The US as an impediment to the stability of nations: a case study of the assassination of Gen. Soleimani
The US’s assassination of Iranian top military commander, General Qasem Soleimani, can be viewed in the context of US’s long-term goal of preventing nations from moving towards independence and stability. Khamenei.ir publishes the following Op-Ed which tries to locate and analyze the assassination in the said context.
The US as an impediment to the stability of nations: – The US’s assassination of Iranian top military commander, General Qasem Soleimani, can be viewed in the context of US’s long-term goal of preventing nations from moving towards independence and stability. Khamenei.ir publishes the following Op-Ed which tries to locate and analyze the assassination in the said context.
The United States, since its formation as a superpower after the end of World War II, has continuously sought to establish itself as the world’s number one power. Therefore, the US government has sought to advance its interests in various parts of the world and sought economic and political domination over countries that were of geopolitical importance, enjoyed substantial underground resources, etc.
After World War II and the spread of an increase in seeking independence and feelings of anti-colonialism in different parts of the world, US presidents could not resort to the aggressive, military methods used by the colonizing countries of the past such as Britain, France, and others to expand their dominance over the world. Therefore, under the pretext of confronting dictatorial regimes in target countries, establishing democracy, spreading freedom and equality, and suppressing reactionary, anti-liberation forces, they carried out maneuvers such as coup d’états, military strikes, economic sanctions, assassinations and the establishment of puppet governments.
In some cases, the use of these methods led to the modern colonization of wealthy countries with rich human and underground resources, and in some cases they failed. Several countries managed to maintain their political and economic independence in the face of US expansionism. Of course, the United States has increased its pressure on these countries.
Countries targeted by the United States after World War II include the following: Greece, Syria, Cuba, Albania, Guatemala, Laos, Lebanon, Iraq, Turkey, Ecuador, Vietnam, the Dominican Republic, Congo, Brazil, Bolivia, Indonesia, Zaire, Panama, Ghana, Cambodia, Chile, Uruguay, Argentina, South Korea, Chad, Granada, Philippines, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Haiti, Uganda, Colombia, Pakistan, Venezuela, Georgia, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Honduras, Yemen and Egypt.
Examining the causes and consequences of some of these US interventions is enlightening. In the case of Yemen, the United States is trying to control one of the world’s most sensitive sea transit routes, the Bab al-Mandeb Strait, and prevent the formation of a united political system in the Islamic Republic of Iran by supporting the Saudi crimes with its military, intelligence and media. But due to the resistance of the Yemenis, they have not yet succeeded in their goals. In contrast to the promised freedom and democracy that was to be formed in Yemen, a humanitarian crisis, famine, and the displacement of millions of people have been imposed on them. Of course, the United States has been able to gain a great deal of money by selling a mass of weapons to Saudi Arabia.
In Venezuela, much effort has been put into creating a coup and overthrowing the country’s pro-independence governments that have been blocking US access to its underground resources and agriculture. The intensity of US interventions in Venezuela reached to a point where instead of Nicolas Maduro, Juan Guido was recognized as the President of Venezuela. Threats of military intervention, financial aid to Guido and his supporters, and severe economic sanctions have put much pressure on this South American country. But the Venezuelan people have realized the dangerous consequences that would result from the country’s independent government being overthrown. It would mean all of the country’s resources being plundered. Therefore, they have stood up to all the pressures brought by the US. And the Islamic Republic of Iran has provided technical assistance and exported some commodities to Venezuela. In this way, Iran has brought the feeling of awe that people had regarding America under question and proved its true friendship with Venezuela.
In Libya’s case, the United States, France and England’s military intervention under the pretext of overthrowing a dictatorial government and establishing a popular, freedom-loving government eventually lead to the looting of the country’s oil resources, a civil war in Libya, the elimination of people’s security, and the widespread involvement of other countries in Libya’s internal affairs. The United States, its allies in Europe together with reactionary Arab countries have tried to repeat this pattern in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Egypt, etc. Fortunately, due to the internal resistance of the people and the help of the Islamic Republic of Iran, such conspiracies have failed except in the case of Egypt.
The key role of the Islamic Republic of Iran in countering the United States’ undermining the independence and national sovereignty of other countries through coups, military attacks, the promotion of terrorism, and the creation of deviant Jihadist groups backed by the West and reactionary Arab states has led to the United States allocating much energy and money to confront the Islamic Republic of Iran in the past three decades. One of the key figures who was able to thwart the US’s unlawful interference that was designed to destroy these countries’ independence and freedom, especially after the US military invasion of Iraq and the planned civil war in Syria and Lebanon, was General Qasem Soleimani.
To defend the interests and independence of Muslims in other Islamic countries and strengthen their resilience against the aggressions of the United States, Israel, and their other allies, General Soleimani sought to activate those countries’ potentials. Hence, the Popular Mobilization Forces in Iraq and the National Defence Forces in Syria were formed. With the help of the two countries’ armies, these two forces were able to suppress the ISIS terrorists.
On the other hand, General Soleimani, in addition to his military prowess and strategic thinking, which was a result of the experience he had gained in fighting the Ba’athist government during the Imposed War and years of military activity, had many of the qualities of an experienced diplomat. Thus, he was able to persuade and unite other countries and political forces. For example, during a short visit to Russia, he persuaded President Putin to maintain a military presence in Syria.
