The Deeper Story Behind the Assassination of Mr. Soleimani by Federico Pieraccini!
(2020-01-08 at 15:20:25 )

The Deeper Story Behind the Assassination of Mr. Soleimani by Federico Pieraccini

Days after the assassination of General Qasem Soleimani, new and important information is coming to light from a speech given by the Iraqi prime minister.

The story behind Mr. Soleimanis assassination seems to go much deeper than what has thus far been reported, involving Saudi Arabia and China as well the United States dollars role as the global reserve currency.

The Iraqi prime minister, Adil Abdul-Mahdi, has revealed details of his interactions with Donald Trump in the weeks leading up to Mr. Soleimanis assassination in a speech to the Iraqi parliament.

He tried to explain several times on live television how Washington,D.C. had been browbeating him and other Iraqi members of parliament to toe the United States of American line, even threatening to engage in false-flag sniper shootings of both protesters and security personnel in order to inflame the situation, recalling similar modi operandi seen in Cairo in 2009, Libya in 2011, and Maidan in 2014. The purpose of such cynicism was to throw Iraq into chaos.

Here is the reconstruction of the story:

[Speaker of the Council of Representatives of Iraq] Halbousi attended the parliamentary session while almost none of the Sunni members did. This was because the United States of Americans had learned that Abdul-Mehdi was planning to reveal sensitive secrets in the session and sent Mr. Halbousi to prevent this. Mr. Halbousi cut Abdul-Mehdi off at the commencement of his speech and then asked for the live airing of the session to be stopped.

After this, Mr. Halbousi together with other members, sat next to Abdul-Mehdi, speaking openly with him but without it being recorded. This is what was discussed in that session that was not broadcast:

Mr. Abdul-Mehdi spoke angrily about how the United States of Americans had ruined the country and now refused to complete infrastructure and electricity grid projects unless they were promised 50% of oil revenues, which Abdul-Mehdi refused.

The complete (translated) words of Mr. Abdul-Mahdis speech to parliament:

This is why I visited China and signed an important agreement with them to undertake the construction instead. Upon my return, Donald Trump called me to ask me to reject this agreement. When I refused, he threatened to unleash huge demonstrations against me that would end my premiership.

Huge demonstrations against me duly materialized and Donald Trump called again to threaten that if I did not comply with his demands, then he would have Marine snipers on tall buildings target protesters and security personnel alike in order to pressure me.

I refused again and handed in my resignation. To this day the United States of Americans insist on us rescinding our deal with the Chinese.

After this, when our Minister of Defense publicly stated that a third party was targeting both protestors and security personnel alike (just as Donald Trump had threatened he would do), I received a new call from Donald Trump threatening to kill both me and the Minister of Defense if we kept on talking about this "third party".

Nobody imagined that the threat was to be applied to General Soleimani, but it was difficult for Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi to reveal the weekslong backstory behind the terrorist attack.

I was supposed to meet him [Mr. Soleimani] later in the morning when he was killed. He came to deliver a message from Iran in response to the message we had delivered to the Iranians from the Saudis.

We can surmise, judging by Saudi Arabias reaction, that some kind of negotiation was going on between Tehran and Riyadh:

The Kingdoms statement regarding the events in Iraq stresses the Kingdoms view of the importance of de-escalation to save the countries of the region and their people from the risks of any escalation.

Above all, the Saudi Royal family wanted to let people know immediately that they had not been informed of the United States operation:

The kingdom of Saudi Arabia was not consulted regarding the United States strike. In light of the rapid developments, the Kingdom stresses the importance of exercising restraint to guard against all acts that may lead to escalation, with severe consequences.

And to emphasize his reluctance for war, Mohammad bin Salman sent a delegation to the United States. Liz Sly, the Washington Post Beirut bureau chief, tweated:

Saudi Arabia is sending a delegation to Washington,D.C. to urge restraint with Iran on behalf of [Persian] Gulf states. The message will be: "Please spare us the pain of going through another war".

What clearly emerges is that the success of the operation against Mr. Soleimani had nothing to do with the intelligence gathering of the United States or Israel.

It was known to all and sundry that Mr. Soleimani was heading to Baghdad in a diplomatic capacity that acknowledged Iraqs efforts to mediate a solution to the regional crisis with Saudi Arabia.

It would seem that the Saudis, Iranians and Iraqis were well on the way towards averting a regional conflict involving Syria, Iraq and Yemen.

Riyadhs reaction to the United States of American strike evinced no public joy or celebration. Qatar, while not seeing eye to eye with Riyadh on many issues, also immediately expressed solidarity with Tehran, hosting a meeting at a senior government level with Mohammad Zarif Jarif, the Iranian foreign minister. Even Turkey and Egypt, when commenting on the asassination, employed moderating language.

This could reflect a fear of being on the receiving end of Irans retaliation. Qatar, the country from which the drone that killed Mr. Soleimani took off, is only a stones throw away from Iran, situated on the other side of the Strait of Hormuz. Riyadh and Tel Aviv, Tehrans regional enemies, both know that a military conflict with Iran would mean the end of the Saudi royal family.

