US hesitance to retaliate against attacks emboldens Iran

The last two years has seen an uptick in the number of attacks against US forces in Syria

US hesitance to retaliate against attacks emboldens Iran

The last two years saw a significant increase in the number of attacks against US forces in Syria and that trend has already continued in 2023.

Two US military bases were hit multiple times in Syria last month, suggesting that there will be no let-up in the targeting of US soldiers.

Unlike the previous attacks that remain unclaimed, Tashkil al-Waritheen, an Iraqi cell directed by Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, declared its responsibility for the latest offensive against US troops in Al-Tanf on 20 January.

These developments strongly indicate that Washington’s decision not to retaliate against the Iranian-backed militias involved is only leading to further aggression.

The US is believed to have around 900 soldiers deployed in Syria. These troops are focusing on supporting the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces to maintain pressure on the remnants of ISIS and to prevent them from recapturing territory.

AFP
US soldiers in a Bradley Fighting Vehicle (BFV) drive past a flare stack near a local oil field as they patrol the countryside of Rumaylan (Rmeilan) in Syria's northeastern Hasakeh province, near the border with Turkey.

However, not all American troops are stationed inside the Kurdish-controlled region. Washington also has a relatively significant military presence in Al-Tanf, which is located on a strategic road connecting Tehran to Lebanon via Iraq and Syria.

Hence, the base is widely seen as part of the larger US strategy to contain Iran’s military reach in the region.

Uptick in attacks

In the two years since President Joe Biden took office, over 230 projectiles, including 170 rockets and 60 drones, were reportedly fired during 79 attacks on positions hosting US troops or contractors in Iraq and Syria.

That is more than one attack a month on average, which is an unprecedented rate in the history of US operations in Syria.

Most of these attacks were carried out against US locations in Deir Ezzor, where operations against ISIS are centred. Despite its importance for Iran, the Al-Tanf base came second.

That is because targeting US positions in the northeast is easier. Al-Tanf’s location in Syria’s Badia desert, which is flat and unpopulated, allows the US to easily spot and eliminate any ground attackers.

To overcome this operational obstacle, anti-American aggressors resorted to using unmanned aerial systems, which requires more technical expertise.

Notably, the drones used in these attacks in Syria are similar to the ones used against US air bases in Iraq.

This strongly indicates that Iranian-backed militias are likely behind the drone incursions in both countries, including the attacks that remain unclaimed.

The drones used in these attacks in Syria are similar to the ones used against US air bases in Iraq. That strongly indicates that Iranian-backed militias are likely behind the drone incursions in both countries, including the attacks that remain unclaimed.

While expelling US forces from Syria seems to be the common goal of these assaults, the triggers that initiate them appear to vary.

For example, the attack on 4 January is believed to have been motivated by the desire of Iranian-backed factions to commemorate the third anniversary of the death of Qasem Soleimani, the senior Tehran military official killed by an American air strike in January 2020.

Other attacks are suspected to be linked to the nuclear negotiations between the US and Iran.

Some believe that the assaults were used strategically to influence negotiations, while others think that the offensives were arranged by hardliners to spoil the talks altogether.

Meanwhile, US and Israeli officials have said that Iran-backed groups in Syria, in addition to launching assaults in response to American air strikes, are also attacking American forces in retaliation for Israeli air strikes.

Notably, a report by The New York Times in November 2021 identified an armed drone assault against Al-Tanf as the first Iranian retaliation against the US in response to an attack by Israel. 

But these triggers are not new and cannot alone explain the motivation for the recent uptick in attacks against US forces. 

Hence, the answer might lie in America's foreign policy under the Biden administration.

The White House's decisions to withdraw from Afghanistan and end the US combat mission in Iraq have emboldened Iranian-backed militias to test Washington's boundaries in both Syria and Iraq.

More importantly, the US has refrained from aggressively retaliating against those involved in the attacks against its bases. 

The White House's decisions to withdraw from Afghanistan and end the US combat mission in Iraq have emboldened Iranian-backed militias to test Washington's boundaries in both Syria and Iraq.

So far, the Biden administration has only launched three rounds of retaliatory air strikes on Iranian-backed militias in Iraq and Syria.

Besides, these retaliations were limited to targeting infrastructure belonging to Iranian-backed groups instead of identifying and punishing the groups responsible.

Washington has made it clear that the aim of its soft approach is to limit the risk of escalation with Iran and minimise the risk of casualties.

However, by having a tunnel vision on these objectives, the US failed to realise that its lenient strategy has increased the risks that American soldiers in Syria are facing.

-Dr Haid Haid is a Syrian columnist and a consulting research fellow of Chatham House's Middle East and North Africa programme.

font change