Ayatollah Ali Hosseini Khamenei, who has led Iran as its supreme leader since 1989, is dead, killed in an Israeli airstrike on Saturday. Israeli and American bombs are still raining down across Iran as part of Operation Epic Fury—a name that doesn’t lend confidence to the notion this administration has good things in mind for the Iranian people. Some are, like the bombs that killed Khamenei, intended to assassinate top Iranian officials, including President Masoud Pezeshkian. Others are aimed at decimating the country’s military. Still others are falling indiscriminately—like the one that fell on a girls’ school in Minab, killing dozens of children.
Make no mistake, this is an illegal regime change war. The implications of Trump’s desperate decision-making may be felt for decades. It is the invasion of Iraq redux, but without even an attempt to cloak itself in legitimacy. There was no congressional address, no attempt to persuade the public, certainly no visit to the United Nations—just three minutes in the State of the Union devoted to a war that may portend that next great American foreign policy catastrophe in the wider Middle East, and America too. The ayatollah is dead and bombs are still falling. Now what?
This is a problem not limited to Iran—though the potential for disaster and chaos is perhaps greater here than it is anywhere else. This administration loves to take cataclysmic action, to make dramatic moves that cannot be undone. But it’s hardly ever clear what it wants to achieve. In Iran, the destruction and general illegality is the point: This administration wants to drop a shitload of bombs, to kill a foreign leader, to destabilize a foreign nation, if not an entire region simply because it can—and because no one can stop them. There’s no evidence that anyone has thought through what comes next, probably because it’s all bad news from here.
Operation Epic Fury—has there ever been a dumber name for something so horrific? Has there ever been a more fitting one?
Still, this operation is, I suppose, epic—the largest air assault since the start of the Iraq War. It is furious too, though that fury itself raises a question this administration has not been able to answer because it cannot be provided: Why are we going to war in Iran?
In practice, this usually means terrorizing immigrant communities or weaker nations. It means kidnapping Maduro and threatening to invade Greenland and dispatching thousands of armed federal agents to snatch up law-abiding immigrants who came to this country for a better life and now risk being disappeared or held in detention for months or dropped outside in the cold and left to die. “One suspects,” wrote Marc Lynch in a typically astute post, “that acting in defiance of international law, expert opinion, and the role of Congress is its own reward for this team.”
Venezuela, which has been led by Maduro’s vice president Delcy Rodríguez since his kidnapping, is helpful to think about here: It suggests the administration is not just suspicious of full-scale regime change but that it’s largely fine with a degree of continuity—so long as the new leaders do what the United States wants, as Rodríguez has, despite being a fully-committed Chavista and no one’s idea of a democratic reformer. In the case of Iran, that would most likely mean the country’s military—the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps—taking power, something the CIA has floated as a potential outcome. If that would possibly be acceptable for the Trump administration, it is almost certainly a nonstarter for Israel. And that’s basically the big problem and unanswered question underlying Operation Epic Fury: What happens when Israel and American objectives diverge? And what about his promise to Iranians that they will be allowed to “take back” their country? There is simply no chance that will be allowed to happen.
And for the United States it’s terrifying too because it’s not at all clear that the administration can simply stop when it decides to. Israel is intent on pushing Iran into chaos and it needs America’s help to do it. So far, Trump has been a willing partner. He may very well intend to call a halt to the operation when he decides it’s gone far enough. But the fact that none of this has been thought through in advance means there are a host of tail risks involved: This conflict can very easily drag on; the United States could quickly find itself with thousands of ground troops in Iran; this could all end with Iran becoming a failed state.
Three days. Three weeks. Three years. More? How long will this continue? Trump, as always, is convinced that he decides when things start and when things end. When the time comes he will declare victory based on a set of criteria that he will invent for the sole purpose of crediting himself with yet another glorious “win.” He will say that the United States has eliminated a maniacal and evil foe and freed the Iranian people from his clutches. He will claim that he has ushered in a new era of peace and prosperity both in Iran and in the wider Middle East. He will be lying and this will be incorrect
So we will keep bombing Iran until such times as Trump infers from whatever vibes he’s feeling that he’s “won.” But there are many other forces–Israel, the Gulf states, the IRGC, and the Iran people themselves—that have much clearer ideas what they want and they are all in tension with one another. Their objectives—be they chaos, stability, preservation, or democracy—are a spiralling array of contradictions. Ask Trump to ponder this fact, and he’ll dismiss it as extraneous fluff. But the vacuum of his diffidence will be filled by all these conflicting interests all the same. How will they respond when Trump decides not to do what they want? No one with any real power in the administration seems to have considered this.
The real point of this is to prove that the United States is strong by killing foreign leaders, military personnel, and yes, schoolchildren, all while making it clear that no one can slow down the murder machine—not public opinion, not the (ostensible) opposition party, not the United Nations, not our (ostensible) allies. Under Trump, the United States does whatever it wants, stops only when it wants to, and walks away from the carnage without looking back. Trump thinks he is in control; it’s not at all clear that he is.
Hence then, the article about the dangerous incoherence of trump s war with iran was published today ( ) and is available on The New Republic ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( The Dangerous Incoherence of Trump’s War With Iran )
Also on site :