Are US foreign policies short-sighted

US Foreign Policy: The Falcon's Myopia

Little Knowledge of Anti-Iran Policy: The Progress of the Destabilization of Iraq and New Cyberwar Skills for the CIA

It is not one of the "usual suspects" who accuse the US that their explosives, prepared by analysis by hawks, are wreaking havoc in the Middle East. Renad Mansour is a senior executive at the UK think tank Chatham House, not an editor at RT or PressTV.

Mansour mourns the death of his Iraqi friend Hisham al-Hashimi, who was killed in Baghdad last week. Who exactly is behind the murder is known only to insiders. It is believed that it was political extremists who killed al-Hashimi. The murder of the man who was active in the "heart of Iraqi politics" (Mansour), a widely respected expert on relationships, adviser and mediator between opponents, highlights the escalating tensions in Iraq, as Mansour describes in his contribution the "security experts" explains.

The effect of the targeted killings

Hashimi had exceptional access to leaders of the Shiite militias in Iraq, also known in this country through the collective name al-Haschd asch-Scha'bi (English: Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) and German People's Mobilization Forces). In addition, he had close contacts with party politicians and the political leadership in Baghdad, with former prime ministers as well as with the current incumbent Mustafa al-Kadhimi. Renad Mansour's contribution to the death of his friend offers a rare glimpse into the internal political "operation" of Iraq. He stays away from the attributions that one knows from headlines.

These headlines discussed, for example, whether the assassination of Iranian General Soleimani by a US drone at the airport in Baghdad struck a "instigator of war and terror", a criminal, or a national hero, as whom Iran's leadership hailed (and even if not quite as pathetic by supporters in Germany as well).

Renad Mansour's portrayal is about the effects that the fatal attack on Soleimani - and above all on Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the deputy chief of al-Hashd al-Sha'bi - had in Iraq. To put it briefly: With this short-sighted action, the USA strengthened the extreme forces, and al-Muhandis was allegedly in the process of centralizing the command structure of the Shiite militias in order to bring the more aggressive elements under control.

Instead, after his death, the instability in Iraq was put on a new path. And with the death of his friend Hashimi, according to Mansour, the last stage of development is revealed: Mediating voices between the camps disappear for fear of what happened to Hashimi. Hence his conclusion:

Hisham was just as much a victim of the American bombs, backed by the exact support of hawk analysts who relied on Hisham's information, as well as the men who shot him.

Renad Mansour

Blocking the rebuilding of Mosul

There are other examples that do not come from the circle of the usual suspects of "anti-US-Americanism" and which show in detail how little the US leadership takes local conditions into account in order to drive a "grand strategy" against Iran . It is then astonishing how roughly and sweeping the US leadership is in Iraq - in a country that the military and political leadership should have known better for 17 years, since the US troops marched in.

Reuters reports on the reasons why the reconstruction of the Iraqi city of Mosul is stalling, to which US politics has played a large part. It has alienated even parties that were sympathetic to it so much that they prefer to accept offers of help from the Iranian side - a peculiar result of a policy that strives for exactly the opposite, namely the weakening of "Iranian influence". And an indictment in view of the fact that the US Air Force was largely responsible for the destruction in Mosul.

But apparently, according to the news agency's background information, the US is currently more concerned with exploiting the al-Hashd al-Sha'bi, who were still allies in the fight against IS, and their supporters in a way that primarily had a destructive effect Has.

Greater CIA powers

This is all the more worrying if the news is true that US President Trump has given the CIA far greater powers to conduct cyberattacks. The Moon of Alabama blog, a keen and rigorous critic of US strategies, thinks it likely that American cyberattacks played a role in the "incidents" most recently reported from Iran - with the spectacular culmination of major damage at the nuclear facility in Natans (Natans: Sabotage on Iranian nuclear facility?).

As stated in Moon of Alabama, such attacks carry the risk of spreading - the other side then also avoids the right to such attacks. It is no coincidence that the Iranian broadcaster PressTV countered with a report on the vulnerabilities of the US military network.

But there is another problem: Such a war from a distance abstracts a lot more from local conditions. What counts is the great strategy that is supported by conveying images of the enemy to the general public. Forces that hold a society together by mediating are not important factors in such calculations.

Initial indications of how Trump's challenger Joe Biden intends to shape his Middle East policy does not give reason to hope that he will take a fundamentally different course. In Iran policy, too, it is likely that not only sanctions will remain. (Thomas Pany)

Read comments (55 posts) https://heise.de/-4845872Report errorDrucken