Right Web

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

Iraqi Raid of Iranian Dissident Enclave May Signal Tilt Toward Iran

A neocon think tank blames President Obama for an Iraqi raid on an enclave of Iranian dissidents that killed several members of a cultish opposition group.

(Inter Press Service)

A raid by Iraqi security forces on a camp of Iranian dissidents is widely seen as a sign that as the U.S. occupation winds down, Iraqi authorities are establishing their independence —and tilting instead towards Iran.

There are unconfirmed reports of injuries and abuses coming from Camp Ashraf, the enclave populated by members of the cultish Mujahadeen-e Khalq (MEK), also known as the People's Mujahadeen of Iran, an Iranian opposition group the United States has considered terrorist since 1997.

The MEK said that security forces killed 12. After initially denying any deaths, on July 30 the Iraqi government confirmed seven deaths , according to the Reuters news agency. Hundreds are believed injured.

That same day, the U.S. State Department confirmed that Iraqi forces had restated a pledge to treat MEK members "humanely," and that U.S. forces had been allowed into the camp to administer medical help to those injured in the raid.

The MEK has enjoyed limited support from U.S. proponents of regime change in Iran —mostly a small cadre of neoconservatives. It was a former MEK spokesperson who first made public the Iranian nuclear facility at Natanz in 2003.

However, the group is extremely unpopular in the Islamic Republic because it fought with Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein in the 1980s during the bloody Iran-Iraq war.

The raid is seen as something of an embarrassment to the Obama administration, which had opposed action against the camp. The attack occurred while U.S. Defen se Secretary Robert Gates was visiting Iraq, though he had no advance knowledge of the large operation.

The top U.S. military officer in Iraq, Gen eral Ray Odierno, told reporters on July 28 that he had no advance knowledge of the attack.

A uthority for the camp ultimately belongs to Iraq.

"Although the U.S. government remains engaged and concerned about this issue, it is a matter now for the government of Iraq to resolve in accordance with its laws," Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on July 29, urging "restraint on both sides."

Amid reports that the Iraqi government intends to close the camp, U.S. officials say they’ve received assurances that MEK members will not be deported to Iran because they would likely face mistreatment there.

The human rights group Amnesty International called on the Iraqi government to look into allegations of excessive force, release the whereabouts of 50 detainees who are apparently missing , and "ensure that they are protected from torture or other ill-treatment, as well as from forcible return to Iran."

The clashes were set off by an Iraqi request to allow national police into the camp. After the MEK rebuffed the demand, Iraq entered the unarmed camp by force. Videos shot by MEK members circulated online showed people being sprayed with hoses and beaten by soldiers with batons.

When the U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003, the MEK was disarmed. The 3,400-member group reportedly possessed more than 2,000 tanks, and other artillery and large weapons.

After being disarmed, the group was protected by the U.S. under the Geneva Conventions. However, the camp came under the Iraqi government's authority as part of the U.S.-Iraqi Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) approved late last year.

With the U.S. presence in Iraq winding down—exactly one month ago, U.S. forces withdrew from Iraqi cities and security was handed to the Iraqi government as part of the SOFA —Iraq has been acting boldly to bolster its sovereign credentials.

The raid is also widely seen as a part of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's balancing act between his U.S. allies and Iran, a fellow Shia Muslim regional power seeking to expand its influence. Iran housed Maliki's party in exile and has continued to support it since it returned to Iraq after U.S.-led forces toppled Saddam Hussein.

On Jul y 10, five Iranians detained by the U.S. military in Iraq for over two years were suddenly released. The move was seen as a bow to pressure from Iraqi politicians who are seeking closer ties with Iran.

Iran has long sought the expulsion of the MEK from Iraq, where Camp Ashraf lies about 100 kilometers from the Iranian border and 96 kilometers from Baghdad.

Though Iraqi authorities denied on July 29 that they had raided the camp at Iran's behest, Iranian parliamentary Ali Larijani lauded the move.

According to news reports, Larijani said, "Although this measure was taken late by Iraq, it is admirable that they have decided to clear Iraq of terrorists."

Maryam Rajavi, the Paris-based leader of the Iranian opposition group the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), said that the Iraqi government is doing the bidding of Iranian Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The NCRI is an umbrella group whose most significant member is the MEK, for which it is believed to be a front.

On her website, Rajavi called the raid "a war crime, a crime against humanity, and a futile attempt by Khamenei to compensate for his defeat in the face of the nationwide uprising" —referring the recent unrest in Iran over the disputed reelection of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

When Iranian authorities cracked down on protesters, the MEK was one of the foreign-based groups they accused of fomenting demonstrations. Iranian authorities refer to the MEK by the Farsi word for "hypocrites," as Larijani did.

Some U.S. neoconservatives and their allies, who have long advocated regime change in Iran, think that despite the group's unpopularity in Iran, it would make an ideal vehicle for creating a viable exiled opposition.

One longtime supporter of the MEK, Raymond Tanter, a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and a Georgetown University professor, formed the Iran Policy Committee (IPC) in 2005 with the aim of building support for Iranian dissidents.

On July 29, the IPC released a statement condemning the attacks, and suggesting  that responsibility for them lies with the Obama administration.

"After all the American blood spilled and U.S. treasure spent on the transformation of Iraq into a moderate American ally in the Middle East," Tanter said in the release, "it would be the height of irony if the Obama administration remained silent in face of the humanitarian tragedy that is unfolding in Iraq with the assault of Iraqi Security Forces on unarmed Iranian dissidents."

According to retired General Thomas McInerney, chair of IPC’s advisory council,  though the U.S. was not in control of the camp at the time of the raid, " those who transferred responsibility may be subject to being prosecuted for committing war crimes."

"The Obama administration may be ultimately prosecutable for dereliction of its responsibility to make sure the Iraqi Security Forces treat those formerly under U.S. protection in a humane fashion," McInerny said. "As the Iraqis attack Iranian dissidents, it opens the door to prosecutable offenses on the part of the Obama administration."

In 2005, Tanter suggested using nuclear "bunker-buster" bombs against Iran's underground facilities, noting that while the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) bans the use of such weapons against non-nuclear states, "such a prohibition might not apply as much to Israel." Israel is not a signatory to the NPT.

Ali Gharib writes for the Inter Press Service and PRA’s Right Web (http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org).

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Lindsey Graham (R-SC) is one of the Senate’s more vocal hawks, and one of the prime vacillators among Republicans between objecting to and supporting Donald Trump.


Ron Dermer is the Israeli ambassador to the United States and has deep connections to the Republican Party and the neoconservative movement.


The Washington-based American Enterprise Institute is a rightist think tank with a broad mandate covering a range of foreign and domestic policy issues that is known for its strong connections to neoconservatism and overseas debacles like the Iraq War.


Max Boot, neoconservative military historian at the Council on Foreign Relations, on Trump and Russia: “At every turn Trump is undercutting the ‘get tough on Russia’ message because he just can’t help himself, he just loves Putin too much.”


Since taking office Donald Trump has revealed an erratic and extremely hawkish approach to U.S. foreign affairs, which has been marked by controversial actions like dropping out of the Iran nuclear agreement that have raised tensions across much of the world and threatened relations with key allies.


Mike Huckabee, a former governor of Arkansas and an evangelical pastor, is a far-right pundit known for his hawkish policies and opposition to an Israeli peace deal with the Palestinians.


Nikki Haley, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, is known for her lock-step support for Israel and considered by some to be a future presidential candidate.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

The Trumpian new regional order in the Middle East is predicated on strongman rule, disregard for human rights, Sunni primacy over Iran and other Shia centers of power, continued military support for pro-American warring parties regardless of the unlawfulness of such wars, and Israeli hegemony.


A comparison of U.S. nuclear diplomacy with Iran and the current version with North Korea puts the former in a good light and makes the latter look disappointing. Those with an interest in curbing the dangers of proliferating nuclear weapons should hope that the North Korea picture will improve with time. But whether it does or not, the process has put into perspective how badly mistaken was the Trump administration’s trashing of the Iran nuclear agreement.


Numerous high profile Trump administration officials maintain close ties with anti-Muslim conspiracy theorists. In today’s America, disparaging Islam is acceptable in ways that disparaging other religions is not. Given the continuing well-funded campaigns by the Islamophobes and continuing support from their enablers in the Trump administration, starting with the president himself, it seems unlikely that this trend will be reversed any time soon.


The Trump administration’s nuclear proliferation policy is now in meltdown, one which no threat of “steely resolve”—in Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s words—will easily contain. It is hemorrhaging in part because the administration has yet to forge a strategy that consistently and credibly signals a feasible bottom line that includes living with—rather than destroying—regimes it despises or fears. Political leaders on both sides of the aisle must call for a new model that has some reasonable hope of restraining America’s foes and bringing security to its Middle East allies.


Congressional midterm elections are just months away and another presidential election already looms. Who will be the political leader with the courage and presence of mind to declare: “Enough! Stop this madness!” Man or woman, straight or gay, black, brown, or white, that person will deserve the nation’s gratitude and the support of the electorate. Until that occurs, however, the American penchant for war will stretch on toward infinity.


To bolster the president’s arguments for cutting back immigration, the administration recently released a fear-mongering report about future terrorist threats. Among the potential threats: a Sudanese national who, in 2016, “pleaded guilty to attempting to provide material support to ISIS”; an Uzbek who “posted a threat on an Uzbek-language website to kill President Obama in an act of martyrdom on behalf of ISIS”; a Syrian who, in a plea agreement, “admitted that he knew a member of ISIS and that while in Syria he participated in a battle against the Syrian regime, including shooting at others, in coordination with Al Nusrah,” an al-Qaeda offshoot.


The recent appointment of purveyors of anti-Muslim rhetoric to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom exposes the cynical approach Republicans have taken in promoting religious freedom.


RightWeb
share