Iran at a Crossroad

by Amin Tarzi and Adam C Seitz

The Islamic Republic of Iran is at a crossroad. 2009 closed

with the Islamic Republic regime witnessing the most

fundamental challenges to its rule over Iran. As a result both

the regime in power and the country of Iran begin the year

2010 with more uncertainty than at any other time in the thirty

years since the triumph of the Islamic revolution. The

uncertainty in Iran not only translates into insecurity for the

regime, but also for the region and beyond, as the regime

flexes its muscles to demonstrate relevance and authority. This

presents a challenging security environment. Chief among the

growing security challenges are Tehran’s continued defiance in

negotiations over its nuclear program, and the weakening of

the chains of commands which hitherto had kept Tehran from

stepping beyond certain redlines in projecting its influence

beyond its borders. Which way is Iran heading?

Nuclear Negotiations and International Security

Issues

The issues surrounding Iran’s nuclear program continued

to go unresolved. Revelations, such as the discovery of the

undeclared Fordow underground nuclear enrichment facility

near Qom, have only created more questions and concerns

over Iran’s true intentions. Tehran continues to walk a tight

rope with regards to its nuclear program. The Iranian

leadership appears to make concessions and keep dialogue

open with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) by

suggesting alternatives to the P5+1 backed IAEA offer to

ship the bulk of Iran’s low-enriched uranium to Russia and

France for conversion into nuclear fuel for a medical

research reactor in Tehran. Thus far, the alternatives Tehran has offered, ranging from

gradual shipments of its uranium “abroad” to shipping the uranium to the Iranian island of

Kish, do little, if anything, to ease security concerns. They can only be viewed as attempts to

stall talks and avoid sanctions or other more robust action by the international community,

all the while Tehran moves forward with its nuclear program.

Gray Research Center, 2040 Broadway Street, Quantico, VA 22134 • 703.432.5260 • www.mcu.usmc.mil

Middle East Studies

at the Marine Corps University

MES Insights • Volume 1, Issue 1 January 2010

MES Notes

Upcoming MES Lecture Series

Middle East Studies at Marine

Corps University will be hosting a

Lecture Series throughout 2010

entitled “A Multidisciplinary

Approach to AfPak Region and Its

People.”

The first speaker in this series is Dr.

James Caron, who will be

discussing his work on social and

political dissent in Pashtu poetry.

The lecture will take place 20

January from 1400-1530 in rooms

163/164 of the GRC.

POC for this event is Adam Seitz at

seitzac@grc.usmcu.edu.

MES Website is Available

The Middle East Studies Website is

now available and is accessible

from the Marine Corps University

homepage at www.mcu.usmc.mil.

MES at MCU Disclaimer

The opinions and conclusions

expressed herein are those of the

individual author and do not

necessarily represent the views of

either the Marine Corps University

or any other governmental agency.

Any references to this newsletter

should include the foregoing

statement.
If obtaining nuclear fuel for “peaceful” use had been the sincere objective for Tehran,

accepting the proposal agreed to in principle by Iran during the October 2009 negotiations

held in Geneva ought to have been sufficient. Therefore, little doubt should remain that

Tehran’s ultimate objective in its nuclear policies is something other than securing nuclear

fuel for its planned power plants and other legitimate uses.

Exacerbating the nuclear dilemma in the past year was Tehran’s repeated missile tests,

increased Iranian political and military support of militant groups not limited to the Middle

East region, and provocations against specific targets in Iran’s neighborhood and beyond.

As nuclear negotiations drag on, Tehran is taking this opportunity to rearm and position its

proxies in the region. Throughout 2009 the international

community witnessed an increase in the frequency and size

of Iran-origin weapons shipments seized en-route to

militants throughout the Middle East, raising concerns that

Tehran is preparing for confrontation with the West through

proxies in the event of a bolder action against the Islamic

Republic or as a leverage in gaining a better deal in the

nuclear negotiation roundabouts.

