2 words. Chicken hawk. We have seen this movie before. Iraq, anyone remember?
9
Better sink their navy first!
The idiots on Fox love the Trumpster,
Whilst he rules like a fire in a dumpster;
Placating dictators
And media haters -
Sending tweets like a twelve-year-old youngster.
14
Gulf of Tonkin. Weapons of mass destruction. Now something about Iran and Saudi Arabian oil fields! Who doesn’t know that the Trump administration, perhaps with SA encouragement, could manufacture the so-called evidence?
Given Trump’s known preference for lies over truth or facts, and with the lackey Pompeo playing at “Secretary” and going along with so many of Trump’s lies: Why on earth would we believe any of this, or at a minimum what of all of it could we believe or take seriously?
8
The Trump doctrine is dictatorship -- the complete disintegration of all Congressional and Judicial constraints, and power centralized in Trump's hands. America is asleep at the wheel. The House is emasculated; the Senate and most of the Judiciary are in Trump's camp. All he needs is the military and we are Russia or North Korea. Americans have their faces stuck in their smart phone or their TV. Few are aware of the crimes being committed by the President. Few read national headlines; few understand history. Passive citizenry is ripe for an authoritarian with an appeal for the base power of divisiveness. We are already under surveillance. Read Orwell.
9
A lot of talk here about Iran's responsibility; what Iran is doing; how bad Iran is. But so little about thr bad actors & provocateurs in Saudi Arabia, Arab Emirates, israel, etc... and the US.
Seems to me that the men running all these nations have only one game plan...lets poke and insult each other till we can start a war irregardless of the distructive end result. So much for lessons learned from hundreds of years if lessons.
7
Trump is Trump. Birds gotta fly,fish gotta swim. Trump has gotta be Trump. Our president makes it up as he goes along, not a single coherent pattern resembling a thought process. Add to that his ignorance , boorishness, and narcissism, you have a recipe for disaster. Unfortunately, it's just a question of time.
10
Washington said it first in his farewell address...""It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliance with any portion of the foreign world" So that's him and Jefferson against the dotard in the WH.
4
Saudi Arabia is like South Vietnam. Billions of dollars in arms squandered by sheer incompetency. Let’s see who will claim the prize this round.
2
President Trump has made it clear that he floats like a bee and stings like a butterfly.
4
Could you ever, EVER not blame Trump?
3
Government has killed humans since time immemorial. In Yemen now, tens of thousands; in Nagasaki and Hiroshima, hundreds of thousands; in Southeast Asia, millions, etc. So, what should we do now about the attack on oil processing facilities in Saudi Arabia? Should we bomb Iran or let the Saudi government do so, if it decides Iran attacked it?
First is not calling government "we," avoiding psychologically identifying with government. It perpetuates holocausts and atrocities against humans here, there or somewhere else.
The ethical way is not to help it; whenever possible, to disarm it.
4
The Saudi dictatorship exists because oil and John D Rockerfeller made it so. We will not miss them when they are gone and the women and non-royals of Arabia will not miss them either. They are bombing civilians in Yemen with US weapons. Its an eye for an eye culture so what do you expect. Bush told us Iraq had WMDs. A lie in 2001 but previously true because members of his team had given Saadam those weapons to use against Iran and the Kurds. Does anyone think the Houtis lie more than Trump?
10
Mr. Stephens has always known how to turn a phrase — “the tremulous optimism of a new bride joining Henry VIII at the altar.” Gotta love it.
It is logical that Trump can be reasonably regarded as a stand-in for Henry VIII in many ways, though he still has three more wives to go (not counting Ivanka).
9
We have spent decades intimidating, starving, and boxing in Iran. Look at a map of our military installations and ship placement for the last 35 years. Is it any wonder Iran behaves as it does? They're cornered and desperate, and that finally led to the multinational agreement we had in place before DJT trashed it. It was the best way to give everbody a chance to move forward towards a possible longer lasting peace in the region. No, I don't condone Iran's radical muslim leadership or their stance on Israel, but I understand their response to the current situation. And as far as Saudi Arabia, I think we'd all be better of without them.
7
“How the U.S. responds to an unprovoked attack on one of the central pillars of the global economy is a test of American leadership. The consequences of failure will be felt for years.”
First off, maybe this is the proof we in the fact based world need to finally decide that depending on middle eastern oil as “one of the central pillars of the world economy” is a fool’s errand. Norway, the only truly oil rich European Country, has made it policy to move to entirely renewable energy. The company that used to be its State Oil Company is one of two developers of the wind projects off of Long Island, the kargest in the Eastern US.
So now, like Iraq and Afghanistan before Bret is determined to prosecute war with Iran. Have we dealt with the failures in Afghanistan and Iraq yet?
6
Ugh. Why read yet more neocon junk just because it validates anti-Trump views? Neoconservatism espouses a kind of usery of Americans that has been demonstrated to be unethical and unfit.
6
I have sailed every type and size of sailboats from heavy blue water schooners to quick 70’ racing sloops.
I look at our country as a ship of state that needs a brilliant sailor at the helm with a choreographed savvy crew. Right now we have Fletcher Christian at the helm heading to Pitcairn Island.
When someone is stumbling drunk we say he is three sheets to the wind. A “sheet” is the rope attached to the corner of a sail and is controlled from the cockpit. These sheets/ropes keep the sail taut in the wind maintaining a steady course.
When there is no one holding these sails taut the boat is meandering all over the place not maintaining a true course.
Our boat, our ship of state is three sheets to the wind with a TV personality at the helm and a crew that has zero idea what it’s doing. We are passengers on this ship and most of us were so used to a competent commander, Barack Obama, that we gave zero thought to the next helmsman...so we didn’t bother to vote and got DJT.
We are in danger of running aground and I see no way of turning our ship around.
I don’t even think we’re going to make it to November 3, 2020.
Another sailing term sums it up.
All is lost.
14
Fletcher Christian!??? More like Capt Bligh!!!
2
“Donald Trumps doctrine. Locked, half-cocked, and probably bluffing.” This is how the world see’s the once great USA. Make America Great Again – he says -- well we have done the exact opposite. The world is laughing at us. Headline - Trump went to the United Nations and Laughter broke out, 9/25/18 NYC (The president startled.“Didn’t expect that reaction,”he said,but that’s okay)his political rise was based on the premise that he had the strength and resolve to change that. Do 45% that support him understand how sad a state we are in on the world stage. Corporate driven healthcare system that is a shamble, Infrastructure in disrepair, we want our guns, can’t figure out how to assert background checks, to keep guns legal for the masses. Political elites governed by corporate donations,fundamental policy’s that keep corporations and individuals in the 1% wealthy, 15 year protracted war in Iraq,Afghanistan,320+M people and an immigration system that president says should have more Norwegians coming,(Norway pop.5.6M,Ranked one of best countries to live in,one of the lowest crime rates in the world national health-insurance system guarantees all Norwegians free medical care in hospitals,USA–worldwide travel advisories by multiple nations-Mass Shootings-38 shootings with multiple fatalities this year, 58 deaths in August alone). The great American society that we are now.Yes I’m Proud to be an American, and our educational system is–well Just ask Felicity Huffman the best can buy.
6
You only need a picture , his only rationale is himself
1
The writer seems to ascertain many things even unproven. I suppose the only good thing is the reluctance of this president to go gunhoe like your typical macho man ready to nuke anyone comes across his path. It seems the writer would rather have another or multiple war conflicts so to make a point that this president has a BIG strategy. However, this one-sided opinion page is rather disappointing in its biased dissection. How about real insights into how to resolve the root conflicts? But I suppose the lenses have been smeared already.
1
Ya know, we keep sayin' this enough and he'll crack and start something just to prove the NYT wrong.
The problem that is more pressing is that HE created the crisis and is unable to resolve it.
EXTRA EXTRA!
Trump cancels nuke treaty with Iran!
World moves closer to war!
This is the exact same mechanism that has landed us in our current predicaments.
Trump caused or worsened crisis;
Trade (Pulled out of TPP, a lever against China)
NATO/Russia (Gaslight allies, praise adversaries)
Border (Defunding military, fake national emergency)
Healthcare (Tried to repeal ACA with no replacement)
North Korea (Kim plays with him like a kitty with catnip)
Mid East (With Bibi's help has wrecked any chance of a settlement for a generation)
Arms race (Trump pulls out of INF, and is stink-eyeing the New Start)
More
The 2016 cycle WAS the firewall.
Worse, everyone on on Election Day knew Trump's character. Shoulda pulled Hillary's lever.
There's no easy way out of the Trump cataclysm.
8
We’ll just have to wait fir Tucker Carlson to tell the President what to do.
4
“...with the tremulous optimism of a new bride joining Henry VIII at the altar...”
Wow!! What a succinct, and quite beautiful line. Rolls off the tongue like “Divorced-Beheaded-Died-Divorced-Beheaded-Survived.”
5
Would you prefer WW III?
4
Bad idea writing an article like this that may embarrass Donald and make him do something dumber than pulling out of the Iran deal signed off by Obama, just because Obama embarrassed him too. The whole world is playing the US president like Nero's fiddle, and he dances to the tune. Embarrass him at your peril!
3
You mean the emperor has no clothes? So what, says 2 out of every 5 Americans. At least that proves his skin is really white.
The jury has even begun to deliberate on whether it was the Houthis , the Iranians or even the Russians for the missile attack.
Three letters that ended costing us over 5 TRILLION and untold amounts of blood... W-M-D.
Fool us once shame on you. Fool us twice shame on us!
3
My neighbor's son died in Bush II's GWOT, looking for WMD in Iraq. If Americans accept Trump's War on Iran, then I will know they are fools.
2
That's what "big" guys with little sticks do.
I still remember when the opposition NYTimes was warning of the impending Trump Armageddon when the world would be destroyed by someone who was described as an unpredictable, trigger-happy lunatic in the White House. Now you're all but daring him to go to war because he's showing restraint. The NYTimes is incredible . . . by definition.
incredible
adjective
1. impossible to believe.
1
No more war for oil!
Donald Trump has no policy and no doctrine.
Why would Bret Stephens pretend otherwise?
Well, if there is no policy, no plan, no doctrine, no accountability... we might as well say that the world’s leading superpower is simply running amok, being lead by a grifter TV personality whose strings are being pulled by a variety of armchair hawks, greedy business people trying desperately to capitalize on new positions and a few power brokers on the religious right who are hell bent on getting even with old enemies (be they real or imagined).
So, yeah, it’s a free-for-all melee at the White House.
2
Bret, i guess your memory is failing. How many ARABS participated in 911? Answer 19. How many were from SA? Answer 15. UAE, Egypt and Lebanon made up the rest. Saudi Arabia contributed 15 of the attachers. Now we want to protect SA. My conclusion is that protecting SA is an act of treason.
5
"...we may be witnessing the beginning of the end of the American era in the Middle East". God I hope so.
I guess it's true about "useful idiots" and God working "in mysterious ways."
1
What the leaders of Iran, China, North Korea and Russia know but Trump’s base apparently does not is that bullies are fundamentally cowards. Thumb you nose at them or worse and they cave.
1
I think the challenge I much more base and fundamental. Trump is a typical bully always seemingly spoiling for a fight but usually able to avoid one through bluster and threats. But just like any bully he caves when someone is not impressed by any of that and simply says: ok then meet me on the playing fields at 5 and have it out. That is when Trump remembers his bone spurs and shows us what he really is, a coward. Worse a coward without a plan or any sense of what he wants to achieve beyond retaining his status as the bully.
2
This is the one area where Donald Trump's cowardice works in our favor as a nation.
George Bush was not a coward and we're still paying for his bravado.
On the question of war in the Middle East I'll go with Trump the sniveler any day.
1
Trump is a bully and like all bullies ultimately scared and weak on the inside. He knows he is completely out of his depth and therefore has to keep ratcheting up the bravado. Somehow, someway, somebody has to constrain him before it is too late.
3
Trump does not even speak coherently. He is repetitive and nonsensical, speaking in a bizarre word-salad of lies, spite, and paranoia. How could he be credited with having a "doctrine". The man is a disgrace.
7
Here we are worrying about going to a dubious war again at the whim of a few and without traditional allied support.
Meanwhile, climate change issues are increasing, birds and the bees and the trees are disappearing, water resources are dwindling, income equality is increasing, racism, sexism, a corrupt legal and political system...
Seems to me that the biggest most immediate, imperative, highest threat in the world right now is Donald Trump.
We need to get that problem solved first to solve the all the rest.
2
"Trump may have the rhetorical impulses of Bob Dornan, but the Iranians have noticed that he has the strategic instincts of Dennis Kucinich."
I don't agree with much Bret Stephens says, especially his grievances about liberals calling him the kind of names he calls everyone else, but I gotta admit, he's a darn good writer.
If the Saudis can't handle this invasive action by themselves, it is time to stop providing them with any arms support. Yes, this attack is another test of American resolve...no, we are not the ones who should initially respond in kind.
3
The only good thing about Trump is that behind his bluster he’s a coward. Thank goodness for that. He doesn’t want a war. Unusual for Republicans. And thank goodness again!
3
Oh, c'mon, Bret Stephens, the Trump Doctrine is nothing more than a series of Trump Towers and Resorts from sea to shining sea. Arguing anything else is nonsense. Donald Trump's impulses are driven by pathological narcissism and his instincts are inspired by P. T, Barnum. He is incurious and incapable of seeing the world as anything other than a binary business transaction: deal or no deal. The only outcomes and consequences Trump cares about are his own bottom line and burnishing a god-like reputation of superiority and greatness.
Donald Trump is a con man possessing zero political experience, zero political skills. zero diplomatic skilss and no moral compass. Let's dispel with the notion that he possesses any skills other than self-promotion. Trump Doctrine, indeed!
5
"That’s a thought that ought to be at the top of Robert O’Brien’s mind as he assumes the role of Trump’s national security adviser — with the tremulous optimism of a new bride joining Henry VIII at the altar." That's good.
1
"At the same time, Trump has also made plain his desire to withdraw from Syria and Afghanistan (to Iran’s advantage in both cases)"
You are wrong here. Iran would not be celebrating an American pullout of Afghanistan. They are worried about the Taliban, who are Sunnis, and a potential refugee influx. Then there the drug smuggling issue through Iran. https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/why-washingtons-foes-wont-welcome-quick-us-pullout-afghanistan
You Op-Ed is pushing for a stronger American response to this oil facility bombing. Why is it our problem? We are not the Saudis enforcer nor their mercenary military. Let them figure out how to get along with their neighbors.
Maybe you and other neocons who are always keen to send in the Marines should volunteer like the American irregulars during the Spanish civil war. I'll be willing to buy you a rifle. Bolton will jump at the opportunity to lead this group.
1
Iran has played its very weak hand smartly, by signaling that any war will be very costly. First, Iran demonstrated that it can attack targets such as oil tankers, in such a way that it cannot be definitely proved that Iran was responsible. Next, Iran shot down a $176 million RQ-4 Global Hawk surveillance drone. American military forces and their allies are still fighting opponents Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria as well a minor actions in Africa. A great advantage that American military forces and their allies have, is provided by surveillance drones. The Taliban, Al-Qaida, Isis and other enemies would have loved to shoot down a Global Hawk surveillance drone, and thus possibly, temporarily deny American military forces the great advantage the Global Hawk provides. However, shooting down a Global Hawk was far beyond their capabilities, as the RQ-4 flies far above the range of ordinary anti-aircraft weapons .
Iran signaled that it can shoot down RQ-4 Global Hawks. Iran says it was over Iranian territorial waters at the time. The Americans say it was in international waters. Many nations that in the past would automatically accept America's version of such events, have expressed doubt as to which side is correct. Trump has reduced America's credibility in the world. To the extent that the Global Hawk was further from Iran, than Iran asserts, it suggests that Iran can shoot down Global Hawks at a greater distance from its territory..".
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4272622
1
The world has no sensible reason to believe anything from Trump and his administration, given the known , and staggering level of, Trump’s lies and the supine behavior of his family, supporters, and the GOP.
I just want to know who pushed Trumps buttons or pulled the strings, to get Trump to unilaterally withdraw from the agreement with Iran. Was it Cotton? Was it Bolton? Was it Bret Stephens and Bibi Netanyahu? Was it members of the military industrial complex looking to ramp up arms sales under this administration? Was it a Saudi bribe? (Like booking a few weddings at some Trump National golf course, or buying a half-dozen apartments in a Trump building? )
It wasn’t just one person - a few folks are to blame here. Maybe all of the above.
I’d really like to know.
1
It i's sad but the best we can hope for with this administration at any given time and with any given situation is that they are not as stupid as they look and not as dumb as they sound.
1
The Author quotes Memarian: “The ferocity with which the authorities have persecuted human rights lawyers, who bring abuses to both domestic and international attention, reflects their fear of exposure and their urgent desire to evade accountability.”
^^As I read that sentence, I thought - wow, change a couple of words and that sentence describing ferocity could apply to *Trump's* own approach towards journalists and those seekign to advocate for *humane* conditions on our border, in detention centers.
1
Trump has a doctrine? Does he even know what the word means?
2
The Saudis can afford to hire non-U.S. mercenaries.
1
It was Washington in his Farewell Address who warned against foreign entanglements. Sheesh
Iran has been carefully watching the president’s interactions with North Korea. He hasn’t touched their nuclear capability, makes excuses for their missile launches and seems to love the world’s bullies. They want to join the party. Why can’t they be as beloved? They have all the criteria that he should love. They will keep trying to get that trump love. Also, Saudi Arabia has billions of dollars of weaponry. Israel watches Iran like a hawk. We have ships monitoring the activity in the Mideast on a constant basis, but no one saw these missals coming? What’s with that? How would anyone feel safe under the US’s watchful eye. Once you have been obliterated, they will be able to confirm that yes you were struck by missals! Now that’s a comfort.
‘Those who don’t like Saudi Arabia as it is will like it even less when it’s gone.’
Nah.
2
"Tremulous bride joining Henry VIII at the altar." What a patronizing comment. And to whom is Bret referring? It must at a minimum be brides 3-6.
And who is in the role of Henry VIII here? Trump? Henry VIII was an obsessed, syphilitic madman. And need I remind anyone that brides 2 and 4 were beheaded?
Better watch those analogies, Bret. They might take you places you don't want to go.
Trump and his administration are in a quandary about the drone attack on Saudi Arabia. The mainstream media drones on and on about Iran, but the attack may have been launched from an Iraqi base. This report contradicts many of the assumptions underlying media accounts
"The strikes which paralysed the Saudi oil industry on Saturday morning, forcing it to halve its output of crude oil, were made by Iranian drones launched from Hashd al-Shaabi bases in southern Iraq, a senior Iraqi intelligence official has told Middle East Eye.
The attacks on Abqaiq and Khurais, two key Aramco facilities in eastern Saudi Arabia, were in retaliation for Israeli drone strikes on Hashd al-Shaabi bases and convoys in August, which were co-ordinated and funded by the Saudis, the official said.
“The latest attack comes for two reasons: another message from Iran to USA and its allies that as long as its siege on Iran continues no one will have stability in the region. However, the second more direct reason is a strong Iranian revenge for the recent Israeli attacks by drones launched from SDF-controlled areas in Syria against pro-Iranian Hashd bases,” he said.
“These Israeli drone attacks were supported and financed by the Saudis. That is why the recent attack was the most devastating, while the previous attacks were more symbolic and inflicted little harm," the official said.
https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/exclusive-iranian-drones-launched-iraq-carried-out-attacks-saudi-oil-plants
1
If it’s war you suggest, Brett, fine. You go. As for me, I can only wish the U.S. had stuck with the nuke pact and given the evolution of peace a chance.
You really believe the drone was flying in international air space?!? Has it not been abundantly clear that nearly everything that comes out of this administration is the exact opposite of the truth?
It’s an insane reflection of our times, but I completely believe the Iranians.
105
a lot has been made of the asymmetry in the warfare fighting capabilities of the US and states like iran, russia, syria and stateless entities like al-Qaeda, isis, the taliban, houthis and the like. but the actual asymmetry lies in the willingness of non-western armies to attack civilian populations and our treaty obligations not to do so. as long as our enemies hide amongst their civilian populaitons the US and its allies will not be able to defeat or even force concessions out of these adversaries until we reduce the asymmetry in our willingness to engage the civilian populations that support our enemies.
It is naive to believe that Trump has a doctrine. Trump's genius is to recognize that The Sopranos plays better than C-Span does. He blusters for his core supporters, knows that he will never be punished, welcomes election interference from autocrats, and gambles that the Democrats will nominate a far-left candidate.
2
Even though you're being unfair to Dennis Kucinich,you have made an important point. The real damage Trump is doing to this country both foreign and domestic will not be felt for some time.This makes him even more dangerous.When Trump is through we will probably suffer a sort of PTSD as a country.Hopefully,the next administration will be more therapeutic.
3
I disagree with "Iran’s increasingly bellicose behavior is less of a response to U.S. economic pressure than it is an assessment of U.S. strategic will." That is the assessment of a person who thinks international relations are an amoral power game. I propose that "Iran’s increasingly bellicose behavior" is more of a response to U.S. economic aggression after unreasonably withdrawing from an effective international agreement, along with an (obviously necessary) assessment of U.S. strategic will.
1
To think Iran would uphold the treaty demonstrates the naivety of the intellectual left. Authoritarian governments don't negotiate. Isn't it obvious the strike comes just after Bolton is fired!?
Furthermore, Iran is China's largest source of oil and doesn't need a treaty to get funding. Taking a firm stance against Iran is also strategic move to hurt China's economy. The problem is Trump is afraid to start a war that will hurt his relection chances. He needs to start putting America first instead of his legacy. He should immediately strike Iran and demonstrate Iran's vulnerabilities. He should also form a naval blockade preventing Iran's flow of oil to the rest of the world.
Trump needs to channel Teddy Roosevelt and start carrying a bigger stick and talk less.
"Those who don’t like Saudi Arabia as it is will like it even less when it’s gone."
I would like to hear an explanation of why that is. We'd miss a medieval repressive theocratic regime? We have NO allies in the Middle East. Israel would love for us to go to war with Iran on their behalf. Iraq is a majority Shi'ite country whose natural ally is Iran and Syria. Iran hates us for overthrowing a democratically elected government and installing our Shah.
I think our best bet is to become completely energy independent and then lead a global coalition to deescalate tensions in the Middle East, but from a position of strength and non-partisanship.
5
Brett,
Explaining:
Those who don’t like Saudi Arabia as it is will like it even less when it’s gone.
should be your next column. I don’t think that it is true and I am interested in reading your argument.
4
Personally I am hoping for a massive foreign policy failure in the Middle East. Take away the oil and why would we care. If we continue down the path of energy independence by relying more on solar, wind, and rechargeable electric batteries, Mideast oil becomes much less relevant. Then we can stop worrying about supporting these tyrannical regimes. Trump will do anything to avoid another war, despite his ridiculous tweets and empty threats. If the Israelis want to play hardball, let them. They can then worry about the consequences of their own behavior. We should stay out of it.
