In light of preparations for the launch the operation of the restoration of the city of Mosul from the grip of the organization Daesh and in the light of conflicting local and regional interests for them, and because the battle of Mosul constitutes an importance to Turkey at the level of internal and external policies , the Turkish National Council, “Parliament approved” overwhelmingly to extend the Turkish military mission to continue its military operations outside the border in Iraq and Syria, an additional year. With this extension , the Turkish army can move around and do all military operations until the end of October 2017, outside its country’s borders, especially in Iraq and Syria. In this context, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan stressed that his country’s troops will play a role in the restoration operation of the city of Mosul under the control of the organization Daesh , pointing out that any party can not prevent it. The Turkish president said at the opening of the legislative session this year, “We will do our best in the liberation operation of Mosul and we must be at the table solution and should not limit ourselves to monitoring and will not allow Shiite militias and the PKK to participate in the process and we will do what needs to prevent this game.” He continued by saying, “In our opinion, the local, Arab and Turkmen forces are able to liberate the city.” Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan called for to stay in the city of Mosul, in northern Iraq, only its residents who originate from the Sunnis of their racial differences of Arab and Kurds and Turkmen . Ali Yildirim , Turkish Prime Minister demanded on the need not to change the demographic structure to the city of Mosul after its liberation from the organization , Daesh.
On Iraqi side , the Iraqi constitutional institutions rejected the Turkish parliament ‘s decision and statements of President Erdogan on participation in the battle of Mosul, and on its part , the Iraqi Council of Representatives unanimously rejected several days ago the presence of Turkish troops in northern Iraq, and considered it as occupied and hostile forces , and called for cutting economic ties with Ankara ; for his part , Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al – Abadi said he would not allow Turkish troops to participate in the battle of the restoration of Mosul from al Daesh and Abadi expressed in a news conference in Karbala , “south of Baghdad , ” last Sunday about his surprise at the insistence of Turkey on the presence of its troops on Iraqi territory, indicating that it did not participate in the planning and preparation for the battle, and the presence of its troops hinders the fight against the organization Daesh . al – Abadi stressed that the goal of the Turkish leadership is linked to an internal project with a purpose of engaging the Turkish army in battles outside his country ‘s borders . He stressed that the battle to restore Mosul will not involve foreign troops, and the role of the international coalition ill be limited on training , advising and providing logistical support and air cover to Iraqi forces, and renewed adherence to the participation of the popular crowd in the battle .The question in this context Is the Iraqi government has the element of physical force that could force Turkey to refrain from taking part in the Battle of Mosul?
This attitude of the Iraqi constitutional institutions may be justified, which is fully consistent with the interests of the Iranian regime, which rejects any regional competition for influence in Iraq, especially from Turkey. This system does not serve the interests of Iraq , recuperative of its social, economic and political ills, but weak scrawny Iraq , easy to control noting that the Iranian regime ‘ control on the Mosul and establish its influence in it through the use of the Turkmen sectarian factor “Shiite” in “Afar” will guarantee for it afterwards a vital land corridor to his allies in Syria ‘s Bashar al-Assad and Lebanon, Hezbollah and down to the coast of the eastern Mediterranean. The Iranian regime will not neglect the strategic gift submitted to him by former US President George W. Bush’s administration, when it launches its military occupation of Iraq on the ninth of April / May 2003. Therefore it seeks by its full force to maintain the gains of his influence in Iraq, and not allow for any regional Arab state or others to share that influence.
As Iran is about to complete a plan worked out for three decades ago to draw a corridor linking it to the shores of the Mediterranean through Iraq and Syria, to give Tehran greater influence in region . the coordination was carried out among senior security and government officials in Tehran, Baghdad and Damascus on the corridor, and all of them were linked to the commander of the Qods Force of the Iranian Guard , Gen. Qassem Soleimani, who runs the wars of Iran in Syria and Iraq . the land route seems gradually taken definite form since 2014, following the control of armed militias affiliated to Tehran on areas of Iraq and Syria.
Martin Chuluuv correspondent for the Observer newspaper in Beirut said , that the interviews were conducted over the past four months with Iraqi influential officials and citizens in northern Syria, confirmed that landmarks of Iran’s path towards the Mediterranean looked known, what makes the tasks of Shiite militias of popular crowd , west of Mosul , part of the Iranian workshop that different forces are taking part in its completion , working to achieve the aspirations of Tehran . the corridor starts from Baquba in Diyala province, the nearest city to the Iranian border in Iraq, toward Shirqat in Salahuddin province controlled by the militia in September, and extends toward the Afar and Sinjar controlled since last November by ” PKK” forces coming from the Syria and the corridor continue to extend from the Rabia crossing between Iraq and Syria through al-Qamishli and Ain al- Arab (Kobani) down to Afrin, they are areas controlled by the Kurdish people’s Protection units . experts on the Middle East consider that the corridor sought by Iran to reach the shores of the Mediterranean, reinforcing the Shiite Crescent, which works to draw it for decades, but it also will change the shape of the presence of Iran in the entire Arab world.
The Observer newspaper quotes from a specialist European source as saying that “Iran is working hard to achieve the goal”, so that it can move goods and people within that corridor, which is guarded through their own forces or other forces belonging to it . Western experts see that Iran probably did not anticipate the reaction of Turkey , which did not accept the plan of Suleimani , which means to consolidate Iran’ relationships with the “PKK” forces and its Syrian extensions . the Iranian project needs to demographic changes started to be implemented in central Iraq, which is currently underway in the north of Syria. And Iraqi militias and parties affiliated to Iran are working on the success of the plan and securing its stages , each one according to its estimation . tha corridor starts from the points used by Iran to send weapons and fighters into Iraq during the past 12 years. They are the same roads used by the Iranian Guard to send fighters against American troops that were occupies Iraq, which caused 25 percent of American losses during that stage.
The militia affiliated to Iran that have caused these losses against the Americans before they leave Iraq, work these days against Daesh in full coverage by the US Air Force, in a political paradox . According to Iran , the issue is pragmatic in terms of collision with Americans or cooperate with them in order to establish this corridor . Aleppo is the largest crossroads to accomplish this corridor, where Tehran has invested a lot of its effort in this regard , and is currently amassing 6 thousands of Iraqi Shiite militias to restore the east of the city from opposition forces there.
As the delegation of Turkish military intervention in Iraq and the statements of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan about Turkish intervention in Mosul were met with severe reject by some Iraqi political forces and religious authorities, for the first level , MP Ahlam Husseini , rapporteur of Foreign Relations Committee in the Iraqi Council of Representatives, on Sunday , called the Iraqi Council of Representatives to respond to the Turkish parliament, which has given a new mandate for his army’s presence on Iraqi soil, considered it as a blatant interference in Iraqi affairs, and the lack of respect for national sovereignty. Husseini added that “this mandate is the occupation of Iraqi territory” as she demanded the Security Council to issue a resolution condemning the Turkish presence in Iraq. For her part , MP for the coalition of state of law, Firdous al-Awadi, considered the vote of Turkish parliament for the survival of Turkish troops in Iraq and Syria, before the Battle of Mosul, a lack of respect for the Iraqi request, concerning the departure of these forces from Iraqi territory. Al-Awadi said the decision “is a declaration of confrontation with the security forces and the popular crowd, which is sure that it will deal with these forces in the same treatment, which treats the terrorist organization Daesh ” and al-Awadi called the central government, to “stand firm to Turkish ambitions , whether political or economic ones . ”
As for the rejection of the religious authorities of the Turkish intervention in the battle of Mosul, the religious authority , Qasim al-Tai, has issued a fatwa to the need to fight Turkish forces in Ba’shqah of Nineveh province , and stressed that the fight against those forces is a legitimate and moral duty. Tai said in a statement on Sunday, “We must fight the invading Turkish forces in Iraq,” as he described on. He explained, saying that “resistance to the Turkish military presence in Iraq, especially after the Turkish parliament’s vote on the presence of these forces is a religious , moral and social duty.” He called the religious authority, to resist those forces by boycott of Turkish goods and companies.
