Eli Lake of The New York Sun reports some rather groundbreaking news, or at least news that adds one more layer to Iranian involvement with the insurgency in Iraq. According to documents found during the arrest of two key Iranians within Iraq about one week ago, Iran is supporting both Shia and Sunni insurgent groups.

Iranian support of Shia groups, namely the Muqtada al-Sadr led Mahdi Army, is of no surprise at all. That has been a known for quite some time now, though rarely stressed when discussions persist on how to move forward in Iraq and what to do with an Iranian state hell-bent on defying the IAEA pursuant to the nation’s nuclear program.

It has also long been pondered, perhaps by just myself, if Iran was assisting Sunni groups within Iraq, joining forces if you will with the known Syria support for Sunni insurgent groups. Ponder no more.

An American intelligence official said the new material, which has been authenticated within the intelligence community, confirms “that Iran is working closely with both the Shiite militias and Sunni Jihadist groups.” The source was careful to stress that the Iranian plans do not extend to cooperation with Baathist groups fighting the government in Baghdad, and said the documents rather show how the Quds Force — the arm of Iran’s revolutionary guard that supports Shiite Hezbollah, Sunni Hamas, and Shiite death squads — is working with individuals affiliated with Al Qaeda in Iraq and Ansar al-Sunna.

Another American official who has seen the summaries of the reporting affiliated with the arrests said it comprised a “smoking gun.” “We found plans for attacks, phone numbers affiliated with Sunni bad guys, a lot of things that filled in the blanks on what these guys are up to,” the official said.

One of the documents captured in the raids, according to two American officials and one Iraqi official, is an assessment of the Iraq civil war and new strategy from the Quds Force. According to the Iraqi source, that assessment is the equivalent of “Iran’s Iraq Study Group,” a reference to the bipartisan American commission that released war strategy recommendations after the November 7 elections. The document concludes, according to these sources, that Iraq’s Sunni neighbors will step up their efforts to aid insurgent groups and that it is imperative for Iran to redouble efforts to retain influence with them, as well as with Shiite militias.

Ansar al-Sunnah is the parent group of Tawhid wal Jihad, later renamed to Al Qaida in Iraq. All three were led at one time by the now departed Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

In October of 2005, it was reported 25 high-ranking Al Qaida members were living in Iran, supposedly under house arrest though Iran later denied any such talk. A report by the German daily Die Welt last August noted Iran is believed to have sent one of Osama bin Laden’s sons, Saad bin Laden, to set up camp in Syria and recruit jihadis for a war against Israel during the Israel-Hezbollah war. There are many, many more links between Iran and Al Qaida, far too many to dismiss them until two years after a Coalition topples the Iranian government and so-called ‘peaceniks’ are running for election here in the States.

Lake continues:

The news that Iran’s elite Quds Force would be in contact, and clandestinely cooperating, with Sunni Jihadists who attacked the Golden Mosque in Samarra (one of the holiest shrines in Shiism) on February 22, could shake the alliance Iraq’s ruling Shiites have forged in recent years with Tehran. Many Iraq analysts believe the bombing vaulted Iraq into the current stage of its civil war.

While Al Qaida in Iraq has never claimed responsibility for the Golden Mosque bombing, all indications point to the group as the culprits of the attack. Zarqawi was alive at the time and on numerous occassions he had openly declared war upon Shia and urged inciting a civil war by implenting sectarian attacks.

Why would a Sunni group who is openly at odds with all Shia join forces with the Shia nation of Iran, or vice versa? Back in 1995, Ayman al-Zawahiri stated in an interview with Nashrat al-Ansar “As we have mentioned before, we are committed to the path of true righteousness, the path of the Sunna, and–thus–there are clear differences between our faith and the faith of the Shiites who believe in the 12th Imam.” In the theological sense, that is completely true and the main reason why Sunni and Shia have been at war with each other for centuries. Zawahiri said the same.

But Dr. Walid Phares takes a different approach, and suggests while the two sects of Islam are at war with each other, they do converge on key ideas and key issues that would allow the Salafists (Sunnis) to join forces with the Khomeinists (Shia).

Each of the two “Jihadi” blocs has its own strategy and area of action: al Qaeda and the Salafists have infiltrated many countries and penetrated some government institutions in the Muslim world. They have also established cells within Western and other democracies. The Khumeinist Jihadists have full control of Iran’s regime and created an axis of terror in the Middle East, including the Baathist regime of Syria and Hezbollah. Both powers aim at crumbling America, undermining democracies and repressing freedoms in the Arab and Muslim world. Although with different long-term goals, the Jihadi Salafists and Khumeinists have converging interests against common enemies: democracies. In many places and on different occasions the two blocs of Jihadism have established interim alliances: the regimes in Iran, Syria and Sudan and the organizations of al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Jemaa Islamiya, and many others have cooperated: against democracies and civil societies, they have formed an axis of Jihadism.

