But John Kerry, Iran Does Support al Qaeda

Posted on July 13, 2016July 13, 2016 by Denise Simon

Primer:

The State Department confirmed that Iran continues to work with Al-Qaeda elements, despite
their expressed hostility towards one another. It stated: “Iran remained unwilling to bring to
justice senior Al-Qaeda (AQ) members it continued to detain, and refused to publicly identify
those senior members in its custody.
Iran allowed AQ facilitators Muhsin al-Fadhli and Adel Radi Saq al-Wahabi al-Harbi to operate a
core facilitation pipeline through Iran, enabling AQ to move funds and fighters to South Asia and
also to Syria.

Al-Fadhli is a veteran AQ operative who has been active for years. Al-Fadhli began working with the Iran-based AQ facilitation network in 2009 and was later arrested by Iranian authorities. He was released in 2011 and assumed leadership of the Iran-based AQ facilitation network.” Clarion Project

Top Intel Official: Al Qaeda Worked on WMD in Iran

New evidence of the bin Laden-Iran connection.

WeeklyStandard: Al Qaeda operatives based in Iran worked on and biological weapons, according to a letter written to Osama bin Laden that is described in a new book by a top former U.S. intelligence official.

The letter was captured by a U.S. military sensitive site exploitation team during the raid on bin Laden’s Abbottabad headquarters in May 2011. It is described in Field of Fight, out Tuesday from Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, the former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, and Michael Ledeen of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

“One letter to bin Laden reveals that al Qaeda was working on chemical and biological weapons in Iran,” Flynn writes.

Flynn’s claim, if true, significantly advances what we know about al Qaeda’s activity in Iran. The book was cleared by the intelligence community’s classification review process. And U.S. intelligence sources familiar with the bin Laden documents tell us the disclosure on al Qaeda’s WMD work is accurate.

Flynn notes that only a small subset of bin Laden’s files have been released to the public. The “Defense Intelligence Agency’s numerous summaries and analyses of the files remain classified,” too, Flynn writes. “But even the public peek gives us considerable insight into the capabilities of this very dangerous global organization.”

It’s not just al Qaeda.

“There’s a lot of information on Iran in the files and computer discs captured at the Pakistan hideout of Osama bin Laden,” Flynn writes in the introduction. The authors note that the relationship between Iran and al Qaeda “has always been strained” and “[s]ometimes bin Laden himself would erupt angrily at the Iranians.” Previously released documents and other evidence show that al Qaeda kidnapped an Iranian diplomat in order to force a hostage exchange and bin Laden was very concerned about the Iranians’ ability to track his family members.

And yet the book makes clear that Flynn believes there is much more to the al Qaeda-Iran relationship than the public has been told. And that’s not an accident. Obama administration “censors have been busy,” Flynn writes, blocking the release of the bin Laden documents to the public and, in some cases, to analysts inside the U.S. intelligence community. “Some of it—a tiny fraction—has been declassified and released, but the bulk of it is still under official seal. Those of us who have read bin Laden’s material know how important it is…”

Not surprisingly, Obama administration officials bristle at Flynn’s characterization of their lack of transparency and lack of urgency on jihadists and their state sponsors. “Mike Flynn, in true Kremlin form, has been peddling these baseless conspiracy theories for years. Anyone who thinks Iran was or is in bed with al Qaeda doesn’t know much about either,” an Obama administration official told THE WEEKLY STANDARD.

It’s an odd line of attack, given the fact that the Obama administration has repeatedly accused Iran of directly aiding al Qaeda. The Treasury and State Departments publicly accused the Iranian regime of allowing al Qaeda to operate inside Iran in: July 2011, December 2011, February 2012,July 2012, October 2012, May 2013, January 2014, February 2014, April 2014, and August 2014. In addition, in congressional testimony in February 2012, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper described the relationship as a “marriage of convenience.”

Asked about the administration’s own repeated statements pointing to the Iranian regime’s deal with al Qaeda, the administration official who dismissed Flynn’s claim as a “baseless conspiracy” theory declined to comment further.

The Flynn/Ledeen claim about al Qaeda’s WMD work in Iran comes with an interesting wrinkle. The authors preface their disclosure of al Qaeda’s work on “chemical and biological weapons in Iran” by suggesting that the revelation was included in documents already public.

