Iran Daily: Tehran Upset by Saudi Prince’s Comparison of Supreme Leader and Hitler


Tehran has shown its anger over remarks by Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, the effective leader in Saudi Arabia, comparing Iran’s Supreme Leader with Adolf Hitler.

Foreign Ministry Spokesman Bahram Qassemi responded on Friday to a fawning profile of Mohammad bin Salman by Thomas Friedman of The New York Times: “The adventurist Saudi crown prince should take into account the inevitable fate of infamous dictators in the region.”

Qassemi asserted that no one in the international community gave credit to “the immature, injudicious and cheap” remarks and conduct of the prince. He portrayed Saudi intervention in Yemen’s civil war and in Lebanese internal affairs as Mohammad bin Salman’s mistakes.

In the interview with Friedman, published on Thursday, Mohammad bin Salman said:

the “Supreme leader is the new Hitler of the Middle East. But we learned from Europe that appeasement doesn’t work. We don’t want the new Hitler in Iran to repeat what happened in Europe in the Middle East.

The Hitler comparison was the only comment by the prince about Saudi-Iranian relations, in an elegy by Friedman that focused on Mohammad bin Salman’s consolidation of his power and crackdown on opponents as “reform” and an “anti-corruption”.

However, the rhetoric was the latest volley in the war of words between Iran and Saudi Arabia, which broke relations with the Islamic Republic in January 2016. Amid a series of confrontations with Tehran across the region, Mohammad bin Salman said in May that any war will be “inside Iran’s borders”.

Earlier this month, after Lebanese Prime Minister Sa’ad Hariri resigned during a stay in Saudi Arabia — a resignation that he finally withdrew on Wednesday when he returned to Beirut, the Saudi monarchy accused Iran and its Lebanese ally Hezbollah of “acts of war”.

Related Posts


  1. Archive: ABC news reveals a CIA plot to “destabilize the Iranian regime” with propaganda:
    Among the activities the CIA was authorised by the Bush administration to engage in:

    1. Propaganda broadcasts.
    2. Placement of negative articles in the press.
    3. Manipulation of Iran’s currency.

    Iran is subject to a sustained barrage of propaganda coming from the likes of VOA Persian, BBC Persian, Radio Farda and Radio Zamaneh, all sponsored by governments seeking regime change in the country,

    • Your assertions about the VOA and Radio Farda are questionable post-2008. They are factually wrong about the BBC and Radio Zamaneh.

      • Let me qualify my remarks then. All four stations are seeking to influence public opinion in Iran with a view to inducing a change in the policies and/or leadership of the Iranian political system (soft regime change). I still think that the British and Dutch governments would be pleased if a new regime emerged in Iran (as long as it wasn’t a communist one) even if they are prepared to deal with the present one. Btw, “Farda” means tomorrow in Persian…implicit in the meaning of this word is that tomorrow will bring a new regime.

        • So the four outlets are providing news and analysis, to which the Iranian public — despite attempts to block the outlets — may respond with their views and interpretations. They are not fulfilling a regime change policy of US-UK-Netherlands Governments.

          • Well, that is indeed how they would describe their activities. But we they wouldn’t have been set up unless to advance the foreign policy agendas of the governments that sponsor them. You know full well that BBC Persian radio played an instrumental role in the CIA-MI6 coup that overthew the democratically-elected goverment of Dr. Mossadegh in 1953:

            One has to wonder why the people of neighbouring Bahrain are not also provided with a similar news service by the same governments that sponsor the broadcasts into Iran. Strange that.

            • Comment shows no understanding of how relationship between Government and BBC programming/operations works — and 1953 is not 2017.

      • It is noteworthy that the British called the Arab nationalist leader, Gamal Abdel Nasser, the “New Hitler” because of his decision to nationalise the Suez canal:

        The Israelis, however, like to call Ayatollah Khamenei the “New Haman” after the legendary Persian mandarin mentioned in the Book of Esther who tried to kill all of the Jews.

        Of course, anyone familiar with the Iranian system knows that major decisions are taken by consensus, involving all centres of power, especially those relating to foreign and security policy.

  2. Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe does not have breast cancer

    The dual-national discovered lumps on her breast but these were not found to be cancerous. However, her mental state in prison is deteriorating as she faces new charges and negotiations over her release have stalled. FS, Boris Johnson, is expected to fly to Tehran soon to discuss her case and other matters.

  3. Iran braces for Trump oil embargo next year:

    “I determined that there is a sufficient amount of oil and oil products from countries other than Iran, and this allows a significant reduction in the volume of oil and petroleum products that are purchased from Iran,” Trump said in a November 17 memorandum sent to the US finance and energy ministers.

Leave a Comment