When the words of the Iraqi prime minister are linked back to the geopolitical and energy agreements in the region, then the worrying picture starts to emerge of a desperate United States lashing out at a world turning its back on a unipolar world order in favor of the emerging multipolar about which I have long written.

The United States, now considering itself a net energy exporter as a result of the shale-oil revolution (on which the jury is still out), no longer needs to import oil from the Middle East. However, this does not mean that oil can now be traded in any other currency other than the United States dollar.

The petrodollar is what ensures that the United States dollar retains its status as the global reserve currency, granting the United States a monopolistic position from which it derives enormous benefits from playing the role of regional hegemon.

This privileged position of holding the global reserve currency also ensures that the United States can easily fund its war machine by virtue of the fact that much of the world is obliged to buy its treasury bonds that it is simply able to conjure out of thin air. To threaten this comfortable arrangement is to threaten Washington,D.C.s global power.

Even so, the geopolitical and economic trend is inexorably towards a multipolar world order, with China increasingly playing a leading role, especially in the Middle East and South America.

Venezuela, Russia, Iran, Iraq, Qatar and Saudi Arabia together make up the overwhelming majority of oil and gas reserves in the world.

The first three have an elevated relationship with Beijing and are very much in the multipolar camp, something that China and Russia are keen to further consolidate in order to ensure the future growth for the Eurasian supercontinent without war and conflict.

Saudi Arabia, on the other hand, is pro-United States but could gravitate towards the Sino-Russian camp both militarily and in terms of energy.

The same process is going on with Iraq and Qatar thanks to Washington,D.C.s numerous strategic errors in the region starting from Iraq in 2003, Libya in 2011 and Syria and Yemen in recent years.

The agreement between Iraq and China is a prime example of how Beijing intends to use the Iraq-Iran-Syria troika to revive the Middle East and and link it to the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative.

While Doha and Riyadh would be the first to suffer economically from such an agreement, Beijings economic power is such that, with its win-win approach, there is room for everyone.

Saudi Arabia provides China with most of its oil and Qatar, together with the Russian Federation, supply China with most of its LNG needs, which lines up with Mr. Xi Jinpings 2030 vision that aims to greatly reduce polluting emissions.

The United States is absent in this picture, with little ability to influence events or offer any appealing economic alternatives.

Washington,D.C. would like to prevent any Eurasian integration by unleashing chaos and destruction in the region, and killing Mr. Soleimani served this purpose.

The United States cannot contemplate the idea of the dollar losing its status as the global reserve currency.

Donald Trump is engaging in a desperate gamble that could have disastrous consequences.

The region, in a worst-case scenario, could be engulfed in a devastating war involving multiple countries.

Oil refineries could be destroyed all across the region, a quarter of the worlds oil transit could be blocked, oil prices would skyrocket ($200-$300 a barrel) and dozens of countries would be plunged into a global financial crisis.

The blame would be laid squarely at Donald Trumps feet, ending his chances for re-election.

To try and keep everyone in line, Washington,D.C. is left to resort to terrorism, lies and unspecified threats of visiting destruction on friends and enemies alike.

Donald Trump has evidently been convinced by someone that the United States can do without the Middle East, that it can do without allies in the region, and that nobody would ever dare to sell oil in any other currency than the United States dollar.

Mr. Soleimanis death is the result of a convergence of United States and Israeli interests.

With no other way of halting Eurasian integration, Washington,D.C can only throw the region into chaos by targeting countries like Iran, Iraq and Syria that are central to the Eurasian project.

While Israel has never had the ability or audacity to carry out such an assassination itself, the importance of the Israel Lobby to Donald Trumps electoral success would have influenced his decision, all the more so in an election year .

Donald Trump believed his drone attack could solve all his problems by frightening his opponents, winning the support of his voters (by equating Mr. Soleimanis assassination to Osama bin Ladens), and sending a warning to Arab countries of the dangers of deepening their ties with China.

The assassination of Mr. Soleimani is the United States lashing out at its steady loss of influence in the region.

The Iraqi attempt to mediate a lasting peace between Iran and Saudi Arabia has been scuppered by the United States and Israels determination to prevent peace in the region and instead increase chaos and instability.

Washington,D.C. has not achieved its hegemonic status through a preference for diplomacy and calm dialogue, and Donald Trump has no intention of departing from this approach.

Washington,D.C.s friends and enemies alike must acknowledge this reality and implement the countermeasures necessary to contain the madness.

Reprinted here from the "Strategic Culture Foundation" provides a platform for exclusive analysis, research and policy comment on Eurasian and global affairs. We are covering political, economic, social and security issues worldwide. Since 2005 our journal has published thousands of analytical briefs and commentaries with the unique perspective of independent contributors. SCF works to broaden and diversify expert discussion by focusing on hidden aspects of international politics and unconventional thinking. Benefiting from the expanding power of the Internet, we work to spread reliable information, critical thought and progressive ideas.