Connect with us

Middle East

The current situation in Syria

Giancarlo Elia Valori

Published

on

Syria is the great rotating platform of the Middle East. Paraphrasing the statement by Mackinder, the well-known British geopolitician of the early twentieth century, “who rules Syria commands the Middle East, who rules the Middle East controls Europe and Africa”.

This is the profound meaning of the “war between the wars”, as Israel once defined its air operations in Syria.

Israel, in particular, does not want Iran to be hegemonic in Syria.

This is the reason why, first and foremost, it tends to achieve a clear balance with the Russian Federation, which will certainly not leave Syria completely in Iran’s hands.

In fact, in November 2018 Israel started new bombings of the Iranian business districts, such as Kiswah, near Damascus, or Harfa, a strong Hezbollah position near the Golan Heights.

In Syria Bashar el Assad’s forces are pressing the jihadist positions in the Idlib region, as well as the cities of Lahaya and Masasnah in the Northern Province of Hama.

The anti-Bashar groups, i.e. the Free Syrian Army, Tahrir al-Sham, also known as al-Qaeda in Syria, and Jaish al-Izza, a jihadist group affiliated with the Free Syrian Army, with armaments supplied by the United States, but operating mainly in the areas near Hama, faced the Shiite forces’ attack very well and still hold a large part of Idlib.

Idlib is, in fact, the most important corridor for de-escalation, as established by the Astana Agreement, but it is also the city in which Syria connects to Turkey and, hence, to the primary lines heading for Europe.

Turkey has so far taken control of the Murak pass, in the Northern Hama province, while Tahrir al-Sham, that previously held that region, has repositioned itself in Kafr Zeita, again in the Northern Hama province.

In the Western part of the Idlib province, the group led by al-Qaeda in Syria, namely Tahrir al-Sham, has negotiated a “ceasefire” with the other jihadist groups, which allows it to keep control of six villages in the Ghab Plain.

Meanwhile, Assad’ Syrian Arab Army, with the elite forces of the 42ndDivision, dubbed “Ghait Forces”, and the 4th Armoured Division, is moving from Southern Syria to the Northern region of the Latakia province.

It should be remembered that all Syrian fighting Corps also have powerful Russian advisors.

The Iraqi Shiite militants, led by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, have moved to Hama’s Northern province, while the Fifth Corps of Assad’s Army – again with Russian support – carries out reinforcement and backup actions between the North of Aleppo and Hama and Latakia’s Northern region.

Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, i.e. the Syrian “section” of al-Qaeda, destroyed all the bridges of Al Eys, in the Southern Aleppo Province.

Hence the Aleppo-Idlib Northern axis is the centre of gravity of this war, while the South is becoming essential  for covering and protecting the Northern regions, which are now decisive for the solution of the Syrian war.

The jihadist group, however, has currently positioned itself on the side of the demilitarized zone of Idlib, which is controlled by Russia, Turkey and Iran.

Meanwhile, some groups – probably linked to Daesh-Isis, which is far from having been “eliminated”, as the Western press propaganda maintains – fight against the al-Qaeda-linked groups in the Idlib region.

This region is the centre of gravity of the war. Operations attributable to ISIS have also been carried out in Aleppo.

Meanwhile, the YPG Kurds effectively fight the jihadist groups surrounding the Kurdish city of Afrin, which is currently controlled by the Turkish troops.

In the meantime, Russia has put its anti-missile defence batteries back into operation in the Western province of Hama.

Hence what does Iranians want from Syria? Initially Iran used the Damascus corridor almost exclusively to transfer arms to the Lebanon.

Currently, however, weapons are manufactured directly in that country. In fact, Hezbollah has approximately 150,000 rockets, missiles and mortar shells, which are produced  both in Iran and in Syria.

The ferocious anti-Zionist policy of current Iran is based above all on Hezbollah’s remarkable ability to attack Israel.

According to Israeli intelligence, one in four buildings is a military base of the Shiite group in Southern Lebanon.

