bin Ladin’s Bodyguard Transferred to SA from Gitmo

Usama bin Ladin’s bodyguard is transferred to Saudi Arabia.

Full detainee file is here.

  1. (S//NF) Personal Information:
  • JDIMS/NDRC Reference Name: Abdul Shalabi
  • Current/True Name and Aliases: Abd al-Rahman Shalbi Isa

Uwaydah, Abdul Haq Rahman, Saqr al-Madani, Mahmud

Abd Aziz al-Mujahid

  • Place of Birth: Medina, Saudi Arabia (SA)
  • Date of Birth: 4 December 1975
  • Citizenship: Saudi Arabia
  • Internment Serial Number (ISN): US9SA-000042DP
  1. (U//FOUO) Health: Detainee is in good health.
  2. (U) JTF-GTMO Assessment:
  3. (S) Recommendation: JTF-GTMO recommends this detainee for Continued Detention

Under DoD Control (CD). JTF-GTMO previously recommended detainee for Continued

Detention Under DoD Control (CD) on 26 October 2007.

  1. (S//NF) Executive Summary: Detainee is a member of al-Qaida and a long-term bodyguard for Usama Bin Laden (UBL), serving in that position beginning in 1999.

Detainee received specialized close combat training for his role as a suicide operative in an aborted component of the 11 September 2001 al-Qaida attacks. Detainee participated in hostilities against US and Coalition forces and was captured with a group referred to as the Dirty 30, which included UBL bodyguards and an assessed 20th 11 September 2001 hijacker.

Detainee received basic militant and advanced training at al-Qaida associated training camps.

 

October 6 & 22, Benghazi Cmte, Popcorn Buttered?

More emails surface in Hillary Clinton Benghazi probe

Politico: More previously-undisclosed State Department emails related to Benghazi have surfaced in a federal court filing, offering a public accounting of at least some of the records still being sought by congressional investigators.

The filing Monday in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit brought by the conservative group Citizens United describes about a dozen Benghazi-related emails that were withheld in whole or in part as State responded to one of the group’s requests seeking information about contacts between a top aide to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and officials with the Clinton Foundation.
Most of the documents also appear to have been withheld from the House Select Committee on Benghazi, which is investigating State’s response to the attack. The committee is scheduled to take public testimony from Clinton on Oct. 22.

A panel spokesman said he could not immediately confirm which of the documents had been turned over to the committee, but Citizens United President David Bossie told reporters staffers at the House panel told the group State never produced the records to Congress.

“To the best of their knowledge, the do not have these documents either, even though they are under subpoena for an extended period of time,” Bossie told reporters outside U.S. District Court in Washington after a hearing on the suit.

State Department spokesman Alec Gerlach told POLITICO there is no effort to impede congressional probes.

“The Department has made every effort to cooperate with the Benghazi Committee, providing 32 witnesses for interviews and over 70,000 pages of documents, including over 20,000 pages in the last month alone,” Gerlach said. “We will continue to respond to the Benghazi Committee’s requests, but as they mount and modify over time, so too must we plan accordingly for the time and resources they consume.”

In the new court filing, State Department official John Hackett said nearly all the Benghazi-related emails involved in the FOIA lawsuit involve deliberations among State officials about how to respond to Benghazi-related congressional inquiries.

In several high profile cases, including the ill-fated Operation Fast and Furious gunrunning investigation, the Obama Administration has defended its right to keep confidential its internal discussions about House and Senate investigations. The administration has also sought to extend that confidentiality to cover responses to media inquiries prompted by congressional probes.

In June, while producing records to congressional committees, the State Department confirmed it was holding back some Benghazi documents.

“A small number of documents implicate important Executive Branch institutional interests and are therefore not included in this production,” Assistant Secretary of State for Legislative Affiairs Anna Frifield wrote in a letter to the House Benghazi panel.

However, House staffers said the diplomatic agency has repeatedly rebuffed requests for a log of documents State is withholding. The FOIA lawsuits provide a vehicle to force the agency to identify those emails, although the substance of the messages is not disclosed.

At the court hearing Tuesday, a federal judge pressed the State Department to move more quickly to process documents requested by Citizens United and others who have been demanding records relating to Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state .

“I think there has to be some reallocation of resources, because these are atypical cases,” U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan said. “This case is important to the public. The public is clamoring for information. Everyone is clamoring for information.”

After Sullivan derided State’s approach as “business as usual,” Justice Department attorney Elizabeth Shapiro insisted that State’s 63.5-member FOIA processing staff has been working long hours and weekends in “demoralizing” conditions to publish emails from Clinton’s account as well as records sought in about 100 pending FOIA lawsuits and thousands of pending FOIA requests.
“I just want to assure the court that it’s not business as usual,” Shapiro declared. “The State Department’s being crushed by obligations.”

Much of the hearing was spent discussing why the State Department failed to complete searches of emails provided by former Clinton Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills and Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin by a court-ordered deadline of September 13.

Sullivan seemed to waver on how culpable State was for delays, sometimes suggesting that the agency had to wait for the cooperation of its former employees and at other points suggesting that State was being sluggish.

The judge initially attributed the delay to “foot-dragging” by Mills and Abedin in response to requests from their former agency. However, he quickly withdrew that accusation.
“So, there was foot-dragging on their part–well, there was delay. I can’t say there was foot-dragging,” Sullivan said.

Justice Department attorney Caroline Anderson insisted that the State Department was only obliged to produce records in its possession at the time the search began, so records turned over later by Mills and Abedin were not technically covered by the FOIA requests filed last year for records of contacts between top Clinton aides and officials with the Clinton Foundation and Teneo Holdings, a private consulting firm with connections to former President Bill Clinton.

“The State Department is in compliance with every order of this court,” Anderson said.

Anderson proposed that State have until December 9 to locate and process relevant records from Mills’ and Abedin’s accounts, but eventually said it was just “the State Department’s hope” to get it done by then. That seemed to irritate Sullivan.

“How long does it take you to run a computer search?” the judge asked. “Someone pushes a button. I’m not minimizing it, but it’s a computer search.”

Citizens United attorney Matthew McGill insisted that State knew or should have known weeks ago if it was going to have trouble meeting the deadline. “They should have come to the court then….Instead, they waited,” McGill said. “That was a tactical decision on their part. It was meant to delay.”

Anderson asked that State have a month to finish the computer-based searches and then more time to review the content of the documents for sensitive national security information and other details subject to withholding. But the judge said a shorter timeline was necessary.

Sullivan ordered State to finish the searches by October 2 and set a hearing four days later.

Bossie said State’s sluggish response was part and parcel of an effort to benefit Clinton’s Democratic presidential bid by kicking the issue down the road.

“Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills have taken the specific strategy and tactics just like they did in the 90s–the same people the same strategies–to drag these efforts out, to drag out congressional committees, to frustrate justice and to frustrate the American people from getting information so that people ask questions like: ‘This has been going on for three years and don’t we know everything and isn’t this a rehash?” the conservative activist said. “That is their deliberate strategy. They’ve been doing this for 20 years…..the same Clinton playbook is played over and over and over again.”

Clinton campaign spokesmen and attorneys for Abedin did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Mills’s lawyer, Beth Wilkinson, called Bossie’s claim of deliberate delay “untrue.”

 

 

 

 

 

RT= Russia Today=Bigger Propaganda

I have always been suspect of this site….you?

UK watchdog raps RT for biased reports

LONDON — RT, the state-owned Russian news channel, was reprimanded by Britain’s communications watchdog Monday for airing biased and misleading reports on Ukraine and Syria.

Ofcom found “significant” breaches of U.K. broadcasting rules in three separate programs screened by RT last year. It ordered the news channel to broadcast statements correcting two of the reports, but stopped short of imposing a fine.

With the latest findings, RT has been found in breach of U.K. regulations 14 times since it began broadcasting a decade ago.

RT, formerly Russia Today, has been increasingly prominent in Britain in recent years, advertising itself as an alternative to the dominant news providers.

Some lawmakers and broadcasters are nervous about its growing influence, amid concerns that it peddles the Kremlin’s view on foreign policy matters.

Margarita Simonyan, RT’s editor-in-chief, said the network was “shocked and disappointed” at Ofcom’s findings. RT had submitted lengthy defences of the programs.

