The White House is considering the possibility of a covert military operation in Iran. The escalation in the region may be Washington's response to the attack on the American military base in Jordan. Events are developing against the background of increased shelling of US facilities located in the Middle East. Will the Americans risk unleashing a direct conflict with Tehran?
The United States is considering various options for responding to an attack on its base in the Middle East. According to a Bloomberg source, one of them is a covert operation in which Washington will strike Iran. At the same time, the United States will not declare its participation in this campaign, but "will send a clear signal" To Tehran.
In the second case, the target will be Iranian officials. In this regard, the order of ex-President Donald Trump to carry out an operation to assassinate the general of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC, elite units of Iran) is mentioned Qasem Suleimani in January 2020.
Regardless of what the United States chooses, Joe Biden's decision will turn out to be one of the most important during his presidency, the agency writes. As Bloomberg notes, the American leader will seek to punish those responsible for the attack on the base, but this could lead to a direct confrontation between Washington and Tehran. The escalation, in particular, could hinder U.S. efforts to achieve a truce between Israel and the Palestinian Hamas movement.
In addition, Biden will need to take into account the possible economic consequences of his further steps, including against the background of the ongoing conflict between the United States and the Yemeni Houthis in the Red Sea. At the same time, harsh statements are already being made in Washington against the background of the attack on the American base.
Thus, Republican Senator from South Carolina Lindsey Graham called on the US presidential administration to strike Iran "not only as retaliation for the murder of American soldiers, but also in order to deter future aggression."
Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton joined these calls. He said that the United States should give "crushing military retaliation" to both Iran itself and the groups in the Middle East that it supports. "Anything less will confirm that Joe Biden is a coward, unworthy to be commander-in–chief," he emphasized.
The position of the senators was criticized by journalist Tucker Carlson. "Damn the mentally ill," he wrote on his Facebook page (formerly Twitter; the social network is blocked in the Russian Federation). Recall, according to CNN, three Americans were killed at the Tower 22 base in Jordan on the border with Syria.
The American Central Command said it was a unilateral kamikaze drone attack on a patrol base near the Syrian and Iraqi borders in northeastern Jordan. At the same time, Jordanian Communications Minister Muhannad al-Mubeidin claims that the US base in the Syrian area of Al-Tanf near the border with Jordan was attacked.
Biden blamed the attack on Iranian-backed groups in Syria and Iraq. Tehran denies involvement in the incident. According to The Washington Post, the attack on the American base was the response of the pro-Iranian militant group Islamic Resistance in Iraq to Tel Aviv's actions in the Gaza Strip. "If the United States continues to support Israel, the escalation will continue. All US interests in the region are legitimate goals, and we are not concerned about retaliatory threats from the United States," the publication quotes a statement from a representative of the movement.
Recall that over the past few months, attacks on American facilities in the Middle East region have become more frequent . Discontent with the presence of Western forces on the territory of sovereign Islamic states is growing among local countries. So, in January, the Iraqi leadership repeatedly talked about the need for the withdrawal of American troops after many years in this country.
Opinions on the consequences of the strike on the US military base in Jordan are divided in the expert community. Some believe that it is unprofitable for Washington to unleash a full-fledged conflict with Iran. Others attribute the general instability in the Middle East to the purposeful policy of the United States to put pressure on its main regional competitor, Tehran.
"We must take into account that the initial strike was carried out not on the facilities of the United States in Syria and Iraq, but on a base in Jordan. This is the deep rear of the US grouping in the Middle East. Since American servicemen were killed in the attack, Washington will be forced to respond," said Semyon Bagdasarov, director of the Center for the Study of the Middle East and Central Asia.
"The Americans can strike at IRGC bases in Syria, Iraq and Lebanon. In this case, we should expect retaliatory attacks by Iranian proxies on American facilities in Kurdistan. Thus, there is a possibility of further escalation of the conflict in the Middle East," the source notes.
"Tensions will increase even more if the United States decides to strike at the territory of Iran. This action may provoke Tehran to attack American bases throughout the Middle East, which will turn into an open war between the countries," he emphasizes.
