عربي English Türkçe اردو فارسى
Logo
Latest News
Features

Iraq Begins the Battle to Restore ‘State Dignity’

A member of Iraq's Counter Terrorism Service (CTS) looks on during a graduation ceremony at the CTS base in western Baghdad in August. (AFP)
A member of Iraq's Counter Terrorism Service (CTS) looks on during a graduation ceremony at the CTS base in western Baghdad in August. (AFP)
TT
20
TT

Iraq Begins the Battle to Restore ‘State Dignity’

A member of Iraq's Counter Terrorism Service (CTS) looks on during a graduation ceremony at the CTS base in western Baghdad in August. (AFP)
A member of Iraq's Counter Terrorism Service (CTS) looks on during a graduation ceremony at the CTS base in western Baghdad in August. (AFP)

For the past 17 years, much has been said about the need to restore the authority and dignity of the Iraqi state, but little has been done to that end. The battle started with the American invasion in 2003 and is ongoing with Iran and Turkey’s violations of Iraq’s borders and the so-called resistance axis, comprised of a number of pro-Iran factions that possess weapons outside the control of the state.

These factions have been operating in line with Iran’s agenda in Iraq, which has established a “deep state” in the country. The battle is imminent, but the question remains: who will deal the first blow?

All prime ministers who preceded current Premier Mustafa al-Kadhimi have avoided an open confrontation with the “outlaws”. Nouri al-Maliki was the exception when he waged an offensive in 2009 against the Sadrists in al-Basra and al-Amara. Kadhimi was appointed to his post with the pledge to Iraqis to hold early and transparent elections and with them, restore the dignity of the state.

Reverse equation
Kadhimi’s opponents, starting with the armed factions and the Fatah bloc headed by Hadi al-Ameri, expected the new premier to overlook the militias’ firing of Katyusha rockets against American targets in Iraq, whether at the US embassy in Baghdad’s Green Zone, the capital’s international airport or the Taji military base.

Kadhimi, however, proved them wrong. Soon after coming to office, he sought “strategic” dialogue with the Americans, which would include discussions on their troop withdrawal from Iraq. The militias, wary of both parties’ intentions, delivered their own message with the nearly daily launch of Katyusha rockets against US interests. Undeterred, the PM went a step further by ordering a raid against the Kataib Hezbollah militia, detaining several of its members, in what was seen as a precedent in the confrontation between the state and armed groups.

His attempt to restore the dignity of the state took a misstep when all but one of the detainees were released. Adding insult to injury were the freed members who trampled on posters of the PM and other officials soon after their release.

Kadhimi believes that such reactions are to be expected, given that he has taken the bold step to buck the trend of his predecessors and wage a head-on “grinding” confrontation against the militias. He is likely expecting more losses, even personal ones, in the future. The PM still holds many cards in the confrontation, significantly that one remaining detainee, who is seen as a hefty catch. The detainee can help lead authorities to the sources of the armament of the militias, allowing security forces the opportunity to shift tactics by focusing on the source, rather than raid the factions’ headquarters.

Big night The morning of June 26 was eventful for Kadhimi, who had a busy schedule. It culminated with a midnight raid by the elite Counter-terrorism Service against the Kataib Hezbollah headquarters. It was a bold step by the premier, whose government is barely two months old.

The premier may have been hasty in his move. Sunni member of the parliamentary security and defense committee Mohammed al-Karbouli told Asharq Al-Awsat that the confrontation with the outlawed armed factions and militias is “inevitable, but it requires means and mechanisms so that the state does not lose its dignity in the process.”

He remarked that the PM was dragging the counter-terrorism units into this battle. The units have presented major sacrifices in the battle against ISIS and it may not be wise to involve them alone in the confrontation with the factions, Karbouli warned. “Neither the units, nor Kadhimi are qualified now to take on this role.”

The PM may be headed towards two losses: waging a losing battle and failure to achieve victory, while also creating divisions within the state and military institutions, he added. The first step should be building a strong and unified military that is “completely loyal to the state” until the conditions are ripe to launch the confrontation.

Head of the Center for Political Thinking in Iraq, Ihssan Shmary told Asharq Al-Awsat that Kadhimi broke the mold by appearing “more committed in implementing his ministerial agenda, especially in regards to limiting the possession of weapons to the state.”

By waging a confrontation with the outlawed factions, he is demonstrating that he is acting away from political pressure and dictates, he added.

He warned that the raid will have “major political repercussions,” explaining that Kadhimi does not boast a political bloc. The factions do and they may come together to impede his government’s work. Moreover, the militias would have now realized that Kadhimi is not willing to turn a blind eye to their practices, which would give them the incentive to resolve their disputes and unite to confront this new challenge. Kadhimi will then have to focus on which approach to take, such as his ability to stall and garner political and popular support.

Most Viewed

 
Features

As It Attacks Iran's Nuclear Program, Israel Maintains Ambiguity about Its Own

FILE - This file image made from a video aired Friday, Jan. 7, 2005, by Israeli television station Channel 10, shows what the television station claims is Israel's nuclear facility in the southern Israeli town of Dimona, the first detailed video of the site ever shown to the public. (Channel 10 via AP, File)
FILE - This file image made from a video aired Friday, Jan. 7, 2005, by Israeli television station Channel 10, shows what the television station claims is Israel's nuclear facility in the southern Israeli town of Dimona, the first detailed video of the site ever shown to the public. (Channel 10 via AP, File)
TT
20
TT

As It Attacks Iran's Nuclear Program, Israel Maintains Ambiguity about Its Own

FILE - This file image made from a video aired Friday, Jan. 7, 2005, by Israeli television station Channel 10, shows what the television station claims is Israel's nuclear facility in the southern Israeli town of Dimona, the first detailed video of the site ever shown to the public. (Channel 10 via AP, File)
FILE - This file image made from a video aired Friday, Jan. 7, 2005, by Israeli television station Channel 10, shows what the television station claims is Israel's nuclear facility in the southern Israeli town of Dimona, the first detailed video of the site ever shown to the public. (Channel 10 via AP, File)

Israel says it is determined to destroy Iran’s nuclear program because its archenemy's furtive efforts to build an atomic weapon are a threat to its existence.

What’s not-so-secret is that for decades Israel has been believed to be the Middle East’s only nation with nuclear weapons, even though its leaders have refused to confirm or deny their existence, The Associated Press said.

Israel's ambiguity has enabled it to bolster its deterrence against Iran and other enemies, experts say, without triggering a regional nuclear arms race or inviting preemptive attacks.

Israel is one of just five countries that aren’t party to a global nuclear nonproliferation treaty. That relieves it of international pressure to disarm, or even to allow inspectors to scrutinize its facilities.

Critics in Iran and elsewhere have accused Western countries of hypocrisy for keeping strict tabs on Iran's nuclear program — which its leaders insist is only for peaceful purposes — while effectively giving Israel's suspected arsenal a free pass.

On Sunday, the US military struck three nuclear sites in Iran, inserting itself into Israel’s effort to destroy Iran’s program.

Here's a closer look at Israel's nuclear program:

A history of nuclear ambiguity Israel opened its Negev Nuclear Research Center in the remote desert city of Dimona in 1958, under the country's first leader, Prime Minister David Ben Gurion. He believed the tiny fledgling country surrounded by hostile neighbors needed nuclear deterrence as an extra measure of security. Some historians say they were meant to be used only in case of emergency, as a last resort.

After it opened, Israel kept the work at Dimona hidden for a decade, telling United States’ officials it was a textile factory, according to a 2022 article in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, an academic journal.

Relying on plutonium produced at Dimona, Israel has had the ability to fire nuclear warheads since the early 1970s, according to that article, co-authored by Hans M. Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project with the Federation of American Scientists, and Matt Korda, a researcher at the same organization.

Israel's policy of ambiguity suffered a major setback in 1986, when Dimona’s activities were exposed by a former technician at the site, Mordechai Vanunu. He provided photographs and descriptions of the reactor to The Sunday Times of London.

Vanunu served 18 years in prison for treason, and is not allowed to meet with foreigners or leave the country.

ISRAEL POSSESSES DOZENS OF NUCLEAR WARHEADS, EXPERTS SAY

Experts estimate Israel has between 80 and 200 nuclear warheads, although they say the lower end of that range is more likely.

Israel also has stockpiled as much as 1,110 kilograms (2,425 pounds) of plutonium, potentially enough to make 277 nuclear weapons, according to the Nuclear Threat Initiative, a global security organization. It has six submarines believed to be capable of launching nuclear cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles believed to be capable of launching a nuclear warhead up to 6,500 kilometers (4,000 miles), the organization says.

Germany has supplied all of the submarines to Israel, which are docked in the northern city of Haifa, according to the article by Kristensen and Korda.

NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN THE MIDDLE EAST POSE RISKS

In the Middle East, where conflicts abound, governments are often unstable, and regional alliances are often shifting, nuclear proliferation is particularly dangerous, said Or Rabinowitz, a scholar at Jerusalem's Hebrew University and a visiting associate professor at Stanford University.

“When nuclear armed states are at war, the world always takes notice because we don’t like it when nuclear arsenals ... are available for decision makers,” she said.

Rabinowitz says Israel's military leaders could consider deploying a nuclear weapon if they found themselves facing an extreme threat, such as a weapon of mass destruction being used against them.

Three countries other than Israel have refused to sign the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons: India, Pakistan and South Sudan. North Korea has withdrawn. Iran has signed the treaty, but it was censured last week, shortly before Israel launched its operation, by the UN's nuclear watchdog — a day before Israel attacked — for violating its obligations.

Israel's policy of ambiguity has helped it evade greater scrutiny, said Susie Snyder at the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, a group that works to promote adherence to the UN treaty.

Its policy has also shined a light on the failure of Western countries to rein in nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, she said.

They “prefer not to be reminded of their own complicity,” she said.