US Commits Act Of War Against Iran By Invading Iranian Diplomatic Station

G.I.’s in Iraq Raid Iranians’ Offices

Anyone that has ever watched the Lethal Weapon 2 film knows that diplomatic immunity is granted to international diplomats, and the properties owned or leased for diplomatic purposes are protected by international law. Even when there is probable cause of espionage, criminal activity or even if a state of war is declared against the diplomat's country of origin, diplomatic conduct, safety and privacy is afforded some protection under international law.

The laws protecting diplomats and diplomatic facilities are in place to provide a means of assuring that all countries will act in a reasonable manner even in the face of hostilities. These laws have a long developmental history and many precedents in both US and international jurisprudence. Under international law standards, as well as provisions of the United Nations Charter, a military force invading a diplomatic property carries the same force as an invasion of the native soil of those diplomats. In fact, diplomatic facilities in other countries are considered extension of the "soil" of the country of origin. Thus when the US establishes an embassy or consulate in a foreign land, the embassy, consulate and the residences of the diplomats are considered US soil.

In addition, under international law and treaty, the host country has a legal obligation to assist in providing security for all such properties. Invading diplomatic facilities is a "causus belli" (act of war). According to this report, the US has done this twice. The outrage and attempts to defend the diplomatic facility by Kurdish troops was not only honorable, but required under international law, despite the stronger ties the Kurds have with the US. The Kurdish representatives of the region and the Iraqi government were well within their rights to protest the actions of both raids.

Further, these acts by the US and its military demonstrate that the US is still running the show over in Iraq, relegating the Iraqi government and its officials, including Prime Minister Maliki, to the role of puppet for US purposes. That role must be very confusing for Maliki because the powerful Shi'ite cleric Al-Sadr is also using him as a puppet for furtherance of Sadr's ultra-conservative, pro-Iranian, anti-American, Shi'ite view of the future of Iraq.

Once again we see that President Bush, and the members of the executive branch that went along with this mission, have no regard for the rule of law, their oaths of office (including the military officers that authorized the mission) to support and defend the Constitution, or the established principles and precedents that have made us a great nation.

One has to ask whether or not this is a ruse to trigger a response by Iran to justify further actions against Iran. If Iran responds with military action, then the justification for going to war, at least in the emotional appeal sense of the matter, will be spun and we will once again be misled into another international conflict.

So let us consider some issues and facts. Our troops are present in Bosnia, South Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan, Gitmo, Somalia, the Persian/Arabian Gulf, the Red Sea and the Mediterranean, as well as being stationed elsewhere. The military is being stretched beyond its capacity and some commanders are not only worried about having bodies on the ground and in their boots, but also having clear lines of supply, materials and other logistics. Our mission in Afghanistan and Iraq has been not only significantly flawed, as was admitted by President Bush in his last address, but offers clear evidence that we are failing to achieve Bush's objectives. While Bush's recent "new plan" calls for 20,000 plus new troops, other nations that have been providing support in Iraq and Afghanistan are reducing troop strengths, which will counteract the "temporary surge" offered by this "new plan."

It is inevitable that if the "temporary surge" suffers counteracting actions by the withdrawal of other troops in the boots from other nations, the US will move to upgrade its troop levels to adjust. That means that even more US military personnel will be sent over, retained, extended and/or called back to duty for assignment in Iraq. If Iran reacts with military force--and it is possible they will because the current leadership, including the ultimate clerical leadership, is guided by a theocratic, authoritarian and fascist delusion that God has sanctioned their actions--then the American forces present in Iraq will be called to respond, thus putting them squarely in the middle of at least three fronts, possibly even four, in that theater of operations.

With the Iranians on the east, the insurgents heavily present in Baghdad and the immediate surrounding areas, the Shi'ites in the south, and the possibility of antagonists from Syria and northern parts of Saudi Arabia crossing the borders in the west and south, these brave souls would be surrounded just like Airborne troops were at the Battle of the Bulge--only this time without General George S. Patton and a slew of tanks immediately available to respond in record time to aid in their rescue.

This is an asinine way to run the military and our foreign policy. It demonstrates an incompetence on the part of President Bush, his cabinet and the military leadership, as well as a certain arrogance that seems to place Bush and his gang above the law. All members of congress need to recognize this incompetence; the dangers of this arrogance; the violation of oath, office and law; and the danger to our nation that these actions have created.

American troops backed by attack helicopters and armored vehicles raided an Iranian diplomatic office in the dead of night early Thursday and detained as many as six of the Iranians working inside.

