Since the onset of the Israel-Hamas conflict, Iranian proxies have carried out 103 attacks against U.S. military targets. The escalating crisis in the Red Sea has further intensified the pressure on the United States to take decisive action. In a recent interview, former U.S. ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, expressed concerns regarding the inadequacy of current measures aimed at protecting U.S. assets in the region.
With approximately 900 troops stationed in Syria and 2,500 in Iraq, along with a significant naval presence in the Mediterranean and Red Sea, the question arises: are we doing enough to safeguard these assets? According to Friedman, the answer is a resounding no. In fact, he cited a report by the Wall Street Journal that identified a lack of retaliatory action by U.S. military members, referring to themselves as mere 'drone catchers.'
Friedman attributed the deteriorating situation in the Middle East to the Biden administration's policy on Iran. He argued that this policy was effectively fueling conflicts involving Iranian-backed groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah, Iraqi Hezbollah, and the Houthis. Moreover, he revealed that U.S. aid to Iran in the past six months amounted to a staggering $16 billion, including $6 billion exchanged for five hostages and an additional $10 million for unspecified reasons. By comparison, Israel's aid package, still pending congressional approval, amounts to a mere $14 billion.
When asked about the appropriate course of action, Friedman emphasized the need for the U.S. to demonstrate strength and leverage its considerable military power. He highlighted the successful removal of Qasem Soleimani, Iran's leading sponsor of terrorism, during his tenure in the Trump administration, suggesting that a similar display of strength could deter Iran and lead to a more peaceful situation.
However, he criticized the current administration for what he perceived as a submissive approach, asserting that begging for mercy would only exacerbate the risk of conflict. Instead, he argued for a proportionate response when attacked, such as striking military facilities in Tehran, in order to demonstrate American resolve and potentially de-escalate the conflict.
Regarding the issue of selective targeting, Friedman questioned the reluctance to take out entire militant groups, given the availability of satellite intelligence. He suggested that these cautious measures stem from a fear of engaging in a full-scale fight. By failing to confront the challenge head-on, he argued, the U.S. inadvertently emboldens and enables Iranian aggression across the Middle East.
In conclusion, the views expressed by Friedman highlight concerns about the current approach to the Iran-related conflicts in the region. The debate over whether a more aggressive stance or continued diplomatic strategies will yield better results remains a topic of contention within policy circles. As these discussions continue, the situation on the ground continues to evolve, and the potential consequences of any decision made by the United States loom large.
