Iran Holocaust Show Sympathetic to Jews

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — It is Iran's version of "Schindler's List," a miniseries that tells the tale of an Iranian diplomat in Paris who helps Jews escape the Holocaust — and viewers across the country are riveted.

That's surprising enough in a country where hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has questioned whether the Holocaust even took place. What's more surprising is that government media produced the series, and is airing it on state-run television.

The Holocaust is rarely mentioned in state media in Iran, school textbooks don't discuss it and Iranians have little information about it.

Yet the series titled "Zero Degree Turn" is clearly sympathetic to the Jews' plight during World War II. It shows men, women and children with yellow stars on their clothes being taken forcibly out of their homes and loaded into trucks by Nazi soldiers.

"Where are they taking them?" the horrified hero, a young Iranian diplomat who works at the Iranian Embassy in Paris, asks someone in a crowd of onlookers.

"The Fascists are taking the Jews to the concentration camps," the man says. The hero, named Habib Parsa, then begins giving Iranian passports to Jews to allow them to flee occupied France to then-Palestine.

Though the Habib character is fictional, it is based on a true story of diplomats in the Iranian Embassy in Paris in the 1940s who gave out about 500 Iranian passports for Jews to use to escape.

The show's appearance now may reflect an attempt by Iran's leadership to moderate its image as anti-Semitic and to underline a distinction that Iranian officials often make — that their conflict is with Israel, not with the Jewish people.

About 25,000 Jews live in Iran, the largest Jewish community in the Middle East after Israel. They have one representative in parliament, which is run mostly by Islamic clerics.

The series could not have aired without being condoned by Iran's clerical leadership. The state broadcaster is under the control of the supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khomenei, who has final say in all matters inside Iran.

Moderate conservatives have been gaining ground in Iran, where there is increasing discontent with the ruling hardliners over rising tensions with the West, a worsening economy and price hikes in basic commodities.

The government even allowed the series to break another taboo in Iran: For the first time, many actresses appear without the state-mandated Islamic dress code. The producers wanted to realistically portray 1940s Paris, and thus avoided the headscarves and head-to-foot robes that all women must normally wear on Iranian TV.

Ahmadinejad sparked widespread outrage in 2005 when he made comments casting doubt on the Holocaust and saying the state of Israel should be "wiped from the map." His government organized a conference of Holocaust deniers and skeptics from around the world in December.

But the series has won support even from hardliners. Some argue that it links the Holocaust with Israel's creation, thus boosting an argument by Ahmadinejad that if the Nazi killing of Jews did take place, the Palestinians who then lived in Palestine should not have had to pay the price for it by the creation of Israel after the war.

"The series differentiates between Jews and Zionism. The ground for forming Israel is prepared when Hitler's army puts pressure on activist Jews. In this sense, it considers Nazism parallel to Zionism," the hard-line newspaper Keyhan said.

State media have said the series, which began in April, is popular. It has been a revelation for some Iranians and has pulled them away from more popular satellite channels, which are banned but which many watch anyway on illegal dishes. The fare on state TV is usually dry.

"Once, I wept when I learned through the film what a dreadful destiny the small nation had during the world war in the heart of so-called civilized Europe," said Mahboubeh Rahamati, a Tehran bank teller.

Kazem Gharibi said he watches the series every Monday on a TV in his grocery store.

"Through this film, I understood that Jews had a hard time in the war — helpless and desperate, as we were when Iraq imposed war on us," he said, referring to the eight-year Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s.

The series began with a love story between Habib, the embassy employee, and a French Jew, Sara Stroke, in the early 1940s. Viewers say the love story pulls them in as much as the history.

After Paris is occupied by the Nazis, Habib decides to forge Iranian passports for many French Jews to save them from the Holocaust — starting with Sara and her family. The German government accepts his embassy's claim that the passport holders are from an Iranian tribe and lets them leave France.

Habib is imprisoned by the Nazis for espionage after his forgeries are discovered. He then is released and returns to Tehran, where he is jailed again for forging passports.

Eight episodes remain in the series, and viewers drawn by the love story are on edge as they await the finish.

"I have watched the series from the beginning," said Sedigheh Karandish, a housewife and mother of two. "It's pulling me in to see what these two people do at the end. Hopefully, it will be a happy ending."

The Central Office for Jewish Emigration was established in Vienna in August 1938 and was headed by Adolf Eichmann of the Jewish Department of the SD. The purpose was to force as many Jews as possible to emigrate. In order to do so, he fixed quotas of Jews, who had to leave and made the Jewish community responsible for filling them out. He set up the Central Office so that all arrangements for emigration could be made in one location. Rich Jews were to finance the emigration of the poorer ones. Eichmann's methods and policies served as a model for the entire Reich and on January 24, 1939 the Reich Central Office for Jewish Emigration was established with Reinhard Heydrich at the head. It was charged with the task of using all available means to prompt Jews to emigrate: and establishing a Jewish organisation that would incorporate all of German Jewry and co-ordinate emigration from the Jewish side.

In addition, prior to chairing the Wannsee meeting at which he unveiled the Final Solution, Reinhard Heydrich had pursued discussion of exporting Europe's Jews back to Palestine. Of course, in the end he was a key player in implementing the Final Solution.

Now, it's a long and convoluted story in which the early Nazi policy was that of self-deportation through intimidation and seizing businesses, then the formal program to force them to self-deport, then a need for a slave labor force, then a necessity to kill used-up slaves and dispose of those who died of exhaustion at slave labor, then to the Final Solution itself which was the fundamental antisemitic ideology of the Nazis all along. So much of this comes down to the perceptions the incompetent Nazis had of the economic value of Jews and the varied economics of how to deport and/or kill them. In many ways, the sequence of events shows how utterly ruthless and inhuman the Nazis were, more so than a simple view of the Final Solution being the goal all along which is the popular view. The truth is actually more heinous.

Anyway, this is exactly the sort of thing that Iran and other Muslim regimes use to make their propaganda that the Zionists collaborated with the Nazis to create Israel and for which there is no evidence and no rational explanation for why Jews, Zionist or otherwise, would even want to cooperate in this. Attempting to portray the Jews of Europe as the victims of both the Nazis and the Zionists is a natural theme for the Muslims and it appears that this show is exploiting that theme successfully. I note that Iran's state media seems to have spent a lot on this programming and will probably export it to other Arab and Muslim countries as well. This Nazi/Zionist theme is also appealing in the Middle East with its fascination for conspiracy theories, especially any conspiracy theory involving Jews or Israel.

Global amnesia
By DAVID HOROVITZ
Jerusalem Post 9/10/07

At the start of his monumental history of Nazi Germany, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, William L. Shirer quotes a variant of the philosopher George Santayana’s remark, “Those who do not remember the past are condemned to relive it.” It is a measure of the current global amnesia that Iranian state television seems more prepared to recall the Holocaust - albeit with a pernicious modern subtext - than the world body that is ostensibly committed to preventing its recurrence.

As first reported in The Wall Street Journal earlier this week, Iranian TV is currently screening the most costly drama it has ever produced, Zero Degree Turn, improbably centered on the romance between a French Jewess and the Iranian-Palestinian Muslim who saves her from the Nazis. The writer and director, Hassan Fatthi, has said he was inspired by reading about the activities of Iran’s World War II-era head of consular affairs in Paris, Abdol Hussein Sardari, who saved numerous European Jews from the death camps by issuing them with Iranian passports.

Part of the drama’s thrust is to distinguish between Jews, who are officially permitted to practice their faith in Iran, and their sovereign state of Israel, which official Iran reviles. Thus while humanizing Jews, the series subtly delegitimizes Israel and those who support it. In one scene described by the Journal, for instance, a rabbi opines that it is “a bad idea for Jews to resettle in Arab lands”; in another, the French Jewish heroine rejects an offer of marriage from a suitor-cousin who supports the establishment of Israel. Writer Fatthi, meanwhile, used the platform of an interview with the Journal to try to parallel genocidal Nazi behavior with Israeli treatment of the Palestinians. “The murder of innocent Jews during World War II is just as despicable, sad and shocking as the killing of innocent Palestinian women and children by racist Zionist soldiers,” he said.

Nonetheless, the lavish series, which was researched with input from Iran’s Jewish Association, stands strikingly at odds with the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s position on the Holocaust. While Zero Degree Turn features a local heartthrob moved to heroism by his love for a Jewish woman threatened by the Nazi mass-murderers, and makes role models out of Iranian diplomats saving Jews, Ahmadinejad would have his countryfolk, and the rest of the world, doubting that the Holocaust ever happened. Monday night after Monday night across Iran, Fatthi is broadcasting an unmistakable challenge to his own president’s efforts at historical revisionism. State TV is essentially telling Ahmadinejad to shut up.

Contrast that 22-part act of subversion with the pusillanimous attitudes and actions of the United Nations. Established in the bitter aftermath of World War II, the UN’s prime stated aims include preventing war and safeguarding human rights, and its Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide is binding on all ratifying countries (of which there are 137 to date, including Iran).

Yet the United Nations has not merely made no serious effort to punish Ahmadinejad for his strategic effort at rewriting the history of genocide against the Jews, it also determinedly refuses to use its own mechanisms to thwart his t the start of his monumental history of Nazi Germany, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, ongoing march toward a planned new genocide against us.

Week in, week out, the Holocaust-denying president of Iran stridently denounces Israel, predicts its destruction, and urges accelerated progress toward the nuclear capability with which he would hope to achieve this ambition. And year after year, the United Nations cheerfully opens its doors to him and provides him with a stage.

As things stand, this year will be no different. Ahmadinejad is set to fly to New York later this month for the UN’s General Assembly session, as he did last year and the year before that. There will be no effort to begin the process of indicting him for conspiring to commit genocide in flagrant breach of the UN’s Genocide Convention. And the United States, as of this writing, has made no move to put his name on a watch list or taken any step toward denying him entrance.

Such global amnesia and disrespect for international law is certainly not confined to the UN and Ahmadinejad, of course. After 12 years of footdragging and corruption in the investigation of the 1984 bombing of the AMIA Buenos Aires Jewish community offices, the Argentinean state prosecution last year formally determined that the bombing, in which 85 people were killed, was “organized by the highest leaders” of the Iranian government.

Last November, Argentina issued an arrest warrant for Hashemi Rafsanjani, Iran’s former president who was recently elected to head its powerful Assembly of Experts, “for his involvement in the AMIA bombing.” Argentina urged Interpol to issue an international arrest warrant for him. The response to date of the international community: Silence. UNFORTUNATELY, ISRAEL is not immune to dangerous bouts of amnesia either, albeit often with the best of intentions.

Yes, we would dearly love to reach a viable accommodation with our Palestinian neighbors, allowing us to live, unthreatened, side by side. And no, most of us strongly reject the notion, slowly gaining traction in parts of the international community, that avoiding engagement with the Islamic extremists of Hamas is preventing any such possibility. Hamas, unlike the IRA in Ireland, is not agitating for a role in determining the future of disputed territory. It is, rather, avowedly seeking Islamic hegemony over both the disputed territory and the sovereign state next door, Israel.

But the fact that uncompromising extremists constitute an ever-more potent threat to any peace process does not in and of itself render pristine and trustworthy the hugely problematic secular partner-enemies of Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah. And forgetting, or ignoring, Fatah’s past conduct is a veritable guarantee that its future will be no better.

