Go home, Tillerson tells Iranian-backed militias in Iraq

[webfact]

Go home, Tillerson tells Iranian-backed militias in Iraq

By Stephen Kalin and Jonathan Landay

 

U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Saudi King Salman speak before their meeting in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, October 22, 2017. REUTERS/Alex Brandon/Pool

 

RIYADH/DOHA (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said on Sunday it was time for Iranian-backed militias and their Iranian advisers who helped Iraq defeat Islamic State to "go home", after a rare joint meeting with the leaders of Iraq and Saudi Arabia.

 

The United States is concerned that Iran, a Shi'ite regional power, will take advantage of gains against IS in Iraq and Syria to expand the influence it gained after the U.S. invasion in 2003, something Sunni Arab rivals such as Riyadh also oppose.

 

"Iranian militias that are in Iraq, now that the fight against Daesh and ISIS is coming to a close, those militias need to go home. The foreign fighters in Iraq need to go home and allow the Iraqi people to regain control," Tillerson said at a joint news conference with Saudi Foreign Minister Adel Jubeir.

 

Tens of thousands of Iraqis heeded a call to arms in 2014 after IS seized a third of the country's territory, forming the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), which receive funding and training from Tehran and have been declared part of the Iraqi security apparatus.

 

A senior U.S. official said Tillerson had been referring to the PMF and the Quds Force, the foreign paramilitary and espionage arm of the powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

 

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif berated Tillerson's remarks as influenced by Iran's oil-rich regional rival Saudi Arabia.

 

"Exactly what country is it that Iraqis who rose up to defend their homes against ISIS return to?," Zarif said in a tweet. "Shameful US FP (foreign policy), dictated by petrodollars."

 

Iraq's military, armed by the United States but supported by the PMF, ejected the ultra-hardline Sunni Muslim militant group from Mosul and other cities in northern Iraq this year. Several thousand U.S. troops are still in the country, mostly for training but also to carry out raids against IS.

 

The campaign to uproot the militants left whole cities in ruins and has hit Iraq's economy.

 

A new joint ministerial-level body between Iraq and Saudi Arabia convened its inaugural meeting earlier on Sunday to coordinate their fight against IS and on rebuilding Iraqi territory wrested from the group.

 

Jubeir emphasized historic ties between the two neighbours, which share a border, vast oil resources and many of the same tribes.

 

"The natural tendency of the two countries and people is to be very close to each other as they have been for centuries. It was interrupted for a number of decades. We're trying now to make up for lost ground," he said.

 

The rare senior meeting, signalling a thaw between states that have been at loggerheads for decades, was also attended by Saudi King Salman and Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi.

 

WINNING THE PEACE

 

Tillerson said the council would contribute to reforms to build Iraq's private sector and encourage foreign investment.

"This will be critical to winning the peace that has been earned through the hard-fought military gains," he said.

 

State media said the council had expressed satisfaction with global oil markets' recovery as a result of a deal with other countries to boost prices by limiting production.

 

The council also agreed to reopen a Saudi Basic Industries Corp office in Iraq and grant Saudi agriculture company SALIC an investment licence.

 

A second meeting will be held in Baghdad but no date was mentioned.

 

Saudi Commerce and Investment Minister Majid al-Qusaibi told Reuters his country seeks to boost exports and is eyeing investment opportunities in Iraq's agricultural and petrochemical sectors, among others.

 

He said backing from the highest levels of both governments would produce "quick results on the ground".

 

"Let's not cry over spilt milk. Whatever happened in the past has happened. The good news is we are all here towards building a prosperous and beneficial future for both countries," he said in a telephone interview.

 

Tillerson and Jubeir also discussed Washington's hawkish new policy towards Iran, including a possible withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear deal and new sanctions on the IRGC.

 

"Both our countries believe those who conduct business with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, any of their entities, European companies or other companies around the world really do so at great risk," Tillerson said.

 

Relations between Riyadh and Baghdad were cut for 25 years, before recent rapprochement, after former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1990. Saudi Arabia, along with the United Arab Emirates, is wooing Baghdad now in an effort to halt the growing regional influence of Iran.

 

Arriving in Doha later on Sunday for the next leg of a multi-country trip, Tillerson told a news conference that there was little chance of a swift breakthrough to resolve a blockade imposed on Qatar by Saudi Arabia and its Arab allies.

 

The kingdom, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Bahrain imposed trade and travel curbs on Doha in June for alleged support of terrorism and friendship with Iran - charges Qatar denies.

 

"There is not a strong indication that the parties are ready to talk yet," Tillerson said.

 

The secretary of state's six-day trip will also take him to Pakistan, India and Switzerland.

 

(Additional reporting by Eric Knecht, and Dubai newsroom; Writing by Noah Browning; Editing by Dale Hudson and David Evans)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-10-23

[craigt3365]

What a mess that whole area is.  Tough times in the Middle East.

