Friday, January 2, 2015

Iraq and Iran defense ministers sign MoU in Tehran

Above: Iraqi Defense Minister Obeidi and Iranian Defense Minister Dehghan upon signing MoU

Iran’s Defense Minister Brigadier General Hossein Dehghan and his Iraqi counterpart Khaled al-Obeidi (an Iraqi Sunni) signed a Memorandum of Understanding in defense cooperation, in Tehran on 30DEC14.

According to Al Arabiya News, dated 01JAN15:
Iran is to help Iraq rebuild its army under an agreement that could formalize Tehran's military support for its neighbor, which remains under assault by the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) group.
No details of the pact were released but state television said the two sides had "agreed to continue cooperation in the defense arena with the creation of a national army to protect the territorial integrity and security of Iraq."
The memorandum of understanding was signed late Tuesday in Tehran where Iraqi Defense Minister Khaled al-Obaidi is holding talks with his Iranian counterpart Hossein Dahqan.
During the same visit, Iraqi Defense Minister and his military delegation also met with IRIN Rear Admiral Ali Shamkhani, current secretary of the Supreme National Security Council of Iran.

Perhaps, on a related note:
Above video still of an Iranian HM-20 MLRS in Iraqi service against ISIL. [Full video HERE]

The significance of this video is that it's posted 30DEC14 by the Iraqi Ministry of Defense, with the HM-20 said to be in service with Iraqi Army 5th Division at Saladin Governorate.

Also, images have recently emerged on social media claiming to depict results of last December's IRIAF F-4E fighter-bomber strikes against ISIL targets, during the Battle of Saadiya. [Click photos to enlarge]

Destruction of ISIL-captured HMMWVs is evident at what appears to be a recaptured ISF depot.

Above images and further evidence of Iranian weapons supplied to Shia fighting forces in Iraq can be found HERE.

Photos: Islamic Republic News Agency

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

This is logical strategic move by Iran to secure Iraq and also secure Iranian interests. Iran has a large battle tested military that is capable of securing this troubled region and defeating Wahabbi terror. The world should be grateful for Iranian sacrifices in the war against terror, thanks to the ill-advised US invasion and subsequent destabilization of Iraq.

Anonymous said...

Amin

Anonymous said...

the world is far from grateful for Iran's military

Anonymous said...

The rampant terrorism in Middle East well predates operation Iraqi Freedom ( some may call it invasion of Iraq by coalition forces ) Liberating the Iraqi people from Saddam's tyranny in 2003 could have served as a stepping stone towards a more comprehensive war against terror in that region .

Anonymous said...

The convoluted logic that if my aunt had a mustache he would by uncle does not apply to the US invasion of Iraq on false WMD premise that has destroyed the country and now set off destructive sectarianism that will engulf the whole region. Iran is playing the only stabilizing role in a growing unstable region. Historically the roots of terror go back to 1948 and the creation of a religion based Apartheid entity in Palestine.

Anonymous said...

Since the war finished with Saddam Hussein the US and some other countries have been helping Iraq to rebuild the Iraqi army so that their army can protect the territorial integrity and security of Iraq. After they had completed doing that they went back to their own countries, and ISIL seeing them all gone then invaded.

When ISIL invaded and Iraq saw that many Sunnis in their army had joined ISIL and/or just left the Iraqi army to become civilians, and that so much of Iraq was in ISILs possession Iraq became very concerned, so then the Iraq Government officially asked other countries for help.

As to the person who mentioned the US destabilization of Iraq, yes they certainly did do that but they stayed till Iraq was secure again. If the Shia majority Iraq Government had not persecuted the Sunni in the army and civilians then the Sunnis in the Iraqi Army would not have left but would have fought ISIL, instead they joined ISIL so that they could get a better life under ISIL and could get vengeance on Iraq for persecuting them. If you want to blame something then blame the previous Governments since Saddam and the same old religious hatred between Shia and Sunni which for centuries has caused so many conflicts. I'm not for the US and just like to state what happened and Iraq was left secure.

