Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

Iraq: Who’s the Enemy?

Two incidents involving U.S. forces in the predominantly Shia southern Iraq over the past week appear to demonstrate the growing complexities and...

Print Friendly

Two incidents involving U.S. forces in the predominantly Shia southern Iraq over the past week appear to demonstrate the growing complexities and dangers of the country’s civil conflict.

Sunday’s day-long battle near Najaf, in which two U.S. pilots were killed when their military helicopter was shot down, was first reported as an attack by Sunni insurgents and “foreign fighters” on the holy city and the tens of thousands of Shia pilgrims who are converging there for Ashura. But later reports identified the heavily armed and highly organized assailants as members of the Army of Heaven, an obscure Shia sect that believes the killing of Najaf’s senior ayatollahs, including Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, will hasten the return of the Mahdi (messiah or leader).

The Iraqi government claimed that 200 Army of Heaven members were killed, including the group’s leader, and another 120 captured after some 15 hours of fighting, which reportedly came as a major surprise to U.S. officials despite the large number of Army of Heaven fighters involved and the firepower—a heavy machine gun downed the U.S. helicopter, according to the Pentagon—at their disposal.

“If they had succeeded in their plans, the political consequences would have been catastrophic,” said one Washington official who noted that this was by far the heaviest fighting in the south since the 2004 insurrection by Moqtada al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army. “The fact that we had no forewarning when so many people were involved shows how limited our intelligence is not just in al-Anbar Province [the stronghold of the Sunni insurgency] and Baghdad, but in the south, too. We really don’t know much about what is going on there.”

U.S.-led coalition forces formally returned control over security to Iraqi forces just last month.

Meanwhile, officials here are still trying to figure out who was behind the January 20 surprise attack on a U.S. security team that was meeting with its Iraqi counterpart in the regional government offices in Karbala, some 50 miles north of Najaf. After initially reporting that five U.S. soldiers were killed defending the compound, the Pentagon reported late last week that only one was killed in the initial attack, while the other four were abducted and later shot execution-style about 30 miles to the east where their bodies were found.

The Associated Press (AP) reported that as many as a dozen attackers traveled in the kind of convoy of SUVs frequently used by U.S. officials in Iraq. They wore U.S. combat fatigues, and at least several of them spoke English, according to Iraqi soldiers who waved them through a checkpoint on the outskirts of Karbala. The SUVs and uniforms apparently involved in the attack were later found abandoned with the bodies in Mahawil in Babil Province after Iraqi guards at one checkpoint gave chase.

“The precision of the attack, the equipment used, and the possible use of explosives to destroy the military vehicles in the compound suggests that the attack was well rehearsed prior to execution,” a military spokesman in Baghdad told the AP.

While the U.S. military has announced the arrest of four suspects in the attack, which was unprecedented in its sophistication, no further information has been released, fueling speculation both within the government and among independent analysts as to who was behind it.

Juan Cole, an expert at the University of Michigan, said he believed the attackers’ final destination in Mahawil, a mixed Sunni-Shia city in an area of intense Sunni guerrilla activity, suggests that Sunni insurgents were responsible and that the raid “was aimed at harming security arrangements” for the Ashura pilgrimage that ended this week in Karbala, where tens of thousands will commemorate the martyrdom of the Prophet Mohammed’s grandson, al-Hussein.

But the precision of the attack—only U.S. soldiers were singled out—also points to an inside job, according to Cole. “How would there have been Sunni Arab guerrilla sympathizers at this police and army meeting at Shia Karbala?” he asked, suggesting that perhaps “mixed units” were involved.

Others see the attack as part of an increasingly dangerous game of “tit-for-tat” between U.S. and Iranian-aligned forces. Ray Close, a retired top Middle East analyst at the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), suggested that the attack and the abductions may have been retaliation for two recent raids in which the U.S. military seized and abducted Iranian officials in Iraq—the first in Baghdad on December 21, the second in the Kurdish city of Irbil on January 10.

After protests by the Iraqi central government, as well as by Tehran, the Iranians arrested in the first raid were released and deported home. The fact that the raid took place at the offices of the leader of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, who had just returned from Washington where he was treated as an honored guest at the White House by President George W. Bush, naturally added to consternation over the incident.

The five Iranians seized in the second raid, which also elicited protests from both Baghdad (notably President Jalal Talabani) and the local Kurdish authorities, have not yet been released, although officials in Tehran hinted Monday that they had received a message from Washington regarding a resolution of the case.

Both raids came amid escalating charges by Bush, as well as other senior U.S. officials, that Iran is providing “material support for attacks on American troops” and threats to, in Bush’s words, “seek out and destroy the networks” that are allegedly doing so. The U.S. Embassy in Baghdad is expected to elaborate on U.S. charges based in part on materials seized during the two raids.

In a widely circulated memo, Close cites a “very knowledgeable friend,” a recently retired analyst from the Defense Intelligence Agency, who noted Washington has had contingency plans for “specific paramilitary actions against Iranian personnel inside Iraq in case Iranian support for the insurgency became a significant problem,” and that such actions would likely provoke retaliation.

“My friend looks at the recent incident in Karbala as very probably an Iranian operation carried out in retaliation against the recent seizures of Iranian operatives by the U.S. in Baghdad and Irbil,” Close wrote. “He says that the sophistication of the Karbala operation seems far beyond the capabilities of the Iraqi insurgents and indicates the high probability of Iranian planning and execution.

“We need to watch carefully now to see if the ‘tit-for-tat’ game between the United States and Iran continues to escalate, and if in the end it proves to be a game that we might have been wiser to avoid or to minimize as much as possible,” Close wrote.

At least one thing is relatively clear: Iran was unlikely to have been behind Sunday’s attack on Najaf. Adherents to the Army of Heaven are reported to be violently anti-Iran; they burned down Iranian consulates in Basra and Karbala last year.

Jim Lobe is the Washington bureau chief of the Inter Press Service and a contributor to Right Web (rightweb.irc-online.org).


Jim Lobe, "Iraq: Who's the Enemy?" Right Web Analysis (Somerville, MA: International Relations Center, February 1, 2007).

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-KS), President Trump’s nominee for secretary of state to replace Rex Tillerson, is a “tea party” Republican who previously served as director of the CIA.

Richard Goldberg is a senior adviser at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies who served as a foreign policy aide to former Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL).

Reuel Marc Gerecht, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, has been advocating regime change in Iran since even before 9/11.

John Hannah, Dick Cheney’s national security adviser, is now a leading advocate for regime change in both Iran and Syria based at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

Dennis Ross, a U.S. diplomat who served in the Obama administration, is a fellow at the “pro-Israel” Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

Sheldon Adelson is a wealthy casino magnate known for his large, influential political contributions, his efforts to impact U.S. foreign policy discourse particularly among Republicans, and his ownership and ideological direction of media outlets.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) is known for his hawkish views on foreign policy and close ties to prominent neoconservatives.

For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Print Friendly

North Korea and Iran both understand the lesson of Libya: Muammar Qaddafi, a horrifyingly brutal dictator, gave up his nuclear weapons, was eventually ousted from power with large-scale US assistance, and was killed. However, while Iran has a long and bitter history with the United States, North Korea’s outlook is shaped by its near-total destruction by forces led by the United States in the Korean War.

Print Friendly

Europe loathes having to choose between Tehran and Washington, and thus it will spare no efforts to avoid the choice. It might therefore opt for a middle road, trying to please both parties by persuading Trump to retain the accord and Iran to limit missile ballistic programs and regional activities.

Print Friendly

Key members of Trump’s cabinet should recognize the realism behind encouraging a Saudi- and Iranian-backed regional security agreement because the success of such an agreement would not only serve long-term U.S. interests, it could also have a positive impact on numerous conflicts in the Middle East.

Print Friendly

Given that Israel failed to defeat Hezbollah in its war in Lebanon in 2006, it’s difficult to imagine Israel succeeding in a war against both Hezbollah and its newfound regional network of Shiite allies. And at the same time not only is Hezbollah’s missile arsenal a lot larger and more dangerous than it was in 2006, but it has also gained vast experience alongside its allies in offensive operations against IS and similar groups.

Print Friendly

Donald Trump should never be excused of responsibility for tearing down the respect for truth, but a foundation for his flagrant falsifying is the fact that many people would rather be entertained, no matter how false is the source of their entertainment, than to confront truth that is boring or unsatisfying or that requires effort to understand.

Print Friendly

It would be a welcome change in twenty-first-century America if the reckless decision to throw yet more unbelievable sums of money at a Pentagon already vastly overfunded sparked a serious discussion about America’s hyper-militarized foreign policy.

Print Friendly

President Trump and his advisers ought to ask themselves whether it is in the U.S. interest to run the risk of Iranian withdrawal from the nuclear agreement. Seen from the other side of the Atlantic, running that risk looks dumb.