[ilostmypassword]

Do you think Tillerson sees the irony in the USA telling Iran to go home?

[craigt3365]

3 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Do you think Tillerson sees the irony in the USA telling Iran to go home?

Why?  The US is there at the invitation of the government.  And you know what's going to happen when the IS battles die down.  It will be back to sectarian violence.  Which happened in the past.

 

Time for the militias to go home and let the people of Iraq rebuild their country. 

[craigt3365]

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/mideast-crisis-iraq-nujaba/

 

Quote

 

The Iraqi militia helping Iran carve a road to Damascus

A group of Iraqi fighters loyal to Iran's Supreme Leader is trying to forge a land route from Iran to Syria. It threatens to exacerbate tensions in the region.

 

 

 

[pkspeaker]

ridiculous.. the US & their foreign coalition are the ones that need to 'go home'  they should have went home as soon as saddam was deposed, instead of fighting a pointless guerilla war which killed 5000 'allied' forces and hundreds of thousands of iraqis..only to have ISIS rise and then be confronted by iraqi shia's and Syria's government (then why did the US fight this vicious insurgency for 5 years? ).. western backers of israel can do nothing but promote violence and sectarianism as seen most recently with the kurdish independence drive..  The US is spending billions in Iraq a month and this is kept secret from the american taxpayer..  there is no more reason for the US to stay in Iraq claiming that they are there to avoid 'loosing' the war (which was the reason Bush II stayed in iraq.. the conflict has moved beyond that so western involvement is just dragging out the conflict

Edited October 23, 2017 by pkspeaker

[Scott]

Post reported and removed.  

[ilostmypassword]

8 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Why?  The US is there at the invitation of the government.  And you know what's going to happen when the IS battles die down.  It will be back to sectarian violence.  Which happened in the past.

 

Time for the militias to go home and let the people of Iraq rebuild their country. 

And the Iranians aren't? Who do you think the Iraqi government trusts more? The Iranians and the militias who helped them retake Kirkuk or the USA which was neutral in the attempt?  And the militias are home, if by home you mean Iraq. Can you cite me some evidence showing that the Iraqi government has called for the Iranians to leave? And what does the revival of sectarian violence in Iraq have to do with Iran? 

[Thakkar]

1 hour ago, ilostmypassword said:

Do you think Tillerson sees the irony in the USA telling Iran to go home?

The country that illegally invaded Iraq—an invasion that led to  ISIS—tells the people who helped clean that mess (and who were invited in by the government that the US installed), to “go home” while itself staying on.

 

”Irony” doesn’t even come close to describing this <deleted>fest.

Edited October 23, 2017 by metisdead
Profanity removed.

[craigt3365]

5 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

And the Iranians aren't? Who do you think the Iraqi government trusts more? The Iranians and the militias who helped them retake Kirkuk or the USA which was neutral in the attempt?  And the militias are home, if by home you mean Iraq. Can you cite me some evidence showing that the Iraqi government has called for the Iranians to leave? And what does the revival of sectarian violence in Iraq have to do with Iran? 

Too funny.  Iraq and Iran didn't have diplomatic relations for some 25 years.  Right.  Lots of love there.  

 

Iran is Shi'i.  Iraq has about 1/3rd of it's population as Sunni.  As you know, they hate each other. 

 

Please read the link I posted.  That will answer your last question.

[craigt3365]

1 hour ago, Thakkar said:

The country that illegally invaded Iraq—an invasion that led to  ISIS—tells the people who helped clean that mess (and who were invited in by the government that the US installed), to “go home” while itself staying on.

 

”Irony” doesn’t even come close to describing this <deleted>fest.

Iraq 1 was to free Kuwait.  Iraq 2 was a mess. 

 

 

[ilostmypassword]

10 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Too funny.  Iraq and Iran didn't have diplomatic relations for some 25 years.  Right.  Lots of love there.  

 

Iran is Shi'i.  Iraq has about 1/3rd of it's population as Sunni.  As you know, they hate each other. 

 

Please read the link I posted.  That will answer your last question.

What a massively uninformed comment.  The reason Iran and Iraq didn't have relations 25 years ago was because of Saddam Hussein, the Sunni leader of Iraq who made it his business to suppress the Shiites.   There was and is plenty of love - and contention and rivalries - between the Shiites of Iran and Iraq.  You don't think that the overwhelming majority of Iraqis are grateful for Iran's decisive role in destroying Isis. And you don't think that the Arab Shiites of Iraq seen Iran as a bulwark against the traditional hostility Salafi Saudi Arabia and friends?

And you think that the Iranians are just going to let the Americans - who have declared Iran to be the number 1 enemy peace in the mideast - to have a free hand in Iraq? You don't think that they have a reason to see the USA as its enemy?

And you still haven't cited evidence that the Iraqi government wants Iran out.

 

Edited October 23, 2017 by ilostmypassword

[punchjudy]

32 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Why?  The US is there at the invitation of the government.  And you know what's going to happen when the IS battles die down.  It will be back to sectarian violence.  Which happened in the past.

 

Time for the militias to go home and let the people of Iraq rebuild their country. 

 

are you serious?........the US invaded and installed the government.

[DaddyWarbucks]

The Muslim population of Iraq is approximately 60 - 65% Shia.

They're not going to "go home"... they're home already.

[ChouDoufu]

1 hour ago, ilostmypassword said:

Do you think Tillerson sees the irony in the USA telling Iran to go home?

perhaps he could offer them subsidized housing at

any one of the 800 bases the pentagram has in

70 countries?

[billd766]

2 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

Do you think Tillerson sees the irony in the USA telling Iran to go home?

 

I think he is correct in what he said.

 

However ALL parties from ALL countries who are in Iraq should go home starting with the UK and the USA, followed by Saudi Arabia who are the USA lapdogs and proxy fighters and every other country who are not from Iraq.

 

Let the Iraqis fight their own war, win or lose.

[Morch]

3 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

Why?  The US is there at the invitation of the government.  And you know what's going to happen when the IS battles die down.  It will be back to sectarian violence.  Which happened in the past.

 

Time for the militias to go home and let the people of Iraq rebuild their country. 

 

That's essentially the argument made with regard to Russia and Iran's presence in Syria. They were invited by the government. Both Iran's and the USA's involvement in Iraq are according to Iraq's government wishes, and the Iraqi government is on somewhat better footing when it comes to sovereignty.

 

Can't have it both ways. If Tillerson wants to use this reasoning it would also apply to USA presence in both countries. Another reminder that while relative to Trump the guy is a paragon of diplomacy, he's not exactly the natural pick for the job.

[Morch]

2 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

Too funny.  Iraq and Iran didn't have diplomatic relations for some 25 years.  Right.  Lots of love there.  

 

Iran is Shi'i.  Iraq has about 1/3rd of it's population as Sunni.  As you know, they hate each other. 

 

Please read the link I posted.  That will answer your last question.

 

As posted above, that bad blood is more to do with Saddam Hussein and a healthy domestic application of partisan politics (the latter going on even today).

 

"Iraq has about 1/3 of it's population as Sunni"  - I think less than that, and then there are them 2/3 Iraqi Shia. While attitudes toward Iran among Iraq's Shia are a wee bit more complex than presented above, it is safe to say that they tend to perceive Iran in a generally favorable light.

 

Like some other ME countries, national identity is not always the main factor relative to local, tribal and religious affiliations.

 

 

[DaddyWarbucks]

12 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

As posted above, that bad blood is more to do with Saddam Hussein and a healthy domestic application of partisan politics (the latter going on even today).

 

"Iraq has about 1/3 of it's population as Sunni"  - I think less than that, and then there are them 2/3 Iraqi Shia. While attitudes toward Iran among Iraq's Shia are a wee bit more complex than presented above, it is safe to say that they tend to perceive Iran in a generally favorable light.

 

Like some other ME countries, national identity is not always the main factor relative to local, tribal and religious affiliations.

 

 

Your last point is so true.

The reason is probably because in so many cases their national boundaries were imposed on them by western countries after the fall of the Ottoman Empire.

[Emster23]

"Hail.... hail....

the gangs all here!

What cha gonna do now?

What cha gonna do now?"

as the song goes....

[fvw53]

3 hours ago, DaddyWarbucks said:

The Muslim population of Iraq is approximately 60 - 65% Shia.

They're not going to "go home"... they're home already.

 

How to separate Iranian Shia militia from the exiled Iraqi Shia's who returned from Iran to fight after the downfall of Saddam Hussein thanks to G W Bush?

[Morch]

19 minutes ago, DaddyWarbucks said:

Your last point is so true.

The reason is probably because in so many cases their national boundaries were imposed on them by western countries after the fall of the Ottoman Empire.

 

Or to put it otherwise, the concept of national identity was, in some cases,  a foreign import.

[retarius]

Hysterical hypocrisy from Rex.....and I did think he was not a bad chap, but sadly he knows nothing at all about the international law. Iran was invited into Syria to help with the foreign invasion by the US acknowledged legitimate government of Syria. The US by contrast have invaded a sovereign state against all international law, but it is something they do routinely so I guess Rex thought it must be legal. Go back to your text books Rex.

[craigt3365]

4 hours ago, punchjudy said:

 

are you serious?........the US invaded and installed the government.

Perhaps you should research this recent history of elections in Iraq.  Seems it'd be very educational for you.