Read more of Dr. Walid Phares’ rather incredible knowledge of radical Islam in his book, Future Jihad. I’m reading it now and I must say that all questions I had going in are being answered.

Lake’s report continues:

A former State Department senior analyst on Iraq and Iran who left government service in 2005, Wayne White, said he did not think it was likely the Quds Force was supporting Sunni terrorists who were targeting Shiite political leaders and civilians, but stressed he did not know.

“I have no doubt whatsoever that al-Quds forces are on the ground and active in Iraq,” he said. “That’s about it. I saw evidence that Moqtada al Sadr was in contact with Sunni Arab insurgents in western Iraq, but I never saw evidence of Iran in that loop.”

Mr. White added, “One problem that we all have is that people consistently conduct analysis assuming that the actor is going to act predictably or rationally based on their overall mindset or ideology. Sometimes people don’t.

“One example of a mindset that may hinder analysis of Iranian involvement is the belief that Iran would never have any dealings with militant Sunni Arabs. But they allowed hundreds of Al Qaeda operatives to escape from Afghanistan across their territory in 2002,” he said.

Are these documents the “smoking gun” an American official claims? They could be, but what does the Coalition intend to do about it? I have very little faith the Iraqi government will take this evidence to curb their ties with the Iranian regime based upon internal pressures, and one would think the Iraqi government knows far more than a reporter for The New York Sun.*

The difference between allies and enemies within Iraq are hard to figure out, at least for this news junkie, but sadly it appears that extends to the U.S. government as well.

The top Quds Force commander — known as Chizari, according to a December 30 story in the Washington Post — was captured inside a compound belonging to Abdul Aziz Hakim, the Shiite leader President Bush last month pressed to help forge a new ruling coalition that excludes a firebrand Shiite cleric, Moqtada al-Sadr.

According to one Iraqi official, the two Quds commanders were in Iraq at the behest of the Iraqi government, which had requested more senior Iranian points of contact when the government complained about Shiite death squad activity. The negotiations were part of an Iraqi effort to establish new rules of the road between Baghdad and Tehran. This arrangement was ironed out by Iraq’s president, Jalal Talabani, when he was in Tehran at the end of November.

Two interesting points to make regarding the above excerpt. First, the U.S. State Department would have mistakenly urged a Shia cleric in Iraq connected to the same Iranian Quds Force who is known to have targeted Coalition soldiers inside Iraq and, based on the captured documents, aligned with Al Qaida in Iraq to have pushed for more control within the nation. In this instance, it is the case of picking the lessor evil and between two Iranian proxies. It would not be an easy decision if well informed, but let us hope the State Department was unaware of these connections when they pushed for the inclusion in the Iraqi government.

Secondly, the Iraqi government knows Iran is aiding Shia death squads within Iraq, namely the Mahdi Army, yet does nothing to disallow the travel of Muqtada al-Sadr to Tehran for talks and sends dignitaries to Tehran for talks between the two nations. Am I the only one who sees something wrong with this picture?

Evidence has been mounting upon Iran’s involvement in Iraq, but how much is simply too much for the Coalition to take? Britsh prime minister Tony Blair has indeed amped up his rhetoric towards Iran, resulting in a stern warning delivered to the British ambassador in Tehran, but rhetoric doesn’t exactly do anyting to a nation that openly declares its intent on forging ahead with a perceived military nuclear program and openly calls for the complete anihilation of another sovereign nation (three nations if the words would ever be reported correctly).

So is this smoking gun enough to convince something we here in the United States has known for 28 years, that Iran is already at war with the United States and is forging ahead with its war on the entire pluralist society? I wish I could take the optimistic route and believe this news will be reported high and wide changing minds along the way, but I’m also a realist. The realist in me knows there won’t be a mention outside of conservative newspapers and magazines and the naysayers of the Iranian regime’s ultimate goal will continue to have their heads stuffed fully up their Ahmadinejads.

*This is a bit off the topic, but does anyone else find it strange how Iraqis talk of Iraq’s former connections to terrorist groups as if everyone and their mother knows of it, but here in the States there is so much doubt and uncertainty? A few comments were made after the execution of Saddam Hussein which reiterated this point. The same is true with Iranian expats with regards to Iranian support for known terrorist groups, but we debate if these intelligence items show an operational link or just a meeting.