- Home
- War in the Middle East
- Editorial- Is the US Base Attack a Turning Point?
- 29
- Jan.
- 2024
Editorial- Is the US Base Attack a Turning Point?
modified on 11 Apr. 2024 à 15:40 Read : 4 minute(s) A A A
Undoubtedly, this marks a crucial juncture in the escalating events across various “fronts” in the Middle East following the Gaza War. Following the deadly attack on October 7, tension hotspots have been progressively unfolding, one after another, across different locations on the regional chessboard, each time with a heightened level of intensification.
It began with Hezbollah opening the southern Lebanese front, followed by a series of attacks (spread over time) on American positions in Syria and Iraq, totaling nearly 150 strikes in just over three months. Subsequently, pro-Iranian Houthi forces conducted repeated operations to impede international maritime traffic in the Red Sea. Most recently, the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) openly entered the scene, marked by ballistic missile assaults against Erbil in the autonomous Kurdistan region of Iraq.
The Sunday attack on a US base in a border region spanning Jordan, Syria, and Iraq undeniably marks the most serious development in this meticulously orchestrated and gradually escalating situation by Iran. Given these circumstances, Washington would find it difficult not to respond swiftly with the heavy toll of three fatalities and approximately thirty injuries, who were targeted in their place of accommodation. The precision of the attack indicates the clear intent of the aggressors to maximize the number of victims.
Already mired in the aggravating problem of clandestine immigration, a factor that is likely to weigh on the course of the US presidential campaign, the Biden administration cannot afford to exhibit signs of weakness in the face of repeated attacks perpetrated by Tehran's allies on its military forces deployed in the Middle East — especially just months before the November election. Indeed, as of Sunday evening, several senators and members of the House of Representatives have entered the fray to straightforwardly underscore that the aggression on the military base at the Jordanian-Syrian border, along with the preceding series of attacks, is precisely the consequence of the Biden administration's “softness” and excessive complacency towards the Iranian regime. Numerous voices within Congress called for retaliation to be aimed at strategic positions within Iran itself.
In such an atmosphere, the head of the White House rushed to explicitly and publicly accuse Iran on Sunday evening of orchestrating the attack, affirming that the US will undoubtedly retaliate. The Pentagon has reportedly provided the president with a list of potential targets.
Amidst these rapidly unfolding developments, the crucial question is to determine Tehran's true objective in orchestrating, through its diverse regional henchmen, the gradual escalation we have been witnessing for many weeks. Is the purpose to compel the withdrawal of American forces from the region? Notably, the Sunday attack occurred amid recent information gathered from various sources suggesting a future withdrawal of the US military from Syria and Iraq. Could these attacks be aimed at accelerating such a withdrawal, if confirmed?
Could the Sunday aggression be aimed, in a different context, at undermining any possibility of a political solution or even an extended truce at the Gaza armed conflict level? In other words, is there an intention to thwart the intensive efforts deployed recently in Paris by senior American, Israeli, Egyptian, and Qatari officials to freeze hostilities in Gaza? Substantial progress has been reported during these talks, prompting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to characterize the discussions on Sunday evening as “positive” and “constructive,” despite some lingering obstacles.
A third hypothesis often put forth to explain this orchestrated, incremental escalation by Tehran is the Iranian mullahs’ regime's willingness to reinforce its negotiating position and manu militari drive the US to engage in dialogue to obtain official recognition of the positions it aims to secure in the regional arena.”
Irrespective of the actual objective pursued by the Iranian mullahs in the current context, the Sunday attack and its immediate consequences in terms of the US response could indeed represent a pivotal moment in the crisis generated by the October 7 attack.
However, despite everything, there is a pious hope that the new course of events might pave the way, if need be, for a comprehensive solution process in line with the Oslo Accords to ultimately break free from the sordid, vicious cycle of sterile and directionless wars.
Comments