
Iran Loses Its Indispensable Man - iron0013
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/01/iran-loses-qassem-soleimani-its-indispensable-man/604375/
======
danso
The New Yorker's 2013 article, "The Shadow Commander", is excellent and very
indepth, and still very relevant today for what Suleimani's death means:

[https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/09/30/the-shadow-
com...](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/09/30/the-shadow-commander)

~~~
hnhg
Also worth a read: [https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/quasim-
soleimani...](https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/quasim-soleimani-
death-who-was-iran-us-uk-relations-qasem)

------
pmoriarty
I'm actually kind of surprised there aren't more assassinations around the
world (not just by the US government, but by all sorts of violent groups, at
the nation-state level and below), since there's so much world-wide travel
these days, and technology is so much more effective and advanced than it used
to be.

Either security agencies are really good at preventing them, or the assassins
are really incompetent or maybe not interested (which seems improbable).

~~~
ttul
I imagine the president receives a list of potential targets on a regular
basis and for whatever reason, this one resonated this time. They had his
location - probably a rare intelligence coup - and Trump was advised that it
was now or never if he wanted to make a huge statement following the rocket
attacks earlier in the week.

I would imagine that the intelligence agencies frequently know where targets
are, but only rarely carry out a strike.

~~~
taurath
His location is not the issue. He traveled nearly openly because to kill him
would be a demand for open war.

------
RcouF1uZ4gsC
One of the things about the Middle East is that politics and diplomacy are
intensely personal. It is less about the office and more about the person.
Suleimani spent decades cultivating all sorts of relationships throughout the
region and that will be sorely missed by Iran.

~~~
goldcd
Agreed - the obvious (and yet neglected) pertinent point is what type of
relationships were these that he cultivated?

Were his associates doing "his will" because they feared him (glad he's dead)
or because they agreed (wish to avenge this)?

Or if as multiple reports indicate he was actually the "2nd most important
Iranian" \- let's flip it and pretend he's the USA's "Mike Pence".

Now even the most ardent Trump Supporter I suspect doesn't give a toss about
the wellbeing of "Mike Pence" \- maybe there'd be a week of mourning in the
lobby industry if he popped his clogs, but we'd get over it.

However if the Iranians had assassinated him (and posted pictures showing them
doing it), I can see maybe a sizable proportion of both sides might consider a
response to be appropriate.

So - "They've just assassinated our VP - what response do we think is
commensurate?

~~~
taurath
Its quite reasonable to postulate that more americans and iraqis will die in
the next year because of this action.

------
Lordarminius
When the retaliation comes, more Americans are going to need 'dem' electric
cars. In any case, Souleimans' value was not only military. He was a
formidable politician as well. His achievements far outstripped that of the US
agents. One example :

 _... the crucial deal that brought the Iraqi government together was made not
by them but by Suleimani. In the months before, according to several Iraqi and
Western officials, Suleimani invited senior Shiite and Kurdish leaders to meet
with him in Tehran and Qom, and extracted from them a promise to support
Maliki, his preferred candidate. The deal had a complex array of enticements.
Maliki and Assad disliked each other; Suleimani brought them together by
forging an agreement to build a lucrative oil pipeline from Iraq to the Syrian
border. In order to bring the cleric Moqtada al-Sadr in line, Suleimani agreed
to place his men in the Iraqi service ministries.

Most remarkable, according to the Iraqi and Western officials, were the two
conditions that Suleimani imposed on the Iraqis. The first was that Jalal
Talabani, a longtime friend of the Iranian regime, become President. The
second was that Maliki and his coalition partners insist that all American
troops leave the country. “Suleimani said: no Americans,” the former Iraqi
leader told me. “A ten-year relationship, down the drain.”

Iraqi officials told me that, at the time of Jeffrey’s announcement, the
Americans knew that Suleimani had pushed them out of the country but were too
embarrassed to admit it in public. “We were laughing at the Americans,” the
former Iraqi leader told me, growing angry as he recalled the situation. “Fuck
it! Fuck it!” he said. “Suleimani completely outmaneuvered them, and in public
they were congratulating themselves for putting the government together.”_

[https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/09/30/the-shadow-
com...](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/09/30/the-shadow-commander)

~~~
dennnis
The US produces more oil

~~~
tzs
It's a world market. US as a producer sells oil both domestically and abroad.
US as a consumer consumes both domestic oil and foreign oil. In 2018, it
worked out to about 9.9 million barrels/day of foreign oil being imported, and
7.6 million barrels/day of US oil being exported.

If something disrupts production of some major world exporter X, causing the
world market price to rise or causing shortages on the world market, US
domestically sees that too.

~~~
hackeraccount
So does Iran - if the price of oil goes up they pay more domestically as well.
As it happens they subsidize the price of energy internally but that brings
more problems then it solves.

