Thread: Eurasia Topics

Iran May Be the Only Winner in Iraq

"Intelligence documents reveal how Tehran took advantage of US blundering

The American invasion of Iraq and the overthrow of that nation’s government in 2003 has rightly been described as the greatest foreign policy disaster in the history of the United States. Eight thousand one hundred and seventy five American soldiers, contractors and civilians have died in Iraq since 2003 as well as an estimated 300,000 Iraqis. By some more expansive estimates the so-called “global war on terror,” of which Iraq was the major component, may have directly killed 801,000, of which at least 335,000 were civilians. Other estimates indicate that the total dead from collateral causes, to include disease and starvation, could exceed 3 million, overwhelmingly Muslims.

The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq alone have also cost, according to the same Brown University study, an estimated $6.4 trillion and still counting as the money to pay for it was borrowed.

The invasion destabilized the entire region and shattered forever the relatively stable status quo whereby minority Sunni dominated Arab Iraq served as a check on Shia dominated Persian Iran’s ambitions. The two countries had in fact gone to war in 1980-1988. The United States provided support to Iraq in that conflict, which killed as many as half a million military and civilians on each side.

After the US invasion, as Shia were a majority in Iraq it was inevitable that the country’s new “democratic” government installed by the victors would eventually find much in common with its eastern neighbor in spite of Washington’s efforts to prevent such a development. The resulting armed conflict that also involved the independence minded Kurdish minority was something like a civil war. It primarily pitted the displaced Sunni against the ascendant Shia militias and was a contributing factor in the subsequent birth and development of the terrorist group Islamic State, also referred to as Daesh.

A remarkable 700 pages of documents relating to Iran’s role in Iraq has surfaced and was printed recently in The Intercept, which received the material, and also in The New York Times, which agreed to help validate and process the information. The Times headlined its piece on the documents with Leaked Iran Cables: Key Findings From Secret Documents: Leaked spy cables reveal how Iran came to dominate the political and military spheres in Iraq. Here’s what the hundreds of documents tell us. For The Intercept, the key insight provided by reviewing the documents was how the “devastation that followed the 2003 US invasion of Iraq gave Iran a golden opportunity to build a political and social order there that was more favorable to their interests.”

The documents consist of copies of original reports and cables written in Farsi that have been sourced to the Iranian external spy service, the Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS). They mostly date from 2013 through 2015. Many of them are field reports that detail the routine of spying – secret meetings, paying bribes, surveillance and countersurveillance. They were sent to The Intercept anonymously by what would appear to be a disgruntled Iraqi official who expressed a desire to “let the world know what Iran has been doing in my country Iraq.” Even though the material is extremely interesting and undeniably genuine, the stories in the Times and Intercept unfortunately only had a short run before disappearing into the mass of impeachment coverage.

As a former intelligence officer, my take on the story was to wonder why anyone should be surprised at what had happened. Iran, operating on internal lines from a position of strength, was working assiduously to infiltrate and place under control a neighboring country that had gone to war with it 30 years before and had killed half a million of its citizens. It was also working to penetrate and manage the new, hostile American presence which was sitting right next door. Spying on one’s friends and enemies alike and co-opting politicians is routine and expected from any competent intelligence service. It is precisely the same formula used by the United States, admittedly more openly, in Afghanistan to this day and also in Iraq after the invasion of 2003.

Just as the United States placed its proxies in Afghanistan and Iraq, Iran has clearly exploited its own relationships with Iraqi Shiites, some of whom actually lived in exile in Iran during the rule of Saddam Hussein. The Iranian intelligence service developed special working relationships with many of those individuals and also sought new recruits within the increasingly Shiite government in Baghdad. Current Prime Minister Adil Abdul Mahdi is known to have a “special relationship” with Tehran through his Iranian official contacts operating in Baghdad.

