The sourcing in the @Reuters piece for the claim that #Iran has cut its subsidies to the #IRGC-controlled militias in #Iraq are "three Iraqi paramilitary group [i.e. #Hashd] commanders and a regional official familiar with Iran's activities in Iraq". Which seems fine. But ...
In #Iraq, the militias controlled by #IRGC have access to official patronage from Iraq's oil and other revenue streams, the criminal #Hizballah networks are untouched, etc. It's not to say sanctions have had *no* effect, just that this thesis of operational effects is wrong.
As if by Providence to make the point that any financial pain is not affecting the operational aspects of #Iran's militias in #Iraq: https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1279698980860055557
The incentives align between the U.S. administration, Iran, and the Western media to report that sanctions are doing serious damage to #Iran's militias and by extension the populations they draw from (reduced salaries). Most of the reporting is thus basically confirmation bias.
One could go on about this, but in brief: Iran gets to play is "Great Satan vs. the oppressed" card; Trump can claim the sanctions have brought Tehran to its knees so now is the moment for negotiations and his photo op; the press can claim Trump is mean. https://twitter.com/KyleWOrton/status/1279703943577251842
You can follow @KyleWOrton.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled:

By continuing to use the site, you are consenting to the use of cookies as explained in our Cookie Policy to improve your experience.