In the West, there is such a folk ballad:
Lost a nail and broke a shoe;
Broken a hoof, broke a warhorse;
Broke a war horse and injured a knight;
Injured a knight and lost a battle;
Lost a battle and lost an empire.
US President Trump ’s assassination of Iran ’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard ’s “Holy City Army” commander Qassem Soleimani is like the “nail” that caused a series of butterfly effects, followed by “bad iron hoof” and “fighting horse” “,” Kill the Knight “,” Loss of Battle “and even” Dead Empire “seem to be expected. At least for now, with the death of Suleimani as the lead, the entire Middle East and the world have become gunpowder barrels. The clouds of the Third World War have begun to spread in every corner.
Will the Middle East detonate World War III, who is Suleimani, why did the US military assassinate Suleimani, what the United States got, what kind of revenge Iran will take, and who will profit in the chaos, China and Russia How to do it and where the situation in the Middle East will go, these are topics of general concern to all parties. The topics in this group will be discussed and elaborated on the above issues, so stay tuned.
At the beginning of the new year of 2020, US President Donald Trump, who is still on vacation at the Haihu Manor in Florida, ate meatloaf and ice cream, and issued instructions to assassinate Iranian holy city brigade commander Suleimani. This scene is similar to Trump’s order in April 2017 at the manor to launch a missile attack on a Syrian air base. At the time, Trump was receiving visiting Chinese President Xi Jinping, and the two were enjoying chocolate cakes. After attacking the target, Trump talked to Xi Jinping about the number and power of missiles. He believed that it would be possible to attack the target thousands of miles away. Xi Jinping did not respond to Trump’s remarks. Trump later boasted to the media that “that is the most beautiful piece of chocolate cake you may have never seen.”
This time, assassination orders were issued against Iranian military commander Suleimani. Trump was surrounded by his family, friends and political allies, including son-in-law, senior White House adviser Jared Kushner, and a minority in the House of Representatives who blocked the impeachment. Party leader Kevin McCarthy. Later, Trump argued that Suleimani had conspired to attack Americans before his death, so U.S. forces ended Suleimani’s life in an air strike in Iraq. This is done to stop a war. US Vice President Mike Pence said on January 8 that without Suleimani, the United States is “safer.”
Multiple factors contributed to Trump’s decision to assassinate. For example, the U.S. unilateral characterization of Iran ’s Holy City Brigade and Suleimani ’s terrorism, U.S. extreme hawkish forces ’suggestions, the lack of military anti-war leadership, the lack of internal checks and balances in the National Security Council, and Israeli lobbying, etc. . However, Trump’s personal factors are decisive. If US military behavior is described as “national terrorism”, then President Trump is the largest political carrier of such “individual terrorism.”
After questioning from the outside world and pressure from opposition parties, Trump reluctantly stated in a national speech on January 8 that the attack was a deliberate decision. This is another turn in Trump’s stance.
Ordering the assassination of Suleimani, Trump completely bypassed the Congress, and it is unknown that the “eight gangs” of both houses of Congress will be passed. All Democrats were kept in the dark, and only individual Republicans were aware of it, such as McCarthy, the House Minority Leader who had dessert with Trump during the assassination, and Republican Senator Graham, who was informed of the attack a week ago. (Lindsey Graham). Even after the assassination, members of Congress want to see what intelligence prompted Trump to give orders. But the briefings by Trump National Security Council members were very hasty and perfunctory, and even pressured Congress not to openly debate this. This led to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s subsequent motion aimed at limiting Trump’s power over Iran.
At the National Security Council level, there were no people who raised “opposition” opinions. After several rounds of blood transfusions, most of the National Security Council’s staff now “cater” Trump, and internal checks and balances basically do not exist. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo just flattered Trump, even because of this order to stabilize the Secretary of State’s seat and give up running for the Senate seat; Secretary of Defense Mark Esper and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley performed Soon after, it will not be against Trump; the CIA directors Gina Haspel and Pompeo, and the director of national intelligence Joseph Maguire only temporarily “agent” .
The unanimous conclusion of these people is that the assassination of Suleimani will not cause war, and Trump as the commander of the three armed forces does not require Congress to approve this, let alone in their view this assassination is for “self-defense”. This is their logic. This led Trump to believe that he was doing the right thing or that no one around him told him right or wrong. The welcoming of the National Security Council staff and the relocation of Republicans has prompted Trump, who is very happy, to go black on the wrong path.
