No to War

Published in El País
(Spain) on 9 January 2020
by Editorial (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Lena Greenberg. Edited by Helaine Schweitzer.
Trump scorns diplomacy and chooses to intimidate his allies.

Donald Trump is completely right about at least two things. Qassem Soleimani had blood on his hands, and the issue is not whether we feel sorry he’s gone. And Iran should not get hold of a nuclear weapon, because this represents a danger to the region and a terrible example of nuclear proliferation. However, Trump was not right when it came to ordering the assassination of the Iranian general, going against not just international law but also an executive order prohibiting the assassination of political enemies signed decades ago by Ronald Reagan.* And Trump was not right when it came to choosing a unilateral method to stop Tehran from managing to become a nuclear power. Nor was he at all right when yesterday, oblivious to good practices and customs in international relations, he rudely demanded that the Atlantic alliance, the main European countries, and even China and Russia give in to his chaotic strategy of bullying and harassing Iran, and abandon the Iranian nuclear deal that has, so far, made it possible to halt the Iranian nuclear program.

Soleimani was the second most powerful member of a dictatorial and dangerous regime, but he was not the head of a terrorist group, which is how Trump described him yesterday in his solemn and somber speech at the White House. Taking his life is an act of war. The only precedent is the downing of the plane that was carrying Adm. Isoroku Yamamoto — responsible for the destruction of America’s entire Pacific fleet in a surprise airstrike on Pearl Harbor — in the middle of World War II. Nor should anyone invoke the dubious legality of George W. Bush and Barack Obama’s selective killings carried out as part of the global war on terror, which took the lives of the leaders of forces defined precisely as non-state actors.

Nothing can justify the escalation on either side. Not the escalation by Iran, with its missile attacks in Iraq and the Persian Gulf. Not the escalation by the United States, with this assassination of an Iranian leader in response to the attack on U.S. Embassy facilities in Baghdad. The move was clearly disproportionate, and there was insufficient consultation with Washington security agencies, much less European allies, beforehand. In return, the European Union, along with the countries that have signed the nuclear deal with Iran, should — instead of following Trump’s inappropriate and abusive orders — ask both sides to cease the escalation and put an end to this highly serious clash, before it becomes an open and uncontrolled war.

Two issues are causing particular concern in Europe. The first is the resumption of the Iranian nuclear program, not just because of the danger it represents in and of itself, but also because the destruction of an agreement so painstakingly crafted is a defeat for multilateralism and a setback in global nonproliferation policies. The second issue is the possibility that the terrorism of the self-proclaimed Islamic State, which Iran, and even the assassinated general, Soleimani, had dedicated significant efforts to fighting against, could make gains. That’s why the EU should devote its energies to both fighting the Islamic State group and convincing Tehran not to bury the multilateral nonproliferation agreement.

The White House, leaning in exactly the opposite direction, has complemented the president’s statement by taking an unjustifiable step that is at odds with its international commitments: denying a visa to the Iranian foreign minister, Javad Zarif, to stop him from attending the U.N. Security Council meeting in New York. This decision precisely limits the only tool capable of resolving the conflict — diplomatic action — and is a further indication of the terrible path taken by Trump in the face of this crisis. The unilateral turn taken by the White House, alien to international law and carried out behind the backs of even diplomatic institutions and American military intelligence, represents a danger to peace in the Near East. This danger calls for urgent action, and leadership by the EU in particular.

*Editor’s note: Ronald Reagan issued Executive Order 12333 which provides that no person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination.


No a la guerra
Trump desprecia la diplomacia y opta por intimidar a sus aliados

Donald Trump lleva toda la razón al menos en dos cuestiones. Qasem Soleimani tenía las manos manchadas de sangre y no es cuestión ahora de apiadarse de su desaparición. E Irán no debe hacerse con el arma atómica, pues constituye un peligro para la región y un pésimo ejemplo de proliferación nuclear. No la tiene, en cambio, ni en la orden de asesinar al general iraní, en contravención no tan solo de la legislación internacional, sino incluso de una prohibición presidencial de los asesinatos de enemigos políticos, firmada hace décadas por Ronald Reagan, ni tampoco en el método unilateral elegido para evitar que Teherán consiga convertirse en poder nuclear. Tampoco le asiste razón alguna en su grosera conminación ayer, ajena a los buenos usos y costumbres en las relaciones internacionales, para que la Alianza Atlántica, los principales países europeos e incluso China y Rusia se rindan a su desaforada estrategia de acoso y asedio a Irán y abandonen el Plan de Acción Conjunta que ha posibilitado hasta ahora la paralización del programa nuclear iraní.

Soleimani era el número dos de un régimen dictatorial y peligroso, pero no el jefe de una banda terrorista tal como lo describió ayer Trump en su solemne y sombría intervención en la Casa Blanca. Acabar con su vida es un acto de guerra que solo tiene como antecedente el abatimiento en plena Segunda Guerra Mundial del avión en el que viajaba el almirante Yamamoto, responsable de la destrucción de la toda flota estadounidense del Pacífico en un ataque aéreo por sorpresa en Pearl Harbor. No cabe acogerse tampoco a la dudosa legalidad de los asesinatos selectivos practicados por George W. Bush y Barack Obama como parte de la guerra global contra el terror para terminar con la vida de dirigentes de fuerzas definidas precisamente como no estatales.

Nada puede justificar la escalada. Ni de un lado, ni del otro. Ni del iraní, con sus ataques con misiles en Irak y en el golfo Pérsico. Ni del estadounidense, con este asesinato de un mandatario iraní en respuesta al asalto a las instalaciones de la Embajada de Estados Unidos en Bagdad, a todas luces excesiva y sin suficientes consultas previas a los organismos de seguridad de Washington y menos todavía a los aliados europeos. En buena correspondencia, la Unión Europea, y con ella los países firmantes del acuerdo nuclear con Irán, en vez de seguir las órdenes impropias y abusivas de Donald Trump, deben pedir a las dos partes que cesen en la escalada y den por cerrado este gravísimo encontronazo, antes de que se convierta en una guerra abierta y sin control.

Dos son las cuestiones que producen especial desazón en Europa. La primera es la reanudación del programa nuclear iraní, no tan solo por el peligro que significa en sí mismo, sino porque la demolición del acuerdo tan difícilmente construido constituye una derrota del multilateralismo y un retroceso en las políticas de no proliferación en el mundo. La segunda es la progresión que pueda hacer el terrorismo del autodenominado Estado Islámico, contra el que Irán, e incluso el asesinado Soleimani, habían hecho no pocos esfuerzos. De ahí que la UE deba dedicar sus energías tanto al mantenimiento de la alianza para combatir el Estado Islámico como a convencer a Teherán de que no entierre el acuerdo multilateral de no proliferación.

La Casa Blanca, orientada exactamente en dirección contraria, ha acompañado la declaración presidencial de una medida injustificable e impropia de sus compromisos internacionales, como es denegar el visado al ministro de Exteriores iraní, Javad Zarif, para evitar que acuda a la reunión del Consejo de Seguridad de Naciones Unidas en Nueva York. Esta decisión limita precisamente el único instrumento capaz de revertir el conflicto, como es la acción diplomática, y constituye un indicio adicional del pésimo rumbo tomado por Trump ante esta crisis. La deriva unilateral y ajena al derecho internacional emprendida por la Casa Blanca, a espaldas incluso de la diplomacia y de la inteligencia militar de Estados Unidos, constituye un peligro para la paz en Oriente Próximo que apela especialmente a la acción urgente y al protagonismo de la Unión Europea.
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Singapore: TikTok Deal Would Be a Major Win for Trump, but Not in the Way You Might Expect

Japan: US Signing of Japan Tariffs: Reject Self-Righteousness and Fulfill Agreement

Mexico: Nostalgia for the Invasions

Singapore: Several US Trade ‘Deals’ Later, There Are Still More Questions than Answers

Topics

Turkey: Will the US Be a Liberal Country Again?

Singapore: TikTok Deal Would Be a Major Win for Trump, but Not in the Way You Might Expect

Pakistan: US Debt and Global Economy

Mexico: Qatar, Trump and Venezuela

Mexico: Nostalgia for the Invasions

Malaysia: The Tariff Trap: Why America’s Protectionist Gambit Only Tightens China’s Grip on Global Manufacturing

Singapore: Several US Trade ‘Deals’ Later, There Are Still More Questions than Answers

Related Articles

Singapore: TikTok Deal Would Be a Major Win for Trump, but Not in the Way You Might Expect

Mexico: Nostalgia for the Invasions

Malaysia: The Tariff Trap: Why America’s Protectionist Gambit Only Tightens China’s Grip on Global Manufacturing

Canada: Putin Is Negotiating Victory, Not Peace

Trinidad and Tobago: US, Venezuela and the Caribbean: Diplomacy 1st