My Pajamas colleague, the brilliant and erudite Meir Javedanfar, belongs to a school of thought–very common among the Iranian diasporah–that sees every event involving the Islamic Republic as yet another proof of the near-flawless cunning and brilliance of the mullahs. My old friend and colleague Claire Sterling once described this forma mentis–in its Italian incarnation–as “dietrologismo,” the science of what lies behind the world as we see it. The handy thing about this approach to the world is that it doesn’t depend on annoying facts, but on one core assumption: that you know who’s behind it all, and he never screws up. Whatever happens, happens according to plan.
So my dear colleague tells us that Iran has–as a State Department official claimed in an interview with the Washington Post over the weekend–that Iran has “reined in” the Shi’ite militias in Iraq it has been supporting for lo these many years. And then he sets out to explain “why.” His explanation is that the mullahs want to keep us buried in an Iraqi quagmire so that we won’t be able to use our ground forces to attack Iran. No matter their call for “America out of Iraq,” that’s just so much propaganda. Their real intention is to keep us there. According to Mr. Javedanfar, the Iranian regime was alarmed when the Democrats won the 2006 elections, fearing that the new majority would actually pull American forces out of Iraq, which in his view would be bad for the mullahs. So Khamenei and Ahmadi-Nezhad bailed out Bush, by making conditions on the ground easier, thereby sabotaging the Democrats.
It’s an elegant theory, except that it leaves out several annoying facts. The first is that the terror war in Iraq rapidly expanded after the 2006 elections. Far from being leashed, Iranian-supported terror groups became considerably more active. So Mr. Javedanfar’s theory that Iran wanted to make life easier for President Bush after the 2006 elections is counter-factual.
Second, the core allegation–that Iran has “reined in” the Shi’ite militias–is itself very dubious. Yes, a State Department official, David Satterfield, said so in an interview with the Washington Post. He gave no proof, he just deduced it from the fact that attacks in Iraq had dropped off. But, just three days earlier, the Pentagon released a report that stated categorically that there had been no detectable reduction in the flow of support and weapons from Iran to Iraq. Secretary of Defense Gates said that “the jury’s out” on all claims that the mullahs were being cooperative, and our ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker, also expressed skepticism about the theory.
So the core allegation is disputed by the people who have the best information, namely our military.
Third, we know for sure that American and Iraqi military action has devastated a good deal of the terror network run by the Iranians. Hardly a day has gone by in the past six months without reports of killing and/or capturing elements of “special groups” (the funny talk used to describe Iranian proxies in Iraq). Several of the leaders have been eliminated or are under interrogation, and it’s also clear that our troops have made progress in dealing with the latest generation of Iranian explosives.
Why ignore the performance of Coalition and Iraqi forces? Because it just doesn’t fit the theory that everything in that part of the world happens because the wily mullahs make it happen. Looking at the “mere facts,” one would have to say that the mullahs have been thwarted in Iraq, at least for the time being, and not just on the battlefield. Perhaps their most terrible defeat has come about in the mosques, where the Iranian version of Shi’ism has not taken hold, and where the traditional “Najaf school” of Shi’ism–according to which clerics should stay out of government–is threatening the Khomeinist heresy, even inside Iran itself. That religious defeat is at once a reason for, and a consequence of, their setbacks on the ground. And it’s happened despite the flow of mullah money into Iraq (well described by Mr. Javedanfar, although the bonyads are not the key institutions at work here; the really crucial ones are front companies run by the Revolutionary Guards/Quds Force, which is why the U.S. Treasury is targeting them).
In all this, the mullahs’ setbacks in Iraq have occurred because of our superiority and Iraqi steadfastness and courage, not because of their unlimited cleverness. They’re not ten feet tall, after all. Indeed, they’ve wrecked the country while awash in petrodollars, and that’s evidence of, uh, monumental incompetence.
Digg This
del.icio.us
PJM Home
19 Comments
a Duoist:The December, 2006 NAS study postulated that Iranian oil exports in 2004 were falling, and potentially would reach ‘zero’ in 2011. Is there an update this year for the 2005 Iranian oil exports?