[craigt3365]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

That's essentially the argument made with regard to Russia and Iran's presence in Syria. They were invited by the government. Both Iran's and the USA's involvement in Iraq are according to Iraq's government wishes, and the Iraqi government is on somewhat better footing when it comes to sovereignty.

 

Can't have it both ways. If Tillerson wants to use this reasoning it would also apply to USA presence in both countries. Another reminder that while relative to Trump the guy is a paragon of diplomacy, he's not exactly the natural pick for the job.

Agreed.  But the US doesn't have a presence in Iraq anywhere near what Russia does in Syria.  And in Iraq, they do seem to be really going after ISIS rather than anybody opposed to the government.

 

It'd be great for all belligerents to leave.  Sadly, ISIS is a big problem.  Not an easy one to deal with.

[punchjudy]

16 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Agreed.  But the US doesn't have a presence in Iraq anywhere near what Russia does in Syria.  And in Iraq, they do seem to be really going after ISIS rather than anybody opposed to the government.

 

It'd be great for all belligerents to leave.  Sadly, ISIS is a big problem.  Not an easy one to deal with.

what was the US presence in iraq at its peak 100,000+........you have a selective memory.

[craigt3365]

4 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

What a massively uninformed comment.  The reason Iran and Iraq didn't have relations 25 years ago was because of Saddam Hussein, the Sunni leader of Iraq who made it his business to suppress the Shiites.   There was and is plenty of love - and contention and rivalries - between the Shiites of Iran and Iraq.  You don't think that the overwhelming majority of Iraqis are grateful for Iran's decisive role in destroying Isis. And you don't think that the Arab Shiites of Iraq seen Iran as a bulwark against the traditional hostility Salafi Saudi Arabia and friends?

And you think that the Iranians are just going to let the Americans - who have declared Iran to be the number 1 enemy peace in the mideast - to have a free hand in Iraq? You don't think that they have a reason to see the USA as its enemy?

And you still haven't cited evidence that the Iraqi government wants Iran out.

 

Ummm...I'm well aware and well informed why they didn't have relations for 25 years.  What I posted is true.  I didn't go into the details of why. 

 

Iran has a huge influence on Iraq.  For better or sometimes for worse.  They did help with IS.  What this is about is what's next.  And if you follow history, it won't be good.

 

http://www.understandingwar.org/report/resurgence-asaib-ahl-al-haq

Quote

AAH is an Iranian-backed Shi’a militant group that split from Moqtada al-Sadr’s Jaish al-Mahdi (JAM) in 2006. Since that time, AAH has conducted thousands of lethal explosively formed penetrator (EFP) attacks against U.S. and Iraqi forces, targeted kidnappings of Westerners, rocket and mortar attacks on the U.S. Embassy, the murder of American soldiers, and the assassination of Iraqi officials. 

This is one of the problems.  Iran wants to dominate Iraq.  Not necessarily a good think.  I sure hope you agree with that.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/15/world/middleeast/iran-iraq-iranian-power.html
 

Quote

 

Across the country, Iranian-sponsored militias are hard at work establishing a corridor to move men and guns to proxy forces in Syria and Lebanon.

 

But Iran never lost sight of its mission: to dominate its neighbor so thoroughly that Iraq could never again endanger it militarily, and to use the country to effectively control a corridor from Tehran to the Mediterranean.

 

The country’s dominance over Iraq has heightened sectarian tensions around the region, with Sunni states, and American allies, like Saudi Arabia mobilizing to oppose Iranian expansionism.

 

 

[craigt3365]

48 minutes ago, retarius said:

Hysterical hypocrisy from Rex.....and I did think he was not a bad chap, but sadly he knows nothing at all about the international law. Iran was invited into Syria to help with the foreign invasion by the US acknowledged legitimate government of Syria. The US by contrast have invaded a sovereign state against all international law, but it is something they do routinely so I guess Rex thought it must be legal. Go back to your text books Rex.

Ummm...the US is there by invitation of the "democratically" elected government.  Or did you miss that part? 

 

I guarantee Rex knows more about international law than you do.

[craigt3365]

6 minutes ago, punchjudy said:

what was the US presence in iraq at its peak 100,000+........you have a selective memory.

What is it now?  Do you even know?  I'm well aware what the peak troop levels were many years ago.

 

For your educatoin:

http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2017/05/us-troops-iraq-mosul-isis-iran-shiite-militias.html

Quote

Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi is talking with the US administration to keep US troops in Iraq after the fight against the Islamic State (IS) is over, the Associated Press (AP) cited Iraqi and US officials as saying on May 5. US officials confirmed to the AP on condition of anonymity that the United States and Iraq agreed on the need for a long-term US presence aimed at warding off the threat of another armed rebellion.

 

[sirineou]

There are no Iranian militias in Iraq ! There are Iraqi militias advised by Iranian  advisors.  These militias can not go home, they are already home.

 If Tillerson does not want advisors there he should start by removing his.