By Moon Of Alabama
June 30, 2021 "Information
Clearing House" - "Moon
Of Alabama""
On Sunday the U.S.bombed three positions of
Iraqi Popular Mobilization Force at the Syrian-Iraqi
border.
The U.S. had no right to do so. The legal
reasoning the Biden administration provided for the
attack
is nonsense. As is the claimed rationale of
establishing 'deterrence' against further attacks on
U.S. troops by this or that Iraqi militia group. The
last strike in that area in February was supposed to
have fulfilled the same purpose but obviously did
not deter anything. Sunday's strike was immediately
responded to with missiles fired against a U.S.
position in Syria. More such incidents will follow.
The attack
has embarrassed Iraq's Prime Minister Mustafa
al-Kadhimi:
The most perplexing aspect of this airstrike,
however, is its timing, coming only one day
after Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi attended
a celebration of the seventh anniversary of
the creation of the PMF, held at Camp Ashraf,
the former headquarters of the anti-Iranian
Mujahedeen-e-Khalq terrorist group, located
about 100 kilometers (62 miles) northeast of
Baghdad. The PMF paraded thousands of its
fighters, along with tanks, rocket launchers,
and drones, before a reviewing stand that, in
addition to Kadhimi, included Defense Minister
Juma Inad, Interior Minister Othman Ghanmi,
Iraqi Army Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Abdul Amir
Yarallah, and PMF Chief of Staff Abdul Aziz al-Mohammadawi.
More important than the list of attendees,
however, is what Kadhimi said about the PMF. In
a tweet released during the parade, the prime
minister noted that “[w]e attended the
parade of our heroic army on December 6 (2020),
as well as the brave police parade, and today we
attended the parade of our sons in the Popular
Mobilization Forces. We affirm that our work is
under the banner of Iraq, and protecting its
land and people is our duty. Yes to Iraq! Yes to
Iraq, the strong and capable country.”
Kadhimi went on to highlight the fact that the
PMF was a state service, and praised its role in
the ongoing struggle against Islamic State.
To reiterate, one day after the prime
minister of Iraq, in the company of his military
and national security team, declared the PMF to
be an essential part of his nation’s state
security, the US undertook to bomb these same
forces at locations in Syria and Iraq from where
the PMF carry out the very anti-IS operations
praised by the Iraqi PM – and did so without
either informing the Iraqi government
beforehand, or seeking its permission.
In response, Kadhimi convened
an emergency meeting of his national
security staff and issued a pointed condemnation
of the US strikes as a clear violation of Iraqi
sovereignty that would prompt his government to
study all legal options in response.
The strike has weakened the U.S. position in Iraq
and has strengthened Iran's position.
Some analysts say that the attack was a
message to Iran in the context of the ongoing
talks about the nuclear deal. But what did that
message say? That the U.S. can bomb some minor
targets? What is new with that?
Let's go back to the big picture.
An overarching aim of the Biden administration is
to concentrate all its forces on the competition
with China. To that purpose it has planned to
largely leave the Middle East behind - the place
where the U.S. has wasted its resources over more
than two decades.
To leave the Middle East the U.S. needs to find
some form of peace with Iran. The Biden
administration thus set out to reenter the nuclear
deal. It must lift the sanctions Trump imposed
against Iran to get there. But then mission creep
set in. Instead of just lifting the sanctions in
return for Iran's adherence to the limits of the
nuclear deal the Biden administration has sought
more concessions from Iran while offering less
sanctions relief.
Iran has made its position clear. If the U.S.
lifts ALL sanctions imposed by Trump it will again
subject its nuclear program to the limits of the
nuclear deal. If the U.S. does not lift ALL
sanctions then Iran will continue to exceed those
limits by ever growing margins.
Secretary of State Anthony 'Pompous the second'
Blinken has the illusion that he can get Iran back
under the nuclear deal and keep significant
sanctions in place. He wants to use those
to press Iran into limiting its missile force
and into ending support for its allies in the Middle
East:
Senior Biden administration officials, from Mr.
Blinken on down, have conceded that among the
shortcomings of the old nuclear accord is that
it needs to be “longer and stronger,” and
address Iran’s missile development program and
support of terrorism.
Now the aperture appears to be widening even
further: It is increasingly clear that any
comprehensive agreement that addresses America’s
many complaints about Iranian behavior must also
cover a broad range of new weaponry that Iran’s
forces were only tinkering with six years ago.
Iran will not disarm itself. Those aims are
impossible to achieve:
Blinken has already said that some U.S.
sanctions will remain, and will be lifted when –
and only when – Tehran ‘changes behaviour’. Note
the quiet shift. Blinken here is not talking
regulatory nuclear framework, he is going
‘Manichean’. Thus, on this metric (correcting
malign behaviour), it is not a matter of how
many individual sanctions remain in place, but
the nature of those remaining. Evidently, the
nature of those that remain must imply great
pain, if they truly are to coerce a change of
strategic course by an irredeemably ‘malign’
Iran. (It is another example of how the
good/evil paradigm freezes politics solid).
Team Biden knows, and freely admits,
that Trump’s maximum pressures did not shift
Iranian behaviour. Yet Blinken is advocating the
U.S. repeating what has just failed.
Actually what Trump did was to persuade Iran to
develop the smart missile-swarm drone deterrence
that has made ‘maga-weapons’ irrelevant. It has
given Iran a strategic edge.
Yet Blinken is now flirting with the idea to
not return to the nuclear deal:
“If this continues, if they continue to spin
more sophisticated centrifuges at higher and
higher levels, we will get to a point where it
will be very difficult as a practical matter” to
return to the parameters of the original nuclear
deal, he said.
“I can’t put a date on it,” Mr. Blinken said
of the day when the Biden administration might
walk away from the nuclear talks, but “it’s
getting closer.”
And then what?
If the U.S. does not return to the nuclear deal
anytime soon Iran will leave it completely. My guess
is by the end of this year. That would free it to do
whatever nuclear it wants to do. Iran will also
increase its support for proxy forces which are able
to hurt U.S. forces and U.S. allies in the Middle
East. A number of ever escalating needle pricks -
burning Saudi tankers, exploding refineries, drone
attacks on U.S. bases - would necessitate for the
U.S. to stay engaged.
The U.S. can not go to war with Iran. The country
can not be occupied and any bombing of it would be
responded to by missile and drone attacks against
each and every U.S. base and ally in the region,
including Israel..
A stand off or low level conflict could thus
continue for a long time. It would consume more U.S.
resources and management time. Time China can use,
undisturbed, to further develop its capabilities. By
adding more and more demands for the lifting of the
sanctions against Iran the Biden administration is
sabotaging its overarching strategic aim of
competing with China.
This is a very shortsighted policy. Iran will not
flinch. Attempts to put pressure on it by killing a
few Iraqi militia are just laughable nonsense. That
the Biden administration tries to do so shows that
it has driven itself into a blind ally but is
unwilling to go into reverse.
What then will be its next move?
No Advertising - No Government Grants - This Is
Independent Media
Registration is necessary to post comments.
We ask only that you do not use obscene or offensive
language. Please be respectful of others.