Archive for the ‘Iranian domination of Iraq’ category

« WarSclerotic home page

In Iraq, Hezbollah’s Got U.S. Tanks, and Washington Wants Them Back

February 21, 2018

David Axe 02.20.18 4:39 AM ET Via The Daily Beast

Source Link: In Iraq, Hezbollah’s Got U.S. Tanks, and Washington Wants Them Back

{Still cleaning up the mess left behind by Barack Barry Sotero Hussein Obama…and dealing with the Iraqi government this former sorry excuse of a POTUS so greatly admired. – LS}

The Pentagon is pressuring Iraq to seize any M-1s that are still in the hands of Iran-backed militias but is vague about how many have been recovered––or not.

Pro-Iranian militias in Iraq got their hands on at least nine high-tech, U.S.-made M-1 tanks as early as 2015, the U.S. government acknowledged earlier this month. Along with the belated admission, the Pentagon and the U.S. State Department say they are trying to take back the tanks. But to a great extent, the damage is already done. The militias have already deployed them against some of America’s longtime Kurdish allies.

“We are aware that not all U.S.-provided defense articles are under the control of the intended recipient,” a spokesperson for the U.S.-led coalition in Iraq and Syria told The Daily Beast via email. “The U.S. continues to work with the government of Iraq to continue acting as quickly as possible to ensure all defense articles are with their intended recipients.”

The Iraqi army has reclaimed “several” of the tanks, the spokesperson said.

The 70-ton M-1A1 Abrams, the most numerous tank in the arsenals of the U.S. Army and Marine Corps and a mainstay of U.S. allies’ own armies, is one of the most powerful fighting vehicles in the world. The four-person tank boasts a 120-millimeter cannon, thick armor and a gas-turbine engine that can propel the vehicle as fast as 40 miles per hour.

Iraq bought 140 refurbished M-1s from the United States starting in 2008 in order to rebuild armored divisions that American forces had destroyed during the 2003 U.S.-led invasion. The unit cost can vary, but each one is worth approximately $4.3 million.

When the so-called Islamic State swept through northwest Iraq in 2014, Iraqi M-1s were in the thick of the fighting. Militants quickly destroyed five of them, damaged dozens more, and captured several intact M-1s. For a few months at least, ISIS possessed operational M-1s. Then pro-Iran Shia militias—collectively known as “Popular Mobilization Forces” or PMF—recaptured some the tanks, the coalition spokesperson said.

In January 2015, a video appeared online that showed an M-1 flying the flag of the Hezbollah Brigades, a U.S.-designated terror group that’s part of the PMF and fights alongside the Iraqi army. A separate video that appeared in February 2016 showed an M-1 sporting the flag of Kata’ib Sayyid Al Shuhada, another PMF militia.

Recaptured vehicles that the PMF seized from ISIS account for only “some” of the at least nine M-1s that have appeared in the militias’ arsenal, according to the coalition spokesperson. The Iraqi army appears to have supplied the balance of the tanks directly to the PMF, in violation of Iraq’s original contract for the M-1s.

The Shia militias deployed at least one M-1 against Kurdish Peshmerga forces during skirmishes in the contested Iraqi city of Kirkuk in October 2017 when the Kurdish Regional Government was making an ill-fated bid for independence. Although the U.S. did not back that effort, the Kurds remain some of Washington’s closest allies in the region, and Iran its most important adversary.

In this instance the Peshmerga knocked out the tank, reportedly using either a Chinese- or German-made anti-tank missile.The Kurdish Regional Government circulated aerial photos of the burned-out M-1 as proof of the tank’s use by the PMF.

The disabled M-1 quickly disappeared from the battlefield, and a Kurdish commander accused the government of Iraq of moving the tank in order “to hide the truth that they have used Abrams tank against the Peshmerga.”

In any event, the U.S. State Department finally confirmed the PMF’s possession of M-1s in a February report from the inspector general for the Iraq and Syria campaigns. “This quarter, the [Department of State] acknowledged that some U.S.-provided military equipment sent to support the mission, including as many as nine M-1 Abrams tanks, had fallen into the hands of Iranian-backed militias that fought against ISIS in Iraq,” the report stated.

The Pentagon is pressuring Iraq to seize any M-1s that are still in the PMF’s hands. “As recipients of U.S.-origin defense equipment, Iraqi authorities have an obligation to adhere to end-use requirements as outlined in agreements concluded with the United States government.”

