Without boots on the ground, the United States has been a leading financial and military supporter – in two major wars. In both cases, the two countries receiving American aid — Ukraine and Israel — have struggled to achieve their goals, and in the case of Israel, the United States is blamed in many parts of the world for the extent of its support.
The United States is also leading a retaliatory campaign against the Iran-backed Houthi militia that has increased in intensity in recent days, with each new strike raising concerns about a looming conflict with Iran. Since the assassination of Qassem Soleimani, Iran, through its agents, has not hesitated to carry out operations against American interests in the region. Which sparked American military discussions about the quality of American deterrence.
Even before the Hamas attack on October 7, 2023, Iranian forces were launching missile and drone strikes, operating through proxies that gave them a degree of deniability. American reactions were consistently tentative and unfocused. So; There is now talk about what should deterrence in the Middle East look like in order to be an effective measure against Iranian actions? In their discussions of Iran’s strategy, they see Iran’s leaders focusing on three things. The first is to protect the system. They want the regime to survive and will do everything in their power to do so. The second and third priorities sometimes move back and forth in order: they aim to destroy the State of Israel, and they aim to expel the United States from the region.
This was happening long before the Hamas attacks on Israel on October 7, 2023. In 2019, the Iranians had very advanced attack planning on US facilities and on other facilities throughout the region. Once again, with the aim of pushing America out of the region, they launched a number of low-level attacks in the summer of 2019, including shooting down a reconnaissance drone, and America chose not to respond. Responses were similarly mixed throughout the rest of the year, as Iranian attacks escalated.
Critics’ argument now is that, had they acted earlier and more directly, they would not have been forced to take action even against Soleimani in January 2020. So; The lesson that was learned was that in matters of deterrence, and in matters of establishing credibility with Iran, it was better to act early “and it is better to act with a certain degree of force that the Iranians will know and understand.”
After the strike that killed General Soleimani, there was an expectation that there would be a much greater response from Iran. They struck the Ain al-Asad base (in Iraq) with a number of short-range ballistic missiles. The Americans realized that the Iranians were trying to kill the Americans in that attack. They were unable to do so, and their punches largely flew into the air due to the repositioning of American forces.
We need to understand that the Iranians have always believed, and still believe, that they can operate below a certain red line in Iraq and Syria that will cause pain to America, and they do not believe that the Americans will respond to that.
With a review of American policy towards Iran, it is noted that Israel’s war on Gaza has exceeded one hundred and twenty days, and with it questions are being discussed within American security circles, including: Will it be possible for Israel to completely uproot “Hamas”? There are many responses to the very high level that the Israelis have taken as their goal in their policy. These measures are still ongoing in Gaza and are not yet fully completed. Then there is still a lot of work left to do, and it shows them that, the Israelis will not be limited to Gaza. When they find Hamas leaders, they will strike them anywhere.
It is very difficult to completely eradicate a violent extremist organization. The Americans found this especially in the case of ISIS. Today, they are still continuing actions up and down the Euphrates River Valley, largely with their Kurdish partners in Syria and sometimes in Iraq to pursue isolated ISIS cells.
We must remember that the Americans never said that their goal was to completely destroy ISIS. They wanted to remove their ability to act internationally, to connect with other ISIS cells, and ultimately, so that local security organizations could deal with the problem. ISIS is not dead yet. It will not disappear as long as the conditions that led to its creation exist.
There has been a lot of talk and a lot of differences of opinion among security experts about the American presence in Syria. With the increase in Iran’s actions and attacks on the American presence abroad, many questions have arisen as to whether it is a wise idea to keep American forces in Syria at this time! It outweighs the belief that (American forces in Syria) had a good impact against ISIS and supported the Kurdish forces. They remember that they also sit at the head of a large prison population, and if they were to withdraw, these people would almost certainly return to the fighting. These are some of the most dangerous terrorists in the world, who are in these concentration camps. So; It is much more complex than a pure counter-terrorism mission. It tends to place few obstacles and difficulties on Iran’s ability to operate there as well.
Experts in the discussions realize that the (American) forces are in a weak and exposed place and vulnerable to attack by Kataib Hezbollah and other Iranian proxies. Over the past few months, US Central Command has done an amazing job protecting the Americans there, and these attacks will continue.
There has also been much talk in the past about improving regional missile defense in the Middle East as another form of deterrence and working with allied partners in doing so. This is because what the military has concluded is that if you wandered around and quietly surveyed most of the countries in the Middle East, they would say that the most dangerous threat is Iran and that its most dangerous threat to the region is in fact its ballistic missile power and drones.
Discussants say: The beauty of joint air and missile defense architecture is that, unlike ground operations, which do not require giving up sovereignty; Because what you’re really doing is you’re dealing with information. Because all issues are on the table; It turns out that what is happening in Gaza will have an impact on the political level, and everyone in the region has become aware of the threat emanating from Iran.
Commander of the US Navy’s Fifth Fleet, Admiral Brad Cooper, recently said: Iran is “very directly involved” in the Houthi attacks in the Red Sea. What the Houthis were able to do was create a major crisis for America by closing a critical maritime choke point that affects its national security strategy and its national defense strategy. Military circles hope that one of two things will happen: Either their offensive capability will be reduced to zero by destroying their missile launch sites, their radar sites, their command centers, the sites where they build these missiles, and, if necessary, the Houthi leadership. They also believe that if America continues to strike the Houthis, even at a very high level, this will not necessarily lead to escalation.
As these closed circles look at the problems in the world today, they see that what is happening in the Middle East is certainly a source of great concern to everyone, but they believe that the biggest problem we face is in the Ukrainian-Russian conflict. She believes that the possibility of war, a big war, is still more real in Europe than in the Middle East.
#afraid #Middle #East #danger #Ukraine
2024-02-09 10:04:39
