Iran and Argentina’s Foreign Ministers sign memorandum in Ethiopia (photo courtesy of Casa Rosada)

The MoU, a bilateral agreement, was created between the two countries in January this year and represents a commitment on the part of both nations to investigate the circumstances surrounding the AMIA attack of 1994. The attack, which left 85 people dead, has yet to see the perpetrators identified or brought to justice.

The Iranian president, Mahmud Ahmadinejad, has officially approved the memorandum without having to put it to parliament. This was made possible by the careful wording of point number six of the agreement, which states that “the agreement will be sent to relevant organisations of each country, including the Congress, Parliament, and other bodies, for ratification into law”. “For Iran, the memorandum is valid since yesterday, because point six mentions other bodies. And among those other bodies is the government,” said Pakdaman. Argentina, in contrast, had it ratified by congress.

In accordance with point number five of the agreement, judicial authorities from Argentina will be able to question Iranian suspects in Tehran who are thought to be involved in the attack and for whom Interpol has issues a ‘Red Notice’. Also, a Truth Commission comprised of five international jurists will be set up and, after analysing all documentation presented by the judicial authorities of Argentina and Iran, will issue a report with recommendations on how to proceed with the case.

In spite of the above, however, Iran continues to assert that none of its citizens are implicated in the AMIA attack. In fact, at present four of the Iranian suspects are potential presidential candidates for this year’s election.

AMIA Monument in Buenos Aires (Photo:Thialfi )

Today, Interpol confirmed five arrest warrants in the case of the AMIA bombing in Buenos Aires and endorsed the recent joint investigation agreement between Iran and Argentina.

It said in a letter sent to the Argentine government today that it considers the agreement a “positive development” in the search for justice for the 1994 attack on the Jewish centre, which killed 84 people.

Argentine Foreign Affairs Minister Héctor Timerman pointed to this development and said the opposition must now “stop using AMIA to attack the government, because in reality they are only attacking the victims of the tragedy.”

President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner took to Twitter to praise Interpol’s announcement.

“Interpol considers this a positive development in the clarification of this case. That does not surprise me,” she said.

She added that the relatives of the victims trusted the government’s handling of the case and said she would like all Argentines to take this as a “sign of genuine respect and concern for victims to do the same.”

On 27th January the Argentine national government announced that it had signed an agreement with Iran to move forward with the investigation of the AMIA case, the 1994 bombing of the Jewish Community Centre, in conjunction with Tehran. Congress voted the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) into law on 28th February, with 131-113 votes of approval in the Chamber of Deputies and 39-31 in the Senate.

Touted by the government as the only way forward in the current stalemate that the case is in, the MoU has sparked great controversy among politicians and within the Jewish community. Will an agreement with Tehran be a step in the right direction, or should any negotiation with the middle eastern country be out of the question?

Background

The aftermath of the terrorist attack (courtesy of Wikipedia)

On 18th July 1994, a van packed with 275kg of explosives blew up about five metres in front of the Argentina Israelite Mutual Association (AMIA) centre, causing the building to collapse. The blast killed 85 people and injured some 300 others.

The attack has been informally linked to several other bombings. The first happened at the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires in 1992, and was the deadliest terrorist attack in the country until the AMIA case. The Islamic Jihad Organisation, which has links to Hezbollah, has claimed responsibility for the 1992 episode. Two other bombings potentially related to the AMIA attack occurred in London shortly after the 1994 episode, one outside the Israeli Embassy and another outside a Jewish cultural centre. Palestinian suspects were arrested for the London attacks.

Investigations into the AMIA bombing have been unsuccessful, to say the least. Although many suspects have been blamed for the attack -including the Iranian government, none have been convicted.

With respect to the series of fumbled investigations following the bombing, Carlos Menem, president from 1989-1999, has been accused of accepting US$10m from Iran to hinder investigations. The allegation was made by a former Iranian spy and triggered a 2002 investigation of Menem’s secret bank accounts in Switzerland that were also scrutinised for arms smuggling links.

Immediately following the 1994 attack, Argentina tried to identify a ‘local connection,’ who conspired with assumedly foreign terrorists. Officers from the Buenos Aires police department were initially arrested for this charge, although all were acquitted in 2004.

