In the most powerful moment of the 2020 State of the Union, President Trump outlined the moral foundation for his decision to authorize the killing of Qassem Soleimani.
The Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps general was killed in an early January U.S. air strike in Iraq. But Trump didn’t justify that action in the context of his broader pressure strategy toward Iran. Rather, he outlined the moral justice of Soleimani’s demise, referencing the story of U.S. Army Staff Sgt. Christopher Hake.
Hake was killed in a 2008 roadside bombing in Iraq. Trump noted how Hake “made the ultimate sacrifice for our country. Sergeant Hake now rests in eternal glory in Arlington, and his wife Kelli is in the gallery tonight, joined by their son, who is now 13 years old. To Kelli and Gage: Chris will live in our hearts forever.”
He went on to say: “The terrorist responsible for killing Sergeant Hake was Qassem Soleimani, who provided the deadly roadside bomb that took Chris’s life … As the world’s top terrorist, Soleimani orchestrated the deaths of countless men, women, and children. He directed the December assault on United States forces in Iraq and was actively planning new attacks. That is why, last month, at my direction, the United States military executed a flawless precision strike that killed Soleimani and terminated his evil reign of terror forever. Our message to the terrorists is clear: You will never escape American justice. If you attack our citizens, you forfeit your life!”
While the decision to kill Soleimani is debatable from a strategic-interest point of view, its moral legitimacy is unquestionable. Soleimani had a rendezvous with death. And Trump made the argument well enough that even House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was forced to clap.
Trump situated his moral argument in a broader framework than his predecessor ever did: the injustice of the Iranian regime. Saluting Iranian protesters demanding a better life, Trump noted that “because of our powerful sanctions, the Iranian economy is doing very poorly. We can help them make it very good in a short period of time, but perhaps they are too proud or too foolish to ask for that help. We are here. Let’s see which road they choose. It is totally up to them.”
This is Trumpism at its best: somewhat simplistic, not terribly eloquent, but bound to American moral leadership and the defense of the nation’s best interests.
Trump should double down on this approach, and leave the callow insults at the door.
