Over the weekend, the United States launched strikes on several dozen targets in Iraq and Syria. This was in response to the death of three and the wounding of more than 40 other American troops in an attack on the small American outpost of Tower 22 in Jordan near the Syrian border. This is another step towards a creeping escalation in the Middle East that threatens to get out of control and escalate into a full-fledged war between the US and Iran. Therefore, American diplomacy is trying to calm or at least freeze conflicts. To what extent this works and how it distracts from other matters, read the author’s material by Apostrophe journalist Roman Kot.
The need to respond
Current events in the Middle East are a clear example of when the situation is getting out of control. According to AP, the US military missed the strike due to a coincidence: they mistook the enemy drone for an American one and allowed it to fly unhindered to the base. In essence, a “black swan” has arrived.
Among other things, this brought another country into the war. It is one thing for pro-Iranian armed groups to attack US forces in Iraq, where Shiites call the US military occupiers. A strike on the US military in Jordan is quite another. It should be recalled that the country is the main ally of the United States in the Middle East among Arab countries. So, we are talking about an outright act of aggression. However, King Abdullah II of Jordan limited himself to condemning attacks on his territory.
At the same time, the Biden administration could not let the situation go on the brakes, because for the first time in a long time, American military personnel were killed. An additional factor that influences the position of the White House is the presidential primaries. Both before and after the strike, Republicans criticized Biden for being “too slow” or “not strong enough” in his response to the attacks. In the conditions of the election campaign, it was impossible to expect anything else. But at least for their electorate, the Democrats showed determination.
At the same time, the question was raised about how not to “go too far and prevent a full-fledged war with Iran. Therefore, Washington decided to launch massive strikes, but with a warning. The strikes were announced for several days, they even named tentative dates - “on the weekend.” Iran appears to have heard the warning. On February 1, Reuters, citing unnamed sources, reported that senior Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps officers in Syria had left the country along with dozens of mid-level officers, but the activity of pro-Iranian groups had remained largely unchanged. Moreover, new threats had emerged In the Red Sea, in addition to attacks on civilian ships, Yemen's Houthis are hinting at the possibility of damaging Internet cables, which, given the fact that fiber optic cables carry 17% of the world's Internet traffic there, seems extremely dangerous.
Troops home?
The current escalation has highlighted another problem - the presence of US troops in Iraq and Syria in general. Immediately after the US attacks, the Iraqi Foreign Ministry handed a note of protest to the US Ambassador. In addition, the Prime Minister of this country, Mohammed Shia al-Sudani, announced the need to withdraw US troops from the country.
Let us remind you that the United States keeps about 900 troops in small bases in Syria, mainly in the northeast of the country and without the permission of the government of Bashar al-Assad. There are 2,500 troops in Iraq. They have remained in these territories since the fight against the Islamic State (IS), a notorious terrorist organization that controlled large parts of Iraq and Syria from 2014 to 2019.
The words of the Prime Minister of Iraq should be taken with caution - the governments of this country have long been balancing between the United States and Iran. In Baghdad, on the one hand, they perceive the US presence as a constant headache, on the other, as a means to contain Tehran’s influence.
US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has so far denied plans to withdraw troops from Iraq and Syria. At the same time, according to him, discussions are underway with the Iraqi authorities about the further presence of American troops. Arguments for: troop withdrawal will reduce the threat to the US military, which is especially sensitive against the backdrop of elections. Arguments against: troop withdrawal will allow IS terrorists to resume their influence. After all, that's what happened in Iraq.
In addition, the White House remembers the hasty escape of American troops from Afghanistan in the first months of Biden’s presidency. Then the footage of thousands of people at Kabul airport trying at all costs to get on planes, clinging to the landing gear, seriously undermined the image of the United States. This time, there are fears that after the withdrawal of US troops, the Islamic State will resume its positions.
Forcing a truce
At the same time, American diplomacy is trying to resolve the situation around the Gaza Strip. This could potentially reduce tensions with Iran.
The US goal is to first conclude an agreement on the exchange of hostages, and then expand it until a complete cessation of hostilities. For this purpose, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken arrived in the Middle East. For the fifth time in the last 4 months. The geography of the tour is extensive: Israel, Egypt, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the West Bank. At the same time, negotiations took place in Paris between Egyptian, Qatari and Israeli intelligence services through the mediation of CIA Director William Burns.
The United States uses a wide range of carrots and sticks to all sides of the conflict. Thus, at the end of January, NBC News reported that Washington was considering the possibility of slowing or suspending the supply of certain types of weapons to Israel. The US also imposed sanctions against four extremist Jewish settlers who committed violence against Palestinians in the West Bank.
In Israel itself the situation is also difficult. The Israel Defense Forces are systematically destroying the infrastructure of terrorists, Hamas militants continue to conduct urban battles using underground tunnels. And hundreds of thousands of civilians in the enclave are suffering from a humanitarian catastrophe. At the same time, there is no unanimity in power. Prime Minister Netanyahu finds himself caught between two fires: right-wing ministers are categorically against any long-term ceasefire. At the same time, opposition members of his military cabinet want the release of the hostages even at the cost of a truce. Another factor slowing down the negotiations is the status of Gaza after the purge of Hamas militants. Israel has still not given a clear answer on this matter, so there are several options: from direct occupation to a peacekeeping mission.
The White House is trying to resolve the crisis as quickly as possible in order to focus on other threats. In the end, neither China nor Russia with its aggression against Ukraine has gone away.
No comments:
Post a Comment