(We can give them equipment and training. But how can we give them time — and training requires time as well as motivation on the part of the trainees — when the Islamic State gives them neither? — DM)
Archive for the ‘Iraq’ category
Ash Carter: Iraqis Need to Be The Ones Fighting Islamic State But Don’t Have The Will to Do So
May 24, 2015Relying on the U.S. for security is a mistake
May 21, 2015Relying on the U.S. for security is a mistake, Al Arabiya News, Khalaf Ahmad Al Habtoor, May 21, 2015
(Al Arabiya is based in the United Arab Emirates and is majority-owned by Saudi broadcaster Middle East Broadcasting Center.– DM)
Obama says Iran’s newfound wealth will be used to improve lives rather than end up in the treasure chests of Hezbollah, the Shiite Yemeni Houthis, or other troublemakers under the Iranian wing. Sorry, but to me that smacks of naivety at best, snake oil at worst.
According to a Daily Telegraph investigation, Iran’s Supreme Leader controls “a financial empire” estimated to be worth $95 billion, more than even the grandiose Shah had managed to accumulate. That alone should tell Mr Obama that Iran has no intention of prioritising the needs of its people over its regional mischief makers.
****************
At a passing glance, President Barack Obama’s meetings with the leaders of the Arab Gulf States have borne fruit in terms of furthering mutual respect and as a building block to closer cooperation. But when one digs beneath the flimflam and the verbal pledges – with the exception of a joint missile defense system and a promise that deliveries of U.S. weapons would be fast-tracked – the recent Camp David Summit delivered few tangible benefits.
Indeed, more than a few commentators have described the meeting as a U.S.-hosted arms bazaar, one that will fill the coffers of American weapons manufacturers with billions of dollars. Plus the P5+1 – Iranian nuclear deal is set to enrich and empower Tehran once economic sanctions are lifted.
Obama says Iran’s newfound wealth will be used to improve lives rather than end up in the treasure chests of Hezbollah, the Shiite Yemeni Houthis, or other troublemakers under the Iranian wing. Sorry, but to me that smacks of naivety at best, snake oil at worst.
According to a Daily Telegraph investigation, Iran’s Supreme Leader controls “a financial empire” estimated to be worth $95 billion, more than even the grandiose Shah had managed to accumulate. That alone should tell Mr Obama that Iran has no intention of prioritising the needs of its people over its regional mischief makers.
Eradicating terrorism
The question is whether the leaders of the GCC countries should rightly feel secure from Iranian aggression now that the U.S. President has promised to come to their defense, militarily if deemed necessary. Naturally, that assessment would be made by the White House, not by the threatened states.
Without a signed and sealed security pact and in light of Obama’s track record of hesitancy in ending regional conflicts or eradicating terrorism, I don’t think so. Are we seriously to believe that the U.S. would declare war on Iran were we to be menaced?
Obama’s rhetoric speaks otherwise when he told the New York Times that internal threats to Gulf States are “bigger than Iran” and, at Camp David, he warned his guests not to “marginalise” Tehran. And even if Obama’s undertaking was rock solid, his term expires in just over 18 months. What happens then?
In any case, while there is nothing wrong with cementing better relations with the U.S., we must not on any account rely on its protection or that of any other world power. Yemen proves that we are able and willing to protect ourselves and our allies and when the proposed Joint Arab Force comes into play, our capabilities will be strengthened. We have no need of guardians or bosses in foreign capitals. We have strong, well equipped armies and air forces. We are not helpless, underage youths pleading to be defended, as characterised by sectors of the media.
Merely a public relations exercise
I would urge GCC heads of state to put Camp David under a microscope to ascertain whether it was a genuine attempt on Obama’s behalf to induce closer ties or merely a public relations exercise to bring Gulf States on board a bad deal rewarding Iran for its hostility, regional interference and its backing of terrorists.
In my opinion, trusting the Obama administration to rein in Iran would be a huge mistake. U.S. engagement with Iran was exactly the legacy Obama was after even before he moved into the Oval Office. And to that end he surrounded himself with pro-Iranian officials, such as Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State John Kerry and Deputy Secretary-of-State Bill Burns, who have all been championing détente with Iran for many years.
Obama’s personal adviser and family friend, Valerie Jarrett grew up in Iran, speaks Farsi, and was a main player along with Bill Burns in U.S.-Iranian secret talks to pave the way for official negotiations. The President’s National Security Council Director for Iran, Sahar Nowrouzzadeh is a former employee of the National-Iranian American Council, a pro-Iranian lobbying organisation.
The President’s own behaviour with regards to America’s long-time sworn enemy was suspect since the beginning. He has been sending the Iranians video Nawrus (New Year) messages and letters to Iran’s Supreme Leader. This year, Obama actually celebrated the Persian New Year at home with his wife and daughters.
Just as strange was Obama’s silence concerning Iran’s crackdown on street protests following elections. And if he condemns Tehran for its human rights abuses and lack of civil liberties, he must be whispering. Because all we hear from him is condemnation of predominately Sunni Arab states on those issues.
