Proof of Iranian cooption of al-Qaida?

Michael Ledeen has argued, for quite some time, that Iran is the root of all evil. Well, at least that Iran has operated in a meaningful operational way with al-Qaida. In National Review Online's group blog, The Corner, Ledeen provides a link to an Asharq Alawsat newspaper commentary by Abdul Rahman al-Rashed, the general manager of al-Arabiya television.

Writes Ledeen:

Read it all. He knows what he's talking about. And if you have time, please tell George Tenet and his experts, who spat at the very idea that Sunnis could work with Shi'ites.

Very well, then. I clicked on the link.

I am . . . unmoved.

The article is short, and Ledeen quotes but one section, where al-Rashed asserts that "The paradox is most striking in the case of Al-Qaeda, the most extremist Sunni organization, which has joined, in the full sense of the word, the Iranian apparatus." Immediately after this phrase, however, al-Rashed writes that the alliance began "in the wake of the defeat of Al-Qaeda and the organization's flight from Afghanistan to all Sunni countries."

Very well, then. Please note that al-Rashed is saying that al-Qaida did not cooperate with Iran until after the US invasion of Afghanistan.

al-Rashed asserts that al-Qaida fled from Afhganistan "to all Sunni countries." Yet the only country he talks about al-Qaida fleeing to is . . . Iran. That would be Shia Iran. Huh.

al-Rashed continues, "We were initially puzzled by the rumors that Iran had arrested a group of fleeing Al-Qaeda members who crossed its border from Afghanistan, only to realize later that the story had far deeper implications." He never says who "we" are, or why "we" were initially surprised by Iran's arrest of al-Qaida members. Could it be because al-Qaida is theologically opposed to the Shia sect of Islam? Could it be because the Iranians have a similar opposition to Sunnis? al-Rashed does not say.

al-Rashed submits:

Like any other extremist Sunni organization, Al-Qaeda does not consider Shiites and other Muslim sects to be Sunnis or followers of the Prophet's family, and therefore it must fight against them. I do not want to give further evidence of Iran's pragmatism. It is an extremist, theocratic Shiite regime that holds Sunnis as infidels.

So extremist Sunni organizations consider the Shia to be infidels, and the Shia Iranian regime reciprocates the warm feelings. Yet al-Rashed doesn't want to give "further evidence of Iran's pragmatism." Huh.

Somewhat confusingly, al-Rashad then states "Proof of this is that Iran's followers committed massacres and evicted people from their homes in a way unprecedented in Iraq's history." Umm, proof of what? Proof of Iran's pragmatism? Or proof of Iran's hatred of the Sunni? I must be low on the blood level in my caffeine, but I cannot make sense of this argument.

It seems to be asserting either a) Iran regards Sunnis as infidels, and thus used Shia co-religionists to purge Sunni neighborhoods in Iraq, or b) Iran is pragmatic, and so used Sunni groups to purge Shia neighborhoods in Iraq. If a) is correct, then it undercuts the thesis that Iran and al-Qaida are in cahoots. If b) is correct, then Iran is not a Shia theocratic regime, and does not really regard the Sunni as infidels, and is using them as a cat's paw against the Shia Iraqi regime. If b) is correct, it also makes it hard to understand why Ahmadinejad was feted during his recent, red carpet state visit to Baghdad.

I suppose it is possible that Iran and al-Qaida are in cahoots. This article, long on discursive commentary and dreadfully short on facts, or links, or reasoned argument, does nothing to convince me. Perhaps Michael Ledeen is a subtler thinker than I (an honest possibility), and I am simply missing the substantive meat here. But I am unmoved by this argument.

As a side note. One of the gripes against the neocons who have pushed for war, war, war is that very damn few of them have worn the pickle suit. (Pickle suit being term of art for the old green jungle camouflage utilities worn by the striking arm of the United States Government.) With that said, and recognized as at least generally true, let us take a moment to recognize Michael Ledeen's son, currently enduring OCS at Quantico. (That would be Marine Corps Officer Candidate School, y'all.)

Ledeen writes:

We're just back from the Marine Base at Quantico, where our youngest is attempting to survive Officer Candidates School. Not easy, which is one reason why the Marines are such an amazing team.

Yut.