Front Burner - Why did Canada list Iran’s Revolutionary Guards as terrorists?

Episode Date: June 25, 2024

Canada announced last week that it has added Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps to its list of terrorist organizations under the criminal code. It now joins the United States as the only Western countries to do so. Unlike most groups on Canada’s terror list, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is an official arm of the Iranian government. The designation is something some Iranian Canadians and Conservative MPs have been calling for many years. So who are the IRGC? And, why now?Kaveh Shahrooz, senior fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute and activist, joins us to explain what the IRGC is and why he’s been pushing for this move.For transcripts of this series, please visit: https://www.cbc.ca/radio/frontburner/transcripts

In the Dragon's Den, a simple pitch can lead to a life-changing connection. Watch new episodes of Dragon's Den free on CBC Gem. Brought to you in part by National Angel Capital Organization, empowering Canada's entrepreneurs through angel investment and industry connections. This is a CBC Podcast. Hi, I'm Allie Janes, in for Jamie Poisson. Last week, Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc made an announcement that some activists in the Iranian-Canadian community, as well as some members of the Conservative Party, have been pushing for for years. Today, I'm here to announce that our government has made the decision to list the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist entity under the criminal code. Canada is following in the United States' footsteps

after the Trump administration made the designation back in 2019. It's a significant moment, among other reasons, because unlike most groups on Canada's terror list, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is an official arm of the Iranian government. So who is the IRGC? Why is Canada making this call now? And what will it mean for Iranians there and abroad? Today, I'm talking with Kaveh Shahrooz. He's a senior fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, as well as a lawyer and a human rights activist.

He's going to take us through what sets the IRGC apart and why he has spent the last several years advocating to have them listed as a terror organization. Kaveh, hello. Thank you so much for joining us. It's really good to be with you. How would you describe what the Modern Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is? Yeah, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the IRGC, is both a military force and an economic force. And I'll talk about each one of these in turn. So it's a military force parallel to Iran's army. Like a lot of dictatorships, the Islamic Republic in Iran has a number of parallel institutions, one of which is just a regular standing army.

But at the time of the revolution in the late 1970s, early 1980s, they also created this parallel force called the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Now the name of the revolution in the late 1970s, early 1980s, they also created this parallel force called the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Now, the name of the organization, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, should tell you something about what this organization is. It is not there to defend Iran or Iran's territorial integrity as most armies do. It is actually there to defend the Islamic Revolution, as the name suggests. Over time, the IRGC has grown and grown in military capability. It has its own navy, it has its own air force and intelligence agency and everything. It is engaged in repression at home through its intelligence agencies.

It is engaged in carrying out attacks abroad. So it has been very involved, for example, in the civil war in Syria. It's been assisting Bashar al-Assad. Iranian fighters on Syrian soil. Despite being foreigners, it appears they are the ones calling the shots in a war that has arguably become as much about them as it is about Syrians. It has been engaged in carrying out terror attacks all over the world. So that's its military function. Over time, though, it has also become a major economic player in Iran. So its leaders are heavily invested in the oil business and the construction business. They muscle other businesses out of the market. So over time, it's just become this

behemoth in Iran that has both military muscle and business muscle, and it can do what it wants. Can you tell me more about that? Like how it becomes such a force in the economy? Because I think that's something that is, you know, for most people, especially when you're talking about like a military force that feels unusual, right? It is a little unusual, but perhaps not, again, in dictatorships. In dictatorships, the military muscles its way into all sorts of public life, including the marketplace. So I think around the time of the Iran-Iraq war, the IRGC began to kind of enter the market

in terms of procurement for war purposes. And over time, this grew and grew. And the leaders of the IRGC have managed to work their way into all sorts of industry, pushing people out, forcibly basically getting shares of companies. And I think in some ways, the sanctions have helped them because they're the ones that know how to evade sanctions most effectively. So they bring goods into the country. And they have the backing of the state, right? The state doesn't dare challenge them, you know, take them to court. The rules are set up for them to be a rent-seeking entity, so to speak.

