Yoshie Furuhasi writes: >> To be more precise, struggles over Iran's economy and sovereignty are >> inseparable. It is no secret that the West's ire against Mahmoud >> Ahmadinejad originates in part in his economic program: among others, >> wage increases, lower interests for the poor, investment in education, >> subsidies for the newly wed, and redistribution that favors rural >> areas: "In recent weeks, he has proposed a $4 billion national >> school-renovation program and has raised not only salaries for workers >> in Iran's vast, government-controlled industrial sector but also the >> minimum wage for everyone else. He doubled government grants for >> newlyweds and forced banks to lower interest rates by several >> percentage points";5 and "expenditures in rural areas increased by as >> much as 180 percent in his first year as president."6 Above all, his >> opposition to privatization has irked the rulers of the multinational >> empire: "I have ordered the economy and industry ministers to stop all >> privatisations, where people's rights have been trampled,' Ahmadinejad >> said on June 8. 'This government does not allow some people to >> plunder public property.'"7 Ali Khamenei's aforementioned gambits8 >> are designed to kill two birds at the same time, placating the bazaari >> interests spooked by the expansive fiscal and monetary policy that >> favors the poor9 and making overtures to the West, whose rulers covet >> Iran's assets and no doubt want to put the Iranians on a diet of >> austerity.
Do you really believe this? That the "West" is upset with Ahmadinejad because he has adopted the Labour Party platform from 1948, as opposed to a judgment that he actually believes his own rhetoric about Israel and the West and will have access to nuclear weapons? What evidence do you have that the policies of George Bush are in any way motivated by the domestic economic policies of the Iranian government? David Shemano
