Analysis

Iran: Island of peace in ocean of troubles?

Iranian leaders failed to use the incident to unite people, but found a new platform to attack each other instead

15.06.2017 - Update : 15.06.2017
Iran: Island of peace in ocean of troubles?

By Selim Celal

-The Turkey-based writer is an expert on Iran’s foreign policy and domestic politics.

ISTANBUL

On June 7, 2017, Tehranites were shocked by twin attacks on the Iranian parliament and the mausoleum of Ayatollah Khomeini, the founder of the Islamic Republic. The attack on the mausoleum was controlled in its early stage with few casualties while the one on the parliament compound continued for up to six hours, leaving 17 people dead and over 50 injured.

Let it be clear upfront that the Iranian parliament has two main buildings totally distinct from each other in terms of architecture. There is a seven-story rectangular administrative building which encompasses the offices of MPs. And there is a pyramidal structure that is the chamber house.

There is no doubt the main targets were MPs. Otherwise, no additional risks would be necessary to enter the parliament compound for any soft targets. It could have been done on any Tehran street with greater efficiency.

The parliament compound is protected 24/7 by a special force unit of the Guardian of the Islamic Revolution (GIR). Snipers are positioned on the towers. Advanced security equipment is in use at the entrances. There is also a three-layer security check one must pass to get to where the attackers reached.

Based on media reports, the attackers crossed the security barriers one after the other by opening fire on the security personnel, and they entered the compound through the waiting area (lounge), a hall where MPs meet their clients and voters from their constituencies.

Regarding what transpired from this point on, there are two official hypotheses. According to the first one, the attackers lost their way, and instead of going to the chamber, they ended up entering the administrative building.

As noted earlier, the building where the chamber is, is so visible. Implementing what seems like a very sophisticated plan, the attackers should have been able to tell a pyramidal structure from a rectangular one.

The other hypothesis says that the attackers had been heading towards the chamber, but the security personnel of the chamber had, in a timely manner, closed the gate that separates the chamber from the rest of the compound. As a result, the attackers, who were being chased, had no choice but to enter the administrative building.

The footage shows that the waiting/meeting hall was full of clients, who had appointments with their MPs. Therefore, given the large number of clients, there must have been a few MPs in the hall as well.

Thankfully, out of the 290 MPs, only one MP, the 59-year-old Koorush Karami, was in the hall during the assault. According to his account, he took a pistol from a dead guard and fought for three hours and even chased the attackers up to the first floor of the administrative building.

He then reached the chamber by jumping over a gap spanning six meters, a heroic feat that one can usually see in action movies. Fortunately, he was not caught in the crossfire between the attackers and the special forces.

When the attackers invaded the compound, an assembly session was in progress under the supervision of the deputy speaker, Masoud Pezeshkian. From a security point of view, the session should have been immediately adjourned and the premises evacuated.

On the contrary, the MPs preferred to stay and do their routine jobs, and post selfies to demonstrate their over-confidence. Meanwhile, Speaker Ali Larijani, who was not in the chamber, risked his life by passing through the crossfire to come to the chamber in order to preside over the session.

There are clear contradictions that cast doubt on the official account on the event, leading us to a number of questions. For instance, how could the attackers go through the multi-layer security system and infiltrate the compound?

How could a 59-year-old MP jump into the chamber while the seemingly well-trained young attackers could not? Why was the attack on Khomeini’s mausoleum not carried out a few days earlier on the occasion of the death anniversary of Ayatollah Khomeini when the mausoleum was teeming with visitors? So on and so forth…

It is, however, difficult to explain the event on the basis of conspiracy theories, and as such, there is no concrete evidence to prove that it was a plot orchestrated by the establishment itself. On the other hand, there are evidences that somehow corroborate the official explanation about the event.

Daesh has already assumed responsibility. The identities of the attackers have also been confirmed. They are Iranian Sunnis of Kurdish origin. In a video recorded prior to the attack, the assailants emphatically say that they are neither Saudi nor Iranian agents. They condemn Iran for its role in Iraq, Syria, Yemen and other parts of the Muslim world.

Iranian authorities argue that the Islamic Republic is fighting Daesh in Syria and Iraq. Obviously, Daesh, like a wounded snake, wanted to do something. After all, only a few weeks earlier, Saudis had promised that they would take the battle inside Iran.

However, this attack being an inside or outside job does not make much difference. The reality is that an attack has taken place and it has partially succeeded with several people killed or injured.