3
Certain words, by their very nature, do not pair well.
“Trump doctrine” is a fair example. It is an oxymoron.
The notion that Trump embraces cognitive structures with the complexity of doctrines, long term goals, philosophies or theories is absurd.
9
Its fascinating to me that the isolationist-interventionist spectrum is largely detached from most other politics. If I tell you I support higher taxes on the wealthy, you can accurately guess most of my other political positions. But not how willing I am for America to be involved abroad. Food for thought.
4
The Saudi government spends more than any other country in the world on defense except for the US and China. If they want to retaliate against Iran for attacking them, then they should. We are not their mercenaries and they can stand up for themselves, after all they have a modern air force capable of destroying the Iranian air force and while no one wants war in the region it is important that we not be drawn into a conflict as a first option, more rather as the last option. If the Iranians know they will fight, they are far less likely to attack the Saudis.
7
One of Trump's problems is that his narrow and uninformed world view is also stuck in the 1970s and 1980s, including that period's preoccupation with the centrality of oil to the world economy and order. Hence his rollback of environmental regulations to benefit oil producers (e.g., wilderness drilling permits, California auto emissions, and wetlands incursions). That mindset is very dangerous in a world where technological advances are making oil increasingly obsolete and the US independent of foreign sources of oil that it does need during the accelerating transition to green energy. Saudi Arabia exists in its present form only because it produces oil. The days where that production must be protected at all costs, including US lives and treasure, are gone. Let Saudi Arabia and Iran settle their religious, cultural, and regional dominance issues without costly US military intervention.
14
We are not oil independent yet, but much less dependent on OPEC countries.
Big oil is terrified of electric vehicles. US military adoption of renewables will propel this industry. If oil interests don't stop it first. This is a place where the US still has an edge, largely thanks to Tesla.
4
USA had a cold war with the Soviet Union for 35 years; It won, and spared millions of lives by avoiding an overt conflict. Now it has a cold war with Iran – which is not only an economic one, as you suggest. Mr Stephens, why should you guys act differently this time, specially with so many countries in the region antagonistic to the ayatollah regime and with much more at stake than the USA?
You could imagine this one coming when the great Deal Maker broke the existing nuclear treaty with Iran.. he was going to 'break' those guys, drive them to their knees, have his way. The 'corner' he intended to back Iran into.. he's backed into himself and he's taken American prestige, respect and resolve with him!
5
You give Trump too much credit. He is a blatant racist, pure and simple. While praising the intelligence of the American electorate, he secretly knows that they can be led around like bulls with nose rings - only instead of bull rings, he uses their beliefs and prejudices to lead them wherever he wants.
If DJT doesn't destroy our fragile democracy, he has published the blueprint and playbook for some other demagogue to do it later. If a democracy like America's is going to exist, there will have to be a paradigm shift in human thought throughout the world. In the near future, we will program the human mind in the computer based on a "survival" algorithm, which will provide irrefutable proof as to how we trick the mind with our ridiculous beliefs about what is important and what is supposed to survive - producing minds programmed de facto for dirty tricks and destruction. These minds see the survival of a particular belief as more important than the survival of us all. When we understand this, we will begin the long trek back to reason and sanity.
See RevolutionOfReason.com
2
Everything this lawless president does is with a view to 2020. He is desperate to stay out of jail. The ME, California, grotesque and gauche discussions about Hispanic (sic), grovelling to the NRA, stonewalling legitimate Congress requests etc etc all constitute distractions. He cares nothing about the issues- just how he can use them to normalise chaos. With his self centred me, me, me focus, these are what he is interested in Don't fall fr it..
He is normalising chaos so that when he loses the election he owill declare a state of emergency and refuse to leave. He is setting you up for it. The outrageous impudence and lawlessness of the Lewandaski circus is an orchestrated effort to sew chaos. The entire country is being groomed for a real coup in 2020.
5
Good God. Doctrine? There is no doctrine. That would imply that he actually understands strategy. He does not. What part of the "doctrine" is his idiotic trade war?
Stop spreading the falsehood that Trump somehow knows what he's doing. He doesn't. He's a puppet and a stooge and a useful idiot for the Republicans and their cronies who are bleeding this country dry.
7
@PubliusMaximus I disagree. Trump knows precisely what he's doing. What he's doing - the only thing - is trying to get Trump reelected. That's what he is about and nothing else matters (to him).
2
His desire to avoid war and confrontation are technically good qualities for someone in his situation. His inaction, however, reeks of a tepid reluctance to act, speak, or lead. Everything he says has a half-hearted, backhanded tone to it. He has nothing else, no other cards, no other strategies. This is the "just got out of the toilet with paper stuck to my foot" response.
''Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.''
Macbeth, act 5 scene 5 W.Shakespeare.
Were I China I'd invade Taiwan, Russia, take Georgia and Ukraine.
Who is there to stop them?
4
"How the U.S. responds to an unprovoked attack on one of the central pillars of the global economy is a test of American leadership. The consequences of failure will be felt for years."
Our failures at "leadership" in the Middle East started at the beginning of the last century when corporate greed started sucking the oil out from under the puppet governments we artificially setup along with 'nations' borders that we drew in sand without a thought to history.
We've been feeling those consequences for the fifty years or more.
2
Bluster about hunting witches aside, given that Mssr. Putin's government likely provided Mssr. Trump's campaign the boost it needed to win his election is it any surprise that Mssr. Trump steps back from action against Iran as he did in Syria?
Once again Stephens bangs the drums for a war to save Israel's illegal settlements. Hopefully, a change in Israel's government and the removal (and imprisonment) of Netanyahu, may possibly cool their urge to drag us into a war with Iran. In any case, should Trump decide to attack Iran after all, depending on his election chances, Stephens will be the first to switch from Never Trump to Hooray for Trump. And of course he will denounce any opposition to said war as arising from anti-Semitism.
5
Revealed? Hasn't it always been obvious? Me, myself, and I. Same as it ever was.
1
Please select ten parents of current enlistees and explain to them - in person - why you would sacrifice their kids' lives in defense of a Saudi regime that won't fight for itself.
11
One wonders who 'America's traditional Middle East ally' is supposed to be, exactly.
Okay, no one actually wonders. But how far are we, the US taxpayers, willing to attempt to contort the realities of the Muslim world so that Israel can manifest its destiny?
I'm not so sure, given the events of the last 20 years, that anyone could do much worse to us than the Sauds and their plane-jacking, TATP-dripping minions.
4
The Iranians recognize a gutless blowhard when they see one. Trump may want us to stay out of the Shia, Sunni catfight but if the Saudis call Trump will come running like a poodle and do their bidding. He "loves" them remember? They buy 40-50 million condos from him. They're his buddies. But if he tries it, you can bet Iran will blow something big up, like a US destroyer. We need to get out of the whole mess. The Sunnis and Shias have been spitting at each other for centuries and they're both ready to sacrifice as many Americans as is necessary.
4
Since Trump became president, my greatest fear has been that a serious and dangerous foreign policy situation/event would arise and in his ill-informed incompetence, he would launch us into another war.
He is a man who would not hesitate to send our young men and women off to help a corrupt "kingdom" that after decades of sucking up American arms/missiles, etc. now is described as unable to fight for its own survival.
Trump's ignorance and tremendous ego endangers the USA and others as well. Terrifying. The test I and so many others have feared all along. Who or what can stop that man?!
2
Donald Trump's foreign policy, especially with regard to the Middle East is "a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." The Iranians have learned that he is all bluff and bluster, utterly inept and unable to swim in the deep end. And 42% of America sees (and agrees with) only his anger towards anything foreign, not his incapacity for actual leadership.
2
Trump’s “doctrine” is basically what happens when a 73 year-old narcissist gets jacked on 6 diet cokes and then binges on Fox News. It’s chaos and the only constant is the reptilian impulse for self-preservation.
13
Just a reminder to us all. This is happening as Trump tries to lower future improvements in automobile mileage with every bit of power he can exert, including suing automakers.
I do not know what to do about Iran but I know this is exactly the opposite of what we should be doing domestically
8
The fact that the US is still supporting the House of Saud, with billions of dollars & and thousands of dead bodies, continues to astonish and sadden me. Probably not in my lifetime, but hopefully in my children's', the rapidly decreasing demand for oil will send the thousands of Saudi "royals" back to the desert...where only a few will survive the rigors like their ancestors did---your Rolls Royce will only be able to go so far in the sand, after all. At that point at least some of the middle East clock can be re-set.
The Persians were dominant for centuries, and may well be again. My only hope is that the United States (if it still exists at that point) will calmly watch the evolutionary process from the sidelines.
5
There remains only one test of American leadership: do we, the people, grasp that our security and prosperity depend on it and that Donald Trump is not capable of providing it? If we cannot vote him (and his party) out, then we don't deserve to have what leadership brings.
4
Trump is a dimwit (but, like, a very smart dimwit, OK?), that's a given.
However, to pretend that we aren't largely the authors of our own fate in our interaction with the tarbaby that is the Middle East through our actions over the last seven decades is willfully obtuse. Our cynical support for Saudi Arabia, Egypt under Hosni Mubarak, Iraq under Saddam Hussein and, yes, our reflexive
support of Israeli, irrespective of how irrational and/or deliberately provocative its policies, have had their consequences and for many of these there is now no carefully calibrated response that will make things right in any sense.
134
@richard /well said. However, if you look at Western oil companies and the Middle East, its much older than that, by a century, nearly two.
I used to see the CIA as a befuddled, tired organization. I mean, how bad and for how long can they fumble "peace in the Middle East." But then, as I got older, I considered the possibility that stability was the last thing they wanted. Plus, a lot of pretty smart folks work over there at the various 3-letter agencies. With this new lens, I realized that, all things considered, they are doing pretty good, especially when you consider that young men (and a few women) deaths are of little consequence to them. Their job is to protect profits for Western companies (which includes cheap gas for that Prime Delivery) and business is good!
20
I'm not sure what the comparison to Dennis Kucinich exactly means, or why Kucinich deserves to be called an uninformed idiot of such magnitude.
Seems unfair.
Absent any clarification, the reference to Dornan is lost on me too.
Since we're making obscure comparison, maybe we can add, 'with the thin skin and penchant for punching down over perceived slights of Bret Stephens.'
6
The Iranian regime is smart, Trump is dumb.
That is all you need to know in order to predict how this stand off will end.
2
Trump foreign policy?
Coming 2021! Trump Tower Riyadh.
6
You're just figuring this out now? That Trump is all talk?
Foreign leaders had this figured out two years ago. Trump was being "tough" on Assad where Obama was "weak". Trump bombed an airport and Assad had it up and running within days. Trump was so "tough", he bombed asphalt.
Trump is "tough" on Putin, Kim, Iran, China, etc. Our allies? He just insults them.
Do you think any of these leaders ever took him seriously? When it comes to foreign policy, Trump is "Dotard".
4
Bret Stephens has been infinitely more dangerous to world peace than one million Donald Trumps. He was one of those rah-rah cheerleaders that advised invading Iraq to chase down illusory weapons of mass destruction only to unleash the true weapon of mass destruction in Shiite Iran, which has made Iraq it's own vassal state, threatens the peace of the region, encourages blowhards like Bibi Netanyahu, and murderous simpletons like Mohammed bin Salman to wage idiotic wars in the name of the faithful. All this for aged swamp gas.
I could go on, but truly thoughtful people already see the absurdity of it all.
3
Let's hope he doesn't read this. He will start a war just to prove he has a big stick. Please don't poke the bear, he is very unstable.
2
What kid the significance of the title? I looked up these two men - nothing like Trump. Trump says he does not want war but has done everything in his power to instigate it. President Obama understood the significance of his actions - Trump does not have a clue and his insecurity shows in his attacks on policies and facts. Based on editorial comments his supporters appear to likewise lack understanding and their history is a figment of their and Fox’s imagination.
3
How he reacts to events might be predictable, but that does not make for a doctrine. Do you speak of children who predictably throw temper tantrums as having doctrines?
4
What "...escalatory attacks against the U.S." are you talking about beside the drone shot down, which may actually have been in Iranian airspace? I'm getting tired of reading pundits who seem to be laying carpet for war. This happened with Iraq. It's happening again.
5
So, when Reagan gave the covert support to Solidarity in Poland, it was good thing to do, but when Russians wrote several posters on Facebook, and published the emails of American officials to show the Americans the truth about their leaders, it is oh.. so evil. Hypocrisy of some Americans knows no bound.
Why does the US have to defend Saudi Arabia? Especially since the 9-11 perps
Were mainly Saudi? If Iran can reek havoc with the Saudis , good for Iran. Are you signing up for military service Brett?
2
To Brett Stevens, I am 53 years old and am very up to date. But I have ZERO idea what your analogy to Dornan and Kucinich are supposed to mean. Maybe try writing to an audience younger than 75???
4
The “Trump Doctrine” is a mirror. Trump spends approximately 2 plus hours every morning being put together with make up, putty and hairspray. He looks into the mirror and practices his squints, scowls and Mussolini lips, his Jesus hand gestures and his intonations. There is no thought or reason, it is all kabuki theater, pretending there is some kind of doctrine is ridiculous..
7
Trump’s seat of the pants management style has never worked well for him with anything. He doesn’t have a work ethic that involves planning or thinking through processes. His lack of a moral compass has historically placed him in a defensive position requiring troops of lawyers. His businesses have failed, one after another. This tragedy is in the final act.
2
Yes, the consequences of Trump's bluffing will last for years.
Now tell us who you voted for, Brett.
3
There is only one Trump approach: “Me, Me, Me First”.
3
The planet is burning. We should get out of our oil dependency. The world doesn’t need a Saudi Arabia.
3
correction: Tweet loudly, and that's it!
1
Trump is like the incessantly barking dog when he’s in his own yard, as soon as he leaves his comfy confines he rolls on his back showing his belly in submissiveness. The world has taken notice.
2
As one of the richest nations in the Middle East why the heck don’t they have a strong military?
2
With his ignorance, obesity, racism and drug addiction, Trump is the poster child for today’s GOP.
The only thing that is missing is religious fanaticism. However, Trump has figured out that Evangelicals really aren’t committed to Jesus in so much Jesus is a vehicle for their hate and bigotry.
3
@Brett Stephens, "an unprovoked attack" what are you talking about?
This column is just spoiling for a war. I am sure your children don't have to do any fighting.
2
Congrats to Bret Stephens for writing an op/ed piece that once again reveals his obsession with Iran without even offering lip service to his obsession with Israel. Even so, regular readers of this otherwise sensible NY Times pundit recognize that his paranoia over the Islamic Republic is one that he shares with the government of his former homeland. He clearly and perhaps deliberately exaggerates the threat that Iran poses to the rest of the Middle East (let alone to the U.S.) in order to provoke us into military action. Our "president" is certainly a bellicose and ignorant weakling who wouldn't know Mohammed from Moe Howard and whose attitude towards Iran would change in an instant if the Ayatollah would only send him a love letter a la his man-crush in Pyongyang. Even so, the last thing our country needs is yet another foolish conflict in a region of the world from which we should completely extricate ourselves. Let the Saudis and the nuclear-armed Israelis do as they will with respect to Tehran. The whole business is none of our beeswax.
4
Bret.. Bret.. John.. Sorry thought this was written by John Bolton. War is the answer. Provoke them if you have to. Finger in the eye. Starve them into submission. Then the backlash and the reason to retaliate. Same old script.
3
Yet another propaganda piece by Stephens to urge for actions that will lead to a war, exploiting our resources.
It is time for us to get out of the ME. Our so called allies, SA is a terrorist state and Israel has only one objective: exploit the USA to benefit their country.
3
Some just can't have enough war.
3
There, uh, is no doctrine.
2
Wasn’t it Washington who warned against entangling foreign alliances? It was a long time ago, before we had a president who started out of the gate in hock up to his coiffure to seedy foreign money men and a foreign bank with ties to the country’s biggest adversary. When the Founders crafted our new country for the advantage of the landed gentry, they didn’t have in mind those who were leveraged up the wazoo on their properties, making them easy marks for foreign actors both national and individual.
2
Brett, how about addressing how pulling out of the Iran nuclear deal got us into this mess - something you advocated! Have you forgotten?
2
I don’t think I’m naive, and I understand the need for deterrence and acting in one’s national interest, but I have a hard time coming to the defense of the Saudi’s. Did they think about us when they murdered a US resident journalist? Our biggest threat is not Iran, it’s extremism and terrorism. Saudi citizens killed 3,000 on 9/11. Extremist Sunnis, not Shia, comprise ISIS. Make no mistake, Iran is a dangerous player, but they are rational. The extremism- Wahhabism - supported and exported by the Saudis is not rational and our destruction is their goal. I look at images from cities in Iran and the general population looks a lot like America, the people look like they live in a somewhat free, liberal society. I know that is not the case, but it doesn’t look like it completely repressed, hostage-like. But, look at images from Saudi Arabia, where they graciously allowed women to drive recently (as long as they are accompanied by a male) and tell me where you would rather live. We can’t allow Iran to bully our allies, I get it, but Israel handles its own issues. They may get financial aid, but Israeli boys and girls risk their lives to do it. I don’t want our kids risking their lives so the House of Saud can go on killing journalists living in America and using their oil money to support extremist madrasas around the world pumping out sunni Western hating extremists. If I have to pay another 25 cents at the gas pump to assuage my conscience, I’m okay with that.
4
Stephens was all in in support of terminating the "awful deal" with Iran and now has a case of the vapors when the easily anticipated results appear? Nobody on the right can think beyond the tip of their nose . . .
3
Jeez, Brett, why the dated reference and unprovoked slam against Dennis Kucinich, a decent guy who was gerrymandered out of office by corrupt Repubs?
3
The Stephen’s Doctrine has long been to attack Iran at any
cost.
I much prefer “bluster”.
Mike
2
I didn’t read anything in this article where Bret Stephens takes any responsibility for his visceral hatred of President Obama (pre Trump), and his characterization of the JPCOA as an apocalyptic agreement for Israel. The chickens are now coming home to roost. Stephens and others painted Obama and the JPCOA in hysterical terms and the nutcases in the Republican Party took him at his word. Now, he’s not able to unring the bell.
I’m glad Stephens has come to his senses, but I’m bitter that I am having to live through the nightmare that the unreasonable Obama hatred has caused.
2
Then again, we have the twin pillars of the Stephen's Doctrine. Pillar #1: Iran is bad; Pillar #2: See Pillar #1.
2
And to think we were on the verge of improving relations with Iran tout court, including travel possibilities and all sorts of trade relations.
But then an idiot came along to get us out of that horrible deal, agreement.
As currently constituted, I would never miss Saudi Terrorist Arabia.
2
Let the Saudis fight their own battles. They have enough weaponry. (Oh, and 9/11)
5
Small stick?
Didn't Trump just drop 40 tons of bombs on a terrorist enclave killing a boatload of terrorists and Osama bin Laden's son?
Maybe Bret Stephens doesn't read unbiased news and is thus woefully uninformed.
1
The last sentence, "The consequences of failure will be felt for years." sums up the entire Trump administration. Like their leader, everything they touch turns to ashes.
Trump brags about what a winner he is. He is not a winner; he is a whiner. No, actually, he is a loser. He destroys everything and everyone who come in to his orbit.
Let the world take note, don't get near him. He is toxic to all lifeforms.
3
No, Bret. The “ Trump Doctrine “ is based on the works of three great Americans. Larry, Curly and Moe.
What could possibly go wrong ???
1
Excellent article Bret, keep it coming. Should Israel worry?
1
This as opposed to the Stephens' doctrine of speaking softly and justifying advocating for murder here, there and everywhere. And Trump of course can get unhinged and start acting in ways that will bring a big smile to Bret's face.
2
Why bring up Dennis Kucinich? Why not bring up George W. Bush and all his friends in the ivory towers of those Ivy League schools Yale, his alma mater. You have apparently forgotten the Iraq fiasco.
3
Documented as a pathological liar, just what credibility does
Trump have ….NONE.
So...why do journalists report what he tells them...????
Is it the job of journalists to affirm that Trump is telling them
the truth.
No...journalists like physicians have an ethical obligation to
tell the truth...that is to NOT give any credibility to any liar
whomever that liar may be; be it the President of The United
States or a door to door salesman...
So...No one should believe ANY report of what journalists have about the statements of President Trump.
However, Bret Stephens you might decide to review the
opinion of Trump's mental health as assessed by ret. Professor of Psychiatry, Lance M. Dodes M.D. and 33 of his
colleagues who are also members of The American Psychiatric Association ; from a Letter to The NYT Editors
printed in The NYT OP ED 2/13/17...:
This assessment of Trump's mental health of Trump's potential to do great harm due to Trump's severe psychological disorder described in this letter to your editors
is a WARNING...of the danger that Trump could create.
This is still a WARNING...so please review Dr. Dodes Letter
and address this very serious problem which I think needs
to be aired...and in my view needs to be resolved by those
who could demand Amendment 25: Section 4 of the US
Constitution...to dismiss a President due to mental or
physical incapacity..Please read Dr. Dodes Letter.
2
This dance with House of Saud has been continuing since US troops landed in Egypt and kept the Nazis from advancing to the oil fields in World War II. It is all about oil and keeping US oil companies profitable with unlimited supply.
As to policies of the Donald, he like Bush I and Bush II will be dragged along into a Mideast war if Big Oil is threatened along with Trump's friends in Israel whom the Christian right demands must be protected at all costs. Trump has learned nothing from past mistakes in the Mideast. There are US troops stationed throughout the Mideast. I would expect next Iran will follow Japan's reaction to total embargoes of oil and attack with cruise missiles a US base. Then we will see if we have a real President. Remember The source of attacks on the USS Cole were known to Bush II in February 2001, and he dawdled and did nothing despite death of 18 sailors. The 9-11 attack followed.
In the end oil interests will dictate any American President's policies.Backing off as Elizabeth Warren wants will only be possible if we are totally energy independent and all US troops are finally brought home. The GOP will never allow it.
1
When America's Political Action Figures make false claims to enrich themselves, it's the Continuity of Government that wins every argument. State Secrets are why Ed Snowden, Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning, Bill Binney and many others blow whistles. Truth shall be known. Jesus said so. We Believe.
1
Donald Trump’s “Doctrine” consists of whatever fortune cookie he finds in each night’s dinner.
1
What has Dornan and Kucinich got to do with Iran? Calling out two people, Democrats, with no context. Typical Stephens.
Reminder: the Saudi’s are up to their eyeballs in nefarious shenanigans, the US defends butchers. Mr. Stephens supports those he likes, throws shade on anyone not inclined to do what the greatest nation in the history of the world wants, irrespective of lives lost. Wars lost. Corporations pollute and pillage.