Another point worth noting is that Martyr Qasem Soleimani believed attempts to preserve Islamic countries’ independence and interests needed to include all Muslims (both Shia and Sunni). He considered ISIS and other similar terrorist groups to be a threat to the entire Islamic world’s security, independence, and freedom. And he indeed practiced what he believed and helped many of the countries in the region threatened by the deadly shadow of ISIS, including Sunni groups in Syria and Palestine. By the same token, with the escalation of ISIS’s crimes in Kurdish areas and in a situation where the United States and Arab countries were unwilling to help the Kurds, Qasem Soleimani prevented the fall of the city of Erbil and it falling under the control of ISIS by rapidly bringing in a military presence.
On the other hand, with the help of ISIS and using its military and financial capabilities, the United States tried to divide Iraq and Syria and plunder these countries’ material and cultural resources while dealing a major blow to Iran at the same time. If the Syrian and Iraqi governments had collapsed, Iran would have lost contact with Lebanon and the Resistance groups in that country. In this way, Israel’s security as US’s main ally in West Asia would have been better guaranteed. But with the destruction of ISIS, the strength of the Resistance Forces and the solidarity between Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Palestine increased more than ever.
As a result of these victories, the regional Mujahid and fighters against ISIS, with their varying cultures and customs from Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc., fought side by side with the common enemy, which was supported by the United States, Israel, Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Thereby, the culture and spirit of Resistance against foreign colonization was substantially exported to other Islamic countries as a practical model.
General Soleimani’s role in the above mentioned unifying achievements was vital and this prompted the United States to remove him physically. The assassination of the top military Commander of the official army of an independent country that was not at war with the United States and was on a military mission in another independent country was a violation of all international treaties, many of which the United States had participated in writing and ratifying. However, there have been many cases throughout history where American officials have shown their readiness to violate international treaties and agreements that stand at odds with their expansionist interests in other countries. If they find a person or persons to be troublesome in this regard, they violate all legal, political, and moral agreements and frameworks. If they do not achieve their goal through sanctions, demonization, creating controversies and lying by way of the mass media, they eventually assassinate him/her.
This process was also used in the case of Martyr General Soleimani. His numerous achievements led the United States to finally remove him physically. After this outrageous act, US President Donald Trump brought contradictory arguments to justify his action.
On the one hand, he stated that the assassination of General Soleimani was a precautionary measure aimed at preventing war. According to many American analysts, the assassination of a senior Iranian military Commander by the US government during a time of peace between the two countries was a declaration of war on Iran. So Trump was supposedly using an aggressive, belligerent move as a way to prevent war. Furthermore, Trump claimed that he had saved the lives of Americans by ordering this assassination. But Iran’s military response in attacking the Ain al-Assad Airbase, its continuing to confront that country’s military presence in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, etc., and their high number of casualties led to their withdrawal. Thousands of US troops were evacuated from these countries, which didn’t do anything to help save the lives of US troops.
But Trump’s most absurd reason for assassinating General Soleimani is that the US president has described him as being the world’s greatest terrorist. General Soleimani, by leading Iran’s efforts and helping countries in the region to a great extent, helped to eradicate ISIS in Iraq and Syria and prevented the spread of US-backed terrorism. And yet, the US government, which had brought war, poverty, insecurity, corruption and terrorism to the Muslims of these countries by way of their military intervention in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Syria, etc., accused Iran and General Soleimani of supporting terrorism.
Trump thought the assassination of General Soleimani would have the same effect that the assassinations of some outdated White House mercenaries such as Bin Laden and Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi had. He thought that in the same way that those assassinations severely reduced the operational capacity of al-Qaeda and ISIS, the assassination of General Soleimani would do the same. Iran’s ability to help neighboring countries diminishes the US hegemony. Trump also hoped to inflict a major, irreparable blow to Iran and make up for US failures to plunder and infiltrate West Asia. Trump also sought to exploit the results of this terrorist act for his election campaign. The pressures of economic sanctions on Iran, the US’s withdrawal from JCPOA, and the conspiracies of Israel and Saudi Arabia had not had the desired results. American policies in Lebanon, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and Bahrain, and even efforts to improve Qatar’s relations with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates had failed. According to his calculations, Trump thought he could change the situation in favor of the US with a military strike. 
But the result of this action was an increase in national unity and public solidarity in Iran in defense of the country’s policy to support countries in the region against the United States. It also intensified anti-American sentiment in all the countries in the region and increased military attacks on its military forces. The White House was also forced to reduce its military presence in many countries where it had planned to plunder their resources and destroy their independence. Iran also attacked a US military base for the first time since World War II in response to the United States action, and they rained rocket fire on the Ain al-Assad Airbase in Iraq, calling into question its credibility and hegemony. Thus we can see that although Iran and the Islamic world were deprived of General Soleimani’s abilities with his assassination, the consequences of this action were completely to the detriment of the United States, Israel and Saudi Arabia, and it pushed them several levels back. On the other hand, Iran has continued to play a role in the West Asian region, to help countries eliminate dependence and to stand up to the illegitimate, aggressive greed of the US.