When Iran, a fanatical Islamic dictatorship, creates a ring of terrorist proxies across the Middle East, develops an advanced ballistic missile system, and is racing towards the development of nuclear weapons, all while repeatedly and publicly calling for the annihilation of Israel, these are inconsequential steps that should be ignored.

But should Israel, a tiny country barely larger than the surface area of Lake Ontario, decide to take these threats seriously, it is a bad actor that threatens global peace and stability.

That bizarre argument is at the core of a recent opinion column on June 18 in The Hill Times by Younes Zangiabadi, the executive director of The Institute for Peace & Diplomacy, an organization that says it is “challenging the conventional, rethinking foreign policy.”

Given how out of step Zangiabadi is with G7 leaders and subject matter experts, he certainly is “challenging the conventional,” though that doesn’t make his argument sound, let alone even coherent.

Zangiabadi complained in his commentary that Prime Minister Mark Carney has condemned the Iranian nuclear program, which he lamented as being overly “one-sided,” all while “ignoring Israel’s continued attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities, civilian infrastructure,” which he termed “clear violations of international law.”

The author is correct that the comments from G7 leaders have been “one-sided,” precisely because there should be no equivocation between the Iranian regime’s genocidal threats and active efforts to destroy Israel, and Jerusalem seeking to defend itself against such a maniacal and blood-thirsty enemy.

International law fully guarantees the right of self-defence, and that includes ensuring that the Islamic Republic of Iran cannot acquire nuclear bombs which, if they fell into Tehran’s hands, would undeniably be used to kill as many Israelis as possible, a point made repeatedly by Iranian presidents over the years.

Despite Zangiabadi’s protestations to the contrary, Israel’s strikes against Iranian regime nuclear and military sites have been remarkably precise, limiting civilian casualties and hitting the most dangerous figures in Iran.

Some conflicts are complicated, but some aren’t. The Islamic Republic of Iran’s well-documented genocidal intentions – and active efforts – leave no doubt that the regime cannot be trusted, not just with nuclear weapons, but with vast stockpiles of ballistic missiles, either.

Yet Zangiabadi has been remarkably consistent in his comments, seeking to downplay the Iranian threat. Over the last six years, he has only authored a total of three opinion columns for The Hill Times, including his June 18 submission.

Two of these commentaries have been about Iran, with his October, 2019 column encouraging Canada to expand ties with the Iranian regime. Just three months later, Iran shot down a civilian airliner, killing 176 people, including 63 Canadians, in a deliberate act of mass murder.

Younes Zangiabadi, by whitewashing the murderous Islamic Republic of Iran, certainly is helping to fulfill the promise of The Institute for Peace & Diplomacy’s promise of “challenging the conventional.” Zangiabadi’s position is not only decidedly unconventional; it is downright obscene.