In 2006, while George W. Bush’s government was under intense internal and external pressures to leave Iraq and was blamed for spending billions of dollars on Iraq and “handing Iraq to Iran on a silver platter,” the plan for the soft partition of Iraq was approved by law in the United States’ Congress with the aim of preventing the United States’ complete defeat in Iraq.
Introduced by Senators Joseph R. Biden and chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations Leslie H. Gelb in May 2006, the measure calls for a decentralized Iraqi government and the establishment of three (or more) semi-autonomous ethnic regions including Sunni, Shi’ah, and Kurdish regional administrations that are linked by a power-sharing agreement in Baghdad.
Gelb explained to the delegates that Washington should call on the promotion of cooperation with foreign supporters of Sunni extremists in Iraq and, while defining the common interests, make them shoulder the costs as well as the future planning and collaborations. The Shi’ahs would now gain power due to being a majority in the country, but the Sunnis do not want to lose power after hundreds of years of dominating Iraq, and the Kurds also do not want to lose their 15-year independence. As long as the United States military is present in Iraq, the riots and uprisings will not be strong and the United States will have to confront them. Hence, in order to see greater and stronger streams, we have to restore the army.
The radical forces in the region will carry out a large part of the project. The bill was approved by Congress on September 26, 2003, by a majority of 75 votes in favour and 23 negatives and the government was required to implement it. Four months later, on January 10, 2007, in a televised address, George W. Bush announced the new United States’ strategy, the main purpose of which was to prevent the United States’ complete failure in Iraq. At the same time, the White House published the outline and important points for a new strategy including driving the attacks against the American forces to zero, confronting Iran’s influence in the Iraqi political arena, weakening the policy of de-Ba’athifiction and seeking to make the ethnic and religious minorities, especially Sunni Arabs return to political scene at the local level and eventually forming a contact group with the countries of the region and the United Nations in order to prepare them to respect Iraq’s administrative divisions and federal frontiers.
According to documents published by Arab and Western newspapers, those who used to attack soldiers and vehicles of the United States army using mortars, machine guns, mines and bombs, and kill women and children as well as destroy shop stores, gradually were organized in a way that they began to attack only prominent figures and movements affiliated with Iran and, as it was expected, the civilians especially the Shi’ahs.
There was not even a single attack being carried out against the American soldiers, tradesmen and diplomats, and the Daesh has sprouted and emerged by recruiting Takfiris that carried out suicide bombings.
This stream was founded in 2011. Daesh traced its beck to Jama’at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad group which was founded in 1999 by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and joined the al-Qaedah network in 2004, after being known as al-Qaedah of Iraq. In 2006, after being engaged in war with the Iraqi government, the al-Qaedah of Iraq joined with several smaller Iraqi insurgent groups under an umbrella organization called the Mujahidin Shura Council which was considered a major power in al-Anbar governorate. On October 13, 2006, the Shura Council along with a number of other insurgent groups, formed the “Islamic State of Iraq.” Abu Ayyub al-Masri and Abu Omar al-Baghdadi were two prominent leaders of the Islamic State of Iraq who were killed during a United States military operation on April 18, 2010, and were replaced by Abu Bakr Baghdadi.
From the very beginning, the group aimed at confronting the new Iraqi government and reestablishing the Ba’athist government. That is why the movement, despite the demands of its supporters namely the Wahhabis and the CIA, was reluctant to send its forces to Syria. But one year later, with the support of the Arab and Western allies and also in order to strengthen the organization through recruiting more Takfiris, the ISI got involved in the war in Syria and added the word “Levant” to its name and therefore the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Daesh) was born.
Since then, they have been provided with huge amounts of weapons and money through the borders of Turkey and Jordan. Yet the old difference between the leaders of Daesh and Saudis, since Daesh aims at reviving the government of Saddam in Iraq, along with the long-standing and fundamental disagreement between the Daesh military commanders and the Saudis, all in all, have escalated the tensions and conflicts between Daesh and its detached branch al-Nusrah Front which had been completely controlled by Saudis and hence these two groups began to fight with each other in Syria.
The process of providing Daesh with relentless aids and supports through the borders of Turkey and Jordan was interrupted, but Ba’athist commanders were experienced enough to provide the needs of the movement through looting the caravans of supplies sent to the al-Nusrah Front by its foreign allies.
Daesh was so aggressive that it did not wait for Turkish trucks to move towards Syria and hence would take the food and arms supplies abroad. Meanwhile, the West did not act against Daesh, and even Turkish officials whose border guards had mistakenly stopped the trucks carrying the supplies for Takfiris in Syria, punished the guards and delivered the trucks to Daesh. Long before the start of the war, the planning for Daesh’s invasion of Iraq had begun in think thanks of intelligence services of the United States, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, France and the United Kingdom, and its $3 billion budget had been funded by Saudis quickly.
