The View from Right Field

What’s Going to Happen in the Middle East?

Obviously, if I knew the answer to this, I would go to Las Vegas and get rich.  But here is one possibility with respect to how Iran/Hezbollah may react to the killings of Hezbollah military commander Fuad Shukr in Beirut and Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran:

1. Remember that Iran did basically nothing when the U.S. killed Qasam Soleimani in January of 2020 in a drone attack on Baghdad airport when Soleimani was visiting Iraq.  Soleimani was  commander of the Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the IRGC group responsible for Iran’s extraterritorial and clandestine military operations.

2. Iran follows U.S. politics.  They know about the Biden-Trump debate.  Like everybody else, they have to wonder how competent Biden is and who is running U.S. foreign policy.

The Coming Constitutional Crisis of 2024 – And American Foreign Policy

In a recent news review,¹ one of the commentators said that, because Trump has made the world part of our political fracas, the political rhetoric now, during the campaign. may be more dangerous for America, and foreign relations. than what comes after November, when the election is over.

I disagree.  I’m afraid the result won’t be known – or, perhaps more accurately, won’t be accepted by the “losing” side – and the things will heat up even more after November 7.  I worry that the election will result in a constitutional crisis greater than any we have seen since 1860-61 – because, no matter who wins, the other side won’t accept it.² 

If Trump loses, he and his supporters will say the election was stolen.  Former President Trump is already saying the election will be rigged.  We know what some Trump supporters did on January 6, 2021.  Who knows what they may do this time.  I understand that last time Mr. Trump was President and that gave him things he could try to do.  But this time, his people may be more upset.

Joe Biden: Getting Foreign Policy Wrong for 50 Years

In 2014, a former cabinet official from both the Obama and George W. Bush administrations wrote that Joe Biden had "been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades."¹  Even though this official likes President Biden as a person and has said President Biden “a man of integrity,” he reaffirmed his statement in an interview in May of 2019. 

And President Biden has continued his string of mistakes and bad decisions since he got into office.  The withdrawal from Afghanistan was a disaster.  President Biden was left with a terrible situation by Donald Trump.  The Trump administration signed what was basically a surrender agreement with the Taliban on February 29, 2020.  While President Biden has said the Trump agreement left him no choice but to go forward with the withdrawal/surrender, that’s not true.  President Biden reversed all kinds of Trump administration decisions.  He could have changed this one, too, but he didn’t want to.  He wanted to get out of Afghanistan, and so we did.  It was the Biden administration that organized, or rather didn’t organize, the withdrawal.  If the withdrawal was a disaster, and if it has damaged the United States’ reputation for reliability and competence abroad, then that was on President Biden and his administration.

Biden’s Foreign Policy Just Isn’t Working – And It’s Not Deterring Anybody

At one point during the first Trump administration¹, I gave up (or at least cut back) on complaining about what he was doing both because it was becoming too time consuming and because the Democratic alternatives weren’t any better.  Well, I think I am just about there on Joe Biden’s foreign policy.  It’s bad, and I have no reason to think Trump 2.0 would be any better.

It has now been four days since an Iran proxy group killed three U.S. soldiers with a drone attack on a base we have in Jordan.  It may be that the Biden administration already has an appropriate response in process, and we don’t know about it yet.  I hope so.²  Because, if we want these attacks to stop, we need to respond in a really big way.  Iranian proxies, and others, have been attacking us for months.  Before Sunday, we were able to knock the drones or missiles down or they only injured people, they didn’t kill them.  So we didn’t respond (at least very much).  We just said: (i) if you kill any of our people (as opposed to merely injuring them), we’ll respond; (ii) we don’t want to escalate or to widen the war/conflict/tensions; and (iii) we don’t want World War III.  Which apparently didn’t scare anybody and probably encouraged some groups to keep attacking us  - because they did.

