The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps: Defining Iran's Military Doctrine

Studies in Contemporary Warfare

by Alma Keshavarz, Andrew Mumford (Series Editor)

The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has yet to be directly analysed as a military security complex with significant political influence. This book explores Iran’s IRGC and Qods Force, focussing on its development following the Iranian Revolution, and how they have skilfully transformed Iran’s defense doctrine to fight a hybrid war that challenges the US and the West. Chapters detail the birth of the IRGC, its political development and influence within Iran, its relationship to militias and terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah, and involvement in Yemen and Iraq. Keshavarz brings first-hand knowledge of what government institutions are looking for with respect to the IRGC, outlining Iran’s hybrid war capabilities that the US and West often misunderstand or miss altogether, in order to provide a foreign policy analysis that identifies the challenges of Iran’s irregular capabilities and what measures are needed to combat it.

Genres: Iran, Military Fiction

226 pages, Hardcover

Published October 5, 2023

Reviews

[Castles · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very interesting academic analysis (definitely not for everyone), about Iran’s situation and interests truthful to what they were in 2023.

It’s a very interesting snapshot depicting Iran’s power in one of its peaks, right before the whole region got into the turmoil of October 7h that finally changed the situation with hamas, hizballah, Syria, the huthies and more Iranian assets.

There are some interesting insights about how America neglected the Iranian front while it was busy with Iraq, And generally there’s a lot to learn from this book, even if it’s not as relevant in 2026 with the operation epic fury which changed absolutely everything. A revised edition should be interesting!

[Zare · Rating 3 out of 5]

While subject is interesting, the way how things are presented gives more of a vibe of draft or incomplete book [read it as it was rushed to print].

I assume that goal was to present IRGC as a very potent hybrid threat, but author ended up with such .... convoluted, plainly said over-worded ..... sections on hybrid warfare that it bordered on hilarious. I have never seen someone using paragraph after paragraph without actually saying anything except hybrid, be afraid. Hybrid what? In my opinion this looks like academia trying to create artificial categories of organized violence, literary making difference between swordsmen using only left, only right or both hands (!?!)

This is why I think that this book was rushed to print and was not cleaned up.

To summarize, hybrid warfare mentioned here is for all means and purposes total war - it encompasses covert and overt warfare (war in Syria was full scale conflict), economic warfare (sanction) and extensive use of assassinations (from all sides - author here is vague when it comes to IRGC, while nothing gets mentioned when it comes to Israel and US side - and not because they hide it, this is always treated as mark of pride). If hybrid means total war then oh man, west has completely forgot what total war is.

To sum it up IRGC is power in the background that influences all of the aspects of Iran politics and military. But (aha!) to say it is independent is wrong (wtf - ain't they big baddies?) - as author mentions Supreme Leader is in background of everything, including the government itself.I have a feeling nobody in the West is quite clear how stuff works. Description of things is it si A but then B and then X.......

IRGC has various capabilities, and according to the author these are all developed because of superiority on US/Israeli side when it comes to conventional forces. I think this is now recognized as wrong view (contested issue) of the situation taking into account this year's war - Iran has more than adequate conventional forces and ability to absorb a lot of punishment.

Second issue that will also become contested IMHO is internal dissatisfaction of Iran populace - statements from US this year show how economic sanctions were targeting Iran's full economic collapse were coupled together with shipments of weapons to internal opposition (US president's quote) to brew the violence in country. In other words, this is not spontaneous anything, but covert military full scale operation in order to break up the country. Hybrid warfare anyone? Of course it is hybrid from the other side, but nonetheless.......

US administration errors when it comes to invasion of Iraq, breaking up that country and thus bringing Shia militias and influence to power, together with completely misfired "full pressure" approach after US annulled JCPOA are covered. I understand US troops got killed in both Iraq and Syria, but can we just look at the reasons they were in Syria and Iraq to begin with. In both cases they were active belligerents, what exactly was expected to happen? We shoot at thee, but thee do not shot at we?

I also find two things interesting. First that Iran and its Shia allies in the region where actively fighting ISIS. For some reason this is just mentioned and that's it. I have a feeling that ISIS was never seen as much threat by West (which also explains ISIS now ruling Syria and West recognize it as legit, which is crazy on its own) so this is just a footnote.
Second thing is author's constant talk how Iran lost Iran-Iraq war. I do not understand it. Iraq invaded, took parts of Iran, Iran counter-attacked and retook its territory. Both sides (Iraq supported by US through intel and weapons (including chemical weapons), and Iran fighting under economic sanctions and smuggling weapons from every possible side (including Israelis who just wanted maximum casualties all over the place)) suffered tremendously, and war ended without territorial changes. To say Iran lost it is stretching facts a bit, dont you think?

Very weird book, just all over the place. It is obvious that Iran aims to be regional power, with influence in the Gulf and Middle East. And I understand Israel and GCC are not happy here. But to look at Iran as this greatest evil while we have Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrein ad UAE supporting various paramilitaries (including ISIS allies in Syria) to fuel regional wars (again Syria, Yemen) is strange to say the least. Unless idea is - these are our "allies" so they good.
And also to talk about Iran militarily without mentioning MEK (supported and armed by US and Israel), Kurds (who got betrayed by US that they gotta be in BDSM), targeted assassinations not outside Iran on Iran officials but inside Iran and in Gulf area (pride of Israel - including blowing embassies with long range missiles) and for all means and purposes economic warfare through sanctions (aiming I guess for same effect as it was achieved in Iraq for 11 years (which is short time considering Iran is under sanctions from early 1980's)) just looks like simplistic view on the situation and definitely one-sided (Iran has nothing to protest about). It would be like saying Carthage truly annoyed Rome, without mentioning the Rome's actions against Carthage. Nothing happens in the vacuum.
Author mentions Iran and it's allies crossing red-lines but does not go into detail, I mean does not give even one example. I don't doubt IRGC is also active in assassinations but again, nothing specific is mentioned. If one is so sure of this, give at least one sample and don't hide behind "audience knows this".

it seems that analyst's and policy drivers decided Iran is enemy, no further discussion. And in all this talk it is visible how US weaved its web of economic warfare due to the much of financial operations going through US financial institutions. This proved to be shot in the foot, and nations are slowly moving away of single currency for their economies.

This view of the world domination - as expected, because to foresee state behavior just analyze group behavior - proved to be a big mistake that blindsided US and its allies (primarily Israel) and it now backfired big way.

To repeat whole book is mixed bag, looks and feels incomplete and rushed. Chapters on literature and various organizational parts of IRGC are very interesting, but the rest is all over the place.

Definitely do not use it as reference for anything (it seems author even insists on this), use mentioned literature for any further dive into subject.