Brian M Downing
Three explosions have hit Iranian targets in the last few days. A medical site in Tehran, the Natanz centrifuge site, and Ahvaz in the Arab Khuzestan province. Such attacks have been going on for well over a decade.
The Mujahedin-e Khalq and the Arab Struggle Movement for the Liberation of Ahwaz are likely responsible. There may be a new dimension as Iran’s repeated violent repression of reformers has nurtured nihilism and violence among urban youth. The newcomers may have already found allies in and out of the country.
The attacks probably had support from Saudi Arabia and Israel, who are eager to weaken Iran. American involvement is possible as well but the president’s attentiveness to world affairs varies a great deal, though he is more fixed on Iran than, say, North Korea or Venezuela.
Goals
The foreign powers might think that attacks will cause enough internal turmoil to bring down the mullahs and generals – regime change. That’s unlikely to happen but the “a little more pressure” myth is ever popular in parts of Washington. Despite sanctions and repression, the Iranian government retains considerable support in rural and working-class areas. Its repressive capacity remains strong, as crackdowns earlier this year have shown.
The involvement of Arab separatists might suggest that parts of the country can be encouraged to break away from Persian dominance. Separatist movements are active also in the Kurdish northwest and the Baloch southeast. Each is supported by Israel, Saudi Arabia, and perhaps the US. Nonetheless, Tehran has sufficient force to prevent fragmentation. However, suppression is costly.
The attacks may be part of a concerted effort to get Iran to withdraw from Syria. Sanctions are in place, the Sunni monarchs are offering incentives, and separatism is gaining strength among the Druze in the south. This limited goal is more plausible but Syria is Iran’s only significant ally in the region and a pullout is less likely than any order to go from Damascus and Moscow.
The foreign powers might be goading Iran into a strong retaliatory measure that will force a broad conflict with the US. Options include a major strike on US targets in Iraq or tanker traffic in the Gulf or by acceleration of the uranium-enrichment program toward weapons-grade stocks.
However, the assassination of General Soleimani last January was followed by surprisingly measured responses, less than what was expected here. Rockets have recently struck near the US embassy in Baghdad, as they did last January.
Principals in Riyadh and Jerusalem may calculate that Donald Trump’s presidency is nearing an end and his successor will be less aggressive toward Iran. It’s now or never. More attacks inside Iran are likely.
Tehran may be reading the same polls, making the same calculations, and opting to ride out the next six months, stormy though they may be. Russia and China are behind Iran and all three are eager to see the US weakened in the world, especially in the Middle East. Intemperate though not necessarily wrongheaded figures might see a major conflict in the Gulf as a decisive moment in America’s decline. US allies would distance themselves further and the US would face more domestic turmoil and perhaps its own separatist threats.
© 2020 Brian M Downing
Brian M Downing is a national security analyst who’s written for outlets across the political spectrum. He studied at Georgetown University and the University of Chicago, and did post-graduate work at Harvard’s Center for International Affairs. Thanks as ever to Susan Ganosellis.