Iran Weaponizes Corbyn’s Labour – Dayenu!

Not only do two wrongs don’t make a right, but frequently they combine to make a far greater wrong.

Jeremy Corbyn’s close association with the Islamic Republic is precisely an illustration of such a phenomenon. Corbyn’s (and his supporters’) anti-semitism has become so open and legendary by this point that a number of high profile Labour moderates, such as Tony Blair, have been compelled to speak out. In the US, the degradation of the Labour party is seen by conservatives as pointing the way to the Democrats, whose leading figures seem to be heading in the same direction, by embracing Islamists, engaging in apologetics for rogue regimes, and supporting radical policies. However, recent revelations shows that Corbyn has taken his disturbing portfolio one step further, openly embracing the enemies of the United Kingdom, Europe, and the humanity itself, Western and non-Western.

The photographs of Corbyn laying wreaths on the graves of the Black September terrorists, responsible for the massacre of the Israeli athletes in Munich is bad enough. (Dayenu).

His warm meeting with the Palestinian terror chief in Tunisia says a lot about his character and ideology (Dayenu!)

His support for Hamas and Hezbullah at a time that UK Parliament is debating designating the entire Hezbullah as terrorist organization is peculiar and at odds with UK’s foreign policy and national security interests (Dayenu!) For instance, he praised the release of Hamas terrorists… on Iran’s State of TV. Iran has been proudly supporting Hamas riots on Israel borders and financing the heads of the terrorist organization. Hamas chief also boasted about the organizations close ties to Hezbullah, another Iranian proxy.

Conveniently enough, Corbyn was happy to overlook Iranian abuses of their own citizens on multiple occasions. He was silent on New Years’ protests in Iran which led to mass arrests and torture of citizens from all over the country.

His stint on PressTV gives comfort to the extremist Iranian government which has arrested a number of UK citizens over the years. The TV station was complicit in the forced confession of a tortured journalist, and, at the time Corbyn worked for it, was banned by Ofcom. (Dayenu!) Confronted, Corbyn refused to say whether he regretted that appearance. Official links showed that Corbyn was paid as much as 20,000 pounds for his appearances, and that even after the initial outrage continued his work.

And, most recently, Corbyn met with the Iranian Ambassador, which the Iranian Foreign Ministry proudly posted about. (Dayenu!) At the time, Corbyn stated that the nuclear deal should be preserved – not particularly a distinctive position from the government’s.

Why would the Iranian Ambassador be meeting with the head of the opposition, as opposed to members of the May government (which has, by the way, opposed withdrawal from the JCPOA, and, despite its differences with the European Union, has worked hard to preserve the deal? Furthermore, why did Iran pay for the left-wing propaganda in support of Jeremy Corbyn on Facebook? Why is Iran meddling in UK elections, as well as lending support to Scotland’s independence movement? These accounts were eventually shut down – but the questions remain.

Whatever Corbyn’s own motivations, it is clear that he has been useful to Tehran’s vile agenda.  He has been appealing to the lowest common denominator within his own party, strengthening anti-Semitic elements, shutting down critics, intimidating Jewish MPs, and contributing to the deeply polarizing effect on the political system and the country as a whole.

Corbyn is not a nice man. He is not a good man. But is he merely an incidental useful idiot or is he working for Iran to undermine his own country? Regardless of the answer to that question, which deserves a more thorough investigation than Corbyn’s self-serving TV appearances, Labour itself has now become Iran’s tool.  Iran is doing more than hacking accounts of political parties or meddling in elections. It is now successfully weaponizing entire political parties to serve its agenda, to undermine stability in countries such as the United Kingdom, and to create even greater havoc in the West.

Iran has successfully cultivated a strong base of support in the UK, where the Palestinian issue has become the central issue for Labour, so much so, that at a recent rally the activists took up Palestinian flags, whereas not one Union Jack was to be found. Corbyn stated that he would unilaterally recognize a State of Palestine if elected Prime Minister.  It has created a fifth column – not of Jews, many of whom have resigned from the party as a result of growing extremism, but of their attackers who support terrorists with blood on their hands, following Jeremy Corbyn’s example.  Rather than being concerned with the economic issues within their own country, Labour members prioritize the Palestine issue. How different is it from what Iran herself is doing?

Iran has ignored and even exacerbated the economic plight of the Ahwazi Arabs, Kurds, Baluchis, Azeris, and others within its own borders, leaving many of its constituents penniless – while giving generously to Hamas (not to regular Palestinians suffering under the yoke of dictators) to cause problems for Israel.  Now Labour leadership is asking its members to put aside internal issues and to focus on a convenient foreign cause most of them know about only from propaganda. That support consists of flag waving and hating on Jews and Israel. Few ask themselves about the contributions of Palestinian leaderships to the hardships of their own people. But that is exactly what Iran needs.

Recently, the UK Foreign Minister Alistair Burt visited Tehran, in part to discuss Iran’s destabilizing activities in Yemen and elsewhere in the Middle East. He urged all parties to the Yemen war to commit to a peace process – which was recently boycotted by the Iran-backed Houthi radicals.  Tehran’s interest, however, was to get  UK and Europe to remain committed to the nuclear deal; to undermine US efforts to reimpose sanctions by engaging in as yet-unnamed vehicle which would allow European companies to do business with IRan.

