Boeing Secret Deals with Iran, Skirting Sanctions

Posted on March 3, 2016March 3, 2016 by Denise Simon

Why Boeing kept Iran dealings under the radar

alMonitor: Barely a week after the Jan. 16 lifting of nuclear-related sanctions on Iran, Tehran hosted its first international business summit in years. The event, sponsored by the Centre for Aviation (CAPA), brought together 400 executives of the global aviation industry to re-establish links with their Iranian counterparts after a decades-long estrangement. What raised eyebrows in Tehran and Washington, however, was the conspicuous absence of Boeing, the world’s largest aircraft manufacturer. Boeing’s curious decision to skip the CAPA event raised questions about the United States’ commitment to the sanctions relief mandated under the July 14, 2015, Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). The decision Boeing made to stay home, likely prompted by unease as to the confusing web of remaining US sanctions, is a harbinger of things to come for the delicate dance between Iran and American business.

It turns out that Boeing, while skipping the high-profile CAPA event in Tehran, has actually been unofficially negotiating behind the scenes with Iranian civil aviation officials for a considerable time. Indeed, weeks after European rival Airbus signed a multibillion dollar deal for 118 passenger jets with Iran, Washington finally gave the go-ahead for Boeing to begin official negotiations and to apply for special licenses to sell aircraft to the Iranians.

As the world cashes in on an Iran ready to do business, the United States risks being late to the game because of a mixture of political sensitivities, confusion about the remaining American sanctions and structural impediments that make trading with Iran prohibitively risky for all but the most adept American companies.

American trade with Iran is known to attract seething headlines in both countries. A simple form on McDonald’s website about franchise opportunities in Iran last year prompted warnings of an impending cultural invasion of the country in the Iranian right-wing media. Similarly, US companies risk the wrath of special interest groups devoted to inflicting reputational damage because of trade with Iran. Halliburton and Hewlett-Packard are prominent examples of companies that have been attacked in the American media for previous legal business relations with Iran.

Groups such as United Against a Nuclear Iran have also been successful in convincing around half of the state legislatures to pass measures punishing companies operating in Iran. These local laws have directed state pension funds with billions of dollars in assets to divest from targeted companies and sometimes have barred these companies from public contracts. The impact of these state “sanctions” on the JCPOA is not clear and may yet prompt a political and legal battle between the federal government and state officials. Indeed, the harm to the reputations of US companies by such local punitive measures is a strong deterrent to engaging with the Iranian consumer. It is also an issue that is likely to continue, as long as Iran remains listed as a state sponsor of terrorism by the State Department.

For American companies large enough to weather bad publicity, the remaining and now largely unilateral US sanctions on Iran represent a potentially costly minefield. The JCPOA allows for licensed sales of American airliners to Iran and the legal importation of Iranian foodstuffs and rugs. Besides these specific carve-outs, US companies may trade with Iran under the general licenses that were available before the JCPOA and under specific licenses granted by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), the Treasury Department’s sanctions administrator. In addition, foreign subsidiaries of US companies that are not under the control and direction of US persons may trade directly with Iran. Maintaining a robust compliance system and routinely checking company interactions with Iran to make sure that they do not run afoul of OFAC regulations is a costly and time-consuming endeavor. Indeed, any American company that trades with Iran under the terms of the JCPOA, and especially under the complicated foreign subsidiary clause, must be large enough to support sufficiently adept legal compliance teams. Small and medium-size US businesses are thus effectively shut out of a presence in Iran for this very reason.

For the large multinational American companies that may be able to gain a foothold in Iran, there remain structural constraints that residual US sanctions place on legal trade with Iran. The United States has made it clear that no payments linked to Iran may be processed through its financial system. This means that profits made by American businesses in Iran will likely not be able to be directly repatriated and probably will remain offshore in segregated foreign accounts. American companies must also contend with strict bars on doing business with any Iranian entities that remain on OFAC’s “specially designated nationals” list, the Iranian government and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Each of these barred entities took over vast parts of the Iranian economy as a result of the international sanctions that have now been lifted.

The JCPOA has opened small opportunities for trade between American and Iranian firms. However, the remaining labyrinth of hard-to-understand restrictions will likely spook most Americans.

Both the Iranian and US governments have a vital interest in seeing that the JCPOA is an enduring agreement — and this partly depends on sanctions relief benefiting Iranian and American private sectors in a way that would effectuate the “buy-in” of JCPOA skeptics. A mutually beneficial trading arrangement that connects the private sectors of the United States and Iran — despite political differences — would strengthen the nuclear deal by attaching a direct economic cost to nonadherence. The limited avenues for legal trade, if quickly institutionalized, can be insulated from the historically volatile political relationship between Iran and the United States.

In this vein, a quiet Iranian commitment to protect American investors in Iran and to tone down the harshest anti-US rhetoric, at least with respect to American business, would give space for Wall Street to influence a change in Washington’s largely monolithic view of a hostile Iran. More importantly, a quiet US commitment to actively support legal trade with Iran — with the same zeal that it uses to enforce sanctions — would give the Iranians space to consider future negotiated compromises.

When Sharia/ISIS Goes Capitalist and Trading

Posted on March 2, 2016March 2, 2016 by Denise Simon

Islamic State ‘earning millions by playing the stock market’

Group using cash looted from banks in Mosul to speculate on international currency markets

Telegraph: Isil is making millions of dollars for its war chest by playing foreign currency markets under the noses of bank chiefs, it was revealed today.

The terror group is earning up to $20m (£14.29m) a month by funnelling dollars looted from banks during its takeover of the Iraqi city of Mosul into legitimate currency markets in the Middle East.

It then makes huge returns on currency speculation, which are then wired back via unsuspecting financial authorities in Iraq and Jordan, a parliamentary committee was told on Wednesday.

Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant’s (Isil) extraordinary venture into white collar crime is now a major source of income, along with oil smuggling and extortion from people living in Isil-controlled areas.

“The cash that Isil has looted is routed into Jordanian banks”

Details of the scam emerged during a hearing of a specially-convened Foreign Affairs sub-committee set up to examine Britain’s role in Isil financing.

The hearing was told that Isil finance chiefs would play the international stock markets using cash looted during their 2014 take over of Mosul, in which the group got its hands on an estimated $429m from the city’s central bank.

They also used money “siphoned off” from pension payments that are still being made by the Iraqi government to civil servants living in the city.

