Iran Crisis Update: 6 Vital Factors Missing From Mainstream Media Coverage

United States mainstream news coverage of the current U.S.-Iran-Iraq crisis is extensive yet still overlooks almost entirely important factors necessary for public understanding of the developments regarding the U.S. drone assassination of Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, right.

Our survey below of recent developments highlights those factors. For context, it also provides excerpts and links about the crisis drawn from major Western news organizations and from one alternative source.

The CIA-led overthrow in 1953 of Iran's democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh (sometimes spelled "Mossadeq"), shown at left, was the first of these overlooked factors, both in terms of importance and chronology.

Commentaries on the current crisis published by Western outlets typically begin their analysis with the date 1979, when religion-inspired Iranian revolutionaries seized 52 American hostages in the course of overthrowing the Shah Mohammad Reza Pavlavi, the cruel and arrogant "King of Kings" that U.S. and British intelligence agents had installed in 1953 to replace the leftist Mosaddegh, who was imprisoned and died in 1967 in exile. The shah and his wife are shown below at right as they fled Iran in 1979 for protection and his medical treatment in the United States.

To report only on the 1979 Iranian reaction to the 1953 coup without mentioning the shah's Western-imposed reign and 1979 protection from accountability confuses the public. That kind of omission is replicated in other "overlooked" factors below, which tend to involve controversial U.S. actions and allegations that officials prefer to ignore, as do most news organizations.

The Justice Integrity Project provides a list of these other overlooked factors below: They are:

• 1953 Overthrow of Mosaddegh
• October Surprise Claims Regarding 1980 U.S. election and hostage release
• Iran-Iraq War 1980-89
• Responsibility for 2001 9/11 Attacks
• WMD Claims Prompting 2003 U.S.-led Iraq invasion
• Irani-led efforts to defeat their arch-enemy ISIS and Al Qaeda jihadists funded by, among others, Saudi Arabia and Qatar

Further below is a roundup of news coverage by date of current developments during the past week. This coverage includes a number of outstanding reports and commentaries by major news organizations, especially the New York Times and Washington Post. In other words, our criticism of a pattern of omissions and missed judgments does not negate the value of what is published in most circumstances.

We include also in our news roundup below selected alternative, foreign and independent media.

For example, the Wayne Madsen Report, published by author and former Navy Intelligence officer and NSA analyst Wayne Madsen, below left, provided this summary on Jan. 6 entitled Soleimani's Revenge of the death toll from the U.S. strike. Soleimani's car is shown at right. Madsen's description below was a prelude to his detailed description of battle-hardened allies from around the world that Iran can call upon for revenge against the U.S. military:

Killed, along with Soleimani (also sometimes spelled "Suleimani") in the U.S. attack on their vehicle within Baghdad International Airport was Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the head of the Iraqi Shi’a Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), also known as the Hashed al-Shabi. Al-Muhandis was also the founder of Kataib Hezbollah, which is part of the PMF. The PMF serves as a virtual Iraqi National Guard, with Shi’a, Sunni, Yazidi, Christian, and Iraqi Turkmen components.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo took the unusual step of declaring the IRGC and the Quds Force “foreign terrorist organizations” last year. The designation had only been applied to non-state entities in the past. Hours after the strike on Soleimani and Al-Muhandis, the State Department declared the Iraqi Shi’a militia group and political party, Asaib Ahl al-Haq (AAH), a foreign terrorist organization.

Almost simultaneous to the designation of AAH, two leaders of AAH -- Qais al-Khazali and his brother, Laith al-Khazali -- were targeted in a further U.S. missile attack on their convoy in north Baghdad.

The two militia leaders and other passengers in their convoy were reportedly killed, an act that further inflamed passions in the region, particularly in Iran and among Iraq’s majority Shi’a population.

Madsen's column on Jan. 7, News on the Iran crisis the corporate media is largely ignoring, led off with: "The Trump administration, in violation of the 1947 United Nations-United States UN Headquarters Agreement, denied Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, right, a visa to attend a January 9 meeting of the UN Security Council in New York to condemn the American assassination of Iranian Quds Force Major General Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad on January 3."

Overlooked Factors

First on our list, as noted above, is the 1953 overthrow of Iran's prime minister. The facts were secret at the time but are relatively well-known by now. National Public Radio (NPR) summarized the history in a report on Feb. 7 last year: How The CIA Overthrew Iran's Democracy In 4 Days, Lawrence Wu and Michelle Lanz,, Feb. 7, 2019 (37 mins.). It began:

On Aug. 19, 2013, the CIA publicly admitted for the first time its involvement in the 1953 coup against Iran's elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh.

The documents [cited by Madsen] provided details of the CIA's plan at the time, which was led by senior officer Kermit Roosevelt Jr., the grandson of U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt. Over the course of four days in August 1953, Roosevelt would orchestrate not one, but two attempts to destabilize the government of Iran, forever changing the relationship between the country and the U.S. In this episode, we go back to retrace what happened in the inaugural episode of NPR's new history podcast, Throughline.

Mohammad Mossadegh was a beloved figure in Iran. During his tenure, he introduced a range of social and economic policies, the most significant being the nationalization of the Iranian oil industry. Great Britain had controlled Iran's oil for decades through the Anglo-Iranian Oil Co. After months of talks the prime minister broke off negotiations and denied the British any further involvement in Iran's oil industry. Britain then appealed to the United States for help, which eventually led the CIA to orchestrate the overthrow of Mossadegh and restore power to Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the last Shah of Iran.

According to Stephen Kinzer, author of the book All the Shah's Men, Roosevelt quickly seized control of the Iranian press by buying them off with bribes and circulating anti-Mossadegh propaganda. He recruited allies among the Islamic clergy, and he convinced the shah that Mossadegh was a threat. The last step entailed a dramatic attempt to apprehend Mossadegh at his house in the middle of the night. But [this first part of] the coup failed. Mossadegh learned of it and fought back. The next morning, he announced victory over the radio.

Second on our list are the disputed claims that Republicans fostered an "October Surprise" in 1980 to persuade Iranian clerics to hold the 52 U.S. hostages seized in 1979 until after the 1980 presidential election, thereby damaging incumbent Democrat Jimmy Carter and paving the way for Republican Ronald Reagan to win the presidency and enhance his stature by announcing the prisoners' release on the day of his inauguration in 1981. 

Several books have been written about the allegation, including October Surprise by former Reagan White House staffer Barbara Honegger in 1989; October Surprise: America's Hostages in Iran and the Election of Ronald Reagan by Gary Sick, a former National Security staffer under Presidents Ford, Carter and Reagan; and Trick or Treason: The October Surprise Mystery in 1993 by former Associated Press and Newsweek investigative reporter Bob Parry.

The specifics of the allegations have been attacked by others in articles and books, as summarized in a Wikipedia "October Surprise" article. Yet Parry published "Second Thoughts On October Surprise" on June 8, 2013 in Consortium News. In it, Parry argued, "New evidence has shaken the confidence of former Rep. Lee Hamilton in his two-decade-old judgment clearing Ronald Reagan's campaign of going behind President Carter's back to frustrate his efforts to free 52 U.S. hostages in Iran, the so-called October Surprise case."

Whatever the specifics, the allegations have helped popularize an enduring controversy that complements the remaining four items on our list, whose relevance to today's controversies cannot reasonably be questioned.

Third is the Iran-Iraq War, in which the two nations battled between 1980 and 1989, with the United States providing secret help at times to both sides. The details of such a long war go beyond the scope of this column. The importance, however, is that the United States engaged at times with secret arms and other dealings with leaders of both nations, whom the United States would later demonize for years of propaganda and economic sanctions so severe as to cause hundreds of thousands of deaths, many of children.

Fourth is the 9/11 (Sept. 11, 2001) attack on sites in New York and Washington, DC, a complex topic containing a simple, relevant fact: Neither Iraq nor Iran was proven -- or even officially alleged -- to have had any known connection to the perpetrators of the attack. Yet those two nations, along with Afghanistan, Libya and Syria, have been relentlessly targeted by the U.S. military afterwards, even though Iran and Syria especially maintain military actions against the Saudi Arabian-style Sunni jihadists alleged to have conducted the attacks. 

On Jan. 3, Vice President Pence, right, made the clearly false claim that Suleimani, whom he described as an "evil man," had helped the accused 9/11 hijackers, of whom 15 of 19 were from Saudi Arabia. In Fact Check: Pence Links Suleimani to 9/11. The Public Record Doesn’t Back Him, the New York Times pointed out  the lack of evidence for Pence's claim

Fifth is the "Weapons of Mass Destruction" propaganda effort that prompted the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, which is the ostensible cause for the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq and Syria in fighting Islamic State / ISIS jihadists.

Sixth is the undoubted role of Suleimani and the Quds forces he led in fighting ISIS. The Irani-led Quds and their allies in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon along with Russian forces have clearly freed vast parts of those two nations from jihadists in recent years, as any review of battle maps would indicate.

Yet Western officials and media typically focus primarily on victories against ISIS that were won in the section east of the Euphrates River that is dominated by U.S. and Kurdish-led forces against ISIS. The Syrian Arab Army under the government of Bashar al-Assad has seized control from ISIS, Al Qaeda and other rebels of almost all of the western part of the country, aside from sections in Idleb and Afrin under the control of jihadists protected in part by Turkey. In the background is a covert anti-Iran alliance of Saudi Arabia and Israel that helps fund the careers of U.S.-based agents of influence who foster continuing public alarm about Iran and its allies.

Summing Up

Reporters and commentators, including this editor, cannot be expected to include such historical material as the six items above on a frequent basis during a fast-breaking story like the U.S.-Iran-Iraq crisis that developed over the past week.

Even so, readers can make a judgment about whether those matters noted above should have received more attention in the sample below of prominent news coverage. This sample is, for obvious reasons, a continuing process. Updates are most readily available in your own media selections. 

Contact the author This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Related News Coverage

Jan. 12

U.S.-Iran-Iraq Crisis Excerpts

Washington Post, Leaders in Tehran face new challenges after Iran admits to downing plane, Erin Cunningham and Isabelle Khurshudyan, Jan. 12, 2020 (print ed.). Protests flared in Tehran, where student-led rallies decried the missile mistake and called on military chiefs to resign.

• Washington Post, What's at stake for Iran
• Washington Post, Iran tensions could fulfill prophecies about the end of the world, some religious teachers say

Jan. 11

U.S.-Iran-Iraq Crisis Excerpts

New York Times, Iran Says It Unintentionally Shot Down Ukrainian Airliner, Farnaz Fassihi, Jan. 11, 2020 (updated). “The Islamic Republic of Iran deeply regrets this disastrous mistake,” President Hassan Rouhani said, as Iran reversed its claims that mechanical failure was to blame.

Iran’s military announced early Saturday that it had accidentally shot down a Ukrainian passenger jet, blaming human error because of what it called the plane’s sharp, unexpected turn toward a sensitive military base.

After days of tension since the jet crashed near Tehran on Wednesday, the same day that Iranian missiles struck American bases in Iraq, the admission was a stunning reversal. Iran initially maintained that mechanical issues had brought the Boeing airliner down, killing all 176 people aboard.

“The Islamic Republic of Iran deeply regrets this disastrous mistake,” President Hassan Rouhani said on Twitter soon after the military released its statement. He offered condolences to the victims’ families and said investigations were underway. The military said the person responsible would face legal consequences.

Washington Post, On the day U.S. forces killed Soleimani, they launched another operation targeting Iranian official in Yemen, John Hudson, Missy Ryan and Josh Dawsey​, Jan. 11, 2020 (print ed.). On the day the U.S. military killed a top Iranian commander in Baghdad, U.S. forces carried out another top secret mission against a senior Iranian military official in Yemen, according to U.S. officials.

The strike targeting Abdul Reza Shahlai, a financier and key commander of Iran’s elite Quds Force who has been active in Yemen, did not result in his death, according to four U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

The unsuccessful operation may indicate that the Trump administration’s killing of Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani, right, last week was part of a broader operation than previously explained, raising questions about whether the mission was designed to cripple the leadership of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps or solely to prevent an imminent attack on Americans as originally stated.

U.S. military operations in Yemen, where a civil war has created the world’s worst humanitarian crisis, are shrouded in secrecy. U.S. officials said the operation against Shahlai remains highly classified, and many declined to offer details other than to say it was not successful.

Jan. 10

U.S.-Iran-Iraq Crisis Headlines

• Washington Post, Iraq asks U.S. to set up mechanism for troop withdrawal
• Washington Post, U.S. hits Iran with fresh sanctions
• Washington Post, House votes to limit Trump’s ability to attack Iran
• Roll Call, Meet the lawmakers who bucked their parties on vote to limit Trump’s war powers
• Washington Post, Analysis: The Trump team’s increasingly jumbled case for striking Soleimani
• New York Times, U.S. Believes Iran Accidentally Shot Down Ukrainian Jet, Officials Say
• SouthFront, Israeli Air Force Targets “Arms Shipment” On Syrian-Iraqi Broder. Casualties Reported
• Future of Freedom Foundation, Opinion: The Long Sordid History of Pentagon Intervention in Iraq

U.S.-Iran-Iraq Crisis Excerpts

Washington Post, Iraq asks U.S. to set up mechanism for troop withdrawal, Sarah Dadouch, Jan. 10, 2020. In a phone call with U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi, left, asked the United States send a delegation to Iraq to set up a mechanism for U.S. troop withdrawal from the country, a statement from the prime minister's office said Friday.

The request followed a vote by the Iraqi parliament to expel thousands of U.S. troops, a direct consequence of a U.S. drone attackthat killed senior Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani and nine companionsin Baghdad a week ago.

