But Eric Brewer, a long-time intelligence official who
recently left Trump’s National Security Council after working on Iran,
doesn’t find that narrative compelling. “Soleimani’s death is not going
to end Iranian influence in Iraq,” he told me, “nor is it likely to lead
to some sort of regime change uprising in Iran.”
There are a few reasons for that.
First, Iranian influence is already well entrenched
inside Iraq’s military and political structures; removing Soleimani from
the equation doesn’t change that. Second, Iraqis and Iranians
have shown they are willing to push for better governance without US
military intervention spurring them to action. In fact, Iraqi protests
recently led some of the leadership there to resign, partly fueled by
the perception that Iran was really running Iraqi affairs of state. And
today there are already large-scale anti-US demonstrations sweeping Iran after the Soleimani killing.
Third, US-Iran history over the last few decades makes
everyday Iranians skeptical of American intentions in the country,
especially Washington’s involvement in the 1953 coup
of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh. (There was an
anti-government movement to remove President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad from
power when Barack Obama was president, and he chose not to get involved
so it didn’t seem like the US was meddling.)
Finally, there’s the hypocrisy problem: The US has no
qualms about supporting other authoritarian regimes around the world,
including Iran’s chief rival Saudi Arabia.
Joke, this is not a one off. It is a shift in policy, and in Trump's own policy.
ReplyDeleteIran switched off internet during people's protest. Soleimani said its a mitzva to kill their own protestors.