But the only document released to date that seems to touch on the subject is a March 28, 2007, letter to an al Qaeda operative known as “Hafiz Sultan.” The letter, which discussed the possibility of Iran-based al Qaeda operatives using chlorine gas on Kurdish leaders and includes a likely reference to Atiyah ‘Abd-al-Rahman, was released by the administration via the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point in May 2012. President Obama’s Treasury Department has claimed that Rahman was appointed by Osama bin Laden “to serve as al Qaeda’s emissary in Iran, a position which allowed him to travel in and out of Iran with the permission of Iranian officials.” It is not, however, addressed to bin Laden and it does not include a reference to biological weapons.

And while the U.S. Treasury and State Department have repeatedly sanctioned al Qaeda’s operatives inside Iran and offered rewards for information on their activities, as noted, statements from Treasury and the State Department do not mention al Qaeda’s “chemical and biological weapons” work inside Iran.

The takeaway: It does not appear that the al Qaeda document referenced by Flynn has been released by the U.S. government.

Flynn and others who have seen the documents say there are more explosive revelations in the bin Laden files kept from the public. Those already released give us a hint. One document, released in 2015, is a letter presumably written by Osama bin Laden to the “Honorable brother Karim.” The recipient of the October 18, 2007, missive, “Karim,” was likely an al Qaeda veteran known Abu Ayyub al Masri, who led al Qaeda in the Iraq (AQI) at the time.

Bin Laden chastised the AQI leader for threatening to attack Iran. The al Qaeda master offered a number of reasons why this didn’t make sense. “You did not consult with us on that serious issue that affects the general welfare of all of us,” bin Laden wrote. “We expected you would consult with us for these important matters, for as you are aware, Iran is our main artery for funds, personnel, and communication, as well as the matter of hostages.”

That language from bin Laden sounds a lot like the language the Obama administration used in July 2011, when a statement from the U.S. Treasury noted that the network in Iran “serves as the core pipeline through which Al Qaeda moves money, facilitators and operatives from across the Middle East to South Asia.”

David Cohen, who was then a top Treasury official and is now the number two official at the CIA, told us back then: “There is an agreement between the Iranian government and al Qaeda to allow this network to operate. There’s no dispute in the intelligence community on this.”

Why, then, is the Obama administration attempting to dismiss the cooperative relationship between Iran and al Qaeda as a “baseless conspiracy?” Good question.

And it’s one that releasing the rest of the documents could help answer.

Note: Flynn’s co-author Michael Ledeen is a colleague of Thomas Joscelyn at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

****

Most recently, in September, the Obama administration launched missile strikes against al Qaeda’s so-called Khorasan Group in Syria. The administration pointed to indicating that this cadre of “core” al Qaeda operatives was planning mass killings in the West, and possibly even in the United States. Two of the terrorists who lead the Khorasan Group formerly headed al Qaeda’s operations in Iran. Tellingly, Iran allowed this pair to continue their fight against the West, even as they have battled Iran’s chief allies in Syria.

Obama’s Treasury Department first publicly recognized the relationship between the Iranian regime and al Qaeda on July 28, 2011. Treasury added six al Qaeda operatives to the U.S. government’s list of designated terrorists. The principal terrorist among them is known as Yasin al-Suri, “a prominent Iran-based al Qaeda facilitator” who operates “under an agreement between al Qaeda and the Iranian government.” Treasury described al Qaeda’s presence in Iran as a “core pipeline” and “a critical transit point for funding to support al Qaeda’s activities in Afghanistan and Pakistan.” Treasury made it clear that other high-level al Qaeda members were actively involved in shuttling cash and recruits across Iran.

Tehran Lives in John Kerry’s Head, Aggressions Approved

Posted on July 12, 2016July 12, 2016 by Denise Simon

It is Iran stupid…yet both the National Security Council, led by Susan Rice, Barack Obama and John Kerry are declared honorary citizens of Iran with gold keys to the city of Tehran.

Check it…

U.S. Confirms Purchase of Iranian Nuke Materials for $8.6 Million

FreeBeacon: U.S. and Iranian officials confirmed on Monday that the United States had completed a $8.6 million taxpayer-funded purchase of Iranian nuclear materials, a deal undertaken by the Obama administration to keep Iran in compliance with last summer’s nuclear agreement.

Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, right, embraces President Hassan Rouhani / AP

Abbas Araghchi, a top Iranian diplomat and negotiator of the deal, announced on Iranian television that the United States had moved forward with the purchase of 32 tons of heavy water for a price of $8.6 million. That money is said to have been successfully transferred to Iran, according to Persian language reports in the country’s state-run media.

An Energy Department spokesperson, speaking on background to the Free Beacon, confirmed the purchase.

“I can confirm reports that the DOE Isotope Program has completed the acquisition of 32 metric tons of heavy water from Iran,” the spokesperson said.

One U.S. official told the Free Beacon that while the deal is being announced officially now, it was actually concluded in April, when the administration first announced it.

“The heavy water deal was really concluded in April and it just took a few months to make all the necessary arrangements you would expect from such a deal,” the official said.

The disclosure could complicate matters on Capitol Hill with lawmakers who have been rebuffed by the administration in their attempts to learn more about the deal, sources said.

An Energy Department spokesperson told the Free Beacon in late April: “We cannot discuss details of the payment until after the purchase is complete.”

The timeline for the deal is raising new questions from congressional sources.

“The confirmation of this late April date is likely to anger lawmakers who were denied details of the deal because the Energy Department told them several months ago that key details surrounding the deal had not yet been firmed up,” said one congressional adviser familiar with attempts to compel further details about the deal.

The source pointed to a a letter presented to Rep. Mike Pompeo (R., Kansas). The Free Beacon was the first outlet to obtain that letter.

“The Obama administration’s deal with the Mullahs in Tehran to purchase heavy water demonstrates a disturbing, potentially illegal, willingness of the administration to subsidize Iran’s nuclear program,” Pompeo told the Free Beacon at the time. “This purchase allows the Iranians to offload previously unsellable product and it destigmatizes the act of doing business in Iran.”

The purchase has sparked opposition on Capitol Hill among lawmakers who say that the United States should not engage in nuclear-related business with Iran. The purchase was made outside of the nuclear accord and was touted by the administration as a way to keep Iran within the limits set under the deal.

Lawmakers have been critical of the sale due to their inability to get specific details from the administration about how the deal would be completed and how U.S. taxpayer funds would be awarded to Iran.

“One of the most important achievements of the JCPOA was that we are now recognized as a seller of heavy water by America, which did not accept heavy water production by Iran,” Araghchi was quoted as saying, according to an independent translation provided to the Free Beacon.

“Heavy water production has reached 25 tons per year and storing heavy water in Oman was the decision of the Atomic Energy Organization [of Iran]. … The need of Arak [heavy water reactor] was between 80 to 90 tons,” Araghchi added. “We considered 130 tons for caution. We have this amount inside the country and send some to storage facilities in Oman.”

Lawmakers are expected to vote Thursday on legislation that would ban the administration from carrying out similar purchases in the future.

Update, 5:30 p.m. The headline and body of this post have been revised to reflect confirmation of the purchase by an Energy Department official.

Oh wait….there is more…..beyond the IRGC, Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps hijacking our sailors, naval aggression is a very common occurrence and threat.

Votel sees cause for concern as U.S., Iranian ships share tight space

TampaBayTimes: ABOARD THE USS NEW ORLEANS — The Iranian vessel with its antiship cruise missiles did what ships from Iran often do — cruise within 500 yards of a U.S. Navy vessel.

Only this time, the USS New Orleans had a special guest — Army Gen. Joseph Votel, head of U.S. Central Command. Votel was visiting the ship in the Strait of Hormuz as part of his tour of the 20-nation CentCom region, which began last week when he flew out of headquarters at MacDill Air Force Base.

Two days after visiting Afghanistan, Votel arrived aboard the New Orleans on a tilt-rotor V-22 Osprey, landing on a flight deck in sweltering heat. He landed just in time to see a Houdong-class warship, belonging to the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps navy, cruise close by.

It would happen five times during the hours Votel spent passing through the Strait of Hormuz aboard the New Orleans, an amphibious transport dock ship. The experience gave Votel a front-row seat to the complex challenges Iran poses to the U.S. and its allies in the region — challenges that fall on Votel’s shoulders as officer in charge of U.S. military operations in the Middle East and Southwest Asia. More here.