According to a 2003 report by the Argentine Intelligence Secretary (SIDE) on an investigation aided by the FBI, the attack was most likely a suicide bombing by Hezbollah member Ibrahim Hussein Berro, although no forensic evidence was supplied to back this claim.

Judge Juan José Galeano, initially in charge of the investigations, was removed from the case in 2003 and impeached two years later after being accused of mishandling proceedings and a video that aired on public TV showed him bribing suspects for information.

In 2005 President Néstor Kirchner called the investigations a “national disgrace” and issued a decree establishing a system for compensation to the victims. One year later an Appeals Court announced that previous rulings on the case had been untruthful and had only served to cover up mistakes of government officials in the aftermath of the attack.

The Argentine government officially accused Iran of backing the attack and Hezbollah of carrying it out in 2006, influenced by US information obtained through Wikileaks and with Israeli approval. It called for the extradition of six Iranian citizens, many of whom are high-ranking governmental officials. The accused immediately rejected the allegations, and Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Ali Hosseini responded that the claims were a “Zionist-American conspiracy.”

Iran has never admitted responsibility for the AMIA attack and has emphasised the need for those culpable to be punished; however, it never extradited the requested nationals for questioning

President Fernández meeting with the victims (courtesy of Casa Rosada)

In 2010 and 2011 President Fernández repeatedly urged Iran to cooperate with Argentine justice. She proposed an investigatory procedure that would have allowed for a third country to mediate the proceedings. Iran rejected this suggestion but agreed to an agreement on bilateral terms, which the MoU eventually brought to fruition.

No more real developments were made until last year when President Fernández announced that her government and that of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would meet to discuss the case.

Then came the announcement of the MoU with Iran and its passage into law last month.

The Law 

The MoU was signed on 27th January in Adis Abeba, Ethiopia by foreign affairs ministers Ali Akbar Salehi of Iran and Héctor Timerman of Argentina and made public that day. The document was printed in Farsi, Spanish, and English, with the English version to serve as the default document in case of interpretative conflicts.

The MoU has nine main points (see below), with three of most concern: the establishment of a Truth Commission, to be comprised of five members– two chosen by each country and one mutually decided; the arrangement for questioning to be held in Tehran, where Argentine officials will be able to interrogate Iranian suspects; and the call for a free exchange of evidence between Iran and Argentina and with the Commission.

After the agreement was signed, Timerman passed it to the Argentine Congress, which met to deliberate the legislation and approved it in an off-term meeting before its regular sessions began.

Timerman asserted that for the first time federal Judge Rodolfo Canicoba Corral and Prosecutor Alberto Nisman will have the opportunity to interrogate the Iranians accused of the attack and that the agreement will advance the case that is currently “paralysed”. He added that without this step, it would be impossible to move forward with gathering testimonies and issuing convictions.

Though apparently still on board with the MoU, which was sent to the Iranian parliament for approval two weeks ago, on 12th February the Iranian government announced that Defence Minister Ahmad Vahidi, who is suspected of involvement in the case, would not be subject to interrogation in the coming proceedings, a new indication of non-cooperation.

The Controversy 

Upon the announcement of Timerman’s signature of the MoU with Tehran, fervent outcry erupted from representatives of the Jewish community in Argentina, which is the largest in Latin America.

In general, those who reject the memorandum claim that involving the Iranian government, which itself has been accused of instigating the attack, is unjust and unproductive. They also think that involving a Truth Commission to evaluate the evidence that Argentina has already confirmed compromises its sovereignty, although the Commission’s suggestions to Argentina about the case will be non-binding.

Leaders of the Delegation of Israelite Associations (DAIA) and the AMIA immediately rejected the agreement and claimed that it even “paved the way for a third attack” on Argentina because the country had subjected itself to foreign, and specifically Iranian, input.

DAIA head Julio Schlosser explained that Iran should not be trusted for negotiations, as it denies the Holocaust, is condemned (especially by the US and Israel) for its apparent nuclear arms development programme, and primarily, as the accused are Iranian nationals.

Tribute to the victims of the AMIA (courtesy of Casa Rosada)

Before Congress ratified the MoU, AMIA President Guillermo Borger publicly warned that moving forward with the agreement “is to associate ourselves with the Iranian theocracy, subjugate our judicial system, and to forget the 85 deaths.” He declared that the law would be a step forward, “but a step toward a precipice.”

