NIE Undermines Administration Claim That Iran Is ‘Igniting’ Violence In Iraq
NIE Undermines Administration Claim That Iran Is ‘Igniting’ Violence In Iraq
The Bush administration has repeatedly claimed that Iran is responsible for the surging violence in Iraq. But on multiple occasions, the Bush administration has “ordered a delay in publication of evidence” to support its claim. U.S. allies who have seen the evidence said that it “still falls short of an airtight case.”
In an inteview with CNN yesterday, Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns said that Iran is “stoking” and “igniting” sectarian violence in Iraq. But he was unable to actually offer any such evidence. Watch it:
Today’s new National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) explains why Iran is not a driving force behind Iraq’s violence:
Iraq’s neighbors influence, and are influenced by, events within Iraq, but the involvement of these outside actors is not likely to be a major driver of violence or the prospects for stability because of the self-sustaining character of Iraq’s internal sectarian dynamics. Nonetheless, Iranian lethal support for select groups of Iraqi Shia militants clearly intensifies the conflict in Iraq.
The NIE acknowledges that Iran is trying to cause trouble. But it also notes that sectarian violence — not Iranian support — is the most immediate threat. Moreover, as the New York Times wrote yesterday, “more threats and posturing are unlikely to get Iran to back down. If Mr. Bush isn’t careful, he could end up talking himself into another disastrous war, and if Congress is not clear in opposing him this time, he could drag the country along.”
Transcript:
WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: Joining us now, the undersecretary of state, Nicholas Burns.
Mr. Secretary, thanks very much for coming in.
UNDERSECRETARY OF STATE NICHOLAS BURNS: Thank you, Wolf.
BLITZER: What evidence do you have, for example, that the Iranians are involved in killing American troops in Iraq?
BURNS: Well, Wolf, I think there’s incontrovertible evidence that the Iranians have been giving very sophisticated explosive technology to Shia insurgent groups for the better part of the last year and half. Those groups have used that technology, some of which is armor-piercing — to attack American soldiers and British soldiers and to kill them. It’s a very, very serious development.
Now, we have warned the Iranian government in past about this. We had not received an adequate response from them. And you have seen now President Bush, over the several weeks, having decided that we will detain those military and intelligence officials in Iraq who are responsible for this.
Obviously, we wish Iran to cease and desist. Iran is not playing the type of role that most other countries are in Iraq.
Most countries like the United States want to see Iraq stayed together as unitary state. They want to see the problems between the Shia and the Sunni be resolved. But Iran seems to be stoking those problems, igniting them.
And so that’s the basic — that’s the basic allegation that we’re making against the Iranians. And we hope they’re going to have a change of mind.
BLITZER: And the State Department, I take it, is putting together a dossier, a full report that will be declassified and made public going through your arguments, your evidence? Is that right?
BURNS: Well, obviously, we have been making the case for the last several weeks and will continue to make the case to the American people and to the international public that this is a problem. There really is no doubt about it.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
58 Responses to “NIE Undermines Administration Claim That Iran Is ‘Igniting’ Violence In Iraq”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Not according to Tony Snowmeister.
February 2nd, 2007 at 12:39 pmOk. The question is:
How the occupational forces complain about another country meddling in the occupated country? Is it just me or this is beyond ridiculous?
February 2nd, 2007 at 12:40 pmIt doesn’t matter. Chimpy & Co. is interested in only one line:
That’s all they need to pursue their little Holy War against Iran. Coupled with an Iranian attack on American or Israeli interests, it’s a ’slam dunk’, as they say.
Watch for something big before the end of the month.
February 2nd, 2007 at 12:43 pmThe Decider likes to ignite his farts.
February 2nd, 2007 at 12:44 pmGreetings from the Federation of Oil Unions in Iraq to the esteemed delegates of the World Social Forum
To our esteemed brothers and sisters in War on Want
Please accept our sincere apologies for not being able to attend your conference. This is due to the difficult and dangerous times that are the reality of Iraq at present. This awful situation is directly the result of occupation and the terrorists who target the people of Iraq. We believe that America is complicit in all the acts of death and destruction that occur daily in our wounded Iraq. It is clear to us that the aim of American planning and invasion is to destroy the infrastructure of the country and to create civil strife and conflict between the components of Iraqi society. The sectarianism that is tearing Iraq apart was unknown before the occupation. Even the long war with Iran and the brutal sanctions regime did not fracture the unity of the Iraqi people.
