Uprooted Palestinians are at the heart of the conflict in the M.E Palestinians uprooted by force of arms. Yet faced immense difficulties have survived, kept alive their history and culture, passed keys of family homes in occupied Palestine from one generation to the next.
الأكيد أنه سواء تمّ التوصل إلى قواعد اشتباك في تحديد طبيعة الردّ الإيراني على العدوان الأميركي الذي أدّى إلى اغتيال القائدين قاسم سليماني وأبي مهدي المهندس وما تبعه من امتناع أميركي مخالف للتهديدات السابقة عن القيام بأي ردّ، أم أنها حسابات متبادلة أجراها كل من الفريقين على حدة، فالأكيد أن حجم القضايا العالقة بين طهران وواشنطن، التي ترجمها اليأس الأميركي من التوصل إلى تفاوض أو تسوية بقتل سليماني، وترجمت القيادة الإيرانية في مواجهتها رفع سقفها السياسي برفع شعار إخراج القوات الأميركية من المنطقة والتحرّر من كل الضوابط الخاصة بملفها النووي وفقاً لمضمون الاتفاق الخاص به، ما يجعل كل فرضيات حدوث تسوية تنهي الصراع مجرد وهم كبير أو كذبة كبيرة في سياق البروباغندا الإعلامية لتهوين الموقف عند الطرف الخائف من مناخ المواجهة على وضعه الداخلي دولياً وإقليمياً.
–
الواضح أن الذي جرى يفتح الباب لفرصة الحؤول دون اندلاع الحرب، وكل حرب في زمن استحالة الإفناء للخصم، أو تدمير قواه بصورة كاملة لفرض الاستسلام عليه، هي مقدّمة لتفاوض سياسي بصفتها حرب استنزاف مكلفة يصمد من يتحمّل تبعات وتداعيات خوضها أكثر من خصمه، ويقطف في النهاية ثمارها بمعزل عن تقديرات القدرة العسكرية الصافية للخصوم المتقابلين. ومن يدقق في مسار حرب تموز 2006 على لبنان وحروب غزة المتكررة يعرف أن النهايات رسمتها معادلات القدرة على الصمود وليس معادلات القدرة على التدمير.
–
انطلقت لحظة المواجهة الأولى من تقدير أميركي بأن إيران عاجزة عن تحمل تحدي التصعيد الذي حملته ضربة اغتيال سليماني، فهي في أوضاع اقتصادية صعبة، ولا تملك موارد خوض حرب، وساحتها الداخلية تواجه احتجاجات شعبية وتذمراً من الوضع الاقتصادي، وحال حلفائها ليس أفضل. وساحات الحلفاء تعاني انقساماً سياسياً يهدد قدرتهم على مشاركة إيران بالخطوات اللازمة للمواجهة. والاستنتاج الناجم عن هذه المقدمات هو أن إيران ستعيش تحت ضغط قدرة الردع الأميركية، وتستجيب ولو تحت الطاولة لطلبات واشنطن، خصوصاً بالانسحاب من سورية وتقليص دعمها لحركات المقاومة تمهيداً للعودة للتفاوض حول ملفها النووي.
–
البعد العسكري لأي مواجهة محكوم بقدرات نارية عالية للفريقين بالتناسب مع نوعية الأهداف المقابلة التي يريد إصابتها، فلا تحتاج إيران لتحقيق التوازن الناري والعسكري إلى مقدرات موازية لتلك التي تملكها القوات الأميركية لتطال بنيرانها كيان الاحتلال والقواعد الأميركية الواقعة في مرمى صواريخها. وهذا يعني أن العامل السياسي الداخلي للفريقين هو الحاسم في تحديد القدرة على تحمل تبعات قرار حرب، وقد شهدت الأيام الفاصلة بين استشهاد سليماني والرد الإيراني ما يكفي من الوقائع للقول إننا أمام داخلين متعاكسين تماماً؛ داخل إيراني يغلي طلباً للحرب وداخل أميركي يصرخ طلباً لتفاديها، والداخل الشعبي والسياسي الإيراني ظهر موحداً وهادراً باتجاه الحرب، والداخل السياسي والشعبي الأميركي يمسك أنفاسه ويحمل انقساماته سعياً للهروب منها.