In response to the sovereignty questions, President Fernandez explained, “Argentine justice will not be obstructed and much less will (the MoU) reduce our sovereignty,” and that Argentine justice officials will carry out the investigations in Tehran under international observation and representatives, “whose objective is to ensure the due legal process” is fulfilled. She furthered, “there is no renunciation of sovereignty when a judge is transferred to another territory.” The president later defended Iran’s involvement, saying, “What will we say then, as Argentines, ‘No, we won’t have a dialogue (with Iran) by principle’? It seems to me that dialogue is a fundamental principle for Argentina, in matters of international politics and those of great conviction.”

Israel has also pointedly rejected the MoU, and its foreign affairs ministry publicly stated that it does not understand what the agreement could bring about for Argentine justice.

According to Buenos Aires sociologist Marcelo Ayos, the agreement with Iran was not only irresponsible, but should not be trusted to resolve the case. He explained that, “the (Argentine) government has not differentiated between political decisions and the search for the truth in the past,” and that the MoU could represent a similar move. To him, the poorly planned accord with Iran, “is a new attack against Argentine society,” in itself.

On the other hand, supporters of the MoU believe that cooperation with Tehran is the only logical move forward for the AMIA case. Many of these supporters are families of the bombing victims. Victims’ families and friends in organisations 18-J and Memoria Activa generally accept the MoU and are optimistic about its potential.

Several victims’ family members shared their opinions with newspaper La Nación. 18-J representative Gerardo Beer commented that the MoU represents a “little light at the end of the tunnel for the case,” and explained, “For us, those that have family lost in that terrible attack, the governments of Néstor Kirchner and Cristina (Fernández de) Kirchner were those that did the most for the case that has any relevance. We have to give them a vote of confidence…”

Adriana Reisfeld, President of Memoria Activa, said she supported the MoU although she does not “have confidence in anything after 19 years” without finding those culpable of the attack. She added, “What is important is that we don’t wait 200 years for Iran to finally sit down (to proceed with the MoU requirements).”

Repercussions

President Fernández said in respect to the MoU that Argentina “would never let the tragedy (the AMIA attack) become a chess piece in the game of wider geopolitical interests.” However, despite the federal government’s assertion that the MoU’s sole purpose is to further the investigative processes into the AMIA case, the Iran-Argentina pact could have international ramifications visible if, in nothing else, Argentina’s foreign policy.

President Fernández pays tribute to the AMIA victims (courtesy of Casa Rosada)

Contextualised within a political climate in which countries like the US and Israel have frozen relations with Iran and are pressuring it to stop its nuclear arms programme, according to some analysts, Argentina’s MoU with Iran represents a shift in foreign policy. For these critics, Argentina is drifting away from Western-leaning tendencies to informal alignment not only with Iran, but also with sympathisers like Venezuela, Brazil, and Ecuador.

Andrés Malamud, researcher at the Institute of Social Sciences at the University of Lisbon, asserted to the Institute of Social Welfare (IPS) that the MoU move was not neutral. “On the contrary, in the eyes of the West, the memorandum constitutes an implicit alliance with Iran.” He explained that the foreign policy of the current Argentine president and her predecessor were essentially on par with that of the US, but now Argentine international relations would be considered non-Western.

However, Argentine legislators like Senator Daniel Filmus insist that the MoU does not, in fact, represent a dramatic policy shift, nor any sort of greater alliance with the country that “negates the Holocaust, fails to recognise Israel’s right to exist, and that persecutes minorities,” but it will simply catalyse the AMIA case investigations.

According to Ayos, in terms of international consequences, although the issue may not represent a direct policy shift, “(The Argentine government) is passing through one of the most vulnerable chapters of recent times,” and runs high risks in negotiating bilaterally with Iran.

President Fernández also explained in her speech concerning the MoU that Argentina is not the only country currently engaging with Iran. She pointed out that earlier this year the US vice-president announced to the UN Security Council that the country was itself preparing for a bilateral meeting with Iran concerning other issues.