One of the breaches related to a program screened in July last year, The Truthseeker: Genocide of Eastern Ukraine, which aired claims that Ukraine’s government and military were committing atrocities in the east of the country, where the government is in conflict with pro-Russian separatists.

The 14-minute report drew parallels between Ukraine’s military and the Nazis. It concluded with a denial from Ukrainian officials that the government had committed atrocities, but this was insufficient for the program overall to appear impartial, Ofcom found.

Another episode of RT’s Truthseeker series, broadcast in March last year, which accused the BBC of “stunning fakery” in a report on the use of chemical weapons in Syria, was also found to be in breach of U.K. regulations.

RT misled viewers by implying that an official public investigation into the BBC report had uncovered wrongdoing, Ofcom said. The BBC was not treated fairly or given a chance to respond to the allegations, the regulator found.

“Ofcom found that RT broadcast content that was either materially misleading or not duly impartial,” the regulator said. “These are significant failings and we are therefore requiring RT to broadcast two clear statements on our decision which correct these failures.”

*** The next question is what about al Jazeera? In 2011, Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy in Media penned a piece on RT. In part:

Russia Today, an English-language channel provided in the U.S. and other Western countries, is funded by the Moscow regime of Vladimir Putin, a former KGB officer, and recently hired an alleged Russian spy who is in the process of being deported from Britain.

Her first “story” for RT was to complain that Western governments have a “habit of lashing out at other countries for not listening to their people, while blithely ignoring public opinion on their own doorsteps.”

Russia Today has been described by Konstantin Preobrazhensky, himself a former Soviet KGB officer who defected to the West, as “a part of the Russian industry of misinformation and manipulation” designed to mislead foreign audiences about Russian intentions. He says Russia Today television utilizes methods of propaganda that are managed by Directorate “A” of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service. He explains, “The specialty of Directorate ‘A’ is deceiving world public opinion and manipulating it. It has got a lot of experience over decades of the Cold War.”

In trying to attract and confuse an American audience, RT regularly features Marxist and radical commentators in the U.S. such as Noam Chomsky, Gloria La Riva of the Party for Socialism and Liberation, Carl Dix of the Revolutionary Communist Party, and 9/11 “inside job” advocate and radio host Alex Jones.

DNA Tests Prove U.S. Getting Punked by Refugee Resettlement

Recent Somali immigrants Nur Ali, right, and his wife Mahado Mohamed, left, sit with their six children Shukri Shukri, from left, 9, one-week-old Ifrah Shukri, in her mother's arms, Ugbad Shukri, 7, Hafifa Shukri, 4, Antar Shukri, 10, and one-year-old Ikra Shukri in their apartment at Mary's Place transitional apartments in downtown Minneapolis. The family arrived in the United States four months ago, first landing in Connecticut before coming to Minnesota.

New Somali refugee arrivals in Minnesota are increasing

After a dip in 2008, a second wave of Somali refugees is arriving in the state. But with fewer family ties, this group faces a new set of challenges. 

Tales of the state’s large So­ma­li com­muni­ty had in­trigued them back in the Ken­yan ref­u­gee camp where they had mar­ried and had five chil­dren. Now, a So­ma­li man they met in Hartford told them all re­cent ar­ri­vals head to Minnesota, home of “Little Moga­dis­hu.”

After a major dip in 2008, the year­ly num­bers of new So­ma­li refu­gees in Minnesota have re­bounded stead­i­ly. The num­ber of So­malis re­set­tled in the state has more than trip­led in four years. As resettlements nationally have picked up, more So­malis are also arriving here after brief stints in other states — often trading early support from resettlement agencies for the company of more fellow Somalis.

“You tend to go some­where you can con­nect,” said Mo­ha­mud Noor, the head of the Con­fed­er­a­tion of So­ma­li Community in Minnesota. “Be­fore peo­ple even ar­rive from Af­ri­ca, they know they are com­ing to Minnesota.”

But without the Twin Cities family ties of earlier arrivals, these newcomers often can’t lean as heavily on longer-term Somali residents. Mary’s Place, a Minneapolis home­less shel­ter, has be­come ground zero for fami­lies like Ali and Mo­ha­med’s. Somali participation in the state’s public food assistance program doubled in the past five years. Meanwhile, the Minneapolis School District, its So­ma­li stu­dent en­roll­ment up 70 percent since 2011, launched eight class­rooms with in­struc­tion in both Eng­lish and So­ma­li to help new­comers catch up.

