Charles Duelfer | The Search For Truth In Iraq

Obama Learns of Malaysian Aircraft Destruction form Putin?!

The Malaysian aircraft destruction is tragic, but not unique. Commercial Airliners have been shot down before.  In 1983 the Soviet air defense fighters shot down a Korean Airlines 747 that had strayed off course, impinged on Soviet airspace and the Soviet Air Defense presumably mistaking the aircraft for an American surveillance aircraft, downed it.  The completely bungled the aftermath by denying it and then the US let on that we had collected all the communications and we went on to play them in the UN Security Council. (I happened to be the State Dept. analyst who accompanied Ambassador Jeanne Kirkpatrick during this Council meeting.)

The US mistakenly shot down an Iranian civilian Airbus (killing about 300) during the Iran Iraq war when the US was patrolling the Gulf to protect oil shipping.  The USS Vincennes fired in error and it was a tragic disaster, but the US admitted it.

The Malaysian case will play out similar to the Korean incident.  The Russians will not be so boneheaded and deny the event.  What happened will be clear from intelligence sources and the investigation.  What Russian and Ukraine will be doing is making responsibility as murky as possible.   Intercepted communications will drive this.

One point that does stick out from the events of yesterday.  The White House declared that President Obama learned of the event during a phone call with Vladimir Putin on Sanctions.  This is amazing.  The Intelligence Community, which has lots of technical collection in the area (recall we still watch for Russian nuclear missile launches to warn of sudden attack among other things) must have seen this virtually in real time…but for some reason, no one  passed the word to the President?  Maybe they thought he wouldn’t care?   Maybe the message got tied up in the DNI bureaucracy?  Maybe the White House staff held it up?  Maybe they just dismissed it as a non-threat incident?  There is a story there that would be interesting to read.

Posted in Intelligence, Iran, Malaysian Airline Shootdown, Russia, Ukraine, United Nations | Leave a comment

Don’t Trade Iraq for an Iran Nuclear “Agreement”

There will come a time, and that may be right now, when Washington has to decide if any deal on Iran nuclear programs is more important than the risk faced from ISIS in Iraq. So far it looks like we have the priorities wrong.

Iran is blatantly intruding on the future of Iraq according to some members of parliament. Iran is said to be blocking candidates for Prime Minister that are any less dogmatic and sectarian than Maliki. Iran’s actions, unless countered, will assure that Iraqi Sunnis continue to see no hope in the central government. Iran’s role in Iraq must be confronted forcefully, now. (There should be no hope of relaxing sanctions if they don’t back off in Iraq.)

If Washington continues to dither, Sunnis will never be persuaded to fight ISIS. Without the Sunnis taking on ISIS, these radicals will occupy and rule a large portion of Iraq (or as some call it, “Syraq” as it now includes a good piece of Syria.   This is a clear and present danger as they say.

If playing hardball with Iran over Iraq causes Tehran to back away from the nuclear talks, so be it. Iranian commitment to forsaking a nuclear weapon is dubious in any case.

Of course, it may be that Washington has taken a concerted decision to link its future to Tehran. This would be astonishing, but certainly that’s how some Gulf States interpret US actions. We have conceded points (i.e. enrichment of uranium) to Iran with their nuclear program that we did steadfastly refused to permit the UAE with there, truly peaceful nuclear energy program. Moreover, the US is now viewed as tolerating and even encouraging the Iran dominance in Iraq. And, add to that, just this week an Assistant Secretary of State who has long publicly opposed the regime in Bahrain, met with Shia opposition members in Bahrain in a direct snub to the government.  They Bahrain government (host to the US Navy fleet headquarter for the Gulf) threw him out of the country.

There are a lot of long-term allies in the region who see this as a concerted series of steps to align the US with the Shia generally and Tehran particularly.

I suspect these steps by the US were without any plan, but simply incoherent reactions to surprises that caught decision-makers off guard. However, it is very difficult to convince leaders in other countries that the US is not pursuing some strategy—at their expense.

Hello? Washington? Does someone have a strategy in there? Just wondering, but it looks from the outside like things are out of control. Or worse, we are aligning with Iran because we have changed, not Iran.

