Iran leaves Trump an off-ramp, but will he take it?
There was little doubt when President Donald Trump ordered a fatal strike last week on Qassem Soleimani that Iran would feel compelled to retaliate.
The question was how hard — and what would Trump do next?
By limiting its initial response to airstrikes on an Iraqi base used by U.S. forces, Iran appears to have sought to leave Trump an off-ramp: score settled, no need to escalate.
There were multiple signs that Iran had tailored its action to be arguably commensurate to Trump’s.
. . . .
Several hours after the first wave of missile strikes, there were no reports of U.S. casualties.
In its place, there was a growing sense that Iran had deliberately missed hitting sites head-on that would likely inflict serious U.S. casualties so as to make its point without overly inflaming the situation.
Indeed, in Iran’s first English-language comment on the strikes on Ain al-Asad air base, Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said his nation did “not seek escalation or war,” but merely to “defend ourselves against any aggression.”
“Iran took & concluded proportionate measures in self-defense,” Zarif, Iran’s chief interlocutor with the West, wrote on Twitter.
. . . .
For Trump, it [not retaliating again] could also allow him to argue that Democrats’ frantic reactions to his strike on Soleimani, with lawmakers warning he might have dragged the U.S. into a new war, were misguided and ultimately incorrect.
That could embolden Trump as he seeks re-election to assert that his foreign policy decision-making had been vindicated when it mattered most.
But it was deeply uncertain whether Trump’s pugnacious disposition and previous vows to punch back if Iran retaliated would allow him to look the other way as opposed to volleying back even harder.
Some administration officials believe Iran intentionally missed areas with Americans
There is a growing belief among some Trump administration officials that Iran's missiles intentionally missed areas populated by Americans when they targeted two Iraqi bases housing US troops early Wednesday local time, multiple administration officials said.
These officials floated the notion that Iran could have directed their missiles to hit areas that are populated by Americans, but intentionally did not.
And they suggested Iran may have chosen to send a message rather than take significant enough action to provoke a substantial US military response, a possible signal the administration was looking for rationale to calm the tensions.
Iranian missiles also landed close to the US consulate in Erbil, but didn't target the consulate itself, though the belief is that they could have.
No comments:
Post a Comment