Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Carrello

  1. The Iraq Parliamentary Finance Committee dictating exchange rates and fiscal policy, rather than the Iraqi Central Bank, is equivalent to The US Senate Finance Committee dictating exchange rates rather than the US Federal Reserve. 

    • Like 1
    • Upvote 5

    Amer Al-Jawahiri to / NINA /: Changing the value of the national currency is now an economic should not be linked to additional unstable revenues

    Monday 09 , August 2021


    Baghdad / NINA / - The Consultant in Industrial Development, industrial cities and investment, Amer Al-Jawahiri, confirmed that: Changing the value of the national currency is now an economic should not be linked to additional, unstable revenues.

    He told the National Iraqi News Agency (NINA) that the change in the value of the national currency against other foreign currencies has not occurred since 2003 except twice, its price was 2500 and then to 1200, and it was changed at the end of last year, which means during 17 years it was changed only twice.

    Al-Jawahiri added that the rise in oil prices is not fixed, it may rise for several months and decrease again, as happened previously, noting that: determining the economic and monetary paths does not depend on steps that occur for some months or seasons of the year.

    He explained that the changes in oil prices should not be based on a change in the amount of the Iraqi currency vis-à-vis other currencies, and that it should not take place in short successive periods. /End


    • Thanks 7
    • Upvote 2
  3. An American call to treat Iraq’s militias as “ISIS” and support Al-Kazemi for a new term


    Reports & AnalyticsWashingtonbreakingISISShiite factionsMustafa Al-Kazemi 2021-07-31 14:38A-AA+

    Shafaq News/ The American "Brookings Institution" called for starting to deal with Shiite militias in Iraq in a similar way to the way ISIS was treated, and to develop policies accordingly to make its "fighting" sustainable and verifiable. 

    The American report, translated by Shafak News Agency, indicated; Washington's counter-terrorism strategy in Iraq focuses on seeking to permanently defeat ISIS, adding that the United States, like Iraq, is also mired in a war with militias allied with Iran, as its bases in Iraq were attacked seven times during the month of July alone.

    The report pointed out that Washington tried to find ways to confront the Shiite militias and their branches, but it indicated that the integration of these forces into the Iraqi political system and society did not facilitate dealing with them using tools such as those used to confront ISIS. 

    After stressing the importance of defeating ISIS, the report pointed out that the organization’s ability to survive was linked to “the continued dominance of Shiite militias linked to Iran, which directly undermine the government by attacking its security forces,” adding that the forces acting as a proxy for Iran are responsible for the killing. More than 600 Iraqis, thousands of protesters wounded, activists murdered or kidnapped, and Iraq "turned into a republic of fear."

    Therefore, the American Institute report called for “formally treating the Shiite militias linked to Iran as equal to ISIS and developing policies accordingly, so that the United States and its allies can begin the process of developing standards to combat these groups in a sustainable and viable manner.” 

    The report pointed out that senior Iraqi officials began classifying the attacks launched by these militias as "terrorism", while the Biden administration struck the militias at least twice. The report described this change in the Iraqi tone, and the proportionate US strikes, as "welcome", but added that formally dealing with the militias allied to Iran as "equivalent to ISIS, it will create a sense of the direction and purpose of future US military responses to militia attacks, in addition to To the broader issue of how Washington deals with Iranian proxies, which is a signal of non-existent intentions, and could enhance American deterrence.

    The report considered that the attacks of Iran’s proxies should not be treated as “anomalous cases or as indications of the collapse of the regime in Iraq, because this reduces the inevitability of containing these groups,” calling for dealing with “Iran’s proxy groups as the same problem and they are directly responsible.” about terrorism and turmoil in the country. 

    The report suggested reaching a grand bargain between the internal allies of the United States in order to "support their attempts to keep US forces in Iraq and conclude a buffer zone against the influence of Iran and its proxies."

    The report called on the United States to make it a priority to direct the Iraqi political parties allied with it, towards concluding this big deal that seems unlikely to be verified by them alone, explaining that Washington has helped the Kurdistan Regional Government and Baghdad to improve relations between them since Al-Kazemi and the Prime Minister of Kurdistan Region, Masrour Barzani. his position. 