Depending on how the Argentina-Iran MoU is handled, its main clauses could be referenced in future cases of international terrorist attacks. If the establishment of a Truth Commission, the free-flow of information between the countries, and the interrogations prove successful, and assuming that the resulting recommendations are adopted, the precedent could become a benchmark for similar issues. However, keeping in mind almost two decades of general case mishandlings, and that Iran continues to deny all connections to the AMIA attacks and has failed to cooperate with Argentine justice in the past, only time will tell.

Click here to find out what Argentines think about the agreement.

The bombing of AMIA, Buenos Aires’ Jewish Community Centre on 18th July 1994 shook the city to its core, killing 85 people and injuring hundreds. The events that occurred that day resonate still throughout the city, with no perpetrator ever convicted.

The investigation into the bombing has continually been marred by accusations of cover-ups and corruption, but the recently passed bill has given some members of the public a renewed sense of hope for justice. The memorandum will see Argentina participate in bi-lateral discussions with Iran through the creation of a ‘Truth Commission’, where members will review and analyse case information and issue recommendations to the state.

The agreement between the two countries has not come without controversy however, and has been sharply criticised by the Israeli government, Argentina’s Jewish community, and opposition politicians.

The Argentina Independent took to the streets and asked locals their opinion on the approval of the memorandum.  Photos by Jerry Nelson.

Alberto, 64, Pensioner, Claypole.

In part it’s good, but in part it’s not. In part I don’t agree with the memorandum reform because in reality I think Argentina’s method of investigation will change in order to fit more with the investigation methods of Iran. But here, we are guilty also, and there are many guilty people out there who remain free. Before, with previous investigations, investigations without Iran, perhaps we almost had reached the truth, but unfortunately the issue is complicated. Very complicated. I think achieving justice for the bombing is what is most fundamental.

Luigi, 50, Sales Assistant, Lanús.

I believe that if the cause of a case as serious as this is being investigated, a case that has gone without punishment and consequences, then it should be investigated without relation or being adapted to fit another country. However, if a country has witnesses or information that would enable the case to be solved, then they have a responsibility to participate in the investigation. The AMIA case has gone unpunished and unresolved for so long, and if it takes another government to intervene and find some truth then that is what should happen.

Cecilia, 41, Journalist, San Telmo.

To me, it seems that the law reform is the main effort by the Argentine government to try and unlock the cause of the bombing. But in truth I think that the new memorandum will also make it difficult to generate an effective cooperation by Iran; the relationship and cooperation between Argentina and Iran may become complicated and hinder the investigation. But this is a case that finally must come to an end and be solved. However, the one thing that seemed strange to me is the hurry that the government seemed to be in when passing the law.

Juan Pablo, 32, Lawyer, Palermo.

I think that the memorandum between Argentina and Iran signifies an agreement between the two countries to try and unlock the cause of the attack and find justice for an attack that occurred, what 19 years ago? I believe that every Argentine wants to know the truth about what happened that day. One of the main suspicions of course, and one that I am in agreement with, is of the participation of another country in the attack – and hopefully with this reform, the government will be able to examine new lines of investigation.

Mariana, 42, La Plata.

I don’t think the case will be resolved; it seems too easy to think that the referendum will clarify all that has happened. And I don’t believe we can trust Iran at all.

I think the two countries, and the citizens of each, will retain the conflict. I’m not sure there are signs that point towards a resolve in such a historical conflict. The intention of the memorandum that both countries agree on is peace and justice, but what seems strange and what raises questions, is that both countries are revisiting a case so voluntarily after such a long period of time. I’m not sure if the memorandum will lead to a clear solution of the case.

Repeat with me for the last time: It’s Friday again!

That’s right, people. After several years, many months, many columns and a shitload of bullet points, the Weekly News Roundup has come to an end.

I’m gonna give you a few seconds for that to sink in.
.
.
.
.
.
Really? I thought you’d be more distraught. Anyway, this is it.

And no, I haven’t been threatened with deportation by the Government. No, I haven’t been fired from the Independent. Sometimes, however, you just feel that it’s time to move on to other things and I must admit that for me the time has come.

Now, I don’t want you to think I’m going away. Because I’m not. So to all the haters out there heaving a sigh of relief, thanking the Argentine gods that I wasn’t going to be around anymore to challenge their ill-acquired truths safely stored inside an impermeable bubble, I’m sorry to say that you’re not getting rid of me. On the contrary, my next task is to directly attack that bubble. But that’s another story and you will soon understand what I mean.