As a matter of fact, contrary to what is widely believed about carrying out acts of terrorism, most of the time there is no need for secret plots. Rather, it is important to be skilled at exploiting a genuine situation. Therefore, the key question is not whose job it was but rather, what the Islamic Republic has lost that it could gain back out of this incident.

Right after the incident, condemnations poured in from different parts of the world, yet the Iranian authorities themselves remained silent. On the same day, the Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei had a meeting with a group of handpicked devoted university students.

To the surprise of all, Ayatollah Khamenei referred to the incident as a "firecracker", and asserted that "today’s fumbling with firecrackers will not affect the willpower of the people". He put the opportunity to further use to justify the Islamic Republic’s presence in Syria and Iraq by saying: "If the Islamic Republic had not resisted, in the midst of all this conspiracy [Iraq and Syria], we would have had more troubles of this sort in the country."

The Supreme Leader begrudged even a simple message of condolences to the families of the victims. One should compare his reaction to that of former U.S. President Barack Obama, who used to appear with tearful eyes besides victims' families in similar incidents in the U.S.

It seems that the Supreme Leader is still suffering from the shock of the defeat of his candidate, Ebrahim Raisi in last May's presidential election. He extensively attacked President Hassan Rouhani's government.

He emphatically told audiences not to wait for his commands but rather "fire at will" whenever they noticed something contrary to the ideals of the Islamic Republic in the society and governmental institutions.

It took the Supreme Leader's advisers more than 24 hours to convince him to issue a statement of condolence. Nonetheless, the statement was also politicized. It was full of anti-Saudi and anti-American rhetoric. For the time being, the word "firecrackers" has been removed from the text of his speech posted on his official website.

Nevertheless, what the Supreme Leader referred to as a "firecrack" seems to have been taken seriously by the GIR commanders who, one by one, jumped into the scene to supervise the operation in person.

Once the operation was over, they also took selfies with MPs. On the one hand, they were trying to emerge as heroes, and on the other they were playing the innocent, given the strong criticisms recently directed at them owing to their economic activities as well as military misadventure in the Middle East.

Like the Supreme Leader, the GIR commanders also took the opportunity to argue that they had been right in their policy of fighting Daesh in Syria and Iraq before it would infiltrate Iran. However, there is a saying: "The public has no memory". One should remind the Iranians that the Islamic Republic entered Syria in 2012, whereas Daesh is a phenomenon that emerged as recent as 2014.

Attempts to capitalize on the incident will continue in the coming days and months. The establishment will use it as a pretext to limit the security power of President Rouhani. It would also be used to take control of Ayatollah Khomeini’s mausoleum.

At present, the principal custodian of the mausoleum is Hassan Khomeini, the grandson of Ayatollah Khomeini. But he is already disgraced by the establishment. His qualification for the Assembly of Experts election held in 2016 was rejected by the Guardian Council.

Therefore, it is a good opportunity to exploit the situation and take back control of the mausoleum on the pretext of security.

It is necessary to note that the mausoleum is a multi-billion dollar project. It is perhaps the largest and most expensive mausoleum in the world. To give an idea about its size, it would be enough to say that its construction has been going on since the burial of Khomeini in 1989. It is continuously being built, rebuilt, designed and redesigned.

Despite all these gains, the incident significantly affected the security prestige of the Islamic Republic. The Iranian authorities always refer to the country as "an island of peace and stability (albeit an oppressive and authoritarian one) in an ocean of troubles". The fact is that a powerful tsunami has hit the "island of peace and stability" to teach the Iranian leaders that peace on an island is not possible if the ocean surrounding it is in trouble.

The incident also shows serious security lapses in the country. One may wonder, if the GIR has failed to protect the parliament, how can it protect ordinary citizens?

There are several parallel intelligence institutions. They are in open competition with each other to the extent that they sometimes victimize each other’s personnel. For instance, the Telegram admin of the minister of intelligence was arrested by the GIR intelligence service a few days before the attack.

Not much later, the spokesman of the government released a statement in which he warned against the danger of a weakening intelligence minister and his personnel.

In a nutshell, the Iranian society is already polarized, particularly following the recent election. The Iranian leaders could use the incident to unite the people, but they have failed to do so. Instead, they have found a new platform to attack each other.

The slogans chanted during the funeral procession of the victims are a clear indication that there is an ongoing political dance on corpses.

* Opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Anadolu Agency.

Anadolu Agency website contains only a portion of the news stories offered to subscribers in the AA News Broadcasting System (HAS), and in summarized form. Please contact us for subscription options.
Related topics
Bu haberi paylaşın