Mediaboss Marketing

The United States will not back away from its deployment to Syria, despite attacks on its forces there last week byIran-backed militia, the White House said Monday.

A one-way attack drone struck a US base in Syria on March 23, killing an American contractor, injuring another and wounding five US troops.

That triggered US retaliatory air strikes and exchanges of fire that a Syrian war monitoring group said killed 19 Syrian and pro-Iranian forces.

White House National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby said he was not aware of any additional attacks over the past 36 hours but cautioned, "We're going to stay vigilant."

Kirby also referred to President Joe Biden's remarks on Friday, when he warnedIranthat the United States would act forcefully to protect Americans.

"There's been no change in the US footprint in Syria as a result of what happened the last few days," Kirby said.

"We're not going to be deterred by these attacks from these militant groups."

Syria's foreign ministry on Sunday condemned US strikes, saying Washington had lied about what was targeted and pledging to "end the American occupation" of its territory.

Iran's foreign ministry also condemned the strikes, accusing US forces of targeting "civilian sites."

US forces first deployed into Syria during the Obama administration's campaign against Islamic State, partnering with a Kurdish-led group called the Syrian Democratic Forces. There are about 900 US troops in Syria.

Prior to the latest spate of attacks, US troops had been attacked byIranian-backed groups about 78 times since the beginning of 2021, according to the US military.

Reporting by Reuters

Read the original:
US Says Will Not Back Off In Syria Despite Iran-Backed Attacks -

In the late 1870s, Persias ruler Naser al-Din Shah watched with trepidation as the caliph Sultan Abdulhamid promoted a new policy of Islamic unity under Ottoman leadership.

A century later, Ankara watched with apprehension as the Iranian revolution ousted the shah, and Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini pursued his own brand of Islamic expansionism in the region.

Despite a 17th-century treaty that ended 150 years of intermittent wars over territorial disputes in West Asia and Mesopotamia, the two hegemons have since pursued policies of competition, cooperation, engagement and, very infrequently, confrontation.

Even in modern times, as the West imposes a policy of containment and sanctions on Iran, Turkey has been reluctant to close the door on its neighbour, partly due to geography and Turkish trade and energy needs - but also due to an intersection of vital interests.

Yet, it would be a mistake to dismiss the warm relations between Turkey and Iran as a case of plus ca change - especially in view of the recent Saudi-Iran detente. Disputes of late outnumber their common interests. To name a few, Syria talks planned later this month in Moscow will include Iran.

Sign up to get the latest alerts, insights and analysis, starting with Turkey Unpacked

Turkey has been a major backer of the political and armed opposition to the Assad regime while Irans decades-long support for Assad puts the two countries at odds in these talks. Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has also strongly objected to Turkish incursions into northern Syria.

A growing Israeli presencein the Caucasus region alarms Tehran, as does Turkeys own rapprochement with Israel.A historical battle for influence in Iraq, particularly in the northern region, between Ottoman Turkey and Persian Iran has only grown over the past decades, accelerated by the 2003 US-led invasion and more expansionist foreign policies in both Tehran and Ankara.

In addition, Turkeys alignment with Natoin the Ukraine conflict, while Iran exchanges military equipment with Russia, also raises concerns. Yet Turkey has tried to maintain good relations with Moscow, at times acting as a mediator, with President Recep Tayyip Erdogan working the phones with both Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelensky, following a policy of engagement, as confrontation would come with far higher costs.

Ankara would be hard-pressed to expect Tehran to sacrifice Yerevan without assistance in reining in Azeri irredentism

In Syria, Turkish and Iranian interests collide. For Iran, Syria is an arena to challenge Israel; for Turkey, Syria harbours a near-existential threat. The fallout from the Syrian conflict poses a direct challenge to Turkeys national security and territorial integrity, due to the presence of armed groups that are affiliated with the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) and actively supported by the West. At the same time, the influx of more than 3.5 million Syrian refugees places enormous pressure on a country currently managing a humanitarian crisis resulting from the 6 February earthquake.