Dec 27, 2007 - 4:46 am lgude:I think the Iraqi Shia resistance to the Qom school and Iranian Mullocracy led by Grand Ayatollah Sistani the leader of the Najaf school has been the most neglected story of the war. Regime change always meant a Shiite dominated democratic government and that meant religious Shiites, not relatively secular ones like Chabali. I think the Shiites will always distrust us because we abandoned them in 91 but they have not rushed into the arms of the Qom school nor is the Malaki government complaining about our relentless pursuit of the ’special groups’. I don’t buy that the Iranians want to keep us in Iraq either.
Dec 27, 2007 - 11:46 am tanstaafl:Of course they screw up. And are undoubtedly engaged amongst themselves in their own version of small minded backstabbing games behind the scenes.
Maybe the Iranians have reduced their forays into Iraq. If so, it should only be considered a pragmatic move and nothing substantive, just as actual Iranian nuclear (weapon) ambitions and the recent NIE may have little relationship.
Any significant change in Iranian ambitions in the region would require a lot longer window than the current one.
Ayatollah Khamenei (whose delight at the events of September 11 2001 could not be concealed) is an old man and, reportedly, not in good health.
The jockeying as to his successor must color the Iranian political landscape significantly.
Some Iranian mullahs don’t, in fact, support Khamenei. So it’s hardly monolithic.
Will A’jad’s hardline guy get in or will Iranians decide to go in a more moderate, sane direction when the old man dies ?
Third, we know for sure that American and Iraqi military action has devastated a good deal of the terror network run by the Iranians.
Devastation, hobbling…the only operative point understood by “terror networks” in Palestine, Lebanon, Afghanistan, Iraq, wherever.
Dec 27, 2007 - 12:00 pm Morton Doodslag:Americans at large, (our military, State Department, media, all of us) have long been the victims of analysis similar to the flawed type dissected above by Mr. Ledeen. Expats from Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey, just to name a few, have fed a steady stream of maudlin gibberish to consumers in the West, and we have consumed this trash eagerly. What is either notably missing from the analysis by these biased Muslim expats, or woefully misrepresented in their analysis, is the centrality of Islam in all the backwardness and vileness we see in their nations of origin.
Even here at PajamasMedia we have often seen analysis by Islamic expats from Pakistan, Iran, Turkey, etc. where the writer can make it through an entire 1200-1500 word analysis without mentioning “Islam”, or “Muslim”, or “jihad” once!
While these persons have left their Islamic nations and Muslim cesspools of origin for a variety of reasons, the overarching fact is that they left.
But there seems to be something about Islam and Muslims which makes it nearly impossible for them to realize or admit the centrality of Islam to all their woes. The flawed and misleading analysis of these expats should now be dismissed. Several facts about their misguided “analysis” should now be indisputable: these analysts have spent a generation either assuring us that Islam is not the problem, or that it’s implicated but fixable. The fact that Islam today is more trenchant and menacing than ever before puts a lie to those Islam-cleansing obscurantists. Islam shows no signs whatsoever of moderating, yet these analysts have spent great time de-linking Islam, and minimizing its menace to the West. Our predicament viz. Islam has been greatly brought on and complicated by their deceptions and emotionally flawed input.
Further, those gullible and foolish advisers in the West who have consumed this garbage, and long fasioned horrible American policies towards the Muslim world should also be dismissed. Their catastrophic sand castles of “democratizing” Islam have been and will remain a disaster. Any semblance of democracy within the ranks of Islam is obviously only a temporary arrangent, and a waste of time and treasure. Proof of this can be seen across the board, from Egypt, Turkey, Pakistan, Algeria, Lebanon, Jordan, etc.
“Democracy” boondoggles and secularism in these sewers of Islam are all regressing. Our agony in Iraq is real, but the results will be ephemeral in the long run. It’s high time for new, clear, and non-delusional insight and analysis to take over in this arena.
