There is a terrorist attack in the Persian Gulf. The Saudi oil installations are set ablaze. The Islamic Republic of Iran issues its ritualistic denials. The commentariat insists that the entire issue is murky and responsibility cannot be assigned with any measure of certainty. As the evidence comes in inevitably implicating Iran, they will conveniently blame the Trump administration for ratcheting up tensions by its abrogation of the Iran nuclear deal. In their telling, Iran’s truculence is always a function of the hard-line policies drawn by the United States.
All this ignores that for months, Iran’s most important officials have openly signaled that they will jeopardize oil commerce unless the U.S. lifts its sanctions. Earlier this summer, President Hassan Rouhani brazenly proclaimed, “World powers know that in the case that oil is completely sanctioned and Iran’s oil exports are brought down to zero, international waterways can’t have the same security as before.” Foreign Minister Javad Zarif has followed this threat with one of his own, “If the United States takes the crazy measure of trying to prevent us from [selling oil] then it should be prepared for the consequences.” Iran has since shot down an American drone and captured a number of oil tankers in international waterways.
The attack on Saudi Arabia fits the pattern of Iranian terrorism. The Islamic Republic prefers to launch its campaigns of violence from foreign territory and use proxies that it trains and arms. Then comes the claims of innocence, as denial has always been one of its enduring trademarks. It’s remarkable how well this has worked in the past.
In 1983, Iran’s surrogates bombed the Marine barrack in Lebanon, killing 241 American servicemen. Nor is this the first time that Iran has directed a terrorist assault on Saudi territory. In 1996 it engineered the bombing of the Khobar Towers, killing 19 U.S. soldiers. Its steady campaign of terror during the Iraq War lacerated U.S. forces. This was terror with impunity, as Iran suffered little from its previous acts of violence.
The history of U.S.-Iran relations is one of rampant misperceptions. In the last few weeks, the Islamist oligarchs may have assumed that Washington is growing wary of its campaign of maximum pressure. French President Emmanuel Macron has tried a number of schemes to renew negotiations between the U.S. and Iran. All these efforts usually entail loosening sanctions as a precondition to talks.
The departure of national security adviser John Bolton has been much celebrated in Tehran and seen as an indication that America seeks to chart a new path. All these claims may be without foundation, but they have seemingly emboldened Iran. An adversary with a poor understanding of American politics may draw all the wrong conclusions from our domestic debates, but the consequences of such misperceptions are still real.
In the coming days, the administration will be advised to cool the temperature in the Middle East. It will be cautioned against forceful measures for they could only lead to a wider conflict. It will be accused of somehow instigating this crisis and thus having an obligation to switch tracks. The underlying assumption of all these claims is that the U.S. is somehow responsible for Iranian mischief. But the Islamic Republic responds to resolution, not a retreat from punitive measures. It respects strength, not blandishments.
The task ahead for the Trump administration is a formidable one. It must marshal evidence demonstrating Iranian complicity at a time when most Democrats and European leaders are inclined to blame the Trump administration instead. It must convince its jittery allies in the Middle East, particularly in the Gulf, to come together and unite behind an anti-Iran stance. It should continue its pressure campaign to reduce Iranian oil exports. It must draw its red lines clearly and unambiguously.
The U.S. has long been the guardian of the Gulf and cannot allow this sensitive region, with its ample oil reserves, to be hostage to Iranian terrorism.
All this is not to suggest a rush to rash action. The Islamic Republic has offered us a unique opportunity to mobilize the international community against it. Iran’s remaining oil customers should be pressed to discontinue their purchases and thus their further subsidization of a regime bent on breaking international law.
The theocracy’s most important vulnerability is still its weakening economy, and it is that nerve that Washington should continue pinching. Given this latest Iranian act of terror, the Trump administration may have stumbled on a unique opportunity to multi-lateralize its strategy of maximum pressure.
Ray Takeyh is a Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.