The killing set off a string of events in the region. On Tuesday, Iran retaliated for the death of its revered Quds Force commander by launching more than a dozen ballistic missiles at two military bases that house U.S. troops in Iraq. President Trump said the strike caused no American or Iraqi deaths and that new sanctions on Iran will be imposed.

The Iraqi prime minister has repeatedly insisted that U.S. troop withdrawal was the only path toward de-escalation. In the phone call on Thursday, he asked Pompeo, above right, “to send representatives to Iraq to put in place a mechanism for implementing the parliament’s decision for the safe withdrawal of forces from Iraq.”

Washington Post, U.S. hits Iran with fresh sanctions, Carol Morello, Jan. 10, 2020. The action was the first concrete response to Tehran’s missile attack on bases in Iraq. The Trump administration hit Iran with more sanctions Friday in the first concrete response to the attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq this week, which were in retaliation for the U.S. airstrike that killed the most powerful Iranian military commander.

The sanctions targeted Iran’s metal industries, and eight senior military and national security officials who U.S. officials said were involved in the ballistic missile attacks on two bases in Iraq that house U.S. military personnel.

Among those sanctioned were the secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, the deputy chief of staff of the armed forces and the commander of the Basij militia that has been responsible for a brutal crackdown on anti-government protests.

• Washington Post, Analysis: Questions pile up about Trump’s claim that Soleimani was going to ‘blow up’ a U.S. embassy
• Washington Post, Professor who jokingly said Iran should list 52 U.S. cultural sites to bomb has been fired

Impeachment

Washington Post, Pelosi signals House will send articles of impeachment to Senate as soon as next week, John Wagner, Colby Itkowitz and Mike DeBonis​, Jan. 10, 2020. “I have asked Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler to be prepared to bring to the Floor next week a resolution to appoint managers and transmit articles of impeachment to the Senate,” the House speaker said in a letter to colleagues Friday.

Washington Post, Opinion: Trump’s unhinged rally rant underscores case for reining him in, Greg Sargent, Jan. 10, 2020. At a rally in Ohio on Thursday night, President Trump drew deafening cheers by boasting about his order to assassinate Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani, deriding Democrats with petty schoolyard taunts and mocking the very idea that Congress should act to constrain his warmaking powers.

In so doing, Trump demonstrated powerfully why Congress absolutely must act to rein in Trump’s unilateral authority to wage war. Not just in a superficial sense — as in, no one this unhinged should be declaring war unilaterally — but in a much deeper sense as well.

At his rally, Trump belittled House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as “not operating with a full deck.” He derided House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff as “you little pencil neck.” The crowd roared, demonstrating how heavily Trump’s petty abusiveness figures as a factor in his appeal.

But what Trump really displayed here is that his deranged attacks on the opposition aren’t mere insults. Taken along with Trump’s mockery of congressional demands for input into decisions of war, they demonstrate a profound contempt for the very notion that his most consequential decisions should be subject to oversight and accountability at all.

Washington Post, ‘Trumpiest Congressman’ cites principles for bucking president on war powers, Fred Barbash, Jan. 10, 2020. Matt Gaetz, the ‘Trumpiest Congressman,’ cites principles for bucking president on war powers. Kevin McCarthy is ‘very shocked.’

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) has been called “the Trumpiest Congressman in Trump’s Washington,” a judgment that he features proudly and prominently on his campaign homepage, along with quotes depicting him as “Trump’s Best Buddy,” “Trump’s Ultimate Defender” and “Rising star of the Trumpian right.”

Gaetz wants so much to impress President Trump that he sometimes wakes up around 5 a.m. so he can be on “Fox & Friends” as early as possible. That’s when “the president is watching,” he told The Washington Post’s Dan Zak. He strives to please Trump in every way, every day.

Every day except Thursday, that is.

Gaetz was one of three Republicans who voted in favor of a House resolution to prevent Trump from taking additional military action against Iran unless Congress declares war or in the event of “an imminent armed attack upon the United States.” The president and the Republican leadership vigorously opposed the measure.

World News

Washington Post, Meghan flies back to Canada; Prince Harry in ‘crisis’ talks with Prince Charles, Karla Adam, Jan. 10, 2020. Her departure renewed speculation that the couple will make Canada their part-time home.

Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, has flown back to Canada following the bombshell announcement that she and her husband, Prince Harry, are "stepping back" from royal duties, prompting intensified speculation that the couple will make Canada their part-time home.

An official at Buckingham Palace confirmed reports that Meghan had returned to Canada — the latest act in a drama that the British press has dubbed “Megxit.”

Meanwhile, Harry remains in Britain, where he is reportedly in deep discussions with his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II; his father, Prince Charles; and his brother, Prince William, about the couple’s future role.

Australian Wildfires / Climate

Washington Post, ‘Megafire’ measuring 1.5 million acres forms in Australia as bushfires merge, Andrew Freedman, Jan. 10, 2020. Hot, dry and windy conditions caused two large blazes to merge into one the size of the state of Delaware — or about eight times larger than New York City. Australia’s bushfire crisis worsened Thursday night into Friday as hot, dry and windy conditions redeveloped across the country’s hard-hit southeast, causing two large blazes to merge into one. The new “megafire” measures about 1.5 million acres, about the size of the state of Delaware or roughly eight times as large as New York City.

“What we’re really seeing with a number of these fires merging is a number of small fires started by lightning strikes, across the landscape,” New South Wales Rural Fire Service spokesman Anthony Clark told the Sydney Morning Herald. “And as they grow, we see fires merging,” Clark said.

Separately, an emergency warning was issued for a blaze in the Southern Highlands region, known as the Morton Fire, that threatened populated areas.

As of midday Friday, firefighters were battling 147 fires in New South Wales, with one at the emergency level, the highest warning category, as a wind shift moved from south to north along the coast.

U.S. Politics

Washington Post, Marianne Williamson drops out of Democratic presidential race, Amy B Wang, Jan. 10, 2020. Marianne Williamson, right, the self-help author who has argued that the United States needs to have “a moral and spiritual awakening,” has ended her long-shot presidential campaign, she said Friday.

Williamson had laid off her entire national staff in late December, but insisted last week she would remain in the race. In an email to supporters Friday, however, she said it would be difficult “to elevate our conversation any more than it is now” with caucuses and primaries about to begin.

More On U.S.-Iran-Iraq Crisis

Washington Post, House votes to limit Trump’s ability to attack Iran, Karoun Demirjian, Jan. 10, 2020 (print ed.). The resolution was put forward by House Democrats amid continued fallout from President Trump's order to kill a senior Iranian general. A similar resolution is expected to come up for a vote in the Senate as soon as next week.

Roll Call, Meet the lawmakers who bucked their parties on vote to limit Trump’s war powers, Bridget Bowman, Jan. 10, 2020 (print ed.). Eight Democrats opposed the resolution, while three Republicans supported it.

• Washington Post, Analysis: The Trump team’s increasingly jumbled case for striking Soleimani

New York Times, U.S. Believes Iran Accidentally Shot Down Ukrainian Jet, Officials Say, Julian E. Barnes, Eric Schmitt, Anton Troianovski and Natalie Kitroeff, Jan. 10, 2020 (print ed.). American satellites, designed to track missile launches, detected the firing of the Iranian short-range interceptor. The new intelligence suggests that the loss of life from the downing of the plane was a direct result of heightened tensions between the U.S. and Iran.

Washington Post, Missile strike on U.S. targets ‘did not intend to kill,’ says Iranian commander, Kareem Fahim and Sarah Dadouch, Jan. 10, 2020 (print ed.). “We intended to hit the enemy’s military machinery,” not to cause casualties, the head of the Revolutionary Guard’s Aerospace Force said, in the latest sign that Iran was seeking to avoid further escalation.

An Iranian military commander said Thursday that missiles fired at bases used by U.S. troops in Iraq were not intended to inflict casualties, in the latest sign that Iran was seeking to avoid further escalation of hostilities with the United States.

After more than a dozen missiles slammed into the bases early Wednesday local time, both sides for now appear to be stepping back from further conflict.

“We did not intend to kill,” said Brig. Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh, the head of the Revolutionary Guard’s Aerospace Force, according to Iranian state media. “We intended to hit the enemy’s military machinery.”

However, he repeated the government’s claim that “tens of people were killed or wounded.” U.S. and Iraqi officials said the strikes caused no casualties.

SouthFront, Israeli Air Force Targets “Arms Shipment” On Syrian-Iraqi Broder. Casualties Reported, Staff report, Jan. 10, 2020. In the early hours of January 10, warplanes of the Israeli Air Force (IAF) targeted an arms shipment on the Syrian-Iraqi border, according to al-Mayadeen. A security source told the Lebanese news channel that the airstrike targeted a truck that was shipping weapons. The source didn’t clarify the destination of the targeted shipment, or to what side it belongs.

“The airstrikes near the Iraqi border were carried out by warplanes [flying] away from the border, they targeted a truck loaded with weapons,” al-Mayadeen quoted the source as saying. A few minutes later, the Lebanese channel confirmed that several individuals, likely Iranian-backed fighters, were killed or injured as a result of the airstrikes. Iraqi sources claimed that the targeted arms shipment belonged to Kata’ib al-Imam Ali, a main member of the Popular Mobilization Units (PMU).

Future of Freedom Foundation, Opinion: The Long Sordid History of Pentagon Intervention in Iraq, Jacob G. Hornberger, right, Jan. 10, 2020.  There is no reason for the Pentagon to be depressed, despondent, or angry over the fact that Iraqi officials are kicking the Pentagon out of Iraq. The Pentagon doesn’t belong in Iraq in the first place.

First, it’s important to keep in mind that ever since the Pentagon and the rest of the U.S. national-security establishment lost their official Cold War enemy, the Soviet Union, with the end of the Cold War in 1989, Iraq never invaded the United States or even threatened to do so. In the 30 years that the Pentagon has been killing people and wreaking destruction in Iraq, it has always been the Pentagon that has been the aggressor and Iraq the defender.

Second, it’s also important to keep in mind that during the 1980s, Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein was a partner and ally of the Pentagon, when the Pentagon was helping him to wage his brutal 8-year war against Iran.

Third, U.S. officials expressed indifference to their partner and ally Saddam when he expressed exasperation with Kuwait, which, he said, was stealing oil from Iraq by slant-drilling into Iraqi land. That expressed indifference to a partner and ally could easily be construed as giving a green light for Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait.

Fourth, when Iraq invaded Kuwait, the dispute was no business of the Pentagon, given that the invasion did not constitute an invasion of the United States. Nonetheless, the Pentagon intervened in the conflict, notwithstanding the fact that Congress had not declared war on Iraq, as the Constitution requires. The Pentagon killed countless Iraqis in what was clearly an illegal U.S. war under U.S. law.

Fifth, the Pentagon had no business intentionally destroying Iraq’s water-and-sewage treatment plants during the course of its intervention. That was a war crime, especially since the Pentagon’s intent was to spread infectious illnesses among the Iraqi people.

Sixth, the Pentagon had no legitimate authority to establish “no-fly zones” over Iraq after hostilities ended. The Pentagon continue to kill Iraqis during the enforcement of such zones, including a teenage boy who was just tending his sheep.

Seventh, the Pentagon had no business enforcing sanctions on Iraq during the 1990s, especially when it became painfully clear that they were killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children, including through infectious illnesses from polluted water. The sanctions were preventing Iraqis from repairing the water-and-sewage treatment plants that the Pentagon had intentionally destroyed during the Persian Gulf War. It was the deaths of those children that turned out to be a major contributing cause to anti-American terrorism, such as the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center, the attack on the USS Cole, the attacks on the U.S. embassies in East Africa, the 9/11 attacks, the Fort Hood attacks, the Detroit would-be attack, and many more.

Eighth, the Pentagon had no legitimate authority to invade Iraq after the 9/11 attacks because Congress never issued a declaration of war against Iraq, as the Constitution requires. Moreover, even if Iraq had weapons of mass destruction in violation of UN resolutions, only the UN had the authority to enforce its own resolutions. Iraq never invaded the United States. That made the Pentagon the aggressor against Iraq once again. The Pentagon killed and injured countless more Iraqis in the process and ended up destroying the entire country under its mantra “Operation Iraqi Freedom.”

Ninth, once the Pentagon discovered that there were no weapons of mass destruction, which was the Pentagon’s excuse for the invasion in the first place, it should have apologized for its “mistake” and come home. Instead, the Pentagon stayed in Iraq for several more years, killing and injuring countless more Iraqis during its occupation and wreaking continued destruction all across the country.

Tenth, the Pentagon’s invasion of Iraq gave rise to ISIS, which the Pentagon used as the excuse for wreaking even more death and destruction, not only in Iraq but also across the Middle East. That’s why the Pentagon is in Iraq today—ostensibly to defeat the entity that the Pentagon brought into existence with its illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq.

Evicting the Pentagon from Iraq is the best thing Iraqi officials could do, both for the people of the Middle East and the United States. The Pentagon has wreaked enough death, suffering, and destruction in Iraq and the rest of the Middle East. The sooner the Pentagon comes home, the better off everyone will be.

Jan. 9

Washington Post, House votes to limit Trump’s ability to attack Iran, Karoun Demirjian, Jan. 9, 2020. The resolution was put forward by House Democrats amid continued fallout from President Trump's order to kill a senior Iranian general. A similar resolution is expected to come up for a vote in the Senate as soon as next week.

