The raging controversy in Iran over the identity of the group that carried out the attack on the military parade in the city of Ahvaz on September 22, 2018, has not abated. Although many Iranians continue to believe that one of the Arab armed groups in Ahvaz is responsible for that operation, others have begun to promote the notion that ISIS was behind this attack, the second of its kind after the first twin attack on the shrine of Khomeini and the administrative building of the Islamic Consultative Assembly (Parliament), on June 7, 2017, for which ISIS claimed responsibility.

Numerous Reasons

Against this backdrop, Iranian mainstream media, such as the Revolutionary Guards’ Javan (Youth) newspaper, have begun to promote that ISIS is responsible for the latest attack, for several reasons, including that the Arab Struggle Movement for the Liberation of Al-Ahwaz denied responsibility for the attack. In addition, the careful preparation and planning of the attack demonstrate to capabilities that may not be possessed by such Iranian groups.

Iranian authorities are promoting this account of the incident to achieve numerous objectives, the most prominent of which are the following: 

1- To highlight the common consensus between Iran and the West: A the current stage, Iran wants to emphasize the issues that could serve as points of convergence with Western countries, notably fighting terrorist organizations, particularly ISIS. In this regard, it can be argued that the mounting tension between Iran and the US over the nuclear and missile programs and the regional role did not prevent the former from signaling that understandings could be reached with Western states on the most important issue of particular interest to them, as these countries realize that curtailing the threats of terrorist organizations in the region will have positive impact on their interests. This comes after the repercussions of regional crises in the Middle East have spilled over into their borders, amid the successive waves of immigrants, refugees, and terrorist operations that hit western capitals, such as Paris, Brussels and London.

In other words, Iran is keen to promote that, like the western countries, it faces serious threats from terrorist organizations, which calls for the need to open common channels of communication between the two parties to reach security understandings that will enhance their role in combating terrorism.  Therefore, during his meetings with some Western officials, President Hassan Rouhani has repeatedly pointed out that fighting terrorism can be a common denominator between the two parties.

2- To Divert attention from Iran’s role in supporting terrorism: The Iranian policy in dealing with political and field developments in many crisis-ridden countries has been one of the primary causes that fueled the activities of terrorist organizations, as has been the case in Iraq and Syria in particular.

Accordingly, those who promote ISIS’s account about the attack are trying to divert attention from Iran’s role in supporting these organizations by suggesting that Iranian role has drawn a backlash from terrorist organizations, on the belief that Iran, in their point of view, has participated in the war on terror, through its support for the Syrian regime, for example, which enabled it to survive the pressures of these organizations in the past years and helped it to regain control of many areas that were held by these organizations.

In other words, these estimates claim that such attacks against the military parade of the Revolutionary Guards come as a response from those organizations to the Iranian role in the war against them, especially in Syria. They believe that this could enhance the efforts of the Iranian regime to justify its insistence on providing further economic and military support for the Syrian regime, since that protects the Iranian interests and national security in the first place.

During his meetings on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly, and even in his address to the General Assembly, Rouhani referred to Iran’s role in Syria, and reiterated that the involvement of Iranian advisors in the military confrontations in Syria was done at the request of the Syrian government as part of fighting terrorist organizations.

3- To downplay the importance of ethnic issues: Strikingly, the hasty accusations made by many Iranian officials and the mainstream media to an armed group in the Ahvaz region have been counterproductive. Such accusations have brought the grievances of ethnicities to the fore, amid the deteriorating living conditions of Arabs, Kurds, Baloch, Azeris, among others, which are set to aggravate during the next period in the light of the new US sanctions, which will peak on November 5, when they reduce Iranian oil exports, which have already plunged even before imposing the new batch.

What made the first account, about the attack, which put the blame on the Ahvazi group, lose its momentum was that the latter quickly denied its responsibility, in parallel with ISIS re-declaration of its responsibility for the attack, which posted a new sound recording threatening that the Ahvaz attack will not be the last.

4- To strengthen security cooperation with neighbouring states: Iran has exploited the recent attack in Ahvaz to bolster its efforts to expand security cooperation with some neighbouring countries, as well as many international forces involved in the region’s crises. This is evident in the first meeting of the Regional Security Dialogue held in Tehran on September 26, 2018, which included national security secretaries and advisors from Iran, Afghanistan, India, Russia and China.

Tehran argues that Iran and all these countries are vulnerable to the upsurge of terrorist organizations, both within and near their borders, noting that terrorists may move from Syria and Iraq to Afghanistan and the Central Asian countries, after having suffered numerous defeats in the two countries, thanks to the roles played by some countries, including Iran and Russia, in fighting these organizations, according to the Iranian point of view.

To conclude, despite Iran’s constant threats to respond to the latest attack in Ahvaz, it is still keen on reaching security agreements with Western countries. The aim is to evade the difficult paths of its interactions with the US, which may ultimately impose strategic decisions that run not contrary to its interests and its vision for the future of its role in the region.