[ad_1]
From: Sophie Tanha, Staffan Lindberg
Published:
The concerns of the outside world about the change of president appear to be justified.
In addition to the decision to take home much of the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, he is also said to have investigated the terrain to bomb Iran.
The decisions are criticized by both Trump’s most loyal supporters and his opponents.
“It’s time to go home,” newly appointed Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller wrote in a statement to the US military last week.
Now that the Pentagon has been informed of the decision, it is considered official.
In Afghanistan, 2,500 of the 4,000 troops stationed today will be withdrawn. In Iraq, the US presence is reduced by 500 soldiers, from 3,000 to 2,500.
The reduction is expected to end on January 15, just five days before President-elect Joe Biden takes office.
The decision is criticized even by Trump’s closest allies within the Republican Party.
“It would hurt our allies and delight those who want us very much,” said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.
Photograph: J. Scott Applewhite / TT
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R).
McConnell, who has been very loyal to Trump in recent years, did not name the president during his Senate speech. Instead, he compared the plans to Obama’s withdrawal from Iraq in 2011 and the historic withdrawal from Saigon in 1975.
“We would abandon our partners in Afghanistan,” he said.
It is important to keep the promise
The Swedish Afghanistan Committee also agrees with this.
Chris Miller says he’s tired of war. It does not go against what the Afghan people are. “Swedish manager Anna Ek writes in a comment to Aftonbladet, continuing:
“It is therefore extremely important that the United States adhere to the agreement reached with the Taliban earlier this year and provide its support for the peace talks that have begun between the Afghan government and the Taliban.”
Now the next bomb falls from the White House: Trump has investigated the possibility of targeting arch enemy Iran, the New York Times reports.
Photo: Rahmat Gul / TT
US troops in Kabul, Afghanistan, 2017.
According to newspaper sources, the president has asked his advisers what opportunities he had to attack Iran’s most important sites for nuclear energy extraction.
The question can be seen as a surprise because one of Donald Trump’s electoral promises has been under the motto America First – that America should stop interfering in the outside world and instead focus on its own problems. With that in mind, it is a logical decision to withdraw troops, but why then increase the risk of a war with another country?
Possible reasons for the attack
Trump’s plan to put the Iranian regime in trouble with the terminated Iran deal, which made it difficult but not impossible for the country to trade with the outside world, did not go as planned. The United States is mostly alone with its toughest trade stance, and the Iranian regime remains relatively strong.
Photo: Evan Vucci / TT
Donald Trump.
Iran continues to be criticized for its expansion of the nuclear program, most recently last week when it refused to answer questions from international inspectors about a suspected warehouse in Tehran where uranium particles were found. But when the United States violated its part of the trade agreement and imposed sanctions on the country, they believe they have the right to continue mining uranium.
On January 3 this year, US forces killed Iran’s highly respected military leader, Qassim Suleimani, an attack for which Iran still demands revenge.
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has long advocated for attacks on Iran. According to his hardline, an attack on an American citizen, which may carry Iran’s threat of revenge against Suleimani, is all that is required for the United States to have motives to enter the country militarily.
If this happens during Trump’s final weeks as president, it doesn’t matter what his electorate thinks about the American war.
The fate of cleaning up the mess that troop withdrawal and an Iranian attack could mean still rests with Joe Biden.
Published:
