US air strikes in the Middle East: what will the fallout be?
The US military says it has attacked more than 85 targets in Iraq and Syria that are linked to the Iranian Revolutionary Guards and Iranian-backed militias. According to Iraqi sources, at least 16 people were killed. The strikes were Washington's response to the death of three US soldiers in a drone attack in Jordan. Europe's press sees an extremely dangerous situation developing.
Put pressure on Iran and Israel
In an article in the Cyprus Mail, historian Gwynne Dyer looks for parallels from the past:
“Here we all are, probably not in that street in Sarajevo in 1914 but quite possibly on the USS Maddox in the Gulf of Tonkin in 1964, at the start of US involvement in the Vietnam War. Which is definitely not where we want to be. It's Biden's move, but he should actually make two moves. Retaliate as little as possible against Iranian proxies somewhere (because a man's gotta do etc), but not against Iran itself. At the same time, compel Israel to end the killing in Gaza, because that's what is giving Iran the leverage to mobilise all these Arab volunteers against America and for the Palestinian cause.”
Intent on not giving in again
Biden doesn't want to lose influence in the region, La Repubblica explains:
“If America had not reacted, it would have been obvious to everyone that it was afraid of Tehran, and this would have inevitably changed the balance in the Middle East. And Biden is well aware of the price America pays when it withdraws from the Middle East: he was vice president at the end of August 2013, when Barack Obama decided to call off the attack on Bashar al-Assad, the president in Damascus who was guilty of using gas against Syrian civilians. ... From then on, US prestige in the region began to decline in favour of Vladimir Putin's Russia. Biden, who had doubts about Obama's decision at the time, wanted to avoid making a similarly grave mistake.”
Just a spark could suffice
Lidové noviny is concerned:
“One or two major attacks on American targets or a poorly aimed American missile that kills a few Iranian Revolutionary Guards supporting anti-American militants are all that separate us from war. The ensuing conflict would paralyse the transport of oil from the Middle East and goods through the Suez Canal, slow down the global economy and potentially even lead to assassinations by members of pro-Iranian militias or Iranian intelligence services in the West. Let's hope that Iran tames its allies, that the Americans aim well and that this grim scenario does not end up becoming real.”
Primarily a campaign manoeuvre
In a Facebook post, foreign policy expert Arkady Dubnov says Biden's motives are mainly domestic:
“The military action must be seen first and foremost as an attempt to salvage the image of America and its president in a presidential election year. Biden and his administration cannot afford to let the jihadists' attack go unanswered - and the response must be extremely resolute. Otherwise Trump cannot be defeated in the election in November. So as cynical as it may sound, the attack launched by the US looks above all like an election campaign manoeuvre.”
Seeking a new grand bargain
The Economist looks at how the strikes could influence the Gaza peace negotiations:
“Optimists in the administration hope they could lay a path for a new grand bargain in the Middle East that would include the establishment of a Palestinian state, Saudi recognition of Israel and an American defence treaty for Saudi Arabia that could help create a new security architecture in the region. The strikes show America is prepared to use muscle against Iran in some circumstances. But for Israel, Saudi Arabia and others who are threatened by Iran, they fall far short of a coherent long-term strategy to contain the regime in Tehran. And in the short-term, any further escalation in fighting could complicate negotiations.”