The documents, in fact, make clear that the Iranian government considers Iraq a client state whose friendly government has to be propped up at all costs. It has indeed penetrated virtually every government ministry at nearly every level. The documents reveal how in 2014 an Iraqi military intelligence officer met with an Iranian spy carrying a message from his boss in Baghdad Lieutenant General Hatem al-Maksusi, commander of military intelligence in the Iraqi Ministry of Defense. His message was “Tell them we are at your service. Whatever you need is at their disposal. We are Shiite and have a common enemy. All of the Iraqi Army’s intelligence — consider it yours.” The Iraqi described secret targeting software provided by Washington and offered to provide it to Iran, saying “If you have a new laptop, give it to me so I can upload the program onto it.”

From the American perspective, the documents reveal that the meetings between senior American diplomats and their Iraqi counterparts in Baghdad and Kurdistan were regularly reported back in considerable detail to Tehran. The Iranians were particularly interested in developing agents who had once worked for the US government and were able to provide information on the CIA and DIA intelligence networks remaining in Iraq after the US military was forced to leave in 2011. The documents reveal, for example, that a CIA asset operating under the pseudonym “Donnie Brasco” offered to sell to Iranian intelligence officers the locations of Agency safe houses, details of training and also the identities of other Iraqis who had worked for the Americans.

The documents indicate that Iranian efforts in Iraq were coordinated by Major General Qassim Suleimani, commander of the elite Quds Force of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, who worked with the existing Iraqi-Shiite militias that had become increasingly powerful during the fighting with the Sunnis. The papers reveal that though there was some fumbling, the Iranian intelligence officers were generally very professional, objective oriented and effective.

Suleimani sought with considerable success to construct a vast network of informants and co-optees within the Iraqi government, many of whom are named in the reports. Interestingly, the Iranians have experienced some of the same problems in seeking to manage the fragile Iraqi political situation that previously plagued the United States, though they have benefited from the Shiite relationship. Deadly anti-government protests currently taking place in Iraq that have killed more than 300 have focused on the country’s pervasive corruption, but there have also been numerous calls for an end to Iranian influence. The Iranian Consulate in Baghdad has been attacked and burning Iranian flags have been a regular feature in the violence. Iran clearly was more successful than the US in the contest for influence over Baghdad, but the reports suggest that it has failed to fully appreciate the genuine Iraqi desire for independence from both Washington and Tehran.

If there is a lesson to be learned from the documents it is that if you blunder around the world breaking countries that you know little about, you will wind up with up doing more damage to yourself. It should have been obvious even in Washington that Iran, with its Shiite connection and first-rate intelligence service, would be well placed to convert Iraq into a Persian satrapy after the removal of Saddam Hussein, but imperial hubris at the Pentagon and White House did not permit any consideration of “What comes next?”

https://www.strategic-culture.org/ne...y-winner-iraq/

Hong Kong society needs to jointly resist US provocation



"US President Donald Trump on Wednesday signed the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act. This amounts to typical US interference in China's Hong Kong affairs.

Being part of China, Hong Kong enjoys a high degree of autonomy under the country's governance. Washington has no jurisdiction over Hong Kong, but the legislation tries to legitimize its right to affect Beijing's policies on the city, which is a clear violation of Chinese sovereignty. Imagine if China takes action to interfere in the US presidential elections or adopts a policy regulating how Canberra should treat its ethnic minority groups, will there be a strong backlash?

It is clearly not the time for China to reason with the US, but to be rational in China-US conflicts. We must prevent more Hongkongers from being misled by US craftiness, which will eventually harm their interests.

Washington is determined to turn Hong Kong into a new front to strategically pressure Beijing. Some beguiled Hongkongers have been taken over by the illusion that the law could help their city gain a higher degree of autonomy, as they imagine Beijing would be deterred by the US legislation, and thus make major concessions that are not in line with the Basic Law.

China's key countermeasure against the law is to further clarify the fundamental rules of the "one country, two systems" principle, completely dispel Hong Kong radical opposition's pipe dream to realize "absolute universal suffrage," correct their misunderstanding of the principle, and firmly repulse US assessments of the high degree of autonomy in Hong Kong.

We must leave no room for collusion and interaction between Hong Kong's radical opposition and the US government. They may act alone and bear the costs, but shall never dream of jointly coercing Beijing.

