What would be Iranian Reaction to any Foreign Assault?

18 August 2010 | 19:19 Code : 8355 Review
By Ali Omidi, Assistant professor of Political Science in the University of Isfahan-Iran.
What would be Iranian Reaction to any Foreign Assault?
Admiral Mike Mullen Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff, said in an interview with NBC’s ‘Meet the Press’ last Sunday “Allowing Iran to develop nuclear weapons is unacceptable … the US has plans to attack Iran if needed to prevent it.”

 These comments generated a perception that a US, and possibly Israeli attack on Iran is imminent. The stance has provoked staunch verbal reactions of Iranian military officials. The Iranian Defense Minister said "Iranian reaction against any foreign military assault would be regretful" for the likely enemy.

What then would be the Iranian deterrence policy toward any foreign attack?

First of all, the main military institution for any the US assault against Iran has been delegated to the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps. This institution has designed multi-level military reactions against the foreign assault:

1. Regional Level; Iranian strategists believe that the Iraqi experience has given them good lesson. Saddam by just limiting the combat field inside Iraq gave military privilege to the enemy. If Iran could expand the combat field, it would be very hard for the US to promote its military strategy easily. So, Iran would attack directly or indirectly (by proxy wars) against the US military bases in the region and Israel. Since, any kind of the US attack means "the death and life issue"(or zero-sum game), Iran would use even the elements such as Al-Qaeda and Taleban as expedient tactics which now are rouge elements in Iranian calculus.

The Inflammatory statements of Iranian president on Israel and holocaust have attracted the sympathy of Middle East peoples. So the Jihadi groups such as Hezbollah and Hamas will use their maximum potential in counter attacking; because these groups consider any the US military strike against Iran as "death and life issue" for themselves too.

2. Domestic Level; In this level, two policies would be taken simultaneously:

 1. Planning of asymmetrical war by pulling the likely enemy inside Iran. Iranian topography (unlike Iraq) would be difficult for blitz war. So, Iran by prolongation of war would increase the enemy losses.

2. Removing the fifth column. The US would calculate on public uprising in favor the US military strike (as in Iraq happened).So, the Iranian authority is very alert in this issue and has destroyed and will remove any alternative for transitional period. It means that, Iranian authority would not tolerate any opposition as alternative of any kind for the transitional period. It will make difficult the horizons of military success in Iran.

 3. Non-conventional instruments:

Evidently, democracies such as the US are vulnerable to loss of life. It’s their ’Achilles heel’. However, in Middle East countries, it has become a ’value’. Iran could well proceed by unconventional instruments, such as (Martyrdom) suicide attacks to increase the military expenses of any likely enemy. Iran would block by any means, the Hormuz Strait and thus increase the expenses of militancy against Iran. In this regard, Iran has established a Suicide Battalion, to signal to the likely enemy that this country has prepared itself to sustain an infinite loss and resist infinitely.

In conclusion, any surgical operation against Iran will easily escalate to all-out war. Any strike only complicates the horizon of managing Iran in its nuclear activities.