Tag Archives: Iran

A Tragic Story: Iran’s Criminal Presence in the Western Hemisphere with U.S. Complicity

December 21, 2017Luis Fleischman

Last month an Argentine Judge ordered the indictment of former President Cristina Kirchner, her foreign minister Hector Timmerman and others on grounds of treason. The allegation is that these leaders made an agreement with Iran where the Islamic Republic would eventually be exonerated from responsibility for the crime of bombing the Argentinean Jewish community headquarters in July 1994, which claimed the lives of 85 people and led to several Iranian figures being placed on Interpol’s Wanted Persons list. The Argentine-Iranian agreement would have eventually had the Argentine government remove these Iranian individuals from the Interpol list. The late Argentine prosecutor Alberto Nisman was the first to uncover the conspiracy, but died under highly suspicious circumstances just hours before he was due to testify before the Argentinean Congress.

While Argentina is delving into this problem, Politico uncovered another serious story this time, involving not a corrupt foreign country, but rather the Obama Administration.

According to Politico, the Obama Administration, in its eagerness to secure a nuclear deal with Iran and fearful of Hezbollah’s destabilizing activities in the Middle East, undermined and blocked an entire Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) operation, aimed at targeting a one billion dollar annual Hezbollah cocaine trafficking operation in Latin America and the United States. Such Hezbollah operation also involved traffic of weapons and money laundering. According to the report, the trafficking of cocaine took place from Latin America through Venezuela and Mexico, with profits in the U.S. The money was laundered through the purchase of American used cars. According to American agents involved in the investigation, the criminal operation was directed and planned by Hezbollah’s innermost circle and “its State sponsors in Iran.”

The DEA investigation, dubbed “Project Cassandra”, sought approval to continue investigations, order the arrests, extraditions and prosecutions of suspects, and impose financial sanctions. However, the Departments of Justice and Treasury rejected, delayed, or blocked these requests. Likewise, the State Department rejected requests to pursue cooperation with countries that could have helped target key suspects involved in those criminal activities.

The money collected by Hezbollah, according to Politico, went directly to fund the group’s military activities in the Middle East, particularly in Syria where it continues to aid and abet the murderous regime of Bashar Al Assad. In Syria alone, more than half a million people have been killed and millions more displaced. Furthermore, this dirty money was made at our own expense, as tons of cocaine were sold on the American market at a time where drug addiction constitutes one of the main social problems in American society, already claiming close to 50,000 American lives this year.

Why would the Obama Administration make such a costly sacrifice to avoid undermining its deal with Iran?

For some it may not make sense. However, based on my own observations throughout the years, it does. The Obama Administration tried to avoid confrontations with anyone it wanted to make a “historic deal” with. Most of these “historic deals” were intended to be made with enemies, as Obama desperately sought an agreement not only with Iran, but also with Cuba and reconciliation with Venezuela.

Thus, Obama failed to insist on the extradition of Venezuelan military and drug trafficker Hugo Carvajal from Aruba and the Syrian-born Venezuelan drug lord Walid Makled from Colombia. Carvajal was the chief of Venezuelan military intelligence and Makled is one of the most notorious drug traffickers in the Western Hemisphere. Makled himself disclosed his own cooperation with scores of the highest officials within Chavez’s government — including Carvajal himself, with the chiefs of the Venezuelan army and navy, as well as with dozens of Venezuelan generals.

Makled also provided information about Hezbollah’s criminal activities and its relations with the Venezuelan political and military elite. Already in 2011, he claimed that Hezbollah was making considerable profits in the Western Hemisphere which was funneled to the Middle East. Makled also said that he was willing to tell this to American prosecutors and asked to be extradited to the United States. Still, Obama failed to apply pressure or make an effective request. Both Carvajal and Makled were returned to Venezuela by the Dutch and Colombian authorities respectively.

In addition, at the end of 2012 Congress approved the “Countering Iran in the Western Hemisphere Act” that provided for “a comprehensive strategy to counter Iran’s growing hostile presence and activity in the Western Hemisphere.”

The bill was signed by President Obama; however, a few months later, the State Department reported that after investigating the matter, it concluded that no threatening Iranian activities exist in the Western Hemisphere. Such report raised suspicions that the Administration was not interested in exploring the matter. According to Congressman Jeff Duncan, then chairman of the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, the report did not consider evidence presented in other countries, particularly the report issued by prosecutor Alberto Nisman that concluded that Iran and Hezbollah had a strong presence in 12 countries.

Nisman died under mysterious circumstances in January 2015; the cause was likely murder. However, the Obama Administration did not pressure the government of Argentina or make any statement of concern about Nisman’s death or his findings. Considering the context provided by Politico, it now makes more sense; Nisman could have opened the debate on Iran in the Western hemisphere once again and perhaps undermined the deal known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

It turns out that the JCPOA has enabled and encouraged Hezbollah’s criminal activities in the Western Hemisphere, which are connected to Iran’s increasing subversive and military activities in the Middle East.

For all the reasons cited above, I believe that the Politico report deserves a Congressional investigation. But most importantly it is crucial that the activities of Iran and Hezbollah in the Western Hemisphere be fully investigated and dismantled. Project Cassandra needs to be restored and carried out to its very end.

Israel Will Continue Operations in Syria Despite U.S.-Russia Ceasefire

November 14, 2017Julia Sora

On November 13^th, Israel declared that it will continue to take military action in Syria against Iranian-backed fighters even as the U.S. and Russia are working towards a ceasefire agreement between U.S.-backed groups and the Assad regime.

Israel has said it would not be bound by a ceasefire agreement and would continue to operate across the border in Syria when it deems necessary. The deal would include Iranian-backed groups fighting on behalf of the Syrian army who would be required to leave the border area and eventually Syria.

While Israel said this was a positive development, it said the agreement didn’t go far enough. Israel claims the agreement doesn’t meet its demand that there will not be developments that bring the forces of Hezbollah or Iran to the Israel-Syria border in the north.

Iran doesn’t believe the ceasefire deal includes its forces which ruins the point of a ceasefire agreement. Russia has also said the new agreement did not include a Russian commitment to ensure Iran-backed groups would be pulled out of the country. According to Russia, Iran has maintained a legitimate presence in Syria.

On November 11^th, at the Asia-Pacific Economic Summit, Presidents Trump and Putin agreed to an extensive statement on the conflict in Syria. The statement reaffirmed that both countries are committed to defeating Islamic State in Syria. Both presidents agreed that there is no military solution to the Syrian conflict.

Trump and Putin also pledged to continue de-confliction to ensure the U.S. and Russian militaries do not clash in Syria, and pledged new support for the U.N.-backed Geneva process, which has failed to find a political solution to end the conflict. The Geneva process is formed in the U.N. Resolution 2254 in 2015 which lays the foundations for a future peaceful resolution of the Syrian conflict.

The U.S. has said that an agreement would focus on de-confliction between the U.S. and Russian militaries, reducing violence in the civil war and reinvigorating U.N.-led peace talks.

The U.S. and Russia have been on opposing sides during the Syrian civil war, with the U.S. backing the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) and Russia supporting President Bashar al-Assad and the Syrian Army.

The U.S. and Russia have made multiple attempts to reach an agreement for establishing a ceasefire in different regions in Syria but have failed to reduce violence for long. In July, a new ceasefire agreement was brokered by the U.S. and Russia for southwest Russia. Israel’s main concern with regard to the July ceasefire agreement is increasing Iranian influence in the region.

The Israeli policy towards the civil war in Syria has been primarily about containment, focused on Iranian-backed terrorist group Hezbollah. Israel has said it has no interest in intervening in the civil war in Syria either in favor or against President Assad.

Israel has maintained a tense border with Syria since Israel took control of the Golan Heights in the Six Day War in 1967. Israel officially annexed the Golan Heights in 1981 and considers them Israeli territory. In June, Israel targeted Syrian military positions with air strikes in Quneitra after ten tank shells from inside Syria hit the Golan Heights. Syria accused Israel of aiding the jihadists with its strikes.

In September, Israeli military shot down an Iranian-made drone sent by Hezbollah in the Golan Heights. In November, Israeli military shot down another drone in the same region operated by the Syrian regime. Israel fears that Iran will use its territory in Syria to launch attacks on the Golan Heights or Israel or that it will create a transit path from Iran to Lebanon that could allow Iran to transfer weapons more easily to Hezbollah.

With IS nearing defeat, the U.S. and Russia are losing their common enemy in Syria yet remain locked in a proxy battle between the Assad regime and U.S.-backed opposition. This has increased the need for close communication between the U.S. and Russia about where their forces are operating to avoid violence which increases the need for a new ceasefire agreement.