The details were revealed to the hearing by John Baron, the sub-committee’s chair, who demanded to know whether the British government – which has pledged to help cut off Isil’s finance networks – was taking proper action against it.

“The cash that Isil has looted, along with siphoned off pension payments, is routed into Jordanian banks and brought back into the system via Baghdad,” he said. “That allows the system to be exploited by Isil, in that they take a turn (profit) on the foreign currency actions and siphon that cash back.”

The profits were channeled back into Isil coffers by “hawala” transfers, an unregulated system of money transfer whereby cash payments are made via agents in one country after a similar amount is presented as collateral in another.

Tobias Ellwood, a junior Foreign Office minister, admitted to the committee that there was a “porousness” in the local financial system but said that work was now underway to shut it down. It had been done without the active connivance of bank staff, he added.

In December, the Central Bank of Iraq named 142 currency-exchange houses in Iraq that the US suspected of moving funds for Islamic State. It banned them from its twice-monthly dollar auctions in a bid to stop the terror group getting its hands on the cash – a main source of exchange in war-torn Iraq.

But Mr Ellwood conceded: “Iraq could have moved faster on this”. Asked if the similar moves had been made in Jordan, he said he was unable to give an answer.

“Jordan plays an important role in the (anti-Isis) coalition,” he added. “Work is being done to close it down, I don’t think there is anything near as much from that source of revenue as before.”

The committee heard claims that Isil’s “rake off” from foreign currency speculation was a “significant part of their income stream”, although Mr Ellwood said he thought that estimates of $20m were excessive.

****

Spiegel: Some members of the intelligence community even view spying in the global financial system with a certain amount of concern, as revealed by a document from the NSA’s British counterpart — the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) — that deals with “financial data” from a legal perspective and examines the organization’s own collaboration with the NSA. According to the document, the collection, storage and sharing of “politically sensitive” data is a highly invasive measure since it includes “bulk data — rich personal information. A lot of it is not about our targets.”

Indeed, secret documents reveal that the main NSA financial database Tracfin, which collects the “Follow the Money” surveillance results on bank transfers, credit card transactions and money transfers, already had 180 million datasets by 2011. The corresponding figure in 2008 was merely 20 million. According to these documents, most Tracfin data is stored for five years.

Monitoring SWIFT

The classified documents show that the intelligence agency has several means of accessing the internal data traffic of the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT), a cooperative used by more than 8,000 banks worldwide for their international transactions. The NSA specifically targets other institutes on an individual basis. Furthermore, the agency apparently has in-depth knowledge of the internal processes of credit card companies like Visa and MasterCard. What’s more, even new, alternative currencies, as well as presumably anonymous means of payment like the Internet currency Bitcoin, rank among the targets of the American spies.

The collected information often provides a complete picture of individuals, including their movements, contacts and communication behavior. The success stories mentioned by the intelligence agency include operations that resulted in banks in the Arab world being placed on the US Treasury’s blacklist.

In one case, the NSA provided proof that a bank was involved in illegal arms trading — in another case, a financial institution was providing support to an authoritarian African regime. Full article here.

Innocent Letter Proves ISIS Aid for Hamas?

Posted on March 2, 2016March 2, 2016 by Denise Simon

Exclusive: Letter By ISIS Fighter To Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi Reveals ISIS-Sinai’s Ties To Hamas

The following report is a complimentary offering from MEMRI’s Jihad and Terrorism Threat Monitor (JTTM). For JTTM subscription information, click here.

MEMRI: On February 24, 2016, a letter from an Islamic State (ISIS) fighter to ISIS leader Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi was posted on social media. In it, the fighter strongly protests the close ties and cooperation between ISIS’s Sinai province and Hamas, particularly Hamas’s military wing.

This letter is the first confirmation of ties between the two organizations that comes from ISIS itself, and a unique firsthand account of the nature of these ties. It appears that the document was not meant for circulation outside ISIS, and to have been leaked by Al-Qaeda supporters.[1]

The letter is by ISIS fighter Abu ‘Abdallah Al-Muhajir, who presents himself as a Gazan who joined ISIS in Syria. He writes that he decided to appeal to Al-Baghdadi in order to fulfill his duty as a Muslim to give loyal advice to the leader of the Muslims. His letter is based on his own personal knowledge from his time in Gaza, as well as on information provided to him by other fighters who came to Syria from the Gaza Strip.

With regard to the ties between Hamas and ISIS’s Sinai Province, Abu ‘Abdallah explains the areas in which the groups collaborate: ISIS fighters in Sinai are smuggling weapons into Gaza for Hamas; Hamas is producing weapons and explosive devices for ISIS Sinai; Hamas is providing logistical assistance to ISIS Sinai, including communications systems and hospitalization for its wounded fighters in Gaza; and ISIS Sinai officials are visiting Gaza and dining at the homes of Hamas government and military wing officials.

Abu ‘Abdallah says that he considers these Hamas-ISIS Sinai ties a violation of the principle of loyalty to the Muslims and rejection of non-Muslims (Al-Walaa Wal-Baraa), stating ISIS considers Hamas a movement that has betrayed Islam and that as such there is no justification, even on the pretext of tactical, operational, and logistical necessity, for maintaining ties with it.

ISIS Sinai province displaying weapons training. Source: Telegram.me/HaiAlaElJehad5, February 6, 2016.

Noting that what motivated him to take the unusual step of writing directly to Al-Baghdadi was the rising rage and frustration among ISIS supporters in Gaza who feel abandoned by the ISIS leadership and by ISIS Sinai, Abu ‘Abdallah expresses harsh criticism of ISIS Sinai for its warm relationship with Hamas. Hamas, he says, is persecuting and torturing ISIS loyalists, and adds that the disconnect between ISIS supporters in Gaza and ISIS Sinai itself is so great that the Gaza jihadis are now questioning the sincerity of ISIS Sinai’s loyalty to ISIS itself and are hesitant to join with it.

Abu ‘Abdallah’s letter caused a stir among ISIS supporters, particularly in Gaza, both because of its content and because such a direct appeal to ISIS leader Al-Baghdadi had been posted online. A group of pro-ISIS media activists in Gaza, Al-Nusra Al-Maqdisiya, which publishes and disseminates pro-ISIS materials on social media. responded to the letter’s publication; however, it denied neither Abu ‘Abdallah’s claims in the letter, nor the details he gave about the Hamas-ISIS Sinai relationship. It was merely enraged because he mentioned the group his the letter.