The Iraqi people will remain united in the face of these crimes that are orchestrated by the occupying American forces. I implore the peace loving people of the west who believe in genuine democracy to stand with the Iraqi people in their hour of need. The Iraqi people will rise to expel the occupying forces and start the mammoth task of reconstruction with Iraqi hands, and help from the peace loving people of the world.
And I particularly say to America “hands off Iraqi oilâ€. This wealth belongs to the people of Iraq and the decent people of the world.
I wish you every success with your conference and please do not forget Iraq and its people. Your support of our civil institutions is much appreciated.
To our friends in “War on Wantâ€, thank you for your financial support. It was thanks to your gracious support that our second privatisation conference in Basra was a success.
Finally, I say to you that the Iraqi people believe in peace and genuine democracy and not Bush’s fake democracy built on death and destruction.
Hassan Juma’a Awad Al-Asadi.
February 2nd, 2007 at 12:45 pmHead of Federation of Iraqi Oil Unions
18/01/07
I would venture to say that Bush and his miserably failed policy of spreading democracy in the Middle East is igniting more violence in Iraq than any other, single cause. Get a grip, George: YOU’RE OVER and so is your legacy, for you or any other member of your corrupt, insane family.
February 2nd, 2007 at 12:46 pmBush administration seeks $245B for wars
http://news.yahoo.com/ s/ ap/ 20070202/ ap_on_go_pr_wh/ bush_war_funding;_ylt=AtwmMEnVorP4XwMDjPD6NfOyFz4D;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ–
February 2nd, 2007 at 12:47 pmDoes the NIE mention the effect of the parallel Saudi support to the Sunnis? Because if you criticize one actor, you have to criticize the other.
February 2nd, 2007 at 12:49 pmEven when asked, Mr. Burns didn’t provide any evidence at all! He just made the allegations once more.
Wolf, I mean, Neutered Puppy didn’t follow up. Since he had his manhood stripped from him by Vice President Grim Reaper, he just curls up in a little ball and sucks his thumb instead of challenging anyone.
February 2nd, 2007 at 12:51 pmAh, remember the good old days during the Clinton era when we didn’t even talk about Iran except to congratulate them on their democratic developments?
Remember when millions of Iranians stood in vigil and in solidarity with us immediately after 9/11?
If we are truly interested in destroying the forces of evil that are intent upon murder, mayhem, and oppression, then why don’t we bomb Texas to smithereens?
February 2nd, 2007 at 12:54 pmThe only consequence of this NIE can be:
Get out of Iraq and stay out of Iran!
IMHO the US troops should be brought back without delay. It is an illusion that they can make things better in Iraq or even slow down the deterioration of the situation. And nobody can tell me, that the destiny of the Iraqi civilians has to be considered, this hasn’t been in the equation at all since day one. Iraq will see months or even years of violence and destruction, with or without American troops. The cause for this is the well known fact, that this is an illegal war founded on nobody knows what, except Mr. Bush and his administration.
In an ideal world, there would be impeachment and a new president, who would find a way to make peace in the region and mend the terrible wounds that have been inflicted. In this world the Iraqi people will have to die and suffer until some balance of power is found within the region and not necessarily for the better. This is what this war has done.
With luck Mr Bush will be tried in The Hague
February 2nd, 2007 at 12:56 pmYou can’t criticize the president how else are we going to seize the oil, I mean bring democracy to the middle east?
February 2nd, 2007 at 12:56 pmIt doesn’t matter if Iran is not causing the violence in Iraq (duh!) They just happen to be the unlucky bastards that are next in line on the PNAC’s map for mideast empire.
