Trump, expertise, the Iran war, and the unitary executive
Trump’s inability to evaluate expert advice and incorporate it into his thinking will undoubtedly play a large role when histories of the Iran war are written.
Trump evidently ignored warnings from experts within the government that Iran would respond to an attack by closing the Strait of Hormuz.
Once the Strait was closed, Trump had a reasonably clear (I think) menu of bad options to choose from: 1) walk away and declare victory, 2) maintain sanctions on Iran and prevent Iranian sales of oil and hope that financial pain eventually brings Iran back to the negotiating table in a somewhat weakened position, 3) lower level military escalation to bring Iran back to the negotiating table in a weakened position (what we have seen the past few days), and 4) various forms of more serious military escalation (Kharg Island, nuclear sites, civilian infrastructure, etc.).
For several weeks leading up to and following the MOU it looked like Trump was choosing door number 1. But in the end he couldn’t stomach the deal his own negotiators had reached. He would have been much better off if he had the foresight to realize this before he opened the Strait to Iranian oil exports and allowed Iran to strengthen its finances.
Menzie Chinn sums it up:
Personally, I do not think the US side is operating with a rational agent (else the MoU wouldn’t have been signed as is, and Iran would not have been allowed to replenish funds by exporting billions of dollars with oil). A rational agent (who probably wouldn’t have struck Iran with such lack of planning in the first place) would have accepted sunk costs, and drop demands for concessions that clearly the US has no leverage to acquire.
Trump illustrates in a way that a million dry academic warnings never could show how dangerously unconstrained the American presidency is. Yet at the same time this world historic idiot is abusing presidential power in ways that are incredibly damaging to our future and unspeakably cruel to so many, the galaxy-brained justices on our supreme court have decided that presidents should have even fewer restraints on their power.
Chinn’s argument rests pretty heavily on the idea that the US does not have leverage to acquire certain demands. I’m not sure it’s as clear a case as he thinks. Iran’s clearest leverage is curtailing energy and other shipments out of the Gulf. On top of that they can threaten to destroy much of the infrastructure needed for that commerce.
Our (US) leverage could be not caring very much about that. A policy of “if not all vessels, then no vessels” is monstrous leverage.
Rubio is hinting at that pretty directly. Yes, we will have economic problems, but nothing like the countries with very serious demands for imported energy, fertilizers. I think there would need to be an intervening regime change, but reviving the blockade (and extending it by destroying rail and road links) would be significant leverage to destabilize Iran enough to get traction on key demands.
Basically “sorry to hear about your plight country X. You need to bring that up with the Islamic Republic.”
Chinn, I think, rules out the clearest leverage available as simply far too destructive and then looks around and doesn’t find other good leverage. Fair enough, but not sure the US is thinking that way.
Eric:
I do not believe this administration would consider an alternative if there were alternatives and there are alternatives. I believe there are alternatives, we just chose not to pursue them. It is interesting . . .
“Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is currently facing multiple ongoing prosecutions and warrants.” Netanyahu government defies court, raising constitutional crisis fears as election nears
A perfect cover for the Prime Minister. Suddenly we have issues with Iran. And here comes Trump to the rescue. Not so much Israel as it is Benjamin Netanyahu, who is in trouble. They are two peas in a pod in their tactics to change the narrative to something else which may not be as troublesome or no trouble at all. Yet we will disrupt the global economy in this effort to save Benjamin’s ass. Tough guy on the block “Tr__p” could push the buttom and create greater havoc in the Middle East.
This is still a democracy, not a dictatorship, and the direct implication of that is that, since “monstrous leverage” would result in $5+ / gallon gasoline and a whole lot of other inflation, the Republicans would quite likely lose the House and Senate this fall. After that, impeachment starts to look pretty good, especially since a lot of the Republican senators won’t be up for election until 2 or 4 years after Trump is out of office anyway (4 – 6 years from now), maybe even wherever senile old rich people go, and what’s left of MAGA won’t be much of a danger to their re-election bids.
John:
Hopefully, Tr__p leaves quietly from his disastrous reign as a President. Hopefully, Netanyahu gets his come-up pence which he deserves the same as Tr__p. Hopefully, voters turn out for the next election. The question to ask is “why?” Why did people not vote in the last election (3 million). It was obvious that Tr__p was the worst of the choices. Yet, here we are with him as the president fumbling around.
Out running errands in my eMini this morning I took note: gas is a solid four bucks a gallon around here, Diesel five …