The year of 2020 just started and US President Donald Trump has already made the world tremble. In 03 Last January, the United States Armed Forces carried out a bold and spectacular military operation around the Baghdad International Airport in Iraq. The missiles launched by an unmanned and operated American ground aircraft - the MQ-9 Reaper, or reaper - culminated in the death of six people, among them the almighty Iranian Major General Qassim Soleimani and the Iraqi paramilitary and fugitive paramilitary Abu Mahdi al Muhandis. The assassination of Soleimani puts an end to a brief peace hiatus in Iraq and opens up a new stage in the Middle East conflict. Heads of State and Government, military officials and diplomatic legations around the world were appalled by the imminent threat of war caused by Trump's boldness and recklessness[i]. With its risky operation, the US seeks to regain control of Iraqi territory and weaken Iran. However, yet, the US military operation only confirmed the modus operandi of his president and indicates what changes he wants for NATO. With regard to our country, it would not be a surprise if in the medium term Trump and the foreign policy of the current Brazilian government - if both governments remain in power - come to take Brazilian troops to the middle of the armed zone in the Middle East.
The United States-Iran conflict: a heavy legacy left by the century 20
The century 20, marked by two world wars, left the heavy conflict United States-Iran for the century 21. The current world dominated by values western countries and packed with waves of technological disruptions has enormous difficulty in understanding and dealing with this âclash of civilizationsâ, how Samuel Huntington coined there is 30 years[ii]. It is a complex conflict that involves economic disputes - it is located on top of some of the largest oil reserves in the world - and political-religious - between liberal democracy regimes and democratic theocracy. Beyond the cultural aspects, economic and political the US-Iran clash continues a dispute immemorial civilizational between the West and the Near East whose origins date back to the Medes wars between Greek city-states and Persia during the antique.
In contemporary history, However, the embryo of the conflict States United-Iran formed with the Islamic revolution in Iran in 1979. From there to here, and with the end of the cold war between the US and the Soviet Union, the Islamic Republic of Iran has become the main antagonist of the great Western power - albeit the main economic-military threat to US hegemony today be China. On several occasions the great leader of the revolution Islamic, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, predicted that Iran's fate would be the to confront the United States. In 1 January 1989, for example, Khomeini addressed a famous letter to Mikhail Gorbachev announcing the end of the Union of Republics Soviet Socialists (USSR) and communism and the advent of Islam as a force world hegemony[iii]. The ideology of communism still exists around the world and Islam in the West has not yet occupied the place of prominence one day occupied by Marxism in the 20, but Khomeini got it right three years before the collapse of the USSR and also the escalation of the importance of the confrontation between Iran and the USA.
The two countries never came to face each other directly, but come from then waging parallel wars in the Gulf and Levant region. In the years 80 the two countries face each other indirectly through Lebanon and Iraq, country that turned into a true dispute board between the two nations. Immediately after the revolution of 1979, Iran had to deploy to contain the advances Saddam Hussein's impetuous forces into his territory in the conflict known as the Iran-Iraq (1980-1988). Iran has always accused the US of encouraging and supporting Iraqi invasion of Saddam Hussein on its territory. Soon after came the first Persian Gulf War (1990-1991) when the United States had to stop Saddam Hussein from his impulsive invasion of Kuwait. twelve years later came the second gulf war, also known as the Iraq War, in March of 2003. A war that suffered intense worldwide opposition and was started under a thick smokescreen raised by the government of George W. Bush - with the false pretense of the existence of weapons of mass destruction. Despite the fast fall of Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath regime followed by his eventual capture and execution, the US failed to install in Iraq the much-awaited and propagated Western-style liberal political regime that was at the same time stable and pro-west. The withdrawal of a good part of the American troops took a long time and only happened in 2011, but only three years later Iraq was hit by a new conflict. The proclamation of the diffuse caliphate of the State Islam in territories of Iraq and Syria led Iraq to a civil war that would last until 2017. In this last episode, a curious â but not unprecedented â scenario is He gave, the two historic rivals â the US and Iran â have entered into a tacit agreement to fight the jihadists of State Islamic. While the US was engaged in aerial bombardment, Shiite militias led by Iranian paramilitaries were in charge of ground operations. Even more curious was that the coming to power of Donald Trump contributed effective way to defeat the Islamic State, producing a hiatus of peace in the Iraq. In this scenario of âIraqi peaceâ, who actually held the reins in of political power, religious and economic were the Shias allied with the Iranians. But, how did that happen?
