Iranian Concepts of Warfare UNDERSTANDING TEHRAN’S EVOLVING MILITARY DOCTRINES J. Matthew McInnis February 2017 AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .........................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 3 STRATEGY AND DOCTRINE FORMATION ................................................................ 4 HISTORICAL AND IDEOLOGICAL INFLUENCES ON IRI DOCTRINE ...............................10 KEY CHARACTERSTICS OF IRI DOCTRINE ...............................................................15 A MODEL OF IRI DOCTRINE .................................................................................17 CONCLUSION: IRI’S EVOLVING MILITARY ..............................................................21 ABOUT THE AUTHOR ........................................................................................ 25 NOTES ............................................................................................................ 27 i Executive Summary his study lays out how formal and informal struc- and its religious and political nature. Many of these Ttures in the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) create unresolved issues carried over into postrevolutionary strategy and doctrine, which institutions or individu- era, even as new ideological concepts became domi- als matter in shaping doctrinal ideas, and which his- nant and Iran faced two external existential threats: torical and ideological factors drive IRI thinking about Iraq and the United States. The IRI’s split military military power. The analytic framework provides a structure, which is divided between the conventional way to model the nature of IRI defensive and offensive Artesh and the ideologically driven Islamic Revolu- doctrines, and it aims to explain how and why Iranian tionary Guard Corps (IRGC), and its current military strategy and force posture may evolve as restrictions thinking centered on defensive and asymmetric war- on resources and conventional weapon acquisitions fare against the United States are arguably reactions are relaxed under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of to these overlapping factors. Action (JCPOA). Rather than attempting to pro- Several broad conclusions can be made about the vide Tehran’s military operational manual, this study characteristics of modern IRI doctrine, based on attempts to demonstrate how to conceptualize and these key historical influences and formal processes, study IRI military doctrine. as well as a review of available IRI doctrinal materials, The IRI’s doctrine-formation process is promul- relevant senior leader statements, and major Iranian gated through a series of policy documents, with military exercises over the past five years. IRI military input from IRI military planners at each stage in the doctrine does not descend from Islamic revolutionary process. As with the US planning process, the devel- thought per se. IRI doctrines instead appear to draw opment, interpretation, and implementation of Ira- mostly on military lessons learned to find effective, nian strategy and doctrine do not always follow in a pragmatic solutions for Tehran’s security challenges clear and linear sequence. However, the IRI’s system in the framework of the state’s ideological and geo- has several distinctive elements related to both the strategic objectives. Most doctrines are ad hoc, despite unique consultative decision-making structures in the overall increasing formality and complexity of the government and the Marxist-influenced approach the IRI’s system for strategy development. There is toward planned economy. Understanding the writings explicit incorporation of foreign military thinking and of the informal thought oligarchy of military leaders capabilities, especially US doctrines, although ex post and the most influential authors in the IRI’s extensive facto ideological and Islamic moral justification from system of think tanks and staff colleges is also crucial the supreme leader for any doctrine is still required. to comprehending modern Iranian doctrinal trends. The Artesh and the IRGC’s competing military struc- Historical experience, religious ideals, and ideo- tures will remain an inherent feature of Iranian doc- logical concerns shape the IRI’s approach to war trine and strategy, even as the IRI leadership engages and military doctrine, but they do not determine it. in stronger efforts to improve interoperability. Across many historical periods, such as the Persian As a revolutionary state constantly worried about Empire, the Islamic conquest, the Safavid dynasty, the potential instability and counterrevolution triggered 19th-century Qajar dynasty, the Pahlavi shahs in the by its adversaries during conflict, the IRI sees war in 20th century, and the 1979 Islamic Revolution, the Ira- 360 degrees. Iranian doctrines reflect this porous- nian state struggled with its relationship to modernity ness across the spectrum of offensive and defensive 1 IRANIAN CONCEPTS OF WARFARE J. MATTHEW MCINNIS operations, when an external Artesh campaign may doctrines have notably remained almost entirely need to quickly transition into an internal one, or unconventional. The IRI generally continues to lack when IRGC actions may move from regime defense classical offensive doctrines to project conventional to deterrence to power projection then back to military power aiming to coerce an opponent; seize deterrence or attempt to achieve all three objectives ground, air, or maritime space; or defeat or destroy an simultaneously. enemy’s forces. However, the IRGC has increasingly Together these concepts can be used to form a integrated conventional capabilities and war-fighting working model of the IRI’s existing doctrines, showing concepts into its unconventional campaigns in the how they align against Tehran’s defensive and offen- current Syria and Iraq conflicts. sive objectives, indicating areas of particular doctri- The degree to which the IRI will become a more nal strengths and weakness, and pointing to potential balanced or conventional military as the JCPOA future directions for the Iranian military. The IRI mili- allows for greater access to weapons and technology tary is still dominated by defensive doctrines oriented will be determined by the increase of defense bud- around four primary objectives: regime security, terri- getary resources, the level of the military leadership’s torial defense, demonstrative deterrence (or shows of trust and integration of the Artesh, the relaxation of force), and retaliatory deterrence. the regime’s ideological hesitation of appearing impe- The IRI’s offensive doctrines are designed primarily rialistic through offensive conventional warfare, and, around exporting the revolution and Iranian influence perhaps most importantly, a shift in threat perception abroad while ensuring the creation and maintenance away from a dominant focus on asymmetric defense of proxy forces that can employ retaliatory deterrence against the United States toward competition and against opponents, such as Lebanese Hezbollah. These confrontation with regional rivals and threats. 2 Introduction ow does the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) think assessing how a state prepares for and will likely con- H about using military power to achieve its secu- duct war. rity objectives? Is there one school or rather many This study draws from numerous Iranian strat- schools of Iranian military thought? Why is Iran’s egy and doctrinal writings, statements and interviews military structured as it currently is? Why and how from key leadership figures, observation of military could that change, especially given the implemen- exercises from the past five years, and observed mil- tation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action itary behavior in crisis and conflicts since the 1979 (JCPOA) and Iran’s deepening role in the regional Islamic Revolution. wars in Syria and Iraq? The report attempts to build an analytic frame- These are fundamentally questions of doctrine work for examining the IRI’s war-fighting concepts. It that are important to defense policymakers and mil- explores doctrine at the strategic level—that is, how itary planners. Understanding how the Iranian lead- a state’s military power is designed and employed to ership looks at military power and strategy is crucial achieve its security objectives. It does not look deeply to designing a better US force posture in the region, at the more operational or tactical levels of conflict. improving security cooperation with our allies, and There will be no discussion of how many missiles Iran communicating more effective responses to Tehran’s would theoretically launch in its first salvos against behavior in the Middle East and globally. US, Gulf Arab, or Israeli forces in a regional war. Nei- A state’s written doctrine, such as it may exist, is ther will it focus on the latest siege tactics used by essential to understanding its leadership’s approach the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and to employing armed force. However, the realities of its proxies in Syria. military structure, deployments, operations, or goals Instead, this study lays out how formal and infor- do not always reflect what is officially published. mal structures in Iran create strategy and doctrine, What has happened or would likely happen on the which institutions or individuals matter in shaping battlefield is what really matters for commanders and doctrinal ideas,