Iran claims its missile attack on two US bases in Iraq killed 80 US troops. The US President, Donald Trump, denied any casualties. The Pentagon indicates that there were only Iraqi casualties but Iraq denies any. With a dozen or more missiles hitting two US bases, the possibility of ‘some’ casualties cannot be ruled out. Did Pakistan acknowledge casualties from India’s airstrike at Balakot?

Despite all the readiness for an Iranian riposte to the killing of Qassem Soleimani, two US bases were easily hit. Recall the devastating Houthi attack on ARAMCO oil facilities in Saudi Arabia, despite a nearby US base equipped with Patriot missiles. That may have put the brakes on Trump, with added pressure from Congress and the realization that American bases elsewhere in the Middle East and even Afghanistan, without missile defence, were easy targets. 

Iran had earlier said it would target America’s allies and interests, even mentioning Israel. Naturally, the NATO countries supported Trump. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who, till now, was voicing restraint, said that if Israel is attacked an immediate punitive response would follow. Russia also warned of the possibility of nuclear war. But, on January 8, Iran’s leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Iran's attacks were a slap on the face of the US and American troops should leave the region. Iran’s Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said the strikes concluded Tehran's response to the killing of Soleimani.

Later the same day, Trump said, "All of our soldiers are safe and only minimal damage was sustained at our military bases. Iran appears to be standing down, which is a very good thing for the world.” So far good sense has prevailed, but will it remain? Trump is looking for flashpoints to boost his electoral prospects and advance America’s weapons and oil sales.

The US does not need Gulf oil. Given the fact that two US bases were attacked, his ego may not permit him to exercise restraint for long. And, if some Americans get hurt or killed, the chances of Trump engineering something in the election year are greater. Conversely, the effect of Trump denying any US troop casualties on the Iranian masses shouting “death to America” also needs to be appreciated. NATO has halted operations against ISIS and a western think tank suggests the US uses ISIS against Iran, which is meant to further inflame Shia-Sunni hostilities. But the fire could engulf the West as well as Saudi Arabia. 

Iran has considerable asymmetric potential and American scholars are even talking about possible sleeper cells within the US. Iran’s Foreign Minister has indicated that mediation to defuse US -Iran tensions are welcome. This has raised calls at home for India to mediate between the two. However, the manner in which Trump laughed off French President Emmanuel Macron’s offer to mediate between the US and Iran is worth recalling. India doesn’t really figure in Trump’s reckoning for Iran and Afghanistan, although this does not imply that India should not engage both sides diplomatically.         

Prime Minister Narendra Modi called Trump on January 7 to convey new year greetings and express his desire to work together to increase cooperation in areas of mutual interest, a statement from the Prime Minister's Office said. But US Secretary of State Michael Pompeo spoke to Pakistani army chief Qamar J Bajwa on January 3, immediately after Soleimani’s killing, seeking Pakistani support. Pakistan, which has blamed Soleimani for Baloch attacks on the Pakistani army found an opportunity to "kill two birds with one stone." Within hours, the US announced resumption of International Military Education and Training (IMET) to Pakistan to strengthen "military to military cooperation on shared priorities and to advance US national security."

Pompeo never called India and it was only on January 5 that External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar called Pompeo and also the Iranian Foreign Minister to voice India's concerns over the escalating tensions after the killing of Soleimani.

When the US barred Asian buyers, including India, from importing oil from Iran in May 2019, US Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross clarified that Washington would not ensure the sale of cheaper US oil to India. After much cajoling by India, the US gave a waiver from sanctions for Chabahar port, but not the vital Chabahar-Zahedan rail line that would strategically link India to Eurasia through the International North-South Transportation Corridor (INSTC).

Pakistan may not reach the 4% GDP growth target but the Indian government too has finally admitted to a GDP growth rate hovering around 5% – the lowest in 11 years. Hostilities in the Gulf will adversely affect India’s economy and strategic interests. But this will be of little concern to Trump.

Apparently, a secret NATO meeting at Newport, UK in September 2014 reportedly discussed how to check the economic growth of not only Russia and China but also India. It, therefore, stands to reason that India should exercise a more robust foreign policy vis-à-vis Iran, increase oil imports and complete the Chabahar-Zahedan rail line.

Trump, who is fixated on Iran’s nuclear programme, has to now make his next move. He has urged world powers to quit the 2015 Iran nuclear deal and work for a new deal. Significantly, when Trump withdrew the US from the Iran JCPOA in 2018, the IAEA had given Iran a clean chit. Any further provocation by Trump could lead to a catastrophic spiraling of the conflict. The winner in all this will be China, which may even felicitate Trump for facilitating China’s race to becoming a ‘Great Power’.

(The author is an Indian Army veteran)