–
تعامل الردّ الإيراني مع هذه الحصيلة كقانون حاكم للحرب فتمّ صرف بعض بسيط من الرصيد السياسي والشعبي الذي ظهر أنه يشمل كل حلفاء إيران، بردّ يثبت الجهوزية لما هو أشدّ، ويستعرض القدرات على المضي قدماً وإلحاق الأذى، لكنه يفتح الباب لتحكم بحرب استنزاف طويلة تشتغل على الانقسام الأميركي حول الحرب لصالح أرجحية كاسحة ترفضها، وفوقها الانفضاض الشعبي عن خيار الحرب، ليتحكّم بالزمن الانتخابي الأميركي في الشهور المقبلة، وليست حالة التطلب للمزيد من الردود في شارع إيران وحلفائها إلا تعبيراً عما تريده القيادة الإيرانية ومعها قادة المقاومة، للقول لم ننتقم بعد، وهذه ليست إلا طلقة أولى، ويمسكون بناصية الحرب بين أيديهم، وفقاً لمعادلة لكم الخيار بين أن تنسحبوا من المنطقة عمودياً، أي على أقدامكم، بمعنى المخرج اللائق الممكن سياسياً الذي تجدون فيه عذراً لهذا الانسحاب، أو أفقياً، أي في التوابيت، بمعنى الذهاب للحرب، وتحمل التبعات، مع تزايد تعاكس الاتجاهات بين الحالتين الشعبية والسياسية في ضفتي الاشتباك، حول حجم التفويض للذهاب للحرب وتحمل نتائجها. – إيران ومعها قوى المقاومة تضع المشهد الرئاسي الأميركي خلال الشهور المقبلة بين رئيس يقرّر الانسحاب فينال فرصة إعادة انتخابه، أو مرشح رئاسي يأتي في ظلال حرب ويتعهّد بالانسحاب فيُنتخَب.
فيديوات متعلقة
حاجي زاده: 9 طائرات أميركية أجلت المصابين من قاعدة عين الأسد إلى “إسرائيل” والأردن
قاآني: القصف الصاروخي على قاعدة عين الاسد كان ضربة أولى لأقوى قوة في العالم
الأسير صدقي المقت إلى الحرية
المقت للميادين: نحن مدينون لدماء الشهيد قاسم سليماني
Four days after the terrorist attack which killed Martyrs Soleimani and Al-Muhandis, the Islamic Republic retaliated with missile attacks on at least two military bases in Iraq where US troops were present. The retaliation was to be expected as popular demands and expectations were at an all-time high during the three day long funeral procession.
So on Wednesday night, on January 8th, at exactly the same time when the US conducted its terrorist attack four days earlier, the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps launched their missiles on the largest and most significant US military base in Iraq, Ain al-Assad where the US had gathered a large number of its troops after evacuating many bases in Shia dominated areas around Baghdad. Ain al-Assad is located in the western Al-Anbar province, and was the same base from which the drones that killed Martyrs Soleimani and Al-Muhandis were launched. There was also a second US base in Erbil that came under attack that night.
According to reliable sources, the Iraqi prime minister Adel Abdul Mahdi was informed by Iran about the imminent attack and relayed the information to the US forces who were prepared in advance. The IRGC attack was conducted with two types of missiles – the Fateh 313 and the Qiam types. These Precision ballistic missiles targeted specific areas of the airbase and were deliberately aimed at avoiding casualties. The idea was to only send a message to Washington and its vassals: “Don’t test us because we can and will hurt you badly”. Despite reports by Iranian state media about 80 casualties, a number reported to appease the domestic opinion, it is more likely that there were very few or rather zero casualties for the US occupation forces. However, it should be noted that the US refused to allow any Iraqis to investigate the site for the attacks, and no pictures whatsoever were released until at least 14 hours after the attack. Indicating that Washington was hiding something.
So why did Iran intentionally avoid killing US troops? The obvious reason for this- de escalation. But the ingenious part of the Iranian plan was to de-escalate the crisis without actually de-escalating it in public. Of course, the leadership in Tehran aren’t so eager for a war which will result in millions of lives lost, Iranians are still traumatized by the 8 year brutal Iran-Iraq war which caused the deaths of over a million Iranians.
The message was aimed to achieve several goals, the first I mentioned above.
The second goal can be identified in the decision to attack the base in Erbil, to show the US that its forces will not be safe in Erbil, and that they should not dare to think that they can remain in their vassal state of Kurdistan.
The third probable goal was to send Israel and the Gulf states a clear message. Throughout the night it was reported by several sources and outlets that Hezbollah had threatened to launch attacks on Israel if the US were to respond to Iran’s retaliations, while the Houthis in Yemen had threatened to launch their missiles on the Gulf states that are harbouring US troops. Meanwhile the Hashd Al-Shaabi had also threatened to turn the US embassy into ashes should they dare to attack Iran. This was a show of force by the Resistance Axis – to show Washington’s allies that the entire region will be engulfed in fire if Iran is attacked directly. It was also reported that night that the IRGC had warned Qatar and the UAE that any country that allowed its territory to be used as a springboard for a US attack would be considered a legitimate target for Iran’s retaliation.
But like I mentioned in my latest article, the true revenge for Iran would not be to strike back militarily, but to kick the US out of the region. This was confirmed by the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei when he held a speech on Wednesday morning:
“The talk of revenge and such debates are a different issue. For now, a slap was delivered on their face last night,” Ayatollah Khamenei said in remarks broadcasted live on national television.
