Horowitz: Trump Throws More Gasoline on the Fire

Tuesday, January 07, 2020

Rob Horowitz, GoLocalWorcester MINDSETTER™

President Donald Trump

When viewed in isolation, Major General Qasem Soleimani's removal from planet Earth is certainly a welcome development. He was a malign force in the region, responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Americans and thousands of innocent civilians. Additionally, given the ramping up of Iranian provocative and dangerous actions, some American military response to restore at least some deterrence was in order.

When viewed in context, however, President Trump’s decision to take out the Iranian equivalent of the Chair of the Joint Chiefs and Secretary of Defense all rolled into one, and to do so on Iraqi soil was reckless and ill-advised. We are already beginning to reap the completely foreseeable negative consequences.

In Iran, where there had been a recent series of demonstrations against the regime, the assassination of Soleimani, has at least temporarily changed the focus of dissatisfaction and anger to the United States. It has further strengthened the hand of the anti-American hardliners. “At least in the short term, this will create a rally to the flag; Suleimani was personally popular,” Vali R. Nasr, a Middle East scholar, former dean of Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies and State Department official, told The New York Times.

Not surprisingly, Iran announced on Sunday that they would now not be subject at all to the limits specified in the 2015 Nuclear Agreement and would aggressively move to reconstitute its nuclear program, unless the United States provided sanctions relief.

In neighboring Iraq, the parliament at the behest of the prime minister voted unanimously to expel US troops over the weekend. While it is uncertain how this will play out, one thing is for sure, President Trump threatening our supposed Iraqi allies with harsh economic sanctions, if they go through with demanding the withdrawal, is not going to do anything to help this fraught situation. Iraq is caught between its neighbor and fellow majority Shia nation Iran, which retains significant influence, and the United States. By taking out Soleimani on their soil, we have turned an already difficult problem for the fragile government of Iraq into one that is near impossible, increasing the possibility of civil war and potentially creating an opening for ISIS.

Perhaps most concerning, the killing of Soleimani does not appear to be connected to any broader strategy for realizing our objectives in the region. The current escalating conflict is the predictable result of President Trump’s decision to go it alone and withdraw from the Iran Nuclear Agreement, despite the fact that Iran was adhering to the deal and that the rest of the signers, China, Russia, France, United Kingdom and Germany all strongly opposed our decision and stayed in. We continue to be in the diplomatically untenable position of insisting that Iran stay in compliance with the “Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action,” while we refuse to live up to our end of the bargain, punishing this formidable and dangerous Middle Eastern nation with economic sanctions. The killing of Soleimani has made our diplomatic isolation only more so.

The Iranian Nuclear Agreement was keeping Iran from moving forward with its efforts to produce a nuclear weapon and would have done so until it expired in 2030. This is why even national security professionals who opposed the deal before it was signed, arguing then that it gave Iran too much money by returning their substantial frozen assets and that these new resources would be used to subsidize their designs of territorial expansion, still didn’t think we should withdraw.. After all, that "ship had already sailed", making it only common sense these original opponents thought to hold Iran to the commitments they made to unwind their nuclear weapons program--commitments to which it was adhering.

The path away from a war President Trump says he doesn’t want is through proactive diplomacy, combining a return to the nuclear agreement with at least some initial limited sanctions relief. As General David Petraeus remarked on Face the Nation, implicitly criticizing the Trump Administration for its passive approach to diplomacy: "It's not quite enough, I don't think, to say, well, they know how to reach us. I think we should actually be trying to reach out through intermediaries first, of course, as we have in the past, and then trying to come to some kind of agreement about how to get back to the nuclear deal that was had its strengths, as well as some shortcomings, to be sure, and then address the other legitimate grievances and issues that we have about militia activity, support and the missile program."

This is the path forward. It is a path that will require President Trump to at least implicitly admit he made a mistake in withdrawing from the nuclear deal.

Let’s hope, despite his demonstrated unwillingness to admit error, the president can at least recognize the current path he is on with regard to Iran is untenable. It is only consistent with a very likely unsuccessful effort at triggering regime change. To have even a slim chance of bringing that result about requires far riskier military actions--ones that further enmesh us in the Middle East, contrary to Trump’s professed desire to be less involved there.

The far more likely outcome is not regime change, but an incoherent policy that continues to fail to produce positive results and leads us perilously close to war. Mr. President, the time for a course correction is now. For all of our sakes, I hope you are capable of executing one--before it’s too late.

Rob Horowitz is a strategic and communications consultant who provides general consulting, public relations, direct mail services and polling for national and state issue organizations, various non-profits and elected officials and candidates. He is an Adjunct Professor of Political Science at the University of Rhode Island.