The Death of Qassem Soleimani: Trump’s Warmongering Choice
“A stick of dynamite into a tinderbox.” While Joe Biden, former U.S. vice president and international relations specialist, clearly held back from mourning the fate of Qassem Soleimani, the reaction of the current Democratic candidate for president says a lot about the risk of an escalation in relations between the United States and Iran. It also therefore says a lot about the threats that the death of the general, who was very close to the supreme leader of Iran, pose to an already very tense situation in Iraq and in the entire region. Another Democratic presidential candidate, Bernie Sanders, referred to the fear of “another disastrous war in the Middle East.”
In Iran, calls for revenge have multiplied, even before today’s meeting of the National Security Council, which will urgently consider a response to the American strike raid on the tarmac at Baghdad’s airport, which, in addition to killing the head of Iran’s elite Quds force, resulted in eight other victims. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei promised that “severe revenge awaits those [American] criminals.”
President Hassan Rouhani called for “free nations of the region” to take their “revenge ... on criminal America.”
The death of the Iranian general, a hero of previous wars against the United States and a true political-military star in his country, undoubtedly indicates the beginning of a dangerous period of uncertainty. It marks an explosive turning point in the long increase in tensions, created by Donald Trump’s withdrawal from the international agreement on the Iran nuclear deal. Tensions have significantly mounted in recent months, and even more so in recent days with the attack on the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad by pro-Iranian militia. The major risk from this point is whether Iraq, paradoxically allied to the United States and to Iran, transforms into a battleground between the two powers.
The White House rather plainly claimed credit according to the typical Trumpian scale of tweets, but the attack by the U.S. Army doesn’t make clear the presidential strategy in the Middle East. It was obviously celebrated by hawks in the Republican camp, supporters of “maximum pressure” on Tehran. But it contradicts Trump’s promise to militarily disengage from the region, a promise that was already largely underway. But a few weeks away from Trump’s impeachment proceedings, and above all, on the cusp of his campaign for reelection, the American president clearly favored the option to go to war at the risk of engaging in a situation he cannot control.
In Iran, calls for revenge have multiplied, even before today’s meeting of the National Security Council, which will urgently consider a response to the American strike raid on the tarmac at Baghdad’s airport, which, in addition to killing the head of Iran’s elite Quds force, resulted in eight other victims. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei promised that “severe revenge awaits those [American] criminals.”
President Hassan Rouhani called for “free nations of the region” to take their “revenge ... on criminal America.”
The death of the Iranian general, a hero of previous wars against the United States and a true political-military star in his country, undoubtedly indicates the beginning of a dangerous period of uncertainty. It marks an explosive turning point in the long increase in tensions, created by Donald Trump’s withdrawal from the international agreement on the Iran nuclear deal. Tensions have significantly mounted in recent months, and even more so in recent days with the attack on the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad by pro-Iranian militia. The major risk from this point is whether Iraq, paradoxically allied to the United States and to Iran, transforms into a battleground between the two powers.
The White House rather plainly claimed credit according to the typical Trumpian scale of tweets, but the attack by the U.S. Army doesn’t make clear the presidential strategy in the Middle East. It was obviously celebrated by hawks in the Republican camp, supporters of “maximum pressure” on Tehran. But it contradicts Trump’s promise to militarily disengage from the region, a promise that was already largely underway. But a few weeks away from Trump’s impeachment proceedings, and above all, on the cusp of his campaign for reelection, the American president clearly favored the option to go to war at the risk of engaging in a situation he cannot control.
Previous article![]( "US and Iran Clash in Iraq")
Next article![]( "US Must Not Stumble into Endless War with Iran")
