Stratfor.com examines Iranian support for Sunni insurgents and posits it is part of a two-pronged strategy: use Sunnis to keep the U.S. tied down, while keeping the heat off Iran's primary proxies, the Shiite militias, while Iran strengthens them. But it is a dangerous game that provides openings for the United States:
Iran's primary militant assets in Iraq are Shiite militias and unaffiliated gunmen. But Iran's support for the Iraq insurgency is not limited to its Shiite allies. Tehran also has been providing support to segments of the Sunni insurgency. Though it might sound like a contradiction for Shiite Iran to support Sunni groups in Iraq, it is not unprecedented -- and there is a certain logic behind the groups the Iranians choose to support.
... By offering support in the form of training, weapons and logistics to these groups, Iran has been able to influence Sunni militants and encourage attacks that suit its interests. Such groups are willing to accept assistance from wherever it may come in order to enhance their own positions within the insurgent movement, and are unlikely to become Iranian proxies. They have their own agendas, which they see as being served through cooperation with Iran. Some of these groups feel that the United States is a far greater threat than Iran, while others simply want access to the sophisticated technology the Iranians have to offer.
... Iranian support for Sunni militants will further complicate an already complex insurgency, making it all the more difficult for U.S. and Iraqi forces to contain it. It will also create suspicions and rifts among various Sunni groups that will cause intra-Sunni violence. On the other hand, the situation provides an opportunity for Washington to drive a wedge between the Iranians and their Iraqi Shiite allies by showing that Tehran has actually been backing their enemies. This is why Iran has tried to encourage the Sunni militants it supports to focus on U.S. and other non-Shiite targets.
UPDATE: change of venue to www.julescrittenden.com. Come check out the new site.
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
What it all means is that the real enemy is Iran (and its little dog Syria). Iraq cannot be stabilized until Iran stops destabilizing it. Tying to work out a winning strategy for Iraq, without taking on Iran is a waste of time.
It would be nice if the author could please provide at least credible link to back any of this up, it would be nice.
So you don't believe its happening?
Naked lunch,
So are you saying Stratfor isn't a link or Stratfor isn't credible? If the latter, do you disagree with the Stratfor information and conclusions, or do you have a better source? I'm interested if you have a better source but somehow I doubt you do.
Isn't this the converse of Edward Luttwack's "Two Alliances?"
The people who want to invade Iran for fun and profit aren't really credible sources, drj.
Except, of course, to other people who want to invade Iran for fun and profit.
The left are the only ones I see talking up an invasion of Iran.
Post a Comment