Mediaboss Marketing

The Mosul offensive has come to an end. The Islamic State has been militarily defeated and its remnants destroyed within the city.

This is a victory for the state of Iraq. A new nation, remade after the evil of Ba'athism was removed from power, it has faced down a grave threat, and given much in a struggle against an existential enemy of the free world.

But this victory has been marred and will continue to be diminished by worrying reports reaching outsiders from Mosul.

Journalists are beginning to pick up on troubling stories, stories amplified by social media of sectarian crimes being committed by victorious Iraqi forces after recapturing the last stretches of Mosul from ISIS.

This is an entirely negative development both in purely moral, humanitarian terms, and also tactically.

A thinking being cannot but be repelled by footage purporting to show Iraqi forces throwing people off cliffs, or executing people in the street, without trial or deliberation.

Whether these videos are exactly as they seem is almost immaterial. In this case, perception is all that matters. Though some in the West gloat at these pictures, taking it as read that all who suffer in them are ISIS and therefore deserving, this outcome is a tragedy for Iraq.

The international coalition planned the Mosul offensive cleverly and orchestrated it deliberately. It was not meant to turn out like this.

The whole point of taking Mosul using Iraqi state forces alone, rather than ethnic or religiously sectarian militias, was to avoid population-cleansing afterwards. The ambition was to build an image of unity.

The crimes of Iranian-supported and -organised Shiite militias are legendary, not least because the horror of these stories grow and mutate in the imagination. Practical examples abound: worried Sunnis can point to the desecration of corpses by men such as Abu Azrael, a celebrated Shiite jihadist and militiaman.

They can look to what happened in Ramadi, where much of the city was destroyed by sectarian militias, and see, fearfully, a reflection of a possible future.

The real tragedy of all this is that the recapture of Mosul is or should be an unambiguous triumph for Iraq. It is a new nation and has rebounded from defeat in 2014. In retaking Mosul, its soldiers have paid a heavy price for an offensive the whole world was rooting for.

Iraq has improved its tactics. It has managed to minimize overt Iranian influence on the latter stages of this offensive. In doing so, Iraqi forces bore the brunt of the fighting and some elite units, such as the Special Operations Forces (popularly known as the Golden Division), have taken notably high casualties.

But all of this risks being sabotaged by trigger-happy soldiers taking revenge on suspected ISIS remnants in Mosul. Many of those killed cannot be ISIS; they were instead trapped in the areas where militants fought to their last.

Those civilians are just as much victims of ISIS as any other inhabitants of Mosul, but their presence in is taken for complicity. This in an offensive which has featured conclusive evidence of Islamic State fighters using civilians as human shields.

Some of the reports have been truly awful; and the videos purporting to show torture and executions are already floating around on social media.

Such indiscriminate reprisals are sure to fuel Sunni fears and possibly lay the groundwork for long-term problems.

If an ISIS-like organisation either survives this current conflict or becomes a standard to which disaffected Sunnis to flock, the Iraqi state and its international allies will have failed.

Mosul was a battlefront and a warzone. Its buildings and streets have taken a battering, as has its population. They now need help rebuilding, and Iraqi authorities must receive assistance, moral and financial, strategic and tactical, to begin doing so.

But the new Iraq's military triumph in Mosul is already being undermined, both internally, by dissolute elements in its armed forces, and externally, by those who have decided that defeating ISIS in Mosul is not a victory worth the name.

This cannot be allowed to continue. Iraq's victory is being undermined and traduced, and this is a real worry for anyone who cares about future of the country and its people.

James Snell is a British journalist who has written for numerous international publications. He can be found on Twitter at @James_P_Snell.

Thinking of submitting an op-ed to the Washington Examiner? Be sure to read our guidelines on submissions.

More:
Iraq's great victory in Mosul is being undermined - Washington Examiner

A teenage German girl who ran away after converting to Islam and was found by Iraqi troops in Mosul says she wants to go home, a German newspaper and broadcaster reported Monday.