    He pointed out that making a broader effort depends on the values and goals that bind the actors allied with the United States and the establishment of sustainable mechanisms for settling disputes between them. 

    The American Institute concluded by saying that treating Iran's proxies as equivalent to ISIS, along with the presence of a broad front allied with the United States in Iraq, would "enhance the credibility of the Biden administration and its negotiating hand with Iran, in nuclear negotiations and regional de-escalation efforts." 

    While the report also called for expanded sanctions against individuals and forces allied to Iran to undermine its attempts to cross-party alliances, it was created to say that the United States may not be able to eliminate these groups and their infrastructure, but it can focus on individuals, rather than organizations, by stopping Funding and support for Iraqi institutions controlled or controlled by those individuals or groups linked to Iran. 

    He concluded by saying that Al-Kazemi, who he described as the prime minister of the "compromise" government, does not have a political base, and that the United States should help him secure an additional term, which is an opportunity that Washington and its allies must seize.

    • Thanks 2
    • Upvote 1
  4. 21 hours ago, Theseus said:

    President Harris prefers to do business from a supine position and will be receiving guests in the Lincoln Bedroom,  Of course all transactions must be handled before the reception begins.

    Feel better, Theseus? Are you a bigger man after your misogynistic, bigoted, ignorant comment?  If you have a daughter, would you share your comment with her and explain your sexual innuendo?


    Harris is Vice President of The United States of America. What will you be doing this afternoon?

    • Confused 1
    • Downvote 8
    • Pow! 2
  5. 17 hours ago, 3 bucks new rv rate said:

    also, where do you think the money comes from to print new lower denoms? printing new lower denoms cost a fortune. that's why the cbi has to make a huge huge huge profit for the second case which is the process of deleting 3 zeros in order to cover the expense of printing new lower denoms and of course and the most important is make a profit for themselves ( for their own pockets ) because they are greedy and corrupt.. 

    You are assuming the lower denoms have not been printed yet. We have been close, very close to the RV a couple of times. We could not have been that close without LDs printed and awaiting their debut. Printing currency takes months and is a "scientific process" that is tedious and exact. 


    If the LDs have not been printed as of yet, IMO we could not see an RV until the second quarter 2022, and possibly the first quarter of 2022.

    • Thanks 1
    • Upvote 2
    • Pow! 2
  6. 3 hours ago, Laid Back said:

    CBI wants you to believe that delete 000 is an RD or LOP.


    Keep calm and relax….. Purchasing power is coming to town 😀


    $1 / 1460 = 0.00068

    After deleting the 000 = $0.68


    Go CBI

    Go delete of 000

    Go LD’s

    Go purchasing power



    Thank you LB. And thanks for doing the correct calculation on the exchange math.

    • Thanks 1
    • Upvote 2
  7. Iraq couldn't pay their employees but they will spend millions and millions of dollars to print new currency because a few denominations have 3 zeroes, other notes have fewer. Iraq is going digital where 3 zeroes wouldn't be an accounting problem. Master cards, payroll cards, debit cards....3 zeroes is not a huge problem when you are broke and digital. 


    Zimbabwe had a 100-trillion note worth 40 US cents. That's a 0s problem.


    There just seems to be a lot of "delete the zeros" articles that are doing a lot of educating, a step in the revaluation process.



    • Like 1
    • Upvote 5
    • Pow! 2
  8. 7 hours ago, 3 bucks new rv rate said:

    it doesn't really matter. 1 bahrain=2.65 usd and i kwd=3.25 usd. i"ll take one of them  straight to the bank and never look back. 


    The purpose of pegging to a basket is to provide exchange rate stability. It has nothing to do with exchange value. 


    • Upvote 2
    • Pow! 1
  9. icon_1_document_x64.pngThe Levant Project (opinion)

    September 2020


    The nature of the project

    The "New Levant” project is based on linking Egypt which constitutes a large population and has its expertise in many fields and location on the Mediterranean, with Iraq which has large oil resources, and Jordan which has good economic advantages. The project focuses on economic cooperation and the promotion of investment and trade aspects between the three countries, in a plan in which there would be more freedom of capital and technology flows, and is expected to encourage other countries to inject new investments into the region.

