The approach of the presidential election in the United States in 2016 was signalled this week by a high-profile debate between the main contenders for the Republican Party nomination, hosted by the conservative Fox TV station. Most of the coverage was dominated by Donald Trump's showmanship, but an important if less prominent theme was the strong opposition voiced by these aspiring leaders to the nuclear deal with Iran. This sentiment will doubtless persist for many months as the election nears, backed by persistent lobbying from pro-Israel voices undeterred by rare criticism from President Obama.
A subset of this GOP attitude towards Iran is a demand for much stronger action in Iraq. Republican hawks are worried about the considerable influence that Iran now wields in the country, an outcome in marked contrast to the hopes they had when the war in 2003 was launched.
Even in mid-2003, a few months after the invasion of Iraq by the George W Bush administration and its allies, the latter had every confidence that the termination of the Saddam Hussein regime would usher in a period when Iran would be severely constrained on all sides. This view seemed plausible: Tehran would face US military bases in Afghanistan to the east, a string of pro-American Arab states down the west coast of the Persian Gulf, a US fifth fleet dominant in the Arabian Sea and the Persian Gulf itself - and above all, an Iraq under firm US control.