In some ways, Ali and Mo­ha­med have had a steep­er learn­ing curve than So­malis who set­tled in Minnesota in the 1990s and early 2000s. The cou­ple spent their en­tire a­dult lives in tents at Ken­ya’s sprawl­ing, over­crowd­ed Hagadera ref­u­gee camp. They didn’t have fam­i­ly or close friends who re­set­tled in America be­fore them, and their no­tion of life in the Unit­ed States was forged out of camp leg­end.

“We al­ways used to think when you come to America, you have a lot of mon­ey and life is re­al­ly easy,” Ali said through a trans­la­tor. “We have been sur­prised.”

Ali and Mohamed are part of a new wave of Somali refugees. Until 2008, the state resettled only refugees reuniting with family here.

But that year, DNA tests showed only about 20 percent of ap­pli­cants in a ref­u­gee fam­i­ly re­u­ni­fi­ca­tion program, most of them from Af­ri­ca, were ac­tu­al­ly re­lated to their stateside sponsors. The program was sus­pend­ed, even as So­malis ar­gued a broad­er defi­ni­tion of fam­i­ly was as much a factor as fraud. The num­ber of new So­ma­li ar­ri­vals plum­met­ed, from a high of more than 3,200 in 2006 to 180 in 2009.

Mean­while, more strin­gent back­ground checks for refu­gees in 2010 snarled the ap­pli­ca­tion proc­ess. Lar­ry Bart­lett, the U.S. Ref­u­gee Ad­mis­sions program di­rec­tor, says the stream­lin­ing of se­curi­ty checks since and the re­sump­tion of the fam­i­ly re­u­ni­fi­ca­tion program in 2012 led to the re­cent in­crease in So­ma­li ar­ri­vals — a trend he ex­pects to con­tin­ue in the next few years.

In the fis­cal year that end­ed in Sep­tem­ber, Minnesota wel­comed al­most 1,050 So­ma­li refu­gees ar­riv­ing di­rect­ly from Af­ri­ca, most of them with­out fam­i­ly ties to the state. Na­tion­al­ly, 9,000 So­malis were re­set­tled, up from about 2,500 in 2008.

No ‘out-migration’

The ex­act num­bers of So­malis moving to Minnesota from oth­er states are hard to track. But there’s little doubt their ranks have swelled, too. The federal Office of Ref­u­gee Resettlement com­piles partial numbers showing about 2,620 total ref­u­gee ar­ri­vals from oth­er states in 2013, up from 1,835 two years earli­er — making Minnesota the state with the high­est in-mi­gra­tion by far.

“This has al­ways been an is­sue for Minnesota,” said Kim Dettmer of Lutheran So­cial Service, one of the ag­en­cies that helps re­set­tle refu­gees who come di­rect­ly to Minnesota. “We have in-mi­gra­tion. We don’t re­al­ly have out-migration.”

Af­ter ar­riv­ing from Kampala, U­gan­da, Ayan Ahmed and her nine chil­dren, ages 4 to 18, spent six months in Phoe­nix. There, Catholic Charities had lined up a fur­nished four-bed­room home for the fam­i­ly and a neu­rol­o­gist for Ahmed’s eld­est son, who is blind.

But then, some fi­nan­cial sup­port Ahmed re­ceived as a ref­u­gee was about to dry up, and she wor­ried about cov­er­ing her $1,200 rent. Most So­ma­li fami­lies she met in Phoe­nix were longtime resi­dents, the strug­gles of ad­just­ing to a new coun­try long behind them. They urged her to go to Minnesota and raised mon­ey for the plane tick­ets.

Ahmed, who is staying at Mary’s Place, says local Somalis have picked up groceries and takeout food for her, and lent a compassionate ear: “Some days, I feel I stayed in Mogadishu.”

Challenges for newcomers

Ali, a five-month preg­nant Mo­ha­med and their kids ar­rived in Minneapolis four months ago with­out a de­tailed plan. They had used up most of their ref­u­gee cash pay­ments for the plane tick­ets.