The raid was the second surprise seizure of Iranians by the American military in Iraq in recent weeks and came a day after President Bush bluntly warned Iran to quit meddling in Iraqi affairs.

There was a tense standoff later in the day between the American soldiers and about 100 Kurdish troops, who surrounded the American armored vehicles for about two hours in this northern Iraqi city.

The attack was denounced by senior Kurdish officials, who are normally America’s closest allies in Iraq but regarded the action as an affront to their sovereignty in this highly tribal swath of the country. Iran’s Foreign Ministry reacted in Tehran with a harsh denunciation that threatened to escalate tensions with the Bush administration.

Herein we see the dynamics I noted above.

The American military said that it had been “conducting routine security operations in Erbil Jan. 11 and detained six individuals suspected of being closely tied to activities targeting Iraqi and coalition forces. One individual was released and five remain in custody.”

American officials have long accused Iran of sending weapons and money into Iraq. In late December the American military detained a number of Iranians in Baghdad, including two diplomats and two who turned out to be senior Iranian military officials. The diplomats were released but the others were forced to leave Iraq under suspicion that they had been working with Shiite militias. The incident also comes at a time when tensions are high between the United States and Iran over its nuclear program.

The incident was a major embarrassment for the Iraqi government, which has been trying to foster initiatives with its neighbor for improving regional security and trade, as well as other issues, and it calls into question the extent of Iraqi control over its own affairs.

There is no way that the US did not know that the identity of these diplomats. With the level of security, intelligence and specific suspicion of Iran's activities, there is no way that these diplomats were not under constant surveillance. Leaving these "foxes" to run loose in the "chicken coop" is not prudent and I cannot imagine that the US commanders and intelligence operatives would not track Iranian diplomats persistently. Therefore, the claim that this was a routine security sweep can't be anything other than "plausible deniability" to cover for covert intent and operations. In the event that the US did allow Iranian diplomats to run around Iraq absent of surveillance, then it demonstrates utter incompetence by the US military, US intelligence agencies, US State Department, and the leadership of all US units in Iraq.

Therefore, we can only conclude that this was an intentional breach of international law. That speaks volumes about the disregard for the rule of law by the Bush administration. It also speaks volumes about the willingness of this president to put our troops and our nation at risk. While Bush has argued that the operations overseas are necessary to "protect the United States," it would seem that he does not understand that enticing or aggravating Iran into hostilities would place our nation at even greater risk. Such an action would be understood by an entirely new group of Muslims that the US has engaged in a deliberate effort to destabilize the Arabian Peninsula, the Mesopotamian region, the Indian Sub-Continent, as well as an attack on Islam itself. It is already in the minds of the most radical and extreme members of Islam that the US is waging a battle against Islam, but such an enticement of war, or even conflict, with Iran would invite even moderate Muslims to adopt that perspective.

We must take immediate action to curb the excesses of this administration unless we are willing to be the cause of a third world war. This would be a war that would not have the "niceties" of the previous world wars. There would not be any respect for western traditions regarding diplomacy and the conduct of war. In addition to meeting troops on a battlefield (which we are likely to win initially), we would face chronic insurgency, terrorism and guerilla tactics that our military is not fully capable of coping with because of the way they are currently and historically trained.

In Thursday’s raid, attack helicopters roared above the normally placid neighborhood here, as American troops backed by armored vehicles broke into the office at around 3:30 a.m., carrying away documents and computer equipment.

Taking those documents and computers is yet another violation of international law and a separate act of war.

American Black Hawk helicopters also swooped over the confrontation with the Kurdish troops, and at least two landed, said an American witness. But there were no reports of shots being fired, and the incident ended peacefully.

Witnesses said the attack was directed at a building that an American official described as a liaison office that was properly accredited with Iraq as an Iranian government facility. It was unclear whether the Iranians who were arrested carried diplomatic passports and whether the office was supposed to share some of the immunities enjoyed by embassies and consulates.

Local residents said the main function of the office was to process papers for people who want to go to Iran for visits or medical treatment.

So, it is clear that the nature of the office as a diplomatic facility was well known and properly established.

Muhammad Ahmad, who lives near the neighborhood, known as Old Korea, said that he was awakened by shooting and helicopters. “These kinds of actions are totally unacceptable and the Kurdish leadership is very angry,” said Fuad Hussein, the spokesman for the president of the semiautonomous territory, Massoud Barzani. Mr. Hussein called the raid an “abduction.”