Iran Seeks to Stir Regional Conflict with Saudis in Yemen and Lebanon

November 13, 2017Alexandra Johnson

Saudi Arabia and Kuwait on November 9^th advised its citizens to not travel to Lebanon as well as asked those already in Lebanon to leave the country as soon as possible following escalating tension as Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri resigned on November 4^th, in a speech delivered in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Bahrain ordered its citizens to leave Lebanon immediately following the Hariri speech on November 5th.

Hariri said in the speech that his sudden resignation was the result of feeling threatened for his life. In his statement Hariri commented that “Hezbollah should be disarmed and wherever Iran interfered in the Middle East, there was chaos.”

On November 10^th Hezbollah’s leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said that Saudi Arabia declared war on Lebanon and Hezbollah, and accused Riyadh of detaining and forcing Prime Minister Saad al-Hariri to resign. In his statement he also said that “officials have declared war on Lebanon and Hezbollah.”

U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson warned other counties and groups against using Lebanon as a vehicle for a larger proxy war. Tillerson also stated that Washington strongly backed Lebanon’s independence and respected PM Hariri as a partner of the U.S. Tillerson also stated that there was no indication that Hariri was being held captive in Saudi Arabia against his will.

On the same day as Hariri’s speech on November 4^th, Saudi Arabia accused Iranian-backed Houthi rebels across the border in Yemen of firing a ballistic missile at the airport in Riyadh.. The ballistic missile was intercepted by the Saudi missile defenses before it could cause any damage or casualties. Saudi Arabia accused Iran of “direct military aggression” and called the missile attack an “act of war.”

Following the missile launch Saudi Arabia tightened its blockade on Yemen, ordering all Yemeni ports to close and grounded all humanitarian flights from receiving aid.

The Iranian government has been supplying missiles to the Houthis, during the civil war, which has served as proxy conflict between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Iran has sent advisers to train Houthi units and provide logistical support as part of an effort to increase influence. The Iranian Revolution Guard Corps is also believed to have transferred rocket and missile capabilities to the Houthis. The war has resulted in over 10,000 deaths to civilians, triggered a cholera outbreak affecting nearly a million people as well as allowed for al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) to flourish in the area. Additionally, the Islamic State has also resurged in central Yemen where Sunni tribal and AQAP are fighting the Iranian backed Houthis.

Hezbollah has also backed the Houthi rebels through the proxy war through military training and growing support, by making the group dependent on Iran. Additionally, the leader of the Houthis, Abdul Malik Badreddine al Houthi vowed to fight in any future conflict between Hezbollah and Israel, supporting the terrorists.

As Saudi Arabia undergoes a major internal shake up triggered as part of a major corruption probe, Iran seeks to stir up regional conflicts. Through its proxies, the Iranians have weaved it way through the crippled governments of both Yemen and Lebanon. Growing influence from Hezbollah is also something that cannot be ignored. The Saudis need to pay close attention to Iran, and find ways to check Iranian expansion, while avoiding direct conflict.

Saudis, Iran on path to ‘very, very bloody’ war

November 9, 2017Frank Gaffney, Jr.

Originally posted on WND

While the world tries to interpret Saudi Arabia’s moves to clamp down on corruption and watches the kingdom accuse Iran of an “act of war,” a former Reagan administration Pentagon official says Saudi Arabia is gearing up for the very real possibility of a “very, very bloody” war with Iran.

Within the past several days, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who is next in line to the Saudi throne, has ordered the arrests of many government officials, including 11 princes, on allegations of corruption. More recently, the crown prince accused Iran of an “act of war” after Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen launched an Iranian missile toward the Saudi capital of Riyadh.

The Houthis admit firing the missile, and Saudi investigators say the fragments prove the missile is from Iran. Furthermore, the Saudi-friendly prime minister of Lebanon abruptly resigned, and many other elements of the Lebanese government are loyal to the Shiite regime in Iran.

So are the events of the past week just the latest developments in an unstable region or something far more significant?

Frank Gaffney is president of the Center for Security Policy, and he served as an assistant secretary of defense in the Reagan administration. He said these recent events are very significant.

“Something is moving, for sure,” Gaffney told WND and Radio America. “I think this is a lot bigger than chess pieces. I think this is nothing less than tectonic shifts taking place throughout the region.”