**** Given the constant aggression by the IRGC with the knowledge and approval of Tehran, these events are likely a leak by Navy officials due to anger and rightly so. Since the Obama administration is pro Iran due to overwhelming protections of the deals with Iran including the Joint Plan of Action, the National Security Council and the State Department stop at nothing to ensure Iran’s actions are acceptable at the cost of law regarding international sea traffic and the major threat to our Navy.

In part from Reuters: The five Iranian vessels consisted of four speedboats, three with mounted machine guns, as well as a guided missile patrol ship.

One of the four speedboats that approached the New Orleans and its escort, a Navy guided missile destroyer, the USS Stout, cut its engines and watched as the U.S. warships passed. An hour before, a larger Iranian guided-missile patrol craft came by.

U.S. officials stressed that such approaches fell within the category of professional interactions, the kind they see during 90 percent of the U.S. Navy’s roughly 250 transits through the Strait of Hormuz each year. But the Navy says some 10 percent are classified as unsafe, abnormal or unprofessional. More here.

NATO Website Goes Dark During Summit

Posted on July 11, 2016July 11, 2016 by Denise Simon

Those Russians are good, good at hacking…

A suspicious outage was reported and interesting that Obama was there too. The Warsaw Summit hosted by Poland where several distinct events happened. 1. There was an agreement to strengthen the alliance with military presence in the East that includes Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. 2. The alliances also agreed to operational strength of ballistic missile defense as well as cyber defenses and applying cyberspace as an operational domain. 3. For Afghanistan, a resolution was approved to continue the mission and funding forces through 2020. 4. A comprehensive assistance package for Ukraine passed. 5. The NATO website/domain was likely hacked.

So….the chatter at more casual breakout sessions and in formal session did include escalating protections in the cyber realm. Obama got the message. Certainly on the heels of the Hillary emailgate scandal, Barack Obama finally admits there things still to be done to tighten up security.

Obama says U.S. government must improve cyber security

Reuters: U.S. President Barack Obama said on Sunday that the U.S. government has to improve its cyber security practices for the modern age of smart phones and other technology, saying that hackers had targeted the White House.

“I am concerned about it, I don’t think we have it perfect. We have to do better, we have to learn from mistakes,” Obama told a news conference in Madrid. “We know that we have had hackers in the White House,” he added.

Concerns have been raised about the security of government information after the head of the FBI said presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s email servers may have been accessed by foreign actors when she was Secretary of State.

****

In 2015, Obama held a cyber security summit. Also there was an Executive Order. He wants better coordination between government and the private sector to fight online threats. Companies on board include Apple and Intel. It was a busy year in 2015 as Obama Announces New Cybersecurity Legislative Proposal and Other Cybersecurity Efforts.

Earmarking $19 billion for cyber programs by Obama also included a czar, Howard A. Schmidt. So how smart is Schmidt, or rather how UN-smart is he?

So far, there is no official proof that any country has ever engaged in a cyber attack, although certain malware attacks have been linked to different nations. The Stuxnet worm, which disrupted Iran’s nuclear facilities, has been attributed to the United States and Israel and the recently uncovered cyber espionage operation Red October is rumored to be either a Russian or a Chinese operation.

To avoid a cyber arms-race and an escalation in cyber attacks, Kaspersky has openly advocated for more online regulation, including international treaties limiting the use of malware — just like there are treaties against biological and nuclear weapons.

For Schmidt, that’s not a viable solution because it would be hard to enforce such a treaty. “At some point in the future maybe that will work but right now, number one, we have enough difficulty enforcing treaties of physical things that you can actually count, whether it’s weapon systems or whether it’s export import of these things, it’s extremely difficult,” he said.

Instead of a treaty that will take decades to become reality, Schmidt thinks countries should just respect the rules of engagement that already apply in real warfare. In war “we don’t just arbitrarily start shooting at people, we don’t send planes, we have respect for airspace, we have respect for a lot of the international laws,” he said. “Cyberspace should not be any different.” More here from Mashable.

One more thing to Obama and Mr. Schmidt….don’t forget the Office of Personnel Management, that experienced one of the largest intrusions of data belonging to and managed by the Federal government. Furthermore, that lady, Mrs. Katharine Archuleta who ran OPM never had any security experience with cyber and directly after the hearings on the cyber hack of the agency, well….she quit.

Cyber doom is here and no one talks about it….most of all the media…it is the best kept secret and classified condition inside the beltway.

