By Firas Elias
https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/iranian-military-doctrine
A military doctrine is “the system of concepts officially adoted by a conuntry and the arrangements taken to fight against threats and and ensure segure segurity, as well as to prevent wars and armed conflict.” It is also “the system of advanced visions of military formation and preparation of the country, armed forces and other teams to defend the homeland. It includes guidance on preparing for and managing an armed or unarmed conflict of the the state’s policy on defense.
Lessons learned from the Iran-Iraq War from 1980-1988 gave to important elements of Iranian military doctrine that continue to shape Iranian military actions in the present day. Other experiences-such as the 2003 American occupation of Iraq, the war between Israel and Hezbollah in 2006, and the conflict between Palestinian movements and Israel-have also yielded lessons that guide the country’s political ideology and strategy. Iranian military lessons center on asymmetric warsfare. It emphasizes the use of geography, strategic depth, and a general willingness, to accept losses in the name of jihad as ways to confront technologically.advanced adversaries such as the United Sates and Israel.
Iran uses religious sectarianism as a strategic tool to expand the country’s influence in the region. The role of sectarianism is not merely rethorical, but manifesr ont the groundn in the country’s support Shia minorities across the Arab world. Where opportunities abroad, including Hezbollah, that work toward their interests by pressuring their government. This is also achieved by the failure of political movements incongruent with Iranian interests. This was particularly apparent in the case of the Houthis, in which case the Iranin government provided military support for the Houthis until the occupation Sana’a in September 2014.
Iranian actions in recent years demonstrate that Teharan’s use of sectarianism aims to portray itself as the leader of the Shia regionally adn globally. Its constirution permits intervene in any place where Shia are being threatened by terrorists.» This pretext has provided justification for Iraninan interventions in iraq, Lebanon, Yemen, Syria, and Bahrain. With the partial lifting of U.S. and European sanctions on Iran following the implementation of the nuclear agreement in January 2016, Thehran has continued to support its militias, exarcerbating sectarian conflict throughout the region.
Unver the rule of Shah Reza Pahlavi, Iranian military doctrine was based on Western armament and thought. most of the military deals during that time were with the United States and other Western countries, with many iranian officers being sen to those countris for training. With the Iranian Revolution in 1979, authorities excetud a large numbers of military officers loayal to the Shah while other fled-particulary those in the Navy. This attrtion resulted in the loss of tactical expertise by the Iranian armed forces capable of applying appropriate combat doctrine in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps to become the «large arm» of Iran in the region. The aim was to transform Iran’s post-revolutionary military doctrine fo revolutionary enthuasiasm, «Islamic» principles, and Shia ideology-allowing Iran to recruit voluntareers fightting in the name of jihad.
It is sufficient to point that the constitution constructs the Iranian army and Revolutionary Guard on this sectarian foundation. Thse forces are not only reponsible for protecting an guarding borders, but also for carrying the «burdens of its divine mission:» jihad for the sake of God, expanding the rule of divine law, and the ideology of vilayet-e-faqih. Khomeini announced in a statement issued on July 30, 1988:
«We will work with all our being to reduce the phenomenon of and immnunity of US officials, even if that requires a desperate struggle. We will not allow the repetitive performance if surrender and compromise with Ametica, Russia, non-believers, adn infidels in the Kaaba and the Hajj. This is the great stage that should bring the call of the oppressed of the world. We ask God to gran us such power, to spread the message of death to America and Russia, not only fro the Kaaba of Muslim, but from churches of the world.»
Similarly, Qassem Suleimani, head of the Qust Force, stated in 2016 duringa commemoration of the Islamic Revolution that «the leaders of the Islamic revolution have became famous throughout the region, form Bahrain to Syria, Yemen, adn even North Africa.»
There are some challenge facing this doctrine, which have resulted from the convergence of political and military leadership and resulted in political conflict within the military. This negatively impacted Iran military philosophy and led led the transfer of political conflict between the converative and reformist movemets into the military establishment, by challeging revolucionary concepts, going against the ideas of the revolutions’s leaders, and retreanting inside Iran’s borders. This clash, which has been escalating since 2015, is especially pronounced between the army and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). The signs of this dispute are evident in statements made by leade Hassan Abbasi, wh strongly criticized the Iraniann army and called it weak, angering army leaders. the leaders of the regime, led by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, soon became emboldened to contain this crisis. However, the statements of Abbasi revealed the vulnerability and lack commitment and military discipline within the Iranian security apparatus.
Finally, it must be noted that in light og the political conflict that have begun to impose themselves on Iran’s militar establishment,, its military doctrine will be presented with several paths in the future, including a shift to a defensive stance due domestic change and external challenges from increasing pressures of then United States and allies. The lack coordination betweene the IRGC and military may also have serious implications for the strategic planning process, especially those related to key issues concernind Iran’s role in the region. The new changes initiated by President Rouhani’s government, which aim to fit the curriculum in Iranian schools and universities to suit the requerements of UNESCO, have been met witch firm rejection by the conservative movement, which contend that these changes will eliminate many of the revolutionary concepts developed by Khomeini by and therefore will have serious repercussions for Iran’s military doctrine. Futhermore, the prioritiazation of Iran’s regional enemies-and thus regional development-is subject to constant change. Before, Iraq was an enemy. Now, it is an ally, As such, inconsistence in the stability of Iran ‘s military doctrine will directly refect upon this ranking enemies and strategic priorities-and thus on the political and the security stability of the region.
4001universeodissey 