WarSclerotic

Resurgence of ‘crushed’ extremists in Iran – The National Newspaper.

Michael Theodoulou, foreign correspondent

People survey the carnage outside Jameh mosque in the southeastern Iranian city of Zahedan on July 15, 2010. Two suicide bombings at a Shiite mosque in heavily Sunni southeast Iran killed more than 20 people, including worshippers and members of the Revolutionary Guards, state media reported. The attack came as people celebrated the birthday of Imam Hussein, grandson of the Muslim Prophet Mohammed, a day also set apart each year to honour the Revolutionary Guards. More than 100 people were wounded in the attacks, which came only minutes apart, at the Jamia mosque in the restive city of Zahedan, capital of southeastern Sistan-Baluchestan province bordering Afghanistan and Pakistan. Amir Rasheki / AFP

Iran’s public enemy number one was hanged at dawn in Tehran’s Evin prison a month ago tomorrow as some of the families of his many victims watched.

The Iranian authorities hailed the execution of Abdolmalek Rigi, 26, as a fatal blow to Jundallah, an outlawed Sunni extremist group responsible for the worst terrorist attacks in the Islamic republic since the 1980s.

But in a gloating and defiant message that it remains a threat, Jundallah (God’s Soldiers) swiftly claimed responsibility for “heroic” twin suicide bombings on Thursday.

Twenty-eight worshippers, including several Revolutionary Guard, were killed outside a mosque in Zahedan, capital of Iran’s remote, restive and impoverished Sistan-Balochistan province, which borders Pakistan and Afghanistan. Nearly 300 others were injured, some critically.

The attack is likely to deepen strains in a region already unsettled by the Afghan war and increase tensions between Iran and the US, analysts said.

But Jundallah’s bloody re-emergence is also stoking political friction in Iran itself, where there was remarkably outspoken criticism this weekend of the government’s iron-fisted handling of the challenge it represents.

Embarrassed by the survival of a small group it claimed to have virtually crushed, senior Iranian officials and state media blamed “the Zionists” [Israel], Britain and, most of all, the US for the mosque blasts.“It cannot be true” that Jundallah masterminded the attack, said Ali Mohammad Azad, the province’s governor.

“Extremist Wahhabis and Salafis trained by US intelligence agents in Pakistan are believed to have carried out the bombings,” Iran’s state-run Press TV maintained.

An Iranian police chief, Ahmadreza Radan, declared that Iran had a right to “pursue rebels inside Pakistani territory”.

On Saturday, a senior Revolutionary Guard commander warned that the US would pay. “Jundallah has been supported by America for its terrorist acts in the past… America will have to await the fall-out of such criminal and savage measures,” said Massoud Jazayeri. His unspecified threat, nevertheless, implied acceptance of Jundallah’s involvement. Western countries have condemned the bombings, which Barack Obama, the US president, branded as “outrageous terrorist attacks”.

Iran has long portrayed Jundallah as a western-driven, external threat, claiming its enemies are attempting to foment religious and ethnic strife to undermine the Islamic republic.

Balochis comprise a significant proportion of the population of Sistan-Balochistan and, unlike Iran’s Shiite majority, are mainly Sunnis.

Iran has variously claimed that Jundallah is supported by countries including the US, Britain and Pakistan – all of which have repeatedly rejected such accusations.

Founded by Rigi in 2003, Jundallah, also known as the People’s Resistance Movement, claims it is fighting for the rights of Iran’s minority Baluch community and denies having any foreign links or a separatist or radical sectarian agenda.

Sistan-Balochistan is one of Iran’s most deprived areas. Sunni Muslims are not employed in senior government jobs, while the regime restricts their religious ceremonies to ethnic regions.

Jundallah exploits such legitimate grievances, but it is far from clear, given its extremely violent methods, whether it enjoys much local support in the province. The regime insists it has none. The group is largely funded by revenue from drug smuggling, analysts say.