Sometimes sir, you are deliberately mean spirited. A conservative without a conscience.
1
Great closing thought, Bret Stephens, comparing the new national security advisor's likely mental state with that of one of Henry VIII's new brides!
One of a few things to give Donald credit: he has not started any useless war. (Or as the author would say of JFK “carry any burden” - while sitting on a comfy sofa at 1600 Pennsylvania ave..).
1
" ... weakness masked in bluster ... general indifference to human-rights ... abandoning American values ... asking for Saudi direction ... " That's some POTUS we've got, huh? Maybe we could get somebody else?
1
Iran leadership and those of other countries have to ask themselves ,"what would a tv reality star do influenced by a narcissistic personality disorder , immoral and erratic with a greedy nature" Anything that benefits him personally as he is the center of the universe in his world thinking he can walk in a room and dazzle anyone with his brilliance . Reality is he is just in office for another year and may not get re-elected why negotiate with a liar who reverses himself in the same day. Trump is a thug corrupt and so ignorant of history he just wings it every day spinning bumper sticker phrases as the policies of a deep thinker.
1
Compared to the Bush neocons, Trump is a humanitarian wonder. I can't believe I'm saying this, but I'd rather have a nutty president than a war criminal in the White House.
2
Was the war in Iraq the demented product of right-wing loons? Of course.
Is Netanyahu acting stupidly and viciously? Of course.
Should we be playing footsie with the Saudis? Of course not.
Should we have stayed in the JCPOA? Of course.
And I still don’t understand what’s so tricky about Stephens’ essential, and correct, point: that you cannot allow a right-wing, theocratic government and the likes of the Republican Guard to get away with what looks a lot like a systematic, escalating test of just exactly how much they can get away with. And no, a couple more sanctions won’t git it.
Here’s the prob with Trump in the Mideast: he’s encouraged the Iranian right-wingers, trashed our European allies, cheered again and again for Putin and similar right-wing dictators, given Assad a pass, bragged about beating ISIL even though he hasn’t, dumped the JCPOA and egged on the Egyptian junta, and endlessly blustered about American military power that supposedly allows us to do whatever we want....and then, after a drone shootdown and tanker seizures and bombed tankers and now what sure looks like a direct attack in an ally, he’s done precisely jack. Oh, and did I mention the isolationism?
In other words, this combo of nuttery, bluster and inaction is intensely dangerous. Once in a while, you gotta deliver a good hearty punch in the snoot.
And the failure to hit ‘em is a lesson that won’t be missed.
It’s more than a matter of style. NYTs, have you heard? We’re in a national security crisis of “urgent “ concern with the chain of command and constitutional process breaking down. Your lead story is about Justin Trudeau wearing a costume?
1
"Those who don’t like Saudi Arabia as it is will like it even less when it’s gone."
Worried about the next regime murdering journalists on foreign soil?
1
Wasn't it it George Washington, not Thomas Jefferson, who warned against "foreign entanglements"?
2
So much winning.
Is Trump relying on Israel to pick up the pieces? The rising price of oil in the U.S. should be nothing Israel need to get itself involved with; 2020 may resolve much of the problem if the U.S. electorate decides it has finally had enough of this mentally defective aberration in the WH.
Let the U.S. public suffer all of the many consequences that 2016 brought, and remind themselves that every vote counts.
1
Trump can just kiss off his presidency if he gets us into this Saudi war with Iran.
1
“I alone can fix it.”
So why haven’t you fixed it, trump?
And you just figured this out?
....and he knows that...thank god.
1
Is Iran massing soliders on the US border, threatening to invade?
Does Iran have warships just off the America coast?
Flying drones in American airspace?
Maybe supplying weapons to Mexico and Canada to trouble the USA?
Has Iran forbidden the USA to have weapons of mass destruction?
Yankees. Go home already. Nobody (except Israel and the Saudi royals) needs your war.
3
Not sure what your point is - what is your strategy?
2
You bet, Bret! Let’s go to war with the wrong country again. Quick, before somebody realizes it’s crazy.
2
All you neocons and neolibs want is war and more war. At least Trump has got that right.
1
I can almost feel a chickenhawk’s like Stephens’s giddiness at the prospect of sending poor whites and people of color to die in yet another Mid-East war.
Easy to love war when someone else is doing the dying.
2
This is the 1930's all over again. Back then, Americans, fresh with the memories of our involvement in World War I, wanted no part of Europe's troubles. As late as the summer of 1941, extension of the one year of selective service in the armed forces passed the House by a single vote. This left the burgeoning army intact when Pearl Harbor was bombed a few months later. As with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, Iran is not going away. And their goal is hegemony over the Middle East, and with an iron fist of the Hitler variety. Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Israel, etc. cannot stop this on their own. Absent US leadership, Iran will win, millions may die, and a huge amount of the world's oil supply will be subject to their hand on the spigot. What will Europe do then? You cannot wish this away. America must act: diplomacy and sanctions first. However, as in the 1930s, the forces of tryanny respect only the real threat of superior force, and the willingness to use it. Anything else, as Stephens notes, will be interpreted as a sign of weakness and an encouragement to go further.
Let MBS fight his own battles. Frankly, it's Trump who has created this situation. Any day I have more respect for Iran than the Saudis, home of wahhabism, bin Laden and a fake progressive prince. An Iranian leader made an intelligent deal with an intelligent president. Then a moronic president tore it up and bullied Iran into a corner. And voila.
3
“Unprovoked attack”??? Give me a break.
2
If another reader can help me discern what Mr. Stephen's is recommending, I could use the help.
2
You imply that Trump needs to attack Iran to show them who is boss. That surely worked in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and Viet Nam!! Obama laid the groundwork for improving the relationships between Iran and the West. Not perfect, but a starting point. Certainly Iran has many reasons to be suspicious of American intent, but we need to start somewhere. Trump has led us to this abyss and he is too stupid and too concerned about himself to even begin to understand what he has done. He is going to be remembered as the savior of ISIS and the man who destroyed America!!
God save us from Donny twitter hands!!
1
Why have Kushner, Trump, Pompeo been cozying up to a psychopathic murderer who dismantled a reporter he didn't like and who leads a medieval, misogynistic, corrupt, cruel and backward kingdom? Trump has shown his affection for tyrants - MBS, Putin, Duterte - and manifestly wants to be one. We can and must bring Trump down but only if we get out and vote.
1
Trump Doctrine????? Give me a break and stop trying to normalize this buffoon by suggesting he has any kind of doctrine. Trump's only doctrine is watching Fox, tanning, playing golf, cheating on his wives and enriching himself.
1
More like be corrupt and incompetent.
From 9/11 on the only message your newspaper pushes is the awareness that the average American is clueless about what to do about many many total outrages that have been done in the name of America. Consider the total ignorance of what Building Seven was or what happened to it, The election of a fool to the presidency, Our separating parents from their children, Bush Jr' s lying us into war. The list goes on and on.
We are a pathetic nation.
What is unclear is exactly what Iran expects to accomplish with its threats and actions. What was the intent of damaging the Saudi oil fields. It if was to push up world oil prices it did not work. If it was to draw the US into another Middle Eastern war the damage to Iran would far outweigh any gains it might make. The Shia form of Islam is apocalyptic and one wonders if that is what the ayatollah is headed for.
Instincts of Dennis Kucinich? More like Dennis Rodman.
118
@RNS I think you mean Dennis the Menace.
8
You had me at half-cocked.
1
Bret likes to take us back in history. I'm sure he is familiar with what General Patton is alleged to have said "War, God I love it.
Next to war everything else pales to insignificance."
Bret seems so sad when one might be postponed or, heaven
forbid, avoided completely.
3
Using the new and improved United States Mercenary Army to defend the values of Saudi Arabia for which we will be very well paid.
4
@Sipa111 in cash!
It is my belief that Trumps foreign policy is driven by his need to get Nobel Peace prize. He thinks getting face time will help him achieve that.
1
What? Bluster and threaten in response to small attacks - even the latest Iranian attack will not disrupt Saudi oil production for very long, despite the apocalyptic headlines - and then deliver a devastating hammer blow at some completely random point down the road, and on our timeline. Is that what Trump has planned?
1
"I would bravely andaggressively protect the United States interests in the Middle East--were it not for my bond spurs."
3
It is amazing to observe the hawk's logic. First, they advocate the aggressive policies, when these aggressive policies bring a response, they claim it is 'unprovoked attack' and call for more aggression, then when this aggression brings mess that they claim we can not leave the mess now so we should stay and conduct more aggression. Seems like they are blood thirsty Gods of the ancient world, who could not rest without bloody human sacrifice.
5
Our only war is with Saudi Arabia and it is a non shooting war.
There are many reasons to be happy I am in Canada. We are a small mouse living next to a large drunk elephant but so far we still have peace order and good government.
Our government ultimately must make its priority Canada's citizens. In the meantime who we trust least will decide where we stand with regard to Iran and the USA.
It is election time and unlike Brexit there will be no referendum and our leaders will choose which side we are on or if Canada really must choose sides.
We trust neither the USA nor Iran but our parliament must decide who warrants the most trust and that is why we have elections. There are millions of Canadians like me who know we cannot trust either side because if it a Secretary of State or an Ayatollah religious zealots and theocracies believe too many things that just ain't so.
2
Just why are we fighting over oil, the substance that is killing our planet?
3
Bret says, "How the U.S. responds to an unprovoked attack on one of the central pillars of the global economy is a test of American leadership." The attack was hardly "unprovoked" when one considers the massacre of Houthis taking place by Saudi air strikes in Yemen. Bret seems to forget that the Shiite leaders of Iran value their fellow Shiites more than the borders that define the nation states of Iran, Syria, Iraq and Yemen. An attack on Yemeni Shiites is surely seen as an attack on Iranian Shiites. One lesser point: Saudi Arabia is hardly a "central pillar of the global economy." Its oil is certainly important, but for reasons Bret identified earlier in his piece, it's hardly a "central pillar" in the world's economy.
4
This current imbroglio started with Trump pulling out of the agreement signed by numerous international players with Iran that contained Iran's nuclear program. Pulling out precipitously without any effort to strengthen the deal. Who knows... something may have worked with the right carrots and sticks. But not from Trump who has now set off a chain of events where out and out war is being contemplated. And WHY? Is Iran really a threat to the US? What in hades would 'winning' look like? Gutting the intelligence establishment and not having any real credible advisors who can present a range of informed options makes Trump even more of a loose cannon. He has painted himself into a really bad corner here.... and the repercussions are likely to be disastrous to the global economy, to stability in the middle east and to the men and women who are sent to fight these ridiculous unnecessary 'wars' without end. Go back to the negotiating table. A prosperous Iran, constrained by a nuclear agreement, is in everyone's best interests.
5
Imagine if George W. Bush responded to 9/11 with a declaration that the global economy’s dependence on Middle Eastern oil had become a threat to global security, and that the USA was investing $3 trillion in energy research and development.
2
Why does Bret care so much about what happens in Saudi Arabia? It is their problem not ours if Iran becomes too powerful. Iran poses no threat to the U.S.
2
Stop fooling yourself, Trump has no foreign policy doctrine. The spontaneous and feckless statements he makes do not represent any pre-planned strategy. At best, they appear to be random thoughts (possibly based on the most recent whispers from others) of an emotionally immature person with severe ADD.
The only doctrine he consistently follows is to free business and its owners of regulation and transparency, unless you own the Washington Post, in which case his preference migrates from one of a free-market doctrine to totalitarian.
Regardless of our path forward - military or no-military action - my greatest fear is that the yes men he has placed into critical advisory roles will be neutralized and any course of action we pursue will be bungled.
2
The US has no dog in the fight of the millennium long "disagreement" between Shia and Sunni, only interests and those interests are not worth the deaths of Americans nor the moral or financial expense.
4
If Obama was for it, Trump is against it.
Stephens can write lots of words, even claiming to "reveal" the Trump Doctrine------without ever mentioning this core and most relevant factor in current American foreign policy.
3
Odd - You seem to be pushing for yet more Mid East involvement - What is another couple of trillion and lives lost?
I'm OK with President Trump holding back for now.
69
@Jay Phelan
A stopped clock is right twice a day but people aren't lining up for one. President Trump isn't holding back but rather he doesn't have a clue as to how to proceed.
25
@Jay Phelan
Trump really had not given any thought to what would happen after he pulled out of Obama’s agreement with Iran.
24
So now we're talking about energy dependence AGAIN for the zillionth time. We have scientists around the world saying that climate change has developed through the use of fossil fuels. We've known for years that if we continue to depend on oil, we will need to import from the Middle East. How many wars have we fought in that region just to get the oil? I've heard that our oil production, along with solar and nuclear could satisfy the entire country's need for energy. But we continue to look to other countries for oil which ultimately lets them control the narrative. We have the capability to do so much more in the energy sector. Why are we still getting into fights about oil??!!
6
Because as of today, the US still uses ~ 18 million barrels per day of the stuff?
Without weighing in on the piece as a whole, it is important to point out something Stephens omits:
The (US-assisted) Saudi war against the Houthis has been brutal in the extreme. If, in fact, it is they who responded with the recent attacks, they have been legitimately provoked.
Not everything may be about Iran.
11
No-one in the middle east, be it people in Iran, Syria, Yemen or Saudi-Arabia should have to wait for Trump to decide he can declare his win and give up.
Iran has pride. Iran is taking small steps to show that it will not let its people suffer without consequence.
Under Trump, the US unilaterally and without evidence imposed harsh sanctions on Iran. This is not an academic exercise or subtle signal -- it has caused massive damage to their economy including the medical and food supply. You can use whatever pretty words you like but this was a direct attack on Iran that was probably more damaging than drone strikes in terms of human cost.
I find it absurd and in-humane when hawks talk about punishing Iran with some testosterone-fueled militaristic gesture (drone strikes!) when the US has been unilaterally punishing Iran for a few years now.
Furthermore, in typical Trump style, no coherent demands were made. No replacement, practical or otherwise, has been offered for the Obama negotiated agreement that pretty much every other major power had agreed to work under, including both Europe and Iran itself. Iran is not some tin pot dictatorship like North Korea -- they expect to dealt with in some sensible way and have shown a willingness to compromise quite heavily in the past. Obama's deal was hardly favourable to Iran.
It is time for grown-ups to take over and return to a sensible agreement with Iran.
14
It is high time to follow the money. Oil prices have been slipping for years. Ask yourself, why aren't the Saudi's, perhaps next to Israel, the best manned military operation in the Gulf, not retaliating themselves?
As for Trump, Iran, or any other conversation, again follow the money - rinse and repeat. He is all about the money.
I wonder what this does to Russian oil/gas reserves?
6
"That’s a thought that ought to be at the top of Robert O’Brien’s mind as he assumes the role of Trump’s national security adviser — with the tremulous optimism of a new bride joining Henry VIII at the altar." Fabulous! (Don't all of Trump's appointees initially feel that way?)
4
Mr. Stephens,
We all know it's about the oil, and I'm not going to claim that Iran is a model actor in this ongoing drama. But I'm okay with a different Saudi Arabia. The current one gave us the hijackers responsible for 9/11. It has a stone cold murderer as it's presumptive leader in MBS. How much worse of a "friend" could it be to America? Iran is in many ways causing trouble in the Mideast, and its elections are a bit of a joke. But I would suggest there are more civil society institutions there, and a more civilized population that is given some level of democracy, than there is in KSA. The US has stuck by, and is stuck with, the wrong 'friend'.
11
Gas prices went up 60 cents since last week. Mr.Stevens devote your next column to who profits in that largesse. Don't forget to begin by writing Trump thinks with his gut, not brain, and followed feelings in his colon and stomach while tearing up the Iran nuclear pact.
8
"The Doctrine" is simple
Always claim victory, and keep enough Op-Ed writers on the payroll to convince the gullible that it's plausible
7
Look at these pictures and read the story published in this newspaper and explain to me why Saudi Arabia, which appears to be committing war crimes, deserves any help from the U.S.? Apparently there were no deaths in the attack on Saudi Arabia and no serious loss in oil production. Trump needs to rescind his rescission of the Iran deal and let the Saudis fight their own battles.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/26/world/middleeast/saudi-arabia-war-yemen.html
9
There is only one group that might be able to check Trump's will-o-the-wisp approach to world politics, and I don't see Mitch McConnell lifting a finger.
6
Do people realize why this is a danger to us? Trump who withdrew from an agreement Obama made with Iran,everything a REAL POTUS OBAMA had done he rolls back .
8
I’d be surprised if Trump could even find the countries mentioned in this article on a map. And he probably doesn’t know the meaning of the word “doctrine”: “If you like your doctrine, you can keep your doctrine.”
4
The president combines the rhetorical impulses of Micky Cohen and the strategic instincts of Idi Amin.
7
All mouth and no trousers,as my gardener likes to say.
6
Unprovoked attack on Saudi Arabia? Yemen and SA have been at war for 4 years. 50,000 dead in Yemen. Hardly unprovoked.
12
Bret, are you advocating for Trump to attack Iran ?
3
Saudi Arabia won’t even let us base out troops on their soil. That’s what prompted Osama Bin Ladin to commit 9/11, after the liberation of Kuwait. Remember? Let them fight their own battles. I’m converting to solar an electric car.
4
Once again Brett you give way too much legitimacy to a Big Mistake on the part of Electoral college votes.
There is no trump doctrine. The guys a reality show tv star propped up by a crooked segment of both major parties at this juncture.
Brett why are you intransigent in allowing this clown credibility !
5
It really is a no-brainer to boot both Trump and the Apocalypse preacher and restore the nuclear agreement with Iran.
5
A manufactured media personality who is so self-unaware as to not even realize how desperately he seeks Obama's approval.
4
Trump is a small, petty, corrupt man interested only in adoration.
We need a better process for vetting presidential nominees, especially their financial entanglements.
8
American presence in the Middle East is a remnant of the Cold War mentality.
3
The Trump Doctrine? First, I don't judge someone on what hey say, but on what they do. And as far as I can tell the only things Trump does are ones that personally enrich him or play to his ego. N Korea - Nobel Peace Prize. Saudi Arabia - Arms sales and providing income to his faltering real estate empire. Russia - more funding and he owes Putin/oligarchs. If you try to look at anything more than self serving you are deluding yourselves. I really get the feeling that the NYT still does not have a clue about how depraved, immoral and greedy Trump (and his Party) really is and they keep trying to look deeper. Give it up. There is nothing more there.
7
Where, oh where is Jared when we need him?!
3
It's more like the cruel, corrupt version of the keystone cops of presidencies.
3
Pundits like Mr Stephens show clearly why the US must reinstate a military draft.
It’s time for every American to feel the cost of foolish war.
219
@Alan J Absolutely - Draft/Universal Service would quiet the big mouths and offer the side affect of different people from different parts of the country getting to understand one another as in WWII
21
@Alan J As if the rich children of well-connected politicians who send the troops to war would actually serve.
29
@Alan J
Couldn't agree more (and I say that as a former draftee, class of '68).
In addition, how about a 5% annual surcharge on incomes over, say, $60,000/year, rising to 25% at maybe the $1,000,000 level? This would be triggered by the deployment levels in the War Powers Act (make it good for something), no exceptions or exemptions. Let's see what the enthusiasm for foolish foreign ventures is when purses as well as sons and daughters are on the line.
35
Small stick for small hands....makes sense.
5
"And then there’s Donald Trump. Locked, half-cocked, and probably bluffing."
My fear each morning is that I'll open this page, and find Trump has done something stupid to trigger a massive Iranian strike on the Saudis, and in response the very fragile Saudi Arabia is imploding politically, just falling apart.
It would be Morning One of Gulf chaos destroying the world economy as the EU, India, China, Japan, Korea, all of them just can't get the oil they need, and worse they know they won't be able to anytime soon.
Any morning it could happen. Life on the edge.
“Strategic instincts of Dennis Kucinich”!
Did you mean to say Dennis Rodman?
8
Strategy?
5
Ouch.
1
Small stick, small hands, small brain, small man, at least trump is consistent.
10
This has nothing to do with oil or the House of Saud, this is really about Israel, isn't it Mr. Stephens? By not mentioning them, you made it the elephant in the room. A sufficiently emboldened Iran would be almost compelled to attack Israel because they're also ruled by a cabal of maniacs, and then what would we do? The feckless Saudis are no bulwark and we would be obligated to intervene. It would be disastrous for everyone, us included. This reminds of of the lead up to WWI, which loomed on the horizon as inevitable; all it required was an assassin's bullet.
Trump could have averted all of this by sticking with Obama's nuclear agreement, flawed though it may have been, and made economic overtures to Tehran but when your Mideast policy is determined by two crooks, Jared Kushner and Bibi Netenyahu; Saudi Arabia's Mr. Bone Saw; and a gnomish casino magnate in Las Vegas, Sheldon Adelson, this is the predictable outcome.
15
Nothing increased Iran's ability to obtain its geopolitical objectives in the region more that the Iraq war, a war for which Mr. Stephens a prominent cheerleader. Nothing short of Iran's total capitulation to the West's demands, a fantasy which is never going to happen, impeded Iran's ability to spread chaos in the region more than the accord on nuclear weapons production. Yet Mr. Stephens was an avid supporter of the US breaching that accord.
Mr. Trump abandoning American values surely will continue to have strategic repercussions. Mr. Stephen has repeatedly abandoned these values in his willingness to support the Iraqi war based on neoconservative's policy goals rather than a full and truthful evaluation of the WMD issue and America's breach of its treaty with Iran. Those who were instrumental in creating the crisis should not be heard on the subject of its resolution.
2
Well for one thing, its a good thing we have President Trump.
Trump has unleashed our drilling and fracking on federal lands, and now we are energy independent.
Under Obama, and if Hillary had been elected, this attack would have caused oil to spike to 100, and stay there.
Liberal governance just doesnt work.
17
@Sports Medicine The only long-term solution is less reliance on oil. The Democrats and other intelligent people have promoted renewable energies. Iowa get 30% of its electric power from wind, SW states get a good fraction from solar. We'll get to 90% wind-solar-nuclear by 2040 or 2050 in spite of the irrational right-wing opposition.
146
@Sports Medicine
It may not be the best strategy to permanently degrade, destroy our own backyard. We can't get these ecosystems back. Better to highly invest in solar, wind, geothermal and nuclear. Deal with a spike in oil while protecting our own land; meanwhile, build renewable infrastructure -- perhaps that's what HRC would have adopted. Trump's fracking is myopic.
115
@Sports Medicine
Firstly, fracking started with President Obama and so did Shale oil industry. However, shale oil extraction is still uneconomical due to low oil prices. However, the facility and the possibility has kept the markets from popping up.
Secondly, KSA is no longer the market-driver or oil. Apart from the USA there is Russia and Russia has Arctic Oil which, again, has kept the markets from popping up.
Thirdly, the fundamental of a liberal mindset, like President Obama, is long term planning (like TPP) which conservatives cannot understand.
