President Trump has Laid a Trap for Iran and China
Opinion: The following article is commentary and its views are solely those of the author. This article was first published the 15th of April via The Angry Demagogue.
Both the defeatist camp and the “victory now” group see the advent of negotiations between the United States and Iran as a defeat for the United States and Israel. The argument by the defeatists is that victory was supposed to be quick and now we are stuck and looking for a way out since no one saw Iranian use of the Straits of Hormuz coming. The defeatists claim that only negotiations can end the conflict and anyway, Iran never should have been considered an enemy so the United States and Israel have overemphasized Iranian danger. The defeatists do not want a military victory and assume defeat as the moral choice.
For the victory now group, negotiations are seen as a weakness by the United States and Israel since a further pummeling of Iranian military and civil assets is the only thing that will guarantee a non-nuclear Iran incapable of threatening their neighbors – and the Straits of Hormuz. If there is no regime change, this group says, then there is nothing left to do except continue fighting until the regime falls or until there is nothing left for them to fight with.
A third group sees tactical victory and strategic defeat – or at least strategic stalemate which has forced both sides to the negotiating table meaning for the United States and Israel it is at least a temporary defeat since a stalemate is not victory.
Which if any of these assessments are correct? Or is there a third explanation that says that the negotiations themselves are a victory even if the absolute goals of the war, removing Iran from the Chinese-Russian axis has yet to be accomplished. We won’t retread the arguments about how much punishment the Islamic Republic has endured nor will we agree that as long as they have one missile launcher and enough Kalashnikov’s to stay in power there is no victory.
However, we do agree as we argued in The Art of the (Middle Eastern) Deal, that negotiations done incorrectly will be a precursor to defeat. Each time there is a rumor of continued negotiations there is panic from the victory now crowd, assuming that this time, President Trump will cave into Iranian demands. The defeatists on the other hand assume that the fact of negotiations is a good thing since military defeat is assured. The Macron-Starmer wing of the defeatists are trying to pretend to be the grownups in the room, as they want to be part of the opening of Hormuz but not be on “either side”. Their attempt to insert themselves into the situation but not on “either side” puts them a step or two below Pakistan but maybe one level above Sanchez’s Spain in influence.
Back to the real world. While the negotiations are between two countries and hosted or mediated by a third, there are two other countries involved on the Iranian side – China and Russia, and four on the American side – Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE and Israel. Each has its own interests and in general most of those mesh with the main participants in the talks. American allies need a non-nuclear Iran that is weak enough that it can’t threaten those countries and America has the same interests. Although a non-Islamist regime would be the best guarantor of that, it is not something that can be done only from the outside.
Russia and China need an American defeat more than anything especially after the world has witnessed the poor performance of their weaponry. They will try to re-arm Iran in order to create a war of attrition with the United States that America will be forced to end. This is where the interests of Russia and China clash. Russia would love the damage if not the destruction of Persian Gulf oil fields and refineries but the subsequent rise in oil prices would further damage China’s increasingly fragile economy. If Putin’s Russia has a goal of survival, self-enrichment and embarrassing the west (one seems to go with the other for Putin) and China’s goal is to dominate the Indo-Pacific, then the survival of Iran is a nice to have for Russia but a need to have for China.
China does not have the will and/or ability to do what is necessary to defend their Iranian ally, so they are really in a no win situation without a nuclear Iran. The American insistence on a complete end to the Iranian nuclear program is a shot right at the Chinese global strategy. Without the Iranian nuclear umbrella, China will depend on the United States for the flow of oil to their country.
As for Iran, they have one goal in this war and that is to survive with enough firepower intact to continue their quest to destroy Israel, rid the middle east of the United States and eventually to bring the Sunni Arab states in the Gulf under their thumb. As opposed to a dictatorship that is “only” corrupt and can be bought, they also need their theological goals met – and that starts with the destruction of Israel and genocide of the Jews. That, like Hitler’s Germany is an aim greater than the goal of winning the war.
They have come to the negotiating table because they felt that a continued bombing attack by the U.S and Israel and possibly the Gulf states risks their goals more than negotiating. This is the same reason that Hamas agreed to release the hostages as they saw the needed respite from the IDF in order to retain control of at least part of Gaza. This could be seen as Iran’s last ditch effort to survive and are using the cease fire to reconstitute their industry, re-arm and most important – to dig out and reach their underground missile cities
So why has the United States come to the negotiating table? Is it a show of weakness? An attempt to re-arm and bring more troops to the region? Is there a regime change plan that needs time to take share?
As for the last of these, over that last two days there have been car bombs and shootings at Basij checkpoints and the commander of Basij forces of Teheran has been assassinated. There is clearly something going on inside of Teheran and the head of the Mossad, David Barnea stated yesterday that the Iran mission will not end until there is regime change. Not only are the IRGC using the cease fire to regroup, so, it seems, is the opposition.
In addition to continued operations in Iran, the blockade of the Straits of Hormuz, an act of war in itself, tells Iran not to see negotiations as a sign of weakness by the United States, but rather as an opportunity for the US to widen their attacks beyond bombs and missiles.
The move from bombing to negotiations have trapped both Iran and China in a place where neither can win unless the U.S, against all statements by the President, VP, Secretary of State and Secretary of War, decides to fold.
Iran is trapped in a place where if they starts to shoot they will have their economy in worse shape than it is now and they no longer are lords of the Straits of Hormuz – THE trump card (no pun intended) that the defeatists have been gloating about.
China is trapped in a place where they need the United States to guarantee their flow of oil and their ally is no longer able to sell it to them on the cheap.
Negotiations have taken away the two things that were pressuring America and its allies – Iran’s daily missile attacks and their veto over the Straits of Hormuz. While they are using the time to try and rebuild what has been destroyed, that will take so long that, assuming no surrender by the United States, will be irrelevant to this war and the next -if there is one.
President Trump and the United States have set a trap for Iran and China and there does not seem to be a good way out. That doesn’t mean Iran will recognize it and end their genocidal quests, but it does mean that their path to victory has been shut down.
Checkmate?
Disclaimer: the views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of the author, and not necessarily the opinions reflected by angrymetatraders.com or its associated parties.
You can follow Ira Slomowitz via The Angry Demagogue on Substack https://iraslomowitz.substack.com/