“The greatest supporter and plotter of terrorism”
Stranger still, while Obama comes across as the ayatollahs’ new best friend, just days ago, the Ayatollah Khamenei attacked the U.S. as “the greatest supporter and plotter of terrorism” and accuses Washington of pursuing its own interests making the region insecure, while branding America as the enemy of both Shiite and Sunni Muslims. Far from committing to stay out of Arab affairs, Khamenei stressed that his country would continue supporting “the oppressed people of Yemen, Bahrain and Palestine in every way possible.”
Are we really going to place our trust in America’s Commander-in-Chief when he claims backing the Free Syrian Army against the Syrian regime partnered with Iran and Hezbollah, even as his Air Force provides air cover to Iran’s Quds Force and pro-Iranian Shiite militias in Iraq’s Anbar province? This rabble with blood-stained hands – officially known as Popular Mobilisation Forces (Al-Shaabi) – has been deployed by Prime Minister Haider Al-Abadi and is directed by the commander of Iran’s Quds Force Qassem Soleimani. What is worse is that Iran is poised to send in ground troops as soon as it receives the go ahead from the government.
And what does Mr Obama say about the shocking news revealed by the Times and other papers to the effect that the government in Baghdad is turning away tens of thousands of desperate Sunni refugees fleeing the city of Ramadi, recaptured by ISIS? Nothing much as far as I can tell! Iraq families with nowhere to go are being treated worse than foreign foes, barred entrance into their own capital city unless they happen to have a local “guarantor.” This is a plan to reduce the Sunni population by sending them into the fray to die; there is no other explanation.
In reality, Saudi Arabia’s towns bordering northern Yemen are under direct threat from Houthis, while Iran, close to being literally under the Iranian boot, constitutes a grave threat to Gulf States. Does the Obama administration plan to wait until the horse has bolted before acting? The Iranian plot to dominate the region is taking shape before our eyes. We are being surrounded. Yet the U.S. president asks us to play nice with the plotters.
Qualitative military edge
The bottom line is we did not get what we asked for. Obama’s commitment to intervene in Syria to stop the regime’s killing spree was off the table along with a joint defense pact on the lines of those the U.S. has with Israel, Japan and South Korea. Moreover, he has turned down the Saudi request to purchase state-of-the-art F-35 Joint Strike Fighters to maintain Israel’s qualitative military edge over its neighbors.
And we certainly did not get what we need. Most importantly, any final agreement with Iran should be negotiated with the participation of Gulf states and co-signed by our leaders. Such agreement should not be limited to nuclear issues, but should be conditional upon Tehran’s commitment to quit meddling in the affairs of Arab countries, notably Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen and Bahrain whether directly (in the case of Iraq and Syria) or via its armed proxies (Lebanon and Yemen).
We should not trust any other countries but our own. We must not await instructions from the White House on how to pursue our own interests, as it is well-known that U.S. friendship is not proffered without strings. We must proceed with our mission to free Yemen of Houthi rabble, continue with our efforts to destroy ISIS and lend every support to that sector of the Syrian opposition fighting for a democratic, inclusive state – as opposed to terrorist groups that seek to drag Syria back to the Middle Ages.
Lastly, we should insist upon the stringent terms outlined above. And if those terms are not put in writing, the GCC should work to weaken the Iranian regime once and for all, beginning with material support for the oppressed Ahwazi Arab citizens of Iranian-occupied Arabistan – a region Iran now calls Khuzestan, which supplies the country with most of its oil and gas.
I fear that Camp David was a well-timed bluff and its weapons bounty no more than candies to sweeten the pill. I trust and believe that our leaders understand the score and will maintain independent strategies to counteract threats to our very existence. We cannot gamble with tomorrow on the words of one man, even if that man is the U.S. president.
Our region has been burned many times before. If the past is a good predictor of the future, we should recognise that ultimately we must become the masters of our own destiny, which is far too precious to be handed to the safekeeping of fair-weather friends.
Ramadi’s fall opens ISIS road to Baghdad. Jordan warns US air strikes won’t stop the terrorists’ advance
May 18, 2015Ramadi’s fall opens ISIS road to Baghdad. Jordan warns US air strikes won’t stop the terrorists’ advance, DEBKAfile, May 18, 2015
Jordan’s King Abdullah has warned the Obama administration in an urgent message that US air strikes alone won’t stop the Islamic State’s advances in Iraq and Syria and, what is more, they leave his kingdom next door exposed to the Islamist peril. ISIS would at present have no difficulty in invading southern Jordan, where the army is thin on the ground, and seizing local towns and villages whose inhabitants are already sympathetic to the extremist group. The bulk of the Jordanian army is concentrated in the north on the Syrian border. Even a limited Islamist incursion in the south would also pose a threat to northern Saudi Arabia, the king pointed out.
Abdullah offered the view that the US Delta Special Forces operation in eastern Syria Saturday was designed less to be an effective assault on ISIS’s core strength and more as a pallliative to minimize the Islamist peril facing Saudi Arabia, Jordan and the Gulf emirates.
DEBKAfile’s Washington sources report that US officials refused to heed Abdullah’s warning and tried to play it down, in the same way as Secretary John Kerry tried Monday, May 18, to de-emphasize to the ISIS conquest of Ramadi, the capital of Iraq’s largest province.
At a news conference in Seoul, Kerry dismissed the Islamists’ feat as a “target of opportunity” and expressed confidence that, in the coming days, the loss “can be reversed.”