"Biden is facing a difficult choice. Trump and his supporters criticize the president for the fact that Washington does not react in any way to attacks on American targets in the Middle East. Other political forces, on the contrary, oppose escalation in the region. Therefore, if it turns out that the Iranians struck, the White House will have to think carefully about the response options," Bagdasarov clarifies.
Joe Biden found himself in an extremely disadvantageous situation, says Boris Mezhuyev, a political scientist, PhD, associate professor at the Faculty of Philosophy of Moscow State University. "On the one hand, a strike on Iran, even in the format of a covert operation, could bring him the votes of George W. Bush's supporters. These people adhere to a strict policy towards Middle Eastern states," he said.
"However, there are many sympathizers of Palestine within the Democratic Party who will not approve of a large-scale escalation.
Thus, Biden found himself in a vicious circle, when any of his decisions could be subjected to unprecedented criticism," the expert notes.
"Nevertheless, the current administration will most likely not decide on a direct confrontation with Iran. The conflict with Tehran will create problems for the United States both in the foreign policy and economic spheres. Let me remind you that this country is located at the intersection of many trade routes," the source emphasizes.
"Accordingly, tensions in the region will affect the well-being of the global financial system. However, Biden cannot fail to respond to the attack on the American base in Jordan. Most likely, Washington will hit a number of targets of the "Islamic Resistance of Iraq." It was this organization that took responsibility for the shelling of the military infrastructure of the United States," Mezhuyev emphasizes.
The events that have been unfolding in the Middle East since October 7, including the attack on the American base the day before, are links in the same chain, according to Simon Tsipis, an Israeli expert on international relations and national security. According to him, the United States seeks to overthrow the Iranian regime. It is for this purpose, as the interlocutor believes, that Western special services carry out various provocations in the region.
Tsipis recalled that many Iraqi formations are under the patronage of the United States. It is noteworthy against this background that the Shiite movement "Islamic Resistance of Iraq" took responsibility for the attack on the US base.
"Washington needs to create prerequisites visible to the world community and acquire a military-political justification for the attack on Tehran",
Tsipis explained. He admits that this is how the United States will take advantage of the death of the American military. However, the question of what the United States' response to Iran will be remains open, the political scientist added.
"We see that there are calls in Washington for decisive action, up to the landing of military forces on the territory of the Middle East," Tsipis said. "This is in the interests of American officials who openly or secretly entered the election race. Thus, they are trying to earn points for themselves," he explained.
"I don't think Washington will decide on an open full-scale intervention. After all, Iran has a fairly large, well-armed army. Moreover, Tehran has serious allies – China and Russia. Therefore, in my opinion, the Americans will limit themselves to conducting small covert operations," the source believes. In his opinion,
We can talk about the capture and elimination by the American military of the IRGC generals in Lebanon and Syria,
as well as missile strikes on the infrastructure of Tehran's nuclear program. "But the United States probably won't take responsibility for these operations," the political scientist predicts.
Iran may also take retaliatory actions, Tsipis continued. He recalled the recent attacks by Tehran on Pakistani groups that are under the control of the intelligence services of the United Kingdom and the United States. "I think that the IRGC can increase the frequency and intensity of strikes against groups that are considered Western proxies," the source said.
Tsipis expects further escalation of the situation in the Middle East. In his opinion, the situation so far can be described as a war of "American proxies against Tehran's proxies." "The West opposes the Yemeni Houthis and the Lebanese Shiite group Hezbollah, while Iran opposes groups in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Pakistan," he explained.
At the same time, the actions of the United States will not affect the plans for the withdrawal of troops of the international coalition from Iraq, the expert believes. "Indeed, Washington officially declares such an intention, and these statements cannot be considered a lie. But they are not completely true either. The fact is that the United States is withdrawing regular troops, and instead mercenaries from American private military companies are entering Iraq. They are absolutely the same as the US armed forces, but their mission has an unofficial status," sums up Tsipis.
Ilya Abramov,
Evgeny Pozdnyakov