• Washington Post, Analysis: The Trump team’s increasingly jumbled case for striking Soleimani

New York Times, U.S. Believes Iran Accidentally Shot Down Ukrainian Jet, Officials Say, Julian E. Barnes, Eric Schmitt, Anton Troianovski and Natalie Kitroeff, Jan. 9, 2020.  American satellites, designed to track missile launches, detected the firing of the Iranian short-range interceptor. The new intelligence suggests that the loss of life from the downing of the plane was a direct result of heightened tensions between the U.S. and Iran.

Washington Post, Missile strike on U.S. targets ‘did not intend to kill,’ says Iranian commander, Kareem Fahim and Sarah Dadouch, Jan. 9, 2020. “We intended to hit the enemy’s military machinery,” not to cause casualties, the head of the Revolutionary Guard’s Aerospace Force said, in the latest sign that Iran was seeking to avoid further escalation.

Washington Post, Opinion: When did it become acceptable to kill a top leader of a country we aren’t even at war with? Jim Webb (Democrat from Virginia, served in the U.S. Senate from 2007 to 2013 and was secretary of the Navy under President Ronald Reagan from 1987 to 1988), l The U.S. desperately needs common-sense leadership in our foreign policy

• Washington Post, Andrew McCabe Opinion: If you think Iran is done retaliating, think again 
• Washington Post, Analysis: The ghosts of 1979 still haunt U.S. policy toward Iran

Future of Freedom Foundation, Opinion: The Long Sordid History of Pentagon Intervention in Iraq, Jacob G. Hornberger, right (foundation president, book publisher, law school graduate and author), Jan. 10, 2020. There is no reason for the Pentagon to be depressed, despondent, or angry over the fact that Iraqi officials are kicking the Pentagon out of Iraq. The Pentagon doesn’t belong in Iraq in the first place.

First, it’s important to keep in mind that ever since the Pentagon and the rest of the U.S. national-security establishment lost their official Cold War enemy, the Soviet Union, with the end of the Cold War in 1989, Iraq never invaded the United States or even threatened to do so. In the 30 years that the Pentagon has been killing people and wreaking destruction in Iraq, it has always been the Pentagon that has been the aggressor and Iraq the defender.

Second, it’s also important to keep in mind that during the 1980s, Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein was a partner and ally of the Pentagon, when the Pentagon was helping him to wage his brutal 8-year war against Iran.

Third, U.S. officials expressed indifference to their partner and ally Saddam when he expressed exasperation with Kuwait, which, he said, was stealing oil from Iraq by slant-drilling into Iraqi land. That expressed indifference to a partner and ally could easily be construed as giving a green light for Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait.

Fourth, when Iraq invaded Kuwait, the dispute was no business of the Pentagon, given that the invasion did not constitute an invasion of the United States. Nonetheless, the Pentagon intervened in the conflict, notwithstanding the fact that Congress had not declared war on Iraq, as the Constitution requires. The Pentagon killed countless Iraqis in what was clearly an illegal U.S. war under U.S. law.

Fifth, the Pentagon had no business intentionally destroying Iraq’s water-and-sewage treatment plants during the course of its intervention. That was a war crime, especially since the Pentagon’s intent was to spread infectious illnesses among the Iraqi people.

Sixth, the Pentagon had no legitimate authority to establish “no-fly zones” over Iraq after hostilities ended. The Pentagon continue to kill Iraqis during the enforcement of such zones, including a teenage boy who was just tending his sheep.

Seventh, the Pentagon had no business enforcing sanctions on Iraq during the 1990s, especially when it became painfully clear that they were killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children, including through infectious illnesses from polluted water. The sanctions were preventing Iraqis from repairing the water-and-sewage treatment plants that the Pentagon had intentionally destroyed during the Persian Gulf War. It was the deaths of those children that turned out to be a major contributing cause to anti-American terrorism, such as the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center, the attack on the USS Cole, the attacks on the U.S. embassies in East Africa, the 9/11 attacks, the Fort Hood attacks, the Detroit would-be attack, and many more.

Eighth, the Pentagon had no legitimate authority to invade Iraq after the 9/11 attacks because Congress never issued a declaration of war against Iraq, as the Constitution requires. Moreover, even if Iraq had weapons of mass destruction in violation of UN resolutions, only the UN had the authority to enforce its own resolutions. Iraq never invaded the United States. That made the Pentagon the aggressor against Iraq once again. The Pentagon killed and injured countless more Iraqis in the process and ended up destroying the entire country under its mantra “Operation Iraqi Freedom.”

Ninth, once the Pentagon discovered that there were no weapons of mass destruction, which was the Pentagon’s excuse for the invasion in the first place, it should have apologized for its “mistake” and come home. Instead, the Pentagon stayed in Iraq for several more years, killing and injuring countless more Iraqis during its occupation and wreaking continued destruction all across the country.

Tenth, the Pentagon’s invasion of Iraq gave rise to ISIS, which the Pentagon used as the excuse for wreaking even more death and destruction, not only in Iraq but also across the Middle East. That’s why the Pentagon is in Iraq today—ostensibly to defeat the entity that the Pentagon brought into existence with its illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq.

Evicting the Pentagon from Iraq is the best thing Iraqi officials could do, both for the people of the Middle East and the United States. The Pentagon has wreaked enough death, suffering, and destruction in Iraq and the rest of the Middle East. The sooner the Pentagon comes home, the better off everyone will be.

Jan. 7

U.S.-Iran-Iraq Crisis Headlines

• New York Times, Iran’s Leader Wants Retaliation to Be Carried Out Directly,
• Washington Post, Soleimani’s funeral procession in Iran sees massive crowds and calls for revenge
• Wayne Madsen Report (WMR), Commentary: News on the Iran crisis the corporate media is largely ignoring
• Washington Post, Iran’s president invokes 1988 tragedy many Americans have forgotten
• Washington Post, How a ‘quantum change’ in missiles has made Iran a far more dangerous foe
• New York Times, Opinion: The Nightmare Stage of Trump’s Rule Is Here, Michelle Goldberg
• Washington Post, Iraq, once a policy afterthought, has become a problem for the Trump administration
• New York Times, News analysis: Iran Challenges Trump, Announcing End of Nuclear Restrictions
• Washington Post, Iran postpones general’s burial after dozens die in stampede during funeral procession
• New York Times, For Some Never Trumpers, Killing of Suleimani Was Finally Something to Like

U.S.-Iran-Iraq Crisis Excerpts

New York Times, Iran’s Leader Wants Retaliation to Be Carried Out Directly, Farnaz Fassihi and David D. Kirkpatrick, Jan. 7, 2020 (print ed.). In the tense hours following the American killing of a top Iranian military commander, the country’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, below left, made a rare appearance at a meeting of the government’s National Security Council to lay down the parameters for any retaliation. It must be a direct and proportional attack on American interests, he said, openly carried out by Iranian forces themselves, three Iranians familiar with the meeting said Monday.

It was a startling departure for the Iranian leadership. Since the establishment of the Islamic Republic in 1979, Tehran had almost always cloaked its attacks behind the actions of proxies it had cultivated around the region. But in the fury generated by the killing of the military commander, Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, a close ally and personal friend of the supreme leader, the ayatollah was willing to cast aside those traditional cautions.

The nation’s anger over the commander’s death was on vivid display Monday, as millions of Iranians poured into the streets of Tehran for a funeral procession and Mr. Khamenei wept openly over the coffin.

After weeks of furious protests across the country against corruption and misrule, both those who had criticized and those who had supported the government marched together, united in outrage. Subway trains and stations were packed with mourners hours before dawn, and families brought children carrying photographs of General Suleimani.

Washington Post, Soleimani’s funeral procession in Iran sees massive crowds and calls for revenge, Erin Cunningham, Sarah Dadouch and Michael Birnbaum​, Jan. 7, 2020 (print ed.). The turnout for the military commander, shown at center, rivaled that of the ceremony to mark the passing of Ayatollah Khomeini in 1989, experts say.

Wayne Madsen Report (WMR), Commentary: News on the Iran crisis the corporate media is largely ignoring, Wayne Madsen, Jan. 7, 2020. The Trump administration, in violation of the 1947 United Nations-United States UN Headquarters Agreement, denied Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, right, a visa to attend a January 9 meeting of the UN Security Council in New York to condemn the American assassination of Iranian Quds Force Major General Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad on January 3.

Under the agreement, the U.S. is obligated to issue permits to foreign diplomats and officials to enter the United States to carry out official UN business. In denying Zarif and his aides a visa, the U.S. stands in violation of the agreement.

The decision by the Trump administration to refuse Zarif entry to attend the Security Council meeting is reviving calls for the UN headquarters to be moved from New York to Geneva, Switzerland, where a number of UN specialized agencies already have their headquarters. Zarif will reportedly address the Security Council via a UN teleconference link from Geneva.

U.S. National Security Adviser Robert O'Brien indicated that he and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo agreed to deny Zarif a visa because he only comes to New York "to spread propaganda

Washington Post, Iran’s president invokes 1988 tragedy many Americans have forgotten, Gillian Brockell, Jan. 7, 2020. On July 3, 1988, the U.S. Navy shot down an Iranian commercial jetliner, killing all 290 civilians onboard. The U.S. said it was an accident; many Iranian officials still think it was intentional.

On Saturday, President Trump invoked history when tweeting out a threat to destroy “52 Iranian sites … some at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture.” He said the potential targets represent the 52 Americans who were held hostage there for 444 days from 1979 to 1981.

On Monday, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani invoked history right back in response to Trump’s threat.

Those who refer to the number 52 should also remember the number 290. #IR655 Never threaten the Iranian nation.
— Hassan Rouhani (@HassanRouhani) January 6, 2020

His hashtag “#IR655” refers to Iran Air Flight 655, a commercial jet shot down by the U.S. military by mistake on July 3, 1988, killing all 290 civilians and crew on board, including 66 children.

Although the incident is nearly forgotten in the United States, it is etched deeply in memory in Iran, where the country is mourning the U.S. airstrike that killed Iranian military commander Qasem Soleimani.

Washington Post, How a ‘quantum change’ in missiles has made Iran a far more dangerous foe, Joby Warrick​, Jan. 7, 2020.  Drones and precision guidance have given Tehran new ways to inflict pain in an all-out war, analysts say.

When a swarm of drones and cruise missiles attacked Saudi Arabia’s biggest oil facility on Sept. 14, an outraged Trump administration quickly blamed Iran for what it called an “unprecedented attack” on global energy supplies. But the real surprise was the strike’s accuracy: Of 19 weapons used, all but two scored direct hits.

When the smoke cleared, Saudi officials counted 14 holes where incoming projectiles had sliced through petroleum storage tanks. Three other critical parts of the oil-processing facility had been hit and disabled, shutting down the facility and temporarily cutting Saudi oil production in half. A photo via social media and Reuters shows the attack.

In subsequent reports, U.S. analysts would describe the attack as a kind of wake-up call: evidence of a vastly improved arsenal of high-precision missiles that Iran has quietly developed and shared with allies over the past decade. In the event of a wider war with the United States, Iran would probably deploy such weapons to inflict substantial damage on any number of targets, from U.S. military bases to oil facilities to sites in Israel, analysts say.

New York Times, Opinion: The Nightmare Stage of Trump’s Rule Is Here, Michelle Goldberg, right, Jan. 7, 2020 (print ed.). Unstable and impeached, the president pushes the U.S. toward war with Iran. We don’t yet know how Iran will retaliate, or whether all-out war will be averted. But already, NATO has suspended its mission training Iraqi forces to fight ISIS.

Iraq’s Parliament has voted to expel American troops — a longtime Iranian objective. (On Monday, U.S. forces sent a letter saying they were withdrawing from Iraq in response, only to then claim that it was a draft released in error.)

On Sunday, Iran said it will no longer be bound by the remaining restrictions on its nuclear program in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the deal that Trump abandoned in 2018. Trump has been threatening to commit war crimes by destroying Iran’s cultural sites and tried to use Twitter to notify Congress of his intention to respond to any Iranian reprisals with military escalation.

Washington Post, Iraq, once a policy afterthought, has become a problem for the Trump administration, Karen DeYoung, Missy Ryan and Paul Sonne​, Jan. 7, 2020 (print ed.). The Pentagon on Monday rushed to play down reports that U.S. troops in Iraq were being repositioned in preparation for a possible withdrawal, worrying allies about a lack of strategy.

The Pentagon on Monday rushed to play down reports that U.S. troops in Iraq were being repositioned in preparation for a possible withdrawal, one day after Iraqi lawmakers passed a nonbinding resolution calling for all foreign troops to leave the country.

“This is a mistake,” the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Mark A. Milley, told reporters at the Pentagon after a letter indicating a withdrawal was released to Iraqi officials by the U.S. military command in Baghdad. The letter, he said, was an unsigned planning draft discussing new deployments and “should not have been released.”

“There has been no decision made to leave Iraq, period,” Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper said.

• Washington Post, Trump administration begins drafting possible sanctions against Iraq after president’s economic threat

Washington Post, Iran postpones general’s burial after dozens die in stampede during funeral procession, Staff report, Jan. 7, 2020. Severe overcrowding and the deadly stampede forced officials to suspend the burial of Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani. Earlier, a top Iranian security official warned that the country has drawn up 13 scenarios to retaliate for the strike that killed Soleimani.

The burial of slain Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani was postponed Tuesday when a stampede erupted killed more than 30 people during massive mourning marches through his hometown of Kerman, Iranian state television reported.

New York Times, For Some Never Trumpers, Killing of Suleimani Was Finally Something to Like, Michael Crowley, Jan. 7, 2020 (print ed.). Years before President Trump ordered the killing of Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, Reuel Marc Gerecht, a former C.I.A. officer and prominent neoconservative commentator, had recommended taking out the notorious Iranian general.