Now back to my post.
Iran and Hezbollah were the first to arrive and they took direct action on the ground supported by fighters and drones.
As the Iraqi army had been reduced badly and so quickly Iraqi desperately needed more soldiers, many Iraqi civilians volunteered but they needed training to be soldiers in the army. As the US and other countries had helped Iraq before to train Iraqi soldiers they then were officially asked could they again provide that type of help, some more countries were also asked.

Next to arrive in Iraq was the US arrived and in August started fighting by bombing ISIL from the air, this as Iraq wanted the US to do that. The US did NOT do any ground fighting with their soldiers in Iraq as Iraq did NOT officially request them for that type of help, and as Iraq did desperately needed more soldiers Iraq did ask for "training and advising" so Iraq could have more soldiers so that is what the US ground soldiers did in Iraq.

Next to arrive in Iraq and at different times were the other countries soldiers, this as they also were asked to help in providing "training and advising" so Iraq could have yet more trained Iraqi soldiers, and that was months ago and they are still there today.

Now from the news article above it appears that Iran will soon also be in Iraq to do "training and advising" of Iraqi soldiers.

Training and advising can involve training in many different types of soldiering, and from basic new recruit training and up to the highest levels of special forces training. That I think is being worked out right now as Iraq would need to give a list to Iran so that Iran knows what type of soldiers and how many to send to Iraq, and that I think is part of the "details of the pact" in the support that Iraq needs, plus other things that go along with that including political and legal things.

Brig. Gen. Basrawi (IQAF.ret) said...

for Anon 3:57 PM

Well there was no Al-Qaeda in Iraq prior to 2003. And i'm sure that you are well aware of the fact that if there was any terror activity going on in Iraq before 2003, it was backed by the Iranian regime, same Shia militias we see now.

Anonymous said...

Who could imagine this picture even 10 years ago???
Maybe hillary kissing rohani in a few years...hahahaha
for all iranians who hate the regime in iran. Just to inform you!!! Better we will be friends with our neighbours instate of being a puppet from somebody in overseas

Anonymous said...

A divided Iraq serves Iran well. So keep it divided and occupied. With regard to ISIL that may not be a bad thing either. It keeps Iraqi and Arabs busy and by now the idea of a Kurdistan as a nation has gone out of the Window. So overall, it serves Iran to meddle in Iraq. After all it is not doing worse than what Russia is doing in Ukraine.

Brig. Gen. Basrawi (IQAF.ret) said...

Thank you. I'm glad that you reveal the Ayatollah way of reasoning. So if we break it all down, it becomes all the more obvious why a country such as Iraq need a person such as Saddam Hussein to keep its ethnic Arab population united and its society safe from outside influence as well as arrest any foreign-fueled development from taking place within the nation's borders, that is, preventing terrorist groups (with allegiance to foreign actors) from threatening the Iraqi nation. The US did to Iraq in just 3 weeks what Iran could not do in 6 years of war, with full knowledge of what would ensue in the power vacuum. They removed the secular Arab socialist government (who put Iraqi/Arab interests at the top and who fought Sunni and Shia extremism) and thus fragmented the country, leaving it open for Iran and surrounding countries. Then sectarianism started. So long story short; first and foremost it was the Americans fault. Secondly the Arabs (especially Shiites) themselves can heavily be blamed for what has happened to Iraq. Thirdly the Iranians are messing around pretty badly.

Anonymous said...

Yes you are absolutely correct that Saddam is history and I don't have to agree with you as in a free forum one has a choice. I am an Iranian first and foremost nothing to do with Khomeini or Shah for that matter. I am sorry we gave away Bahrain and I am sure by now you have made your own conclusion about my attitude towards Arabs be it Shia or Sunni. Unlike many I feel that Iran has far more in common with Israel than Arabs. So really my opinion is not influenced by the regime in Iran or anything else for that matter.

I think our strategy with regard to Iraq is sound. Divide and conquer. Make sure that they are divided and there will never a be a situation where an idiot like Saddam has a chance to surface.

Anonymous said...

AnonymousJanuary 3, 2015 at 4:00 PM
"Iran has far more in common with Israel"
How on earth did you come to that conclusion?