19ﺳﭙﺘـﺎﻣﺒﺮ 2011
ﺩﺭ ﻭﺑﻼگ ﺍﻣﺮﻭﺯ ﻧﮕﺎﻫﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﻛﺸــﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﻫﻢﻣﺮﺯ ﺭﻭﺳﻴﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻨﻮﺏ ﻏﺮﺑﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺸــﻮﺭ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻳﻢ .ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻄﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ »ﺑﺮﺑﺎﺩﺭﻓﺘﻪﻫﺎ« ﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﺷــﺪ ،ﺍﺳﺘﺮﺍﺗﮋﻯ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﻣﻬﻤﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺮﺯﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﻨﻮﺏ ﻏﺮﺑﻰ ﺭﻭﺳﻴﻪ ﻓﻌﺎﻝ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻮﺍﺿﻊ ﻛﺮﻣﻠﻴﻦ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺒﺎﻝ ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ ﻭ ﺁﻧﻜﺎﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺭﺃﺱ ﺁﻥ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ .ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻪ ﺷﺎﻳﺪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﺍﺯﺍ ﺑﻜﺸﺎﻧﺪ ،ﻭﻟﻰ ﺟﻬﺖ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﺩﻗﻴﻖﺗﺮ ﻣﻮﺍﺿﻊ ﻛﻨﻮﻧﻰ ﺭﻭﺳﻴﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺒــﺎﻝ ﺗﻬــﺮﺍﻥ ﻭ ﺁﻧﻜﺎﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﺔ ﻳﻚ ﺧﻼﺻﺔ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ ﺑﺴــﻴﺎﺭ ﻓﺸــﺮﺩﻩ ﮔﺮﻳﺰﻯ
ﻧﻴﺴــﺖ .ﺧﻼﺻــﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻣﻴﺪﻭﺍﺭﻳﻢ ﭘﻠﻰ ﺑﺎﺷــﺪ ﺟﻬﺖ ﺩﺳﺘﺮﺳــﻰ ﺳﺎﺩﻩﺗﺮﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺍﺳﺘﺮﺍﺗﮋﻳﻚ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﺔ ﻛﻠﻴﺪﻯ. ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﻭ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﻪ ،ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥ ﺟﻨﮓ ﺍﻭﻝ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﻋﻤ ً ﻼ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺴﺘﻌﻤﺮﺓ ﺍﻣﭙﺮﺍﺗﻮﺭﻯ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﺴــﺘﺎﻥ ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﺷــﺪﻧﺪ؛ ﻋﻮﺍﻣﻞ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﻴﺲ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻛﻮﺩﺗﺎ ﻣﻴﺮﭘﻨﺞ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺴﻨﺪ ﺣﺎﻛﻤﻴﺖ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺪﻧﺪ ،ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﻪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻛﻤﺎﻝ ﭘﺎﺷــﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻜﻴﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺑﺎﻗﻴﻤﺎﻧﺪﺓ ﺍﺭﺗﺶ ﻋﺜﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺧﻮﺭﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺣﻤﺎﻳــﺖ ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﺴــﺘﺎﻥ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳــﺖ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ .ﺟﺎﻟﺐ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ »ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖﺁﻣﻴــﺰ« ﻣﺬﻛﻮﺭ ﺩﻗﻴﻘﺎً ﻫﻤﺰﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺤﻮﻻﺕ ﺭﻭﺳﻴﺔ ﺗﺰﺍﺭﻯ ﻫﻤﺎﻫﻨﮓ ﺷــﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ .ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻣﭙﺮﺍﺗﻮﺭﻯ ﺗﺰﺍﺭﻫﺎ ﺑﺎ ﻛﻮﺩﺗﺎﻯ ﺑﻠﺸــﻮﻳﻚﻫﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻢ ﻓﺮﻭﭘﺎﺷﻴﺪ ،ﻭ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭ ﺗﺰﺍﺭ ﺑﺠﺎﻯ
ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻦ ﺩﺭ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ »ﺑﺮﻧﺪﮔﺎﻥ« ﺟﻨﮓ ﺍﻭﻝ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﺴﺘﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻥﺷــﺎﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺳــﺮ ﻭ ﮔﺮﺩﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﺍﻥ ﺑﺎﻻﺗﺮ ﺑﻮﺩ ،ﺩﺭ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺖﻫﺎﺋﻰ ﻧﺸﺴــﺖ ﻛــﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﺟﻨــﮓ« ﺍﺯ ﺻﺤﻨﺔ ﺳﻴﺎﺳــﺖ ﺍﺭﻭﭘﺎ ﺣﺬﻑ ﺷــﺪﻧﺪ :ﺍﻣﭙﺮﺍﺗﻮﺭﻯ ﺍﻃﺮﻳﺶ ،ﺍﻣﭙﺮﺍﺗﻮﺭﻯ ﭘﺮﻭﺱ ،ﺍﻣﭙﺮﺍﺗﻮﺭﻯ ﻋﺜﻤﺎﻧﻰ ،ﻭ ﺑﺮﺧﻰ ﻗﺪﺭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻪﺍﻯ. ﺧﻼﺻﺔ ﻛﻼﻡ ،ﭘﻴﺮﻭﺯﻯ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﺴﺘﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻨﮓ ﺍﻭﻝ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﻰﻗﻴﺪ ﻭ ﺷﺮﻁ ﻭ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻭ ﻛﻤﺎﻝ ﺑﻮﺩ؛ ﺭﻗﺒﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺷﺮﻕ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺑﺮﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻧﺪ، ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻓﺮﻭﭘﺎﺷﻰ ﺗﺰﺍﺭﻳﺴﻢ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺭﻓﺘﻦ ﺗﻜﻴﻪﮔﺎﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﭘﺎﺭﻳﺲ ﺩﺭ ﺷﺮﻕ ﺍﺭﻭﭘﺎ ،ﻋﻤ ً ﻼ ﺗﺤﺖ ﻗﻴﻤﻮﻣﺖ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﻟﻨﺪﻥ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﺮﻓــﺖ ،ﻭ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺍﻣﺮ »ﻣﻴــﺮﺍﺙ« ﺍﻣﭙﺮﺍﺗــﻮﺭﻯ ﻋﺜﻤﺎﻧﻰ ،ﻳﺎﺩﮔﺎﺭ
ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﻭ ﻛﻬﻦﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺳــﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﻳﻚ ﻫﻠﻮﻯ ﭘﻮﺳﺖ ﻛﻨﺪﻩ ﺗﻮﻯ ﮔﻠﻮﻯ ﻟﻨﺪﻥ ﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩ.