Blindly compared to his predecessor
When defending his assassination of Suleimani, Trump kept criticizing his predecessor, believing that this attack on Iran should have been done by his predecessor, Barack Obama. In other words, Trump considers this move to be a clean-up of the “message” left by Obama.
Trump has always wanted to overtake Obama, thinking that his internal affairs and foreign affairs are more successful than Obama. Driven by this consciousness. Trump has been focusing on “denying” Obama since he took office, removing all labels related to Obama’s agreements. Examples include withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), tearing up of the Paris climate agreement, ending repairs with Cuba and reopening the blockade. One of the sources of tension between the United States and Iran is Trump’s announcement in May 2018 to withdraw from the Iran nuclear agreement and the United States’ “extreme pressure” on Iran. The attack by Iran and its agents on US military bases and facilities in the Middle East, including missile attacks against US allies, is also related to this US decision.
The abolition of this agreement has nothing to do with the Iran nuclear agreement itself, and has nothing to do with Iran’s words and deeds, but more to Obama. On many occasions, Trump regards the Iran nuclear agreement as the Obama agreement, or the worst agreement in American history, and is naturally eager to destroy it and then quickly.
In fact, Trump hasn’t even read the agreement, not even knowing that the agreement is to prevent Iran from possessing nuclear weapons. Even at the time, the U.S. intelligence community and the National Security Council agreed that the Iranian nuclear agreement was in effect, but since Trump took office, he fell into a constitutional crisis such as “communicating with Russia”, campaign violations, and anti-immigrants, forcing him to relocate his attack targets. Aiming at Obama’s historical achievements, coupled with the encouragement of hardliners and pro-Israeli forces around him, Trump eventually tore up the Iran nuclear deal.
The most realistic problem is that Trump’s rejection of Obama and the removal of Obama’s label will inevitably lead to another Obama. In the next 2020 election, Trump’s likely opponent is Joe Biden. Biden is Obama’s vice president and a shadow of Obama. By negating Obama, you can deny Biden. It’s a killer.
A “human” threat
In the absence of effective internal checks and balances, coupled with the lack of personal governance, the danger of Trump’s personal factors is self-evident.
Trump’s reluctance to fight can be seen in his opposition to the surge in the Middle East, the abandonment of Kurds, and the withdrawal of troops from Syria and Afghanistan. However, his logic of “not fighting” is completely disregarding right and wrong, and even disregarding international law for the sake of “not fighting” and fabricating unnecessary charges. In April 2019, Trump declared the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a “terrorist organization,” according to the New York Times, a decision announced in a “rush and chaos” process. This time Trump ordered the assassination of Suleimani, assassination of leaders of other countries under the pretext of “preventing war.” Trump did not understand international law and even threatened to attack Iranian cultural sites. After the US military came forward to deny it, Trump changed his tongue.
Including Trump’s repeated attitude in the trade war with China and the reckless impulse to meet with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, Trump’s emphasis on personal political interests can be seen. Trump also unilaterally announced the relocation of the U.S. ambassador to Israel in Jerusalem without any progress in the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, and acknowledged Israel’s control of the Golan Heights. He did not consider excessively favoring his allies and announced these decisions s consequence.
Such hasty, impulsiveness, ignorance, and randomness are rare in international politics. According to a German poll conducted by the YouGov poll in the United Kingdom in December 2019, for Russia, China, the United States, Iran, and North Korea, most Germans (41%) consider Trump as the number one threat to world peace, while Iran and China Leaders Khamenei, Putin and Xi Jinping account for only about 7%. According to a poll released by the Pew Research Center in 2019, among the polls conducted in 25 countries, the international community not only trusts French and German leaders more, but also counts on Chinese and Russian leaders.
Trump’s ridiculous words and deeds hurt American credibility and leadership. The assassination happened just as the Senate was about to take over the impeachment case, and to a certain extent the public’s attention to his impeachment case was diverted. This once again reflects his consistent style of transferring internal contradictions by creating external crises. This disgraceful assassination instead reflects Trump’s internal self-confidence. It is also this lack of self-confidence that prompted him to override personal interests and likes over national security, damage the national image and credibility of the United States, and bring risks to regional security.
The influence of historical figures and leaders of different periods on the entire country is beyond doubt. In times of national crisis, some leaders may even play a role in turning the tide. A declining United States now needs such a leader. But it is definitely not Trump who shouted “make America great again” to turn the tide of the United States.
If he is re-elected this year, this internal friction and risk are likely to continue. If the Democrats are in power, they will inevitably be overthrown, and the United States will be caught in the vicious circle of constant “damage and repair” as Bush and Obama took office in the first 15 years of this century.