February 2nd, 2007 at 12:57 pmBush’s Trash Talk About Iran
The Bush administration’s charges against Iran are, for the most part, scare talk and nothing more. Iran has virtually nothing to do with the Iraqi resistance movement, which is commanded and staffed by Sunni Arab military officers and Baathists. They consider Iran to be a deadly foe and call Iraq’s Shiite leaders “Persians.†The vast majority of U.S. casualties in Iraq are victims of this well-organized, mass-based insurgency – but it is certain that none of their weapons, IEDs or training comes from Iran. Similarly, there is so far not a shred of credible intelligence to show that the Karbala raid was organized by Iran, and there is no record of Iranian involvement in any attacks on U.S. forces since the March, 2003 invasion.
February 2nd, 2007 at 12:58 pmThese allegations against Iran defy logic! Could someone please explain to me why Iran would risk war with the U.S. by killing a few soldiers in Iraq?
What could Iran possibly hope to gain by war with the U.S.?
February 2nd, 2007 at 12:58 pmWar with Iran is inevitable under Bush. It is already starting. The engagement will be significant by the time the public gets the full story a month from now.
February 2nd, 2007 at 12:59 pmre#2 JuanC
It is not beyond reason for HYPOCRITES to make such an argument, because HYPOCRISY makes anything reasonable!
February 2nd, 2007 at 1:00 pmJust another case of Monkey Boy twisting the facts to suit him. I swear, we need to get that last 30% to wake up and see just what he is doing to this country.
February 2nd, 2007 at 1:01 pmPeterW- but, but, but, I thought the Saudi’s were our friends. 9/11 hijackers, support for sunni insurgency, dining at the white house, summoning our VP, financing terrorism, owning a chunk of our economy, what could possibly be the problem.
February 2nd, 2007 at 1:01 pmBush wants to blame the Iranians for his Iraq failure………. FULL STOP
February 2nd, 2007 at 1:03 pmU.S. loses fourth copter in Iraq in two weeks
February 2nd, 2007 at 1:06 pmBush administration seeks $245B for wars
AP - 30 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - The Bush administration will ask for another $100 billion for military and diplomatic operations in Iraq and Afghanistan this year and seek $145 billion for 2008, a senior administration official said Friday.
February 2nd, 2007 at 1:08 pmBREACH OF NATIONAL SECURITY
February 2nd, 2007 at 1:08 pmWAR CRIMES
CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY
These are three good reasons to look to yourself, Bush, and try to decipher what next to do. I don’t think continuing this war in Iraq or starting another one is Iran is the answer we are looking for, at this point. Really… I don’t.
What Burns doesn’t mention that others, such as Juan Cole, have is the support Sunnis receive from Saudi “operatives.” And Sunnis have without a doubt been attacking US forces, while Shiite attacks have been sporadic. The lawlessness, the gang mentality of some of the factions, the shifting alliegences cloud the situation and make the situation ripe for misinformation and obfuscation. Very dangerous situation. This powerkeg could be set off by one mistake, accidental or no.
February 2nd, 2007 at 1:10 pm#22 Any supplemental funding bill should have to come with a tax rider to pay for it.
Excess profits tax on war profiteer and oil companies, for example.
February 2nd, 2007 at 1:12 pmis there a word for ‘losing credibility even when you’re already at zero credibility’?
February 2nd, 2007 at 1:15 pmHas everyone forgotten that Blackwater has a sizeable mercenary army at their and our Vice Presidents disposal? These guys are retired military that have spent their entire careers as Special Forces, Rangers, Seale and other coverts. This is disturbing in itself, and after every thing that happened, I wouldn’t be surprised if they were used to keep the war and the profiteering rolling.
February 2nd, 2007 at 1:18 pm“See the line that runs down the middle of that picture?”
unless they ‘doctored’ the NIE, you’re point is irrelevant.
February 2nd, 2007 at 1:19 pm“So to say that “The Bush administration has repeatedly claimed that Iran is responsible for the surging violence in Iraq.†attempts to make it sound as if the Bush Administration is gunning for any little excuse to go to war with Iran.”
Comment by wormburner — February 2, 2007 @ 1:11 pm
Haven’t been following the news lately eh?
February 2nd, 2007 at 1:26 pmBush the DECIDER has decided to attack Iran, so he has given the middle finger to the Congress, so it is up to them to impeach Bush and Cheney!