In 2017, however, the Israeli air force began to hit hard on the weapon landline stretching from Teheran to Beirut.

Hence Syria has become a sort of second Lebanon, with the current establishment and deployment of an Iran-led army on the field, in addition to the normal maintenance of the lines for transferring weapons from Iran to Southern Lebanon.

Hence this transformation of Israel’s operational logic has led to a change of Iran’s tactics.

On the basis of the agreement signed between Iran and  Assad’s regime on August 26, instead of operating solely on Syrian territory,  the Shiite Islamic Republic will merge almost entirely with the Syrian armed forces, while Iran’s  war industries will be integrated with those of the Baathist regime.

In all likelihood, Iran wants to replace the fallen soldiers of Assad’s army with its own.

Nevertheless Iran is increasingly using Iraq as a storage area for missiles and it also wants to use the Iraqi Shiite militias in the future.

The fact remains that Iran is increasingly standing out as a regional winner in the Syrian conflict.

Russia is certainly not happy about it.

After the US quick withdrawal from Syria, which enables Assad’s regime to stand as the sole protector of the Kurdish groups of Rojava, the Russian Federation is developing a new strategy.

Together with Iran to the Syrians, the Russians are moving to the middle Euphrates river valley, so as to later cross that river and conquer the areas previously occupied by the US forces and their Syrian allies, namely the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), that fought mainly against Isis-Daesh.

The aforementioned region is rich in oil, but Russia and Syria are mainly trying to prepare for the offensive of the Turkish Army on the city of Manbiji, one of the symbols of the Kurdish independence movement.

Considering the US withdrawal, the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), however, are dealing with Assad and the Russian forces to grant passage on the territory they previously conquered.

Moreover, with a view to securing the border between Iraq and Syria, the Iraqi regime is actively collaborating with the Russian-Iranian coalition.

Nevertheless, at economic level, things are not going so well for the Syrian-Iranian and Russian coalition.

In eight years of war, however, Assad’s forces have lost control of most Syrian oil wells and natural gas fields.

The phosphate reserves and the agricultural production areas have also fallen into enemy hands.

Syria has reserves worth 2 billion oil barrels – and Bashar al-Assad’s regime stopped light oil production in 2012 and  heavy oil production in 2013.

Before the war, Syria produced an average of 385,000 barrels a day.

Currently, according to official sources, Assad’s regime extracts only 20,000 barrels a day.

In its action against the jihadist groups, however, the Syrian regime has recently reconquered – one after the other – the most important oil areas, namely Shaar, al-Hayl, Arak, Hayan and finally the area of Al-Mahr, in the region of Palmira.

Meanwhile, the Kurds – already supported by the United States – keep control of their oil fields and gas deposits in Eastern and North-Eastern Syria.

The areas controlled by the Kurds – currently in contact with Assad’s forces  – account for 30% of the Syrian territory.

The Kurdish forces have conquered approximately 1,000 wells, some of which are in good condition and can easily start production.

The Kurdish wells, controlled only by the forces of Rojava, are enough for the consumption of the whole area. Probably the Syrian government secretly bought oil from the Kurds so as to resell it at a higher price, since the Kurdish oil had  a much lower price than the one charged on the international market.

As to natural gas, the largest well is the old Conoco, in the Eastern region of Deir Ezzour, which is still controlled by the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).

One of the old axes of the US presence in Syria.

A well that before the conflict produced 21 million cubic meters a day, as against the current 8.5 million cubic meters, while the Syrian government maintains that it currently produces 16.5 million cubic meters a day.

Obviously the cost of gas for Syrian citizens has multiplied by ten during the war, which is still continuing.

With specific reference to phosphates, of which Syria was one of the top exporting countries, in all likelihood the over 2 billion tons of  Syrian reserves will be spoils of war for both Russia and Iran.

The largest production area is again in the region of Palmira. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps took full control of the region in 2015.

In 2017 Syria also signed an agreement on phosphates with Russia, thus leaving Iran aside.

Only Russia, however, does invest in the Syrian phosphate extraction areas.

As to olive oil, the main Syrian agricultural resource, before the conflict Syria was the top Arab producer, with 100 million olive trees and 1.2 million tons of olive oil a year.

As a result of war, production has fallen by 300%.

The provinces of Aleppo and Idlib were the major olive oil production areas.

Let us now analyse the behaviour of Turkey, which is the other great army operating in Syria.

Turkey’s army – the second largest within NATO – which also seems to be strangely not interested in the Syrian war, has carried out extensive and effective operations in Northern Syria.

Apart from some obscure operations – such as the one of Tell Rifaat, where the Russians immediately gave in to the Turkish forces surrounding the country – the somehow  hidden and secret alliance between Turkey and the Russian Federation seems to be increasingly clear.

Why? Probably because Russia wants to prevent Turley from siding too much with the United States.

Moreover, after the Turkish shooting down of a Russian fighter aircraft in 2015, and after President Erdogan’s official apologies to Russia, it seems that the Turkish-Russian-Iranian axis is strengthening, above all to define and control the “de-escalation zones”.

There are four de-escalation zones: 1) the Idlib province, as well as the North-Eastern areas of Latakia province, the Western areas of Aleppo province and Northern areas of Hama province. There are over one million inhabitants in this zone, dominated by an alliance of al-Qaeda-linked jihadist groups.

2) the Rastan and Talbisehenclave in Northern Homs province. There are approximately 180,000 inhabitants in this zone and its wide network of rebel groups includes al-Qaeda-linked fighters.

3) Eastern Ghouta in the Northern Damascus countryside. Controlled by Jaish al-Islam, a powerful rebel faction that was participating in the Astana talks, it is home to about 690,000 civilians.

4) The rebel-controlled South along the border with Jordan that includes parts of Deraa and Quneitra provinces. As many as 800,000 civilians live there.

The agreement envisages that the jihadist rebels and government forces should halt hostilities for six months.

Russia will continue to fly over the areas, but refrain from conducting air raidsto bomb enemy positions.

In short, Turkey is siding with Russia and the latter is interested in having Turkey as a key ally in Syria, with a view to breaking NATO’s Middle East strategy and having a strong army operating in Assad’s territory, as well as reducing its engagement and hence the cost of the Russian mission to Syria.

Advisory Board Co-chair Honoris Causa Professor Giancarlo Elia Valori is an eminent Italian economist and businessman. He holds prestigious academic distinctions and national orders. Mr. Valori has lectured on international affairs and economics at the world’s leading universities such as Peking University, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Yeshiva University in New York. He currently chairs “International World Group”, he is also the honorary president of Huawei Italy, economic adviser to the Chinese giant HNA Group. In 1992 he was appointed Officier de la Légion d’Honneur de la République Francaise, with this motivation: “A man who can see across borders to understand the world” and in 2002 he received the title “Honorable” of the Académie des Sciences de l’Institut de France. “

Continue Reading
Comments

Middle East

Beyond the dire needs of Iraq’s demonstration: National renaissance and a new challenge to Iran

Published

on

For many, Iraqis have long been gone into hibernation to hold the politicians accountable for corruption in OPEC’s second-largest oil producer. So the first of October 2019  was a turning point when the young Iraqis have taken the streets in Baghdad, and to gather hugely in the symbolic place of Tahrir square, which separates a hundred meters of the Republic Bridge from the green zone. Shockingly the contagion of the protest spilt over into the other Shiite-dominated cities in southern the country, such as Wasit, Basra, Maysan, Dhi Qar, Muthanna, Babylon, and Diwaniyah.

Several demonstrations erupted in different parts of Iraq over last years to be sure, yet none of which was as spontaneous and outstanding as October’s one. Youths have taken the initiative without support neither from clerics nor any political party. The grievances have, primarily, limited to the basic needs of offering jobs and making substantial strides in services. Though, quickly, inflated to change the government whom the wrathful youths blame for turning a blind eye to the corruptors.

In this circumstance of the unconscious co-presence, the protestors unprecedentedly overstepped their differences to rally around the Iraqi flag. Concurrently, they lambaste Iran for meddling into their affairs. That was a grave alarming for Iran’s policies not only in Iraq but inside Iran also regarding its populace is upset about the current economic crisis due to the US sanctions.

Iraqi government in predicament  

In 2018, the Adeel Abdul-Mahdi’s government was formed by a fragile contract between al-Fatah and al-Binna Alliances plus Kurd’s bloc. Abdul-Mahdi was one of the dissenters who once received by Iraqis with flowers bouquet and festoon when he returned home after the US invasion in 2013. At that time, most of the current adolescent protestors were either had a few years or not yet born; nonetheless, they grew up on the pledges of the successive governments that didn’t amount to more than repetitive slogans.

On the 25th of October, the tight deadline for the government to commence decisive reformations came to an end without concrete change. Against this backdrop, the second wave of anti-government campaign erupted, this time more massively to exceed Baghdad to disseminate into the other southern cities of the country. Influx of all walks of life have joined in with the angry mob what put the government between the devil and the deep blue sea.

First option for Abdul-Mahdi was to call for an early election that means dissolving the parliament, as per (64) article of the constitution, that required the absolute majority of its representatives upon the prime minister request and the President’s consent. Practically such a process is difficult to achieve timely considering the current government has yielded from intricate coalition of competitive parties. Another troublesome article of the constitution is of the interim sixty days in which the government converts into a caretaker government until new government receive the office, that means to be paralysed to achieve the urgent reforms sought by the angry youths. On similar premise was the answer of the prime minister to the plea of well-known cleric Muqtada al-Sadr for the former to resign.

The second alternative is to actualize swiftly the dire needs of the protestors who are significantly increasing in number and raising their demands. The prime minister, however, preferred remaining in the office so it can work on the people’s needs, for the time being at least until the two blocs in the parliament form a new government. The protestors have perceived these gestures suspiciously, arguing whether a pile of pledges haven’t realized within years, they wouldn’t definitely be achieved over a few months. In a desperate attempt to appease the demonstrators, Iraqi President Barham Salih delivered live televised speech promised to hold an early election, reversely, people’s reactions became far more violent.

Whether the government would answer protestors’ call to step down, or it would utterly resist, the essential question remains is how to fulfil the rest of their demands. Especially, they made their claim quite lucid; the “real country” is sought for, not merely socio-economic reforms.

From dire needs to National renaissance   

There is little doubt that Britain had established Iraq with multi-identities in the 1920s, composing of Sunni, Shiite, and Kurds, that shaped, afterwards, the ruling elites which would be in enduring conflict for decades to come Ironically, after 2003, the same paradigm has been rearticulated by the US civil governor to compose the Iraqi political system of different ethnic and sectarian elites in order allegedly to avoid marginalising any community. These elites, however, adopted increasingly extreme stands on their constituencies’ issues for their own political purpose that indulged the country into endless chaos for over sixteen years.

Notwithstanding, in a much similar trajectory to many states of the Arab Spring, some impoverished segments in Baghdad have begun to protest sporadically, then the sentiment has spread rapidly like wildfire amongst Iraqi youths. The protest rose a severe challenge as much to the official government as to the politically active elites. when the demands peaked to expel all the political parties whom the protestors accuse of foreign allegiance. Nonetheless, couple of incidents got the government into a tight corner; on the one hand, students of the colleges and even primary schools abruptly got out of their institution, waving the flag and singing the national anthem collectively. On the other hand, the demonstration blew up in the Shiite holy city of Kerbala which supposedly supports wholeheartedly the Shiite-dominated government. The situation aggravated when the furious people have set fire to the Iranian consulate In Kerbala.    

Noteworthy, these public claims have also brought about a couple of neoteric events that might reproduce the Iraqi identity, if not reintroduce it differently. First: the youths who have mainly led the public rally have vowed to fly nothing but Iraq flag despite the majority of them were from the Shiite sect. Second: in unusual phenomenon after 2003, the women from diverse speciality stood shoulder to shoulder with the men despite the brutal reaction of the security forces. Together they are chanting slogans against the politicians and clerics too; some of those women even didn’t put a veil on.

Needless to say that the demonstrators founded for a new political practice within which the prospective governments would be responsible not only to their political collations but to the laypeople as well. Ultimately,  the protesters need to incarnate their movement as a social entity to maintain constant momentum on political life.

Iran is anxious

At the eve of the collapse of the tyrant government in Baghdad, Iran emerged as the most influential player, benefiting from its historical religious and cultural ties as well as a long shared border of1400  km with Iraq. It developed complicated relationships with all competitive political groups in Iraq, especially with those who took Iran their exile during Saddam Hussein’s rule. It has significantly entrenched its clout after defeating ISIS in 2014, by backing up each of  Kurdish Peshmerga and Iraqi forces including the Popular Mobilization Forces.

Therefore, the anti-Iranian demonstration shocked the Iranian leaders seeing the protesters are not their traditional foe in Iraq, Sunni sect, instead they are mostly kids from the pious Shiite neighborhoods. Iran, publically, downplayed the effectiveness of the protest, and they connected the Iraqis’ movement to US-sedition. Additionally, on October 6, 2019, the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei tweeted on his official account “Iran and Iraq are two nations whose hearts & souls are tied together through faith in God, love for Imam Hussein and the progeny of the Prophet. This bond will grow stronger day by day. Enemies seek to sow discord but they’ve failed and their conspiracy won’t be effective”.  

On the contrary, the Iraqi streets exploded in outrage from Iran and its affiliations inside the country, particularly, when anonymous snipers killed dozens of them. While Iraqis accused Iran and its affiliates of the executions, Iran claimed the assassinators are from the Iranian opposition of Mujahedin-e Khalq in Iraq. They sneaked in the crowd of demonstrations, pretending they are  Iranian security forces, so the Iraqi would attribute their murders to Iran. However, the demonstrators have attacked the buildings of all parties, and they executed two leaders of full-hearted pro-Iran militia, Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq in Maysan province. Furthermore, many effigies of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Qasem Soleimani were insultingly burnt, that even occurred repeatedly in Shiite-dominated cities in southern Iraq.

These rapidly spiralling events in Iraq imposed new burdens on Iran to unobstructedly continue its strategies in the region, chiefly because:

First: As Iraq is a sole conduit for it to elude the US sanctions, Tehran doesn’t tend to compromise the domination upon it.

Second: Iraq presents the strategic corridor of what once King Abdullah of Jordan called ” Shia Crescent“, in which Iran domination stretch from Iraq to Syria and Lebanon reaching to the Mediterranean sea.

Third; Iranians’ worry is the Iraqi demonstration might spill over into their constituencies at home, especially Iranians are suffering from the current economic and financial hardships due to the last package of the US sanction. According to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), Iran GDP anticipated to shrink by 9.5 per cent at the end of 2019, after it grew healthy last year to reach 4.8 percent.   

Though seems it is not as capable as used to be in the last ten years in Iraq, Iran attempted despairingly to contain the demonstration. For that reason, the Iranian Gen. Qassim Soleimani flew by helicopter to meet with the Iraqi prime minister and politicians. Perhaps he realized now the demonstration is much immense than the heavily fortified of Green Zone where he held his meetings.  After all, these social movements of anti-sectarianism would more or less make the Iranian domination upon the surrounding region inoperative in the near future.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Americans return to Syria for oil

Published

on

Soon after the adoption of the Russian-Turkish Memorandum on Syria, President Trump, known for his “consistency” in decision-making, made it clear that he had no intention of withdrawing US troops, which had already been moved to Iraq, from the east of Syria. The reason for the US forces to stay on is the need to protect the local oil reserves against the “Islamic State” (which is prohibited in the Russian Federation). The American president even reflected on which company should be contracted to produce Syrian oil, eventually opting for ExxonMobil (who else!).

The Pentagon spoke to this effect as well, in more concrete terms. The oil of northeast Syria will go to the allied Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), – said US Secretary of Defense Mark Esper, adding: “We want to make sure that the SDF have access to these resources, in order to guard prisons and arm their own units . Our mission is to ensure the safety of the deposits.” When asked by reporters whether Syrian and Russian forces would have access to these resources, Esper answered in the negative. Thus, the United States has yet again demonstrated that they do not deem themselves bound by international law. At the same time, they confirmed the American so-called “businesslike” approach to international problems.

The Russian Foreign Ministry has repeatedly insisted that Syrian oil should belong to the Syrian people. Speaking at a press conference following the recent meeting with Turkish and Iranian counterparts, Sergey Lavrov said: the United States plans to protect Syrian oil from Syria.

According to the Russian Defense Ministry, the Americans found it normal to trade in Syrian oil before. Igor Konashenkov, spokesman for the Russian Defense Ministry, the United States extracts oil using de facto “contraband” equipment that was brought on the territory of the Syrian Arab Republic bypassing American sanctions. According to the Russian military, revenue from these transactions exceeds $ 30 million per month.

Compared to neighbors, Syria is far from an “oil giant.” Its developed reserves amount to about 2.5 billion barrels, while Saudi Arabia has reserves of 268 billion, Iran – 158 billion, Iraq – 144 billion, Kuwait – 104 billion, UAE – 98 billion barrels. Oil reserves in Syria are not that abundant for the US to “cling” to them. So what’s the matter?

Only a fraction of oil reserves are located on the territory liberated by the Syrian army and its allies, the lion’s share of the reserves is controlled by SDF units (and the Americans, of course). By means of depriving Damascus of oil revenues, which made a major source of the country’s pre-war budget, Washington hopes to weaken Syria’s resistance. In addition, the United States won’t stop short of supporting the Kurdish state. By “gifting” Syrian oil to their political protégés, the Americans encourage the Kurds to refrain from making an alliance with Damascus and continue to act as a counterweight to Turkey and Russia and play the role of an anti-Iranian bastion.

It’s the Americans themselves who will buy this oil. In all likelihood, they will buy it cheap. “I want to bring our soldiers back home, but I want oil too. I’m a civilian, I don’t understand why the war in Iraq was needed at all. If my people go to Iraq, let them at least keep the oil,” – Donald Trump shared his thoughts not so long ago,  criticizing the policies of his predecessors. Bashar al-Assad responded by describing Trump as “the best American president ever” because he is the most transparent and honest.” “He says he wants oil, and that’s absolutely true – it’s  American policy,” –  the Syrian leader concluded.

Simultaneously, while maintaining control of the oil fields, the Americans continue to “punish” Ankara for its “excessive” independence in international affairs. After all, they are not going to pump stolen oil through Turkey, which is trying hard to become the southern energy hub for Europe.

Furthermore, the majority of oil-bearing regions in Syria are populated by Arabs, rather than Kurds. Peshmerga captured the fields during the struggle against the Islamic State, prohibited in Russia. Now, should the Americans change their minds about the “protection” of the oil reserves, they will use this to “explain” their yet another betrayal to the Kurds.

In all likelihood, there will be no serious armed clashes over Syrian oil. The problem could be solved through reaching a power-sharing agreement between Damascus and the Kurds, which means dividing the powers between the central government and the local authorities. The Constitutional Committee, which is currently in session in Geneva, could play an important role to achieve this but for the fact that neither Ankara nor Damascus wants the Committee to comprise representatives of the SDF – a bloc that de facto controls the north-east of the country. As a result, Hikmat Habib the Executive Committee of the Assembly of Democratic Syria said: the outcomes of the Geneva meeting will not mean anything “for the people of northern and eastern Syria” (Kurds – A.I.).