“What is important about confrontation is that the military action as such is not sufficient. What is important is that the seditious American presence in the region must end,” he said to chants of “Death to America” by an audience in Tehran.
The Leader hailed the Iraqi parliament’s decision ordering US troops to leave the country as well as the Iranian parliament’s blacklisting of American forces as terrorists.
“This measure by the Majlis was a very good blow. The Iraqi parliament’s act for the expulsion of America from Iraq was also very good. May God help them continue this path.”
“The Americans want Iraq to be like the former idolatrous regime in Iran or Saudi Arabia today – a region full of oil to be under their control so they can do whatever they want – a milking cow in the words of that individual,” Ayatollah Khamenei said in reference to US President Donald Trump.
“But the faithful elements and the Iraqi youth and their Marja’iya (religious authorities) stood up to these scenarios and Haj Qassem assisted this vast front in the capacity of an active adviser and an honorable supporter,” the Leader added.
The Islamic Republic’s allies lauded the IRGC’s attack with statements of support from Syria, Hezbollah, Hashd Al-Shaabi and Houthis. The Islamic Republic’s moral victory and bravery during this crisis has encouraged the region to muster enough courage to dare to speak of the Terrorist Empire’s inevitable expulsion from West Asia.
The strike has also shown the world and especially Washington’s vassals in the region that the billions of dollars spent on purchasing “the best military equipment” in the world are useless as a deterrence against the Islamic Republic. This realization will push them to seek rapprochement with Tehran, and could even entice countries to seek to purchase Iran’s missiles.
Meanwhile, on Wednesday afternoon, US president Donald Trump held his speech in response to the attack. Speaking from the White House, Trump backed away from threatening further strikes against Iran, describing Tehran’s stand-down as “a good thing for all parties concerned.”
“Our missiles are big, powerful, accurate, lethal and fast…The fact that we have this great military and equipment, however, does not mean that we have to use it.”
Trump did, however, vow to impose new economic sanctions on the Islamic Republic, in addition to the thousand or so already imposed since the US withdrew from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA, or Iran nuclear deal) in 2018. “These powerful sanctions will remain,” he said, “until Iran changes its behavior.”
After boasting about America’s “big missiles,” Trump spent the remainder of his speech suggesting that under a new deal, Iran could become a “great country,” and could cooperate with the US on areas of mutual benefit.
“ISIS [Islamic State, IS, ISIL] is the natural enemy of Iran,” he said. “The destruction of ISIS is good for Iran. And we should work together on this and many other shared priorities.”
(Trump during the moment of the IRGC missile attack)
I’m certain that any intelligent person understood that Trump got the message quite clearly. He spent major parts of his speech talking about the JCPOA and other matters, and his how “great” the US economy is – neither of those had anything to do with the crisis. Many people surely noticed how his tone changed – from previously threatening to destroy Iran’s cultural sites if Iran responded, to suggest that Washington was hoping for negotiations, once more proving many people’s points of Trump’s total incompetence when it comes to diplomacy.
Now that the Iraqi parliament have voted for the expulsion of US forces, which can be seen as the first retaliation for Martyrs Soleimani and Al-Muhandis’ killings (the second one being the IRGC’s attack), the US occupation of Syria is also in danger. Washington and its pathetic vassals, unless they wish to send their troops home in coffins, will have to respect Iraq’s decision or face the wrath of the Iraqi resistance forces.
The time when Washington can just hit other countries and threaten them to stand down is over. The Empire has been exposed and will no longer be able to freely terrorize the region without suffering consequences. One way or another the US will be removed from West Asia, beginning with Iraq.
It would be inaccurate to say the US will leave the Middle East. However, it is certain that the assassination of one single man – the Iranian General Qassem Soleimani – is diminishing US influence significantly. This could not have happened without the (in) direct help of US President Donald Trump.
Trump is doing everything possible to undermine and degrade US hegemony in the world. He doesn’t need any help in this endeavour, but his advisors and cabinet members share his talent for mismanaging foreign policy and national security affairs. With this bad advice US relations around the world, and particularly in the Middle East, have been run as if by a businessman, used to negotiating and intimidating with little subtlety and altogether lacking diplomatic skills.
Every time Iran needs help, President Trump rushes headlong to boost its image in the world, particularly among the “Axis of the Resistance” and above all in relation to China and Russia. These two countries will now only strengthen their relationship with Iran, the country that has effectively and publicly challenged the strongest country in the world.
Targeting a base with thousands of officers and soldiers from hundreds of kilometres away and deliberately avoiding human casualties shows incredible self-confidence in Iran’s manufacture of their own missiles. Iran has shown the strength and technical ability to bomb the most powerful US base in Iraq with precision missiles and has now twice shown mercy by not killing US servicemen.
