Three days after the death, in an American strike, of the Iranian general Ghassem Soleimani, on the night of January 2 to 3, Allan Kaval, journalist at World, answered questions from Internet users about the consequences of this operation carried out in Baghdad.
Page Contents
Cedric: Is there a risk of world war or even nuclear if the United States carries out its threats?
Allan Kaval: In monitoring this crisis, it is preferable to avoid scaffolding conditional scenarios. The tensions are high, for sure. Iran's promised retaliation for the United States after Ghassem Soleimani's death has yet to materialize. In addition, Iran does not have nuclear weapons, even if the Iranian civil nuclear program is well at the origin of the current crisis. The escalation between Washington and Tehran was indeed based on the exit from the United States of the nuclear agreement signed in 2015 between Iran, the United States, Russia, China, France, l 'Germany and the European Union.
UtopisteDebout: Can you summarize the history of the latest facts that have led to the current situation since the end of the nuclear treaty?
The Iranian nuclear treaty still exists, but the current crisis is due to the American decision to leave it in May 2018. The crisis accelerated a year later, in May 2019, with the tightening of American economic sanctions which prevent Iran from exporting its crude oil and therefore deprive Tehran of a large part of its revenues. It was during this period that the Islamic Republic decided to oppose the policy of maximum pressure led by the United States a policy of "Maximum strength".
This strategy has been implemented in two ways:
-
on the nuclear issue, Iran has started to gradually disengage from its obligations, at the rate of disengagement every sixty days since May, without however leaving the treaty. The goal was to pressure other signatories, especially Europeans, to get relief from sanctions on Iran from Washington.
-
Regionally, Iran has put pressure on the United States' allies. This resulted in attacks on oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuz this spring. On September 14, strategic Saudi oil installations were targeted by a missile and drone attack. At the same time, transfers of Iranian missiles and rockets to Iraq, Syria and Lebanon have continued, much to the chagrin of Israel.
During this period, the United States appeared on the reserve, unresponsive to Iranian aggression – the Iranians went so far as to shoot down an American drone in June. With renewed attacks by Iran’s allies from US positions in Iraq, this posture has changed. The United States ended up reacting extremely strongly by eliminating General Ghassem Soleimani, paving the way for escalation on a whole new scale.
Bertrand: Are the assassinations of Iranian Qassem Soleimani and Iraqi Abou Mehdi Al-Mouhandis legal under American law?
The question of the legality of this act is the subject of lively debate between experts. However, the legal questions seem to have been knowingly dismissed by the American leadership, which seems more inclined to base its policy on the balance of power, and on it alone. In addition, if the Popular Mobilization, which gathers the Shiite militias affiliated to Iran, is not regarded as a terrorist organization by the United States, it is well the case of Hezbollah Brigades, the organization of Abu Mehdi Al-Mouhandis.
Lilioli: Is it true that Donald Trump is threatening to commit war crimes by attacking cultural sites?
Donald Trump has twice threatened (on Twitter, in the past few days, then in an exchange with journalists) to target Iranian cultural sites. It is not known which sites the President of the United States has in mind. Insofar as these sites are not used for military purposes, attacking them constitutes a war crime according to the Geneva Convention.
Nodruob13: Do you think the Iranians will go after Israel?
Some former Iranian officials brandished the threat on Sunday of a large-scale attack on Israel. These statements, which were made during the funeral of Ghassem Soleimani, seemed to be rather rhetorical, however.
Iranian officials say they are actually considering a direct response against US military interests in the region, not Israel. It is interesting to note that Hassan Nasrallah, head of Lebanese Hezbollah, aligned with Tehran and on the front line of the pro-Iranian camp against Israel, only mentioned American targets, not Israeli ones, in his speech on Sunday.
Damien: Turkey in Libya, Russia in Syria, Iran in Iraq, can we think that the United States is losing its influence in the Middle East?
The United States maintains a reduced presence in Syria. In Iraq, despite the parliamentary vote calling for the departure of American forces, their presence is not called into question in the very short term. It is important to note, however, that the US desire to reduce Iranian influence in the region has proven counterproductive. The assassination of Ghassem Soleimani indeed allows the Shiite camp to unite against American influence in Iraq and the Iranian regime to rally, despite a recent wave of contestation, the population behind him by playing on the nationalist rope.
bp: What could be the consequences of the law requesting the departure of foreign forces passed by the Iraqi Parliament? Does France have forces stationed in Iraq?
It is not a law but a non-binding text calling on the Iraqi executive to take steps to organize the departure of foreign forces from Iraqi soil. Currently, the resigned government of Adel Abdel Mahdi does not have the constitutional legitimacy to renegotiate the diplomatic agreements which have framed the presence of these forces since 2014 in the context of the fight against the Islamic State organization. It is not certain that the government is asking for a full departure.
France indeed has forces there. With the officers who operate as part of the coalition, the French military is about two hundred.
Tday: Has there been a position taken by European heads of state since the disappearance of the Iranian general?
In a joint text, Paris, Berlin and London called on Iran on Sunday to withdraw measures taken in violation of the nuclear deal after Tehran announced its withdrawal from the limit on the number of centrifuges used in its program civil. The Europeans did not condemn the assassination, even if Berlin risked a timid criticism of Donald Trump's aggression. However, they called on Iran to refrain from leading or supporting "New violent actions", while calling for a " de-escalation ".
habajépatoucompri: The images of the processions today in Tehran seem to illustrate a massive support of the Iranian people to their rulers, in the context of this crisis. Is that the case ?
The Iranian people are not a monolithic entity, but it is absolutely certain that the assassination of General Ghassem Soleimani and even more the threats of President Trump, especially on cultural sites to which all Iranians are attached, could only '' fan the nationalist flame. The Iranian regime does not represent the entire Iranian nation, but it does have a monopoly on the weapons that can be used to defend it. It can thus silence differences within itself and benefit, at least temporarily, from popular support in the face of external aggression.
This is all the more striking since the Iranian regime was the subject of a massive protest movement in November, suppressed in blood, in particular by the Revolutionary Guards, the body of General Soleimani. In a sense, American aggression is an unexpected but not necessarily lasting blessing for the Iranian regime, still contested on all sides a few months ago.
Victor: Is the Iranian military a risk, at least to the American units stationed in the area?
Because of the sanctions that weigh on it, the Islamic Republic does not have very powerful conventional forces. On the other hand, it has thought of its defense strategy in asymmetrical mode. Supervised by the guards of the revolution, it is intended to carry out guerrilla actions outside the borders of Iran, and inside in the event of an invasion.
Aziz: Is Iran essential to the political balance of the region and if so why did the Americans ignore this data?
The calculations of the great powers are sometimes quite trivial. Donald Trump seems to have decided to accelerate the escalation so as not to appear weak after having remained on the reserve for several months in the face of Iranian actions hostile to the United States and their allies in the region. His administration believes that it can make Tehran bend by pushing the Iranian regime to the brink, even if it means taking the risk of a military conflagration.
