In the annals of history, radical movements often emerge from the shadows, seemingly inexplicably and suddenly. ISIS, also known as Islamic State or Daesh, the self-proclaimed Sunni terror group that rose from the wreckage of Iraq to declare an Islamic caliphate, is no exception.
As shocking as its ascent was, a question persists: how did a band of extremists, emerging from the heart of Shia-dominated Iraq and straddling Syria, come to dominate vast territories with such speed and efficiency? The answer may not lie in Sunni extremism alone, but in a far more calculated, insidious strategy – a strategy executed by Iran’s notorious state militia, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).
Let us begin by considering the sheer improbability of ISIS’s rise. By 2014, the organization emerged seemingly out of nowhere, rapidly seizing control of key cities like Mosul, right at the heart of the Shia world. This was not just a strike against the Iraqi state but an existential threat to Shia Islam itself. Mosul, followed by the imminent threat to Najaf – home to some of the most sacred sites in Shia Islam – presented a moment of unparalleled crisis. And crises, as we know, offer opportunities for those willing to exploit them.
It was in this moment of chaos that Iran’s influence in Iraq was cemented – not by accident, but by design. The Iranian regime, ever opportunistic, saw in ISIS a pretext to expand its reach. With Islamic State menacing Iraq’s holy cities, Tehran positioned itself as the only real defender of Shia Islam. But this narrative, often swallowed whole by the West, is far more complex and disturbing.
CONSIDER THE pivotal moment in June 2014 when, as ISIS forces lay a few kilometers from the holy city of Najaf, Iraq’s military inexplicably retreated en masse. This sudden retreat left Iraq defenseless. It was this collapse that allowed the emergence of the Popular Mobilization Units (PMU), ostensibly born from a fatwa issued by Ayatollah Ali Sistani.
But this was not a simple call to arms – it was a carefully orchestrated event, manipulated by Iran. The IRGC, under the command of General Qasem Soleimani, did not simply ‘assist’ the PMU: they absorbed it. Far from being an independent Shia militia, the PMU became an arm of Iranian military power, allowing Iran to control Iraq’s security apparatus from within.
A former member of the Quds Brigade in Syria, Mostafa Afzalzadeh, offers a revealing insight into Iran’s long-standing ambitions in Iraq. During conversations in Tehran back in 2017, Afzalzadeh described how the IRGC had laid the foundations for controlling Iraq’s security infrastructure well before ISIS appeared on the scene. According to him, the rise of ISIS provided a convenient excuse for Iran to tighten its grip, not a genuine defensive reaction. The idea that the Islamic Republic was merely responding to the ISIS threat, often parroted by the West, is little more than a fiction designed to obscure Tehran’s real intentions.
CENTRAL TO this strategy was Soleimani, who personally selected and groomed figures within the Popular Mobilization Units to ensure that their allegiance lay not with Baghdad but with Tehran. The general’s influence went far beyond mere military coordination. By embedding loyalists in key positions, he effectively controlled Iraq’s security forces, allowing Iran to extend its reach into every aspect of the political and military apparatus of its neighbor to the west. Far from being a homegrown force to counter ISIS, the PMU became little more than an extension of Iranian power, with Soleimani pulling the strings.
What is more chilling, however, is Soleimani’s admission that he had been in extensive communication with ISIS regarding troop movements. This wasn’t a simple matter of battlefield intelligence, but a calculated dance between enemies, each using the chaos for their own ends. Far from being the valiant defenders of Shia Islam, Iran and its proxies were playing a far more complex and sinister game.
False narrative of the Islamic Republic as the hero
The narrative of Iran as the hero in the fight against ISIS begins to crumble under the weight of such revelations, exposing a far more disturbing truth: Both sides were using the conflict to advance their own agendas, often at the expense of the very people they claimed to protect.
Afshin Payravi, a member of the Iranian opposition, was blunt in his assessment. He stated unequivocally that the alliance between ISIS and the IRGC is no secret – this has been common knowledge among Iranians since the terror group first emerged. “What is truly astonishing,” he remarked, “is that almost no one has sounded the alarm. The West, for all its intelligence apparatus and political posturing, remains blind to what Iranians have known all along.”