Following are excerpts from the letter:

Abu ‘Abdallah: If ISIS Sinai Maintains Its Ties With Hamas “We Will All Regret The Disaster That Will Befall Us In Sinai”

Abu ‘Abdallah begins his letter by explaining that what ISIS Sinai is doing in its ties with Hamas is serious and could lead to disaster: “A complaint by a soldier in the [Islamic] State to the Caliph of the Muslims, against the actions of the brothers in Sinai Province. An urgent letter from Abu ‘Abdallah Al-Muhajir to our commander and Caliph of the Muslims Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, may Allah protect him.

“The Prophet said: ‘The religion is sincere advice’… which is why I seek Allah’s aid in writing and disseminating this urgent and highly important letter, which has in it serious matters that must be addressed, and ended, by Sheikh Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi and the Islamic State leaders. For by Allah, if these things continue and persist, we will all regret the disaster [that will befall] us in the beloved land of Sinai, which is the most important and powerful [Islamic] State province outside Iraq and Syria.

“This is a letter from your son Abu ‘Abdallah Al-Muhajir, and in it are matters that I have experienced during my presence on Gaza soil, as well as matters about which the brothers [in Gaza] wrote to me after I joined [the fight] in Syria, and matters that I learned from brothers who emigrated to Syria and Iraq before I did. I recoiled from writing [the letter], and consulted with my immigrant brothers, and we agreed to publicize what we know, while the brothers in Gaza advised me to say these things secretly and not write publicly for fear of the response of the brothers in Sinai province. But matters have reached a point where it is no longer possible to remain silent, and providing advice in secret would not have helped. Silence in the face of what is happening would have made us the devils of silence, and silence is betrayal of Allah, His messenger, and the Caliph of the Muslims.

“Oh, Caliph of the Muslims, I wish to speak to you about an issue related to the foundations of the religion and the tenets of the faith – Al-Walaa Wal-Baraa [loyalty to Muslims and rejection of non-Muslims], for which the blood of thousands of Islamic State jihad fighters has been spilled. For the sake of this principle, we are hostile towards the entire world, we are withstanding a war waged against us by the whole world, and even by some who claim to be jihad fighters.

“[But] even after all these great sacrifices, some brothers come along and destroy [the principle of] Al-Walaa Wal-Baraa, on weak pretexts and for reasons unbecoming of any jihad fighter who belongs to this mighty state.

“I speak to you today about the suspect and illegitimate ties between Sinai province and Hamas, which are hidden from no one. What I will write about now is based on two main things:

“1. After a period of being in Syria, I have learned that the Islamic State considers Hamas, with all its branches and wings, to be an apostate movement, and that it treats it as an apostate cult, including [the ‘Izz Al-Din] Al-Qassam [Brigades, Hamas’s military wing]. This is known to all the brothers here in Syria and Iraq.

“2. The second thing is the internal memos coming from the [Islamic] State leadership ruling that many factions in Syria are apostates, including for collaborating with apostates and for transferring weapons to them or maintaining a relationship with them.”

ISIS Sinai province fighters undergoing military training. Source: Telegram.me/HaiAlaElJehad5, February 6, 2016.

“Sinai Province Is Smuggling Weapons For Hamas In Gaza”

Abu ‘Abdallah then explains the ties between ISIS Sinai and Hamas, and tells why he thinks they are a violation of the tenets of loyalty:

“Allow me, Caliph of Muslims, to inform you of some aspects of the suspect ties between Sinai province and Hamas:

“1. Sinai province is smuggling weapons for Hamas in Gaza, because of the province’s fighters’ expert knowledge of the [smuggling] routes from Libya, Sudan, and Egypt.

“2. Sinai province depends very much on Hamas and Al-Qassam for weapons and for explosives and ammunition. There are direct and continuous supply routes from Hamas to Sinai province. The Al-Qassam factories operate assembly lines for manufacturing explosive devices and bombs for the Sinai province, but do not stamp the Al-Qassam logo on them, as they usually do.

“3. Sinai province leaders are regularly visiting the Gaza Strip, and holding cordial meetings with Hamas and Al-Qassam leaders, even [Hamas] government [representatives]. Animals are slaughtered for them, feasts are held, and they are embraced in Gaza.

“4. Hamas and Al-Qassam are accepting all wounded Sinai province [fighters], and they are treated in Gaza Strip hospitals under Al-Qassam’s direct protection.

“5. Hamas is providing wireless communication hubs for Sinai province, because of the difficulty of operating them in Sinai and because they are vulnerable to swift destruction by the Egyptian army.

“[Hypothetically,] if we disregard the religious dimension, and Al-Walaa Wal-Baraa, we would be able to say that Sinai province benefits greatly from these ties, and that the province is being clever and devious in order to attain power and ammo from Hamas, for fighting the infidel [Egyptian President] Al-Sisi. However, in truth, and viewing things on a shari’a level, the province is committing several religious transgressions… among them:

“1. Violating the principle of loyalty to jihad fighters in Gaza and Islamic State supporters [there], and abandoning them and handing them over to their apostate enemy (Hamas)…

“2. Violating the principle of rejecting Hamas, which has replaced the laws of Allah and rules Gaza with laws of unbelief, and of [rejecting] the Al-Qassam Brigades, [which is] this government’s violent aggressive force. I was shocked when I discovered here in Syria that the Islamic State treats the Hamas government and movement, and the Al-Qassam Brigades, as apostates. Where, then, does Sinai province stand on this?

“3. Strengthening the apostates and making it easier for weapons to reach them by smuggling weapons to Hamas via Sinai province land, even using the province’s men and vehicles. One of the brothers told me, by means of his brother who is in the [Gaza] Strip, that Israel bombed one of these convoys, killing province jihad fighters as they were transporting weapons to Hamas.

“4. Maintaining friendly ties with the leadership of Hamas and Al-Qassam, which the [Islamic] State considers apostates. [These ties include] exchanging visits with them, welcoming them, and treating them in a manner displeasing to Allah…

“5. Relying on Hamas and Al-Qassam – which the [Islamic] State consider apostates – for its supply of ammunition and weapons. This is no different than taking weapons from the UAE, Saudi Arabia, or Qatar in order to fight [Syrian President] Bashar Al-Assad, as the apostate factions do here in Syria, or as Hamas does when it takes money from Iran. [This action by Hamas] is a crime for which we have condemned Hamas for decades, and have ruled that it is apostate, for this and other reasons.

