Millions of Iraqi citizens recently gathered together to participate in a "million-strong” march, the biggest demonstration during the history of Iraq in the capital Baghdad to demand the withdrawal of all U.S. forces. Al-Sadr, whose party holds the most number of seats in Parliament, seized on the public anger over the drone strike that killed Maj. Gen. Qassim Soleiman to call “a million-strong, peaceful, unified demonstration to condemn the American presence and its violations.” [...] I have no doubt in my mind that his assassination will have an impact, not only on the future of U.S.-Iran relations but in the region and beyond. Here are twelve consequences I can point to in the aftermath: ...

The bottom line is that modern aerospace power provides America asymmetric options to succeed in meeting challenging security situations. When dangerous circumstances unfold—as most recently evidenced with Iran’s malign behavior—the courses of action available to leaders are governed by what is in their toolkit at the time. Ensuring we possess disproportionate advantage in our defense demands wise preparation. Solutions in the modern era are complex and take significant time to generate. Decisions made today to rapidly increase inventories of the F-35 and B-21 will shape advantageous security options for America well into the future.

The National Iranian American Council (NIAC), and its sister organization NIAC Action, are American civil-society organizations working on behalf of members of the Iranian-American community and the broader American public. At a time when our nation is bitterly divided, NIAC is an important voice in our public debate on issues of enormous consequence for all Americans — and particularly for Americans of Iranian heritage — including heightened tensions in the Middle East and the risk of war, policies like the Muslim travel ban and extreme vetting, the rise in domestic hate crimes, and the protection of civil liberties. We are deeply disturbed by the letter from Senators Tom Cotton, Ted Cruz and Mike Braun insinuating that this Iranian-American organization has dual loyalties, is somehow less American than other organizations in this space, and should be subject to a Justice Department investigation. While these Senators may have profound differences in opinion with NIAC, particularly on the question of escalation and potential war with Iran, the Justice Department is not the forum to resolve those debates. These tactics have no place in our political process or our national discourse, and risk turning our Justice Department into a political tool to intimidate and silence voices that disagree with whichever administration is in power. We are concerned that everyone involved in contentious policy debates, regardless of political persuasion, will be at risk.

Both European and Gulf allies are distancing themselves from Washington as a result of escalating tensions with Iran. European leaders blame Trump for withdrawing from the nuclear deal without offering an alternative, and Gulf leaders do not want to serve as the battlefield of this US-Iranian confrontation nor to encounter additional Houthi attacks. While this European and Gulf neutrality restrains the American diplomatic effort, it also limits Tehran’s ability to retaliate in the Gulf. Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi told the Iraqi parliament on January 6 that upon arriving in Baghdad, Soleimani was carrying the Iranian response to the Saudi message of de-escalation. Iran might want to maintain this détente with Gulf leaders.