Trump’s Iran strategy: Rhetoric and bluster, or aggressive containment?
Tehran ran rings around Obama because ultimate deterrence was off the table, meaning parties to the deal were negotiating from a position of weakness; deliberately ignoring Iran’s nefarious activities in order to nail down a narrow nuclear proliferation accord. Nobody wants war, yet Iran is a bully state which only understands the language of force, and doesn’t hesitate to use violence against weaker peoples.
Investment in transnational proxies has bought Tehran a frontline of defense, the likes of which the world has never seen before. In neighboring states it is not Iranians fighting on behalf of the Islamic Republic, but impoverished Afghans, Pakistanis, Yemenis and brainwashed local Shiites, fighting for a few dollars a day for the honor of becoming cannon-fodder. Iran can thus sustain armies in the field for a fraction of the usual cost, with minimal exposure for Iranian nationals or territory. In Iraq around 80,000 of those Al-Hashd Al-Shaabi forces which answer to Tehran directly are paid from Baghdad’s state budget. These forces, complicit in human rights violations tantamount to sectarian cleansing, supplement their income through extortion, smuggling and demanding ransoms for abducted Sunni citizens. Should we allow Iran to extend its paramilitary franchises to the GCC, Central Asia, Africa and beyond?
Control of states like Syria is a means to an end. Tehran’s aggressive regional stance is a bridgehead for attacking regional and Western targets. Middle Eastern oil reserves are central to global energy security. With Tehran’s ability to block the Straits of Hormuz at will, its penetration through the Mediterranean and its use of Houthi proxies to menace shipping through the Mandib Strait, Iran can hold the global economy to ransom.
Iran’s proxies have exploited tensions around the Kurdish referendum to pursue territorial claims across central Iraq. Hashd leaders repeatedly threatened to use force to secure control of Kirkuk. There have been skirmishes in other cities along this Kurd-Arab faultline in recent weeks. The Kurds are perceived as having benefited from US support and thus any offensive against them can partly be interpreted as a personal rebuke to Trump.
At moments over recent months there appeared to be a US desire to reinforce its Kurdish and Arab allies in eastern Syria to prevent Iranian proxies regaining control of this vast region from Daesh. But US military leaders drew back from this option, fearing prolonged confrontation – allowing Tehran to win another round in this regional chess-match.
Trump is blessed with senior officials like H.R. McMaster and James Mattis with decades of experience in grappling with Iranian meddling. Trump must use the vast resources of his presidency to consolidate international support behind a multi-faceted campaign against Tehran’s expansionist policies.
An experienced European diplomat told me that all eyes now are on the Revolutionary Guards. Will they deflect attention, or provoke Trump further with renewed missile tests and confrontational military posturing”
Likewise, this is the moment of truth when we discover what Trump is made of. Will he settle for bluster and rhetoric, while ultimately allowing Tehran to become the unchallenged power in the Middle East? Or is he serious about a far-reaching and decisive strategy to contain and push back Iran?
Baria Alamuddin is an award-winning journalist and broadcaster in the Middle East and the UK. She is editor of the Media Services Syndicate, a foreign editor at Al-Hayat, and has interviewed numerous heads of state.
Q