    The alliance is being built on economic understandings between the three countries, which have a combined GDP of nearly 570 billion dollars, according to World Bank data. The project was previously proposed by former Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi, and the three countries held two previous summits: the first in Cairo on 25 March 2019 with the participation of President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, King Abdullah II bin al-Hussein, and (former) Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi; and the second on 22 September 2019, on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) meeting in New York, and brought together the Egyptian President, the King of Jordan and the Iraqi President Barham Salih.

    The recent summit, which was held in Amman on 25 August 2020, bore an indication of the seriousness of the three countries in advancing the alliance, through the establishment of a permanent secretariat for coordination on the tripartite cooperation files. The task of the secretariat would be to implement and follow up on what was agreed upon between the three countries, in an attempt to avoid the failure of previous Arab experiences whose protagonists failed to transfer them from the stage of statements and wishes into practical application. In the first year, the secretariat would be located in Amman. It would successively move each year between the capitals of the three countries.

    The alliance focuses on complementary elements, namely oil, energy, transport, commodity trade and labour. An oil pipeline would be extended from Basra port in southern Iraq to the Aqaba port in Jordan and onward to Egypt. While Jordan would get Iraqi oil at a price lower than the international market price, in addition to the transit fees, Egypt would benefit from the process of refining part of the Iraqi oil on its territory. On the other hand, Iraq would import electricity from Egypt, and it could also benefit from Egyptian expertise in the reconstruction process. Jordan's potential in the field of transport would be tapped, considering its large capabilities in this field. Goods would also be exported from Jordan and Egypt to Iraq.

    Project goals, timing, and contexts

    A. Objectives

    • Benefitting from the economic and geographical advantages of the member states, and networking the economic interests in a manner that would benefit the economies of the member countries.
    • Transferring Iraq’s economic activity to the Red Sea and the Mediterranean, away from the Arabian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz, which are under Iran's control. This would strengthen the Iraqi power cards against Iran.
    • Developing political and security coordination among member states in a manner that would serve the goals of each party.

    B. Timing and context

    The timing of putting forward the project has several implications:

    • It constitutes an attempt to penetrate the state of fragility in the Arab region that has made it an arena of conflict and competition for regional and international powers. The project may constitute the nucleus of a larger Arab grouping and benefit from Arab capacities to change the equations and weights in the region’s conflicts by contributing to the reproduction of Arab solidarity.
    • The project comes at the height of the sectarian divide in the region and the negative repercussions it has produced. The project would break the cycle of the Sunni-Shiite conflict that has characterized the outcomes of regional policies in the last decade, even as Middle Eastern societies are experiencing restlessness from sectarian conflicts in favour of searching for economic and political solutions to the crises experienced by the peoples of the region.
    • The launch of the project coincides with the increase in tension between the US and Iran, and an Arab openness to Israel represented by the UAE-Israeli agreement. These shifts would give the alliance additional political impetus by obtaining Arab-US support.

    C. Regional overlaps of the project’s countries

    The parties involved in this project have bilateral relations that conflict with one another's orientations and the political values that govern their regional relations. Therefore, to what extent would this affect the alliance and the possibility of its development and survival? To what extent can its parties manage the network of old and new relations and maintain a balance in those relationships?

    • Iraq is linked by quasi-strategic relations to Iran. Those relations have grown considerably in light of the presence of a ruling political elite at both the legislative and executive levels, in addition to sprawling relations with the Iraqi parties and their military militias. On the other hand, the relations of Jordan and Egypt with Iran appear tepid, despite the existence of diplomatic representation between those parties.
    • While Egypt and Jordan have a peace agreement with Israel, some Iraqi quarters seek to link Iraq to the axis of "resistance" and consider themselves at war with Israel as a result of the targeting of their militias in Syria and the western regions of Iraq.
    • All parties have relations with the Saudi-UAE alliance ranging between alliance, as in the case of Egypt and Jordan, and coordination, as in the case of Iraq as a result of the existence of a UAE-Saudi approach that aims to include Iraq within the Arab framework and reduce Iranian hegemony over it.

    The parties to the project are likely to seek to separate their alliance relations from the political complexities of the region. It is clear from the final communiqué that those parties are aware of the complexity of the network of relations in the region, specifically with regard to Iraq, whose Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi stressed the need to move away from the policies of the axes. This seemed to be a message to Iran that the alliance is not directed against it.

    Challenges and opportunities before the project

    The "New Levant" project is linked to the reality, circumstances and developments of the region. It will certainly be greatly affected by this reality. The political will of its parties will have an important role in facing challenges, even as they will have a role in maximizing its opportunities for development and leadership.

          A. Challenges

    Despite the importance of the locations and roles of Egypt and Jordan in this project, the compass of the challenges is mainly directed towards Iraq. The success of the project is linked to Iraq’s ability to fulfill its obligations towards it. Despite the enthusiasm shown by Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi for the project in general, this does not hide the fact that there is an Iraqi division between supporters of the alliance with Iran and supporters of Iraq’s return to its Arab framework, with the scale tilting in favour of Iran's supporters. So, Kadhimi is likely to face a number of challenges, the most important of which are the following:

    • The possibility that Iraq would not be capable of obtaining Parliament’s ratification of the understandings reached at the Amman Summit between Iraq, Jordan and Egypt. Amer al-Fayez, a member of the Foreign Relations Committee in the Iraqi Parliament, who is a deputy from the pro-Iran Fatah Bloc led by Hadi al-Amiri, was quick to downplay the Amman Summit, saying that "no commitment can be made during the tripartite summit unless it is ratified" in Parliament.
    • Fear that the alliance would be interpreted as Iraq’s inclusion in the game of regional axes. While Kadhimi stressed in his meeting with the government, after his return from the tripartite summit, that Iraq should be kept away from the policy of the axes, asserting that the alliance focuses mainly on the economic side, it is not unlikely that Iran's supporters in Parliament and the partisan blocs would resort to activating this adherence to this principle in order to reject the alliance.
    • The tense relations between Kadhimi and the pro-Iran Iraqi militias, which accuse him of involvement in the assassination of the deputy chairman of the Popular Mobilisation Committee (PMC) Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, and the commander of the Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) Qasem Soleimani, and which rejected the results of his US visit, may contribute to Iraq's failure to comply with the outcomes of the Amman Summit, considering its impact on Iran's interests in Iraq.
    • The most serious challenge facing the project lies in the efforts of some regional and international parties affected by the alliance to activate their tools in Iraq to obstruct the course of the project. This is not limited to Iran; Turkey would also view the alliance through the perspective of hostility with Egypt and refuse to give Egypt a foothold in Iraq; and Russia would deal with the alliance as a "US product."
    • The financial and economic crisis in the three countries, especially Iraq which is the main pillar of the project. This would reduce or delay joint investment plans or even the plan to extend the oil pipeline.

    B. Chances of the success of the project

    There are indications of the project's potential for success, as follows:

    • As the party to which the success of the alliance is linked, Iraq has the opportunity to get rid of Iranian hegemony, in light of the existence of a popular movement calling for reform and the removal of Iran's proxies from the circles of influence in government, even as Iran is going through difficult conditions as a result of the popular discontent and the challenges of the coronavirus epidemic. This provides Iraq with an opportunity to proceed towards getting rid of the reality of dependency imposed by Iran.
    • The existence of a clear US support for the project which forms part of the strategy to besiege Iran and dismantle its hegemony over Iraq. The US administration desires to turn Iraq towards Egypt and Jordan. The Trump administration has pressured Kadhimi during his recent visit to accelerate the project to connect the electricity grid to Egypt and Jordan.
    • The expectation that the project would receive an Arab support, especially by the Gulf states, given that the alliance constitutes an important tributary in strengthening the Arab position in the face of the penetration of regional powers, especially that Iraq and Jordan are geographically linked to the Gulf countries, and that fortifying the security of both countries is an important issue for the Gulf countries.
    • The existence of an Arab public opinion in support of the project, specifically in the three member states of the alliance. The expected benefits of the alliance, especially at the economic level, would also give the alliance the necessary momentum for development and survival.

    Winners and losers from establishing the project

    A. The winners

    • Members of the project (Egypt, Iraq and Jordan), in view of the expected returns on the alliance, and the need of the three parties for economic returns on the projects to be executed. Besides, the alliance would strengthen the cards of the three countries at both the political and security levels.
    • The US, which had a clear role in pushing for the birth of this alliance that would strengthen its cards in the face of the Russian and Chinese encroachment on the region. The alliance would also constitute an important blow to the Iranian project at its most important leg, namely Iraq.
    • The UAE and Saudi Arabia, considering that the Arab alliance between the three countries would reduce the areas of influence and dominance of regional competitors, namely Turkey and Iran, and strengthen the cards of the UAE and Saudi Arabia in the regional confrontation with those two parties.

    B. The losers

    • Iran is at the forefront of the losers because the alliance brings Iraq directly closer to the Arab system and the attempt to find a new Arab bloc through which Iraq could be more effective within the Arab system. This would result in the withdrawal of one of the pillars of Iran’s strategic project in the Middle East and creating a big gap in its regional strategy. In addition, the alliance threatens Iran with losing the Iraqi market which is the only export outlet for Iran’s products. The volume of Iraqi exports from Iran is nearly 12 billion dollars, and the trade balance tilts in Iran’s favour by 100 percent. Therefore, Iran is unlikely to accept the loss of its influence in Iraq, and would suggest to its proxies there that the alliance is part of a Gulf-US conspiracy. It would use all methods to obstruct the alliance's paths, including destabilising Iraq.
    • Turkey does not want a strong Arab bloc, with a strong economy and army, as this would affect its direct interests. Turkey has important interests in Iraq where the trade volume between the two countries is more than 20 billion dollars. Iraq also exports part of its oil through the Turkish port of Ceyhan, and Turkey does not want Arab alternatives for Iraq. On the other hand, this alliance is in the interest of Turkey's Arab opponents, especially Egypt, the UAE and Saudi Arabia, and strengthens their cards in the confrontation with Turkey.
    • Qatar: the alliance opposes the interests of Qatar which has become closely linked to Turkish interests in the region and seeks to weaken the Egyptian role and deprive its Gulf rivals, the UAE and Saudi Arabia, of any political and security gains.
    • Russia and China: Iraq has long been one of the traditional Russian centres of influence in the region. Russia has begun to extend its influence to Iraq in recent years, in preparation for a possible US exit from the region. As for China, Iraq is at the heart of its interests in the region, especially the Belt and Road project, in addition to its desire to obtain shares of the reconstruction of Iraqi cities and the infrastructure. The US presence in the nascent alliance, both in terms of its support or the proximity of its parties to US interests and policies in the region, constitutes a blow to Russian and Chinese schemes regarding Iraq.

    Expected paths of the project

    The project includes a geopolitical dimension that would change the existing regional balances and impose new equations contrary to the context followed by the region since the beginning of the current century which marks the beginning of the history of the collapse of the Arab system and the decline of its status and influence in the ongoing interactions in the region. The importance of the project is attributable to the following reasons:

    • Creating an Arab bloc capable of creating an objective balance in the region and fixing the imbalance in the balance of power in favour of the regional parties, namely Iran and Turkey, whose projects have come to threaten Arab security.
    • Restoring power to Arab geopolitics which possess important strategic advantages without being able to employ them in the context of competition and conflict with Turkey and Iran. Iraq ranks low in its relations with those two parties. Besides, the chaos caused by Turkey and Iran in Iraq finds its echo in the weak national security of the neighbouring Arab countries. However, the important question is: would the strategic dimension be activated in the Arab alliance? Does Egypt, which is the strongest party in the alliance, have the will and desire to pursue the alliance project to achieve the desired strategic returns?

    It was remarkable that the final communiqué of the Amman tripartite summit did not mention the "New Levant". The communiqué focused on terms such as "coordination", "cooperation" and "integration". This raised the question of whether the parties have given up this project, or they have deliberately focused on the economic formula without conferring on the project political and security dimensions which the parties do not seem willing to pursue directly at this stage.

    However, there are many indications of an Egyptian unwillingness to give the project a political dimension, limiting it to its economic dimensions because Egypt is not interested in counting on a specific party, and wants to manoeuvre between the various alliances and groupings. Moreover, Egypt's current matrix of preferences does not give importance to reviving the Arab Mashreq region and reshaping the regional balance of power, even as its focus is largely on the issues of the Renaissance Dam and the Libyan conflict. Thus, Egypt is currently interested in the economic returns that may accrue to it from Iraq.

    Despite Jordan's enthusiasm for the project, in the context of its efforts to strengthen its strategic position which was affected by regional changes and whose effectiveness was reduced in the Syrian, Palestinian and Iraqi files, Jordan's problem lies in the first place with the US administration which has an interest in weakening its effectiveness in favour of the US peace project in the region.


    The nature of the project’s paths depends on the political will of its parties, especially the capability of the Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi to accommodate the many obstacles that Iran will put in front of him. This requires radical internal changes at more than one level, the results of which may appear in the early Iraqi elections which was called for by Kadhimi in June 2021. The Egyptian role would also have an important impact on mobilising Arab countries behind the project and moving it from the field of limited economic benefits to the geopolitical side. This would change the power equations in the region, depending on the Egyptian orientations in the next phase.


    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
  10. Thank you, Yota.


    The Levant Project is very important, IMO. Not only does it establish exports for Iraq to Jordan and Egypt, receiving electricity from Egypt, but attempts to release the stranglehold Iran has on Iraq, most importantly. Turkey's grip would be lessened as well. There are many great aspects of this agreement if they can pull it off that would provide Iraq with sovereignty and forward economic movement.  

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 2
    • Pow! 1
  11. 4 hours ago, luvalife said:

    Hold on tight Carrello, You are about to learn some truth!  If you don't understand what is going on there is a TON of information available.  May I suggest you turn off the MSM! They are lying to you! Good Luck!

    So the Right controlled Supreme Court was incorrect 3 times when they overturned election fraud claims and state and federal courts when presented with election fraud claims were wrong also when 64 cases were thrown out of court? 

    • Thanks 1
    • Upvote 4
    • Downvote 2
    • Pow! 1
  12. 16 hours ago, Shelley said:

    Come on man ...

    you know the answer to that question 

    NO country , President , Prime Minister , Can tell or demand another country to do something with that country’s currency !!!

    And the differences you ask of between

    Obama/ Biden and Trump

    Obama / Biden ... withdrew all the troops causing the vacuum for ISIS

    Thousands of Iraqi’s died at the hands of ISIS... Obama left Iraq high and dry.

    Trump ... Put troops back in , wiping out ISIS , brokered peace deals in the Middle East ... security and somewhat stability to Iraq , so yes people did believe Trump’s efforts could possibly bring about an RV 

    Trump could never demand an RV .. 

    but you knew that didn’t you !!



    Get a straw, Shelley. You'll need it for all that Kool-Aid your're drinking.

  13. 11 hours ago, markb57 said:

    wow Carrello, you give your own post a Thank You?....LOL! How pathetic. Your post has so much nonsense in it, I don't know where to begin to respond to it....


    11 hours ago, markb57 said:

    wow Carrello, you give your own post a Thank You?....LOL! How pathetic. Your post has so much nonsense in it, I don't know where to begin to respond to it....


    I would like to hear your response to my "nonsense." Give it a whirl.

  14. 3 hours ago, jcfrag said:

    My greatest concern at this time is that today it is worse then it was when Obama was President. And I have some really warm memories of what a cluster flock it was in Iraq back in those days. 😳 😱 😭


    If it was so great when trump was president, why didn't he demand an RV? That is what the Right on DV expected, especially since most believe trump owns billions in IQD.  If President Obama and President Biden are so bad, and trump is such a financial genius, why did he not make Iraq RV their currency? 

    • Thanks 1
    • Haha 1
    • Upvote 1
  15. What the hell does an election have to do with the exchange rate! The PM may want to use the exchange rate politically and push the button prior to an election to gain support. Okay. But the actual worth of a currency or the revision of an exchange rate has nothing to do with an election. Ask Kuwait. IMO the PM would lose the poor as supporters keeping the exchange rate low for 4 more years. 



    • Upvote 4
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.