BY SOPHIE SOLOWAY ’23
The Trump administration ordered the assassination of Iranian military advisor, Major General Qasem Soleimani, on Jan. 3. Soleimani’s death immediately sparked immense political discourse between the U.S. and Iran.
Within days, Iran shared plans to withdraw from the deal which had limited the nation’s ability to build its nuclear armory. According to The New York Times, the United Nations scrambled to recover past policy with little cooperation from Iranian leadership.
Mount Holyoke International Relations Professor Bryan Nakayama does not foresee a reformation of the former nuclear deal, noting, “For Iran to rejoin the deal the U.S. would have to stop seeking to under- mine and end the deal. Last I knew, Iran had not fully withdrawn from the deal — it was breaching uranium enrichment limits while maintaining the IAEA inspection regime. This is part of a larger process of Iran slowly stepping away from the deal — as the benefits have not materialized. Iran is still enriching uranium at far below the threshold necessary for weaponization so there is no immediate risk if Iran chooses to develop a nuclear weapon.”
Trump’s 2017 inauguration represented a distinct shift from the countries’ comparatively close ties, which began with Iranian president Hassan Rouhani’s relationship with Barack Obama.
Projections of military action from Iran appear far more pertinent when considered within the context of the geopolitical history of the Middle East. Both the United States and Iran hold immense power within the region, according to Al Jazeera. United States military bases surround Iran, in the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Turkey and Turkmenistan.
Similarly, Iran has spent years expanding its military presence in the region, primarily in Syria and Iraq. These similar military positions suggest to some that more violence might soon impact the region.
The countries’ relationship has been complex for decades. From the Cold War-era Central Intelligence Agency’s overthrow of Iranian leadership, to President Trump’s abandonment of the Iranian nuclear deal and reinstallation of economic sanctions against Iran and its fiscal allies, there has been a clear struggle for power within the region. The United States has vested interests in the nation, largely due to its sizable oil refineries, which have led to countless interferences in Iranian political leadership. Since the 1953 forced coup of Iranian leader Mosaddegh Mossadeq, relations have only suffered.
These complexities have inspired many to question the motivations behind Soleimani’s assassination. According to the BBC, many view Trump’s decision as a mere political power move in the face of the upcoming presidential election.
“Many different rationales have been given for the strike,” Nakayama said. “The claim that the U.S. was responding to an imminent threat has largely fallen apart so it is likely a different cause ... Trump is not an
anti-interventionist but he also seems to assiduously avoid large-scale confrontations that directly risk American lives ... It was likely a consequence of bureaucratic politics — individual governmental actors pursuing personal agenda — specifically Secretary of State Michael Pompeo has been pushing for this assassination for some time.”
Tension between the U.S. and Iran came to a head on Jan. 8, when Iranian missiles took down a Ukrainian passenger plane flying in the region, shortly after an attack on an Iranian base holding United States military officials. Iranian military officials allege that the plane was mistaken for an attack jet, according to the BBC.
Professor Nakayama disagrees with claims that this action can be interpreted as a sign of aggression; instead, he notes that “the destruction of the aircraft was genuinely a mistake [or] consequence of the ‘fog of war’ and not an attempt to signal.”
The New York Times claims that Iranian officials knew they had downed a Ukrainian plane for three days while they still continued to perpetuate false stories and denied responsibility.
In addition to the aggressive U.S. military presence, some new defensive policy has been instituted. For instance, The New York Times reported that many Iranian citizens — including those that have spent considerable amounts of time in the U.S. — have been turned away when returning to the United States. Iranian student at Northeastern University, Shahab Deh- ghani was held overnight at a Boston airport despite having a valid student visa.