• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Iran Bombing

I think the Iran Pakistan agreement to expedite the pipeline may be really important, actually. The US needs Pakistan as an ally in Pashtunistan, but at the same time Iran and Pakistan are pursuing these economic links at a time when the US is trying to economically isolate Iran.

Wotta mess.

I used to think recent US strategy in the region was just 'make as big a mess as possible so things are hard for China, and then get the f out and go nuclear/gas/coal'. I don't think this any more, but it sure was an easy paradigm through which to look at the region.
 
And once again I don't think there is any evidence to support that the US directly ordered a bombing at the moment. If the US was involved at all it was more likely in the form of 'arms length support' of Jundullah.

Still, perhaps the recent bombing is a legacy of an earlier strategy i.e. support (tacit or otherwise) of Jundullah ? I.e. perhaps the US has withdrawn its support now. However, if the US *did* provide support to Jundullah to destabilise Baluchistan as part of its Bush-era regional strategy of Iran containment, then the most recent bombing might be a delayed effect of this earlier support (like a strategic landmine or timebomb, set in an earlier era and detonated at an inopportune moment.)


I agree with all of that but have seen no evidence of a policy change under Obama. Asia Times has a couple of articles containing "Jundullah" from as late as June 2009 - reading.
 
Hmm... Jundullah-ISI ties would seem to weaken the 'destabilize the region, make a pipeline harder' theory.
 
Pepe Escobar June 2009:

[...] On May 28 in Zahedan, in Sistan-Balochistan province in Iran, the Pakistan-based, hardcore Sunni, ultra-anti-Shi'ite outfit Jundallah ("Soldiers of God") claimed responsibility for a suicide bombing inside the Amir al-Momenin mosque that killed 25 people and wounded 125.

The timing and the circumstances could not be more suspicious. Tehran simply cannot understand how Islamabad could not contain Jundallah after it has been offered key, on-the-ground intelligence. [...]

After the bombing, the diplomatic dance could not but step into overdrive. Islamabad insists it is aligned with Tehran in their regional brand of the war on terror. But Tehran, not beating around the bush, has now explicitly demanded Islamabad to hand over Jundallah supremo Rigi, who is based in Balochistan. Pakistan's Interior Ministry has promised, on the record, to "hunt down" Jundallah. [...]

Crucially, Islamabad's tune also has begun to change, in tandem with Tehran, drifting to the "third party" gambit - a foreign player supporting Jundallah's cross-border destabilization campaign, which sabotages any Pakistan-Iran rapprochement and of course the IP [Pipeline].

One does not need to share Tehran's national security worries to identify this foreign player: Washington, which not by accident supports a rival pipeline to IP, the ever-troubled Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) pipeline, the raison d'etre for the US involvement in Afghanistan. Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said as much, "We consider Rigi's network linked with some foreign forces in Afghanistan." And he added Iran had plenty of "evidence".

Both Washington and Islamabad have tended to ignore Jundallah's anti-Iran activities. Well, not really, because under the George W Bush-era Jundallah was co-opted by US intelligence for regime change purposes in Iran. As for the Pakistani angle, will the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) finally move against Jundallah, as it seems to be moving against Baitullah Mehsud's Taliban? In principle, this should be a no-brainer; according to the Fars News Agency, the chief of the Iranian Armed Forces, General Hassan Firouzabadi, informed Islamabad of Rigi's exact location.


Bolding mine. Seems to imply US support has stopped. But then the question is really why Pakistan/ISI doesn't move. Or did they hand over Rigi since then?
 
Interesting.

This article, from an online Pakistani newspaper ("The News International- No. 1 English Newspaper from Pakistan" = valid source???) also suggests that at least some Pakistani officials suspect a 'third party' may be continuing to support Jundullah:

http://thenews.jang.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=22462

"However, the diplomatic circles in Islamabad say the Iranian authorities had warned the Pakistani ambassador to Tehran on May 30 that Islamabadís failure to act against the Jundullah network in Balochistan could also jeopardise the future of the recently-signed Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline project. They pointed out that the Pakistani and the Iranian presidents had only signed the initial agreement after 14 years of delayed negotiations and the most crucial gas sales and purchase agreement had not yet been finalised.

On the other hand, the Pakistani authorities in Islamabad do not rule out the possibility of a third player aiding and abetting the anti-Iran activities of Jundullah with a view to damage the Pak-Iran ties and sabotage the ëpeace pipeline projectí."


Also, as far as the ISI, I seem to recall some discussion as to how much autonomy they had relative to Islamabad, in particular with regards to the continued support that some elements of the ISI continued to provide to the Taliban even after Pakistan became a US ally in the GWOT. This could perhaps be relevant in the context of ISI support for Jundullah.

What motive would Pakistan have for not moving against Jundullah? I have not yet seen this spelled out.
 
But then the question is really why Pakistan/ISI doesn't move. Or did they hand over Rigi since then?

Apparently, they handed over his brother:

http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect...n-iran-to-step-up-security-along-border-rs-04
(September 8th, 2009)
"Last month, a bomb explosion occurred in a mosque in Zahedan, killing 32 people and injuring scores of others. After the bomb blast, Pakistani security forces arrested Abdul Hameed Rigi, brother of Jundullah chief Abdul Malik Rigi and handed him over to Iran."
 
Funny that you bring him up. I just read an interview with him but originally decided not to post it. He was on PressTV back in June accusing his brother of being payed by the US to destabilize Iran. If the person on PressTV is the same guy who was handed over months later. :boggled:

edit2: Hm, somethings not right with the dates ... that "interview" must be the press conference after he was handed over - or what?

edit: and Rigi himself is apparently still on the run in Pakistan.
 
Last edited:
One does not need to share Tehran's national security worries to identify this foreign player: Washington, which not by accident supports a rival pipeline to IP, the ever-troubled Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) pipeline, the raison d'etre for the US involvement in Afghanistan.

Again with that nonexisting pipeline?
 
Also I don't know that I personally would call blowing up military leaders a 'terrorist attack'. Aren't military leaders OK to kill?

That's why we do our jobs; so people don't go attacking innocent civilians.
 
I'm having a hard time understanding a lot of the posts in this thread. Is the bombing in Iran a non-issue because the group responsible has had previous ties to US intelligence? Is it okay that this took place because it happened to Iran? Are there people here who would assert or agree with an assertion that Jundullah are not a terrorist organization?

Point of reference: the info that the US got about the "secret" enrichment facility in Iran supposedly came from Jundullah informants, if I recall correctly.
 
edit2: Hm, somethings not right with the dates ... that "interview" must be the press conference after he was handed over - or what?

Hmmm... so he only makes these allegations of strong US involvement with Jundullah after he's in Iranian hands. Interesting. It doesn't necessarily mean that what he's saying is false, but it does reduce the credibility somewhat that he's making the statement while under Iranian custody.
 
I'm having a hard time understanding a lot of the posts in this thread. Is the bombing in Iran a non-issue because the group responsible has had previous ties to US intelligence? Is it okay that this took place because it happened to Iran? Are there people here who would assert or agree with an assertion that Jundullah are not a terrorist organization?

Point of reference: the info that the US got about the "secret" enrichment facility in Iran supposedly came from Jundullah informants, if I recall correctly.

Well, I can't speak for anyone elsse, but I'm not attaching any value judgements to anything that happened here. I'm just trying to sort out what seems to have happened, and also just checking out some ideas about what various countries' strategic objectives are in the region, and what role these armed groups play in them.

Interesting note about the Jundullah informants and Qum, (snicker), do you have a link?
 
Hmmm... so he only makes these allegations of strong US involvement with Jundullah after he's in Iranian hands. Interesting. It doesn't necessarily mean that what he's saying is false, but it does reduce the credibility somewhat that he's making the statement while under Iranian custody.


Well, i decided not to post it even without knowing that he was handed over because it had a propaganda smell. But i'm not sure about the dates. According to your article and the anti-war article, he was captured in August while the PressTV article is from June (it has also "jun" in the URL, so they didn't use european dates).

But that's a side issue - the brother shouldn't be considered a credible source anyway.
 
Well, i decided not to post it even without knowing that he was handed over because it had a propaganda smell. But i'm not sure about the dates. According to your article and the anti-war article, he was captured in August while the PressTV article is from June (it has also "jun" in the URL, so they didn't use european dates).

But that's a side issue - the brother shouldn't be considered a credible source anyway.

It seems the Dawn.com article is the one mixing things up. Maybe it was re-posted in September or something, but the Zahedan bombing took place in may and the handover was in June.
 
Well, I can't speak for anyone elsse, but I'm not attaching any value judgements to anything that happened here. I'm just trying to sort out what seems to have happened, and also just checking out some ideas about what various countries' strategic objectives are in the region, and what role these armed groups play in them.

Actually, I was commenting on other posters who seemed to be expressing happiness that this has happened and dismissing the bombing as being newsworthy.

Interesting note about the Jundullah informants and Qum, (snicker), do you have a link?

That depends on what you mean by a link. Official news sources describe the CIA as having obtained increasing levels of intelligence on the matter, with certainty having been confirmed by other intelligence agencies finding the same information. Since it's obvious that CIA operatives would be disallowed (by both US official policy and the Iranian government) from entering the nation, connections between the US agency and the Jundullah have come up before. Iran tends to regularly accuse the CIA of funding Jundullah actions, which the CIA denies. However, despite that and further claims about the extent of the US relationship with the Jundullah group, the higher realistic likelihood is that any contact between the two would be reminiscent of the long-standing US tradition of "enemy of my enemy" information-trading, and while I can't find on the net a specific mention of the Jundullah group and CIA asset discoveries I do know that the CIA has a limited number of paths to exploit for gaining information about internal Iranian programs but has as a bargaining tool detailed tactical cartographic data that can be used in exchange. Knowing the Jundullah's documented activities against the Iranian regime, such data would be worth more than cash or weapons to the Pakistan-based group and their leader, Abd al Malik Regi.

To be clear: no conspiracy theorizing here. There's no reputable proof that the US is funding or supporting the Jundullah behavior in Iran. That the CIA would use what information the Jundullah might offer up to share to confirm suspicions isn't even the same ballpark as being complicit in state terrorism in Iran.
 
I am still boggled by the almost blind supportthe Islamic Fundy regime in Iran gets from the Militant Left. Wiredest alliance since Hitler and Stalin made nice back in 1939.
 
I am still boggled by the almost blind supportthe Islamic Fundy regime in Iran gets from the Militant Left. Wiredest alliance since Hitler and Stalin made nice back in 1939.

Who in the hell are you talking about?
 

Back
Top Bottom