And so, yeah, over time, you know, people think of Iran as a theocracy, which in a lot of ways it is. Obviously, you know, the supreme leader of Iran is a religious figure. But really, Iran, I think it's more accurate to think of it as a military dictatorship with the IRGC being the ones in charge of the country. You mentioned that they, of course, act domestically against dissidents. Can you tell me more about that, the kind of tactics they use when they're acting against dissidents? As I mentioned at the outset, Iran has parallel institutions. So there's a regular judiciary and then a revolutionary court system through which dissidents are often put on trial.

So it has that way of detaining and imprisoning dissidents, but also at times of public unrest. So, you know, in 2019, there were mass protests. The backlash started in mid-November when the government doubled gas prices. People were already struggling to get by following U.S. sanctions. The regime shut down the internet as the unrest grew. The U.S. believes more than 1,000 people have been killed. In 2022, there was a mass uprising, often referred to as the Women's Life Freedom Movement. Street protests in Iran over the death of a woman in custody have spread to more towns and cities. Masa Amini's family claim she was attacked after being arrested by the morality police. Women in Iran set their headscarves on fire in fury.

They are tired of the morality police beating them up and the Islamic Republic leaders who police their every move. But almost 100 cities have been engulfed with demonstrators, many of them women, who are clashing with violent security forces. The IRGC moves in. It actually carries out killings. It cuts off the internet access of the country so that people can't mobilize and can't get the news out. And it's through these mechanisms that it actually puts down any efforts at toppling the regime. So in 2020, a Ukrainian international airlines plane was shot down after taking off from Tehran and 176 people died, almost half of whom were either Canadian citizens or permanent residents.

And so what is the IRGC's connection to that? The IRGC is directly implicated in shooting down that plane. The order for shooting down that plane came from the IRGC. And the families of the victims have done an investigation into this. They maintain that this was a deliberate action by the IRGC. Iran's regime initially tried to blame technical failure for the fact that the plane went down. As soon as Western intelligence indicated that the plane was actually shot down, they had to concede that. But they've been refusing to cooperate at every step of the way, refused to share information and so on. They've run this sham trial. Some very low-level people

they've put on trial. It's unclear actually who they've even charged or what they've charged them with. Just for your listeners, this was when shortly after the US killed an Iranian general, Qasem Soleimani. General Soleimani, who for many was seen as a charismatic national hero, was the commander of the Quds Force of Iran's elite revolutionary guards. They're responsible for Iranian foreign military operations. And Iran was anticipating that there might be conflict in the region, and yet they still left the airspace open. And that was an IRGC decision to do that, which was at the very least criminally reckless. And I'll just mention here that Iranian authorities have maintained that this was an accident.

To an overflowing crowd, the Ayatollah Khamenei called for unity and defiance against the West. He called the downing of the plane a bitter incident that hurt our hearts. Iranian authorities claimed the plane crashed as a result of a technical fault without providing any evidence about why they believe that. The country's ambassador to London reiterated the same on British TV. So we are in fact confident from our side that there has been no missile launched in that area at that time. As you noted, they've since jailed 10 people, but they've been widely criticized for not

providing evidence and for not providing details of their investigation to the families of the victims or to investigators. Are there also allegations that they have harassed or intimidated dissidents abroad, including here in Canada? Definitely. I think every activist in Canada you speak with, but also sort of globally, they will have their own story of having been harassed in some way by IRGC authorities. You know, family members of this flight, PS752, they all have stories to tell of

having received phone calls, for example, threatening phone calls saying, you know, if you continue your activism, there'll be consequences. Their families have been detained. There was one particularly outspoken member of the Association of the Families of those that died on that plane. And he had been critical of the Iranian regime. He's very outspoken. His mother, for example, was prevented from coming to Canada. You know, the IRGC basically made the determination that they were going to punish him this way

by preventing his mother from traveling here. Canadian activist Hamed Esmailioun says his mother, Turan Shamsolahi, has been banned from leaving Iran for at least six months. She was in distress. I heard that she was shivering when she heard the news. Shamsolahi was stopped at Tehran's airport on her way to Canada to be with Esmailioun to mark the four-year anniversary of his wife and daughter's deaths. You know, the Canadian authorities have mentioned the IRGC is very responsible for cyber crimes and cyber harassment of dissidents in Canada.