At the air­port, they met a So­ma­li cabdriver who of­fered to drive them to Village Market, a So­ma­li mall in south Minneapolis. The fam­i­ly went to the mosque in­side the mall, prayed and asked for help. A So­ma­li fam­i­ly agreed to put them up for the night and took them to Mary’s Place the next day. There, the couple, their five older children and new­born daugh­ter sleep on three bunk beds in their tidy a­part­ment.

In some ways, things are look­ing up: Ali is tak­ing Eng­lish class­es and re­cent­ly found a full-time job as a butch­er in a ha­lal mar­ket. They have health in­sur­ance and food stamps. But they have found they can rely only so much on local So­malis, who are busy with their own lives. And saving up en­ough mon­ey to move into their own place is an elu­sive goal that weighs heav­i­ly on Ali.

With lim­it­ed ties to the local So­ma­li com­muni­ty, re­cent So­ma­li ar­ri­vals face a new set of chal­len­ges. Community lead­ers say it used to be un­think­a­ble that a So­ma­li fam­i­ly should land in a home­less shel­ter: New­comers could in­voke the most tenu­ous fam­i­ly con­nec­tion to move into famously hospitable So­ma­li homes in­def­i­nite­ly.

But these days long­er-term resi­dents re­cov­er­ing from the re­ces­sion might balk at put­ting up com­plete strang­ers. Mean­while, af­ford­a­ble hous­ing for large fami­lies is scarce, es­pe­cial­ly in Hennepin County.

Ironically, community activists such as Abdirizak Bihi say, these newcomers might need more support than earlier arrivals. Many have spent most of their lives in makeshift camps such as Qabri Bayah in Ethiopia, with basic amenities and limited access to formal education.

When these refugees move too soon after arriving in a different state, they get cut off from resettlement agencies there responsible for finding homes and jobs for them. Noor, whose group tries to assist newcomers with navigating the transition, says the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment needs to do more to dis­cour­age this early migration. At the U.S. State Department, Bart­lett says staff members strive to honor refu­gees’ host city pref­er­ence. Some refu­gees even sign a docu­ment af­firm­ing they are going to the city where they want to stay.

“The prob­lem with mov­ing quick­ly is that the bene­fits don’t al­ways fol­low you,” Bart­lett said. “We re­al­ly try to im­press that upon them.”

Adjusting to the influx

Mary Jo Cope­land, the found­er of Mary’s Place, says as many as 60 of the shel­ter’s rough­ly 90 units are oc­cu­pied by So­ma­li fami­lies, gen­er­al­ly re­cent ar­ri­vals from Af­ri­ca by way of an­oth­er state. Cope­land, who hired two So­ma­li-speak­ing ad­vo­cates to help the fami­lies with job- and a­part­ment-hunt­ing and more, says these resi­dents have im­pressed her: They take Eng­lish class­es, keep their apart­ments im­mac­u­late and save up ev­er­y­thing they earn work­ing at day cares, gro­cer­ies and cab com­panies.

“You name the state, they are from all over,” she said. “As soon as they move out, oth­ers move in.”

The num­ber of So­ma­li adults and children who participated in the state’s fam­i­ly cash as­sist­ance program jumped 34 percent from 2008 to 2013, to 5,950. At the same time, food as­sist­ance participation increased 98 percent, to 17,300 adults and children, which does not include U.S.-born Somalis. Census numbers place the Minnesota Somali community at more than 33,000, a count Somali leaders say underestimates its size by tens of thousands.

The Minneapolis School District responded to a ma­jor up­tick in new So­ma­li stu­dents by launching the NABAD program, an ac­ro­nym that’s also a greet­ing in So­ma­li. The dis­trict is al­most 10 percent So­ma­li this fall. The new class­rooms — two last year, eight this fall af­ter prom­is­ing early re­sults — fea­ture an English language learn­er teach­er and a So­ma­li-speak­ing aide. Students spend a school year there be­fore join­ing the main­stream.

At Andersen United Community School, teach­er Stephany Jallo and her third- through fifth-graders re­cent­ly went over a pic­ture book called “Nabeel’s New Pants,” about a group of kids who re­ceive clothes as gifts to wear for the Is­lam­ic hol­i­day Eid. At each of Jallo’s ques­tions, hands shot up. Oth­er stu­dents looked to Ham­di Ahmed, a visit­ing co-teach­er, who trans­lat­ed into So­ma­li.

Jallo says four of her 20 stu­dents came with no for­mal ed­u­ca­tion, but most are mak­ing rapid prog­ress: “I have no doubt I have fu­ture doc­tors, law­yers, teach­ers and sci­en­tists in my class.”

Ali and Mo­ha­med’s kids also have ac­a­dem­ic catch­ing up to do. These days, the par­ents wor­ry about af­ford­ing win­ter coats, an a­part­ment and fur­ni­ture. But when they see their kids crack­ing open their home­work min­utes af­ter get­ting home — the glass facade of Tar­get Field gleam­ing be­yond the kitch­en win­dow — Ali and Mo­ha­med’s faces fill with hope.

Who Signed the Iran Deal in the First Place?

The gesture inspection. formality.

Iranian nuclear experts have taken environmental samples from the military base at Parchin without United Nations inspectors being present, the spokesman for Iran’s atomic energy agency was quoted as saying on Monday.

The procedure for taking the samples, which could shed light on whether Iran’s nuclear program ever had a military dimension, has been under intense discussion since Tehran reached a nuclear deal with world powers in July.

Western diplomats told Reuters earlier this month inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the United Nations nuclear watchdog, would observe samples being taken.

“Iranian experts took samples from specific locations in Parchin facilities this week without IAEA’s inspectors being present,” Behruz Kamalvandi was quoted as saying by state news agency IRNA.

“They followed regulations and standards and the samples were given to IAEA’s experts,” the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) spokesman added. He did not rule out IAEA inspectors being present for future samples being taken.

IAEA chief Yukiya Amano visited the site at Parchin on Sunday, the agency’s first visit there in a decade. Iranian state media described the visit as ceremonial rather than an inspection.

Was the Iran Deal Signed By Anyone? Rep. Pompeo Demands Answers From Kerry

Congressman Mike Pompeo (R-KS) sent a letter to Secretary of State John Kerry, this morning, requesting a complete and signed version of the Iran Deal finalized this summer in Vienna. The copy submitted to Congress for review, Rep. Pompeo notes, does not include the side deals signed between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), nor have any representatives of the P5+1 or Iran signed it.

“As you know, pursuant to H. Res. 411, the House of Representatives considers the documents transmitted on July 19, 2015 incomplete in light of the fact that the secret side deals between the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the Islamic Republic of Iran were not provided to Congress,” Pompeo wrote.

Rep. Pompeo gave Secretary Kerry the benefit of the doubt, insisting that an administrative error must be at fault for Congress receiving an unsigned version of such a groundbreaking deal. Pointing to other international agreements, which were given to Congress complete with signatures, he assumed that Kerry would tout his accomplishment in organizing this deal by presenting Congress with the full, inked version.

“I am confident that you intended for the JCPOA to be signed by each of the P5+1 participants. I can find no international agreement of this ‘historic’ nature that was not signed by the parties,” he said.

He went on emphasize the importance of having a signature on such a document, to make it binding to all parties involved. He discussed the fact that President Rouhani announced that Iran is not putting the document through its national legislative process, so as not to place legal constraints on the Iranian government or people.

“[Having signatures] is particularly important with respect to JCPOA. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has made clear that he does not believe that JCPOA is legally binding on his nation, saying, ‘If the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action is sent to (and passed by) parliament, it will create an obligation for the government. It will mean the president, who has not signed it so far, will have to sign it,” Pompeo asked. “Why should we place an unnecessary legal restriction on the Iranian people?”

He closed the letter by highlighting how many concessions Iran has received in this agreement, and that there is no reason they wouldn’t sign the copy submitted to Congress to approve.

“Given the many benefits that will accrue to the ayatollahs, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, and other unsavory elements of the Iranian regime, I believe that Iran should, at the very least, bind itself to the few requirements placed on it under the JCPOA by signing the agreement,” Pompeo wrote.

