Posted on 03/24/2007 5:21:18 AM PDT by radar101
The capture of British Navy servicemen by Iranian forces is not simply an incident over sea sovereignty in the Persian Gulf. It is a calculated move on behalf of Teheran’s Jihadi chess players to provoke a “projected” counter move by London and its American allies. It is all happening in a regional context, carefully engineered by the Mullahs strategic planners. Here is how: The Iranian regime’s master plan is to wait out the remainder of Tony Blair’s mandate (few more months) and the remaining “real time” of President Bush (till about the end of 2007). For the thinking process in Tehran, based on their Western consultants, believe that Washington and London have reached the end of the rope and will only have till 2008 to do something major to destabilize Ahmedinijad regime. As explained by a notorious propagandist on al Jazeera today the move is precisely to respond to the Anglo-American attempt to “stir trouble” inside Iran. Anis Naccash, a Lebanese intellectual supporter of the Ayatollahs regime, appearing from Tehran few hours ago on the Qatari-based satellite and “explained” that the “US and the UK must understand that Iran is as much at war with these two powers in as much as they support the rise of movements and security instability inside Iran.” He added that Khamenei is clear on the regime’s decision to strike: “we will be at war with you on all levels: secret, diplomatic, military and other.” Pro-Iranian propagandists in the region, via media and online rushed to warn that this movement is part of Iran’s counter-strike against any attempt to destabilize the regime. Two major tracks emerge from these statements, the Iranian military maneuvers and the capture of British Navy personnel.
1) Iran’s domestic front is putting pressure on the Ahmedinijad regime.
From internal reporting, dissidents and anti-Ahmedinijad forces from various social sectors are practically in slow motion eruption against the authorities. Students, women, workers and political activists have been demonstrating and sometimes clashing with the regime’s security apparatus. Western media didn’t report proportionally on these events over the past few weeks. In addition, ethnic minority areas have been witnessing several incidents, including violence against the “Revolutionary Guards,” including in the Arab and Baluch areas. And last but not least, the defection of a major intelligence-military figure early this month to the West was, according to internal sources, a “massive loss” to the regime and a possible first one in a series.
2) The regime “need” an external clash to crush the domestic challenge.
As in many comparable cases worldwide, when an authoritarian regime is faced with severe internal opposition it attempts to deflect the crisis onto the outside world. Hence, Teheran’s all out campaign against the US and its allies in Iraq, Lebanon and the region is in fact a repositioning of Iran’s shield against the expected rising opposition inside the country. Hence the Khomeinist Mullahs plan seem to be projected as follow:
a. Engage in the diplomatic realm, to project a realist approach worldwide, but refrain from offering real results
b. Continue, along with the Syrian regime, in supporting the “Jihadi” Terror operations (including sectarian ones) inside Iraq
c. Widen the propaganda campaign against the US and its allies via a number of PR companies within the West, to portray Iran as “a victim” of an “upcoming war provoked by the US.”
d. Engage in skirmishes in the Gulf (and possibly in other spots) with US and British elements claiming these action as “defensive,” while planned thoroughly ahead of time.
3) The regime plan is to drag its opponents into a trap
Teheran’s master planners intend to drag the “Coalition” into steps in engagement, at the timing of and in the field of control of Iran’s apparatus. Multiple options and scenarios are projected.
a. British military counter measure takes place, supported by the US. Iran’s regime believe that only “limited” action by the allies is possible, according to their analysis of the domestic constraints inside the two powerful democracies.
b. Tehran moves to a second wave of activities, at its own pace, hoping to draw a higher level of classical counter strikes by US and UK forces. The dosing by Iran’s leadership is expected to stretch the game in time, until the departure of Blair and of the Bush Administration by its political opponents inside the country’s institutions and public debate.
In a short conclusion the “War room” in Tehran has engaged itself in an alley of tactical moves it feels it can control. But the Iranian regime, with all its “political chess” expertise, may find itself in a precarious and risky situation. For while it feel that it can control the tactical battlefield in the region and fuel the propaganda pressure inside the West with its Petro-dollars, it may not be able to contain the internal forces in Iran, because of which it has decided to go on offense.
The Ahmedinijad regime wishes to crumble the international consensus to avoid the financial sanctions: that is true. But as important, if not more, it wants to be able to crush the revolt before it pounds the doors to the Mullahs palaces.
Dr Walid Phares is a Senior Fellow with the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies in Washington
ping
No option?
do you really think the Iranians would have killed the sailors on the high seas? I doubt it.
I agree with your post 5, but explain why their "mother ship" didn't notice the Iranians approach or offer their own forces protection.
The bigger question is why didn' the Cornwall help our her marines in the rubber rafts when they saw the iranian boats approaching? It is even possible that one of the best equipped, modern ships on the high seas somehow "missed" the approach of the Iranian vessels? Those Iranian boats had to have been tracked for a long time, long before they overran the Royal Marines in rubber rafts. Just how far away from the mother frigate do you think those rubber rafts were? Something really stinks here.
I have always believed (maybe in error) that Bush will take on Iran toward the end of his term. This just may push it forward in time a bit with Blair's end coming sooner. I think some fireworks are going to happen soon.
Likely correct. Either the ROE or higher command refused action to use force to resist the Iranians.
Its really very easy to see why HMS Cornwall was told to stand down: a shooting conflict with Iran would spike
oil prices and send the capital markets south.
Those wanting to launch strikes on the Islamic Republic
either aren't thinking through the consequences, or don't
care.
Sailors and saltwater can screw-up anything...
Their subs are very vulnerable. It's time to start a harassment campaign against their subs -- one of them may have to have an "accident". Not necessarily sunk, but humiliated and shown to be vulnerable.
I haven't seen where Madame Pelosi or Monsieur Murtha have remarked adversely on the latest Iranian outrage; I guess they need a few push polls on the matter before proceeding.
Clearly the Iranian regime's fears of exactly such a thing happening led to Ahmadinejad staying home instead of coming to the UN. Did we have a psy-ops campaign whispering sweet threats into their ears?
Even though they have a lot of nutjobs in high positions, they are not immune from fear. They enjoy the comforts afforded by power and position. In the same way that, to make a trivial comparison, the clearly Clintons believe that their enemies are doing or planning the same corrupt and vile acts that they themselves are doing or are contemplating doing, so do the mullahs believe that the West (despite outward displays of weakness) is also capable of, and indeed is planning, to employ the same devious measures that the Iranians routinely use. So, let's not disappoint them...
The flaw in the reasoning of the moollahs is Israel.
It's called, "Rules of Engagement." More PC crap!
Sonce the British have been appeasing the Muslims since before 1920 I daon'd them doing much.
Playing western liberals like a drum.
However what this means is that we should do is short circuit their escalation and respond to either this or the next provocation with overwhelming force. This time on Monday the Iranian Navy and Air Force should no longer exist. Their nuclear, chemical and biological weapons facilities should be inaccessible, with the above ground entrances collapsed into rubble, caused by 2,000 lb bunker busters guided into those entrances.
Sounds like something Jack Ryan would do. I LOVE it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.