Posted in Iran, Iraq, ISIL, ISIS, Sunni, Terrorism | Leave a comment

Extremists at Former Saddam CW Facility

The Wall Street Journal reports ISIL extremists at a former Iraqi CW facility.  The Muthana State Establishment was a huge facility where the Saddam government produced tons of anthrax and sarin.  Most of it used against the Iranians in the 1980′s war. The UN weapons inspection team UNSCOM, inspected and destroyed all key equipment and munitions.  However some of the precursor chemicals were too unstable to move safely to the incinerator and hydrolysis plant we operated from 1992-1994.  So we placed barrels of this toxic waste and contaminated equipment in two huge bunkers on the facility, inventoried the contents and entombed them.   The contents are dangerous, but not as weapons.  I have been in one of the bunkers but with a full CW protection suite including self-contained breathing source and a detector which was flashing warnings.  Those bunkers will be very dangerous to anyone who tries to break into them (and people have, largely scavengers looking to extract re-bar metal).  But the risk that the contents can somehow be used against others is minute.  It is more akin to a toxic waste site than a weapons bunker.

In fact, if the bad guys succeed in getting in, it may be one way of getting some of them off the battlefield.

Posted in Iran, Iraq, ISIL, ISIS, Syria CW, WMD | Leave a comment

Give the Sunnis an Alternative NOW!

Unless President Obama says something fast to give secular Sunnis some hope that the US will take their interests seriously this time, they have no alternative to ISIS.

Say something to the Sunnis!  Give them an alternative!  And it has to be real.  If we are seen to be warming to Iran, it will be a disaster.  Sunnis will never believe they have a path ahead.  And it must be soon.  Before any possible US military or intelligence support to existing government forces, or consideration of dialogue with Iran.  Finally, we must make clear that Maliki will go.   President Obama now owns the Iraq issue.  He needs to act now, not later this week.

If he doesn’t, it will be a mistake even bigger than the early missteps of President Bush’s Administration in firing the Iraqi Army and equating all secular Sunnis they have no place in the “new Iraq.”  It’s worse this time because it demonstrates an inability to learn from the past.

The President needs to be public in this message.  And he needs through credible representatives, reach out to tribal leaders, in Iraq and respected Iraqi leaders who have exiled themselves outside Iraq.  They have been pleading for the US to take a greater role for years to offset the drift of the Baghdad government toward sectarian division.

Ten years from now I hope people are not debating the mistakes of the Obama administration in Iraq–for Iraq’s sake as well as our own.


Posted in Intelligence, Iran, Iraq, ISIS, Sunni, United Nations | 1 Comment

Iraq – So What to Do?

A possible path ahead is to take advantage of the post election negotiations and configure a leadership that accommodates Sunni interests. This would by necessity mean someone other than Maliki becoming Prime Minister.

Someone (possibly an American, but I doubt we are that knowledgeable, coordinated, or competent) needs to talk with key Sunni tribal leaders and former Army leaders—to include former Baathists. Just finding interlocutors who can represent and make commitments for those with legitimate interests will be difficult.

Maybe a UN representative could do this, but it would be better (essential) if such discussions were completely confidential. Bear in mind that anyone representing the Sunni voices will be at risk of assassination from ISIS.  The vast majority of Iraqi Sunnis are secular (recall the Baathists and the Army under the former regime were strictly secular).  The radical Islamists of ISIS will know they are small in number and, while ruthless, they can be crushed by the other Sunni’s when the time is right.

Maliki needs to know that the US will not support him as Prime Minister and the new government must accommodate Sunni interests in a material way. Stitching something together will be extraordinarily difficult. The last thing we should do is to give more military support to Maliki at this point. We would be seen as supporting the Shia side in what is becoming a sectarian war.

Somebody needs to talk to Sunni leaders and fast. At a minimum, they need to know that the US will not oppose them (and indeed should support them) so long as their goals are limited and realistic. They need to know that the US does not support Maliki, but does support a balance of power between Sunni and Shia groups.

The alternative to this path is to let the conflict play out. That will be costly, unpredictable, and end with a divided Iraq. Iran will be supporting the Shia in the south and others will back Sunni groups. Baghdad could look like Beirut in the 70’s, or worse.

We may wind up there anyway.

Posted in Iran, Iraq, United Nations | Leave a comment

Maliki is the problem, not the solution

Prime Minister Maliki, who is in midst of negotiating a government in aftermath of the recent Iraqi elections, has asked for US support including airstrikes. The last thing we should do now is further imbed ourselves with Maliki. This is the shortsighted view that got us where we are now. It will be a tragic mess for a while, but the sizeable and powerful block of Sunnis who have been disenfranchised by the Maliki and now are taking up arms, will create new facts on the ground. ISIS is not a long-term threat in Iraq. Ultimately, Iraqis will kill ISIS. However, first the Iraqis have to sort themselves. The de facto partition of Iraq is now likely.

