Following the threats of Iran and Hezbollah to respond to the assassinations of Hezbollah leader Fuad Shukr in Beirut and Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, the US administration decided to significantly increase its forces in the region, including deploying additional aircraft carriers, vessels, and pilots.
Spokespersons of the administration have all emphasized that the purpose of the forces is to deter Iran and protect Israel, similar to the actions taken on the evening before the Iranian attack on April 14. The administration emphasized that it doesn’t seek escalation and that it’s sticking to its position, as was stressed in all the talks it held with Israel (including by President Biden and Defense Minister Austin), that only a deal to release the hostages will initiate a process of de-escalation, including between Israel and Hezbollah.
The substantial reinforcement of forces is indeed perceived as intended to deter and protect Israel primarily from an Iranian attack. However, the impression is that it stems from the concern that without American protection, Israel would suffer a severe blow, which would compel it to respond. In such a scenario, the likelihood that the United States would need to expand its involvement would significantly increase, possibly to the point of a direct response against Iran. Therefore, assuming that Tehran will not be deterred, it seems that the massive military deployment is intended to minimize as much as possible the risk that Iran landing a blow that would force Israel to respond harshly and put the United States in a dilemma of how to act. From an American perspective, if the Iranian response is thwarted (similar to the attack in mid-April) Israel would refrain from responding and the incident could be contained.
Although the administration is committed, as it was before, to helping Israel, all reports indicate that anger and frustration with Israel’s conduct is increasing. However, at this stage, the Biden administration doesn’t place the responsibility on Israel for delaying the deal. Nevertheless, many leaks, likely originating from the administration, including the alleged phone conversation with President Biden, leave no doubt that the administration also holds Prime Minister Netanyahu responsible. The administration is caught in a quandary regarding its ability to respond to Israel due to the US election campaign, but the collapse of the strategic plan to end the war, personally led by President Biden, has left the administration without an alternative, and it is likely that the blame will clearly fall on Israel, certainly if the administration is dragged into expanding its military involvement in the Middle East, without wanting to in the final stretch of the tumultuous election campaign, whose results will likely be affected by developments in the region.
Following the threats of Iran and Hezbollah to respond to the assassinations of Hezbollah leader Fuad Shukr in Beirut and Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, the US administration decided to significantly increase its forces in the region, including deploying additional aircraft carriers, vessels, and pilots.
Spokespersons of the administration have all emphasized that the purpose of the forces is to deter Iran and protect Israel, similar to the actions taken on the evening before the Iranian attack on April 14. The administration emphasized that it doesn’t seek escalation and that it’s sticking to its position, as was stressed in all the talks it held with Israel (including by President Biden and Defense Minister Austin), that only a deal to release the hostages will initiate a process of de-escalation, including between Israel and Hezbollah.
The substantial reinforcement of forces is indeed perceived as intended to deter and protect Israel primarily from an Iranian attack. However, the impression is that it stems from the concern that without American protection, Israel would suffer a severe blow, which would compel it to respond. In such a scenario, the likelihood that the United States would need to expand its involvement would significantly increase, possibly to the point of a direct response against Iran. Therefore, assuming that Tehran will not be deterred, it seems that the massive military deployment is intended to minimize as much as possible the risk that Iran landing a blow that would force Israel to respond harshly and put the United States in a dilemma of how to act. From an American perspective, if the Iranian response is thwarted (similar to the attack in mid-April) Israel would refrain from responding and the incident could be contained.
Although the administration is committed, as it was before, to helping Israel, all reports indicate that anger and frustration with Israel’s conduct is increasing. However, at this stage, the Biden administration doesn’t place the responsibility on Israel for delaying the deal. Nevertheless, many leaks, likely originating from the administration, including the alleged phone conversation with President Biden, leave no doubt that the administration also holds Prime Minister Netanyahu responsible. The administration is caught in a quandary regarding its ability to respond to Israel due to the US election campaign, but the collapse of the strategic plan to end the war, personally led by President Biden, has left the administration without an alternative, and it is likely that the blame will clearly fall on Israel, certainly if the administration is dragged into expanding its military involvement in the Middle East, without wanting to in the final stretch of the tumultuous election campaign, whose results will likely be affected by developments in the region.