Hamas Leaders “Surprised” at U.S. Response – And What That Tells Us

The Financial Times reports:

“Hamas has admitted surprise that its attack on  Israel this month promoted such a muscular response, with Washington deploying two carrier strike groups, air defense systems and thousands of troops to the region.

Ali Barakeh, a senior member of Hamas’s political leadership in exile, said the groupv ‘didn’t expect this much if a response from America.

Blinken Announces Biden’s Red-Line. Let’s Hope They Mean It.

At the United Nations on Tuesday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken issued a pretty clear red-line to Iran and its “friends”:

“The United States does not seek conflict with Iran.  We do not want this war to widen. But if Iran or its proxies attack U.S. personnel anywhere, make no mistake: We will defend our people, we will defend our security - swiftly and decisively.” 

Good.  Now, we just have to hope the Biden administration means it.  In 2012, Barack Obama famously (perhaps infamously) announced his red-line on Syria’s use of poison gas:

Biden Is Looking for Oil Everywhere – Except Texas

The Biden administration energy policy reminds me a lot of Johnny Lee’s 1980 hit country song “Looking for Love (In All the Wrong Places)”, except it should be changed to “Looking for Oil in All the Wrong Places.”  With, first, inflation surging and, now, Russia invading Ukraine, the Biden administration is looking for oil.  Except it is looking in the wrong places.

Late last year, with gas prices up, the Administration asked Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states to increase oil production.  They wouldn’t.  According to some reports, one of the reasons the Administration is pushing to reinstate the Iran nuclear agreement is to get Iranian oil back on the world market.  The New York Times has reported that Administration officials are talking with Venezuela on ways to end on sanctions on their oil, to get supplies up and gas prices down.

The Killing of Qassem Soleimani and the Dog That Didn’t Bark

“The Adventure of Sliver Blaze,” one of the most popular Sherlock Holmes stories, involves the theft of a famous race horse, Silver Blaze, and the killing of its trainer, just before an important racer.  In a conversation with a Scotland Yard detective, Sherlock Holmes explains a key clue:

“Gregory: Is there any other point to which you would wish to draw my attention?
Holmes: To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time.
Gregory: The dog did nothing in the night-time.
Holmes: That was the curious incident.”

A Few Thoughts on the Killing of Iranian Revolutionary Guard General Qassem Soleimani

1. It seems to me that, with a proper plan and an appropriate long-term strategy, the killing of Iranian Revolutionary Guard General Qassem Soleimani could work out well for the United States and other people and countries opposed to the theocratic and totalitarian policies of Iran’s government, especially their external aspects.  Whether the Trump administration has the people to come up with such a plan and strategy and whether Donald Trump has the experience, patience, and long-term commitment to follow through on such a plan and strategy is a real question and concern.¹

2. As for the criticisms about killing, or assassinating, a general of a country with which we are not at war, I would say that what constitutes “war” is a lot different today than what it was in even the first half of the twentieth century.  General Soleimani organized a lot of attacks on United States soldiers and our friends and allies.  He seemed to think he was at war with us.  In today’s world, that may be enough.

Ryan Crocker on the United States’s Middle East Policy – and More

On Thursday evening, Ryan Crocker and Danielle Pletka spoke to the Chicago Council on Global Affairs on “How Effective Is America’s Middle East Strategy.”¹  Mr. Crocker has been ambassador to, in alphabetical order, Afghanistan, Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon, Pakistan, and Syria.  He has also served in Iran, Qatar, and Egypt.  He has been named a Career Ambassador and has been awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom.  Ms. Pletka is Senior Vice President, Foreign and Defense Policy Studies, at the American Enterprise Institute.

Among the things former Ambassador Crocker said (I will also include some things Ms. Pletka said):²

In response to the question what the Trump administration’s Middle East strategy is, former Ambassador Crocker said, “You’re asking the wrong guy.”  He said there is no strategy.  He cannot connect the dots of the various individual things the Administration is doing into a policy and strategy.