The Secretary of State’s words were unlikely to scare the Islamists, who had caused more than 500 deaths in the battle for the town and witnessed panicky Iraqi soldiers fleeing Ramadi in Humvees and tanks.
Baghdad, only 110 km southeast of Ramadi, has more reason to be frightened, in the absence of any sizeable Iraqi military strength in the area for standing in the enemy’s path to the capital.
The Baghdad government tried announcing that substantial military reinforcements had been ordered to set out and halt the Islamists’ advance. This was just whistling in the dark. In the last two days, the remnants of the Iraqi army have gone to pieces – just like in the early days of the ISIS offensive, when the troops fled Mosul and Falujah. They are running away from any possible engagement with the Islamist enemy.
The Baghdad-sourced reports that Shiite paramilitaries were preparing to deploy to Iraq’s western province of Anbar after Islamic State militants overran Ramadi were likewise no more than an attempt to boost morale. Sending armed Shiites into the Ramadi area of Anbar would make no sense, because its overwhelmingly Sunni population would line up behind fellow-Sunni Islamist State conquerors rather than help the Shiite militias to fight them.
Iran’s Defense Minister Hossein Dehghan, who arrived precipitately in Baghdad Monday, shortly after Ramadi’s fall, faces this difficulty. Our military sources expect him to focus on a desperate effort to deploy Shiite militias as an obstacle in ISIS’s path to Baghdad, now that the road is clear of defenders all the way from Ramadi.
In Amman, King Abdullah Sunday made a clean sweep of senior security officials, firing the Minister of Interior, the head of internal security (Muhabarat) and a number of high police officers. They were accused officially of using excessive violence to disperse demonstrations in the southern town of Maan.
The real reason for their dismissal, DEBKAfile’s counter-terror sources disclose, is the decline of these officials’ authority in the Maan district, in the face of the rising influence of extremist groups identified with Al Qaeda and ISIS, in particular.
As Ramadi Falls to Islamic State Terrorists, WH Says Their Momentum Has Been ‘Blunted’
May 15, 2015As Ramadi Falls to Islamic State Terrorists, WH Says Their Momentum Has Been ‘Blunted’,Washington Free Beacon via You Tube, May 15, 2015
(It’s not even good spin. — DM)
Key Iraqi town of Ramadi falls to ISIS, along with Jubbah next door to US training base
May 15, 2015Key Iraqi town of Ramadi falls to ISIS, along with Jubbah next door to US training base, DEBKAfile, May 15, 2015
ISIS rolls into Iraqi town of Ramadi
In the current situation prevailing in western Iraq, the Americans and Iraqis might as well forget about their plans for retaking Iraq’s second city, Mosul, from ISIS control, this year.
*********************
Ramadi, the provincial capital of western Iraqi Anbar, fell to the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant Friday, May 15 after its inhabitants were put to mass flight. The town, 110 km west of Baghdad, controls the traffic on the Euphrates River. Small pockets of Iraqi troops are still stranded there after taking hundreds of casualties.
The jihadists are in mid-momentum of a fresh multi-pronged offensive, which they launched shortly after they lost Tikrit last month to the biggest counter-offensive they had faced since seizing large tracts of land in Iraq nearly a year ago.
This momentum has carried the Islamists across Anbar province which touches the Syrian and Jordanian borders to capture another key location – Jubba, next door to Iraq’s biggest air base at Al-Ansar. There, hundreds of US officers and soldiers are training Iraqi troops to fight ISIS and helping the Iraqi army manage the fighting in the province.
Parts of this base have already come under Islamist gun and mortar fire.
Not far from Ramadi, ISIS is threatening the oil-producing town of Baiji where a small Iraqi army force of no more than a few hundred soldiers is surrounded by the jihadists, with slim chances of holding out much longer before they are wiped out or forced to surrender.
Yet another ISIS arm is pushing east towards Baghdad, with the object of disabling the international airport by bringing its runways within mortar range.
To conquer Ramadi, ISIS used bulldozers to knock gaps in the sand earthworks built by the Iraqi army to defend the town, then sending half a dozen bomb cars through the gaps to the Iraqi military command centers where they detonated.
Some of those bomb cars were driven by Muslims from West Europe, who had traveled through Syria to join up with ISIS in Iraq. The jihadists named one of them as “Abu Musa al-Britani.”
Just Thursday, May 14, the British police revealed that more than 700 potential terror suspects had traveled to Syria from the U.K. to fight or support extremists, and about half are believed to have returned, primed for terrorist operations on home ground.
In response to the British police statement, ISIS released a video recording of a message delivered by its leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi calling on supporters around the world to join the fight in Syria and Iraq or to “take up arms wherever they live.”
It was Baghdadi’s first message since a number of media reports said he was killed or critically injured, and was intended to refute claims that he was no longer in active charge of the group.
DEBKAfile’s counter-terror sources outline the common operational tactic, modus operandi, employed by the Islamist group in all its Iraq offensives.
After singling out a targeted location, their fighters first seize control of its environs. That way, they can block off in advance any incoming and outgoing movements of Iraqi troops – whether in retreat or for bringing up reinforcements. Next, their fighters storm into the core of the targeted location. Fleeing Iraqi soldiers and their local allies and civilians are summarily put to death.
