Politics

Effectiveness, not size, key to US involvement in Middle East

In the Middle East, the United States has slowly but surely transitioned from guardianship to partnership, and CENTCOM has been at the forefront of that process.

AFP

The US Air Force shows the "Thunderbirds" and the United States Navy Flight Demonstration Squadron, the Blue Angels, debut the Super Delta formation consisting of six F-16 Fighting Falcons and six F/A-18 Super Hornets.

Effectiveness, not size, key to US involvement in Middle East

Bilal Saab

last update on 29 Jul 2023

In the summer of 2016, I was honoured to be asked by former US national security advisor Stephen Hadley and former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright to help design a wargame, or a simulated crisis, to test whether more or less US engagement in the Middle East would be more beneficial for US interests and regional security.

The crisis revolved around a fictitious incident at sea between Saudi and Iranian naval forces. We postulated that several small attack craft belonging to the Iranians confronted a Saudi frigate in the Arabian Gulf southwest of the island of Abu Musa.

One Iranian boat sank, and one Saudi sailor went missing. Each side believed the other to be responsible for initiating the clash, and both placed their military forces on alert.

Lessons learned

Throughout the crisis, we tested how greater, and reduced, US involvement might have defused the situation and deterred, or not, Iran from escalating. The biggest takeaway, which shouldn’t have been surprising, was that the level of US involvement was less relevant than the effectiveness of US involvement.

Of course, the fact that the United States had military assets stationed in the region mattered a great deal because it gave Washington response options. But the number of these assets was less crucial.

AFP — An American flag flies near US Navy boats docked at Bahrain's Salman port in the capital Manama, on May 12, 2013, one day before the start of the biggest exercise of mine countermeasure maneuvers in the Arabian Gulf.

This meant that the size of America’s military presence in the region – more specifically, its troops and equipment – while necessary, were not a determining factor in the success of US involvement. A second major takeaway from the wargame was that Iran was most likely not deterred by a greater US military presence or show of force.

This meant that the size of America's military presence in the region – more specifically, its troops and equipment – while necessary, were not a determining factor in the success of US involvement.

Events in the Middle East over the past few weeks and months reminded me of the insights we gleaned from the 2016 war game.

Even though US Central Command (CENTCOM) has fewer military resources today due to the US focus on the challenge posed by China in the Indo-Pacific and Russia's war against Ukraine, it has been more effective lately in its involvement in the region, both unilaterally and together with regional partners.

Indeed, for all the talk of US abandonment of the Middle East, it is simply not true.

The proof is in the pudding

The examples of effective US involvement are numerous but some deserve mentioning given their significance.

Just recently, CENTCOM conducted a strike that killed an Islamic State (IS) leader in eastern Syria. That operation clearly showed that the United States remains committed to the mission to counter IS despite the very modest US troop presence in that part of Syria.

A little before that, the US Navy said it had intervened to prevent Iran from seizing two commercial tankers in the Gulf of Oman. That was a case of deterrence success, and it once again showed that the United States continues to prioritise freedom of commerce and navigation in those critical Gulf waters.

In addition to these kinetic operations, CENTCOM has deployed additional military assets to the region including a Navy destroyer and F-35 and F-16 fighter jets, all to bolster the US deterrent against Iran. CENTCOM also has increased its training tempo with regional partners to promote interoperability and strengthen military bonds.

From guardianship to partnership

The frequency and sophistication of the latest joint training exercises have incorporated cutting-edge and innovative technologies, and have received a noticeable boost. These heightened activities are more effective because they are part of CENTCOM's newly-revamped responsibility as a security integrator.

In the Middle East, the United States has slowly but surely transitioned from guardianship to partnership, and CENTCOM has been at the forefront of that process.

Of course, there have been many misses, as well.

Iran did manage to seize several ships over the past few weeks and months and engage in various unlawful acts both on land and at sea, putting into question the effectiveness of US deterrence.

AFP — A US Navy vessel sails during the International Mine Countermeasures Exercise (IMCMEX) organised by the US Navy at its Naval Support Activity base, the 5th Fleet command centre off the coast of Bahrain's capital Manama.

But the larger point here is that the very success of that deterrent depends not necessarily on the number of troops, fighter jets, or aircraft carriers the United States utilises – which is what regional partners always focus on – but on the concepts that define the US role and the political will of US leaders to act.

The effectiveness of American deterrence depends not necessarily on the number of troops, fighter jets, or aircraft carriers the US utilises but on the concepts that define the US role and the political will of US leaders to act.

A problem of policy, not practice

The problem has rarely been CENTCOM but, rather, policy and politics in Washington. I am in no way suggesting that size does not matter. It does because capacity contributes to the mission of partner reassurance. But it is not more important than effectiveness.

This begs the question of how the United States can be more consistent with its effective involvement. With greater consistency comes trust, which is critical for partnership. But trust has been lacking in America's regional relations.

In a 2 June speech at the Shangri-La Dialogue, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin repeated a famous saying in the military: "you can't surge trust."

He's right.

The United States doesn't need more troops or hardware to rebuild trust with its regional partners. It just needs to be more effective, innovative, and consistent with what it already has.

+ / -