U.S. President Donald Trump (R) meets with Mohammed bin Salman, Deputy Crown Prince and Minister of Defense of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, in the Oval Office at the White House, March 14, 2017 in Washington, DC. Pool/ABACA/ABACA/PA Images. All rights reserved.With ISIL reeling in the decisive battle
to recapture Mosul – ISIL’s biggest urban stronghold –, Masoud Barzani
president of the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) declared,
on June 7, that the KRG would hold an independence referendum on September 25.
Barzani’s announcement sent shock waves
across the region, and what made it profoundly alarming was his determination
to conduct this controversial referendum in Kirkuk, an oil-rich multi-ethnic
city, as well as in other disputed areas, which were seized by the Kurdish
fighters (Peshmerga) as the Iraqi Army unravelled in the face of ISIL’s
lightening advance in June 2014.
While Iran swiftly declared its strident
opposition to the referendum, Iraq’s Prime Minister Haider al Abadi’s initial
response was muted.
Turkey’s president Erdogan by contrast,
scathingly criticised
Brazani’s move. This was highly unexpected, since Turkey consistently enabled
the KRG to defy the Iraqi Central Government (ICG) by selling oil
independently.
Even with Turkey and Iran standing by
the ICG, Abadi nevertheless turned to the US to resolve this contentious issue.
Washington sought to persuade Barzani to postpone the referendum, arguing that
it would deflect attention from fighting ISIL.
However, the offensive
by the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) on August 20, to recapture Tal Afar, without
any Peshmerga participation, demonstrated that battling ISIL superseded all
other priorities.
In essence, the US’ chief objection was
essentially the timing of the referendum, only a few months before the
parliamentary elections due in May 2018, which would undoubtedly torpedo
Abadi’s prospects of being re-elected, as his premiership would be inextricably
linked to surrendering Kirkuk.
Barzani’s rejection
of an international proposal on 14 September prompted the US special envoy for
the war on ISIL, Brett McGurk, to explicitly emphasize that
the referendum lacked any international legitimacy.
Consequently, Barzani vowed to press
ahead with the vote, prompting Saudi Arabia, a close ally of Barzani, to
dispatch on September 17 its Gulf affairs Minister Thamer al Sabhan, who
appealed to Barzani to back down.
In the eyes of Riyadh, Barzani has
doubtlessly been playing an instrumental role in not merely destabilizing its
arch foe Iran by enticing Iran’s Kurds to rise up, but also encouraging
Turkey’s Kurds to severely undermine Turkey’s government which has emphatically
backed its arch rival Qatar in the face of a tight blockade it has imposed in
partnership with UAE, Bahrain and Egypt.
On September 21, ICG ordered the ISF
including the Popular Mobilisation Forces (PMFs) – consisting of mainly Shia paramilitary units
and volunteers, who spearheaded Iraq’s fight back against ISIL – to launch an offensive
to not only retake Hawija, a strategic ISIL bastion, but also to send a stark
warning to Barzani.
Buoyed by US and Saudi ringing endorsement, Abadi
demanded on September 24, that the KRG must hand
over airports and border crossings to ICG and also halt oil export.
Even though, Barzani’s independence vote was
overwhelmingly backed, on September 29 it was abundantly clear that it has
spectacularly backfired when all international flights ceased and US Secretary
of State Rex Tillerson underlined that the US
rejected it.
While Iran and its allies in Iraq and Syria were
gaining the upper hand against ISIL, came Trump’s desperate attempt to turn the
tables on Tehran by refusing
on October 13, to re-certify the nuclear deal, claiming disingenuously that
Iran was violating the spirit of the 2015 accord.
Iran, fired back by defiantly showcasing its
significant influence, sending the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard
Corps Qasem Soleimani to Sulaymaniyah in Kurdistan on October 15.
Soleimani utilised his close ties with the Patriotic
Union of Kurdistan (PUK) leadership, especially Bafel Talabani, practically
securing the withdrawal of PUK Peshmerga units and enabling ISF not only to
sweep effortlessly into Kirkuk on October 16, but also the remaining disputed
areas.
Paradoxically however, the collapse of Brazani’s
independence dream – thanks undeniably to Iran –
has been exploited by Trump and Riyadh to bolster Abadi’s inherently weak
leadership by presenting him as Iraq’s National hero who crushed ISIL and
foiled Kurdish independence.
Ever since 2003 when the US toppled
Iraq’s ruthless dictator Saddam Hussain, Saudi Arabia has not only adamantly
refused to recognize Iraq’s fledgling democracy but has been working tirelessly
to derail the political process.
Against this backdrop, Obama’s administration sought
to assuage Riyadh’s distrust by compelling Iraq’s ex-PM Nuri al-Maliki, who is
deeply loathed by Riyadh, to step aside despite winning the 2014 election, in
favour of Abadi.
Riyadh however, only appointed al Sabhan as its first
ambassador to Iraq in December 2015. And in a stunning speech
in July 2016, from Washington, Iraq’s Foreign Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafri, who
was well-connected to the Saudis during the nineties through his business of
organising and acting as a religious guide for Iraqi Haj pilgrims in London, expressed
his resounding shock at Riyadh’s relentless efforts to destabilise Iraq,
acknowledging that Baghdad has persistently been covering up Riyadh’s
subversive activities.
Clearly Baghdad’s expulsion
of al Sabhan in August 2016 was an act of last resort.
Trump’s victory in the US presidential elections was
beyond doubt music to King Salman’s and his –
young inexperienced – son Mohammed bin
Salman’s (MBS) ears. He has fervently embraced Riyadh’s uncompromising stance by
considering Iran’s nuclear agreement as the worse deal ever, pledging to scrap
it.
Additionally, regarding Iran’s growing influence as
the primary threat to the region, while also supporting Riyadh’s vociferous yet
unsuccessful campaign – given the growing chorus of highly credible US and
European leaders, including ex-President Obama, ex-Secretary of State Clinton
and ex-Vice President Biden, all of whom have firmly pointed the finger of
blame at Saudi Arabia for funding, arming and exporting its extremist hard-line
Wahhabi Salafi ideology to terrorist groups, such as ISIL, Al Qaeda and Jabhet
Al-Nusra – to shift the responsibility for instability and insecurity to
Iran.
Although, Trump initially treated Abadi as Obama’s
poodle, but apparently had a major change of heart, largely due not only to intense
lobbying by Tillerson and the defence secretary James Mattis, but also Abadi’s
tacit support to Trump’s quest to tackle Iran’s threat, as revealed by Trump’s readout
of his phone conversation with Abadi in February 2017.
This clearly laid the foundations for a new strategy
spearheaded by Trump and sponsored by MBS, aiming to prop up Abadi’s powerbase
ahead of the May 2018 elections, ultimately empowering him to steer Iraq away
from Tehran and towards Riyadh.
Yet ironically, Trump-MBS strategy has relied heavily
on weaning Iraqi Shia blocs off Iran and pushing them towards Riyadh, thereby
inevitably creating a Shia-dominated bloc that is ostensibly led by Abadi but
in reality controlled and employed by Riyadh to combat Shia blocs aligning with
Iran.
To implement this strategy Saudi Foreign Minister Adel
al-Jubier arrived in Baghdad in February 2017, and Abadi was invited to meet
Salman in June 2017, opening the door for Iraq’s Interior Minster Qasim
al-Araji, who is a leading figure in Badr Organisation, which is part of the
PMFs, followed by Moqtada al Sadr, who is a highly influential cleric and head
of the al-Ahrar bloc, to converge in Riyadh in July 2017.
Trump, has sought to shore up the new strategy by
first sending McGurk in August 2017 to attend the reopening of the Arar border
crossing between Iraq and Saudi Arabia, and then Tillerson on October 21 to
join Salman and Abadi in Riyadh for the inauguration of the Saudi-Iraqi
cooperation Council.
Without doubt, Tillerson’s demand while in Riyadh that
the PMFs should go back home, was intended to consolidate MBS’s credentials as
guardian of Sunni Islam, while also boosting Abadi’s image by allowing him to
slam Tillerson’s remarks in a face to face meeting the next day in Baghdad.
So far Trump-MBS strategy has not made any significant
headway, suffering its first major setback in August 2017, when al-Araji revealed
from Tehran that MBS had asked him and also Abadi to mediate to ease tensions
with Iran.
MBS had to make a stark choice, either losing face or
spoiling the perfect pretext used by Iraqi Shia leaders to justify their
eagerness to visit Riyadh. Of course, MBS denied making such a request.
And while Riyadh would prefer to trumpet Sadr’s bloc
alliance with Ayad Allawi’s al-Wataniya coalition, which was announced
in June 2017, as tangible evidence that its strategy is delivering, in fact it
was merely an agreement to coordinate positions in parliament.
Surely, Riyadh must be disappointed that Ammar Al-Hakim’s
leadership of the pro-Iran Islamic Supreme Council has so far been reluctant to
openly edge closer towards Riyadh.
And again, Sadr’s declaration on November 21, that he
strongly supports Abadi’s bid for a second term is definitely not inspired by
Riyadh, but instead driven by Sadr’s implacable obsession with blocking
Maliki’s prospects of becoming PM. It is also in retaliation for Iran’s
full-blown backing to his arch rival Qasi al-Khazali, head of Asaib Ahl al Haq.
Trump-MBS strategy constitutes a major turn around in
the US outlook for post-2003 Iraq, shifting the emphasis from constructing a
fragmented Iraq that could potentially break up to a more united Iraq under the
leadership of Abadi, who is not merely heavily dependent on its support, but
also prepared to bend backwards to tow its line on Iran. In this context,
Barzani became an obstacle and Kirkuk a mere detail.
Indeed, Abadi’s declaration
on December 9 of the end of war against ISIL signals the beginning of the
elections campaign. But with MBS engaged in an escalating anti-Shia
confrontation against Iran and its allies, it is very hard to imagine how Shia
leaders such as al-Sadr and al-Hakim could join a coalition hell-bent on taking
the fight to Tehran.