Jundallah launched its armed campaign in 2005 and is thought to have between 100 and 1,000 fighters. These take advantage of the turbulence of Iran’s lawless border province with Pakistan to slip between the two countries, analysts say.

Pakistan denies providing Jundallah any official assistance, pointing out that it has handed over several senior members of the group to Iran in recent years, including Rigi’s brother, Abolhamid Rigi, who was hanged in May.

There was bold domestic criticism this weekend of the government’s handling of the Jundallah challenge. The conservative daily Jomhuri Islami questioned the execution of Rigi, and his brother before the “uprooting” of Jundallah’s entire network.

Three members of parliament have resigned in protest over security issues following the bombings.

“The culture of this region is revenge. After Rigi’s execution, we had warned that this group [Jundallah]would retaliate,” Abbas Ali Noora, an MP from the province said.

Iran’s main reformist party went much further. The Islamic Participation Front strongly condemned the mosque bombings, but also blamed Iran’s “coup d’etat” government, saying that the terror attack showed that the government’s hardline tactics had failed.

“We believe that such crises are rooted in those kinds of policies which classify Iranians unequally and consider different rights for them,” the statement said. “This leads to an increase in discrimination and intensifies a sense of inequality so that dependent terrorist agents will become able to abuse people’s dissatisfaction.”

Jundallah’s claim of responsibility last week made clear the mosque bombings were not only bloody payback for Rigi’s execution but were also designed to demonstrate that its survival despite the loss of its youthful leader.

The regime “thought that through the martyrdom of Abdolmalek [Rigi]the fight will end”, Jundallah boasted in a statement. The blasts had “shattered the dreams of executioners and devils”.

The group said its two young “martyrs”, both members of Rigi’s clan, had targeted Revolutionary Guards, who were among the worshippers attending ceremonies marking the birthday of the Prophet Muhammed’s grandson, Hussein, a revered figure in the Shiite faith.
It was perhaps no coincidence that the blasts came as the elite military force, which underpins the regime’s survival, was also marking its national day.

Jundallah vowed more attacks would follow to punish the Iranian regime for its “incessant crimes” in Balochistan.

The Middle East’s private little war.

It’s not at all surprising that one of the Arab world’s most senior diplomats is eager for the United States to attack Iran. The unusual part is that the diplomat, the United Arab Emirates’ ambassador to the United States, said that at a very public forum, in Aspen, Colo., earlier this month.

Arab officials, particularly leaders of the gulf states, are not at all reticent to discuss their concerns about Iran’s nuclear program – in private talks with visiting presidents and foreign ministers. But there seems to be an unwritten rule that little if anything be said in public, even though Iran and the Arab world are actually fighting a private little war.

The reason for that is simple. Who complains the loudest about Iran? Israel first. The United States second. Which Arab leader wants to stand up and proclaim agreement with Jerusalem and Washington – even indirectly?

With considerable understatement, Steven Cook, an Arab-world expert with the Council on Foreign Relations, noted: “There’s very little incentive for Arab leaders to sign up with Israel or the United States.”

That’s why Ambassador Yousef al-Otaiba’s remarks were so remarkable. Asked during the Aspen Ideas Festival whether he wanted the United States “to stop the Iranian nuclear program by force,” he answered exuberantly: “Absolutely. Absolutely!”

He said his view was the result of “a cost-benefit analysis.”

“Despite the large amount of trade we do with Iran, which is close to $12 billion … there will be consequences, there will be a backlash and there will be problems with people protesting and rioting and very unhappy that there is an outside force attacking a Muslim country.

“If you are asking me, ‘Am I willing to live with that versus living with a nuclear Iran?’ my answer is still the same: ‘We cannot live with a nuclear Iran.’ I am willing to absorb what takes place.”

The ambassador spoke the truth, but he also broke the rule. So a few hours later, his country’s foreign minister said al-Otaiba’s remarks, as quoted in news stories, “are not precise” and were “taken out of their context.”

