Once his speech, at the World without Zionism conference had been disclosed to the international community, President Ahmadinejad received excruciatingly harsh criticism for his words. How could any national leader possibly make such remarks, and furthermore, what could possess them to do so? In the todays society, after the world has witnessed so many horrendous wars and seen so much bloodshed, why would any president call for the explicit annihilation of another nation? Moreover, how could someone let him?

After examining his hierarchical role in the Iranian government, it is quite clear that it is not President Ahmadinejad, but Ayatollah Khamenei who is responsible for governing the political and religious aspects of Iran. Khameneis responsibility as a Grand Ayatollah was not bestowed on him indiscriminately. In order to be a Grand Ayatollah one must excel throughout many decades of education, training, and experience that all culminate to such a role if the individual is deemed to be the best person for the position. Khameneis near absolute role as leader is fraught with responsibilities; with his main agenda focused on maintaining a Shia Muslim rule. His jurisdiction of power also spans over every outlet of media within Iran. From newspapers to internet sites, he essentially partakes in determining which messages the government as well as the nation will receive and vocalize.

Having established that his occupation isnt for an incapable and metaphorically blind individual, it would suffice to say that Ayatollah Khamenei would not permit President Ahmadinejad to make the comments that he had made at the World without Zionism conference and allow him to repeat such comments without any condemnation or rebuke unless he had a significantly good reason in mind.

Perhaps the Grand Ayatollah allowed such comments because Iran wants to fight terrorism as much as the rest of the world. In his speech, Ahmadinejad warned all the leaders in the Islamic world to beware;if any of them [are to] take a step towards the recognition of this regime [Israel], then [they] will burn in the fire of the Islamic Umma (nation) and will have eternal shame stamped on his forehead, regardless of whether [the nation] did this under pressure by the dominant powers, or lack of understanding or naivet or selfishness or worldly incentives.

In not so many words, his message mirrored another realists viewpoint: George W. Bush Jr. In his campaign against terrorism, the United States President has stated that we will starve terrorists of funding, turn them one against another, [and] drive them from place to place, until there is no refuge or no rest.  And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism.  Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime (Address to a Joint Session of Congress and the American People).

While both Iran and the United States agree that terrorism ought to be removed from the world and that innocent people ought not to be harmed, their categorizations of which nations are committing such atrocities differ. For instance, unlike the US, Iran does not consider Israel to be a peaceful democratic nation but instead a Zionist regime. The term Zionism was coined in 1890 by Nathan Birnbaum. Zionism [is] the national movement for the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel, advocated, from its inception, tangible as well as spiritual aims( A Definition of Zionism).

The International Jewish community felt that the turmoil they had faced in World War II could have been avoided if they had a place that they could have recognized as their home. After World War I, the Balfour Declaration of 1917 was established after Great Britain determined that part of Palestine would now be the new home for Jews. The declaration did not take full effect until after World War II in 1948 when the Zionist movement sped forth. From looking at any world map it is evident that the Jewish populace of the world has been successful in attaining their goal of establishing their own homeland since todays maps regard the entity that was Palestine as present day Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip.

It is apparent from his speech that this movement has extremely vexed President Ahmadinejad. From his lecture, he recounts how the Palestinian people are being driven out of their home and are continually suffering under the control of the Zionist regime. He decries Israel and labels the occupying state [as] the bridgehead of the Oppressor World in the heart of the Islamic world. In this context, he boxes all other non-Islamic nations as the Oppressor World which is collectively attempting to undermine Islam through the establishment of Israel. Furthermore, Ahmadinejad claims that any nation which has recognized Israel has already contributed to the downfall of Islam. His rationale comes from the fact that Israel has control over the holy city of Jerusalem, and Israel also has support from many other nations and leaderships, including the United States which he identifies as the World Arrogance of the Oppressor World. Given this substantial amount of power that Israel has, Ahmadinejad has predetermined that if Israel wants to they can possibly take over more property.

A crux of his speech warns his constituents to be wary of the future plans that Israel has. He tells his audience to be aware of the new conspiracy [that] has been plotted and is underway. They [the Israelis] have been forced to evacuate a corner of Palestine and this was imposed on them by the Palestinian nation. But they want to sell this as the final victory and use the evacuation of Gaza and the creation of a Palestinian state as an excuse to end the Palestinian cause and goalWith the excuse of having cleared the Gaza Strip to show their good will, they want a group of Muslim nations to recognise this corrupt regime, and I am very hopeful and pray to God that the Palestinian nation and the dear Palestinian groups will be cautious of such sedition.

Ahmadinejad provides assurance to his audience explaining how their victory in conquering the Oppressor World is inevitable, despite any obstacles or resistance that may arise from the Oppressor World or from skeptics against the Islamic nations. The Iranian president finds that many are sowing the seeds of defeat and despair in this all-out war between the Islamic world and the Infidel Front, hoping to dishearten the Islamic world. Such people are using words like its not possible. They say how could we have a world without America and Zionism?

He goes on to cite how under the past Iranian Shah, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, that there was a very stringent control over the Iranians who were subjugated to a terrible reign of terror by the members of SAVAK or the Shahs secret police. However, when the dear Imam [Ruhollah Khomeini] said [that the Shahs] regime must be destroyed, and we want a world without a client state, many of those who claim to be political gurus and other things said its not possible. But our nation fought and now for 27 years we have a government that is independent of America.

Based on the speech that Ahmadinejad has delivered, one could assume that the conspiracy about Israel being used to infiltrate and undermine the Islamic World may be the only reasons that Ahmadinejad would have outright disdain for this nationbut what if there was another possible motive behind his stance?

Considering that Ahmadinejad thinks the world would be better off without the presence of what he has called, the Oppressor World, the inevitable coming of this religious figure would be more of an incentive for Ahmadinejad to hold his views. If nothing more it certainly adds a twist to this conspiracy.