Donald Trump is not the first president to have had the opportunity to take out Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, Iran’s terrorist mastermind. But past presidents thought killing Soleimani was either unthinkable or the consequences were frighteningly unpredictable. Trump disagreed.
This was not as shocking a decision as Democrats and the media seem to think. One of Trump’s quirks is to do the opposite of what earlier presidents have done when facing a similar situation. Where they balked, he has acted, boldly and bravely.
Killing Soleimani was a gamble, but the reward was great. For only the second time in the 40-year history of the Islamist regime, Iran blinked. The other was in 1988, when Iran planted mines in the Persian Gulf. President Ronald Reagan’s response was to sink or cripple six Iranian vessels and destroy two oil platforms. Iran’s resistance was fierce but it failed.
To avenge Soleimani’s death, Iran fired rockets on two military bases in Iraq. It was a meek attack with no U.S. casualties. If Iran had sought to kill Americans, it would have targeted the base near the Iraq-Iran border or the large facility where far more soldiers are stationed.
This was a sign the Iranian regime fears war. The president knew this. Retired Gen. Jack Keane, a Trump confidant, says Iran cannot win a war with America. The regime would be destroyed. And protecting it is the paramount concern of Iran’s leaders. It’s why they are desperate to build a nuclear arsenal — at least as a deterrent.
Nor does Trump want a war. His call for negotiations with Iran may have surprised the media, but it shouldn’t have. Negotiations, which are popular, are likely to boost his political status. By itself, the Soleimani episode has flummoxed Democrats, who are nervous about criticizing the killing directly. Instead, they demand information about the “process” that led to it and whether it was “imminent” to carry it out last week.
Forget that. Trump insisted on talking about what’s good for Iran and the world. “We must all work together toward making a deal with Iran that makes the world a safer and more peaceful place,” he said after the timid Iran bombing. “We must also make a deal that allows Iran to thrive and prosper and take advantage of its enormous potential.”
Trump’s habit of doing what his predecessors wouldn’t has cropped up repeatedly during his three years in the White House. And there’s an odd part of this practice. When he does what earlier presidents didn’t do, he is often doing what they privately favor.
European members often refuse to fund their military obligations fully. Yet presidents decline to make a public fuss. Trump, however, has gone public in criticizing the negligence of America’s allies. He appears to enjoy a fuss.
Most presidents would be happy if the American Embassy in Israel were moved from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Presidential candidates routinely promise to do so, then renege if elected out of fear of an eruption by Israel’s foes in the Middle East and the United Nations. Trump, to his credit, has actually moved the embassy. The eruption was brief and weak.
Presidents, including Trump, agree that China cheats on trade and ignores orders of the World Trade Organization. But presidents, until Trump, have done zilch to force China to play fair. Trump has turned to a weapon that presidents oppose, tariffs. He is risking an economic turndown and progress with China has been slow.
Then, there’s the matter of daily White House briefings. They’ve been a feature at the White House for decades. The press loves them. Presidents hate them. Since Watergate in the 1970s, reporters have exploited the briefings to focus on the president’s troubles. Rather than anger the media, presidents have continued the briefings. Trump canceled them. Trump himself briefs, telling reporters what he’s thinking from dawn to dusk.
Doing the opposite hasn’t always worked. Trump has adopted the practice of criticizing foreign leaders by name — allies, not adversaries. What good does he get out of picking on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada? Nothing. Treating leaders of friendly countries as punching bags doesn’t have much of an upside. He and German Chancellor Angela Merkel don’t see eye to eye on immigration, but why make their relationship worse?
Trump switched to being buddies with Kim Jong Un. Kim stopped nuclear tests for a bit, but now is resuming them. The benefits to either country from the friendship await the verdict of history.
Perhaps the worst mistake of Trump’s presidency was his pullout of a few thousand U.S. troops from Syria. He betrayed the Kurds, longtime allies. He didn’t recognize the strategic value of even a small American force between Syria and Iran. He looked like a rookie.
After Soleimani’s death, he was pummeled by Democrats and the press. Then the Iranians blinked. Trump had acted like a pro, and Iran’s leaders were afraid of him.
Fred Barnes is a Washington Examiner senior columnist.