The first time was in June 2019 when Iran declined to down a US spy plane carrying 38-officers that had violated Iranian space during the “Tanker’s war”. The second time was yesterday when Iran deliberately chose not to bomb human targets at the Ayn al-Assad base hosting in Iraq, home to thousands of US, British, Canadian, Norwegian, Belgian and Dutch officers. Iran used precision missiles to hit specific military objectives avoiding human casualties, by contrast with Trump’s decision to assassinate an Iraqi commander (Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes) and an Iranian general and diplomat on a mission of peace (Sardar Qassem Soleimani).
The Iranian hit on the Ayn al-Assad military base exposed the weakness of the most sophisticated radar and interception missiles in the US arsenal. President Trump has long bragged about these tools like the “best in the world”. But the US defence system at the Iraqi-US base in al-Anbar (west of Iraq) was incapable of intercepting one of the 13 ballistic missiles launched. The consequences of this single act are devastating both to the US armament industry and to US foreign policy in the Middle East.
This strike has shown US allies in the region that the hundreds of billions of dollars they have invested in US weapons are an insufficient defence against Iran. These countries now recognize they have no real deterrence against an Iranian attack. This realisation will push the traditional enemies of Iran in the Middle East to bypass their differences and take the road to Tehran to regain good ties with the “Islamic Republic”. It should not be excluded that many countries would be tempted to buy Iranian precision missiles that must be much cheaper than the expensive US manufactured ones.
President Trump also sent a wrong signal when he announced: “The US doesn’t need Middle Eastern oil”. This statement has been taken by many Middle Eastern leaders as indicating the US government’s lack of appetite to defend their interests since many of these regimes base their yearly budget on oil income.
This brings us to another important point: Trump’s threat to Iran’s nuclear capability. Following the Ayn al-Assad bombing, it is clear the US will not be involved in bombing Iran any time in the future. The US has the destructive military capability, so does Iran. The lesson learned from the Iranian bombing is that Iran is ready to bomb and hit back US targets with great accuracy. Therefore, bombing Iran is off the table. However, Iran developing its nuclear capability is on the table. Tehran is likely to announce new developments in this area as we approach the anniversary of the US revocation of its commitment next April.
Iran has no choice but to totally pull out from the nuclear deal due to the incapacity and unwillingness of the European signatories of the Iran deal (known as the JCPOA) to honour their commitments, to offer Iran any alternative, and to confront Trump’s unilateral abrogation of the US treaty obligation. Such an announcement will be the Iranian “gift” to Trump for his forthcoming electoral campaign, providing political ammunition to Trump’s political opponents.
Trump has done everything in his power to unify Iran behind their leaders by imposing sanctions on the Iranian people and assassinating their general. Iran played the US sanctions skilfully when attacking tankers in the Strait of Hormuz, gathering public support for the regime and fuelling nationalist feeling. The US assassination of Sardar Qassem Soleimani brought millions onto the street and unified Iran under one flag: the return of Iranian dignity, power and sovereignty. Only Trump could have achieved such a critical goal, regenerating the Iranian regime at the right and most needed moment.
Trump’s call for NATO to assume its responsibility in the Middle East has been interpreted in the region as indicating a serious decline of US hegemony. The US President is showing his inability or unwillingness to deal with Middle Eastern affairs. This could reflect the incompetence of his advisors, or a strategic decision by the US to let go of its influence.
Iran showed its power as a regional country capable of facing the US in its most difficult state. There is little doubt the 40 years of US sanctions on the “Islamic Republic” were a total fiasco even with Trump’s “maximum pressure” of sanctions. It would be difficult to imagine the results if Iran was not under these sanctions all these years.
The US primary ally in the Middle East, Israel, is watching the events with a lot of focus. Iran’s threat to hit the US or Israel is real today. Not only that, throughout the years, Iran has delivered these precision missiles to its partners in the Middle East. Iran (or its allies) showed its capability in the most complicated and coordinated attack ever, as proved during the destruction of Saudi Arabia oil facility. Drones and precision missiles launched hundreds of kilometres away hit simultaneously their target. This spectacular attack was claimed by Yemen, the poorest country in the Middle East that initiated its weapon supply and retaliation only in recent years. What about Hezbollah, the fully equipped and highly trained organised but an irregular non-state actor with 38 years of experience? Hezbollah has received precision missiles from Iran and deployed these on the Syrian-Lebanese borders under the mountain chain in underground silos. The Iran bombing of the US-dominated base in Iraq marks the end of the Israeli-Hezbollah war. Israel can see what Iran and its allies are capable of. It should maybe start thinking about a different approach towards the Palestinians.
The US President – who promised to end the “endless wars” – killed the Iraqi commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes and the Iranian Major General Qassem Soleimani believing he could win control of Iraq and achieve regime change in Iran. On the brink of triggering a major war, Trump has spectacularly lost Iran and is about to lose Iraq.
