According to newly revealed information, Russia has recently begun to build a new military base in Latakia in Syria. In this respect, Russian flights are using an air corridor over Iran and Iraq in order to transport the necessary equipment into Syria. This development indicates the fact that contrary to what General Martin Dempsey (The current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) and Kenneth Pollack (A distinguished Middle East expert in the Brookings Institute) in different occasions e.g. testimonies before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, repeatedly stated, the current Haidar Al-Abadi government is completely under the control of the Islamic Regime of Iran and cannot be trusted neither with regards to current civil war within Iraq nor in the war against ISIS in this country.
Reviewing this issue is a very important point due to the fact that although, the events of 1- the current civil war between various religious and ethnic groups within Iraq and 2- the war against ISIS in Iraq, are two separate issues; but they are totally related to each other. To put it simply, we cannot fundamentally defeat ISIS in Iraq, if we haven't be able to establish an inclusive political system in Iraq. In other words, as long as the political system in Iraq would be under the control and hegemony of a particular religious or ethnic group, some Islamic radical groups like ISIS and Al- Qaeda would re-rise and reestablish; simply because the fertile land and the necessary components exist. In short, your current policy with regards to ISIS will never work neither in Syria nor in Iraq based on many reasons including the brief details of this short note.
I have warned the western politicians in this matter through many short notes. Here below two of them will be re-uploaded again in a hope to refresh some memories.
M. Sirani 17.09.2015
1- Iraqi Prime Minister Haidar Al-Abadi Asked U.S. For Weapon.
There is no doubt that selling weapon to current Iraqi government would have a huge economical benefit for the U.S. economy. But, there are some serious considerations in this matter, which the combination of all of them indicate a fact that the current U.S. administration should response to Al-Abadi's request in a very cautious and careful manner. In short, based on some reasons including:
1- The current Iraqi political system is the puppet of the Islamic Regime of Iran.
2- The current Iraqi political system is not an inclusive government.
3- Some Ministers within current Iraqi political system are the high ranking members of Badr Organization, which is a subset organization of Iran's IRGS and Quds Force. (Those, who are interested to know more about the three issues mentioned above, can read my short note entitled "You are shocking me General Dempsey" in the following link).
4-- Unlimited increasing influence of IRGC and its numerous subsets Shiite Groups in Iraq.
5- Serious violation of the human rights and atrocities against Sunni people performed by various Shiite groups.
6- The ongoing civil war in Yemen and the important role of Iran in this country.
7- And the uncertainty about the final outcome of a nuclear deal with Iran.
The current U.S. administration should evaluate Al-Abadi's request in a very cautious and careful manner. Because, there is some possibility that some of these weapons would fall in the hands of IRGC and Quds Forces and will be used against U.S. forces somewhere in the future; exactly the same as those high-tech weapons that were ended up in the hands of Al-Qaeda and Taliban and later were used against U.S. and its allies in Afghanistan. Should we learn something from history or not?
M. Sirani 14.04.2015
2- You Are Shocking Me general Dempsey.
You Are Shocking Me General Dempsey.
In an interview which took place Thursday, when the reporter asked General Martin Dempsey about Iran's military operation in Iraq, the Joint Chiefs Chairman responded:
"So far, those operations haven't threatened U.S. troops or their mission" (Yahoo, 2015).
This statement is honestly shocking me. One might wonder why? This is the story. Everybody knows that the Iranian Regime has completely colonized Iraq since many years ago at least since December 2011, when the U.S. withdrew its troops from Iraq. Since 2013, ISIS has systematically begun to seize the power in Iraq and Syria. To put it simply, ISIS activities in both Iraq and Syria are threatening Iran's interests (in different terms) in both countries. Since August 2014, the USA has formed a coalition (nearly 60 countries as Mr. John Kerry says) and has begun to fight ISIS in Iraq and Syria. I'm wondering: why should the Iranian Regime complain? Why should the Iranian Regime perform any activity against the U.S. troops, when the U.S. troops are fighting ISIS and doing a great favor for the Iranian Regime free of any charge?
Not only Iran but also the Syrian regime are using Buck Passing Strategy and enjoying all the activities that the USA and its coalition are doing against ISIS in both Iraq and Syria. What else should the Iranian Regime or Assad's Regime wish in this matter General Dempsey?
This is not the end of the story. General Dempsey surprises us with another shocking statement. In this interview, General Dempsey is identifying the Iranian influence in Iraq a positive move, if the Iraqi government remains committed to inclusivity of all different groups inside Iraq. His direct statement is as follows:
"If it is a path that ties the two countries more closely together economically or even politically, as long at the Iraqi government remains committed to inclusivity of all the various groups inside the country, then I think Iranian influence will be positive" (Yahoo, 2015).
This part of General Dempsey's statement is interesting and at the same time shocking from different angles. I'm wondering, do i have to remind the Joint Chiefs of Chairman about the destructive role of the Iranian Regime in Iraq, which directly and indirectly facilitated the best environment for the emergence and presence of ISIS in both Iraq and Syria? Do i have to remind General Dempsey that hegemonic influence of the Shiite regime of Iran led most of the Sunni tribes in Iraq to join ISIS? Or do i have to remind General Dempsey that since 2003 onward, most of the U.S. troops in Iraq were killed by the IRGC, Quds forces and their affiliates such as Mahdi Army or Badr force?
Furthermore, General Dempsey has used the term "inclusivity" as a characteristic of the current Iraqi government, in order to underpin his statement about the positive role of the Iranian Regime in Iraq. I don't want to deeply analyze this part of General Dempsey's statement; although there are many loopholes in this matter as well. But with help of some simple questions, i would try to illustrate my argument.
Dear General Dempsey:
1- Who is the current Iraqi Minister of Transportation? Is Hadi Al- Amiri the current minister or not? Is Hadi Al-Amiri the head of Badr Organization or not? Is the Badr Organization a subset of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) or not?
2- Who is the current Iraqi Interior Minister? Is Mohammed Ghabban a Shiite politician affiliated to the Badr Organization or not? Needless to say that Interior Ministry is a key security ministry within every political system including current Iraqi government.
3- Who is the current Iraqi Human Rights Minister? Is Mohammed Shia' al-Sudani a Shiite politician affiliated to the Badr Organization or not?
Dear General Dempsey, the Joint Chiefs of Chairman of the strongest country in the world: With just these simple examples, could we identify the current Iraqi government an inclusive political system and furthermore could we identify the overall influence of Iran in Iraq a positive move? Or should we be optimistic about the inclusivity of Iraqi government somewhere in the future?
In sum, i can offer you many other examples and a more deeper academic argument, which the combination of all of them indicates a simple fact that:
The current Iraqi government is not inclusive and never will be a inclusive political system as long as the Islamic Regime governs in Iran.
Note: If you think you can stop Iran's adventurous nuclear activity by handing over Iraq to Iran, you are absolutely and completely in the wrong direction. You will understand my statement, when it's too late. Remember my short note in this matter.
M. Sirani 09.01.2015