More than eight years later, Mr. Gerecht got his wish when a drone strike ordered by President Trump killed General Suleimani in Baghdad, touching off an international crisis even as it delighted a cadre of Republican Middle East hawks who have been sharply critical of Mr. Trump on many other issues.

“He surprised me,” said Mr. Gerecht, a fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a hawkish Washington think tank that consults closely with the Trump administration on Iran policy. “I didn’t expect him to have the intestinal fortitude to do that.”

But it was an unusual admission from Mr. Gerecht, who has regularly criticized the president, dating to the 2016 campaign, when he was among the dozens of Republican foreign policy insiders who added their names to a letter denouncing Mr. Trump as unfit to lead the nation and collectively came to be known as Never Trumpers.

It was clear on Monday that Mr. Gerecht spoke for many of his ideological comrades, who generally believe that military force can be a positive tool and not always a dreaded last resort, and that Iran in particular is likely to back down when confronted with strength. Many of them are collectively known as neoconservatives, or neocons, even if not all of them accept the label.

Many of those hawks have long applauded Mr. Trump’s sanctions-based “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran, but they had come to doubt the president’s willingness to use military force and were delighted to see him take action against someone responsible for consolidating Iranian influence at the expense of many American lives.

Other frequent Trump critics who cheered the strike against General Suleimani include Representative Liz Cheney of Wyoming, a frequent critic of Mr. Trump’s foreign policy who posted on Twitter shortly after the Iranian commander’s death that Mr. Trump was “was right to order decisive action to kill” him.

Adding to the praise was Mr. Trump’s former national security adviser, John R. Bolton, who issued his own triumphal tweet: “Congratulations to all involved in eliminating Qassem Soleimani,” Mr. Bolton wrote, calling the strike a “decisive blow” to the Quds Force and potentially “the first step to regime change in Tehran. ”

Calls for regime change in Tehran — which Mr. Trump himself says he does not seek — are deeply unsettling to Democrats, as is the track record of Mr. Bolton and other Republicans applauding the strike on General Suleimani.

Such commentary comes just after conventional wisdom in Washington and abroad had hardened around the notion that Mr. Trump was determined to avoid a new Middle East conflict.

Although it remains far from clear that Mr. Trump wants a full-scale conflict with Iran as he kicks off an election year — speaking to reporters on Sunday, he repeated his view that invading Iraq was “the worst decision ever made in the history of our country” — the concern is further stoked by similarities that some analysts see between his justification for the Suleimani strike and that of the Bush administration’s march to war in 2003.

Jan. 6

U.S.-Iran-Iraq Crisis Headlines

• Ruptly via YouTube, Iran: Supreme Leader Khamenei weeps while leading prayers at Soleimani's funeral
• New York Times, Democrats are moving to invoke a mostly untested law in an attempt to block a war with Iran. Here’s an explanation
• New York Times, Pentagon Rules Out Striking Iranian Cultural Sites, Contradicting Trump
• Washington Post, Trump threatens strikes on Iranian cultural sites, sanctions against Iraq
• New York Times, Iranian-Americans Questioned at the Border: ‘This Is Not O.K,’
• Washington Post, Analysis: Trump’s insistence on proving his toughness conflicts with America’s actual strength
• Wayne Madsen Report (WMR), "Soleimani's Revenge" found in battle-hardened groups around the world
• New York Post, Iran officials hint at possible attacks on Trump properties

U.S.-Iran-Iraq Crisis Excerpts 

Ruptly via YouTube, Iran: Supreme Leader Khamenei weeps while leading prayers at Soleimani's funeral, Jan. 5, 2020 (2:43 min. video.).

New York Times, Democrats are moving to invoke a mostly untested law in an attempt to block a war with Iran. Here’s an explanation, Charlie Savage, Jan. 6, 2020. Democratic leaders in Congress are moving to swiftly invoke the War Powers Resolution in an attempt to block President Trump from taking the United States into a war with Iran, even as Iran vows revenge for his killing of Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani and Mr. Trump is threatening disproportionate strikes inside Iran if it does retaliate.

But Congress’s control over decisions about going to war has been eroding for generations, and administrations of both parties have established precedents that undercut the resolution as a meaningful check on presidential war-making authority.

Here is an explanation of the legal issues raised by the rapidly evolving crisis.

New York Times, Pentagon Rules Out Striking Iranian Cultural Sites, Contradicting Trump, Peter Baker and Maggie Haberman, Jan. 6, 2020. Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper sought to douse an international outcry on Monday by ruling out military attacks on cultural sites in Iran if the conflict with Tehran escalates further, despite President Trump’s threat to destroy some of the country’s treasured icons.

Mr. Esper acknowledged that striking cultural sites with no military value would be a war crime, putting him at odds with the president, who insisted such places would be legitimate targets. Mr. Trump’s threats generated condemnation at home and abroad while deeply discomfiting American military leaders who have made a career of upholding the laws of war.

“We will follow the laws of armed conflict,” Mr. Esper said at a news briefing at the Pentagon when asked if cultural sites would be targeted as the president had suggested over the weekend. When a reporter asked if that meant “no” because the laws of war prohibit targeting cultural sites, Mr. Esper agreed. “That’s the laws of armed conflict.”

The furor was a classic controversy of Mr. Trump’s creation, the apparent result of an impulsive threat and his refusal to back down in the face of criticism. When Mr. Trump declared on Saturday that the United States had identified 52 potential targets in Iran if it retaliates for the American drone strike that killed Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, none of those targets qualified as cultural sites, according to an administration official who asked not to be identified correcting the president.

New York Times, Iranian-Americans Questioned at the Border: ‘This Is Not O.K,’ Mike Baker and Caitlin Dickerson, Jan. 6, 2020. Up to 200 people were held by border agents, with some of them reportedly asked to share their opinions about the situation in Iran and Iraq. Arriving at the United States border in Washington State early Sunday morning after a skiing trip to Canada, Negah Hekmati and her family were pulled out of line for further questioning by Customs and Border Protection agents.

The family found itself in a room filled with fellow Iranian-Americans, many of whom had already been held for hours. The agents wanted to know the identities of Ms. Hekmati’s parents, siblings, uncles and cousins. Her husband, a software engineer at Microsoft, was asked about any military service in his past. The agents left, and then came back with more questions.

During the five overnight hours they were held at the Peace Arch Border Crossing on their way back home to the Seattle area, Ms. Hekmati said, her 5-year-old would not sleep, worried about the prospect of jail. The young girl asked Ms. Hekmati to stop speaking Farsi, hoping that might help avoid further scrutiny.

“My kids shouldn’t experience such things,” Ms. Hekmati said. “They are U.S. citizens. This is not O.K.”

More than 100 people of Iranian descent appear to have faced similar delays at Washington’s border with Canada over the weekend, a process Gov. Jay Inslee described on Monday as the inappropriate “detention” of people — some of them United States citizens — who had done nothing wrong.

“I don’t think there’s any reason that is rational — and certainly constitutional — to target people based on the place of their birth,” Mr. Inslee said in an interview. “It’s pretty clear that that’s what they did here.”

New York Times, News analysis: Iran Challenges Trump, Announcing End of Nuclear Restrictions, David E. Sanger and William J. Broad, Jan. 6, 2020 (print ed.). President Trump thought the nuclear deal was flawed because restrictions on Iran would end after 15 years. Now, responding to a U.S. strike, Iran has declared the limits over after less than five.

When President Trump withdrew the United States from the Iran nuclear deal in May 2018, he justified his unilateral action by saying the accord was flawed, in part because the major restrictions on Iran ended after 15 years, when Tehran would be free to produce as much nuclear fuel as it wanted.

But now, instead of buckling to American pressure, Iran declared on Sunday that those restrictions are over — a decade ahead of schedule. Mr. Trump’s gambit has effectively backfired.

Iran’s announcement essentially sounded the death knell of the 2015 nuclear agreement. And it largely re-creates conditions that led Israel and the United States to consider destroying Iran’s facilities a decade ago, again bringing them closer to the potential of open conflict with Tehran that was avoided by the accord.

Iran did stop short of abandoning the entire deal on Sunday, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, and its foreign minister held open the possibility that his nation would return to its provisions in the future — if Mr. Trump reversed course and lifted the sanctions he has imposed since withdrawing from the accord.

 Washington Post, Critic’s Notebook: The president didn’t threaten just Iran’s culture sites. He threatened culture, Philip Kennicott, Jan. 6, 2020. A line has been crossed, and not one determined just by international law or conventions on the preservation of culture. It is about the soul of a culture or a people.

Washington Post, Trump threatens strikes on Iranian cultural sites, sanctions against Iraq, Seung Min Kim and Philip Rucker, July 6, 2019 (print ed.). President Trump served a bellicose brew of threats, rebukes and contempt on Sunday as he escalated tensions in the Middle East and awaited Iran's possible retaliation for the U.S. killing of one of its top generals (whose funeral procession is shown above, center, with crowds of mourners surrounding).

Trump projected a wartime posture as he wrapped up his holiday vacation here, reiterating that if Iran took military action against the United States he may order attacks on Iranian cultural sites, which could constitute a war crime under international law. He vowed on Twitter to "quickly & fully strike back, & perhaps in a disproportionate manner."

Trump threatened Iraq as well. He countered the Iraqi parliament's move Sunday to try to expel foreign troops, including U.S. forces, by telling reporters that he would respond by imposing "very big sanctions" on the nation and demanding that Iraq reimburse the United States for the billions of dollars it had invested in a major air base there.

Should Iraq force out the Americans, Trump said, "We will charge them sanctions like they've never seen before, ever. It'll make Iranian sanctions look somewhat tame."

He added that he would impose "very big sanctions" on Iraq "if there's any hostility, that they do anything we think is inappropriate."

Trump also flouted protocols at home, making a mockery of his necessity to advise Congress of military action by writing on Twitter that his tweets would serve as official notification of strikes.

Washington Post, Analysis: Trump’s insistence on proving his toughness conflicts with America’s actual strength, Philip Bump, Jan. 6, 2020.
The president’s threats against Iran are only the most recent example of his strategy since the 2016 campaign: He would ignore precedent and propriety as he saw fit to advance his agenda.

Wayne Madsen Report (WMR), "Soleimani's Revenge" found in battle-hardened groups around the world, Wayne Madsen, Jan. 6, 2020. Donald Trump became the first U.S. president in the history of the Islamic Republic of Iran to have unleashed the dogs of war on that nation.

Trump ordered the aerial assassination, by a missile-armed MQ-9 Reaper drone of the commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps' (IRGC) Quds Force, Major General Qassem Soleimani. The Quds Force is a special operations unit that acts outside of Iran’s borders. Killed, along with Soleimani, in the U.S. attack on their vehicle within Baghdad International Airport was Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the head of the Iraqi Shi’a Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF).

The net result of the assassinations of Soleimani and the three Iraqi Shi’a militia leaders is that political fractures in relations between Iran and some Iraqi Shi’as, as well as political and economic dissent within Iran, itself, have taken a back seat to unity among all major Shi’a elements in both countries against what they perceive to be the common enemy: the United States.

All Shi’a political and religious elements in Iran and Iraq agree that the assassinations of Soleimani and the Iraqi Shi’a leaders must be avenged.

New York Post, Iran officials hint at possible attacks on Trump properties, Bob Fredericks, Jan. 6, 2020. Senior Iranian officials are using Twitter to hint at threats against President Trump’s properties — including his Mar-a-Lago Club resort in Florida and Trump Tower in Manhattan — over the killing of Iran’s top military commander.

Hesameddin Ashena, a top adviser to Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, tweeted a link to a Forbes magazine profile that listed the properties, none of which is fortified to withstand a military attack, along with a quote from the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

The tweet also included a link to a Business Casual video about his real estate empire.

“I tell the whole world that if the world wants to stand up to our religion, we will stand up against their whole world,” the quote read.

Ashena also retweeted video posted by actor Robert De Niro of black-clad throngs filling Iran’s streets mourning Gen. Qassem Soleimani, who was killed Friday in a drone attack at Baghdad International Airport.

And he retweeted an NBC News interview with former Ambassador John Limbert, who was one of the 52 hostages held captive by the ayatollah starting in 1979. “Mr. President, if you are listening, please don’t bother yourself on my account. Because I want nothing to do with it,” Limbert said.

Trump, who just returned from spending the holidays at Mar-a-Lago, which he calls the “Winter White House,” has said he has a list of 52 potential Iranian targets — the same number as the number of hostages who were held.

Ashena also retweeted a post from the president in which he complained about impeachment at a time “when we have so many important matters pending,” asserting that the attack was meant as a distraction. “The relationship between terror and impeachment became clear,” Ashena wrote.

Ashena wasn’t the only Iranian official targeting Trump on Twitter. Javad Sarif, Iran’s foreign minister, called the president’s advisers “clowns” in one of a series of anti-Trump posts. “Have you EVER seen such a sea of humanity in your life, @realdonaldtrump ?” he wrote along with a series of photos of mourners.

“Do you still want to listen to the clowns advising you on our region? And do you still imagine you can break the will of this great nation & its people? End of malign US presence in West Asia has begun,” Zarif wrote.

“A reminder to those hallucinating about emulating ISIS war crimes by targeting our cultural heritage: Through MILLENNIA of history, barbarians have come and ravaged our cities, razed our monuments and burnt our libraries. Where are they now? We’re still here, & standing tall,” the foreign minister tweeted.

Hundreds of thousands of mourners thronged Tehran’s streets on Monday for Soleimani’s funeral.

