Rising Seas and Changing Tides: The US Failure to See Sea Change in the Middle East

In 2004, I was finishing my master’s thesis on the potential for democratization in Iran, and 16 years later, the gross characterization remains the same- then and now, and for the years in between- one of missed opportunities. Plenty has been written in the last two weeks. More people have learned that 1953 was just as important at 1979, and that the Cold War didn’t end and is instead an ongoing and widening proxy war. I won’t repeat what’s been said, but a few things are worth adding color and context because people’s democratization movements have failed over and over, but are necessary to long term peace and stability.

It’s worth briefly noting what else was going on in the world in the 1990s that prevented us from acting in Iran, and elsewhere. Desert Storm had concluded, but the Bosnian War, the Somali famine, genocide in Rwanda were ongoing, and Clinton correctly concluded Americans had no appetite for US military intervention certainly and little for foreign affairs. Instead Americans and Europeans were enjoying relative economic stability and prosperity, and turned their attention inwards, to their own continents, forming the European Union, and ignoring NATO, and the UN, whose recent peacekeeping missions were unsuccessful.

Many wealthier and highly education Iranians left with or just before the Shah, such that 20 years later, the majority of the population was under the age of 30, with little upward mobility. Younger Iranians concluded that western invention had failed them but so, too, had their own leadership. The mid-late 90s brought Iranian young people’s movements for democratization, however, with few assets and little real power, and no support from the rest of the world, they failed to launch. And, as is often the case when liberal forms of democracy fail, radical conservatives then prey on the despair and seize power, ruling by crushing dissent. Iran since has furthered its “aggressor” nation status.

Since the Islamic Revolution in Iran, the country may have a secular president, but it is absolutely ruled as a theocracy under the paternalistic leadership of Ayatollah Khameini since 1989. That theocracy is so change-adverse that the constitution itself forbids amending the constitution, such that any form of democratic movement, or plea for constitutional amendment, is not only impossible, but traitorous. What’s more, the theocracy controls the most elite of the Iranian military- the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), giving it the power to enforce impediments to change.

For the US’ part in missing opportunities, we-

· Did not support native democratization efforts in Iran

· Did not engage the moderate President Rouhani when he came to power

· Unilaterally withdrew from JCPoA

· Undermined our credibility when Trump blustered on Twitter that the US would target 52 (one per 1979 hostage) cultural sites for missile strikes. Terrorists destroy world heritage sites, not parties to Geneva Convention

· Weakened Iraq and so empowered its regional rival, Iran

· Ignored the Arab Spring, and focused on Benghazi- missing a large body of water for a drop

· Refuse to understand the units of time and power that exist in the region, and change the metrics of efficacy such that they are as useless as measuring sea levels in bananas

· Fundamentally misunderstand terrorism and continue to conduct full military operations and occupations

· Operationalize exceptions in the form of special forces and drones, rather than addressing the flawed goals or processes when we fail to achieve the desired outcomes

· Mismanage wars in Afghanistan and Iraq to the point of actively promoting corruption, and got so turned around, that we formed alliances with the terrorist organization we were initially battling

It was under these circumstances that the events of the last two weeks have unfolded.

The US conducted drone strikes against an official of the Iranian government, under diplomatic cover, under invitation of the Iraqi government, within the borders of another sovereign nation, against all international law and protocol. Regardless of how bad Soleimani was, a state actor by definition is not a terrorist, and without declaration of war, was an unacceptable target. This monumental decision was made outside of the normal process, based on fundamental misunderstanding of -well, everything, and in the company of the Mar-a-Lago kakistocracy instead of NSC or Congress. Our allies quickly distanced themselves from the US as the Iraqi parliament then voted to expel all US military forces from Iraq- a move unprecedented in the 244-year history of the US. The Secretary of State (not Defense) then attempted to retroactively define “imminent threat” as “plotting,” which does not meet the threshold, whether legally or operationally within the IC, for action.

A myriad of smaller mistakes ensued, and we’ll find out in the coming weeks about the late FAA warnings, why Iran didn’t ground flights or how they possibly thought they could deny satellite and forensic evidence, but none of it will change the outcome. In following the Iranian example ofthe 1990s, the Arab Spring was entirely predictable as was its failed outcome, and so, too, can we predict the result of the people’s protest in Iran today. We will remain blind to opportunity.

If we were smart, we’d gratefully accept the Iraqi vote to expel US forces and negotiate our withdrawal, for what contrived metrics can we possibly invent at this point to define “success” in the Iraq or Afghan War? We could then begin a clearer, more cogent approach to counterterrorism. If we were smart, we’d use Iran’s tragic mistake of killing 176 civilians as a pivot point to negotiate a new nuclear deal, entice them to the table (and away from Syria) with a new policy in Israel that would stabilize Gaza as well. We would acknowledge that there is no border impervious to ideas, or ICBMs, or climate change, or globalization. We would realize our 5000-year-old model of territorial sovereignty cannot be maintained and instead seek peace through inclusion and endeavors of mutual benefit.

We will do none of these things. We will continue to fail to see the sea change.