It is probably the senator’s “prerogative” to demand irresponsible action without taking responsibility for the consequences. Fortunately, Biden has no idea how to respond to the attack by Iranian proxies that killed three U.S. soldiers and injured about 40 others, without drawing the United States into endless Middle East wars again in the process. We are thinking carefully about how to respond to this.
As President Biden weighs his options, what thoughts are going through policymakers’ minds? Based on conversations with current and former officials, we can make some inferences about the president’s decision-making. He will likely take decisive action, but he should think carefully about the consequences of his choices.
For months, this crisis has been coming towards Biden in slow motion. Iranian-related groups have declared the beginning of the US military presence in Iraq and Syria (and now Jordan) after the start of the Israel-Gaza war. U.S. authorities have counted more than 160 attacks since then, or more than one a day. Shia militias were lucky (or unlucky, as they see it) not to have killed any Americans until last weekend.
To use the antiseptic language of strategists, these groups are “undeterred.” The Pentagon received several attacks and retaliated, but they were not strong enough. Experts estimate that between 50,000 and 80,000 Iranian-backed militias are active in Iraq alone. These Shiite militias appear to consider the United States a low-risk target. Apparently, the Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen are doing the same, firing missiles at ships bound for the Red Sea and disrupting international shipping. These calculations will need to be changed.
The Biden team’s first task is to “belong.” It is necessary to determine exactly which Iranian proxy launched the deadly drone and determine whether it was launched on Tehran’s orders. With that information, Gen. Michael Eric Kurilla, the commander of U.S. Central Command, could devise a plan to destroy the group’s ability to kill Americans. The Iraqi Islamic Resistance Movement, an affiliate of the group, claimed responsibility for the attack. That’s not enough. The Kuril Islands must attack targets, not news releases.
We’ll get to the issue of the Tehran attack later, but let’s start by attacking the proxy group that launched the drone into a base known as Tower 22 in Jordan. This is not an easy mission.
The first obvious question is how this group will retaliate against our counterattack. Most of the large Shiite militias have additional capabilities that they have not yet used against U.S. targets, such as long-range ballistic missiles, large rockets, and drones.
The goal of retaliation is to reduce, not increase, the threat to U.S. forces. But the United States has a large embassy in Baghdad and about 2,500 troops in Iraq and 900 in Syria. It has a lot of targets. Before launching a retaliatory attack, commanders must ensure that these Americans are adequately protected.
The irony of this campaign is that the Biden administration was planning to begin talks with Iraq soon about the possibility of reducing some or all of these troops. Part of the idea was that the Islamic State, the nominal reason for the U.S. presence, was no longer a major threat but a walking target for American soldiers.
At a time when the U.S. military is under attack, Biden will not want to appear weak by withdrawing troops under fire. But he must not forget the similar dilemma faced by President John F. Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis.
The United States then planned to remove older liquid-fueled nuclear missiles from Turkey. When Russia demanded the removal of missiles in return for removing them from Cuba, Kennedy could not openly submit to Soviet pressure. But he privately told the Soviets that if they kept quiet, the missiles would soon be gone, and the crisis was resolved.
How about aiming for the octopus’s head? A direct attack on Iran risks escalating into a wider war. Starting a war also requires hard evidence, especially after the Iraq debacle. Iran’s Foreign Ministry says claims about Iranian direction are “baseless accusations” and that U.S. officials appear to have no evidence of such direct command and control.
But let’s be honest: Iran provides arms, training, and political support to these groups, whether or not Iran orders the attacks. It is fighting a typical covert operation against the United States through proxies in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen in order to drive the United States out of the region without being directly responsible. Iran’s obsession with “death to America” has been growing since the 1979 revolution, and it will not end overnight. But Biden can take steps to deter the current indirect war.
Deterrence is about sending a signal. In some cases, that means the use of military force, but more often it comes with a credible warning. The administration’s chief vigilance officer was CIA Director William J. Burns, known as “Back Channel,” to borrow the title of his memoir. He secretly traveled to Moscow ahead of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 to warn President Vladimir Putin of the consequences of U.S. and NATO support for Kiev. His warning was spot on.
Sending a warning to Tehran is further complicated by the fact that the United States must be prepared to support any threat. I think an overt attack on Iranian territory by the US is a bad idea, especially with the Middle East already on fire, so I’d like to put Mr. Burns’ back channel aside for now. But superpowers can also take other steps to protect their interests. Iran is not alone in its ability to carry out deadly covert actions.
The final two cards in Biden’s deck are diplomatic. Biden’s national security adviser Jake Sullivan has just returned from a meeting in Thailand with senior Chinese foreign policy official Wang Yi. Sullivan called on China to use its influence against Iran to ease tensions. He stressed that Houthi attacks could ultimately sink ships in the Red Sea, with knock-on effects on global markets.
Wang seems to understand that China, which relies on global maritime trade, has more to lose from the Houthis’ recklessness than the United States. In a crisis where Beijing’s interests align with those of the US government, let’s see if Beijing uses its power to shape global events.
What is the most reliable path to curbing the violence incited by Iran after the Gaza conflict? To bring the conflict to a quick end. Burns was in Paris last week to broker an agreement between Israel and Hamas that would lead to a long lull in fighting, something Hamas could call a cease-fire and Israel could call an extended pause. Biden will need to use every tool in his kit to achieve his breakthrough.
Once the Gaza conflict is over, détente will spread to other theaters, including Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and Lebanon. Conversely, if Gaza is not stopped, other fires will intensify.