PHOTO: US Attorney General Loretta Lynch announces the indictment of seven Iranians for alleged cyber-attacks, March 24, 2016 (Jacquelyn Martin/AP)


What we are reading this week for insight into the developing stories in Iran and the Middle East:

Iran

Feds Set a Risky Precedent by Indicting 7 Iranian Hackers
Robert M. Lee
Wired

Department of Justice (DOJ) created a potentially dangerous precedent when it indicted seven Iranian hackers involved in attacks on the US financial sector. The US is charging the seven Iranians for cyber attacks in the form of a distributed denial of service (DDoS) that hit a part of the US financial sector, as well as an intrusion into a small dam in Bowman, New York.

While the dam intrusion offered no potential for harm, the extended DDoS against US banks and their infrastructure is worth the DOJ’s attention. However, focusing on the people that conducted the attacks instead of just the Iranian government introduces the potential for a serious backlash against US military and intelligence professionals who conduct cyber operations on behalf of the US government.

As a former US military cyber-warfare operations officer, this is troubling to me. Such indictments should focus on stemming the actions of governments—not on highlighting the operators themselves.

Read more….


What Zarrab’s Arrest Means for Rouhani
Enis Erdem Aydin
Al-Monitor

Reza Zarrab, the dual Iranian and Turkish citizen arrested in the United States on charges of money laundering and banking fraud to evade sanctions on Iran, is not just any businessman. When he was caught up in graft allegations in Turkey in 2013, he surfaced as an alleged associate of Babak Zanjani, the Iranian tycoon recently sentenced to death in Tehran.

Zarrab’s March 19 arrest sits at the nexus of Turkey-Iran-US relations — with potential implications for all sides. While much focus is on how his detention may be bad news for Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP), the real story is that this is much more good news for Iranian President Hassan Rouhani.

The sanctions on Iran propelled the rise of individuals subcontracted to circumvent the restrictions. This shady web, led and incited by the administration of former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and its affiliates in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, bred corruption and lawlessness. As a letter by Zarrab cited in his indictment states, this web “wisely neutralizes the sanctions and even turns them into opportunities by using specialized methods.”

Since taking office, Rouhani has systematically sought to discard corrupt remnants of the Ahmadinejad era and also counterbalance the IRGC and other hard-line elements.

Read more….


Iraq

Fears in Iraqi Government, Army Over Shiite Militias’ Power
Hamza Hendawi and Qassim Abdul-Zahra
AP

These [Shia] militias, many of them backed by Iran, mobilized in 2014 to fight Sunni extremists from the Islamic State group. However, they are now showing no intention of standing down after the battle, demanding instead to be a major force shaping Iraq. That prospect worries not only Iraq’s Sunni minority but also officials in the military and the Shiite-led government, who fear the militias will dominate Iraq the way the Revolutionary Guard does Iran and the guerrilla group Hezbollah does Lebanon.

Two top generals warned that the army could eventually come to blows with the militias, known collectively as the “Hashd”, Arabic for “mobilization.”

“They (the militias) have now infiltrated the government and are meddling in politics,” said Ali Omran, commander of the army’s 5th Infantry Division and a veteran of numerous battles against IS. “I told the Hashd people that one day I and my men may fight them.”

The more than 50 Shiite militias in Iraq have between 60,000 and 140,000 fighters, according to estimates from the government and the Hashd itself. They are backed by tanks and weapons, and have their own intelligence agency, operations rooms and court of law.

Read more….


Moqtada al-Sadr is Back, Proving That He’s Still a Force in Iraqi Politics
Liz Sly and Mustafa Salim
The Washington Post

Moqtada al-Sadr, the troublesome cleric whose militia repeatedly battled U.S. troops more than a decade ago, is back in action in Iraq — this time as a champion of political reforms.

And what a comeback it has been, replete with high political drama, bold gestures of choreographed symbolism and moments of nerve-racking tension that have seen Baghdad brace for a potential new war.

Sadr’s return to the limelight began in February, when he emerged from years of self-imposed retirement from politics to lead a mass protest campaign calling for the creation of a new government and an end to the corrupt practices of the country’s despised political elite.

On Thursday, after spending five days holed up in a tent inside Baghdad’s heavily fortified Green Zone to press his demands, he was handed a victory, in the form of a proposed new government presented to Parliament by Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi. The new, streamlined cabinet is to be composed not of politicians but technocrats with the skills required to run ministries — meeting one of Sadr’s top demands.

Whether a new government will be formed is in question. Parliament won’t vote on whether to approve the candidates for another 10 days. This reform proposal may yet founder, like others before it, on the paralyzing squabbles of the country’s feuding politicians.

Read more….


Saudi Arabia

The Salman Doctrine: the Saudi Reply to Obama’s Weakness
Nawaf Obeid
The National Interest

it is now clearer than ever that America and Saudi Arabia are on a collision course over strategic decisions in the Middle East. This is because the “Obama Doctrine” is diametrically opposed to the emerging “Salman Doctrine,” which the Kingdom is developing in order to restore peace and a modicum of stability to the region. And while the Saudis and their allies would benefit immensely from having the United States at their side, Washington also has much to lose by distancing itself from the Saudi agenda. Since the end of World War II, American influence and standing in the Arab world has, to a large extent, been dependent on the “special relationship” with the Kingdom.

President Obama expressed [his] doctrine on his first campaign trail when he said that “the United States cannot use its military to solve humanitarian problems.” This explains his decisions to refrain from taking out Assad after Syria crossed his “red line” by using chemical weapons on its people, to capitulate to Iran’s regional ambitions to strike the nuclear deal, to allow the development of Shia militias in Iraq, to avoid pressing Israel on the Palestinian issue and to initially go easy on ISIS [the Islamic State] because it is “not an existential threat to the United States”. Yet, as the Goldberg article makes clear, the Obama Doctrine not only represents the president’s extreme hesitation toward American military intervention, but also evinces his specific abandonment of the Arab world and his now declared support for a more powerful Iran.

The best way to demonstrate the complete opposite worldview of the Obama doctrine is to look at the Salman Doctrine. The Saudi leadership believes that Assad must be removed from Syria; that Iran’s regional and nuclear ambitions must be denied; that the Shia militias of Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen are terrorist groups and must be destroyed; that the world needs to recognize a Palestinian state; and every global effort must be made to defeat ISIS and Al Qaeda. At the center of many of these doctrinal differences is the Saudi assertion that Iran is at the root of numerous security problems now plaguing the Middle East. Obama’s assertion that Saudi Arabia should “share” the region with Iran is patently absurd, given Tehran’s vast and unending support for terrorism.

Read more….