(It is worth recalling that under Saddam’s largely Sunni government, religion was kept out of government. Whatever its other problems, it was a strictly secular government.  Saddam said emphatically in debriefings that we should keep “the Turbans” out of government.)

Given where we are, this will not be quick or clean. The Kurds will now take undisputed control of Kirkuk (long the object of their intentions). They will protect their new border while the south may effectively become its own Shia enclave with a tentative relationship with Iran. As for the rest, and control of Baghdad, it will be ugly. Watch Maliki’s investments and family.   I bet they are going to moving out of Iraq swiftly—with good reason.

On the financial front, watch how this interacts with the upcoming Iran nuclear negotiations due to complete July 20.  Oil deliveries from southern Iraq are at risk.  Iran will play a role in supporting the Shia and Maliki in Iraq.  If Washington does align itself with Maliki and de facto, Iran, in the Iraq battle, Gulf states will be even more angry with Washington. Volatility in oil markets is going to be up for a while.

Posted in Financial Wars, Iran, Iraq, United Nations | Leave a comment

Cascading Chaos in Iraq

Watching the disintegration of Iraq is a horror. Many predicted this. There were Iraqis reaching out to the US and others pointing out that there were large numbers of Iraqis who, if continually cut off from a role in the government, would ignite in fury against the government. That is happening.

While the western press is calling the attacks the work of ISIS, they are not the real force. The most effective fighters (according to Iraqis with long experience both under Saddam and post-Saddam), are former members of the former Army from Saddam days. Under Saddam the Iraqi army numbered in the hundreds of thousands. They all have families so if you multiply that number times the number of immediate family members, you get a large number of people who have been denied the positions and opportunity to participate in Iraq. They were dissolved in 2004. But they remained a potent and dissatisfied slice of the Iraqi population. While the US was present they sustained a hope of getting an equitable role in the new Iraq. However, the US is gone and Prime Minister Maliki has given them no stake in the success of the Iraqi government. The recent election was a punctuation mark, ending their hope.

Now there really may be a conflagration between Shia and Sunni with international consequences.   Next we may see Iran step in. The Kurds, wisely armed and protected will face the problem of massive refugees from the south. Turkey may get involved.   And or course Jordan, inundated with refugees from the previous Iraq war and now the Syrian conflict, may get yet another wave of refugees.

The underlying dynamic was knowable, indeed was known, but no one felt obligated to address it.

Conflict will break out in Baghdad. Maliki’s army will not fight for Iraq. Shia will fight for Shia and the Shia militias will be Maliki’s forces. The US, by its continued support of Maliki is doomed to be seen as an opponent now by the secular Sunnis. Ayatollah Sistani will likely be forced to rally Shia to arms. Will the Saudis and other Gulf States stand by while Iran supports the Shia?

The US has withdrawn to a corner and is seen as a trivial force. We can stop supplying spare parts to the military equipment we have provided, but what else?

Many Iraqis have said, the stability of Iraq under Saddam was preferable to insecurity that followed. There were moments in the last five years when a leader other than Maliki could have turned this around. Now, Iraq will likely fight itself to some draw and division of territory. Who will broker the peace? Not the US. Turkey? Iran? The UN?



Posted in Iran, Iraq, United Nations | 2 Comments

NSA Scutinized, Not FBI?

There has been much discussion about NSA and whether it is collecting too much data (especially on American citizens) and whether the procedures and authorizations by which it operates should be revised. This debate will not be resolved anytime soon for at least two reasons.

One is that we don’t know how big the threat is to the livelihood of the United States. When the Soviet Union was the primal threat, we could come up with analytic models to estimate of the size of the threat. Not so with terrorism. And frankly, how much money and privacy are we willing to give up to protect against attacks that may be horrible, but not really a threat to our national security? The Boston bombing was tragic, but how many more billions should we spend on intelligence and law enforcement as a result? Osama bin Laden bragged that he caused the United States to divert hundreds of billions of dollars as a result of his attack which cost less (much) than a million.

The second aspect of this debate is that while the focus has been on NSA, it is really the FBI that is the consumer and guide of domestic data. Their objectives and bureaucratic incentives have not been carefully reviewed, at least not publicly. People get put on no-fly lists and some are subject to other consequences. There is little or no review and no mechanism for an appeal. (I wonder if eventually we will all be on the no-fly list.)

No one in the system ever wants to make a decision to do less. Yet, at some point the cost in dollars and individual freedom must be taken into account.

Underlying all this is a suspicion that the government, even with good intentions, is prone to misusing any powers it has.