This new ISIS impetus in Iraq has wiped out the military advantages the Iran-backed Shiite militias and US air force gained from the capture of the central Iraqi town of Tikrit in late March and early April. When the Shiie mlitias turned on the local Sunni populace for murder, burning and looting, the Obama administration turned to Tehran and Baghdad and demanded those militias be removed from the city.
Since the Iraqi army is incapable of recovering control and holding Tikrit after the Islamists were driven out, the town has sunk into anarchy with innumerable armed gangs battling each other for control of its quarters, some of them ISIS loyalists.
In the current situation prevailing in western Iraq, the Americans and Iraqis might as well forget about their plans for retaking Iraq’s second city, Mosul, from ISIS control, this year.
President Strangelove or, how I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb
May 14, 2015President Strangelove or, how I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb, Jerusalem Post, David Turner, May 14,2015
Concerned about Soviet intentions in the region the Truman administration entered into the U. S.-Saudi Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement (MDA) in 1951. The Agreement provided the foundation for what would emerge as an American commitment to provide a defense umbrella for the region to protect American interests in the Middle East. American assurances to states in the region seemed intact until the GW Bush Administration invasion of Iraq. Trapped in a war it completely misjudged and soon realized it could not win the administration sought an accommodation with Iran to control Shi’ite militias battling the Americans.
The Bush policy of “accommodation” with Iran became the Obama policy of “appeasement” towards the Islamic Republic. Thus began a six-year-long quest to intended to encourage that country’s recalcitrant and hegemony ambitious leaders to abandon its nuclear weapons program. With the imminent 30 June deadline for signing an Agreement quickly approaching the president invited the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states headed by Saudi Arabia to Camp David promising a mutual defense agreement assuring the Arab states of American protection in the event Iran proved a threat to the region. In addition to “assurances, the Saudis insisted on a signed and “formal alliance structure with the United States guaranteeingU.S. support against potential Iranian aggression.”
In advance of the conference the White House announced that President Obama would meet with the Saudi king the day beforeCamp David. But at the last minute, “[d]ispleased with Washington’s dealings with Iran, with an emerging deal over its nuclear program and with US security proposals to Gulf Arab nations,” King Salman announced he would not meet with President Obama and would not attend the Camp Davidconference. In the end only two of six Gulf nations decided to attend with heads of state.
The king’s last-minute cancellation, his turn-down of a meeting with the leader of the Free World was described as “a calculated snub for the president’s policies on Iran and the Middle East.” It was revealed that Kerry, in his meeting with the Saudis the week earlier, told the king that Obama was not prepared to finalize according to the king’s timetable any agreement that might result at Camp David.
And then there was the fact that a mutual defense agreement with the Saudis, the 1951 MDA, already existed already assuring the Saudis protection under America’s nuclear umbrella. Mistrust of American intentions and assurances by America’s “allies” built up over the previous twelve years was palpable.
Bush and the Region
“Even before the inauguration [and, of course, the pretext of 9/11], Cheney asked outgoing Secretary of Defense William Cohen to provide Bush with a briefing focused on Iraq… [Bush appointee] Defense Secretary Rumsfeld saw, “September 11, 2001, as a potential “opportunity.””
Symptomatic of hubris resulting from power minus coherent policy President Bush ignored both Arab and Israeli warnings of Foreseen Consequences certain to follow should the administration follow through with its threat to invade Iraq.
“With his latest remarks, [Saudi, later king] Prince Abdullah joined the chorus of Arab complaints about the Bush administration’s talk of taking military action to oust Saddam Hussein and put an end to his programs to develop weapons of mass destruction. At virtually every stop in the Arab world, Mr. Cheney has been told that an American military strike would destabilize the region.”
And, according to Lawrence Wilkerson, a member of the State Department’s Policy Planning Staff, “[t]he Israelis were telling usIraq is not the enemy – Iran is the enemy.” Wilkerson said that the Israeli reaction to invading Iraq in early 2002 was, “If you are going to destabilize the balance of power, do it against the main enemy.”
Bush and the Bomb
“Cut off the head of the snake,” the Saudi ambassador toWashington, Adel al-Jubeir, quotes the king as saying during a meeting with General David Petraeus in April 2008.
In a speech to the Knesset in 2008 to observe Israel’s 60thanniversary Bush told the Knesset, “America stands with you in firmly opposing Iran’s nuclear weapons ambitions. Permitting the world’s leading sponsor of terror to possess the world’s deadliest weapon would be an unforgivable betrayal of future generations.” Nowhere in his speech did Bush hint at his long held view that America was not prepared to enter another Middle East war, that there never was a military option with which to threaten Iran’s nuclear weapons program. No accident then that Bush chose war-averse Robert Gates as his defense secretary; and that Gates in turn chose war-averse Admiral “Mike” Mullen as head the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The dovish defense pair would for years be the president’s PR mouthpiece warning against even the threat of force to halt Iran’s nuclear program. The Gates/Mullen oft-repeated warning of “unforeseen consequences” became, over the years a common, almost mantra-like warning against any action against Iran.
No surprise then that the openly dovish, newly-elected President Obama invited Gates to remain on as his defense department head, “a show of bipartisan continuity in a time of war that will be the first time a Pentagon chief has been carried over from a president of a different party.”
Obama and the Region
By way of destabilizing the region Obama has not yet equaled the fallout of Bush’s invasion of Iraq. If Bush gifted Iraq to Iran, set the stage for the “Arab Spring,” Obama did not come in second for lack of trying. The new president followed Bush by targeting his own tyrant, Muamar Qadafi and transformingLibya, as did Bush in Iraq, a political wreck bordering on a failed state. Libya today is ruled al-Queda, Islamic State and other terror organizations with two governments powerless to assert control. Bordering Egypt Libya today supplies both the Sinai Salafist insurgency and the terror enclave of Gaza with weapons. And as Bush ignored Israeli and Arab warnings regarding the impact of invading Iraq, Obama chose to those same Arab-Israeli warnings regarding his intention to depose America’s principal Arab ally, Hosni Mubarak of Egypt. In a single mindless move the U.S. followed up its Iraq disaster with Egypt. And followed the collapse of Egypt’s secular regime, insult to injury Obama endorsed as “democratic government” the same Muslim Brotherhood with a decades-long terror campaign against the government; the group behind the assassination of Anwar Sadat for having sought peace with Israel: the Muslim Brotherhood whose child, al-Quaeda, had flown airliners into New York’s World Trade Center! The list of Bush and Obama Administration policy failures seems to know no limits: Iraq redo, Bahrain,Yemen and the bloodbath of Syria. Lacking capacity to learn from ideology-based failures, it continually repeats its “unintended consequences.”
Obama and the Bomb
If Bush set the pattern for accommodation then the tactic at least had some “justification” as Iran’s IRGC was funding, arming and even leading the Shi’ite insurgency against Iraq’s American invaders. Not provoking Iran might have the result of limiting American casualties. But for Obama, recipient in advance of the Nobel Peace Prize for promising regarding “world peace”; for Obama to provide Iran, a state sponsor of Islamist terrorism a world forum to show up American weakness and enhance Iranian prestige; for Obama whose commitment on entering office was to promote nuclear non-proliferation: for Obama to provide Iran all the time necessary to achieve threshold nuclear armament status and, failing to contain Iran the consequence would be a nuclear arms race in the lands of the Arab Spring… Saudi Arabia,Turkey and Egypt are already moving to parity with Iran whileJordan and several Gulf states are at varying stages of planning.
Obama, who promised nuclear non-proliferation, has turned out to be godfather to a nuclear arms race in the least stable, most militant region of the world!
How Iran Saved Obama’s “Blame America” Foreign Policy
April 29, 2015How Iran Saved Obama’s “Blame America” Foreign Policy, Front Page Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, April 28, 2015
Obama’s public rejection of every ally, from Israel to Egypt to Saudi Arabia, has finally created the Post-American Middle East that his “Blame America” doctrine sought. The Post-American Middle East is a hive of terrorist groups and a region of nuclear arms races where murderous despots with vast armies dream of resurrecting the Ottoman Empire, the Persian Empire and the Abbasid Caliphate.
*********************
Obama’s Middle East policy was doomed to fail because it was based on the myth that everything wrong with the region was America’s fault.
Senator Obama had argued that Iraq would fix itself once we pulled out. Without America, the Iraqis would create a “political solution”. Instead the Shiites used the withdrawal to take over the government and Al Qaeda rebounded to dominate the Sunnis. After years of denying what was going on, he was forced back into Iraq after genocide and beheadings filled every television screen.
From the White House, he deployed the “Iraq Solution” across the Middle East by withdrawing support from American allies and backing terrorist groups like the Muslim Brotherhood. The chaos tore apart the region and turned over entire cities and countries to terrorists.
Egypt went through multiple coups. Street violence in Tunisia wrecked the country and supplied thousands of fighters to ISIS. His regime change war in Libya led to terrorist takeovers of its capital. Al Qaeda nearly took over Mali. Houthi Jihadists backed by Iran took over Yemen’s capital. The Saudis are bombing Yemen. The Egyptians are bombing Libya. The French are still fighting in Mali.
Iran and Al Qaeda have divided up Iraq, Syria and Yemen between themselves.
Withdrawing American power and influence didn’t work because we were never the problem. American soldiers weren’t causing the Sunnis and Shiites to fight each other. They were the only thing preventing it. American power and influence across the Middle East wasn’t holding back freedom and human rights, it was the only thing keeping a modicum of freedom alive in places like Egypt and Tunisia that quickly fell to Islamist rule in the Arab Spring, resulting in street violence, torture, terrorism and military coups.
The left had been fundamentally wrong about the cause of the problems in the Middle East. Obama trashed the region by following its wrongheaded doctrines.
Once the “Blame America” foreign policy has been implemented and the region went to hell, he had no idea what to do next. Intervening in Libya made sense according to the “Blame America” doctrine because Gaddafi had recently cut a deal with the United States and was obstructing the Jihadists who were implementing the local version of the Arab Spring in coordination with the Muslim Brotherhood.
But intervening in Syria didn’t. Assad wasn’t an American ally. Therefore the “Blame America” doctrine said that he should be left alone. But he was obstructing the Arab Spring. Overthrowing him would let the Muslim Brotherhood claim another country, but would alienate Iran and spoil any reconciliation.
Unable to make a final decision, Obama veered back and forth between Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood. Some days he seemed on the verge of bombing Syria and other days he was against even providing the promised weapons to the Sunni rebels. Even his supporters accused him of having no plan.
Syria’s real red line was the one that it had drawn through his foreign policy. Instead of making the Middle East better, his withdrawals had made it worse. And the beneficiaries of his foreign policy, especially the Muslim Brotherhood, were clamoring for more American military intervention.
Even Iraq’s Shiite government, backed by Iran, wanted American intervention.
Obama’s foreign policy had created a new set of untrustworthy client states which had to be kept alive by American intervention. The great joke of his foreign policy was that his new terrorist states acted just like the old dictators they were supposed to replace. They wanted American weapons and soldiers. Their own people hated them and hated America by extension. The climax of the Arab Spring came with crowds in Tahrir Square denouncing Obama and the Muslim Brotherhood for acting as his client state.
The “Blame America” foreign policy had led to even more blame of America. The new “democratic” Islamist governments that he helped bring to power to appease the Arab Street and atone for the sins of supporting the old secular-ish dictators backfired by making the Arab Street hate us more than ever.
Iran saved Obama’s foreign policy. Just as he was stumbling around Syria and weeping at being stuck back in Iraq, the agents of the Iran Lobby suggested that the whole mess could be put back together again. Iran and the US would fight on the same side against ISIS in Syria and Iraq. And this cooperation could be used to hammer out a nuclear accord that would retroactively justify Obama’s Nobel Prize.
The only problem was that everyone else in the region was completely against the idea.
The Iran Lobby threw Obama’s failed foreign policy a lifeline and he grabbed it. The bombing of Syria was off. Assad turned over some WMDs, but went on using others. The US began acting as the air force for Iran’s Shiite militias in Iraq while the Kurds and the Sunni Sheikhs of the Awakening were shut out.
When the Houthis took over Yemen, Obama shrugged. When the Saudis began bombing Yemen, they didn’t tell him because they were afraid the news would leak to Iran. And the administration covertly began pressuring them to stop, confirming that it now took its marching orders from Tehran, not Riyadh.
Obama ignored the vocal opposition, particularly from Israel’s Netanyahu, because the Iran deal was the only thing holding his foreign policy together. It made it seem as if he knew what he was doing. Take away the Iran deal and there was no longer a strategy, just a series of incoherent panicked responses.
That is why he continues to cling to the Iran deal. Without it, the Emperor’s foreign policy is naked.
The Iran deal salvaged the “Blame America” foreign policy by reorienting it away from the Muslim Brotherhood to deal with our great enemy in the region. By acceding to Iran’s nuclear program, Obama could finally fix everything by atoning for America’s biggest foreign policy sin in the region.
Despite his Muslim family background, Obama never understood the Middle East. Instead he looked at the region through a left-wing lens and saw only America’s crimes.
The Sunnis and Shiites, the Arabs, Kurds, Persians and Turkmen, weren’t fighting because of America. They were fighting over differences in religion, ethnicity and clan. The left has always thought that the way to fix the Middle East was to withdraw American influence. Instead doing that destabilized the region and created a power vacuum that Russia and Iran have been more than happy to fill.
Obama’s final foreign policy act was to fall directly into Iran and Al Qaeda’s trap.
Iran and the various Al Qaeda groups had effectively split parts of the region among themselves. By embracing Iran, Obama alienated the Sunni Middle East and shoved entire populations into Al Qaeda’s waiting embrace. He completed the polarizing process that he began with the Arab Spring by selling out the moderates to the extremists and waiting for everyone in the region to love America again.
But the Muslim Brotherhood lost out to its edgier Al Qaeda children. Egypt and the Saudis are scrambling to hold together some sort of Sunni center without the United States and against its wishes. Obama’s alignment with Iran, his rejection of Egypt’s new government and his failure to back the Saudis in Yemen has sent the message that the only legitimate alternative to Al Qaeda is Iran.
That’s not an alternative that most Sunnis can accept. Many would rather stand with Al Qaeda than Iran.
Obama’s public rejection of every ally, from Israel to Egypt to Saudi Arabia, has finally created the Post-American Middle East that his “Blame America” doctrine sought. The Post-American Middle East is a hive of terrorist groups and a region of nuclear arms races where murderous despots with vast armies dream of resurrecting the Ottoman Empire, the Persian Empire and the Abbasid Caliphate.
While genocide goes on, sex slaves are raped under the rule of a Caliph and black flags are unfurled and nuclear weapons are developed to fulfill apocalyptic Islamic prophecies, Obama smiles for the camera and waits for his second Nobel Prize.
It had been America’s fault all along. Now that Iran and Al Qaeda are in charge, everything will be okay.
Al Qaeda on winning streaks in Yemen and Iraq, exploiting stalemate in proxy wars
April 17, 2015Al Qaeda on winning streaks in Yemen and Iraq, exploiting stalemate in proxy wars, DEBKAfile, April 17, 2015
Thursday and Friday, April 16-17, two branches of Al Qaeda took the lead in violent conflicts, catapulting key areas of the Middle East into greater peril than ever. In Yemen, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) and in Iraq, the Islamist State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIS), launched new offensives 3.050 kilometer apart.