The Iraq war started by G.W. Bush served as an invitation to the Iran clandestinely enters Iraq. Islamic Republic officials do not vacillated with the power vacuum left by the fall of Saddam Hussein's regime and by disorganized American action. Iranian special agents were taking over the country through religious leaders, Shia politics and military Iraqis â it is worth remembering that 70% of the Iraqi population is Shia. The big architect of the Iranian rise to control of Iraq was the enigmatic and influential Soleimani.
Soleimani, or the eminence grise
Major General Qassem Soleimani was the commander of the Jerusalem Force â better known as Force Qods of SepÄh-e Qods in farsi â elite group of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. none other word better defines Soleimani's role in the Middle East than the phrase 'eminence parda': individual with a lot of influence in political life or in any other activity, but that remains anonymous, that does not show nor act clearly. Soleimani was very close to the great Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and had a prominent role in clandestine military actions throughout the Middle East and South Asia over the past two decades[iv]. He was very close to military officers in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon and also enjoyed ties of friendship with important political and religious leaders as, for example, Hassan Nasrallah of Lebanese Hezbollah, from the iraqi cleric Muqda al-Sadr and the Grand Mufti of Syria Ahmad Hassoun. Soleimani was key in the reassignment of Bashar al-Assad's military forces in Syria.
Major General Soleimani's death leaves most analysts Western politicians completely bewildered, because very little is known about fact about the internal power structure in Iran and there is no way to predict how his death will come to affect the course of history in the country, in the Middle East and world. As the death of Iran's top military figure and regarded by many as the second most powerful man in the country â behind only the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei â will affect decision-making and internal power struggles? your proximity with Ayatollahs and clerics inside and outside Iran and their prominence in articulating of clandestine international operations provoked jealousy and fear in many, inside and outside Iran. His death was at the same time lamented and celebrated by many. Despite its popularity among the Iranian population and the Shiites in the Middle East he was not unanimous among officials Iranians and perhaps knowledge of this information has encouraged the bombing that killed him.
the lit wick: The Intercept (de Glenn Greenwald) strike again
In November 2019 o site The Intercept it's the The New York Times published an explosive dossier of reports entitled The Iran Cables based on a massive and unprecedented leak of documents prepared between 2014 e 2015 by Iranian officials operating within and outside the country and linked to the Ministry of Intelligence and Security of Iran[v]. Based on information contained in more than 700 documentation pages on farsi about the participation of Iran and the United States in the fight against the State islamic in iraq, the dossier shows the deep infiltration of the government of Tehran in Iraq, effectively controlling political and economic aspects. THE Iranian advance into Iraqi territory began alongside the US invasion of Iraq. Iraq in March 2003, but the deepening of the domain happened with the gradual withdrawal of US presence from the country. Many of the military officers Iraqis who had provided services to the Central Intelligence Agency (or CIA in English acronym), with the withdrawal of the Americans, They passed gradually collaborating with the Iranian intelligence service, giving Crucial information about US action in Iraq. The documents also showed evidence of Soleimani's well-known influence, but also revealed totally new information for the west.
