Khamenei tampers with corpse of history in search of rescue board

THERE is no doubt that delusions of domination do not change the historical and demographic facts. Therefore, any attempt made by the Mullah regime to distort reality about the Arabism of the Arabian Peninsula will never be able to change the facts dating back to more than four thousand years.

Such attempts would neither change the identity of the eastern coast of the Arabian Gulf nor deny the deep-rooted Arabism of its inhabitants under any justifications, as this regime claims ownership of Kuwait, Bahrain, and the Gulf states in general.

One of the heresies that the Mullah regime came up with is the so-called “Persian Gulf Day” that is celebrated annually on April 13. On this day, the regime regurgitates its allegations concerning the identity of this water basin, adhering to a single incident when the Macedonian leader had taken the sea route adjacent to the coast after it was occupied by the Persian state in the year 325 BC. It is based on this incident the Persians built their sand-house to cement the alleged identity.

Prior to the Macedonian journey of Niahorus, this region was known as the Arabian Gulf, even though it had various names throughout the past four thousand years.

It was known as the “Sea of the Land of God”. The Assyrians and Acadians called it “Nar Murto” (the Bitter River). It was also called “the Eastern Sea of the Great Sun” by the Chaldeans. The Greeks and Romans called it “The Red” because they considered it part of the Arabian Sea which was called “The Red”.

It is proven that the Roman historian Pliny the Younger gave the term “The Arabian Gulf”. In 150 BC, the Greek historian Ptolemy called it “the Sea of Maysan” in relation to the Arab Kingdom of Maysan which was located in Ahvaz (currently the eastern coast of the Gulf).

Other names given to this water basin included “Bahr al-Qatif”, “Bahr Al-Bahrain” and “Arab Gulf”. The Ottoman Empire called it “Gulf of Basra”, a term that Turkey still uses to this day.

Historically, the Gulf represented a “complex deficiency” in the Iranian culture since the defeat of the first Persians in the Battle of Dhi Qar in the sixth century. To this day, the image has not differed in the modern state. During the Shah’s rule and when Iran occupied Khorramshahr (Muhammarah) and toppled the Arab state in it, the eastern coastal region was named “Coast of Persia”.

However, the political changes in the first half of the 20th century forced the regime of Muhammad Reza Pahlavi to engage realistically with the Gulf states and recognize their sovereignty on the western coast, but he did not give up his ambitions in Bahrain except after the referendum held by the United Nations in 1970.

Today, when the Iranian officials excavate and exhume the historical corpse and seek to consolidate it in the minds, they delude their ability to impose their control on the region and change its reality in line with their expansionism approach based on the principle of “exporting the revolution”.

This undermines all their shenanigans related to good neighborliness and cooperation, and other slogans that are contradicted and refuted by their daily actions.

If Iran has real intention to establish proper and peaceful relations, its theocratic regime must look realistically at the outcome of the British-French dispute regarding the English Channel, which is simply called “The Channel”. They fought for decades, but the need for cooperation and abandoning the expansionism mentality after World War II led them to settle for everything that would enhance the interests of their people. Through a joint project, Paris and London worked on building a canal under the sea as well as a railway linking them.

Naturally, there is a fundamental difference between the French and the British systems. This applies to the Mullah regime which has failed internally and tries to cover up its backwardness with aggression, provocation and insolence, attributing all these to religious statements that are contrary to the essence of Islam.

Clearly, despite all the bitter experiences this theocratic regime has gone through, it seems unconvinced that the mentality of religious wars had ended 1,000 years ago. The world today aspires for peace to be one of the basic principles of state policies. Unfortunately, it is difficult for such facts to be understood by those still living in the dark caves of the Middle Ages.