After all, Soleimani was too important and significant figure in the Iranian military establishment. His unit of the Islamic revolutionary guard Corps “al-Quds” was responsible for the conduct policy outside of Iran. That is,
Soleimani was sort of a curator of many Shiite armed groups in the middle East
In fact, he directed the actions of various Lebanese, Syrian, Iraqi, it is possible that Yemeni forces. Together hundreds of thousands of fighters.
The most serious challenge to
Naturally, the blow to such an important figure is the most serious recent challenge to the military-political leadership of Iran. Washington made his move, rigid and almost left the Iranians room to maneuver. Now Iran needs to think about what he do now.
While there is only war of words
Soleimani’s successor as the commander of “al-Quds” General Esmail of Kani said, “be patient and you will see the corpses of Americans throughout the Middle East.” The representative of Iran to the UN Majid Takht Ravanchi said
murder Soleimani, “equivalent to Declaration of war”
Theoretically, the response from Iran is very likely. It is clear that the Iranians are in principle able to attack Americans in the middle East. The US military are in Iraq, Syria, many countries of the Persian Gulf, in Jordan. There is Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu immediately supported the elimination of Soleimani and a long-time enemy Iran.
Tehran could make this many of the Pro-Iranian armed groups from Lebanon to Iraq,
this, in fact, hinted the new commander of the “al-Quds” of Kaani, not using their regular formation. Without a doubt, in Iran, there are those radical politicians who are willing to such measures. After the murder of Soleimani they have received an additional argument for the revitalization of their actions.
In this case it turned out such a military-political ping-pong. First, in 2019, the American President Donald trump gave some reason to think that he is not ready to take decisive action. In June, he refused to strike at Iran in response to the downed us drone. In September, did not respond to the attacks on neftepererabativaushiy complex in Saudi Arabia. In October unexpectedly withdrew American forces from Syria at a moment when Turkey began its operation in respect of loyal Americans of the Kurds. Then trump many in the US blamed on the delivery of strategic positions.
In the end, many, including in the Middle East region,
I had the impression that Americans are not the same as tramp in the words of terrible, but really weak
and avoids any harsh measures. The actual flight of American troops from North-Eastern Syria has caused friction even with the leadership of his own party of the American President. Many senior Republicans had expressed dissatisfaction with his policy.
Most likely, Iran thought that the United States is already far not the same. In the East generally don’t respond well to the indecision and unwillingness to take hard measures. Accordingly, they considered that it is possible to extend the use of a kind of guerrilla tactics.
The test of strength
That is, they will continue to have Americans on the strength. With this was associated the caused 27 Dec strike missiles, the Pro-Iranian group “Kataib Hezbollah” on an American military base in Kirkuk in Northern Iraq. In response, the Americans, December 29, attacked a camp of this group in Iraq. This led to the beginning of the protests in Baghdad, which resulted in the Pro-Iranian crowd of demonstrators attacked the U.S. Embassy in Iraq.
The most unusual about this incident was not so much what the protesters broke into the Embassy building in a protected so-called “Green zone” of Baghdad, and that the attack was carried out by Iraqi security forces that the area was guarded. There is no doubt that it has fundamentally changed the situation.
In the former cases, various incidents in Iraq, local government and government forces at least tried to take a neutral position
Official Baghdad even tried to take control of the Pro-Iranian militia Hash al-SHAABI, including its formation in the structure of the army. This was done with the aim to avoid actions of the Pro-Iranian insurgents against the Americans that can cause a reaction.
This time against the Americans was made by the security forces that guarded diplomatic area
The government of Iraq failed to prevent. It is clear that Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi today, it is obvious “lame duck”, in American political terminology, the outgoing politician, who is not much affected. He resigned on 1 December after large-scale anti-Iranian protests in Iraq and is now head of the provisional government.
Analogy in 1979
The Americans themselves claim that the Iranians were preparing a takeover of the Embassy by analogy with the events of 1979, when it seized the U.S. Embassy in Tehran. At the time of this incident, and then a failed attempt to release hostages undermined the reputation of President Jimmy Carter and prevented him to win the elections in 1980 the following year. In that situation, Carter began to look too weak politician that has caused disappointment in the United States.
If the Iranians wanted to once again experience the trump strength, the attack on the Embassy in Baghdad could be a clear demonstration of their capabilities. Still, not only the demonstrators were Pro-Iranian, but also the local Iraqi military from security forces, someone had to give the order.
In a situation when the authorities in Iraq are almost there, Iran is certainly capable of significant influence, if not population, to armed people from different agencies
But the Iranians, most likely, if we agree that they were behind the attack, would not cross a certain line. So, in fact the attack on the Embassy was not and, despite every opportunity to arm the attackers, no one shot and not stormed. Americans also only used tear gas and stun grenades.