“Beautiful military equipment doesn’t rule the world, people rule the world, and the people want the US out of the region”, said Iran Foreign Minister Jawad Zarif. President Trump doesn’t have many people in the Middle East on his side, not even among his allies, whose leaders have been repeatedly insulted. Iran could not have dreamt of a better President to rejuvenate its position domestically and regionally. All Iran’s allies are jubilant, standing behind the “Islamic Republic” that fulfilled its promise to bomb the US. A “New Middle East” is about to be born; it will not be “Made in the USA” but “Made in Iran”. Let us hope warmongers’ era is over. The time has come to recognise and rely on intelligent diplomacy in world affairs.
Proofread by: C.G.B and Maurice Brasher
This article is translated free to many languages by volunteers so readers can enjoy the content. It shall not be masked by Paywall. I’d like to thank my followers and readers for the confidence and support. If you like it, please don’t feel embarrassed to contribute and help fund it for as little as 1 Euro. Your contribution, however small, will help ensure its continuity. Thank you.
Representative of Hamas resistance movement in Lebanon Ahmad Abdu Hadi revealed that Hezbollah top commander Hajj Imad Mughniyeh and Commander of IRGC’s Quds Force General Qassem Suleimani had visited Gaza repeatedly and contributed to resistance actions against the Zionist entity in the coastal enclave.
“There are 360-kilometer underground tunnels in Gaza. The idea of these tunnels was introduced by two men: the first was Imad Mughniyeh, while the second was Qassem Suleimani,” Abdul Hadi said in a meeting with journalists on Wednesday.
Martyrs Suleimani and Mughniyeh went repeatedly to Gaza and contributed to the defensive plans by the resistance factions in the besieged strip, Abdul Hadi added.
“Thanks to Suelimani and Mughniyeh the resistance managed to have and produce Kornet rockets and anti-aircraft rockets as well as missiles equipped by three warheads that are capable to reach Tel Aviv.”
Mughniyeh was martyred in a Mossad car bomb attack in the Syrian capital, Damascus, in February 2008. Suleimani was
Iran’s Islamic Revolution has triumphed internationally. We begin with the immensity of Qassem Soleimani’s funeral.
The time Hajj Qassem Soleimani spent on the path of jihad begins with the commencement of the Islamic Revolution in 1979 and ends with the revolution’s global victory in 2020.
The Islamic Republic made the whole world understand the definition of honor. It introduced to the world the essence of Iran’s Islamic Revolution as well as its meaning and values which were never limited to a certain geography. On the contrary, they were meant to be global. The natural time prerequisites were the ones that delayed the Islamic Revolution from acquiring its international nature.
Martyr Qassem Soleimani’s great burial ceremony that took place following the qualitative Iranian response marks the end of a chapter for the people of this world. The great leader was not laid to his final resting place until the door of a new stage that will be witnessed by everyone was opened. It is the stage of victory and glory that he always wanted.
The beginning of his jihadist career coincided with the start of the Islamic Revolution. Soleimani’s role was central in the Quds Force as he was responsible for exporting the revolution to support the oppressed people of the world.
The arrogant forces thought that by ending General Soleimani’s physical existence they would destroy his role and retract the effects of the Islamic Revolution. But they miscalculated. Where the Americans failed, the Iranians succeeded.
Washington’s move only served to introduce a new phase that ordained the Islamic Republic of Iran as the godfather of regional and world politics. Here, we are just assessing a series of facts.
In the standards of strength, there is a difference between having power and managing it. The essence of real power is in its management, not its possession. It is the delicate line that separates the behavior of the weak and the righteous from that of the people of falsehood who arrogate in the use of power.
In the world of power management, the Iranian nation succeeded where many empires, nations and countries failed. It succeeded because it realized early on the meaning of rebelling against tyrants and how to achieve glory starting from the victory of Imam Khomeini’s revolution during the 1970s. Didn’t the Shah of Iran represent the arrogance of the West in the East? Is it possible that those who have eliminated arrogance fail in managing a revolution against arrogance in the world? These are historical facts. But we are a nation that does not read the true lessons of history.
What is happening today is a consequence that the world has been late in understanding. However, the Islamic Republic found in the assassination of martyr Qassem Soleimani the right time for the world to know that values always triumph, even after a while. Hence, with a carefully planned method, it delivered a just punishment that matches the level of Iranian national security and the weight of a martyr belonging to the axis of resistance. Since Iranian national security interests are integrated with that of the axis of resistance, the image of the Islamic Revolution is complete. And its scenery turns towards internationalism.
The greatness and wisdom of the Iranian leadership appeared. An upsurge in the strengths of the righteous system also appeared. It was met with the fall of the U.S. as an arrogant power. A state of confusion and weakness also appeared. Iran has humiliated the head of arrogance. This is just the beginning. Soon, a collapse of the arrogant system with its political, economic, military and security dimensions will follow.
This as the burial ceremony came after retribution that translated the quality, style, location and timing of the meaning of managing power. With it, a new phase that would be called “glory to the vulnerable and humiliation of the arrogant” was opened throughout the world.
Is it not the first time in history that a great leader bearing the banner of truth is buried after carrying out retribution against his arrogant enemies? More importantly, if this was just the beginning, what would the next stage be? Here, it is necessary to pause at what happened before the response. Did Washington not mobilize all of its diplomatic ties to mediate with Tehran to prevent a response? Have major powers not moved to dissuade Iran from responding and for Iran to state its conditions that Washington was ready to agree to?
The first response took place. In assessing its results, the shift in the balance of power is clear. But this shift, with the pangs before the birth of the new world order, is considered the most difficult period. It is a stage in which the knives planted by the arrogant and the pains that came with them will be extracted from the body of the world. But it seems that for the sake of honor, the pain becomes a feeling of euphoria.
It is the beginning where the truth revealed the definition of glory and immortalized martyr Qassem Soleimani at the heart of time. And the beginning of the stage pushing the revolution of the weak towards internationalism is connected to his martyrdom.
America’s hegemonic military agenda in the Middle East has reached a dangerous threshold.
The assassination of IRGC General Soleimani ordered by the President of the United States on January 3, 2020 is tantamount to an Act of War against Iran.
President Donald Trump accused Soleimani of “plotting imminent and sinister attacks”: “We took action last night to stop a war. We did not take action to start a war…. we caught him in the act and terminated him.”
US Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper described it as a “decisive defensive action” while confirming that the operation ordered by POTUS had been carried out by the Pentagon. “The game has changed” said Esper.
What the media has failed to acknowledge is General Soleimani’s central role in countering ISIS-Daesh and Al Qaeda terrorists in both Iraq and Syria.
The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps-Quds Force (IRGC) under the helm of General Soleimani consisted in waging a real counter-terrorism campaign against ISIS-Daesh mercenaries, who from the outset were funded, trained and recruited by the US and its allies.
Trump’s action plan to “stop a war” consists in “protecting” America’s ISIS and Al Qaeda affiliated foot-soldiers.
US Extrajudicial Assassinations
While the assassination of General Soleimani constitutes a criminal act on the part of President Trump, the US practice of extrajudicial assassinations of foreign politicians has a long history.
What distinguishes the assassination of General Soleimani from previous extrajudicial killings, is that the president of the US has formally announced that he gave the order.
This sets a dangerous precedent. It was “overt” rather than “covert”, i.e. a covert operation by the CIA or by a US sponsored Al Qaeda affiliate acting on behalf of Washington.
It is important to note that it was not Trump but in fact Obama who formalized (“legalized”) the practice of extra-judicial assassination (ordered by the president):
And if the president [Obama] can kill anyone, including US citizens, without judicial review, what power does he not have? Any but the most formal distinction between democracy and presidential dictatorship is swept away. (Joseph Kishore, wsws.org, October 31, 2012)
Trump’s Response: More Troops to the Middle East
While the Pentagon announced that it is “sending thousands of additional troops to the Middle East”, a unanimous vote in Iraq’s parliament was reached demanding the immediate withdrawal of all US forces.
The legislation requires the Iraqi government to “end any foreign presence on Iraqi soil and prevent the use of Iraqi airspace, soil and water for any reason”.
Note: Death to America: refers to the US Government, Not the American People
Backflash: A Digression. The Obama Air Raids (2014-2017)
Concurrently the Iraqi parliament suspended the corrupt 2014 agreement with the Obama administration which invited the US to lead a fake counterterrorism operation directed against the Islamic State (ISIS-Daesh), made up of mercenaries who are funded, trained and recruited by US-NATO, with the support of Saudi Arabia and the UAE.
The decision of the Iraqi parliament is in this regard fundamental. This operation was used by the Obama administration as a pretext to justify a third phase of the Iraq War (1991, 2003, 2014). Initiated in June 2014 by Obama under the disguise of a counterterrorism operation, a new phase of killing and destruction was launched.
Why was the US Air Force unable to wipe out the Islamic State which at the outset was largely equipped with conventional small arms not to mention state of the art Toyota pickup trucks?
From the very outset, Nobel Peace Laureate Barack Obama’s air campaign was NOT directed at ISIS. The evidence confirms that the Islamic State was not the target. Quite the opposite. The air raids were intended to destroy the economic infrastructure of Iraq and Syria.
Look at the following image which describes the Islamic State convoy of pickup trucks entering Iraq fromn Syria and crossing a 200 km span of open desert which separates the two countries.
