This article is from the source 'washpo' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/us-airstrikes-on-iran-backed-militia-draw-condemnation-retaliation-threats-in-iraq/2019/12/30/d13a10be-2af0-11ea-bffe-020c88b3f120_story.html

The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
U.S. airstrikes on Iran-backed militia draw condemnation, retaliation threats in Iraq U.S. airstrikes on Iran-backed militia draw condemnation, retaliation threats in Iraq
(32 minutes later)
BAGHDAD — U.S. airstrikes against bases of an Iranian-backed militia in Iraq drew widespread condemnation across the Iraqi political spectrum Monday, as well as threats of retaliation, raising the risk of an escalating spiral of attacks and questions over the continued viability of the U.S. military presence. BAGHDAD — Iraq said Monday that it would review its relationship with the United States following U.S. airstrikes on bases belonging to an Iranian-backed militia that were opposed by the Iraqi government because of the risk that they could ignite a war between the United States and Iran.
Iraq announced Monday after an emergency meeting of its National Security Council that it will “review” its relationship with the United States as a result of the strikes. The strikes against Kitaeb Hezbollah, in which 25 militia members were killed and 50 injured, drew widespread condemnation from Iraqis across the political spectrum, as well as threats of retaliation, underlining the United States’ growing isolation in Iraq and calling into question the continued viability of the U.S. troop presence.
A spokesman for the Iraqi government said top officials had pleaded with the United States not to go ahead with Sunday night’s airstrikes against the Kataib Hezbollah militia, in which at least 25 militia members were killed and more than 50 injured. U.S. officials said the strikes were “defensive” and intended to deter further rocket attacks such as the one on Friday targeting a military base in Kirkuk that killed a U.S. contractor and injured four U.S. troops, the first U.S. casualties in an intensifying series of attacks.
Iran and its allies warned that the United States would face “consequences” for the strikes, which were carried out in response to a rocket attack blamed on Kataib Hezbollah that killed an American contractor and injured four U.S. troops at a base in Kirkuk on Friday. “This was a defensive action designed to protect American forces and American citizens in Iraq, and it was aimed also at deterring Iran,” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told Fox News. “This was an Iranian-backed rogue militia acting to deny the Iraqi people their basic sovereignty.”
“The blood of the martyrs and the wounded will not go in vain, and the response will be harsh for the American forces in Iraq,” said Jamal Jaafar Ibrahimi, deputy head of the Popular Mobilization Units, of which Kataib Hezbollah is a part. He is a powerful ally of Iran who is better known by his nom de guerre, Abu Mahdi al-Mohandis. But the government in Baghdad called the U.S. attack a violation of Iraqi sovereignty as Iran and its allies intensified calls for U.S. troops to leave Iraq. Protesters waging a three-month-old campaign against the government burned American flags and expressed solidarity with the victims of the strikes.
The two attacks sharply raised the stakes in the regionwide confrontation between Tehran and Washington that began earlier this year after the Trump administration launched its “maximum pressure” campaign of harsh economic sanctions against Iran. “We are the protesters of Tahrir Square who refuse all interference in internal affairs,” read a banner held up by protesters in central Baghdad. “Our sovereignty is one, our blood is one.”
The sanctions are intended to force Iran to reopen negotiations on a 2015 nuclear deal, but instead they have prompted Iran to embark on what it has described as a campaign of “maximum resistance.”The campaign has embroiled international shipping in the Persian Gulf and, increasingly, U.S. troops in Iraq. At an emergency session of the Iraqi National Security Council, ministers and security officials described what they termed a “grave violation” of rules governing the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq, according to a statement issued after the meeting. Iraq will revisit the status of U.S. troops in the country, the statement said. 
The contractor was the first American to die in a series of intensifying rocket attacks against facilities where U.S. troops are based — strikes that increasingly seemed designed to inflict casualties. After an attack earlier in the month narrowly missed hitting Americans, the State Department warned that the U.S. military would respond if an American were killed. Allies of the militia warned of retaliation.
The retaliatory strikes marked the first time that the United States has used military force against an Iran-linked target since U.S. combat troops withdrew in 2011. The U.S. military characterized the strikes as defensive in nature and said they were intended to deter further attacks against the 5,000 U.S. troops who returned to Iraq after 2014 to fight the Islamic State. “The blood of the martyrs and the wounded will not go in vain, and the response will be harsh for the American forces in Iraq,” said Jamal Jaafar Ibrahimi, deputy head of the Popular Mobilization Units, of which Kitaeb Hezbollah is a part. He is a powerful ally of Iran who is better known by his nom de guerre, Abu Mahdi al-Mohandis.
With both sides now having drawn blood, there is a risk that the troops will either be drawn into an escalating tit-for-tat exchange of fire with Iran’s proxies in Iraq or face increased pressure from Baghdad to pull out of Iraq altogether, said Renad Mansour, director of the Iraq Initiative at the London-based Chatham House think tank. The airstrikes sharply raised the stakes in the regionwide confrontation between Tehran and Washington that began this year after the Trump administration launched its “maximum pressure” campaign of harsh economic sanctions against Iran.
Whereas both sides had seemed intent on avoiding escalation in the past, that no longer seems to be the case, he said. “Does this mean a new norm in U.S.-Iranian relations in Iraq, which is that they are both willing to destabilize a country they have spent many years trying to stabilize?” he asked. The sanctions are intended to force Iran to reopen negotiations on a 2015 nuclear deal, but they have prompted Iran to embark on what it has described as a campaign of “maximum resistance.” The campaign has embroiled international shipping in the Persian Gulf and, increasingly, U.S. troops in Iraq.
Alternatively, he said, Iran and its allies are likely to step up pressure for the removal of U.S. troops from Iraq. Although there are still some Iraqis who want U.S. troops to remain in Iraq as a counterbalance to Iran, “it’s going to become more difficult for Iraqis advocating an American presence to make their case,” he said. The retaliatory strikes, the first time the United States has used military force against an Iran-linked target since the U.S. troop withdrawal in 2011, were intended to send a signal to Iran that the United States will no longer stand by while its troops in Iraq face danger, U.S. officials said. The United States sent troops back to Iraq after 2014 to fight the Islamic State militant group, and about 5,000 of them are based there.
But with both sides now having drawn blood, there is a risk that the U.S. troops will either be drawn into an escalating tit-for-tat exchange of fire with Iran’s proxies in Iraq or face increased pressure from Baghdad to pull out of Iraq altogether, said Renad Mansour, director of the Iraq Initiative at the London-based Chatham House think tank.
Whereas both Iran and the United States had seemed intent on avoiding escalation in the past, that no longer seems to be the case, Mansour said. “Does this mean a new norm in U.S.-Iranian relations in Iraq, which is that they are both willing to destabilize a country they have spent many years trying to stabilize?” he asked.
Alternatively, he said, Iran and its allies are likely to step up pressure for the removal of U.S. troops from Iraq. Although some Iraqis still want U.S. troops to remain in Iraq as a counterbalance to Iran, “it’s going to become more difficult for Iraqis advocating an American presence to make their case,” Mansour said.
The Iranian Foreign Ministry said the attacks showed that the United States was a source of conflict and tension in Iraq and would have to pull its forces out. “America must put an end to its occupying presence,” Iranian government spokesman Abbas Mousavi said.The Iranian Foreign Ministry said the attacks showed that the United States was a source of conflict and tension in Iraq and would have to pull its forces out. “America must put an end to its occupying presence,” Iranian government spokesman Abbas Mousavi said.
Iraq’s political leaders, who have sought to balance alliances simultaneously with both Iran and the United States, also condemned the strikes.Iraq’s political leaders, who have sought to balance alliances simultaneously with both Iran and the United States, also condemned the strikes.
In a half-hour phone call Sunday, acting Iraqi prime minister Adel Abdul Mahdi urged U.S. Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper not to go ahead with the strikes, warning that they would “lead to further escalation,” Abdul Mahdi’s spokesman, Maj. Gen. Abdul Karim Khalaf, told the Iraqi News Agency. In a half-hour phone call Sunday, acting prime minister Adel Abdul Mahdi urged U.S. Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper not to go ahead with the strikes, warning that they would “lead to further escalation,” Maj. Gen. Abdul Karim Khalaf, a spokesman for Abdul Mahdi, told the Iraqi News Agency.
“We have previously confirmed our rejection of any unilateral action by the coalition forces or any other forces inside Iraq, and we consider it as a violation of Iraqi sovereignty and a dangerous escalation that threatens the security of Iraq and the region,” the spokesman quoted Abdul Mahdi as telling Esper.“We have previously confirmed our rejection of any unilateral action by the coalition forces or any other forces inside Iraq, and we consider it as a violation of Iraqi sovereignty and a dangerous escalation that threatens the security of Iraq and the region,” the spokesman quoted Abdul Mahdi as telling Esper.
At the same time, Iraqi President Barham Salih expressed his opposition to the strikes in a telephone call with the U.S. Embassy, calling them “harmful to Iraq and. . . unacceptable,” the news agency said. At the same time, Iraqi President Barham Salih expressed his opposition to the strikes in a telephone call with the U.S. Embassy, calling them “harmful to Iraq and … unacceptable,” the news agency said.
Other major political blocs also issued statements condemning the strikes, underlining the extent to which the United States in Iraq has lost influence to Iran in recent years, said Mansour. There were no statements of condemnation following the rocket attack in Kirkuk. Other major political blocs and leaders also issued statements condemning the strikes, including the powerful cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, who said he would lead a campaign to expel U.S. forces by “legal and political means.”
Ayatollah Ali Sistani, Iraq’s top Shiite cleric, issued a statement calling the U.S. action “sinful” and without justification.
U.S. officials noted that there were no statements of condemnation following the rocket attack in Kirkuk.
The reaction in Iraq underlined the extent to which the United States in Iraq has lost influence to Iran in recent years, Mansour said.
“All of Iraq’s institutional leaders are condemning America,” he said. “The issue is that America doesn’t have any allies.”“All of Iraq’s institutional leaders are condemning America,” he said. “The issue is that America doesn’t have any allies.”
Sly reported from Beirut.Sly reported from Beirut.
U.S. strikes in Iraq and Syria target Iranian-backed militia, Pentagon saysU.S. strikes in Iraq and Syria target Iranian-backed militia, Pentagon says
Here’s how airstrikes targeting Iran-backed paramilitary groups in Iraq threaten post-ISIS stabilityHere’s how airstrikes targeting Iran-backed paramilitary groups in Iraq threaten post-ISIS stability
Today’s coverage from Post correspondents around the worldToday’s coverage from Post correspondents around the world
Like Washington Post World on Facebook and stay updated on foreign newsLike Washington Post World on Facebook and stay updated on foreign news