It is the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress that holds the power of interpreting the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR). Facing the US' potential move to cancel Hong Kong's special trade status with this law, Hong Kong society needs to behave in accordance with the Basic Law on major issues and cooperate with the central government to offer no pretext for the US to use this law. If the radical opposition interprets the Basic Law in an unconstitutional manner, mainstream society in Hong Kong must stand up against them and stop them.

If Hong Kong society has force strong enough to resist constitutional arrangements, thus helping the US resort to its law and causing further damage to the city's business environment, it will be Hong Kong society's misfortune. The city will suffer some pain and make necessary adjustments to its economic structure.

Hong Kong's special trade status is stipulated by the Basic Law, rather than awarded by the US. As long as the society sobers up and works hard with the motherland's support, no external forces can truly wield influence over its destiny.

In the meantime, the law also threatens to sanction Hongkongers who do not cooperate with the US. This will suppress neutral space for people with different ideas and further tear the city apart. The only way to maintain the solidarity of Hong Kong is to resist US provocation and prevent more people from joining hands with the opposition for fear of US sanctions. Efforts to fight the forces colluding with the US should be stepped up, and the corresponding laws need to be improved. There is no way to allow traitors to prevail and patriots to suffer.

"One country, two systems" is China's independent constitutional arrangement and US intervention damages its external environment. Hong Kong society should be vigilant. To maintain "one country, two systems," the Chinese mainland and the HKSAR need to work together. Anyone who colludes with external forces to undermine "one country, two systems" must pay a heavy price."

Hong Kong society needs to jointly resist US provocation - Global Times

^The "Act" has been issued quite late. However, the people behind it have been made happy. And the "Act" will not make any harm to China, unlike to the issuer...

Another crass example of "double standard": There are so many other "revolutions" just behind the corner where many people have been dying, no "Act" need to be issued?

China is the biggest trading nation of the most countries in the world. It is the biggest creditor in the world.

Yet its allowing the US to walk all over it. Seppo flags are flying in Hong Kong. Xi needs to man the fuck up.

Originally Posted by Backspin

China is the biggest trading nation of the most countries in the world. It is the biggest creditor in the world.

And China is reliant on foreign manufacturers to have their businesses operate in China. Literally millions of jobs depend on this, if they are lost then the people will rise, no-one messes with their rice bowls -as can be seen from recent riots re. pork and others . . . and several manufacturers have already relocated to Indon, B-D, Vietnam etc...

Originally Posted by panama hat

And China is reliant on foreign manufacturers to have their businesses operate in China.

Only until they've nicked everything they need.

Originally Posted by panama hat

China is reliant on foreign manufacturers to have their businesses operate in China.

I suspect most foreigners in and those foreign companies that supply China earn a penny or two, or did China threaten to sanction them if they didn't do business with the Chinese citizens.

Bitch at your own national companies which have either closed down the local companies and thus require less people, those companies that are selling their souls for some revenue, the company executives that receive bonuses, the suppliers that serve the foreign companies or the local suppliers that gladly take Chinese money to employ locals, fill the local universities or buy property and goods/services in your "home" country.

Originally Posted by OhOh

I suspect most foreigners in and those foreign companies that supply China earn a penny or two, or did China threaten to sanction them if they didn't do business with the Chinese citizens.

Bitch at your own national companies which have either closed down the local companies and thus require less people, those companies that are selling their souls for some revenue, the company executives that receive bonuses, the suppliers that serve the foreign companies or the local suppliers that gladly take Chinese money to employ locals, fill the local universities or buy property and goods/services in your "home" country.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Only until they've nicked everything they need.

They still rely on foreign-owned companies for their manufacturing base

Originally Posted by OhOh

I suspect most foreigners in and those foreign companies that supply China earn a penny or two, or did China threaten to sanction them if they didn't do business with the Chinese citizens.

Did anyone ever deny this? Why are you deliberately veering off the topic?

Originally Posted by OhOh

Bitch at your own national companies which have either closed down the local companies and thus

Yea . . . nah . . . (again! ) you're going off on your own little rant again, which has nothing to do with the discussion. The post you are chucking your toys out of (to bastardise a saying) came from Backspin's:
"China is the biggest trading nation of the most countries in the world. It is the biggest creditor in the world."

