|
Attacking Iran May Trigger Terrorism |
|
|
|
|
Monday, 03 April 2006 |
U.S. Experts Wary of Military Action Over Nuclear Program
By Dana Priest Washington Post Staff Writer
As tensions increase between the United States and Iran, U.S. intelligence and terrorism experts say they believe Iran would respond to U.S. military strikes on its nuclear sites by deploying its intelligence operatives and Hezbollah teams to carry out terrorist attacks worldwide.
Iran would mount attacks against U.S. targets inside Iraq, where
Iranian intelligence agents are already plentiful, predicted these
experts. There is also a growing consensus that Iran's agents would
target civilians in the United States, Europe and elsewhere, they said.
U.S. officials would not discuss what evidence they have indicating
Iran would undertake terrorist action, but the matter "is consuming a
lot of time" throughout the U.S. intelligence apparatus, one senior
official said. "It's a huge issue," another said.
Citing prohibitions against discussing classified information, U.S.
intelligence officials declined to say whether they have detected
preparatory measures, such as increased surveillance,
counter-surveillance or message traffic, on the part of Iran's
foreign-based intelligence operatives.
But terrorism experts considered Iranian-backed or controlled groups --
namely the country's Ministry of Intelligence and Security operatives,
its Revolutionary Guards and the Lebanon-based Hezbollah -- to be
better organized, trained and equipped than the al-Qaeda network that
carried out the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
The Iranian government views the Islamic Jihad, the name of Hezbollah's
terrorist organization, "as an extension of their state. . . .
operational teams could be deployed without a long period of
preparation," said Ambassador Henry A. Crumpton, the State Department's
coordinator for counterterrorism.
The possibility of a military confrontation has been raised only
obliquely in recent months by President Bush and Iran's government.
Bush says he is pursuing a diplomatic solution to the crisis, but he
has added that all options are on the table for stopping Iran's
acquisition of nuclear weapons.
Speaking in Vienna last month, Javad Vaeedi, a senior Iranian nuclear
negotiator, warned the United States that "it may have the power to
cause harm and pain, but it is also susceptible to harm and pain. So if
the United States wants to pursue that path, let the ball roll,"
although he did not specify what type of harm he was talking about.
Government officials said their interest in Iran's intelligence
services is not an indication that a military confrontation is imminent
or likely, but rather a reflection of a decades-long adversarial
relationship in which Iran's agents have worked secretly against U.S.
interests, most recently in Iraq and Pakistan. As confrontation over
Iran's nuclear program has escalated, so has the effort to assess the
threat from Iran's covert operatives.
U.N. Security Council members continue to debate how best to pressure
Iran to prove that its nuclear program is not meant for weapons. The
United States, Britain and France want the Security Council to threaten
Iran with economic sanctions if it does not end its uranium enrichment
activities. Russia and China, however, have declined to endorse such
action and insist on continued negotiations. Security Council diplomats
are meeting this weekend to try to break the impasse. Iran says it
seeks nuclear power but not nuclear weapons.
Former CIA terrorism analyst Paul R. Pillar said that any U.S. or
Israeli airstrike on Iranian territory "would be regarded as an act of
war" by Tehran, and that Iran would strike back with its terrorist
groups. "There's no doubt in my mind about that. . . . Whether it's
overseas at the hands of Hezbollah, in Iraq or possibly Europe, within
the regime there would be pressure to take violent action."
Before Sept. 11, the armed wing of Hezbollah, often working on behalf
of Iran, was responsible for more American deaths than in any other
terrorist attacks. In 1983 Hezbollah truck-bombed the U.S. Marine
barracks in Beirut, killing 241, and in 1996 truck-bombed Khobar Towers
in Saudi Arabia, killing 19 U.S. service members.
Iran's intelligence service, operating out of its embassies around the
world, assassinated dozens of monarchists and political dissidents in
Europe, Pakistan, Turkey and the Middle East in the two decades after
the 1979 Iranian revolution, which brought to power a religious Shiite
government. Argentine officials also believe Iranian agents bombed a
Jewish community center in Buenos Aires in 1994, killing 86 people.
Iran has denied involvement in that attack.
Iran's intelligence services "are well trained, fairly sophisticated
and have been doing this for decades," said Crumpton, a former deputy
of operations at the CIA's Counterterrorist Center. "They are still
very capable. I don't see their capabilities as having diminished."
Both sides have increased their activities against the other. The Bush
administration is spending $75 million to step up pressure on the
Iranian government, including funding non-governmental organizations
and alternative media broadcasts. Iran's parliament then approved $13.6
million to counter what it calls "plots and acts of meddling" by the
United States.
"Given the uptick in interest in Iran" on the part of the United
States, "it would be a very logical assumption that we have both
ratcheted up [intelligence] collection, absolutely," said Fred Barton,
a former counterterrorism official who is now vice president of
counterterrorism for Stratfor, a security consulting and forecasting
firm. "It would be a more fevered pitch on the Iranian side because
they have fewer options."
The office of the director of national intelligence, which recently
began to manage the U.S. intelligence agencies, declined to allow its
analysts to discuss their assessment of Iran's intelligence services
and Hezbollah and their capabilities to retaliate against U.S.
interests.
"We are unable to address your questions in an unclassified manner," a
spokesman for the office, Carl Kropf, wrote in response to a Washington
Post query.
The current state of Iran's intelligence apparatus is the subject of
debate among experts. Some experts who spent their careers tracking the
intelligence ministry's operatives describe them as deployed worldwide
and easier to monitor than Hezbollah cells because they operate out of
embassies and behave more like a traditional spy service such as the
Soviet KGB.
Other experts believe the Iranian service has become bogged down in
intense, regional concerns: attacks on Shiites in Pakistan, the Iraq
war and efforts to combat drug trafficking in Iran.
As a result, said Bahman Baktiari, an Iran expert at the University of
Maine, the intelligence service has downsized its operations in Europe
and the United States. But, said Baktiari, "I think the U.S. government
doesn't have a handle on this."
Because Iran's nuclear facilities are scattered around the country,
some military specialists doubt a strike could effectively end the
program and would require hundreds of strikes beforehand to disable
Iran's vast air defenses. They say airstrikes would most likely inflame
the Muslim world, alienate reformers within Iran and could serve to
unite Hezbollah and al-Qaeda, which have only limited contact currently.
A report by the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11
attacks cited al-Qaeda's long-standing cooperation with the
Iranian-back Hezbollah on certain operations and said Osama bin Laden
may have had a previously undisclosed role in the Khobar attack.
Several al-Qaeda figures are reportedly under house arrest in Iran.
Others in the law enforcement and intelligence circles have been more
dubious about cooperation between al-Qaeda and Hezbollah, largely
because of the rivalries between Shiite and Sunni Muslims. Al-Qaeda
adherents are Sunni Muslims; Hezbollah's are Shiites.
Iran "certainly wants to remind governments that they can create a lot
of difficulty if strikes were to occur," said a senior European
counterterrorism official interviewed recently. "That they might react
with all means, Hezbollah inside Lebanon and outside Lebanon, this is
certain. Al-Qaeda could become a tactical alliance."
Researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report.
|
|