Amid the recent upheavals in the Arab world, one country has largely escaped attention.
That country is Iraq. However, the absence of anything attributable to the Arab Spring within its borders should not lead to the conclusion that all is tranquil in the land of the two rivers.
As the United States prepares to withdraw, Iran and its regional allies and proxies are ramping up their campaign to impose the look of defeat on the pullout. This is part of a larger, ongoing effort by Iran to dominate the politics of Iraq in the post-US era. The Lebanese Hezbollah, as a client of Iran, is playing a central role in the developing Iranian strategy in Iraq.
That strategy resembles the one applied successfully in Lebanon. It involves the creative combination of political and military activity. The intention is the acquisition of power, in the largest Shi’ite-majority Arab state.
The remaining 47,000 US combat troops are set to leave Iraq on December
31, according to the existing State of Forces Agreement. However,
American officials are concerned about the Iraqi forces’ ability to
effectively ensure security. They are therefore currently attempting to
convince the Iraqi government to allow some troops to stay past the
This has become a political issue in Iraq, with patriotic credit going
to forces most vociferously opposing the extended stay of US forces.
In this context, recent months have seen a notable uptick in attacks on
US forces by Shi’ite paramilitary groups linked to Iran and Hezbollah.
Fourteen US soldiers died in enemy attacks in Iraq last month. For the
sake of perspective, in January and February, there were no US combat
deaths caused by Shi’ite organizations in Iraq. In March, there was one
such death, In April there were four.
The Iranian-backed Kta’eb Hezbollah (Hezbollah Brigades) claimed
responsibility for the attacks. The American authorities find this
credible because of the type of weaponry used. The bloodiest attacks in
June involved the use of improvised rocket-assisted mortar systems
(IRAMs) – a type of weaponry particularly associated with the Shi’ite
groups. These primitive but effective weapons consist of explosives
packed into canisters, propelled by Iranian-produced rocket systems.
The Hezbollah Brigades is the most active of the small, armed Shi’ite
groups Iran is utilizing as tools of policy in Iraq. The organization’s
founder, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis (Jamal al-Ibrahimi), is a former close
adviser to Iranian Quds Force commander Kassem Suleimani. Muhandis is
also a former member of the Shi’ite Islamist Dawa Party, and a veteran
of the Iran- Iraq War, in which he fought on the Iranian side.
An additional group worthy of mention is the Asaib al-Haq (League of Justice) organization.
This latter group is a result of a split-off from Muqtada al-Sadr’s
Mahdi Army. However, both the Hezbollah Brigades and the Asaib al-Haq
are today considered to be under the direct control of the Iranian
Revolutionary Guards and the Quds Force. Sadr himself is today also
openly aligned with Iran.
Through involvement with these groups, Iran thus maintains both a
terrorist and paramilitary capacity in Iraq, and a “legitimate” mass
political movement (which itself has an armed wing – the Mahdi Army).
Hezbollah has been intimately involved in the training of Shi’ite
paramilitaries on behalf of Iran, since the early days of the US
occupation of Iraq. As Arabic-speakers, the Lebanese have an obvious
advantage over Iranians in operating relatively inconspicuously in Arab
The US Justice Department is currently preparing to prosecute Ali Mussa
Daqduq, a senior Lebanese Hezbollah operative who masterminded the
group’s training of the Iraqi Shi’ite groups prior to his capture there
in mid-2007. Daqduq, a veteran operative, previously commanded Hezbollah
leader Hassan Nasrallah’s security detail, and ran a special operations
According to US Brig.-Gen. Kevin Bergner, Daqduq was tasked by Iran and
the Hezbollah leadership to organize Shi’ite terror groups in Iraq “in
ways that mirrored how Hezbollah was organized in Lebanon.”
Daqduq organized the training of recruits in Iran, where they were
instructed in the use of IEDs, mortars, rockets and small arms, and in
conducting intelligence and kidnapping operations.
In tandem with this clandestine activity, Iranian backing of the Sadr
movement has yielded political dividends. Sadr was able to decide who
could form a government in Iraq after the 2010 elections, because
neither of the two main blocs scored an absolute majority. Having chosen
to back Nouri al-Maliki, he remains able to block legislation.
Sadr has threatened to return to the path of violence if US troops do
not depart on December 31. His Mahdi Army, while currently not openly
active, retains its weapons. Sadr himself remains resident in Iran. In
the meantime “Sadrists” are taking up positions in ministries associated
with social services, health and transportation.
So Iran is pursuing a joint political and paramilitary strategy in Iraq.
This involves the establishment and/or sponsorship of militant groups,
based on the majority Shi’ite community. These groups commit themselves
to the Iranian style of government and engage in civilian political,
open military or clandestine terror activity according to the needs of
Does any of this sound familiar? It ought to, because it is the same way
Iran gained power in Lebanon, through the use of its proxy, Hezbollah.
The strategic stakes are far higher in Iraq than they ever were in
Lebanon, of course. Control of tiny Lebanon brought the Iranians to the
Mediterranean and gives them a front line against Israel. No small
things. But control of Iraq would mean control of the largest
Shi’ite-majority Arab state, a country replete with Shi’ite holy shrines
and with oil resources. It is also a country that borders Saudi Arabia,
Iran’s main regional rival.
Tehran is in no hurry. But its bid for power in Iraq has begun.