Follow us on social

Shutterstock_1605957556-scaled

Trump Administration knew Soleimani killing risked war with Iran

Heavily redacted classified DOJ memo shows the legal contortions used to justify the 2020 assassination.

Middle East

The Trump administration acknowledged that assassinating Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani in January 2020 could have escalated into war with Tehran, a newly declassified memo shows.

Last week, the Biden administration released a heavily-redacted version of the legal justification for killing Soleimani, in response to a lawsuit filed by the civil liberties organization Protect Democracy.

The memo claims that Soleimani was “actively developing plans” to harm U.S. troops and diplomats in the Middle East and that the 2002 Iraq War authorization provided legal justification for the strike. Both those arguments were cited publicly by the Trump administration at the time. 

But the document also states that the administration “considered the risk that the operation could escalate into a broader conflict,” given that Soleimani was “part of the military of Iran.” In the end, “the President’s national security team advised him, based upon available intelligence, that the targeted operation would be unlikely to escalate into a full-scale war.”

Several high-level officials were known to have pushed then-President Donald Trump to carry out the assassination.

Mike Pompeo, secretary of state at the time of assassination, had met with officials to discuss ways to “take Qassem Soleimani off the board” soon after becoming CIA director in 2017, Yahoo News reported earlier this year.

Pompeo even floated a broader “leadership decapitation strategy” against Iran, reportedly telling officials, “Don’t worry about if it’s legal; that’s a question for the lawyers,” according to the Yahoo News report.

The opportunity presented itself in late December 2019, when clashes between U.S. forces and Iranian-backed militias in Iraq killed one American and 25 Iraqis, and led to a pro-Iranian mob attempting to storm the U.S. Embassy.

When the option to assassinate Soleimani was being discussed, Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told Trump that he would “be held criminally negligible for the rest of your life if you don’t do this,” due to the risks posed by Soleimani’s operations to U.S. lives, according to journalists Carol Leonnig and Philip Rucker in their upcoming book I Alone Can Fix It.

U.S. forces then killed Soleimani on January 3, 2020 in an airstrike outside Baghdad International Airport, where the Iranian officer was meeting with several Iraqi militia commanders. Iran retaliated by firing missiles at a U.S. air base in Iraq, injuring over a hundred Americans.

In the days following the strike, the Trump administration offered contradictory explanations in public, first claiming that Soleimani posed an “imminent” threat to U.S. troops and diplomats, then admitting that they did not know of a specific time or place Soleimani planned to harm Americans.

The Trump administration’s explanation behind closed doors was not satisfactory, either, according to several Republican and Democratic lawmakers. Administration officials “were evasive and the answers were unsatisfactory,” one anonymous Democrat told Vox, while Sen. Mike Lee (R–Utah) publicly denounced officials for providing “the worst briefing I’ve seen, at least on a military issue.”

When asked how the administration would request legal authorization for military force, an official simply said, “I’m sure we could think of something,” according to Lee.


Baghdad, Iraq, January 3, 2020, thousands of Iraq people participating in funeral program of Iranian general Qassem Soleimani
Middle East
syria damascus bombing
Top image credit: A man walks with a Syrian flag, after powerful airstrikes shook Damascus on Wednesday, targeting the defense ministry, as Israel vowed to destroy Syrian government forces attacking Druze communities in southern Syria and demanded their withdrawal, in Damascus July 16, 2025. REUTERS/Khalil Ashawi

Israel blindsides Trump in self-serving effort to break up Syria

Middle East

Just days before Israeli F-35s screamed over Damascus, the improbable seemed within reach. U.S. Special Envoy Tom Barrack, leveraging his dual role as Ambassador to Turkey and point man on Syria, was brokering painstaking back-channel talks between two historic enemies.

The Syrian government, led by interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa, the former Islamist militant turned statesman, signaled openness to a non-aggression pact with Israel. Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar publicly welcomed Syria into “the peace and normalization circle in the Middle East.”

keep readingShow less
US Dollar
Top image credit: Yingko via shutterstock.com

Are Trump's aggressive policies weakening the dollar?

Global Crises

There has been an extraordinary flurry of announcements from the Trump administration about its preferred domestic and international policies since January 20.

Policies have been threatened, announced, postponed, canceled, and reinstated with greater or lesser severity. But underneath this hyperactivity, a clear pattern of economic policy preferences is emerging.

keep readingShow less
Masoud Pezeshkian
Top image credit: 6/22/2025 Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, center, attends a protest following U.S. attacks on nuclear sites, in a square in central Tehran on sunday, Jun 22, 2025. (Photo by Sobhan Farajvan/Pacific Press/Sipa USA VIA REUTERS)

What the West misunderstands about Iran

Middle East

When Iranian officials were preparing for the sixth round of negotiations with their U.S. counterparts over the country’s nuclear program, Israel launched a surprise military strike. Rather than condemning the attack, the United States and Europe stood by — or even applauded. The German Chancellor framed it as “the dirty work Israel is doing for all of us.” This moment only reinforced what Iranian leaders have long believed: that the world demands their surrender — and leaves them alone, at constant risk of betrayal and invasion.

Unless the West begins to understand Iranian history — and the mindset it has created among Iranian leaders — it will continue to misread Tehran’s actions. What often looks like aggression or stubbornness from the outside is, in the minds of Iranian decision-makers, an act of defense grounded in deep national memory.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.