Jan. 5

U.S.-Iran-Iraq Crisis Headlines

• New York Times, Iraqi Lawmakers Vote to Expel U.S. Troops as Iran Mourns a Slain General
• New York Times, U.S.-Led Coalition Halts ISIS Fight as It Steels for Iranian Attacks
• Washington Post, Pompeo dismisses Iraqi leader’s call for all foreign troops to leave
• Washington Post, Iran says it is suspending all commitments to 2015 nuclear deal
• Washington Post, Trump faces Iran crisis with fewer experienced advisers and strained ties with U.S. allies
• Washington Post, Opinion: Why lying about an ‘imminent’ attack would matter,'
• New York Times, Editorial, Congress, Stop President Trump’s Rush to War With Iran
• Washington Post, At Baghdad funeral procession for Qasem Soleimani, calls for retaliation against U.S.
• Washington Post, Why Soleimani’s killing is different from other targeted attacks by U.S.
• New York Times, Tensions Abroad Stir a Whirlwind at Fort Bragg as Soldiers Deploy
• Washington Post, Trump threatens reprisals against Iran should U.S. assets or Americans be attacked
• Washington Post, Iran’s new Quds Force leader brings continuity to post held by his slain predecessor
• Palmer Report, Opinion: Donald Trump goes berserk after his Iran stunt completely blows up in his face

U.S.-Iran-Iraq Crisis Excerpts

New York Times, Iraqi Lawmakers Vote to Expel U.S. Troops as Iran Mourns a Slain General, Alissa J. Rubin, Steven Erlanger and Farnaz Fassihi, Jan. 5, 2020. The vote to oust American troops is not final until Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi signs the draft bill, but there is little doubt that he will. Hundreds of thousands poured into the streets in Iran to pay their respects to Maj. General Qassim Suleimani, who was killed in a U.S. strike in Baghdad.

Lawmakers in Iraq voted on Sunday to require the government to end the presence of American troops in the country after the United States ordered the killing of the Iranian leader of the elite Quds Force, Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, on Iraqi soil.

The decision to heed the demands of angry Shiite factions and politicians came as hundreds of thousands of mourners poured into the streets of Iran to pay their respects to General Suleimani, the most powerful figure in the country after the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

The vote is not final until Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi, left, of Iraq signs the bill. But since he drafted the language and submitted the bill to Parliament, there was little doubt he would sign it.

Although the vote was 170-0 in Parliament, many of its 328 members, primarily Kurds and Sunnis, did not attend the session and did not vote, showing the division in Parliament on the demands to oust American troops. While groups that grew out of Shiite militia organizations have pushed hard for the expulsion, Sunni Muslim factions and the Kurds wanted the United States to stay.

The legislation threads a fine needle: While using strong language demanding that the government “end any foreign presence on Iraqi soil and prevent the use of Iraqi airspace, soil and water for any reason” by foreign forces, it gives no timetable for doing so.

It would end the mission approved in 2014 that gave the United States the explicit task of helping the Iraqi forces to fight the Islamic State. That agreement gave the Americans substantial latitude to launch attacks and use Iraqi airspace. But the measure would leave in place the Strategic Framework Agreement, which allows an American troop presence in Iraq in some form.

New York Times, U.S.-Led Coalition Halts ISIS Fight as It Steels for Iranian Attacks, Thomas Gibbons-Neff and Eric Schmitt, Jan. 5, 2020. The coalition is ending its yearslong mission attacking the Islamic State and training local forces in Iraq and Syria. American forces in Iraq and Syria will now focus on protecting themselves.

Washington Post, Pompeo dismisses Iraqi leader’s call for all foreign troops to leave, Felicia Sonmez, Paige Winfield Cunningham and Tony Romm, Jan. 5, 2020.  “We are confident that the Iraqi people want the United States to continue to be there to fight the counterterror campaign,” the secretary of state said, two days after a U.S. strike that killed a top Iranian commander.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, right, on Sunday dismissed calls by Iraq’s caretaker prime minister for a timetable for all foreign troops to exit the country in the wake of a U.S. strike that killed top Iranian military commander Qasem Soleimani, arguing that the Iraqi people want the United States to remain and continue the fight against terrorism.

Pompeo appeared on all of the Sunday morning news shows to discuss U.S. strategy following the strike, which also killed eight others, including Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, a powerful Iraqi militia leader.

Washington Post, Iran says it is suspending all commitments to 2015 nuclear deal, Erin Cunningham​, Jan. 5, 2020.  Iran said Sunday that it is suspending all commitments under the 2015 nuclear deal it had struck with world powers and will abandon restrictions on uranium enrichment and other activities unless U.S. sanctions are lifted.

The government announced the move in a statement carried by state news agencies.

"Iran's nuclear program will now be based solely on its technical needs," the statement said. The move includes breaching the accord's caps on everything from enrichment capacity to activating centrifuges to its stockpile of nuclear fuel.

"If the sanctions are lifted … the Islamic Republic is ready to return to its obligations," the statement said. It added that Iran will continue to cooperate with the International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations' nuclear watchdog.

Iran, meanwhile, said Sunday that it would limit its response to the drone attack to U.S. military targets.

"The response for sure will be military and against military sites," Hossein Dehghan, the military adviser to Iran's supreme leader, said in an interview with CNN. "The only thing that can end this period of war is for the Americans to receive a blow that is equal to the blow they have inflicted."

Deghan’s remarks came as President Trump threatened Saturday on Twitter to strike “52 Iranian sites … some at a very high level & important to Iran and the Iranian culture” should Tehran retaliate against Americans or U.S. interests in the region. Iran has 24 locations on the U.N. list of cultural world heritage sites.

Washington Post, Trump faces Iran crisis with fewer experienced advisers and strained ties with U.S. allies, Greg Miller​, Jan. 5, 2020. The president has spent much of his first three years in office attacking critical capabilities he now needs.

• Washington Post, Pelosi says Trump notified Russians of Baghdadi raid before telling congressional leaders
• Washington Post, In confrontation with Iran, Trump wrestles with shadow of Obama
• Washington Post, The key word in U.S. justifications for killing Iranian general: ‘Imminent’
• Washington Post, Could the strike on an Iranian general trigger a draft? The Selective Service, explained

Washington Post, Opinion: Why lying about an ‘imminent’ attack would matter,' Jennifer Rubin, right, Jan. 5, 2020. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and State Department subordinates vigorously argued Friday that the justification for killing Iranian general and terrorist leader Qasem Soleimani was intelligence that an attack was “imminent.”

It is easy to understand why such a rationale would be advanced. An imminent threat would arguably obviate the need for a declaration of war from or even prior consultation with Congress. Exercising the right of self-defense, an established principle of international law, would satisfy allies and sidestep nasty questions about violation of an executive order in place with only minor changes since 1976 that prohibits assassination.

Aside from the legalities, as a political matter, polls have shown overwhelming opposition to a war with Iran. Casting the killing as defensive and urgent rather than an act of a war of choice would be one way to avert a public backlash. (If this reminds you of the Iraq War, you are in good company.)

New York Times, Editorial, Congress, Stop President Trump’s Rush to War With Iran, Editorial Board, Jan. 5, 2020 (print ed.). Republican senators are the only people with the power to restrain the president. President Trump must doubt his administration’s own claims that it deterred Iranian threats.

“Let this serve as a WARNING that if Iran strikes any Americans, or American assets,” Mr. Trump tweeted on Saturday, “we have targeted 52 Iranian sites (representing the 52 American hostages taken by Iran many years ago), some at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture, and those targets, and Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD. The USA wants no more threats!”

The threat came after Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, vowed “forceful revenge” for an American drone strike early Friday that killed Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, a top Iranian military commander, after, the White House claims, the general prepared attacks on American interests.

Why was Mr. Trump’s threat on Twitter even necessary? Wasn’t the death of General Suleimani supposed to have stopped the threats the president now claims America still faces? Mike Pompeo, the secretary of state, defended the attack on Friday by saying, “It was time to take this action so that we could disrupt this plot, deter further aggression from Qassim Suleimani and the Iranian regime, as well as to attempt to de-escalate the situation.”

Killing General Suleimani seems to have deterred and de-escalated nothing. Otherwise, why would the State Department have needed to advise all Americans to leave Iraq?

Washington Post, At Baghdad funeral procession for Qasem Soleimani, calls for retaliation against U.S., Mustafa Salim, Kareem Fahim and Louisa Loveluck​, Jan. 5, 2020 (print ed.). Thousands joined the ceremonies on Saturday for Quds Force commander Qasem Soleimani (shown at center above in a 2018 Iranian government photo) and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, an Iraqi militia leader. “We will take our revenge,” some chanted.

Iran has vowed to retaliate against the United States for the killing of Soleimani, Tehran’s most powerful military commander, and the Trump administration has said it is sending thousands of new troops to the Middle East. The looming confrontation has left the region bracing for an escalation of violence, and Iraq, caught between its allies in Tehran and Washington, fears the country will be at the center of the storm.

An Iranian commander quoted by the Tasnim News Agency on Saturday suggested that dozens of American facilities and military assets in the Middle East were at risk, along with Israel, a key U.S. ally.

 Washington Post, Why Soleimani’s killing is different from other targeted attacks by U.S., Siobhán O'Grady, Jan. 5, 2020 (print ed.). After the killing of Soleimani, the United States could face direct Iranian reprisals, including potential cyberattacks, analysts said. Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, threatened “severe revenge” but gave no indication of what could come.

Barbara Slavin, the director of the Future of Iran Initiative at the Atlantic Council, said Trump is “trying to do a victory lap here and beat his chest and somehow show this is like killing Baghdadi.” She was referring to the October raid on the hideout of Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in northwestern Syria. “But it’s not. It’s much more serious,” she said.

Like Baghdadi’s, other targeted killings carried out by the United States have typically struck at extremist leaders without affiliations to a powerful state such as Iran.

Washington Post, Trump threatens reprisals against Iran should U.S. assets or Americans be attacked, Mustafa Salim and Kareem Fahim, Jan. 5, 2020 (print ed.). After an Iranian commander suggested that dozens of U.S. sites in the Mideast were at risk following the American strike that killed a top Iranian general, President Trump tweeted that Iran would be “hit very fast and very hard” if it goes after U.S. targets.

“Iran has been nothing but a problem for many years,” Trump tweeted. “Let this serve as a WARNING that if Iran strikes any Americans, or American assets, we have targeted 52 Iranian sites (representing the 52 American hostages taken by Iran many years ago), some at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture, and those targets, and Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD. The USA wants no more threats!”

Washington Post, Iran’s new Quds Force leader brings continuity to post held by his slain predecessor, Erin Cunningham, Jan. 5, 2020 (print ed.). Brig. Gen. Ismail Qaani, shown above in an Irani government photo, is considered more cautious and bureaucratic than Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani, who was killed in a U.S. drone strike.

Just hours after a U.S. drone strike killed Iran's charismatic elite Quds Force commander in Baghdad early Friday, Tehran announced it had named a successor: the force's little-known deputy chief, Brig. Gen. Ismail Qaani.

Qaani, 62, was appointed by supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who issued a statement praising the general’s role as a prominent commander in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. As a key branch of the Revolutionary Guard, the country’s most powerful security organ, the Quds Force carries out the Iranian military’s special operations abroad.

Palmer Report, Opinion: Donald Trump goes berserk after his Iran stunt completely blows up in his face, Bill Palmer, Jan. 5, 2020. This morning Palmer Report explained just how badly Donald Trump was losing with his Iran gambit. He thought taking out Qasem Soleimani would make him more popular in the U.S., and that it would cause Iran to lose leverage. But Trump doesn’t understand how politics or leverage works, and so the stunt has created even more problems for him at home, even as Iran gains the upper hand. Now it’s gotten even worse for Trump.

The Iraqi Parliament has now voted to expel the U.S. military. This means Iraq is essentially siding with Iran over the United States, which is stunning considering how closely the Iraq regime has been allied with the U.S, and how much Iraq and Iran have traditionally hated each other. This is a major blow to Donald Trump, because it’ll make it that much harder for him to convince voters that he has any idea what he’s doing in the region.

It all serves to hand even more leverage to Iran, which has clearly demonstrated over the past several years that it doesn’t want a war with the United States, and instead merely wants Trump gone from power. Now Iran is in a position where it can needle Trump and further weaken him ahead of 2020 – and as long as Iran doesn’t do anything egregious enough to push a majority of Americans into wanting a war, Trump won’t be able to respond to Iran in any meaningful way.

Trump’s worsening mess prompted him to post this strange tweet this afternoon: “These Media Posts will serve as notification to the United States Congress that should Iran strike any U.S. person or target, the United States will quickly & fully strike back, & perhaps in a disproportionate manner. Such legal notice is not required, but is given nevertheless!”

To be clear, Donald Trump’s tweet isn’t anything; it’s total gibberish. He knows it too. He’s just hoping that by posting this silly tweet, the government of Iran will somehow decide that maybe Trump really does mean it. The trouble for Trump is that he’s spent his entire life identifying suckers and then defrauding them out of their money and property, and so he thinks world leaders are suckers too. In reality they’re all laughing at him. They have been from the start. He’s the worst negotiator of all time.

Trump Actions

Palmer Report, Opinion: Donald Trump is maniacally out of control, Bill Palmer, Jan. 5, 2020. The pundits who spent the past week insisting that the Iran thing was somehow going to magically help Donald Trump’s 2020 odds? Here’s hoping they’re a little quieter next week, because they’ve – predictably – turned out to have been entirely wrong. The Iran thing isn’t just blowing up in Trump’s face, it’s escalating against him in real time, to the point that he’s now threatening two countries in the region.

