Media Search:



A Shocked Iraq Reconsiders Its Relationship With the U.S. – The New York Times

The reality on the streets, where antigovernment protests have swelled, with calls for an end to Irans influence, was something else, though, as fear of what may come outweighed any jubilation over the killing of General Suleimani.

Faiq al-Shakhe, a member of Parliament, said the demonstrators showed, no signs of happiness or celebration. Instead, he said, they were worried about a violent response from Iran-aligned militias, who have already killed many protesters and may now, more than ever, see them as agents of the United States.

It was a wrong act from America because America should have coordinated with the Iraqi government, said Ameer Abbas, a protester, who shared the widespread view that the American attack was a violation of Iraqi sovereignty.

Another protester, Mustafa Nader, said, we are all against foreign interventions, whether from Iran, Saudi Arabia or the United States. We do not have a personal problem with Iran, but if America were to intervene at the same level as Iran, you will see as much objection as there has been against Iran, and maybe stronger.

Emma Sky, a former adviser to American forces in Iraq and a senior fellow at Yale, said the American-Iraqi relationship is going to be really damaged by the killing. I think there will be more calls for the U.S. to withdraw troops, she said.

She said Americans will be hard pressed to justify a continued presence in Iraq because of the perception that its objectives are not aimed at promoting a stable Iraq, but containing Iran.

The U.S. doesnt have a policy on Iraq, she said. It has a policy on Iran.

While Iraqs Parliament is sure to take up the issue of the American troop presence, few expect the government to actually expel the Americans. Many Iraqi leaders still view an American presence as vital to its security, and depend on American training of the Iraqi security forces and, for better or worse, as a counterweight to Iranian influence.

See original here:
A Shocked Iraq Reconsiders Its Relationship With the U.S. - The New York Times

Joe Biden Was Talking Up War With Iraq Years Before Invasion – The Intercept

Hussein, it turned out, did not have an active WMD program, but was hoping to keep Iran, his regimes longtime foe, guessing as to whether he did have one as a deterrent.

During questioning, Biden mocked Ritter as ol Scotty boy and suggested that his demands that the international community compel Iraq to cooperate with inspectors if met, would give Ritter the unilateral authority to start a war in Iraq. Biden argued that such decisions belonged to higher-level officials. I respectfully suggest they have a responsibility slightly above your pay grade, to decide whether or not to take the nation to war, Biden said. Thats a real tough decision. Thats why they get paid the big bucks. Thats why they get the limos and you dont. I mean this sincerely, Im not trying to be flip.

He ended by redeploying his unusual idiom in thanking Ritter. The reason why Im glad you did what you did: We should come to our milk. We should make a decision, Biden said.

Bidens earlier suggestion that taking Saddam down was the only way to guarantee an end to the WMD program left little doubt where Biden would later come down on the issue.

Bidens grilling of Ritter is important because it gives context to claims Biden later made: First, that when he voted in favor of the invasion of Iraq as a senator, he did not mean to vote for war, but hoped the resolution would empower inspectors to get back into Iraq and monitor the program. And second, that he never believed Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

On the first claim, Biden told NPR last year that former President George W. Bush looked me in the eye in the Oval Office. He said he needed the vote to be able to get inspectors into Iraq to determine whether or not Saddam Hussein was engaged in dealing with a nuclear program. He got them in and before you know it, we had shock and awe.

But according to Bidens own statements in 1998, he believed that Hussein could never be trusted to eliminate his program, no matter how many inspectors were admitted.

In October 2004, by which time it had become clear there were no WMDs, Biden told an audience at the Council on Foreign Relations, I never believed they had weapons of mass destruction.

In fact, as Biden had said in 1998, he believed not only that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, but no amount of inspections or diplomacy could guarantee their removal. That, he told Ritter, could only be done by guys like you in uniform to be back on foot in the desert taking this son of a taking Saddam down.

Bidens thought process puts critical hearings he held in 2002 as chair of the Foreign Relations Committee in sharper context. That summer, as the world was focused on the war in Afghanistan, from where the attacks of September 11, 2001, had been launched, Biden sought to begin a national dialogue on Iraq. During a series of high-profile hearings, he feigned neutrality, but his earlier questioning of Ritter leaves no doubt where he stood: Iraq had WMDs, and the only way to disarm Iraq with confidence was to depose Saddam Hussein. Biden, given his chairmanship, was a leading voice on foreign policy within the party. He had voted against the first Gulf War, waged by Bushs father, and wasnt considered a knee-jerk hawk. His support for the 2003 war made Democratic opposition ultimately untenable even as Ritter, in the run up to it, loudly made the case against war, arguing that the WMD claims were overhyped.