Former DHS Official Explains Islamic Infiltration and the Agency

Posted on July 11, 2016July 11, 2016 by Denise Simon

I personally sat in this conference call with several others….it was chilling.

Words and symbols have meaning when it comes to the Islamic world. The Islamic Caliphate has a foothold in America going back decades.

YOU MUST SIT STILL FOR THIS VIDEO SESSION.

Inside this conference call, Mr. Haney referred to the Words Matter Memo of 2008. Here is that memo.

This site wrote about Tablighi Jamaat directly after the San Bernardino terror attack.

TABLE 1 – The Six Principles of the Tablighi Jamaat3

Kalimah An article of faith in which the tabligh accepts that there is no god but Allah and the Prophet Muhammad is His messenger
Salaat Five daily prayers that are essential to spiritual elevation, piety, and a life free from the ills of the material world
Ilm and Dhikr The knowledge and remembrance of Allah conducted in sessions in which the congregation listens to preaching by the emir, performs prayers, recites the Quran and reads Hadith. The congregation will also use these sessions to eat meals together, thus fostering a sense of community and identity
Ikram-i-Muslim The treatment of fellow Muslims with honor and deference
Ikhlas-i-Niyat Reforming one’s life in supplication to Allah by performing every human action for the sake of Allah and toward the goal of self-transformation
Tafrigh-i-Waqt The sparing of time to live a life based on faith and learning its virtues, following in the footsteps of the Prophet, and taking His message door-to-door for the sake of faith
*A Simple Message: Tablighi Jamaat’s simple message is compromised of six basic principles formulated by Muhammad Ilyas in 1934 (See TABLE 1). With its easily understood literature, the organization reaches a wide population, varying in education and knowledge of Islam. Eschewing abstract debates on doctrine, the group focuses on the need to reform the individual spirit.
*Distance from Politics: While some current and former Tablighis occupy government posts in South Asia, the Tablighi Jamaat asserts an avowedly apolitical stance. Rather than seeking to improve the well-being of society as a whole, the group focuses on transforming the individual. Borreguero argued that this approach allows the group to remain adaptable to diverse socio-political contexts and has facilitated its expansion. By remaining apolitical (unlike the Muslim Brotherhood), the Tablighi Jamaat avoids political confrontation, allowing it to exist in countries from Latin America to Africa to the Middle East without fear of proscription. However, Borreguero emphasized that this does not completely separate the movement from political authority: some members of Tablighi Jamaat have held government positions in Pakistan and Bangladesh, and the group tends to keep close and peaceful ties with governments in South Asia.
*Respect for Authority: Tablighi Jamaat respects political authority, perhaps because the group itself is hierarchical in nature and emphasizes the authority of group elders.
*Absolute Secrecy: An important key to the group’s transnational appeal is the near absolute secrecy with which it operates. Very little is known about the group’s inner workings because it does not hold official records of its membership and leadership ranks, nor does it keep formal financial books or minutes of shura decision-making. Other than Muhammad Ilyas’ “Six Principles” there is no other overarching doctrine to which the group adheres. According to Borreguero, maintaining secrecy stems not from a concern that authorities will uncover any nefarious dealings within the movement. Instead, it is ostensibly a shield against charismatic personalities creating internecine squabbles and splinter factions. More here.

Yet, the most terrifying organization as described by Mr. Haney in this video is The Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America. While we fret over the turn of our Supreme Court, this Islamic group changes all law enforcement culture in American, lower courts and education through indoctrination.

Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America

ClarionProject: AMJA’s jurists preach jihad, female genital mutilation and allow marital rape. The Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America (AMJA) says it “was established in response to the growing need of an Islamic jurisprudence specific to Muslims in the West. Its main goal is to uphold authentic standards using high academic standards, moderate approach and a rejection of extremism.”

In 2008, Al-Sawy said that Muslims are only allowed to become American citizens when there are no other viable options because the country is not ruled by sharia law:

“As for optionally obtaining citizenship of a non-Muslim country it is definitely prohibited without a doubt, moreover it could be a form of apostasy or main means leading to apostasy because willingly accepting the laws of disbelievers and obeying it without any valid excuse or enforcement, or ignorance is considered a nullifier to Tawheed [the doctrine of oneness of God] and Islam.” Read the full summary here.

*****

“See Something, Say Nothing” author Phil Haney reveals the
shocking truth about Muslim Brotherhood infiltration into the U.S. and how they are being aided and abetted by our government. Includes powerpoint and Q&A session following the presentation.

Iran’s Selective Celebrations over Dead in Syria/Iraq

Posted on July 11, 2016July 11, 2016 by Denise Simon

The long relationship primer of Iran and Syria. Raqqa, Syria is the base of operations for Islamic State. While Barack Obama just authorized and additional 560 Marines for deployment to Iraq for a probable Mosul liberation operation, questions need to be answered: 1. Who will lead the government in towns such as Fallujah and Mosul, much less Iraq? 2. Who will lead Syria if Russia and Iran continue to support Bashir al Assad or will sanctions and other actions force Assad to be removed and he flees?

Mosul Raqqa

Support for radical Palestinian groups: Both allies backed Palestinian groups opposed to negotiations with Israel, such as Hamas. Syria has long insisted that any deal between Palestinians and Israel must also resolve the issue of Israeli-occupied Syrian territory (the Golan Heights). Iran’s interests in Palestine are less vital, but Tehran has used its support for Palestinians to boost its reputation among Arabs and in the wider Muslim world, with varying success.

Support for Hezbollah: Syria acts as a conduit for the flow of weapons from Iran to Hezbollah, a Lebanese Shiite movement whose armed wing is the strongest military force in Lebanon. Hezbollah’s presence in Lebanon acts as a bulwark against a possible Israeli land invasion of neighboring Syria, whiling equipping Iran with some retaliatory capability in case of an Israeli attack on its nuclear facilities.

Iraq: After the US invasion of Iraq, Iran and Syria worked to prevent the emergence of a US-dependent regime in Baghdad that could pose a threat. While Syria’s influence in its traditionally hostile neighbor remained limited, Iran developed a close relationship with Iraq’s Shiite political parties. To counter Saudi Arabia, the Shiite-dominated Iraqi government followed Iran’s lead by opposing calls for regime change in Syria following the outbreak of the anti-government uprising in the country. Read more here.

Iran, Once Quiet About Its Casualties in Syria and Iraq, Now Glorifies Them

TEHRAN — The first news report, to a nation usually kept in the dark about military matters, was shocking: 13 Iranian soldiers, all with links to the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, had been killed in an ambush near the Syrian city of Aleppo. What followed this spring may have been even more surprising. Details about the soldiers appeared extensively in the Iranian news media, which not only gave the names of the dead but lionized them with sweeping life stories. Poster-size portraits were plastered all over their hometowns.

For years, Iran covered up its military activities in Syria and Iraq, so the government could deny any official involvement on the ground. Coffins arrived with the bodies of soldiers who went unidentified, referred to only as “defenders of the shrines” of the Shiite saints. When the bodies began to come home in larger numbers, the state news media began calling them “volunteers.”

No longer. Now every Iranian killed in action is named, his picture published, his valor lauded in elaborate tributes in the hard-line news media and on Instagram accounts dedicated to the fighters. The reason for the change, analysts say, is not some newfound dedication to transparency but a rift between the Iranian establishment’s hard-liners, who control the military, and the moderates.

The hard-liners, they say, want to prevent any decline in Tehran’s absolute support for Syria’s president, Bashar al-Assad, and to undermine the moderates, who they fear might be open to a political settlement in which Mr. Assad would step down.

The Revolutionary Guards see publicizing the sacrifices of the fallen as a way to build domestic support for the current Syria policy and squelch any talk of compromise. The Instagram accounts have attracted tens of thousands of followers, most of them supporting the military effort.

Hard-liners are promulgating Iran’s military successes — and even setbacks — in a variety of ways, including news reports and documentaries. An exhibit at the recent Tehran International Book Fair allowed ordinary Iranians to pose as “defenders of the shrines,” photographed sitting on a military motorcycle in front of a billboard showing a pulverized city street in Syria.

The main focus, however, is on social media.

Facebook and Twitter are blocked by the state in Iran, but the photograph-sharing app Instagram is freely accessible. Previously used mostly by middle-class Iranians showing off new puppies or vacations on the Caspian Sea, the app is now suffused with images of “martyrs” and young men proudly wielding machine guns.