Soleimani, or the persian sphinx: "Decipher me or I'll devour you"
If, on the one hand, the documentation sent to the The Intercept confirmed that Major General Soleimani was the mastermind behind the Iranian role in Iraq, on the other hand, the criticisms were exposed internals he received. Despite his undeniable mastery of the situation in Iraq and its powerful allies, Soleimani's strategies were being harshly contested in Iran's highest spheres of power. Some Ministry officials called for limits to the violent actions carried out by Soleimani's men in the Iraq, this because the actions commanded by Iranians in Iraq raised anti-Iran sentiments among the Iraqi Sunni population. In addition, the sunnis had been the targets of severe acts of abuse by Iraqi Shiites, per often associated with an Iranian presence. Besides that, the documentation reveals that rivalry existed between officials of the Ministry of Intelligence and Security of Iran and members of the Qods Force led by Soleimani and also jealous statements about the role exercised and the power exercised by Soleimani in the region. Between the complaints highlighted Soleimani's rapprochement with officials and politicians of the Turkey as former Prime Minister and Turkish diplomat Ahmet DavutoÄlu and fellow diplomat Hakan Fidan, the mighty and influential ex- head of Turkey's National Intelligence Organization.
The difficulty in attacking Soleimani has always been based on the issue of decipher it or understand it in all its complexity. In the West the figure of Major General was understood only through limited sources of information and interpreted by individuals who were sometimes unaware of how the entrails of the power of Islamic Republic of Iran actually works. The revelations contained in documents leaked to the The Intercept brought to light the objections of senior Iranian officials to Soleimani's actions and most likely were crucial to the Trump administration's decision-making in eliminate it.
the attacks of 3 of January: generate instability to negotiate, not war
Although controversial and highly risky, the daring and well executed US attack in Baghdad gave clear demonstrations to Iran of the ability to US military intelligence and technology. As written by former ambassador British in Saudi Arabia and expert on Middle East affairs, John Jenkins: the US has shown Iran that it is not a paper tiger[we]. The truth is, the US has avoided direct confrontation with Iran for years., because the risks have always been incalculable. For the US, the ideal scenario for the end of the conflict would be the self-implosion of the regime, as in the case of the Soviet Union or its gradual fading, as not the case of Cuba Castro. Former Secretary of US State John Kerry â equivalent to our Minister of Foreign Affairs Foreign â recently stated that the Soleimani assassination was always a military option, but due to the incalculable risks it was never considered as a valid option[vii].
The boldness of Trump and his generals has made Iran's situation uncertain and dangerous. It is undeniable that the General's death generates a temporary void at the top of the Iranian military command inside and outside the country. restore the ability to Soleimani's command will take time. Although the new commander of the Qods Force, o Brigadier General Esmael Ghanni, have as much experience and prestige as your colleague, he lacks the charisma and personal ties of his predecessor and is the doubt, therefore, how respected he will be[viii]. Ghanni will temporarily suffer from a hiatus in his authority whether in Iran or outside of it and this should affect the country's military actions.
Iran's strategy: revenge is a dish best served cold
Two days after Soleimani's assassination, the prestigious journalist Englishman Robert Fisk signed an article in The Independent opining that with the assassination of the Iranian Major General, trump had chosen war, not accidentally, but planned[ix]. However, Fisk warns his readers that Iran fights a different kind of war. Whenever attacked, Iran has opted for caution, delaying deliberately your retaliation.
In this duel Iran is undeniably the underdog, unable to face equal to equal with American might. Besides that, in the event of a direct confrontation Iran will not have allies of the same caliber as those that will be together from usa. Since the beginning of the years 80 Iran has become the grand master of unequal warfare through indirect attacks, clandestine and punctual. officers Iranians operating the Qods Force are the brains behind the operations clandestine abroad. They helped create Hezbollah in Lebanon precisely to attack the US and eventually expel them from the country[x]. Iran also made use of targeted attacks, such as the attack on American embassy in Beirut, Lebanon in April 1983 and to the embassies American and French in Kuwait in December of the same year. Between 1985 e 1986 The Iran was also involved in twelve terrorist attacks in Paris because of a conflict in the trading of political prisoners. Over the past Four decades Iran has proved resilient and astute, but never faced a scenario as adverse as the current one of heavy economic sanctions and a frontal assault on its top military officer.
