A strikingly intelligent maneuver today.
Iran needed to show *some* formal response for the hit on its consulate in Damascus. But this delayed, heavily telegraphed, and ultimately moderate military display establishes it as the cooler head *even if* its action today emboldens other actors to act with greater force.
This isn't a game of chicken; this is military powers trying not to be the one to make *the* tipping point move.
May we all rest a little easier in our armchairs, for now.
@MLClark I am honestly asking, is this meant to be sarcastic?
@MLClark I am trying to understand how you think this is a moderate response.
Ah, I see.
I'm not a warmonger and I'm not cheering for any military action.
I'm noting the strategy here. Iran waited instead of retaliating immediately after the attack on its consulate and it retaliated by sending a volley of highly telegraphed drones and a missile or so, then stopping.
If the situation were reversed, and a US consulate were hit, what would you consider to be a moderate way for a state to show force to its people & allies, while still affecting "control"?
@MLClark I know that the US has in the past conducted surgical strikes as response to aggression. This seems to be a scatterblast attack on multiple locations and would be harder to describe as a focused strike. It is too early to assess the full meaning of this attack.
I would say it's too early to assess the full *consequences*, but my observation with respect to Iranian political strategy re: retaliatory force has to do with its affection of self-control on the world stage. Iran's actions could still embolden further actions, 100%. For now Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Israel, and the US among others are clearing the air from one slow-moving volley, not a sustained barrage joined with further acts of aggression.
That's the affectation of "control".
*Saudi Arabia with the Houthi side of things, but it and Jordan's responses also signal how little the region wants to escalate right now. May that sentiment continue, for all our sakes and sanities.
No, not sarcastic. But observing that a country needed to show force on a political level (for its own allies / people) isn't an endorsement of Iran or any state.
What Iran has done has created plausible deniability for its own responsibility in further action in the region. Emboldened Houthi and other operatives may continue their attacks, but Iran gets to claim that it's just responding to an attack on its own, for now.
What seemed sarcastic about that assessment?
@MLClark Some sarcasm is very dry to the point of stating the opposite of what the author thinks. Now I understand your meaning better.
I appreciate the question, and opportunity to clarify, EL Butterfield! This was a stressful uncertainty for us all to witness, and I imagine that nerves will continue to be high for a while.
I'm glad we could talk it out in more "characters" to address the mess of internet tone.
@MLClark Your response to the post.