The Astana process remains the only viable mechanism to resolve the Syrian crisis. Bringing in Iran, Syrian President Bashar al-Assads biggest supporter, may be the missing piece of the puzzle. Irans inclusion in the process is key to Ankaras normalisation with Damascus, and has boosted Turkish expectations of eliminating the PKK-linked Peoples Defence Units (YPG) in Syria and encouraging the return of Syrian refugees to their homeland. For Iran, its inclusion is an opportunity to cement its gains in Syria by leveraging its regional influence.

An unpopular view among those who supported the US-led invasion of Iraq two decades ago suggests that Iran and Turkey have emerged as the biggest winners. In Ankara, it is thought that Tehran may be able to influence an Iran-friendly government in Baghdad to manage Turkeys PKK problem in both Syria and Iraq.

In Ankaras view, the PKK in northern Iraq is open to Iranian influence via its relationships with Iraqi Kurdish leaders, and some suggest that the Iranian government is in contact with both the PKK and its Syrian affiliates. Still, much rests on what Turkey is willing to offer Iran in return for such cooperation. Kurdish separatism, too, remains a concern for Tehran in its heavily Kurdish regions, and Turkey could prove helpful to Iran by managing irredentist ethnic Azeris in Iran.

Turkeys policies in Iraq are influenced by the presence of PKK bases in the porous border areas, the status of Turkmens, and the countrys territorial integrity. Iraqs central government has condemned Turkish cross-border operations against PKK sanctuaries, while doing little to tackle the issue to Ankaras satisfaction. Turkeys most recent anti-PKK operation, dubbed Operation Claw-Lock, was waged last April following a visit to Ankara by Masrour Barzani, the prime minister of Iraqs Kurdish region.

Iran, too, has a contentious relationship with its own Kurdish population. Kurdish separatist groups from Iran have found shelter in Iraq, and Iran regularly targets the positions of the Iranian armed opposition. Iraqs foreign ministry has condemned the attacks by both Iran and Turkey, saying they distract from the efforts of countering terrorism on a regional level - but beyond rhetoric, little has been accomplished.

Iran sees Israels presence in Azerbaijan as part of a western encirclement, suggesting that Israel is conducting intelligence operations by Israeli-backed Azeri agents in Iran

Meanwhile, the strengthening of Azerbaijan-Israel relations has given Tehran reasonable cause for discomfort, as Tel Aviv has made no secret of its intentions to use Turkey-allied Baku as a springboard for attacks on Iran, despite Azerbaijani denials.

Iran sees Israels presence in Azerbaijan as part of a western encirclement, suggesting that Israel is conducting intelligence operations by Israeli-backed Azeri agents in Iran to carry out sabotage and assassinations, notably the suspicious January 2023 shooting incident at the Azerbaijani embassy in Tehran.

We see the presence of the Zionist regime in the region as a major threat to peace and stability. Wherever this regime is involved, there has been insecurity and crisis, Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian told his Turkish counterpart on 8 March. The Islamic Republic of Iran warns the parties to pay close attention to the behaviour of the Zionist regime. They should not allow its presence in the region.

Turkeys own rapprochement with Irans arch-foe Israel has also raised serious concerns in Tehran. Analysts suggest the current climate will likely render Iran more amenable to negotiations with regional rivals, which might account for the recent detente with Saudi Arabia.

Azerbaijan and Turkey are on the same page on Caucasus matters, with both viewing the creation of a Zangezur corridor through Armenias southernmost Syunik province as key to a joint plan for a connected Turkic world. Standing steadfastly in the way of this dream is Tehran, which views that goal as incompatible with the regions geopolitical and historical realities - and bypassing Iran would be unacceptable.

Saudi-Iran reconciliation: Is Arab-Israeli alliance against Tehran ending?

More significantly, Iran is deeply concerned about the rhetoric emanating from Baku in the aftermath of the Second Nagorno-Karabakh war and the prospect of enraging the ethnic Azeri population in its north. The outbreak of popular protests in Iran only compounds the resurgence of Azeri irredentism in the north, Kurdish separatism in the west, and Balochi claims in the southeast.

How far Iran will go in appeasing tensions with its neighbour is debatable. Ankara would be hard-pressed to expect Tehran to sacrifice Yerevan without assistance in reining in Azeri irredentism or mitigating the risk of an attack on Iran from Israel. These matters are as existential to Tehran as PKK separatism is to Ankara, especially during an election year.

