As recent American military deployments to the Middle East and President Donald Trump’s escalatory rhetoric have heightened speculation of an imminent attack on Iran, there are increasing signs that such action would trigger a regional and even global “Shiite jihad,” particularly should the U.S. take out Iran’s clerical leadership. This would present a new phenomenon which is likely to pose daunting security challenges, not least for the United States itself.
In a recent speech, the secretary-general of the Lebanese Hezbollah movement, Sheikh Naim Qassem, warned that a new war on the Islamic Republic would engulf the entire region. The assassination of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in particular would have dire regional and even global implications, given the large masses of Shiite Muslims who subscribe to the Wilayat al-Faqih doctrine, according to which Khamenei is leader of the Islamic ummah.
“A war on Iran this time will ignite the region,” Qassem declared, and any harm done to Khamenei “would be an assassination of stability and of the situation in the region and the world, due to the spread of the supporters and advocates of the Wali al-Faqih [Khamenei].”
These statements should be taken seriously, not least given what one could call the “modern-day empowerment” of regional Shiite players. In order to better understand this dynamic, it is worth revisiting the early 1980s, which witnessed the attacks on the Marine barracks and the American embassy in Beirut. Those operations were conducted prior to the actual emergence of Hezbollah as an organization; a group under the name Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility. But it is widely believed that the group that became Hezbollah was behind the operations, with support from Iran.
Notwithstanding the fact that Syria is now governed by a Sunni leadership after decades of being under Alawite rule, Shiite players in the region are today in a stronger position compared to the early 1980s. The toppling of Saddam Hussein in Iraq gave the Shiite majority in that country privileged status; armed Shiite factions form the backbone of the Popular Mobilization Units that play an integral role in the state security apparatus. In Yemen, the Houthis—who are also considered Shiites—have emerged as a force to be reckoned with. Hezbollah for its part still retains the capability to inflict serious damage, despite being badly battered in the recent war with Israel.
This effectively translates into a “Shiite force multiplier” superior to that of the early ’80s, when Shiite factions still succeeded in conducting anti-American operations with devastating results. (The Marine Barracks attack alone led to the death of almost 250 U.S. servicemen.)
Indeed, ominous warnings have come out of both Iraq and Yemen as the region braces itself for another potential war on Iran, this time initiated by the United States. The leader of the Iraqi Kataib Hezbollah (not to be confused with the Lebanese Hezbollah), Abu Hussein al-Hamidawi, pledged “total war” if Iran were to come under attack: “We affirm to the enemies that war against the [Islamic] Republic will not be a walk in the park. But rather, you will taste the bitterest forms of death, and nothing will remain of you in our region.”
Most concerningly for the United States, there are strong indicators that Iraqi Shiite factions will conduct operations similar to the Marine Barracks and American embassy attacks that occurred in Beirut. Telegram accounts reveal that Kataib Hezbollah has recruited individuals to conduct suicide missions. According to these accounts, other Iraqi Shiite factions have promised to retaliate by targeting foreign embassies and U.S. bases and interests in Iraq.
The Houthis have released video footage that appears to warn of a resumption of maritime attacks in the Red Sea.
At the same time Khamenei’s status as “the leader” in the eyes of a significant segment of Shiites worldwide heightens the risk of an individual radicalization effect should he be targeted. In other words, Shiites across the globe who subscribe to the Wilayat Al-Faqih doctrine would become more prone to self-radicalization if Khamenei were killed. This would potentially open the door to Shiite “lone wolf” attackers. This would be a new phenomenon; individual attacks associated with Islamist jihadi ideology have always been perpetrated by Sunnis inspired by the likes of Al Qaeda and ISIS. Given the difficulty security agencies in the United States and other Western nations have faced when dealing with lone wolves, the prospect of this happening should be a cause of major concern.
An attack on Iran may very well plant the seeds of a regional and even global “Shiite jihad,” which will become even more likely in the event of Khamenei’s assassination. This would mark a major shift in the threat landscape facing the United States and other Western nations that could take part in a war against Iran. (The EU blacklisting of the Revolutionary Guards raises the question of whether European nations may join such a war.) The nature of the confrontation would change from geopolitical, with the enemy identified as “Iran and its network of proxies,” to religious, with the enemy being a more widely dispersed “Shiite jihad.” That would be a dramatic development, essentially embroiling the United States in a religious war.
Read the full article here