Iran felt the blow: immediate response with disastrous operation
Iran's first retaliations came almost immediately with the launches of missiles to US military bases in Iraq, natural area of ââconflict and battle board, and the downing of a civilian plane in Tehran. At contradictions over the downing of the plane show signs of open gaps, be inside of the commands or operational capability of Iran's military forces. THE real reason for the downing of the plane is so far unfathomable, but the revelation by outside sources that missiles shot down the aircraft and reconnaissance official with the justification of human error weakens and discredits the capacity of the air division of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard, in addition to raising serious suspicions. Possible alternative hypotheses about what actually happened may come to foment the ranks of political dissidents inside and outside the country. Some student protests have already formed at major universities in Tehran, in partly because some of the Ukrainian victims were former students of universities.
In the short term, Trump's strategy for Soleimani's death could generate strong waves of political instability to the country through demonstrations popular protests against the regime of the ayatollahs and in an eventual weakening of Iran's position. However, plus some protests isolated in universities of Tehran, until now what has been seen and heard in the streets of Iran's major cities were throngs of people chanting words of order of support for the Islamic republic accompanied by chants of praise to Allah, to Koran and the prophet Mohammed and praising the newest Islamic martyr: Qasim Soleimani[xi]. Although the Iranian government maintains the support of the majority of the population and the protests under control, Iran faces an unprecedented situation, because you never had to deal with an American president as unpredictable and arrogant as Donald Trump.
Trump's strategy: opening negotiations with bravado and aggression
Trump's main strategy in his negotiations has been to attack and sequence negotiate. For being an aggressive negotiator, Trump is not embarrassed to act out of protocol. In seeking better negotiating conditions, Trump did not intimidates in asserting the economic-military power of the US, but runs big risks in such displays of force. It's what he did to the north leader Korean Kim Jong-un and his private trade war with the Chinese. At the Iran case, Trump kicked off his confrontational strategy in May 2018, to pull the US out of the Plan Global Joint Action (PACG) â international agreement for program control Iranian nuclear plan formulated by the government of Barak Obama and signed jointly by USA, Iran and the five UN Security Council countries along with Germany and European Union. Despite leaving the US, the other signatory countries opted for staying in agreement. Six months later, Trump put heavy sanctions economics against Iran. Although sanctions have negatively affected exports, Iran's economic growth and national currency value, The government remained firm in its position of not negotiating with the United States United States on its Nuclear Program, even denying the initiative proposed by the French President Emanuel Macron placing Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif with Trump administration representatives during the summit of the G7 last August, in Biarritz in France. With the assassination of Soleimani, Trump riskily pushed his confrontational strategy to the limit, seeking out intimidate your opponent and measure their responsiveness. Days after the attack, Trump declared via Twitter that the assassination of the Major General was âto avoid war, not to start one.
Although on social media Trump declares to avoid war against Iran, in the real world the president of the USA acts in a reckless and spectacular way, giving clear signs of not understanding who they are negotiating with. Shiites are notorious because they do not compromise their principles and historically do not tend to assume commitments to its enemies â what made Obama's PACG a huge American conquest despite criticism. What Trump Wants from Iran? he seeks two concessions; first of all wants Iran to lessen its influence and operations in the Middle East; second, it needs Iran to sign a new deal that limits its nuclear and ballistic ambitions. To advance on these two points Trump will have to walk a long and winding road. The big question that hangs in the air is: in the short and medium term to where this Trump's forced attempt to frame the Iranian regime?
The Trump paradox and the role of NATO
Trump is not lying when he says he prefers to avoid a war with Iran, but there is a paradox in two of its Iran-related goals. Trump seeks contain Iran and reduce the presence of American troops in conflict zones. One of his main campaign promises was precisely the withdrawal of US troops in the Middle East. The political cost of fatalities and war casualties are sky-high for the United States[xii]. However, US withdrawal from Iraqi territory would leave room for Iran takes over the country completely and turns it into a second republic Islam â which would be unacceptable not only for the US, but also for Israel and even the Saudis. already a few years ago, the expert jonathan Paris at a conference on Soleimani, indicated that the US would have to replace its military presence in Iraq with an international coalition[xiii]. The US president has also indicated that he wants to position the country as a strategic and technological leadership, decreasing the presence of American troops in ground operations. The desire to form a western alliance to contain the Iran and Islamic fundamentalist groups in the Middle East may be one of the reasons why the US president has been talking so much about reforming the Alliance Atlantic, better known as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (nato or English acronym Nato). Trump's bravado in assassinating Soleimani intimidates and worries not only Iran, but everyone. Trump looks like he will use the threat of war with Iran to manipulate its western allies into engage in NATO reform.
Since his presidential campaign in 2016, Trump has expressed severe criticism of NATO and as president has been tough and threatening to pull the US out of organization[xiv]. Among its main demands is the demand for commitments budgetary expenditures on military expenditures by member countries [xv]. The reforms Trump signals he wants for NATO go far beyond compliance of budget obligations. It indicates a radical reform expanding the space of NATO operations to âout of areaâ in the jargon of NATO diplomats and officials. organization, as indicated by the retired US Marine and former Commander NATO Supreme Ally James Stavridis[xvi]. Other Trump's apparent intention for NATO would be the entry of new members, generating conditions for the US to exercise the proposed strategic leadership of international coalitions on several fronts across the globe. Trump recently gave a very concrete clue as to what he thinks for the future of NATO by suggesting that allies operate in the Middle East, even suggesting in a very peculiar way a new acronym: Born-ME (from English North Atlantic Treaty Organization-Middle East)[xvii].
Like this conflict may affect Brazil?
The seismic waves caused by rising tensions from the US-Iran conflict will not be long in arriving in Brazil. The immediate consequence will be an increase in the fuel price, as usually happens in every conflict in the East Average. Although the markets reacted moderately to the assassination of Soleimani, with the increase in military tension in the region, some analysts predict a scenario of high oil barrel prices in 2020[xviii]. A second possibility, this is medium term and more serious, is that Brazil could be brought into combat zones in the Middle East â assuming Donald Trump be re-elected and that the current Brazilian government remains in power. the entrance of Brazil in the conflict could be one of the members of a coalition of Allied countries operating in the Middle East.
Last March, during the visit of the Brazilian president to the
White, Trump aired the remote possibility that Brazil would become a
organization member. Many journalists and specialists disdained the speech
of Trump by insinuating that the American president is unaware of the limits
geographies of the North Atlantic Ocean[xix].
few months later, the US designated Brazil as a non-NATO ally under the
justification of ârecognition for the recent commitments of the government of
Brazil in increasing cooperation in the defense sector with the USâ. Such
The design also authorizes the carrying out of joint maneuvers between the two
Armed forces[xx].
Those responsible for foreign and defense policy of the current Brazilian government
should consider the risks associated with an unconditional alliance with the US, having
in view of Trump's possible re-election and the bold reforms he plans
for NATO and the world.
[i] Amaro Silvia, âWorld leaders call for calm after Iranian attack on US forcesâ, CNBC, 8 January 2020 https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/08/world-leaders-react-to-iran-attack-on-us-bases-in-iraq.html
[ii] Samuel P.S. Huntington, 2010, The shock of Civilizations and the Recomposition of the World Order, Sao Paulo: Point of Reading.
[iii] Letter sent by the Ayatollah of Iran Ruhullah al-Musawi al-Khomeini to the then Secretary General of the Union Soviet Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev, in English: https://www.al-islam.org/call-divine-unity-letter-imam-khomeini-president-mikhail-gorbachev-imam-khomeini/letter
[iv] Dexter Filkins, âThe Shadow Commanderâ, The New Yorker, 23 September 2013 https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/09/30/the-shadow-commander
[v] James Risen, Tim Arango, Farnaz Fassihi, Murtaza Hussain, Ronen Bergman, Jeremy Scahill, Betsy Reed, Vanessa Gezari, Roger Hodge, âThe Iran Cablesâ, The Intercept and The New York Times, 18 November 2020 https://theintercept.com/series/iran-cables/
[we] John Jenkins, âIran must decide when to drink its new âcup of poisonâ â, ArabNews, 8 January 2020 https://www.arabnews.com/node/1610111
[vii] John Kerry in an interview with MSNBC, âKerry: Other Admins Considering Killing Soleimani, But Cost Too Greatâ, 8 January 2020, The Last Word, MSNBC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FT936RI6RVo
[viii] Maysam Behravesh, "Esmail Ghaani: Who is the new commander of Iranâs Quds Force?â, TRTWORLD, 13 January 2020 https://www.trtworld.com/opinion/esmail-ghaani-who-is-the-new-commander-of-iran-s-quds-force-32902
[ix] Robert Fish, âWar more by design than by accident as Trump goes straight for the jugularâ, The Independent, 13 January 2020. https://www.independent.ie/opinion/comment/robert-fisk-war-more-by-design-than-by-accident-as-trump-goes-straight-for-the-jugular-38834827.html
[x] Ryan C. Crocker, âThe Long Battle With Iran â, The New York Times, 5 January 2020 https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/05/opinion/Soleimani-iran-trump.html
[xi] âHuge crowds across Iran gather to mourn top general Soleimaniâ, France24, 7 January 2020 https://www.france24.com/en/video/20200107-huge-crowds-across-iran-gather-to-mourn-top-general-soleimani
[xii] Zvi Bar'el, âIraq Is a Costly Burden for Trump, but Troops Withdrawal Would Be Worseâ, 10 January 2020 https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-iraq-is-a-costly-burden-for-trump-but-troops-withdrawal-would-be-worse-1.8378751
[xiii] Jonathan Paris, âLearning from Qassem Soleimaniâ, Fathom Forum, Fathom Journal, 30 of April 2018 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HCxP2i2qDE
[xiv] Julian E. Barnes e Helene Cooper, âTrump Discussed Pulling U.S. From NATO, Aides Say Amid New Concerns Over Russiaâ, The New York Times, 14 of January of 2019 https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/14/us/politics/nato-president-trump.html
[xv] âNATO claims that barely 7 members intended 2% from GDP to military expensesâ, EFE, 25 June 2019 https://noticias.uol.com.br/ultimas-noticias/efe/2019/06/25/otan-afirma-que-apenas-7-membros-destinam-2-do-pib-a-despesas-militares.htm
[xvi] James Stavridis, âTrumpâs Right That NATO Can Step Up Against Iranâ, Bloomberg, 10 in January 2020 https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-01-10/trump-s-right-that-nato-can-step-up-against-iran
[xvii] âTrump proposes âNATOMEâ: NATO expanded to Mideastâ, Associated Press, 9 January of 2020 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6f3ODUYwfz8
[xviii] Simon Watkins, âIs Iran Preparing To Send Oil Back To $100? â, OilPrice.com, 14 January 2020 https://oilprice.com/Energy/Oil-Prices/Is-Iran-Preparing-To-Send-Oil-Back-To-100.html#
[xix] Rick Noack, âTrump misunderstands NATO so badly, he thinks Brazil could be part of itâ, 20 March 2019, The Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2019/03/20/trump-misunderstands-nato-so-badly-he-thinks-brazil-could-be-part-it/
[xx] "States United States designates Brazil as a non-NATO allyâ, German wave reproduced by AgencyBrasil, 1 August 2020, http://agenciabrasil.ebc.com.br/internacional/noticia/2019-08/estados-unidos-designam-oficialmente-brasil-como-aliado-extra-otan
