The 1,000-strong Australian contingent in Afghanistan has lost its first soldier to direct enemy action. It’s important that all Australians share with the grief of the deceased’s family. It’s appropriate that our leaders remind us of what’s at stake in ensuring stability in Afghanistan.

And it’s totally inappropriate for Defence Minister Brendan Nelson to be using this tragedy to drum up hysteria in support of those wanting a US invasion of Iran.

Nelson today claimed that various kinds of “improvised explosive device” (IEDs) which killed the deceased Digger “are finding their [way] from Iran into both Iraq and Afghanistan.” At the same time, he said that he didn’t know “precisely” where the device came from. Why bring up Iran at this time?

Nelson is showing a surprising lack of sophistication in the sectarian mechanics that underpin so much of the conflict in this region. So for his benefit, here’s some crucial background.

Muslims in this region tend to fall into two sectarian categories – Sunni and Shi’ite. This region has been a battleground for centuries of sectarian conflict. When Saddam Hussein invaded Iran in the early 1980s, he used sectarian rhetoric to gain financial, military and political support from Sunni neighbours fearful that Iran’s export of revolutionary Shi’ite ideology might make their Shi’ite communities restless.

The “Islamic Republic of Iran” is in fact a Shi’ite republic, so the Iranians have good reason to support the Shi’ite elements of the Iraqi insurgency, but they have little reason to support the Sunni and/or al-Qaeda backed elements. Al-Qaeda and Sunni sectarian forces haven’t just been attacking Shi’ite communities, they’ve also been targeting sacred Shi’ite shrines in Iraq, which in fact represent the most sacred shrines in the Shi’ite Muslim world. Iran knows that al-Qaeda regard Shi’ite Muslims as being just as bad as infidels and is bitterly opposed to any Shi’ite political authority.

To understand this sectarian background, Dr Nelson would do well to read the lengthy essay in the New York Times Magazine concerning Iraqi writer Kanan Makiya, author of the first book for Western audiences exposing Saddam Hussein’s crimes. 

Similarly, Iran wouldn’t have any incentive to support an insurgency in Afghanistan which would strengthen the presence of the Taliban and al-Qaeda there. The Taliban were also implacably anti-Shi’ite, and viciously persecuted Shi’ite Afghans from the Hazara and other tribes. The current Afghan administration led by Hamid Karzai is far more Shia-friendly (and certainly more Iran-friendly) than the Taliban.

Of course, these facts don’t stop neo-Cons from tripping over themselves to peddle lies about Iran. Sometimes the lies are caught out, as in the case of claims Iran was passing legislation forcing religious minorities to wear special identification badges.

I’m certainly no friend of Ahmedinejad and his gross forms of anti-Semitism. But it’s one thing to attack a lunatic leader. It’s another to invade a country. And it’s in poor taste for Nelson to pursue this kind of agenda when the nation mourns its loss.