In a Rosh Hashana interview published in today’s paper, President Shimon Peres declares that the chemistry between Abbas and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is good, that there is a chance that the two can reach a “Declaration of Principles” on a permanent peace accord, and that its central features would be much like the proposals set out by Bill Clinton in the final months of his presidency.

If this means that Abbas would publicly make plain, on behalf of the Palestinian people, that he acknowledges the impossibility of a “right of return” for Palestinian refugees to Israel - removing one of the central obstacles to an eventual accommodation - then the numerous hours of recent OlmertAbbas talks would have been productive, but still not decisive.

For if Olmert and Abbas are engaged in a kind of reverseOslo exercise - attempting to resolve the knottiest “final status” issues in the hope that by specifying the terms of an ultimate accommodation they will inspire both sides to travel the path to its realization - they are on shaky ground, indeed.

These are two weak leaders whose desire to reach some sort of an agreement is understandable, if for opposite reasons: Olmert is desperate to remain in power, and believes the public will not throw out a leader whose presence offers the promise of peace; Abbas is desperate to get out of the hot-seat, and may be ready to negotiate terms on which his successors will somehow have to try to deliver.

But for all mainstream Israel’s readiness for territorial compromise with the Palestinians, or more accurately separation from the Palestinians, any such partition selfevidently requires a capable partner to whom to hand over territory. And at present Abbas, and his Palestinian Authority, are anything but.

Abbas has lost Gaza to Hamas, faces an emboldened Hamas in the West Bank, has not rooted out the terror gangs from his own organization, and by no stretch of the imagination can be said to have reformed Fatah governance. He could certainly sign a declaration of principles, and would rightly be applauded were he to commit himself to terms that would theoretically afford a viable accommodation. But what of the practice?

Stating what ought to be blindingly obvious, Israel could only contemplate relinquishing control of West Bank territory within rocket range of BenGurion Airport, to give just one example, if it were entirely confident that the vacuum left by its departure would not be filled by people brandishing rocket launchers.

Put it another way: A permanent accord can only be implemented through the Palestinians’ meeting the commitments they have so signally failed to meet in the Oslo Accords, the road map and every other failed peace framework, and chiefly the concerted thwarting of the men of violence who will destroy any and every attempt at progress. A HIGHLY respected overseas politician with whom I am friendly, a frequent visitor to this region, told me of a visit he had this week with the PA’s Prime Minister Salaam Fayad, the former World Bank official on whom so many would-be international peacemakers are pinning so much hope.

He was dismayed, he told me, to hear about some of the appointments Fayad has made - including that of one very senior adviser who is notorious for taking particularly hostile positions to Israel.

But he was impressed by Fayad’s response when they talked through what my friend set out as the prime tasks facing the PA if it were to come to constitute a genuine peace partner. These included imposing the rule of law and ending corruption; halting incitement against Israel in the media, schools, mosques, training camps et al; and denouncing and fighting terrorism, halting arms smuggling, blocking terror funding and arresting terrorists. Fayad said he fully endorsed every item on the list, and was already hard at work on many of them, notably the staunching of terror funds and the rooting out of corruption.

But then my friend met with a longstanding contact who holds a senior position in the PA judiciary, and was told that corruption and bribery and violence were as rife as ever, if not worsening, and that the notion of Abbas establishing a credible rule of law was a pipedream. IT MAY not be a lost cause, but it would be madness to ignore the scale of the challenge facing would-be peacemakers, and to create expectations that, if not met, will plunge us still deeper into conflict. The route back toward substantive dialogue is an arduous one, and needs to be planned responsibly, with realistic, verifiable goals, mechanisms for assistance, and incentives and pressures to ensure achievement.

At the end of another tense Jewish year, we pray for peace as fervently as ever and urge our leaders to work for it - a peace built on solid foundations, on genuine goodwill and courage and the determination to frustrate murderous extremists. And we hope that those who speak for us will be wise to the miscalculations and the arrogance that have cost us so dear - capable of learning from history, rather than condemning us to relive it.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.