Experts have outlined Joe Biden ’s options as the US President faces a difficult choice about how to respond to the deaths of three US soldiers after a base in Jordan was targeted in a drone strike overnight.
The outpost, Tower 22, in the north-west of the region, bordering Syria, was struck by what the White House has described as “radical Iran-backed militant groups operating in Syria and Iraq." Leaving three US personnel dead and a further 25 injured, President Biden said the US is still "gathering the facts" regarding the "one-way" drone attack responsible for the first US casualties since US soldiers in the Middle East began being hit by air strikes months ago by Iranian-backed groups since the onset of the war in Gaza.. The incident marks a major escalation in the conflict.
Dr Afzal Ashraf, who teaches International Relations and Politics at Loughborough University, and has spent over 30 years in the UK Armed Forces as a senior officer, told TheMirror.com what will happen next will “depend on a decision that Biden will have to make.” He added: “I will suggest that that decision should be made after the facts become clearer.”
READ MORE:
Dr. Afzal Ashraf, teaches International Relations and Politics at Loughborough University, and has spent over 30 years in the UK Armed Forces as a senior officer (SKY News)Following Biden’s declaration that he would “hold all those responsible to account at a time and in a manner of our choosing”, Dr Ashraf said that this development “does present a very serious potential of escalation ”. Dr Ashraf added: “It is not certain if these attacks have been directed by Iran, and we do not know to what extent these attacks are directed by Iran. The Iranians have always been clear that they do not have directive control over groups carrying out attacks.”
Inside WW1 military hospital abandoned for decades before new lease of life
If you can't see the poll, click here
Since coalition forces began in the region on October 17, the US has launched several strikes against Iranian-backed Iraqi militants in Iraq and Syria that have carried out over 140 attacks on American forces in the region. However, the US is yet to act directly against Iran. Dr Ashraf added: “Everything the Iranians have done so far has been to avoid any direct engagement with the United States. So if the government is convinced that this attack was backed by Iran they have a few options for their approach.”
A kamikaze drone was used to strike the base (Iranian Army office/AFP via Gett)Of the three options Dr Ashraf outlined, the first was to directly attack Iran, but he said this would initiate a “ cycle of violence” from which “Iran has nothing to lose, and the US will likely gain nothing from.”
He said: “One is to directly attack Iran, that is something Israel will be keen to encourage, and this will have enormous consequences, as Iran will be reluctantly forced to respond directly against the Americans. It has many options here as the US has multiple bases close to Iran. It could target the US Naval base in Bahrain, which has thousands of US personnel at any given time.”
Map shows the location of the strikeThe second option would be an “indirect approach.” This would involve the US attacking “Iranian interests outside Iran.” He said the US and Israel have been doing this by attacking members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps [IRGC], and added that “The US has many options for sending out a message.”
The final option would be to consider the Iranian government’s “culpability” for backing these attacks. Dr Ashraf posited whether these attacks were carried out by “people like the Houthis, who are beside themselves at what’s happening in Gaza.”
Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Alie Khamenei (Iranian Supreme Leader'S Office/ZUMA Press Wire/REX/Shutterstock)Concluding that anything other than the indirect approach would be “disastrous” for Biden in his election year, considering Trump is against this war, Dr Ashraf said that the indirect approach would best be carried out by targeting Iranian personnel on foreign territory.
“President Trump is against this war. It will be disastrous for President Biden unless he makes the decision to target the very close allies of Iran, rather than Iran itself. If he does want to engage with Iran, he should do this by attacking Iranian personnel on foreign territory, which he has done, But this has all been carried out in contravention of International Law.
The Rukban camp, which is near the location of the drone strike, and lies in no-man's-land off the border between Syria and Jordan in the remote northeast, near Damascus, Syria (Getty Images)“Such attacks might sound good in Washington and Europe may say ‘well done’, but over the course of time they are increasingly being seen as the world’s pariah states when it comes to breaking International Law, there are more instances of Western countries doing this, but this will not be in the calculus.”
Regarding what the next steps will mean for Biden’s viability as a leader, Dr Ashraf said, that “Some of the political lobby influences in the US do not act in the interests of the United States or even of the president himself.” He added: “This is an election year and no president can afford to get involved in another conflict in the Middle East because there has been a 100 per cent track record of failure there.
US Navy Seal team's message for Saddam Hussein after being captured in Iraq
For all the latest news, politics, sports, and showbiz from the USA, go to
US soldiers in Bradley tanks patrol an area near Syria's northeastern Semalka border (AFP via Getty Images)"In my experience State Department officials and military leadership have the capability to provide the President with sensible advice and suggest effective decisions. Most of the decisions that have led to failures in the Middle East conflicts have been made by political advisors for their own ideological and political interests."
Furthermore, he said Dr Ashraf’s next steps should be to reverse the perception that “the moral capital of the Western world - has been hugely eroded in recent years.”
He said Biden should avoid any “unjustifiable or illegal reaction.” Dr Ashraf suggested that Trump’s indirect approach against Syria was advisable. “You could feasibly draw the conclusion that the US’ history in the Middle East does not bode well for what happens next. Some of its better decisions have been to not react. President Trump chose to blow up some disused weapons dump rather than massively attack Syria after allegations it had used weapons of mass destruction.”
Joe Biden faces a difficult choice (Getty Images)Underscoring his assertion that there is a risk of degrading the West’s perception here, that world leaders will not be takeng into account, Dr Ashraf compared the West’s initiation of violence to our opponents on the global stage.
“There have been a few good decisions, but the West doesn't appreciate - that it is being associated with aggression and warfare- and the people we traditionally think of as a threat to world peace, the Chinese, and the Russians, start relatively fewer wars.’’
Meanwhile, Tyler Kustra, an assistant professor of politics and International Relations at the University of Nottingham said that Biden is “walking a very fine line.
He told TheMirror.com: ''American servicemen have been killed which requires a response - at the same time he doesn't want to widen the conflict - Iran knows this which is why it's engaging in this provocative behaviour - killing three servicemen is not a blow to the military - but it is provocation. This is an Irian-supported group that did this - Iran has wanted its proxies to engage American forces - knowing that American soldiers could be killed.
Tyler Kustra's research focuses on economic sanctions and political violence (Nottingham University)“Americans are there as a trip-wire, if you kill enough of them then they will be forced to start a war. He will have to find something that looks forceful enough to start a wider war. An airstrike will be happening somewhere - they keep a list of targets in a binder on their bookshelf - and they will be looking through that as we speak. The action will have to be small enough that Iran isn't forced to engage all of its forces, but big enough to show America’s allies around the world that they are strong.’’
Regarding whether talks will continue to pull American troops out of Iraq, following reports that the Pentagon had set up a higher military commission in August to organise talks, Mr. Kustra said: “The status of forces will be discussed. Iran has been engaging far more in proxy attacks since the terrorist attacks by Hamas. Regarding the status of forces in Iraq, both sides will be considering much more seriously whether they want Americans in the region. It causes additional problems - if I were national security advisor this is exactly what I would want to be waking up to on Sunday.
“I am not certain that this attack was ordered by the Iranians, but this attack is too random to not have the return address for Tehran. Biden walked a good diplomatic line with his statement, but now Trump will win either way. MAGA republicans say ‘We don’t another war’ but I think if I turned up to a MAGA rally saying three US soldiers had been killed that wouldn’t be the case. So Biden is threading a needle here.”
Read more similar news:
Comments:
comments powered by Disqus
