What is the endgame for the U.S. in striking ‘Iran-backed’ Shiʿa militias in Iraq and Syria? Some 85 ‘targets’ were struck 2/3 February 2024 (around midnight, Syria/Iraq time).
The strikes are a response to the 29 January 2024 drone strike in Area 55—the 55 km2 area in Syria that adjoins Iraq and Jordan. Area 55 contains al-Tanf (Syria; 33°30′21″N 38°37′04″E), and holds an illegal U.S. military base, which is where the three Arizona National Guard personnel who died were stationed. There is a U.S. military presence in Tower 22 in Jordan, but this is a legal base because it was established with permission from Amman. This is why Biden and DOD insist the injuries and deaths occurred ‘inside Jordan.’
Firstly, was the 29 Jan strike intended to cause casualties? The Shiʿa militia that launched the ‘kamikaze’ drone probably knew that it could cause deaths and injuries. So, casualties and U.S. retaliation were expected—at some point in the campaign—given that American bases in Iraq and Syria had been struck by rockets and suicide drones some 166 times since 8 October 2023.
Secondly, if retaliation by Washington was expected, was there a pre-planned response by Shiʿa groups? I would argue that the response is steady escalation given the ultimate goal for Iraqis and Syrians is the expulsion of all American troops illegally occupying their countries. Indeed, within minutes of last night’s airstrikes, American bases at Ayn al-Assad and al-Harir in Iraq, and al-Tanf (Syria), were struck by drones and rockets. Evidently, Shiʿa soldiers were not deterred.
Thus, the question posed above. Endgame.
The U.S. is caught in a trap; a cycle of escalation followed by retaliation followed by further escalation and retaliation. Tehran, IRGC, and Shiʿa militias are aware that Biden will be forced to ‘do something’ to avoid looking weak; and that the usual suspects—neo-conservatives, Israel, AIPAC, Republicans— especially Senators Lindsey Graham, Tom Cotton, John Cornyn, and Ted Cruz—will bay for Iranian blood. But the U.S. cannot strike Iran directly for fear of unleashing a war that will engulf the region; lead to the destruction of American bases in the Persian Gulf and far greater losses of American life; and disruptions to the flows of oil and gas to global markets. Hence, as Scott Ritter put it, ‘one big sound and light show.’ The sound and light show followed five days of American diplomatic outreach to Iran. Washington also telegraphed its strikes, allowing Shiʿa warriors ample time to vacate bases, move armaments and munitions underground, and then enjoy the Muslim ‘Sabbath’ (jumma; Friday) with family. The airstrikes generated glaring headlines in American and British media; and ‘talking heads’ on CNN and Foxnews were giddy—as intended. The strikes pacified (for now) all but the most rabid Iran-haters. But what next?
Perspectives 
You must be logged in to post a comment.