Ignoring global outcry, Trump says America will not be held hostage to nuclear blackmail
It is no coincidence that just hours after U.S. President Donald J. Trump defied the international community by withdrawing Washington from the Iran nuclear deal and re-imposing “the highest level of economic sanctions” against Tehran, that Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu boarded a plane to Moscow.
“I am leaving for an important meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin,” the premier asserted prior to his departure. “The meetings between us are always important and this one is especially so. In light of what is currently happening in Syria, it is necessary to ensure the continued coordination between the Russian military and the [Israel Defense Forces].”
Indeed the Israeli army is on high alert in the north, where municipalities were ordered Tuesday night to facilitate access to public bomb shelters over what the military called “abnormal movements of Iranian forces” in Syria. Amid reports of an imminent attack, the IDF allegedly launched pre-emptive strikes on multiple military bases near Damascus; this as Israeli defense chief Avigdor Liberman held security consultations at Military Headquarters in Tel Aviv.
Jerusalem and Tehran engaged in their first direct confrontation in February, following the penetration of Israeli airspace by an Iranian payload-carrying drone. The IDF responded with a dozen air strikes targeting military infrastructure in Syria, during which an Israeli jet was downed for the first time in three decades. While tensions have since been somewhat diffused, Israel continues to conduct operations to uphold Jerusalem’s red lines; namely, to thwart the transfer of advanced weaponry to Hizbullah and to prevent the Islamic Republic from establishing a permanent military foothold across the northern border.
To this end, Israel on April 9 struck the Tiyas, or T-4, air base, killing fourteen Iranians in the process. The Mullahs repeatedly have vowed to respond to this Israeli “aggression” and may even determine that they no longer have anything to lose and, therefore, that sparking a conflict is in their best interest, using it as justification to restart their atomic program, if not make a full-out dash for the bomb.
According to Zvi Magen, a former Israeli ambassador to Russia, Prime Minister Netanyahu’s meeting with President Putin—at least their sixth encounter over the past three years—comes, first and foremost, within the context of the two countries’ need to continue coordinating their military operations in Syria, where a de-confliction mechanism has been devised to prevent any inadvertent accidents.
Notably, previous defense minister Moshe Ya’alon over the weekend revealed that in 2015 the IDF came close to shooting down a Russian jet that was headed towards Israeli airspace. He made clear the imperative of maintaining an open channel of communication with Russian forces stationed in Syria, who were contacted at the time at the Khmeimim Air Base by Israeli counterparts to alert them of the danger, which, in turn, led to the warplane being diverted.
“But now, there is a larger issue,” Magen qualified to The Media Line, “as tensions have risen with Iran, which has achieved a position in Syria. Putin, who is the major player there, will position himself as a peacemaker and attempt to broker an understanding between Israel and Iran, which is stuck in the corner now. Russia is looking for the best arrangement for itself,” he elaborated, “and the Iranians are, in many respects, competitors in Syria that have their its own goals. But now that there are problems with Israel, Tehran may be more flexible to Russian demands to reach a détente with the Jewish state.”
With its back up against the wall, Iran has instead threatened to take measures “stronger than [Trump] imagines”—including “vigorously” jump-starting its uranium enrichment program. However, this could simply be posturing on the part of the hardliners, as the Iranian regime is believed to have contingency plans for the continuation of the accord without American participation. In fact, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani on Monday kept this door open, saying that “what [Tehran] want[s] for the deal is that it’s preserved and guaranteed by the non-Americas.”
In fact, it appears that the other parties to the deal, based on their official reactions to President Trump’s decision, are similarly open to the possibility of maintaining the nuclear deal’s framework for the time being. Evidently, the French, British and German foreign ministers will meet with Iranian representatives later this week to discuss a path forward.
Moreover, U.S. sanctions will not take effect for another 90 days, which provides a small window of opportunity for a breakthrough, albeit an improbable one. Whereas President Trump vowed to continue working with allies to find a “real, comprehensive, and lasting solution to the Iranian nuclear threat,” most analysts agree that it is exceedingly unlikely that Tehran will abide by any American-led process.
By contrast, Iranian officials lashed out at the White House following the U.S. president’s announcement, calling his decision “illegal and illegitimate.” Then, Wednesday morning, Iranian legislators burned a U.S. flag in parliament while chanting “Death to America,” a fit of rage that seemingly confirmed many of President Trump’s accusations and affirmations.
But the American leader made an important differentiation in his speech; namely, between Iran’s “lunatic” regime and its civilian population. In this respect, initial contacts by The Media Line with opposition sources in Tehran suggest that the Ayatollah’s critics were energized by President Trump’s words, which included a direct appeal to the “long-suffering people of Iran,” with whom he said Washington stands.
“Trump’s address was a massive shot in the arm to the Iranian people, who now believe that they have U.S. support if they mobilize to attempt to overthrow the regime,” according to Dr. Harold Rhode, a Fellow at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs who spent nearly three decades as an advisor on the Islamic world in the Office of the U.S. Secretary of Defense.
“Almost miraculously,” he expounded, “the body of [Reza Shah Pahlavi, Iran’s former ruler,] was just discovered. It had been missing since the mausoleum which housed his remains was destroyed in the aftermath of the 1979 revolution. The Iranian people are mystical and overwhelmingly not anti-American and many of them saw this as a sign that the Mullahs’ days are numbered.”
Within this context, it is worthwhile noting that the Iranian government last week banned the use of the popular Telegram messaging application under the pretext of protecting “national security,” ahead of potential mass protests that are more likely to materialize given the mounting prospect of further economic hardships. The messaging service, which allows text to be encrypted, is used by an estimated 40 million Iranians and has in the past been employed by anti-government groups to organize protests, including the weeks-long demonstrations earlier this year.
What began as small rallies over economic stagnation quickly evolved into nationwide marches against the regime, with thousands of Iranians taking to the streets in January to air their grievances, ranging from corruption and the misappropriation of funds to the absence of basic freedoms. It was the largest movement against Iran’s rulers—with chants of “death to the regime” heard across the country—since the “Green Revolution” was brutally quashed by Tehran’s security establishment nearly a decade ago.
As such, in Dr. Rhodes’ estimation, “the Iranian regime is afraid, very afraid. The leaders know they cannot stand up to America or Israel. The usual reaction would be to cower, but that is not the Iranian way. Previously, they have done their best to preserve their interests by arriving at some sort of compromise.”
Otherwise, many world leaders have warned of a large-scale military confrontation, not only involving the Jewish state and Sunni Arab countries, but also potentially the United States and Russia, which has re-emerged as a force in the region. In such an eventuality, President Trump’s ditching the JCPOA will effectively opened up Pandora’s Box in the Middle East tinderbox.
In the past, historians have described such conflicts—those involving multiple players and pitting global powers against each other—as world wars.