"I just want to go back home to my family," 16-year-old Linda Wenzel said. "I want to get away from the war, away from all the weapons, away from the noise."

German daily Sueddeutsche Zeitung and public broadcaster ARD said their reporter interviewed the girl in Baghdad after she was found earlier this month as Iraqi forces liberated the northern city of Mosul from the Islamic State group. She could theoretically face the death penalty in Iraq for membership in IS, according to the country's counter-terrorism law.

Wenzel ran away from her home in the small eastern German town of Pulsnitz last summer, shortly after converting to Islam, according to German security officials. She had been in touch with IS members online and was married to one of the extremist group's fighters after arriving in the group's territory.

Her husband died shortly after the marriage, the German media reported.

The girl said she had been hiding in a basement in Mosul when Iraqi soldiers captured her. She said she is "doing fine" despite a bullet wound in her left leg that she said "is from a helicopter attack."

She is currently in a military hospital ward in Baghdad, according to the report.

It's not clear if Wenzel can return to Germany or if she will be tried as an IS member. However, even if she is sentenced to death in Iraq, she would not be executed before the age of 22.

A spokeswoman for the German Foreign Office, Maria Adebahr, said German Embassy staff visited Wenzel and another German woman on Thursday. While Germany and Iraq didn't have any official extradition agreements, the German government was looking into other ways of cooperation regarding the two German women, Adebahr said.

Photos of a disheveled young woman in the presence of Iraqi soldiers went viral online earlier this month, but there were initially contradicting reports about the girl's identity.

The soldiers initially mistook her for a Yazidi woman, but the teenager told them: "I'm not Yazidi, I'm German."

Wenzel was one of 26 foreigners arrested in Mosul this month, Iraqi officials have said.

The Iraqis found three other women from Germany, with roots in Morocco, Algeria and Chechnya. Iraqi officials said the German-Moroccan woman has a child and both were arrested in Mosul about 10 days ago.

The Chechen-German woman was identified as Fatima by Sueddeutsche Zeitung and ARD. She is sharing a room with Wenzel and has an arm injury, they reported, adding that the woman had told them that her two children were missing after a recent air raid in Mosul.

German paper Bild reported Monday that Linda's father, whose name was only given as Reiner W., learned of his missing daughter's whereabouts on the radio as he was working on the construction of a German highway.

"I had a breakdown where I heard that Linda is alive," Bild quoted the divorced father as saying. "I so much wish that my Linda will come home healthy again. I will always be there for her."

Original post:
Report: German runaway found in Iraq wants to go home - ABC News

Iran and Iraq have pledged to join forces against militant fighters and ideology in the region by boosting bilateral defense ties, a move that could present a challenge to U.S. foreign policy goals.

Iranian Defense Minister Hossein Dehghan and Iraqi Defense MinisterIrfan al-Hiyali met Sunday in Tehran to sign a military agreement aimed at improving joint efforts to curb the influence of jihadissuch as the Islamic State militant group. ISIS has conducted deadly attacks in both countries and is still being fought by Iraq with support from Iran and the U.S., but the U.S. has become increasingly concerned about Iran's growing foothold in Iraq. Despite the volatile history of the twomajority Shiite-Muslim neighbors and theirdiffering views on Washington, the new deal will reportedly seeIran and Iraq's armed forces work together on a number of strategic levels.

Related: U.S. military must leave Iran's borders and stop calling us terrorists, Revolutionary Guards say

Daily Emails and Alerts - Get the best of Newsweek delivered to your inbox

"Extending cooperation and exchanging experiences in fighting terrorism and extremism, border security, and educational, logistical, technical and military support are among the provisions of this memorandum," Reuters quoted Iran's state-run Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA) as reporting.

