Thread by @NegarMortazavi

Trump doesn't want a war with Iran — but he might get one anyway. John Bolton was one of the main architects of the 2003 invasion of Iraq by George W Bush. And today he seems to be playing a similar tune about Iran.

My piece for ⁦@Independent⁩ independent.co.uk/voices/trump-i…

The chances of war between Iran and the United States have just increased again. A small mistake from either side could now lead to dangerous results — and easily escalate into a disaster for both sides, as well as the entire Middle East.

It’s no secret that Bolton wants a war with Iran aimed at regime change. In 2015 he wrote “To stop Iran’s bomb, bomb Iran” and suggested the US or Israel attack Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, then support the opposition aimed at regime change in Tehran.👇🏼
nytimes.com/2015/03/26/opi…

In 2017 at the Paris gathering of Iranian opposition group Mujahedeen-e Khalq or MEK [previously on the US terrorist list] John Bolton said the policy of the United States should be “the overthrow of the mullahs’ regime in Tehran.”
By @RobertMackey👇🏼
theintercept.com/2018/03/23/her…

Trump does not want another war in the Middle East. He constantly criticized his Republican and Democratic predecessors for waging costly conflicts in the region, and ran an election campaign on the promise of ending those wars and avoiding new ones.

Trump has no obsession with regime change in Iran. What he really wanted was to tear up Obama’s nuclear deal and negotiate a “better” one (or just a new deal with his name on it). But the current foreign policy team that surrounds Trump may well push him toward war anyway.

today’s political climate in the US is different from pre-Iraq war era. Iraq war happened in the aftermath of 911 when American public was outraged and ready to take out all enemies. It was not hard to sell a war, even one partially built on misinformation about Saddam‘s WMDs.

Today Americans are tired of years of wars in the region, with thousands of casualties and billions of their tax dollars spent. Although hawks still hold some positions of power in the administration and Congress, their long-time war agendas do not hold much support.

American media organizations and journalists have also learned a lesson from the Iraq war: that not all information and intelligence from the administration can be taken at face value, and should be treated with caution.

Today Europe is unlikely to follow the US into war. An important reason is the nuclear deal that provides systemic diplomacy and regular contacts between Iran and Europeans and makes it difficult to get Europe on board with war on Iran. Unless something extraordinary happens.

German member of parliament @berlinliebich told me that he is not supportive of American “threats” towards Iran and added that “we have asked our government to reject any possible requirement of the German Armed Forces as a part of this adventure.”

John Bolton knows it’s not easy to sell a full-on war with Iran to the American public. But he would be quick to strike in the case of accidents, plunging the US into a conflict that will be much worse than the Iraq war and a disaster for both the Iranian and the American people.

The people of Iran are extremely dissatisfied with their own leadership. The economy is on a constant downfall, Iran’s regional adventures in Middle East have isolated it from the West, and now saber-rattling with Washington has increased the threat of war.

But despite their grievances, Iranians are also afraid of war and don’t want to end up like war-torn neighbors Iraq and Afghanistan, or see civil wars like those in Syria or Libya. American hawks must bear the interests of Iranians in mind as they attempt to further their agenda.