ﺩﺭ ﻣﺴــﻜﻮ ﺑﻪ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺑﻼﻭﺍﺳﻄﻪ ﻭ ﻧﺎﻣﺸﺮﻭﻉ ،ﻭ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻓﺮﻭﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻥ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﻭ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺍﻣﺎﻥ ﻓﺎﺷﻴﺴﻢ »ﻣﺪﺭﻥﻧﻤﺎ!«
ﻭﻟﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮ »ﻧﻮﺷــﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻴﺸﻰ« ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮ ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻣﭙﺮﺍﺗﻮﺭﻯ ﭘﻴﺮﻭﺯﻣﻨﺪ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﺴﺘﺎﻥ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪﺍﻯ ﻻﻳﻨﺤﻞ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﻭ ﺑﺮﻭﻥ ﻣﺮﺯﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺭﻭﭘﺎ ﺩﺭ ﮔﻴﺮ ﺷﻮﺩ؛ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪﺍﻯ ﺗﺤﺖ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ »ﺟﻨﺒﺶ ﺗﻮﺩﻩﺍﻯ!« ﺍﻏﻠــﺐ ﻣﻮﺭﺧــﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﺘﻔﻖﺍﻟﻘﻮﻝﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺣﺪﺍﻗــﻞ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺍﺭﻭﭘﺎ، ﺭﻳﺸﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﻨﺒﺶﻫﺎ ﻣﻰﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺼﺎﺋﺐ ﭼﺸﻤﮕﻴﺮﻯ ﺟﺴﺘﺠﻮ ﺷﻮﺩ ﻛــﻪ ﻃﻰ ﺟﻨﮓ ﺍﻭﻝ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻮﺩﻩﻫﺎ ﺗﺤﻤﻴﻞ ﺷــﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ .ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺼﺎﺋﺐ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺁﻭﺍﺭﮔﻰ ﺩﻩﻫﺎ ﻣﻴﻠﻴﻮﻥ ﺭﻭﺳﺘﺎﺋﻰ ﻭ ﺷﻬﺮﻧﺸﻴﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺮﻛﺰ ﺍﺭﻭﭘﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺮﺍﻩ ﺁﻭﺭﺩ .ﺳــﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﺴﺘﺎﻥ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥ ﺟﻨﮓ ،ﻋﻠﻴﺮﻏﻢ ﭘﻴﺮﻭﺯﻯ ﺑﻰﻗﻴﺪ ﻭ ﺷــﺮﻁ ﺑﺮ »ﺭﻗﺒﺎ« ﺑﻪ ﻫﻴــﭻ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻗﺎﺩﺭ ﺑﻪ ﻛﻨﺘﺮﻝ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺤﺮﻛﺎﺕ ﮔﺴــﺘﺮﺩﺓ ﺗﻮﺩﻩﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻣﺴــﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﻓﺮﻭﭘﺎﺷﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﺎﺷﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻨﮓ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻧﻤﻰﺷــﺪ .ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﭼﺸــﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻯ ﮔﺴــﺘﺮﺵ ﺭﻭﺯﺍﻓﺰﻭﻥ ﺗﺤﺮﻛﺎﺕ ﺗﻮﺩﻩﺍﻯ ،ﺣﺪﺍﻗﻞ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﻭﭘﺎﻯ ﻣﺮﻛﺰﻯ ﻭ ﺷﺮﻗﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻟﻬﺎﻡ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻴﻢ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﻭ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﺲ ﻏﻴﺮﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺍﺟﺘﻨﺎﺏ ﻣﻰﻧﻤﻮﺩ.
ﺑﺮﺭﺳــﻰ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﺍﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻌﺪﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺭﺍﻳﺶ ﺍﺳﺘﺮﺍﺗﮋﻳﻚ ﺑﺎﻻ ﺩﺭ ﻗﻠﺐ ﺍﺭﻭﭘﺎ ﺑــﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺁﻣﺪ ﺧــﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺤﺚ ﻣﺎ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴــﺮﺩ؛ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻐﻴﻴــﺮﺍﺕ ﻧﺨﻮﺍﻫﻴــﻢ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧــﺖ .ﻭﻟﻰ ﺗﺎ ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺑــﻪ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﻪ ﻭ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﻣﻰﺷــﻮﺩ ﺻﺮﺍﺣﺘﺎً ﺑﮕﻮﺋﻴﻢ ،ﻧﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺟﻨﮓ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﻭﻡ، ﻛﻪ ﺣﺘﻰ ﻓﺮﻭﭘﺎﺷــﻰ ﺗﻤــﺎﻡ ﻭ ﻛﻤﺎﻝ »ﺍﺗﺤﺎﺩ ﺷــﻮﺭﻭﻯ« ﻧﻴﺰ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﺍﺕ ﻋﻤﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦﺩﻭ ﻛﺸﻮﺭ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﻴﺎﻭﺭﺩ.
ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ،ﻟﻨﺪﻥ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥ ﺟﻨﮓ ﺍﻭﻝ ،ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺴــﻴﺮ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﺯﻣﻴﻨﺔ ﻣﻨﺎﺳــﺐ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﻬﺎﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﺗﺤﺮﻛﺎﺕ ﺗﻮﺩﻩﺍﻯ« ،ﺩﻭ ﺳﻴﺎﺳــﺖ ﻫﻤﺎﻫﻨﮓ ﻭ ﻣﻮﺍﺯﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﺑﺴــﻴﺎﺭ ﺍﺳــﺘﺎﺩﺍﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﻭﭘﺎ ﺑﻪ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺭﺍﻧﺪ .ﺷــﺎﺧﺔ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ ﺣﻤﺎﻳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻓﺎﺷﻴﺴﺖﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ ﻣﺮﻛﺰﻯ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺧﻰ ﻛﺸﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺭﻭﭘﺎﻯ ﻏﺮﺑﻰ ﻧﻈﻴﺮ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻪ ،ﺍﺳﭙﺎﻧﻴﺎ ﻭ ﭘﺮﺗﻐﺎﻝ ﺑﻮﺩ .ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ ﺩﻭﻡ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻛﺎﻣ ً ﻼ ﺭﻭﺷــﻦ ﻭ ﻭﺍﺿﺢ ﺍﺳــﺖ ،ﻫﻤﻜﺎﺭﻯ ﻣﻘﻄﻌﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺑﻠﺸﻮﻳﺴــﻢ ﺭﻭﺱ ﻭ ﻣﻬﺎﺭ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪﻃﻠﺒﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﺮﺍﻣﺮﺯﻯﺍﺵ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺑﺪﻩﺑﺴﺘﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻮﻗــﻊ ﻭ »ﭼﺮﺏ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺳــﺒﻴﻞ« ﺗﻨﺪﺭﻭﺗﺮﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺮﻣﻠﻴﻦ .ﻭﻟﻰ ﻫﻤﺰﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺮﻭژﻩ ،ﺩﺭ ﻛﺸــﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﻨﻮﺏ ﻏﺮﺑﻰ ﺭﻭﺳﻴﺔ ﺷﻮﺭﻭﻯ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺣﻤﺎﻳﺖ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﺴــﺘﺎﻥ ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻄﻮﺭ ﻛــﻪ ﺑﺎﻻﺗﺮ ﮔﻔﺘﻴﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻧﺐ ﻓﺎﺷﻴﺴــﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺤﻠﻰ ﻣﻨﺤﺮﻑ ﺷﺪ ،ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﻴﺮﭘﻨﺞ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﻭ ﻛﻤﺎﻝ ﭘﺎﺷﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺭﺳﺎﻧﺪ. ﺩﺭ ﺍﻭﺍﺧﺮ ﺩﻫﺔ ،1930ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ ﺳــﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ »ﭘﻴﺮﻭﺯﻣﻨﺪ« ﺍﻧﮕﻠﺴﺘﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻗــﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﺭﻭﭘــﺎ ﻭ ﻣﺮﺯﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﻨﻮﺏ ﻏﺮﺑﻰ ﺭﻭﺳــﻴﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺠﻰ ﺭﺳــﻴﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻨﮕﺎﺭﺍﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺁﻥ ﭼﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻑ ﻧﻈﺮﻯ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ .ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺠﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻗﺒﻴﻞ ﺑﻪ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻥ ﻓﺎﺷﻴﺴﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﺮﻛﻮﺑﮕﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻟﻤﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺍﻳﺘﺎﻟﻴﺎ ،ﺣﺎﻛﻤﻴﺖ ﻫﺮﺝﻭﻣﺮﺝ ﻭ ﻓﺌﻮﺩﺍﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﻗﺮﻭﻥﻭﺳﻄﺎﺋﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﻭﭘﺎﻯ ﺷﺮﻗﻰ ،ﺷﻌﻠﻪﻭﺭﺷﺪﻥ ﺟﻨﮓ ﺩﺍﺧﻠﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺳــﭙﺎﻧﻴﺎ ﻭ ﭘﺮﺗﻐﺎﻝ ،ﺩﺳــﺘﻴﺎﺑﻰ ﺑﺎﻧﺪ ﺧﻮﻧﺨﻮﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﻟﻴﻦ
ﺩﺭ ﺍﻭﺝ ﺍﺳﺘﺮﺍﺗﮋﻯﻫﺎﻯ »ﺟﻨﮓﺳــﺮﺩ« ،ﻛﺸﻮﺭ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﻛﻮﺩﺗﺎﻯ 22ﺑﻬﻤــﻦ 57ﺍﺯ ﭼﻨﮕﺎﻝ ﻳﻚ ﻓﺎﺷﻴﺴــﻢ »ﻣﺘﺠﺪﺩ« ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺷــﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺑــﻪ ﺩﺍﻣﺎﻥ ﻳﻚ ﻓﺎﺷﻴﺴــﻢ ﺩﺳﺖﻧﺸــﺎﻧﺪﻩ ﻭ »ﺩﻳﻦﻓــﺮﻭﺵ« ﻓﺮﻭﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩ. ﺩﺭ ﻫﻤﻴــﻦ ﺑﺮﻫﻪ ،ﻧﻈﺎﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﻪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺟﻬــﺖ ﻫﻤﺎﻫﻨﮕﻰ ﺑﺎ »ﻓﻀﺎﻯ ﺍﻳﺪﺋﻮﻟﻮژﻳﻚ« ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﺍﻓﻐﺎﻧﺴﺘﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺁﻭﺭﺩﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ، ﭘــﺲ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﻛﻮﺩﺗﺎﻯ »ﺍﺑﺮﻳﺸــﻤﻴﻦ ﻭ ﺧﺎﻧﮕﻰ« ،ﺑﺎ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﻛﺸــﻴﺪﻥ ﻓﻘﻪ ﻭ ﺷــﺮﻳﻌﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺻﻨﺪﻭﻗﺨﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ »ﻛﻬﻦ« ،ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻰ ﺗﻼﺵ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺮﺝ ﺩﺍﺩﻧﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ »ﺳــﻴﻨﻪﺧﻴﺰ« ﻭ ﮔﺎﻡ ﺑﻪ ﮔﺎﻡ ﺍﺯ ﻛﻤﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ »ﺳــﻜﻮﻻﺭ« ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺷــﺪﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻭ ﺍﻟﻬﺎﻣﺎﺕ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻰ ﺍﺳﺒﺎﺏﻛﺸــﻰ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ .ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ »ﻛﻤﺎﻟﻴﺴــﻢ« ﻛﻪ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥ ﺟﻨــﮓ ﺍﻭﻝ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﻧﻘﻄــﺔ »ﻗﺪﺭﺕﺍﺵ« ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺿﺪﻳــﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺣﺎﻛﻤﻴﺖ ﺩﻳــﻦ ﻣﻰﺩﻳﺪ ﻭ ﻓﺮﺿﺎً ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺑﻮﺩ ﺑﺮ ﺗﺤﻜــﻢ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﺷﻬﺮﻯ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ﭘﺎﻳﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ،ﺑﻪ ﺗﺪﺭﻳﺞ ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﺷﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺵ »ﺩﻳﻦﺑﺎﻭﺭﻯ!« ﺧﻼﺻﺔ ﻛﻼﻡ ،ﺑﺤﺮﺍﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﺮﺍﻣﻮﻥ ﺟﻨﮓ ﺍﻓﻐﺎﻧﺴــﺘﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺮﺯﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﻨﻮﺑﻰ ﺷــﻮﺭﻭﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟــﻮﺩ ﺁﻣﺪ ﻭ ﻃﻰ ﺁﻥ ﻏﺮﺏ ﻭ ﺍﺗﺤﺎﺩ ﺷــﻮﺭﻭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺑــﺮ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻨﺪ ،ﺗﺮﻛﺶﻫــﺎﻯ ﺍﻳﺪﺋﻮﻟﻮژﻳﻚﺍﺵ ﺟﺰ ﮔﺴــﺘﺮﺵ »ﺍﺳــﻼﻣﮕﺮﺍﺋﻰ« ﻧﺒﻮﺩ .ﺳﻴﺎﺳــﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻻﺋــﻞ ﻓﺮﺍﻭﺍﻥ ﻫﻨﻮﺯ ﻧﻪ ﻣﺴــﻜﻮ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺻﺮﻓﻨﻈﺮ ﻛﻨــﺪ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻏﺮﺏ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻌﻤﺎﺭ ﺍﺻﻠﻰﺍﺵ ﺑﻪ ﺷــﻤﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺍﺯ »ﻓﻮﺍﻳﺪ« ﭼﺸــﻤﮕﻴﺮ ﺁﻥ ﺩﻝ ﺑﻜﻨﺪ .ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ،ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻄﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﻴﻢ ،ﺳﻴﺎﺳــﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺴــﻴﺮ ﭼﭙﺎﻭﻝ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻪ ﮔﺴــﺘﺮﺩﻩﺗﺮ ﻣﻠﺖﻫــﺎﻯ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻪ ﻫﻤﮕﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ »ﺩﻳﮓ ﭘﻠﻮﻯ« ﺍﺳــﻼﻡ ﭼﻤﺒﺎﺗﻤــﻪ ﺯﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ .ﭼﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻬﺎﻧﺔ ﺣﻤﺎﻳﺖ
ﺍﺯ »ﺑﻬﺎﺭﻋــﺮﺏ« ،ﻭ ﭼﻪ ﺗﺤﺖ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺟﺎﻧﺒﺪﺍﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ »ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺑﺎﺕ ﻣﺮﺩﻣﻰ« ﻭ ﺍﻟﻬﺎﻣــﺎﺕ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻳﺨﻮﺍﻫﺎﻧﻪ ﻭ »ﺍﻟﻬــﻰ« ﻭ ...ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺮ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ، ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﻔﻨﮕﻴﺎﺕ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻗﺪﻳﻢﺍﻻﻳﺎﻡ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ :ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻦ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﻫﺎﺋﻰ ﺑﻬﻴﻨﻪ ﺟﻬﺖ ﭼﭙﺎﻭﻝ ﻣﻠﺖﻫﺎ. ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ،ﻓﺮﻭﭘﺎﺷــﻰ ﺍﺗﺤﺎﺩﺷــﻮﺭﻭﻯ ﻭ ﺷــﻜﻞﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﺳــﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ »ﻧﻮﻳﻦ« ﺩﺭ ﺭﻭﺳﻴﻪ ﻣﻄﻠﺐ ﭘﻴﺶﭘﺎﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻩﺍﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ؛ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻜﻴﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺷــﺒﻜﺔ »ﻧﻈﺎﻣﻰ ـ ﺍﻣﻨﻴﺘﻰﺍﻯ« ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ »ﺟﻨﮓﺳﺮﺩ« ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﺎﻧﺪﻩ» ،ﻣﻨﻄﻖ« ﻭﻳﮋﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺳــﺖ ﺗﻮﺳــﻌﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺭﺷﺪ ﻭ ﮔﺴــﺘﺮﺵ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ »ﻣﻨﻄﻖ« ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﻫﺎﺋﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻗﺪﻳﻢﺍﻻﻳﺎﻡ ﺑﺮ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﺍﺳــﺘﺮﺍﺗﮋﻳﻚ ﺍﺭﻭﭘﺎﻯ ﺷﺮﻗﻰ ﻭ ﺁﺳﻴﺎﻯ ﺟﻨﻮﺏ ﻏﺮﺑﻰ ﺣﺎﻛﻢ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﻪ ﭼﺎﻟﺶ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﻃﻠﺒﻴﺪ .ﺑﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻦ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﭼﺸــﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯ« ﺍﺳــﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻮﺍﺿﻊ ﺳﻴﺎﺳــﻰ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﻭ ﺗﺮﻛﻴــﻪ ﻭ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻃﺎﺗﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻨﺪﻭ ﺣﺎﻛﻤﻴﺖ ﺩﺳﺖﻧﺸــﺎﻧﺪﻩ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﺑﻴﻦﺍﻟﻤﻠﻠﻰ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺑﺤﺚ ﻭ ﮔﻔﺘﮕﻮ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻴﻢ. ﺣﺎﻝ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻘﺪﻣﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻮﺗﺎﻩ ﺑﺮ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﭽﺔ ﺍﺳــﺘﺮﺍﺗﮋﻳﻚ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻪ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻛﺮﺩﻳﻢ، ﺑــﺎ ﺗﻜﻴﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺩﺍﺩﻩﻫــﺎﻯ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ ،ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻣﻮﺍﺿﻊ ﺳﻴﺎﺳــﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺟﺎﻧﺐ ﺩﻭ ﺗﺸــﻜﻴﻼﺕ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺳــﺮﻛﻮﺑﮕﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ ﻭ ﺁﻧﻜﺎﺭﺍ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻋﻮﺍﻣﻞ »ﻗﺪﺭﺕﺳــﺎﺯ« ﻏﺮﺏ ﺑﻪ ﺣﺎﻛﻤﻴﺖ ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ ﺳــﺎﺩﻩﺗﺮ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ .ﻃﻰ ﭼﻨﺪ ﺳــﺎﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻭﺝﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺳــﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﺭﻭﺳﻴﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻃﺎﺕ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺭﺩ ،ﺗﺤﻮﻻﺕ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭ ﺩﻭ ﺣﺎﻛﻤﻴﺖ ﺩﺳﺖﻧﺸﺎﻧﺪﺓ ﻏﺮﺏ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺖ ﺍﺳــﻼﻣﻰ ﻭ ﻛﻤﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﺗﺮﻙ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻭ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﻇﺎﻫﺮﺍ ً ﻣﺘﺨﺎﻟﻒ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ .ﻭﻟﻰ ﻋﻠﻴﺮﻏﻢ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺴــﻴﺮ »ﻣﺘﺨﺎﻟﻒ« ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻣﺸــﺨﺺ ﻭ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﻯ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺤﻮﻻﺕ ﺣﺎﻛﻢ ﺷﺪﻩ. ﻧﺨﺴــﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﻧﮕﺎﻫﻰ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﺪﺍﺯﻳﻢ .ﺑــﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻠﻰ ،ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﺷﺎﻫﺪﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻫﺎﺷﻤﻰ ﺭﻓﺴﻨﺠﺎﻧﻰ ،ﻛﻪ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺒﺎً ﺑﺎ ﻓﺮﻭﭘﺎﺷﻰ ﺭﺳــﻤﻰ ﺍﺗﺤﺎﺩﺷــﻮﺭﻭﻯ ﺗﻘﺎﺭﻥ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ ،ﺑﺎﻧﺪ »ﺧــﻂ ﺍﻣﺎﻣﻰﻫﺎ« ﺍﺯ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺍﺟﺮﺍﺋﻰ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﮔﺬﺍﺷــﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷــﻮﺩ ،ﻭ ﺑﺮﺧــﻼﻑ ﻫﻴﺎﻫﻮﻯ ﺭﺍﻳﺞ ﺩﺭ »ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ ﺍﺳــﻼﻣﻰ« ﻛﻪ ﻧﺒﺮﺩ ﻓﺮﺿﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﺎﻻﺕ ﻣﺘﺤﺪ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺭﺃﺱ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ ﺧﻮﺩ »ﺟﺎﺳﺎﺯﻯ« ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ ،ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻰ ﺗﻼﺵ ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﻄﻊ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺴــﻴﺮ ﻳﺎﻓﺘــﻦ ﺭﺍﻩﻛﺎﺭﻫﺎﺋﻰ ﺟﻬﺖ »ﻋــﺎﺩﻯ« ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻥ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎ ﻣﺼﺮﻭﻑ ﻣﻰﺷــﻮﺩ! ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻗﻠﺐ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺤﻮﻻﺕ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻨﺎﺡﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ »ﺗﻨﺪﺭﻭ« ﻭ »ﻏﻴﺮﺳﺎﺯﺷــﻜﺎﺭ« ﻧﻴﺰ ﻛﻢ ﺳــﺨﻦ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻧﻤﻰﺁﻳﺪ،
ﻭﻟﻰ ﺟﺎﻟﺐ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺟﻨﺎﺡﻫﺎﻯ »ﺗﻨﺪﺭﻭ« ﻛﺬﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻣﻮﺍﺿﻊ ﺍﻳﺪﺋﻮﻟﻮژﻳــﻚ ،ﺳــﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﻯ ،ﻣﺎﻟﻰ ﻭ ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻯ ﻣﺸــﺨﺼﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ .ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﻨﺎﺡﻫــﺎ ،ﻫﻤﭽــﻮﻥ ﺑﺎﻧﺪ ﺍﺣﻤﺪﻯﻧﮋﺍﺩ ﺍﺯ ﻧﺒﺮﺩ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳــﺮﺍﺋﻴﻞ ﻭ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺳــﺨﻨﺮﺍﻧﻰﻫﺎ ﻭ ژﺳــﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎﺗﻰ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ،ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻛﺎﺭﺷــﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻼﺵﻫﺎﻯ ﺁﺷــﻜﺎﺭ ﻭ ﭘﻨﻬﺎﻥ ﺟﻬﺖ ﻋﺎﺩﻯﺳــﺎﺯﻯ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﺑﺎ ﻭﺍﺷــﻨﮕﺘﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﺸﺪ! ﻭﻟــﻰ ﻋﻠﻴﺮﻏﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ »ﻣﺨﺎﻟﻔﺖﻫﺎﻯ« ﺷــﺪﻳﺪ ﺗﻨﺪﺭﻭﻫــﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎ، ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ ﺩﺍﺧﻠﻰ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺖ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻰ ﺑﺎ ﻋﺎﻣﻞ »ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ« ﻭ ﻳﺎ »ﻋﺪﻡﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ« ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﺎﻻﺕ ﻣﺘﺤﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺭﻭﺯ ﻧﺨﺴــﺖ »ﻣﺴــﻤﻮﻡ« ﺷــﺪ ،ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻧﺸــﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺍﺑﺴــﺘﮕﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺷﻨﮕﺘﻦ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺐ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳــﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺩﻋﺎ ﻣﻰﺷــﻮﺩ .ﺍﮔﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻗﻠﺐ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﮕﻰ« ،ﺧﺼﻮﺻﺎً ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﻓﺮﻭﭘﺎﺷﻰ ﺍﺗﺤﺎﺩﺷــﻮﺭﻭﻯ ﺗﻼﺵ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻰ ﺟﻨﺎﺡﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺖ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻰ ﻣﺼﺮﻭﻑ ﺑــﻪ ﻓﺮﻳﺎﺩ »ﻣﺮگ ﺑﺮ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎ« ﻭ ﻫﻤﺰﻣﺎﻥ ﺟﺴــﺘﺠﻮﻯ ﺭﺍﻩ ﺣﻠﻰ ﺟﻬﺖ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﺁﻣﺪﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎ ﺷــﺪﻩ ،ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﺌﻮﺍﻝ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﭼﺮﺍ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺣﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﺗﺎﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﻧﺘﻮﺍﻧﺴــﺘﻪ »ﺍﺟﺮﺍﺋﻰ« ﺷــﻮﺩ؟ ﭼﺮﺍ ﻫﻴﭽﻴﻚ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻭﻟﺖﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻼﺕ ﺭﻧﮕﺎﺭﻧﮓ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻤﻪﺭﻧﮓ ﺁﺧﻮﻧﺪﻳﺴﻢ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺪﻩ، ﺍﺯ ﺍﺻﻼﺡﻃﻠﺒﺎﻥ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺗﺎ ﺳــﺮﺩﺍﺭﺍﻥ ﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻭ ﻧﻬﻀﺖ ﻋﺎﻇﺎﺩﻯ ﻭ ﺧﻂ ﺍﻣــﺎﻡ ﻭ »ﺟﻨﺒﺶ ﺳــﺒﺰ« ﻭ ...ﻫﻴﭽﻜﺪﺍﻡ ﻧﺘﻮﺍﻧﺴــﺘﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺮﺯ »ﻫﻤﺎﻫﻨﮕﻰ« ﭘﻨﻬﺎﻥ ﺑﺎ ﻭﺍﺷــﻨﮕﺘﻦ ﻋﺒﻮﺭ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺩﺳــﺖ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑــﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻋﻠﻨﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻴﺎﺳــﺖ ﻭ ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩ ﻛﺸﻮﺭ ﺑﺎﺯ ﺑﮕﺬﺍﺭﺩ؟ ﭼﻪ ﻋﺎﻣﻠﻰ ﺗﻮﺍﻧﺴﺘﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﻘﺎﻭﻣﺖ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ،ﺗﻤﺎﻳﻞ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ »ﻋﻤﻴﻖ« ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎ ﺟﻬﺖ ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ »ﻋﻠﻨــﻰ« ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﻣﺮﺯﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻳــﺮﺍﻥ ،ﺧﺼﻮﺻﺎً ﺗﺤﺖ ﺣﺎﻛﻤﻴﺖ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﺩﺳﺖﻧﺸﺎﻧﺪﺓ ﻭﺍﺷﻨﮕﺘﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﺎﺩﮔﻰ ﺍﺑﺘﺮ ﻛﻨﺪ؟ ﺳﺌﻮﺍﻝ ﻣﺸﻜﻠﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ! ﻭﻟﻰ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ» ،ﺗﻘﺼﻴﺮ« ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﻫﻤﻴﺸــﻪ ﺑﺮ ﮔﺮﺩﻥ ﺟﻨﺎﺡﻫﺎﺋﻰ ﻣﻰﺍﻓﺘﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺻﻮﻻً ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ. ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺒﻮﺩ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﻋﻠﻨﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎ ،ﭼﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻼﺕ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺖ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻰ ،ﻭ ﭼﻪ ﻧﺰﺩ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻨﺎﺡﻫﺎﻯ »ﻣﺨﺎﻟﻒﻧﻤﺎ« ،ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ »ﻛﻼﻫﻰ« ﺗﺎ ﺭﻳﺶﻭﭘﺸﻤﻰ ﻭ ﻋﻤﺎﻣﻪﺍﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻏﺮﺏ »ﺩﻛﺎﻥ« ﺍﺳﻼﻡﻓﺮﻭﺷﻰ ﻭ »ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏﭘﺮﺳﺘﻰ« ﺑﺎﺯ ﻛﺮﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ ،ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﺘﻮﻥ ﺗﻜﻴﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ »ﺗﻨﺪﺭﻭﻫﺎ« ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺳــﻨﮓﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ! ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﺫﻋﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﺗﻨﺪﺭﻭﻫﺎ« ﺑﺴــﻴﺎﺭ »ﻗﺪﺭﺗﻤﻨﺪﻧــﺪ« ،ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻢ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﻼﺕ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺑﺮﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﻳﺴﺘﺎﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ ،ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﻼﺕ ﺍﻛﺜﺮﻳﺖ ﺟﻨﺎﺡﻫﺎﻯ
ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺖ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻰ .ﻭﻟﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ »ﺗﻨﺪﺭﻭﻫﺎﺋﻰ« ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ؛ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﻚ »ﺟﻨﮓ ﺯﺭﮔﺮﻯ« ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﻳﺎﻻﺕ ﻣﺘﺤﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﭼﺎﺭﭼﻮﺏ ﻣﻨﺎﻓﻊ ﺍﺳﺘﺮﺍﺗﮋﻳﻚ ﻏﺮﺏ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻥ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺭﺍﻩ ﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻩ. ﭘﺎﻳﻪﺭﻳــﺰﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﺟﻨﮓﺯﺭﮔﺮﻯ« ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻮﺍﻣﻞ ﻣﺘﻌﺪﺩﻯ ﻧﺴــﺒﺖ ﺩﺍﺩ .ﻭﻟــﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻃــﻮﺭ ﻣﺜﺎﻝ ،ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ ﻣﻮﺍﺿﻌﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﻮﻳﺴــﻨﺪﺓ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺑــﻼگ ﺍﻫﻤﻴــﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ،ﻳﻌﻨــﻰ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ ﺑﻴــﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺣﻘﻮﻕﺑﺸــﺮ ،ﺣﻤﺎﻳﺖ ﻭﺍﺷــﻨﮕﺘﻦ ﺍﺯ »ﺗﻨﺪﺭﻭﻫــﺎ« ،ﻳﺎ ﺑﻬﺘﺮ ﺑﮕﻮﺋﻴﻢ ﺍﻟﻘﺎء ﺍﻳــﻦ ﺩﺭﻭﻍ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻨﻴــﻦ ﺟﻨﺎﺡ ﻗﺪﺭﻗﺪﺭﺗﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺖ ﺍﺳــﻼﻣﻰ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻰ ﺍﻫﺮﻡﻫﺎﻯ »ﻗــﺪﺭﺕ« ﺭﺍ ﻗﺒﻀﻪ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ،ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺷــﻨﮕﺘﻦ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻣــﻜﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﺔ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ »ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ« ﺍﺯ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺖ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺪﺓ ﺧﻮﺩ ،ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻠﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻗﺒﻴــﻞ ﻋﺪﻡ ﺭﻋﺎﻳﺖ »ﺣﻘﻮﻕ ﺑﺸــﺮ« ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻔﺎﻯ ﻧﻘﺶ »ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺴــﺌﻮﻝ« ﺍﺩﺍﻣــﻪ ﺩﻫﺪ .ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺳــﺎﺩﻩﺗﺮ ،ﺩﺭ ﺍﻓــﻜﺎﺭ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻰ، ﻭﺍﺷــﻨﮕﺘﻦ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭﻟﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺯﻣﻴﻨﺔ ﺭﻋﺎﻳﺖ ﺣﻘﻮﻕﺑﺸﺮ »ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭ ﻧﻬــﻰ« ﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑــﺎ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻨﮓ ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨــﺪ؟ ﺍﻳﻨﻬﻤﻪ ﺍﮔﺮ ﻧﺨﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﻣﻨﺎﻓﻊ ﻣﺎﻟﻰ ،ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻯ ،ﺗﺠﺎﺭﻯ ﻭ ﻏﻴﺮﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺵ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﺟﻨﮓﺯﺭﮔﺮﻯ« ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻳﻢ. ﻭﻟﻰ ﺍﻳﻔﺎﻯ ﻧﻘﺶ »ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺴــﺌﻮﻝ« ﺗﻮﺳــﻂ ﻏﺮﺏ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺤﻮﻻﺕ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﺩﻗﻴﻘﺎً ﺍﺯ ﻧﺨﺴــﺘﻴﻦ ﺩﻳﺪﺍﺭ »ﻋﻠﻨﻰ« ﻣﻘﺎﻣﺎﺕ »ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺖ ﺍﺳــﻼﻣﻰ« ﺑﺎ ﻃﺮﻑﻫﺎﻯ ﻏﺮﺑــﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻟﺠﺰﺍﻳــﺮ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﺷــﺪ؛ ﻃﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﺑــﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﻣﻮﻗﺖ »ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ« ،ﺑﻪ ﺭﻳﺎﺳﺖ ﺷﻴﺦ ﻣﻬﺪﻯ ﺑﺎﺯﺭﮔﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻑ ﻣﻘﺎﻣﺎﺕ ﻛﺎﺥ ﺳﻔﻴﺪ ﺩﺳﺘﻮﺭﺍﻟﻌﻤﻞ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﻭ ﻫﻤﺰﻣﺎﻥ ﺷﺒﻜﺔ ﻻﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﺎﻭﺍﻙ ﺗﺤﺖ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ »ﺩﺍﻧﺸﺠﻮﻳﺎﻥ ﭘﻴﺮﻭ ﺧﻂ ﺍﻣﺎﻡ« ،ﺑﺎ ﺗﺴﺨﻴﺮ »ﻻﻧﺔ ﺟﺎﺳﻮﺳﻰ« ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻴﺎﺳــﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺸﻮﺭ ﺍﺟﺮﺍﺋﻰ ﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ .ﺍﺯ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺭﻭﺯ ﻓﻀﺎﻯ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﺑﺎ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺓ ﻣﻮﻫﻮﻣﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺎﻡ »ﻧﺒﺮﺩ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎ« ﻣﺴﻤﻮﻡ ﺷﺪ ،ﻭ ﺷﺎﻫﺪﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺴــﻤﻮﻣﻴﺖ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﻠﺖ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﻛﺸﻨﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺩﺭﺩﻧﺎﻙ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﻇﺎﻫﺮﺍ ً ﻃﺮﻑﻫــﺎﻯ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎﺋﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺧﻴﻠﻰ ﺧﻮﺵ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ ،ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﺁﺏﻗﻨﺎﺕ« ﺩﺳﺖﺑﺮﺩﺍﺭ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ. ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ،ﺳﻴﺎﺳــﺖ ﻛﺸــﻮﺭ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺴــﻴﺮ ﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻩ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮ ﺍﺯ ﮔﺎﻩ، ﮔﺮﻭﻫــﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻟﺶﻭﻟﻮﺵﻫﺎﻯ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺖ ﺍﺳــﻼﻣﻰ ﺗﺤــﺖ ﻋﻨﺎﻭﻳﻦ ﻏﻠﻂﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺣﻤﺎﻳﺖ ﺍﺯ »ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻳﺨﻮﺍﻫﻰ«» ،ﺟﻤﻬﻮﺭ«» ،ﺁﺭﺍء ﻣﺮﺩﻡ« ﻭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ »ﺍﻟﻬﺎﻣﺎﺕ« ﻣﺮﺩﻣﻰ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﻨﺪ ،ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﻴﺎﻫﻮ ،ﺭﺳﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ ﻭ ﺩﺍﺧﻠﻰ ﻧﻴﺰ ﭘﻴﺮﺍﻣﻮﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﻌﺎﺭﻫﺎ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺗﻌﻬﺪ ﻭ ﺩﻟﺒﺴﺘﮕﻰ ﺍﺻﻮﻟﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺖ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ »ﺟﻨﺠﺎﻝ ﮔﺴــﺘﺮﺩﻩ« ﻭ ﺑﺴﺎﻁ ﻗﻬﺮﻣﺎﻥﺳــﺎﺯﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺭﺍﻩ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻧﺪ .ﻫﻤﺰﻣﺎﻥ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺟﻨﺎﺣﻰ »ﻧﺎﺷــﻨﺎﺱ« ﻭ
ﺑﺴــﻴﺎﺭ »ﻣﻘﺘﺪﺭ« ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺖ ﺩﺳﺖﻧﺸﺎﻧﺪﺓ ﻏﺮﺏ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﻳﺖﺍﺵ ﺭﺍ »ﻋﻠﻨﻰ« ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻢ ﺑﺎ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﻭ ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮕﻰ ﻭ ﻣﻄﺒﻮﻋﺎﺗﻰ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻠﻰ ﺑﺎ »ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ« ﻣﺨﺎﻟﻒ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎ! ﺑﻪ ﺻﺮﺍﺣﺖ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺩﻳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻠﻔﻴﻖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﺗﻴﻐﺔ »ﻣﺴــﻤﻮﻡ« ،ﻳﻌﻨــﻰ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻳﺨﻮﺍﻫﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎﺗﻰ ﻭ ﺍﻗﺘﺪﺍﺭﮔﺮﺍﺋﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﮕﻰ» ،ﻗﻴﭽﻰ« ﺑﺮﻧﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﺩﺭﺳﺖ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻥ ﻃﻰ ﺳــﻪ ﺩﻫﺔ ﮔﺬﺷــﺘﻪ ﮔﻮﺵ ﻣﻠﺖ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺮ ﻣﻴﻌﺎﺩ »ﺑﺮﻳﺪﻩ!« ﺩﺭ ﻇﺎﻫﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻧﻤﻰﺁﻳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺳﻴﺎﺳــﺖ ﻏﺮﺏ ﭘﻴﺮﺍﻣﻮﻥ ﻣﺴــﺎﺋﻞ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﺗﺤﻮﻝ ﭼﺸﻢﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ .ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺳﺎﺩﻩﺗﺮ ﺳﻴﺎﺳــﺖ »ﻗﻴﭽﻰ ﻣﺴﻤﻮﻡ« ﻫﻨﻮﺯ ﻫﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺟﺎﻧﺐ ﺍﻳﺎﻻﺕ ﻣﺘﺤﺪ ﮔﺎﻡ ﺑﻪ ﮔﺎﻡ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ ﻣﻰﺷــﻮﺩ .ﻭﻟﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻻﺋﻠﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩﺷــﺎﻥ ﻣﻄﻠﺐ ﺍﻣﺮﻭﺯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﻣﻄﻮﻝ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﻛﺮﺩ ،ﺗﻴﻐﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺮﻧــﺪﺓ ﺍﻳــﻦ ﻗﻴﭽﻰ ﺿﺪﺑﺸــﺮﻯ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻡ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻛﻨﺪﺗﺮ ﺷــﺪﻩ .ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﺳــﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺷــﺎﻫﺪ ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﻓﺮﺍﮔﻴﺮﺗﺮ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﺔ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﺻﺤﻨﻪﺳﺎﺯﻯ« ﻣﺴﺨﺮﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻳﻢ. ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻄﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻻﺗﺮ ﺍﺷــﺎﺭﻩ ﻛﺮﺩﻳﻢ ،ﺩﺭ ﻇﺎﻫﺮ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﻋﻜﺲ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺖ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻰ ﻣﺘﺤﻮﻝ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ! ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ،ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺸــﻮﺭ ﺍﺯ »ﺳﻜﻮﻻﺭﻳﺴﻢ« ﻛﻤﺎﻟﻴﺴــﺖﻫﺎ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻙ...ﻥ ﺧﻴــﺰﻙ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺖ »ﺍﺳــﻼﻣﻰ« ﻓﻜﻞﻛﺮﺍﻭﺍﺗﻰﻫﺎ ﺭﺳــﺎﻧﺪﻩ! ﻓﺮﺍﻣﻮﺵ ﻧﻜﻨﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻨﺪﻭ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺖ ﻫﻨﻮﺯ ﻫﻢ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﭘﻴﻤﺎﻥ »ﺳﻨﺘﻮ« ﻧﺎﻧﺨﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎ ﻭ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﺴﺘﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻪ ﻫﺴــﺘﻨﺪ .ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺷﺎﻫﺪﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﻃﻰ ﭼﻨﺪ ﻣﺎﻩ ﺍﺧﻴﺮ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻚ »ﺩﻣﻜﺮﺍﺕﭘــﺮﻭﺭ« ﺁﻧــﻜﺎﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺳــﺮﻋﺖ ﺍﺯ ﭼﻬﺮﺓ ﺩﺳﺖﻧﺸــﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﻴــﺲ ﻭ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﻪ ﻓﺮﻭ ﻣﻰﺍﻓﺘــﺪ .ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﺍﺭﺩﻭﻏﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﺍﺳــﺮﺍﺋﻴﻞ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻮﺿﻊﮔﻴﺮﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﺷﺪﺍﺩ ﻭ ﻏﻼﻅ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ؛ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺤــﻮﻻﺕ ﻭﺳــﻴﻊ »ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻳﺨﻮﺍﻫﺎﻧﻪ« ﺩﺭ ﺟﻬــﺎﻥ ﻋﺮﺏ ،ﻳﺎ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ »ﺑﻬﺎﺭ ﻋﺮﺏ« ﺣﻤﺎﻳﺖ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ؛ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺎﻣﺎﺕ ﺁﻧﻜﺎﺭﺍ ﺳــﻔﺮﻫﺎﻯ »ﻧﮕﺮﺍﻥ ﻛﻨﻨﺪﻩﺍﻯ« ﺑﻪ ﻣﺴــﺘﻌﻤﺮﺍﺕ ﻗﺪﻳﻢ ﺍﻣﭙﺮﺍﺗﻮﺭﻯ ﻋﺜﻤﺎﻧــﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﻧﺎﻣﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﮔﻨﺠﺎﻧﻨﺪ .ﺳــﻔﺮﻫﺎﺋﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻦ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﭽﺔ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻓﻰﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﺑﺤﺮﺍﻥﺁﻓﺮﻳﻦ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺗﻠﻘﻰ ﺷــﻮﺩ .ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﭘﺮﺳــﻴﺪ ،ﭼﻪ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻣﺮﻭﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺭﺩﺍﻯ »ﺧﻴﺮﺧﻮﺍﻫﻰ« ﻭ »ﻣﺮﺩﻡﺩﻭﺳــﺘﻰ« ﺁﻧﻜﺎﺭﺍ ﻋﻤ ً ﻼ ﺩﺳــﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﺁﺷﻮﺏ ﻭ ﻫﻴﺠﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﻛﺎﺫﺏ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻪ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ؟
ﺑﻦﺑﺴﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻓﺮﻭﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻩ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﻭﺳﻴﻊ ﻭ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ .ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺳــﻌﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ ﻫﻤﺰﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﺎ ﭘﺮﻫﻴﺰ ﺍﺯ »ﺳﺎﺩﻩﺍﻧﮕﺎﺭﻯ« ﺗﺎ ﺣﺪ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻦﺑﺴﺖ ﺭﺍ »ﺳﺎﺩﻩ« ﻛﻨﻴﻢ .ﺷﺎﻫﺪﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺪﺗﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻣﻌﻀﻠﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺎﻡ »ﺑﺪﻫﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﻳﻮﻧﺎﻥ« ﺑﺮ ﺳﺮ ﺯﺑﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻩ .ﻫﻢ ﺍﻣﺮﻭﺯ ،ﮔﻮﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻟﻴــﻞ ﻧﺒﻮﺩ »ﺗﻮﺍﻓﻖ« ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻃﺮﻓﻴﻦ ﺍﺭﻭﭘﺎﺋﻰ ﭘﻴﺮﺍﻣﻮﻥ ﺷــﻴﻮﺓ ﺣﻞ ﺑﺤﺮﺍﻥ »ﺑﺪﻫﻰﻫﺎ« ،ﺑﻮﺭﺱﻫﺎﻯ ﻏﺮﺏ ﺑﻪ ﺷــﺪﺕ ﺳﻘﻮﻁ ﻛﺮﺩ! ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻄﻠﺐ ﭘﻴﺸــﻴﻦ ﺑﻪ ﺻﺮﺍﺣــﺖ ﮔﻔﺘﻢ ﻛﻪ »ﺑﺪﻫﻰﻫﺎﻯ« ﻳﻮﻧــﺎﻥ ،ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺑﺪﻫﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺩﻭﻟﺖﻫﺎ ﺑﻴﺸــﺘﺮ ﺭﺳــﺎﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺳــﺖ ﺗﺎ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ .ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﺮﺑﺎﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺳــﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ،ﺩﻭﻟﺖﻫﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ »ﻛﺴــﺐ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ« ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺘﮕﺰﺍﺭﻯ ﻛﺮﺩﻩﺍﻧــﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻳــﻦ ﺑﺪﻫﻰﻫﺎ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻗﺴــﻤﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﻳﺖ ﺳﻴﺎﺳــﻰ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻤﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ .ﻭﻟﻰ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺗﺤﺖ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ ﻣﺴﻜﻮ ﺧﺮﻭﺝ ﻳﻮﻧﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﭘﻮﻟﻰ ﻳﻮﺭﻭ ﺗﺤﻘﻖ ﻳﺎﺑﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺸﻮﺭ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺗﺠﺎﻧﺲﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺬﻫﺒﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﺳــﻴﻪ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﺷــﻮﺩ ،ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ »ﺗﺨﺎﻟﻒﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ« ﺩﺭ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻣﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﻪ ﻓﺎﺻﻠﻪ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﺩ ،ﻓﺎﺟﻌﻪﺍﻯ ﺑﺴــﻴﺎﺭ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺁﻧﻜﺎﺭﺍ ﻭ ﻫﻢﭘﻴﻤﺎﻧﺎﻥﺍﺵ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺁﻭﺭﺩ. ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﺭﻭﺑﻞ ﺭﻭﺳﻴﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﻛﻠﻴﺴﺎﻯ ﺍﺭﺗﺪﻭﻛﺲ ﻳﻮﻧﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺴﻜﻮ ﻣﺮﻛﺰﻳﺘــﻰ ﺍﻋﻄﺎ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻤﻞ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨــﺎﻯ ﻓﺘﺢ ﻣﺎﻟﻰ ﻭ ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻯ ﻣﺠﻤﻊﺍﻟﺠﺰﺍﻳﺮ ﻳﻮﻧﺎﻥ ﺗﻮﺳــﻂ ﺭﻭﺳــﻴﻪ ﻣﻰﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺗﻠﻘﻰ ﺷﻮﺩ .ﻓﺘﺢﺍﻟﻔﺘﻮﺣﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺷــﺒﻜﺔ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﻧﻮﻳﻦ ﺭﻭﺳــﻴﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﺑﻼﻭﺍﺳﻄﻪ ﻭ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺗﻜﻴﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺩﻻﺭ ﻭ ﻳﻮﺭﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻯ ﺳــﻴﺎﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺪﻳﺘﺮﺍﻧﻪ ﻭ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺁﺏﻫﺎﻯ ﮔﺮﻡ ﺭﻫﻨﻤﻮﻥ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺷــﺪ .ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﻪ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺎ ﺣﻤﺎﻳﺖ ﺍﺭﺗﺶ ﺗﻀﻌﻴﻒﺷــﺪﺓ ﻧﺎﺗــﻮ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻨﮕﺔ »ﺩﺍﺭﺩﺍﻧﻞ« ﺑﺮ ﺳﺮ ﺭﺍﻩ ﮔﺴــﺘﺮﺵ ﻣﺮﺯﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﺭﻭﺱ ﺳﻨﮓﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻯ ﻛﻨﺪ .ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻭﺣﺸﺖ ﺣﺰﺏ ﺍﺳﻼﻡﮔﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﻪ ﻭ ﺟﻔﺘﻚﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺧﻴﺮ ﺍﺭﺩﻭﻏــﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ ﺣﻤﺎﻳﺖ ﺍﺯ »ﺩﻣﻜﺮﺍﺳــﻰ« ﻭ ﺍﺳــﻼﻡ ﻭ ﺧﺼﻮﺻﺎً ﻣﺒﺎﺭﺯﺓ ﺍﻳﺸﺎﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺮﺍﺋﻴﻞ! ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺳــﺎﺩﻩﺗﺮ ،ﺍﮔﺮ ﺭﻭﺳــﻴﻪ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻤﻞ ﺷــﻜﺎﻑ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺗﺤﺎﺩﻳــﺔ ﺍﺭﻭﭘﺎ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ،ﻳﻮﻧﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﺑﻞ ﻭﺍﺑﺴــﺘﻪ ﻛﻨﺪ ،ﺍﺩﺍﻣﺔ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ ﻛﻤﺎﻟﻴﺴــﺖﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﻪ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺷﺪ .ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻄﻮﻁ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻃﺎﺕ ﺣﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻏﺮﺏ ﺗﺤﺖ ﻧﻈﺎﺭﺕ ﺭﻭﺳﻴﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ. ﻭ ﭘﻴﺸــﺘﺮ ﺩﻳﺪﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﭽﺔ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻪ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻛﻤﺎﻟﻴﺴــﺖﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ »ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻟﻴﭽﺔ« ﺳﻴﺎﺳــﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻟﻨﺪﻥ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨــﺪ .ﺩﻟﻴﻠﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺭﻭﺳﻴﻪ ،ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺮﻭﺯﻯ ﺑﺮ ﺭﻗﺒﺎﻯ ﺗﺠﺎﺭﻯ ﻭ ﻣﺎﻟﻰ ﺧﻮﺩ ،ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮﻛﺮﺍﻥ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﺓ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﺴﺘﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻧﻜﺎﺭﺍ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺣﻤﺎﻳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻤﻞ ﺁﻭﺭﺩ؛ ﺑﻪ ﺻﺮﺍﺣﺖ ﺑﮕﻮﺋﻴﻢ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻧﺨﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ.
ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺭﺳﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻏﺮﺏ ﺑﻪ ﻋﺎﺩﺕ ﻣﻌﻤﻮﻝ ،ﻓﺮﻳﺎﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺭﺩﻭﻏﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﭘﻴﺮﻭﺯﻯ »ﺍﺳــﻼﻣﮕﺮﺍﻳﺎﻥ« ﺗﺮﻛﻴﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻫﻤﺮﺍﻫﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺤﻮﻻﺕ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻪ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨــﺪ ،ﻭ ﺭﻭﺯﻧﺎﻣﺔ ﺁﻟﻤﺎﻧﻰ »ﻳﻮﻧﮕﻪﻭﻟﺖ« ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺳﻔﺮﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﺎﺑﻬﻨﮕﺎﻡ ﺍﺭﺩﻭﻏﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻧﻮﻳﺴﺪ: »ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﻰ ﺭﺳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺭﺟﺐ ﺍﺭﺩﻭﻏﺎﻥ ،ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﻭﺯﻳﺮ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﻪ ،ﺩﺭ ﺳــﻔﺮ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻬﺎﺭ ﻋﺮﺏ ﺳﺨﻨﺎﻥ ﻣﻨﺎﺳــﺒﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺭﺍﻧﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. ﺍﮔــﺮ ﺍﻇﻬــﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻤﻊ ﻭﺯﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻪ ﻛﺸــﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﻋﻀﻮ ﺍﺗﺤﺎﺩﻳــﻪ ﻋﺮﺏ ،ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻫﺮﻩ ،ﺍﺯ ﻣﻼﺣﻈــﺎﺕ ﺩﻳﭙﻠﻤﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭﺭ ﺑﻮﺩ ،ﺩﺭ ﻋﻮﺽ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﭘﺴﻨﺪ ﻣﺮﺩﻡ ﻛﻮﭼﻪ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﺍﺭ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ«. ﺑﺎﻳــﺪ ﭘﺮﺳــﻴﺪ »ﻳﻮﻧﮕﻪﻭﻟــﺖ« ﺍﺯ ﻛﺠﺎ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳــﺨﻨﺎﻥ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﭘﺴــﻨﺪ »ﻣــﺮﺩﻡ ﻛﻮﭼﻪ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﺍﺭ« ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺘــﻪ؟ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ »ﻣﺮﺩﻡﺩﻭﺳــﺘﻰﺍﻯ« ﻧﻴﺴــﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻏﺮﺑﻰﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺒﻠﻴﻐﺎﺕﺷــﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻤﻴﻨــﻰ ﻭ ﺧﺎﻣﻨﻪﺍﻯ ﻭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻻﺕﻭﻟﻮﺕﻫﺎﻯ »ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ« ﻧﺴــﺒﺖ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﺩﻧﺪ؟ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﻣﺮﺩﻡ ﻛﻮﭼﻪ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﺍﺭ« ﻫﻤﺎﻥ »ﻣﺮﺩﻡ ﻫﻤﻴﺸــﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺻﺤﻨﺔ« ﺍﻣﺜﺎﻝ ﺑﻨﻰﺻﺪﺭ ﻭ ﺧﺎﻣﻨﻪﺍﻯ ﻧﻴﺴــﺘﻨﺪ؟ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻤﻞ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺭﺩﻭﻏﺎﻥ ﺟﻔﻨﮕﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪ ﻋﻤﻠﺔ ﻓﺎﺷﻴﺴﻢ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ »ﻏﺮﻏﺮﻩ« ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ،ﺗﺮﻫﺎﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﻣﻼﻣﻤﺪ ﺧﺎﺗﻤﻰ، ﺍﺻﻼﺡﻃﻠﺒﺎﻥ ﻭ »ﺳﺒﺰﻫﺎ« ﻋﻠﻢ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ .ﺍﻳﻨﺎﻥ ﻫﻢ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺮﺍﺋﻴﻞ ﺳــﺮ ﺟﻨﮓ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻤﻠﻪ ﻃﺮﻓﺪﺍﺭﺍﻥ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ »ﺭﺍﺳﺘﻴﻦ« ﻭ ﺗﻠﻔﻴﻖ ﺩﻣﻜﺮﺍﺳﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻳﻦﺍﻧﺪ! ﻭﻟﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺁﻧﻜﺎﺭﺍ ﺩﺍﺩﻭﻓﺮﻳﺎﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺧﻴﺮ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻘﺎﺿﺎﻯ ﻛﻤﻚ ﻳﻚ ﻏﺮﻳﻖ ﺗﺸﺒﻴﻪ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺮ ﺗﺨﺘﻪﭘﺎﺭﻩﺍﻯ ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ .ﺍﺭﺩﻭﻏﺎﻥ ﺟﻬﺖ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ »ﻛﻤﺎﻟﻴﺴــﻢ« ﺩﺳﺖﻧﺸﺎﻧﺪﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻦﺑﺴــﺖ ﺍﺳﺘﺮﺍﺗﮋﻳﻜﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺤﻤﻞ ﺁﻥ ﻫﺮ ﺭﻭﺯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺁﻧﻜﺎﺭﺍ ﺳــﺨﺖ ﻭ ﺳــﺨﺖﺗﺮ ﻣﻰﺷــﻮﺩ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﺎﺱ ﺑﺮﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ. ﻛﻤﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﻴﺴﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﻪ ،ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﻓﺎﺷﻴﺴﻢ »ﺁﺧﻮﻧﺪﻯ« ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﮔﺎﻡ ﺑﻪ ﮔﺎﻡ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻦﺑﺴــﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺳﺘﺮﺍﺗﮋﻳﻚ »ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ« ﺧﻮﺩ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﻣﻰﺷــﻮﺩ ،ﻭ ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻄﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﻓﺮﻭﭘﺎﺷﻰ »ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺘﻰ« ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺳــﻜﻮﺕ ﻛﺎﻣﻞ ﺩﺭ ﻗﻠﺐ ﺩﺳﺘﮕﺎﻩ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺖ ﭘﺎﻛﺴﺘﺎﻥ ﺷﺎﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩﻳــﻢ ،ﺩﻳــﺮﻯ ﻧﺨﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﮔﺬﺷــﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﮔﺮﺩﻳﺴــﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ ﺳﻴﺎﺳــﻰ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﻭ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﻪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻋﻠﻨﻰ ﺷﻮﺩ .ﺟﻬﺖ ﭘﺮﻫﻴﺰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻃﺎﻟﺔ ﻛﻼﻡ ،ﻣﻮﺍﺿﻊ ﻣﺴﻜﻮ ﭘﻴﺮﺍﻣﻮﻥ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﻭ ﺍﺻﻮﻻً ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﻨﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺮﺻﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻌﺪﻯ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﻛﺮﺩ.