From the ‘Battle of Dignity’ to the shield of shame: How Jordan has fallen

APR 16, 2024

Source

Amman’s collaboration with Tel Aviv peaked last Saturday with its shocking defense of Israeli territory from Iranian drones and missiles, a move that may prove fateful for the future of the Hashemite Kingdom.

(Photo Credit: The Cradle)

Khalil Harb

The most dangerous development during Iran’s massive 13 April retaliatory strike against Israel last weekend was the defensive military alliance – comprising the US, Britain, Jordan, and France – that coalesced to defend the occupation state.

Jordan has jumped to Israel’s full defense at a time when Arabs have never been more collectively outraged by its crimes.

Particularly notable was Jordan’s role in thwarting Iran’s incoming drones and missiles. The Hashemite Kingdom was the only Arab or Muslim state to act as Israel’s “firewall,” providing direct military protection for Tel Aviv within a multilateral, regional military framework.

Despite Amman’s long-standing pro-Israel stance, this sudden reassertion of its position is indicative of some broader shifts in military strategies across West Asia. 

Patterns and calculations of confrontations across West Asia will be readjusted to adapt to this new equation and others that have emerged in the region as alliances shift to and away from the west. 

That includes the Axis of Resistance, which will likely reassess the expected range of responses in a future confrontation, given that western anti-missile capabilities are well spread throughout strategic locations – strategic sites from the Ain al-Assad base in Anbar, Iraq, to the Al-Tanf base at the Syrian–Jordanian–Iraqi border and from the Mashabim base in the Negev desert to the King Faisal base in northwestern Jordan.

Strategic shifts

Over the years, the Jordanian government has dramatically shrunk its commitments to the Palestinian cause and “Arabism.” 

This can be traced from its 1968 “Battle of Dignity” against Israel to 5 November, when King Abdullah II boasted of his country’s “success” in airdropping medical aid to the Jordanian field hospital in the Gaza Strip, and now, quite stunningly, employing its air force to protect Israel’s security from retaliatory Iranian strikes. 

This shift is not merely a reactionary measure but the culmination of years of extensive security and military coordination with the occupation state, as highlighted by a Jordanian opposition activist speaking to The Cradle. This deep-seated integration into anti-missile and drone operations reflects a strategic evolution rather than a spontaneous response.

Eyewitness reports from multiple sources to The Cradle describe the audible presence of warplanes over the Amman region, followed by the sound of explosions hours later when overhead projectiles were intercepted and downed. 

One Jordanian witness relays that the suburb of Marj al-Hamam saw the most interceptions against Iranian drones and missiles, with debris reported across the area.

Jordanian writer and journalist Rania Jabari informs The Cradle that “citizens in Jordan have felt jammed on the GPS for about two weeks,” that is, since after the Israeli airstrike on Iran’s consulate in Damascus. 

Amid rising concerns about a swift Iranian counterattack through drone incursions, Israel reportedly initiated GPS jamming operations across several regional countries, including Jordan. 

Jabari suggests that this electronic interference might have precipitated the Jordanian Air Force’s readiness to intercept any unauthorized aerial objects in its airspace, given the potential risks to national security from mistakenly guiding Iranian drones into Jordanian territory.

However, the Jordanian opposition activist casts doubt on the capability of Jordan’s Air Force – equipped with only about 60 older F-16 and F-5 aircraft – to single-handedly manage the response against hundreds of Iranian drones and missiles destined for Israel.

Regional repercussions 

Supporting these suspicions, Israeli Channel 12 reported that Israeli fighter jets had intercepted drones launched by Iran in the airspace of Jordan and Syria. 

The day after the Iranian Operation True Promise, the Jordanian government issued a vague statement, only saying that “some unidentified flying objects that entered our airspace last night were dealt with and intercepted to prevent endangering the safety of our citizens and inhabited areas.”

The statement conspicuously omitted any mention of the scale of involvement of the Israeli Air Force or the nature and role of US fighter jets participating in the operation.

Given the limitations of Jordan’s aerial fleet and the extensive geographic area these planes need to cover – a “firewall” stretching approximately 1,500 kilometers from western Iran to the occupied territories of Palestine – the involvement of international forces seems credible. 

Additionally, Iraqi sources inform The Cradle that coalition forces had shot down about 30 drones and missiles over Iraq, with explosions heard in regions like Erbil, Najaf, Wasit, and Anbar. This indicates that a significant number of the drones and missiles traversed Jordanian skies, where they were intercepted before reaching their intended targets in Israel.

The role of the Jordanian Air Force is so significant that the Iranian Mehr news agency quoted an Iranian military source as saying, “Iran will monitor Jordanian movements, and if they cooperate with Israel, Jordan will be our next target.”

The source is said to have “warned Jordan and other countries in the region before the start of the attack against cooperating with the occupying entity.”

This statement seems to have aroused the ire of the Jordanian government. On Sunday, authorities summoned the Iranian ambassador in Amman to warn against Tehran’s “questioning of Jordan’s position.”

Jordanian Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi also issued a statement saying that his government would “intercept any drone or missile that breaches our airspace, whether Iranian or Israeli.” 

However, the Jordanian oppositionist questions the accuracy of Safadi’s statement, especially about his country’s readiness to confront a similar threat coming from Tel Aviv, noting numerous occasions when Israeli fighter jets infiltrated Jordanian airspace to carry out raids on Syria. 

A history of betraying Palestine  

Jordan’s historical antagonism towards Palestinian resistance dates back to the “Black September” massacres of 1970, aimed at expelling the PLO from the country – allegedly with the support of former King Hussein bin Talal, who reportedly received backing from Israel and the US.

During the 1967 Six-Day War, Israel’s Air Force shot down and destroyed dozens of Jordanian aircraft. Following the 1994 Amman–Tel Aviv peace agreement, the two states have struck multiple defense deals, including Israel supplying Jordan with F-16 jets and Cobra helicopters.

Since the 1970s, when Israel supported Jordan during the Palestinian revolt against King Hussein, the two air forces have not engaged in combat. Israeli belligerence persists despite this. On the eve of the 1991 Gulf War, when asked about potential opposition from the Jordanian Air Force should Israel strike Iraq, then-retired Air Force Commander Avihu Ben-Nun boldly stated, “There would be no more Jordanian Air Force.”

It is very likely, moreover, that the western militaries involved in Israel’s defense last weekend utilized Jordanian bases. For example, US troops are stationed at the Mashabim air base in the Negev desert, supporting operations like the Iron Dome system. 

Similarly, UK and French military forces are present at multiple strategic locations within Jordan, including the King Faisal Air Base in Al-Jafr and the Humaymah base near Aqaba, where they play roles in regional defense and run intelligence operations.

There are also French troops at King Faisal Air Base, known as Al-Ruwaished Base, which is close to Al-Tanf. From this base, activities involving espionage operations in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, and Iran are carried out through a state-of-the-art reconnaissance center, and its airport is believed to be used by both Israeli and US drones. 

Sacrificing Jordan’s stability for Israel’s security 

But Jordan’s relations and collaboration with Tel Aviv remain deeply unpopular among the country’s citizenry, with protestors amassing for weeks near the Israeli embassy in Amman – many of them subsequently subjected to repression and tight security restrictions by Jordanian authorities. 

Adding to the pressure on Amman, the Iraqi resistance faction, Kataib Hezbollah, announced earlier this month its readiness to arm “12,000 fighters with light and medium weapons, anti-armor launchers, tactical missiles, millions of bullets and tons of explosives, so that we can be united to defend our Palestinian brothers,” adding that it would seek to “cut off the [Jordan] land route that reaches the Zionist entity.”

By participating in the interception of Iranian drones, Jordan has made a significant contribution to alleviating some pressure off Israel, but one that comes with a much more significant domestic consequence for the stability of the kingdom. 

Will Amman’s blatant alignment with Tel Aviv in this context prove to be politically detrimental for its monarch? In years to come, this decision may be viewed as a strategic error of gargantuan proportions. For now, Jordan’s political future and its position in regional politics remain uncertain – certainly as Tel Aviv and Tehran gear up for further confrontations. 

King Abdallah can jump into the fray as he did last weekend and suffer through further waves of domestic and Arab outrage, or he can resolve to stay neutral and quiet – as many larger, more powerful neighbors chose to do – and let Iranians and Israelis adversaries fight their own battles.

The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of The Cradle.

MOST POPULAR

• How Iran’s ‘strategic patience’ switched to serious deterrence
• Iran attack puts Israeli Rafah invasion on ice: Report
• Yemen’s ‘uninhibited’ attacks push French warship to exit Red Sea
• Hezbollah ambushes Israel’s Golani Brigade on Lebanon border
• Tel Aviv confirms key airbase damaged by Iranian strikes

Spoils of War: General Electric’s role in Iraq’s energy crisis

SEP 29, 2023

Source

US energy giant General Electric holds a vise grip over Iraqi energy matters. Since the US invasion, Iraq has spent $85 billion on its electricity sector but still faces 12-hour daily power outages. So why is GE still getting contacts it won’t fulfill?

The Cradle’s Iraq Correspondent

US energy giant, General Electric’s (GE) website showcases a dazzling array of graphics, accompanied by statements from company officials, which paint a picture of a thriving partnership with Iraq. 

“GE employees across our gas power, grid, and healthcare businesses are partnering with the people of Iraq to achieve continued progress in society and improve people’s lives every day. Since 2015 we have collaborated with private and public financial institutions to help secure over US $2.4 billion in financing for energy sector projects across the country.”

However, this glossy facade is a far cry from the reality of the multinational’s actions on the ground. In truth, GE’s energy policy in Iraq mirrors the broader approach that has been adopted by the White House towards Baghdad since the tumultuous illegal US-led invasion of 2003.

Origins of Iraq’s energy crisis 

The energy conundrum has long been a source of concern for Iraqis. In the wake of the US occupation, corruption proliferated within state institutions, but it is the stranglehold exercised by GE – alongside Germany’s Siemens – over all matters pertaining to Iraqi energy that has exacerbated the situation.

This intricate web of control first emerged in 2003 when Washington assumed complete authority over Iraq. At that juncture, GE assumed responsibility for maintaining Iraq’s electricity infrastructure following the decision to privatize this once-government-subsidized sector.

An energy expert who represented the Iraqi government during those negotiations reveals to The Cradle that the initial maintenance contract inked between Baghdad and GE carried a staggering price tag of $5 billion. 

More astonishing is that GE had no physical presence in Baghdad at the time: “The Americans were negotiating and signing contracts in Baghdad and then returning to Amman,” says the expert. 

The genesis of Iraq’s electricity crisis can be traced back to the Persian Gulf War in 1991. The country’s strategic power plants were targeted for destruction by the US-led international coalition forces, and the US sanctions that followed thwarted any attempts at rehabilitation. This left Iraq’s infrastructure and industries in ruin and subjected its citizens to unbearable conditions during sweltering summers.

Between 2003 and 2021, Iraq poured a bewildering $85 billion into its struggling electricity sector. A former advisor to Iraq’s prime minister reveals to The Cradle that nearly half of this colossal sum was channeled into constructing gas-powered stations to generate electricity. 

The remaining funds were allocated to purchasing gas, fuel, and electricity from neighboring countries, all while shouldering the financial burden of paying salaries to a workforce of 300,000 employees in the Iraqi Ministry of Electricity.

Prolonged power outages

A government advisor specializing in energy affairs estimates that some $35 billion has been squandered on futile investments within the country’s electricity sector.

That sum, he contends, could have significantly advanced Iraq’s electricity production to a formidable 40 gigawatts, which would sufficiently meet the entire nation’s surging energy demands. Instead, in stark contrast with that potential, Iraq’s current electricity production now languishes at a mere 23 gigawatts, barely satisfying half of the country’s needs.

This deficiency has led to agonizingly prolonged power outages, lasting up to a grueling 12 hours each day, especially during the scorching summer months.

Iran has alleviated a big part of that burden by exporting 7.3 gigawatts of electricity to Iraq monthly, while GE, Siemens, and their affiliated companies were contracted to provide an additional 27.7 gigawatts toward reaching the coveted 35-gigawatt goal.

That target has never been reached. Instead, Baghdad has had to continue relying on Iranian supply, and currently covers those costs through an account held with the Iraqi TBI Bank on behalf of the Iranian government. However, relentless US pressure on Iraq during sanction-exemption negotiations has placed Iraqi officials in a difficult position, forcing them to reduce payments to Tehran.

The GE vs. Siemens showdown

In the meantime, despite their non-performance in Iraq’s electricity sector, General Electric and Siemens continue to face off in fierce battles for yet more contracts. A high-ranking Iraqi official tells The Cradle that this fight goes right to the top:

“This issue was the first point raised by western officials in their meetings and communications with their Iraqi counterparts. All American presidents raise the issue of General Electric contracts. Siemens contracts were the focus of any contact that [former] German Chancellor Angela Merkel had with any Iraqi official. We were feeling tremendous pressure, and the prime Minister was confused about how to deal with this file.”

Back in 2008, Siemens had inked a substantial $1.9 billion contract with the Iraqi government to equip five new power stations with gas turbines capable of generating 3.19 gigawatts of electricity. This contract, alongside a $2.8 billion contract with GE the same year, was supposed to help solve the electricity crisis in Iraq. 

But for well over a decade, neither conglomerate has delivered that full potential. Citing sanctions on Iran, Siemens delayed its supply of turbines to Iranian, Egyptian, and South Korean companies that Baghdad had commissioned to build power stations in Basra, Kirkuk, and eastern Baghdad.

For its part, GE simply ignored its contract specifications to provide heavy water and multi-fuel turbines, sending Iraq gas-only turbines instead, and then to add insult to injury, nabbed themselves extended maintenance contracts. 

The American energy giant has also long-exploited Washington’s overwhelming political and military leverage over Iraq to stymie Siemens’ ambitions. In 2008, GE secured a $2.8 billion contract to supply Iraq with 56 gas turbines capable of generating 7 gigawatts, but it took four long years to deliver the goods to Iraq.

A $4.1 billion contract to install the turbines at various Iraqi stations had to be implemented by Turkish companies instead, adding to the litany of GE missteps.

The story doesn’t end there:  Not only were GE’s turbines unable to operate on Iraqi gas, which then required chemical treatment to adapt to them, but it turns out the turbines were also incompatible with Iraq’s high temperatures, causing a spike in malfunctions. An example of the company’s shoddy performance can be seen at Al-Muthanna plant in southern Iraq, where six out of ten GE turbines are currently out of service. 

Despite these avoidable failures, GE then obtained a $700 million contract to operate a power plant in the southern governorate of Dhi Qar. True to form, six years later, it still hadn’t done the required work. 

The irrationality continues. Early this year, the Iraqi government signed yet another memorandum of understanding with Siemens to produce 6 gigawatts of electricity from associated petroleum gas (APG) in order to maintain turbines, establish transmission stations, and train Iraqi teams.

Foreign exploitation, domestic corruption 

The situation is bleak: after two decades, numerous contracts, and tens of billions of dollars spent, Iraq still falls short of acquiring more than a third of its electric power requirements. 

One of the primary reasons for this abject failure lies in the manipulation of contracts’ post-approval by Iraq’s Council of Ministers. This is when powerful corporations move in to rejig clauses and appendices that grant them additional extensions without having to face penalty clauses.

As one senior Iraqi official tells The Cradle, “the problem is political” and its solution is elusive. “More than $100 billion has been spent to solve Iraq’s electricity crisis, and the spending continues to no avail,” in part because of the lack of political resolve from politicians to tackle hard problems face on:

“The crisis will not be resolved if the tariff price is not adjusted. One kilowatt costs the state treasury 10 cents and is sold for 1 cent at best, while politicians promise their voters a further reduction in the price of electric energy without any scientific basis.”

Too many Iraqi politicians fear confrontation with an unforgiving Washington that knows Iraq’s most vulnerable pressure points. 

Despite the overwhelming evidence that Iraq’s energy crisis has been caused by domestic corruption and ineptitude – and western corporations who have exploited those weaknesses – the cognitive dissonance continues to snowball. Some politicians and commentators have even gone so far as to blame Iraq’s energy crisis on its reliance on imported Iranian gas, holding Tehran and its allies in Baghdad responsible for the sector’s collapse. 

While western companies have undoubtedly and significantly played a role in Iraq’s energy crisis, Iraqis must absolutely assume the responsibility for not having negotiated contracts with companies like GE and Siemens to demand tangible, timely, and measurable results. 

The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of The Cradle.

Andrei Martyanov: Response to YouTube “military analysts”

July 16, 2022

Please visit Andrei’s website: https://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/
and support him here: https://www.patreon.com/bePatron?u=60459185

Andrei Martyanov: Victory Day, May 9th, How To Make A Decision. Real War Planning.

May 09, 2022

Please visit Andrei’s website: https://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/
and support him here: https://www.patreon.com/bePatron?u=60459185

War Realities, Top Gun Romantics, Mercenaries, the reality of a wall socket.

May 03, 2022

Please visit Andrei’s website: https://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/
and support him here: https://www.patreon.com/bePatron?u=60459185

من «كامب ديفيد» إلى «نيوم» مخطط إمبريالي صهيوني عسكري اقتصادي متكامل

د. ميادة ابراهيم رزوق

ـ من اتفاقية كامب ديفيد إلى مشروع «نيوم» مخطط امبريالي صهيوني عسكري اقتصادي متكامل لشرق أوسط جديد وفق أجندة صهيوأميركية تشمل الكيان الصهيوني بدولته المزعومة (إسرائيل) كلاعب وجزء أساسي من المنطقة، وتكمن تفاصيل ذلك في كتاب «الشرق الأوسط الجديد» لوزير الخارجية الإسرائيلي شمعون بيريز الذي صدر عام 1993 ، وتضمّن رؤيته لمستقبل المنطقة بأحلام كبرى تربط بين (إسرائيل) وفلسطين والأردن ومصر والسعودية بمشروع سياسي اقتصادي يخلق سوقاً اقتصادية في المنطقة على غرار السوق الأوروبية المشتركة، وبتحالف عسكري موحد على غرار حلف الناتو، من خلال إنشاء شبكات كهربائية لا تعترف بالحدود، ومنطقة حرة بلا حدود بين السعودية ومصر و(إسرائيل) ليتوافق ويترجم ذلك وفي وقت لاحق بـ (رؤية2030 ) لولي العهد السعودي محمد بن سلمان تحت اسم «نيوم» اختصار لجملة المستقبل الجديد، والذي يتضمّن إنشاء منطقة حرة تقع في قلب مربع يجمع السعودية ومصر والأردن وفلسطين المحتلة.

ـ بين هذا وذاك تتالت الأحداث على المنطقة ضمن إطار مشروع الشرق الأوسط الجديد الذي حلم به قادة ومنظري الكيان الصهيوني وأبرزهم شمعون بيريز، وبدأ ذلك بعد اتفاقية كامب ديفيد عام 1979 التي أخرجت مصر من معادلة الردع العربي، والجيش المصري من حرب المواجهة والوجود مع كيان العدو الصهيوني، إلى حرب الخليج الأولى بدعم أميركي وتمويل خليجي سعودي بشكل أساسي للرئيس الراحل صدام حسين لإنهاك وإضعاف قوى وجيوش وإمكانيات إيران والعراق، مروراً بحرب الخليج الثانية /غزو العراق للكويت/ التي كانت سبباً رئيسياً وبتخطيط مسبق لتواجد القواعد والقوات العسكرية الأميركية بشكل كبير في المنطقة، ثم اتفاقيات أوسلو (1و2) ووادي عربة التي كانت أكبر مؤامرة على قوى وفصائل المقاومة الفلسطينية، وليس انتهاء بالاحتلال الأميركي للعراق بحجج كاذبة واهية تحت عنوان امتلاك أسلحة الدمار الشامل، وتفاصيل أخرى لا مجال لذكرها في هذا المقال تمهيداً لسيناريو ما يسمّى (الربيع العربي) الذي بدأ من تونس أواخر عام 2010 متدحرجاً إلى عدد من الدول العربية، واصطدم بصخرة الصمود السوري وقوة التعاون والتشبيك والتكتيك لقوى محور المقاومة من إيران إلى العراق وسورية وحزب الله في لبنان مع الحليف الروسي والصديق الصيني، ففشل في تحقيق أهدافه في تقسيم وتجزئة المنطقة، وتطويق روسيا والصين وإيران للسيطرة على منابع وأنابيب النفط والغاز.

ـ ترافق ذلك مع الجزء الأساسي الذي سنركز عليه في هذا المقال لعلاقته المباشرة بـ مشروع نيوم، وهو «عاصفة الحزم» الحرب على اليمن التي بدأت عام 2015، وقامت بها قوى التحالف المدعومة من الولايات المتحدة الأميركية والتي تضمّ إلى جانب السعودية ثماني دول أخرى هي الإمارات ومصر والأردن والسودان وموريتانيا والسنغال والكويت واليحرين، إلى توقيع مصر اتفاقاً عام 2016 بإعطاء النظام السعودي جزيرتين ضروريتين لربط مشروع نيوم بسيناء بانتقال جزيرتي تيران وصنافير إلى السيادة السعودية لتصبح الرياض جزءاً من اتفاقية «كامب ديفيد» بأثر رجعي، ثم إعلان ترامب لصفقة القرن والترويج لها عام 2017 لتصفية القضية الفلسطينية، وتنسيق جارد كوشنير صهر الرئيس دونالد ترامب ومستشار البيت الأبيض عام 2019 لورشة المنامة في البحرين الجانب الاقتصادي من صفقة القرن للتمويل أملاً بنجاح الصفقة، وصولاً لمشروع محمد بن سلمان المدينة الذكية «نيوم».

ـ تعتبر حرب الإبادة اليمنية أحد أهمّ تفاصيل مشروع «نيوم» للسيطرة على مضيق باب المندب والثروات النفطية اليمنية وخاصة في محافظتي مأرب والجوف، حيث يعتبر مضيق باب المندب ذا أهمية استراتيجية عسكرية أمنية اقتصادية كبيرة يربط بين البحر الأحمر والخليج العربي والمحيط الهندي، ويعمل كطريق ملاحة للسفن النفطية وغير النفطية التي تنتقل بين الشرق الأوسط وبلدان البحر المتوسط، وتأتي أهمية اليمن الاستراتيجية بالسيطرة على مضيق باب المندب بامتلاكها جزيرة بريم، ومرة أخرى مُنيت قوى التحالف في حرب اليمن التي تخوضها السعودية بشكل رئيسي بالوكالة عن الولايات المتحدة الأميركية والعدو الصهيوني بفشل تحقيق الأهداف وفق ما سبق، وتتالت انتصارات الجيش اليمني واللجان الشعبية وحركة أنصار الله رغم الصواريخ الباليستية والقنابل المحرمة دولياً ومعاناة المجاعة وانتشار الأوبئة في اليمن، وخلقت معادلات ردع جديدة من خلال استهداف بارجة حربية وناقلة نفط سعوديتين، وضرب منشأة «أرامكو» النفطية السعودية، وما تلاه من انهيار الإنتاج النفطي لأسابيع عدة، وأصبحت تطال صواريخ المقاومة في اليمن العمق السعودي بمطاراته ومنشآته النفطية، إضافة للتفوّق في الحرب البرية في استعادة وتحرير العديد من الأراضي اليمنية، وخاصة محافظة الجوف التي فيها أكبر الحقول والشركات النفطية، وذلك في ظلّ تصدّع قوى التحالف التي عانت من انسحابات متتالية من قطر إلى العدد الأكبر من الجنود السودانيين إلى غيرها من بقية الدول التي أصبحت مشاركتها رمزية.

ـ تستمرّ المعارك والعمليات العسكرية لتحرير محافظة مأرب معقل سلطة حزب التجمع اليمني للإصلاح (الإخوان المسلمين في اليمن) وهو المسيطر على المفاصل المهمة في ما تسمّى الحكومة الشرعية في اليمن، وأهمّ الحصون التي تتمسك بها قوات التحالف وبما تحتويه من مخزون نفط استراتيجي، وبتأييد الحاضنة الشعبية من مشايخ وقبائل مأرب التي ناشدت حكومة صنعاء لتخلصهم من سلطة الإخوان المسلمين.

ـ خلال الأيام او الأسابيع المقبلة وبتحرير مأرب، مع بدايات العجز الاقتصادي للنظام السعودي من انخفاض إيرادات النفط جراء حرب أسعار النفط إلى انعدام إيرادات الحج والعمرة من جراء جائحة كورونا، وتفشي الفيروس في السعودية داخل وخارج أفراد الأسرة الحاكمة مع ما تعانيه من أزمات داخلية أخرى، وبالتكامل مع إنجازات محور وحلف المقاومة على مستوى الإقليم ستتغيّر موازين القوى، لتكون سنة فارقة مهمة على صعيد التحوّلات الكبرى لصالح محور حلف المقاومة.

ـ وبالتالي فإنّ تفوّق قوى المقاومة على القوة الإسرائيلية الأميركية الإمبريالية وأدواتها التركية والرجعية العربية قد تكون مقدّمة لرؤية استراتيجية لمشروع تحدٍّ جديد لدول غرب آسيا في برنامج متكامل للتشبيك في الإقليم لإنشاء كتلة اقتصادية اجتماعية كبرى قادرة دولها على تحقيق التنمية الاقتصادية، وتأمين فرص العمل، والحماية الأمنية والرعاية الصحية والخدمية لشعوبها.

Analysis: Historical inevitability of ‘1979 US embassy’ event in Iraq: not now, but soon

Thursday, 02 January 2020 12:47 PM 

Supporters of Iraq’s Hashd al-Sha’abi force hold placards depicting trampled US symbols reading in Arabic “Welcome” during a protest outside the US embassy in the Iraqi capital Baghdad on January 1, 2020 to condemn the US air strikes that killed 25 Hashd fighters over the weekend. (Photo by AFP)

By Ramin Mazaheri

Ramin Mazaheri is the chief correspondent in Paris for Press TV and has lived in France since 2009. He has been a daily newspaper reporter in the US, and has reported from Iran, Cuba, Egypt, Tunisia, South Korea and elsewhere. He is the author of the books ‘I’ll Ruin Everything You Are: Ending Western Propaganda on Red China’ and the upcoming ‘Socialism’s Ignored Success: Iranian Islamic Socialism.’

The recent protests at the US embassy/city-state/Superman fortress of solitude in Iraq undoubtedly served notice of what the 2020s will bring for Iraq: freedom from three decades of US domination and terrorism.

The protests were shocking for many reasons. Iraq has been under the boot of the US for so long many around the world thought such resistance was impossible. Pity the poor, underestimated Iraqis: even when they did engage in civic disobedience the West sought, as usual, to give all the credit/blame to Iran. After dominating them so long, the West is incapable of seeing Iraqis as a people/culture with the power of self-determination. The endless refrain is “Iran-backed militias”, but it is Iraqis who staff those militias and who crossed into the Green Zone.

The past few days have produced much for us to comment about, but what good are such comments regarding the Iraqi context if we divorce ourselves from their past few decades?

There was a lot of debate, first provoked by the British medical journal The Lancet, about the death toll from Gulf War II, but few seem to remember the horrific death toll from Gulf War I of Bush père: 400,000 Iraqi dead, half of them civilians. Just 300 deaths combined among the anti-Iraq axis.

That’s a stunning figure which should not be forgotten, but to the “blame Iran” crowd in the West this war never happened. In fact, Gulf War I to Americans is something of a joke: the images of precision missiles going down chimneys, ecstatically broadcast in a ratings uber-bonanza for the still-new 24-hour news of CNN, helped “restore pride” to an America whose last conflict was Vietnam. The short-lived economic boom of the 1990s followed, and Gulf War I was barely an afterthought immediately.

Top cleric condemns US strikes on PMU bases, urges respect for Iraq sovereigntyThe drone strikes killed at least 27 individuals and wounded 51 others.

Sanctions, however, are not a ratings bonanza for CNN – the blockaded Cubans, allegedly starving North Koreans and the horrifically-sanctioned Iraqis (which ran until Gulf War II) do not provide exciting, pride-swelling, jingoism-fuelling footage. Quite the opposite, which is why the US runs no such footages; they didn’t have to ban footage of dead US soldiers for Gulf War I, but the “free press” of the US allegedly remained “free” even when they did just that for Gulf War II. One would think that in the “blame Iran” crowd one or two Americans might point out that this era of Husseinian splendor amid everyday want (and during the last era of global economic expansion) might have produced just a bit of anti-American resentment which may still linger?

