
We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of TheHindu Businessline and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.