Maybe Vladimir Putin will bring back the old Russian threat which is easier to calculate and design defenses against.

Posted in Intelligence, NSA, Russia, Terrorism | Leave a comment

American Vulnerability – The Dollar

American media seems to be focused on domestic affairs while astonishing things are going beyond the borders—and we seem to stand by watching helplessly. The United States position of prominence is eroding.

Yesterday, at a summit in Shanghai between China’s President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin a massive 30-year natural gas deal was signed to provide Russian gas to China. The agreement has been under negotiation for years and its fruition is a big deal for energy markets and international politics.

Less noticed, but possibly even more interesting, was an agreement between Russia and China aimed at undermining the role of the US dollar as the base currency. The Russian bank VTB and the Bank of China signed an agreement in the presence of Xi and Putin to avoid using the dollar and conduct exchanges in domestic currencies. This is a really big signal.  The all mighty dollar may not always be all mighty.

Look at the world (or even just the United States) from the position of China. What makes America a super power? Is it the military? Partly. Is it nuclear weapons? Not so much. What really gives us leverage is the position of the dollar as the base currency. In the last financial crisis, we escaped largely by printing money. Other countries can’t get away with that without causing massive inflation. Sitting in Beijing, it could be seen as a financial attack—US Treasury printing tons on dollars that has the effect of exporting inflation to other countries.   We borrow money (by selling treasuries to finance our wars, debt, TARP, etc.) and then pay them off by, in essence, printing dollars.

The role of the dollar as base currency is a uniquely powerful lever. It is one that is rarely thought of in terms of national security, but nothing is more important. If we lose it, we will have lost our position as the last super power. Period.

Beijing, Moscow, and others are well aware of this. The role of the dollar also gives us the currently valuable tool of sanctions. If Washington decides to limit banking use of dollars for transactions with certain entities, e.g. in Russia or Iran, then we can impose our will on the international financial system. You can bet there is no higher strategic priority than to undermine that position.

We are blindly squandering this leverage from inattention and by our inability to control our appetite for printed dollars.  This is a national security issue, not just a budget issue.

Domestic politics may make it convenient to be staring at our navel while waiting for the next election.  However, the dynamics in the outside world and our shrinking position will effect our own standard of living here.

To see how the role of the dollar figures in international conflict, read James Rickards new book, “The Death of Money: The Coming Collapse of the International Monetary System.” While the title seems a little over the top, Rickards hits on some critical dynamics of an ongoing conflict that is not kinetic, but even more dangerous. There will be a moment when Washington wakes up. It’s only a question of when.

Posted in China, Financial Wars, Russia | Leave a comment

Syria CW – Success, but so what?

Syria has missed its latest deadline to finish removing Chemical agent and precursors from its territory.  However, they almost made it–about 92% done.  Bashar al-Assad clearly has moved to fulfill his obligation to get rid of his CW capability.  There is no reason to doubt that the last amount won’t be shipped.  In fact, given government successes in reclaiming territory from rebel groups, the shipment of chemicals to the port of Latakia where it is loaded onto ships has become easier.

Clouding this “positive” step by Assad, is the reported use of chlorine as a weapon.  Chlorine is a common but toxic chemical which was used in WWI.  It is a lousy weapon since it is relatively heavy and thus doesn’t disperse well in the atmosphere.  It also smells so you know where it is and can steer clear of it.  Nevertheless, it seems Assad’s forces dumped some amount for some unclear purpose.  Using Chlorine as a weapon is a violation of the Chemical Weapons Treaty that Assad just signed.  Stupid on his part it would seem since he is giving up his “effective” chemical weapons and can accomplish whatever terror or military purposes he may have with non-chemical weapons.  Assad would seem to be squandering whatever boost to his international reputation his divestiture of his real CW capabilities.  Go figure.

The international arms control/disarmament community should still chalk Syria up as a win.  They have pretty much gotten rid of everything.  Remaining inspections will check detailed compliance and there will be a debate over the destruction or “inactivation” of factories used to produce weapons.  And of course Syria has to ship out the last barrels of chemicals.  But it looks on course to complete the job and the OPCW/US destruction process on board the MV Cape Ray will proceed–probably meeting the next deadline of June.

In the meantime, Syria is still in flames.  The Russian role is even more complicated given the developments in Ukraine. And Iran is watching and calculating what to do regarding its negotiating deadline of July when either the negotiations have succeeded and sanctions are further reduced, or not.   This will be a really big deal though to regard American press, attention seems to be directed inward not outward.

Posted in Iran, Russia, Syria CW | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment