Follow Us:

Trilateral offensive

President Biden’s three-pronged offensive is likely to impinge on multilateral geostrategy. In America’s reckoning, the certitudes of international law.

Statesman News Service | New Delhi |

On the face of it, Sunday’s airstrikes under the direction of President Joe Biden, were directed at facilities used by Iran-backed militia groups. But the offensive cannot but convulse Iraq and Syria near the border between the two countries, indeed the home of ISIS. Pentagon’s Press Secretary, John Kirby, claimed the militias were using the facilities to launch unmanned aerial vehicle attacks against US troops in Iraq.

As it turned out, the US military targeted three operational and weapons storage facilities ~ two in Syria and one in Iraq.

This indubitably is a direct assault on territories in the two countries that have become the bedrock of miliant nationalism of the Islamist variety.

The Pentagon described the airstrikes as “defensive,” saying they were launched in response to attacks by Iran-backed groups.

“The United States took necessary, appropriate, and deliberate action designed to limit the risk of escalation, but also to send a clear and unambiguous deterrent message,” Mr Kirby said.

Sunday’s strikes mark the second time the Biden administration has taken military action in the region. In February, the US launched airstrikes against facilities in Syria, near the Iraqi border, that it said were used by Iranian-backed militia groups. A lethal cocktail had thus been brewing for a while.

It is, therefore, a three-pronged offensive.

President Biden said Iran should view his decision to authorize US airstrikes in Syria as a warning that it can expect consequences for its support of militia groups that threaten US interests or personnel.

“You can’t act with impunity. Be careful,” Mr Biden said when a reporter asked what message he had intended to send.

The Pentagon claimed those strikes were in retaliation for a rocket attack in Iraq in February that killed one civilian contractor and wounded a US service member and other coalition troops. At that time, Mr Biden said Iran should view his decision to authorize US airstrikes in Syria as a warning that it can expect consequences for its support of militia groups that threaten US interests or personnel.

On Sunday, Mr Kirby said Mr Biden “has been clear that he will act to protect US personnel. Given the ongoing series of attacks by Iran-backed groups targeting US interests in Iraq, the President directed further military action to disrupt and deter such attacks.”

The Pentagon spokesman added: “As a matter of international law, the United States acted pursuant to its right of self-defence. The strikes were both necessary to address the threat and appropriately limited in scope.”

The Speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, said in a statement Sunday that the US airstrikes “appear to be a targeted and proportional response to a serious and specific threat,” adding that “protecting the military heroes who defend our freedoms is a sacred priority.”

President Biden’s three-pronged offensive is likely to impinge on multilateral geostrategy. In America’s reckoning, the certitudes of international law.