US weighs options for retaliation after Iran missile attacks

The US has vowed to respond to attacks by Iran-backed militants in Iraq that injured American soldiers, which could bring Tehran and Washington closer to direct conflict, according to regional security analysts.

White House National Security Adviser Jon Finer said that ballistic missile strikes on al-Assad base in Western Iraq on Saturday were “very serious” and added “we are going to respond… to establish deterrence in these situations, and to hold these groups accountable”.

The US military acknowledged an unspecified number of injuries as a result of the attacks, which were claimed by the “Islamic Resistance in Iraq” (IRI), an umbrella term covering a network of militias that receive funding and weapons from Iran. The strikes came after Iran promised retaliation for a suspected Israeli air strike that killed Iranian military officials in Syria.

The latest assault is considered the most serious of more than 100 attacks on US assets in Iraq and Syria claimed by IRI since the outbreak of the Israel-Hamas war.

The US has established conventions for responses to such attacks, carrying out retaliatory air strikes against militant groups in cases where troops are wounded or new capabilities are introduced.

An anti-Iran protest in Duhok, Iraq, last week (Photo: Getty)

The White House imposed sanctions on groups alleged to have ties to Iraq-based militias on Tuesday, including airline Fly Baghdad and its CEO, but is also expected to take military action.

Michael Mulroy, a former US defence department official and security analyst, said that retaliatory strikes could target Iranian personnel, and potentially Iran itself.

“I believe the response to al-Assad will be focused on the group responsible plus the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) operatives in Iraq,” he said, referring to Iran’s irregular military that plays an active role in operations abroad.

“I think if these attacks continue and kill any Americans, we will look to respond in Iran,” Mr Mulroy added. “Managing escalation will be part of the deliberations but establishing deterrence will be, too.”

Related Article

US says it’s ‘not at war’ as plans emerge for military campaign against Houthis

World

US says it’s ‘not at war’ as plans emerge for military campaign against Houthis

Read More

The analysis was echoed by former US diplomat and negotiator Aaron David Miller.

“[The US] don’t want to strike Iran directly for fear of escalation, which only widens the margin for pro-Iranian groups… to strike at US forces,” he told the New York Times. “At some point, if US forces are killed, they’ll have no alternative but to respond directly against Iranian assets.”

Hugh Lovatt, a Middle East specialist with the European Council on Foreign Relations, predicted that the US would “retaliate against Iranian backed groups in Syria and Iraq” with “stepped up strikes” in response to the scale of the attack on al-Assad.

Neither the US nor Iran wants a full blown war, the analyst said, but the risks are growing with region-wide escalation around the war in Gaza.

“The biggest trigger could be intensifying Israeli action [against] Hezbollah to move it back from the Israeli border,” said Mr Lovatt, referring to the militant Lebanese faction and Iranian ally.

Israel and Hezbollah have exchanged fire at Israel’s northern border since the outbreak of war in Gaza. Israeli leaders have warned the group that it is ready to mount a full scale offensive in Lebanon.