“Sinai Province Is A Pawn Of Hamas”

“Oh, Sheikh Abu Bakr, Sinai province thinks its actions are wise and that it is making a laughingstock of Hamas. But what the province leadership does not know, or what it is ignoring, is that Hamas is giving them these weapons so that they will use them against [Egyptian President] Al-Sisi, in an attempt to end his regime and in preparation for restoring the democratic rule of the Muslim Brotherhood.[2] [Sinai province] is a pawn of Hamas, which is being exploited as part of its Ikhwani [Muslim Brotherhood] plan. Were this not the case, Hamas would not have fought against Islamic State supporters in Gaza, and against anything related to the Islamic State.

“Oh sheikh of ours: Hamas is clever and is giving Sinai province everything it wants, so that it [Hamas] can gain a foothold in [Sinai], and so that it will have ‘stock’ in the province, and so that it will be able to protect itself against anything the province might do against it. They [Hamas’ leaders] are clever, oh sheikh – they give table scraps to the province, so that they can divide the men of tawhid [Islamic monotheism – nickname for Salafi-jihadis] and deal with them as they please, since no one supports them. Hamas knows that no one but Sinai province can help the Salafis in Gaza, and has therefore taken possession of it, and has thus kept it away from the crimes being carried out in Gaza against the supporters of the Islamic State.

“Oh, sheikh of ours and Caliph of the Muslims: If anyone tries to describe this situation to you in a way that contradicts this, then [know] that I am a loyal advisor. The relationship between Sinai province and Hamas has crossed all limits, and has reached the point where the province is asking Hamas to manufacture the uniforms for its soldiers. Hamas manufactures the military uniforms for Sinai province – the uniforms we see, and over which we rejoice, in videos are from Hamas, oh our Sheikh Abu Bakr. I swear to the Lord of the Ka’ba that it would have been better for the Sinai province soldiers to wear ragged, torn, and patched uniforms than to ask Hamas to manufacture their uniforms for them.

ISIS military trainer training Sinai province recruits

“In accordance with the close relationship between the sides, we find that for the sake of worldly honor which Hamas gives it, the Sinai province has sold its religion. This is embodied by Sinai province’s disregard of the cruel war that Hamas is waging against the supporters of the Islamic State. Sinai province does not even [dare] threaten, or warn Hamas, over its ongoing abuse of Islamic State supporters…

“The Hearts Of Islamic State Supporters In Gaza Are Filled With Rage And Shock At The Actions Of Sinai Province”

“Back when I visited the brothers in Rafah, they told me that Hamas men call Sinai province ‘the Raed Al-‘Atar Province’ – named after the Al-Qassam Brigades commander who oversaw the weapons and ammo shipments to the province.[3] One of the immigrant brothers [i.e. fighters from Gaza who came to Syria] told me, on behalf of brothers in Gaza, that one senior official in the apostate Hamas internal security [apparatus] would torture and ridicule Salafi jihad fighters, saying, ‘Our relations, in Hamas, with Sinai province are stronger and better than yours with Sinai province.”

“This is true and very real. Hamas and Sinai province are maintaining warm relations and direct lines of communication around the clock.. I know that Sinai province has severed ties with all the Salafi jihad fighters in the Gaza Strip, and is attempting to cut anything connecting it to them, so as not to sour the relations with Hamas and ruin the relationship between them. You must know, oh sheikh of ours, that Sinai province refrains from announcing the deaths of brothers that came to it from Gaza. They only announce their deaths much later, and claim that they were killed in other regions, not Sinai, so as not to embarrass Hamas, which is worried by this possibility.

“You must know that the jihad fighters ‘Abd Al-Rahman Al-Nouri[4] and ‘Arafat Al-Sa’idi[5] were killed in Sinai, but it was announced that they had died in Syria, which is not true. Additionally, one of the immigrant brothers in Sinai who came to Syria informed us of the death of a man named ‘Abd Al-Ilah Qashta, several months ago, but Sinai province has not yet announced his death, nor will it. The announcement of his death will be made by another province, because he was an Al-Qassam commander.[6]

“Some say that there is an agreement that the province will not accept anyone from Al-Qassam into its ranks, and that if one such man is killed, they will not announce his death. A few days ago, the death of Muflih Abu ‘Adhira was announced by [ISIS] Tripoli province [in Libya], even though he died in Sinai.[7]

All those mentioned above are jihad fighters from Gaza who immigrated to Sinai.

Poster of Muflih Abu ‘Adhira released by ISIS’s Tripoli province

“One of the brothers who recently came from Gaza to Syria said that the hearts of Islamic State supporters in Gaza are filled with rage and shock at the actions of Sinai province. For example, how can they accept that one of the province leaders is in the lap of Hamas luxury in Gaza, doing as he pleases and travelling to the homes of Hamas and Al-Qassam leaders, and enjoying their food at lavish banquets, while a few hundred meters away, Islamic State supporters are tortured in Hamas prisons, and their faces spat in, and are humiliated in in the worst way because of their loyalty and support for the Islamic State – of which Sinai is one of its most important provinces.

“I should mention here that Sinai province appointed a cleric to solve the problem of Salafi groups in the Gaza Strip. We were surprised when the cleric came to us and announced that the judge appointed by Sinai province had dismantled our organization, Majlis Shura Al-Mujahideen, which was the largest Salafi organization in the Gaza Strip.[8] He said to everyone: ‘Do not establish organizations [separately from the Islamic State] – go swear fealty to Sinai province.’ Some time later I asked the brothers [i.e. other Salafis in the Gaza Strip] what had happened [i.e., did the Sinai province accept their oath of fealty and bring them into its ranks]. They told me that the province was not responding to them. That is how things stayed until the end of my time in Gaza. There is no strength or ability other than Allah’s! Is this [a path that befits] the religion, oh our Sheikh Abu Bakr? [How can] the province dismantle the jihad groups who were operating for the sake of Allah’s religion [in Gaza] and then prevent them from joining it? …”

“One Last Thing For Sheikh Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi: Do Not Forget The Supporters Of The Islamic State In Gaza”

“One last thing for Sheikh Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi: Do not forget the supporters of the Islamic State in Gaza. Do not forget them, oh sheikh, for they were the first to support the [Islamic] state. They established [the pro-ISIS media activist group] Al-Nusra Al-Maqdisiya at a time when it was difficult to support the [Islamic] State, and it was under onslaught from all sides. The brothers we left behind in Gaza are a responsibility placed in your hands, oh Sheikh Abu Bakr; they are orphans at the tables of misers. Other than Allah, they have no supporters but the Islamic State.