Get the hottest, most important news stories on the Internet – delivered FREE to your inbox as soon as they break! Take just 30 seconds and sign up for WND’s Email News Alerts!

Gaffney said Iran’s goal of creating a “Shiite Crescent” is greatly disturbing to the Saudis. The crescent is a continuous stretch of Iranian-dominated areas that stretches from the southern end of the Red Sea through Yemen to Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon, all the way to the Mediterranean Sea.

He said Crown Prince Salman is bracing for a major fight to prevent Iran control of the entire region.

“I think what is teeing up, as I see it, is probably a very, very bloody war in that part of the world, and it may not be confined to that part of the world,” Gaffney said.

He said the Iran threat is growing in multiple respects.

“The Iranians are establishing hegemonic control of large parts of this very strategically significant region,” Gaffney said. “They aspire to do more, and I think they are willing to do everything from Shiite militia in Iraq and Syria through their own Quds force and Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps.”

He also also suspects Iran is prepared to use ballistic missiles with non-conventional warheads (chemical, biological or nuclear) in order to assert an iron grip on the region, and he would not be surprised to see the fighting spread to other parts of the Middle East.

“It could go beyond that,” Gaffney explained. “Turkey is a factor in all of this. The central Asian republics beyond [are also at risk]. This could get extraordinarily messy, and then it goes without saying that Israel may be drawn into it.”

So is this “tectonic shift” a result of the natural tides of history in the region, dating back to the Shiite-Sunni divide over a thousand years ago, or have specific policies accelerated the specter of an ugly sectarian war in the region?

Gaffney said the forces of history are obviously a major factor, but he said policy moves made in the Obama and George W. Bush administration are also coming back to haunt the neighborhood. Gaffney blasted Obama for the 2015 nuclear deal and slammed the Bush administration for eliminating the Iraq army in the early days of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

“The principle impediment to Iranian ambitions (the Iraqi army) was removed,” Gaffney said. “The damage done during the Bush years in that respect has been greatly compounded by the policy of Barack Obama in greatly enhancing the power of the Iranian regime.”

Get the hottest, most important news stories on the Internet – delivered FREE to your inbox as soon as they break! Take just 30 seconds and sign up for WND’s Email News Alerts!

But why is the crown prince focused on rooting out corruption when so many national security concerns are on the front burner?

“It seems pretty clearly aimed not so much at dealing with the corrupt officials, because, if that were in fact the object, I think every single one of them would be rounded up. It’s about power. It’s about consolidating his hold on it before his father (King Salman) passes from the scene,” said Gaffney.

“He’s clearing the decks for action against the principal, and increasingly existential threat to the kingdom, which is the Islamic Republic of Iran,” he added.

Gaffney insists that labeling Iran an “existential threat” against Saudi Arabia is not an exaggeration.

“If they don’t do something about this, presumably with the help of the United States, they will be encircled and the resources on which they still rely on very heavily – namely the sale of petroleum – can be cut off at will through the Persian Gulf or the Red Sea by the Iranians or their proxies,” he said.

Even with massive military resources courtesy of the U.S., Gaffney does not believe the Saudis can match the Iranians without help. He said Egypt and Jordan would be heavily recruited to join the fray, along with possible U.S. air power.

Her said the Saudis don’t have the personnel to do the job.

“They’ve got an enormous amount of very advanced equipment,” Gaffney said. “They just don’t have many people who have either the skills or the will to wield it in defense of the kingdom or their interests more broadly.”

As for the Trump administration’s position as events unfold in the Middle East, Gaffney said the U.S. ought to be publicly on the side of the Saudis. However, he said the most important tactical policy is to stop Iran’s nuclear program.

“Our interests at the moment lie with trying to deprive the Iranians of their nuclear and other ambitions,” he said. “And that’s going to be vastly harder today than it was before Barack Obama started greatly enabling those ambitions.”

Saudis, Iran on path to ‘very, very bloody’ war

November 9, 2017Frank Gaffney, Jr.

Originally posted on WND

So are the events of the past week just the latest developments in an unstable region or something far more significant?

Frank Gaffney is president of the Center for Security Policy, and he served as an assistant secretary of defense in the Reagan administration. He said these recent events are very significant.

Get the hottest, most important news stories on the Internet – delivered FREE to your inbox as soon as they break! Take just 30 seconds and sign up for WND’s Email News Alerts!