DEBKAfile’s military sources report that both branches of the Islamist terror movement used the absence of professional adversarial troops on the ground – American and Saudi – to push forward in the two arenas. Washington and Riyadh alike had decided to trust local forces to carry the battle – Iran-backed Shiite militias alongside Iraqi troops against ISIS in Iraq, and the Yemeni army against Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen.
This gave Al Qaeda a free passage to carry on, especially when offered the further benefit of contradictions in the Obama administration’s attitude toward its foe, Tehran: On the one hand, Iran was offered lead role in the region for the sake of a nuclear deal; on the other, it faced US opposition for its support of rebel forces in Yemen.
The conflict in Yemen is no longer a straight sectarian proxy war between Sunni-ruled Saudi Arabia and Shiite Iran (that also stretches to Iraq and Syria.), as a result of what happened Thursday, April 16.
AQAP embarked on a broad offensive in southern Yemen’s Hadhramaut region on the shore of the Gulf of Aden and captured the important seaport of Mukalla as well as the coatal towns of Shibam and Ash-Shirh. The group also overran Yemen’s Ryan air base in the absence of real resistance from the Yemen army’s 27th Brigade and 190th Air Defense Brigade – both of which are loyal to the escaped president Mansour Hadi.
This winning AQAP offensive was instructive in four ways:
1. For the first time in two decades, Al Qaeda in Arabia is operating on professional military lines. Its sweep across Yemen’s southern coastland showed the Islamists to be plentifully armed with antiair missiles and other air defense systems.
2. AQAP’s smuggling rings run a large fleet of vessels which collaborate with Somali pirates. This fleet is now preparing to seize control of the strategic Socotra archipelago of four islands opposite Hadhramaut and only 80 kilometers from the Horn of Africa. Socotra sits in the bottleneck for shipping from the Arabian Sea and Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Aden and on to the Suez Canal.
On one of the Socotra islands, the US set up an air base and deployed special forces in 2011, in readiness for an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities. AQAP does not have enough strength to capture this island, but is capable of holding it siege and under barrage from sea and land.
3. The Arabian branch of Al Qaeda has for the first time gained control of a large sweep of territory in Yemen, a feat analogous to its fellow branch’s advances in Iraq since last June.
4. Hadramauth is bounded to the north and the east by the Saudi Arabian Rub’ al Khali or Empty Quarter, which is the world’s second largest desert region. AQAP has therefore gained proximity to the oil kingdom through its desolate back door.
Our military sources note that Saudi Arabian and United Arab Emirate air forces have controlled Yemeni air space since March 26, supported by US intelligence assistance. They might have been expected to bomb AQAP units and stall their advance through Hadhramaut.
But they refrained from doing so for a simple reason: Both Riyadh and its Gulf ally are unwilling to throw their own ground forces into the war against the Shiite Houthi rebels. Still in proxy mode, they expect Al Qaeda’s Arabian jihadis to save them the trouble of putting their troops on the ground to vanquish the Shiite rebels.
The same principle guides Washington in Iraq – albeit with different players. There, the Americans rely increasingly on the pro-Iranian Iraqi Shiite militias, under the command of Iranian Revolutionary Guards officers, rather than the Iraq army, to cleanse the ground of ISIS conquests.
Two weeks after Western publications trumpeted the militias’ success in liberating the Iraqi town of Tikrit from its ISIS conquerors, it turns out that the fighting is still ongoing and the jihadis are still in control of some of the town’s districts.
Iraqi Prime Minister Haidar al-Abadi, while on a visit to Washington this week, told reporters that, after the Tikrit “victory,” his army was to launch an offensive to recapture the western province of Anbar on the Syrian border from the grip of ISIS.
The situation on the ground is a lot less promising. As Abadi and President Barack Obama discussed future plans for the war to rid Iraq of the Islamists, ISIS launched fresh offensives for its next goals, Ramadi, a town of half a million inhabitants 130 kilometers west of Baghdad, and the oil refinery town of Baiji
The jihadis have already moved in on Ramadi’s outskirts after the Iraqi army defenders started falling back.
ISIS attacks Ramadi: It’s way worse than we’re being told
April 17, 2015ISIS attacks Ramadi: It’s way worse than we’re being told, Alanbwest.com, Allen West, April 17, 2015
[T]ens of thousands are fleeing Ramadi, the largest city in Anbar province of some half a million — the city lies 100 miles from Baghdad. And ISIS has also launched an attack on the major oil refinery city of Baiji, just north of Tikrit. Could it be that ISIS conducted a very well planned and executed deception plan to make Iraqi Security Forces and their Iranian allies focus on Tikrit, while they focused their offensive operations elsewhere? If so, it’s a brilliant operational level ruse.
But there is an even more important question — how did ISIS do this without any detection? How did they reposition their force — in open desert — and no one saw it? This is a direct reflection of the intelligence failure of the so-called Obama coalition.
***********************
One of the best lessons I learned in my years of service in the military is a quote often share with y’all: “the enemy has a vote.”
You can try and sell the American people — and others — a politicized line such as “al-Qaida has been decimated and destroyed” or “we have reached the framework of a deal with Iran” or “ISIS is not Islamic,” but the bad guys are not affected by empty rhetoric.