Dec 27, 2007 - 1:58 pm Winston:Praise the American troops and especially General Petraeus for their outstanding service. They did their job to secure Iraq. And SCREW the mullahs. They’re the very problem some people try to ignore. Mullahs are evil and they don’t do any thing to help any body. They’ve done nothing and won’t do any thing. They’re evil! Period!
Dec 27, 2007 - 2:25 pm David W. Lincoln:Something that you touched on Michael. I find it interesting to see the Revolutionary Guards as active as they are, and China’s army is as involved as it is.
Frankly, I find it as counterproductive to ask which came first (the chicken or the egg as example): civilian hands off approach, or military expansiveness.
Your thoughts please, for I see commonality between the military wing of the Beijing Politburo setting the agenda for the Beijing Politburo, and the Revolutionary Guards setting the agenda for the Mullahs, in that each swear fealty to something larger.
ML:
I don’t see it. The dictators are paramount in each case, so far as I can tell. The military are not an independent variable.
Dec 27, 2007 - 6:50 pm Anthony (Los Angeles):Mr. Javedanfar’s analysis struck me as odd, too, but I couldn’t quite put my finger on it. Your article clarified it for me: rather than ratcheting back the militias, Iran escalated their activities in the hopes of exploiting the Democratic victory in 11/06 to finally send us packing in disgrace, leaving them the main player in Iraq. Unlucky for them, however, the President put two new commanders in place (Petraeus and Odierno) with a new strategy and loosened rules of engagement, and they went after the Iranian proxies hard. If the cats-paw militias are quieter now, it’s because they’ve been beaten on the battlefield, not through Tehran’s restraint.
Regarding Grand Ayatollah Sistani, Reuel Marc Gerecht a few years ago called him the most important man in Iraq; I believe his words were something like “lose Sistani, lose Iraq.” If indeed there’s been a “theological war” in the background, it looks like the old ayatollah has won — lucky for us.
Finally, your mention of Claire Sterling caught my eye. Her book, The Terror Network, was a real eye-opener for me. Give her a fan’s regards, please.
ML:
I wish I could. Alas she died many years ago.
Dec 27, 2007 - 8:20 pm Ira Zad:It is hard to imagine the Theocracy of Tehran helping the US quell violence that Iran itself instigated in the first place in Iraq.
But, the fact is that our on-again/ off-again, confused, and extremely inconsistent policy towards Iran has created the perfect breeding grounds for all sorts of theories to emerge.
Another one of these theories is that in US’s latest round of “play nice” with Iran recently, Iran’s “help” in Iraq (to quell violence that Iran itself started), could have been part of a back-door deal between US and the regime in Tehran. The deal was purportedly exchanged releasing some (10) remaining Iranian “POWs” in Iraq, and more importantly US finally giving the “go ahead” to Russia to deliver the nuclear fuel that Iran had been begging from Russia for over a year.
I think the best way to prevent the creation and propagation of theories by people is to fix our own policy towards Iran, which has been -quiet frankly-a disastrous failure.
We are now actively promoting a No Regime Change policy in Iran. Just read Condi Rice’s recent comments about encouraging the “reformists” inside the regime to come back on the stage.
So long as US policy remains the way it has been, people will look for more “satisfying” answers.
http://mor2com.blogspot.com/
ML:
People will look for more “satisfying” answers no matter what happens. They are just desperate to find a ‘logical’ explanation for something that may be explained by accident or stupidity, two of the greatest forces in human life.
You seem surprised that Condi is not advocating regime change. But she has never advocated it. Nor has Bush. Nor Cheney. Nor any american president or secretary of state since 1979…so you are not entitled to be surprised, because that’s the pattern of amerian policy to iran.
Dec 28, 2007 - 2:27 am Morton Doodslag:As ML points out, good or bad, regime change in Tehran has not been US policy towards the fascist Islamic Republic.
