"Iraq looking at Chinese advanced air defence system?" Topic

The Iraqis are negotiating with China for delivery of up to $2.5 USD billions worth of weapons.

This includes things that may appear to be rational purchases given Iraq's current situation e.g. Type 99 MBTs.

But bizarrely the potential acquisition of HQ-9 SAMs systems is also being mentioned.

HQ-9 is roughly equivalent to Russian S300.

Given Islamic State ops in Iraq will probably be come to a close in the next year or so, Iraq will be run by Shias and Kurds.

Is the Shia regime in Baghdad looking at bolstering deterrence against the Sunni Arabs after IS is booted out of the country?

I've always questioned whether Sunni Arabs would allow pro-Iranian Shias and Kurds to completely take over Iraq thus completing Iran's Shia crescent.

Perhaps Iraqis are asking the same question?

defense-watch.com/2016/11/28/iraq-considering-2-5-billion-arms-contract-china

Is the Shia regime in Baghdad looking at bolstering deterrence against the Sunni Arabs after IS is booted out of the country?

I've always questioned whether Sunni Arabs would allow pro-Iranian Shias and Kurds to completely take over Iraq thus completing Iran's Shia crescent.

Iraq is de facto an Iranian ally given its majority shia population after the US unwisely deposed Saddam and the sunni Ba'athists from power, who previously quelled any shia dissent as brutally as Assad has been crushing sunni dissent in Arab Spring. If nothing else Iran wields much greater influence in Baghdad today than it did before 2003.

Sunnis are not going down quietly. Many joined ISIS, Al Qaeda, Jabhat al-Nusra etc. to fight against the Iran puppet government in Baghdad in what we call a "Sectarian" war. ISIS was formed from a core of former Iraqi officers who served in Saddam's army and became out-of-work after the US destroyed the Iraqi army.

Ironically, in Syria it's the opposite case. The minority shias (Alawites) are desperately holding onto power with the help of Iran and Russia over the majority sunni population.

I think China will be the prime arms supplier to Iran and her proxies from now on. Chinese arms tend to be cheaper than Russian for the cash-strapped Iranians. China also publicly warned against reneging on the nuclear deal struck in 2015. Why is Putin so quiet on this matter? I suppose he didn't want to jeopardize any chance of a "reset" with the new POTUS.

link

The Iraqi leadership is primarily Shia. As the population is about 60% Shia. And with Iran right across the border. Being about 90% Shia. They will "assist" their Shai brothers in Iraq against their Sunni enemies. Which at one time Sunnis only made up 15% of Iraq.

And Iran still believes the USA is the Great Satan, etc. So we are as much hated enemies to them as the Sunni.

However, with a US "New Sheriff" in town shortly. China, Russia, Iran, Iraq, etc., may be in for some surprises. Some may be pleasant but many more probably won't be … Based on who you are. Business as usual may not be like it was in the past 6-8 years. And Without a shot being fired, generally. What's that old saying ? "Know your enemy … but do business with them anyway …" … But in this case that won't be for all your enemies …

So the question arises:

After IS disappears, what will the Sunni Arabs do in Iraq?

The Sunnis are clearly completely dispossessed of political and military power in Iraq.

Doing nothing will be seen as a loss for Sunni Islam and it pushes Iranian influence right up to the Saudi border.

Once IS in Iraq is finished, relevant assets will be cleared to provide support to Assad in Syria. This has already been happening with an estimated 25,000 Iraqi militia being diverted to Syria.

This could help further tip balance in further of Assad which in turn cements Iranian/Shia positions.

And Lebanon is already in Iranian hands – latest Lebanese president is a known Hezbollah supporter.

Sunni Arabs are also getting their proverbial butts kicked in Yemen.

Basically the Persian Shia cause is ascendant.

I really can't see Saudi Arabia and co tolerating this for too long.

I wonder if they'll agitate and try to con Uncle Sam into acting against Iran instead of getting their hands dirty?

The sunnis in Iraq will continue to be disaffected and marginalized. They will join other, non-ISIS jihadi groups and continue the struggle with aid from Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States. Many observers are already half-expecting the loose anti-ISIS alliance to unravel and start fighting amongst themselves.

My prediction is that the war drums for regime change in Iran will be irresistable as it was for Iraq under a previous administration. The new SecDef is staunchly hawkish vis-a'-vis Iran. The US will be drawn back into the ME in a prolonged, costly and draining conflict while China and Russia take advantage and further modernize/build up their forces and hardware in pursuit of their own regional ambitions.

Any direct conflict between the West and Iran is a very bad idea. The population of Iran is more than double that of Iraq. Sure there are some pro-Western people living in Iran, but if there were direct conflict, the resulting wave of patriotism against the outsiders would erase those feelings quickly.

It is far better to strive for change internally in Iran than to go toe to toe. I have no doubt that the Iranian kit isn't up to the task of defending against the West, but Iran isn't Iraq and having the best kit alone doesn't assure anything in an asymmetric war, not to mention the troubles it will cause in any pro-Iranian states.

A war against Iran would practically guarantee Israel getting involved (whether they'd want to or not), and once that happens, you are looking at wide spread revolts and civil wars across the Middle East as whatever pro-Western governments there are simply scramble to ride out the storm.

Iran also has a number of military advantages over 2003 Iraq:

1. Large number of ballistic missiles.
2. Has ability to shut down Straits of Hormuz.
3. A well developed insurgency warfare capability
4. A truly fanatical paramilitary capability.
5. Much greater sense of national unity and identity (no separate Kurdish enclave, no mass persecuted Shias)

Overall it would probably make Iraq look like a cakewalk.

Surely even Trump isn't that criminally stupid as to invade Iran…

All good point Deadles. And the US Military knows this and more …

Surely even Trump isn't that criminally stupid as to invade Iran…

As I have said, the US does not have to invade Iran to have an effect on them. And opposed to some US civilian leadership in the recent past. The next elected leader of the US will listen to his military's advice.

the sunnis in Iraq will continue to be disaffected and marginalized. They will join other, non-ISIS jihadi groups and continue the struggle with aid from Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States. Many observers are already half-expecting the loose anti-ISIS alliance to unravel and start fighting amongst themselves.

This is very possible. There will be no peace as long as all the religious and ethnic, etc., differences are not worked out. Among themselves, the West [or East] can't do anything to "fix" this situation. It really is a moslem problem.

My prediction is that the war drums for regime change in Iran will be irresistable as it was for Iraq under a previous administration. The new SecDef is staunchly hawkish vis-a'-vis Iran. The US will be drawn back into the ME in a prolonged,

Very much unlikely. You underestimate the new leadership's knowledge, abilities, etc. Again the US can effect Iran without an invasion. There may be some IRGC boats sunk, missile and radar sites destroyed and possibly some of Iran's Fighters splashed. But an all out invasion of Iran is very highly unlikely, IMO … Besides the US alone would not have the assets to invade Iran. It may even take NATO. BUT … There is NO reason to invade Iran. I think some here are drinking the media … Mattis, etc., is not Robert Duvall's character in Apocalypse Now. Please ! And the invasion of Iran was never seriously considered, not for a few decades.