Barely six hours have passed since the double terrorist attack in Iran and the statement by a senior US official noting that “it looks like a terrorist attack, the kind of thing we have seen ISIS [Islamic State] do in the past, and as far as we know, “It’s our assumption at this point.” Approximately 20 hours later, the Islamic State claimed responsibility for the attack through its Amaq agency. Three other US intelligence officials, “with evaluations by military officials in the region”, corroborated that first version of urgency, according to The New York Times. Too much coincidence? Great success on the part of North American intelligence?
Those who believe in the conspiracy theory according to which the IS jihadists were and are people in the pay of the United States and Israel already have the answer, and it is spreading through social networks.
Those who rather believe that Washington is trying to avoid a regional flare-up by quickly exonerating Israel for Wednesday’s carnage may also find arguments for attribution to the jihadist group. In this sense, to the question of why the Islamic State would assume its responsibility, the answer is simple: Why not?
The IS message said – apart from its talk about the supposed polytheism of the Shiites as a religious argument – ??that two fighters, of whom it gives noms de guerre, without these matters at all, blew themselves up with explosive belts among the crowd gathered in Kerman, causing “300 deaths.” Sources cited by the semi-official Irna agency have said that the first explosion was the work of a suicide and the second probably as well, correcting the first version released on Wednesday, according to which they were bombs arranged in bags.
The justification for the attack in Iran would be based on the fact that General Qasem Soleimani, in whose act to commemorate his assassination by the US the attack was committed, fought the Islamic State. Soleimani led the fight in Iraq against the jihadist organization at the head of his men and the Iraqi Shiite militias. And also in coordination with the international – read Western – coalition against IS. Soleimani, an old acquaintance of the CIA, was temporarily not an enemy in those days.
On the other hand, Islamic State has a history of acting in Iran. In June 2017, two of his militiamen attacked the mausoleum of Ayatollah Khomeini and three others attacked the Parliament in Tehran. They died soon, taking 12 lives with them. The organization immediately assumed responsibility. Hassan Hassan, a great specialist in the Islamic State, then recalled that about three months earlier the IS announced the creation of its first command in Iran, with about 16 members and under the name of the Salman al Farsi Brigade (or Salman the Persian), one of the companions of the prophet Muhammad. In October 2022, an IS militant killed 13 people at a temple in Shiraz.
The name of the Salman al Farsi Brigade has not appeared this time in the statement, and according to an expert from The Soufan Group observatory also cited by the NYT, it could actually be the Islamic State-Khorasan, that is, the branch of the organization active in Afghanistan, where it has taken a toll on the Shiite community in recent years. Iran is a neighboring country to Afghanistan, and ISIS would have sufficient capacity to attack there. The reason? The opportunity, we could point out.
This possibility is supported by the poor conditions in which the Islamic State-Central, that is, the mother group, based in Syria and Iraq, apparently finds itself. Another expert, Aymenn al Tamimi, recalled a few months ago that the current caliph of IS is a “hidden” caliph, he does not manifest himself, almost nothing is known about him and his name, Abu Hafs al Hashimi al Qurashi, in reality it matters little.
In any case, what matters now is what Tehran has to say.
