Nida Al-Watan, Lebanon, January 10
No one ever imagined that US President Donald Trump, who specializes in deals, not wars, would have ordered the US military to assassinate the second most important man in Iran – the planner and executor of the Khomeinist revolution, the commander of the Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Major General Qasem Soleimani! Indeed, this decision doesn’t seem to make sense. It is Donald Trump, after all, who dismissed his former national security advisor, John Bolton, due to the latter’s hawkish stance toward Iran and his repeated calls to strike it. Therefore, there are only two possible explanations for this strike: either the US had credible intelligence, gathered by the CIA, that Iran would not respond to Soleimani’s assassination, or the assassination was coordinated in one way or another with Tehran. The latter option might seem like a ludicrous conspiracy, but some important questions have been raised in the past few days. Foremost, how is it possible that US troops stationed in Iraq vacated two of their military bases just before the Iranian retaliation occurred? There is certainly reason to believe that Soleimani was the greatest obstacle standing in the way of a potential reconciliation between the mullahs and Washington. He was a staunch supporter of Iran’s nuclear militarization and its build-up of arms abroad. It is possible that in order to implement its “deal of the century” in the Middle East, Washington realized that it must first curb Iran’s activity in the region. This couldn’t have been achieved as long as Soleimani was around, yet removing him was impossible due to his great domestic influence. The mullahs needed someone else to take him down. The assassination serves both sides’ interests: first, it is a gift to Donald Trump ahead of the upcoming US elections. Second, the assassination can facilitate Iran’s return to the negotiating table and save the Iranian regime from collapse. Third, it provides Washington with the ability to lift its sanctions on Tehran. Whether this explanation is realistic or not, it is still one worth considering. Now, we have to wait and see how Hizbullah, the last remaining obstacle, responds to Soleimani’s killing. –Tony Abi Najm