MESOPOTAMIA NEWS FOCUS : Welche Botschaft steckt hinter dem US-Luftangriff in Syrien?
Enab Baladi – Jana al-Issa (8 März 2021
Das Gezielte iranischer Milizen durch US-Streitkräfte im Osten Syriens hat Fragen über den Ort des Angriffs aufgeworfen – warum in Syrien und nicht im Irak? Zumal das US-Verteidigungsministerium (Pentagon) bekannt gegeben hat, dass der Luftangriff eine Reaktion auf die jüngsten Angriffe auf die Internationalen Koalitionstruppen (ICF) im Irak war.
Die US-Streitkräfte starteten am 26. Februar Luftangriffe auf vom Iran unterstützte Stellungen der Miliz im Osten Syriens. Pentagon-Pressesprecher John Kirby sagte in einer Erklärung, die Streiks seien von US-Präsident Joe Biden angeordnet worden.
Am 16. Februar gab der offizielle militärische Sprecher der Operation Inherent Resolve (OIR), Oberst Wayne Marotto, die Tötung eines zivilen Auftragnehmers und die Verletzung eines US-Soldaten und anderer Koalitionsmitarbeiter nach einem Raketenangriff auf Erbil, die Hauptstadt der Region Kurdistan im Nordirak, bekannt.
Die vom Iran unterstützte Miliz “Wächter der Blutbrigaden” übernahm die Verantwortung für den Angriff auf den Flughafen Erbil.
Warum Syrien?
In seiner Antwort an Enab Baladiwies das US-Außenministerium darauf hin, warum die Stellungen der vom Iran unterstützten Milizen zielgerichtet waren, nicht im Irak. Darin heißt es: “Diese militärische Reaktion wurde von diplomatischen Maßnahmen begleitet, einschließlich Konsultationen mit den Partnern der Internationalen Koalition. Die USA sind zuversichtlich, dass die ausgewählten Infrastrukturziele im Osten Syriens von denselben vom Iran unterstützten Gruppen genutzt wurden, die für die jüngsten und möglichen zukünftigen Angriffe auf US-Streitkräfte verantwortlich sind.”
The Iraqi expert in international relations, Dr. Omar Abdul Sattar, told Enab Baladi that the U.S. strikes coincided with a striking statement, the first of its kind, by the Iraqi Foreign Minister, Fouad Hussein, on 25 February, in which he described those behind the rocket attack as “terrorists.”
This statement indicates that the Iraqi government has used American support to confront the Iranian militias that hit Erbil airport, followed by consultations between the Pentagon and the Iraqi government as its ally, to determine the attacks’ location.
This analysis overlaps with statements by the U.S. Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin, following the strikes, in which he said, “I am confident that the target we went after in Syria was being used by the same Shi’ite militia that conducted the rocket attacks in Iraq. We know what we hit,” the U.S. Associated Press news agency reported.
Austin noted that his country’s forces carried out the strike based on intelligence provided by the Iraqi side. He said, “We allowed and encouraged the Iraqis to investigate and develop intelligence, which was very helpful to us in refining the target.”
For its part, the Iraqi Defense Ministry released a statement expressing its surprise at the U.S. Secretary of Defense’s statements about the exchange of intelligence with the Iraqi government before targeting Iranian positions in Syria. The Iraqi government asserted that its cooperation with the ICF is limited to fighting the Islamic State (IS).
Political analyst Hassan al-Nifi thinks that the U.S. strike was directed at a specific side, namely the Iranian militias on the Syrian-Iraqi borders. The strike is of dual purpose; its tacit objective is to send a message to Iran warning it against its militias’ increased presence in Syrian territory.
Less aggressive option, indicating probable future hostilities
The strikes were a relatively small, carefully calibrated military response, as seven 500-pound bombs were dropped on a small cluster of buildings at an unofficial crossing at the Syria-Iraq border used to smuggle across weapons and fighters, the New York Times newspaper cited U.S. officials.
The Pentagon offered up larger groups of targets, but U.S. President Biden approved a less aggressive option, according to the officials.
The Biden administration is currently pursuing the carrot and stick policy with Iran and its militias in the region. It has not developed a clear policy towards Iran yet, particularly with Iranian nuclear diplomatic deliberations between the two sides, al-Nifi said.
Dr. Abdul Sattar said that the U.S. strike was a sudden move regardless of the target size. The Biden administration’s policy towards Iran started to become clear. Iran is unwilling to move on its positions and is increasing its demands in the nuclear deal. On the other hand, Biden did not lift the sanctions on it and ordered a strike on its positions in Syria, which could lead to a series of future strikes against Iran.
The U.S. strikes are often a response to previous attacks targeting its bases, and as long as the attacks continue to occur, the U.S. side will respond regardless of the scale of the response, al-Nifi said.
U.S. message to different world powers
In a report entitled “In Message to Iran, Biden Bombs Syria,” the U.S. Foreign Policy magazine wrote, “In bombing the war-torn country within weeks of becoming president, Biden follows in the footsteps of his predecessor Donald Trump, who launched a missile strike 77 days into his term, hitting a Syrian airbase in retaliation for a suspected chemical weapons attack.”
“What the strikes both have in common is that they are designed to be interpreted not as an act of war, but as a message. In Biden’s case, it’s an attempt to set boundaries of acceptability with Iranian proxy forces and meant to prevent further escalation,” the magazine added.
Der Vorsitzende der Kommission für Informationspolitik der Russischen Föderation, Alexej Puschkow, sagte, der US-Luftangriff auf Syrien könne als Signal an Russland und eine Reihe anderer Weltmächte über die Art des außenpolitischen Kurses von US-Präsident Joe Biden gesehen werden.
Mit dem Streik wollte Biden weniger als 40 Tage, nachdem die US-Demokraten ins Weiße Haus kamen, eine Botschaft an Moskau, Teheran, Damaskus, China, Tel Aviv und Riad mit unterschiedlichen Zielen senden.
A U.S. official told VOX news website on condition of anonymity to speak free about sensitive discussions that the Biden administration es thinking behind the airstrikes was that it needed to send a message that the U.S. will not turn a eyes to Iran-backed militia attacks against U.S. forces”.
Biden, der den Angriff leitete, sagte, dass der Iran seine Entscheidung, die Luftangriffe in Syrien zu genehmigen, als Warnung betrachten sollte, um US-Personal und Partner vor diesen Angriffen und zukünftigen ähnlichen Angriffen zu schützen und zu verteidigen.