In a number of Arab capitals, including Jordan, Qatar and some European’s, several briefings were held between representatives of the Saudi and Qatar intelligence agents, some Daesh commanders in particular Saddam’s Ba’athist officers and a number of Iraqi politicians. In those meetings, they were informed that this plan needs to be dealt with on two fronts and that it is for the first time that a project is being carried out at such a level of both political and military.
Following the Daesh incursion into Iraq and the occupation of some parts of the country on June 5, 2014, the next United States plan for exerting pressures on the Iraqi government began and hence the American politicians clearly called for the resignation of Maliki in an attempt to eliminate the Iraqi central government.
Another proof for the above-mentioned fact is that according to documents released by Charles Ernest Grassley the senior United States Senator from Iowa, the United States Department of Homeland Security has secretly made a list of terrorists based on which those who are linked to the terrorists would be allowed to enter the United States without any limitation. Such a list, which allows suspects to have easy access to the United States, has worried Grassley and hence he has revealed several DHS emails that include this list and discussions on licensing terrorists to enter the United States. In addition, these documents show the United States’ cooperation with terrorist groups such as Daesh and other Takfiri groups.
The goal of forming the recent coalition with the United States to fight Daesh is not to eliminate this Takfiri group, but to prevent more Daesh disobedience and subordinate it with the aim of achieving the United States goals in the region. The best reason for this is that the United States has not disturbed the activities of other Takfiri groups such as al-Nusrah Front in Syria in a manner that these groups continue their terrorist activities without interruption.
The United States foreign policy in Syria and Iraq before the formation of that coalition was giving a chance to Takfiri groups like Daesh so that they would gain enough power and influence and therefore the military presence of the United States in the region being justified.
But the United States’ responsibility for the development and expansion of the Takfiri terrorist network in Syria is more than that. Based on some documents, the United States has played a direct role in the formation of Daesh.
According to the documents leaked by Edward Snowden (a former NSA employee), the NSA in collaboration with the United Kingdom Security Agency and the Mossad Special Military Information and Mission Center, has provided grounds for the formation of Daesh. Accordingly, Snowden had described a joint American, British and Israeli effort to create a terrorist organization capable of centralizing all extremist actions across the world. The plan was code-named “Beehive” — or in other translations, “The Hornet’s Nest.” This is acknowledged by Hillary Clinton acknowledged this in her book “Hard Choices.” She states that Daesh was made by the United States. “With the aim of dividing up the Middle East.” She continues by saying that: I had travelled to 112 countries and reached an agreement with some friends to recognize Daesh as soon as its formation is declared: but all of a sudden everything changed. (Due to the coup that took place against the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt), it was agreed that the formation of the Islamic State (Daesh) would be announced on 5/7/2013, and we would wait for its establishment to, along with Europeans, recognize it as soon as possible.
Until 2014 and when Daesh began to carry out operations that targeted the United States interests in Iraq, the American governors have not disturbed the activities of such group whereas Daesh had been active since the beginning of the civil war in Syria and occupied a large part of this country before the invasion of Iraq.
Daesh used its own disgusting methods, such as cutting off heads, mutilating and burning people, and selling women and children as slaves. Whenever this group would gain victory It would kill civilians and innocent people. At that time, the terrifying reports of Takfiri terrorists were not reflected in Western and Arab media, as the United States and its partners participated in such incidents; however, taking a stance against Daesh was highlighted in Western media when the terrorist acts of this group, which had been created and supported by the West, befell the West in a way that the terrorist attacks in Paris and the threat of carrying out attacks on other Western countries became a cause of concern to the United States and the West.
Conclusion
Based on the documents and resources presented in this paper, it became clear that the United States and the West have always tried to use the negative capacities that existed within the Islamic world against Islam, as the formation of al-Qaedah and Daesh and the all-out support that they have received in recent years suggest that instead of direct intervention the United States has achieved its goals through recruiting such Takfiri movements.
A remarkable point about al-Qaedah and Daesh was the specific interpretations presented by the intellectual leaders of these two movements regarding the concept of Salafism. By reviving the concept of jihad, they prescribed a special struggle for themselves against the enemies of Islam in the present era. Such an approach was first adopted towards communism then the Christian West and Zionism, and ultimately the streams within the Islamic world namely the Shi’ahs and other Sunni groups that opposed the Salafi thought.
However, managing such movements and supporting them in fighting against communism while exploiting their capacity of exercising jihad, the United States was able to finally drive the movements to fight against Shi’ahs making the struggle against the West and Zionism to be no longer a priority for such Salafi movements.
Archive of The Enemies of the Islamic Revolution
leave your comments