Showing posts with label General Qassem Solaimani. Show all posts
Showing posts with label General Qassem Solaimani. Show all posts

Friday, November 01, 2019

Is a Hidden Hand Destabilizing Iraq?

Kevin Barrett

In early October, violent protests broke out in Baghdad and other Iraqi cities. Some of them degenerated into all-out riots. Eight members of the security forces and almost 100 civilians were killed, and more than 5,000 wounded. At the time of this writing (October 21), the situation is beginning to flare up again as the Arba‘in pilgrimage winds down.
The protestors decry economic stagnation and corruption — two very real problems. But circumstantial evidence, including the timing and context of the protests, the Saudi origins of much of its social media support network, and the targeting of relatively independent Prime Minister ‘Adil ‘Abd al-Mahdi less than a year into his term, suggest that American-Zionist colonial forces may be indulging in their usual color-revolution-style shenanigans.

Historical Context

Iraq’s crippled economy and its political culture of corruption are the product of a century of genocidal Anglo-Zionist assault. As the Australian Jewish scientist and avoidable mortality expert Gideon Polya writes,
The West has now commenced its Seventh Iraq War since 1914 in over a century of Western violence in which Iraqi deaths from violence or violently-imposed deprivation have totaled 9 million… A holocaust is the destruction of a large number of people and 9 million Iraqi deaths from Anglo-American violence or violently-imposed deprivation certainly constitutes an Iraqi Holocaust… Any argument that the British and Americans did not “intend” to kill 9 million Iraqis is belied by the remorseless slaughter over 101 years interrupted only by the period between the overthrow of the British-installed monarchy in 1958 and the commencement of Sanctions in 1990.
The disastrous consequences of the last three decades of American-led annihilation of Iraq are described in detail in Abdul-Haq al-Ani and Tarik al-Ani’s two-volume Genocide in Iraq. The two authors explain,
The current horrific malaise in the state of Iraq has its roots in the US-led destruction of Iraq in 1991, followed by a decade of US/UK-led harsh international sanctions against the entire Iraqi population that killed millions — one of the most heinous crimes of the 20th century.
The neoconservative Zionist war criminals who orchestrated the 2003 invasion and occupation of Iraq hoped to transform the entire region to benefit Israel. The Iraq misadventure was part of a larger plan to “take out” any regional powers that were sufficiently independent to stand up to the Zionists. But the people of Iraq, and the region, resisted. The result was a quagmire of endless war and destruction.
Today, 16 years after Baby Bush’s invasion, Zionist-imperialist forces still occupy a devastated Iraq. But the occupation has lost much of its influence over the Iraqi government, which has increasingly been working with regional partners beginning with Iran and the Axis of Resistance, along with the occupiers’ antagonists Russia and China. The occupiers are displeased. But they are so unpopular with Iraqis that they cannot act openly. Instead, they use covert means to try to sabotage Iraq’s strengthening relationships with forces promoting regional independence.

Timing of Iraqi Protests

The October protests broke out just two days after Prime Minister ‘Adil ‘Abd al-Mahdi angrily accused Israel of bombing Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Forces with air support from the United States. Normally when an independent sovereign state is attacked by an aggressor, all hell breaks loose: the aggrieved party mobilizes for retaliation, and the United Nations and other international institutions scramble to contain the situation (imagine if it was Russia or China bombing American targets). But Iraq’s protests fell on deaf ears. The world apparently views Iraq as a permanently occupied territory that the Zionist terrorists are welcome to bomb at will, with protection from their US lackeys.
‘Abd al-Mahdi’s refusal to remain silent while Israel was bombing his country must have angered the occupiers. Shortly after the Prime Minister spoke out, violent protests erupted on the streets of Baghdad and other Iraqi cities. The fact that the protestors have legitimate grievances in no way detracts from the likelihood that those grievances were weaponized by experts in the fourth generation warfare tactic of deploying color-revolution-style protests to plague, undermine, and/or collapse targeted governments/administrations.
And then, just as the protests got underway, the world learned of a foiled September plot to assassinate Major General Qassem Soleimani, the most celebrated senior commander in Islamic Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, and a prime force behind Hizbullah’s and Syria’s victories over the Zionists and their proxies. It seems that the Zionist-imperialist alliance, frustrated by its defeat in Syria and its inability to overtly attack Iran, has turned to covert methods, including assassination plots and color-revolution-style attacks on overly independent and responsible Iraqi leaders.
In his article “The US-Iran Silent War Is Transformed into an ‘Iraq Uprising’” Elijah J. Magnier cites Iraqi sources who claim,
…the assassination attempt against the commander of the Iranian IRGC-Quds Brigade Qassem Soleimani is not a pure coincidence but related to events in Iraq. Soleimani was in Iraq during the selection of the key leaders of the country. He has a lot of influence, like the Americans who have their own people. If Soleimani is removed, those who may have been behind the recent unrest may think it will create enough confusion in Iraq and Iran, allowing room for a possible coup d’état carried out by military or encouraged by foreign forces, Saudi Arabia and the US in this case.
Fortunately the plot against General Soleimani failed. In any case, would the people of Iraq permit a Saudi-American military coup designed to keep Iraq vulnerable to Zionist bombing? Such a coup, under its own colors, would be unacceptable to Iraqis. But a regime change operation that used local proxies and opportunists would have a better chance of success.
Those who argue that the protests in Iraq are indeed harbingers of a color-revolution-style regime change effort point out that this scenario is practically universal whenever local rulers of empire-occupied nations attempt to defy their imperial overlords. As Magnier points out,
The recent decisions of Abdel Mahdi made him extremely unpopular with the US. He has declared Israel responsible for the destruction of the five warehouses of the Iraqi security forces, Hashd al-Shaabi, and the killing of one commander on the Iraqi-Syrian borders. He opened the crossing at al-Qaem bet-ween Iraq and Syria to the displeasure of the US embassy in Baghdad, whose officers expressed their discomfort to Iraqi officials. He expressed his willingness to buy the S-400 and other military hardware from Russia. Abdel Mahdi agreed with China to reconstruct essential infrastructure in exchange for oil, and gave a $284 million electricity deal to a German rather than an American company. The Iraqi Prime Minister refused to abide by US sanctions and is still buying electricity from Iran and allowing the exchange of commerce that is bringing large amounts of foreign currency and boosting the Iranian economy. And lastly, Abdel Mahdi rejected the “Deal of the Century” proposed by the US: he is trying to mediate between Iran and Saudi Arabia and therefore is showing his intention to keep away from the US objectives and policies in the Middle East.
And suddenly, as if by magic, crowds of angry young people, mobilized by Saudi social media accounts, start rioting in Baghdad, al-‘Amarah, al-Nasiriyah, al-Basrah, al-Najaf and Karbala’. What a coincidence!
The protestors have every right to be angry. But they should redirect their fury against the war criminals who have occupied and crippled their country, not against Iraqi leaders who assert a modicum of independence.

Monday, September 16, 2019

Return of the Prodigal!

By: Kayhan Int’l

The recent visit to Iran of a prominent Iraqi religious leader and his participation in the mourning ceremony in Tehran on the Day of Ashura for Martyrs of the Tragedy of Karbala, while seated next to the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, with the Commander of the elite Qods Force sitting beside him, seems to have surprised, if not shocked, the US, Israel and the reactionary Arab regimes.
For the Islamic Republic of Iran and the revolutionary people of Iraq, as well as for the Resistance Front in the whole region, there was no element of surprise in Hojjat al-Islam Seyyed Moqtada as-Sadr’s warm reception by Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, and the place allotted to him at the VIP platform beside Major-General Qassem Soleimani.
The message was loud and clear. The pictures of the gathering published by the official websites of the two fraternal and friendly countries, indicates that Iran and Iraq attach special importance to their national sovereignty, territorial integrity, cultural affinity, political practicability, economic homogeneity, and religious solidarity.
It means both the neighbours share identical views on the peace, security, stability, and independence of the entire region, which should be cleared of all vestiges of terrorism, including the illegal presence of CENTCOM terrorists.
Sadr, whom the western and Arab media had portrayed as a prodigal, ready to sacrifice Iraq’s independence by drifting away from his roots for a few favours from the Persian Gulf sheikhdoms and his former enemy, the US, has made all calculations go awry by visiting Iran at the right time and choosing the Ashura occasion to announce his unity with the Resistance Front.
Whether Washington, the Zionist entity and the heretical Wahhabi clique of Riyadh likes it or not, Iraq and its various popular forces, including those led by Sadr who heads the largest parliamentary bloc in Baghdad, are one and the same.
They share the same views as Lebanon’s legendary anti-terrorist movement, the Hezbollah, or for that matter the heroic Ansarallah of Yemen, and the Palestinian liberation groups.
All these independent minded forces take inspiration from the Islamic Republic of Iran, since Tehran continues to steadfastly adhere to the timeless movement of Imam Husain (AS), the grandson of Prophet Muhammad (SAWA).
In other words, the Resistance Forces consider Seyyed Moqtada Sadr among the pillars of the regional movement against American imperialism, Zionism and Arab reactionaries, side by side with Hezbollah Secretary General Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah and Ansarallah Leader Seyyed Abdul-Malik Badreddin al-Houthi.
No wonder, Trump, Netanayahu and the Saudis are already beginning to see their dreams of dominating the region turning into nightmares.

Friday, January 04, 2019

Syria: Victory for the Resistance Front

Editor



Donald Trump has simply done in Syria what a long list of his predecessors has done elsewhere in the past: declare victory and get the hell out. Debate in the US over Trump’s December 19 announcement to withdraw the 2,000 American troops from Syria has ranged from hysterical (among the Washington warlords) to congratulatory messages from the largely ill-informed left. Lost in much of this verbal war is the fact that US troops were in Syria illegally and that they were about to suffer a humiliating defeat had they stayed much longer.
We will refrain from discussing the pros and cons of Trump’s withdrawal announcement. Instead, we will consider what led to this development because in the West there is a tendency to belittle others’ successes and only talk up America’s “victory” or magnanimity in withdrawing!
Did the US really achieve “historical victories” against Da‘ish terrorists, as Trump has claimed? Da‘ish is an American creation whose purpose was to achieve regime change in Syria. Financing and logistical support came from US allies Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Jordan, Israel and others. This diabolical plot was defeated, thanks to the resilience of the Syrian army and state, as well as help provided by such Syrian allies as Hizbullah, Islamic Iran, and Russia.
Trump realized this and saw little point in keeping 2,000 troops in Syria when the US already has more than 50,000 troops in the region spread across some 42 military bases. Besides, American forces were in a region supporting Kurdish separatists, much to the chagrin of NATO member Turkey. Ankara would not allow the emergence of an autonomous Kurdish state on its border. Trump had a choice: support the Kurds or keep Turkey in NATO. Even a moron like Trump could understand this simple math.
Not so the warmongers in Washington for whom perpetual war and bloodshed is the road to riches, hence their loud protests at this “sudden withdrawal” that would cause harm to “American interests.” The war dogs are everywhere: in Congress, the military, Trump White House as well as the media. Let us name some: Senator Lindsey Graham, Trump’s National Security Advisor John Bolton, and Secretary of Defense James “mad dog” Mattis all decried the announcement. The latter resigned in protest. Good riddance. Trump’s special representative on Syria, the lunatic James Jeffrey and Brett McGurk, the special presidential envoy for the global coalition to “defeat Da‘ish,” were also vehemently opposed. They wanted to create a Kurdish ruled proxy state in northeast Syria. This was meant to weaken Syria by partitioning it so that Zionist Israel would emerge even stronger.
Bolton, Jeffrey, and his lieutenant, Joel Rayburn, the deputy assistant secretary of state for the Levant, have argued publicly that US forces would not leave Syria until all Iranian forces had left. If these people have any self-respect, they would resign but they won’t. They are not men of honor; their overriding interest is shedding the blood of innocent people to make money for their bosses, the weapons manufacturers.
The other major reason for the US withdrawl is money for the dealmaker-in-chief. On Dec. 18, the US State Department cleared Ankara to purchase a package of Patriot systems, with an estimated price tag of $3.5 billion. Turkey has twice passed over the Patriot — in 2013 when it chose a Chinese system that it later dropped out of, and in 2017 when it said it finalized the S-400 deal. In both cases, Turkey insisted on a transfer of missile technology regarding the Patriot before it would consider the system, something the US had declined to do. Trump and Erdogan obviously struck a deal: Turkey would buy the Patriot system instead of the Russian S-400, the quid pro quo being that the US withdraw from Syria so that Turkey can go after the US-backed Kurdish forces on its border. Trump gets to crow about the billions for US WMD proliferators and Erdogan gets a free hand with the Kurds.
Let us return to the question of the resistance front that has achieved a singular victory by not only preventing the criminal regime change plot in Syria but also forcing the US to withdraw. Last July when Trump threatened Iran and claimed it would suffer unspecified consequences, General Qassem Solaimani, head of Iran’s Quds Force responded, “You may start the war but we will finish it.” The general also reminded Trump to check with his intelligence and military chiefs before making any foolish moves. “Seventeen years ago, you invaded Afghanistan and attacked the Taliban. Today you are begging them for negotiations,” General Solaimani told Trump. If the US cannot defeat the ragtag bands of Taliban, what chance does its pleasure-loving soldiers have against battle-hardened Iran’s revolutionary guards and troops?
This has been starkly demonstrated in Syria where the US is cutting its losses and getting the hell out. What this also shows is that where the leadership is sincere and determined, it can achieve remarkable results. Despite incredible loss of life and blood, the resistance front has shown that so-called superpowers and their meddlesome allies can be defeated. This is an important lesson that all people struggling for justice and peace need to internalize.