On Sunday, the Parliament of Iraq (shown above in a government photo) voted to expel the U.S. military from its country. This means Donald Trump has blown this so badly, Iraq has decided to firmly side with its traditional enemy Iran over the United States. This also means that Iran now has even more leverage over Trump. So on Sunday evening, Trump announced that if Iraq doesn’t relent, he’ll hit the country with massive economic sanctions. That’s right, Trump is now threatening to cripple a key U.S. ally with sanctions.

This is deranged beyond words. Donald Trump is maniacally out of control. He’s gone from committing one of the dumbest mistakes in the modern history of the presidency by taking out Soleimani to begin with, to then threatening to commit war crimes against civilians in Iran, to then losing Iraq as an ally, to now making idiotic threats against Iraq.

This is also further proof that Trump has already lost his Iran gambit. This isn’t something that was ever going to magically gain him a single vote. But it’s quickly dissolved into the kind of debacle that’s so embarrassing, it could end up driving his poll numbers even lower. For that matter, there’s the very real scenario in which he ends up getting impeached again, for refusing to notify the Gang of Eight, and for threatening war crimes.

Jan. 4

U.S.-Iran-Iraq Crisis Headlines

• Washington Post, With missile strike, Trump opts for escalation and a swing at a ‘hornets’ nest’
• Digital Journal, Iraqi parliament session could call for expulsion of US troops
• Washington Post, Editorial: Yes, Soleimani was an enemy. That doesn’t mean Trump made the right call
• New York Times, Editorial: ‘The Game Has Changed’
• Palmer Report, Opinion: Donald Trump’s Plan D
• Moon of Alabama, Opinion, U.S. Will Come To Regret Its Assassination of Qassim Soleimani
• Washington Post, Protesters rally at White House against war and Trump’s drone strike decision,
• ANSWER Coalition, Advocacy: Trump starts war on Iran: ALL OUT Sat. Jan. 4 National Day of Action

U.S.-Iran-Iraq Crisis Excerpts

Washington Post, With missile strike, Trump opts for escalation and a swing at a ‘hornets’ nest,’ Joby Warrick and William Branigin, Jan. 4, 2020 (print ed.). Trump administration officials described the fiery attack (with charred death car wreckage shown above) as a defensive measure intended to disrupt Iranian plans to kill U.S. diplomats or service members overseas.

But current and former U.S. officials said the United States almost certainly will face retaliatory strikes for the killing of Quds Force commander Qasem Soleimani, right, as well as a heightened risk of a wider regional conflict, which U.S. administrations previously had sought to avoid.

Washington Post, At Baghdad funeral procession for Qasem Soleimani, calls for retaliation against U.S., Mustafa Salim, Kareem Fahim and Louisa Loveluck​, Jan. 4, 2020  Thousands joined the ceremonies on Saturday for Soleimani and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, an Iraqi militia leader. “We will take our revenge,” some chanted.

Iran has vowed to retaliate against the United States for the killing of Soleimani, right,Tehran’s most powerful military commander, and the Trump administration has said it is sending thousands of new troops to the Middle East. The looming confrontation has left the region bracing for an escalation of violence, and Iraq, caught between its allies in Tehran and Washington, fears the country will be at the center of the storm.

An Iranian commander quoted by the Tasnim News Agency on Saturday suggested that dozens of American facilities and military assets in the Middle East were at risk, along with Israel, a key U.S. ally.

Washington Post, Why Soleimani’s killing is different from other targeted attacks by U.S., Siobhán O'Grady, Jan. 4, 2020. After the killing of Soleimani, the United States could face direct Iranian reprisals, including potential cyberattacks, analysts said. Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, threatened “severe revenge” but gave no indication of what could come.

Barbara Slavin, the director of the Future of Iran Initiative at the Atlantic Council, said Trump is “trying to do a victory lap here and beat his chest and somehow show this is like killing Baghdadi.” She was referring to the October raid on the hideout of Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in northwestern Syria. “But it’s not. It’s much more serious,” she said.

Like Baghdadi’s, other targeted killings carried out by the United States have typically struck at extremist leaders without affiliations to a powerful state such as Iran.

New York Times, Tensions Abroad Stir a Whirlwind at Fort Bragg as Soldiers Deploy, Rick Rojas and Myah Ward, Jan. 4, 2020. Some 3,500 soldiers from the 82nd Airborne Division are bound for the Middle East, spelling uncertainty for families and a community where the base is its backbone.

• New York Times, Iranians Close Ranks Behind Leaders After U.S. Kills Popular General, Staff report, For years, Iran has been a divided nation led by aged revolutionaries determined to impose their will on a predominantly young population. With the death of Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, citizens have rallied behind their leaders, vowing revenge on the United States.
• New York Times, Analysis: In Era of Perpetual Conflict, a Volatile President and Few Limits, Staff report, President Trump’s decision to authorize the attacks is the latest example of the capricious way in which he has chosen to flex his lethal powers.

Digital Journal, Iraqi parliament session could call for expulsion of US troops, Ken Hanly, Jan. 4, 2020. U.S. troops are operating in Iraq under a legal mandate granted by the government. However, the attack on the Baghdad Airport killed members of the approved paramilitary forces. The Iraqi military and others claim this action falls outside the mandate.

The Joint Operations Command claimed the attack was a clear violation of the US mandate and of Iraq's sovereignty:

“The Joint Operations Command mourns the hero martyr ... who was martyred last night in a cowardly and treacherous attack carried out by American aircraft near Baghdad international airport. We affirm that what happened is a flagrant violation of Iraqi sovereignty and a clear breach by the American forces of their mandate which is exclusively to fight Islamic State and provide advice and assistance to Iraqi security forces.”

The US mandate was centered almost exclusively on the US helping fight ISIS. Many Iraqi MPs suggest that as ISIS is mostly defeated the US should leave. After the Baghdad attack no doubt there will be even more pressure to eject US troops.

Hadi al-Amiri the head of the Badr Brigade and leader of the second largest bloc in the Iraqi parliament called on Iraqis to unite and expel the US and other foreign troops from Iraq. The even larger bloc leader Moqtada al-Sadr, left, has long pressed to the US troops to be expelled. Even though the two leaders often have different views on the issued of expulsion of US troops they are now united.

No doubt there will be motions for US and other foreign troops to be ejected from Iraq. These are likely to be supported. It remains to be seen if the US will pay any attention. There is no sign that the US has any sign of withdrawing.

New attack reported

Although further confirmation and clarification is needed, there is a report of a further attack by the US: "Iraqi state media identified the new attack as another US airstrike, near the Taji stadium north of Baghdad. The attack hit a convoy of medics, destroying two medical vans, and killing at least six people, also identified as medical personnel.

Reports suggest that the attack was intended to target a commander within the PMU, and while they declined to say who they thought the US was trying to kill, Twitter reports after the strike initially claimed Ahl al-Haq leader Qais al-Khazali had been killed. This has since been denied, and it appears no PMU commanders were even present in the convoy."" If the report is accurate it will provide even more fuel for campaigners wanting to eject US troops from Iraq.

Washington Post, Editorial: Yes, Soleimani was an enemy. That doesn’t mean Trump made the right call, Editorial Board, Jan. 4, 2020 (print ed.). The consequences of the strike are unpredictable, but there is no denying the risk that the United States will be pulled more deeply into the Middle East and its conflicts.

Having made clear that he wants to pull the nation out of those conflicts, and having said as recently as Tuesday that he wanted peace with Iran, Mr. Trump has committed an act of escalation and now is deploying more than 4,000 additional troops to Kuwait as a hedge against Iranian counterstrikes.

New York Times, Editorial: ‘The Game Has Changed,’ Editorial Board, Jan. 4, 2020. The assassination of Qassim Suleimani, one of Iran’s top military commanders, rocks the Middle East. Is President Trump ready?

The real question to ask about the American drone attack that killed Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani was not whether it was justified, but whether it was wise. Many pieces of the puzzle are still missing, but the killing is a big leap in an uncertain direction.

• New York Times, How Trump, in Minutes, Reached Risky Decision Predecessors Had Avoided, In ordering the attack, Mr. Trump challenged predictions it could lead to a wider war in the Middle East.

More On Iraq Protests, Threats

Moon of Alabama, Opinion, U.S. Will Come To Regret Its Assassination of Qassim Soleimani, b (pen name for Germany-based analyst), Jan. 4, 2020. The Trump administration is telling fairytales about its murder of Major General Qassem Soleimani. He was not planning any "imminent attacks" on the U.S. or its interests in Iraq.

Iran has to take revenge for the outrageous assassination of Soleimani to prevent future assassinations of a similar kind. The U.S. broke the rules when it killed an active commander of another country outside of a declared war. New rules must now be established to regain a balance.

The U.S. did not murder only Qassem Soleimani. On December 29 it also killed 31 Iraqi government forces. Five days later it killed Soleimani and the Deputy Commander of the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF/PMU/Hashed al-Shabi) and leader of Kata'ib Hizbollah Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis. There were also four IRGC and four Kata'ib Hizbollah men who were killed while accompanying their leaders. The PMU are under direct command of the Iraqi Prime Minister. They are official Iraqi defense forces who defeated ISIS after a bloody war. Their murder demands that their government acts against the perpetrators.

Soleimani's main task was to build and support external groups that are able to resist their local enemies as well as able to act on behalf of Iran. He excelled in his job for over 20 years. Iran has now many friends who it can ask to execute whatever it decides should be done.

Iran's revenge act can not be done within U.S. borders. That would be interpreted as a direct attack and could be used as a pretext for war. Iran will also want to have some plausible deniability for whatever happens. It must therefore exclude incidents in the Persian Gulf or near its shore. East Asia would be the preferable venue. Like it did in the Lockerbie case Iran is likely to use cutouts to execute its plans.

There is a historic example of how Iran reacts to such U.S. provocations.

Newsweek covers for 12 September 1983 (left) and 18 July 1988 (right), illustrating the KAL007 and Iran Air incidents respectively. The caption "Murder in the Air" framed the KAL incident as a deliberate act of war, whereas "Why It Happened" framed the Iran Air incident as a tragic mistake (Wikipedia).

The U.S. attack

Iran Air Flight 655 was a scheduled passenger flight from Tehran to Dubai via Bandar Abbas, that was shot down on 3 July 1988 by an SM-2MR surface-to-air missile fired from USS Vincennes, a guided missile cruiser of the United States Navy (whose communications center is shown at right). The aircraft, an Airbus A300, was destroyed and all 290 people on board, including 66 children, were killed.

The Iranian retribution

Pan Am Flight 103 was a regularly scheduled Pan Am transatlantic flight from Frankfurt to Detroit via London and New York. On 21 December 1988, N739PA, the aircraft operating the transatlantic leg of the route was destroyed by a bomb, killing all 243 passengers and 16 crew in what became known as the Lockerbie bombing.

The Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corp (IRGC) claimed to be responsible for the bombing of the plane. It had used a Palestinian cutout in Lebanon to plant the bomb. But for political reasons the official investigation was manipulated and the blame for the Lockerbie bombing was put on Libya's leader Muammar Gaddafi who had absolutely nothing to do with it.

The murder of the passengers and crew of Iran Air Flight 655 and the retribution for it were five and a half months apart. This gives us a hint of how long it might take for Iran to prepare the retribution for the U.S. assassination of Major General Qassem Soleimani. There is also the political calender that has to be considered. If an Iranian revenge act is of a kind that could help Trump to get reelected it must wait until after the U.S. election. If the revenge act is of a kind that could hurt Trump's poll numbers it must come during the last few months of the campaign.

Elijah J. Magnier @ejmalrai - 14:33 UTC · Jan 4, 2020
#BreakingNews:

#US asked #Iran, according to sources in #Tehran, to limit its response to the assassination of Brigadier General #QassemSoleimani to a "similar response".

This means when confirmed, @realDonaldTrump is offering to Iran the life of a US four-star general.

We will know that it has happened when this flag comes down:

Tomorrow the Iraqi parliament will meet to consult over a law that would evict all U.S. troops. There is currently some disunity within the Shia majority in the parliament. Should it fail to evict the U.S. the Shia PMU groups will act on their own. Not because of Soleimani or Iran, but because their comrades and leaders were killed. They will attack the U.S. military wherever they can. The situation for the U.S. in Iraq would then soon become untenable.

Washington Post, Protesters rally at White House against war and Trump’s drone strike decision, Joe Heim, Jan. 4, 2020. Hundreds of demonstrators gathered in Lafayette Square across from the White House on Saturday afternoon to voice opposition to the deployment of additional U.S. troops to the Middle East, demand the removal of American forces from Iraq and warn against getting into a war with Iran.

The crowd, a diverse mix of young activists and grizzled protest veterans, stood under gray skies, cheering and chanting as speakers railed against the administration and the prospect of a war with Iran. Actress and activist Jane Fonda was among those who addressed the protesters, saying that the “climate movement and the peace movement must be one movement.” Tourists passing by took selfies with demonstrators, and a combination of Secret Service, Metropolitan Police and U.S. Park Police officers watched the peaceful proceedings from a short distance.

ANSWER Coalition, Advocacy: Trump starts war on Iran: ALL OUT Sat. Jan. 4 National Day of Action, Jan. 4, 2020 (updated). Statement from the ANSWER Coalition below:

The Trump administration and Pentagon have moved to start a war with Iran by assassinating Qassem Soleimani, the top military leader of that country. If Iran openly assassinated a top U.S. general and bragged about it, there is no question that the United States would initiate full-scale war. Trump and the Pentagon have acted illegally, in violation of the Constitution, the War Powers Act and international law.

