IS, Tikrit and Changing Strategic Alignments in Iraq and Syria

Newsclick interviewed Prof. Aijaz Ahmed, well-known political analyst, to discuss the new developments in Iraq, Syria and the role of Iran in the fight against Islamic State (IS) in and around Tikrit. Prof. Aijaz explains the strategic interest of Iran in stabilising Iraq and Syria. He also addresses the contradictory stand of the US in fighting IS. Aijaz feels that the US policy could be a possible strategic trap for Iran. The US would support, for example, Jabhat ul Nusra against Assad in Syria to bleed Iran, Syria and Hezbollah. This would also explain why the US does not want a defeat of the IS, and therefore its lack of participation in the current offensive of the Baghdad forces. Interestingly, we are also seeing a new alignment on the ground -- Iran, Iraq, Syria and Kurds, all joining hands to fight the IS.

Rough Transcript

Prabir Purkayastha(PR): hello and welcome to Newsclick. Today we have with us professor Aijaz Ahmed and we are going to discuss the developments in Iraq and Syria, particularly the kind of attacks now taking place in and around Tikrit with the Iranian General Army leading the attack. It also appears that United States is not involved in the attack at all. So Aijaz what do you think happening particularly in this war?

Aijaz Ahmed(AA): the US has decided not to participate in most of that fighting and I think neither the US nor the Iranis want to appear even substantially now or appear to have an alliance of any kind. So a common campaign is unlikely anyway. Iran has an independent interest of its own strategic interest in stabilizing iraq as well as Syria, the present state existing in the two countries. It also has an interest in defeating IS. Now, none of these in fact coincide with US strategic interest as a matter of fact. The United States is very concerned about how much power IS has gathered but it doesn’t want to see IS defeated. It wants the irani and the Iraqi government tied down. It doesn’t want a stable government either in Iraq or in Syria. So in that sense the strategic interests are quite different. At the same time because the US is concerned about how powerful IS is becoming particularly because it is now beating down the neck of the Saudiz. So americans actually don’t know what to do, they have contrary interests. Then there is of course question of what the American objectives are in Syria where IS is also very active.

PP: when we look at what is happening in Syria is also very interesting. We have Jabhet Al Nusrah, the Al Qaida affiliate now being regarded as the possible ally against Bashar Al Assad. You think this is also an interesting phenomenon that is taking place? The fact that you want to move against Bashar Al Assad and you consider Al Qaida an ally.

AA: let us say by the end of 2011 the Assad government had defeated the rebellion, which was actually internally grown. Until then foreign participation in it was very low. It is since then that the Americans have thrown along with the Saudiz and the Turks and so on. Various kinds of Jihadiz of various tribes and it is very unclear whose loyalties are what. These are also Jihadiz who travel from one outfit to another partly on mercenary ground, you know various kinds of things are going on. Americans have already destroyed the Syrian society, they have not been able to destroy Syrian state, they want to destroy that state. Jabhet Al Nusrah they can have complete co-operation with Turkey and Jordan over Jabhet Al Nusrah. Jabhet Al Nusrah is the official outfit or certainly was. We don’t have any evidence that it changed or seized to be the face of Al Qaida but what is its relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood is, both Syria and Turkey brotherhood is very unclear to us. Now the problem is when we think of Muslim Brotherhood we think only of Egypt. There are very powerful Muslim Brotherhood outfits in Turkey and there was a considerable Muslim Brotherhood which was decamped to Turkey from Syria and the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood when it could not take on the state decamped to Turkey. So what the relationship is between Jabhet Al Nusrah, Al Qaida, Muslim Brotherhood, the Saudiz who are dead set against Is and Al Qaida seem to be moving towards supporting there brothers. It is a very strange game being played for one purpose that is to dismantle the Syrian regime. One last point in this, my fear is that there might be a strategic trap for Iran in this. It is already fighting IS in at least two countries and with his with Lebanon in this way Iraq, Syria, Lebanon. If you strengthen Jabhet Al Nusrah as “good moderate jihadiz” throw in all the weaponry for them to go and attack the Syrian regime. Iran is now fighting both IS and Jabhet Al Nusrah for how long, is it a way of trapping Iran into a strategic quagmire into which it bleeds Iran there is a very serious possibility in that I believe.

PP: before we go into the larger issue of geo strategic interest against Iran there is also Qatar. Qatar is playing an intermediary role between Jabhet Al Nusrah and United States and also the role of Israel where they are also supporting Jabhet Al Nusrah at the border with air support and artillery support and helping it strike Hezbullah. So you think all this also puts into the question?

AA: I think it’s a very very complex situation. Jabhet Al Nusrah is something that is changing its colors all the time. Please also remember one of the charges against Bashar Al Assad for quite sometime by this American conflicted opposition has been that Hafiz Al Assad refuses to fight IS properly and is concentrating all its power with Jabhet Al Nusrah. So the Syrians have known for a while that this is the force that all of these people are going to eventually back. Americans, Al Qaida all of them fighting together just to get rid of Hafiz Al Assad. No. I think it is a trap to Iranian into its strategic interest.

PP: and Aijaz what you really saying is that the geo strategic issue is the primary one and whatever happens at the nuclear talk with Iran and the United States is not going to disturb the geo strategic matrix that is there is West Asia against the resistance front which is really Iran, Hazebullah, Syria.

AA: let us go step further. It is very important for them that both IS and Jabhet Al Nusrah remain a capable fighting force because you are absolutely right., these are the two forces Iran and Hazebullah that have upheld and supported the regime but the amazing thing is that after all this that has happened in Syria, the Syrian army, the Syrian armed force they have not been able to break at all. There determination to save the Syrian state as it exists is extraordinary under such circumstances most fighting forces you could and that was there first calculation, that was the first thing that they wanted to do under such circumstances an army would break up under pressures of this kind not only that the first objective of the Turko-US alliance was to create in the few small no. of officers, one significant officer nobody of any consequence went to their side, rest of the armed forces had stood behind Bashar Al Assad.

PP: so the Iran’s discussions on the nuclear issue should be dealing with the larger geo strategic issue and it does not matter whether its Republicans or the Democrats or Obama and the Senate leadership agree or disagree. Whatever happens with the nuclear talks is not going to change this larger geo matric issue at the moment is west asia.

AA: yeah, that’s what I believe.

PP: we have to see how it develops interesting developments in both Syria and Iraq and dangerous for the resistant front in a longer sense but also some threats for the Saudi regime which might bring certain changes in west asia.

AA: one thing sure that is very interesting is that objectives and circumstances have pushed Kurds into an alliance both with the Iraqi and Syrian government for them the threat is from Turkey but they have sort of made friends with the Iraqis, Syria Iraq, Iran at the moment. There is an objective alliance made based on actual interest.

PP: thankyou very much Aijaz. It was a pleasure talking to you and we will continue to watch the developments in this region. Thanks once again.