Iran Deploys Tanks To Border With Iraqi Kurdistan

Days before last week"s Kurdistan referendum, Iran took steps to isolate and punish the Iraqi Kurdistan region and the government in Erbil (KRG). This included closing Iranian airspace to northern Iraq"s two international airports and sending Iran"s elite Revolutionary Guard forces to conduct drills along the northwest border with Kurdistan, but in the early hours of Monday Iran dramatically escalated its military build-up along the border by deploying dozens of tanks supported by artillery - this according to a Kurdish government official and Iranian state television.

The Kurdish official confirmed the tank build-up, saying "The tanks can be seen from the Kurdish side.” And Iranian state TV on Saturday indicated that Iran and Iraq would cooperate in joint drills and the establishment of heightened border security, to the point that Iran would "receive Iraqi forces that are to be stationed at border posts”.

#Iran|ian military drill on Kurdistan Region border (Haji Omaran Crossing Border) despite business being conducted as usual.#TwitterKurds pic.twitter.com/UCrL1HPXvl

— Kurdistan 24 English (@K24English) October 2, 2017

Iranian government officials had warned just prior to last week"s referendum that, “The republic of Iran has opened its legitimate border gates on the premise of the consent of the federal government of the Iraqi state. If such an event [referendum] happens, these border gates from the perspective of the Islamic Republic of Iran would lose its legitimacy." It appears Iran is now making good on its threats as it worries that an independent Kurdistan at its border would be a destabilizing force concerning Iran"s own sizable Kurdish minority.

Last week multiple videos and images surfaced in Iranian social media purporting to show Iranian state police and security forces deploying to the Kurdish towns in Iran"s north. Multiple reports indicate pro-Kurdistan demonstrations took place in various Kurdish Iranian towns in response to the Erbil government"s referendum, something strictly banned and thus a rarity in the Islamic Republic. Iran"s Kurdish population numbers over 6 million out of a total population of about 80 million people - most of which are concentrated in a northwest strip of land which runs along the border with Iraqi Kurdistan as well as in a small northeast pocket.

#Kurdistan:1000s of Iranian police forces have arrived in the city of #Mahabad after Kurds in the region celebrated the #KurdistanReferendum pic.twitter.com/GoH17RTWso

— Thomas van Linge (@ThomasVLinge) September 27, 2017

Kurds in the #Iran-ian Kurdish city of Baneh (Bana) celebrate in support of the #KurdistanReferendum on independence.#TwitterKurds pic.twitter.com/mMQiGuFW3i

— Kurdistan 24 English (@K24English) September 25, 2017

According to Iraqi Kurdish network Rudaw English, Iran launched a major crackdown with dozens of arrests reported in Iran"s northwest region in the days following the referendum:

Two Iranian Kurdish political parties and a human rights watchdog all reported “scores” of arrests after thousands took to the streets in Kurdish cities of Iran chanting Biji Kurdistan, long live Kurdistan, and waving Kurdistan flags to celebrate the success of the independence referendum next door. Flying the Kurdistan flag and singing the national anthem are forbidden in Iran. 

Iranian intelligence and security forces have set up a joint command center “for the purpose of identifying and arresting the organizers of the demonstrations,” the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan (PDKI) stated. They are reportedly analyzing video footage of the gatherings. 

Furthermore it appears that Iranian TV sent a message to its broader Kurdish population indicating that all activities were being monitored by authorities:

The Kurdistan Human Rights Network (KHRN) reported that Iranian police were closely monitoring the demonstrations that attracted rare attention in the country. “Iranian state television on Tuesday acknowledged the rallies, a rarity in the Islamic Republic broadcast,” the group stated. 

As we previously explained, the Kurdish referendum pushed Iraq into the arms of Iran when the relationship between the Iraqi Prime Minister Haidar Abadi and Iranian officials was at its lowest level. But after the KRG"s insistence on pushing forward with moves toward independence, Abadi sees in Iran the only sincere partner to count on, and can rely on the Iranian Army and Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) in the case of any military escalation against Kurdistan, particularly in the disputed Iraqi cities, with Kirkuk at the top of the list.