“How can it be that while all [other ISIS] provinces conduct media campaigns [and release] videos to call jihad fighters in the Islamic Maghreb [North Africa], Somalia, Afghanistan, and Yemen to swear fealty to the Islamic State,[9] the letters, cries, and calls for help by the men of tawhid in Gaza are ignored?[10] Oh Sheikh Abu Bakr, you are the Caliph of [all] the Muslims, both the weak and the strong – so how can there be such discrimination among Muslims? [How is it] that the strong are addressed and called on to swear fealty [to ISIS], while the oath of fealty by the oppressed [Salafi-jihadis in Gaza] is rejected?

“Oh sheikh, the Islamic State supporters in Gaza are not organized. They have no plan; they have no lack purpose, unity, or coordination. This is all because the Islamic State ignores them, and Sinai province abandoned them, and will not even contact with them. At the same time, even Al-Qaeda supporters have organized their ranks and launched military preparations, by Allah! …

“Why do the Islamic State leaders here in Syria not notice that Salafi jihad fighters travel from Gaza to Syria and Iraq instead of going to Sinai province? [One] reason is that the province refuses as a matter of principle to accept them; only someone who crosses the border [from Gaza] and arrives without the knowledge of Sinai province and then forces himself on them can join it. The second reason is that many of the Islamic State’s supporters in Gaza are unconvinced [of the benefit] of immigrating to Sinai province, and are unconvinced that it is a province that truly belongs to the Islamic State. This is because of the relationship that everyone can see exists between the province and Hamas, and [the province’s] renunciation of the supporters of the [Islamic] State in Gaza. It has gotten to the point where many question Sinai province’s [loyalty] to the [ISIS] path and the sincerity of its affiliation to the caliphate state.

“This [letter] was an expression of some of what we have kept secret for years, when we were in Gaza and since then, when Allah allowed us to immigrate to the beloved Syria. We disregarded many of the deeds of the brothers in Sinai province. But enough is enough, and the time has come to expose and to disclose [what we know].

“Allah help you, our beloved sheikh, caliph of us and of all the Muslims, Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi. We pray to Allah for an end to what is happening [i.e. that the Hamas-Sinai province ties will be terminated], for our brothers in the Gaza Strip to be rescued from their situation, and for our caliphate and our state to receive support with regard to the actions of the brothers in Sinai [i.e. that ISIS will be spared the bad consequences that are bound to occur due to the Sinai province’s ties with Hamas]…”

Pro-ISIS Media Group Al-Nusra Al-Maqdisiya: Letter Of Complaint Based On Rumors

The members of the pro-ISIS media group Al-Nusra Al-Maqdisiya, which Abu ‘Abdallah had mentioned in his letter, published a furious response to the letter, claiming that he was stirring things up based on unsubstantiated rumors. However, it denied none of his claims, not even those related to the Hamas-Sinai province relationship. It was merely outraged that he had mentioned it.

In its response, the group stated:[11]

“Any Islamic State soldier should address any complaint to the relevant bodies and committees, without resorting to the internet!”
“The Caliph does not accept letters and complaints from his soldiers via the Internet!”
“We have no connection, large or small, to this matter…”
“The letter expresses a situation of destructive emptiness that afflicts some of the grey men [Al-Ramadiyyun] who envy the successes and achievements of the Sinai province. They are frustrated because their achievements lag behind the Sinai province’s, and for that reason they have begun to criticize it and incite against it.” Al-Ramadiyun is a nickname for the members of the Dughmush clan, who established their own powerful militia called Jaish Al-Islam and presented it as a group affiliated with global jihad. The members of Al-Nusra Al-Maqdisiyya are apparently referring here to tensions between the Dughmush clan and Salafi-jihadis in Gaza.

5.” All arrests and difficulties that faced by supporters of the Caliphate in Gaza are a duty that they met willingly and freely, for worship of Allah and for the sacred caliphate enterprise. These supporters did not bear this as a favor to the Caliphate”

“We call upon supporters of the Caliphate in Gaza to continue focusing on supporting the Caliphate as they have been doing, and not to deal with rumors”.
“We are continuing on the path of supporting the Caliphate, and Sinai province in particular…”

Al-Nusra Al-Maqdisisiyya’s clarification notice.

Endnotes:

[1] Telegram.me/jabal_1o0, February 29, 2016.

[2] ISIS rejects democracy and therefore uses the term pejoratively.

[3] Ra’ed Al-Attar was the commander of Hamas’ military wing in the southern district of the Gaza Strip, and was among the leaders of its weapons’ smuggling operations. He was killed by the IDF in August 2014.

[4] ‘Abd Al-Rahman Al-Nouri’s death in Syria was announced by pro-ISIS outlets online in July 2014. Paldf.net, July 7, 2014.

[5] Arafat Al-Sa’idi’s death in Syria was announced in May 2014 by the pro-ISIS forum Jihadi Media Platform and Twitter accounts associated with Gazan ISIS supporters. Al-Hayat (London), May 16, 2014.

[6] The phenomenon of members of Hamas’ military wing joining ISIS is a known one. The death of Abd Al-Ilah Qishta was a source for much confusion . The Egyptian army reported that it had killed Qishta in the Sinai, while other sources reported he had died fighting for ISIS in Libya. While some sources in his hometown of Rafah confirmed that he was a commander in Hamas’ military wing, his family denied that he had joined ISIS. Aljazeera.net, February 13, 2015; Raya.ps, February 11, 2015; Alwafd.org, February 11, 2015. Hamas officials denied he was a member of its military wing. Gazaalan.net, February 11, 2015.

[7] ISIS sources announced Muflih Abu ‘Adhira’s death February 15, 2016, without providing details about the circumstances in which he died. No Libyan sources claimed responsibility for killing him Twitter.com/Xog313/status/699392667814400000; Maannews.net, February 16, 2016.