February 2nd, 2007 at 1:26 pm#27 I’m the Decider (c) ™
February 2nd, 2007 at 1:28 pmThe Democrats need to keep this pressure on the Bush administration.
The administration was supposed to be reporting to Congress on the progress of the war. Needless to say, the previous Republican Congress didn’t require these reports. I wonder why?
The more that the Democrats can use these types of things against the administration, the stronger their position will be.
February 2nd, 2007 at 1:33 pmJuan C,
No no no - you’ve got it all wrong! We’re not the occupiers, we’re the liberators!
sarcasm off/
February 2nd, 2007 at 1:34 pmwormburner: “The administration doesn`t want to go to war with Iran at all unless they keep the centrifuges working ovetime like days of old.”
The cult member will always tend to disregard information which shows his cultleader in a negative light. This particular cult member has evidently not been reading the newspapers.
February 2nd, 2007 at 1:39 pmHere’s the question that NO ONE, not my senators, representative, or even (oddly) any one here has answered:
What if the AUMF was reversed or rescinded by congress?
Would Bush then even have the authority to order a strike on Iran?
Someone smarter than me please answer this question. Please.
February 2nd, 2007 at 1:41 pmfilmlabs,
what picture are you talking about?
February 2nd, 2007 at 1:42 pmWhat I’d like to know is, why are all of the major news outlets, even NPR, all following the script so well for them? All we’ve been hearing lately is Iran, Iran, Iran! And most people seem to be falling for it!
I mean, most of them SEEM intelligent enough. But they all seem to be allowing themselves to be manipulated!
February 2nd, 2007 at 1:44 pmTuber,
To the best of my knowledge, the President has the authority to use the military as he sees fit, for a set period, either 90 days, or 120 days, don’t recall which. After that the president is required by law to ask congress for additional time, and money. So yes he could attack Iran.
February 2nd, 2007 at 1:45 pmTuber, I heard Bernie Sanders saying he was not sure congress had the authority to reverse the authorization. If Sanders feels that way, you can understand how ambivalent more moderate members of congress are.
February 2nd, 2007 at 1:45 pmwormburner sez:
Just curious, wormburner…do you know how many centrifuges you’re talking about here, and how long they would take to produce enough high-grade fissile material for one bomb?
February 2nd, 2007 at 1:48 pmTuber sez:
No, he wouldn’t. Virtually all the ‘war-time president’ authority that Chimpy wields comes from the understanding (or misunderstanding) of that vague authorization…the ‘blank check’ that Congress stupidly gave their blessing to in the days of unbridled panic and blind patriotism immediately following 9/11.
Rescind that, and we’re back to the ‘pre-9/11′ mindset, where Congress declares war.
February 2nd, 2007 at 1:56 pmTripmaster: “do you know how many centrifuges you’re talking about here, and how long they would take to produce enough high-grade fissile material for one bomb?”
Don’t expect a Bush cultist to answer that question for you. As you probably already know, the CIA estimates at least 10 years before they would be ready to even begin making bombs if they went all out and started working on it now. That leaves us lots of time for diplomacy, something this administration knows nothing about.
February 2nd, 2007 at 2:09 pm#40 Kranzy,
I understand what you are saying but your “use the military as he sees fit” is factually incorrect. I know that the CinC’s powers allow for actions required for immediate defense or special operations (althogh even special ops require congressional approval), but not the type of powers necessary for an invasion such as Iraq, which is why congress had to authorize such.
However, since Bush is trying to use that same authorization to invade Iran, what would happen if that very authorization was revoked?
February 2nd, 2007 at 2:15 pmAccording to Chuck Hagel, they wanted the authorization to apply to anywhere in the middle east. Hagel and all the Democrats in the Senate wouldn’t accept this and the y had to specifically say Iraq.
February 2nd, 2007 at 2:19 pmI did not realize that Tuber, it has been some time since Civics. I was under the impression the President could authorize the military as he sees fit for almost anything. I can understand your point though. Once say an invasion has started, then it is difficult to stop.
