Political pressure builds on Biden to strike Iran after US deaths
Send a link to a friend
[January 29, 2024]
By Phil Stewart and Idrees Ali
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The killing of three U.S. troops and wounding of
dozens more on Sunday by Iran-backed militants is piling political
pressure on President Joe Biden to deal a blow directly against Iran, a
move he's been reluctant to do out of fear of igniting a broader war.
Biden's response options could range anywhere from targeting Iranian
forces outside to even inside Iran, or opting for a more cautious
retaliatory attack solely against the Iran-backed militants responsible,
experts say.
American forces in the Middle East have been attacked more than 150
times by Iran-backed forces in Iraq, Syria, Jordan and off the coast of
Yemen since the Israel-Hamas war erupted in October.
But until Sunday's attack on a remote outpost known as Tower 22 near
Jordan's northeastern border with Syria, the strikes had not killed U.S.
troops nor wounded so many. That allowed Biden the political space to
mete out U.S. retaliation, inflicting costs on Iran-backed forces
without risking a direct war with Tehran.
Biden said the United States would respond, without giving any more
details.
Republicans accused Biden of letting American forces become sitting
ducks, waiting for the day when a drone or missile would evade base
defenses. They say that day came on Sunday, when a single one-way attack
drone struck near base barracks early in the morning.
In response, they say Biden must strike Iran.
"He left our troops as sitting ducks," said Republican U.S. Senator Tom
Cotton. "The only answer to these attacks must be devastating military
retaliation against Iran's terrorist forces, both in Iran and across the
Middle East."
The Republican who leads the U.S. military oversight committee in the
House of Representatives, Representative Mike Rogers, also called for
action against Tehran.
"It's long past time for President Biden to finally hold the terrorist
Iranian regime and their extremist proxies accountable for the attacks
they've carried out," Rogers said.
Former President Donald Trump, who hopes to face off against Biden in
this year's presidential election, portrayed the attack as a
"consequence of Joe Biden's weakness and surrender."
The Biden administration has said that it goes to great lengths to
protect U.S. troops around the world.
One Democrat openly voiced concern that Biden's strategy of containing
the Israel-Hamas conflict to Gaza was failing.
"As we see now, it is spiraling out of control. It's beginning to emerge
as a regional war, and unfortunately the United States and our troops
are in harms way," Democratic Representative Barbara Lee said, renewing
calls for a ceasefire in the Israel-Palestinian war.
[to top of second column]
|
Three U.S. service members were killed and at least 34 wounded in a
drone attack by Iran-backed militants on U.S. troops in Jordan, said
U.S. President Joe Biden, the first deadly strike against U.S.
forces since the Israel-Hamas war erupted. Iran's mission to the
United Nations said in a statement on Monday that Tehran was not
involved in the attack.
NOT SO SIMPLE
Democratic Representative Seth Moulton, who served four tours in
Iraq as a Marine, urged against Republican calls for war, saying
"deterrence is hard; war is worse.”
"To the chicken hawks calling for war with Iran, you're playing into
the enemy's hands—and I’d like to see you send your sons and
daughters to fight," Moulton said. "We must have an effective,
strategic response on our terms and our timeline."
Experts caution that any strikes against Iranian forces inside Iran
could force Tehran to respond forcefully, escalating the situation
in a way that could drag the United States into a major Middle East
war.
Jonathan Lord, director of the Middle East security program at the
Center for a New American Security, said striking directly inside
Iran would raise questions for Tehran about regime survival.
"When you do things overtly you represent a major escalation for the
Iranians," Lord said.
Charles Lister of the Washington-based Middle East Institute said a
likely response would be to go after a significant target or
high-value militant from Iran-backed groups in Iraq or Syria.
"What happened this morning, was on a totally different level than
anything these proxies have done in the past two to three months...
(but) despite all of the calls to do something in Iran, I don't see
this administration taking that bait," Lister said.
A U.S. defense official, speaking on the condition of anonymity,
said it was unclear what the second and third order effects would be
in going after Iran.
"Unless the U.S. prepared for an all out war, what does attacking
Iran get us," the official said.
Still, Lord and other experts acknowledge that Israel had hit
Iranian targets in Syria for years, without dissuading Iran,
including four Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps officials in
Damascus on Jan. 20.
The United States has also struck Iranian-linked targets outside of
Iran in recent months. In November, the U.S. military said it struck
a facility used not only by Iran-backed group but also by the Iran's
Revolutionary Guard Corps.
But Lister said the U.S. had gone after Iranians outside of Iran in
the past, like the 2020 strike against top Iranian general Qassem
Soleimani, and only yielded a response during a limited period of
time.
"So to an extent, if you go hard enough and high enough, we have a
track record of showing that Iran can blink first," Lister said.
(Reporting by Phil Stewart and Idrees; additional reporting by Simon
Lewis; editing by Paul Thomasch and Diane Craft)
[© 2024 Thomson Reuters. All rights reserved.]This material
may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |