Qassem Soleimani is the de facto commander of the war against ISIS. Business Insider.
Iran and the United States are much closer then people realize in the fight against ISIS. Business Insider. The strategy that was put to use in the battle of Tikrit involved heavy U.S. airstrikes combined with a ground attack by the Iranians proxy militia units. With the Iraqi army it no shape to fight for the next major target, it is very likely that this pattern will continue. Although the support to Iranian units is indirect, the airstrikes are putting the United States clearly one side of a brutal sectarian war. Iran's leader in Iraq, Major General Qassem Soleimani was directly involved in the battle for Tikrit and was largely seen as the de facto leader of the military forces in that battle. Soleimani has a long history with the United States. He led militia units during the Iraq war that killed hundreds of U.S. soldiers. Needless to say the United States is downplaying the fact that they are working with him. For their part Iran considers Iraq and Iran to be essentially the same state.
My Comment:
Not a whole lot of new information in this article but I wanted to comment on it anyways. Though the United States made efforts to downplay the relationship between the Iranian militias and the airstrikes on ISIS, the fact is that Iran is basically our army on the ground in Iraq. This would have been unthinkable just a few years ago. It's unthinkable now. Despite the high level nuclear talks Iran is still our enemy and is perhaps the most dangerous state in the region. We may have similar goals in Iraq, but they are not our friend.
Given that Iran and General Soleimani were responsible for the deaths of hundreds of U.S. soldiers in the Iraq War it is unbelievable that we are working with them now. But that is the state of our foreign policy under Barack Obama. I understand that the circumstances are extreme and that sometimes the enemy of our enemy is our friend, but that is not the case right now. We are being used. We are using the Iranians as well, but I think they are getting the better end of the deal, especially if they have the de facto annexation of Iraq as their goal.
Iran is fully capable of providing air support for their military units. They have a large airforce and they could provide close air support with F-4 Phantoms and SU-25 Frogfoots, if they were willing to do so. Indeed, they have done so in the past. All they would have to do is move their planes to Iraqi airfields and they could take over the air support role for the offensive against Mosul. But why on Earth would they commit their forces to battle if the United States are committed to bombing their enemies?
I know that the United States has at least attempted to not support the Iranian militias directly but they are still helping Iran on the ground. The problem is that there seems to be no other options. The Iraqi government can not stand alone. Their armed forces were largely destroyed or evaporated during the first stage of the war. The Kurds in the north are good fighters but they aren't willing to fight beyond their territory. And there are no other groups willing to deploy ground soldiers. The United States are not going to do so. Americans are sick of war and the President will not go back into Iraq. His legacy, such as it is, is at stake.
Our allies in the region hate this situation as well. Notably, the Arab states who have contributed to fight against ISIS have not supported these Iranian militias. Neither have France, Canada, or the United Kingdom, as far as I know. And the Israelis are furious with us. I know the threat of ISIS is huge, but working with our enemies seems to be the wrong way to go about it. If I were in charge I wouldn't have called in airstrikes in Tikrit. Let the Iranians do that themselves while we focus on ISIS forces fighting the Kurds in Iraq and Syria... Too bad that will never happen.
No comments:
Post a Comment