February 2nd, 2007 at 2:24 pmIt seems that Bush constantly confuses events in Iraq and Iran. For instance, Bush said that Iraq wouldn’t let the Un Inspectors in when, in fact, he kicked the UN Inspectors out of Iraq. Now, Iran is a whole different story, they won’t let the UN Inspectors in. Did somebody not only take the “W” keys off Whitehouse keyboards but also flip-flop the “Q” and “N” keys? Why else would Bush be confusing Iraq for Iran so often?
On the Libby trial, the WP has a good article. Enjoy.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/comments/display
February 2nd, 2007 at 2:24 pmthe CIA estimates at least 10 years before they would be ready to even begin making bombs if they went all out and started working on it now
Comment by Bluedog49
I agree but have you answered Wormfodders point on them working overtime? ;)
The administration doesn`t want to go to war with Iran at all unless they keep the centrifuges working ovetime like days of old.
February 2nd, 2007 at 2:37 pmComment by wormburner
It was very interesting to watch a panel discussion on Lou Dobbs Tonight with Retired General David Grange, and two experts on the Middle East.
Each time Gen. Grange tried to implicate Iran, they pointed out that 99% of U.S. Troops killed meet their deaths at the hands of Sunni insurgents. They said it would be ludicrous and impossible to think that Shiite Iran could be giving weapons to and encouraging the Sunni’s who then would use the weapons kill Shiite Iraqis. The panelist said, “it would be like thinking that the U.S. government was behind 9/11 - it is an impossible formulation to believe that Iran would help Sunnis.”
General Grange protested and said, well Iran does make most of the IED’s that kill our troops. They again corrected him and said they would need to see solid proof of that. General Grange had been thoroughly discredited.
He left with the point that Iran’s nuclear threat means that a war with Iran was inevitable anyway.
It would be nice to hear some honest assessments from the military, not just what will further Bush’s Neocon and Exxon\Mobil agenda.
February 2nd, 2007 at 4:01 pmThe reason there is a delay in the release of information about Iran’s involvement in Iraq is there is too many holes in the information. IED’s could be coming from any ‘arms’ dealers in the area, criminal and otherwise. Also, the American people are at present, not so easily fooled by the Administrations ‘claims’ about Iran. We’ve seen Bush/Cheney spin information to fit their private agenda’s before and we know why he’s ordered more carriers into the Persian Gulf. We know he is looking for any reason to attack Iran and that the congress and public out cry from American citizens are still standing in his way. We are not without the courage to remove him and Cheney from office before we impeach if National Security warrants. It is not called Mutiny but relieving him of command for treason, which includes lying and trying to form his own government against the nation that elected him.
February 2nd, 2007 at 5:03 pmPutting multiple carrier groups in the gulf is an obvious attempt to stage a “Gulf of Tonkin” type scam and blame Iran for bombing them. The only thing that may stop this could be happening behind the scenes. If I were a member of the corporporate oligarchy, I would understand that a war on Iran could possible mean no Repub president and no Repub majorities in Congress for decades, just like after the great depression. Democratic policies, even as they exist in the DLC, are not as conducive to excess corporate profits as repub policies. Cheney and Bush may be taking angry calls from their bosses. I sure hope so.
February 2nd, 2007 at 5:07 pmAnd, let’s not forget that there are Saudi, Lebonese, Syrian, Egyptian and UAE men fighting with Iraqi insurgents. Haven’t heard any complaints about them.
February 2nd, 2007 at 5:09 pmCan we dispense with the ” spreading democracy ” propaganda, it’s all LIE . Gawd all mighty, read Chalmers Johnson, read Smedley Butler and read Greg Palast , then you’ll get a clear picture ,that it’s all about neocon Imperialsim.
February 2nd, 2007 at 6:12 pmA. they deal with dictators as along they agree with U.S. foreign policy.
B. They need an excuse to invade, build military bases, and take control of resources, whether it’s Cobalt in Africa, that the military wants for space weaponry, oil in Africa and Oil in Iraq and Iran, with the stated goal of cutting off China’s supply and control prices.
The U.S. has over 1000 military bases in various sizes all over the planet (Chalmers Johnson,preeminent EXPERT) to control oil routes, oil wells, and current and proposed pipelines. I.E. Afghanistan, where the oil pipeline deal was signed weeks after Bush dropped Karzai, into the country, Karzai, former UNOCAL OIL Consultant.
