Mediaboss Marketing

Forward Operating Base (FOB) Hammer, typical of a semi-permanent base in Iraq.

TEL AVIV: Contrary to declarations made by President Donald Trump, the U.S isnot withdrawing forces from Iraq, but is building at least three semi-permanent new bases very close to the Iranian border in northern Iraq, Israeli sources tell Breaking Defense.

Tens of thousands of Iraqis marched in Baghdad on Friday calling for US forces to leave the country, but the protesters dispersed very quickly and were peaceful. And now Moktada al Sadr, the cleric who called for the protests, has withdrawn from the fray.

Israeli experts say that immediately after Trumps declaration the U.S became aware that executing the decision would leave policymakers and the military with greatly reduced influence in a region that has seen rapid and extensive Russian penetration into the region.

After the assassination of Qassem Soleimani, commander of Irans Quds Force, the Iraqi government protested what it described as a violation of international law and its parliament passed a non-binding resolution calling for the withdrawal of US troops. Since, then the U.S. military has not withdrawn and indications are that the US presence will even become greater, exports here say.

The Iranian response to Soleimanis killing resulted in the launch of ballistic missiles and cruise missiles at American bases in Iraq.The American base in Iraqi Kurdistan was also hit near the city of Erbil.

The US plans to establish one military base near the city of Sulimania, another large military base near the city of Halabja, which is only 14 km from the Iranian border, while the third military base is planning to set up south of the province of Erbil Erbil.

Professor Uzi Rabi, director of the Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies, told Breaking Defense that the U.S has realized that withdrawing from Iraq will dramatically hurt the sanctions on Iran. They have realized that in spite of the presidents declaration, they have to keep a real presence and they are doing it by building bases in the Kurdish areas. This was expected by anyone who really understand the powers operating in this strategic region, the Israeli expert said.

Experts say that the assassination of the Quds force commander has made it more difficult for Iran to supply advanced missiles to the Houti rebels in Yemen.

The sources added that Soleimani was smuggling defense systems to Yemeni rebels loyal to the Iranian regime.

The operation was reportedly planned to be carried out by Unit 190 in the Revolutionary Guards, in charge of smuggling weapons to Iranian militia in the Middle East, with Soleimani in personal command.

The Israeli sources said the Iranian effort to arm its proxies in Iraq and Yemen forces the U.S to keep a military presence in the region.

Original post:
US Builds Several New Bases In Iraq Near Iran - Breaking Defense

President Trumps strategy to confront Iran is easy to understand: impose maximum pressure to gain maximum leverage ahead of negotiations to dismantle its nuclear program and address its malign activities all while avoiding a military entanglement or pursuing a policy of regime change.

Irans leaders, for their part, recognize that Mr. Trumps strategy has already sent their economy into a tailspin and could bring down their regime if sanctions are not soon lifted. The recent regime-perpetrated murder of about 1,500 Iranian protesters demonstrating against the governments austerity policy revealed a destabilized Islamic Republic increasingly afraid of its repressed citizens.

The Iranian regime doesnt need to trust America or Mr. Trump to strike a deal; it just needs to act as a rational actor to avoid collapse. Unlike the 2015 Iran deal, which was a fragile nonbinding political agreement subject to the ebb and flow of American politics, Trump could offer to submit a binding treaty to the Senate for ratification.

Tehrans conventional options are limited because it cannot win a direct military confrontation with the United States. So instead the regime pursues headline-grabbing provocations to foment political debate in open democracies in Europe and the United States while avoiding direct military retaliation. The list of Iranian provocations over the past year includes the downing of an American drone, mine attacks on ships in the Strait of Hormuz and a cruise missile strike on Saudi oil facilities. On the nuclear front, Irans slow but steady effort to shrink its breakout timeline raises alarm bells in Western capitals without provoking an American or Israeli military strike on its nuclear facilities.

Each of these escalation points appear designed to bait Mr. Trump into reinforcing the false narrative that there are only two choices when it comes to Iran: war, or a return to the flawed 2015 nuclear deal. If Iran could make war seem imminent, so the thought goes, it might indirectly force Mr. Trump into relieving sanctions (assuring the regimes survival), perhaps even without entering direct negotiations.

To his credit, President Trump recognized those traps for what they were and exercised strategic patience. Indeed, Mr. Trump could have responded to each provocation with a proportional military response. After a day of flag waving, the national mood might well have shifted against Mr. Trump, forcing him to offer sanctions relief prematurely without achieving any long-term national security objectives.

This may indeed have been what Qassim Suleimani thought he would achieve following the killing of an American contractor and an attack on the United States embassy in Iraq. Instead, Mr. Trump surprised Iran by striking its top terror strategist, and then surprised it once again by responding to Irans ballistic missile retaliation with a return to strategic patience. Mr. Trump emerges from the past few weeks in a stronger position. The maximum pressure campaign remains fully intact with political space to increase the sanctions pressure even further. Iran faces a backlash at home and abroad after its downing of a Ukrainian passenger jet. Mr. Trumps critics who warned that his policies would spark a third world war now seem to have gotten ahead of themselves.