The targeted assassination and murder of a central leader of Iran is designed to initiate a new war. Unless the people of the United States rise up and stop it, this war will engulf the whole region and could quickly turn into a global conflict of unpredictable scope and potentially the gravest consequences.

The Pentagon high command is recklessly bragging about this illegal, targeted assassination in the most crude and false manner. “This strike was aimed at deterring future Iranian attack plans,” stated the lying generals. They know that the objective of the strike is just the opposite. They want a war with Iran – a country of more than 80 million people. Trump wants it too because he thinks it will guarantee his re-election in 2020.

For all who believe in peace, for all who are opposed to yet another catastrophic war, now is the time to take action. On Saturday, January 4 in cities across the country there will be protests against a new war in the Middle East and calling for the withdrawal of all U.S. troops and bases in the region.

Initiators for this call include the ANSWER Coalition, CODEPINK, Popular Resistance, World Beyond War and many other anti-war and peace organizations. If you want to add your name as an endorser click here.

Demonstrations will take place on Saturday, January 4 in the following cities:

• The White House: Washington D.C., 12 noon at the White House
• Chicago, IL,12 noon at Trump Tower
• Los Angeles, CA , 1 pm at Pershing Square
• New York City, NY, 11 am at Time Square

More locales via link here.

New York Times, Opinion: American Foreign Policy Is Broken. Suleimani’s Killing Proves It, Jonathan Stevenson (senior fellow at the International Institute for Strategic Studies), Jan. 4, 2020. A properly functioning National Security Council would never have let it happen, for good reason.

In the scheme of things, he had it coming. Yet killing him made little strategic sense for the United States. In some ways, the most significant thing about his death is what it shows about the breakdown of American foreign policymaking.

President Trump ordered the strike directly, prompted by the death of an American contractor on Dec. 27 in a rocket attack by Kataib Hezbollah, an Iranian-sponsored Iraqi Shia militia. Mr. Trump did not bother to consult congressional leaders. As with his other displays of martial fiat, his immediate impulse was probably to shock the liberal domestic audience, vicariously make himself feel tough, and assert raw executive power by going around the normal channels of decision making.

Patch.com, Gov't Photo ID Now Required To Visit Arlington National Cemetery, Michael O'Connell, Jan. 4, 2020 (updated). Arlington National Cemetery raised its security profile on Friday. Visitors now must provide a government-issued photo ID to enter.

Arlington National Cemetery increased its security posture Friday, Dec. 3 due to current conditions, according to a new post on its official Facebook page. From now on, all visitors 16 and older will need to provide a valid state or government issued photo ID when they enter the cemetery. This includes funeral attendees, tourists and others on official business.

The public is asked to stay vigilant and report any suspicious activity to the Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall Watch Desk: 703-588-2800/2801.

Jan. 3

U.S.-Iran-Iraq Crisis Headlines

• Washington Post, Iran vows revenge after U.S. drone strike kills elite force commander
• New York Times, Attack at Baghdad Airport Is Major Escalation in U.S.-Iran Conflict
• Reuters, Iraqi parliament to hold extraordinary session on Sunday
• Washington Post, Why Iraq is at the center of the dispute between Iran and U.S.
• Wayne Madsen Report (WMR), Analysis: Soleimani coordinated the battle against ISIS in Iraq with U.S. and its allies
• Consortium News, Opinion: VIPS MEMO: Doubling Down Into Yet Another ‘March of Folly,’ This Time on Iran
• Consortium News, Opinion: US Kick Starts Raging ’20s Declaring War on Iran
• Consortium News, Opinion: Qassem Suleimani Air Strike Escalates US Assassination Policy

U.S.-Iran-Iraq Crisis Excerpts

Washington Post, Iran vows revenge after U.S. drone strike kills elite force commander, Louisa Loveluck​​, Jan. 3, 2019. The death of Quds Force commander Qasem Soleimani, right, could plunge the region into a new cycle of violence. His death in the wreckage of a two-car convoy (shown above) in Baghdad left U.S. outposts bracing for retaliation.

The U.S. Embassy in Iraq warned its citizens to leave “immediately.” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said he discussed the operation afterward with British and Chinese officials, telling them that “the U.S. remains committed to de-escalation.”

New York Times, Attack at Baghdad Airport Is Major Escalation in U.S.-Iran Conflict, Michael Crowley, Falih Hassan and Eric Schmitt, Jan. 3, 2020 (print ed.). President Trump ordered the killing of the powerful commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps, Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, right, in a drone strike on the Baghdad International Airport early Friday, American officials said.

“General Suleimani was actively developing plans to attack American diplomats and service members in Iraq and throughout the region,” the Pentagon said in a statement. “General Suleimani and his Quds Force were responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American and coalition service members and the wounding of thousands more.”

“This strike was aimed at deterring future Iranian attack plans,” the statement added. “The United States will continue to take all necessary action to protect our people and our interests wherever they are around the world.” (More detail below.)

Reuters, Iraqi parliament to hold extraordinary session on Sunday, Ahmed Aboulenein, Jan. 3, 2020. Iraq’s parliament will hold an extraordinary session on Sunday to discuss the U.S. air strike in Baghdad which killed Iran’s Quds Force leader Qassem Soleimani and Iraqi militia commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, it said on Friday.

Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi called on lawmakers to hold an emergency session and address the attack, which he called a violation of sovereignty.

Washington Post, Why Iraq is at the center of the dispute between Iran and U.S., Adam Taylor​, Jan. 3, 2019. The location of this round of violence shows how Iraq is again stuck in the middle of the dispute between the United States and Iran — a dangerous place for a country still reeling from years of dictatorship, war and extremism.

Wayne Madsen Report (WMR), Analysis: Soleimani coordinated the battle against ISIS in Iraq with U.S. and its allies, Wayne Madsen, below at left, Jan. 3, 2020. It was less than five years ago that U.S. troops in Iraq were coordinating with Iranian Major General Qassem Soleimani and members of his elite Al Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) attacks on the forces of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) in Iraq. The Al Quds Force is the foreign expeditionary arm of the IRGC.

A 2015 photograph showed Soleimani [circled] in Tikrit, the hometown of the late Iraqi president Saddam Hussein, along with U.S., Iraqi government, British, and French forces, as well as members of the Iraqi Shi'a Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF). During the battle with ISIL, Soleimani also coordinated operations against the Saudi-backed jihadist forces with Pershmerga paramilitary forces of the Kurdistan Regional Government in northern Iraq.

Consortium News, Opinion: VIPS MEMO: Doubling Down Into Yet Another ‘March of Folly,’ This Time on Iran, Jan. 3, 2020. “We write with a sense of urgency suggesting you avoid doubling down on catastrophe,” Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) tells Donald Trump in its latest memo to the president.

The drone assassination in Iraq of Iranian Quds Force commander General Qassem Soleimani evokes memory of the assassination of Austrian Archduke Ferdinand in June 1914, which led to World War I. Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was quick to warn of “severe revenge.” That Iran will retaliate at a time and place of its choosing is a near certainty. And escalation into World War III is no longer just a remote possibility, particularly given the multitude of vulnerable targets offered by our large military footprint in the region and in nearby waters.

What your advisers may have avoided telling you is that Iran has not been isolated. Quite the contrary. One short week ago, for example, Iran launched its first joint naval exercises with Russia and China in the Gulf of Oman, in an unprecedented challenge to the U.S. in the region.

It is time to call a spade a spade. The country expecting to benefit most from hostilities between Iran and the U.S. is Israel (with Saudi Arabia in second place). As you no doubt are aware, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (shown above) is fighting for his political life.

He continues to await from you the kind of gift that keeps giving. Likewise, it appears that you, your son-in-law, and other myopic pro-Israel advisers are as susceptible to the influence of Israeli prime ministers as was former President George W. Bush. Some commentators are citing your taking personal responsibility for providing Iran with a casus belli as unfathomable. Looking back just a decade or so, we see a readily distinguishable pattern.

Consortium News, Opinion: US Kick Starts Raging ’20s Declaring War on Iran, Pepe Escobar, Jan. 3, 2020. Iraq is the preferred battleground of a proxy war against Iran that may now metastasize into hot war, with devastating consequences.

Consortium News, Opinion: Qassem Suleimani Air Strike Escalates US Assassination Policy, Luca Trenta, Jan. 3, 2020. The killing of the Iranian general, Qassem Suleimani, shown above in a 2018 Iranian government photo) signals an escalation in the U.S. policy of assassination and targeted killing.

This is the latest and most dramatic development in the ongoing proxy conflict between the U.S. and Iran. Much of that conflict has taken place on the territory of Iraq, including a recent attack on the U.S. embassy compound. The Trump administration explicitly blamed this recent attack on Iran. In turn, Iranian authorities, including Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Sharif, have accused the U.S. of committing an act of “international terrorism” in killing Suleimani in what was described as an “extremely dangerous and foolish escalation.”

While it is too soon to say what the consequences of this latest U.S. operation will be, the killing of the Iranian general certainly signals an escalation in the U.S. policy of assassination and targeted killing. It also establishes a dangerous precedent for international politics.

In a statement, the Department of Defense justified the drone strike by saying Suleimani was “actively developing plans to attack American diplomats and service members in Iraq and throughout the region.” It emphasised that the Quds Force is designated as a foreign terrorist organization by the U.S. government. It also stressed that the attack was justified to protect U.S. personnel abroad and to deter future attacks.

But Suleimani was also, clearly, a foreign official. It is also not evident that he posed an imminent threat to U.S. nationals. No details are given on this concern. These two points – the type of target killed and the nature of the threat – have traditionally been crucial elements in any decision by the U.S. government to undertake a targeted killing or pre-emptive strikes.

Since the mid-1970s, an executive order has prohibited U.S. government agencies from engaging in assassination. However, while upholding the ban on assassination, the Ronald Reagan administration worked to create the legal and political space it needed to kill terrorists when it saw fit. Legal opinions from the CIA and the Pentagon at the time suggested using force in counter-terrorism was a different matter altogether and so fell outside the remit of the ban on assassination.

A key element of the Reagan administration’s justification, as made clear in National Security Decision Directive 138, was that these measures were pre-emptive and were taken in self-defense, against targets that posed an imminent threat to U.S. interests and personnel.

In an important precedent for the Suleimani killing, some members of the Reagan administration also argued that not only terrorists, but also leaders of states supporting terrorism, could be targeted. On this basis, while some disagreement remains, several primary and secondary sources seem to agree that the Reagan administration tried to kill Libyan leader Muhammar Gaddafi in an air strike on his headquarters and home in 1986. Gaddafi survived the bombing.

New York Times, Analysis: For Trump, a Risky Gamble to Deter Iran, David E. Sanger, Jan. 3, 2020. American officials have no doubt the Iranians will respond — but they don’t know how quickly, or how furiously. President Trump’s decision to strike and kill the second most powerful official in Iran turns a slow-simmering conflict with Tehran into a boiling one, and is perhaps the riskiest move made by the United States in the Middle East since the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

The calculus was straightforward: Washington had to re-establish deterrence, and show the Iranian leadership that missiles fired at ships in the Persian Gulf and at oil facilities in Saudi Arabia, along with attacks inside Iraq that cost the life of an American contractor, would not go without response.

But while senior American officials have no doubt the Iranians will respond, they don’t know how quickly, or how furiously.

For a president who repeated his determination to withdraw from the caldron of the Middle East, the strike that killed Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, who for two decades has been leader of Iran’s most fearsome and ruthless military unit, the Quds Force, means there will be no escape from the region for the rest of his presidency, whether that is one year or five. Mr. Trump has committed the United States to a conflict whose dimensions are unknowable, as Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, seeks vengeance.

Complicating the management of a perilous moment is the president’s impeachment and the revival of Iran’s nuclear program.

It is only a matter of time before there are questions about whether the strike was designed to create a counternarrative, one of a conflict with a longtime adversary, while a Senate trial to determine whether to remove Mr. Trump begins. And already there are charges that the president overstepped his bounds, and that the decision to kill General Suleimani — if it was a decision, and the Iranian leader was not simply in the wrong convoy at the wrong moment — required congressional approval.

New York Times, Fact Check: Pence Links Suleimani to 9/11. The Public Record Doesn’t Back Him, Zach Montague, Jan. 3, 2020. In a series of tweets on Friday defending President Trump’s decision to authorize the drone strike that killed Iran’s top intelligence commander, Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, Vice President Mike Pence reeled off a list of some of General Suleimani’s most notorious attacks and machinations. Mr. Pence described “an evil man” who had threatened American national security interests for decades.

In one of his tweets, Mr. Pence, right, claimed that General Suleimani helped 10 of the men who would go on to carry out the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks cross through Iran and enter Afghanistan. That does not match established historical accounts of General Suleimani or public United States intelligence about the hijackers.

This lacks evidence. How Mr. Pence arrived at this number and this account is unclear. From what is commonly known about General Suleimani and the group of men who carried out the Sept. 11 attacks, their paths did not cross.

Responses To U.S.-ordered Killings

New York Times, Attack at Baghdad Airport Is Major Escalation in U.S.-Iran Conflict (continued from above). The killing of General Suleimani was a major blow for Iran and a major escalation of President Trump’s “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran, which began with economic sanctions but has steadily moved into the military arena.

The strikes followed a warning on Thursday afternoon from Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper, who said the United States military would pre-emptively strike Iranian-backed forces in Iraq and Syria if there were signs the paramilitary groups were planning more attacks against American bases and personnel in the region.