This convoy entered Iraq in June 2014.
What would have been required from a military standpoint to wipe out an ISIS convoy with no effective anti-aircraft capabilities?
Without an understanding of military issues, common sense prevails.
If they had wanted to eliminate the Islamic State brigades, they could have “carpet” bombed their convoys of Toyota pickup trucks when they crossed the desert from Syria into Iraq in June 2014.
The Syro-Arabian Desert is open territory (see map right). With state of the art jet fighter aircraft (F15, F22 Raptor, F16) it would have been –from a military standpoint– “a piece of cake”, a rapid and expedient surgical operation, which would have decimated the Islamic State convoys in a matter of hours.
But if that had happened, they would not have been able to implement their “Responsibility to Protect” (P2R) bombing campaign over a three year period (2014-2017).
Instead what we witnessed were drawn out relentless air raids and bombings which culminated with the so-called liberation of Mosul (February 2017) and Raqqa (October 2017) by the US led coalition.
And we were led to believe that the Islamic State had the upper hand and could not be defeated by a powerful US led military coalition of 19 countries.
The people of Iraq and Syria were the targets. Obama’s bombing raids were intent upon destroying the civilian infrastructure of Iraq and Syria.
ISIS-Daesh were never the target of US aggression. Quite the opposite. They were protected by the Western military alliance.
US Troop Withdrawal: Yankee Go Home (2020)
While a major US troop withdrawal is unlikely in the foreseeable future, “America’s War on Terrorism” is in jeopardy. Nobody believes that America is going after the terrorists.
The “Yankee Go Home” process has commenced. The US is not only being ousted from Iraq and Syria, its strategic presence in the broader Middle East is also threatened. And these two processes are intimately related.
In turn, several of America’s former allies including Turkey, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and Egypt have normalized their relations with Iran.
Trump’s Punitive Bombings. Will They be Carried Out?
In recent developments, Trump has warned that if Tehran responds to the assassination of General Soleimani, he will “target 52 Iranian sites” intimating that they would be “HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD.”
Donald Trump wants to hit back. But he has a serious logistical problem on his hands of which he may not even be aware of.
Normally a punitive operation of this nature directed against Iran would be entrusted to USCENTCOM’s forward headquarters in the Middle East located at the Al Udeid Air Force base in Qatar.
With 11,000 US military personnel, the al-Udeid Air Force base close to Doha is “one of the U.S. military’s most enduring and most strategically positioned operations on the planet” (Washington Times). It has led and coordinated several major Middle East war theaters including Afghanistan (2001), Iraq (2003). It was also involved in Syria.
But there is a problem: The forward base of USCENTCOM at the al-Udeid Air Force base is in Qatar. And since June 2017 Qatar has been “sleeping with the enemy”. Qatar has become a staunch ally of Iran.
What both the media, as well as foreign policy and military analysts fail to acknowledge is that US CENTCOM’s Forward Base headquarters at the al-Udeid military base de facto “lies in enemy territory”. And it would seem that POTUS is totally unaware of this situation.
“Qatar has always been an exceptional partner, and this base from which we are operating is a great base, and CENTCOM has no intention of moving anywhere,” said CENTCOM’s deputy commander, Chance Saltzman.
More recently, they have been discussing the establishment of Iran-Qatar bilateral military ties.
Having decided that Al Udeid (located in enemy territory) could not be moved to another location in the Middle East, the Pentagon then envisaged a scenario of moving Al Udeid air and space operations to South Carolina: “to 7,000 miles away in South Carolina”. It was a simulation. “The temporary switch” lasted only 24 hours.
Lessons Learnt: You cannot effectively “wage war” in the Middle East without a “Forward Base” in the Middle East. This “South Carolina Test” borders on ridicule.
Are US military planners desperate?
Since May 2017, following the break up of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) the Pentagon has NOT BEEN ABLE TO MOVE USCENTCOM FORWARD BASE (including its air force striking capabilities) OUT OF ENEMY TERRITORY (QATAR) to a “friendly location” (e.g. Saudi Arabia, Israel) in the broader Middle East region.
Military analysts now admit that in the case of a conflict with Iran, Al-Udeid would be an immediate target. “The base’s defence system is said to be ill-equipped to defend itself against the low-flying cruise missiles and drones…”
Mr. President: How on earth can you launch your punitive bombings on Iran from the territory of a close ally of Iran?
From a strategic point of view it does not make sense. And this is but the tip of the iceberg.
While the bombing and missile attacks can be dispatched from other US military bases in the Middle East (see diagram below) as well as from Diego Garcia, US aircraft carriers, submarines, etc, the regional USCENTCOM Forward Base at Al-Udeid, Qatar, plays a key role in the command structure in liaison with USCENTCOM headquarters in Tampa, Florida, and US Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM) at the Offutt Air Force Base, Nebraska.