Back in 2010 I began writing this column after some guy I met in a bar told me he had been living in Argentina for two years and “he didn’t know or care to know who the president was”. Things got even worse when I mentioned Cristina and he replied: “Dude! The president has a girl’s name?!”

OK, so he wasn’t the sharpest knife in the drawer. But he still got me to think that many expats living in this country (not all of them, obviously), be it due to the language barrier or just the fact that they didn’t give a shit, were experiencing Argentine reality from behind a Plexiglass. They could see everything that was happening around them, but they were not able to join it.

So on a rainy Friday, more specifically on August 20th, 2010, I wrote this piece of crap.

Thirty months later, this column has become a primordial aspect of my life. It has become my signature, my voice, my shrink. But above all, it has allowed me to connect with all of you who looked for a place to engage in collective catharsis and blow off some steam. And I’m immensely thankful for your buena onda.

Yes, even you haters. Your regular hate mail has managed to make my days brighter many times, so come here you rascals and give me a hug.

And like I said before, this isn’t goodbye. This is just an “I’ll be back in a few weeks in a different way“. Until then, you’re on your own.

Scary, isn’t it?

This is what you need to know:

• That thing with Iran keeps dominating the news this week (and by “thing with Iran” I mean the signing of a bilateral accord between Argentina and Iran that would create a Truth Commission in order to investigate the 1994 AMIA bombing) and people aren’t happy. Specially because the Kirchnerite party, with a majority in both houses of Congress has decided to pass a bill authorizing it despite the fact that the entire Jewish community in the country is against it. The Senate passed the bill yesterday and sent it to the Lower House, where they expect it will be debated as soon as next week.

• But since we know that what we really crave as human beings are anecdotal politics, here is Kirchnerite Senate majority leader Miguel Angel Pichetto, who in the heat of the debate made a distinction between “Jewish Argentines and Argentine Argentines.” Oops!

• The Jews, affable but with deadly ninja moves, were not amused by this. So now they are suing him for discrimination.

• But wait! Pichetto says he’s sorry for discriminating on the Jews, specially because he’s gonna get sued and all. So there, problem solved. Moral of the story: don’t fuck with the Jews.

• You have probably heard about this since it has been all over the news for the last few days, but I still need to address it. First, this happened last Sunday.

• The problem with that story is that, since the person who was driving the car is the son of a prominent Government-friendly journalist named Eduardo Aliverti, the polarized media is giving us two choices of reality, and as usual we can choose the one we like more:

• Pro-Government media: Oh, that poor boy (the driver, of course). How unfair to accuse him of hitting someone with his car and not giving a shit about it. Despite being extremely drunk, he still picked up the body of the (clearly reckless) cyclist and drove him to the closest toll both where he asked for help. Verdict: Obviously innocent. It’s all of us who must be blamed for living in such a judgmental society.

• Anti-Government media: The driver is clearly a monster who hit the cyclist and carried his dead body for as long as he wanted because he didn’t care, because he’s the son of a journalist who likes the Government so he gets special protection so nothing is going to happen to him so he deserves to rot in jail because clearly he is a serial killer. Verdict: Obviously guilty. Also, President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner should resign because somehow this is all her fault.

• Get it? Just like Lionel Hutz from The Simpsons said once: there’s the truth… and the truth. Deal with it.

•  Speaking of car accidents: Damn it, kids! How many times have I told you to always look both ways when you’re crossing the street? If you don’t learn the easy way then it’s time for you to learn the hard way. Watch please.

• Oh, stop covering your eyes. No one died! In fact, they barely got hurt. Which means those two girls are either superhuman or a couple of crash test dummies that came back to life at night, like those toys in Toy Story 3 did, and got run over while they trying to get to a bar.

• Also, you gotta love the creepy bastard who spent five hours in front of his computer editing that footage, providing us with the same shocking images over and over again.

• And dude, a soundtrack? Really?

• This week, in the department of “No shit, Sherlock“, Infobae tells us that when it comes to internet download speeds, Argentina is ranked number 109 in the world, between the Reunion Islands, which you didn’t even know existed, and Barbados, a place you only know because an episode of Friends took place there once. Now you know why people aren’t much into internet porn around here. It’s not because we’re puritans, but because by the time the video is done downloading, the excitement’s worn off.

