Iran

Iran’s unprecedented attack on Israel Saturday night represents a dangerous escalation for three reasons. The first is its scale, some 300 drones and missiles. Second, it marks the first time the Islamic Regime has launched a lethal attack on Israeli territory from Iran itself, rather than through proxies. Most important of all is the combination of the first two: a major attack launched against Israel from Iranian territory. Although Israel, the US, the UK and, surprisingly, Jordan managed to shoot down nearly all the incoming drones and missiles, it was the thought that counts. And it was a very dangerous thought. Within hours, the Iranian attack changed the region’s strategic landscape.

Twenty-one years ago today, the United States committed its worst foreign-policy mistake in generations: invading Iraq to overthrow Saddam Hussein, the despot who ruled the Arab country with an iron fist for nearly a quarter-century. The entire operation was supposed to be a “cakewalk,” in which the mighty US military, stocked with the best technology and weapons the world had to offer, would pummel a decrepit Iraqi army that was hobbled by international sanctions for the better part of a decade. The mood at the time was serious but stoic. Donald Rumsfeld, the US defense secretary, argued that the entire war wouldn’t last more than five months.

What do you think of the apothegm “Better late than never?” I think it is often dubious. For confirmation, I adduce the airstrike the Biden administration just conducted against eighty-five targets in Iraq and Syria. The attacks, against infrastructure associated with Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, are billed as the opening salvo in response to last week’s drone attack by Iranian assets in Jordan that left three Americans dead and more than forty injured. Taking a page from an earlier, square-jawed time, officials from the administration tersely commented that America’s “multi-tiered” response would continue at a “time and in a manner of our choosing.”  Spoken like a real administration. I wonder from what storeroom they got the script?

The drone strike that struck near the sleeping quarters of a small US outpost in northeastern Jordan, killing three American troops in the process, has landed like a thud in the corridors of the Biden administration. Hawkish lawmakers who have been jonesing to bomb Iran into the Stone Age for years, such as Lindsey Graham and Tom Cotton, are using the weekend’s travesty to push the argument to an even higher decibel. The logic: Iran and its proxies need to understand that the US won’t be pushed around. It’s an emotionally satisfying response, but one that could get the United States into a heap of trouble if not thought through and tailored appropriately. President Biden and his advisors have spent the last forty-eight hours talking through options.

Hamas’s most valuable assets are the American hostages it holds. That simple fact means the terrorist organization will demand the highest value in return. What can America give Hamas in exchange? Not prisoners, since the US doesn’t hold any Hamas fighters. That means the US cannot follow the Israeli pattern of giving Hamas three Palestinian prisoners in exchange for every one held by Hamas. Nor can America provide boatloads of cash, as the Biden administration has for Iran. Biden could continuing giving Iran money, but that is much harder in the midst of war. And it is untenable politically to pay Hamas directly while the fighting continues. The Biden team might promise to help rebuild Gaza later, but that’s not valuable to Hamas right now, as it fights for its life.

Professor Alan Dershowitz is one of Israel’s most prominent defenders outside the Jewish state. He has just written — in record time — a book about the events of October 7: War Against the Jews — How to End Hamas Barbarism. It will be published next month and will argue, among other things, that the Hamas attack “has required Israel to consider its nuclear option as a last resort to assure its survival.” I spoke to Professor Dershowitz and asked him first, about another of the book’s arguments, that there should be no absolute distinction between civilians and combatants in Gaza, but instead “a continuum of civilianality.” "It existed in Nazi Germany," he said.

When a long-silent former president finally speaks out, the public listens. So do foreign leaders, especially when the former president is closely tied to the current one. That’s why Barack Obama’s comments on the war in Gaza attracted attention.  Anyone who remembers President Obama’s foreign policy knew what to expect: criticism of Israel and a delicate dance around Iran’s malign behavior. In fact, he did not mention Iran at all. He totally ignored their role. His audience expected him to add a few words of moral self-righteousness, warning Israel about future civilian casualties, as if Israeli Defense Forces hadn’t taken enormous and costly steps to avoid them.

Responsibility for the catastrophe now unfolding in the Middle East belongs to Hamas and its sponsor, Iran. The atrocities we are now discovering — the deliberate killing of innocents, the capture of hostages — were an integral part of Hamas’s military strategy and grew directly out of its vicious hatred of all Jews — and of Western civilization. These are acts of true evil and, in committing them, Hamas has the full backing of Iran. President Biden spoke for America when he said, bluntly, “The brutality of Hamas’s blood thirstiness brings to mind the worst rampages of ISIS. This is terrorism.” It is important to begin with these basic points before discussing mistakes made by Israeli and American leaders.

Negotiating with Iran can be the diplomatic equivalent of a day-long migraine. While Iran policy often strikes a chord in Washington, DC, people across the political spectrum come together on this basic proposition: the Iranians are some of the best hagglers on the planet. Wendy Sherman, a career US diplomat who played a major part in negotiating the now-defunct Iran nuclear deal, referred to the Iranians as legendary for their skill at the bargaining table. Donald Trump alluded to their skill, too: “[T]]he Iranians, frankly, are great negotiators,” he said in 2016. And former ambassador (and now CIA Director) William Burns commented the same year, “The Iranians are very skilled negotiators, very tough.

The Biden administration seems to be bumbling on all diplomatic fronts these days. Not only is it trying to magic into existence a thaw in the US-China relationship, while Beijing is only throwing on the liquid nitrogen, but it's also trying to resurrect a version of the nuclear deal with Iran. Concrete details are scant, but reporting from both the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal gives a decent sketch of what the White House is contemplating. It’s not pretty. Under the outlines of the agreement, the US would “avoid tightening sanctions,” stop impounding Iranian ships and release billions in cash currently frozen by US sanctions for humanitarian applications.

Peace isn’t exactly blossoming like rosebuds in the Middle East. The region is still host to a devastating civil war in Yemen, a humanitarian crisis in Syria, sporadic terrorist attacks in Iraq and an endless tit-for-tat between the US and Iranian-backed militias in Iraq and Syria. Indeed, just last night, President Biden authorized several airstrikes against three militia locations in retaliation for a drone attack on an American base in Syria that killed one contractor and injured six others. But for an area of the world so often regarded as hopeless, the Middle East is suddenly looking like an epicenter of diplomacy.