Yet, despite the differences between Tehran and Ankara, as US and western countries confront Iran, one should still expect Turkey to take a conciliatory and diplomatic approach to its relationship with Iran, even under enormous Nato pressure. A regional war would have significant adverse impacts on Turkey, and it is unlikely that any Turkish administration would be supportive of a military option.

Expect Ankara to carefully follow a policy of dialogue, to seek opportunities for cooperation and collaboration, and to monitor the situation closely for opportunities with or threats from Tehran.

Today is important, but so is history and geography.

The views expressed in this article belong to the authors and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.

See more here:
Turkey-Iran: Why Ankara is reluctant to close the door on its neighbour - Middle East Eye

Some observers in Iran say that the society has been "radicalized" because of recent protests which were the product of the authoritarian political system.

In an interview with the reformist daily Shargh, sociologist Maghsud Farasatkhah said that the government needs to find answers to a set of urgent national problems including water shortage, capital flight, emigration of human resources, increase in poverty, diminishing economic stability, gender, ethnic and social inequality, and so on.

"But currently, the government has reduced politics to the unilateral omission of 'others' to reinforce its political power," he said, adding that ignoring the need for dialogue has led all politics into an impasse.

Farasatkhah added that a ruling class should come to power by trying to satisfy the aspirations of the people, but this is ignored in Iran, as all decisions are made by an elite whose relations with the rest of the society can be defined as "patriarchal."

Sociologist Maghsud Farasatkhah

By the word "elite," Farasatkhah means a group of non-elected politicians loyal to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, or those who have been elected to positions through a system of biased candidate vetting that merely serves the leader's interests.

According to Farasatkhah, this elite operates via non-transparent and non-accountable institutions in which there are no checks and balances. This will inevitably bring about a conflict between rulers and society. Examples of this are disagreements between the government and the people, such as compulsory hijab. What is prohibited by the government is permissible in the eyes of the nation. The same duality and conflict also exist in many other areas such as the unrestricted access to the Internet, sports, art, education, and so on.

The unrepresentative elite tries to force its views on the people and deny them personal and political freedoms.

In such a situation, when the people are not allowed to take part in politics, they turn into masses, and masses sometimes act as populist politicians and propagandists want them to act. Farasatkhah said that the society currently acts like a mass which is easily overwhelmed by events in Iran and the world. Any incident can potentially upturn the situation, and this is a cause for concern. "I am worried about the future and stability of the society as eventually the people will be the losers in the chain of events.

Farasatkhah said that the way out of this situation is turn the masses back into a society in which vocational, civil, local, and public institutions could be activated to empower the society, make it rational and rob the populists of their leverage.

However, many dissidents and critics might label Farasatkhas recommendations as wishful thinking within the ideology and structure of the current regime. Nice ideas have been around in Iran for decades, but the regime has prevented all reforms.

In another interview in the same issue of Shargh, Expediency Council member and a long-time regime insider, Majid Ansari said he can see signs that a part of the government has noticed the threats and understood the need for a review of current policies. Ansari is concerned about the threats but is willing to offer his way out of the problem.

Expediency Council member and a long-time regime insider, Majid Ansari

Ansari, an aide to the de facto leader of reformists in Iran, former President Mohammad Khatami, said that current protests has put regime politicians and political groups in all factions to test. He acknowledged the people's disillusionment about the factions but still believes that there are still ways to restore people's trust in political groups and even the government.

Iranian protesters have been saying that there is no big difference between the hardliner and reformist factions of the regime and they do not believe in that dichotomy any longer. Regime change, they say, is the only way to resolve the many crises Iran faces.

Ansari also acknowledged that the all-conservative government in Iran has led to "a relative political impasse," but he believes that admitting the mistakes made during the past years and using collective wisdom to make things right will put the nation back on the right track.

However, he did not say why Iran was not able to get on the right track in 44 years since the establishment of the Islamic Republic.

Ansari's solution is mainly based on holding free and fair elections, but doing so requires changes to the constitution or the combination of institutions linked to Khamenei, including the Guardian Council, and it is not clear who can bring Khamenei to terms with the idea of change as in his latest speech on March 21, he ruled out any change in the constitution and attributed the idea of change to "the enemies."

Here is the original post:
Pundits In Iran Look For A Way Out As Regime Digs In -

"In 2022, more people worldwide were on the run than ever before. At the same time, millions took to the streets for their rights. People flee and protest because their lives are threatened, because they are oppressed, persecuted, and disenfranchised, and because their human rights are violated," said Markus N. Beeko, the secretary general of Amnesty International's branchin Germany.

Beeko's figures are alarming:Amnesty International documented war crimes and crimes against humanity in 20 of the 156 countries surveyed, including some committed by Russian forces in Ukraine. In 62 countries, governments restricted freedom of assembly, association, and expression. And in 79 countries, activists were arbitrarily detained, many of them tortured and abused.

But there are plenty of developments that give cause for hope, according to Beeko. "The courage and perseverance of the people who are taking to the streets for freedom and justice, in Iran, Peru, Georgia and elsewhere, is impressive," he said.

"It's also a positive development that states have taken in millions of refugees from Ukraine unbureaucratically," he added. "Moreover, with investigations into human rights abuses in Syria, Myanmar, Ukraine, and Iran, the international community is showing that it wants to hold those responsible accountable."

Whether Russian President Vladimir Putin will ever have to answer to the International Criminal Court is open to question, butit appears that Russia's war against Ukraine would provide enough material for its own Amnesty International report.

"Russia's invasion of Ukraine is a blatant violation of the United Nations Charter, an act of aggression and a crime under international law," said Janine Uhlmannsiek, Europe and Central Asia desk officer at Amnesty International in Germany. "Amnesty International investigators have documented numerous war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by Russian forces."

Uhlmannsiek lists among these the indiscriminate attacks on residential areas, hospitals, and schools by the Russian military and the use of indiscriminate weapons such as banned cluster munitions, which have caused thousands of civilian casualties. Amnesty saidthere have also been crimes such as torture, sexual violence, and unlawful killings, and the deportation of large numbers of civilians to Russian-occupied territories or to Russia.

This browser does not support the video element.

"In one case documented by Amnesty, an eleven-year-old boy was separated from his mother. We have also documented cases of unaccompanied children being taken from Mariupol to Donetsk," says Uhlmannsiek, referring to parallel policies in Russia: "In the case of children who are either considered orphans or without parental care, the procedure to obtain Russian citizenship has been accelerated. This is to facilitate the adoption of children by Russian families."

All of this, she said, is a deliberatesystematic policy, and part of a comprehensive attack on Ukrainian civilians. The same goes for the use of violence against women, and systematic rape, which is always a feature ofarmed conflicts.

"We were able to talk to a woman who was raped several times by Russian soldiers. The war of aggression has a serious impact on women, girls and marginalized populations in Ukraine and puts their psychological, physical, sexual and reproductive health at risk quite enormously," said Uhlmannsiek. "At the same time, the war also increases the risk of gender-based violence and exacerbates the risk of exploitation."

The human rights situation in Russia itself, already dramatic before February 24, has worsened over the past year, Amnesty said. The government has been relentless in its crackdown on those who oppose the war or report on it independently. Amnesty International counted more than 100 criminal cases on charges of discrediting and at least 180 for knowingly disseminating allegedly false information.

"They face heavy fines and up to 15 years in prison. Last year, in March 2022, new laws were rushed throughthat criminalized the discrediting of the Russian armed forces and the dissemination of alleged false information about the armed forces," says Uhlmannsiek. "In its efforts to conceal the true extent of the destruction caused by the invasion of Ukraine, the Russian leadership is really cracking down on critical voices and on independent media."

As well as Russia's war on Ukraine, Amnesty International's annual report is focused on the human rights situation in Iran, particularly following the violent death of 22-year-old Kurdish woman Jina Mahsa Amini in September 2022. Amini was arrested for allegedly not wearing her headscarf correctly, and her subsequent death in custody sparkeda wave of protests throughout the country that still continues.

The mullahs' regime responded with brutal violence over the past few months. "We saw another significant deterioration in 2022 in terms of the number of executions, torture and arbitrary arrests," AmnestyMiddle East specialist in Germany Katja Mller-Fahlbusch told DW. "At the same time, we have seen a unique awakening. The courage with which Iranians are fighting for their freedom and their human rights, against all odds and against all state violence, even after six months, is impressive."