[8] “Majlis Shoura Al-Mujahideen in the Environs of Jerusalem ” was a group formed by a merger of Salafi-jihadi factions operating in the Gaza Strip. Its establishment was announced in June 2012. In October 2012 the two leaders of the group were killed in an Israeli airstrike. See MEMRI JTTM report New Jihadi Group In Gaza Announces Its Establishment, Takes Responsibility For Attack In Southern Israel, Reveals Saudi And Egyptian Fighters Among Its Ranks, June 19, 2012. .

[9] For examples of ISIS campaigns calling on jihadis in various countries to join its ranks, see MEMRI JTTM report ISIS Launches Campaign Urging North African Muslims, Al-Qaeda Members To Join Its Rank, Target Local Governments, January 21, 2016; and MEMRI JTTM report ISIS Steps Up Efforts To Divide Somali Al-Qaeda Affiliate Al-Shabab, Calls On Its Members To Join ISIS’s Ranks, October 2, 2015.

[10] Abu ‘Abdallah appears to overlook ISIS’s widespread media campaign in which it lashed out at Hamas and encouraged Palestinians to continue escalating their wave of attacks. See MEMRI Inquiry & Analysis Series Report No. 1195, ISIS Campaign: Encouraging Palestinians To Carry Out Lone Wolf Attacks, October 20, 2015; Also, in July 2015 in July 2015 ISIS’s Aleppo branch released a video featuring three fighters from Gaza who vowed to take vengeance on Hamas. See MEMRI JTTM clip Palestinian ISIS Fighters in Aleppo Threaten Hamas: Gaza Shall Witness Blood and Torn Body Parts, July 2, 2015. For more on ISIS’s ambivalent relationship with the Palestinian issue and with its supporters in Palestine see: MEMRI Daily Brief no. 66, The Islamic State (ISIS) And Palestine – Rhetoric vs. Reality, November 19, 2015.

[11] Source: Telegram.me, Mu’assasat Al-Nusra Al-Maqdisiyya channel, February 27, 2016.

Iran Denies U.S. Travel Visas

Posted on February 29, 2016February 29, 2016 by Denise Simon

Oh, but wait to whom exactly? Investors? Nah…to members of Congress…..uh huh But we normalized relations right?

Iran Denies Travel Visas to U.S. Lawmakers

Congressman sought to observe Iranian elections

FreeBeacon: Iran has denied travel documents to three U.S. lawmakers who sought to observe the country’s Friday elections and ensure that they were carried out fairly, according to information provided to the Washington Free Beacon.

The Iranian regime delayed for weeks and ultimately ignored multiple visa requests by three House lawmakers who sought permission to travel to the country in order to monitor the elections held last Friday. Observers say the elections ushered in another crop of hardline, anti-American officials.

The congressmen, including Reps. Mike Pompeo (R., Kan.), Lee Zeldin (R., N.Y.), and Frank LoBiondo (R., N.J.), personally delivered their visa applications to the Iranian Interests Section of the Pakistani embassy in Washington, D.C., several weeks ago.

The lawmakers sought to observe the recent elections, as well as visit the country’s nuclear sites and meet with American hostages currently being held in Iran. While at the embassy, they provided Iranian diplomats with a list of their priorities for the visit.

The Iranian government failed to respond to these requests despite assurances from officials that the matter would be dealt with in a timely fashion. Iran has yet to explain why it did not respond to the congressmen.

Pompeo and the other lawmakers said Iran’s behavior indicates that it has something to hide from the United States and that the country cannot be trusted to uphold promises made under the recent nuclear agreement. They also criticized the Obama administration for not advocating on their behalf.

“Our straightforward and sincere visa applications have been met with mockery and delay from Iran, revealing this regime’s desire to hide from the American public,” Pompeo, a member of the House Permanent Select Committee of Intelligence, told the Free Beacon on Monday. “I am hopeful that the next U.S. president will critically examine the utility of President Obama’s nuclear deal and put America’s interests ahead of political legacy.”

Pompeo further described Friday’s election in Iran as a “sham” that served to enable the country’s hardline government.

“Because the fanatical Ayatollah holds ultimate power, February 26 was more of a selection of the next group of radicals by the current radicals, than a true election by the people,” he said. “Iranian state television has declared a national victory for the hardliners—politicians who declared that Israelis ‘aren’t human’ and who called for the execution of the pro-democracy Green Movement leaders were selected.”

Early election results indicate the hardliner candidates dominated the election, in part because most moderates were disqualified from participating in advance.

Iran’s Guardian Council, which is controlled by the Supreme Leader, is believed to have disqualified around 60 percent of the potential candidates, including around 99 percent of those viewed as reformists.

“The bulk of the disqualified candidates represent comparatively pragmatic elements of the ruling elite,” Saeed Ghasseminejad, an Iran expert at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, explained in a policy briefing last week. “On the other hand, most of the approved contenders are radical revolutionaries—devotees of the supreme leader with close ties to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). It is mathematically impossible for the less-hardline factions to win at the ballot box.”

“As a result, those supposed ‘moderates’ who were approved have been forced to round off their party lists with hardline candidates,” Ghasseminejad said.

LoBiondo and Zelden said that Iran’s refusal to grant them travel documents is a sign that the country is not seeking to boost ties with the U.S. as a result of the nuclear deal.

“In this supposed ‘new era of openness and cooperation,’ it is disappointing—but not surprising—that our request to visit Iran and monitor these elections was met with a closed door,” said LoBiondo, chair of the House’s CIA subcommittee.

“Furthermore, with the implementation of the nuclear deal and with Americans still detained in Tehran, it is perplexing why the Obama administration refuses to advocate on behalf of our official Congressional visit to Iran on such critical national security issues.”

