The US and the siege of Iran's influence in Iraq

[yota691]

The US and the siege of Iran's influence in Iraq

05-09-2017 02:44 PM

Readers

 

Baghdad News -

 

Majid al-Samarrai 

increased in recent days circulation of news and reports and scenarios about the existence of contacts and meetings with US leaders and officials of the Baath Party officially banned in Iraq since the ninth of April 2003, and raised such news questions on the Iraqi street on the validity of the news and fears of some politicians rulers The country of the Americans so achieve on the ground. The news has not been confirmed or denied from its original sources.

This issue is linked to the draft of the occupation of Iraq in 2003 on the military page of political and social disasters when the Americans succeeded in eliminating the regime of Saddam Hussein and the Baath Party and the infrastructure of the State of Iraq, but failed on the political page after their alternative alternative based on sectarian quotas, And the decisions of de-Baathification and the disbandment of the Iraqi army, which remained in force even after the departure of the occupation in 2011, where provided "legitimate" cover for the new ruling parties to liquidate and chase opponents of power. 

It is not new to say that the American policies, especially in their experience in Iraq, have been duplicated by those who removed the former regime and its party. They were more extreme than the leaders of the Shiite parties in excluding the Baathists and persecuting them. Those parties exercised over the past years and are selective with a sectarian dimension, The new army.

Many of the former army officers who have taken over military and security duties have been reinstated. Some of them have become a respected combatant in the recent war against Da'ash. They have also excluded from the accountability and justice procedures persons belonging to the Ba'ath Party. Parliamentary or governmental position. 

The citizen succumbed to the new hypotheses and divisions despite the damage of the politics of these parties on his life. After these years, the Shiite popular awakening towards the policies of Iran in force in Iraq, which exceeded the risks of the American project in the dismantling of Iraqi society sectarian, revealed the awakening fragility of the sectarian game and claims of support of the Shiites, The majority of Iraqis are looking for a comprehensive solution that goes beyond the failed political experience of the extremist Shiite and pro-Tehran forces, even if it is done by America to restore their unified protection.

It seems that such awakening has moved to the Americans after they discovered their policy mistake. Their leaders from former and current administrations launched dramatic positions such as admitting guilt to oust Saddam. This comes as part of a radical revision of their policies in Iraq. Including the establishment of a strategic alliance with the Gulf Arabs (Saudi Arabia and the UAE) reflected programs within Iraq, and enter the program to modify the political process to reduce the dominance of political Islam parties and tools of the Wali Faqih in Tehran, by clearing the area of the participant And the involvement of political elites from outside those parties in the responsibilities of governance.

Some of these trends have been expressed by US officials with a role in policy-making and research centers close to American decision-making. The former US ambassador to Iraq, James Jeffrey, called on the government of President Donald Trump to pursue a political approach that creates a balance between the use of military force against Iran and its containment from inside Iraq and similar steps taken by the United States in the 1980s to counter the Soviets in Afghanistan and Iran. Gulf. 

There are many US officials who support the option of escalation against Iran from Iraq, according to a study published by Dennis Ross, special assistant to former President Barack Obama at the Washington Institute, where the Trump administration demands the isolation of Iran, saying: "The new administration will have to maintain the consensus of the two parties in Congress that the situation in Damascus and Baghdad and the role played by Iran there is unacceptable. "

He believes that the best way to deal with them is "to raise the costs of continuing Iranian intransigence, specifically by addressing vital issues outside the framework of the nuclear agreement, particularly Iran's chronic interference in the region." 

In addition, there are political moves at the level of the maturity of the new American visions, where at the end of February, the Geneva conference, which was overseen by the United States in coordination with the European Institute for Peace to discuss the arrangements after the establishment of an advocate in Iraq, with the participation of General David Petraeus, The most senior American generals briefed on the Iraqi issue, with the participation of former French Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin, and other international figures.

The conference's stated goal was to study the developments in the political situation in Iraq after an encouraging organization, and hoped that this conference and other public relations activities would begin to organize a new coherent political force to lead Iraq, replacing the current forces loyal to Iran, Stressing on contacts between US officials concerned with the Iraqi issue and Iraqi Baathists. 

These contacts, if they are serious, are aimed at preparing for the formation of a non-sectarian national unity government that, according to the Americans, aims to create a new balance of power between Sunnis and Shiites in a central Iraqi state and possibly secure the declaration of the establishment of the Kurdish state.

It is noteworthy that an important aspect of this scenario was announced by Vice President Nuri al-Maliki, who indicated in his statements to the Lebanese newspaper Al-Akhbar on May 30, 2017. "For me it was in the analysis, until some insiders in the American circles declared that there was a decision to postpone the elections. Iraq Some politicians have started talking about postponing the elections and calling for the continuation of such a decision. Those who know today that the Islamic trend will win again, so there is nothing left to them but to disrupt the elections in order to exclude us.

And here begins the new chapter: a state without a government, without a parliament and enter the constitutional vacuum, becomes Iraq without a government running the country. There is an international resolution pending the issuance of the Security Council under Chapter VI, calling for the formation of an emergency government under the pretext of running the country temporarily until the situation stabilizes, and elections are held again, to be completed at this time chapters of the plot to exclude the Islamic project. The owners of this project are now working to overthrow the Electoral Commission, and it seems clear to us that there is a plan to confuse the state and raise an atmosphere of concern, and create an unstable security environment, to convince Iraqis and others that the elections are not possible. 

This scenario is also echoed by some Sunni politicians loyal to the current situation and worried about their fate after being implicated in corruption and failure, and their fear of the emergence of clean elites from the non-sectarian Sunni Arabs clashing and searching for the scene.

The Shia and Sunni politicians are confused about the future, and this is why their actions are part of the attempts to mix the cards and inflame the Baath's return to political life through a deal with the Americans, forgetting the fact that it was the Americans who overthrew the former regime and who initiated the criminalization of the Baath Party. Dialogues with all the Iraqi parties other than political Islam may be among them personalities Baathist to reflect perceptions of the future of Iraq, does not mean that there is a US decision to involve them in government if we know that this represents a red line in all Shiite forces in Iraq, Or its pro-Tehran and some of them maintains close ties in Washington.

The United States has held long-term dialogues with the Taliban in Afghanistan, which is resisting them militarily there, but the recent US decision is to send more American troops to fight the Taliban, and this is the American policy. However, the success of the American scenario in reducing Iran's influence in Iraq would be a breakthrough in the political situation and provide opportunities for Iraq's undemanding national elites to take its legitimate role in running the country and give Iraq a chance to regain its place in its Arab environment. 

The next change project means a fundamental change in American policy in Iraq, but the success of this endeavor remains dependent on two variables: first, the specificity of the military political balance that will impose itself after the completion of the expulsion of Daqash; and second, the Iranian arrangements against this endeavor. ? Then the new Iraq and the future of American politics will unfold.

[Boozer]

You have 2 you need to rid yourself of , Maliki and Iran,  But First can you RV so I can say my Goodbye's as sad as it will be I must Go !!!!  

[nannab]

9 hours ago, Boozer said:

You have 2 you need to rid yourself of , Maliki and Iran,  But First can you RV so I can say my Goodbye's as sad as it will be I must Go !!!!  

 

I say let him and a few others go to Iran so only one MOAB  is needed. Waste not want not. lol