Are We Going to War with Iran?. Iran is being pushed into a corner…
By: Jacquie Devigne
Tags: USA, Politics, Iran, War, Donald Trump

Are We Going to War with Iran?

Iran is being pushed into a corner. What will this mean for the Biden administration?

(Photo: Photo: Leonhard Foeger/Reuters)

Mohsen Fakhrizadeh — long described by American and Israeli intelligence officials as Iran’s top nuclear scientist — was killed in a roadside ambush near Tehran on Friday. Iranian officials were quick to place blame on Israeli agents.

It is unclear exactly how involved the United States was in this targeted assassination. As of now, the White House has not commented on the matter, although Donald Trump has retweeted articles detailing the attack. That being said, the United States and Israel have shared intelligence on their common adversaries; Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu share a hostility toward Iran and its nuclear program. It is difficult to imagine that Trump did not provide at least tacit approval of the ambush.

Trump is — at least nominally — a lame-duck president. Why would he allow such bold action to go forward?

At his core, Trump is eager to oppose Iran. He pulled out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action — commonly referred to as the Iran nuclear deal — in 2018. He ordered a targeted strike against Qasem Soleimani — the commander of the Quds Force — while Soleimani was in Baghdad in January. Trump cited threats to American embassies to justify the strike, although then-Secretary Mark Esper contradicted that assertion. Trump’s critics are quick to point out that Trump may want to prevent the incoming Joe Biden administration from re-negotiating the Iran nuclear deal.

Trump is an agent of chaos. Peace is not his goal.

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has vowed “definitive punishment” for those responsible for the most recent assassination. Exactly how Iran will respond remains to be seen. Will Iran dispense that punishment to Israel? To Israeli embassies? To prominent Americans? Will Biden be able to re-negotiate the Iran nuclear deal as he campaigned that he would do?

There is reason to believe that Iran will respond to this targeted assassination harshly. To be fair, if two prominent American officials were killed by a foreign adversary in less than one year — and especially if one of them was killed on American soil — the American public would be demanding retribution. Only the most devoted peacenik would be able to maintain a non-interventionist stance in the face of such aggression. There is no reason to think that the same dynamic is not at play in Iran right now.

Iranian protestors burn images of Trump and Biden during a rally in Tehran on Sunday. (Photo: Atta Kenare/AFP via Getty Images)

Perhaps most depressing is that Trump has not suffered any political capital in this major foreign policy move. The drone strike on Soleimani in January received quick scrutiny from the media and condemnation from Democrats, whereas Fakhrizadeh’s ambush has received considerably less attention. Perhaps timing plays a role in this discrepancy — Fakhrizadeh was killed the day after Thanksgiving, and the American public may be outrage-fatigued after recent election coverage.

In terms of foreign policy, Trump’s supporters fall into one of two categories: non-interventionists — such as Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) — and hawks — such as Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR). Trump has successfully been able to market himself to each camp depending on the audience. Paul has not yet commented on Fakhrizadeh’s assassination, even though Paul previously praised Trump for his so-called aversion to war in the Middle East. On the other side, Cotton expressed support for the attack on Soleimani and has previously downplayed the consequences of any possible conflict with Iran. Cotton was confident that a war against Iran would be, “two strikes, the first strike and the last strike.”

Cotton’s confidence is misplaced. The War in Iraq was similarly downplayed in 2003, though troops remain in Iraq to this day. Cotton’s assertion reveals how casually war is still perceived by American policymakers.

A potential war would be disastrous for Iran, but besides blasting a large hole in the federal budget, another Middle Eastern war might hardly be noticed by the American public. Americans have tolerated “forever wars” for the past nineteen years. Active duty military personnel — the Americans who are most affected by war — represent only 0.4 percent of the American population, and they are increasingly recruited from the same geographic areas and from military families. Few are asked to sacrifice. The burdens are not equally shared.

The world may not be safer following Fakhrizade’s ambush. Trump is unconcerned.