Lastly, your assumption that under Hillary the oil prices would rise to $100 assumes that there are no other oil producing countries. Drop of 5% of supply would not make the price run up 100%.
127
Brett you don’t know with Trump, nobody does including himself He is utterly stupid, totally inconsistent, malignant.
4
The House of Saud is nothing but a glass house. Iran has thrown a few small rocks at it and it is already cracking. Just imagine what would happen if Iran decides to throw a bigger rock.
Trump may be a simpleton, but his instincts on this particular situation are correct.
If one wants to avoid the glass house of Saud to shatter completely, one must not give the Iranians any excuses to shatter it.
The only other alternative is total war with Iran, and nobody should want this option.
Let Trump follow his instincts and seek a diplomatic resolution with the Iranians, put his name in gold and all caps on it, and tell the Saudis to be quiet or fight their own battles; which they can’t and won’t. And sell them another couple of hundred billions worth of useless military hardware so they can parade them in front of their golden palaces.
Everyone will be happy, and we can go back to reading his daily tweets.
1
The lesson is bluster is only bluster and the corollary do not start something you have have no plan as to how you will complete it. When Trump dropped out of the Iranian nuclear agreement he started down the road to conflict with no plan as to how he would deal with the Iranian response. Can we go back to a time when we actually cooperated with others to recreate the Iranian deal? trump said he wanted something better, but in the end has created nothing but an international catastrophe in the making.
2
Not just the Iranians, the Chinese, the North Koreans and above all, Putin, have all learned that Trump is a "paper tiger". He, and therefore we, have lost all credibility on the international stage. We, with the strongest military and economy, should hold all the cards. This self-proclaimed deal maker has NO clues what our cards are. He is ruining our reputation and his ignorance and blustery may ruin the world. I hope not, but, I would not be surprised if it becomes so.
1
Trump supporters voted for that fictional character they saw on The Apprentice. Unfortunately the real Donald Trump is indecisive and clueless, which makes the world a much more dangerous place.
3
Iran has not attackef America. It has not attacked NATO. It's beef is with the Sunnis who seem intent on warring with Iran as well. With the exception of a downed drone in a questionable fly zone, we have suffered no damage. The Saudi's are back to full production.
Why trump feels the need to protect the killers of journalists and 3000 Americans on 9/11 has more to do with protecting oil profits and not Americans. It has more to do with Kushner's sneaky loans and real estate deals.
trump is making us no safer, no stronger. He tweets loudly and carries a limp stick.
5
The great revelation of the Trump doctrine...is that there is no Trump doctrine. There is only Trump, reacting, bullying, threatening, and then backing down. Going with your ignorant gut is not the same thing as having a foreign policy or any kind of principles whatsoever. Nor is treating the world like a casino construction project.
The Trump principle is that there is nothing there. Emperor's clothing, anyone?
3
As always a very glib Bret is always calculating how best to kill people. Whether on the Gaza border in Iraq in Iran. Well so many here so many there. Calibrate it to the last breath of how many again? Well that might be going too far. No not far enough.
3
Trump does indeed have a doctrine. It’s called the Line Dance Doctrine. Take one step forward then three steps back, now lean to the right then shimmy in place, spin in a circle then throw your hands up high. All while crossing numerous red lines.
3
"Doctrine".
Bret, you're overthinking this.
3
When it comes to foreign policy, this emperor has no clothes.
Iran will survive this period of economic crises. Maybe their ayatollahs won’t. If they successfully goad the “great satan” into a shooting war then their popularity will surge. This game has to stop.
1
Having to suffer Bret Stephens at the top of the front page is one reason I just recently unsubscribed here.
2
Trump’s guiding principle is simple:
“What would Al Capone do?”
1
Speak loudly, and carry a small stick with small hands.
The President who cried Iran by Aesop Jr.
Once upon a time, there was a President who twitted misleading statements and utter falsehoods about multiple subjects, especially about the country of Iran. One day, a country called Russia really attacked the President's country but the people believed it was another false alarm, and when people realized that the Russian attack was real, it was too late.
2
Long over due. We should be out of that region and wash our hands of their wars and hatred. We don’t need anything they have to offer. The Middle East has been at war as long as I’ve been walking this earth. They will continue to be at each other‘s throat’s. I say good riddance to them. Let them bleed their own blood on their battle fields and their so called holy books. We can provide the means. All we need to do is Monitor the activities, tighten Immigration and keep the terrorist at bay with our beautiful drones. When they step out of line bomb them back into their caves.
Donald J. Trump or how a con man became president of the United States.
"The Emperor" has no clothes. Or guts. Or brains. And his "Base" are the last to figure it out.
1
Add to the headline: And beat everyone up at every opportunity.
Gee. that's helpful. Encourage the unstable narcissist to talk loudly and carry a big stick?
1
Donald Trump made a solemn sworn oath to preserve,protect and defend whatever profitable Trump Organization advantage that he is hiding from the American people in his personal income tax returns and business accounting financial records arising from his occupation of the White House.
Donald Trump is aided and abetted in his personal profit family quest by his smiling and smirking and hacking and meddling ventriloquist masters Benjamin Netanyahu and Vladimir Putin.
No Trump collusion except for all of the Trump collusion.
No Trump obstruction of justice except for all of the Trump obstruction of justice.
MAGA means making Israel and Russia great again.
3
Corporal bone spurs, who mocks gold star families and wounded war heros.
And yes, McCain was a war hero. Not because he became a POW, but because of how that came to pass, and how he behaved while in captivity.
Iran it's been a thorn in our side for generations since the fall the King of Iran, and a hostage at the Embassy paints a picture red their deceit to their people the Republican guard from the Olla Toler sponsoring terrorism throughout the world. There road to enlightenment from Allah, Koran.
What can the American people take away from this, they start their prayers from hate t to America but Iran is not the only country that pray hate to America .
We cannot have any foreign policy with Tehran only with the strong arm and with the military solution.
Sanctions will not stop Iran they will keep on doing what they do best terrorized the worlds.
You have to get the coalition of nations to attack Iran to cut off the head of the serpent . The only thing that Iran has his oil besides Saudi Arabia they have oil deals throughout the world including a Iran deals China 400 billion their oil.
Someday soon America will have to wake up and fight Iran if not today it will be tomorrow.
I didn't get why? Why the US has to fight Iran? Because they are Muslims? Because their Government structure is different than our? Or because the US want dominate the World and can not stand those who refuse to obey?
1
This is a bumper sticker administration. It funny to watch cable news people try to discuss Trump’s motives or, what he might do next. Like any comedy performer, all he really wants to accomplish is to get to the next show without appearing incompetent. But, rather than let Entertainment Tonight cover Trump’s alleged motives, the “news” guys attempt to apply logic to what he does and says and the result is hilarious. The Trump Doctrine...I don’t know, I don’t want to know and, especially, I don’t care.
1
Brett Stephens wrote this article in case anyone forgot that he is a Republican pushing bad Republican policy.
As a student of history, I understand the dangers of a power vacuum. I spent 2002 explaining that going into Iraq with 130,000 troops would create a power vacuum in Iraq. General Shinseki did also, and that is why they fired him.
But Republican policy has been to CREATE power vacuums, not fill them.
This is because he believes, as the emperors invading each other around the Middle East for 10,000 years did, that powerr vacuums are filled by military misadventures. The Right, which refuses to learn the lessons of the Enlightenment and wants to undo it, is perpetually optimistic about the ability of violence to fill political vacuums when, what violence really does, is destroy the institutions and political structures that actually fill political vacuums. Even those that do understand, like Kissinger, don't care, because they don't really want to create stability, because stability makes it harder to steal.
I ripped into Obama yesterday, but his deal with Iran was filling a political vacuum in the Middle East. By creating political structures for dialogue and building mutual trust between the U.S. and Iran, Obama empowered the less extreme politicians in Iran so they could build peaceful structures and institutions.
Trump needs chaos to steal, so he empowers the extreme Right here and there.
Iran is not the threat.
Stop helping the extreme Right cause chaos.
1
Our traditional Mideast allies are dictatorships that fear both their people and their religious fanatics. Saudi Arabia nourished and exported the ideals that, in their pure form, brought us 9/11. These ideals still threaten it while justifying the rule of the House of Saud.
How we respond to the mess we have helped create and preserve is indeed a test of our leadership. We have let ourselves be manipulated by the Saudis and suckered into helping their Wahhabist crusade for decades as more and more Muslim women were forced to cover first their hair, then their bodies, and even their faces. With our help, they arranged for the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan to be replaced by a multi-sided civil war between various stripes of religious fanaticism rather than a government that reflected our principles, and we celebrated this as a victory for our side.
If Saudi Arabia is one of the central pillars of the global economy, this global economy is doomed, by our need to stop climate change, to be replaced by a different global economy in which we will still play a leading role and the Saudis will retire and live on their savings. Our leadership is fantasy unless it is going there.
1
Trump has at least three options here. One, do nothing which will probably see the Iran Revolutionary Guard and their Houthi pals continue to aggress against the Saudis which will require them to deal with Iran without our assistance - and why not, they supposedly have the weaponry to defend their country and their oil. They seemed to have had little trouble using their weapons against Yemen. Second, Trump can unleash some type of military attack on specific military targets which will likely see Iran's retaliation in the region and possibly lead us back into another Middle East quagmire - remember Iraq and Afghanistan anyone? Third, Trump, with his tail between his legs, can implore his European friends to revive the Obama endorsed agreement/treaty which seemed to be working for all parties concerned until Trump in his usual arrogance upset matters. Diplomacy can work as it has proved to be a viable route in the past, present company possibly excluded, but this would mean that Trump has to think he has not lost or caved in. One would think he'd rather be known as a peacemaker than a warmonger but that's up to him.
78
@Horseshoe Crab
You can't say the Houthis "aggress against the Saudis" when it is the Saudis that attacked them in the first place.
11
@Horseshoe Crab
Trump having options making decisions for us..
On anything frightening.
7
@Horseshoe Crab
You nailed it. Trump has 3 choices:
1) do nothing after bellicose threats, proving that he roars like lion but runs like a scared mouse or
2) he can attack Iran and reduce his chances of winning re-election or
3) He can re-sign Obama's Iran deal, after saying how awful it was.
None of them look good. I'd laugh at Trump getting his just desserts, but it's my country's reputation he's dragging into the gutter with him.
16
Saudi Arabia was attacked, they have billions of dollars worth of weaponry, let them handle this. Under no circumstances should the US take any action, except to wean the nation from dependence on foreign oil, for once and for all.
2
Would have been nice to see a bit more elaboration on this line
"Those who don’t like Saudi Arabia as it is will like it even less when it’s gone"
We spent 10+ years in SE Asia fighting communism and went home with our tail between our legs. Left alone, the Vietnamese gave up on communism and seem to be doing fine on their own.
Lets say Iran over runs the middle east- what if it ends up more prosperous and more educated than they are now? We really don't know what will happen if we withdraw but at the same time we have no stomach for any further intervention- we blew that in Iraq.
1
I didn’t scroll through all of the responses, but how come Bret Stephens and so many readers don’t know that it was Washington, not Jefferson, who warned us against entangling alliances?
I’m not a history teacher or anything. I shouldn’t be the exception. But I am. And that doesn’t make me feel smart. It makes me feel sad and tells me that democracy, as in an educated informed populace, is broken. This is why he is our President. Trump is as much a symptom as a cause of our rot.
4
"Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations--entangling alliances with none."
-Thomas Jefferson
1
"Those who don’t like Saudi Arabia as it is will like it even less when it’s gone."
That depends largely on whether the US, like Stephens, continues to act as apologist and de facto PR agent for the current murderous regime. Stephens argues the House of Saud is the only thing blocking a worse alternative; this is the same rationale that lay behind American support for all manner of evil in the last century.
Moreover, if the US is obliged to assure militarily the perpetuation of the current regime in spite of the billions of taxpayer dollars given outright to the Saudi military, what good is the military aid? Either SA can defend itself or our military aid is wasted.
I'd call – again – for The Times to dump Stephens, but it's likely a worse replacement could be found.
1
Doctrine? What about crony capitalism, where the president uses foreign policy to line his pockets directly ot indirectly by helping special interests line theirs...follow the money
2
Common on, Bret. Trumps alliance with SA is based on fees and commissions. Wake up.
1
Trump has one move. He makes a lot of noise and then...he walks away. That's his "Art of the Deal". The Paris Climate Accords, TPP, JCPOA, anything that displeases the little toddler, his response is always to run out of the room wailing. There are never any solutions only histrionics, he has used up his one idea; walking out. Please stop elevating this childish ploy to the status of being a "doctrine" or an "ism". Everyone else in the world sees this and regards him as the dull tool that he is, why can't we?
5
If Saudi Arabia cannot defend itself then it should fall. It isn't like Saudi Arabia is a beacon of American values in the Middle East. They kidnap foreign prime ministers. They have dissidents jailed, tortured and killed at home and just killed overseas. We do not need their oil. We do not want their religious fundamentalism, which motivated the 9/11 attackers. Let them burn.
2
My grandchildren are not going to war to make the world safe for Saudi oil.
3
"How the U.S. responds to an unprovoked attack on one of the central pillars of the global economy is a test of American leadership. The consequences of failure will be felt for years."
Nothing new here. We've been dealing with the consequences of Republican foreign policy stupidity and failure ever since 2003, when President Cheney (Oops, Dubya) illegally invaded Iraq.
Best solution - do what the original "cutter and runner", Ronald Reagan, did after his Marines were blown up in Lebanon. Declare victory and get out. Let the whole Middle East destroy itself and then go in and clean up the mess. But for now, get out.
2
my take from up North on the Trump Doctrine: Tweet Loudly and carry a big Shtick.
When will this TV show end, it's like an irritating daily whack-a-mole pop up on our collective screens.
2
The thing about keeping the peace is that no agreement will satisfy everyone, but was it working?
So for all of those who disliked Obama's agreement, "was it working"?
Yes or No?
If you have to preface your answer with, "but in x years.... blah, blah, blah, it wouldn't have worked (or something similar)" , you're not being honest with yourself or to the country.
It simply WAS working.
3
Trump stated that Russia annexing Crimea was Obama’s fault, because they didn’t respect him. If the Iranians are behind these attacks, is it because they don’t “respect him” ?
And why would they? He almost single handedly null and voided a signed, internationally negotiated agreement, making it barely worth the paper it was printed on. Why would they, or any other nation respect or trust this administration ?
1
"A third implication is that we may be witnessing the beginning of the end of the American era in the Middle East." "The beginning of the end of the American era" has become a global phenomenon under Trump. Trump should learn to shut his mouth and then take a crash course in civics and international politics. Since most folk know he'd fail at both, it is a wasted pursuit.
1
Not a word about our culpability in Saudi war on Yemen and the mass misery that has resulted. Ah. to be a conservative with a clear conscience.
3
Bret L. Stephans analysis is excellent but is he goading Trump to act militarily?
In Stephen's eyes all the heroes are republican, or at least Reagan, and all the fools are Kucinich. Please....
Saudi Arabia is not our friend, it is not our ally, and protecting their kingdom is not in our interests. It is also not our job to promote a revolutionary overthrow in Iran.
It is our job to revitalize America; to rebuild a crumbling infrastructure that republicans (mostly) have allowed to rot; to build an education system for tots through high school that rivals the university system; and to stop putting a price on everything.
If the koch industries and their fellow extraction pirates want their sea lanes protected they should build their own navies with their own money.
I saw a bumper sticker the other day: If you vote for a clown; except a circus.
Don't really know if that refers to Reagan, bush the younger, or the current fake acting republican squatting in our House. But it should refer to all of them.
3
In all of this, where is Jared of Arabia? He is nowhere to be found.
3
How much oil from Canada (a national security threat) has been calculated to assert America's self-sufficiency?
1
Such a shame Jared didn’t get his Middle East peace plan rolled out before this all became a big hot mess.
Surely it could have all been avoided.
Back to the drawing board!
2
Please. No more oil wars, Bret. Thanks.
2
The idea that the US must respond to an attack on Saudi Arabia (in the middle of war Saudi Arabia started) is completely insane.
2
Sometimes you have to think before you act. Sometimes you have to look for good advice, and recognize it if it should accidentally drift in front of you. Sometimes you have to listen to people you don't like.
Sometimes you have to ask why.
Obama did not enter into the Iran agreement because he felt the Iranian government was such a great and deserving bunch of fellows. He entered into it in the hopes that prosperity, education and a robust middle class would force the country into more moderate grounds. People get used to comfort, and start demanding more of it.
And that policy was agreed to, by most countries, because the alternative is war with an enemy that has people and weapons to spare. We could not win in Afghanistan and Iraq - certainly not powerhouses - so what makes war with Iran likely to have anything other than dire consequences? We cannot even figure out how to just leave Afghanistan, and bungled leaving Iraq (although I don't think there was a way to exit gracefully once we entered.)
But we listened to the idiot brigade of hawks, and now we have no moves. We are in check, or possible checkmate.
And the Iranians know that.
1
Trump doctrine?
You mean his mindless tweets that boast of his genius ability to out think and out negotiate and out fight anybody on the planet?
You mean that one?
The one that the republican party genuflects to every morning?
Ok. I get it.
3
Maybe if trump didn’t have such a tiny “stick” in the first place, he wouldn’t have spent his entire life trying to convince the world he has such a “huge, beautiful, tremendous, bigly, the best anyone has ever seen before in history” stick...
But that’s just a part of the problem...
His entire life he’s employed other people to make business decisions for him...
They’d do all the heavy lifting, research, understanding, and tell him why he should chose option “A” or “B”....
He’d come in at the end without understanding squat and using his “hunches” chose whatever they sold him best on.
Mostly it was the stupidest choice.
Even the dumbest presidents at least tried to figure out the situation and make an educated guess...
He has no such interest...
His decisions are based solely on who is pulling his strings at the moment and how it effects his fortunes.
Period.
To assign a higher meaning to his actions or expect more, ignores his entire past, his own words and is just plain pointless.
2
Bret, was the goal of this column to get Trump to bomb someone, anyone? Is there actual real evidence that the attack was Iranian and not anyone else? Finally why should we be attacking someone who attacked Saudi Arabia........when did they become part of NATO? Why would we spend American lives for the kingdom? When did you lean toward Bolton?
2
Always ask: What would Putin want?
Then Blondie's and actions make sense. Not's not the chaos, it's the corruption.
1
Sure, Bret. In three words: Larry, Curly and Moe.
Seriously.
3
Sanctions were good enough to get Obama a deal. We could have built on that to coax Iran into behaving like a normal country but Trump in his blind hatred for anything Obama accomplishes, unilaterally scrapped the deal and started over.
Now we see the consequences.
2
When bullies are backed into a corner (in this case, of Trump’s own making), they often over react. I am terribly concerned about the current situation in the Middle East. Between the thugs in Saudi and the terrorists in Iran, maybe the best thing to do is let them fight each other and stay out entirely. With luck, maybe, like the gingham dog and calico cat, they will destroy each other.
2
The Trump Doctrine is "Trump First. Second and Forever" and foreign policy, like every other issue is reformulated every day based upon Trump's Whim or what some "guy" told him on the phone the night before. So far, internationally, it's "Walk Loudly and do Nothing!!!" This echo's his philosophy of "The Wall." Trump is doing nothing to build anything - alliances, trade treaties, political consensuses, health care. He seems to have abandoned his prior role of "Builder" and limited his role to "Demolition" only. He is compulsively dismantling every action that Obama took. And the federal government is following. The EPA should be renamed the Environmental Destruction Agency ("EDA"). All protections and regulations have been rolled back. No clean water. No clean air. Maybe Trump is planning on bringing back Trump Bottled Water and planning on bottling pure Trump Oxygen. Buy Trump or you die.
And now the Justice Department is more involved with obstructing justice than seeking justice.
This "Potemkin" Presidency should not be able to stand past this next election. However, Republicans will find a way to allow Russia and other countries to subvert our elections, in addition to "Purging" the election rolls - committing election fraud in the name of preventing election fraud.
Oy Vey !!
4
The Iranian Foreign minister said Trump is not a lion but a rabbit. The whole world knows now that Trump is a barking dog that does not bite. No world leader seems to take him seriously not even the North Korean leader, Kim Jong Un.
America has lost its credibility under Trump.
2
The "leaders" of the US have proven over and over that they are hopelessly incompetent at dealing with other governments, especially those for whom war really is a continuous lifestyle. Trump is only different in that he is so stupid he happily gives government secrets to the enemy in his own office, in public view.
And the US "intelligence" agencies have a long and sordid history of incompetence and mis-calculation. They are no help in any conflict, rather exacerbate it thru their sheer ineptitude. The fact is that no US leader has much in the way of intelligence that is useful in dealing with people like the Iranians, or Saudis, or North Koreans who are well versed in court intrigue and internal conflict that allows them to run circles around amateurs like Trump and his court of yes-men brown nosers who couldn't out-maneuver a cow in a field to save their lives.
2
Can anyone fill me in on Robert Dornan and Dennis Kucinich? All I remember is that, decades ago, the latter was known as the "boy mayor" of Cleveland. Is Bret's mentioning these guys another way of saying that our "boy president" is a bully and a craven?
Like all bullies, Mr Trump ups the ante to the brink, and then pulls back at the last moment, afraid of being hurt and of confronting an enemy that won't back down.
He is the ultimate digital warrior...all bluster and bluff within the safety of his twitter feed.
2
A doctrine implies a set of principles, perhaps even some thought going into them. For trump, uneducated, cruel, and ignorant, his only doctrines (and that of his phony "administration") are getting approval and money. As much as opinion writers want a there there, there isn't any with this, uh, person.
2
trump is creating a power vacuum, one that’s ultimately going to be filled by china, but first there’s going to be a lot of killing and chaos caused by his weakness and abdication of responsibility, trump represents the decline of the american hegemony, or “pax americana” there’s going to be a virtual flood of global instability coming
Among our era's more confounding ironies: those who recognize the catastrophic strategic impact of Trump's incompetence, stupidity, weakness, and betrayal of American values are often the same individuals who've learned nothing from 60 years of failed American intervention in Iran, the Middle East, and beyond.
Trump came to office presented with a bad set of choices to manage. Contemptuous of complexity, and interested only in those who "pay with cash," he made those choices radically worse and likely completely unmanageable by anyone.
1
Ah Bret, you take me back. I still miss ole "B1 Bob". His clashes with political opponents were ugly, nasty, and personal. And that's just the Republicans. I remember when he and his opponent for the Republican primary were on Sean Hannity's radio show. The two started tearing into each other like junkyard dogs. Poor Hannity was in the middle trying to restore peace between the two ultra conservatives, constantly saying, "I didn't expect this".
I wonder why B1 Bob never ran for president? From what we know now, he definitely had a shot.
1
At least you get that Trump is a coward. For all his macho talk, he only bluffs, and countries like North Korea, Russia and Iran know it. And the extent of Trump's foreign policy is to reach out to corrupt leaders he can make a deal with. Thus Trump's association with Putin, Bibi and Kim Jong un. No leader in Iran is willing to play ball with Trump's illegalities, so they become the enemy.
1
Sadly, this analysis steers well clear of the first and foremost crucial observation: that unilaterally withdrawing from negotiated, enforceable agreements will inevitably open the door to conflict and war.
Let's be surgically clear: we would not be here except for the ill-advised blunder of Mr. Trump. The strategy of strangling Iran with sanctions to get it to bow down - after abrogating America's solemn treaty commitments for no reason but politically posturing - is now proven to be an utter failure.
The only reason Iran feels it needs to put it's foot on the oil pipeline to the west - by damaging oil tankers and oil refineries - is to remind the world that it can destabilize our economy just as surely as we are disrupting theirs, if we continue down this path.
Trump has shown he is not only criminally incompetent, but still operates with the delusion that he can employ New York real estate sales tactics to negotiate international peace and security with dangerously armed adversaries.
That's like sending the local used car salesman to negotiate a hostage release with Columbian drug lords.
The simple reality is that once you take good faith negotiation off the table, uncontrolled conflict is guaranteed.
3
Saudi Arabia has been engaged in a war in Yemen for three years. If that war spills over into an attack on Saudi soil, why should the US get involved?
Because Saudi oil is a "central pillar of the global economy"?
No, not a good enough reason for me.
3
The Middle East has been a problem for decades. However, this chapter need not have occurred. It has because Trump decided to undo the hard work the Obama administration did in creating an agreement with Iran. I'm amazed that the Iranians stuck to the agreement for as long as they did after Trump pulled us out. This is the result of Trump's America First policy which is as shortsighted as his other "policies". Now we are seeing the results of this. There is an election coming up. If we would like to see some better, more well thought out policies, ones that don't involve impoverishing other nations to make a point, perhaps we shouldn't re-elect Trump.
9/19/2019 1:05pm
4
Bret is right that we don't have many good options available to us now. However, the situation we now face in the Middle East is the result of the lack of foresight and of any coherent long term strategy for the area. Did we really think that Iran would not respond when we withdrew from the Iran Accord, imposed sanctions, supported the Saudi bombing of the Houthi rebels and seemingly gave Saudi Arabia a blank check to do whatever it wanted. This is what the bellicose policy advocated by people like Bret gets us into.
The Iran deal negotiated by Obama was a good first step in lowering the temperature in the Middle East although we also needed to reign in the Saudis who have been even more disruptive in the area than Iran.
3
I am originally Iranian, although living in Europe. I want to bring up a few points:
- Persians used to have empires (e.g. the Achaemenid or Sassanid empires) with long reach over many of the regions, which current Iran is accused of interfering in, or having surrogate forces in. In those distant past eras, Persians were not muslim, and had their own ancient religions (e.g. Zoroastrianism).
- The Arabs conquered the Persian empire. They forced Persians to become Muslim. As opposed to what the Islamic government in Iran claims, Iranians didn't invite Islam with open arms. For two centuries, we suffered, secretly holding onto our past traditions, some of which are still alive today (e.g. Nowruz, our beloved new year celebration).
- Not long after, as Arabs were useless at governing, they used the aid of Iranian vizirs and ministers to practically govern the lands. Power slowly and smoothly returned to the Persian hands, which tells a lot about power of culture over arms and muscles.
- Iranians got revenge over what they endured, by eventually creating their own brand of Shia islam. It was like telling Arabs "OK you forced Islam down our throats, now we are going to beat you at your own game; we are going to be the leaders in the Islamic world".
Now what do you expect me to think of all this. I am secular. Not religious. I am awed and dismayed by the wicked turn Iran's history took. But I am even more dismayed, at simplistic explanations of situations. Context is missing.
1058
@FK Thank you very much for your Iranian history primer. I am familiar to a degree with the outline you summarized but I am still ignorant about the process of Islamization of Persia, in particular the adherence to the Shia faction after the schism. You tickled my interest. I met a substantial number of Iranian students over the years (or children of Iranian immigrants) and I was thrilled to discover that up to a couple of generations ago, their grandparents were still followers of Zoroastrianism, although ostensibly practicing Islamic faith. I have learned about many cases of syncretism in the region, and I find the subject endlessly fascinating. If left to the people, religions could be the common ground for reciprocal understanding instead of ideological warfare.
84
@College prof Many thanks for your comment. Actually thinking through my comment, I realize, there are so many things I left unsaid, including the role of Mongols and subsequently Turks in all this. History is complicated. Hatred often has its roots in a distant past, without either side realizing. By understanding the past, we can get over our grievances, the same way therapy and digging into our individual pasts helps us understand our present problems. I wish for peace between countries. I also wish for a day Iran will have friendlier relations with the rest of the world. I live in Ireland, and if Ireland could turn the table, and with zero natural resources, turn from a poor to a relatively wealthy country by making the right choices and investments, so can Iran. Climate change and renewable energy could be one area where Iran and its regional neighbors could collaborate, because when climate change strikes, it doesn't discriminate between Shia or Sunni.
129
@FK thanks for the education.
34
Bret Stephens is part of the problem. He wrote against the Iran deal constant and was happy when Trump abandoned it. But of course there was no backup plan except a war of choice, just like Iraq. It was always clear that the American people had no interest in another Mid-east war, so it made no sense to pull out of the Iran deal in the first place.
Bret - your chickens have come home to roost.
4
"It’s long been obvious that Saudi Arabia can’t defend itself despite its $68 billion military budget — and that’s probably just as well."
Say what? They can't defend themselves with 1/10 of the U.S. military budget against a single country, whose military budget is not even 1/3 of the theirs? Really?
4
Journalists (well, the REAL ones) tend to be that "reality-based community" that Karl Rove famously slagged way back in 2004.
We've gone from the fictions of the Bush years and the wars in Iraq/Afghanistan to full FICTION ("alternative facts" and the primacy of confirmation bias).
Having a guy who played a successful, abusive "leader" on TV to having him as POTUS means that a substantial number of Americans have totally jumped the shark.
It's not what Trump IS -- it's that he's quotable on all sides of an issue so that anyone can cherry pick the fiction they like out of the word salad.
What he DOES is obscured by the brain freeze induced by an all-out assault on what used to pass for "The Wisdom of the American People".
You can point out the idiocy and weakness -- but, you will be dismissed by those who need to hear you.
118
@Robert Stern
Since they will not listen, we can stop trying to compromise with them and build a coalition of the Left and real middle to beat them in elections.
When the Democrats move to the right, it empowers the Right. That is why we have Trump.
15
It is no accident that the uptick in Iranian-related actions against US allies in the region has come in the wake of Trump’s idiotic, unforced error of withdrawing us from the nuclear agreement that was working. He has now put the United States in a position where there is no good offramp. The Iranians are not going to knuckle under to economic sanctions. Iran is simply more united by sanctions And our European allies have been proven correct in the stupidity of withdrawing from the nuclear agreement. If Trump decides to use military force, well then, that will not end well for anyone. Not our allies in the region. Not our forces. Not our economy. And not Trump’s political future. If Trump waffles, he will simply continue to look weak and feckless. From a National Security point of view, the best we can hope for is that Iranians wait him out and deal with a new president who can actually think clearly about National Security. But we better keep our fingers crossed in the meantime. It’s amateur hour in the White House. And that is dangerous.
190
@Yankee11 It appears that Iran is playing their extremely weak hand, with great skill. This contrasts with Trump's squandering much of the American advantages of overwhelming military and economic power, previously amplified by strong series alliances.
Iran is slowly increasing its uranium enrichment, and will exceed the levels specified in the 2015 Nuclear Agreement. If the 2015 Nuclear Agreement was still intact with American still adhering to it, Iran would not now be increasing its uranium enrichment. World opinion now is mostly that Trumps' withdrawn 2015 Nuclear Agreement and punishing economic sanctions against Iran, have left Iran with little choice now, but to take some action. Trump and others' view that sanctions would force Iran to quickly renegotiate a new deal were very unrealistic and are now putting Trump in a very poor position.
If America's allies were even considering aiding an effort to invade Iran, this makes them less likely to participate in such a potentially costly undertaking. While, Iran's military is no match for even America without any allies, invading and occupying Iran could make the fiasco of the second US-Iraq war look like a picnic. The only way to eliminate Iran's nuclear capability would require forces on the ground. Simply employing air strikes, armed drones and/or missiles could not assure the destruction of the hundreds of well-hidden underground nuclear facilities.
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4272622
6
Doctrine
n. A principle or body of principles presented for acceptance or belief, as by a religious, political, scientific, or philosophic group; dogma.
n. A rule or principle of law, especially when established by precedent.
n. A statement of official government policy, especially in foreign affairs and military strategy.
In other words an overarching philosophy or strategy. Both of which require an intellect and attention span greater than that of a fungus gnat. Neither of which is in residence at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue right now.
Beyond that we should just get out and let the chips fall where they may. The West has been meddling with the Middle East since the Crusades. It's time to let these regimes stand or fall on their own. Maybe even let them draw their own geo-political boundaries for a change.
1
Trump's biggest mistake was to walk away from a treaty that was working just because Barack Obama negotiated it. Now he's imposing counterproductive sanctions, Iran has no reason not to pursue nuclear weapons, and they've got Trump's number as a strategically clueless armchair general.
If this is the end of U.S. involvement in the near east, good! We've done nothing but harm the region and ourselves. Stephens seems to think we should repeat old mistakes and support the "Green Revolution," the way we used a CIA-backed coup to put Reza Pahlevi in power. Remember how well that worked out?
1
Your false assumption is that using military force is a show of strength. The opposite is true. If we bomb Iran, the what? They retaliate. We bomb again. Where does this go? Maybe Hezbollah kills scores of Israelis. The whole Middle East explodes. We have no European allies this time. Strength is in restraint, prudence, and wisdom. Negotiation and dialogue are the only answers.
142
@Dan I agree with your observations on military force. Left out was the lack of Allies of any kind to Trump's view of global strategic policy which is non-existent.
7
@Dan
"Strength is in restraint, prudence, and wisdom."
I agree, but those are three qualities that Trump is completely devoid of.
The expression "Up a creek without a paddle" pertains here. Too bad someone didn't use a paddle more often on the 73 year old child in the Oval Office.
8
Astonishingly, our foreign policy seems crafted for the early years of the postwar, or the cold war era, where American might, and presumably, a sense of American righteousness could be depended upon to maintain global stability in the face of home grown insurgencies, anti business democratic movements, and Russian influence in regional conflicts. The world economy was yet to transform into globalization, and weapons' technologies available to smaller governments were no match for America's military. All of this has changed. Even a limited attack on global energy infrastructure can have profound economic impact, and with modern missile technology widely available, the United States and it's allies are powerless to prevent it. Essentially, a regional conflict with an adversary such as Iran can no longer be prosecuted without suffering unacceptable losses, in lives lost, and economic damage. This is why missile technology has been so embraced by Iran, North Korea, and of course, China. It's a force multiplier that extends the reach of adversaries and imperils US regional forces that could previously remain out of harm's way while conducting offensive military operations. It's time to stop investing in military force that is essentially useless, and time to reassess how to engage other countries that may not have our exclusive interests in mind.
1
Correction: George Washington warned against entangling alliances in his farewell message. Correction: You fail to mention the Trump business dealings with the Saudis.
2
Trump's foreign policy is hung on phrases like "locked and loaded", we could win that war, but it might kill millions of people, we'll see what happens, I received a beautiful letter, and on and on. It gives us such reassurance for world stability, doesn't it? I long for the day when we have a sane and intelligent president.
5
I thought the Trump Doctrine (both for domestic and foreign policy), was to expect the worst and you'll never be disappointed.
2
"We are locked and loaded". "We will impose crushing sanctions." "We will loan them money." This foreign policy by twitter is schizophrenic and shows that Trump has no clue what he is doing. Put someone who believes that chaos is a great negotiating tactic in power and you get chaos, not stability. Give this man another 4 years in power and the terrible war that follows will be our own fault.
3
Saudi Arabia, the nation the spawned 15 of the 9/11 hijackers, is NOT our friend. I say let them defend themselves. And if they can't, that's not our problem. No Americans are going to die to defend them and their oil. And if their destruction upsets the balance of power in the Middle East and upsets the existing world economic order, so be it.
3
Mr. Trump is an untrustworthy liar and willfully ignorant as well. He has alienated U.S. allies and has hinted that NATO nations cannot rely on the United States to meet treaty obligations. He is serving as Vladimir Putin’s surrogate in matters related to eastern Europe and Syria. Mr. Trump has no coherent foreign policy, other than a desire to follow Mr. Putin’s lead and to get a “win” for himself. In the Trump vocabulary a “win” is whatever he says it is, thus he will attempt once again to lie his way out of a difficult situation. Mr. Trump’s word is utterly unreliable in any context. Why would Iranian leaders perceive any credibility in anything Mr. Trump says. Why would anyone with even a hint of intelligence believe anything Mr. Trump says? Of course, House and Senate Republicans, particularly Moscow Mitch, are exempted from critical thinking about anything except how to retain power while stroking the Trump ego, cutting taxes for the wealthy, limiting voting rights people of color, and apologizing to the NRA after the next mass shooting incident.
1
Talk about the Big Muddy... Saudi Arabia is clearly the Big Dustbowl...the place where vision and orientation is lost in an all consuming desert of blazing sun and whipping wind.
Mr Stephens has written the best analysis of the current American situation that I have read. America can not resist meddling in regional power struggles, even if we are dragged into war.
The Middle East conundrum is Saudi Arabia is a weak corrupt government without the demographic element to stand up to foreign powers, but with lots and lots of oil. A golden goose.
So, first Saddam Hussein, and now a Theocratic Iran wishes to harvest that goose. The US doesn't even need the Saudi oil--as it once did--to rule the world. But, the thought of Iran...or Russia...or Turkey...Oh; you get the idea...gaining control of the world's gas station is so terrifying to Washington that American foreign policy rotates around "protecting" Saudi Arabia. Kinda like Saudi internal policy rotates around "protecting" their women.
Obviously the whole situation is an insane construct of Rube Goldberg checks and balances, which includes--but is not limited to--Keeping the Saudi public in the dark, Keeping the American public in the dark, and Pampering a corrupt Saudi Royal family. This construct will topple! Amazed that it hasn't already happened. The question is: Must America go to war--repeatedly--as the inevitable train wreck crashes, in slow motion, one car after another, into the boulders on the train tracks?
Speak loudly and carry a small stick - that's what Stormy said about Trump as well...
3
This was exactly my comment yesterday on the same subject, in slightly different words: "scream at the top of your voice and carry a toothpick" - I modestly believe that my wording was better, and claim precedence.
1
Trump created this crisis by pulling out of the nuclear deal and doubling down on sanctions. Now as Stephens says, the Iranians are calling his bluff and he doesn't know what to do about it. He has always been a bully and the old guy in Tehran knows how to handle a bully -- you stand up to him. But this isn't seventh grade: Trump could start a war that could wreck world oil markets and destabilize the Middle East. Mr. Bluster has blundered his way into a situation that is waaay over his head.
4
"his reluctance to re-establish deterrence with Tehran through a limited military reprisal"
This is a perfect example of what Shirazi and Johnson call "Laundering Imperial Violence Through Anodyne Foreign Policy-Speak".
Just say that he should go to war. Or that you'd like him to kill a few Iranians, or destroy a couple million dollars worth of infrastructure but maybe not enough to actually go to war.
1
Mr Stephens,
I hope you know understand now the error of your violent opposition to the Obama administration nuclear agreement with Iran and the profoundly flawed view that you can make diplomacy by threatening wars that your enemy fear less than you. I believe in your next column you should acknowledge the error of your prior stance when is now obvious that America has been placed between looking weak and ineffective or, having to declare an impossible to win war that the population does not want, to defend a murderous regime that financed the 9/11 attack.
3
The Donald spent his whole life stiffing people he owed money to and suing others to intimidate them.
He has no one to sue now.
If ever there was anyone totally ill suited for the job, we unfortunately have one in the Oval Office. He knows nothing about diplomacy or anything else for that matter. He tweets and speaks without thinking about the ramifications. This self-declared super genius has dragged us down into his swamp as he goes merrily along admiring and aspiring to be a dictator.
Doesn't Congress care where our country is headed.
Maybe that UFO we heard about this morning will swoop down and take our fearless leader up, up and away.
2
“How the US responds to an unprovoked attack...”
A completely absurd premise Mr. Stephens. The Saudis, with the complete backing of the US, have been bombing and killing in Yemen for three years. They are responsible for the targeted killings of thousands of civilians and the creation of the world’s worst humanitarian cries of the past few years. This attack on an oil facility was most assuredly not unprovoked. America’s continued support of the brutal Saudis is the perfect example of what is truly wrong in America. Money trumps morality at every turn.
4
One notes the implicit criticism of the Obama administration. The "Green Movement ... nearly toppled" the Iranian regime? Really? What is needed now is support for a new - apparently hidden - Green Movement, the way the Reagan administration supported Solidarity in Poland? Really? No mention here of the Obama administration's signal achievement in orchestrating the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action - the "Iran nuclear deal" - which the NYT supported editorially, and which the EU, UN, and almost all countries supported but which Trump, Netanyahu and their fans traduced! Destroying that deal is what has isolated Trump, and his media fans should accept some responsibility.
2
The Trump Doctrine is trying to figure out how to monetize the Presidency and stay out of jail. And if you can promote a little racism, xenophobia and misogyny, so much the better.
4
Trump has no rational coherence about anything. Ever. And I mean ever. Hence this column is pointless.
That said, highest compliments to Mr. Stephens for the unforgettable, truly great phrase used to describe Mr. O'Brien on his becoming Trump's newest national security adviser: "With the tremulous optimism of a new bride joining Henry VIII at the altar."
Yup, it's just a matter of time before Trump lops off his poor little head.
3
He doesnt want to further destabilize the Middle East like Bush, Obama and Hillary did, by wars and regime change-very simple.
Does anyone wonder if Iran considers Trump's voiding our agreement with them and then placing sanctions on Iran as an act of war?
I wonder if Obama had not made Trump feel so foolish if Trump would not be so keen on reversing the good things that Obama did?
2
If Teddy Roosevelt's doctrine was "speak softly and carry a big stick," Trump's is "bluster loudly to cover a weak hand."
1
2016, Wanted an uneducated, narcissist, and "reality TV" personality to benefit the Republican leadership and the Global Oligarchy partners. Must be able to bluster without muster. Must lack the ability to comprehend real-time geopolitical complexities, must be incompetent and inept. Corruptibility a must!
1
In the aftermath of 9/11, Iran offered an alliance to the US, which the Bush administration shortsightedly rejected. Instead, they and subsequent administrations chose to put all our eggs in the Saudi basket, leading us to this absurd situation where the US is the de facto military force for a corrupt and murderous absolute monarchy. If we had accepted the Iran offer back then the world would be a safer place today.
8
Pulling the U.S. out of international agreements isn't a strategy. It's ideological and mostly incompetent. The reason Trump fired Bolton is that he had no understanding of diplomacy and no core beliefs about foreign affairs at the time he hired him. It's a dangerous time for America and the party of Ike arew a bunch of scardy cats afraid of their top dog. Who would have thought?
The American We are the only boss here attitude will get America nowhere.
1
Perhaps our president is beginning to understand the price he hast to pay for being MBS client. He has danced and giggled, but now he must pay the piper.
This well written, well reasoned piece about Trump’s Iranian policy ignores his abandonment of the nuclear treaty and is, therefore, worthless.
2
A truly strong and intelligent leader wouldn't have to decide whether or not to bomb Iran. He would have remained in the deal Obama and our allies had negotiated with Iran and would have continued to build on it.
Trump may be a fool. But so, I'm afraid, are war hawks like Stephens who have been trying to get us into a war with Iran ever since they got us into the war with Iraq.
2
it was Washington who warned against entangling alliances
@michael cullen
I STAND CORRECTED. IT WAS JEFFERSON
Iran wants to become the next Empire. Iran is a terrorist country - it can import (or has already) terrorism to the US and cause pain right here. Are we really ready for war? Isolationists are totally blind to realities of 21st century Globe. The Middle east is defiantly NOT the Mid West... It functions and think in a "Middle East Mode". It will take a clever person in USA to run this country, and move the world into a Real New Ara.
As far as "appropriate responses" go, I'm fairly sure that we have some good enough white hat hackers out there who could cause something interesting to happen without causing loss of life--how about taking down Teheran's power grid for a few hours?--and it would even have plausible deniability (heh heh).
But apparently Trump and the Operation Throbbing Manhood types that still suffuse the Republican Party don't have that degree of subtlety or sophistication.
2
Well which is it? Does the Times and all the other Trump critics want us to attack Iran or not?
They are all so quick to criticize Trump for not attacking, but one would have to wonder what they would all say if he DID attack?
Anyone want to lay a bet that the headlines we read - "See, we told you so, Trump is getting us into another war".
And then come the first and every servicemen who dies, the media will say Trump has blood on his hands?
"Blood for Oil" would be plastered on every news page.
And thats why this media has lost all credibility. 2 minutes of thought, and one can see why no matter what Trump does, this media will find some way to bash him. Meanwhile, the economy is doing great. No recession, no collusion, no obstruction (yeah, he was justified in firing Comey).
Pretty soon, the next narrative is going to be justifying how we could afford all of Liz Warrens free stuff.
One aspect of this attack that puzzles me is how half of Saudi Arabia's oil production was knocked out by the attack and how the world oil market was upended by it. With prices for gasoline in America going up by as much as 25%. Then, three days later, poof. Saudi oil production is back to capacity. How can that be? If half your car was destroyed on Friday and you were back driving it to work on Monday, where is the crisis exactly? And why is the price of gasoline in America, which is totally self reliant oil wise, now 'only going to rise by 20% if supply has been reestablished? Here's what I think should happen. Send the proper message to the Iranian people that there is a better way. Have drones fly over the population centers and drop leaflets suggesting that if they overthrow the current regime, the future looks much brighter for them. On the pamphlets would be a lovely, computer created depictions of Trump Resort and Spa and Kushnerworld. You know exactly what oppressed citizens all over the world are pining for. Tensions would drop immediately. And then a few days later, planes would fly over Iran dropping orange, not red, MIGA hats. Make Iran Great Again. Followed a few weeks later by a Trump rally with the man himself. The new Ayatollah. And think of all those new American tourists in their red hats bringing their American dollars into Iran. It just boggles the mind.
Last week, Brett Stephens - writing about the defenestration of John Bolton -allowed that he himself agreed with the latter's "fervent opposition to the Iran nuclear deal". Interesting choice of modifier; Fervent relates to emotions, to heat, passion, NOT to considered down-the-road judgement. So yes, Washington's alternatives to yet another war in the Mid-East are looking very limited. And trashing the Iran nuclear deal looks more and more like a people playing checkers on the world chess board. Speaking about emotions, some folk outside the USA are pining for the good old days when NY Times columnists complained about Obama's cerebral ways.
This passes for strategic thinking in Washington: brilliant checkers' moves on the world chess board
2
Trumps doctrine: If they don't have a beautiful location for his next hotel or billions to grow his empire after he's out - forget about them!
And you have to admire the chutzpah of those Iranians. Kind of like us in a more hungry, less bloated, time. Maybe we could get some of that can do energy back if we let them immigrate here.
Oh, that's right - they can't...
In my opinion this is all part of the strategy to re-elect Trump. Go to war with Iran, then when the presidential election rolls around gullible people will put him back in office saying "But we can't change horses midstream." I worked for W
1
"How the U.S. responds to an unprovoked attack on one of the central pillars of the global economy"--How can this attack be considered "unprovoked ", when the Ssudis have been bombing Yemen against the Houthis for years. Damaging to the world economy, yes, but "unprovoked?"
9
"How the U.S. responds to an unprovoked attack on one of the central pillars of the global economy is a test of American leadership. The consequences of failure will be felt for years."
I would just wonder in light of the brutal civil war in Yemen, and Saudi Arabia's recent appalling behaviour at home and abroad, how an attack like this can be described as "unprovoked".
275
“It’s long been obvious that Saudi Arabia can’t defend itself despite its $68 billion military budget — and that’s probably just as well.”
Further implications:
While this may be true about the Saudis, it is also obvious that the they are eager to fight the Iranians to the last American soldier, sailor and airman.
Trump wants to avoid military conflict because of his concern about how it will affect his chances of re-election. I have no doubt that if public opinion demanded military action our flip-flopping President would immediately set aside his long held opposition to America’s military involvement in the Middle East.
Trump has no foreign policy. He makes it up as he goes.
The Iranians know all of this and they also know that Trump cannot be counted on to negotiate in good faith.
Finally, the people who could have really helped Trump negotiate these trouble times are long gone from the administration,
275
@Michael Roush Sanctions and any number of other financial and economic pressures should be the weapons of choice - not a a military task force ready to strike. Only when used does the "big stick" theory work, and, more often than not in recent history, when it is used it leads to needless death, destruction, an unending presence, and an embarrassing exit.
5
@Romeo Salta
Your theory is not so bad but the application here is that the U.S. is the aggressor against Iran by imposing an economic embargo against international law and for no justifiable reason.
6
I was with Bret Stephens up until reading this amazing declaration: "Those who don’t like Saudi Arabia as it is will like it even less when it’s gone."
There's no easy way to stop being the world's policeman. There's no easy way to extricate our country from the grip of corrupt and misoygnistic Arab leaders whose main appeal to our sitting president is how much they're willing to "pay in cash."
At some point, one has to say enough, come what may. If we're not going to fight for our own defense or human rights among our enemies --decidedly not in the era of Trump--we shoudn't fight at all.
The Saudi-American relationship, driven by oil, is a costly one to maintain. If this president has his eye on his own election, he'll do anything he can to avoid losing even one American life in defense of a corrupt regime whose demands keep getting higher.
232
@ChristineMcM
The unfortunate reality is that if the US stops being the worlds policeman it will leave a dangerous void. No one else has the capability or the will to do it. We have unfortunately learned and paid a terrible price in blood and treasure when we do not intervene and let international conflicts escalate. No matter what you may think, it will eventually reach our shores and by that time the intervention will cost much more.
10
@ChristineMcM
I think you're correct that a key to this situation can be found in the wealth wielded by the Saudis, but it's not just Trump.
If the current ruling family is overthrown, it will come as a big shock to the American people. We won't know what to do.
There are a lot of politicians and corporate "people" who have questionable relationships with the the House of Saud. They will also be confused.
It's quite possible, even likely, that the "winner" in the conflict might be even more ruthless and despotic. It's likely that wealth will pass to different hands, but unlikely that those hands will be clean.
Aligning with the Saudis in the current environment is dangerous. Abandoning any commitment to human rights is part of it, but seeing the Saudis as the good guys and the Iranians as the bad guys is equally problematic.
Oil diplomacy is changing. We have increased our national production. Russia depends on oil to support a sick economy. Venezuela is a mess. The oil barons face an uncertain future. It takes sophistication to understand these complexities and that is something the Trump administration lacks.
28
@ChristineMcM
Wow - I too stopped in my tracks on that one ... great comment, totally agree.
"Might be worse" ... tell that to the women of SA.
19
One way or another, Trump appears determined to see what his approval rating is with gas at six or seven dollars a gallon. Anybody think he will still break thirty percent?
3
Trump is clearly not any kind of leader, but the house of Saud is feckless and corrupt and has been for decades, their fall is a historical certainty. So we should prepare for a world where the balance of power shifts away from Saudia Arabia. If the world gets its act together and does something about climate change, the oil economy is going to be severely impacted and the strategic importance of the region as a whole will diminish.
437
@John Wallis Well said!!
6
"Quasi-isolationists on the left"? Are you referring to those people on the left who opposed the war in Iraq? I can't think of any other 'isolationist' tendencies on the left, unless it's a general desire to end the generations long war in Afghanistan -- both engendered through disinformation and outright lies by G.W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, et al.
The vast majority of isolationist sentiment in the United States is carried on the right, where it is believed the United States is being played for a patsy by the entire world -- despite the fact that the United States is in fact incredibly wealthy, maintains the most fearsome and potent military in the world and in fact consumes more material per capita than any other nation on Earth -- all despite non-isolationist policies. To put it bluntly: it isn't the left that thinks we should leave the UN, curtail legal immigration, or -- the favorite pipe dream of America Firsters: go it alone.
I always like your columns Mr. Stephens, even if I rarely agree with your conclusions. But in this case, I have to take exception with erecting a group that doesn't really exist on the left. It's a straw man which obscures one basic difference between the left and right: The left reaches out. The right pulls back.
It applies to government, diplomacy, international affairs, social welfare, environment, infrastructure and multiculturalism, to name a few.
It's not a thing on the left.
574
@Art Likely
I agree with a lot of what you say, but I think divisions between right and left are part of the media's narrative and generally distort reality.
International relations are complex. Is it a relic of the Cold War that we want to divide into right and left?
Is the House of Saud on the right or the left? Is Iran on the right or the left?
15
@Betsy S Agree with the media point. Amazing to see the election process and the different ideas of the candidates reduced to a game show.
11
@Art Likely
Well said!
11
Odd that Bret doesn't mention the major role in putting us into these dangerous straits by Trump unilaterally pulling out of the Iran deal. Whatever one thought of Obama's major foreign policy achievement ( I thought it potentially a big step in the right direction long term wise) was there ever any reason to think Donald was up to the serious work recalibrating an actual strategy entailed? As for support from our European allies or any sort of coalition it isn't all that easy to unburn bridges. America first may end up meaning America alone.
901
@Donnie. It’s not odd at all that Stephens didn’t mention Trump’s leaving the Iranian nuclear agreement..he praised it when Trump made the decision...it was supposedly a bad deal that the Iranians would never live up to. Wonder where we would be now if a rational actor had become President and kept us in the deal? Sigh we’ll never know...
89
@Pragmatic Of course, I meant the "odd" sarcastically. I usually find myself respecting Mr. Stevens even while disagreeing with him almost completely but I thought his argument on the wisdom of breaking the deal unilaterally absurd at the time.
21
@Donny and Pragmatic What Bret and his fellow conservatives don't seem to realize is that Obama sowed the seeds of regime change in a fairly low key fashion. Iran has a young population, they all have cellphones and satellite dishes abound. They know how we in the west live and want to be part of it. By reducing sanctions, opening trade with Iran the regime would have eventually moderated. After all, the ruling class would have benefited the most and once the goodies started flowing they too would have been reluctant to give them up and the west would have made money in the process. That's what intelligent long term thinking looks like rather than the childish instant gratification of the chickenhawks.
51
Every year the Senate has a reading of George Washington's Farewell Address and every year only a few Senator's show up.
If they would show up, or at least read it over and over (it is on Senate.gov), maybe they'll seriously Washington's advice on foreign entanglements. He warns about them again and again.
One is:
"Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence
on the other."
9
Hence the consequences of foolishly voting for a rank amateur for President. Those Trump rally attendees ought to read this and ponder the results of their actions and the sustained damage done to this nation and its allies. Their need to send "a protest message" against the Washington establishment by voting for the most manifestly unqualified and proudly ignorant individual ever to hold the office has a real world price to pay. The cowardice of the Republican Party to step up and curb Trump's insanity for fear his mob of supporters will go against them in a primary at some later date is a shocking example of hypocrisy. The Red State voters have brought this calamity down upon the nation and will be forever damned by history for their actions. Some patriots! They should be ashamed!
22
@Joe
"Those Trump rally attendees ought to read"
But then how could Spanky be re-elected?
1
Our "Village Idiot" has now placed himself in the preverbal rock or a hard place.
Damned if he spends American blood and resources by declaring war on Iran in order to protect the rotten MBS and his gang of thugs,
or
Damned by his cozy hardliners and his peanut gallery of racist Rubes if he doesn't.
Maybe he'll seek advise from his brilliant presidential advisers Ivanka or Kellyanne?
This has to be someone else fault!
19
Except I would say (fourth line) 'Half locked and half cocked.." since little he says has any conviction or permanence.
4
"Iran’s increasingly bellicose behavior is less of a response to U.S. economic pressure than it is an assessment of U.S. strategic will."
****
It's apparent that Bret knows Saudi Arabia is near Iran, but he just can't grasp how the two countries could have any relationship without U.S. involvement. Most of Iran's actions are part of the Saudi-Iranian relationship system. The enmity between them is part of a long history. The US is an annoying blip on their screens.
I mean, the United States already murdered one Iranian leader in cold blood without repercussions, and he was democratically elected. The Iranians are probably waiting for us to do it again.
1
A war hawk making our plans. Is the NYT proposing a war with Iran? Did I read that right? An erudite idiot is still an idiot.
3
"Speak loudly and carry a small stick"
What are you Bret, the Ann Coulter of the NY Times? Don't threaten Trump's manhood, or he will pull out all stops to demonstrate otherwise, with no concern about the consequences of his decision on anyone.
Do you want to go to war with Iran? Then call him weak on Iran (as the war hawks are doing) and imply that Trump's posturing is a big charade (which it is), then it could well be "off to war we go."
Remember when Trump said he would probably agree not to shut down the government? Then Coulter and the red-state army said he should have demanded the Wall and was weak. A Fox News star said keeping the government open was a gift to the Democrats. Bam! Trump shuts down the government just for spite to prove his power and strength.
Decision-making is not one of Trump's strengths. As we have seen repeatedly, Trump impulsively blasts off with a definitely definitive decision, only to backpedal, reverse it, then say "We will see..." Whomever was the last person in the room telling Donald what to do has the advantage.
But call Trump weak, and he will prove you wrong, by either (a) pulling back from doing the right thing, or (b) rushing in to do the wrong thing.
Yes we know Trump yells loudly and carries a small stick. But shh! Don't tell the world the Emperor he has no clothes, or there could literally be hell to pay.
The Trump Doctrine is just Trump, and that is a terrible problem for us, the world, and the planet.
7
@PB
My thoughts exactly. Just smile and nod, feed him a cheeseburger and wait for his attention to wander elsewhere.
1
Half-cocked.
Anyone who is a strategic thinker would have left the Iran deal in place and then quietly worked to improve it.
American voters are reaping what we have sowed.
10
Another meaningless article by a writer for the Times.
It's pathetic that you guys root against your own country, but at least you're predictable, and that makes you ineffectual and harmless.
You failed in your attempt to push Hillary into office in 2016, and I'm sure you haven't yet figured out why.
1
There is no Trump doctrine.
Just Trump, his swamp, and his swamp creatures, mining as much corruption for their personal, financial gains, as possible. Trump will pardon all of them.
They could care less about the rest of us, and they have continually shown it!
When are the rest of us gonna say, "We're mad as hell, and we're not gonna take it any more!"
4
Trump is a LIAR. His only 'doctrine' is What's in it for ME? Not the nation, country, society or government. ME. Will Trump get more ratings, votes or money. ME. ME. ME.
Oh, and his hatred of all things Obama drive his desire for retribution and humiliation of all things Obama. Consequences be damned.
4
Perhaps his bone spurs are acting up again and clouding his brilliant judgement. Iran will become a nuclear nation because of Trump. Then what Bret, is Israel going to order a first strike nuclear attack? If the US really wants peace with Iran this isn’t the path. An open apology from a sitting US president for CIA interference in their elections could be start. Regime change with threats or war, don’t work so well with the ME. If we spent the same amount of our treasure on renewable energy instead of war, we wouldn’t need that damn oil. How many trillions have we wasted since 1945, how many more will it take. It’s a failed strategy like the conservative drug war.
6
"Those who don’t like Saudi Arabia as it is will like it even less when it’s gone."
Ah, the drumbeats are for war are quickening. Logic and evidence be damned. We recently learned three Saudis with government ties were involved in planning the attacks on 9/11. We witnessed the Bin Ladn family evacuated from the US by the Bush family shortly after the attacks when all foreign and domestic flights were canceled. We did nothing when the Saudis butchered a US-based journalist.
No, I won't miss the Saudis when they are gone.
We've been to this circus before. In Vietnam with a trumped-up attack on a US naval vessel in the Gulf of Tonkin. 65,000 dead US soldiers. In Iraq with a similar ruse involving concrete evidence of Sadaam's amassing a huge cache of (non-existent) weapons of mass destruction. Thousands of dead US soldiers and hundreds of thousands of dead and maimed Iraqis.
The Iranians are not nice people. They are a threat to the stability of the region and ultimately to the world. The Saudis, likewise. Like, Sadaam, the Iranian regime was contained under the international pact engineered by consensus with US leadership. War is not inevitable, it is a choice extending beyond US interests. And as we have seen, in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan, military intervention by the world's most powerful military is not nearly as effective in reality as it is on paper.
4
Trump is so transparent, everyone including Putin, Kim Jong Un, the Iranians, the Taliban, Recep Erdogan, and, in fact, the entire world, see Trump for what he is, all bark and no bite.
Sadly, after 73 years of BSing his way through life, he believes his own BS that he can "make a deal" with world leaders, and doesn't need the advice of people who have studied our enemies for years, i.e., the State Department and the DoD.
Go it alone is a fool's errand. And yes, not only should the Saudi be very, very afraid, but so should the U.S.
3
Read "Guilty Men" by "Cato", the account of how refusal to face the facts led Britain to appeasement, and to nearly losing the Second World War. We seem to be following a similar script, grovelling after each act of aggression by Iran and pretending there is no threat.
Iran isn't as powerful or dangerous as Germany was, but our moral disarmament and refusal to recognize reality resemble Britain's.
1
I am afraid that I agree. I wish I did not.
Is poking Iran about addressing terrorism, or because conflict raises oil prices helping Russia and the fracking industry?
Is support of Saudi Arabia important in balancing the power in the Middle East or done because they spend so much money at Trump properties? Etc.
Trump's constant lying is devastating to national security because he'll never get majority support from Americans to take tough action because they distrust his every word and every motivation.
4
It is not in America's interest to intervene in the Middle East where bellicose factions have been fighting for centuries over land and resources. When the West needed their oil, we tried to impose our will on people who will always be at war with one another. With near totally energy independence we must stop fighting the losing battle of being the world's police force. The United States should use diplomacy and humanitarian aid to help cool the passions that lead to conflict. Military intervention is unwise and unwarranted.
2
Iran and Saudi Arabia are at war and have been for years (Yemen). It was foreseeable that Iran would take the war to Saudi territory. From Iran's point of view, it was a reasonable attack because the American public will not support another war in the region, especially on behalf of a Saudi monarchy that is largely viewed as barbaric. Trump's abrogation of the treaty gave Iran a huge boost to take such an action and more.
6
Saudi Arabia cannot defend itself against Iran.
No matter how many billions of dollars wort of American weapons they have, they don’t know how to use them.
There are reportedly approximately 70,000 Pakistani servicemen serving in the Military of Saudi Arabia. They are the only capable
servicemen there.
Every fighter pilot in their air force is a Pakistani
Without US support, Iran would overrun Saudi Arabia in six days.
There is no option other than Saudi Arabia and Iran sit down and sort this out. Let Saudi Arabia ask Trump to lift the sanctions, (to save face for Trump). Let Saudi Arabia cease their pounding of Yemen. Let the Europeans work out a new deal with Iran, and let Trump take credit for it.
6
Sanctions and any number of other financial and economic pressures should be the weapons of choice - not a a military task force ready to strike. Only when used does the "big stick" theory work, and, more often than not in recent history, when it is used it leads to needless death, destruction, an unending presence, and an embarrassing exit.
1
"We the People" already failed a truly, critical test of American leadership, in November 2016. And for that, the "consequences of failure will be felt for years."
9
Iran knows us better than we know Iran and Khamenei knows Trump better than Trump even knows how to spell Khamenei's name.
Trump is very transparent. Anything that pops into his brain comes out of his mouth. Everyone knows that he does not want to get into a shooting war with anyone. His base won't stand it and Trump has said as much. So there is no worry in Tehran or anywhere else that anything they could do as provocation would get Trump to commit to deploying American Armed Forces anywhere.
That debilitates diplomacy because most diplomacy works on the concept of sticks and carrots.
Trump does not want to be sanctions for his bad behavior and so, by transference, he does not want to sanction anyone else for their bad behavior. Now he does economic sanctions, but none of these characters, who have been under economic sanctions since 1979 have any fear nor are they particularly deterred by unilateral economic sanctions.
Trump forgets that the JCPOA came about because of multilateral comprehensive sanctions that we were able to impose by diplomatic means and the efforts of, yes, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Netanyahu and the John Bolton's of the world were upset with Obama because under that type of sanction, he did not extract more from Iran than just the suspension of the nuclear program. They wanted more. Obama saw that linkage of the nuclear issue with the other issues could jeopardize the entire agreement, so it was limited
7
Trump's approach also involves the art of the flip-flop. Wait five minutes and he'll contradict himself.
3
Mr. Stephens, what would you do if you were in Iran's shoes? The US has imposed draconian economic sanctions and has almost completely surrounded Iran with US troops. Would you expect Iran to sit idly by while the US mulls invasion?
So it should come as no surprise that Iran has launched these attacks.
This whole situation is of Trump's making by abrogating the treaty and surrounding Iran with US troops.
Also, what if another attack on Saudi Arabia occurs? How will the US react? Has anyone in this administration brought this up to the President or are they all afraid to ask Trump about this? The lack of foresight and coherent policy in this administration is appalling. We seem to be going from pillar to post on this one as well as many other foreign policy questions.
12
Trump is really a classic bully - he talks loudly, makes a lot of threats, but when actually confronted tends to back down. He is out of his element. That being said, I have no desire for the U.S. to get involved with another war in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia and Iran have been fighting proxy wars for years. The GOP and Conservatives ripped President Obama for not getting engaged in Syria. They seem oddly silent and complacent about Trump's actions. External forces are not going to change the internal political situation in Iran. While the U.S. and other nations could possibly give some clandestine support to those who oppose the current regime, it will take another Revolution in that country to put in place another government. We have spent trillions of dollars in Middle Eastern adventures over the decades, and I'm not entirely sure what has been gained. Given the fact Trump has alienated our traditional allies, I doubt the U.S. really has any leverage at this point to gather a coalition to evaluate the confront the situation. We backed out of the JCOP. And by the way, to Mr. Sports Medicine, fracking took off under Mr. Obama.
6
In an article about Afghanistan this morning a suicide bomber in one part of the country and American drones in another part of the country killed some number of people. In a matter of fact manner it was mentioned that American and Afghan forces had killed a larger number of people this year than the Taliban, not unlike the score of a football game.
As Trump tries to starve Iran into a deal after destroying a deal that was working in order to spotlight his own deal making talents, what he demonstrates is his complete and utter disregard for human life except, of course, his own.
As a country ,we are told, we have achieved energy independence, but what does that really mean? From whom are we independent? All of the drug companies that have a presence in this country received the Tax Reduction, but still charge the citizens of this country more than double what the rest of the world pays. If the Saudi attack reduces the world supply of oil by 20% are we protected because we have enough? Only if you have enough money to pay the higher price that has come. There is enough for the needy, but not for the greedy. That's who we need protection from , but there is no protection on the horizon, only the threat of war and something worse.
11
Ah, yes, sigh of relief, we can rest assured that trump has some sort of "doctrine" that will take care of the Iranian crisis. Almost like a president might.
This crisis that trump created all by himself by cancelling all things Obama and pulling out of the Iranian nuclear deal, then imposing strangling sanctions on Iran, and snuggling up to MBS.
Having a doctrine assumes trump has made some sort of decision about something. It assumes that he has weighed circumstances against some stated principle of his government's policy. About something.
Can you honestly envision, even a died-in-the-wool republican who thinks he's wonderful, trump actually thinking about anything? With those lizard lids wide open, quietly reflecting on anything? I can't.
It seems he only reacts to what he's most recently seen on Fox. So, to find trump's "doctrine" check with the prepaid, willfully-ignorant Fox characters. It's all just tee-vee, but in this case, it's a program without a script let alone anything so lofty as a doctrine.
10
I'm not quite sure what point Bret Stephens is trying to make here. Why should the US respond at all to an "unprovoked" (sic) attack on Saudi Arabia? Not a single mention of Yemen and the absolute misery that Saudi Arabia is causing there. Incredible. Does Mr Stephens think the US should attack Iran? Is that what he is suggesting? Then he should come out and say it.
9
Second only to the malevolent incompetence of Donald Trump is that of hawkish pundits such as Mr. Stephens. What is he calling for?
The Iranian democrats and dissidents, such as the Green Movement, are honorable, courageous, and admirable. Help from Washington, which has been meddling in Iran since the 1953 coup against Muhammad Mossadegh, a democrat who had nationalized the Anglo-Persian Oil Company, would be the kiss of death, as it would be in the United States for a politician to have ties to Russia. Oh, wait. One can say on Iranians' behalf that they have more pride.
This is a crisis of Trump's making, thanks to his extremely foolish abrogation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, aka the nuclear deal, which all the other signatories urged us to uphold. There is no military solution, and the route to eventual democratization lies through greater trade, not "maximum pressure."
Neoconservatism is intellectually bankrupt and does not deserve a place in the paper of record.
7
Mr Stephens,
Don't use your brains or over analyze, that's what teh GOP and Trump wants.
They have simple doctrine..(it's not even about winning)
Lie and create fights among others; and Take all the wealth they can from others.
5
The current occupant of the White House as a Dornan-Kucinich hybrid? Mr. Stephens must dislike this guy as much as I do! Nevertheless, some good points are made about the folly of only pretending to be strong and resolute, namely, what happens when his bluff is called?