*** More real cause to worry about the Iran deal:

Boosted by nuke deal, Iran ups funding to Hezbollah, Hamas

Operating on assumption sanctions will be lifted, Tehran increases support to proxies, while freezing out Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal

Times of Israel:

On Sunday, the director of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Yukiya Amano, arrived in Iran for talks on the nuclear agreement, as part of what appears to be an attempt by the UN nuclear watchdog to evaluate whether Iran ran a military nuclear program in the past.

Hezbollah fighters hold party flags during a parade in a southern suburb of Beirut, Lebanon (AP/Hussein Malla/File)

Amano is expected to meet with various Iranian nuclear scientists for answers on this very subject. On December 15, ahead of the lifting of crippling economic sanctions on Tehran, he is slated to present the world with definitive answers that will determine whether Iran complied with the terms of a nuclear deal signed on July 15. But the Islamic Republic is not waiting for a green light from Amano or the international community, and is working under the assumption that the sanctions will be lifted.

Since the deal was signed, Iran has significantly increased its financial support for two of the largest terror groups in the region that have become political players, Hamas and Hezbollah. In the years before the deal was signed, the crippling sanctions limited this support, which had significantly diminished along with Iran’s economy. But Tehran’s belief that tens, or hundreds, of billions of dollars will flow into the country in the coming years as a result of sanctions relief has led to a decision to boost the cash flow to these terror organizations.

This support, for example, has enabled Hezbollah to obtain highly developed new armaments, including advanced technologies that many militaries around the world would envy. Al-Rai, a Kuwaiti newspaper, reported Saturday that Hezbollah has received all the advanced weaponry that Syria has obtained from the Russians. The report cited a security source involved in the fighting in Zabadani, on the Syria-Lebanon border, where Hezbollah is fighting the al-Nusra Front, the Islamic State, and other groups. It is evidently the growing Iranian financial support that is enabling the Lebanese Shiite militia to purchase advanced weapons, including ones that were hitherto outside of its reach.

The increased Iranian financial support for Hezbollah in the wake of the deal is not unrelated to other political developments in the region. The growing sense of security in Iran with regard to its political status has also been bolstered by a Russian decision to increase its involvement in Syria, and may be what drove Iran to send hundreds of members of its Revolutionary Guard Corps to play an active role in the Syria fighting. Iran, along with Hezbollah and Moscow, has decided to dispatch sizable forces to the Syrian front in the past few weeks to prevent the collapse of Bashar Assad’s regime.

The Shiite-Russia axis has been anxiously watching the Islamic State creep toward Damascus in recent months, and saw the territory controlled by Assad, an important ally, diminished to the coastal region of Latakia south of the capital. The Iranians and Russians grasped that not only was Damascus endangered, but also access to the Alawite regions, from Homs to Damascus — thus the urgency for intervention, including with troops on the ground.

The high morale and sense of security among the Iranians in the wake of the deal don’t stop with increased support of Hamas and Hezbollah. Today, Iran is the main, and likely only, power attempting to build terror cells to fight Israel on the Syrian Golan Heights, in areas under Assad’s control. This does not mean that the Syrian president is aware of these attempts or green-lighted them. But for Israel, that does not matter. Tehran is investing more effort and money after the nuclear deal to carry out attacks against Israel from the Golan, even under Assad’s nose.

As regards the Palestinians, in the past two months, Iran has sent suitcases of cash – literally – to Hamas’s military wing in Gaza. Not everyone is happy about this, including some Hamas officials. Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal, who was always the man who controlled the money, has found himself outside the circle of Iranian funding over the summer. Tehran, which was none too pleased by his visit to Saudi Arabia and meeting with King Salman, decided to take revenge on him in an original way. It bypassed Mashaal and has handed over the suitcases, by way of couriers, directly to the leaders of the group’s military wing in the Gaza Strip.

The exiled head of Palestinian Islamist movement Hamas, Khaled Mashaal, gestures during a press conference in the Qatari capital Doha, on September 7, 2015. (AFP/ AL-WATAN DOHA/KARIM JAAFAR)

The Hamas military leaders, for their part, are happy about two things: First, the money they are receiving during a difficult economic period in Gaza; second, the opportunity to weaken Mashaal and his cronies, who have been living in luxury in Qatar and dictating to Hamas in Gaza what to do and what not to do, who to get closer to (Saudi Arabia) and who to stay away from (Iran).