One of the more prominent Instagram accounts is run by a reporter for Iranian state television, Hassan Shemshadi, who honors Iranian fighters and Afghans in the Iran-backed Fatemiyoun brigade.

Mr. Shemshadi’s more than 90,000 followers are treated to selfies and other shots from the front lines in Syria. There are pictures of him doing a stand-up for state television in front of an armored vehicle, of his passport and boarding pass for a flight to Damascus, and of the star officer of the Revolutionary Guards, Gen. Qassem Soleimani.

But most of Mr. Shemshadi’s posts concern the increasing number of Iranian casualties in Syria and Iraq. Since he started posting news of soldiers’ deaths in 2015, he has published a total of 346 mini-obituaries of Iranians and Iranian-backed Afghans in Syria and Iraq. That is a large majority of the 400 or so Iranian and Afghan soldiers thought to have died so far in the conflicts there.

“In the name of the Lord of the Martyrs and the honest, the defenders of the shrine, Asadollah Ebrahimi and Saheb Nazari both from #Fatemiyoun, Mehdi Asgari from #Karaj, Mehdi Bidi from #Tehran, Mohammad Amin Karimian from #Mazandaran were martyred by takfiri terrorists in Syria,” Mr. Shemshadi wrote a week ago, using an Arabic word for infidels. Over 3,700 people said they liked the post.

Mr. Shemsadi continued, “They died while defending the pure Mohammedan Islam and the holy shrines and also maintaining the national security of our country, and ascended to the heavens.”

More here from the NYT’s.

*****

1. Iran vs. Saudi Arabia: Perfect Enemies?

At its core, the Iranian-Saudi rivalry is about power and money: two oil-rich giants, vying for control of the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow water passage that accounts for almost 20% of all oil traded worldwide (and 40% of all US crude imports pass).

Iran and Saudi Arabia would always struggle to avoid collision, but ethnic and sectarian tension certainly doesn’t help. Iran is a majority Persian country that belongs to the Shiite branch of Islam. The vast majority of Saudis are Sunni Arabs, with a Shiite Arab minority (about 10%).

The two governments are also ideological rivals:

Wahabism: Saudi royals have spent vast amounts of money funding the spread of the (Sunni) Wahabi school, an ultra-conservative, literal interpretation of Islam, which is the state religion in Saudi Arabia. The official title of the Saudi King includes the duty of the “Guardian of the Two Holy Places”, Mecca and Medina, suggesting a degree of a divine authority.
Supreme Leader: The Islamic Republic of Iran, on the other hand, has promoted its version of political Islam, a combination of elected republican institutions under the guidance of a Muslim cleric, the Supreme Leader. The founder of the Iranian regime, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, condemned the Saudi monarchy as a tyrannical, illegitimate clique that answers to Washington, rather than God.

2. The Rise of Iran & Sunni-Shiite Sectarian Tension

Cultural and ideological differences aside, the growing tension has more to do with Iran’s growing regional clout that threatens Saudi Arabia’s position in the Arabian Peninsula and the Persian Gulf.

When the 1979 Islamic revolution in Iran brought to power Khomeini’s Shiite Islamists, Saudi Arabia feared that Iran would try to export its revolution into the Gulf Arab monarchies. When Iraq attacked Iran in 1980, Saudi Arabia enthusiastically supported Saddam Hussein’s war effort, and the Iraqi dictator remained a bulwark against Iran’s expansion until he was toppled by the US-led coalition in 2003.

The perceived threat never receded. Although Iran’s distinctly Shiite model of an Islamic state found little traction among Sunnis in the Arab world, Gulf Arab monarchs feared that Iran would incite rebellions among Shiite populations in Sunni-ruled Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Kuwait.

With Saddam’s regime now replaced with a government dominated by Shiite political parties friendly to Iran, Saudis thought that the nightmare scenario was closer than ever. In 2004, Jordanian ruler Abdullah II warned of an emerging “Shiite Crescent” in the Middle East.

Since the peak of the Sunni-Shiite civil war in Iraq (2006-07), the geopolitical rivalries in the Middle East have been acquiring an increasingly sectarian tone. With Iran firmly embedded among the Shiite Islamists in Lebanon and Iraq, Saudi Arabia poses as the protector of Sunnis. Never before has religious identity in the region been so politicized. Read more here, excellent basis and summary.