I personally find the attitudes of the ira zads and the javedanfars of the world threadbare and extremely tiresome. Deeply embedded in their obvious frustrations with the rape of their nation by the Mullahs is an equal seeming anger, frustration, and blame against America for doing too much or too little. How is ANYTHING happening in their hideous nation America’s fault or resposibility to fix???
Well, some might say they’re simply exercising their francise of free speech here, but I must say I’m extremely tired of their formulations. The heinousness of their society has never been our fault, nor is it our responsibility to fix. It’s becoming increasingly clear that Muslims and Islam show a congenital tendency to bellyache, point fingers, scape-goat, and rage — they also show a congenital inability to take responsibility for their failures as a culture, or to confront the hemorrhaging font of evil fueling the nightmare: ISLAM. My ears are closed to their endless bellyaching and finger pointing and shirking. My heart is closed to feeling much sympathy for them. Enough is enough. Confront your society, stop confronting ours! Stop blaming us for your lack.
Dec 28, 2007 - 11:59 am shiraz:This note is primarily to Morton Doodslag who although thinks logically about the evil we as the free world are facing which is Islam, but unfortunately does not know much about Iran and Iranian as people, as culture or as a land with the thousands years of history, culture, science and philosophy to the Western world and humanity in large.
It is after all the Iranian culture and ancient history that shaped not only Christianity but even our American constitution. Morton should know that we Iranians are in large oxymoron to the same Islam he so correctly exposes and rejects. It was not Iranians who brought this cancerous evil cult upon us and the world. I am not suggesting that 100% of Iranians reject Islam but it is exactly the same way that there are millions of American liberals and followers of “Multiculturalism” who advocate that there is in fact 2 sides to this religion a peaceful one and the extremist one for which by the way the extremist one is not looked upon as an entity on its own but rather a by-product of American adventuresome and imperialism and its bad policies in the mid east. This rather dry tiresome and left winged portrait of the America is what shapes these fossilized left liberal crowds in the US and abroad. Morton should know that after all it was not Iranians on their own who brought this evil regime upon themselves, but it was the Iranian communists and left winged elites the exact same threads of the leftist fabric that still prevails so massively in the US and abroad that made the pact with the mullahs to depose Shah and his secular regime. It was after all also the wrong retarded policies of that peanut farmer President Carter, the ever conniving Soviets and the French government of the time that brought the islamo -fascist regime of Khomeini into the land of Iran and forced it upon millions of secular peace loving Iranians.
Morton should know that Iranians are the No. #1 enemy of this fascist regime, not the US not Europe and not definitely the Russians, Chinese, or any other power for that matter. If it was not for the sick appeasing policies of the last 30 years of US administrations and the Europe’s insatiable thirst for economical trade off, the mullahs with their backward ideology of hate, murder, and mayhem would have been trashed in the dustbin of history. Iranians time after time rose up and took the hit to revolt against this evil and not once the US or Europe came to recognize that, support that and encourage that. Therefore I am not quite sure where Morton bases his anger, This anger must be thrown back to the Western governments who adamantly support this evil regime directly or indirectly, appeasing them yesterday, today and tomorrow. Their aim not being regime change but behavior change!!! You see why we the repressed Iranians with Islam being shoved down our throat for the the past several centuries are so disappointed at the lack of will, honesty and good morals from the Western governments? I am not even going to talk about the “Left, liberal” sleeping crowd since they are not worthy of any negative thought at this point. Useful idiots was the smartest phrase that had ever come out from Stalin’s mouth. That will say it all about them. But from our very courageous who speak out the truth with no fear we expect more. I suggest reading Iran’s ancient history books, including their ancient faith before attack from Islam. Iranians are hostage to this evil that has been brought upon them by the Left fossilized movement and their troll President of the time Jimmy Carter and not the masses. We had 35 million population and what you saw was about 1 million strong KGB trained supported radicals with their Moslem brothers from Palestine and the rest were the same liberal crowd (useful idiots same ones as in the US) who stormed the streets of Tehran in 1979. Do not ever forget that. History is alive and will always be. History always repeat itself too! Lesson must be learnt if we want to survive.