And here we go again with the Obama administration and the conflagration against Islamic terrorism. We’ve been told that ISIS has stalled. Their recruiting is low and they’re demoralized – by the way, what is up with the Ohio man just arrested after returning from Syria and training with ISIS?
The Daily Beast, not exactly a conservative outlet, reports, “ISIS is reportedly marching on the key Iraqi city of Ramadi—upending the momentum the U.S.-led military coalition seemed to have just days ago, and threatening to shatter an already delicate recent power shift that both the U.S. and Iraq hoped to exploit.
“Until Wednesday’s reports about Ramadi both U.S. and Iraqi officials were examining what effects ISIS’s recent losses could have in future battles. The officials were even talking about where they would take down ISIS next. During his visit to Washington, Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al Abadi suggested in an interview Wednesday with reporters that his troops could move on both Anbar Province—where Ramadi in the local capital—and the oil-rich city of Baiji.
But that was before, according to residents, three cities near Ramadi fell into ISIS hands. Hours later, area security forces reportedly asked for more support from the central government to retain control of the city. Pentagon officials stopped short of saying the city was on the brink of falling. But they didn’t sound confident it would hold, either.
“The situation in Ramadi remains fluid and, as with earlier assessments, the security situation in the city is contested. The ISF [Iraqi Security Forces] continue to conduct clearing operations against ISIL-held areas in the city and in the surrounding areas of Al Anbar province,” U.S. Central Command spokesman Army Major Curt Kellogg said in a statement, using the government’s preferred acronym for ISIS. The coalition continues to coordinate with ISF forces and provide operational support as requested.”
The truth is, tens of thousands are fleeing Ramadi, the largest city in Anbar province of some half a million — the city lies 100 miles from Baghdad. And ISIS has also launched an attack on the major oil refinery city of Baiji, just north of Tikrit. Could it be that ISIS conducted a very well planned and executed deception plan to make Iraqi Security Forces and their Iranian allies focus on Tikrit, while they focused their offensive operations elsewhere? If so, it’s a brilliant operational level ruse.
But there is an even more important question — how did ISIS do this without any detection? How did they reposition their force — in open desert — and no one saw it? This is a direct reflection of the intelligence failure of the so-called Obama coalition.
However, let me digress for a moment and consider the effect this is having on those brave and courageous men and women who just a decade ago bled, sacrificed, lost limbs, and died in order to drive the enemy out of Ramadi.
Can you imagine what it is doing to them to hear this news — of course it appears that President Obama cares little. His campaign promise was more important than acknowledging the enemy has a vote. His defiance would not allow him to admit that he was wrong and that our men and women who DID serve with honor and distinction defeated the enemy, al-Qaida in Iraq. The emotional scars run deep, and sadly the person inflicting the damage and reopening wounds resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
During a Senate Armed Services hearing Chairman John McCain, a former combat fighter pilot, asked an astonishing question — which those of us in the know, knew. How many total sorties have been flown since last August when we announced the air campaign against ISIS? The answer is approximately 12,000. How many of these sorties have dropped weapons (munitions)? The answer was 3,000. When queried, the new Secretary of Defense, Ash Carter, explained that the problem is that we don’t have G-FACs (Ground- Forward Air Controllers) on the ground. As well, it appears we don’t have intelligence gathering capability. ISIS is not being pushed back. They are on the offense, and how can that be happening?
Not only in Iraq, but in Yemen, where President Obama stated last September that this was a shining example of success. Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) has taken over a vital airfield, port, and oil facility. And if you haven’t been paying attention, Americans are fleeing the country by whatever means they can find. Right now they are escaping on boats to Dijbouti. For those of you who aren’t aware, the U.S. Marine Corps always has a regional force afloat called a Marine Expeditionary Unit (Special Operations Capable) — MEU(SOC). One of their mission sets is called NEO – Non Combatant Evacuation Order — which is where they coordinate with the local embassy to extricate Americans from a hostile country. Remember, ARG/MEU (Amphibious Ready Group/Marine Expeditionary Unit) was sitting off the coast of Yemen, but the Obama administration ordered our embassy evacuated as the Marines destroyed their weapons and flew out on Oman Air.
I know, you’re saying, why should I care? You think I’m just complaining and running my mouth. I believe the same was said of one Winston Churchill whilst the people of England were embracing Neville Chamberlain. The point is that the enemy is being emboldened and domestic prosperity means nothing when planes fly into buildings. The redistribution of wealth will mean little when someone shouts “Allahu Akhbar” and guns down American troops in America. Income inequality will not be a pressing issue if another woman is beheaded at her workplace by an Islamist — and it’s just dismissed.
We are suffering from the sickness of soundbite mentality and as the Taliban says, “you may have watches but we have the time.”
We have an administration that is lying to us and refuses to confront a very threatening enemy. The last time such a maniacal threat was disregarded — well, millions lost their lives. I pray that a catastrophic event does not have to occur to wake us up — but it seems we are on that road. This is not about bravado, it is about making a stand to defeat Islamo-fascism and its spawn, terrorism and jihadism. And let us not forget that meanwhile Vladimir Putin lurks in the dark places and China slowly extends its regional hegemony.
Remember, peace through strength.
anneinpt
artaxes
danmillerinpanama
davidking1530
Peter Hofman
Joseph Wouk
Peter
Louisiana Steve
WarSclerotic 
Recent Comments