The Iran situation as it stands, for now

Brian M Downing 

Candidate Trump sounded ominous warnings toward Iran which continued into his presidency. He withdrew the US from the JCPOA, reimposed sanctions, and is trying to bring Tehran’s oil exports down to a trickle. Only Saudi Arabia, the GCC states, and Israel support the US.

Fighting seemed near earlier this week. The administration cited intelligence suggesting Iran was about to attack Americans in Iraq and Syria. This was based on detecting some missiles loaded onto small boats in the Gulf. Saudi ships and oil facilities suffered damage from uncertain sources. A rocket hit the Green Zone in Baghdad.

As those events were unfolding, the administration deployed an aircraft carrier and B-52s to the Gulf. One report said the US was planning to send 130,000 troops too, though this is unlikely as a ground war is highly unlikely. 

Yesterday, however, acting Sec of Defense Shanahan and Sec of State Pompeo, in a joint presentation, tried to allay concern of imminent hostilities. National security chief and lead warhawk Bolton has been silent. 

Why the walk back?

The dynamics behind the scenes aren’t clear but the president’s calming words indicate appreciable if not profound differences with Bolton. This has led to speculation that Bolton was behind the sharp increase in tensions. However, Bolton could not have ordered the military deployments. Generals and admirals take such orders only from the president. Something else was going on.

The Pentagon and other security bureaus may have urged caution as events were leading to open conflict that could bring adversities without discernible advantages. Military leaders voiced opposition to warhawks in Bush the Younger’s presidency. Admiral Fallon famously said there’d be no war during his watch.

The brass are warier than the warhawks. War games show that swarming tactics could overwhelm defenses and damage a US aircraft carrier, perhaps badly. That hasn’t happened since Okinawa (1945). Tehran could initiate running skirmishes along tanker routes that would require endless responses. Russian and Chinese intervention is possible if not probable, as both powers sense the US is in decline and poorly led just now.

Allies in Europe and East Asia may have expressed concern that oil prices, already rising, could reach levels unseen in years. The global economy would suffer. Even the roaring US economy, which the president claims as his, would slow down, perhaps well into the election year.

The anti-Iran entente

The president may bestride his times but his constancy is less than stellar. A pullout from Syria hasn’t happened and is unlikely to ever happen, largely because of pressure from Saudi Arabia, the GCC states, and Israel. They want a US presence in eastern Syria to threaten lines of communications between Tehran and Damascus.

The entente states want more though. They are eager to see Iran gravely weakened and expect the US to do the job. Time is running out for them. Trump’s reelection is in doubt and his successor might not share the entente’s agenda. Indeed, the Tehran delenda est policy makers may be relegated to think tanks and lobbies for quite some time.  

Pressure will come hard and fast from the entente. The president’s son-in-law, who put aside real estate to manage foreign policy in the Middle East, will also press the case for war. They know as well as anyone of the president’s lack of firm beliefs in the world. Perhaps more incidents in the Gulf will help their case.

© 2019 Brian M Downing 

Brian M Downing is a national security analyst who’s written for outlets across the political spectrum. He studied at Georgetown University and the University of Chicago, and did post-graduate work at Harvard’s Center for International Affairs. Thanks as ever to Susan Ganosellis.