Soleimani Assassination: Leadership, Strategy, and International Law
This paper examines the January 3, 2020 U.S. airstrike that killed Iranian Major General Qassem Soleimani and Iraqi militia leader Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis near Baghdad International Airport. The analysis addresses three central questions: whether President Trump's order represented effective executive, diplomatic, and ethical leadership; whether Soleimani's assassination advanced or hindered U.S. interests in the Middle East; and whether the strike constituted state-sponsored terrorism under international law. Drawing on legal frameworks, foreign policy analysis, and regional geopolitical consequences, the paper concludes that Trump fell short of executive and diplomatic leadership standards, that the long-term strategic effects on U.S. interests remain uncertain, and that the strike does not meet the legal definition of state-sponsored terrorism.
- Introduction: Context and three analytical questions posed
- Analysis of Trump's Order: Executive, diplomatic, and ethical leadership evaluated
- Effect of Soleimani's Assassination on U.S. Interests in the Middle East: Regional geopolitical consequences across key states
- Did the Strike Constitute State-Sponsored Terrorism?: International law definition applied to the strike
- Conclusion: Findings on all three analytical questions summarized
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Structures the argument around three clearly defined analytical questions, keeping the analysis focused and preventing the paper from drifting into general commentary on U.S.-Iran relations.
- Balances legal frameworks (Authorization for Use of Military Force, international law on state-sponsored terrorism) with geopolitical analysis, giving the argument both normative and empirical grounding.
- Acknowledges complexity and uncertainty — for example, noting that Trump's ethical leadership is difficult to assess conclusively — rather than overstating conclusions, which strengthens academic credibility.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates multi-criteria evaluation: rather than building a single thesis, it applies distinct analytical lenses — executive power, diplomacy, ethics, regional strategy, and international law — to the same event. Each section uses relevant legal precedents or scholarly definitions (e.g., Terry's definition of state-sponsored terrorism, Prize Cases doctrine) as evaluative benchmarks before reaching a judgment, modeling how to apply theoretical frameworks to a real-world case study.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with contextual background on the strike and states its three research questions. The body is divided into two major analytical sections: the first evaluates Trump's leadership across executive, diplomatic, and ethical dimensions; the second assesses geopolitical consequences for U.S. interests and then turns to the international law question of state-sponsored terrorism. The conclusion systematically revisits each of the three questions posed in the introduction, providing clear and direct answers to each.
Introduction
On January 3, 2020, the United States launched airstrike attacks near Baghdad International Airport, killing two of the most influential leaders operating across Iran, Iraq, and the surrounding region. The strike killed Qassem Soleimani, the Major General of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps–Quds Force (IRGC-QF), and Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis, the Deputy Head of the Popular Mobilization Commission and founder of the militia known as Kata'ib Hezbollah (Jahanbani, 2020). The strikes occurred against a backdrop of escalating conflict between the U.S., Iran, and Iraq, following a December 27, 2019 attack by the Iranian-backed proxy Kata'ib Hezbollah that killed a U.S. contractor and wounded several American service members.
The strike triggered widespread criticism of the Trump administration's use of executive powers, diplomatic strategy, and ethical judgment in leadership. Trump was accused of pursuing a poorly planned strategy toward Iran (Blazakis, 2020). This paper focuses on three important issues: (1) whether the executive order by President Trump represented an effective use of his executive powers, diplomatic strategy, and ethical leadership; (2) whether the killing of General Soleimani inhibited or promoted U.S. interests in the region; and (3) whether the act constituted what international law refers to as state-sponsored terrorism.
Soleimani was considered the architect and facilitator of Iran's extensive regional reach. He engineered relationships with a large network of groups across the Middle East and beyond (Parker & Noack, 2020). Although the focus on Soleimani's killing is justified, the significance of Al-Muhandis's death has largely escaped public attention. He played a central role in mobilization efforts in Iraq and was the hallmark of what the Iranian state's priorities were there. Both figures were eliminated in a single strike ordered by U.S. leadership, leaving the world to wonder what would become of the IRGC-QF's role in regional politics — particularly its links with militia groups in Syria and Iraq.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.