•  A crane fell in a construction site in Puerto Madero, killing one person and injuring two others. Don’t worry, nothing happened to the Faena Hotel.

• Today marks the one-year anniversary of the tragic Once train accident and society is up in arms (as it is every other day, to tell you the truth). This morning, relatives and friends of the 51 people who perished in the terrible crash attended a ceremony at the Once railway station and issued some strong statements against the National Government that included insults against Cristina, Planning Minister Julio De Vido and other Government officials, and a full rejection of the President’s message last night, in which she offered her condolences to the families of the deceased. In a predictable outburst of anger, the families exorcised their demons by hurling the worst possible insults to a National Government that last year handled the death of 51 people in the worst possible way.

• Even one of the founders of the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo organization said she disagrees with the President.

•  Meanwhile, in Dubai, Diego Armando Maradona was back to his usual hijinx when he decided to appear via telephone on live television and discuss the trials and tribulations of having to deal with a new offspring with his daughter Dalma in front of 40 million people. Yeah, that’s right. We jump from the somber platforms of the Once train station to the never ending stupidity of Maradona in a single bullet point. It’s my last column. Let me be.

• Anyway. Dalma, who despite being like 100 million years old is behaving like a spoiled brat who is jealous of her newborn sibling, went to a TV show to cry on camera and say waaaah waaaah waaaah. Maradona, who at the time may or may have not been drunk/high, made a surprise appearance via Skype or something, and began asking everyone why his daughter had left the set even though she hand’t left the set. “I’m right here!”, the little Maradona spawn said like a million times to no avail.

• Then he greeted everyone again with a slurry “Good evening, everyone” and once again wondered why his daughter had left.

• “Damn it, I’m right here!” she said again. Now it was just sad.

• After a series of semi incoherent ramblings about who knows what, he finally said he was tired of the putos periodistas (faggot journalists) who are willing to do whatever is necessary to find a story. “Ricardo Fort isn’t the only faggot in Argentina,” he warned. Classy! Because the conversation wasn’t bizarre enough, now Ricardo Fort becomes a part of the equation. So there he is, everyone. That’s your role model. That’s the kind of person you idolize. Feel good about yourself?

• This of course, caused some of those journalists to take offense.
  

  This is you right now. (Photo/Wikipedia)

  Particularly tabloid and yellow press kings Jorge Rial and Luis Ventura, who replied one day later by detonating two nuclear bombs in the hearts of those who worship Maradona as the God of all things football. Ventura, clearly hurt, revealed “some information that he had allegedly kept secret until now”: A) During that infamous drug bust in which he was arrested, Maradona was caught in bed with another dude. B) He likes boys who dress like girls (transvestites). C) He’s a pedophile.

• You know what’s worse? Football and the tabloid press are two things I despise. And yet, here we are. Ironic, isn’t it?

• Well aware that I was retiring from the Weekly News Roundup business today, Cristina didn’t waste any time and decided this was the perfect time to launch a new network suspiciously named DeporTV. The ceremony inaugurating the new channel, which is aimed at promoting sports (meaning football), featured all mandatory Government cliches, including:

1. Football as the catalyst for human redemption:  “I have heard from many neighborhood leaders how Fútbol para Todos changed lives in the neighborhoods, because the kids, and the husband too, stay at home,” Cristina said. “They no longer have to go to the gas station or bar to watch but can instead watch the game all together, eating torta fritas at home.” I know you can’t see me right now, but you have no idea how fast my eyes are rolling.
2. The dictatorship: ”The event was also used to honor athletes that were forced to leave Argentina during the 1950s and forced to “disappear” during the most recent Argentine dictatorship in the 1970s.” Because anything in this country that fails to explicitly and directly address the dictatorship = fascist.
3. Maradona (Seriously): “Football legend Diego Maradona spoke at the presentation via videoconference from Dubai.” How touching! Was that before or after he called several gay journalists “fags”? No, really. I just want to know.
4. The press sucks:   “We are going to have a channel that is not going to lie to us,” Maradona said. Well, finally we see eye to eye on something! I mean, can you imagine if the local press had decided not to look the other way when you scored a goal using your hand, effectively winning the Mexico 86 World Cup? Remember, hmmm? Shut the fuck up and stop insulting our intelligence.

