US: We Weren’t Involved in Israeli Attack on Iran; We Don’t Control Iraqi Airspace

WASHINGTON DC, United States (Kurdistan 24) Both the State Department and Pentagon strongly denied on Monday that the U.S. was involved in Israel’s strike on Iran on Saturday, which was undertaken as retaliation for Iran’s Oct. 1 strike on Israel.

The U.S. statements came amid high tensions in the region, including Iraqi complaints that the U.S. was somehow involved in the attack on Iran.

That is false—but was echoed by Middle Eastern journalists in both the State Department and Pentagon briefings on Monday.

In addition, Hoshyar Zebari issued a related and strongly-worded caution. Zebari is a long-time Kurdish leader—first in opposition to Saddam Hussein, and then as Iraq’s first post-Saddam Foreign Minister, and later Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister.

On Monday, Zebari warned about serious problems in Baghdad that might lead it to become entangled in the conflict between Israel and Iran. 

Zebari’s warning constitutes a strong suggestion that others—like the U.S. and Europe—need to be more actively engaged in ensuring that Baghdad stays out of that conflict.

State Department Denies U.S. Involvement in Israeli Attack

Both the State Department and Pentagon denials of U.S. involvement came in response to questions from Middle East journalists. 

Yet both reporters had basic facts wrong!

At the State Department, a reporter simply invented an understanding between Washington and Baghdad.

“Per an agreement with Washington, Iraqi airspace is protected by the United States,” he said. “So while Iraq is filing an official letter of complaint to the United Nations Security Council for breaching its airspace, do you take Iraq’s concern into consideration?”

The reporter had erred seriously in suggesting that the U.S. had been in charge of the attack—or at least had overseen it!

Miller’s response began by correcting him. He politely dismissed the reporter’s statement as “not an accurate description.”

“Iraq is a sovereign country,” Miller stated. “It controls its own airspace. The United States does not control Iraqi airspace.”

“The U.S. Strategic Framework Agreement outlines our bilateral relationship with the Government of Iraq,” Miller continued, “and it does not address any questions of airspace, which are left to the Government of Iraq to determine.”

That agreement was concluded in 2008, in the last days of the George W. Bush administration. That was nearly 20 years ago, so it is likely that most people, including those working on the issue now, know little about it, unless they have made a special effort to research past history.

The errant reporter then asked a second question, “Did your force in Iraq and Kurdistan Region have any role for logistics or for consultation?”

“The U.S. did not participate in this attack,” Miller responded.

Pentagon Denies Involvement in Israeli Attack

At the Pentagon, a similar exchange took place with Deputy Press Spokesperson, Sabrina Singh.

It began with another false statement from a Middle Eastern journalist. 

“Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu thanked the US for close coordination and support in addressing the strikes against Iran,” he  said. 

That story, too, was false. Relations between the U.S. and Israel remain tense. The U.S. pushed Israel to moderate its response to Iran’s Oct. 1 attack in the hope that the “tit for tat” military exchanges can be brought to an end.

When he spoke about the strike on Monday, addressing Israel’s parliament, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu refuted criticism that he had given into U.S. pressure.

Netanyahu did not thank the U.S. Rather, he affirmed Israel’s independence. “We make decisions ourselves according to our interests and considerations,” he said.

Having misquoted Netanyahu, the reporter continued, “In terms of coordination of support, was that only limited to political coordination support? Did you offer any intelligence to assess? Did you have any forces from the Air Force in the — in the air, Navy, in case the Israelis needed help?”

“So, Fadi, what I can tell you is, again, what I said is that we didn't have any military involvement in this operation,” Singh replied. She noted that there was broad U.S. political support for Israel—but no military support for the attack on Iran.

Iraq’s National Security Adviser Visits Erbil

On Sunday, Qasim al-Araji, Iraqi National Security Adviser, visited Erbil, where he had discussions with the Prime Minister of the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), Masrour Barzani, its President, Nechirvan Barzani, and Masoud Barzani, former leader of the KRG and now head of the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP.)

Read More: Iraqi National Security Advisor, Qasim al-Araji welcomed by President Barzani

Araji is a regular visitor to the Kurdish capital and appears to act as a primary channel of communications between the Iraqi government and the KRG on security matters.

Araji was appointed to his position in 2020, when Mustafa al-Kadhimi was prime minister. Kadhimi, who had lived in Britain while in exile from Saddam’s regime and had acquired British citizenship, was seen as a pro-Western political figure.

Araji, however, is a senior member of the Badr organization, a Shi’a opposition group, supported by Iran, that goes back to the days of opposition to Saddam’s rule. The Kurds and Shi’ites were the core of that opposition, and the Kurdish leadership would know Araji from those days.

Moreover, Araji’s regular visits to Erbil further suggest that the Kurdish leadership has cordial relations with him.

Hoshyar Zebari’s Warning

Israel’s retaliatory strike on Iran was limited to military targets, as the U.S. had urged. So far, Iran’s response has been limited—but that has not necessarily been the attitude of its proxies.

On Sunday, one of Tehran’s proxies in Iraq, Kata’ib Hizbollah, issued a shrill threat. It described Israel’s attack on Iran as “a dangerous precedent that Iran has not experienced before.”

The group, which was established in 2007 and designated by the U.S. as a terrorist organization two years later, threatened both the U.S. and Israel.

On Sunday, Kata’ib Hizbollah issued a statement denouncing the Israeli attack as a “reckless transgression by a rogue entity and an intruder in the region.” It also held the U.S. responsible for Israel’s attack, asserting that it “will pay the price.” 

On Monday, the day after Qasim al-Araji visited Erbil, Zebari posted a disturbing tweet. Iraq’s government and diplomacy, during the current regional military crisis, which involves actual combat, Zebari wrote in Arabic, suggests a “confused and erratic position toward Iraq’s interest in the middle of fabricated internal crises and the conflicting positions of some politicians and armed factions with the official government positions.”

الأداء الحكومي و الدبلوماسي العراقي خلال الأزمة العسكرية و القتالية الراهنة في المنطقة يشير إلى موقف بائس و متخبط وفاقد للبوصلة ازاء المصلحة العراقية في خضم الأزمات الداخلية المفتعلة والمواقف المتباينة لبعض السياسين و الفصائل المسلحة و مواقف الحكومة الرسمية. نحن بحاجة إلى تضامن…

— Hoshyar Zebari (@HoshyarZebari) October 28, 2024

“We need political solidarity, clarity of vision, and a real review away from the policy of appeasing all external parties in order to create a sound path and an independent policy for our government and our national state,” Zebari added.

There is a significant chance that Zebari’s tweet reflects dismay at what Araji conveyed in his meetings with the Kurdish leadership the day before. It would not be dismay at Araji himself, but at the course of decision-making in Baghdad.

If so, it may well suggest that the balancing act that the Iraqi government has been pursuing during the course of the war between Iran and Israel is faltering. There is a significant danger that Iraq will be dragged into that war.

Read More: Iraq walks tightrope as militia strikes against Israel raise war risk

Other parties, including the U.S. and Europe, might well understand this to indicate that greater efforts are required to keep Baghdad out of the conflict between Israel and Iran. More is needed to counter pressure from pro-Iranian elements within Iraq, as well as from Iran itself, which seek to drag Iraq into that conflict, even as the Iraqi leadership would like to stay out of it.