The Assassination

The civilised world, that is Trump & Cie. just assassinated Qasem Suleimani, an Iranian general. Because of Suleimani’s track record and position in Iran, this killing enjoyed much more media attention than most targeted killings, which are, after all, all in the day’s work for us ‘civilised’.

There are various criteria by which one can assess this killing: moral, legal, strategic and the tactical. Can one build a moral case for killing? Some feel that they can, others not. Most will agree that Suleimani had it coming. The legality of the act may be intellectually interesting but of no practical significance. Iraq, since it was invaded by the USA, like Syria, Libya and several other countries, is a playground, where anyone seems to be able to do what they wish.

Whilst it is hard to believe that Trump even knows how to spell the word strategic, let alone act strategically, it may be that the killing of Suleimani, will trigger the opening of a new channel of negotiations between the US and Iran, which will lead to some or other agreement. Both sides are actually interested in one. The accidental shooting down of the Ukrainian plane, and the Iranian mea culpa, in a bizarre way, may serve the same purpose.

Israel is likely to be worried by any rapprochement between Iran and the USA. In a speech, which Israel’s chief-of-staff, General Kochavi, gave on Christmas day, (before the assassination) he complained about the fact that Israel had to do all the anti-Iran work on its own. He would prefer – he explained – a reality in which “we weren’t the only ones acting against them offensively.” Kochavi asked and Trump delivered.