Soleimani's Occupations by War, Peace or Agreements
12 January 2017
By Eyad Abu Shakra
Those who are familiar with how Iran's political institutions work explain
General Qassem Soleimani's intended appearances in pictures and films shot in
Arab battlefields where his militias fight, and the broadcasting of them on TV
and online social networks, as part of the 'psychological warfare' that Tehran
has mastered.
Soleimani, Commander of the IRGC's 'Quds Brigade', is himself engaged in a
fight for influence within Iran's security and military establishment which is
currently the backbone of the country's power structure under the nominal
'legitimacy' of the 'Vali e Faqih'. 'Elected' and selected councils, as well
as religious authorities, the presidency and the prime minister's posts are
now of secondary importance compared to the real 'centre of power' which
comprises the interests networks of the security and military apparatuses –
led by the IRGC – and its financial mafias; albeit, under the cloak of 'the
Supreme Guide' Ali Khamenei.
Thus, Soleimani and his mates in the IRGC and other security and military
apparatuses are the ones who today call the shots, decide the national
political agenda, and plan and execute Iran's adventures abroad. Furthermore,
even, when recalling that most of what is being uttered in the now familiar
arrogance may not be true but is primarily reserved for 'local consumption',
and that Iran's internal situation is much worse than we are led to believe by
Tehran propaganda organs, one has to accept that the better part of Tehran's
arrogance is helped by very helpful and accommodating regional and global
conditions.
Indeed, it was recently reported that things are not all well between Tehran's
leading players and some of its influential lobbyists in Washington who have
different approaches and tactics. However, reliable observers do not see these
emerging differences as a critical problem in dealing with Washington under
Donald Trump unless the anti-Iran forces and those at the receiving end of
Tehran's aggression and expansionism succeed in establishing a solid
understanding based on common interests with the incoming Trump
administration.
Frankly, one has to regard Tehran's achievements in both Iraq and Syria as
outright victories. Tehran has also managed to reach an agreement with
Washington leaving it the freedom to do as it pleased throughout the Middle
East, and tie up its tactical interests with those of Russia despite the
historical Russo-Iranian animosities in the southern Caspian Sea basin.
The Iranian de facto occupation of Iraq began with the 2003 US-led attack and
occupation, and gathered pace under the Coalition Provisional Authority which
dismantled Iraqi state institutions and 'gifted' the country to pro-Iran
sectarian factions; and now this Pax Iranica is obvious after the successive
governments of Ibrahim Jaafari, Nuri Al-Maliki and Haider Al-Abadi. In the
meantime, while the Kurdish north is all but an 'independent state', the only
part of Iraq whose position remains ambiguous in the atmosphere of Iranian
hegemony is the Arab Sunni part awaiting the outcome of the battle for Mosul
and the clarification of the relationship of the Mid-Euphrates (Al-Anbar) with
the central government in Baghdad.
The overall picture is not much different in Syria now that the Russia – Iran
alliance is applying the final touches on the desired demographic change in
'Useful Syria' through systematic mass population displacement under full
international auspices. This displacement, or rather 'cleansing' is being
meticulously conducted regionally and internationally through multi-party
talks and meetings that began in Geneva and may not end in Astana, the capital
of Kazakhstan.
In other Syrian areas, while the situation in the 'militarily-frozen' south
seems to be controlled by coded messages between Israel on one side and the
Assad regime, Soleimani's bunch, and Putin's protectorate on the other,
Washington continues to bet on Kurdish secessionist ambition in northern Syria
under the pretext of fighting ISIS. Finally, eastern Syria, i.e. Deir Ez-Zor
Province is left to share the same fate with the Iraqi part rest of the
Mid-Euphrates basin.
Last but not least, there is Lebanon. Here the majority in both the Christian
and Sunni Muslim communities thought they finally managed to ''save''
Independent Lebanon by electing a 'strong' Maronite Christian with majority
support as President, and appointing a 'strong' Sunni with a majority support
as Prime Minister. They felt that the two men (Michel Aoun and Saad Al-Hariri)
would be able to end Lebanon's 'political vacuum' which lasted for around two
and a half years. But while most level-headed Lebanese knew deep inside that
the 'vacuum' was only the tip of the 'iceberg', and that the reality was much
more serious, they gave this development the benefit of the doubt, and trusted
yet again promises that have been proven to be worthless. The grantor of these
promises was the 'force of the Status Quo' – i.e. Hezbollah – that receives
its orders from abroad while exercising its 'occupation' of the country,
permeating all government institutions, and unilaterally fighting regional
wars that serve the interests of its regional master, Iran.
This 'occupation' is now about to be legitimized by an 'electoral law'
demanded by Hezbollah, and would contribute to the ongoing process of the
IRGC's occupation of Syria; noting that the latter is taking shape through
sectarian cleansing of regions, towns and cities like Qusair, Homs and Aleppo,
as well as that in the greater Damascus region with the intention of
bolstering its defences and linking it with the Shi'ite human reservoir in
neighbouring Lebanon.
In fact, Hezbollah – an organ of the IRGC and a follower of Vali e Faqih – has
done its share in changing the demographic map of Lebanon, through its
military adventures that damaged the country's economy, driving hundreds of
thousands of Lebanese to emigrate.
Thus, one needs to reflect when seeing Qassem Soleimani's pictures in front of
Aleppo's historic citadel, the weeping displaced being driven away in the
regime's green buses in a journey of sectarian population exchange, and
hearing of forced 'conciliations' under threat of famine and murder.
Yes, one must reflect and think, as the international community chatters about
fighting terrorism, fighting extremism, and supporting 'legitimacy' through
conferences and deals designed – in reality – to facilitate the redrawing of
the Middle East map.
We are indeed at a threshold of a regional situation totally different from
the one in place around 100 years ago. In this new situation there will surely
be winners, losers and the departed; and it is our duty to realise the
magnitude of its critical challenges.
Eyad Abu Shakra is the managing editor of Asharq Al-Awsat. He has been with
the newspaper since 1978.
©
EsinIslam.Com
Add Comments