SO.. DOES IRAN HAVE A PLAN FOR LIMITED WARFARE?

This DEBKA article somewhat address the issue some of us have been wondering about for some time now.

Is Iran really starting to believe they can gain from a limited confrontation with the West.. namely the US and Israel?

One of the first and most logical questions one can ask is, " does Iran have anything to lose by taking such action"?

Well, the obvious answer is yes, but lets look at it from their viewpoint and see if they really could be convincing themselves to give this idea a shot.

First off, who do they really believe will stick with them in  a full scale regional war?

Hamas and Hezbollah?

I don't think so. 

I have said this before, but I will say it again; the Arabs will not destroy their entire region for the sake of the Persians.

Will any Nation state go along with them?

Look at the statement about the Arabs... the same concept applies.

So, if Iran is starting to understand that after the fall of Syria, the clock for the Arab Spring coming to Iran will be ticking down faster and faster and the Arab to include the Arab League and the GCC are not about to support a Persian Regional War, then what option does Iran have?

A limited, unilateral event!!!

Now, the concept the Arabs will not destroy their nation states for the Persians is sound logic, but that doesn't mean  the streets of the Middle East will be peaceful.

Violent unrest given an Israeli conflict in the region might possibly be manipulated into some level of support, but not at the nation state level and that would limit the support.

Now, at this point of the argument it become difficult for me to not see the region sliding into a regional conflict just based on the law on unintended escalation.

Having said that, I am now more and more convinced the West and Israel have begun to figure out how to avoid this unintended escalation.

the more the US and it's Allies begin to believe they can limit the regional impact of this conflict, the more likely they may convince themselves it's possible.

Ok, If Iran can't convince itself it can manage to turn this event into a Regional War, then why do they opt for the unilateral, limited action?

First off the basic concept of survival come to mind.

Just as Iran is growing more and more convinced they can not hold off the collapse of their proxy Syria and thus lose control of Hamas and Hezbollah, they are surly realizing the concept of a full scale, regional war... a Total War.. would mean the end of the current Iranian government.

Ok, right about now, it is obvious how complicated this issue of conflict with Iran truly is.

So, again.. why would Iran vote for a limited, unilateral incident?

Saving face.... distracting the public of Iran without bring about the leadership's downfall.

Sounds like two very logical and very plausible goals.

On top of this, add the fact Iran is confident the US and it's Allies would be desire to limit the conflict at all cost.

The economic impact of such event would be crippling to a struggling word economy.

Wrapping this discussion up let me give my opinion of this limited, unilateral conflict  actually taking place.

In my opinion it's as simple as,  why should it not happen?

What option does Iran have?

No other Nation is going to go along with them, with possibly the exception of North Korea; a topic I will get to in the next few days.

The Arab Spring; now more the Sunni dominance campaign, is going to come to Iran.

Iran will have to do something and they have to have it ready soon...  real soon....

They have run out of friends and nobody is going to burn down everything they have for the sake of the Persians.

On Monday, I will explain how I think this event might take place and why the war of words over the littoral lanes in the Gulf may be the real story.

http://debka.com/article/21620/