Many wrongly believe the United States has already reached full maximum pressure on Iran. In truth, several critical pressure points remain untapped. The administration this month rolled out fresh sanctions targeting Irans construction, mining and manufacturing sectors, along with the first step in a crackdown on violators of American sanctions on Iranian metals and petrochemicals. Sanctions targeting Iranian state shipping lines are set to take effect in June and could be expedited for more immediate impact.

Another potential target: Irans financial sector in its entirety. In 2018, Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, and Representative Mike Gallagher of Wisconsin, proposed legislation imposing sanctions on Irans financial sector, which the United States recently determined to be a primary jurisdiction of money-laundering concern. The effect could be destabilizing, immediately cutting off all non-sanctioned banks inside Iran from international commerce, forcing their disconnection from the global financial messaging system known as SWIFT and rendering all remaining foreign exchange reserves held outside Iran inaccessible for any purpose.

Additional steps could be taken to deprive Iran of the strategic benefits still enjoyed under the nuclear deal and related United Nations Security Council resolution particularly, the scheduled lifting of key restrictions on its nuclear program, missile development and conventional arms transfers. Irans recent expansion of uranium enrichment coupled with its consistently violent behavior provides the United States and Europe with ample pretext to trigger the deals snapback clause, which would restore prior Security Council resolutions on Iran and eliminate a key disincentive to an Iranian decision to negotiate. The United Kingdom, France and Germany the Iran deals European contingent recently initiated the process to do just that.

To be sure, its possible that Irans supreme leader will never authorize direct negotiations with the United States, even in the face of his regimes imminent economic collapse and international political isolation. But if Mr. Trump can succeed in achieving true maximum pressure and restoring international restrictions on Iran, a phone call from Tehran agreeing to negotiate without preconditions could likely follow.

Richard Goldberg (@rich_goldberg), a senior adviser at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, most recently served as the National Security Councils director for countering Iranian weapons of mass destruction.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. Wed like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And heres our email: letters@nytimes.com.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.

Read more:
Trump Has an Iran Strategy. This Is It. - The New York Times

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) The chief of Irans powerful Revolutionary Guard warned Monday that it will retaliate against American and Israeli commanders if the US continues to threaten top Iranian generals.

I warn them to withdraw from this field, Gen. Hossein Salami told state television, adding if they do not, they will definitely regret it.

The US killed Revolutionary Guard Gen. Qassem Soleimani, who headed the expeditionary Quds Force, in a drone strike outside of Baghdads airport in Iraq on January 3. Five days later, Iran retaliated by launching ballistic missiles at two bases in Iraq housing American troops, causing injuries but no fatalities among soldiers there.

Get The Times of Israel's Daily Edition by email and never miss our top storiesFree Sign Up

Soleimani was responsible for Iranian proxy forces across the Mideast. The US alleged that he was plotting attacks on American targets.

Soleimanis replacement, Brig. Gen. Esmail Ghaani, has said he would carry on with his predecessors work.

This undated photo released by the official website of the office of the Iranian supreme leader shows Maj. Gen. Esmail Ghaani. (Office of the Iranian Supreme Leader via AP)

Salamis comments come in response to remarks from the US special representative for Iran, Brian Hook, made to a Saudi-owned pan-Arab newspaper at the Davos economic forum last week.

Asked about Ghaanis pledge, Hook was quoted by the daily Asharq Awsat daily newspaper as saying if he follows a similar path of killing Americans, he will meet the same fate.

He said any any attacks against American personnel or interests in the region will be met with a decisive response.

I think the regime now understands that they cannot attack America at will, and expect to get away with it.

Hook was quoted as saying. So we will hold the regime and its proxies accountable for any attacks on Americans, or on American interests in the region.

Brian Hook, US Special Representative for Iran and Senior Policy Advisor to the Secretary of State, takes questions from the media at the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles, January 7, 2020. (Damian Dovarganes/AP)

Salami said both the US and Israel should know that if they threaten our commanders, none of their commanders will find safety.

He added that Irans reaction to continued threats would be completely different from the past but did not elaborate.

Later, the head of Irans judiciary, Ebrahim Raisi, vowed to bring Soleimanis killers to trial and punishment for this terrible crime.

Excerpt from:
Iranian general warns of retaliation against Israel if US threats continue - The Times of Israel

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) The chief of Iran's powerful Revolutionary Guard warned Monday that it will retaliate against American and Israeli commanders if the U.S. continues to threaten top Iranian generals.

I warn them to withdraw from this field, Gen. Hossein Salami told state television, adding if they do not, they will definitely regret it.

The U.S. killed Revolutionary Guard Gen. Qassem Soleimani, who headed the expeditionary Quds force, in a drone strike outside of Baghdad's airport in Iraq on Jan. 3. Five days later, Iran retaliated by launching ballistic missiles at two bases in Iraq housing American troops, causing injuries but no fatalities among soldiers there.

Soleimani was responsible for Iranian proxy forces across the Mideast. The U.S. alleged that he was plotting attacks on American targets.

Soleimani's replacement, Brig. Gen. Esmail Ghaani, has said he would carry with his predecessor's work.

Salami's comments come in response to remarks from the U.S. special representative for Iran, Brian Hook, made to an Saudi-owned pan-Arab newspaper at the Davos economic forum last week.

Asked about Ghaani's pledge, Hook was quoted by the daily Asharq Awsat daily newspaper as saying if he follows a similar path of killing Americans, he will meet the same fate.

He said any any attacks against American personnel or interests in the region will be met with a decisive response.

I think the regime now understands that they cannot attack America at will, and expect to get away with it, Hook was quoted as saying. So we will hold the regime and its proxies accountable for any attacks on Americans, or on American interests in the region.

Salami said both the U.S. and Israel should know that if they threaten our commanders, none of their commanders will find a safe place to live.

He added that Iran's reaction to continued threats would be completely different from the past but did not elaborate.

Later, the head of Iran's judiciary, Ebrahim Raisi, vowed to bring Soleimani's killers to trial and punishment for this terrible crime.

Story continues

___

Associated Press writer David Rising in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, contributed to this story.

Read more:
Iranian general warns of retaliation if US threats continue - Yahoo News

The following is a contributed article by Benny Czarny, CEO and founder of cybersecurity firm OPSWAT.

President Trump's unexpected and controversial decision to kill Qassim Suleimani, an Iranian Major General in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, was met with immediate speculation about Iran's capacity to strike back. While opinions differed on the retaliatory timeframe and targets, almost all of the talking heads agreed that America's digital assets, especially those powering critical infrastructure, are at severely heightened risk of cyberattack in this post-Suleimani world.

Iran's cyber capabilities are relatively well-known and improved steadily in the latter part of the 2010s. The Center for Strategic and International Studiesexplains that "years of constant engagement with Israeli and Saudi Arabia have improved Iran's cyber capabilities, and experience with covert action gives Iran the ability to conceptualize how cyberattacks fit into the larger military picture."

A big part of the Iranian cybersecurity threat is its strategic prioritization of high risk, high reward critical infrastructure targets essential to the American way of life. In fact, a new report by Wired revealed that a hacking groupaffiliated with Iran and its proxies has been probing American electric utilities for the past year.

While security analysts don't believe that Magnallium, the identified hacking group backed by Iran, has the ability to break down the front door of a grid's control center, it's clear that the reconnaissance needed to eventually do so is underway, and was even before Suleimani's death.

If there's perhaps one mutually agreed upon benefit to come out of the Suleimani killing,it's the heightened dialogue on critical infrastructure cybersecurity. While U.S. power companies are much more secure now then they were a decade ago, vulnerabilities continue to be identified at the same time threats continue to increase in frequency and sophistication.

That's why as we begin this next decade, the energy industry must prioritize cybersecurity training for employees at every level of their organization and embrace a holistic Zero Trust approach that emphasizes prevention strategies over reactive detection methods.

As public and private enterprises look to new cybersecurity solutions to mitigate the risks, global cybersecurity spending is expected to grow to $133.8 billion by 2022,according to International Data Corporation. The White House's 2020 budget alone includes more than$17.4 billion for cybersecurity-related activities, a 5% increase over 2019.

However, we'll need to do more than throw money at the issue.

The problem lies in the fact the energy sector has become an increasingly attractive target both for nation-states like Iran engaged in geopolitical campaigns as well as profit-motivated criminal syndicates. That's largely due to the fact that much of our nation's energy sector is built upon a tangle of legacy industrial control systems that were intentionally designed as closed, 'air-gapped' systems.

But perhaps the greatest vulnerability is the human element. While many energy companies are addressing remote device and network risks, basic security awareness and training often feels like it lags behind.

As we enter the next decade, executive leadership at energy organizations will need to take a hard look at their existing systems, their security practices, and most importantly, their attitudes towards how they approach cybersecurity.

And because threats can now come from anywhere, any piece of connected technology must be treated as potentially malicious. This is the essence of a "Zero Trust" prevention-first mentality one in which trust is never implied and the legitimacy of every file, every device, and every network connection is always questioned.

All employees be they executives, control engineers or accountants must develop a deeper appreciation that any interaction with technology can open a door to a potential cyberattack. It's imperative that CI organizations prioritize cybersecurity training for all employees, emphasizing that every person who interacts with technology also plays an important role in protecting mission critical infrastructure.

To truly prepare for the increasing sophistication and frequency of cyberattacks targeting energy infrastructure, the burden will rest squarely on the shoulders of executive leadership to take the lead in showing that all employees, regardless of their role or responsibility, are aware that any interaction with technology has the potential to unleash the next Stuxnet, or worse.

What comes from the Suleimani killing from both a cyber and physical perspective remains to be seen. But Iran and its proxies aren't the only cyber threats that America's energy sector will face in the decade to come.

To mitigate risk, energy stakeholders must begin to make the mindset shift from detection to prevention, for once an attack on energy is underway, it could be too late to respond.

View original post here:
The Iranian cybersecurity threat is a good reminder for the energy sector to embrace a prevention mindset - Utility Dive