He said Crown Prince Salman is bracing for a major fight to prevent Iran control of the entire region.

“I think what is teeing up, as I see it, is probably a very, very bloody war in that part of the world, and it may not be confined to that part of the world,” Gaffney said.

He said the Iran threat is growing in multiple respects.

Get the hottest, most important news stories on the Internet – delivered FREE to your inbox as soon as they break! Take just 30 seconds and sign up for WND’s Email News Alerts!

But why is the crown prince focused on rooting out corruption when so many national security concerns are on the front burner?

“He’s clearing the decks for action against the principal, and increasingly existential threat to the kingdom, which is the Islamic Republic of Iran,” he added.

Gaffney insists that labeling Iran an “existential threat” against Saudi Arabia is not an exaggeration.

Her said the Saudis don’t have the personnel to do the job.

Kurdish President Barzani Steps Down from Power

October 31, 2017Alexandra Johnson

Iraqi Kurdish President Masoud Barzani is resigning as president of the Kurdistan Regional Government, effective November 1^st,after the September 25th independence referendum backfired triggering a regional crisis for Iraq.

The Kurdish parliament approved of the Barzani’s resignation as Kurdish President, which was met by armed Kurdish protesters who disapproved of his resignation. Demonstrators stormed the parliament as the session was in process, firing gunshots. So far there are no reported injuries or casualties.

In his address to the public on October 29^th Barzani stated, “I am the same Masoud Barzani, I am a Peshmerga and will continue to help my people in their struggle for independence.” He also stated that that the results from the independence referendum which voted for 92.7% in favor of independence, “can never be erased.”

Barzani in his statement also condemned the United States for failing to back the Kurds. He said, “Our people should now question, whether the US was aware of Iraq’s attack and why they did not prevent it.”

The US State Department called Masoud Barzani “a historic figure and courageous leader of his people,” and added that the decision to step down “represents an act of statesmanship during a difficult period.”

Barzani has campaigned for Kurdish self-determination for nearly four decades. Barzani assumed office as President of the KRG in June 2005 after the new constitution of Iraq was ratified.

Technically Barzani’s second term expired in 2013, but it was extended without elections through parliament due to the fight against Islamic State.

The elections for Kurdish President had originally been set for November 1^st, but due to his resignation, they were delayed by eight months. Later, it was agreed to transfer presidential duties to the Parliament and the Ministry of Justice within parliament following a voting process and additionally the KRG’s Presidential Council has been abolished. Currently the KDP has the majority in the Kurdish Parliament with 51 seats and the PUK has 49 seats.

Prior to President Barzani stepping down from power, the Kurdish region has experienced turbulence due to the decision to press forward for the independence vote, despite Iraq, Turkey, Iran and the United States urging not to move forward. Following the vote on October 16^th the Iraqi government seized Kirkuk from the KRG.

Then on October 27^th the KRG and the central government in Baghdad called for a ceasefire over the fighting that has occurred in Kirkuk between the Iraqi forces and the Kurds. The retaking of Kirkuk from the KRG was a crucial victory for the national forces. The KRG used Kirkuk as one of their strongest argument for independence due to its oil reserves as well as an ethnically mixed population.

A truce has not been officially agreed on, but the armed conflict has stopped in Kirkuk, and it was expected that there would be “Diplomatic efforts underway to set a date for talks to start between Erbil and Baghdad” said Vahal Ali, director of the President Barzani’s media office.

However, the Kurds are clashing with the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) as they launched an offensive on October 26^th in area of the Zummar district of Northern Ninewa. Zummar is located north west of Mosul. Simultaneously Peshmerga and PMF forces began fighting near the town of Faysh Khabur, which is also one of the most important border crossings located on the border of Iraq, Syria, and Turkey.

Additionally, as of October 31^st the Habur border gate was handed over to the central government of Iraq from Turkish control. Iraq’s entire land border with Turkey is located along the Kurdish region. The Turkish and Iranian governments blocked air travel and border crossings to and from the Kurdish region at the request of Iraqi Prime Minister Haider Abadi urged the governments to block travel.

The loss of control over the Habur gate is crucial for the KRG. The Habur gate has been under control of the KRG since before 2003, and it’s could result in a domino effect impacting Kurdish control of other important land crossings. Another crossing site, the Faysh Khabur, is the site of the main oil export pipeline for northern Iraq, and crude exports through it are the principal source of funds for the Kurds. The central government is now demanding all crossing between Turkey and Iran be relinquished, and both Turkey and Iran support Prime Minister Abadi’s decision.