Kahoneez, there are 14 new permanent ones going up in Iraq along with an “embassy” bigger than Vatican City.
There’s only one general way to deal with this: corporations have too much political power in the U.S. It’s way past time to take that power away from them.
February 2nd, 2007 at 6:56 pmOk. Now, bear in mind that this is a public release of previously classified information, declassified at the behest of the White House.
We do not get to see the rest of the NIE. But this cherry-picked intelligence supports an indefinite presence of U.S. troops in Iraq and lays the groundwork for justifying pre-emptive strikes against both Syria and Iran.
The Bush Doctrine is one of pre-emptive strikes.
I wonder how much the networks are charging for commercial time during their broadcasts of WWIII, scheduled to begin in mid-March…
February 2nd, 2007 at 7:09 pmThank you Amanda and the National Intelligence (?) ESTIMATE! I am SOOOOO relieved to hear Shiite Iran has no interest in a Shiite dominated Iraq - whew!! I’m even more delighted that IE’s are not coming from Iran. Come to think of it, I have about as much respect for the Estimate as I do Jimmy Carter - NONE, ZERO….zilch.
February 3rd, 2007 at 7:55 pm56- “I wonder how much the networks are charging for commercial time during their broadcasts of WWIII, scheduled to begin in mid-March…”
It already started, you’re just a little slow on the uptake
February 3rd, 2007 at 7:56 pmTick, tick… Dwight Eisenhower said, referring to the presidency, “God Help us if we get someone in there that doesn’t know anything about the military”. Even worse, we have an oil man from Texas with zero combat experience, a military industrial complex that is now so far out of control they have silenced 80% of the Congress, oil’s insane price level - spiked by the prospect of a devastating regional war - now ironically fueling the violence to an exponential degree to the delight of Chinese, Russian and Chech explosives makers, a U.S. Senate with only a hand full of intelligent people who aren’t sleeping at night right now because they are worrying about the imminent future of this country and probably worst of all a dumb and dumber population with the collective intellect of an ostrich. Tick, tick my friends.
February 4th, 2007 at 12:11 amI keep noticing so many posts are ‘observational’ and usually include lines to the effect of …”if the American people would just’…or …”when will we wake up to…why can’t we see that…we should just…it’s time to”…etc., etc., that I’ve come to the conclusion that the American population is more informed than ever about the current dis-functioning of this administration’s foreign policies. The NIE is also just a statement of what is and what will be if it goes on like this. I do not find what WE can do to stop it, on all fronts. It is all smoke and mirrors though, for no matter what our policy is, to maintain our foothold(Iraq) in the middle east, is to protect and maintain our (corporate) interests (oil). It is neocon imperialism. It is desperate because our entire economy, including the physical being of our populace is dependent on oil. It is urgent because once we attack Iran, the neocon agenda of world dominance(which would include increased terror and violence even up to a WWIII) is unstoppable. The only thing I know TO DO is: Inform everyone I know; Write my representatives in congress making them aware of the urgency of this foreign policy blunder; Write the committee chairmen in the Senate; Urge Pelosi to form a committee that could somehow strategize a way to make it possible to be able to REMOVE CHENEY/BUSH from office without due process due to a threat to national security and charge them with treason before going through the process of impeachment; stand ready to take up arms to back the congress against the executive branch. Next on the TO DO list is Corporate reform: regaining excessive war-time profits; fines and accountability for fraud, waste, bribery and corruption; putting a cap on CEO benefits; mandatory profit sharing and health insurance; making them liable (if they want equal protection under the law like a ‘real’ person, then like a ‘real’ person the entity must have a life span and then DIE, not continue to grow for centuries); have civic responsibilities during times of national emergency and not profiteer at times of tragedy(Exxon/Mobile 2006 profit of $39.5 billion–Come on..during War. what next…”Hey, Katrina victims have a bottle of water for $10.”). Our best defense and Offense against this administration’s foreign policy, to stop the war, to battle the Giant Corporations IS our Congress. We must force them to act. So please, share your ideas of what to DO…what actions we can take now because the situation is EXTREMELY URGENT.
February 4th, 2007 at 10:33 pm