What is happening in Iran?

Basically, few reactionary Mullahs led by Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader, with the assistance of their cronies at the Revolutionary Guards Corps and a public support of less than ten percent of Iran's 70 millions population, have hijacked the country's resources and its people. This is a short and concise answer to the above question.

But the real dilemma in relation to this little minority is to find out if they are really capable of delivering what they have been pretending for quite sometimes--endangering the stability of the Middle East and/or beyond; if troubled hard. They very much like us to believe that proposition. They have been vocal about it since the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq by the US; and they are surely walking in the same direction today. For instance, days ago there was a missile attack, after a relatively quite period, on Camp Victory, a US military camp outside Baghdad in Iraq. As a result, five US personnel believed to have been killed. Robert Gates, the US Secretary of Defence, has indicated, in an interview with CNN, that Iran is the source of the hardware used in the attack---but we should always remember not to mistaken the Islamic Republic Revolutionary Guards Corps for Iran! Iran belongs to the Iranian people and until such a time they speak their view in a free referendum on what this little minority and their generals are doing in their name and the name of their country; one should be careful when attributing these actions to Iran and its people.   

Leaving this aside, an Iraqi Shiite group has interestingly claimed the responsibility for the attack. It is interesting because we, confidently, know that Iraqi Shiite has not had a bigger; stronger; and richer backer than the Islamic Republic since the creation of the regime in Tehran over 32 years ago. Tehran helped Mohammad Baqir al-Hakim, a prominent Iraqi Shiite figure, both financially and militarily to form the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq in the early 1980s. The council was one of the biggest opposition group to the Saddam's regime for two decades. After the demise of the Saddam's regime in 2003, the council and other Shiite groups close to Moghtada Al Sader and its Mahdi Army joined forces almost dominating the entire political and military structures of Iraq today. Therefore it would not be a wrong assumption to suggest that; Tehran has no difficulty to pursue its political and military goals, both regional and international, using its elements in Iraq. Thus the missile attack on the Camp Victory, regardless of which Shiite group claims responsibility for it; can be seen as a direct message from Tehran to the White House. But the question is; why? What has caused Tehran to go to such extent to authorise the killing of the US personnel today?

I am not sitting at high political, military or intelligence positions having access to that sort of information to know what has really forced them to make such a move. Therefore in searching for the reason or reasons behind the attack, I can only rely on my imagination, hopefully a good imagination though! 

Tehran is under immense pressures, economically; politically; and perhaps militarily--if needed to be. Day after day there come more and more economic and personal sanctions against the regime and its highest political and military figures. Recently US has named some of its top military brass as supporters of the Assad's regime in Syria and accused them of assisting the Syrian regime in its killing spree of civilians in Syria. Military people in Tehran must have surely felt the heat. Simply because this could be a starting point toward accusing them of committing crimes against the Syrian people today. While Tehran and its Revolutionary Guards may well be aware of the consequences of their actions in Syria; they may have been left with no choice but to defend the Assad's regime. They have stuck between rock and a hard place--I believe. Before their eyes, their biggest ally, Bashar Al Assad of Syria, in the Middle East is at the verge of removal. They see the possible demise of the Assad's regime as a stride toward their own. Because they are conscious of the fact that a huge percentage of Iranians are against them; internally, it makes them badly vulnerable. Externally, however, Syria was their only, known, strategic ally, as a nation, in the Middle East; which they now see its survival as a matter of do or die of their own.

Needless to say that they have used this alliance of convenience with Syria to compensate their political, economic and military weaknesses against the West over decades. And now what other choice do they have? None; except fighting along Assad and its regime. And at the same time send the strong message of that kind to the White House; they are ready to fight to death!

But I would like to put this question to politicians and generals in Tehran; doesn't a suicide make you look silly (?); just because you are not good at maths!