“NOT EXPLAINABLE

EXPLANATION”

Attempts to prove Iran's authorship in attacks on Saudi refineries have caused more confusion than clarity. Who really were the executors of this attack?

By Dany Smith & Ali Al Najafi

When the high military command of the Saudi kingdom held a press conference inside the facilities of the ARAMCO oil refinery, a senior Saudi official described what happened while exposing the remains of allegedly Iranian missiles lying on the ground to the press. But those remains had some signs that did not correspond to the story. Some accredited foreign journalists did not hesitate to point out some of these curiosities and then they began the technical explanations of why some of these arguments, which, without fitting with what they wanted to explain, caused that official to strive to give a little credibility to that version coming to seem his explanation more to a stand-up comedian by Woody Allen than the revelation of real events.

The kingdom's defense official, General Tarik Al Maliki, was trying to give a reasonable explanation of how Iran was able to launch such a precise and destructive US missile attack. Some came to watch with admiration as this official made a huge effort to make fit these inconsistencies warned by the curious journalists, while some American advisers camouflaged among those present took note of the situation.

It was all a charade. The Saudis themselves were not convinced that Iran had been the author of the attack, much less, that the missiles and drones used were launched from their territory. For now and not to lose the thread of the accusations, they preferred to hold the Yemenis responsible by launching brutal retaliatory bombings that killed an unspecified number of civilians. It was clear that attacking Yemen was much more feasible and less risky than attacking Iran. Everything responded to a clear need of the US State Department and Secretary Mike Pompeo himself to have “evidence” -or at least an appearance of them- to publicly blame the Islamic Republic and its “evil Ayatollah regime.”

US Patriot in Saudi Arabia

It was the same media pantomime that the United States and its allies have been around for decades around the Islamic Republic.

But if this attack had actually been launched from Iranian territory, what happened to all the air and anti-missile surveillance systems deployed in the region and in particular with the 88 expensive “Patriot” systems acquired by Saudi Arabia? From Washington this question has only returned a deafening silence which calls for reflection on what has really happened. The Saudis themselves wonder, have we been fooled by our American friends? When in reality what they should say is “Have they deceived us again?”

US E-A3 Sentry over Persian Gulf

Few (to say no one) it is believed that CENTCOM has been overlooked that a drone fleet and several intermediate-range missiles have been fired from a region as guarded as the Iranian border. The periodic aerial surveillance of E-A3 “Sentry” aircraft based in Saudi Arabia makes it even more doubtful to believe. To this we must not forget the continuous activity of naval electronic surveillance and intelligence carried out by the task forces (with their Aegis Systems) that are operating within the waters of the Gulf. There is a clear intention behind these signals to hide something else.

For the Russian specialists these systems failed “because they do not meet the declared characteristics”, which translated into common language, “these systems do not serve what they say they serve.”

If the American version is taken seriously, the generals in the Pentagon and the entire military missile systems industry would have to review the products they have in service since, if their early warning radars and anti-missile systems “MIM-104 Patriot” They failed to detect and even less tear down these unsophisticated attack vectors, it shows that they have sold the rusty scrap to the Saudis. It is clear that blaming technical failures is a recurring shortcut to excuse yourself from curious situations like this, but not in the prevailing circumstances it is frankly credible. Some other sheikh would have commented in the halls of the Palace “Bayt Al Saud” “Will we be reimbursed what we paid for these craps?”

Smoke come from ARAMCO installations

There is behind the production of these weapons systems a large mega corporate business (1500 to 2000 million dollars) that involves the US Department of Defense and private companies such as “Raytheon” that are concessioned to provide defensive systems to countries that have decided enter NATO or as in the case of Saudi Arabia, to protect US oil investments.

It is hard to believe that Washington continues to promote these defensive systems as “the best anti-aircraft systems in the world”, not if -by the words of Pompeo himself- they have such unforgivable failures. If this rude incident showed that the expensive system sold to the Saudis did not even see the attack coming, it sounds like a bad joke that Mike Pompeo alleges that “even the best anti-aircraft system in the world sometimes fails”. Such expensive protection is effective or it is not. And it is clear that with this, it is very debatable that he is the best in the world. Undoubtedly, rumors about suggestions to the royal house to replace these systems with the Russian “S-400” missile systems, has unleashed concerns among the US military.

However, no one in the region - except Israel - swallows the version of an Iranian attack. The Saudis doubt it very much, the Emiratis do not swallow it and the Qataris reject it flat. Even the same Russian premier Vladimir Putin has pointed out that “there is no evidence that Iran was behind these attacks on Saudi refineries.” In addition to contradicting the account of the US Department of State and the accusations of Donald Trump himself, it makes us reflect on where the launches were made and who was really behind. At the height of the circumstances and with all the records that have been recorded, many of us believe that this has been a “Black Operation” most carried out by a special unit interested in seeking the Casus Belli.

The feasibility to simulate an attack from Iran exists and is available in the field of events, but they are uncomfortable for the West. And the main scenario to realize this attack is in the convulsed territory of its neighbor. In recent months, social protests have been increasing and street violence has become peculiarly fierce in southern Iraq. Convenient chance? Since the invasion, all calamities have been possible. Iraq remains under US control and in the south of the country (from where the operation could have been executed) the British influence through its intelligence could have facilitated the preparation and execution of this attack.