Besides withholding future arms shipments, Washington can end support for the scores of M-1s in the Iraqi army’s armored divisions. There have been reports that General Dynamics Land Systems, the Michigan-based company that builds the M-1s and provides spare parts and technicians for the tanks, recently threatened to cut ties with Baghdad over the militia’s use of M-1s. A General Dynamics spokesperson declined to comment on the reports.

Categories: Iranian domination of Iraq, Obama and Iraq war, U.S. in Iraq
Tags:

Comments: Be the first to comment

Tehran Visit Showcases Role of Iranian-Backed Militias in Iraq

September 9, 2016

Tehran Visit Showcases Role of Iranian-Backed Militias in Iraq, Counter Jihad, September 9, 2016

[B]oth the state and the tribe should be subordinated to properly trained religious leaders.  What constitutes a “properly trained” religious leader?  One trained in Iran’s elite schools, of course, preferably holding at least the rank of Ayatollah.

******************

The Long War Journal has an excellent piece on the recent visit to Tehran of Iraqi militia leader Akram al Kabi, of the Harakat al Nujaba militia.

Militia officials frequently travel to Iran, but the publicity surrounding Kabi’s visit is unprecedented. This indicates the rising clout of the Iraqi cleric among the political elite in Tehran.

Kabi boldly proclaimed his allegiance to Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, as well as the concept of velayat-e faqih, or guardianship of the jurist, which is the political and theological basis of the Islamic Republic as established by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. Kabi echoed Tehran’s propaganda claims, and boasted about targeting American forces during the Second Gulf War. He reiterated his commitment to the “Axis of Resistance,” an alliance of state and non-state actors led by Iran. Kabi vowed that the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), the umbrella organization of Iraqi paramilitary groups that includes Iranian-backed groups such as Nujaba, would participate in the anticipated operation to lay siege to Mosul, which has been held by the Islamic State since 2014. Following Mosul, Kabi called for Iraqi militias to shift resources to Syria and chase the Islamic State into the strongholds of Deir ez-Zour and Raqqah. He also threatened to target Turkish forces stationed near Mosul.

The role of velayat-e faqih in Iran’s control of regional militia forces cannot be overstated.  The core theory of the Iranian revolution, it holds that only a specialized class of Shi’ite clerics can properly manage human affairs through government.  Loyalty is thus not properly given to either the elected officials of the semi-modern states of the region, nor to the tribal leaders who are often the real powers in much of the Middle East.  Rather, both the state and the tribe should be subordinated to properly trained religious leaders.  What constitutes a “properly trained” religious leader?  One trained in Iran’s elite schools, of course, preferably holding at least the rank of Ayatollah.

This does not bar the existence of elected governments, to be sure.  Iran has one itself.  However, every aspect of the elected government is placed under the “guardianship” of some cleric or body of clerics.  Iran’s “Guardian Council,” made up of such clerics, determined who was even allowed to stand for office in the last round of elections.  They dismissed 99% of the proposed candidates from the moderate and reformist parties, requiring that those parties recruit cleric-approved hardliner candidates even to participate in the elections.  Thus, while there was still an election, and the ‘moderate and reformist’ parties did fairly well, actual power became even more concentrated among those hand-picked by the clerical leadership.

Kabi, a US-designated foreign terrorist, will be participating in the attack on Islamic State (ISIS) positions near Mosul.  The United States is deploying nearly five thousand troops in the same assault.  Kurdish forces will also be participating.  The aftermath of the battle against ISIS in Mosul will thus be nearly as contentious as the actual battle itself, as Iran, the Kurds, the Turks, and the United States all scramble to try to sort out what the final disposition of the highly-contested and strategic city happens to be.  As the Long War Journal points out, Kabi is vociferously opposed to the United States’ interests, and describes his militia (here labeled “PMF,” an acronym that means “popular mobilization forces”) as a counterweight to American ambitions in Iraq:

During the meeting with Rezai, Kabi claimed that the PMF’s participation in the Mosul operation would foil a U.S. plan to build permanent military bases there. He claimed that the U.S. opposes PMF participation in Mosul because it intends to build such a base. Kabi touted the Iraqi Prime Minister’s decision to deploy PMF forces to Mosul.

Iran clearly intends to use these forces to limit America’s ability to shape the final outcome.  Khamenei’s loyalists are not in any sense swayed to rethink their relationship to the United States, neither by the so-called “Iran deal” nor by the fact that the Obama administration’s policies are supporting Iran’s own ambitions in Iraq and Syria.  They still regard the United States as the enemy, and are acting accordingly.

Categories: Iranian domination of Iraq
Tags:

Comments: Be the first to comment