Map source: Iran Times

Baghdad is confident that Iraqi Kurdistan President Masoud Barzani didn’t take this step without a blessing from the Americans, despite official US opposition to the referendum. It seems Washington decided to swap its relationship with Baghdad with that of Erbil because it won’t be able to support both at the same time.

Supporting Erbil is more attractive to the US and its regional allies (particularly Saudi Arabia), in the hope that the Kurdish Iraqi move would trigger the appetite of the Kurdish Iranians (and the Syrian Kurds who are already on this same path). If this happens and we observe an uprising in Iran, which the Saudis would certainly support, the Iranian economy and that of the government of Baghdad will both be under severe pressure.

Iran supported Barzani in 2014 and provided him with weapons (at a time when the US was denying any support to Iraq, during the 6 months after the fall of Mosul in 2014), but it is today in an undeclared war against Erbil, fully behind Baghdad’s measures and supporting future escalation and punitive steps.

Why Despite Threats, Turkey Won't Impose Sanctions On Kurdistan After The Referendum

Submitted by Elijah Magnier, Middle East based chief international war correspondent for Al Rai Media

High-ranking sources in Kurdistan (Erbil) said that the Kurdish leader Masoud Barzani “expected the sanctions already announced by Baghdad and expects many more sanctions to come in the future”. Nevertheless, “the referendum was an essential step to undertake,” otherwise Barzani would no longer be considered the Kurdish leader.

“We are not afraid of Turkish sanctions because Ankara would lose more than it will gain if the common borders are closed. The Turkish representative promised us (months before the referendum) that harsh political measures will be adopted against Kurdistan but that no economic sanctions would be seriously considered. After all it is up to Turkey to stop sending its oil tankers to recover our oil production at a cheap price if Erdogan considers it a practical move within his own economy,” said the source.

Good morning! We see no disruptions in KRG crude oil exports out of the Turkish port of Ceyhan as today there are two tankers loading. #OOTT pic.twitter.com/BzTj1eGf0W

— TankerTrackers.com???? (@TankerTrackers) September 29, 2017

In past 5 days. 553K barrels of KRG oil departed daily from the Turkish port of Ceyhan for Croatia, Italy & Israel. Normal activity. #OOTT pic.twitter.com/lidVIK6DSg

— TankerTrackers.com???? (@TankerTrackers) September 29, 2017

The Erbil leadership knows that the Kurds lived through hunger and genocide throughout the years, sometimes living in the mountains for decades. Therefore, although any threat to their existence won’t be taken lightly, it cannot affect the process of independence that has been put on their desired track. The Kurdish leaders will agree to allow Baghdad to control airports (Erbil and Suleymaniyeh) as requested by Prime Minister Haidar Abadi, and would like to reestablish good neighbor relationships with all surrounding countries, particularly since the declaration of independence may require two or three years to put into concrete effect.

The 1800 km long borders between Kurdistan and the rest of Iraq will force Erbil to send more Peshmerga troops to reinforce its security all along its borders and especially in disputed areas. However, for many countries the referendum has created embarrassment and reshuffled many of the alliances in the Middle East: the implications of this have yet to be considered. It is Turkey that will be holding the key to the success or failure of a new “state” in the Middle East: Iraqi Kurdistan.

A pipeline network connects Iraq’s northern oil fields to the Turkish port of Ceyhan. Image source: Anadolu News Agency.

Turkey, a summary of its role in the recent history of Syria and Iraq:

• Turkey supported the uprising of Sunni tribes in 2014 when these metamorphosed into the “Islamic State” (ISIS) terror group. Ankara didn’t ask its consulate diplomat to abandon the diplomatic mission, and so the diplomatic staff became prisoners in ISIS’ hands, to be later exchanged with hundreds of mujahideen and their families held by Turkey.


• Ankara allowed the Iraqi Peshmerga to cross its territory into Syria to help the YPG (the Syrian branch of Turkey’s most sworn enemy: the PKK) and recover Ain al-Arab (Kobane) from ISIS in the north of Syria.


• Turkey opened its borders to Jihadists from al-Qaeda and ISIS under the excuse of “bringing down the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad”.


• Turkey brought down a Russian jet while bombing jihadists along the Syrian borders, pushing Moscow to heavily engage in the Syrian war and give the upper hand to Assad.


• Turkey allowed al-Qaeda and the foreign fighters of the Turkistani group to occupy the bordering city of Kessab. The city was later recovered but Ankara created another military balance by expulsing from its territory of thousands of members of al-Qaeda who then occupied the city of Idlib, today the center of al-Qaeda in Syria (also known as Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham).


• Turkey asked its Syrian proxy to pull out of the city of Aleppo, rendering its liberation easier and less costly for the Syrian Army and its allies, which marked a real turning point in the war in Syria.


• Turkey joined the de-confliction negotiation in Astana (Kazakhstan) after reconciliation with Moscow and the return to normal relations between both countries.


• Turkey moved its forces into Syria to stop the creation of a Kurdish “state” known as “Rojava” (from al-Hasaka to Efrin) and disrupted a Kurdish Syrian access to the Mediterranean that could have been also used in the future for the Iraqi Kurds in case of sanctions against Iraqi Kurdistan.


• Turkey considered Iran a “terrorist state sponsor” but kept its diplomatic relationship with Tehran. It increased economic exchanges and fully collaborated with Iran in Astana as partners and guarantors in Syria.


• Ankara did not hesitate to support the Iraqi Kurds in order to enjoy economic advantages, and to keep its forces in the north of Iraq. Despite many attempts by Baghdad to remove the Turkish troops, Ankara rejected all demands and hid behind “the Kurdistan request” so as to maintain several hundreds of officers and soldiers in Iraq.


• Turkey is not expected to implement any economic sanctions against Erbil despite Erdogan screaming, “the Kurds will go hungry”. There is no doubt, however, that Turkish officials will continue launching verbal attacks against Barzani but doubt remains about economic sanctions and the cessation of oil purchases.

To sum it up: President Erdogan declared war on the Syrian Kurds but prevented them from losing Kobane; declared war on Assad but supported him to recover Aleppo; declared war on terrorism but allowed ISIS and al-Qaeda to enjoy all support from Turkey and bought oil from ISIS; threatened the Iraqi Kurds but still bought their oil while keeping its hundreds of trucks queuing up on their borders; promised to keep al-Qaeda under control in Idlib during the last Astana meeting, but allowed it to launch military offensives afterwards.

It is obvious that the Iraqi Kurds are aware of Ankara’s unstable and continuously changing of policy, very confident that any other measures by surrounding countries (Iraq and Iran) can be easily overcome in the future, as long as Erdogan is offering alternatives. The cost is that the Iraqi Kurds fall into Ankara’s hands and control, but it looks like Barzani is happy with this outcome: as long as he has his new state, pushing its place onto the Middle East map, right in the middle.

Iran and Iraq

The Kurdish referendum pushed Iraq into the arms of Iran when the relationship between Iraqi Prime Minister Haidar Abadi and Iranian officials was at its lowest level. Today Abadi (and most Iraqis) sees in Iran the only sincere partner to count on, and can rely on the Iranian Army and Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) in the case of any military escalation against Kurdistan, particularly in the disputed Iraqi cities, with Kirkuk at the top of the list.

Baghdad is confident that Barzani didn’t take this step without a blessing from the Americans, which is expected to become more visible in the coming months, according to Iraqi officials in Baghdad. It seems Washington decided to swap its relationship with Baghdad with that of Erbil because, apparently, it won’t be able to support both at the same time.