However, Damascus and the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) have been taking  steps towards each other: after the start of another Turkish military operation, the Kurds allowed Syrian troops to enter the territory under their control, while Damascus proposed that peshmerga should become part of the Syrian army. As it happens, chances to maintain the territorial integrity of the country are there for grabs.

From our partner International Affairs

Continue Reading

Middle East

US-Iran confrontation amid Lebanon, Iraq protests

Published

on

The U.S welcomes to spread uprising to Iran and weakening Iran`s influence in Lebanon and Iraq, whereas Iran seeks up political stability in the two countries.

Enormous antigovernment demonstrations in Iraq and Lebanon have been the spotlight around the world since last month. People in the two countries are dissatisfied concerning socio-economic problems include mismanagement in urban services, recession, governmental corruption, increasing unemployment, and growing injustice. Both countries have a common factor. Iran is the only country that has an important influence on their governments. So, the country has followed the related happenings carefully.

A few days after the protests, Iranian officials expressed their position. The first man was Amir Abdollahian, who is the special assistant to the speaker of Iran`s parliament. He wrote in his Instagram Page that “yesterday in Yemen, the United States and Saudi Arabia forced the prime minister to resign and failed, as they are currently struggling in quagmire of Yemen” he said then. “Today in Lebanon and Iraq, they also launched the same project of chaos and destroying governments that the new copy of political terrorism will undoubtedly fail.”

But Iran`s president and foreign minister have not said anything about the crisis, although recently Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has blamed the U.S and its allies for spreading “insecurity and turmoil” in Iraq and Lebanon, urging anti-government protesters in both countries to seek changes in a lawful way.

“Their people also have to know that although they have legitimate demands, those demands can be met only through the framework of legal structures,” he added.

In fact, Iraq and Lebanon are very sensitive for Iran. Iraq has a long border with the country and Hezbollah as a proxy force in the south of Lebanon is its security border along Israel. So, any changes in both can be hazardous for Iran`s interests because the country has an effective position in their governing body structures.

On the other side, the U.S has conducted full support to protesters especially in Iraq where some protesters have stated slogans against Iran`s intervention. Some protesters in Karbala attacked Iran`s consulate. Although the socio-economic is the main problem of Iraqis, Iran`s influence had been a side issue and an interesting subject for critics of the Islamic regime.

Iraq`s prime minister has agreed to resign as well as Saad Hariri resigned in Lebanon. In the meantime, governmental media of Iran have attempted to portray that any resign or government changing is a wrong solution for two countries. Just as Seyed Hasan Nasrollah, leader of Hezbollah had disagreed with Hariri`s resign but the U.S has supported to form a new government in Lebanon and Iraq. 

The U.S Secretary of State Mike Pompeo called on “Lebanon’s political leaders to urgently facilitate the formation of a new government that can build a stable, prosperous, and secure Lebanon that is responsive to the needs of its citizens.”

Pompeo also sent a message about to accountability necessity of government concerning killed people amid protests in Iraq, unlike Iran that wants to abate the chaos.     

U.S Secretary of State said the Iraqi government’s investigation into the violence in early October “lacked sufficient credibility” and that “the Iraqi people deserve genuine accountability and justice.”

After that, Iranians rail against U.S. Brigadier General Hossein Nejat, who is the deputy of the I.R.G.C`s chief said, “The U.S has invested in the social faults in Iraq and Lebanon.” Still, he said “this is America sedition”

“From a long time ago, Americans had brought many persons from Iraq to America for training, and they formed extensive social media. The U.S wants Iraq to be insecurity intensively until a dictator comes and catches the power,” he added.

Also Mohammad Ali Movahhedi Kermani, Tehran’s provisional Friday prayers leader said that “Based on the available information, the U.S ambassador to Iraq has openly backed the ongoing violence in Iraq and has called on Iraqi police to let such behaviors continue.

Iran has exported its Islamic ideology to some countries in the region such as Iraq and Lebanon in years ago. But now, the economic problems are the most important subject for people of the two countries. That`s why one protester told Foreign Policy that “hungry has no religion.” This sentence has the same meaning Imam Ali`s hadith, Shias’ first Imam that “the poverty is bigger death.” 

Simply put, ideology is not working without money and social welfare. Now, Iran is under tough sanctions by America and its people have economic problems with high-level inflation. But the U.S and its allies have more chance to increase influence in two countries in terms of the economic situation. The U.S has aided $1.5 billion to Lebanon`s army since 2005. But according to the WSJ, the financial assistance by the U.S has stopped recently to Lebanon due to Israel`s pressure. WSJ wrote, “The Trump Administration has suspended security assistance to Lebanon, congressional officials said, including more than $100 million for the Lebanese armed forces.”

Also, a meeting held between United States Secretary of the Treasury Mnuchin and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In this negotiation, Netanyahu complained that Iran was financing new missile-development activities inside Lebanon for the Hezbollah militant movement.

Several Israeli news organizations reported this week that Mr. Netanyahu has asked government officials to urge allied capitals to impose conditions on their aid to Lebanon to ensure Lebanese officials clamp down on the missile-development activities—one possible reason for a U.S. funding suspension.

In related news, Saudi Arabia as a close ally of The U.S recently has suspended the assistance to Lebanon to weakening the Hezbollah.

“In a way, you bail out Lebanon, you bail out Hezbollah,” said Shafeeq Ghabra, the political science professor at Kuwait University, according to Daily Star.

One Gulf official, who declined to be identified by name when talking about sensitive foreign policy, “Prime Minister Saad Hariri had refused financial help to avoid money going to Hezbollah via the government,” the Daily Star reported too.

Based on some reports, America has suggested rebuilding oil and power Iraq`s facilities instead of Iraq`s companionship with sanctions against Iran. So, Lebanon and Iraq are under economic pressure and both need foreign aids, whereas Iran now has a severe budget shortage. This situation can be a factor to reduce Iran`s influence compared to the U.S in two countries after uprisings.

Analysts said the power-sharing system in the two countries is very important for Iran because the Shiite has a high position currently. Both have different religions and sects. In Iraq, the prime minister is Shiite. Also in Lebanon based on the agreement of 1989, the power divided into religion and sects, such that parliament speaker must be a Shiite Muslim. The current condition is acceptable by Iran because Shia’s power is insured. But protests now are not examples of deep sectarian divisions in two countries. For the first time, the protesters seek the end of sectarian power and power-sharing system. They want to root out corruption by a new government. So, the unprecedented protests can be dangerous for Iran`s investments in the Shiite groups in the region. Due to America’s attempts and some slogans in protests against Iran, it is possible the power of Shiite`s groups in the two countries will be abated finally. 

In fact, The U.S wants the uprising will extend to Iran because Iranians are in the same situation in terms of economic problems, just as Iran`s government is wary about protests infectious power. If Iran`s Shiite allies like Hezbollah and Amal in Lebanon and Al-Hashd Ash-Shabi in Iraq be able to separate Shias from other protesters, its spread range will reduce.

The U.S welcomes to spread uprising to Iran and weakening Iran`s influence in Lebanon and Iraq, whereas Iran seeks up political stability in the two countries. Iran also attempts to say the U.S is behind the protests and insecurity in the two countries is their work.

Lately, Hossein Shariatmadari, the representative of supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei and editor chief of the conservative Kayhan newspaper, wrote addressed to Iraqis that “seize the American and Saudi embassies.”

Some suggested that President Trump’s “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran has been almost defeated because Iran has not come to the negotiation table so far, so perhaps the protests in Lebanon and Iraq lead to Iran’s surrender.

Nowadays, Iraqis and Lebanon`s people seek up a better future by changing the political structures in their countries. Thinking to welfare, removing the corrupted politicians and protecting their countries from any foreign interference. But amid the protests, the confrontation has begun in two countries between America and Iran but would not finish simply.

Continue Reading

Latest

Trending

Copyright © 2019 Modern Diplomacy