In order for the Iranian regime to avoid any overt tension with Turkey about its intention to share the battle of Mosul noting that the regime committed preferring not to comment officially on it , but only satisfied with its allies of Iraqi parties and militias to express its attitude to it. But if it is allowed for us to say, and we assume that the Iranian regime has expressed his stance against the Turkish military intervention in the battle of Mosul, a justification for his refusal as a violation of Iraq’s sovereignty and interference in its internal affairs and a violation of international legal norms fixed in general international law and the Charter of the United Nations. But the Iranian regime is not so naive –till now- to show that position. Because hostile practices in the Arab region and in Iraq in particular do not let any human or moral logic to support its position.
What can be said in this place, that those who kill Muslims in Iraq, standing supporter and advocate of the policies of the former prime minister, Nuri al-Maliki based on abhorrent sectarianism, exclusion and eradication, a key component of the Sons of Iraq, a Sunni component, Maliki himself opened the door to Iranian influence on a sectarian basis ,unprecedented in the modern era, and thus linked the future of Iraq to the Iranian influence, and turn Iraq as aback garden to Iran. It stands in the face of the aspirations of the Syrian people in the liberation from the totalitarian rule of Bashar al-Assad and the establishment of a democratic state, and works at the same time to kill them through the militias of death squads that have been brought in from Iran such as the Iranian Revolutionary Guards , Basij and residents of Shiite Afghans, and the Iranian regime pursued forced displacement policy pursued by Bashar al-Assad to evacuate the cities, towns and villages since the last months of 2011, investment in the following years to create the planned demographic change, especially in the surroundings of Damascus and in Homs, and its features have appeared recently in the brutal sieges of starvation and shelling in Zabadani and Qalmoun and Darya and district of Al-waer. This policy does not aim only to make any political solution impossible due to the impossibility of return of displaced persons and restore their homes , their property, or those who found their shops burned and their properties removed, or even the return of «absentee» who their property were confiscated considering them as «terrorists» (in application of the Israeli scenario to act freely to the property of Palestinians ).
And of Iraq such as Asaib Ahl-Al-Haq and the Brigades of Hezbollah and of Lebanon , Hezbollah where his leader announced that the Palestine road passes through the Syrian Zabadani and Pakistan brigade , Zeinbion and Afghanistan Brigade , Fatimids, and even from the Ukraine and North Korea, and who helped the Houthis in the military coup in September of the last year , against the rule of President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi, and involved Yemen into civil war unless the intervention of Saudi Arabia on suitable time through the decisive storm to bring things back on track before the coup.
It is also working to destabilize the state of Lebanon through its agent there which is Hezbollah, and contributing to spread its sectarian poisons in the Arabian Gulf, particularly in Bahrain, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia and is working tirelessly to destabilize the stability of them , and train sleeper cells of the sons of the Shiites Arab tempted in the desert of Iraqi city of Najaf; to return to their homelands as sleeper cells , waiting for the moment of zero to blow up the internal situations in it noting that the State of Bahrain and Kuwait are the best example of that. It is to ignite a sectarian war in the Levant, and one of the symbols of its political system boasts to control the four Arab capitals, and the Iraqi capital Baghdad, is the civilization and culture of the Persian Empire , so it has no right to speak about the respect for the sovereignty of States . And the assistance of Iranian regime of former US President George W. Bush administration on the occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq. In the context of these practices and Iranian attacks on the sovereignty of Arab countries , there is no meaning to any official Iranian statement which is trying to show his commitment to respect the sovereignty of Iraq, which was – and still- violated by it , because the Iranian regime has lost both political , moral and humanitarian value. The fact that the Iranian regime is an authentic corner of the crises of Iraq and its complexity, not solve them.
Rawabet Center for Research and Strategic Studies