The current situation of the KRG due to the seizure of Kirkuk, President Barzani stepping down from power, and the loss of the Habur gate has very negative impacts for the original goal of independence.

U.S. House Votes to Impose Sanctions on Hezbollah

October 27, 2017Julia Sora

The U.S. House of Representatives voted on October 25^th to impose additional sanctions on Iranian-backed Hezbollah in an effort to take a harder stance against Iran’s support for international terrorism.

There were 3 Hezbollah-related measures that passed without opposition in the House. The first imposes new sanctions on any entities found to support the group, such as by providing weapons to Hezbollah. The second imposes sanctions on Iran and Hezbollah for using civilians as human shields. The third is a resolution which urges the European Union to designate Hezbollah as a terrorist organization, which the U.S. did in 1997.

Hezbollah has denounced the latest sanctions on the group, saying the new measures are an intervention in Lebanese internal affairs, a violation of Lebanese sovereignty and an unacceptable targeting of the Lebanese people.

The House voted on October 26^th on another bill, to impose additional sanctions on Iran related to its ballistic missiles program. The bill calls on the president to report to Congress on the supply chain for Iran’s ballistic missile program and to impose sanctions on the Iranian government or foreign entities that support it. The failure of the Iran nuclear deal to include prohibitions on Iran’s development of ballistic missiles has been repeatedly cited by Iran deal critics.

On October 13^th, President Trump said that he would not certify that Iran was complying with the 2015 Iran nuclear deal. In accordance with the Corker-Cardin legislation, following the president’s decision to not certify the deal, Congress has the option to restore sanctions withdrawn under the 2015 agreement, or introduce new ones within 60 days of the decertification.

Iran has said that it won’t tolerate any changes to the current nuclear agreement and has threatened to withdraw partially or completely from the agreement if new measures are imposed.

Iran has been Hezbollah’s main backer, supplying the group with weapons and money for more than three decades.

Hezbollah has received Iranian-supplied weaponry, monetary aid, and combat training and Hezbollah has in turn sent fighters to Syria and Iraq to support Iran and its allies. In Syria, the group has played a major role in keeping President Assad and the Syrian Army in power. In Iraq, the group has battled the Islamic State and helps promote Iranian interests in the region.

The U.S. is increasing pressure on Hezbollah and earlier this month, imposed sanctions on two Hezbollah officials, Talal Hamiyah and Fuad Shukr, and offered a reward for information leading to their capture. Hamiyah is the head of Hezbollah’s foreign operations, while Shukr is a member of Hezbollah who runs the group’s military forces in southern Lebanon.

These sanctions on Iran and Hezbollah are an attempt by the U.S. to clamp down on Iran without immediately moving to undermine the Iran nuclear deal which is an international nuclear agreement.

“North Korea’s nuclear arsenal is an offensive arsenal, not a deterrent”

October 23, 2017Fred Fleitz

Center Vice President for Policy and Programs, Fred Fleitz, joins Lou Dobbs to talk about the continuing developments on North Korea as well as the comments made by Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson.

The Regional and International Responses to the Seizure of Kirkuk

October 18, 2017Alexandra Johnson

A variety of regional and international actors are weighing in on the October 16^thseizure of oil-rich Kirkuk province by Iraqi security forces and Shia militia. The territory is one of the many disputed regions between the central government in Baghdad and the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) in Northern Iraq.

Kurdish forces have also retreated from other disputed territories such as Sinjar and territories that are close to the Iranian border.

The current situation in Iraq came to a head following KRG’s independence referendum on September 25th, which overwhelmingly favored Kurdish independence.

Iran, Turkey, the central government in Baghdad, as well as the United States were opposed to the referendum before it occurred, however, each have varying reactions toward the seizure of Kirkuk.

Iran has held a particular role in the Iraqi advancement into Kirkuk though the PMF. The PMF or Hashid al-Shaabi is a conglomeration of Iraqi militias, which is backed by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Iran’s primary military force. The IRGC was recently designated a terrorist organization by the United States due to their terror funding to Hezbollah and other groups.

Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi said in a statement that it was his “duty to work in accordance with the constitution to serve the citizens and protect the unity of the country” by advancing into Kirkuk as well as other disputed territories.

