Is there any material on whether or not the IRGC is working with the Shia in Afghanistan, like the Shia elements of the Hazaras, or any of the other groups in Afghanistan?
Is there any material on whether or not the IRGC is working with the Shia in Afghanistan, like the Shia elements of the Hazaras, or any of the other groups in Afghanistan?
Given the Iranian habits/cultural inclinations to what we narrow and linear Westerns would call outrageous exaggeration, has anyone suggested that these "elite" elements may be something like the "unstoppable" and "Iranian" designed underwater rocket (the aging Russian-made Shkval torpedo)? Could this be another media generated tempest in a teacup?
Sub-State Actors
So far we generally have two categories of actors that we frequently refer to when discussing conflicts, which are State Actors and Non-State actors. I am beginning to wonder if it is appropriate to designate a third category called sub-state actors. These are organizations that are allegedly belong to the state, yet also conduct independent operations outside the realm of state control. I'm not they exist, but I think the ISI of Pakistan and the Quds of Iran could be two examples. If true this creates some interesting dilemnas.
As anyone wrote on this subject previously?
Bill
That's an excellent question. The Hazara are Mongol-descended Sevener Shia who would be "hereteical" in the eyes of more stringent Iranian Twelver Shia. OTOH, the ruling clique in Syria are Alawites, an even more distant and weird offshoot, yet are nominally considered Shia by Iranian authorities."Is there any material on whether or not the IRGC is working with the Shia in Afghanistan, like the Shia elements of the Hazaras, or any of the other groups in Afghanistan?"
I suppose if the Iranians can work with Hekmatyar....
Bill, the middle ground between "State" and "Non-State" is "State-Sponsored". This description fits Quds to a tee. The problem is that even state-sponsored has a very wide range, from rogue elements of the state's apparatus to elements that would be considered non-state except that they are wholly funded by one state. Of course, the state involved usually sees an interest in covering the money trail carefully IOT create plausible deniability, and there is always a question of how 'rogue' are those rogue elements (again with the plausible deniability).
I've read considerable commentary regarding the ISI and meddling in India, and know there is a book out there that I browsed once. I'll try to hit the Research Center this weekend and dig it up.These are organizations that are allegedly belong to the state, yet also conduct independent operations outside the realm of state control. I'm not they exist, but I think the ISI of Pakistan and the Quds of Iran could be two examples. If true this creates some interesting dilemnas.
As anyone wrote on this subject previously?
Most Hazaras are Twelvers. There is a small Hazara population in Iran as well.
I have to disagree with you on this. I suspect that the Quds force falls firmly into the "State" category. Now it may be debatable whether their orders are coming from the religious apparatus or the government but in Iran that is an entirely moot point.Originally Posted by Van
SFC W
RFE/RL, 16 Feb 07: Iran: Expert Discusses Iran's Quds Force And U.S. Charges Concerning Iraq
...RFE/RL: Is it possible that the Quds Force is involved directly in attacks against U.S. forces and coalition troops?
Abedin: Not at all, because that's not Iranian policy. The contention which the Americans have made -- now they've backtracked from it -- is rather quite silly, because now what they are saying is that maybe the Quds Force is doing it without the official sanction of the Iranian government. The Quds Force, although it's a highly specialized department, it is subject to strict, iron-clad military discipline. It's completely controlled by the military hierarchy of the IRGC, and the IRGC is very tightly controlled by the highest levels of the administration in Iran. If the Quds Force was going around blowing up American soldiers, then that would be definitely sanctioned by the highest levels of the Iranian government. But my point is that they're not doing that, because Iranian policy in Iraq is not about that. Iranian policy in Iraq is to give proper training and support to Iran's natural allies in Iraq in order to influence their political positioning in post-occupation Iraq. The Iranians are far too smart, in my view, to challenge American power in Iraq directly....
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks