Mediaboss Marketing

As the US influence in the Middle East wanes, it increasingly associates itself with dictatorships like Saudi Arabia, whose dark face and role in supporting terrorism is known to everyone in the region, a high ranking Iranian Revolutionary Guard official told RT.

The United States and President Trump in particular consider only one dimension of convergence with Saudi Arabia, ignoring the ideological and intellectual challenges and costs such ties entail, media adviser to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), Commander-in-Chief Hamid Reza Moghadam Far told RT in an exclusive interview.

That was one of Trumps senseless moves. He was just seeking to milk this cow and thinking about only business, Moghadam Far said.

Read more

The first challenge is that Trump goes to such a country as his first trip after being elected That is the behavior shown towards a dictatorial regime in which democracy is meaningless and no elections take place and the people have no presence on the scene. The next challenge is that they claim that they are combatting terrorism. It is no secret that Saudi Arabia has provided the most support for terrorism.

The recent naming of Mohammed bin Salman as Saudi Arabias new crown prince might be another outcome of Trumps visit amidst internal disputes among Saudi princes and with other Arab countries.

This replacement is one of the internal political impacts of the [Trumps] visit on Saudi Arabia. I mean the replacement of the crown prince. But Saudi Arabia is facing certain conditions today that I think the development would create further problems for the country, Moghadam Far said, pointing out that this decision would hardly be beneficial for the Saudi people.

While the appointment might push Saudi Arabia into further radicalization, it would unlikely lead to an armed conflict with Iran, Moghadam Far believes, as the Saudi army is not fit for military action.

There is no possibly of conflict. Today many Arab countries are complaining about Saudi Arabias inexperienced and radical moves. They consider Saudi Arabia as callow, Moghadam Far told RT.

A number of inexperienced people who are ruling Saudi Arabia lack the resolve and determination to initiate a war on Iran. They lack the courage and power. I do not think they will come up with such conclusion, even if all global powers support them.

Saudi Arabias policies in the Middle East only bring instability to the region and its alliance with the US only diminishes the already dwindling American power and influence, Moghadam Far believes.

[The US policies] definitely have a negative effect. What matters more, however, is that the US is not as influential a player as it used to be and it can no longer manipulate regional equations. Today, it does not enjoy such a sway at all and its influence in the region has waned, Moghadam Far said.

READ MORE: US stirring up Iranophobia to boost arms sales to Arab nations Tehran

It now has to associate with countries like Saudi Arabia whose negative role in supporting terrorism, whose dictatorship, and whose dark face is known to everyone in the region.

Read more

Tehrans recent Iranian missile attack on Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) terrorists in Syria should have weakened the resolve of the Saudis and other powers to go to war with Iran. A key message of the attack was to clearly demonstrate Iranian military capabilities to those who doubted them, Moghadam Far said.

In the past, when these missiles were test-fired in Iran, the US and certain western countries used to usually announce that Iran was lying that its launches had been successful and tried to create this impression that Iranians do not have such a capability and their missiles cannot strike their targets with precision, he said.

The strike also demonstrated Irans resolve to fight terrorism, rubbishing usual US accusations that Tehran supports terrorist elements.

As in the past, whenever Americans want to mount pressure on Iran, impose new sanctions and proceed with an issue in the region and beyond, [the US] accuse Iran of backing terrorism, Moghadam Far said.

But I think that todays conditions are such that the worlds public opinion does not accept this. The world has come to realize that the US, despite leading a coalition against [IS] and terrorism in Syria and Iraq, Syria in particular, does not fight terrorism in practice and is in fact is supporting it They cannot both take an opposite stance against terrorism and accuse Iran.

Read the original post:
US seeks to 'milk' terrorism sponsor Saudi Arabia Iran's Revolutionary Guard to RT - RT

BEIRUT Iranian state media on Wednesday called the appointment of Mohammed Bin Salman to the position of crown prince and successor to Saudi Arabia's King Salman as a "soft coup".

"Soft coup in Saudi Arabia/Son becomes the successor of the father," read the headline on the Iranian state TV website.

The move is likely to rattle Iran's leadership, which has been critical of comments by Prince Mohammed last month that the "battle" should be taken into Iran.

Iran, which is predominantly Shi'ite Muslim, and Saudi Arabia, which is mostly Sunni, compete for power and influence across the region. The two countries support opposite sides in the conflicts in Syria and Yemen.

Islamic State carried out attacks on the Iranian parliament in Tehran and the shrine of the founder of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, two weeks ago that left at least 17 dead. Iranian officials pointed a finger at Saudi Arabia, which denied any involvement.

Tension between the two countries increased last month when U.S. President Donald Trump visited Saudi Arabia and took a bellicose stance against Iran in an official speech, repeatedly accusing the Islamic Republic of supporting terrorism.

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei labeled the Saudi leadership "idiots" in a speech last month.

Read the original:
Iran State Media Calls Promotion of Mohammed Bin Salman a 'Soft Coup' - New York Times

Israels military and Israeli defense analysts have mocked Irans first strike on the Islamic State militant group (ISIS) in Syria, arguing that many of the missiles Tehran used in the raid missed their targets.

Irans Revolutionary Guard said it fired as many as seven missiles at an ISIS compound in Deir Ezzor while Iranian media cited sources who said that the strikes killed 360 militants on Sunday.

It marked the first time Tehran has fired into Syria from Iranian territory, using bases in Kermanshah and Kurdistan.

Daily Emails and Alerts- Get the best of Newsweek delivered to your inbox

The strikes were retaliation for the ISIS-claimed suicide bomb and gun attacks in Tehran on the countrys parliament and shrine of the founder of the Islamic Republic Ayatollah Khomenei that left 18 dead on June 7.

But Israeli military chief Gadi Eisenkot said Tehran was lying about the strike: Their achievement was less than what was reported in the media. The strike manifested something, but it was far from a direct hit or what they have said, Eisenkot told the Herzliya policy conference on Tuesday.

Israeli Chief of Staff General Gadi Eisenkot attends an official memorial ceremony marking the tenth anniversary of the 2006 war between Israel and Lebanon's Hezbollah movement, at the military cemetery of Mount Herzl in Jerusalem on July 19, 2016. On Tuesday, he mocked Iran's first strike against ISIS in Syria. Thomas Coex/AFP/Getty

He said Iran was attempting to get more accurate rockets in its push for hegemony in the Middle Eastbut it was not there yet.

At least three of the seven ballistic missiles did not reach their intended targets, Israeli sources said in the Hebrew-language media, The Times of Israel reported.

Read more: America created ISIS, says Iran's Supreme Leader

If the Iranians were trying to show their capabilities and to signal to Israel and to the Americans that these missiles are operational, the result was rather different, analyst for Israels Channel 2 broadcaster Ehud Yaari said. It was a flop, he added, a failure.

ISIS has not acknowledged the strikes and Syrian activists said at least two of the rockets caused no casualties.

It is likely that the strike was not only intended to hit ISIS but to send a message to Irans adversaries, particularly the U.S., whose air force is operating in Syria in support of a Kurdish-Arab alliance besieging the eastern city of Raqqa, and Saudi Arabia.

The Saudis and Americans are especially receivers of this message, Gen. Ramazan Sharif of Irans Revolutionary Guard told state television. Obviously and clearly, some reactionary countries of the region, especially Saudi Arabia, had announced that they are trying to bring insecurity into Iran.

Iran is supporting the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad with ground forces and advisors in coordination with Russia. After the Iranian military pointed to the strike as a wider warning in the region, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu hit back on Monday. I have one message for Iran: Dont threaten Israel.

See the article here:
Israel Mocks Iran's First Strike on ISIS in Syria As 'A Flop' - Newsweek

Iran and its proxies have already begun to shape post-ISIS Syria, and eastern Syria is the most important theater. Yet recent events show that Iranian-backed forces advancing there will inevitability collide with two hostile forces, and compete with one of them.

The first lies south in the al-Tanf border area, where U.S. special forces and their Arab partners continue to take ground from the Islamic State (known as ISIS, ISIL, or Daesh). The second force lies to the north, where the U.S.-backed Syrian Democratic Forces, or the SDF, could follow their current Raqqa offensive with an attack on ISIS in Deir Ezzor. Iran will come under great pressure to try to counter these advances.

If it and the United States stay the course in the current atmosphere of strategic confusion, it is difficult to see how they can avoid a conflict, and it is still unclear whether U.S. policy is ready for one.

Sporadic U.S. airstrikes and Iranian-backed ground maneuvers may look like haphazard tactics in a desert wasteland, yet there is in fact much at stake in these territories for Iran, Hezbollah, and the Syrian regime. Iran must prevent the control of eastern Syria by U.S.-backed forces in order to protects its dominance in Iraq, the survival of the Syrian regime and Hezbollahs strategic depth. Additionally, while analysts continue to highlight that the regime is too weak to control all of Syria, the regime itself appears to disagree. It has its sights set on the water and oil resources of eastern Syria, without which it would struggle to survive. The regime has every interest in preventing U.S.-backed Arab or Kurdish forces from securing this territory.

The regime itself seems too weak and preoccupied to threaten the U.S.-led coalition in al-Tanf. However, Iran is far more capable, with large reserves of (proxy) manpower and little tolerance for a U.S.-backed de facto statelet in its Syrian clients territory. It is more likely that Iran, acting through its local proxies, would test the coalitions resolve through increasing provocations. If so, it would calculate that the United States would back down to avoid serious escalation, thereby curtailing its territorial advances.

Whether that is a sound calculation depends on the United States ultimate goals in eastern Syria and the importance it places on them in the face of the likely array of Iranian threats.

On May 17, the IRCG-affiliated Fars News reported that Hezbollah had deployed 3,000 forces in the eastern Syrian desert, most of which were redeployed from the highly strategic Zabadani, Madhaya and Serghaya regions near Damascus and the Lebanon border. It is unclear which Hezbollah units were deployed, but if indeed they were taken from those key areas, they may be the elite Radwan units, apparently deployed among pro-regime militias. Radwan forces specialize in raids and small-unit tactics, and were critical to the regimes tactical counteroffensives during the battle of Aleppo.

Hezbollahs desert deployment is likely aimed at constraining the coalitions operations by leaving as large a military footprint as possible before an imminent large-scale operation against ISIS in Central Syria, according to pro-Iranian regime news outlet ABNA. In principle, these deployments seem aimed at preempting and complicating U.S.-led operations, rather than seeking a direct confrontation, and while expanding Iran and Assads control in central Syria. The militias would lose a direct confrontation with U.S. forces, but the question is whether the United States is willing to take them on.

If the U.S. chooses not to take them head on, the weaker forces can indeed make things difficult. For example, last week regime forces managed to preempt U.S.-backed fighters expansion north of al-Tanf simply by taking the ISIS territory itself first. The U.S. can either force them to withdraw, or call off its mission. Neither option is especially attractive: one carries the risk of war, the other of humiliation if not complication of the counter-ISIS mission.

In the north, Iranian-backed efforts are less obvious. In Iraq, Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) have made steady gains against ISIS to secure the Iraq-Syria border in Operation Mohammed Rasullah the Second. For these Shia-dominated forces, the goal is at a minimum to cut ISIS cross border supply lines.

However, the missions limits are unclear, particularly given Irans influence over the PMF. Certain pro-Iranian elements may go on to disrupt the U.S.-backed SDFs anti-ISIS advances in eastern Syria, perhaps under the pretext of (and indeed through) fighting ISIS, and through more pre-emptive land grabs, for example. In fact, factions like Liwa Abu al-Fadl al-Abbas are already operating across the border despite U.S. threats.

PMF Deputy Commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis rejected these threats, affirming that there has to be a road linking the two countries. Last week, activists reported that PMF units had seized two villages in southern Hasakah in Syria, a province north of Deir Ezzor. And most recently, a Syrian Army delegation is holding talks in Baghdad to discuss border security.

The most confusing actor in all this is the United States itself. Its official mission in Syria remains defeating ISIS. Its aggressive actions against Iran in the eastern desert, such as attacking Iranian-backed forces and deploying long-range artillery, could merely be measures taken by field commanders to protect U.S. forces conducting anti-ISIS missions. On the other hand, the Trump administration is deeply hostile to Iran, and key members of its national security team favor a more robust, long-term, U.S.-military presence in Syria to contain Iran. Either theory could explain U.S. action.

If the United States itself has no clear policy, Iran is left testing its limits or acting without any idea of its constraints and therefore dangerously. The administration has not explained how it plans to tackle the inevitable Iranian obstacle on the U.S. advance into eastern Syria, so Iran cannot reliably gauge the scope and intensity of U.S. commitment to this race. This makes an escalation, intentional or otherwise, much more likely. Escalation itself is not necessarily undesirable, but the Trump administration has not presented a clear case for it, and neither friend nor foe seem to know whether it has adopted it.

Faysal Itani is a senior fellow with the Atlantic Councils Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East. Ali Marhoon is an intern at the Atlantic Council Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East. This first appeared on the Atlantic Councils blog The Perilous Race for Post-ISIS Syria.

Read the original:
Opinion: The US and Iran are headed for a collision in Syria - MarketWatch

Iranian drone Shahed-129 is displayed by armed forces in a rally commemorating the 37th anniversary of the Islamic revolution February 11, 2016 in Tehran. Ebrahim Noroozi / AP File

The Iranians have been basing Shahed-129 drones at the airfield, according to the officials. The Iranian-made drones can be armed or used for reconnaissance. Neither official could say for sure whether either of the two drones that

Related:

The U.S. has established

On June 8, the U.S. shot down a drone that had fired on coalition forces near At Tanf. A second armed drone was shot down by a U.S. jet on Tuesday as it approached coalition forces in the same area. The U.S. also downed a Syrian government warplane earlier this week in northern Syria.

Neither official would speculate on who is operating the drones that have tried to attack U.S. and coalition assets, but both said the Iranians have been training the Syrians how to use them.

U.S. special forces have been training Syrian opposition fighters at the At Tanf base for more than a year.

Read more from the original source:
Iran Has Drone Base Near US Troops in Syria - NBCNews.com