Two Iraqis take a selfie while stepping on a U.S. flag during a parade marking Al-Quds (Jerusalem) International Day organized by the Popular Mobilization Forces in the southern Iraqi city of Basra, June 23. The Popular Mobilization Forces are the collective label for a number of majority-Shiite Muslim, Iran-backed militias battling the Islamic State militant group (ISIS) alongside U.S.-backed forces in Iraq. Haidar Mohammed Ali/AFP/Getty Images

While the U.S. has yet to offer an official response, Iran's Foreign Ministry reportedly said the following day that Iran's international relations were no one else's business. Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Bahram Qasemi confirmed Monday that the military agreement had been signed and maintained that no third country should be involved in Iran and Iraq's relationship, IRNA reported.

Iran and Iraq fought a bitter war in the 1980s, in which the U.S. publicly backed Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, a Sunni Muslim Baathist, against the new Islamic revolutionary government of Shiite Muslim cleric Ayatollah Ruhollah Musava Khomeini. Privately, the U.S. backed both sides to attain funds to battle leftists in LatinAmerica. After the U.S. ultimately toppled Hussein in 2003, Iran quickly began to build relations with the newly installed Shiite Muslim-led government of Iraq and has contributed the services of its elite Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corp. toward battling ISIS after the militant grouptook over nearly half of Iraq in 2014.

The U.S. has also sent troops and has lent extensive resources to assist the Iraqi military and Iraqi Kurdish forces, both of which have fought alongside Iran-backed, majority-Shiite Muslim militias, known as the Popular Mobilization Forces. The U.S. and Iran accuse each other of attempting to destabilize the region and of funding foreign groups classed as terrorist organizations in order to advance their own respective interests. Relations between the U.S. and Iran have become particularly tense since the election of President Donald Trump, who has pledged increased support for Iraq, but has taken a hard-line stance against Iran by increasing economic sanctions and suggesting a renegotiation of a 2015 nuclear treaty signed between the U.S., Iran and several other nations.

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Iraqi President Saddam Hussein shake hands December 20, 1983, in Baghdad amid a bloody war between Iran and Iraq that killed hundreds of thousands on both sides. The U.S. publicly supported Hussein against a hostile Iranian revolutionary government but provided arms to Iran in order to fund anti-Communist fighters in Nicaragua and facilitate the release of U.S. prisoners in Lebanon. Getty Images

As ISIS loses the last of its ground in Iraq, Iran has taken the opportunity to court its neighbor. In addition to Sunday's defense agreement, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Hossein Jaberi-Ansari and Iraqi Parliament Speaker Salim al-Jabouri also met Sunday in Baghdad, where the secondIran-Iraq Joint Political Committee is due to be held, according to IRNAand Press TV, an affiliate of the semi-official Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting agency.

Iran and the U.S. have also downplayed each other's role in defeating ISIS in its former stronghold of Mosul, Iraq's second city and by far the largest population center the jihadishave ever controlled. The U.S. and Iran are also conducting parallel campaigns against ISIS in neighboring Syria, where their partnered factions have clashed at times.

Read more:
Iran and Iraq Military Unite Against 'Terrorism,' Creating Potential Problems for US - Newsweek

Miami Herald

Fate of 39 Indians missing in Iraq for 3 years still unknown Miami Herald Iraq's foreign minister said Monday he does not know whether 39 Indian workers who were abducted by militants in Iraq three years ago are dead or alive. Foreign Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari met with his Indian counterpart, Sushma Swaraj, and other ... No substantial evidence on 39 missing Indians, says IraqEconomic Times Iraq not sure of fate of 39 IndiansThe Hindu On Missing Indians, Congress Preps Privilege Notice Against Sushma SwarajNDTV Firstpost all 90 news articles »

See original here:
Fate of 39 Indians missing in Iraq for 3 years still unknown - Miami Herald

This year has been a pretty interesting ride for oil. Right now, prices appear to be trading near the low-end of a specific range of about $45 to $55 per barrel amidst fears of not only higher US output but also because the market fears that OPEC may be backtracking on its production goals. In what follows, I want to dig into some data that shows it's not OPEC that has been the problem but, rather, one of its members. No, I'm not talking about Libya or Nigeria here but am talking about, instead, a larger player in the group than both of these combined.

Last year, OPEC decided, after a two-year long war on US shale, to finally cut production to the tune of around 1.2 million barrels per day. They also negotiated cuts with some non-OPEC nations, namely Russia, to slash nearly 0.6 million barrels of extra oil from the market as well. Prices surged initially and everybody, myself included, thought the road higher would be easier than it ended up being. There was also a concern (not from myself but from others) that OPEC wouldn't honor their pledge. That said, on the whole, OPEC has defied those expectations and has cut.

*Created by Author

If you look at the graph above, for instance, you can see the goal OPEC set for itself last year in terms of production. This data excludes output from Libya and Nigeria since both of those nations were exempt from cuts. It also excludes Equatorial Guinea since it's a new addition to the group and had no specific limit set. In the graph, you can also see how OPEC's production has looked, using the group's own estimates, compared to their goal. In the next graph below, you can see the difference between these two figures.

*Created by Author

Overall, OPEC's work, less what has been done by Libya and Nigeria, has been phenomenal. By my math, if you look at the output, production has been mostly lower each month. Sure, as you can see in the graph below, June was bad with 1.56 million barrels produced in excess of what was planned, but total output since the start of this year has been 5.41 million barrels below what OPEC said they would pump out. This shows commitment but, most importantly, it should help to reduce the global oil glut faster.

*Created by Author

While OPEC, on the whole, has done well, the same cannot be said of Iraq. If you look at the graph below, for instance, you can see the nation's average daily output, reported each month, compared to what the nation promised to produce last year. Not one single month has the nation reported at or below its target. It's best month was April, when production averaged just 30 thousand barrels per day above the goal but, since then, output has moved higher. In June, production was 0.15 million barrels per day higher than the country promised last year.

*Created by Author

In the next graph, as shown below, you can see that this isn't even the worst of it. You see, while OPEC reports its own estimates of output for each of its member nations, some nations provide their own estimates of what they produced. As you can see, Iraq isn't even trying to hide the fact that they are producing above what was agreed upon. In fact, they may even be proud of it since the country's own estimates put oil production quite a bit higher than OPEC's own estimates. Generally speaking, I am inclined to believe data like this over estimates, but I don't know what to make of this situation.

*Created by Author

If we assume that OPEC's estimates for Iraq are correct, we can generate a graph like the one below. In it, you can see that oil production from the group as a whole would have been consistently below the target if Iraq had behaved accordingly. The best month would have been a draw from the group totaling 6.42 million barrels, while aggregate production over the first six months of this year would have been 21.53 million barrels lower than under perfect adherence to their plan.

*Created by Author

Besides Saudi Arabia, which has been doing most of the heavy-lifting this year, another interesting nation is Iran. Last year, one common fear I heard from oil bears was that the country would never cooperate on a cut with the rest of OPEC, largely due to its animosity toward Saudi Arabia and other Sunni-majority nations. Certainly, from a political perspective, this makes sense but, as I have always believed, politics only has a short-term sway while economics will always drive things in the long run.

*Created by Author

Sure enough, as you can see in the graph above, Iran has done really well in terms of adhering to its target of 3.797 million barrels per day. Five of the past six months have seen production average below that (February was the exception). On the oil front, I believe that Iran is the most likely to destroy the existing oil deal because of political concerns but, even so, the nation has managed to behave because it knows that doing so, especially when Saudi Arabia has cut beyond expectations, is in its own best interests. This means the fear that Iran may exit the deal at any point is probably vastly overstated.

Based on the data provided, it seems to me that OPEC, as a whole, has been doing its job. Sure, it's bad to see Libya and Nigeria both increase output, but that was largely expected. What's not expected, however, is to see Saudi Arabia and other nations do all the heavy-lifting to offset Iraq's shortcomings. While I am certainly still bullish on oil, I believe that OPEC needs to pressure Iraq to fulfill its end of the bargain because, not only will it help the market rebalance, but it might increase the sense of unity among the group. A continuation of the country not adhering to the group's agreement may otherwise unsettle things and pose a risk for oil bulls.

Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours.

I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

The rest is here:
Iraq: OPEC's Problem Child - Seeking Alpha