Terror in Ahvaz and a Reaction That Could Be More Dangerous

The provocative statements of Saudi officials in recent years or their connections with some violent groups opposing the Iranian government can be seen as Riyadh's support for the "terrorist and disgusting incident" in Ahvaz. However, to prove Saudi Arabia's role and convince the international community, especially under conditions where the Islamic Republic's claims are not easily accepted globally due to its external problems, more documents and evidence are needed. Violent attacks in the Khuzestan region in recent years, including those seemingly related to Saturday's attack, have been repeated many times, but Iran's propaganda focus on Saudi Arabia's role has mainly emerged in the recent Ahvaz attack. This method of immediately linking any terrorism and violence to an opposing or hostile country has a precedent on the other side as well. From Saudi Arabia and Gulf countries to Nigeria and Morocco, they have primarily relied on the statements and positions of military and political leaders of these countries to substantiate their accusations against the Islamic Republic. When General Qassem Soleimani threatened Bahrain with unprecedented words, stating that if the government of that country took action against the opposition leader, it would face armed resistance from the people and seal its own fate, or when Mohammad Ali Jafari, the commander of the Revolutionary Guards, announced the "creation of armed resistance cells" throughout the region and beyond, regardless of how much these statements have found or will find practical counterparts, they provide suitable grounds and evidence for Iran's opponents in the region to link violent and provocative actions in their own countries, rightly or wrongly, to Iran. Regardless of what and how much Saudi Arabia's role in the Ahvaz attack truly was, and how much extensive propaganda in this regard relates to the reality of the assassination, and how much it aims to seize the propaganda space ahead of the UN General Assembly and counter the Trump administration's efforts to pressure Iran at this assembly, and regardless of how much this propaganda focus on Saudi Arabia is real or aimed at overshadowing the weaknesses of security measures for the parade or generally internal issues, Iran's uncalculated reaction (whether the accusations against Saudi Arabia are true or not) could create far greater dangers. Hussein Shariatmadari, the representative of the Supreme Leader at Kayhan newspaper, wrote points one day after this act that could easily be used against Iran and provide fresh fodder for both correct and incorrect propaganda about "Iran's support for terrorism." Shariatmadari wrote in the Sunday issue of Kayhan that while the atmosphere is still heated and people's resentment is high, revenge must be taken, by any means necessary: "Yesterday's terrorist attack clearly indicates the empty hands of the enemy in confronting Islamic Iran, and this opportunity should not be overlooked or wasted. As Saadi said; when your hand reaches the enemy's brain, seize the opportunity from the heart of the dust. When the US and Israel and their fake pawns like Saudi Arabia and the UAE do not consider attacks on military personnel and women and children as terrorist operations, why should their military and security officials anywhere in the world be safe from the fire of revenge?! Especially since the supporters of Islamic Iran are not few around the world, and from now on, the germs of corruption and decay should fear even from their own shadow." In other words, if the scenario of the assassination of the Saudi ambassador in the US by Iran three years ago had weak content and remains ambiguous, the fatwa of Hussein Shariatmadari, whether acted upon or not, provides good fodder for promoting and completing such scenarios, increasingly linking any terrorist action in the world to the Islamic Republic and intensifying international pressure on Iran, further isolating it. Some circles and figures in Iran have even spoken of a direct strike against Saudi Arabia, meaning a military action should take place, which means feeding those circles in Saudi Arabia and the region that are not satisfied with weakening Iran through heavy sanctions and pressuring its economic chokehold, demanding its further crushing to the point of disintegration, including relying on US military capabilities. In other words, any adventurous action against Saudi Arabia is a suitable ground for Riyadh's long-standing efforts to convince Washington to resort to military leverage or at least to impose a military blockade on Iran. In addition to provocative positions like that of Hussein Shariatmadari, other voices from Iran have also emerged, introducing the recent missile attack by the Houthis on Saudi Arabia as a kind of "revenge against Saudi Arabia for yesterday's assassination in Ahvaz." This statement aligns with what one of the commanders of the Revolutionary Guards said in mid-August. He stated that the Houthis' attack on two Saudi ships was carried out at Iran's request. Later, this news was leaked, but they could not manage its repercussions, and it continues to be cited as evidence of Iran's support for their missile attacks on Saudi Arabia. Overall, the solution of proxy and propaganda warfare between Iran and Saudi Arabia and Israel, which partly incorporates the violent movements of opposing groups in each country, rightly or wrongly, is nothing more than threats and posturing. Beyond opening and transformation in the internal arena and strengthening national cohesion, Iran can better isolate the extremists in Saudi Arabia and Israel by revising its regional policies, including regarding the existence of Israel and changing its actions in neighboring countries, which are the scenes of its struggle and competition with other regional powers. Such an approach, which facilitates regional interaction between Tehran and Riyadh and other opposing capitals, and consequently leads to the establishment of balanced relations with the US and the West, can better ensure Iran's internal security and eliminate the potential support of any foreign country for violent and terrorist groups. The crisis related to the JCPOA also has its own specific solution and is unrelated to the aforementioned solution. With the statements and positions announced in Tehran and despite the heavy burden of sanctions on the people, it does not seem that after 40 years, the Islamic Republic is ready to shift in this direction, but in politics, nothing is impossible.