Good luck foisting that explanation on the world. The ambassador spoke from onstage with at least 200 people in the audience. Organizers tape-recorded the exchange. Just after the session, Rep. Jane Harman, D-Venice (Los Angeles County), told the Washington Times: “I have never heard an Arab government official say that before. He was stunningly candid.”

Behind this kabuki dance, and despite the flowery language Arab and Persian leaders customarily offer in public discourse, the two sides actually hate each other. There could be no better illustration than this spring’s Islamic Solidarity Games, scheduled to take place in Iran.

The games, a regional Olympics, were intended to encourage Islamic comity, just as the name denotes. But the unity began to fall apart months ahead of time, when the Arab states learned that Iran had inscribed “Persian Gulf” on all of the tournament’s logos and medals.

For 50 years the Arab states have argued, to little effect, that the body of water is actually the Arabian Gulf. Iran was rubbing this dispute in their faces.

Then Iran began insisting that civilian aircraft flying to Iran from the Arab world use “Persian Gulf” in plane-to-tower communications as well as announcements to passengers.

In January, the Arab states abruptly canceled the games.

More recently, the United Arab Emirates closed down 41 Iranian companies working in the Emirates, saying they were violating U.N. sanctions. The United Arab Emirates, along with Britain and Germany, began refusing to refuel some Iranian passenger planes that stopped at their airports. The Arab League voted not to invite Iran to a regional summit this summer.

Arab states don’t believe Iran will bomb them. But they fear an accident. They worry about a regional nuclear-arms race. And some of them are furious that the debate over Iran is taking the focus off their favorite issue: Israel and the Palestinians.

But Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, in a rare outburst, made clear what most Arabs really think. “The Persians,” he once declared, “are trying to devour the Arab states.”

Late last month, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president, tried in his own ham-handed way to reassure them.

“Are they so afraid of two bombs?” he asked. The United States had just estimated that Iran had enough nuclear fuel for two bombs, if it was further enriched. “There are 20,000 bombs stockpiled” in other countries, “and they are so afraid of the possibility of the existence of two bombs? This is really amazing.”

Joel Brinkley, a professor of journalism at Stanford University, is a former Pulitzer Prize-winning foreign correspondent for the New York Times.

US Says Israel Rocket Shield Will Work.

WASHINGTON — A U.S.-backed rocket shield is on track to protect Israeli towns against rocket attacks from the Gaza Strip, a senior State Department official said Friday.

The system, dubbed the “Iron Dome,” is being touted by the Obama administration as the latest example of expanded military cooperation between the U.S. and Israel. President Barack Obama has asked Congress for $205 million to accelerate development of the system, about half its total cost.

The election-year message of increased U.S. aid to Israel seems aimed at assauging the concerns of many Jewish voters that Obama remains committed to Israel’s security, despite diplomatic tensions earlier this year.

“As surely as the bond between the United States and Israel is unbreakable, our commitment to Israel’s qualitative military edge has never been greater,” said Andrew Shapiro, an assistant secretary of State for political and military affairs.

Israel has had no system in place to guard against the thousands of rockets that militants have rained down on its southern and northern borders over the years, fired by Hamas militants in Gaza and Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon.

Millions of Israeli civilians are within rocket range, and the military has stepped up its quest for a solution after the country’s 2006 war against Hezbollah, when 4,000 short-range Katyusha rockets bombarded northern Israel.

Iron Dome uses cameras and radar to track incoming rockets and shoot them down within seconds of their launch.

Jonathan Peled, a spokesman for the Israeli embassy, said he could not provide details on the latest round of tests, but confirmed that a test this week was successful.

Neither country has said when the system will be operational.

Israel receives about $3 billion a year in U.S. military aid, including money for training. Last fall, more than 1,000 U.S. troops participated in a massive U.S.-Israeli missile defense exercise codenamed “Juniper Cobra.”