Israel-Hamas War: US Fumbles for Clarity

Since Hamas’ shocking attack on Oct. 7, the Israel-Hamas war has continued to spread. The latest fallout: On Jan. 28, Iran-backed militias attacked a small U.S. outpost in Jordan, killing three U.S. troops and injuring others.

US Response to Jan. 28 Attack

The U.S. responded, in early February, by striking militia bases in Syria and Iraq. It has since indicated that these attacks will continue. The fatal Jan. 28 attack followed over a hundred smaller attacks against U.S. outposts since the beginning of the war; these attacks appear to have been calibrated to minimize the risk of major casualties — the Jan. 28 attack being an exception.

The Biden administration has aimed for a measured response. It has attempted to minimize casualties, particularly of Iranians; even the U.S. assassination of a militia leader in Baghdad was accomplished with great precision. At this point, neither Washington nor Tehran wants an outright conflict. But the prospect of escalation looms: When deadly violence is in play, miscalculation — or miscommunication — can lead to crisis.

The small U.S. bases scattered around Iraq and Syria have been the subject of militant attacks since long before the onslaught started by the Israel-Hamas war. Most of these bases were set up during the fight against the Islamic State, when it raged across Iraq and Syria in the mid-2010s. Now, they are essentially eyes and ears monitoring Iranian activities in the region. The question arises: Are these small, scattered outposts worth their potential costs?

Biden should take a lesson from former President Ronald Reagan, who led the U.S. response when 240 Marines were killed in Lebanon in 1983 by the militant group Hezbollah. Reagan launched a few counterattacks, then withdrew the Marines from danger, “cutting and running” could be the wisest course for Biden.

Iran’s Chess Game

Iran, a long-time supporter of Hamas, is playing a complex game in the Middle East. It seeks to weaken the U.S. power in the region — without provoking a costly war with Washington. To date, Tehran appears successful; so far, the war in Gaza has taken the normalization of relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia, Iran’s regional rival, off the table. In the wake of huge casualties in Gaza, Iran’s rejectionist position toward Israel is striking a chord with tens of millions of angry Arabs and Muslims.

Meanwhile, attacks by the Houthis, another Iran-backed militant group in faraway Yemen, on shipping in the Red Sea have demonstrated the U.S.’ inability to guarantee security in international sea lanes. The Houthis began their attacks in the Red Sea on Nov. 19, prompting the U.S. and its allies to retaliate by striking the group’s facilities in Yemen. To date, efforts by the U.S. and its allies — which have killed several dozen militants — have failed, and traffic is still being rerouted from the Red Sea. Meanwhile, the tit for tat between the Houthis and the U.S. continues.

Israel’s northern border, meanwhile, remains relatively quiet; Hezbollah, the Iran-backed militant group that controls southern Lebanon, does not relish a fight with Israel.

Casualties Continue to Mount in Gaza

All the while, the heart of the conflict — the Israel-Hamas war — grinds on bloodily. Palestinian casualties are approaching 30,000. Behind the scenes, various proposals for a cease-fire and hostage release have been presented and rejected. Israel, Hamas, Qatar, and Egypt are key players in the negotiations; importantly, there are signs that the Biden administration is growing impatient with the hard-line approach of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Biden has been a staunch advocate of Israel throughout his long public career, and he has been resolute in his support for the Jewish state since the Hamas’ attack on Oct. 7. But major differences have emerged between Biden and Netanyahu. Biden is facing criticism abroad and at home for his support of Israel. Some left-wing protesters have taken to calling him “Genocide Joe.” The administration clearly wants a quick end to the fighting and then a rapid movement toward a political solution. Netanyahu, for his part, remains committed to the eradication of Hamas, however long it takes and at whatever cost. He is adamantly opposed to a two-state solution, a cornerstone of U.S. policy for decades.

If a cease-fire is struck, the differences between Biden and Netanyahu may actually intensify. Focus will shift to the “day after” — that is, the security and political arrangements for a post-war Gaza, where the U.S. and Israeli positions will be far apart, notably on the negotiation of a two-state solution.

An Uncertain Future Lies Ahead

Wars inevitably introduce huge uncertainties into geopolitical affairs. The same is true of the war that began with Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack. The U.S., for instance, may yet be drawn into a full-scale war. At minimum, we may see our relationship with Israel and friendly Arab states permanently changed, though in ways that are now frustratingly impossible to predict.

This material may be quoted or reproduced without prior permission, provided appropriate credit is given to the author and Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy. The views expressed herein are those of the individual author(s), and do not necessarily represent the views of Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy.