Over the weekend representatives of the government in Berlin issued numerous statements intended to teach the Iranian government how to behave democratically. The Iranian ambassador was summoned to the Foreign Ministry, in a colonial hegemonic manner. The Iranians are rejecting this interference and threatening to break diplomatic relations with Berlin. Still, German organizations close to the government are continuing unabated their activities, fanning domestic protests in Iran. Among the main perpetrators of foreign seditious propaganda are the official German foreign radio station, the Deutsche Welle and several German party-affiliated foundations.
In tandem with Twitter, CNN and BBC, the state-financed Deutsche Welle radio station is supporting the government opponents in Iran. The radio station, headquartered in Bonn, which, since April 1962, has its own Farsi-language broadcast program, expanded this program in 2000 to provide a Farsi-Online component. This was further enhanced in 2007. The "Dialog with Iran," a "geopolitically important region" is "a focal point" of the Deutsche Welle, explained the station's director at the time. Above all the station "also wants to report on events and developments inside Iran" particularly "from the European perspective." This barely concealed informational interference in Iranian domestic affairs was announced nearly parallel with the US government's formulation of its program of subversion. The Bush administration had allotted triple-digit millions of dollars to the financing of the Iranian underground movement.
Already at the beginning of this year, an increase in German foreign propaganda was noticed in Teheran. In January, Teheran accused the Deutsche Welle, and other German organizations, of seditious activities and temporarily blocked access to their internet site. The current data of the state-financed radio station in Bonn confirm that the Farsi-language program is currently particularly in demand. For example, since the elections the number of visitors to the site has "multiplied to around 120,000 hits" per day and "the direct contacts to editorial staff in Bonn" have "dramatically increased." According to Deutsche Welle statistics, the Farsi editorial board is receiving up to 3,000 mails daily. Reports "dealing with reactions in Germany to the developments in Iran" are particularly in demand from the nation at the Persian Golf, according to the foreign broadcasting station.
Open to the West
Protests against Teheran, of diverse motivations are also being supported by German party-affiliated foundations. Already several years ago, the SPD-affiliated Friedrich Ebert Foundation had initiated projects for Iran. Hoping for a reorientation of Teheran's foreign policy, the foundation described its objectives as building "civil society institutions" and "helping Iran open itself" up to the West. In the past, this foundation has played a leading role in coups and coup attempts in Europe and Africa.
Shortly following the disputed elections, the FDP-affiliated Friedrich Naumann Foundation initiated an Iran project. A conference entitled "The Ethnic Question and Democracy in Iran" took place last Saturday in Frankfurt/Main in cooperation with the Society for Threatened Peoples (GfbV). Promoting German ethnic policy, the GfbV is notorious for its ties to organizations with links to Nazis. This conference focused on repression of religious and linguistic minorities that - in the opinion of the GfbV and the Naumann Foundation - necessitates the weakening of the central government in Teheran. "Up to 60% of the (Iranian) population"  need special rights, because they belong to oppressed minorities, declares the GfbV. This is a new edition of the subversive ethnic strategy that was successfully applied to Yugoslavia. For a long time, it has been known that Germany has been seeking to instrumentalize autonomous and secessionist forces active on Iranian territory. Already several years ago, it was declared at the Bundeswehr University in Munich that secessionist movements in the "multi-ethnic nation," Iran, should consistently be used as a means of destabilization "subjacent to military intervention".
Foreign interventions in Iran, as pursued also by German organizations, are counterproductive in the eyes of experts. "Interference by the West would be extremely harmful to the movement," warns Bahman Nirumand, an expert on Iran. The movement "would be immediately accused of being guided by the West and its leaders branded as collaborators." Nirumand is referring to comparable experiences with western interventionists. In its struggle against the pro-Western Shah regime, in the aftermath of World War II, the Persian democratic movement was also provided western advice - to the benefit of the Shah's dictatorship. It was only with Western support that the feudal Pahlavi-clan was able to crush the democratic government in 1954. The former colonial powers were and are still pursuing their territorial ambitions and their quest for access to natural resources. The liquidation of the Mossadegh government, under the guidance of Great Britain and the USA, prevented the country for decades from pursuing an independent development. Subsequently, Islamist forces were strengthened to the point that they finally could seize power in 1979. When the Islamist government insisted on Iran's autonomy, refusing to return to a semi-colonial feudal status, the USA incited Bagdad to wage war against Teheran (1980 to 1988) with the intention of weakening both countries. This US attempt was not crowned with success in Teheran. Berlin has since been supporting the democratic movement it had previously been fighting.
Since the protests began, the German boulevard press has extensively reported on "chaos in Teheran". The press organs of the big bourgeoisie are now following suit. Their foreign policy departments are now aggressively anticipating a coup. The Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ) revealed its foreign policy intentions in an article by its Teheran correspondent, in which he describes "four scenarios" aimed toward regime change. Scenario number 3: "A bloodbath (...) in which the world would not stand by and watch inactively", the newspaper threatens.