World Poised on Post-Soleimani Knife-Edge. Possible Off-Ramp Emerges?
The political fallout from Trump’s kill order will extend far wider than Iraq.
The political fallout from Trump’s kill order will extend far wider than Iraq.
Masih Alinejad isn’t just an Iranian journalist and activist. She’s on the U.S. government payroll and works for the increasingly “rabidly pro-Trump” Voice of America.
If Trump and Pompeo really want to de-escalate, that means not only backing off from more provocative and deadly kinetic acts; it also means backing off from the economic warfare that started the destructive cycle.
Would Trump ever assassinate a Chinese military leader?
Congress had the chance to repeal the law authorizing the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq. Team Trump is now using it as legal justification for killing Soleimani.
Meanwhile, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo blamed President Obama for starting a war with Iran.
This latest act of “foreign policy by assassination” will be largely rejected by most in the world. Only a few craven Gulf kings and princes—and Israel—will applaud it.
The outlines of the blowback are already taking shape as the Iraqi government, even some neutral and anti-Iran factions, have condemned the attack as, at the very least, an insult to the sovereignty of their country.
U.S. officials privy to the intelligence Trump used to determine a purported “imminent” threat from Iran say the evidence was “razor thin.”
The latest developments in Iraq and the greater Middle East illustrate the flaws in a piecemeal, unrealistic, and excessively military-reliant U.S. strategy.
Iran actively maintains a network of thousands of militants in the region, with organizations like Hezbollah, Hamas and the Popular Mobilization Forces ready to provide fighters.
Soleimani’s death will not end the opposition. Instead, it is an invitation to ignore the existing rules of the game. Americans in the Middle East, whatever their profession, are now targets.