Amnesty's report found that the Iranian regime has not shrunk from arresting, torturing and raping children and young people. According to Mller-Fahlbusch, this too is a systematic plan aimed at intimidating their families and preventing them from protesting in the streets. The death penalty and even public executions have also formed part of this strategy.

"Between the arrests, the show trials, thedeath sentences, and the executions in four cases so far, it took only a few weeks at a breathtaking pace," said the Amnesty expert. "There are no rule-of-law standards and no regulated procedure, it is solely a means to stir up fear."

Mller-Fahlbusch fears that this violent suppression will continue this year, arguing that state authorities in Iran have for decades only employed one means: That of violence and the systematic violation of human rights. But she predicts that the protests of a society that no longer allows itself to be divided will also continue, which is why the international community must show solidarity, she said.

"In the case of Iran, publicity and public pressure provide protection," she said. "Quiet diplomacy, for example in the case of imprisoned dual nationals, does not help. What helps is public pressure, because the publicity created makes the crimes of those in political power visible. And this in turn raises the price for the Islamic Republic of Iran in this very, very cynical game."

The human rights organization is also concerned about the situation in Myanmar, where the military seized power on February 1, 2021. Since then, Amnesty International has documented extensive human rights violations, including war crimes and possible crimes against humanity. The rulers used indiscriminate and targeted ground and air attacks against civilians, looting villages and burning them to the ground.

Thousands are believed dead, 1.5 million displaced and 13,000 people still imprisoned in inhumane conditions. In addition, Amnestyhas documented four executions, plus at least 100 death sentences. Unfair trials were as much a part of everyday life as the routine use of torture during detention, the report found.

This browser does not support the video element.

In East Africa, meanwhile, Amnesty International has welcomed the peace agreement between the Ethiopian and Tigrayan governments, though it is worriedthat the processing of war crimes does not play any role in the peace process and that the Ethiopian government may wantto prevent it.

Amnesty's research foundthat all parties to the conflict in northern Ethiopia have committed human rights violations, including war crimes, massacres, looting, and sexual violence. Hundreds of civilians have been killed in Tigray by air strikes by Ethiopian security forcesand the Ethiopian government has blocked food aid to Tigray, possibly usinghunger as a means of warfare.

In response to all these abuses, Amnesty International has called on Berlin to condemn these offenses, to strengthen civil society and to advocate for the release of journalists and human rights defenders, as well as to demand that human rights violations be dealt with.

This article was originally written in German.

While you're here: Every Tuesday, DW editors round up what is happening in German politics and society. You can sign up here for the weekly email newsletter Berlin Briefing.

Follow this link:
Amnesty International: Spotlight on Iran, Myanmar, Ukraine - DW (English)

The failure of diplomatic efforts to bring Iran back to the JCPOA nuclear deal, and the problematic role being played by Iran in the Russia-Ukraine war, require a new Western strategy regarding Iran. This would aggressively push back against Iran's nuclear ambitions and regional aggressions to reduce the risk of actual war with Iran. It also would seek to reverse the drift of regional players toward Russia and China, and to stabilize a new global order.

Washington should seek a joint U.S.-European declaration that the JCPOA no longer holds, and a U.N. Security Council resolution on the resumption of sanctions on Iran ("snapback"). The United States should also advance a military option against Iran and pose a credible threat to the survival of the Islamic Republic's regime. This would not necessarily lead to war. Just the opposite is true: Without such measures, the likelihood of a violent eruption in the Middle East significantly will increase.

The present Iranian leadership could not have hoped for an easier period than the one it is now experiencing. Tehran is marching forward towards its hegemonic goals, unhindered and away from the limelight.

While Washington is absorbed by domestic concerns, by the war in Ukraine, and by the ebb and flow of tensions with China (and while Israel is distracted with internal disputes), Iran is enhancing relations with Russia and China. Iran may very well feel that catapulting to the threshold of military nuclear power is but a simple, riskless decision away.

Iran has enriched uranium to 84 percent which is very close to the 90 percent level necessary for a nuclear weapon. It has accumulated significant amounts of fissile material at various levels of enrichment and is barring International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors access to sites associated with the nuclear project. It refuses to answer the agency's questions.

At the same time, Iran is continuing its subversive activities across the region via proxy forces, deepening its political, economic and security grip in Iraq and Syria, expanding its production and export of military drones, and overall playing a significant role in the creation of an anti-American axis.

Internal protests against the regime in Iran are continuing but have been contained by brutal repression. The protests have not succeeded, yet, in posing a real threat to the regime.

As for Western responses, the European Union parliament indeed has adopted a resolution calling to designate the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and its subsidiaries as terror organizations (given its terror activities, its involvement in repressing dissent, and its supplying of drones to Russia), but this is a non-binding text. The resolution has been met with derision and disdain by the IRGC commander, General Hussein Salami. He warned that such Western resolutions only motivate the IRGC to escalate its opposition to "Iran's enemies."

U.S. policy towards Iran remains anemic. President Joe Biden and his team regularly declare their commitment to preventing Iran from obtaining military nuclear capability, but they present neither a plan of action nor take active measures towards this goal.

Biden may have said, in passing, that the JCPOA "deal is dead," but the fact that no such formal announcement has been made, and no alternative measures have been announced, leaves open the prospect that Washington has not yet fully abandoned the idea of a return to former President Barack Obama's weak nuclear deal with Iran.

Iran's arrogance and its overweening self-confidence regarding the Biden administration demonstrates the erosion of U.S. standing and influence in the Middle East. This can be deduced from the conduct of Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, which studiously have avoided siding with the U.S. against Russia on Ukraine and have bolstered their relations with China in the search for diplomatic support, alongside or in place of Washington's.

Even committed believers in the diplomatic option within the White House will find it difficult to deny that their approach to Iran has failed, with the U.S. paying dearly as a result. Now, with diplomacy at the point of collapse and in the face of Iran's provocative involvement in the war in Ukraine, it is finally time for Washington to check Iran's aggrandizement and aggression (as long urged by Israel), and in the process to rebuild U.S. ties with pro-Western countries in the Middle East.

This is the place to note that in Iran's view both its nuclear and conventional build-up are meant primarily to secure the survival of the Islamist regime against external foreign intervention. But the regime is there not just to survive. It is driven by an ambitious vision of Islamic revolution and regional hegemony.

In the past, sanctions have taken a heavy economic toll on Iran. However, sanctions not only have failed to generate a real threat to the regime's survival, they have not halted Iran's terrorist aims nor its military build-up.

The Biden administration cannot leave the Iranian question hanging. It would do well to put together a road map with the following elements: Snapback sanctions on Iran with tight supervision (especially of Iranian oil exports and dual-use technologies); designation of the IRGC as a terrorist organization across Europe; suspension of Iranian membership in international forums; sanctions and economic pressure on individuals and organizations involved in repressing human rights; penalties on key Iranian industries; covert disruptive measures against Iran's nuclear program; and the articulation and demonstration of a credible military threat against Iran's rulers.

Some Americans fear that such steps will bring the U.S. closer to war with Iran. We argue that instead these moves will enhance American deterrence and prevent war. The elimination of Qassem Soleimani in January 2020 by a U.S. drone strike is a case in point. Iran reduced its overall terrorist activity in the wake of this bold move. Tehran understood the imbalance of power between the U.S. and Iran.

While this may not be a sufficient base upon which to draw broader conclusions, it does suggest that there is no need to overstate the dangers involved in tough action against Iran, nor to ignore the huge gap in relative strength between the two rivals. And the cost of the alternativethe implications of failure to act against Iranmust be borne in mind.

Meir Ben Shabbat is head of Misgav: The Institute for Zionist Strategy & National Security, in Jerusalem. He served as Israel's national security advisor and head of the National Security Council between 2017 and 2021, and for 25 years held senior positions in Israel's General Security Service. Eran Lerman is vice president of the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security. He served as a deputy national security advisor, and for 25 years held senior positions in Israeli military intelligence.

The views expressed in this article are the writers' own.

Read more:
It's Time to Get Tough on Iran. Really Tough | Opinion - Newsweek