ML:
Frankly I think you’re a bit too easy on Iranians in general during the ‘79 revolution. Nobody has exposed Carter’s sins more than I, but I still insist that the Iranians themselves were the main actors, and millions of them convinced themselves that the shah was even worse than he was, and that Khomeini would be an improvement. They are no trying to explain it all to their children.
Dec 29, 2007 - 12:52 pm shiraz:Dear Dr. Ledeen, I totally agree with you in that also that same crowd of a million who stormed the streets of Tehran back in 1979 for which lots were the trolls of the Soviets and Tudeh’s party, and Mujahedeen and so and so were as you rightfully said such fools to think that Khomeini was going to be much better than Shah and bring them free gasoline, free rice , free electricity , etc. as he had promised. Our parents are as you said ashamed of such foolishness as they believed. Nevertheless my point is that this is no different than the same “Liberal leftist anti-American, leftist elite whom some of them like to be called and recognized as even “Radicals” of the US who blatantly pride themselves of being “anti-establishment” and “anti-American” in general. After all being “REBEL” is always “In Vogue” especially in our politically correct environment. It was back then in 1979 and it is today. We Iranians have a saying in that 1 sheep roams and hundred others follow! That is what happened back then in 1979 for whom thousands on the street did not even know what they are about to get. The same exact can happen in any corner of the world today. My point is that it can easily even happen here in the US today where millions of those idealized multicultural liberal fools can easily give up their freedom and all they have just to defy the system and embrace rebellion. Human nature is the common denominator to all people all over the world. All I wish now is to warn our very young rebellions in the US and the American in general not to fall in the same trap that we Iranians have fallen deep in because of our parents’ foolishness and nativity back in 1979. We’ve been there, done that and now see how we destroyed all that we had! Luckily in the US today we have far more sanity from wider range of people than we had in Iran in 1979. Freedom, prosperity and security (all that we Iranians to some extent had before the mullahs)bring boredom to the masses at the very important decisive junctions in their history. We must be awake and wise. You have the very correct analysis of the recent history of Iran and the factors involved in shaping it.
ML:
Thanks for this thoughtful comment. There are two books you will enjoy: Eric Hoffer’s “The True Believer,” and Elias Canetti’s “Crowds and Power.” Both classics.
Yes, such things can indeed happen anywhere, but it’s less likely in a country like the United States, for many reasons.
Dec 29, 2007 - 3:03 pm Nick Guariglia:It’s ironic, isn’t it, that it is usually you, or people with a similiar opinion about Iran, that is accused of doing this very same thing by these very same people. Namely, we’re told we *blame* Iran for “everything” without evidence (a false claim)… whereas the likes of Satterfield actually do just that, except they *credit* the regime without evidence.
Dec 29, 2007 - 4:32 pm Ira Zad:The point is, it was a US President who used the term “Axis of Evil” with Iran regime amongst one of the Evils that must be confronted. But instead, several years after his speech, we are making deals with Iranian regime, and appeasing them every chance we get. And we have not done anything drastic or really threatening to the existence of that “Evil” regime, either. That is something we have to face.
We have switched between soft and hard (only in rhetoric) policy so many times with Iran since 2001, that it is enough to spin any mullah’s head and ultimately make him laugh out loud at our painfully transparent and ineffective policy towards them.
Not only we have not helped the opposition to overthrow the regime, but we have been actively seeking –desperately I might add — to make deals and compromises with this member of the now hollow term “Axis of Evil”.
We have also failed to do much with another “Axis of Evil” member, North Korea; as we have managed to make Iraq into a blazing quagmire for which we now seek and need another “Axis of Evil” member, Iran’s help to “fix”? What happened to our high and mighty goals for the region here?
It’s high time we faced our own evils, our inconsistent foreign policy, and failure in achieving what we set out to do.
As John Bolton said recently, our foreign policy is in a “free fall”. He must be congratulated on his straight forward realism in seeing things as they really are.
http://mor2com.blogspot.com/
ML:
That’s one point, there are lots of others.