Nothing about 'bitching' or 'forcing' or anything similar. Perhaps you need a bit of a reality check

Originally Posted by panama hat

They still rely on foreign-owned companies for their manufacturing base

Not once they've set up their own manufacturing bases and put the competition out of business by flooding the market with knockoffs full of stolen technology.

c.f. The Hoverboard.

Originally Posted by OhOh

The foreign owned companies relocated to take advantage of a lower cost labour prices and to reduce their operating costs.

Yea, still missing the point

Originally Posted by panama hat

And China is reliant on foreign manufacturers to have their businesses operate in China. Literally millions of jobs depend on this, if they are lost then the people will rise, no-one messes with their rice bowls -as can be seen from recent riots re. pork and others . . . and several manufacturers have already relocated to Indon, B-D, Vietnam etc...

The US's confidence its totally misplaced. And much of China's lack of confidence in itself is misplaced.

You cannot begin to talk with who is reliant on who with the creditor. The US is the one who is reliant on recycled Chinese mercantalist dollars coming back in. It is the USA who's biggest export market is Canada while it has a 700 billion dollar a year military. How does the US close this funding gap ? With debt from outside.

China has all these factories and sure, they are over capacity. But creditors can always downsize, strategically default on some internal debt, find other markets ect. And all the while, employees can return to the rice patties and the informal economy.

Where as the US is literally writing trillions of checks, that it does not have the money for.

China is not just a low wage factory country anymore. It has moved onto all kinds of things. It makes everything these days. And for every economic horror show like ghost cities, there are cities that hold industrial monopolies on the whole world. For every disaster , there is a success story.

There's a lot of dopey China doom stories floating around the west.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Not once they've set up their own manufacturing bases and put the competition out of business by flooding the market with knockoffs full of stolen technology.

c.f. The Hoverboard.

The whole "stolen tech" gripe isn't what its cracked up to be. There are conditions for entering the Chinese market. Like technology sharing. American companies are agreeing to those conditions and then crying to the US government about the conditions that they agreed to. They did not have to enter the Chinese market.

Originally Posted by Backspin

The whole "stolen tech" gripe isn't what its cracked up to be. There are conditions for entering the Chinese market. Like technology sharing. American companies are agreeing to those conditions and then crying to the US government about the conditions that they agreed to. They did not have to enter the Chinese market.

Well that's stating the fucking obvious, but if they don't open in China they can't compete you dumb shit.

Another one of HoHo's favourites, the lovely Iranian regime, slaughtering their own people for daring to complain.

At least 208 people were killed in the protests and the crackdown that followed, Amnesty International said on Monday. Iran’s mission to the United Nations disputed Amnesty’s findings early on Tuesday, though it offered no evidence to support its claim.

Iranian state television on Tuesday acknowledged security forces shot and killed what it described as "rioters” in multiple cities amid recent protests over the spike in government-set gasoline prices — the first time that authorities have offered any sort of accounting for the violence they used to put down the demonstrations.

The acknowledgment came in a television package that criticised international Farsi-language channels for their reporting on the crisis, which began on Nov. 15.

Iran has yet to release any nationwide statistics over the unrest that gripped the Islamic Republic with minimum prices for government-subsidised gasoline rising by 50%.

Iran shut down internet access amid the unrest, blocking those inside the country from sharing their videos and information, as well as limiting the outside world from knowing the scale of the protests and violence. The restoration of the internet in recent days across much of the country has seen other videos surface.

"We’ve seen over 200 people killed in a very swift time, in under a week,” said Mansoureh Mills, an Iran researcher at Amnesty. "It’s something pretty unprecedented event in the history of the human rights violations in the Islamic Republic.”

While not drawing as many Iranians into the streets as those protesting the disputed 2009 presidential election, the gasoline price demonstrations rapidly turned violent faster than any previous rallies. That shows the widespread economic discontent gripping the country since May 2018, when President Donald Trump imposed crushing sanctions after unilaterally withdrawing from Tehran’s nuclear deal with world powers.

