In addition to ensuring Israel has what it needs to crush Hamas as well as seeking to alleviate the dire humanitarian catastrophe for Palestinians in Gaza, President Joe Biden’s administration has another critical responsibility on its plate: preventing the war from spreading to other countries in the Middle East.
Senior U.S. officials, up to Biden himself, have repeatedly warned Iran and its network of proxies in the region to think twice before taking advantage of the situation. Using intermediaries in the Lebanese parliament, the U.S. has delivered messages to Hezbollah, the Lebanese proxy that rules southern Lebanon, to not open a second front against Israel. The U.S. also deployed two carrier strike groups in the Middle East, enhancing the U.S. military’s ability to respond to various contingencies as needed.
Thus far, the strategy has appeared to work well enough. The large-scale war Israeli and Lebanese civilians feared after Hamas’ depraved attack in southern Israel more than a month ago fortunately hasn’t come to pass, at least not yet. While Israeli troops and Hezbollah militants have clashed repeatedly over the last few weeks, the incidents have been contained to the Israeli-Lebanese border area.
One can’t say the same thing in Iraq and Syria, where approximately 3,500 U.S. troops are positioned across a constellation of small military bases for the ostensible purpose of keeping the Islamic State terrorist group contained.
On Sunday, the U.S. conducted a round of precision airstrikes against two Iranian-linked militia facilities in eastern Syria, killing an unknown number of fighters in the process. The strikes were in retaliation for a series of one-way drone and rocket attacks on U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria that have been virtually nonstop since Israel launched its offensive against Hamas. “The president has no higher priority than the safety of U.S. personnel, and he directed today’s action to make clear that the United States will defend itself, its personnel, and its interests,” Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin wrote immediately after the strikes were reported.
This isn’t the first time the Biden administration has taken action against Iranian-backed groups. This weekend’s strike was the third in about two weeks. Overall, the U.S. has struck militia training bases, headquarters and ammunition storage units seven times during the Biden presidency. Indeed, the first strike occurred only weeks after Biden took the job.
Ask U.S. defense officials what they aim to achieve with these strikes, and you usually get the same answer: We want to deter these groups from launching more attacks on U.S. positions. By responding forcefully, the U.S. hopes to signal to the various groups launching the attacks that they cost more than they presumably offer in gains.
But if we’ve learned anything over the last several weeks, it’s that deterrence has failed in every respect. The militias haven’t missed a stride in harassing U.S. troops deployed in Iraq and Syria. There have been dozens of militia attacks since the initial round of U.S. strikes late last month and four in the 24-hour period since the latest U.S. strikes on Sunday, which is evidence enough that U.S. military action to date hasn’t changed the calculus of these organizations one iota. If anything, the U.S. strikes compel further retaliation from the militias, which in turn force the U.S. to conduct more airstrikes. It doesn’t take a genius to see how this tit-for-tat exchange could easily get out of control.
To some lawmakers and analysts, the reason deterrence hasn’t been established is because the Biden administration is too wimpish in its responses. “Pin prick strikes against ammo dumps in the desert won’t do a damn thing to stop Iran from attacking our troops,” Republican U.S. Rep. Mike Waltz tweeted last week. Hal Brands, a professor at Johns Hopkins University, recommends the U.S. make it crystal clear to Tehran that the Iranian military will be susceptible to U.S. military action if the attacks continue. Of course, this is pretty much what President Donald Trump did in January 2020, when he authorized the assassination of Qassem Soleimani, one of Iran’s most notorious generals. The result: Iran sent a dozen ballistic missiles into a U.S. air base in Iraq, causing injuries to about 100 U.S. service members. The rocket attacks continued in the months thereafter.
Is establishing deterrence even possible? U.S. defense officials seem to think so. The reality is less promising. Nonstate organizations are extremely difficult to deter in the first instance. This has nothing to do with U.S. strength or grit, as so many appear to believe, and more to do with the fact that nonstate actors aren’t, well, states. Unlike states, nonstate groups don’t have to worry about maintaining internal political stability, caring for a general population or promoting an advantageous balance of power. All of these considerations serve as handcuffs for states, hindering their freedom of movement. Not so for nonstate actors.
How, therefore, can the U.S. protect itself from further attacks in Iraq and Syria? The answer, it would seem, is to pack up and leave.
Although this is unsatisfying to some, the U.S. ultimately doesn’t gain much from being in either country. The Islamic State caliphate is long gone, and whatever remains of the terrorist group can be contained by local actors — the Iraqi government, the Syrian government, Iranian-linked militias, the Kurds, Russia and Turkey — that for their own self-interested reasons have the intent and capability to keep the organization on a leash. The only other option is the status quo, which courts unnecessary risk and will eventually result in U.S. fatalities.
Simply put: The militias will continue taking potshots at U.S. troops as long as they remain in Iraq and Syria. It’s about time U.S. policymakers finally come around to that obvious conclusion.
Daniel DePetris is a fellow at Defense Priorities and a foreign affairs columnist for the Chicago Tribune.
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.
Daniel DePetris: The US isn’t deterring attacks in Iraq and Syria as it deals with the Israel-Hamas war
3
1
14.11.2023
In addition to ensuring Israel has what it needs to crush Hamas as well as seeking to alleviate the dire humanitarian catastrophe for Palestinians in Gaza, President Joe Biden’s administration has another critical responsibility on its plate: preventing the war from spreading to other countries in the Middle East.
Senior U.S. officials, up to Biden himself, have repeatedly warned Iran and its network of proxies in the region to think twice before taking advantage of the situation. Using intermediaries in the Lebanese parliament, the U.S. has delivered messages to Hezbollah, the Lebanese proxy that rules southern Lebanon, to not open a second front against Israel. The U.S. also deployed two carrier strike groups in the Middle East, enhancing the U.S. military’s ability to respond to various contingencies as needed.
Thus far, the strategy has appeared to work well enough. The large-scale war Israeli and Lebanese civilians feared after Hamas’ depraved attack in southern Israel more than a month ago fortunately hasn’t come to pass, at least not yet. While Israeli troops and Hezbollah militants have clashed repeatedly over the last few weeks, the incidents have been contained to the Israeli-Lebanese border area.
One can’t say the same thing in Iraq and Syria, where approximately 3,500 U.S. troops are positioned across a constellation of small military bases for the ostensible purpose of keeping the Islamic State terrorist group contained.
On Sunday, the U.S. conducted a round of precision airstrikes against two Iranian-linked........
© Chicago Tribune
visit website
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Andrew Mitrovica
Mort Laitner
Rami G Khouri
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
Nikkei Editorial
