Trump’s Iran Charade

In the aftermath of the US attack on Iran’s nuclear plants, a debate rages about the extent of the damage done.  On the one hand, the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) offered a preliminary assessment that was pretty bleak. It said that the bombing had caused limited damage to the facilities at the heart of its nuclear program.  This despite dropping a dozen of the most powerful bombs in the nation’s arsenal: the 30,000 lb bunker busters, which had never been used before in combat.  Undoubtedly, this operation was an excellent opportunity for the air force to test their effectiveness.  If they failed to do the job intended, this would reflect poorly on the efficacy of the weapon.

On the other hand, Pres. Trump declared Iran’s nuclear capability was “obliterated.”  He never offered any evidence for his claim.  Given his loose relationship with the truth, the media has been correct to be skeptical.  This is one of the few times it has not rolled over and played dead regarding US military adventurism in the Middle East.  But the more questions reporters asked, the more enraged he and his toady, Pete Hegesth became.

The usual suspects (David Albright, Israel and even the IAEA) have endorsed this analysis, each for their own reasons.  That’s especially true of the Israelis, given Netanyahu’s ginned up hatred and paranoia concerning Iran.  Essentially, every claim Israel makes on this subject is suspect.

IAEA: Iran will resume enriching uranium in “months”

After initially declaring the US strike successful, IAEA chief Rafael Grossi has tempered his assessment. He said this three days ago:

…The programme has taken serious damage. The attacks…caused major physical destruction at three sites – Natanz, Isfahan and Fordow.

Iran had focused most of its uranium enrichment and conversion activities at those places. So yes, very serious damage…I know there’s a lot of talk about whether this is total destruction or not.

What I can say – and I think everyone agrees – is that the damage is very significant.

Earlier today, he downplayed the level of destruction of the nuclear facilities:

“The capacities they have are there. They can have, you know, in a matter of months, I would say, a few cascades of centrifuges spinning and producing enriched uranium, or less than that,” Grossi told CBS News in an interview.

“Frankly speaking, one cannot claim that everything has disappeared and there is nothing there,” he added…

It seems clear that the IAEA is attempting to thread the needle and offer each party something in their battles for political advantage.  But the most recent statement, while not fully embracing the media skepticism, adopts many of its key claims.

Khamenei-Trump grudge match

After I finished writing this, there was an important new development.  Ayatollah Khamenei released a video statement to the Iranian public declaring a complete victory over the country’s enemies:

…Khamenei threatened to attack more U.S. military bases should any further aggression from the U.S. side occur.  “The Islamic Republic slapped America in the face. It attacked one of the important American bases in the region,” Khamenei said…

“Such an action can be repeated in the future too. Should any aggression occur, the enemy will definitely pay a heavy price,” the Ayatollah warned, adding that Iran has “access to key U.S. centers in the region.”

Khamenei claimed “total victory” over Israel…[and]that the U.S. had only intervened because “if it didn’t, the Zionist regime would be completely destroyed,” claiming that Israel “was practically knocked out and crushed under the blows of the Islamic Republic.”

These claims are, of course, delusional.  Perhaps a sign of a leader desperate to reassure the public that his armed forces were able to strike a powerful blow in retaliation for the attack. The note of defiance was also intended to project confidence in the face of powerful enemies.

However, Iran’s leader miscalculated in terms of the reception of his statement in Washington DC. Trump was livid and went on one of his extended rants, which he routinely does when someone contradicts him. It’s not yet clear if his anger will translate into further military action.  If it does, it’s a clear sign that Trump’s ego is driving him into dangerous adventurism. His statement is just as delusional as Khamenei’s and reveals that neither has the least understanding of the other. Such ignorance and ego could easily lead to catastrophe:

“Look, you’re a man of great faith. A man who’s highly respected in his country. You have to tell the truth. You got beat to hell,” Trump said… [When] asked by a reporter if the U.S. would consider bombing Iran again, if intelligence reports were to conclude that Iran could enrich uranium to a level that concerns him. “Sure, without question, absolutely,” he replied.

Because why not repeat an exercise in futility which failed the first time in its goal of total eradication?  Why noit try again. Maybe the second time will be the charm.

Trump resumed his rant:

…“His country was decimated, his three evil nuclear sites were obliterated, and I knew exactly where he was sheltered, and would not let Israel, or the U.S. Armed Forces… terminate his life. I saved him from a very ugly and ignominious death,” Trump said, lamenting that Khamenei would not “thank” him for this. “During the last few days, I was working on the possible removal of sanctions, and other things, which would have given a much better chance to Iran at a full, fast, and complete recovery. The sanctions are biting! But no, instead I get hit with a statement of anger, hatred, and disgust, and immediately dropped all work on sanction relief.”

Whatever Trump did or didn’t do to stop the purported assassination plot, Khamenei’s death would be neither ugly nor ignominious. To Iranians his death would be the sacrifice of a hero.  He would proudly give his life on behalf of his country.  It would rally the nation to resist the foreign enemy.

It’s almost macabre for Trump to expect anything less than “anger, hatred and disgust” from Khamenei, considering what US bombs have just done to his country.  To expect Iran’s leader to “thank” and offer him “honey” in return for for his beneficence, is preposterous.

“They are always so angry, hostile, and unhappy, and look at what it has gotten them. A burned out, blown up country with no future, a decimated military, a horrible economy, and death all around them. They have no hope, and it will only get worse! I wish the leadership of Iran would realize that you often get more with honey than you do with vinegar. Peace!”

Iran has existed for centuries. Far longer than the US.  It has a proud history.  It has never been burned out or blown up by anyone. Nor will a tinpot US dictator do what no other enemy before could.

Proliferation expert dismisses Trump claims

Jeffrey Lewis, one of the US’ foremost experts on nuclear proliferation, published his own analysis of the evidence in Foreign Policy.  Based on his examination of the satellite imagery before and after the attack, he supported the DIA assessment.  The article’s headline was: ”

Iran Is on Course for a Bomb After U.S. Strikes Fail to Destroy Facilities
Satellite imagery confirms that Iranian capabilities are bruised, not annihilated.

He further wrote:

I’ve spent the past several days telling incredulous reporters that Israel’s bombing campaign against Iran, even with help from the United States, looked anemic—and that it would, at best, set Iran’s nuclear program back by several months, maybe a year if we were lucky.

One of the key components of a nuclear program is enriching uranium, which is done via centrifuges.  They are produced at some of the facilities that were bombed by Israel and the US.  Lewis disputes claims that this equipment was destroyed and irreplaceable:

…The IAEA no longer knows how many centrifuges Iran has stockpiled or where they are all stored. Iran could use any centrifuges in storage to replace centrifuges that have been destroyed or to set up new centrifuge facilities…In addition to whatever centrifuges Iran already has, it also can make more.

Democratic senators join Iran skeptics

Though Trump refused to notify any Democratic leaders about the US attack in advance, as is customary in such situations, they were included in a top-secret post-operation briefing. The results further confirmed the DIA conclusions:

…Several Democrats said the intelligence presented contradicted the White House’s sweeping claims of success…[They] said the classified assessments they received suggested a more limited impact…

“…The allegations that we have obliterated their program just don’t seem to stand up to reason,” said Senator Chris Murphy, Democrat of Connecticut. “…It still appears that we have only set back the Iranian nuclear program by a handful of months.”

[Senator] Chuck Schumer…added: “There was no coherent strategy, no end game, no specific, detailed plan on how Iran does not attain a nuclear weapon…”

Prof. Muhammed Sahimi, an engineering professor at the University of Southern California, adds that Iran also has the opportunity to adopt an alternative enrichment process for its uranium: the use of mesh membranes to filter out impurities and enrich the material.  This process would be far less technically   demanding, while achieving the same objective as centrifuge technology.  It would also be far easier to conceal and distribute such equipment throughout the country.

Lewis suggests further that any damage done can either be repaired or bypassed by other secret facilities:

…The DIA thinks the program has been set back…one to two months. Even if the program was delayed two to three years, as some Israelis claim, the much-maligned 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) delayed Iran’s program by many times that.

Opponents of the diplomatic solution complained that many of its provisions sunsetted after 10 or 15 years…Yet these same people who complained that 10 or 15 years wasn’t long enough for a deal, are now forming up to cheer a measly few months of delay by bombing—a delay, mind you, for which they have absolutely no plan what to do with, other than to do it all again…

Lewis asks, concerning the aftermath of these attacks on Iran: what comes after?  He raises an important point: just as Netanyahu had no post-war plan for Gaza–which eliminated a key goal of its military operation–so he has no post-attack Iran strategy.

Trump’s half-baked “negotiation” strategy

Trump believes he can force Iran to come to the negotiating table where, presumably, these issues will be addressed.  But there is little hope that anything productive will come out of such discussions: Trump remains adamant that a condition is Iran’s guarantee it will eliminate its nuclear program.  It will never do that as it is both an insult and violates its sovereignty.

What reason is there for such talks if Trump is correct and Iran’s nuclear capabilities have been “obliterated?”  The existence of such a meeting scheduled for this coming week (though Iran denies it) suggests there are still such intact facilities.  In the doubtful eventuality that the program has been eliminated, perhaps Trump wants to ensure that Iran will not attempt to restart it.  Though I remain skeptical.

Trump may put on the table a wacky proposal that unspecified Gulf countries will offer $30 billion in aid to Iran for a civilian nuclear reactor, in return for ending its nuclear effort.  The plan would further offer the release of $6-billion in funds frozen due to sanctions. Note that $120-billion in total assets are being withheld.  It’s not a very attractive proposition. Not to mention that you simply can’t buy off Iran like you can mistresses and ex-wives.

The US seems to believe that it can throw money at any problem it faces in the Middle East.  Instead of offering political rights and an independent Palestinian state, it devised a plan with the Orwellian name, Peace Through Prosperity. It offered economic incentives for Palestinians to end their campaign for an independent state.  They wanted nothing to do with it and it died aborning.  The US threw billions into efforts to prop up its anti-Taliban Afghan regime.  All went for naught when the Islamists took over the country as soon as the last Marine had left.

Finally, with Israel’s assassination of much of Iran’s military command and nuclear scientist cohort, they will be replaced by second tier personnel who will be promoted to fill their superiors’ jobs.  Trita Parsi in an interview (video above) with Medhi Hassan, predicted that the rage felt in leading circles of the regime would lead to a far more militant, intransigent set of leaders to replace them. Precisely the opposite of Trump’s goal to bomb Iran into submission.

Contrary to expectations, Netanyahu wants no such an outcome.  He doesn’t want an Iran that is open to the west, with normalized US relations, taking its place among the global community.  This would ensure Iran continues to be a rival and threat to Israeli hegemonic interests. It offers him a means to rally the nation around his leadership.  Israel needs a state of permanent war against its neighbors. Israel’s geostrategic interest, like that of many colonial powers, is  chaos. It is a nihilistic nation which eschews good relations, diplomacy, global engagement and all the trappings of a healthy nation state.

It must be sanctioned and ostracized–to be removed from the circle of nations. Instead, it receives everything it needs (weapons, research and intelligence cooperation, etc.) to conduct genocide (Gaza); and war crimes (Iran).