The state TV report sought to describe killings in four categories, alleging some of those killed were "rioters who have attacked sensitive or military centers with firearms or knives, or have taken hostages in some areas.” The report described others killed as passers-by, security forces and peaceful protesters, without assigning blame for their deaths.

https://www.gulftoday.ae/news/2019/12/03/at-least-208-killed-in-iran-protests-amnesty

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Another one of HoHo's favourites, the lovely Iranian regime, slaughtering their own people for daring to complain.

Why not to favorite their neighbours - in Iraq - where after 15 years of the long desired democracy - nourished by (please no names here) - died few hundreds more...

Originally Posted by Backspin

They did not have to enter the Chinese market.

Either from supplying/buying the goods and services from afar, or take advantage of the financial and humanitarian opportunities provided by creating the goods or services within China. For sale in China, or as many do, export them to other countries.

Originally Posted by OhOh

Either from supplying/buying the goods and services from afar, or take advantage of the financial and humanitarian opportunities provided by creating the goods or services within China. For sale in China, or as many do, export them to other countries.

Translation: The chinkies blackmail them into moving there either by making it hard to do business from outside or undercutting the fuck out of them.

Then they steal the technology and start undercutting them even more.

It's a vicious, dirty, cheating chinky cycle.

Russia looks to invest in Pakistan in a big way


"Moscow and Islamabad have inked their largest-ever cooperation deal, worth billions of dollars, to expand trade and business, Pakistani officials have announced. It includes huge investments in energy, rail and steel industries. The deal comes as a 64-member delegation, led by Russian Minister of Industry and Trade Denis Manturov, is in Pakistan on an official four-day visit.

As part of the agreement, Russia will provide financial assistance worth $1 billion for the rehabilitation and upgrading of the Pakistan Steel Mills (PSM) project.

The two sides also discussed investments in the much-delayed North-South gas pipeline. Russian companies are expected to build a gas pipeline from Karachi in the south to Lahore in the north-east to transport imported natural gas to meet the region’s energy demands.

Earlier this year, Russia promised a $14 billion investment in Pakistan’s energy sector, including $2.5 billion for the North-South pipeline project.

A Russian company has developed a project to convert the Muzaffargarh thermal power station to coal and establish a 600-megawatt coal-fired power plant at Jamshoro.

Russia’s Sukhoi Superjet 100 (SSJ-100) planes will be supplied on both wet and dry lease with an option to purchase, according to Pakistani officials.The narrow-bodied aircraft with a dual-class cabin is capable of transporting 100 passengers over regional routes

An unnamed official told Pakistan’s Daily Times that the aircraft could be operated in both domestic and international sectors, including the Middle East, CIS, India, China, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and the UAE.

Islamabad, which purchased MI-35 helicopters in 2018, is interested in other Russian hardware as well.The two nations aim to increase bilateral trade which last year stood at $700 million. Pakistan’s exports to Russia reached $150 million while imports from Russia are worth $250 million.

Moscow will also help to construct a railway track from Quetta to Taftan.

Last week, Pakistan and Russia signed an agreement on the settlement of mutual financial claims and commitments on operations of the former Soviet Union, whereby Pakistan repaid a $93.5 million debt to Russia.“We have removed the problem. Russia will come to Pakistan strongly now,” said a Pakistani government official."

https://www.rt.com/business/475368-r...tments-energy/

Rather gas than coal I say, although it might upset the chinkies own plans to leverage debt diplomacy to get at Pakistan's assets.

Originally Posted by OhOh

Nah, the Russian offering of floating nuclear stations, new submarine type reactor designs, are the way to go. Delivered, connected and utilised for 20 + years. Disconnected, replaced by a new one, the old boat towed back to Russia for reloading the reactor, maintenance and offered for reuse.

Russia gets to reuse the reactor core contents to create new nuclear feedstock.

Keeps the entire nuclear cycle under one controller . No unexplained losses.

But if one has in-country coal reserves, it certainly employs many people for generations. Put electrostatic scrubbers on the exhaust stack to extract the polluting gasses, if and when they are proven to be required.

Russia.

Nuclear power stations.

You're not very bright, are you?