Domestic Insecurity and Leadership Issues

Prior to the highly disputed June 2009 presidential

election and the internal fallout which has followed it, there

was some sense that the Islamic Republic had a defined,

albeit complicated and convoluted, leadership structure. The

supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was the final

arbiter, and he and his office acted as a source of ultimate

legitimacy within the regime. Khamenei, while not

omnipotent within the system, was clearly the person who

stood, at least in the public perception, outside of the

wrangling of Iran’s multifaceted power structure and was

the one who checked and balanced various forces

competing for primacy within the regime. However,

Khamenei’s blatant support of Mahmud Ahmadinejad prior

to the election and after his disputed victory has stripped the

Supreme Leader of any aura of impartiality that he had

retained. The massive protests which have rocked Tehran

and other Iranian cities since June and the government’s

brutal suppression of these protests have left a greater rift in

many Iranian decision-making apparatus, illustrating the limits of Khamenei’s power and

control over the system in charge in Iran. All the while as the Iranian leadership continues

to scramble to regain order and legitimacy, the door has been opened for the Islamic

Republic Guard Corps (IRGC) to step in amid the power struggle with clinched fists to fill the

power vacuum.

Gray Research Center, 2040 Broadway Street, Quantico, VA 22134 • 703.432.5260 • www.mcu.usmc.mil

MES December News

3 December 2009

Dr. Amin Tarzi participated in a

conference for The Abbasi Program

in Islamic Studies at Stanford

University entitled “Alienated

Nations, Fractured States:

Afghanistan and Pakistan.”

Dr. Tarzi’s presentation was entitled

“Yaghistan Revisited: The Struggle

for Domination of Afghan-Pakistan

Borderlands.”

8 December 2009

Dr. Amin Tarzi participated in a

conference at the Asia Society

entitled “Can President Obama’s

New Afghanistan Strategy

Succeed?”

Video and transcripts are available

through the MES Website.

17 December 2009

Dr. Amin Tarzi gave a talk at Camp

Pendleton for the Marine Corps

School of Infantry entitled

“Measures of Success in the

Afghanistan Theatre.”
It is too early to predict that Iran is turning into a shadowy military dictatorship

unofficially headed by elements within the IRGC. But it is becoming clearer that there are

major rifts among civilian political circles and also among the clergy, leaving the hardliners

in the IRGC ranks as the powerbrokers and eventual deciders of the course of action for the

Islamic Republic.

The internal threats to the security of the Iranian regime and the apparent lack of resolute

leadership among the traditional civilian forces in charge in Tehran have created concerns

about a host of issues; prime among them for the international community are the Iranian

regime’s threat perceptions and the IRGC’s reaction to further domestic unrest. Beyond

questions about gross violations of human rights currently taking place against protestors and

political opponents of the regime, the two aforementioned interrelated dilemmas are likely to

be key questions facing the international community regarding Iran this year.

To address the first dilemma, the international community needs to anticipate and

prepare for the Iranian regime’s reaction should the domestic upheaval gain momentum. It is

likely that the regime will continue to accelerate the pursuit of nuclear technology beyond

peaceful uses to gain more legitimacy for the system and bolster nationalistic fervor among

Iranians, both in concrete actions and also in opaque actions aimed at raising more concerns

about Iran’s nuclear program. Tehran seems to be calculating that by inviting more

international condemnation for its nuclear activities, it can divert attention from its internal

problems and also to blame the international community for fomenting those problems.

Incorporating this understanding effectively into negotiation strategies and engagement

planning is critical to advancing the international community’s position in the region.

The second challenge is about Iran’s leadership. Is there an individual or an identifiable

institution, other than the IRGC, with which the international community could continue to

negotiate the fate of Iran’s nuclear program as 2010 begins? In desperation, Tehran might

gamble to invite harsher international actions as a diversionary tactic. With lack of decisive

leadership and with access to advanced nuclear technology, this could be a dangerous

gamble for all involved. It is imperative to identify in the near-term an empowered,

acceptable interlocutor that can be a reliable partner at the table.

As 2010 begins, Iran – both regime and country – is at a crossroad. Which path will it

take? This will depend heavily on internal pressures, of course. However, the international

community has a hand to play as well. It is in the playing that the course will be determined.

Gray Research Center, 2040 Broadway Street, Quantico, VA 22134 • 703.432.5260 • www.mcu.usmc.mil

Middle East Studies at Marine Corps University

Dr. Amin Tarzi • Director, MES • tarzia@grc.usmcu.edu

Adam C. Seitz • Senior Research Associate, MES • seitzac@grc.usmcu.edu