Tweet
The recent violence in Iraq has highlighted a change in the nature of the problem over there that really hasn't gotten a lot of attenton -- at least a change from when the Sunni insurgency was the primary threat. As I understand it, the primary fighting that is going on right now is actually between two Shia groups, Muqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army and the Badr Brigade (on behalf of the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council), and the Sunnis are more or less out of the equation, by virtue of deals cut with Shia militias.
Here's the thing, though -- while this Shia-Sunni civil war has morphed into a civil war between opposing Shia sects, we've been ramping up the rhetoric against Iran. al-Sadr's historical ties to radical Shias in Iran are on the one hand pretty well-documented, but current ties to Iran are much more sketchy. Nevertheless, when allegations are made about Iran funding and supporting anti-US forces in Iraq, they are almost invariably referring to the Mahdi Army.
On the other hand, the "Iraqi military," and the force that protects Iraq's national interests is actually one and the same with the Badr Brigade -- an organization that was actually formed by the Iranian government and which was based in Iran for 2 decades prior to the US ousting Saddam. It actually fought alongside Iran in the Iran-Iraq war. Following Saddam's ouster, the Badr Brigade openly streamed into Iraq from Iran and the US engaged them as an ally because of their opposition to Saddam's Baathist regime, thinking they would be helpful against Sunni insurgents. This is now the organization that we arm, fund, and train, and that we've charged with keeping the peace.
The part I'm having trouble reconciling is that it would seem that Iranian interests and US interests aren't really opposed, at least as it pertains to Iraq, and we're openly supporting the Iranian Badr Brigade in its attempt to control Iraq. Meanwhile, we're raising hell about how bad Iran is and how Iranian influence in Iraq is something that is grounds for ramping up pressure on Iran. The Badr organization, however, is an ally of Ahmadinejad as I understand it.
I recognize that politics makes for strange bedfellows and all that jazz, but this just seems like madness to me.
WTF? Anyone able to she any light on this?
Here's the thing, though -- while this Shia-Sunni civil war has morphed into a civil war between opposing Shia sects, we've been ramping up the rhetoric against Iran. al-Sadr's historical ties to radical Shias in Iran are on the one hand pretty well-documented, but current ties to Iran are much more sketchy. Nevertheless, when allegations are made about Iran funding and supporting anti-US forces in Iraq, they are almost invariably referring to the Mahdi Army.
On the other hand, the "Iraqi military," and the force that protects Iraq's national interests is actually one and the same with the Badr Brigade -- an organization that was actually formed by the Iranian government and which was based in Iran for 2 decades prior to the US ousting Saddam. It actually fought alongside Iran in the Iran-Iraq war. Following Saddam's ouster, the Badr Brigade openly streamed into Iraq from Iran and the US engaged them as an ally because of their opposition to Saddam's Baathist regime, thinking they would be helpful against Sunni insurgents. This is now the organization that we arm, fund, and train, and that we've charged with keeping the peace.
The part I'm having trouble reconciling is that it would seem that Iranian interests and US interests aren't really opposed, at least as it pertains to Iraq, and we're openly supporting the Iranian Badr Brigade in its attempt to control Iraq. Meanwhile, we're raising hell about how bad Iran is and how Iranian influence in Iraq is something that is grounds for ramping up pressure on Iran. The Badr organization, however, is an ally of Ahmadinejad as I understand it.
I recognize that politics makes for strange bedfellows and all that jazz, but this just seems like madness to me.
WTF? Anyone able to she any light on this?
Comment