On October 17^th PM al-Abadi appointed a new Interim Governor Rakan Ali al-Jabouri, who is an Arab, to replace the ousted Kurdish governor, Najmaldin Karim.

The Prime Minister also ordered on October 18^th the withdrawal of all armed groups including the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) and called for turning over security to “the control of the local police with the support of counter-terrorism units.”

Turning over control to the police services remains a concerning option, given that regional police are forced to rely on the Iraqi ministry of interior for funds and support.

The head of Iraq’s Ministry of the Interior Qasim Mohammad Jalal al-Araji, is a part of the Badr Organization which is a wing of the PMF. He received his formal military training through the IRGC, after being captured by Iran during the Iran-Iraq war in 1984.

Local police in Kirkuk have claimed dissatisfaction with the Ministry of the Interior, claiming the Baghdad based government failed to provide support for Kirkuk police during efforts to combat the Islamic State.

Iraq’s neighbors and the United States are also responding to the recent military activity in Kirkuk.

Turkey also responded to the advance on Kirkuk on October 16^th saying it would keep its airspace closed to Iraq’s semi-autonomous northern Kurdish region.

The Deputy Prime Minister of Turkey Bekir Bozdag stated that the government decided to work with the Iraqi central government for secure the handover of the Ibrahim Khalil (Habur) border gate from the KRG to Baghdad.

The Prime Minister of Turkey Binali Yildirim warned that those who insisted on holding the referendum for independence from Iraq “should pay the price,” but also said that Turkey has no problems with the Kurdish people of Northern Iraq.

Turkey and Iraq launched a military drill before the Sept. 25 referendum along the Turkish-Iraqi border, which was interpreted as preparation to take control of the border gate from the hands of the KRG.

Iran and Iraq also conducted joint military exercises along the north-eastern border of the country following the referendum on October 2^nd. Baghdad demanded that the KRG relinquish control over its external border crossings with Turkey and Iran, as well as handing airports over to federal control.

The United States did not support the KRG’s decision to hold a referendum, however did urge the Iraqi government to avoid the use of force.

The Department of Defense also made a statement from the Operation Inherent Resolve which has focused on efforts in Iraq, said that “they were aware of reports of a limited exchange of fire during Oct. 16 and believed the engagement was a misunderstanding and not deliberate as two elements attempted to link up under limited visibility conditions.”

The DoD also made clear that their focus is attempting to downplay tensions within Iraq while moving forward in efforts to destroy the Islamic State.

Recently members of Congress have been vocal on the loss of the Kirkuk from the KRG. Arms Services Committee Chair Senator John McCain (R-AZ) made a statement stating that he was deeply concerned by the Iraqi advances of the government forces on the Kurdish people.

Congressman Steve King (R-IA) also denounced the U.S. State Department’s claim that the Kurdish referendum lacked “legitimacy” and described the U.S. as missing out on a historic opportunity to strengthen American efforts to combat Islamic terrorism in the region.

Official U.S. policy continues to support a unified Iraq, despite the role of Kurdish forces as the U.S.’ ally against Islamic terrorism.

Tension is also escalating between the Kurdish Democratic Party (KDP) and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) over the fall of the city.

President Barzani stated that he wants to prevent a Kurdish civil war following the events of Monday. The president said in a statement, “they want to drag us into a civil war, but we will in no way be doing this” referring to the Iraqi central government.

The Peshmerga general command on Monday blamed the fall of Kirkuk on “a historic treason” committed by some PUK commanders. The PUK, which controlled Kirkuk province, rejected the accusations that their troops surrendered Kirkuk instead blaming the decision of the KDP to go ahead with the Referendum despite the opposition from Baghdad, Turkey, Iran and the United States.

Iran has held ties as well as influence over the PUK, due to its geographically proximity with Sulaymaniyah, the Kurdish territory on the border with Iran. Iran helped support the PUK fighters during the Kurdish civil war that occurred in the 1990s against the then Turkish-backed KDP.

The PUK in the past has also held talks with Iran about building a pipeline to export oil from the Sulymaniyah province. As the Kurds have been continually disappointed by its ally the United States, there is more inclination for some Kurds to align with Iran for economic and military support.

With reactions from all regional and international players, the Kurds are going to have to reorganize and establish cooperation between the two main parties if they hope to regain their contested territories or continue to pursue independence.