This is a case of criminal action on the part of the troops involved and, by rights, should be prosecuted in the same manner as the murders that have occurred overseas. In fact, it would be within the rights of the Iraqi and/or the Iranian government to seek extradition of the troops involved for prosecution under sovereign laws.

The Iranian government said the raid violated international law and demanded the detainees’ release.

“This is a provocative action by the United States and is against all international laws and regulations,” said the Foreign Ministry spokesman, Mohammad Ali Hosseini, the state-run radio reported.

“The Americans are following two aims,” he said. “They want to continue their pressure against Iran and, secondly, to create tension among Iraq’s neighbors.”

He added: “The provocative and mischievous actions cannot damage the friendly relations with Iraq.”

Unfortunately, these statements are accurate.

A senior State Department official said that the Iranian office in Erbil was not technically a consulate, but rather a liaison office which also provided some consular services.

He said that American officials believed that the Iranians intended to turn the office into a consulate at some point, but that had not yet happened. Therefore, he said, the State Department does not consider the office to be Iranian territory.

This is a bogus argument on the part of the State Department.

Thursday afternoon, the Kurdish interior minister, Karim Sinjari, appeared surprised when an American reporter asked him during a meeting with American businessmen to confirm the raid on the liaison.

“Yes,” Mr. Sinjari said tightly. “It was American-led.” Asked for further details, he said: “We have no information. They did it by themselves.” He then cut off questions.

This provides evidence that the US is directly responsible and solely accountable for the acts. Who the hell is the US State Department to rule on what constitutes a diplomatic facility endowed with full protection on Iraqi soil? Isn't this the call of the Iraqi government since the facility is located on Iraqi soil? Doesn't this show a complete contempt for Iraqi sovereignty? What does this say about the pattern of ignoring and circumventing US and international law by President Bush and his administration?

The standoff began around 11 a.m. in Einkawa, a pleasant and predominantly Christian suburb of Erbil where many Western officials live and keep offices. Possibly angered by the earlier raid, the Kurdish forces refused to let several American Humvees through a checkpoint.

“It was the Americans’ fault,” said a Kurdish guard from the checkpoint, who refused to give his name. “We asked them to stop but they did not stop. That is why we pointed our guns at each other.”

This provides further evidence that the US has no regard for Iraqi government, sovereignty or autonomy, justifying my claim that the US is treating the Iraqi government set up as a "fledgling democracy" as its puppet in the Middle East.

The standoff, while tense, was carefully controlled by the Kurds. The American who witnessed it said that as the lines of traffic lengthened on the blocked road, the Kurds began waving cars through and they drove directly past the stopped Humvees.

It appears that the Kurds acted in a reasonable manner even in the face of overt disregard for their authority.

The Iranian Foreign Ministry summoned the Iraqi and Swiss ambassadors in Tehran in protest, and demanded the immediate release of what it called diplomats, the state-run television reported.

The Swiss represent American interests in Tehran. The United States has had no embassy in Iran since 1979, when radical students attacked the American Embassy in Tehran and took 44 diplomats hostage.

Anyone want to conjecture as to the content of messages sent between the US and Swiss in the last 30 hours or so? Anyone want to bet that the Swiss are quietly protesting the outrageous nature of the raids and violation of international law and precedent? Anyone want to take odds that there are numerous messages condemning the selective views offered by the US State Department regarding the "technical" ruling on the nature of the Iranian office and the diplomatic immunity/protection that should have been afforded to it/them?

Mr. Hosseini told state-run television on Thursday that the consulate in Erbil was set up after coordination with Iraqi officials and that “it was involved in consulate work.”

A measured statement late in the day from Mr. Barzani’s office expressed “its sadness over these actions,” indicating that it believed the building had diplomatic immunity. “It is better to inform the Kurdistan government before taking actions against anybody,” the office said.

It certainly sounds like this was considered a diplomatic facility by Iraq and by the autonomous Kurdish government.

The American military said in a statement that “the documents and equipment that were removed will be examined to determine the extent of the alleged illegal or terrorist activity. Based on the outcome of that investigation, appropriate action will be taken regarding the detainees.”

This statement is an act of outright espionage. If it was done on our soil, or at one of our diplomatic facilities, we would be seeking retribution and restoration of our property without examination. Our willingness to adhere to double and triple standards speaks clearly to our own hypocrisy. As a citizen, a veteran and a decent human being, I object in the strongest terms.

PROTECTION OF NATIONAL SOVEREIGN RIGHTS UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW