The targeted killing of Qassem Soleimani, above all, wipes out the argument that it is possible to negotiate with Iran on one level while fighting it on another. That was the theory that former President Barack Obama followed when he was working toward the 2015 nuclear deal. He promised that harsh US sanctions would remain in place against Tehran when it came to terrorism and missiles, but when it came to its nuclear program, Iran would be embraced by the West and be able to return to the family of nations. That theory has been blown apart more than one, and on Friday morning, that piece of failed doctrine was finally declared dead.
This weekend's targeted killing – which apparently took out the most senior political figure targeted by the US since Admiral Yamamoto of Japan in World War II – eradicated the false distinction and forced Iran into a dilemma, not only in terms of the US, but the entire region. Will it be willing to set fire to the region to avenge an assassination that was carried out in a neighboring state, in which Iran intervenes even though it is unwanted? If the anti-Iran protests in Iraq weren't enough of an indication of the Revolutionary Guards' "popularity" there, perhaps the celebrations that erupted after Soleimani's death will get the message across.
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter
US President Trump was wise in ignoring, until now, Iran's various provocations, including the daring attack on Saudi oil facilities in September. It was seen as a sign that the Americans were increasingly disinclined to get bogged down in the Middle East morass, but – like a canny poker move – Trump's "ignoring" was intended to lay the groundwork for the "kill of the century" that came early Friday morning. His "ignoring" was a deception, and Iran lost the psychological game that it started.
Iran will find it hard to drum up international legitimacy to launch a regional war so it can avenge the killing of the former Quds Force commander, since he was a known terrorist entity who had been a moving target for years. The fact that he died in Iraq hints at both amateurism and complacency on his part – he knew very well that Iraq is a no-man's-land where the Americans operate freely, especially the Baghdad airport, where US security forces can track everyone with precision.
Plenty of people are making dark predictions and warning about the possible ramifications of the hit, just like many in Israel expected fire and sulfur following the assassination of Ahmad Yassin in 2004. In effect, Yassin's death actually reined in Hamas, and we might assume that the death of Soleimani will similarly cause the Iranians to recalculate their path. Eventually, it will have a deterrent, restraining effect: with all due respect to Iraq and Syria, what it most important to Iran is to survive Trump and revive its economy. Iran is desperate to find a way out of the crisis created by US sanctions, and any way it might do so entails convincing the Europeans to pressure Washington. Starting a war will only create distance between European governments and Tehran.
Only a few months ago, senior officials in Iran told the New York Times that the regime had concluded that Trump would win the 2020 presidential election, and so it should try to contain damage and agree to be flexible enough for him to lift the sanctions. Have the recent "Ukrainegate" and the decision to impeach President Trump caused the Iranians to think that he will fall in 2020, and therefore they can do whatever they want in the Middle East? Or perhaps Tehran thought that the president would be distracted by election campaign and prefer not to take the risk of any adventures in the Middle East that would cause him to lose support in Congress, where his legal fate will be decided?
On Friday, they saw for themselves that Trump is at his best when he supposedly has his back to the wall, and as over 15 Republican candidates and Hillary Clinton learned in the 2016 election, he is capable of surprising even himself. The Iranians had a chance to take the hand he was holding out by agreeing, with the generosity of the victor, to meet with them without preconditions and talk as equals, but they missed it.
Either way, the "kill of the century" once again categorizes them as terrorists, a categorization they can't throw off without a major change in thinking that starts by cutting themselves off from Syria and Iraq. The message of the "kill of the century" was also heard clearly in Pyongyang, where Kim Jong-Un has been sending hints for some weeks now that a major provocation is on the way. Now Kim knows that any false step, even the smallest, will arouse the wrath of the president on Pennsylvania Ave. Trump is determined to restore America's lost honor, and anyone who is thinking of getting in his way should move, and fast.
After the horrific attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, I saw the crude protests against then-President Bush. You read that right – Bush, not Osama Bin Laden. What a strange world, I – an Israeli journalist in Paris – said to myself, trying to find a little bit of reason in the insanity.
On Friday, I thought back to that time. President Donald Trump ordered the kill of the century, and the various TV channels (including Israeli ones) were stingy with compliments. What's worse, dime store experts are explaining that the move could further destabilize the region, since we all know that the late Qassem Soleimani, former commander of the Quds Force, was a key figure in keeping the region stable. Really, what would we do without the Islamic Republic of Iran, which promotes human rights in Iran and throughout the world?
The assassination of Soleimani in Iraq illustrates how insane the world can become. The peaceniks and the human rights advocates should have been the first to welcome the death of the arch-terrorist. The world is much safer without people like him. Soleimani was responsible for, among other things, building up terrorist forces in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and Lebanon, and of course strengthening terrorism in his own country, Iran, on the backs of the wonderful people who live there, whom I as a journalist had the privilege of meeting when I traveled there. Now he has joined the ranks of the arch-terrorists who are no longer with us.
What is the instinct that prompts people to Pavlovian, lightning-quick, attacks on Trump, like the ones against Bush after 9/11? To a large extent, these "expressions of concern" are a natural consequence of their total inability to understand Trump, ever since he entered politics. They didn't correctly assess his chances, or his determination to live up to the commitments he made to the American voters, and now they are trying to make his successes look ridiculous, to dwarf them or dismiss them as "whims," at best, or "dangerous haste," at worst.
We're already used to biased political analyses, and they have minimal effect on public opinion. What is nevertheless worrying is the fact that this shortsightedness also characterizes people who hold key positions in the security establishment – one of whom was held up until recently as a "dream" replacement for Prime Minister Netanyahu, or at least a leading ideologist of the revolution. "There are signs of a change in Trump's approach to Iran, including the possibility of a meeting between the presidents. That is a warning light for us all, that demands that we warn against Netanyahu's over-dependence on President Trump and sharp changes in his positions," former Prime Minister Ehud Barak recently tweeted. He tweeted – so what?
Incidentally, the prophets of doom who doubted Trump's promise to move the US Embassy to Jerusalem explained that doing so would be a provocative step that would put Israel's security at risk. The fundamentalist Democrats and liberals in the US will continue to criticize him, and our pundits and top officials can keep on dismissing his achievements in an all-knowing tone. Reality, as usual, will prove them wrong.
As Israelis who are under threat from the Iranian regime every day and every hour, even though we have no territorial dispute with it (the opposite, we share a glorious past), we should thank the US for its impressive, courageous, and important action, which sends the crucial message that Israel knows it has to defend itself, but he leader of the free world was reminding the world that the US was able to protect itself and its allies.
And in the name of the Jewish, Christian, and Muslim citizens of Israel, as well as the peoples of the region, we just want to say to Trump: Thank you again, Mr. President!
