Trump chairs a UN Security Council meeting at UN headquarters in New York, U.S., September 26, 2018. \ CARLOS BARRIA/ REUTERS

The post Trump at UN Security Council: Syria’s Butchery Is Enabled by Russia, Iran first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

The protest wave began, according to Iranian sources, in the city of Mashad, and was originally organized by hard-line clerics – rivals of President Hassan Rohani who sought to capitalize on the unrest over unemployment and high prices. If this was indeed the motivation, it seems to have backfired, with protests quickly spreading to dozens of cities across Iran and now targeting not only the relatively “moderate” Rohani government but the more hard-line establishment around Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and his allies, including the Revolutionary Guards.

One of the many slogans being heard at the protests is “No Gaza, No Lebanon, No Syria, My life for Iran!” – referring apparently to the billions Tehran has spent on its allies across the region, instead of investing in the stagnant economy at home.

It’s ironic that the protests, which were planned by Rohani’s hard-line rivals to pressure him, have backfired in such a way. In recent months, one of the major behind-the-scenes debates in the Iranian establishment has been whether to make a further major investment in Syria. As the Syrian civil war seems to be dying down, the Revolutionary Guards have sought to capitalize on the money they spent there and entrench their presence by building a permanent air base and docking facilities on the Mediterranean coast. This would mean spending at least hundreds of millions more, if not billions, on construction.

According to Western intelligence sources, the factions close to Rohani are against spending this money they say is needed for improving infrastructure and providing jobs at home. The debate taking place behind closed doors in Tehran seems to have spilled out onto the streets of Iran’s cities.

Iraq and the Arabian Peninsula

The extent of Iran’s funding for its allies and proxies in the region is impossible to assess accurately, in part because much of the funding comes in the form of arms and equipment, as well as the transport of fighters and supplies in aircraft operated by Iranian state-owned airlines. Iran extends invaluable support to its allies also through the services of its officers as military advisers and by setting up Shi’ite militias that it trains and deploys across the region.

Iran in recent years has invested billions in propping up its allies in Lebanon, the Gaza Strip, Yemen, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, but above all, since 2011, it has poured money in keeping Syrian President Bashar Assad in power.

Iran’s investment in the Assad regime over the past six and a half years has come in various forms and is difficult to quantify. Iranian state-owned banks set up credit lines for the Syrian government of $3.6 billion in 2013 and $1 billion in 2015 to let the regime buy oil and other goods from Iran.

The $4.6 billion does not include arms supplies, arriving daily in Iranian cargo aircraft at the Damascus airport, the deployment of thousands of military “advisers” of both Iran’s army and Revolutionary Guards – a thousand of whom are estimated to have been killed in action – and the much larger force of Shi’ite militias, mainly fighters from Afghanistan that Iran has organized and funded. Around 50,000 of these militia members have fought in Syria. They earn $300 a month, and Iran also pays for their weapons, travel and sustenance. In other words, Iran has spent billions more annually on the Assad regime over the last six years.

Around 100,000 Iranian-backed militia fighters have been operating in Iraq in recent years, both fighting the Islamic State and furthering Iran’s interests in neighboring territory. Though part of the funding for these militias comes also from Iraqi sources, the lion’s share of their pay and weaponry is financed by Tehran.

The Hezbollah model

Of course, of all the Shi’ite militias in the region, the one that has gained the most from Iran’s largesse is Hezbollah. Estimates of Iran’s funding for the Lebanese group reach anywhere from $60 million to $1 billion a year. It comes in the form of direct financial support, massive quantities of both basic conventional arms and advanced weapons systems, training facilities in Iran, and investment in construction projects in Lebanon to boost Iran and Hezbollah’s standing in the country.

The model that Iran pioneered in Lebanon from the mid-1980s, of training and arming Hezbollah as its local proxy, has been replicated with anti-government Shi’ite underground groups in Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, and militias in Iraq since the U.S. invasion in 2003 and the Houthis in Yemen since at least 2015. In their case, the aid has come in the shape of long-range missiles as well, which the Houthis have been firing at Saudi Arabia, including Riyadh.

Not only Shi’ite groups have received arms and funds. Israeli intelligence has assessed the financial support to Islamic groups in Gaza at around $100 million annually, though this decreased since the beginning of the Syrian civil war, when Hamas, which was close to the Sunni rebel groups in Syria, temporarily cut its ties with Iran and the Assad regime. Over the last two years, those ties have been reestablished and the financial support for Hamas is now at around $50 million, while the more radical Islamic Jihad, which did not cut ties with Tehran, is receiving around $70 million.

The Revolutionary Guards, who have supervised these investments, have tried to make at least some of them profitable. Syria used much of the credit to pay for Iranian oil and gas, which Iran had no customers for when it was under sanctions and support for the Assad regime was given in part in return for mining rights in Syria and the lease of land for agriculture. But it will take time, probably years, until matters in Syria have calmed sufficiently for the Iranians to see any profits.

The Iranian nuclear deal, which ended most of the sanctions on Iran, has unfrozen tens of billions of dollars that have reached the regime’s coffers but have yet to be translated into prosperity trickling down to the Iranian people. The hard-liners’ attempt last week to channel the frustration with Rohani, whose government led the nuclear talks, seems to have resulted in an outburst of anger also at the hard-liners’ investment of billions that Rohani was less in favor of.

Either way, it could be bad news for both rival sections of the Iranian leadership. Once you push people out on the street, it becomes very difficult, if not impossible, to direct their fury.

Anshel Pfeffer
Haaretz Correspondent

Source: https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/iran/.premium-1.832218

The post Analysis Iran Spends Billions on Proxy Wars Throughout the Mideast. Here’s Where Its Money Is Going first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Almost two-thirds of respondents to a recent public opinion poll in five Middle Eastern states said Russia, Turkey and the United States increased their influence in the region over the past decade. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was voted the least popular leader in the region, trailing behind even Syrian President Bashar Assad and Iranian President Hassan Rohani.

The poll, which was conducted by Washington’s Pew Research Center, examined views on regional geopolitics in Tunisia, Lebanon, Jordan, Israel and Turkey.

While 64 percent of respondents across the region said Russia’s influence in the Middle East today is greater than it was a decade ago, similar numbers — 63 and 62 percent, respectively — said the same was true of Turkey and of the United States.

More than half, 53 percent, said Iran’s regional influence rose in the past decade, compared to 46 percent for Israel and 41 percent for Saudi Arabia. The only country in the region that lost influence in the past 10 years, according to the poll, was Egypt, with 46 percent of respondents saying it was less influential today and just 19 percent saying its regional influence had increased since a decade ago.

The poll examined attitudes in the five surveyed states to the leaders of other countries in the region. (Respondents were not asked about the leaders in their own countries.) Overall, the poll showed negative attitudes to leaders in the region, but the country-by-country results are edifying.

In Jordan, Saudi Arabia’s King Salman bin Abdul-Aziz Al Saud Salman was the overwhelming favorite, with 86 percent of respondents saying they viewed him favorably. Two-thirds, 66 percent, of respondents in Jordan said the same about Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Netanyahu was voted the least popular regional leader by Jordanians who participated in the poll, with only 1 percent saying they viewed him favorably. Jordan and Egypt are the only Arab states that have a peace agreement with Israel.
read more: https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/1.828409

In Turkey, the only regional leader that was viewed favorably by more than 20 percent of respondents was the Saudi monarch. All the other regional leaders were viewed negatively by an overwhelming majority of Turkish respondents, with Netanyahu again the least popular with 7 percent of the “votes.”

In Israel, the most popular regional leaders were Egypt’s President Abdel-Fattah al-Sissi and Jordan’s King Abdullah II, who were viewed positively by 44 and 43 percent of respondents, respectively. Erdogan and Salman were viewed favorably by 15 and 14 percent of Israeli respondents, respectively. Fewer than 7 percent gave a nod to Assad or to Rohani.

In fact, the only country out of those surveyed where Assad and Rohani enjoyed some degree of popularity was Lebanon, where 45 percent of respondents viewed both favorably. Erdogan was slightly less popular, at 42 percent, while Netanyahu came in last, with 0 percent of Lebanese expressing favorable views of him.

Not surprisingly, the results in Lebanon were split along ethnic and religious lines. Shi’ite Muslims were more likely to view Assad and Rohani positively, Christians were more inclined to approve of Sissi and Sunni Muslims more likely to hold favorable views of Erdogan.

In Tunisia, Erdogan won the popularity contest, with 59 percent of respondents saying they viewed him favorably. Netanyahu was the least popular, with only 7 percent expressing such a view.

Nearly one-third of all respondents to the poll, 32 percent, said they believed the Syrian civil war would end within the next five years. Nearly as many, 29 percent, believed it will continue for at least five more years, and just 26 percent said they though it would be over by the end of 2018.

Source: https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/1.828409

The post Poll: Russia Wields Most Influence in Middle East; Netanyahu Least Popular Leader first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.