• Seriously, if this is going to be my last bullet point ever… if this is going to be the epitaph carved on the cover of a future “Weekly News Roundup Greatest Hits” then let me say it again:  for once and for all, please, stop insulting our intelligence.

I love you, kids.

Have a great life, everyone!

Send Adrian your comments at adrbono@gmail.com or follow him on Twitter at @AdrianBono

Daniel Filmus (Photo: Santiago Trusso, in Flickr)

With a vote of 39 to 31 on Thursday, the Senate approved the proposed memorandum to have bilateral discussions with Iran regarding the 1994 bombing of the Argentina-Israeli Mutual Association (AMIA) in Buenos Aires. The agreement will face a vote in the Chamber of Deputies next week.

“The memorandum is an effort to make sure there is no impunity,” president of the Committee on Foreign Relations Daniel Filmus said. “The easiest thing would have been to leave everything as it is, which would not come with political costs, but we do not want that. We know that when the guilty are not punished, history can repeat itself.”

The Unión Cívica Radical (UCR) and Frente Amplio Progresista (FAP) opposed the memorandum, which was passed by a senate with a Frente para la Victoria (FpV) majority.

“There are contradictions, lies, and also concealment (in this memorandum),” Jujuy Senator Gerardo Morales said in opposition.

The vote was preceded by a debate that lasted nearly 11 hours. The Chamber of Deputies votes on Wednesday, and Deputy Agustí Rossi professed his confidence that the memorandum will become law that day.

“We are going to have a quorum and the necessary majority,” he said.

Foreign minister Héctor Timerman. (Photo by MRECIC ARG, on Flickr)

In a radio interview with Vorterix, Argentine foreign minister Héctor Timerman asserted that the government is searching for the best way to bring justice to the AMIA bombings of 1994.

“We are going to find a way to make the guilty pay. As we always do, dealing with the issues, in this same way, we will succeed in this memorandum,” he said, referring to the ‘Truth Commission’ to be held with Iran upon congressional approval. “We are going to find the way to make those guilty pay for the crime they committed.”

Timerman held a dialogue with the Senate yesterday, defending the bill that ratifies the agreement. The Senate is expected to vote on the bill on 21st February and the Chamber of Deputies would pass it on 28th February.

Even if the bill passes through both chambers of congress, it would have to be approved in Iran as well before the memorandum could come to fruition. Timerman said that a long delay by the Iranian government could provide Argentina with a victory, at least in one sense.

“We don’t trust in Iran and would prefer to negotiate with Sweden or Norway, but the defendants are there (in Iran), and if its Parlament takes 20 years to approve the memorandum, it would give us a great moral force before the world,” he said.

In the Vorterix interview, Timerman was defensive of yesterday’s remarks, in which he stated Iranian suspects could refrain from testifying. “The judge asks them their names and if the defendant says he is not going to answer, the procedural step has already been taken,” he said. “It is the Constitution that gives this right. What do they want us to do, make a judge violate the Constitution?”

The possible inefficacy of the memorandum has been one of the many criticisms voiced since the agreement was made between Timerman and his Iranian counterpart. In addition, many in the Jewish community have criticised the idea of holding any bilateral talks with Iran whatsoever, given the nation’s denial of the Holocaust.

Former Argentine chancellor Dante Caputo vocalised his opinion that the discussions with Iran have arisen due to Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez’ absence from the international political scene. Chavez has been hospitalised for two months as a result of an unknown type of cancer.

Timerman met with the AMIA today, though no details have yet been released regarding the meeting.

Foreign minister Héctor Timerman, by nasa hq photo, on Flickr

A spokesman for the Iranian foreign affairs ministry announced yesterday that Defence Minister Ahmad Vahidi would not be subject to interrogation in conjunction with the 1994 AMIA bombing. Vahidi is suspected of involvement in the attack that claimed the lives of 85 people, and his participation in the upcoming Argentine inquiry to be held in Tehran forms part of a memorandum agreed to by both countries.

Argentine foreign minister Héctor Timerman defended the polemical memorandum in front of congress earlier today in an effort to assuage concerns. The agreement, already rejected by the Jewish community, has come under further fire from the Secretary General of the Delegation of Israeli Argentine Associations (DAIA) Jorge Knoblovits. Speaking from the news channel Todo Noticias, he warned that “the memorandum can not be signed in these conditions”. Victims and families of the dead have also asked for the proposed bill to be redrafted.

Timerman affirmed, however, that, “the memorandum ensures that the suspects will be brought before an Argentine judge and that they will be questioned.” He went on to chide legislators over assertions that the memorandum includes “secret clauses” and “spurious interests,” urging them to end such “fantasies”. Furthermore, state news agency Télam released a statement issued by the Iranian foreign affairs minister Ali-Akbar Salehi, stating that Iran would “adhere to the agreements” set out in the memorandum.

Speaking before the Senate’s Foreign Affairs, Justice, and Constitutional Affairs commissions, Timerman praised the agreement, alleging that it will allow the case to “escape from the paralysis in which it finds itself.” In a concession to its critics, Timmerman later admitted that there was a good chance that the accused would refuse to testify.

President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner has hit back at AMIA president Guillermo Borger’s claim that the recent agreement between Argentina and Iran is putting the centre at risk of “a third attack”.

President Fernández took to Twitter yesterday to say that the Argentine people and the judiciary in particular “deserve to know what Guillermo Borger knows”.

“I consider Borger to be a respectable person. What could he possibly have up his sleeve to make such an affirmation?”

In a series of ten messages on her Twitter account, president Fernández went on to question Borger’s claims and asked: “If a terrorist attack did occur because of Argentina’s agreement with Iran, who would be the intellectual and physical mastermind?”

She added: “It’s clear that it could never be the signatory countries. Could it be those who have rejected the agreement? Countries, people, or intelligence services? Who?”

When the bilateral agreement was inked at the end of January, Borger said that the Jewish centre was “absolutely taken aback” by the government’s decision to send the draft to congress.

“Not only have some aspects of the accord not been cleared up, but it has also left many people simply confused. This decision is enabling the possibility of a third attack, because truly we are submitting ourselves completely by doing this.”

Under the agreement, Argentina and Iran will create a truth commission, which will re-investigate the 1994 bombing of the AMIA Centre in Buenos Aires with the help of five international jurists chosen by both countries.

Walls at the AMIA serving as a memorial to the victims. ‘Impunity affects us all, let’s demand justice’, ‘I was born 16 years ago and 16 years after we are still calling for justice’, read among others. (Photo by LoboEstepario, en Flickr)

Major outcry has erupted amongst the Jewish community in Argentina after President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner announced yesterday that an agreement signed with Tehran to formally address the 1994 AMIA attack has been drafted for congressional approval. If signed into law, the agreement would allow for Argentine judges to interrogate Iranian citizens accused of causing the bombing that killed 85 people.

Because the terms of the agreement are reportedly unclear, and Iran is currently suspected by some countries of developing nuclear weapons, this progression in bilateral relations has caused widespread dissent, especially by leaders within the Jewish community.

Leaders of the AMIA and the Delegation of Israeli Argentine Associations (DAIA) have voiced their disapproval of the agreement, stating that the accord paves the way for a third attack. Guillermo Borger, president of the AMIA said that the group is “absolutely surprised,” to hear the national announcement to pass the agreement to the legislature, and, “if before we were dismayed by the memorandum that proposed the agreement; we are now trembling.

According to Julio Schlosser, leader of the DAIA, Iran cannot be trusted as a negotiator in this case, as it is the host country of the accused persons, denies the Holocaust, and is controversial for its nuclear arms programme. Schlosser insists that under these circumstances, the terms of the agreement do not provide the clarity that the case merits and establish a precarious settlement.

Other spokespeople from the DAIA also reject the proposition to move the agreement with Tehran into law, saying, “After profound analysis and debate, the leaders of the DAIA cannot accept the stated memorandum,” as it, “does not contribute to the advancement in the search for truth and justice in the context of the pending court case in our country.”

With the Frente para la Victoria (FpV) majority in both houses, Congress is expected to ratify the memorandum, although opposition seats generally disagree with the terms of the agreement. Despite public rejection of the proposal by the Frenta Amplio Progresista (FAP) and the Pro, lawmakers have already begun to prepare commissions to implement the law should it be endorsed.