« Previous · Home · Next »
Ambitions of Caliphate
By John
Is Iran seeking a monopoly on global Islamic terrorism? According to the UK's Daily Telegraph, the Iranian government has been quietly slithering into the upper echelons of Al Qaeda, and are actively trying to install "their guy" as Bin Laden's successor.
I can't help but to think of the old "all roads lead to Rome" axiom from the days of the Empire. If Iran has its way, soon all avenues of terrorism may trace directly to Tehran.
While the thought of a "one terrorist team, one terrorist fight" under Iranian leadership may be unnerving, the corporatization of Islamic terror may actually simplify our War on Terror, in that Iran is centralizing terror organizations that have always used decentralization as a strength. If Iran succeeds in making those entities dependent on the Ayatollahs, as Hezbollah is, then eliminating Tehran would be a tremendous blow to Islamic terror.
Iran has never been capable of playing on the State vs. State stage. They have little influence in international politics, their military is a joke, and they are flanked on all sides by actors friendly to the Western powers. Thus it is little surprise that Iran is looking to bolster their power and influence in the asymmetrical circles of the globe.
Our solution? Beat them at their own game. Bolster shipments of weapons, money, and supplies to the Iranian underground, send in special forces to quietly train the resistance, and force Iran to look inward instead of outward. Airstrikes won't do the job and invasion is out, so treating the Iranian resistance like we treated the Northern Alliance is our best bet.
It may feel a bit odd to foster instability in a region where we have long treasured market-friendly stability, but make no mistake. If the beast's head in Tehran is cut off, it will cycle down to nearly every major Islamic terror organization in the Middle East, and it will be a huge step towards winning this Long War.
More:
Bill Roggio
Counterterrorism Blog
Outside the Beltway
Blue Crab Boulevard
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://op-for.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/608
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Ambitions of Caliphate:
» Neo-Isolationism in a Global War from ShrinkWrapped
At the moment, a great deal of effort is being expended to understand and/or spin the results of the election. The war in Iraq was a major influence on the electorate, though it is an open question whether the results [Read More]
Comments
Turkey, Kuwait, and American-occupied Iraq and Afghanistan.
What's so outlandish about that? I'm not talking about militias, I'm talking about governments.
With friends like those, who needs enemies.
John, ya can't count Iraq as a standing pro-western government. They're hardly effective at preserving their own security much less helping us out with Iran (in ANY capacity... even if it's just to cheerlead us or cast a vote in the UN).
I'll give you Kuwait.
Turkey? Hmmm... they were hesitiant to really help us out with Iraq (remember the 4th ID, which was supposed to push through Turkey into northern Iraq into Turkey). Doubt they'd do much for us with Iran unless Iran really did something stupid.
Don't forget the long standing animosity between Iran and Turkey. Iran supports a now-benign terror group that used to be very active in Turkey.
As for Iraq...hell with over one-hundred thousand US troops there, who cares if their government is functional or not? My point is sound, they can't act State v. State as long as we're a presence.
If we haven't chopped the legs out from under the ally suggested: MEK Firend of Foe
Let's try that again.
Iran bomb behind the sale of weapons,this will trafficking of weapons that are then spread.easy to stop and now that go on strike,whit exact conclusion of the facts,namely to stop terrorrism and not.McCain,Peatrus,Bush does not speak to bomb the basis of Iran?
Post a comment
Potential comment conditions listed here. Oh, and you may use basic HTML for formatting.
"Flanked on all sides by nations friendly to western powers"?? Please tell me you typed that with a smile on your face, John.
At the snap of the ayatollah's finger, we'd have an Iraqi Shi'ia uprising on our hands the likes of which were merely HINTED at in 2004. Maliki's gov't is suspended by a thread, which is held more in the hands of Sadr than either us or Sistani.
We are in a poor position to deal with the Iranians and this new threat. The Iranians know it, which is why they're being so bold.