U.S. intercepts Iranian order for attack on U.S. interests in Iraq: report

WASHINGTON Fri Sep 6, 2013 2:42am EDT

Related Topics

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States has intercepted an order from an Iranian official instructing militants in Iraq to attack U.S. interests in Baghdad in the event the Obama administration launches a military strike in Syria, the Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday.

The American embassy in Baghdad was a likely target, according to unnamed U.S. officials quoted by the newspaper. The Journal said the officials did not describe the range of potential targets indicated by the intelligence.

In addition, the State Department issued a warning on Thursday telling U.S. citizens to avoid all but "essential" travel to Iraq.

President Barack Obama has asked the U.S. Congress to back his plan for limited strikes in response to a chemical weapons attack on civilians that the United States blames on Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's forces.

The Journal reported that the Iranian message was intercepted in recent days and came from the head of the Revolutionary Guards' Qods Force. The newspaper said the message went to Iranian-supported Shi'ite militia groups in Iraq.

The Journal reported that the message informed Shi'ite groups to be prepared to respond with force after any U.S. military strike on Syria.

"Travel within Iraq remains dangerous given the security situation," according to the State Department's warning, which replaced an earlier one "to update information on security incidents and to remind U.S. citizens of ongoing security concerns in Iraq, including kidnapping and terrorist violence."

The department said that numerous insurgent groups, including al Qaeda's Iraq affiliate, remain active and "terrorist activity and sectarian violence persist in many areas of the country at levels unseen since 2008."

It added: "The ability of the embassy to respond to situations in which U.S. citizens face difficulty, including arrests, is extremely limited."

The State Department declined immediate comment. The CIA declined comment.

(Additional reporting by Tabassum Zakaria; Reporting by Will Dunham and Arshad Mohammed; Editing by Eric Walsh)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (46)
nose2066 wrote:
Big deal. The Shiite Muslim militants in Iraq (backed by Iran)are nowhere nearly as effective in killing people as the Sunni Muslim militants (like al Qaeda) that are backed by the really rich oil governments.

Sep 05, 2013 12:31am EDT  --  Report as abuse
amibovvered wrote:
Pull the other one!

Sep 05, 2013 12:32am EDT  --  Report as abuse
MaggieMP wrote:
What exactly, one wonders, did the US expect by way of preparation and retaliation from other forces?

The US ‘started’ this particular escalation by assuming it had moral authority over criminal weapons uses by others. (It has no such authority – not after destroying Iraq, using ‘chemicalized’ weapons on Fallujah to bring extreme birth deformities in hundreds if not thousands of newborns, and earlier ‘assistance’ to Saddam Hussein’s use of chemical weapons against the Kurds … just to make 3 of many points.)

At this moment the NY Times reports “President Obama has directed the Pentagon to develop an expanded list of potential targets in Syria in response to intelligence suggesting that the government of President Bashar al-Assad has been moving troops and equipment used to ..”

I’ve not read the article.

If governments (and possibly US legislators) involved can’t behave with compassionate intelligence – we citizens had best be prepared to insist!

Sep 05, 2013 12:44am EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.