US warns Iran against strikes on Iraqi, Coalition forces
WASHINGTON DC (Kurdistan 24) – US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo warned Iran and its proxies against attacking military facilities where Iraqi Security Forces (ISF), as well as US forces and other members of the Coalition against the Islamic State, are based.
“Iran’s proxies have recently conducted several attacks against bases where [ISF] are co-located with US and International Coalition personnel,” a statement issued by Pompeo on Friday stated.
Increasing Iran-backed militia attacks
Pompeo cited two recent assaults on Baghdad International Airport (BIAP.) The first attack, on Dec. 9, hit near a diplomatic security compound, run by the State Department. It injured five members of Iraq’s Counter-Terrorism Service, two of whom were critically wounded. That strike was followed by a second attack on Dec 11.
The US will continue working “hand-in-hand with our Iraqi partners,” Pompeo affirmed. “We must also use this opportunity to remind Iran’s leaders that any attacks by them, or their proxies of any identity, that harm Americans, our allies, or our interests will be answered with a decisive US response.”
As a senior US military official told Reuters, “We’re used to harassing fire,” but, previously, the pace was “pretty episodic.” Now “the level of complexity is increasing,” and “the volume of rockets being shot in a single volley is increasing.”
The official attributed the attacks to two Iranian-backed militias, which are part of Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF): Kata’ib Hezbollah and Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq (AAH.)
He described a Nov. 8 attack, in which a converted flatbed truck was used to launch 17 rockets on the Qayyara military base, south of Mosul. That assault caused no significant damage, but the same technique was employed subsequently against Balad air base in central Iraq and al-Asad air base in western Iraq, using larger 122 mm rockets.
The Dec 9 assault on BIAP employed yet “significantly larger” munitions—“240 millimeter rockets not known to have been used in Iraq since 2011”—when the Iraq war ended and US forces withdrew from the country.
The US military official also warned that the Iranian-backed militias attacking the Iraqi bases were nearing a “red line,” when the US would respond with force and “no one will like the outcome.”
He complained that the Baghdad government has taken no action against the militias, although they “are supposedly being brought in under the heel of the Iraqi government as part of its security forces.”
The PMF were formally made part of the ISF in late 2107, but they are headed by an Iraqi best known by his nom de guerre, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, who has long had close relations with Iran. Indeed, his ties with Tehran go back to the 1980s, when he was involved in the bombings of the US and French embassies in Kuwait and for which he was tried in absentia and sentenced to death.
Washington’s “maximum pressure” campaign, which has radically reduced Tehran’s oil revenues, is generally seen as the main reason for the increasing attacks. However, the US has yet to respond forcibly to any of the attacks in Iraq or elsewhere in the region.
Pulling Punches?
In May and June, Iran sabotaged several oil tankers. Those attacks culminated in the Jun. 19 downing of a US Navy RQ-4A Global Hawk drone, flying in international air space.
Trump first indicated that he would respond militarily to the shoot-down of the drone and “initially approved attacks on a handful of Iranian targets, like radar and missile batteries,” The New York Times reported. However, at the last minute, after speaking with Fox News host, Tucker Carlson, he called off the strike.
Read More: Trump ends day of conflicting signals by calling off strike on Iran
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R, South Carolina) warned then that the US had to respond vigorously to Iranian aggression. “If [the Iranians] do anything else against an American asset,” he said, “and this President doesn’t respond like Ronald Reagan, then that’s the signal to North Korea and the entire world that we’re all talk.”
That is pretty much what happened, however. In September, Iran launched a major attack on Saudi oil facilities, using drones and cruise missiles. Tehran tried to make it appear that Houthi rebels in Yemen were behind the assault, but both Washington and Riyadh soon concluded that Tehran was directly responsible.
Yet Trump did not respond militarily. Rather, he vowed more sanctions.
Read More: Pompeo calls attacks on Saudi oil facilities 'act of war,' as Trump promises new Iran sanctions
Graham suggested then that Iran had taken Trump’s response to the downing of the US drone as “a sign of weakness” and warned that the Iranians “are clearly not going to stop until they pay a heavier price.”
A former Pentagon official advised Kurdistan 24 that Graham was “absolutely right,” suggesting “that’s probably what we’re seeing now,” as he warned that “this hesitation may cost the lives of US troops.”
He also pointed to the effect it has had on Saudi Arabia. “If you’re going to isolate Iran, politically and economically, you need allies,” he said.
But as The Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday, the Saudis are no longer interested in confronting Iran. Rather, they are trying to reduce tensions.
“Riyadh’s newfound interest in better relations” with Tehran “comes as Saudi officials question how much backing it has from the US and other allies,” the Journal stated.
“Saudi calculations changed” after the Iranian attack “temporarily disabled a large portion of the country’s crude [oil] production” and, afterwards, “Washington didn’t hit back at Iran.”
As a Saudi official explained, “The September 14 attack was a game-changer.”