UK Foreign Minister’s admonitions with respect to Yemen counted for very little.  Despite the Parliament’s interest in designating Hezbullah as a terrorist organization, which could cause further problems for Iran, Labour remains strongly opposed.  Corbyn, thus, is potentially undermining whatever leverage UK has to curtail Iranian aggression and contribution to assorted Middle Eastern conflicts.  Most recently, for instance, Hezbullah inspired a large terrorist cell in Bahrain, with 170 people charged as a result. Corbyn, so far, does not have sufficient power to derail British foreign policy; critics say that young people see no future in the return of old-school socialism, where Corbyn even hired an open Stalin supporter and Communist. Many say that younger people have been leaving Labour in droves in search of better opportunities, that Labour’s support base is shrinking as a result of Corbyn’s radical policies.

The optimists believe that Corbyn will be crushed under the weight of his own excesses, that sooner or later the party will rebel and tear him down, and that new, moderate leadership will triumph even before the next elections.

However, if Iran is paying for the cultivation of a new ally, rumors of Corbyn’s political demise may be greatly exaggerating. At a time when the US has largely succeeded in downsizing Iran’s oil trade through sanctions and in the downfall of its currency, Iran needs allies more than ever – yet it has little to offer in return. Even China, despite loud proclamations to the contrary, has been lagging behind in purchasing oil, as the trade war with the United States is heating up and Beijing seeks to recoups its losses.  These developments leave Iran in a financially precarious straits.

Like Russia, unable to finance serious operations and with not much to offer, Iran has turned to exploiting vulnerabilities rather than building constructive relationships.  It is at a significant disadvantage. Even its staunchest allies in Europe are forced to make difficult choices. Merkel, as predicted, crumbled under the pressure of Saudi boycott over Germany’s criticism of KSA’s handling of the Hariri debacle in Lebanon, the threat of US sanctions which had its companies and bigger banks scrambling out of Iran, and US-imposed tariffs on EU products.  Germany could have handled some of these hardships, but not all of that financial pressure simultaneously.

Merkel government’s policies are losing popular support and key figures. Iran is not in a position to compete with the United States… or for that matter, anyone else. Its last remaining hope for emerging victorious out of this unpleasant turns of events is to disrupt the existing political order and to create bases of support in key countries. Corbyn, a result of decades of leftist education and successful propaganda inside the United Kingdom, was an obvious and natural ally.  If successful, the model of paying off opposition parties in return for their vocal support could be replicated elsewhere. Already, Iran enjoys some support within the main European governments. Austria turned a blind eye to the aggression of the Iranian intelligence, and even terrorist plots being hatched in the heart of Vienna.

However, populist right-wing governments in Europe are also cozy with Russia, with which Iran enjoys both a staunch military alliance and an economic rivalry. Learning from Russia’s own playbook – and at times, going at it together – Iran is likely looking to take over the opposition parties completely even as the governing bodies are clinging to the last remnants of any principles. For that reason, European nationalism is becoming increasingly less about the protection of national sovereignty, distancing from EU bureaucrats and their mind-numbing control, or, for that matter, liberating European countries from onerous and unsustainable open border immigration policies – and more about a quest for victory over similarly  minded parties with a different base of financing. IF nothing changes in UK and other countries, there will ultimately be little substantive difference between the so-called nationalists and their openly socialist opponents. If the governments of UK, France, Germany, and others do not quickly see how well Iran and Russia are taking advantage of the political chaos and lack of principles and scruples to essentially coopt existing policies and buy off opponents, European countries will soon be nothing more than nearly anarchic vassaldoms for Tehran and Moscow.

If Corbyn comes to power in the UK, US can kiss good bye to the Five Eyes. Corbyn will seek to dismantle the intelligence alliance, and for that matter, discredit and undermine the entire British intelligence apparatus, filling it with career supporters of his own policy and foreign funded agents of influence. That is always an ongoing process from the perspective of foreign governments seeking to infiltrate, but rarely (if ever) is it a deliberate policy by a sitting government.  Corbyn may be as incompetent as he is evil, and his ability to affect damaging policies may be limited by his poor ability to negotiate with those who see his positions as nothing short of lunacy.

However, he can do a lot of damage to UK’s credibility very quickly, for unlike Trump, for all his shortcomings, who has ultimately and after assorted ups and downs, finally surrounded himself with a solid team of foreign policy professionals, Corbyn continues to surround himself with like-minded radicals rebelling against the existing order. He and his presence within Labour are a very real threat, not just to the existing model of democratic principles (how much of a threat is it if the very demos that is beneficiary of that process is giving him support?) but to security of UK and her allies. He will likely be a Tehran/Moscow puppet, not merely a greedy interloper like May, Macron, and Merkel.

For that reason, there needs to be an immediate and thorough investigation into the financing of the Labour Party. Corbyn should not be able to get away with being paid off by a foreign government while remaining in UK Parliament or leader of the party. However, that is unlikely to happen in the near future – despite Labour’s  recent losses, a Labour critic recently lost a no confidence vote internally, while other critics have been deselected or resigned.  These critics sense a party purge, and ultimately, Labour may end up being a party of radicals. Does that mean a near monopoly for the weakened Tory government for years to come? That remains to be seen, but regardless Iran will continue trying to work on whomever is available to assure relative sympathy regardless of which party is in power. These transparent dynamics will likewise be replicated in other European countries, possibly with even greater success. Corbyn may not be the catalyst, or even a catalyst, for Iran’s looming domination of European political scene, but he surely is an important and troubling facilitators.