It is a damning indictment of the international community’s failure to recognize the depth of the collusion between these supposed enemies, and a reminder that some truths, no matter how obvious, are left unspoken.
The Iranian regime’s hand in this becomes clearer when one considers reports from Tehran claiming that Iraq’s military collapse was not merely incompetence but the result of loyalties bought and paid for. By facilitating the creation of the PMU, Iran could justify its own military presence in Iraq under the guise of defending Shia Islam from ISIS.
It was, in essence, the birth of a new order through engineered chaos. If not for ISIS, the IRGC would have had no excuse to march into Iraq and seize de facto control of its institutions. Iraq, today, is a shadow of its former self – its sovereignty compromised by a foreign power under the banner of security.
BUT IRAQ is only one chapter in this story of engineered disorder. Syria followed a similar playbook. By 2014, President Bashar Assad faced multiple fronts, his regime teetering on the brink of collapse. The Syrian state, much like Iraq, was in no position to defend itself.
It was in this vacuum of power, with ISIS carving out a swathe of territory across eastern Syria, that Iran found its second great opportunity. As Assad’s grip loosened, the only voice that offered unequivocal support was that of Tehran’s Grand Ayatollah. From the ruins of Syria, the so-called “Shia Crescent” was born – an axis of influence that now stretches from Lebanon to Iran, allowing for the movement of troops, weapons, and ideology.
This Shia Crescent corridor is not a passive line on a map – it is a highway of Iranian influence, one that has allowed Tehran to move its proxies, including Hezbollah, with impunity. It was ISIS, in its role as a destabilizing force, that facilitated this Iranian expansion. And yet, in the West, this broader context is rarely discussed. Instead, Iran is often viewed as merely reacting to ISIS, rather than as a benefactor of the chaos it helped to foster.
There is also a darker, more haunting parallel between ISIS and another group that has been thrust into global consciousness more recently – Hamas. The tactics that ISIS used – the horrific violence, rapes, brutal executions, and acts of torture inflicted on communities across Syria and Iraq – eerily resemble the terror unleashed by Hamas terrorists during their shocking attacks on Israel on 7 October.
This parallel cannot be dismissed lightly, especially when we consider that Hamas has been trained, aided, and abetted by none other than the IRGC. The violence demonstrated by Hamas is not an aberration, but rather an extension of the same brutal methods perfected by ISIS, with both groups acting as pawns in Iran’s broader strategy to sow chaos.
AND THEN we have the infamous figure at the center of it all: General Qasem Soleimani, commander of the Quds Force and hero to many within the Shia world. Soleimani was celebrated as a warrior and a defender of Shia Islam, but what if his willingness to “ride the frontlines” was not the act of courage it was painted to be? What if Soleimani’s bravado was built on the knowledge that he risked nothing, because the chaos around him was engineered for his own rise?
After all, battles orchestrated in one’s favor are not battles at all – they are performances. The more one considers it, the more the pieces fall into place. The IRGC’s absorption of the PMU, the sudden collapses of the Iraqi army, and Soleimani’s own ascension all point to one conclusion: that Iraq was set up to be absorbed by Iran.
Tehran’s masterstroke was not only in creating the conditions for its military involvement but in presenting itself as the only solution to a problem it may have helped create. It was Soleimani who took center stage, but the script had already been written.
Today, the Shia Crescent corridor stands as a testament to Iran’s success. From Lebanon to Iran, Tehran’s influence now stretches across the region, solidified by the very chaos that groups like ISIS and Hamas have sown. To dismiss the links between these groups and the Iranian regime is not just naïve – it is dangerous.
The West must wake up to the reality of Iran’s strategy. ISIS, Hamas, and the chaos they create are not aberrations – they are part of a calculated plan to expand Iran’s reach, weaken its enemies, and entrench its power. And all the while, Tehran’s leaders will continue to claim they are simply defending the Shia world from chaos, when in truth, they are the architects of it.
The writer is executive director of We Believe In Israel.