At least 85 targets in Syria and Iraq were attacked from the air during the night to Friday. Late on Saturday evening, around 30 targets in Yemen were hit in a new wave of attacks. The airstrikes are in response to the deadly drone attack on a US military camp in Jordan last week. The Islamic Resistance in Iraq network has said it was behind the attack that killed three American soldiers. The network consists of various militias linked to Iran, writes the BBC. While the US receives support from its allies, on Saturday there were strong reactions from the parties involved. In Iraq, an American diplomat has been called in, while the Syrian Ministry of Defense believes that the US has thrown fuel on the fire. A spokesman for Iran’s Ministry of Defense has called the attacks a strategic mistake, which could destabilize the region. So far, the Iranians have not threatened to strike back, according to the New York Times newspaper. Many are now wondering what the consequences of the significant American airstrikes will be. news has been in contact with three experts who share their assessments. Henrik Thune is a researcher, former diplomat and former state secretary in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and at the Prime Minister’s office. Here in a meeting with representatives of Afghan civil society in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Cecilie Hellestveit is a lawyer and social scientist. She is an expert in international law, researches conflicts and is a foreign policy commentator. Jon Hanssen-Bauer has been ambassador to both Israel and Lebanon, and has followed developments in the Middle East closely. Is there a risk of escalation in the short term? Cecilie Hellestveit – Middle East expert and international law expert: – There is always a risk of escalation in a theater of war with so many actors and where so many military targets are attacked, says Cecilie Hellestveit to news. – But the big picture is more reassuring, because both the Americans and the Iranians have been absolutely clear that they do not want this to escalate into a direct confrontation. – And I’m holding a button that the Iranians will keep calm. Hellestveit explains this by saying that the US is in a phase where it wants to withdraw US forces from Syria and Iraq. This is something that Iran and the Shia militias also want. RUINS: This was the headquarters of the Hashd al-Shaabi, also known as the Popular Mobilization Forces in Iraq. Photo: HASHD AL-SHAABI MEDIA OFFICE / HANDOUT Jon Hanssen-Bauer – former diplomat and ambassador in Israel and Lebanon: Jon Hanssen-Bauer also does not think there is a danger of a further escalation now. – I understand that Iran is afraid that a major war with the United States will now limit their opportunities to benefit from the hostilities taking place in the region. So I think they will think very carefully before they respond to the American attack on a larger scale, says Hanssen-Bauer to news. The US attacks are a response to the drone attack on a US military camp in Jordan last week. Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide says he understands the US. Henrik Thune – former state secretary in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Prime Minister’s office: Henrik Thune believes Iran will try to contain the militias. – I think both the US and Iran strongly want to avoid any direct escalation between them in the short term. Iran will therefore probably try to hold back the militias. But in the longer term, there is a risk of greater unrest, particularly linked to the US bases in Iraq, writes Thune to news. There are around 2,500 American soldiers present in Iraq and 900 in Syria. A video purporting to show one of the attacks in Syria is circulating on social media. CNN and the New York Times have location-verified the video. CNN says this is a weapons depot in Iraq. What will happen in the longer term? Henrik Thune: In an update on Facebook, Thune writes that he fears both the attacks against the Houthi militia in Yemen and this weekend’s attacks in Syria and Iraq are mistakes on the American side. – I think both of the two ongoing operations from the American side unfortunately point towards being strategic misjudgments, which undermine the USA’s position in the Middle East and globally, writes Thune. He lists four misjudgments in US military operations, summarized here by news: The US is turning the Middle East against them: Many in the Middle East see the attacks by the Houthis and Shia militias as a protest against Israel. Therefore, the US attack is seen as support for Israel’s war, which in turn increases support for the Houthis, the Shia militias and Iran. Danger of more war in Iraq: The attacks are very unpopular in Iraq and it may lead to the political leadership having to ask for American forces to leave the country. It will lead to more chaos and the militias and IS getting stronger. Risk of more insecurity in the Red Sea: The Houthis’ attacks against ships in the Red Sea do not allow them to stop attacking their bases in Yemen. For that, the Houthis are too capable to protect their capabilities and rebuild. There is a risk that the attacks will lead to the movement seeing more ships as legitimate targets, which will harm western shipping. Lack of diplomacy: The two military operations show an absence of effective diplomacy. – As far as the militias in Iraq and Syria are concerned, they are unlikely to want a significant escalation in the first place. An extremely limited American attack could therefore stabilize the situation. After last night’s significant attack, the danger is that the militias will eventually see it politically opportune to respond more forcefully, and then the kind of spirals that create escalation will occur, writes Thune on Facebook. YEMEN: In January, the US and the UK carried out several major attacks against the Houthi militia in Yemen. The background is that the militia has been shooting at civilian and military ships in the Red Sea since 3 December last year. Photo: AP Jon Hanssen-Bauer: – We see a great polarization between Iranian interests and the West, including the United States and the Arab countries around Israel. There are a great many “small wars” being fought in various areas, which make it unclear and easily inflammable. – The US is making progress, as far as I can understand, in discussions with Saudi Arabia and their friends on the one hand, and Israel on the other, to try to resume talks on a normalization of relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia and the others the countries in the region before Biden seriously enters the election campaign. It is a positive move. Cecilie Hellestveit: – I think the Americans have calculated that there could be some form of escalation with the more ungovernable militias supported by Iran, but that they are reasonably sure that the Iranians will stay away. The fact that the war between Israel and Hamas appears to be entering a less intense phase also means that the danger of Iran getting involved is lessening, Hellestveit believes. She says that a new order is about to be established in the Middle East. – I consider that the new order which for many years has led to instability in the Middle East – which is about who will be the leaders in the region after the Americans withdraw more and more – is about to settle. – Then the question is, of course, are the regional powers themselves able to keep order in the Middle East? There are things that indicate that we are on our way to a place where it can be done. And that is good news, concludes Hellestveit.
ttn-69
– Bikker against strategic misjudgments – news Urix – Foreign news and documentaries
