On January 3rd we woke up to breaking news that the US had killed Gen Soleimani. He commanded Iran’s most elite military unit, the Revolutionary Guards Quds Force and was in charge of virtually all Iran-sponsored foreign military terrorist operations, particularly in Syria, Lebanon, Gaza and Iraq.
Retired U.S. General David Petraeus, who commanded American forces during the war in Iraq, once called Soleimani “our most significant and evil adversary in the greater Middle East.”
The US has been engaged in a world war on terrorism since 9/11, 2001. General Soleimani is the most senior terrorist leader in the world and therefore a valid target.
One’s initial reaction to the news of his death might simply be, oh my, now there will be a revenge attack on the US mainland and/or against military or civilians stationed overseas. While that may be true, a simple knee-jerk reaction hardly explains the larger issue and justification for taking him out at this point in time.
To put the Soleimani incident in perspective, it may be helpful to go back in time and review Middle East policy in general and Iran in particular since 9/11 2001.
President Bush’s policy/strategy in the Middle East post-9/11: After building a justification for invading Iraq and Afghanistan, the Bush Administration’s strategy evolved into one of nation building. That is, if we can successfully establish two valid and enduring democracies, Iraq to a greater extent and Afghanistan to a lesser extent, they could be the catalyst to transform the Middle East.
Unfortunately, we discovered after trillions of dollars and many American lives, that the Middle East is not up to the task. They are so deeply entrenched in authoritarian rule that they cannot conceive the concept of freedom as we know it.
September 27, 2013:President Barack Obama calls Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, marking the highest-level contact between the U.S. and Iran since 1979.
What evolved from that was a strategy towards Iran of, for lack of a better word, appeasement. That is, you be nice to us and we will be nice to you. It was essentially a reset of US policy in the Middle East. It was also blind to the Iranian goal of dominance in the Middle East.
What followed was two years of hard work by Obama, Biden and Secretary State Kerry at the negotiating table with Iran. The Iran nuclear deal, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, was sealed July 2015. Part of the deal was to offer Tehran billions of dollars in sanctions relief in exchange for agreeing to curb its nuclear program. The agreement was aimed at ensuring that “Iran’s nuclear program will be exclusively peaceful.”
Meanwhile, throughout the two years of negotiations, on any given Friday, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei could be viewed repeating his weekly message, “death to Americana and destruction of Israel”.
During negotiations, Obama/Biden/Kerry gave observers the impression that they would do anything to consummate the agreement. When completed many believed it was not worth the paper it was written on and in fact it gave Iran the green light to continue their drive toward Middle East domination and development of nuclear weapons and long-range delivery missiles.
Additionally, during the negotiations, President Obama orchestrated the return of $1.7 billion to Iran. During January 2016 an aircraft carrying $400 million cash in various currencies landed in Tehran. That money purportedly was partial payment of an outstanding claim by Iran for U.S. military equipment that was never delivered. Soon after, $1.3 billion followed.
To put this cash payment in context, Iran is the world’s largest state-sponsor of terrorism. Since 9/11 one of the most important actions against terrorism has been to shut down their ability to use the services of international banking. Cash has become the life-blood of terrorism. There is a lot of American and innocent civilian blood on that cash. A failed Obama strategy of appeasement.
May 2018, President Trump pulled out of the nuclear agreement with Iran and since has strangled them with economic sanctions. Interestingly, since the pullout, Iran admitted to advances in its nuclear weapon development.
The Trump foreign policy/Middle East Strategy can be summed up as follows: “America First”; we will rebuild our economy and our military while imposing harshest possible economic sanctions against those who wish to do us harm. We will avoid getting involved in large land wars around the world. But, be advised, if you strike us, we will strike back and you will not like the results.
On New Year’s Eve, an Iranian-backed terrorist organization in Iraq, attacked the US Embassy in Bagdad. Dozens of terrorists breaching the compound, did so in support of Kataeb Hezbollah, which the State Department has designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization.
General Soleimani had led Iran foreign policy towards the US through an 18-month lead-up to the US Embassy attack. Following the Iranian rocket attack on Saudi oil fields and the shooting down of a US drone over international waters, the Trump administration demonstrated unusual restraint. However, President Trump did issue a “red line in the sand” warning to Iran.
Soleimani flew into Bagdad to become personally involved with the Kataeb Hezbollah terrorist operations, thereby crossing the red line and presented himself as a perfect target of opportunity.
The Trump doctrine does not seek a land war with Iran. But three loud-and-clear messages have been sent to the Iranian leadership. One, when we identify a “red line” we mean do not cross it. The second is an implied message that the next air strike could take out your entire oil refining capability which is your last and only source of revenue. Finally, the take-down of Soleimani says it all; we know where you are and you might be next.
Marv Covault