Briefly, need to know
Briefly, need to know
The Death of Qassim Suleimani and Issues in the Middle East
The Death of Qassim Suleimani and What It Means
On Friday, January 3rd, a U.S. airstrike killed Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani. So how did this all start, why does it matter, and what set of chain reactions did President Trump just cause.
An American Contractor was killed on December 27th
The assassination of Suleimani was partly a reaction to a rocket attack on an Iraqi military base. The United States is stationed in Iraqi at the will and invitation of the Iraqi government, so in this attack that killed the contractor, both United States military and Iraqi personnel were injured.
It was not clear who launched the attack. While the American forces stationed in Iraq have been threatened by both Iranian-backed militias and the Islamic State, neither took responsibility for the rockets. The United States accused and blamed Qassim Suleimani for the attack.
In response
President Trump, while on holiday in Mar-a-Lago was presented with a list of options on how to retaliate against the attack. Trump chose, out of those options, to strike five targets in Iraq and Syria that are controlled by an Iranian group. Missiles for missiles— attacking supposedly the group that killed and wounded Americans— was, as some would say, a valid and equal response.
How protestors in Iraq responded
Protests in Iraq have been going on since October for many different reasons, but overall protestors have been angered by foreign involvement in Iraq from both Iran and the United States. On Tuesday, December 31st, protestors stormed the American Embassy in Baghdad, Iraq chanting “Death to America”.
What Trump did next
Trump started by deploying 750 more troops to the region in response to the threat on American personnel and facilities.
These protests are a direct parallel to the protests on the U.S consulate in Benghazi in 2013 where 4 Americans died. During the 2016 election, Trump criticized Hilary Clinton’s actions, who was then Secretary of State, for the unnecessary deaths and how the situation should have been handled better. So thinking back to these events, Trump calls his advisors back to Mar-a-Lago and says he wants to take further action. On the list presented to him in the first place with options on how to respond, the most extreme option on the list was to assassinate Qassim Suleimani. The option to kill Suleimani, even though on the list, was put there almost to deter the President from taking extreme action and encourage another response. None the less, Trump chose to assassinate Suleimani.
There were intelligence reports that Suleimani would be flying into Baghdad International Airport that night. When he arrived at the airport he was met by Iraqi officials deemed okay to kill by the Pentagon and the strike was authorized on his two car convoy as it was leaving the airport. This precise military strike killed Iranian General Suleimani along with other Iraqi officials.
Who is Qassim Suleimani exactly and why does this matter
Qassim Suleimani, also spelled Qassem Soleimani, was the most powerful general in the Iranian military. He is responsible for Iran’s control in Iraq, attacks against Israel, and the death of hundreds of Americans in Iraq. He was the head of the Quds Force, which is the foreign branch of Iran’s powerful security. He has been considered a terrorist by President’s Bush and Obama, but they have never taken action against him.
The Pentagon has accused Suleimani of planning several coming attacks on the United States, including the attack on December 27th.
Above is the statement made by President Trump after the death of Suleimani.
His death, although Trump states was not meant to start a war, is in fact an act of war. The Iranian people consider him a hero and have been mourning his death since the airstrike on Friday.
Mourners have flooded the streets of Iran to commemorate Suleimani and a state-wide Funeral is being held today, January 6th. Many mourners have chanted, “Revenge is coming.”
President Hassan Rouhani of Iran in his condolences on Saturday stated, “The Americans did not realize what a great mistake they made,” Mr. Rouhani said. “They will see the effects of this criminal act, not only today, but for years to come.”— The New York Times
Moving Forward
The death of Suleimani happened on Iraqi soil and the attack was referred to as “an outrageous breach to Iraqi sovereignty” by the prime minister of Iraq, Adel Abdul Mahdi. Since the United States is stationed in Iraq at the will of the Iraqi government, the presence of the U.S. in Iraq is now in question. Iraq has since voted to expel American forces from the country with a vote in parliament of 170-0.
One of the goals for killing Suleimani was to deter attacks against Americans, but it is possible the assassination could spark more attacks against the United States.
General Suleimani was also an opponent of the Islamic State, also known as ISIS. So the death of Suleimani benefits ISIS. Suleimani was responsible for building up Iran-backed militias that did the majority of the fighting to drive ISIS militants out of Syria and Iraq. Now the United States will be divided between handling the issues it has created with Iran and Iraq and fighting ISIS.
Additionally, Iran announced Sunday that they will no longer limit their production of nuclear weapons. Trump, trying to warn Iran not to attack said that the U.S. has already pinpointed 52 targets in Iran, including cultural sites. The destruction of these cultural sites would most definitely be an act of war.
Editors Note:
I truly tried to make this a very factual and informational piece instead of putting in my own opinion and bias, a very complicated thing for me to do considering I have a strong opinion on this issue.
This is my opinion here if you wish to read it:
Trump clearly should not have assassinated Suleimani. The United States had already responded to the death of the American contractor and as far as I know it is not even confirmed that Suleimani was directly responsible for the attack. Killing Suleimani is the equivalent to killing the vice president of the United States essentially. It is a big big thing to do and unless Trump wants to start a war, which he says he doesn’t, Suleimani should not have been assassinated. By killing Suleimani and sending more troops to the Middle East, Trump is only putting more lives at risk and fueling his own ego. If Trump truly believed Suleimani had authorized attacks against the United States, he should have spoken to congress before hand and should have spoken to the Iraqi government before taking any action. Trump also completely disrespected the Iraqi government and just made another enemy.
If Iran killed an American official with a bomb on U.S. soil, there would be complete outrage and we would declare war. Trump thinking that the Iranian and Iraqi people will not react is so naive.
Okay opinion done.
Admittedly, this took me quite a long time to put together and it was a lot of information to synthesize. With that being said there is so much underlying information and my use of the New York Times as a primary source could have been problematic. Basically, continue your own research and dive into this issue on your own. These tensions between the United States and the Middle East have existed far before 9/11 and are therefore quite complex.
My point is— you owe yourself and everyone who has died in this conflict your time and effort to understand the issues. This may have been your first effort to do so but it can not be your last. And in taking my own advice it will not be my last either and I shall continue to discuss these issues in the Briefly Series.
The first thing I listened to that gave me a very complex but clear picture of assassination was a podcast by The Daily called The Killing of General Qassim Suleimani. So I would highly recommend listening to it if you have any further questions or comprehend information better by listening.
I wanted to discuss both the issues in the Middle East and the devastating fires in Australia this week but I decided that each issue is too important to not discuss in full. The fires in Australia will be discussed in their own edition next Sunday/Monday if not sooner.
Thank you for your time, patience, and appreciation. If you have any comments and or additional information you believe I should look into and discuss I would greatly appreciate your feedback.
Always,
Isabelle Rosa