A very distinctive video was spread in the network, where the American convertiplane landed Marines at the Embassy to enhance its security. It is obvious that flying these hulking machines in the sky over Baghdad was able to discontinue conventional portable flak complex, if someone wanted to. So, we can assume that the purpose of the event was not a seizure of the Embassy, but rather a demonstrative humiliation of the United States.
The Americans claimed that Soleimani came to Baghdad to coordinate activities on further seizure of the Embassy. But, if such a plan existed, it was logical to do this immediately after the protests began, using the effect of surprise. If suddenly the Iranians have begun to prepare the seizure of the Embassy after the arrival of Soleimani, it would have been a military operation with the intervention of us aircraft and troops. Then began a real war in the center of Baghdad.
Many observers note that the impact Soleimani was made possible by the betrayal of someone close to him,
otherwise, where Americans learned about the time of his arrival. But even if so, still, the Iranian General had shown obvious negligence. He drove from the airport in the same car with the leader of the Pro-Iranian militia in Iraq, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, which is well known and accurately observed.
The Americans and Iranians have long experience each other
It is very possible that this was due to the underestimation of the enemy. Soleimani knew that the decision on its liquidation in the United States can only take the trump. If trump has not responded to the drone, the tanker and the oil refinery in Saudovskoy Arabia, why did he have to attack an official of Iran in the territory of another state.
Soleimani could believe that for just no reason. Disgruntled protesters outside the Embassy still not quite the reason, they was not inside it. It must be borne in mind that the Americans and Iranians have long experience each other for strength. This kind of game, something like a confrontation of intelligence services during the cold war. But every game, even the unscrupulous, has its own rules. In this sense, the murder of a key General of the enemy side is a very sudden step.
Yes, the Pro-Iranian forces shelled the us base, the Americans in response attacked the base of the Pro-Iranian proxies, and so on. But no one is attacking American bases in Syria and Iraq all the power of Pro-Iranian militia of hundreds of thousands of people. In fact, there is such a slow process, where the parties face off, but do not cross some boundaries.
In this sense, the murder Soleimani is a shock to the Iranian elite
The Americans sent in their way a ping-pong table, and with such force that Tehran now we have to think how now not to look weak.
The problem here for the Iranians is that, like the Buddha earlier, they have to take such tough measures, which from their point of view does not meet their interests. It is that, paradoxically, when all available bellicose rhetoric, but the war to Iran is still not needed.
It’s too big a risk given the fact that the fronts of this war will be many and the enemy has an overwhelming advantage in air and missile weapons. Many of the Pro-Iranian police will not be able to compensate for the superiority of the US, Israel and perhaps Arab countries of the Persian Gulf in the air force.
At that time, as
defeat in the air war is able to bring Iran to the brink of economic disaster,
that is very dangerous given the presence of many disaffected in this country. And, more dangerous for the current authorities in Tehran of a national minority on the margins, and not protesters in major cities.
Tehran is in an extremely difficult situation
In this regard, Tehran and finds himself in an extremely difficult situation of choice of further tactics. Before the murder Soleimani, the Iranians relied on the fact that trump is weak. In the end, it will be possible to agree if not with him, with the future President of the United States, if they will become a more easygoing person.
Officials in Tehran have repeatedly said that
the best way out of this situation would be to return the U.S. nuclear deal with Iran
In this situation it is possible that the Iranians wanted to create a Trump such problems in the middle East, which would reduce its rating in the US and withdrew from the political game.
Probably Trump all of this and explained to his advisers. Could also be that played a role, the position of the leadership of the Republican party. In words, they support trump, stating that he will not allow impeachment, which the Senate must muster a two-thirds majority. Without the support of Republicans is impossible. But everything has its price. Incidentally, this is why trump, it seems, and the troops returned to Syria, trying to make up for their retreat. So maybe he gave the order to eliminate Soleimani.
Now in the capitals of different countries of the world build scenarios of future developments.
One expects a radical scenario. For example, Israel, which has historically feared Iran and its desire to have a nuclear bomb
In this group Saudi Arabia and some other Arab countries that fear Iran’s ambitions to create a kind of a big Shiite world.
For many others it is a big problem. In Europe I can’t stop thinking about the refugee flows, which inevitably, if there is a big war in the middle East. The same questions are faced by the countries, which are combined with the likely zones of conflict, they can also deal with refugees and other problems.
For the global economy this means a rise in oil prices and possible shortages of supply
from the Persian Gulf during hostilities. In General, anything good, the negative development options too much.
But this leaves hope that it will not come to extremes. Iran may be limited to the belligerent rhetoric and verbal threats. In the end, they didn’t say when it will begin. Maybe never. Despite all the desire of radical politicians to prove themselves on the battlefield, the risk for both sides of the conflict here is too great.