Dec 29, 2007 - 4:34 pm shiraz:Thank you Dr. Ledeen for suggesting these 2 books. I will definitely read them. I have to be honest here confessing how I almost panicked when just a short few months ago that nut head Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez had come in here with all his audacity to preach in a Brooklyn church offering those easily affected people free gasoline! All of a sudden I saw footprints of that old hag Soviets and their proxies! Wow! How could it be? Soviets around our border? It was so surreal!!!
We are so blessed here in the US since we have such open free market economy and our geographical isolation protects us from the nut heads such as Chavez in all its different colors be it green or red! Cheers to Lady Liberty and the land of the Free! I dig for the day that Iran becomes once again the beacon of hope, prosperity and progress in the mid east.
ML:
Me too.
Dec 29, 2007 - 9:44 pm Robert Miller:Dear Dr. Ledeen,
I hope you’re well.
I can fully appreciate your take here. Iran’s mullocracy is far from omnipotent, and such a viewpoint is reminiscent of how certain pundits viewed the Nazis in the 1930’s.
And General Petraeus and our warriors have fought magnificently.
However, there is another highly likely explanation for the Iranian cutback in support for Shi’ite militias like the Mahdi Army.
And it accounts for otherwise curious events like the deeply flawed Iran NIE, the gang rape of Israel at Annapolis and the US embrace of the Saudi `peace’ ultimatum, the invitation of Syria to Annapolis and the subsequent caving in of the March 14 movement in Lebanon in favor of the pro-Syrian `consensus’ candidate General Sulieman,http://joshuapundit.blogspot.com/2007/12/lebanon-another-victim-of-annapolis.html and the recent US shipment of strategic materials to Syria in defiance of our own sanctions.
I also note in this context the rapidly warming relations between Iran and the Saudis and the large amounts of Arab capital now moving into the US financial markets as well as the Saudis continuing to effectively import US inflation by continuing to lean on OPEC to keep oil sales pegged to the falling dollar…and of course, a US president with a year to go in office who realizes that a peaceful transition in Iraq constitutes a large part of his historical legacy.
As you know, I have considerable respect for your opinion in these matters, and would be interested in what you would have to say about this.
All Best,
RM
ML:
I think the theory about a deal between the US and Iran is nuts.
Dec 30, 2007 - 3:25 pm Robert Miller:I certainly hope you’re right…but I don’t see any other logical explanation for the items I mentioned.
Dec 31, 2007 - 4:40 pm tanstaafl:An interesting article on some of the less obvious dynamics inside Iran
Iran’s inner and outer circles of influence and power
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-circle31dec31,1,6012308.story
ML:
It’s a good article, thanks for posting it. Its major weakness is lack of context: Khamenei is dying, and a lot of the action in Iran these days has to do with the succession strugle, rather than demonstrating “concentric circles of power” or the like. If Khamenei were in good health, there would be a lot less of the infighting we see today.
Jan 1, 2008 - 11:31 am Brian H:There is another glaring “timing” problem with MJ’s theory: the Iranians should now be accelerating their activities since US casualties have been falling precipitously for months, and the US public is increasingly cognizant of that fact. It is far more plausible that many of their levers are breaking in their hands, inflicting painful and infectious slivers and cuts.
Jan 1, 2008 - 9:11 pm frieda:“as yet another proof of the near-flawless cunning and brilliance of the mullahs”
this is right on the money…we also think that “British” are the real force behind the Mullahs’ longevity!
I agree with your analysis, we are wining because Iran is losing its influence in the South. At the end of the day, nationality played a bigger role than just religion. Shia Arabs don’t like Iranian style “shia-ism”, simple as that. When honeymoon was over, Iraqis realized they dont want taliban or iranian “shia-ism” in their backyard!
ML:
There will no doubt be a difficult final act in the south, but certainly the Iranians have failed to accomplish their main mission, which was the creation of an Iraqi Shi’ite region under the effective control of the Islamic Republic.
Jan 2, 2008 - 2:44 am