“It’s unfortunate that Iran has not yet granted our request for visas to observe Iran’s election and for other productive purposes. The American people and rest of the free world still deserve first hand confirmation of what present day reality is in Iran. I look forward to Iran showing that it is a partner in peace by issuing our visas so that we can meet with Iranian leadership, visit nuclear sites, and meet with American hostages,” said Zeldin, a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

*** Western corporations have been doing business in Iran for decades despite sanctions, especially so since 2013;

US-listed companies doing business in Iran: $540 million in revenue and counting

QZ: Economic sanctions on Iran have been getting tougher in recent years, and the United States tightened the screws a little more last summer with the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act (PDF).
One unusual aspect of that law is that it started requiring companies traded on US stock exchanges to disclose more about the business they’re doing with Iran, and the Securities and Exchange Commission created the clunkily named IRANNOTICE filing to help them do it.
Companies were already beginning to disclose more about their ties to Iran, Syria, Cuba and other countries non grata (at least in US eyes) under pressure from the SEC. Now they must be systematic about it—and disclose gross revenue and net profits wherever possible.
Quartz’s partial tally: more than $540 million in gross revenue and $15.5 million in profits for US-listed companies from their business with Iran in 2012—and that’s just from 30 or so large companies that have made the disclosures since mid-February.
The numbers underscore the difficulty of maintaining tight sanctions in a global economy. But they also hide a lot of nuance and variation.
Companies based outside the US accounted for 99% of the revenue and three-quarters of the profit. (They made the disclosures because they list shares or American Depository Receipts on US markets.)
In fact, a big chunk of the total came from one company: $414 million in revenue for Statoil ASA, the Norwegian oil and gas company, from Statoil’s contracts with the National Iranian Oil Co.
Statoil also said it has terminated its agreements with Iran, abandoned it licenses there, and “will not make any investments in Iran under present circumstances.”
That’s a common refrain in the disclosures we saw: Many, though not all, of the disclosed transactions reflected companies wrapping up old business en route to cutting most or all ties with the Islamic republic. Typically, the transactions hadn’t been prohibited before the new rules kicked in.
Among the other noteworthy disclosures:
ING Groep said it collected €58 million in revenue and €395,000 in profits from repayment of old loans and a collection of frozen Iranian bank accounts. (Of course, in June, ING also settled allegations by the US Treasury and federal prosecutors that it hid transactions with Cuba and helped finance some sales to Iran, by agreeing to pay $619 million in penalties. It if keeps its nose clean for 18 months, the prosecutors will drop their charges.)
The biggest disclosure by a US company came from auto-parts maker TRW Automotive Holdings, which said it collected $8.3 million in revenue and $377,000 in profits from non-US subsidiaries that “sold products to customers that could be affiliated with, or deemed to be acting on behalf of, the Industrial Development and Renovation Organization” — one of the Iranian entities on the federal government’s massive list.
Under broad rules defining corporate “affiliates,” TRW’s transactions forced investor Blackstone Group to file its own disclosure. And Carlyle Group disclosed that a European portfolio company, Applus Servicios Technologicos, collected €1.19 million in revenue (and €200,000 in profits) from Iranian customers “that could be affiliated with the Industrial Development and Renovation Organization.” Similarly, Hertz had to report that a French affiliate of investor Clayton, Dubilier & Rice had received €2.5 million in payments from Iranian interests to an account at Bank Melli last year. And Apollo Global Management disclosed that portfolio company LyondellBasell Industries (Apollo funds owned 19.6%) reported collecting €4.2 million in revenue and €2.4 million in profit last year from Iranian entities.
Thomson Reuters reported $2.4 million in revenue and $426,000 in profits from selling news and intellectual-property and financial data to Iran-linked entities.

Other big Iran-related disclosures included GlaxoSmithKline at £19.7 million in revenue and £2.8 million in profits, and AstraZeneca at $14 million in revenue and $6 million in profits, both through distributors. Glaxo said that, after a review of the business, it “intends to supply only products of high medical/public health need (as determined using criteria set by the World Health Organization) from its Pharmaceuticals and Vaccines businesses.” AstraZeneca says it has a US license to do some business with Iran, but so far has sold only drugs from outside the US to distributors there.
Amusingly, at least for observers, there doesn’t seem to be a lower threshold to the disclosure requirement. So Dell, the Texas computer company, disclosed a whopping £106.13 ($169.90 at the time) in revenue from Iran, collected by a United Kingdom subsidiary to Quest Software, which Dell said last year it would acquire. The fees were paid by a unit of Bank Melli, which the US government links to Iran’s nuclear and missile programs, for maintenance licenses on software that helps search email and other communications. Drafting Dell’s 374-word disclosure probably cost the company more than the licenses brought in. (Dell says it canceled the service contract and won’t do further business with Bank Melli.)
Other picayune disclosures include Hyatt Hotels, which said the Park Hyatt Hamburg collected $9,300 for 33 room nights under a preferred-rate arrangement with Europaeisch-Iranische Handelsbank, which is on the US Treasury’s Blocked Persons List. And CME Group said it received $3,150 in revenue for selling market data to Iran’s Government Trading Group and a European subsidiary of the National Iranian Oil Company.

Israel Seeing Future with Bigger Weapons

Posted on February 29, 2016February 29, 2016 by Denise Simon

Israel Requests US Bunker-Busting Bombs with Increased Power The visit of US Vice President to Israel is crucial for the future US defense aid to Israel.

IDF: On Monday, Joe Biden will land at Ben Gurion Airport, for his last visit as Vice President of the United States. Ostensibly, this is one of the more boring visits: current Democratic administration is in his last year, and Biden himself had decided not to run for the Democratic presidential nomination, as many vice presidents have done before him.

Still, the visit arouses huge interest, especially in the Israeli defense establishment. The reason: the discussions with the United States regarding a new framework agreement for defense aid entered the final straight, and Biden might bring about some news on the matter, or at least a hint. Anyway, shortly after Biden’s visit, the defense minister will visit Washington, after which Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will also visit the United States. Therefore, the aid agreement is expected to be signed by the end of March, at the latest. Israel is counting on the American administration to be generous towards Israel’s defense needs at this time, in order to win the support of the Jewish vote (and mostly the Jewish donors) prior to the presidential elections.

Aid or “Compensation”?

To understand how the coming month will be crucial in terms of the Israeli defense ministry, we need to understand the context: the US elections will be held in November 2016, whereas the previous defense aid agreement between Israel and the United States will expire in 2017. The 10-years-long agreement set the extent of the defense aid back in 2007. According to the soon to be expired agreement, Israel received each year $ 3.1 billion. This is a huge sum, which constitutes more than 20 percent of Israel’s defense budget. Under the terms of the aid, the Ministry of Defense has received permission to convert half a billion dollars each year into NIS, to use the money for local acquisitions. The remainder is used as the primary budget source, to finance IDF equipment of central combat platforms such as fighter jets and helicopters.

Beyond the generous annual aid, Israel receives additional aid from the United States for special projects. For example, the US has funded the equipping of seven of the nine Iron Dome batteries. In addition, the US DoD had collaborated with the Israeli defense establishments in the development and funding of other major missile defense projects – “Arrow 3” and “David’s Sling”.

It was recently reported that the Americans will also deliver funds for projects that will assist the fight against underground tunnels built by Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Furthermore, the IDF and the US military has an agreement in which Israel could use American military equipment, kept in storages in Israel, in emergencies. To top that, the US Army also operates an innovative and classified radar system in the Har-keren mountaintop in the Negev region. Israelis are not allowed to see it firsthand (the closed US area on Israeli soil generates considerable resentment in the defense establishments).

Harming the Israeli national honor or not, the new aid agreement on the agenda is also considered as compensation for the nuclear deal with Iran in summer 2015. The truth is that the compensation is not for the nuclear deal, but for the massive arms sales of American companies in the Persian Gulf.

Not many are aware, but the entire region is in an intense arms race, as Iran plans to spend no less than $ 20 billion of its funds, which were frozen during the economic sanctions, in order to finance the procurement of advanced weapons systems, primarily from Russia. Iran’s neighboring countries fear its massive procurement and its transformation to a nuclear power, sooner or later (no leader in the Persian Gulf believes that the agreement will prevent Iran from attaining a nuclear bomb). For this reason, they also acquire weapons, mainly from France and the United States (including many squadrons of modern fighter aircraft, made by the two countries).

This massive equipping is a great celebration for the US defense companies, but these weapons may one day be directed against Israel. Because the United States is committed to maintaining Israel’s qualitative edge (under a law passed years ago in Congress) – Israel is expected to receive increased aid, to allegedly ensure this advantage.

Aid Talks

Sources very involved in the defense and diplomatic relations between Israel and the United States, are confident that Israel had already missed an excellent opportunity to boost the “compensation”. It was near the time the agreement with Iran was signed. “Before signing the agreement, the American government was willing to give Israel almost everything it had wanted, to “silence” the criticism of the agreement. But because the Prime Minister has decided to fight Obama, the Americans have taught him a lesson and did not promise any compensation,” said a source close the subject.

Now, as mentioned, Israel hopes that the Democrats’ electoral considerations prevail over the US administration’s hostility towards the current Israeli government. But what Israel really wants and what would be the extent of the new aid? Talks over the subject between Israeli and American teams began last fall, as part of negotiations between the Israeli Defense Ministry and the Pentagon. During those conversations, Head of the IDF Planning Directorate, Maj. Gen. Amikam Norkin, presented the IDF’s needs to his US colleagues.

During the past few weeks, the aid negotiations was intensified and the reins were passed to PM Netanyahu’s hands, who deals with the issue closely.

The person who coordinates for the subject is the acting Head of the National Security Council, Ya’akov Nagel, who works regularly with the head of the US National Security Council, Dr. Susan Rice. Originally, Nagel started in the Administration for the Development of Weapons and Technological Infrastructure (MAFAT) in IMOD, and is currently a candidate for Heading MAFAT. Other major candidates mentioned, were Brig. Gen. (Res.) Dr. Danny Gold, who is considered as the father of “Iron Dome”; Maj. Gen.

(Res.) Ami Shafran; and Brig. Gen. (Ret.) Eytan Eshel and Brig. Gen. (Res.) Shmuel Yachin. The four of them served as Heads of the IDF’s R&D department.

Meanwhile, a new Head of the National Security Council was appointed this week, instead of Yossi Cohen, who has been appointed as Head of Mossad in early January: Brig. Gen. (Ret.) Avriel Bar-Yosef, originally a Navy officer, received the prestigious appointment.

Back to the US aid: the two main questions on the agenda are concerning the sum of the annual aid, in the decade between 2017 and 2027, and the quality of weapons that Israel will receive. Israel expects a significant boost in the annual aid, as part of “compensation” for the nuclear deal. Sums of even

4 and 5 billion dollars were heard. The second question, which depends on the actual sum of the defense aid, is what weapons systems Israel could purchase with that money.

Israel is already planning on at least two squadrons of the future F-35 fighter (the first aircraft of this model will land on Israeli soil this December), but in the Air Force they fantasize about no less than four squadrons by the end of the next decade. In addition, they desire an additional F-15 squadron, a modern array of transport helicopters and refueling aircraft, as well as an aircraft which is half helicopter and half fighter, the V-22.

In addition to aircraft, Israel-US talks involve advanced air-to-ground missiles and much-needed weapons, should it turn out that Iran has been fooling the world and continues to strive for a nuclear bomb. These weapons include, mainly, bunker-busting bombs, more advanced and heavier than the “Lite” version of bunker-busting bombs that the air force received five years ago.

Some of the systems discussed between Israel and the United States are highly classified. In many cases, it is expected that the Americans would agree to include such systems in the weapons arsenal supplied to Israel, only if they know that Israeli defense industries are already developing similar systems in parallel.

Not all interests of Israel and the US are overlapping, but from Israel’s perspective, the aid agreement shall determine Israel’s military power for many decades. Thus, this month will bring about crucial decisions, and all negotiation tricks will come into play, by both sides.

***

The curious relationship between Israel and Saudi Arabia and why

IRGC Forms Base Near Saudi Border

LONDON [MENL] — Iran has established a military base in Iraq near the border with Saudi Arabia.

An Iraqi military source said Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps was operating a base in Naqib, along the Saudi border. The unidentified source said IRGC was storing weapons as well as training Hizbullah.

“They want to create a foothold for IRGC’s Quds Force along the Saudi border,” the source said.

The source, identified as an Iraq Army colonel, told the Saudi-owned A-Sharq Al Awsat that IRGC was working with its Shi’ite proxy, Abbas Brigade. The brigade was said to have expelled the residents of Naqib, also off-limits to the Iraq Army.

“They also want to secure a safe land route to transport IRGC fighters and weapons into Syria and Lebanon,” the Iraqi officer said.

In 2015, Saudi Arabia came under mortar attack from alleged Iranian-sponsored militias in southern Iraq. As a result, Saudi Arabia has bolstered its military presence along the Iraqi border.

Other Iraqi sources confirmed that IRGC held large areas of southern Iraq, particularly around Basra. They said Teheran was controlling much of the south through such proxies as Hizbullah-Iraq and Shi’ite militias funded by the Quds Force.

“When armed militias seized control of the town [Naqib], Sunni and Shi’ite Arabs were expelled under the pretext that they want to protect Karbala from Islamic State of Iraq and Levant fighters,” the Iraqi colonel said.