Source: Statista
While Qatar and the US have a longstanding bilateral cooperation agreement pertaining to the al-Udeid Air Force base, Qatar has military cooperation agreements not only with Iran but also with Hamas and Hezbollah, all of which are “enemies” of the USA:
The challenge for Washington is that while Qatar hosts al-Udeid, it’s also friendly with the Gaza-based Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), it is close to the Hezbollah’s leadership … [Qatar also] has cozy relations with Iran. Indeed, if Qatar didn’t host America’s largest air base in the Middle East, it would be under pressure from the U.S. to cease much of this behavior.”
And to top it off, Qatar is also friends with Russia. A military technical cooperation agreement pertaining to air defense was signed with Moscow, immediately following Qatar’s rift with Saudi Arabia in June 2017.
Turkey’s Incirlik Air Force Base
“A sleeping with the enemy situation” also prevails with regard to Turkey’s Incirlik Air Force base which was established in the 1950s by the US Air Force. Incirlik has played a strategic role in all US-NATO led operations in the Middle East.
With about five thousand airmen, the US Air Force is now hosted in a country (aka Turkey) which is an ally of both Russia and Iran. Turkey and Iran are neighbouring states with friendly relations. In contrast, US and Turkish supported rebels are fighting one another in Northern Syria.
In mid-December 2019, Turkey’s foreign minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu dropped a bombshell, intimating “that the United States could be barred from using two strategic air bases [Incirlik and Kurecik] in retaliation to possible US sanctions against his country” regarding Turkey’s purchase of the Russian S-400 missile defence system.
America’s Conventional Warfare Capabilities
For several reasons, US hegemony in the Middle East has been weakened in part as a result of the evolving structure of military alliances.
America’s command capabilities have been weakened. Two of the region’s largest strategic Air Forces bases, namely Incirlik (Turkey) and Al-Udeid (Qatar) are no longer under the control of the Pentagon.
While war against Iran remains on the drawing board of the Pentagon, under present conditions, an all out Blitzkrieg (conventional theater war) involving the simultaneous deployment of ground, air and naval forces is an impossibility.
While the US does not have the ability to carry out such a project, various forms of “limited warfare” have been contemplated including targeted missile attacks, so-called “bloody nose operations” (including the use of tactical nuclear weapons), as well as acts of political destabilization and color revolutions (which are already ongoing) as well as economic sanctions, manipulations of financial markets and neoliberal macroeconomic reforms (imposed via the IMF and the World Bank(.
The Nuclear Option against Iran
And it is precisely because of US weaknesses in the realm of conventional warfare that a nuclear option could be envisaged. Such an option would inevitably lead to escalation.
Ignorance and stupidity are factors in the decision making process. According to foreign policy analyst Edward Curtin “Crazy people do crazy things”.
Who are the crazy people in key decision-making positions?
Trump foreign policy advisers: Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, national security adviser Robert O’Brien and Brian Hook, (Special Representative for Iran and Advisor to Pompeo), could “advise” President Trump to authorize a “bloody nose operation” against Iran using tactical (B61 bunker buster) nuclear weapons, which the Pentagon has categorized as “harmless to civilians because the explosion is underground”.
The bloody nose operation” as designated by the Pentagon, conveys the idea of a military op (using a low yield “more usable” tactical nuclear weapon) which allegedly “creates minimum damage”. It’s a lie: the tactical nuclear weapon has an explosive capacity between one third and 12 times a Hiroshima bomb.
Tensions between the United States and Iran are spiraling toward a military confrontation that carries a real possibility that the United States will use nuclear weapons. Iran’s assortment of asymmetrical capabilities—all constructed to be effective against the United States—nearly assures such a confrontation. The current US nuclear postureleaves the Trump administration at least open to the use of tactical nuclear weapons in conventional theaters. Some in the current administration may well think it to be in the best interest of the United States to seek a quick and decisive victory in the oil hub of the Persian Gulf—and to do so by using its nuclear arsenal.
We believe there is a heightened possibility of a US-Iran war triggering a US nuclear strike…
Of significance, the use of tactical nukes does not require the authorization of the Commander in Chief. That authorization pertains solely to so-called strategic nuclear weapons.
Despite the warnings of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, present circumstances do not favor the conduct of a US “bloody nose” tactical nuclear weapons’ operation.
The US Air Force’s tactical nuclear weapons arsenal is stored and deployed in five non-nuclear European countries including Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Italy, Turkey at military bases under national command.
According to Hans Kristensen and Matt Korda (Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, 2019 report), the US possesses an estimated 230 tactical nuclear weapons of which 180 are deployed in the five non-nuclear European countries. Some 50 B61 bunker buster bombs with nuclear warheads (gravity bombs) are stored and deployed at the Incirlik air force base which is under Turkey’s jurisdiction. (see table above)
