Iran has blamed Great Britain for supporting the elements of the Iranian insurgency, but has not yet been able to present any solid proof of those claims, as opposed to the solid physical evidence against Iran in providing material support for Hezbollah in Lebanon, Palestinian factions in the West Bank and Gaza, and the sectarian Shia violence in Iraq, in the form of captured Iranian weaponry. It would be logical, of course, for Western powers to support the various low-level insurgencies in Iran. Attacks in Iran's oil and gas producing regions can pose a threat to the stability of the central government. Hopefully Iranians can accomplish regime change without need for direct military intervention by Western armies, saving many lives on both sides.
I have to say I might believe the Iranians on this. Indeed, I've wondered if the British are involved in preparing the ground work for a Western-supported revolution in Iran (and where are those missing AK-47s?). If so, Prime Minister Blair's comments recently that he would step down in a year might indicate the outer time limits of action.
Subcontracting this work to the British would certainly keep the New York Times from publishing the details from American leakers.
We shall see. After the November elections.
