Amid the regional and international meltdown, the million-dollar question seems to be: Does the US fear a direct military confrontation with Iran, especially at the current stage?
Before answering this question, we must address the motives behind the question.
The most important is the strong discrepancy in statements by United States officials. For example, the Pentagon claimed that the US had not found any direct order from Iran to its agents to attack US forces in the Middle East.
Pentagon spokesman Brig.-Gen. Patrick Ryder told reporters, “We don’t necessarily see that Iran has explicitly ordered them to take these kinds of attacks.”
When asked to elaborate, Patrick Ryder said, “We haven’t seen a direct order, for example, from the Supreme Leader saying: ‘Go out and do this.’”
In contrast, the Pentagon, through US Air Force spokesman, Gen. Pat Rader, said that US forces in Iraq were attacked 10 times between October 17 and 24, while US forces in Syria were attacked three times during the same period. As a result, 20 American soldiers were hit by drone strikes on American bases in Iraq and Syria.
That means that the Pentagon is waiting for evidence showing clear and direct orders from Khamenei for attacks on Americans. But it also admits that many recent attacks have targeted Americans – not to mention previous attacks.US Secretary of State Antony Blinken acknowledged the existence of threats against US forces in the Middle East. He said they were coming from Iran’s supporters and allies in the region and that he expects them to escalate.
White House Strategic Communications Coordinator John Kirby said the US believes Iran-linked groups were behind the increasing attacks on American targets in the Middle East. He said missile and drone attacks on US facilities in Iraq and Syria have become more frequent recently. Kirby confirmed that “Iranian-backed groups” are behind the attacks. For its part, the Pentagon says all the attacks on American forces bear Iran’s fingerprints. But, it says, there is no evidence at this time.
I do not know, as an observer, what evidence American officials are looking for. My astonishment here, frankly, is not aimed at condemnation, but at trying to understand. The history of the US is replete with waging wars and military operations against specific targets, sometimes without waiting for confirmed evidence, or by citing undocumented evidence and proof. Therefore, the American position in this case becomes confusing and questionable.
However, analysis of the scene can provide relatively convincing answers to these questions. It is obvious that the US has no doubt that these groups and militias are supported by Iran.
Let me refer here to the statement of an American official to CNN that there are “red lights flashing everywhere.” American officials say that at this stage, it appears that Iran is encouraging the groups rather than explicitly directing them. Kirby, as spokesman for the US National Security Council, said there is a very direct link between these groups and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.
Another US official said, “The road leads back to Iran. Iran funds, arms, equips and trains militias and proxy forces all across the region.”
Despite these condemnations, it appears that there will be a long wait for evidence. Another US official explained this by saying that the extent to which these groups are willing to act independently of Iran is a persistent intelligence gap.
Iran’s goal is to maintain some level of plausible deniability
This simply means that US intelligence agencies are waiting for evidence they won’t get, they don’t want to get, and aren’t even looking for now. After all, the existence of evidence means the need to respond to the source of the confirmed threat to preserve US credibility and international standing.
There is no doubt that the US failure so far to resolve the fate of Ukraine makes it more cautious in dealing with Iran in the military field.
The state of polarization and the struggle for hegemony and global influence with Russia and China cannot tolerate a new American failure, which this time could be painful.
For this reason, despite all the efforts and assurances of support for Israel since the beginning of the current crisis, President Joe Biden and members of his administration have taken positions marked by confusion, disarray, and shifting viewpoints. Their attitudes were shaped by electoral calculations and extreme concern about Hezbollah’s involvement in the current conflict.
Biden is still hiding behind his very hesitant stance on dealing strictly with Iran. Arguably, the only case that would force the White House to engage in a direct military confrontation with Iran would be if it were to interfere directly in the conflict with Israel.
That is highly unlikely because Iran does not want such a war. This could destroy a large part of its military capabilities. Consequently, Iran is content to weaken the capabilities of its adversaries through its agents.
The Iranian and US sides are thus engaged in a game whose rules and red lines they know well. But that does not preclude the possibility of strategic mistakes or misjudgments that lead both sides to do what they dread.
The writer is a UAE political analyst and former Federal National Council candidate.