Biden had reason to disbelieve the WMD claims. In a classified hearing on September 24, 2002, at the urging of a staff member, Biden asked then-CIA Director George Tenet what evidence of WMDs the U.S. had technically collected.

None, Senator, Tenet said, according to an account in the book Hubris, by Michael Isikoff and David Corn. Biden, wondering if there was some highly classified evidence, asked Tenet, George, do you want me to clear the staff out of the room? Tenet told him no. Theres no reason to, Senator.

None, Senator that answer will ring in my ears as long as I live, the staffer later told the authors. Later in that same hearing, Biden heard from two government witnesses who rejected the aluminum tubes claim that had been circulating, and would later become a centerpiece of Secretary of State Colin Powells presentation to the United Nations.

Biden, to be sure, was not a full-throated advocate for the war on Bushs terms, and throughout the fall, worked with Republican Sens. Richard Lugar and Chuck Hagel to try to build support for a narrower authorization, that would only allow Bush to attack Iraq for the purpose of dismantling a WMD program. But the effort was undercut by House Democratic leaders, and particularly Rep. Dick Gephardt, D-Mo., who pushed ahead with Bushs broader resolution. I was angry, Biden later said, according to Hubris. I was frustrated. But I never second-guess another mans political judgment.

Biden was also aware of the difficulty of invading and occupying Iraq, unlike some of his Republican colleagues. In February 1998, the News Journal of Wilmington reported that Biden saw invasion as unlikely.

Though some Republicans have urged the military to remove Saddam from power entirely, Biden said there was little will for that in Congress. Such a move would require a bloody ground war, the use of 300,000 to 500,000 ground troops, and some kind of continuing presence in Iraq while a new government is installed, he said.

Yet during the summer 2002 hearings, Biden claimed that one thing is clear, these weapons must be dislodged from Saddam Hussein, or Saddam Hussein must be dislodged from power. Given that he was already on record believing that the weapons could never effectively be dislodged from Saddam Hussein, that left only one option: war. Biden voted for the Iraq war resolution on October 11, 2002, three weeks after hearing from Tenet in the classified session.

See original here:
Joe Biden Was Talking Up War With Iraq Years Before Invasion - The Intercept

Heres a timeline of the recent turmoil in Iraq – The Boston Globe

The US military carried out airstrikes on five sites in Iraq and Syria against the Iranian-backed Kataeb Hezbollah militia, calling it retaliation for last weeks killing of an American contractor in a rocket attack on an Iraqi military base that it blamed on the group.

At least 25 fighters from the Shiite militia were killed and dozens wounded. The targeted group, which is a separate force from the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah, operates under the umbrella of the state-sanctioned militias known collectively as the Popular Mobilization Forces, or PMF. Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the deputy commander of the PMF and a founder of Kataeb Hezbollah, was also killed in the strikes Friday that killed Soleimani in Baghdad.

The two were scheduled to meet and were leaving Soleimanis plane at the airport when Fridays attack occurred.

The Iranian-backed Iraqi militia vowed to retaliate for the US airstrikes, the largest targeting an Iraqi state-sanctioned militia in recent years.

A spokesman for Kataeb Hezbollah denied the group was behind last weeks rocket attacks, including the one that killed the American contractor, saying Washington is using them as a pretext to attack his group.

These forces must leave, he said of American troops in Iraq, calling Sundays attack a crime and a massacre.

The Iraqi government said it will reconsider its relationship with the US-led coalition the first time it has said it will do so since an agreement was struck to keep some US troops in the country. It called the attack a flagrant violation of its sovereignty.

Hundreds of Iraqi Shiite militiamen and their supporters broke into the American Embassy compound in Baghdad, smashing a main door and setting fire to a reception area.

The marchers, many of them in militia uniforms, shouted Death to America and Death to Israel outside the compound, hurling water and stones over its walls. The group set up a tent camp overnight in front of the embassy and sprayed graffiti on its walls.

