What is the significance of Alberto Nisman’s death?

On Monday Diego Lagomarsino, an associate of the deceased Argentinian prosecutor Alberto Nisman, affirmed that he played no role in the prosecutors mysterious death.

Nisman was a Jewish-Argentinian prosecutor who was investigating the 1994 terrorist suicide bombing of the Jewish headquarters (AMIA) in Buenos Aires by an Iranian sponsored Hezbollah fighter. The bomb killed 85 people and wounded 300.

Nisman had uncovered that the joint Argentinian-Iranian commission on the AMIA bombing set up in 2013 was a farce whose goal was to exonerate Tehran for its role in the attack. Kirchner wanted Iran cleared of wrongdoing because she wanted the country taken off the “terror list,” which would allow Buenos Aires to pursue a “food for oil” program with Tehran.

He was getting ready to present his findings to a Congressional Committee when the police found him dead in his home on January 18^th, 2015 with a bullet to the head. Kirchner immediately went on national television and declared the death a suicide.

The evidence contradicted the President’s claims. The gun from which the bullet was fired belonged to Lagmorsino who was the last person to see Nisman alive. Also, Nisman’s friends and family said he was not suicidal or had he ever suffered from depression.

Given these circumstances it is likely that Kirchner or the Iranians might have ordered Nisman assassinated. Both sides probably wanted to protect the “food for oil” deal, which absolving Tehran for its role in the MAIA bombing would allow.

At the time Argentina was going through an energy crisis. The situation got so bad that in 2012 Kirchner nationalized the Argentinian assets of Spain’s energy company Repsol.

This did not work and still Argentina had to struggle with major blackouts. The “food for grain” program offered a way out because it promised to exchange Argentinian grain for Iran oil. Both Iran and Argentina would benefit from the deal. Along with Argentina grain Tehran could further expand its terror network in South America while Kirchner would have petroleum to power Argentina’s power plants.

Nisman’s evidence threatened to crush the deal and expose the Iranian network. So both Kirchner and mullahs had reason to want Nisman dead.

Kirchner had a history of employing violent leftist gangs such as the Quebracho to stifle the opposition and compromised the judiciary in order to enforce her policies. Due to Kirchner’s history of violence it is not hard for some Argentina’s to think that she had some role in Nisman’s assassination. Iranian directed operators, whether Hezbollah or IRGC, have a history of active measures in the region and may have acted independently.

At the time of his death Alberto Nisman was about to expose collusion between the Argentinian government, Iran, and Hezbollah. Such revelations would have damaged the Kirchner administration and disrupt the oil deal with Tehran.