2
No need to disparage Dennis Kucinich or his ideas. He was ahead of his time.
3
Instead of spending 760 billion on defense we should be spending it on eliminating the need for fossil fuels. We would make the Mideast irrelevant , save the planet from killing itself, and btw bankrupt Texas and hydrocarbon supporters of the GOP.
7
Bret, evidence. There is no good public evidence of Iran’s involvement in any of the incidents you mention. And yet you seem to think we should be taking military action—killing people—without such evidence. Most of us learned from Iraq and the WMD debacle. You apparently have not.
7
As repressive and trouble-making as they are, the Saudis have us over a barrel: The world still wants and needs their oil.
That's realpolitik and, yes, it stinks.
We can drop them like a bad habit, of course, but we may be cutting off our nose to spite their face.
I see no happy option here.
(Why can't things just be like a Clint Eastwood movie, where bad guys eat it and good guys live happily everafter!)
@Jim Muncy
The world may currently need Saudi oil but the United States no longer does. If even one half of the money we spend to defend the oil supply for the rest of the world was used to build currently viable renewable energy production, other nations would not need antiquated fossil fuels either.
2
@Bill
Thanks for info. I agree and wish we would take up your idea, but first we have to invade Iran and start another endless war. Priorities, you know.
1
You’ve put your finger on a key reason people need stories.
Trump is at his very center a coward. He knows it. That's why the bluster. He ducked the Vietnam War. Yet acts like a belligerent general and wants military parades. He picks on those weaker, but is intimated and backs down from those who stand up to him. The world's figured him out
How very sad that a large portion of this country hasn't. Then again, when you think about the regions that support him the most, especially the South, they are full of phony bravado too and tend to pick on the less fortunate or weaker, African-Americans, immigrants, women. Is there a state in the country more phony tough than Texas?
During the Civil War, the South used to brag that one Confederate soldier was worth two or three Union men. Then they met the armies of U.S. Grant and William Tecumseh Sherman.
The region hasn't changed that much and they have found their avatar.
8
@History Guy
Hmmmmm........
Gee, you Republicans should have supported the nuclear deal President Obama and our European allies secured with Iran. It was much better than all of this Bibbified Trumpism. And face it. Donald Trump's policies are exactly what the Republicans have been calling for: break the deal, swagger more, and impose sanctions again. Now you know: your national security policies don't work--unless, of course, you actually do want to start a war with Iran.
8
No, no. Trump speaks loudly and carries two sticks; the small one for our enemies and the big one for his friends who are always left feeling he did stick it to them.
2
Funny that there was an alternative that Mr Stephens decried when BLOATUS (biggest liar of all time) ascended. He could have stayed in the nuclear deal and negotiated from within and just perhaps reduced Iran’s malevolent messing in the region while bringing it back to the community of nations. Couldn’t have hurt to try, especially remembering that Trump is the master negotiator, the ace of aces! But as I remember, Stephens was among those cheering our reneging on our word and betraying our co-signers!
7
What does Putin want him to do? That is likely his doctrine.
4
Donald Trump has no strategy. There is no 3D chess. There are no deeper thoughts. The only two things Donald Trump ever thinks about are:
A) Will it hurt someone if I do this?
B) I am awesome!
And that’s it. Donald Trump is the textbook case for extreme narcissistic personality disorder. Everyone can see it plain as day. The man ordered his underlings to alter a hurricane map with a sharpie and then threatened to fire anyone who spoke out.
Conservatives like Bret Stephens who still defend Trump as a normal politician are doing severe damage to the United States. I think they know they are too. They either don’t care, or like Trump, they enjoy inflicting that damage.
5
Mr. Stephens, this argument will be worth considering if you clarify "unprovoked" by specifying the attacker: better writing, please!
2
Wasn't it Washington, not Jefferson, who warned against entangling alliances?
3
@James Levy
I haven't read Jefferson lately, but I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't offer similar advice. You can find Washington's Farewell Address at senate.gov.
"Those who don’t like Saudi Arabia as it is will like it even less when it’s gone."
How long have we been a slave to Saudi oil? Much too long I suppose, just imagine if we weren't. Bret would not be writing an article about the Mideast, probably something about too many solar panels cluttering up ropf tops in Manhattan.
Wean ourselves off oil, and our never-ending problems in the Mideast will disappear.
3
Trump’s dilemma is directly related to the ignorance he displayed by pulling out of the Iran nuclear deal.
4
Trump has his own goals and strategies in negotiating with Iran. He has his eyes focused on the ball - a better nuclear deal. And unless the military strike you call for is overwhelming, you can expect Iran to retaliate against the Saudis as well as US interests. Where does that leave things?
More oil fields and infrastructure destroyed. The world economy damaged. How is that in our interest?
Trump has shown that he is capable of using the US military to act decisively - see ISIS. But his weapon of choice is economic. And it's not like he has pulled the military out of the region. The US can act militarily against Iran at any time of its choosing. Within minutes. And decisively.
Iran is looking for your predictable response. Showing patience with both Iran and NK works to the USA's advantage. As time passes economic constrictions bite further. And his economic olive branch to both regimes gains credibility.
Also bear in mind that Iran has been very careful not to harm an American. I think they understand his line-in-the-sand.
Lastly: beware the Trump hater - that would be you Bret - giving Trump advice.
@Dred
You are giving Trump far too much credit as being a rational human being with the best interests of our country at heart. He is not and does not.
7
@Dred If Trump wants "a better nuclear deal" with Iran, why isn't he negotiating one? If that was the goal, why not come out in public and talk about specific shortcomings of the previous treaty and talk about what needs to be done to fix them?
Trump trashed the treaty with Iran because he has a selfish obsession with overturning everything Barack Obama achieved. He did so over the objection of every other nation that was party to the treaty. Those nations objected because they knew the treaty was working, and because they knew Trump had no better alternative.
Trump is the master of "the art of no deal." It's easy to trash an existing treaty. Much harder to replace it with something better.
324
@Joe M.
Would be nice if every discussion on the current Iran situation began with "because Trump pulled out of the multilateral treaty"
Don't forget the importance of Bibi , Israel and arms sales in the region
3
"with the tremulous optimism of a new bride joining Henry VIII at the altar" -- great line about the likely mental state of Robert O'Brien.
But let's face it: the "bad behavior" of Iran has escalated dramatically since the Trump sanctions. He has boxed himself into a corner that is the direct result of his rhetorical excesses and his dumb (there is no other word for it) insistence on applying New York real estate tactics to international affairs. If the Middle East goes up in flames, he will bear a lot of the blame.
3
I must correct you, Bret: "The first implication is that..." abandoning the agreements Obama (and everybody else) made with Iran was a mistake. Or maybe the first implication is that the electoral college, supposedly put in place to prevent the election of an unqualified rabble-rouser, has completely failed us.
The second implication is that Trump had, and still has, no idea what he is doing beyond putting on a show.
He's trying to bluff his way out of the situation he unwittingly created, but the second fact (or "implication") prevents him from being able to negotiate with anyone. That Trump spent the weekend playing golf, waiting for the Saudis to tell him what to do, is pretty pathetic. Would Kucinich have done that?
4
There is cyber warfare also...
Washington is filled with people making big statements but nothing happens.
Climate change will not be stopped; you know the reason why. The disparity in wealth will only grow bigger; you know the reason why. More and more countries will get nuclear weapons; do you know the reason why? Israel will destroy and eliminate the palestinians; you know why. And US will support them; do you know why? Nuclear annihilation of the world is likely and you know why. And Trump may get re-elected and you know why (more and more whites without college education are listening to him and he focuses on their naivete and lack of critical thinking. Our government is becoming the duality of oligarchy versus democracy not liberal versus conservative; do you know why? Corporations are joining with government and fascism is rising; do you know why?
Millions of people live paycheck to paycheck in US; do you know why.
Our politicians and "philosophers" make many statements about what must be done but none of the important ones come to fruition. We hear Senator Warren state she will free us from many of the above. How ill she do that when her policies hit Mitch McConnell and and the Senate? Not doable. The corruption has grown so massive in this country and the lack of real leadership.
1
Corruption is Trump’s “doctrine”. Always remember, it’s all about him and money.
2
I thought Trump's doctrine was simply to sow chaos and undo any of the policy/strategy that the "Demon-rats" did before him. That and to make a buck.
How does your analysis apply to how he's handled North Korea and China? They don't have oil for us there. China basically owns us in debt.
As much as I detest Trump's ignorant, self-enriching corruption, I find it disturbing that the neocon establishment continues to goad him toward war to justify and underwrite military industries. This holds true whether he contemplates a long overdue withdrawal from the 18 year long Afghanistan debacle or in hesitating to attack Iran. Trump prefers to wage war on American workers where the Democrats want war on everyone else.
If you google "Dennis Kucinich" and "Foreign Policy," here's what you get:
1. My most favored nation is America; no MFN for China
2. If Darfur had oil, we’d be occupying Sudan
3. Reject war as an instrument of foreign policy
4. Americans have been misled about the Iraqi war
5. Affirm intention to work with the world community
6. Promote international treaties but reject global corporatism
7. Lead world to sustainable energy production
8. Foreign aid for peace incentives, not conflict
9. Acknowledge the Armenian Genocide of the early 1900s.
Bret, before you cheap shot someone with these views, try winning an election.
7
This is terrifying.
1
Correction: Trump's doctrine should be - speak loudly, and carry a small "shtick". This whole sordid affair with Trump has been nothing but reality TV.
3
“Trump may have the rhetorical impulses of Bob Dornan, but the Iranians have noticed that he has the strategic instincts of Dennis Kucinich.”
I’m not a fan of Mr. Kucinich, but at least his “strategic instincts” weren’t formed by the most recent pundit he saw on Fox News.
4
Trump's sole doctrines are: Get me re-elected at all costs; kiss the ground I walk on; how can I profit from this.
5
It’s a curious thing that this column ends up emulating Trump’s “all hat and no cow” ethos. It talks loudly but backs off making tangible policy recommendations or anything that could hold the author to account. If you want to go to war, then say so.
Sounds like Bret Stephens wants " leader spoiling for a fight".
I wonder if Bret thinks the US, in adding six trillion in exchange for overseeing the killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, Afghans, Syrians, Libyans, and wrecking their countries as made the US safer.
While I'm a Sanders supporter, in large part because I know that he has the courage to implement a demilitarized foreign policy, I liked Warren's debate comment about the stupidity of asking the US military to do in Afghanistan and Iraq, what is IMPOSSIBLE to accomplish by military means.
Trump knows that his base, and most Americans want US troops out of the Middle East.
The pundits, like Bret, the Establishment media, like the NYT,
the Washington Foreign Policy Establishment and the Military Industrial complex thrive on Forever War.
1
Damn we need to unfriend the Saudis. I wish you'd quit with your almost constant march to war, Bret, you were doing so well, playing well with others, not being a deranged hammer who saw every Islamic country as a nail. Our "friends" the Saudis are a tumor. And all this comes days after our remembrance of the last Saudi gift to us: I can see where the towers were from where I'm writing now.
2
Econ 101 on the Mid East
Today's NY Times carries this article
"The End of Saudi Arabia’s Illusion
Time to face reality: The United States doesn’t want to go to war with Iran to protect its Arab allies."
As Keynes said, according to Samuelson
"When the Facts Change, I Change My Mind. What Do You Do, Sir?"
And the facts DO have changed. Thanks to fracking , the US is now the worlds largest oil producer.
We do no longer need Mid East oil to get our economy running
In 2007, before we had large scale fracking Chuck Hagel, later the Secretary of Defence , said this about the War in Iraq
"People say we’re not fighting for oil. Of course we are. They talk about America’s national interest. What the hell do you think they’re talking about? We’re not there for figs."
Well , Mr. Stephens, we do NOT have to be there any longer, not thanks to US politics but to US geological engineering excellence and we do want a war to get the figs.
Stephens writes, "What would Iran’s leaders really fear? Above all, a revival of the Green Movement that nearly toppled the regime following the stolen presidential election of 2009."
This statement demonstrates an astonishing ignorance or willfully myopic view of the history of U.S./Iranian relations. Iran has a litany of reasons to view the United States as a military threat. They're not "testing us" to get a better negotiating position or prop up an unpopular regime. They're responding militarily to us attacking them. We regularly conduct cyber attacks on their country, we have invaded both of their neighbors, we arm their enemies, we impose economic sanctions and we intercept their ships.
The United States has been an existential threat to Iran since they overthrew our puppet government.
I'm not sympathetic to Iran, but Stephens's column shows a dangerous lack of perspective.
2
Donald Trump reminds me of the Boy Who Cried Wolf. At what point do we believe him now that there have been too many false alarms. My worry, though, about articles such as this (or even my comment) is that at some point, acting out of pique and raging about fake news, that he'll decide to pull the trigger. Probably exactly when it isn't warranted. No instinct for the finer points of diplomacy. My way or the highway. God help us.
2
It's an interesting riddle:
How will the US will respond to Iran, given consequences of failure will be felt for years?
With Trump in the White House, the question as to whether there will be a measured, intelligent response, almost answers itself, no?
It's almost like wondering how the US Olympic swim team will do in the relay -- with Danny DeVito as its anchor. Hmmm.
2
The Iranians are smart enough to not want to wait out Trump. By trying to wait him out there is a very significant possibility that he will be replaced in 2020 by a different president. That president is going to be far more skillful and capable than Trump. No matter who replaces him. That president will have the advice of people that are far smarter and more experienced than the sycophants that surround Trump. The Iranians know how weak Trump is and they are taking every advantage of it while he is still president. The last thing they want is to have to deal with a smart, capable US president and allies.
Think of those young people manning naval ships, including a huge aircraft carrier, in the area. Their Commander-in-Chief could start a war as an ego trip and they would pay with their lives.
2
Of course Trump's policy for the Middle East is an unmitigated disaster. Any sane person watching events of the past three years could come to no other conclusion. But this doesn't translate into loss of support for Trump. So he does, in fact, have a "strategy" for doing what he's doing - and that is, appeasing his far right, bigoted base.
Trump knows that his voters hate brown-skinned people, especially those with Middle Eastern ancestry, and they'll support any action he takes with Iran, up to and including getting this country into a disastrous war with Iran. Think Iraq, only exponentially worse.
Now, we know that Trump is bent on destroying every accomplishment of President Obama's no matter the harm to us or other nations. This was his sole motivation for trashing the 6-nation nuclear accord with Iran. But again, Trump's voters love this - another slap against brown skinned people.
The result if Trump plunges us into a disastrous war with Iran? Thousands of our young service men and women will die needlessly, tens of thousands of Iranian civilians will die needlessly, and in the end, Iran will have nuclear weapons anyway. And Trump's base will cheer all the louder. Because he "stuck it" to those uppity people.
In fact, Trump could well strengthen his support by starting this disastrous war. Dubya's decision to invade Iraq gave him a clear path to a second term. And being re-elected - meaning, staying out of prison - is the sole motivation Trump has.
2
Whether Iran can wait out Pres. Trump is not that simple a question. They are undergoing serious economic problems and the people are already upset.
Iranians know much about the world and you know they have to be wo ndering when THEY get a democracy and get to choose their own leaders.
But would the NY Times see a political reason never to ask too many questions about the Iranian people wanting to be free?
The paper's eager acquiescence with Pres. Obama's strong support of the mullahs' junta when that street uprising began was tawdry and exactly what American presidents shouldn't do.
@L osservatore We already went down the road you are suggesting, in 1953, and it did not go well, either for the Iranians, or ultimately, for us.
There is no moral pathway to support of anything this president does...Full Stop. Start questioning why you do, Mr. Stephens and the implications of doing so.
2
"How the U.S. responds to an unprovoked attack on one of the central pillars of the global economy is a test of American leadership." Really? Unprovoked? The Saudi's have been attacking the countries around them for years, with American cover. The fact that one of their victims hit them back should surprise nobody. If Mr. Bone Saw can sucker the US into fighting for Saudi Arabia you can bet the so-called royal house will be winking and toasting with forbidden alcohol.
4
Stephens offers the best summation of Trump’s latest national security advisor, saying he has “the tremulous optimism of a new bride joining Henry VIII at the altar.”
Well, he did so voluntarily, even though he witnessed the, metaphorical, beheadings of those who came before. But the powder keg violence of the MidEast is not metaphorical. The saudis literally do behead, crucify and bone saw people. Wars abound, and trump is wondering clueless and babbling through the minefield.
3
I don't know the particulars of Mr. Stephens' personal life, but he sounds like someone who does not have children in the military. Nothing Iran has done so far is worth a drop of some kid's blood.
4
The solution is staring us in the face.
Go green. End this dependency on oil. In doing so, you render all these guys impotent.
It's time.
Transforming to a green economy is what the planet needs, and it's what our economy needs.
No one ever said Make Whale Oil Great Again.
Like that.
The end of oil.
2
I don’t believe Trump has a doctrine or a strategy or even a vision. He just fell into a job he never thought he would get and is now trying to survive while keeping his ego satisfied, because that’s probably the one thing that keeps him awake at night ... satisfying his Ego!
2
It might be better for the planet if Saudi and Iranian oil production were totally crippled forcing us into green solutions.
2
"These are not the actions of a leader spoiling for a fight."
These are the actions of a real estate grifter.
It is hard to ignore Mr. Stephens background neocon self. His problem is with Mr. Trump's indecisiveness. War is on his mind, but with a more lovable Bushian outlook. Apparently he agrees with Trump's setting aside the Iran agreement, and calls the attack on Saudi Arabia unprovoked. Huh? Yemenites do not think the bombs dropping on their heads are unprovoked gestures. Mr. Stephens are you willing to suit up along with your family to engage in conflagration? I think not. Trump is cover for the nasty neoconservative policies. Their argument is going to war with Iran should be subtle and deceptive.
2
Obviously, Iran is a nasty place, particularly if you're an educated or secular Iranian, and they and their proxies have made wreaked plenty of havoc in the Middle East, particularly in Syria, where Assad would be long gone without their help (and Putin's). But their current string of atrocities or "provocations" are a result of the Dotards reneging on the Iranian nuclear deal, and his bullying of our European allies or their companies to go along with his sanctions. The Iranian leadership, desperate to change the status quo, are simply trying to find a way to make things painful for everyone else. It looks like terrorism, but its really just the survival skills of a regime backed into a corner with no real thought to what comes next...
1
Trump pulled us out of the Iran deal which was keeping Iran quiet and relatively compliant. He totally caused this. Now a strike would be a terrible idea and even Trump knows it. he has no doctrine, no plan, and no idea about what to do or even who to accomplish it.
Trump has put us in a car with no brakes heading down a steep hill.
3
How did those fancy and expensive anti-missile devices that SA bought (now with more cash!) work against drone missiles?
Why is SA unable to defend itself?
Why does it seem as if Pompeo swore an oath to the constitution (such as it is) of SA?
2
Sure someone has flagged this already, but Washington was the one who cautioned against entangling alliances, not Jefferson. (He was all for getting entangled with France.)
Refusal to retaliate is weakness? Why? I despise this president, but I have no issue with him not getting us into another war.
2
One unsure step forward, two less sure steps backward. trump’s unqualified for this job doctrine. Except tearing apart the country and all it stood for, what else has he accomplished? Oh yeah, tearing apart our alliances. Then there’s destroying the environment.
Caging children, that’s a good one. Siding with dictators.
What a legacy.
The story’s old and it’s only been three years. Wow, what an accomplishment.
Mr. Stephens, re: your "assessment" in your last paragraph is itself "provoking" to those who wish to see an escalation of the conflict. Is that in fact what you wanted to do? I suspect so.
The Houthi rebels who claim responsibility for the attack on the Saudi oil production facilities can hardly be seen as "unprovoked" given that the Saudi government has been attacking them for years in Yemen. I do not apologize for either side here, I just wish for you to not so blatantly misrepresent the true situation, even though it is an "opinion" piece you write. I would certainly welcome from you a revision of that one.
3
The Trump and Netanyahu Doctrine is more a accurate assessment of what we are assailed by.
We are seeing the Art of the Deal in real time and we’ll live with it’s three dimensional reality for a lifetime at least. Thank you to all those who continue to champion a reality tv star with a fake orange tan as President. This used to be discussed in cultural terms as the dumbing down of America. Let’s hope it’s not referred to in future historical terms as the end of America.
1
Great headline. Apparently there is no money to be made for Trump in going to war. It is not his thing and a big part of his base are libertarian stay out of war supporters.
Every now and then the most incompetent person who ever served as president can be right.
1
I can’t believe we are still trying to analyze trump*. He has no agenda, vision or policy beyond 3 motivations: self-aggrandizement, self-enrichment and a grinding, howling need to settle grudges, specifically but not limited to Barack Obama. This explains everything. Tear up Tehran agreement? Surely a thumb in Obama’s eye, and something to crow about at rallies...then move on. What? That upset the table? There are consequences? Oh dear...(etc. etc.)
1
Brett Stephens brings up the sentence "The president combines the rhetorical impulses of Bob Dornan with the strategic instincts of Dennis Kucinich." without so much of an explanation of how those two politicians are tied to this article. I googled Bob Dornan, who has been out of Congress since 1996. And where does Dennis Kucinich fit into this article?
3
Itching for a fight, Bret? Sure, Iran is too, but whether it's our fight is something for democratic debate, not political whim. Especially not the whim of a person who careens from one issue to the next and one side of an issue to the other at random, or based on the view of whomever he spoke to last. It's not at all certain that Iran attacked the Saudi oil installations, instead of its Yemeni allies fighting a murderous Saudi regime. For once, Trump's restraint is spot on, even if he's right for the wrong reasons. Facts seem to get blown up at moments like these, as in the Gulf of Tonkin incident or the Iraq War, it's time for some thought and restraint. You, however, seem to be less restrained than Trump. That's sad, and your itchy trigger finger is irresponsible at best.
2
There is no doctrine. A doctrine is a coherent statement of principle. Trump is incapable of having one.
He is just a chaos machine.
2
Saudi Arabia can't defend itself? It is bigger and richer than Israel. It just won't defend itself. It's the Donald Trump of countries. Use money gained by inheritance (or geological location), and manoeuvre others into dying for you, thinking they will gain. We gain nothing from its false friendship, and fortunately don't really need their oil anymore.
1
Since '73 we have blundered in the ME. Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, et al should have removed the weapon the ME has held over the world, its oil. Aggressive funding, research and support for alternative energies removes the leverage. SA had 33,000,000 people vs Iran's 77,000,000. Most workers in SA are imported. They have our weapons, but not the heart to do their own dirty work. Don the Con's first trip was to SA. They gave him a necklace which he humbly bowed down to the king to receive. How presidential! Boom and bluster is this guys strong suit. Pull out of the Nuclear Deal, impose sanctions and what could go wrong? He had no idea, but I think he is beginning to get it. He is surprised that they didn't fold before his monumental ire. That puts us in a worse position. While he is weak, he cannot appear to be so. His vanity cannot take it and we will likely be in a tough(er) spot as a result. for a long time to come.
Putting aside, for the moment, everything Trumpism, at the basic level, Trump is just a very bad president.
Nice one, Bret. So, here we have a president who “thinks” you add through subtraction ( the art of the deal ) and applies that “strategy” to a world that operates on an evolving global calculus while playing three-dimensional chess. At this rate, can climate change even matter.
“Who knew that abandoning American values would have strategic repercussions.” Everyone, except those in this Administration, apparently!
Another unintentionally ironic piece by Stephens--yes, Jefferson did warn against entangling alliances. So why is Stephens arguing that we should defend the ruthless Saudi regime? Not to mention his continued support for entangling the US with Israel's illegal occupation which only inflames anti-US sentiment across the globe.
The entire Trump entourage from top to bottom has the ethics and integrity of Cory Lewandowski: They all have no obligation whatsoever to tell the truth to anyone unless sworn under oath.
1
Mr. Stephens omits why U.S. relations and power in the Middle East have fallen. Trump — at the urging of Mr. Stephens — violated and abruptly withdrew from the successful multilateral Iranian nuclear arms control pact. All of Iran’s provocative behavior arises from the idiotic error on the part of the U.S.
This withdrawal set in motion the decline in U.S. power. We are losing power because the U.S. cannot be trusted to comply with treaties. Iran knows it. Alas, Mr. Stephens seems to not recall.
1
Who cares what the Iranians do? There is no proof they attacked the Saudis and it's not our business if they did. The realationship between the rebels in Yemen and the Iranians is much like that between the US and Israel. Is an attack on the sponsor of a client state a resonable response in one case and not the other? Think 9/11. Maybe thinking rationally is uncomfortable but basing action on the soundbites generated leads to disaster.
I was not a big Reagan fan while I was a college student in Seattle. The National debt at the time had finally topped one trillion dollars and in the media there were numerous articles on how to wrap your head head around such a formidable amount of money. How times have changed.
Part of that monstrous debt was attributed to Reagan’s Star Wars program and that we were devising a missile defense program that would knock out anything that “evil empire”, the Russians could hurl at us. The evil empire statement by Reagan was a bold move on his part and I believe it shook the Soviet Union to the core. They were terrified of Reagan, were convinced the program would render their program useless and in the end contributed greatly to their demise.
Fast forward 35 years and we have our tough guy in chief blathering about all day long how much smarter and tougher he is then anyone else. He uses only the best words (and my sincere apologies to substandard words out there)...,the type of guy who in a nutshell is a very very insecure man shrouded in vanity. He has no poker face because he doesn’t read, doesn’t take advice or surround himself with experts in their field. All he cares about are personal headlines and fame. The entire world knows this by now and are now free to do whatever they want. Give him either money or fame and he will go away.
1
You say the test of leadership. The one test. Voluntarily resign from office. That would be leadership for all the Republicans.
There is no Trump “doctrine”. Follow the money. Oil money, in his case.
1
The very fact that, by now, every American expects their POTUSes to have a "doctrine" is a sign that the USA is not a democracy, but an empire.
1
There is a new axis in the world but no new sherif in town. Putin, Xi, and the ayatollah are reprising the roles of Germany, Japan and Italy in the 30’s and 40’s. Unfortunately trump is awol. The reason Putin backed trump was for exactly this kind of moment. On top of everything else wrong the the boy leader, we now find out that he is chicken. Why is trump chicken? Because money is and always was the force behind the man. When that doesn’t work then try bluster or better yet a combination of the two. But Putin saw this and now the Iranians have figured it out too. This is exactly why american strength and leadership on the world stage is so vital. Now more than ever. Trump is wrong and wrong for the world. A game show host with no business dealing in political matters. Mr art of the NO deal.
Unfortunately, we may have already lost the Middle East. After carping endlessly about Saudi,s killing of a journalist, and fumbling it badly in Iraq by the last Republican boy wonder, we have limited influence. Turkey has been leaning towards Russia and may already be more in Putin’s camp then ours. Somehow we seem to be expecting Israel to do the heavy lifting. The time is ripe to give the ayatollah a bloody nose. You cannot negotiate with a tiger when your head is in its mouth. I never thought I would live to see a game show host as president or an America afraid of itself.
1
"Trump may have the rhetorical impulses of Bob Dornan, but the Iranians have noticed that he has the strategic instincts of Dennis Kucinich."
You lost me Mr. Stephens. What on earth does this even mean?
Then there's: "Those who don’t like Saudi Arabia as it is will like it even less when it’s gone." How do you know this, Mr. Stephens? Why would you even think it? The Kingdom (a Kingdom in the 21st Century! OMG!!) of Saudi Arabia gone sounds like a fist good step to me.
And. BTW, there are many ways to isolate Iran completely, and all of them are non-violent. For example, make a deal with China not to buy oil from Iran, but rather, from the USA. Of course, that would mean we had a President who was a real deal maker, rather than one who merely played wannabe on TV.
By all indications, Trump's goal, day after day, is to "win" the news cycle, with no thought about how that's going to impact the country or the world a day, a week, a month, or a year down the road.
Our strategic adversaries, on the other hand, are playing the long game. They know Trump is a "twitter tiger" who will say whatever comes into his head on any given day, but who has no long term strategy, and thus will be easy to outmaneuver.
The Iranians aren't stupid. They've watched what's happened as Trump has talked about raining "fire and fury" on North Korean, then done nothing but pose for photos and make concessions. They know that they can go on harassing the world's oil supply for the rest of Trump's presidency if they need to, and they know that their hand will only get stronger with each passing month.
Someone sure is spoiling to wag the dog and Bret Stephens is only too happy to help. Was defending the Saudi's the as-yet undisclosed promise to the as-yet undisclosed foreign leader?
1
Trump's supporters all know that he's a real tough dude: he has that 'growl' tonal quality when he speaks (except when whining about his enemies always ganging up on him). As every wanna-be tough guy says, he's 'locked and loaded.' Right.
“But it’s not too soon to think through the implications of the likely answer.” Yes, it is too soon because, based on this very statement, we do not have complete information. We also don’t know what additional information Trump has at this time. Is cautiousness now out of date? Is not showing your hand suddenly a liability? Or maybe Trump should fabricate an incident as a cause of war, e.g., the Gulf of Tonkin or WMD. Then all the Neoliberals will be foaming at the mouth.
So much for having a "businessman" run the country.
"The president combines the rhetorical impulses of Bob Dornan with the strategic instincts of Dennis Kucinich." What are you talking about? This reference is too obscure for even the most wonky.
2
"Governments are a collection of men who do violence to the rest of us."
Leo Tolstoy
2
"These are not the actions of a leader spoiling for a fight. "
They are the actions of a clueless leader.
With trump's childishness and ignorance driving all of his foreign policy we can expect his administration to make things worse in a region filled with religious autocrats. Much as trump loves to fancy himself the next autocrat, he simply doesn't have the stomach for outright ordering the deaths of American soldiers the way he's thrilling to the deaths of migrant children and women. Arab women and children mean nothing to him, but he understands he would have to commit the lives of his base to another senseless war.
For now, I'm rooting for the Iranians to teach trump a lesson in humility that he's thus far been unable to learn.
This is a bizarre comment.
First, the Iranians are not Arabs. They are Persian Shi’ite Muslims.
Second, you’re “rooting” for Iran? This isn’t an NBA game.
According to everyone except Bret Stephens and Donald Trump, Iran was abiding by the nuclear deal.
Regardless, Trump pulled out and reimposed sanctions, angering our allies and reducing American credibility, and triggered a series of events that led to exposing the US under Trump as a nonsense-spouting coward (much like the man himself), put the world’s oil supply at risk, and makes each and every ally question just how strong the US commitment is to their defense.
Well done, guys!
And lets not let the last Republican administration off the hook either. Whenever I hear “Iran did it,” I have to ask, “Reeeeally? Do they have WMDs too?”
The Republican party has become
the party of lying chickenhawks, who talk big, avoid military service themselves, and send other people off to do their fighting, often on flimsy pretexts (Bolton, Cheney, G.W. Bush, Reagan, Pence, et al.).
At least Trump is too scared to engage in that level of hypocrisy. He’s just a plain chickenchicken.
It was clear from the beginning of George W.’s presidency that he was looking for a war. And he found one.
I for one am grateful that Trump doesn’t want war. Yes, his bluster and backtracking makes us look weak and foolish, but at least - so far - he’s avoiding military conflicts that are guaranteed to be horrible, losing endeavors for all involved.
1
The Trump Doctrine?
Really, Bret.
There's no "there" there.
2
Only problem with backing the Saudis is their horrible abuse of women's right in particular and their giving birth to and sponsoring the intolerant and violent Wahabi movement that resulted in the Russian war in Afghanistan, in which we oddly encouraged and joined forces with the jihadis to fight "communism." Now trump is favoring Putin and joining forces with the people who drove the planes into the World Trade Center. My point is that meddling in foreign wars has always resulted in disaster. This is not about protection. Perhaps WWII was necessary. That was the last one. The "good war," if you can call it that after millions were killed. Is this about oil? Oil is killing the planet. Let Muslims be Muslims. Leave them alone. Solar and wind will defeat them.
It will take decades if not generations, to undo Trump’s incompetence.
Lie constantly and carry a fillet of fish?
Seriously, though, Iran (or whomever) did this didn't attack us. We have no dog in this fight (even though certain members of the .01% may have investments).
1
Bret nailed it with his comparison of O'Brien with the latest wife of Henry the VIII.
Unlike Bolton, O'Brien has heaped praise on Trump. He seems to get that Trump’s self-centeredness is the basis for any "policy" that he sets. (It explains the maddeningly mercurial nature of what those policies are.) What is consistent about Trump is his general indifference to human-rights issues and to the role of the US in influencing and policing international issues. For O'Brien, it means being equally indifferent, staying back, and biting his tongue unless he has pretty compliments to bestow upon Trump.
1
By all accounts Iran was abiding by the nuclear deal and eager to rejoin the civilized world. When Trump tore it up and slapped on sanctions, he declared economic war on Iran and set in motion the chain of events we are witnessing now.
Our President has painted himself into a corner, so he's faced with getting into another catastrophic Mideast war, or looking weak. Given the circumstances, I hope he ignores the war hawks and proceeds with extreme caution. All out war with Iran would make Iraq look like a soiree.
2
Maybe its time we quit pretending that Iran is doing anything more than responding to our provocations.
our economic sanctions are themselves an act of war fully intended to inflict pain on Iran.
We just can't seem to get past a nation and people that won't bow down.
4
When something appears mysterious, it is often more simple than it looks. Trump works for the Russians not for the United States. Just what did he promise Putin on the phone recently?
9
It’s not “obvious” to me “that Saudi Arabia can’t defend itself despite its $68 billion military budget,” at least in the first instance. If the Saudi’s want a war with Iran, let them retaliate and we can then decide what is in our interest. It is not in our interest to interject ourselves in the Middle East once again simply because oil supplies may be interrupted. Each time we have done so we have suffered unintended consequences. If John Bolton and other chicken hawks want a war with Iran, they should volunteer for service in the Saudi military.
14
@Chet Let's not send American boys (and women) to do a job that should be done by Arabian boys (certainly not women).
Trump may not understand that actions create reactions. Pulling out of the Iran deal, which we made with so many other countries exacerbated an unsteady situation, and we see the consequences in the headlines. Our best friends and allies are now the Russians and Saudies, so our president will undoubtedly
confer with them on the future of this mess. Grim.
9
"limited military reprisal"
..... is all in the eye of the beholder, isn't"
The attack on Abqaiq caused no casualties, only calibrated damage and destruction to process equipment. Refineries regularly do that all by themselves.
It was brilliant attack by Iran. They were able to avoid Saudi Arabia (or America) from waving a bloodied flag in retaliation, demonstrated that the defense hardware we sold to the Saudis can be readily defeated, and that Iran has the will to take out the rest of Abqaiq along with other Patriot protected assets if they wish to do so.
Unilaterally coming out of the Iran Nuclear agreement and imposing economically back-breaking sanctions may have seemed like a "winner" to Trump, but even if he had read a bit of WWII history, even in comic book form, he would have learned that when we did that to Japan in May 1941, their answer was Pearl Harbor.
"Limited reprisals" are only a few keystrokes away from "unlimited reprisals".
I also don't think it's too early to nominate the best political line of the year:
" .... with the tremulous optimism of a new bride joining Henry VIII at the altar"
Priceless!
7
I would propose that, as with North Korea, the Iranian leadership has a vested political interest in poking the US in the eye. It demonstrates to its people that they are smarter, tougher, stronger than the US, and are the only thing protecting them from an all-out US invasion. This has been the basis for control in both countries for decades.
Withdrawing from the JCOP gave the Iranian leadership exactly what they wanted --- an excuse to re-start their nuclear program and the opening to resume the eye-poking, knowing full well that Trump has painted himself into a corner. His only options now are to attack Iran --- which will only further strengthen the imam's position as protector against the Great Satan --- or go back to the negotiating table and try to negotiate a stop to the Iranian aggression in exchange for easing sanctions. Nuclear discussions are off the table.
Trump's deficiency here is that he can't see a way to formulate Middle East policy in the framework of a real estate deal. It just doesn't fit, and he really doesn't know what to do with it otherwise. That's why he's waiting for MBS to tell him what to do next. The very real risk here is that MBS and Saudi Arabia have always viewed their US relationship as transactional --- if MBS offers to buy another gazillion dollars worth of planes and tanks, we'll be in Iran faster than you can say locked and loaded.
14
The U.S.-Iran hostility will not be eased while Trump is President. The Iranians realize that Trump and his family are heavily involved financially with the Saudis and are not to be trusted.
Trump declared economic war on the Iranians with the reimposition of sanctions, which he keeps tightening. This is causing massive economic pain in Iran, but they can bear it long enough for Trump to lose the 2020 election. They know that any President that takes Office in 2021 will not be as obsessed with repealing Obama's deals as is Trump.
Finally, Iran knows that if the US goes to war with it that they can cause a deep global recession by destroying Saudi oil refineries and certainly cause Trump to lose.
The Iranians truly understand the art of the deal.
18
Well said, Pat, and spot on! Iran does know that they can trigger a global recession. Until we have weaned ourselves off Oil, wars for oil will happen. Disgusting.
Iran has taken Trump's measure and found him confused and floundering. Iran knows very well their oil customers will not let Trump destroy its production capacity, and short of that Iran cannot afford to play a role in this world. So Iran will continue to escalate the situation, protected by it's customers' unwillingness to do anything that will that will stop the flow of oil
Billions of dollars and acres of equipment cannot make up for the Saudi's inability to fight...they have not in modern history distinguished themselves as fighters.
Media Mavens who accuse the US being Saudi lackeys are silly, it is the other way around; whether they like it or not the US is the only country that has the capability, and almost the will to fight for Saudi. We are not their lackeys , they are our dependents....they could not continue to exist without a protecting patron.
So what is Trump to do? Our natural partners will not support him because of their dependence on oil from the region and because no country worthy of the name can or should trust him. Unless there is proportional retaliation, the Iranians will continue to escalate.
Chances of very good Trump will not need to to anything because events and oil customers will take it out of his hands. It is very likely that Trump's decision not to retaliate for the attack on tanker traffic will turn out to be his Syrian Red Line. Explain that to the base.
5
Correct me if I'm wrong...didn't Mr. Stephens think that the Iran deal was horrible and that trump et al did the right thing in getting out of it?
As is frequently the case, people not involved in the particulars of negotiating that deal - might not have been aware that perhaps this so-called 'bad deal' was the best that could be achieved.
No worries, with their crack team of policy experts/fashion designers, the trump administration will make it all better. In fact, Kushner's plan to solve the Middle East crisis must be almost finished by now - after all, he surely has been working on it part time while managing some real estate deals...
17
@Mike Bonnell
Alleged fashion designers, if you please
He can't handle the job. It's not TV (as he wishes it was), and he's way over his head, as he makes it worse by pushing away those that would advise him (a shrinking, and highly diluted pool), and behaving as the spoiled child he will always be.
He MUST be removed from office.
He'd be much happier with a daily TV show, which is what he's been giving us (and the world) since his preposterous escalator ride. The real world of war, poverty, pollution, inequality and conflict is uncovering what most of us knew from the beginning: he's no president.
36
@Slann
Sadly, even if trump were removed today it will take a generation to clean up his mess. Once he stirs up the Middle East even more who knows what the outcome will be or if a clean up would even be possible.
3
"--with the tremulous optimism of a new bride joining Henry VIII at the altar."
That line actually provided me a moment of comic relief amid the general horror described in the column.
30
If Iran is smart as Trump is obviously not, they will wait until after the election in 2020 before doing anything to further scale up the conflict.
It is the same conflict we faced in Iraq, a centuries old dispute between the Shia and the Sunni populations. We all know how well our intervention in Iraq has gone, we should not repeat the same mistake.
For those countries dependent on Saudi oil, it is a great opportunity to turn from fossil fuels to sustainable energy.
25
Whose interests are we defending in the Middle East? In an era of American self sufficiency in oil, and a rapid movement to electrification of ground transportation and increasing use of solar and wind power, we need the House of Saud like we need a hole in the head. We are defending Chinese interests in the Middle East. Let the Chinese sort out how to defend their oil imports. It’s not our problem. We have spilled enough American blood there. We need to get out now.
52
@John Smith If only it were so, John. But the Trump administration seems bent on doing all it can to increase our use of and dependence on oil, at the same time it seems to be doing all it can to destabilize the Middle East. Haven't you been listening to Trump's views on the "electrification of ground transportation ... solar and wind power" you presume is going to save us?
2
The Trump doctrine is random ramblings with no coherent action that has the effect of everyone else scrambling for a semblance of stability and sanity.
27
Is it only a coincidence Iran took this action immediately after Bolton bolted? The answer seems to be "no" and supports the thesis that Iran is poking the bear (i.e. D'ump).
11
Anyone who thought it was a grand idea to walk away from Obama’s Iran deal has no business knocking the strategic instincts of Dennis Kucinich or anyone else.
57
Brett,
By leaving out the horrendous war in Yemen, driven by the Saudis, and the US breaking the Iranian treaty to stop nuclear weapons development; just masks the real issues.
We know the Saudis can't be trusted.
Don't start a war over a drone please. Or over oil.
Bret, please take a deep breath.
20
Don't mistake shrewdness for weakness, proclaiming that we are locked and loaded is a correct response but don't count on this president to start another phony war, especially when the last one wasted so many lives and resources, and for whom, for what. It is way past time for the news media to start giving us the entire story, not just these convenient half truth's we have put up with for far too long.
3
@Joe Gilkey This piece has nothing to do with the news media. In fact it is the personal opinion of an avowed NeoCon. Since it appears that you have not grasped this simple fact, your conclusions cannot have any validity.
Is there any truth to the allegation that Iran has chosen to outwait this US Precidency before any negotiations begin? And further, to humiliate POTUS and deny him a diplomatic win that might aid his reelection effort.
3
@Ed N No! Why would they bother when he is so adept at humiliating himself?
Despite the swagger and tough talk, Trump is focused entirely on domestic politics, even when he's ostensibly acting in the international arena. The tariffs have nothing to do with improving America's trade posture and everything to do with showing his base he's "sticking it to" the Chinese. His anti-immigrant policies have nothing to do with security and everything to do with showing his base he shares their disdain for non-whites. His approach to Iran is based not on real strategic considerations but on the "America first" isolationist instincts of his base, particularly when it comes to promoting human rights for people with brown skin. His embrace of Netanyahu and Israel is clearly conditioned on Bibi's continuing to promote his presidency and re-election among conservative American Jews. If Saudi Arabia or other countries potentially threatened by Iran want the US to come to their defense, they need to find a way to make it pay for him. Donald Trump doesn't do anything because it's the right thing to do. It's all about him, and nothing else.
27
Trump, in the wake of Dubya's disaster in "democratizing" Iraq has little latitude for reigniting another confrontation in the Middle East. To "just go shopping" with a shooting war & skyrocketing oil prices wouldn't cut it this time around.
If you want to play poker Stephens, give John Bolton a call. I'm sure there's an empty seat just waiting for you.
3
The agreement the US (and others) made with Iran was very good. Rather than negotiate over time to make it even better, the Baby King broke it. There is merely a doctrine of destruction here. Placing onerous sanctions on Iran when it was complying with the treaty was foolish and short-sighted. There are serious consequences for having a president (elected with help from Putin) who is unfit for office.
19
@MHW
You gave me an idea for an algorithm for generating accurate reviews of Trump's actions.
"(Fill in the blank) was foolish and short-sighted".
Simple, succinct and ALWAYS true!
Wait, so now we're supposed to criticize Trump for not wanting to wage wars in the Middle East? Look, I can't stand the guy either, but thank heavens my visceral hatred doesn't so skew my thinking that I can't look at something like this objectively.
4
@HKGuy
Trump is simply using this as a political ploy. He doesn't care one way or another about a war. What he SAYS cannot EVER be trusted. He is just as likely to turn around tomorrow and order our military to destroy Iran.
DO NOT ATTRIBUTE ANY LOGIC OR CONCERN FOR AMERICA TO TRUMP. He's only concerned about Trump. THAT is being objective.
2
The problem is not that he wants war, but that he’ll blunder into one.
3
@HKGuy
Now that I re-think this, yes, Trump has definite vested interests in using our military hardware and having to replace it. His cronies own huge shares in Haliburton, United Tech and Raytheon - they all make high-tech weapons. Just like Bush who dropped hundreds of "smart" bombs on Iraq to the tune of $1 million+ apiece to have a useless fireworks show, Trump will be blue to support his position as the biggest arms dealer in the world by selling more of our best to SA and insuring no-bid contracts to any number of arms manufacturers. He'll justify this by claiming "more jobs" - many of which will be in funeral homes worldwide.
Even Tony Stark had better ethics than Trump, and certainly a much bigger brain.
1
No mention of the agreement we had with Iran before Trump pulled out? I'm amazed at Stephens's myopia.
16
Trump has no policy, that is the problem. It's not even a doctrine--why dignify this? As the parade of advisors come and go, nothing changes in Trump's basic approach, which is make ad hoc decisions based on Fox News or whatever voices predominate at the moment, ignore any real analysis, and operate on impulse. He has squandered what little diplomacy he has left on the international stage while the GOP sits complacently to the side. What a disaster.
11
No reveal here; Trump's ineffectual bluster has been on display since he began his run for the presidency. Combine that with zero knowledge of history, current affairs, and limited intelligence, and we have our perfect storm.
17
Republicans start wars. It's what they do.
The only good think about Trump is that he seems reluctant to start a war. That's the single, solitary aspect of his presidency that I support. He's a dove.
Naturally, Republicans despise this about him.
7