Right now, no one really knows what will become of rapidly-deteriorating U.S.-Iran relations.
President Trump seemed to signal in a Wednesday television address that things with Iran will remain stable but left the option of military action still very much on the table. Meanwhile, top U.S. officials have taken to cable news shows to justify the Trump administration’s assassination of Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad last week, and the president has warned that dozens of sites (both military and cultural) will be bombed if Iran lashes out more significantly than last night’s fireworks show.
This exhausting back-and-forth makes me wonder: Was it really wise or necessary to take out Soleimani?
No doubt, Soleimani, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’s vicious Quds Force, was a despicable military man who played fast and loose with the rules of engagement. As the leader of Iran’s proxy wars in the Middle East, he called the shots in the Iranian effort to prop up the Assad regime in Syria — even when that regime was furiously cluster bombing cities and torturing dissidents.
But the Trump administration’s rush to respond quickly to intelligence linking Soleimani to an alleged, impending attack on U.S. personnel is reminiscent of the intelligence fiasco precipitating the Iraq War debacle. Its consequences could be just as severe, despite the apparent lull in hostility. As I learned during my time there, Iran’s vibrant civil society is constantly in the crosshairs due to the ruling regime and its international enablers.
In May of 2015, I touched down in the Islamic Republic of Iran for the first time. I had been giddy from the start of my three-hour flight from Istanbul, though a bit nervous after reading reports of various Americans being kidnapped and interrogated by the regime over the years. But after 10 days of couch surfing, talking to random citizens on the street, and attending the wedding of the sister of someone I befriended in-flight, I could safely say that Iran is one of the warmest, most welcoming countries in the world.
Over my next two visits, I taught myself to see past the creepy, sycophantic portraits of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei everywhere and truly connect with an increasingly-vibrant Iranian civil society. Perhaps it takes going there to learn that there’s much to lose from war and escalation with Iran.
Walking in the streets of Tajrish, a relatively secular, liberal suburb of Tehran, I saw a resilient people trying to undermine the Islamic Republic at every turn.
Women wore their headscarves as far back as the authorities would allow them. People bought donuts decorated with the American flag and shopped for rugs bearing the likeness of U.S. currency. But these would-be reformers are in a constant tug-of-war with Islamist, militant supporters of the status quo, and fiery tit-for-tats quickly turn into a cause célèbre for the mullahs and a horde of Soleimani wannabes.
The hardliners in Iran have had a hard time recently, as protests rattle their confidence and grip on power.
As it turns out, the Ayatollah and his cohorts have never proven their competence in administering the resource-rich Iranian economy. Iran’s heavy grip on the gasoline sector and the sudden raising of fuel prices have prompted some of the worst unrest since the Islamic Revolution, leading to the deaths of hundreds (if not thousands) of protesters and prompting the regime to shut down the internet.
Safe to say, the Iranian people don’t appreciate this. Especially in those dark moments, they look to the ultimate foil posed by the United States, a nation that is stable, free, and prosperous.
But the regime can count on gratuitous moments of Iranian national unity in confronting the U.S. when we assassinate leaders and delineate Iran as being in the “Axis of Evil.” And just as in 2002 and 2003, the American people are supposed to take the administration’s word for it that there’s some imminent military danger justifying a potentially-catastrophic response. This may well be the case, but certain systems are better than others at properly ascertaining and responding to risks.
If the administration wants to declare war against Iran’s proxy agents abroad, it should explain its case to Congress and present relevant intelligence. Transparency and congressional buy-in can create a more cautious system safeguarding the vibrant but fragile Iranian civil society that offers hope to the Persian people. In Tehran and elsewhere, I saw a thousand flowers blooming.
Let’s not pursue policies that let jackboots quash their flowers into something hideous.
Ross Marchand is a Young Voices contributor and a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog.
