Last week, Iranian news agencies reported the creation of two new security agencies.
On this issue, Passdaran General Saeed Mojaradi, the deputy of the Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces announced the formation of a “joint workgroup comprising the government and the general command of the armed forces” with a “political-security” mission and said, “This workgroup, is headed by Saeed Jalili, the secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, and involves all the armed forces of the country and other subdivisions that have a responsibility in the fields of foreign policy, domestic security and defense matters.”
In his description of this new government body, he said that “one of the issues important to the general command of the armed forces is the manner of management of the economic sanctions alongside with measures and efforts such as cultural ploys and cultural invasion which require for a more serious centralized and thoughtful planning.” From these remarks it becomes clear that one of the major tasks of this new workgroup is security-economic work outside Iran with the purpose of “managing economic sanctions”. Second, this workgroup shall participate in security-driven suppression efforts inside the country by playing a role in the battle against “cultural ploys” and “cultural invasion” (two terms used by hardline media and agencies to describe critical press and socio-political activists, and, cultural dissidents).
The other analogous news concerning the change in the structure of the security machinery of the state is related to a news that was announced a day earlier, at the “Security and Tranquil” exercises in the country’s capital where Tehran governor Morteza Tamaddon announced the formation of a new security council in the city titled “Security Implementation Council”. He too, without clarifying the details, limited his comments about the new security structure to these remarks: “This council shall be made up of thirteen members of the Security Councils of the city and the province of Tehran in coordination and harmony with other agencies to resolve the security issues.”
The most important aspect of the birth of these two new security agencies is their “parallel activities” with the most important parts of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s security councils.
Specifically, the new “government-military joint workgroup” which is planned to start work under the direction of a very close friend of the president, Saeed Jalili, and which involves “all the armed forces of the country and other subdivisions that have a responsibility in the fields of foreign policy, domestic security and defense matters”, is already viewed as a parallel agency to the Supreme National Security Council of the country (SNSC). The SNSC is precisely the agency where all “armed forces and other and other subdivisions that have a responsibility in the fields of foreign policy, domestic security and defense matters” (whose membership ranges from military commanders to senior intelligence officials) are present without any exceptions. So it is not clear why must the same individuals be gathered in another council and at a different location to make decisions over the same “political-security” matters.
Similarly, the new agency called the Security Implementation Council is clearly a parallel to the Security Council of the City and Security Council of the Province (whose membership comprises of the governor or governor general, the highest law enforcement and military commanders, the highest security and judicial authorities in the town or the province, the Friday Prayer Imam, etc). It is noteworthy that right from the beginning, the individuals that have been appointed as members to this new security council are the very same individuals who are members of the town and provincial security councils! So the question again is why do individuals who are members of a security council, and who meet, discuss, engage in security work and who have a budget, resources also have to participate in another security council and review and made decisions over security matters? What is different in their tasks and duties, goals and outputs in the new council that does not exist in the town and provincial councils?
The announcement of the birth and mission of this new parallel security group was unexpected and vague, thus limiting comments to such questions to speculations. Even Majlis deputies apparently had been kept in the dark about the creation of the Security Implementation Council and government-military joint security council.
It must be noted that the two new councils whose creation was announced are not merely advisory bodies whose creation and scope of jurisdiction and mission did not need legislative provisions: These government bodies are planned to make policy and decisions over the most sensitive security issues in the Islamic Republic of Iran, ranging from crushing domestic security threats to circumventing international sanctions from abroad.
In conclusion, one overriding ambiguity about these two government bodies remains: on what Majlis laws have these councils been created and which laws have identified their responsibilities, budget and authority? Which legal entities are entrusted with overseeing their activities and decisions? Is it even possible for Majlis representative, for example, to know what is going on in these bodies? These questions become even more pronounced when one notes that the government-military workgroup is planned to be comprised of all the members of the SNSC, excluding a few of the latter’s members who are not members of the armed forces or the ninth administration (including representatives from the judiciary and the legislative branches of government).
Is the fact that these bodies are completely new, their legal sources are ambiguous, their mission, authority and responsibilities are unknown, their deliberations are outside the knowledge of institutions such as the Majlis (which while being under the control of the conservatives has elements that are not in line with the administration of President Ahmadinejad) not the very purposes for which they were created?
One wonders what activities could these two new parallel government bodies be expected to perform that views existing government structures - even with their weak legal and supervisory tools - to be obstacles, thus necessitating the creation of new entities?
