Iran is stuck between a rock and a hard place on ISIS
and Iraq. Taking responsibility for security in Iraq – or even significantly
contributing to it – would be a huge undertaking. But a fragmented Iraq on its
border is a first-order concern for Tehran - it can’t just sit by with fingers
crossed. The choice is complicated by Syria. Iran can’t continue to pursue its
interests in Syria at the same level if it is mired in Iraq as well. It is
likely that Tehran will have to choose, and it will choose Iraq.
To Iran, Iraq and Syria are similar challenges,
except today’s crisis in Iraq is harder to solve and matters more. Until
recently, Assad’s Syria has been a good friend and ally to Iran and still
today, a conduit to the Mediterranean and Hezbollah. But Iraq is Iran’s
backyard.
Iran has a lot to lose in Iraq by inaction. Last time
Iraq’s interests were fundamentally opposed to Iran’s, there was a devastating
8 year long war. ISIS threatens Iran’s vast interests in Iraq: its significant
influence over politics, in fact the country as a whole, including symbolic religious shrines,
and trade, which reached
$12 billion in 2013. Unlike in Syria, the majority Shia population in Iraq
represents a real constituency for Tehran. Iraqi fragmentation threatens to
stir up desires for independence amongst other minority communities, including
in Iran, and force Tehran to double up efforts and resources in order to maintain
its influence in Iraq. ISIS gains have peaked American interest in Iraq once
more. Iran does not want any increased role for its US adversary in neighboring
Iraq again. More importantly, the crisis threatens to spill over the 910 miles
of porous border, which is poorly defended by the Iraqi police.
Iranians are terrified.
Many question Iran’s involvement in Syria, but they support involvement in
Iraq. Syria is an optional war: a crisis where Iran can dial its involvement up
or down based on its policy preferences. It is not an existential issue. But
ISIS activities in Iraq pose a real threat and a genuine sovereignty concern,
something Iran hasn’t seen in a long time.
To date, Iran has invested a great deal in Syria:
money, equipment and above all, political capital. While many argue this policy
succeeded, it’s clear that the cost is high for Tehran. Iran’s presence in
Syria has caused its regional popularity to plummet,
discord
amongst the elite, and rising discontent amongst ordinary Iranians questioning
the use of public funds to prop up a dictator. Iran sustaining a regime it
wants in power is part of its capacity to lead in the region, and so far it’s
working.
But getting the result Tehran wants in Syria has been
difficult. Today, it is a drain on Iranian resources and political capital.
It’s no surprise that Tehran doesn’t want a repeat of Syria in Iraq. But
containing the crisis in Iraq will be much harder, with many more potential
pitfalls.
Today, Iran is trying to broker cooperation between
all factions in Iraq against ISIS. But it is also assisting Maliki in pushing
ISIS back. Tehran is providing intelligence and advisors, including commander
of the Revolutionary Guards Quds Force Qassem Soleimani himself since mid-June,
and military assistance. Reports
confirm Iranian Su-25 aircrafts were shipped to Iraq in early July, while the
first Iranian military casualty was reported
a few days later. But overt Iranian involvement in Iraq further risks
polarizing Iraqis and deepening sectarian tensions. In addition, Maliki’s
stubbornness and overly sectarian style of governing no longer makes him a safe
bet for the Iranian government, which must now find ways to ensure the survival
of the current Shia-led structure.
Iraq is also high stakes because of the impact
failure will have on Iran. If Iran has the kind of experience in Iraq that
America had in Afghanistan and Iraq - running a shattered country - there won't
be a lot left over to do much else. Involvement in both Iraq and Syria will
continue to erode resources while making it impossible for Iran to pull out
after such investment.
Iran cannot afford to be involved in a long, drawn
out conflict on two fronts. While it is improbable that ISIS will sustain its
current course, it was also improbable that they would take a quarter of Iraq.
But they have and Iran is worried. Tehran can’t afford to let the crisis run
its course because the risks are too high. Over the years, Iran has invested
patiently in both Iraq and Syria. That's why it’s so difficult for Tehran to
give either of them up. But Iran will have to choose because its resources and
abilities are finite. It will likely choose Iraq.
No comments:
Post a Comment