"From 1980 to 1988, Iran fought an extraordinarily bloody war with Iraq. During that conflict, tanker traffic in the Gulf was threatened by Iranian forces, and that led to several armed clashes between the U.S. Navy and the Iranians.
"Due to its activities in Lebanon and elsewhere, Iran has been designated as a sponsor of global terrorism, and for that reason economic sanctions and export controls remain in effect. During President Bush's 2002 State of the Union address — his famous 'Axis of Evil' speech, he included Iran with the regimes of Iraq and North Korea as nations dedicated to supporting terrorist activities worldwide."
Garrett felt a pang of irritation at that — not at the briefing officer himself, but at the domestic political situation behind his words. Fallout from the war in Iraq continued to sift down on news broadcasts and newspaper editorials across the country. America and Great Britain had invaded Iraq and deposed its leader, Saddam Hussein, in 2003. Though few people either at home or abroad had supported the bloodthirsty Saddam, few thought the war justified, especially when Coalition forces were unable to find WMDs — the weapons of mass destruction Saddam was supposed to be building and hiding.
And as Washington's saber-rattling rhetoric against Iran had grown louder, so too had the voices of protest against a possible war against Iran. Editorialists and activists across America continued to make fun of the
President's emotionally charged comment about an
"Axis of Evil."
"The Islamic Republic of Iran continues to seek to be the dominant power in the Arab Gulf region," Markham continued. "They are actively seeking to become a nuclear power, though they insist that they are interested only in the peaceful uses of nuclear power. Of particular concern to U.S. intelligence is their program of cooperation with the government of North Korea, in which they have shared their nuclear research with Pyongyang in exchange for PDRK long-range missiles and missile guidance technology.
"There is a growing body of evidence that Iran has supported al-Qaeda in numerous ways. Ominously, an Iranian defector gave detailed information to American authorities in Azerbaijan about an upcoming al-Qaeda and Iranian terror attack on New York City just prior to September 11. The report was not confirmed, and Iran was not indicted in the attack, primarily for political reasons. There are also well-attested reports that Iran sheltered Osama bin Laden after his escape from
Afghanistan in 2002 or 2003.
"This potential cooperation between al-Qaeda and the Tehran regime has been downplayed in the past, principally because the revolutionary government of Iran is Shi'ite, whereas Osama bin Laden, the former Taliban government of Afghanistan, and most of al-Qaeda's leadership are all Sunni. These two branches of Islamic belief view one another as heretical, and traditionally there has been little cooperation between the two. We believe, however, that increased pressure from the West is forcing a greater degree of cooperation between them, especially in terms of logistical support, transport, supplies, weapons, and ammunition. 'The enemy of my enemy is my friend' appears to be the new order of the day when it comes to cooperation between disparate Islamic groups.
"The possibility of increased cooperation between the extremist elements of both the Sunnis and the Shi'ites is a matter of considerable concern to us.
"Publicly," Markham went on, "Iran has been pushing for a reduction of tensions with the U.S. for a long time. The government in Tehran claims to want full normalization of relations. More than anything else, they want Washington to lift the freeze on some eleven billion in assets that we slapped on them in 1979, at the beginning of the hostage crisis.
"Privately, however, Iran seems unalterably set on a policy of military buildup, territorial gain, the acquisition of nuclear weapons, and general religious and social destabilization within the Gulf region. This policy keeps them at odds with the United States, and seems destined to lead Iran and the U.S. into head-to-head conflict."
The satellite photograph was replaced by a head shot of a bearded man in a turban.
"This man," Markham said, indicating the face on the screen, "is a real sweetheart. The Ayatollah Karim Amir Moaveni. He's only recently emerged as the supreme leader of the Iranian Guardian Council. Ultrahardliner, ultraconservative. He's something of a living saint to Shi'ites in both Iran and in Afghanistan. And he won out in the power struggle within the twelve-man council that makes all important decisions in Iran.
"It's a little hard for Americans to understand just how powerful this Guardian Council of Twelve really is. They must approve all political decisions, and they approve who may and may not run for office in Iran's elections. In recent years Iran's president has made much of being a reformer… but, believe me, he cannot get into office and he will not stay in office without the express approval of the Guardian Council.
"Back in 2000 the president of Iran was Mohammed Khatami. At the UN, Khatami actually refused to shake hands with President Clinton until he'd checked in with the then-supreme leader, the Ayatollah Khamenei, and asked for permission. That permission, by the way, was refused.
"Ayatollah Moaveni has been of particular interest to National Intelligence lately, because he is a staunch militarist… and a hardcore fanatic. In the 1980s he pioneered the use of civilians — including children — to move ahead of advancing Iranian troops to find Iraqi minefields. When Iranian forces recaptured the port of Abadan after the Iraqi invasion, he was one of the clerics who insisted that the war continue, and kept it going for eight bloody years. He was also directly responsible for ordering the assassination of some hundreds of Iranian nationals worldwide: people considered to be enemies of the regime.
"In recent years there's been some loosening of the mullahs' control, some indications that they might be trying to pursue a more liberal policy, both toward the West and toward their own people. The younger segment of the population — teens and twenty-somethings — have been disaffected and restless. They've been protesting by boycotting elections. The mullahs have arranged for what amount to government subsidies for everything from buying a house to getting married, and lifted some of the government controls on dress and public behavior, apparently to defuse that discontent, or at least to keep the younger crowd apathetic.
"Currently, Iran stands at a difficult juncture. The people want greater freedom, especially in the economic sector. The mullahs want to maintain strong control over all aspects of Iranian life… not unlike the late lamented Taliban in Afghanistan, though they haven't been as bloody or as ham-handed as that. The clerical forces have tried to engage civilian support by loosening economic controls somewhat, but their control is backed by the Revolutionary Army; by Savama, the successor to the Shah's Savak secret police; and by gangs of thugs known as the 'Ansar-e Hezbollah.' Those last are gangs of thugs, usually aligned with one or another of the clerics. Their name means 'Helpers of the Party of God,' and they're used to intimidate and physically threaten demonstrators, journalists, and anyone engaged in what the regime considers to be immoral or counterrevolutionary activities.
"The big question in Iran today is whether the ordinary people are going to get sick enough of the human rights abuses to get rid of the clerics.
"So much for the historical background," Markham said. He clicked the remote, and another aerial photo came up, showing a large-scale construction site. "We're now interested in what we're seeing here in the Bandar-e Charak region — at White Scimitar. The DNI has been keeping the President apprised of the construction of the White Scimitar site. Given the current political situation in Iran, and between Tehran and Washington just now, the President has assigned the highest priority to intelligence gathering efforts in this region."