“If we get word of attacks, we will take pre-emptive action as well to protect American forces, protect American lives,” Mr. Esper said. “The game has changed.”

In Iran, state television interrupted its programing to announce General Suleimani’s death. The news anchor recited the Islamic prayer for the dead — “From God we came and to God we return” — beside a picture of General Suleimani.

American officials consider General Suleimani, the commander of the Revolutionary Guards’ elite Quds Force, responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American soldiers during the Iraq War and hostile Iranian activities throughout the Middle East.

The American drone strike hit two cars carrying Mr. Suleimani and several officials with Iranian-backed militias as they were leaving the airport.

American officials said that multiple missiles hit the convoy in a strike carried out by the Joint Special Operations Command.

The strike killed five people, including the pro-Iranian chief of an umbrella group for Iraqi militias, Iraqi television reported and militia officials confirmed. The militia chief, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, was a strongly pro-Iranian figure.

The public relations chief for the umbrella group, the Popular Mobilization Forces in Iraq, Mohammed Ridha Jabri, was killed as well.

Washington and Tehran appear intent on ratcheting up both their messaging and their forces, raising concerns of a larger conflict. In the past several months, Iranian-supported militias have increased rocket attacks on bases housing American troops. The Pentagon has dispatched more than 14,000 troops to the region since May.

Caught in the middle is the Iraqi government, which is too weak to establish any military authority over some of the more established Iranian-supported Shiite militias.

Moon of Alabama, Opinion: U.S. Will Come To Regret Its Assassination of Qassim Soleimani, b (Germany-based analyst), Jan. 3, 2019. Today the U.S. declared war on Iran and Iraq. War is what it will get.

Earlier today a U.S. drone or helicopter killed Major General Qassim Soleimani, the famous commander of the Iranian Quds ('Jerusalem') force, while he left the airport of Baghdad where he had just arrived. He had planned to attend the funeral of the 31 Iraqi soldiers the U.S. had killed on December 29 at the Syrian-Iraqi border near Al-Qaim.

The Quds force is the external arm of the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. Soleiman, right, was responsible for all relations between Iran and political and militant movements outside of Iran. Hajji Qassim advised the Lebanese Hisbullah during the 2006 war against Israel. His support for Iraqi groups enabled them to kick the U.S. invaders out of Iraq. He was the man responsible for, and successful in, defeating the Islamic State in iraq and Syria. In 2015 Soleimani traveled to Moscow and convinced Russia to intervene in Syria. His support for the Houthi in Yemen enabled them to withstand the Saudi attackers.

Soleimani had arrived in Baghdad on a normal flight from Lebanon. He did not travel in secret. He was picked up at the airport by Abu Mahdi al-Muhandes, the deputy commander of the al-Hashd al-Shaabi, an official Iraqi security force under the command of the Iraqi Prime Minister. The two cars they traveled in were destroyed in the U.S. attack. Both men and their drivers and guards died.

The U.S. created two martyrs who will now become the models and idols for tens of millions of youth in the Middle East. The Houthi in Yemen, Hizbullah in Lebanon, Islamic Jihad in Palestine, the paramilitary forces in Syria, Iraq and elsewhere have all benefited from Soleimani's advice and support. They will all take actions to revenge him.

Moqtada al-Sadr, left, the unruly Shia cleric who commands millions of followers in Iraq, has given orders to reactivate his military branch 'Jaish al-Imam al-Mahdi'. Between 2004 and 2008 the Mahdi forces fought the U.S. occupation of Iraq. They will do so again.

No Iraqi politician will be able to argue for keeping U.S. forces in the country. The Iraqi Prime Minister Abdel Mahdi has called for a parliament emergency meeting to ask for the withdrawal of all U.S. troops. Iran will tie its response to the political calender. U.S. President Donald Trump will go into his reelection campaign with U.S. troops under threat everywhere. We can expect incidents like the Beirut barracks bombing to repeat themselves when he is most vulnerable.

Washington Post, Opinion: Trump ordered the fatal strike on Soleimani. Now what? Jennifer Rubin, right, Jan. 3, 2019. Trump has raised strategic incoherence to new levels. Acting without so much as briefing Congress and despite his own party’s qualms about a new war in the Middle East, Trump risks not only war but also political blowback should Iran retaliate.

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) tweeted the question on most lawmakers’ minds: “Soleimani was an enemy of the United States. That’s not a question. The question is this — as reports suggest, did America just assassinate, without any congressional authorization, the second most powerful person in Iran, knowingly setting off a potential massive regional war?”

Politico, Analysis: Trump just made his most consequential decision as president, Jake Sherman and Anna Palmer, Jan. 3, 2010. This is a hugely consequential decision by President Donald Trump that could color the remainder of his presidency, shake up the 2020 campaign and reshape the Middle East for decades. It’s a big deal.

What is the larger strategy? Administration officials told us this morning that the strategy is to get Iran back to the negotiating table through defensive actions.

Furthermore, Congress is already wondering why it was left in the dark -- many members were told after the attack, and before the statement came out confirming his death. Does Congress need to consider a new Authorization for Use of Military Force, something it has talked a lot about but has been scared to do for more than a decade?

MEET THE NEW GUY: Iran has already named Soleimani’s replacement. According to the official Tasnim News Agency, it’s Gen. Esmail Qaani, who was tapped by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei as the new head of the elite Quds Force. Qaani, who was Soleimani’s deputy, has been described as lacking his former boss’ charisma but perhaps making up for it somewhat in hardened battlefield experience.

ADVICE WORTH TAKING: The U.S. Embassy in Iraq issued a revised “security alert” for Americans stuck in Baghdad or considering travel there. The guidance: “U.S. citizens should depart via airline while possible, and failing that, to other countries via land. … Do not travel to Iraq … Avoid the U.S. Embassy … Monitor local and international media for updates.”

QUESTIONS ON THE LEFT: JOE BIDEN: “No American will mourn Qassem Soleimani’s passing. He deserved to be brought to justice for his crimes against American troops and thousands of innocents throughout the region. He supported terror and sowed chaos. None of that negates the fact that this is a highly escalatory move in an already dangerous region. … President Trump just tossed a stick of dynamite into a tinderbox.” Full statement

PRAISE ON THE RIGHT … @SenTomCotton: “Qassem Soleimani masterminded Iran’s reign of terror for decades, including the deaths of hundreds of Americans. Tonight, he got what he richly deserved, and all those American soldiers who died by his hand also got what they deserved: justice.

Palmer Report, Opinion: Donald Trump just totally blew it with Iran, Bill Palmer, Jan.3, 2020. There’s a popular narrative that says all a president has to do to get reelected is to start a war at precisely the right time. The thing is, that narrative simply isn’t true. The reality is that a popular president can become more popular by starting a war, because the people trust that president’s intentions. But an unpopular president can only make things even worse for himself by trying to start a war at a time when the people are already sick of his crap.

This brings us to whatever it is that Donald Trump just did in Iran. After Iranian-backed forces attacked the U.S. Embassy in Iraq, the United States had no choice but to carry out a proportional response. Trump had to blow up something, as would any other president in Trump’s position, in order to let Iran know that there are consequences for violently attacking U.S. soil. The thing is, Trump overplayed his hand.

All that Trump had to do was blow up an ammo dump or two in Iran, and call it a day. He’d have been widely praised by the media for carrying out the correct proportional response. Instead, he overplayed his hand by taking out Qasem Soleimani. Trump seemed to think he’d get credit for taking out a notorious monster. But while no American is going to miss Soleimani, the reality is that Trump’s response was not a proportional one, but an escalatory one. It’s so over the top, Iran will now have to respond in some way, in order to save face with its own people.

Donald Trump has consistently shown that he’s afraid of war. It’s been clear all along that he fears a war could finish off what’s left of his teetering presidency. But now that he’s forcing Iran to respond in kind, he’ll soon face a no-win situation where he has to either escalate things further in response, or humiliate himself by not responding. If Trump gets us into a war with Iran, his reelection odds will drop to zero. No matter how many times the media makes the braindead claim that war can somehow magically get an unpopular president reelected, it’s a laugh-out-loud false narrative. Even Trump knows it.

ANSWER Coalition, Advocacy: Trump starts war on Iran: ALL OUT Sat. Jan. 4 National Day of Action, Jan. 3, 2020. New statement from the ANSWER Coalition below:

The Trump administration and Pentagon have moved to start a war with Iran by assassinating Qassem Soleimani, the top military leader of that country. If Iran openly assassinated a top U.S. general and bragged about it, there is no question that the United States would initiate full-scale war. Trump and the Pentagon have acted illegally, in violation of the Constitution, the War Powers Act and international law.

The targeted assassination and murder of a central leader of Iran is designed to initiate a new war. Unless the people of the United States rise up and stop it, this war will engulf the whole region and could quickly turn into a global conflict of unpredictable scope and potentially the gravest consequences.

The Pentagon high command is recklessly bragging about this illegal, targeted assassination in the most crude and false manner. “This strike was aimed at deterring future Iranian attack plans,” stated the lying generals. They know that the objective of the strike is just the opposite. They want a war with Iran – a country of more than 80 million people. Trump wants it too because he thinks it will guarantee his re-election in 2020.

For all who believe in peace, for all who are opposed to yet another catastrophic war, now is the time to take action. On Saturday, January 4 in cities across the country there will be protests against a new war in the Middle East and calling for the withdrawal of all U.S. troops and bases in the region.

Initiators for this call include the ANSWER Coalition, CODEPINK, Popular Resistance, World Beyond War and many other anti-war and peace organizations. If you want to add your name as an endorser click here.

Demonstrations will take place on Saturday, January 4 in the following cities:

• The White House: Washington D.C., 12 noon at the White House
• Chicago, IL,12 noon at Trump Tower
• Los Angeles, CA , 1 pm at Pershing Square
• New York City, NY, 11 am at Time Square

More locales via link here.

Washington Post, Iran vows revenge after U.S. drone strike kills elite force commander, Louisa Loveluck​​, Jan. 3, 2019. The death of Quds Force commander Qasem Soleimani could plunge the region into a new cycle of violence. His death in the wreckage of a two-car convoy in Baghdad left U.S. outposts bracing for retaliation.

The U.S. Embassy in Iraq warned its citizens to leave “immediately.” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said he discussed the operation afterward with British and Chinese officials, telling them that “the U.S. remains committed to de-escalation.”

Washington Post, Potential clash between U.S. and Iran averted as embassy siege ends, Mustafa Salim and Liz Sly, Jan. 2, 2019. The Kataib Hezbollah militia told its supporters to leave the area around the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad after Iraq’s prime minister said he would support efforts to pass a law calling for a U.S. troop withdrawal, according to a militia official.

Jan. 1

World News

New York Times, Iraq Protesters Swarm Near U.S. Embassy Again, Dispersing Amid Tear Gas, Falih Hassan and Alissa J. Rubin, Jan. 1, 2020. For a second day, demonstrators swarmed outside the United States Embassy in Iraq on Wednesday and troops fired tear gas in an attempt to disperse them, but after a few hours the militia leaders who had organized the demonstration called on the crowd to leave.

Unlike on Tuesday, protesters did not get inside the compound. By midafternoon all but about 200 had dispersed, taking their tent poles with them.

President Trump said on Tuesday that Iran was responsible for events at the embassy compound in Baghdad, and tweeted, “They will pay a very BIG PRICE! This is not a Warning, it is a Threat.”

The situation in Iraq reached a new level of volatility in the last few days as Iran and the United States attacked each other’s forces, in an escalation of hostilities that was at risk of spiraling out of control. The growing confrontations between the United States and Iran, the two main sponsors of the fragile Iraqi government and the two primary foreign military powers there, makes the already unstable region even more so.

The United States blamed an Iranian-backed militia for a rocket attack on Friday on an Iraqi military base, which killed an American contractor and wounded several other people. American forces responded on Sunday with strikes on five sites controlled by the militia, in Syria and Iraq, that killed at least two dozen people and injured twice as many; Iran has put the death toll at 31.

Washington Post, Trump threatens Iran after embassy attack but is reluctant to get more involved in the region, Anne Gearan, Philip Rucker and Josh Dawsey, Jan. 1, 2020. It’s unclear what moves President Trump will make next as he feels the tug between taking a tough line with Iran and trying to avoid getting more involved in the Middle East.

Washington Post, Israel’s Netanyahu seeks immunity from criminal charges, Ruth Eglash, Jan. 1, 2020. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was indicted in November in three cases focused on bribery, fraud and breach of trust. Netanyahu announced Wednesday that he would ask the Israeli parliament to grant him immunity in three criminal cases, tying up further the already lengthy legal proceedings against him in a political system that has been gripped by deadlock for the past year.

Netanyahu’s immunity request to the Knesset would shield him from prosecution at least while he remains in office. It also pitches the country’s political establishment against the legal system ahead of an unprecedented third general election in less than a year. That election is set for March 2.

In November, Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit concluded that there was enough evidence to prosecute Netanyahu, right, in three cases involving allegations that he and his wife, Sara, accepted more than $260,000 worth of luxury goods in exchange for political favors and that he interceded with regulators and lawmakers on behalf of two media companies in exchange for positive news coverage.

Yuval Shany, vice president of the Israel Democracy Institute, said Netanyahu will have a tough time prevailing on his immunity request. Even if approved by the Knesset — first by a house panel and then by a vote of the entire parliament — the Supreme Court most likely wouldn’t allow it to stand.

• New York Times, Thousands Flee Fires in Australia as States Warn Crisis Will Worsen, “It’s going to be a blast furnace,” one official said, after predictions that the next few days would be the worst yet in an already catastrophic fire season.