Brian M Downing
Iran will strike back hard after Suleimani’s assassination. To Iranians, the event is roughly comparable to the 9/11 attacks on the US. So popular was the IRGC general that If the mullahs and generals do not demonstrate resoluteness in coming days or weeks, they will face popular protest far stronger than what reformers can mobilize.
But there will be no forbearance from Tehran. Pro-Iran militias in Iraq are already launching rocket and mortar attacks on US personnel. More is coming in Iraq, Syria, the Gulf, and Afghanistan where Tehran has been supporting the Taliban.
Inside Iran
In addition to weighing the ferocity and locations of counterstrikes, Tehran is gauging its support from Beijing and Moscow. The three states had already announced joint naval maneuvers in the Sea of Oman and all three want to see American power in the region decline – and without a major war.
Tehran may ask Russia to deploy military forces into Iran. After decades of foreign meddling and a coup, Iranians oppose foreign presences but they did allow Russian aircraft to attack Syrian rebels from an airfield near Hamadan, albeit briefly. Another exception may be made to stand up to the US now. Chinese naval vessels anchoring in Iranian ports would help too.
Another request would be for the sale of ship-killing cruise missiles. These weapons go supersonic as they near targets and are very difficult to bring down. The US has upgraded its SeaRAM defense system but it is unproven and might not handle swarming tactics in any case. The loss of an aircraft carrier would signal a portentous power shift in the region, but the response might be fearsome.
Tehran has just announced that it will no longer abide by any limits on nuclear enrichment at its Fordo and Natanz sites. There might be considerable support in Tehran for building nuclear weapons now, especially in the IRGC, but Moscow and Beijing do not want it. Today’s announcement will embarrass Washington and deepen the divide with European and Asian allies – much to the advantage of Russia and China.
However, it will also cause Washington and Jerusalem to dust off plans for attacking Fordo and Natanz. And concern of such an attack may force Russia and China into pushing high-value chips forward.
Global opinion
Sympathies do not ordinarily attach to a government of clerics and generals that has recently killed 1500 of its people. But world leaders and publics are more hostile just now toward the Trump administration for its rhetoric, policies, and boorishness.
Few countries outside the US, Saudi Arabia, and Israel believe that Iran had a nuclear weapons program when Washington reimposed sanctions two years ago. Now that Iran has restarted the program, most of the world blames Washington.
Suleimani was by no means admired outside the Shia world but his assassination is widely seen as a dangerous escalation – far more than the Iranian-backed militia’s attack on the US embassy in Baghdad.
Germany is already beginning efforts to calm the region. It will find considerable support in Europe, Asia, and elsewhere, none from the White House.
Inside the US
US is as polarized as anytime since the mid-19th century and presidential primaries are about to begin. That’s hardly a good time for a reasoned discussion of anything, especially foreign policy which after all has thus far been barely mentioned by candidates.
The Democrats are hardly a party of non-interventionism. The 2003 Iraq war had broad support from them. Later, when it went badly, their opposition was limited, almost meaningless. The war went on – and it still does.
Criticism of Suleimani’s assassination and warnings of its ramifications have begun. The opposition party will speak of high principles but will be seen as partisan and opportunist. It’s unclear how independent voters will respond as polling data show concern with Iran rising over the last two years and military action in the world enjoys considerable support.
Congress is unlikely to try to reestablish control of wars. It ceded that to the White House long ago and could manage it no better than it does the national debt.
Democrats in the House would more usefully summon intelligence figures and generals, active and retired, and ask their views on Iran’s nuclear program over the last two years, the advisability of killing Suleimani, likely consequences for US troops in Iraq and Syria and regional stability, and their relation to US security.
Generals were already uneasy with Trump’s inconsistency in foreign policy, inattentiveness to briefings and advice, and disrespect toward Generals McMaster, Mattis, and Kelly. Now he has firmly implanted the US, through design or incompetence, in a worsening conflict between Saudi Arabia and Iran.
The generals, politicians, and voters will have to determine if the president’s temperament and judgment are benefiting or endangering American interests and lives.
© 2020 Brian M Downing
Brian M Downing is a national security analyst who’s written for outlets across the political spectrum. He studied at Georgetown University and the University of Chicago, and did post-graduate work at Harvard’s Center for International Affairs. Thanks as ever to Susan Ganosellis.