So it's definitely involved in harassment of dissidents in Canada and elsewhere. ABC Gem, brought to you in part by National Angel Capital Organization, empowering Canada's entrepreneurs through angel investment and industry connections. Hi, it's Ramit Sethi here. You may have seen my money show on Netflix. I've been talking about money for 20 years. I've talked to millions of people, and I have some startling numbers to share with you. Did you know that of the people I speak to, 50% of them do not know their own household income. That's not a typo. 50%.

That's because money is confusing. In my new book and podcast, Money for Couples, I help you and your partner create a financial vision together. To listen to this podcast, just search for Money for Couples. So now, of course, the Canadian government has officially declared the IRGC a terrorist organization. And this is something that you yourself have been publicly calling for for many years. You testified to the Senate committee about it in 2012. And so can you tell me more about this? Why specifically you've been calling for this action? Well, I think the designation of the IRGC is both, in my view, a recognition of actual facts

and simultaneously, it's a policy decision to put pressure on Iran's regime. What I mean by recognition of facts is the IRGC does not operate like a typical military does. The IRGC actually engages in terrorist behavior. It engages in bombings of civilians in the Middle East. As I mentioned when I was introducing the IRGC, it has been very involved in the civil war in Syria, in which a great many civilians were deliberately targeted. It has been implicated in bombings all over the world, carried out against civilians. The government of Argentina intends to make the 25th anniversary of this mass murder meaningful. On July 18th, 1994, a suicide driver blew up a van filled with explosives, destroying the headquarters of the Jewish community known as AMIA, killing 85 people and wounding more than 200.

Investigators feel certain that the Lebanese Shiite Muslim group Hezbollah, ordered by Iran, carried out this crime. So in one sense, naming them as a terror organization, I think, is just a simple recognition of the truth. But also, you know, a lot of dissidents that work on Iran have arrived at the conclusion that Iran's regime responds to pressure. It does not respond to carrots, it sticks that are most likely to change its behavior. And listing this powerful organization that's responsible for so much repression at home and that controls so much of the economy in the country, I think is a very powerful way of the Western world kind of standing up against Iran and putting pressure on it such that either it reforms its behavior, which I don't think is very likely,

or more likely, you know, empowering the dissidents in the country to be able to rise up against the regime. What does this actually change from a technical or from a legal standpoint? Does this have teeth? Whether or not it will have teeth in Canada really depends on how much enforcement action there is. Now, assuming that the government is serious about it and the RCMP and other security and intelligence forces decide to pursue it, I think it will have teeth. If they identify people that are engaged in financial relationships or providing some other form of support to the IRGC, that is a criminal act. They can be arrested. They can be put on trial. Hopefully, their assets can be seized, all of that. And I think it's fair to say, I don't have exact numbers on this. There are numbers floating around, but I think it's fair to say that there is a fairly significant IRGC

presence here in Canada. Um, you know, the officials come to this country, they send their family here. Um, they certainly send their money to this country for safekeeping. Um, and so if that pressure actually starts to build, I think you can begin to see either them leaving or, you know, them getting caught up in the legal system, which would be great. But regrettably, you know, with this government, unfortunately, they have dragged their feet at every stage of this process. So I do worry that despite the designation, there might not be sufficient enforcement action. You, of course, have not been alone in calling for this. I mean, on this note about sort of the timing of this,

I mean, there are several conservative MPs who've been calling for this designation for years. Is the IRGC a terrorist group? Yes or no? Because of the government's inaction over the last six years, the Iranian regime's capabilities here in North America have only increased. As of so many other Iranian Canadians,

I mean, for a whole bunch of reasons that we've been talking about, you know, treatment of dissidents inside Iran, alleged harassment of dissidents in Canada, downing of flight PS752. The pressure has been mounting for weeks, from protests of support in Canadian streets to anger from loved ones of those killed when Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps shot down flight PS752.

I am D.C. President! All men, terrorize! Accusing the government... What do you think about the timing of this? Why didn't they do this earlier? Why are they doing it now? I don't know why they didn't do this earlier, frankly. I've never heard a very good explanation from anyone with ties to the government about this. I think at the very beginning of the Trudeau government,

this government was of the view that they could perhaps get into negotiations with Iran and they could rehabilitate that relationship, which had been severed under the Harper government. I think with the shooting down of PS752 and some other incidents, that became politically not feasible. But I suspect that the Canadian government still wanted to support the US and the Europeans who were negotiating a nuclear deal and they perhaps felt that listing the IRGC would be unhelpful to that effort. So I don't know why they dragged their feet for so long, but I suspect, and I'm being very cynical about this, but it's really the only explanation, is that this is a government that's losing in the polls. The conservatives have had great success in outreach, both to the Iranian Canadian community

and to the Jewish community, in saying that they're going to take the step. And the Trudeau government just, I see this as kind of a Hail Mary pass in the hopes of retaining those votes. And I mean, the Canadian government has specifically cited the IRGC's links to Hezbollah and Hamas in their decision. Canada already lists both those groups as terrorist entities. I'll preface this question by saying that there's no evidence that Iran knew about Hamas's plans to attack Israel on October 7th, according to U.S. intelligence. But how much do you think that October 7th and the war in Gaza may be factoring into Canada's decision here? I think it has certainly factored into the political calculation, right? This is now a hot-button issue that a lot of those with ties to Israel, you know, Jewish Canadians primarily,

but, you know, many others that care about Israel, that they now are paying very close attention to. So certainly the political calculus has changed. But I think the idea that the IRGC is linked to Hamas and Hezbollah, I mean, this is not a secret. This is something that's been known for years and years, far before October 7th. So it's not like the government suddenly came to realize this post-October 7th. I want to talk to you about some of the pushback or the critique about this decision. I mean, one of the reasons that the Trudeau government had previously given for why they didn't want to do this is that military service is mandatory for men in Iran, meaning that, you know,

some will end up serving for the IRGC against their will. And so now that the government has taken this step, there are some in the diaspora who are criticizing this call and saying, you know, they're worried that this is too sweeping,

that some of those conscripts will get swept up in the dragnet of this policy. And they're thinking that, you know, Canada should be sticking to a more targeted approach. So I'm wondering, firstly, if Canada has said anything about that and also what your take is on that. Yeah. So I think this is a very legitimate concern. Obviously, when you design a policy, you don't want to harm innocent people in the process. It would be foolish to design it so broadly that you end up catching innocent people. Canada now warns Tehran could retaliate. We know that this is going to have real impacts for members of the Iranian community in Canada

and potentially their families back home. I don't think, you know, for the years that the government of Canada spent saying, you know, we're concerned about the conscript issue, I don't think they've actually taken any meaningful steps to carve out the conscripts or, you know, exempt them from this rule. For those who are in Iran right now, it's time to come back home. Canada escalated its travel advisory, warning of a high risk of arbitrary detention. escalated its travel advisory, warning of a high risk of arbitrary detention. All I have been told in briefings with experts and so on is that the way the enforcement's going to work is going to be focused on who's providing material support. And if you can demonstrate that you were conscripted, that a long time ago you were in the IRGC because you were forced to go there, they're not going to sort of bring enforcement action against you. But, you know, if your son

is currently a conscript in the IRGC, and you live in Canada, you want to send them money, you will be caught in that net, which I think, in some ways is poor policy design. And it gives me a sense that over the past couple of years, even though the government's been talking about this, they haven't actually spent much time thinking about how to how to address this issue. Well, I know that that's been some of the criticism so far of, I mean, there is kind of a case study of this in the U.S. already. The U.S. made the same designation back in 2019. And critics in the U.S. have argued that, you know, fundamentally, they feel that the policy hasn't been effective in weakening the RGC, but that it has punished regular Iranians in,

you know, just the kind of ways that you're talking about, like whether they're trying to receive financial support, like former conscripts if they're trying to receive financial support from family abroad, or if they want to leave Iran for the US. So I mean, what would you say to that critique? Do you think that's a fair point? I think there are two parts to your critique, and one part I agree with, one part I disagree with. So the part about the policy is over-inclusive and that it hurts innocent people because it was poorly designed, I agree with. I'm actually in touch with folks who were conscripted into the IRGC. They tell me their stories and it's heartbreaking. And in a lot of meetings with government officials in Canada, I've stressed this point to them

saying, you know, we need to design a policy mechanism by which, you know, innocent people don't get hurt. So that part I agree with. I disagree with the earlier sort of premise of your question that says this had no effect on the IRGC. I think policies like this, especially if they're pursued globally, right, not just one country, but a number of Western countries. If they actually designate the IRGC and start actually going after their people and freezing their assets, it will significantly weaken this institution. You know, we know for a fact,

those of us that work on Iran, the IRGC's people and Iranian officials writ large, they create an awful condition in the country, but they themselves don't want to live under those conditions. They move to the West. They bring their families to the West. They bring their money to the West. And if the West can actually close its doors

and imprison these people or send them, they bring their families to the West, they bring their money to the West. And if the West can actually close its doors and imprison these people or send them back or send their families back, I think the folks that are in the government will begin to make different calculations about how they want to behave inside Iran. How do you design that to make that happen? Because I mean, as you've pointed out, I mean, these are people who are highly connected and who have all the mechanisms at their disposal to, you know, to skirt these kinds of policies and to not be the ones that are getting targeted by them. So is there a way to actually, you know, design a policy so that it doesn't do that? Well, you know, our policy now with listing them as a terror organization, I I think is the right policy. It's really a matter of enforcement, right? Like we've got, um, security agencies and intelligence agencies, and I sure hope that they've been keeping an eye

on IRGC officials coming into the country. They've been watching their, uh, the movement of funds and so on. Um, and if they haven't been doing that, they should really get up to speed because the IRGC I think is a real threat to Western countries, including Canada. And I think so with the new weapon in their arsenal, so to speak, with this new designation, I think they can get to work, but it's just a matter of actually taking that step and having the political will to do so. I mean, just finally, you know, on this broader point about carrots and sticks, I mean, there are some critiques of, you know, when we're looking at the U.S. designation, there are some who've argued that they feel that it has made it harder for the U.S.

to exert diplomatic influence over Iran because, you know, it further increases tensions between them. And so when we're looking at Canada now, I mean, Iran has responded to this calling the decision hostile and irresponsible. And, you know, I guess the argument from some is that, you know, unless you're like attempting full regime change, that you need to be able to talk to each other. And so I'm wondering just finally, you know, what your take is on that, like what this could mean for Canada's ability to have a dialogue with Iran in the future and whether you think that matters or not.

I don't think it matters. And we've run this experiment many times, right? So Zahra Qasimi, the photojournalist, you know, she was detained, she was beaten, she was sexually assaulted and killed in Iran. It is a horrible tally of broken bones, bruises and other traumas, a litany of injuries suffered by Zahra Kazami, the Canadian journalist who died in Iran. And this was at a time when Canada and Iran had perfectly good diplomatic relations. Iran was simply unresponsive to any inquiry from Canada.

any inquiry from Canada. European countries have diplomatic relations with Iran and Iran never hesitates to take their citizens hostage, take over their embassies as it did with the UK a little while ago, and just behave in really awful ways. People talk about the need for diplomacy, and I understand that instinct, but that instinct makes sense for states and regimes that are kind of responsive, that feel like they want to be part of the international order. Iran's regime has shown itself over and over again that it doesn't actually care. Whether or not you have diplomatic relations with it or don't, it doesn't actually care. So I think the right thing to do is to actually cut off diplomatic relations. All right, Kaveh, thank you so much. It was a pleasure to have you on. It was really great. Thank you. All right, that is all for today.

Thanks so much for listening to FrontBurner, and we'll talk to you tomorrow.