Some commanders of militia factions loyal to Iran joined the protesters outside the embassy in a strikingly bold move. Among them was Qais al-Khizali, the head of one of the most powerful Iranian-backed Shiite militias in Iraq who is on a US terror list, and Hadi al-Amiri, the head of the PMF, the umbrella group for the Iran-backed militias.

President Trump blamed Iran for the breach of the embassy compound in Baghdad and called on Iraq to protect the embassy.

There were no reports of casualties. The State Department said all American personnel were safe and that there were no plans to evacuate the embassy. Following the storming of the compound, Defense Secretary Mark Esper ordered roughly 750 additional American troops to deploy to the region, with another 3,000 placed on standby.

The political influence of the PMF has risen in recent years, and their Shiite allies dominate the parliament and the government. That has made them the target of the anti-government protesters, who set up a sprawling protest camp in central Baghdad, and who for weeks have been trying to enter the Green Zone. Iraqi security forces have beaten them back with tear gas and live ammunition, killing hundreds.

The militiamen and their supporters, however, were able to quickly enter the Green Zone on Tuesday and mass in front of the embassy, with little if any resistance from authorities. Iraqi security forces made no effort to stop the protesters as they marched to the heavily fortified Green Zone after a funeral for those killed in the airstrikes.

The Iran-backed militiamen withdrew from the American Embassy compound after two days of clashes with American security forces.

US Marines had fired tear gas in response to stones thrown by protesters but no one was reported killed and the tent camp dispersed after the PMF called on its supporters to depart, suggesting their message had been received.

We rubbed Americas nose in the dirt," said Fadhil al-Gezzi, a militia supporter.

Embassy workers and diplomats were ultimately holed up for more than 24 hours during the situation at the embassy. Ambassador Matt Tueller, the American ambassador to Iraq, was traveling at the time of the attack but State Department officials told The Hill that he would return to the embassy amid the tensions.

General Qassem Soleimani, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, and six others were killed in the early-morning airstrike at Baghdad International Airport, Iraqi officials said.

A senior Iraqi security official said the airstrike, conducted by an American drone, took place on an access road near the cargo area of the airport after Soleimani left his plane to be greeted by al-Muhandis and others. The official said the plane had arrived from either Lebanon or Syria.

The supreme leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, warned that a harsh retaliation is waiting for the United States following the attack. The US Department of State warned American citizens to leave Iraq immediately and closed the embassy in Baghdad.

Material from the Associated Press was used in this report.

Peter Bailey-Wells can be reached at peter.bailey-wells@globe.com. Follow him on Twitter @pbaileywells.

Read the original post:
Heres a timeline of the recent turmoil in Iraq - The Boston Globe

Iran Is Testing U.S. Resolve in Iraq – National Review

So far, the Trump administration is keen on a show of force, to demonstrate that Tehran wont win this round.

Hundreds of U.S. paratroopers from the 82nd Airborne Division boarded C-17 Globemaster aircraft on January 1. They are part of the 750 sent to the Middle East after an Iran-backed militia fired rockets that killed a U.S. contractor and, in response, U.S. airstrikes killed two dozen militiamen. Then pro-Iranian protesters, guided by Iraqi politicians, attacked the U.S. embassy in Baghdad. This is President Donald Trumps Iraq moment. He said it wont be another Benghazi, where terrorists attacked a U.S. diplomatic compound and a CIA annex, killing U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, causing the U.S. to withdraw from the city.

The Trump administration is now at a crossroads in its Iran policy and in its wider Middle East strategy. Since walking away from the flawed Iran deal, the U.S. has been pushing maximum pressure sanctions against Iran. Iran has been testing American resolve, attacking oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman in May and June 2019, downing a sophisticated U.S. drone, sending a drone swarm to attack Saudi Arabia, and firing rockets at Israel. Iranian-backed groups have also carriedout eleven attackson bases in Iraq where U.S. forces are present. Trump had been reticent to retaliate,calling off strikesin June after the drone downing. But in mid December, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo warned of a decisive response if the rocket attacks continued. The U.S. also sanctioned Iranian-backed groups in Iraq, including Harakat Hezbollah al-Nujaba, and Qais Khazali, leader of Asaib Ahl al-Haq. The message was clear: If its forces are harmed, the U.S. will take action and will pressure Irans proxies in Iraq.

Kataib Hezbollah, led by Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, launched 32 rockets at the K-1 military base on December 27, killing a U.S. contractor and wounding four U.S. personnel. Muhandishas a long history ofattacking Americans, plotting attacks on the U.S. embassy in Kuwait in the 1980s. He has worked with Hezbollah in the past, and in the mid 2000s he opposed the U.S. in Iraq. U.S. airstrikesin December killedtwo dozen Kataib Hezbollah members, including officers of the unit in Syria and Iraq, in contrast to similar airstrikes Israel has carried out against pro-Iranian groups there. Israel prefers precision strikes that usually kill fewer people.Israel allegedlystruck Kataib Hezbollah in June 2018. For the U.S., the decision to strike was about sending a message that Irans proxies will pay for their actions.

On December 30, a senior State Department official said that the U.S. is serious about confronting Irans activities. Pompeo has said that all Iranian-commanded forces must leave Syria. He went to Iraq in May 2019 to warn of credible threatsagainst us by the Iranians and their proxies. Irans regime studies U.S. decision making and has been poking and prodding all year. It strikes at U.S. allies to see how Israel and Saudi Arabia will respond. Riyadh did not respond to the September attack on Abqaiq;Israel has carriedout more than1,000 airstrikeson 250 targets in Syria.

Iran also wants to show the U.S. that it can circumvent sanctions. Indias foreign minister visited Iran in December, and Iranianforeign minister Javad Zarifwent to Qatar, Oman, Russia, and China. Irans president recently went to Malaysia and Japan.Iran, Russia, andChina held a joint naval drill, and Iran is working on an economic port agreement with India in Irans Chabahar, port which is a lifeline for Afghanistan. Unsurprisingly, Iran has hosted the Taliban, in an effort to pressure theU.S. in Afghanistan.

What can the U.S. do next? Senator Lindsey Grahamhas called on alliesin Iraq to stand with the US. Pompeo has calledout senior Iraqipoliticians and militia leaders for their ties to Iran and for their role in attacking the embassy. He has also called on leaders in Israel, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates tobuild support for U.S.responses.

There are several hurdles now in Iraq. This is Americas Iraq 5.0 moment. In August 1990, the U.S. sent forces to Saudi Arabia to confront Iraqs invasion of Kuwait. The U.S. returned to Iraq in 2003 to remove Saddam Hussein. After the 2007 surge to defeat the Iraqi insurgency, American forces left in 2011. President Barack Obama sent troops at the invitation of Baghdad to help defeat ISIS. Now, facing a potential confrontation with Iran, the US. deployment to Iraq to defend the embassy has been a majorfocus for CENTCOM,U.S. special forces, and OperationInherent Resolve, the anti-ISIS campaign. This indicates how serious U.S. forces are in taking the next step. Trump has spoken out against endless wars, but his team wont countenance more attacks on U.S. forces. This could lead to calm, if Tehran appreciates that Washington is serious; toclearer U.S. support for Israels actionsagainst Iran; and to an anchoring of U.S. forces in areas of southern Syria and the autonomous Kurdistan region of Iraq, a stable and safe area where the U.S. is generally welcome.

But Iraq is at a crossroads as well. Three months of Iraqi protests, often against Irans heavy-handed role in the country, means that many Iraqis are disappointed by the abuses of the same militias that target Americans. Iraqs prime minister has resigned because of the protests, and Iraqs president must choose a new leader. Amid a major crises with the U.S. and Iran, Iraqis are caught, held hostage by militias but wanting to avoid another round of fighting.

Iran wants to pressure the U.S. to leave Iraq. So far Trump is keen on a show of force to demonstrate that Iran wont win this round.

View original post here:
Iran Is Testing U.S. Resolve in Iraq - National Review

1,400 Ancient Cuneiform Tablets Identified from Lost City of Irisagrig in Iraq. Were They Stolen? – Livescience.com

About 1,400 cuneiform tablets that were possibly stolen from Irisagrig, a 4,000-year-old lost city in Iraq, have just been revealed.

Even though archaeologists know the tablets originated in that lost Sumerian city, they don't know where the city is now located. Only looters have that location, archaeologists said.

The newly examined tablets describe the palace of Irisagrig and the animals kept on the grounds, including lions and dogs; the tablets also detail a festival held in a temple dedicated to a god of mischief.

Related: See Photos of an Ancient City Discovered in Iraq

The new find shows that the company Hobby Lobby whose co-owner, Steve Green, helped found the Museum of the Bible in November 2017 in Washington, D.C. had far more cuneiform tablets obtained (possibly illegally) from this city, and other sites in Iraq, than previously believed.

The 1,400 Irisagrig tablets, along with 600 cuneiform tablets from other archaeological sites in Iraq, are detailed in the book "Tablets From the Irisagrig Archive" (Eisenbrauns, 2019) by Marcel Sigrist, professor emeritus at cole biblique et archologique franaise de Jrusalem, and Tohru Ozaki, a retired lecturer at the University of Shizuoka in Japan.

The tablets were recorded by hand, but not photographed, between 2012 and 2016, during which time "they were in Oklahoma in the storerooms of Hobby Lobby," Sigrist told Live Science. "They bought these tablets I never knew how it happened. It was not really my business" Sigrist said.

In 2017, Hobby Lobby paid a $3 million fine for importing artifacts illegally from Iraq, and the company forfeited about 450 cuneiform tablets and 3,000 clay bullae (a type of seal) that were returned to Iraq, a settlement statement from the U.S. Department of Justice said. However, 223 of those 450 cuneiform tablets were seized in January 2011 in Memphis, Tennessee, by U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Though Sigrist didn't have the opportunity to study those tablets, another scholar, named Eckart Frahm, did. He described them in a 2017 interview with Live Science. A few of those 223 tablets contain 4,500-year-old magical incantations, Frahm said at the time.

Related: Cracking Codices: 10 of the Most Mysterious Ancient Manuscripts

The combination of the 1,400 newly published tablets from Irisagrig, 600 newly published tablets from other Iraq sites and 223 tablets that were seized in January 2011 means that the total number of cuneiform tablets once owned by Hobby Lobby exceeds 2,200.

After the Sigirst and Ozaki studied the tablets, some of the artifacts now appear to be missing. John Marzulli, a spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Justice, said that, aside from the 450 cuneiform tablets mentioned in the 2017 settlement statement that announced Hobby Lobby's fine and forfeiture of artifacts, he has no information about any other cuneiform tablets once owned by Hobby Lobby.

A spokesperson for Iraq's antiquities minister said that about 3,817 artifacts once owned by Hobby Lobby had been returned to the Iraq embassy. It's unclear how many of these returned artifacts are cuneiform tablets; however, if 3,000 clay bullae were returned to Iraq, as the U.S. Department of Justice claims, that means that only up to 817 cuneiform tablets out of the 2,200 that Hobby Lobby had could have been returned to Iraq.

Related: Top 10 Battles for the Control of Iraq

Sigrist said that after 2016 he never received any communication from Hobby Lobby. "When I approached them, I never received any answer anymore," and he decided to describe the tablets in a publication so that scholars could become aware of the artifacts' existence. Hobby Lobby has not responded to requests for comment.

The newly published cuneiform tablets tell of numerous economic and administrative transactions that happened at Irisagrig. Inscriptions on the tablets describe how the rulers of the city kept lions and fed them with the carcasses of cattle. The "lion shepherds," those who took care of the lions, received rations of beer and bread.

The tablets also tell of the many dogs that were kept in Irisagrig's palace, mentioning the carcasses of animals that were fed to them and how the "dog shepherds," those who cared for the dogs, got rations of bread and beer. Dogs were very important for the security of the palace, Sigrist said. "When you are in the desert, you need protection, custodians, and the dogs are the best custodians you can have in these areas," he said.

The tablets tell of food given out at a king named Amar-Suen's festival, which took place at the Temple of Enki, a god of mischief and wisdom. The tablets also tell of the numerous officials who served the king, such as the "sagi," officials who were often cupbearers to the kings of Irisagrig.

The newly described tablets date to a time when Irisagrig was involved in few conflicts and things were fairly peaceful, Sigrist said. In later times, Irisagrig's territory fell victim to invasion and wars.

Originally published on Live Science.

Read the rest here:
1,400 Ancient Cuneiform Tablets Identified from Lost City of Irisagrig in Iraq. Were They Stolen? - Livescience.com