Supporting Erbil is more attractive to the US and its regional allies (particularly Saudi Arabia), in the hope that the Kurdish Iraqi move would trigger the appetite of the Kurdish Iranians (and the Syrian Kurds who are already on this same path). If this happens and we observe an uprising in Iran (the Saudis already promised to support any unrest in Iran), the Iranian economy and that of the government of Baghdad will be both under severe pressure.

Iran supported Barzani in 2014 and provided him with weapons (at a time when the US was denying any support to Iraq, during the 6 months after the fall of Mosul in 2014), but it is today in an undeclared war against Erbil, fully behind Baghdad’s measures and supporting future escalation and punitive steps.

No one can wind back the clock to before the Kurdish referendum. However, it is still possible for Barzani to avoid contributing toward a further mess in this increasingly reshuffled Middle East. He could indeed consider all these issues as an unnecessary concern, similar to a "storm in a tea cup". Unfortunately, it seems the Kurdish leader is determined to continue his path, denying any immediate intent for concrete realization of independence, yet without excluding it.

Iran Says It Confronted, Turned Away U.S. Vessel In Persian Gulf; U.S. NAVCENT Denies

An Iranian warship confronted an American warship in the Gulf and warned it to stay away from a damaged Iranian fishing boat, Iran"s Tasnim news agency reported on Sunday, but the U.S. Navy denied any direct contact with Iranian forces. The incident took place when Iranian fishing boat Shams suffered an engine malfunction 72km off the coast of the Iranian port town of Jask, near the Strait of Hormuz, Iran news agencies reported on Sunday.

The vessel was requesting the navy’s help, and Iranian missile-launching warship Falakhan was sent on a rescue mission.

Shortly after the distress signal, a US warship “with the body number 02” approached the boat, but “it was shooed away after receiving a warning” from the Iranian missile-launching warship, Falakhan, according to Fars.  As Reuters adds, "the American vessel turned away after the warning from the Iranian ship, which belonged to the naval branch of the Iranian army. The Iranian military vessel then towed the fishing boat, which had sent out a distress signal after taking on water, back to shore."

Iranian media did not specify when the incident, close to the strategic Strait of Hormuz, took place.

Later on Sunday, the US Naval Forces Central Command (NAVCENT) denied any direct contact with Iranian forces, Reuters reported. According to the US Navy, the USS Tempest, the second Cyclone-class patrol ship, which was operating in the Gulf of Oman September 6, received a distress call from an unidentified vessel. The boat was 75 nautical miles (138km) from the US vessel.

Coastal patrol craft USS Tempest (PC-2)

At the same time the motor vessel Nordic Voyager, much closer to the boat in distress, offered help and had made visual contact with it. The Nordic Voyager, a crude oil tanker, is currently sailing under the flag of the Cayman Islands, according to vesselfinder.com.

The Tempest offered to support the Nordic Voyager which declined the offer, NAVCENT said. Following the radio traffic from a distance, USS Tempest heard the Nordic Voyager coordinate additional Iranian Navy help for the vessel in distress to tow it back to Iran.

“At no time was there any direct contact between the US and Iranian maritime forces,” NAVCENT spokesman Chloe Morgan said, as cited by Reuters.

* * *

In recent months, tensions have been on the rise between the Iranian and U.S. military in the Gulf.

In August, an unarmed Iranian drone came within 100 feet (31 meters) of a U.S. Navy warplane as it prepared to land on an aircraft carrier in the Gulf, a U.S. official said at the time. In July, a U.S. Navy ship fired warning shots when an Iranian vessel in the Gulf came within 150 yards (137 meters) in the first such incident since President Donald Trump took office in January, U.S. officials said.

Also in July, the USS Thunderbolt fired several warning shots from a heavy machine gun in response to an Iranian vessel’s “provocative actions,” according to Pentagon officials.

In March, American officials claimed that US warships were “harassed” by Iranian forces in the Strait of Hormuz. Washington then said that the Iranians had their weapons uncovered, manned, and armed.

During the presidential campaign last September, Trump vowed that any Iranian vessels that harass the U.S. Navy in the Gulf would be “shot out of the water.”