Gulf War II came, but has it really gone? Is Iraq any different than a French neo-colonial subject in Africa, with foreign troops protecting the interests of foreign capital and not the welfare of the people?

Questions worth answering, but the “blame Iran” crowd only insists that the Gulf War II devastation of Iraq – maybe unparalleled since the “Korean conflict” – is the fault of non-belligerent Tehran. The destruction of infrastructure capital, the wasting/fleeing of human capital, the lives ruined by death/maiming/psychological trauma – this is all too much for a human to fully grasp, but one should not take the approach of the US and make no effort to grasp it at all.

This lack of effort at self-reflection is very typically American even within their own society – if America’s leaders will push a McCarthy-era Russophobia wave for three years just to avoid honest discussion of the failures of the Democratic Party and “democracy with American characteristics”, then why should we expect those leaders to be honest about Iraq? Why should we ask those leaders to honestly account for the murders, bombings, assassinations, strangulations and corruption they ordered for three decades?

Given the three decades of US domination and occupation, how can anyone be surprised by the recent protests targeting their embassy?

Indeed, many Iraqis, especially their young, are probably saying, “Why did it take so long to get here?”

A protester wearing the Iraqi flag stands outside the US embassy in the Iraqi capital Baghdad on January 1, 2020 during a demonstration. (Photo by AFP)

Two thousand nineteen was a momentous year in the Middle East because a local nation proved for the first time in two centuries that they have technological and military parity with Western capitalist-imperialists in the war theater of the Middle East. That country is Iran, which already began proving 40 years ago that they have a political, intellectual and artistic (cinema) culture equal to or better than, and certainly more modern and “of the historical moment”, than that of the West. What we saw on these Western new year’s eve protests in Iraq is a spreading confirmation of these slow, long-running historical trends, processes and facts. 

The protests were cheered by many worldwide of course: even if the Western political and media elite has these insane anti-Iran and pro-US capitalism-imperialism blinders on, the average person does not. Many hoped the protests would turn into a new Tahrir Square, like in Egypt, but they were disbanded after only two days.

That seems like a sad development, but the people of Iraq, Iran and their allies realize that sending out a force is no good unless that force can be controlled. Egypt was not under foreign occupation, after all. Many Iraqis justifiably feel they are at war and the embassy protests were an “attack” – it was not a place to spontaneously express patriotism and see how that may or may not coalesce. 

I suggest that the protest force was sent home because the damage has been done. After all, has the Green Zone ever been so breached?

The psychological and cultural consequences of this two-day affair are nothing but positive for Iraqis and nothing but negative for Americans and their corrupt, self-interested allies.

US airlifts forces to Iraq embassy amid protestsFootage shows US military aircraft dropping off as many as 100 marines to the American Embassy in Baghdad amid angry anti-US protests.

It is thus very similar to Iran’s military victories in 2019 – shooting down a drone, stopping a British-flagged tanker: these are not enormous military victories but they are enormously symbolic. They are not the momentous result of long battles but instead herald the very beginning of new long-term forces which are increasing in inevitability every moment.

Yet again in the past year, American planners were dumbfounded, scared and did not know how to react. The US is not powerless in Iraq but for a long moment they felt that way – for a long moment Iraqis felt powerful over Americans. These are not small cultural and psychological things, given the Iraqi historical context.

On a larger level: Hussein came to power by repressing the intersection of democracy and Islam with as much bloody zeal as any Western neo-imperialist. He fought a war at the behest of the West to destroy the Iranian democratic revolution because it dared to unify these two ideas, and proved that they are not acids and bases. When Hussein insisted that Iraqi Baathists are equal to their secular Western counterparts, the West destroyed his country with a blockade and then occupation.

The role of Baathism in Iraq is up to Iraqis to decide, not me. However, its history – and for many reasons beyond their control – is not very stirring, to say the least. If a majority of Iraqis want more of an intersection between Islam and Iraqi democracy than what Baathism tolerated, they do have an example to look at – Iran. It is precisely because Iran provides this example that they are the root of all evil in the Muslim world to Western capitalist-imperialists and Islamophobes. It is not only that Iranians have created a successful society on par with the top Western nations, but the West most certainly needs a scapegoat, due to their history in the region. 

A 1979 US embassy occupation is an historical inevitability in Iraq – we thought maybe this was it, but it was not.

In pictures: Iraqis hold angry protest outside US EmbassyIraqi protesters gather outside the US Embassy in Baghdad to condemn American airstrikes on PMU bases. Here are some exclusive photos.

Perhaps Iraq is truly not ready? They have been rather debilitated for several decades, after all. Nor does Iraq have a shah to kick out first – an embassy occupation for Iraqis would seemingly be the start of their revolution, whereas in Iran the occupation came nine months after the victory of their revolution.

Iraq is not Iran, of course, but the recent events at the Baghdad embassy show that both cultures view the presence of the US in their country as a major, major source of domestic strife and problems.

The reason a US embassy occupation in Iraq is an historical inevitability is because – despite the “blame Iran” propaganda – there is no chance that the US and Iraqis can have a mutually beneficial co-existence due to:

1) the presence of American soldiers,

2) the three decades of violent war, sanctions and occupation waged by the US,

3) the network of corruption created by US capitalist-imperialist influence and ideology, which ensures only and always a subservient role for Iraq, and which purposely disempowers their full potential,

4) the very ideology, practices and culture of the Washington, which are predicated on competition, violence and corruption, which makes them fundamentally opposed to mutually-beneficial cooperation.

(The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of Press TV.)

US Moved Air Force Command From Qatar To South Carolina Fearing Iranian Attacks

Source

30.09.2019

The US Air Force Commander Center’s operation was moved from Qatar to South Carolina, after operating out of the Middle Eastern country for the last 13 years.

The Command Center was used to command fighter jets, bombers, unmanned aerial vehicles and other US Air Force assets from Northeast Africa, the Middle East to Southeast Asia.

On September 28^th, the building of the Combined Air Operations Center (CAOC) in al Udeid Air Base, Qatar was vacated.

All flights and operations were controlled from Shaw Air Base in South Carolina, US. Over 300 planes were in the air when the shift happened in Syria, Afghanistan and the Persian Gulf.

On the next day, the CAOC in Qatar regained control, but this marked the first-time operation was transferred to the US since the CAOC was initially established in Saudi Arabia during the 1991 Gulf War.

Air Force Commanders said that new technology allowed the shift and it was a long-standing ambition. But it surely comes by no accident, as it happens during renewed tensions in the Middle East, with both US and Saudi Arabia having a tough rhetoric on Iran. The Islamic Republic also leaves no quarter in its responses.

“The functions that the CAOC provides for air power are so critical and so essential that we can’t afford to have a single point of failure,” said Maj. Gen. Chance Saltzman.

Air Force officials said that the increased tensions in the Middle East and the incidents blamed on Iran added urgency to possibly moving command away from the region – especially if a war would be coming.

“Iran has indicated multiple times through multiple sources their intent to attack U.S. forces,” said Col. Frederick Coleman, commander of the 609th Air and Space Operations Center.

“Frankly, as the war against ISIS winds down and as we continue to work through a potential peace process in Afghanistan, the region is calming down and potentially more stable than it has been in decades,” he said. “Except for Iran.”

Analysts, quite obviously, said that if a conflict arises the command center would likely be targeted.

“It doesn’t take a whole heap of imagination to look at it and think, if push came to shove and it was a full-blown conflict, it would be one of the priority targets,” said Douglas Barrie, a senior fellow specializing in aerospace at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London.

Most notably, the base is defended by Patriot batteries and other missile defense systems, whose capabilities were clearly presented in defending Aramco’s oil infrastructure on September 14^th.

According to Saltzman, the practicalities of missile defense made complete protection impossible.

“It’s really probably better to think about this as an immune system,” he said. “There’s going to be germs that get into the body. It’s about how fast and how resilient you can fight it off.”

By making the CAOC mobile, the US could respond to a potential attack much more quickly.

Byron Pompa, AFCENT operations director at Al Udeid, said moving facilities and equipment often could compensate for not having a huge footprint across the region.

“In times like today,” he said, “we can’t have a ton of permanent-fixture operating bases throughout the area of responsibility.”

“Our goal is deterrence,” Saltzman said, not conflict. But the lack of communication with Iran can make sending that message difficult. The U.S. has to use other measures, he said, including turning off radar from time to time or planning flight routes to make it clear it does not intend to attack.

The plan is to operate the CAOC remotely once per month, while it would remain in Qatar during the remainder of the time. The idea is to reach 8 hours of distanced operation every 24-hour period, either from South Carolina or elsewhere.

There were no plans to close al Udeid permanently. Some of the 800 positions are to be transferred to US in the future.

“The goodness here is now we’re saving taxpayer dollars that we’re giving back to America,” Coleman said. “And, you know, America’s sons and daughters aren’t abroad in the Middle East. They’re home.”

Qatar, in particular, has invested heavily on Al Udeid in recent years, spending as much as $1.8 billion to renovate the base, the largest in the region, capable of housing more than 10,000 U.S. troops. Thus, shifting focus away from it may seem as a sort of loss on investment on Qatar’s side.

This is actually a development that leads to the consideration that the US and its allies may, in fact, be considering the highly likeliness of a war in the Middle East against Iran, showing the urgency of this shift of command capability.

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• The Saker: “Iran Prevails Over the US, Twice, But This Is Far from Over”
• U.S. To Deploy Air-Defense Systems, 200 Troops In Saudi Arabia