This is the third in the series about strategy and the current Middle East conflict.

The Biden administration has adopted a deterrence strategy in the Middle East based upon an expectation that the Israel-Hamas conflict will escalate.  The administration appears to have intelligence that the Iranian proxies (Hezbollah and either Iranians or Syrians operating from Syria) are prepared to expand the conflict. There is also newly arrived in the area a small flotilla of Chinese warships.

Hezbollah has been launching some rocket attacks into northern Israel. There have been several attacks coming out of Syria and even some cruise missiles from Yemen.  A US destroyer destroyed the cruise missiles while several attacks wounded one American in Syria.

The question is whether the deployments are too much or not enough for deterrence and if necessary for war fighting.  To date there have been two carrier battle groups and several squadrons of Air Force A-10s and support aircraft forward deployed.  Secretary of Defense Austin announced yesterday the deployment of PATRIOT and THAAD air defense systems to protect US Forces—locations not disclosed.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said Sunday that the United States expects the Israel-Hamas war to escalate through involvement by proxies of Iran, and they asserted that the Biden administration is prepared to respond if American personnel or armed forces become the target of any such hostilities.

“This is not what we want, not what we’re looking for. We don’t want escalation,” Blinken said. “We don’t want to see our forces or our personnel come under fire. But if that happens, we’re ready for it.” Austin, echoed Blinken when he said “what we’re seeing is a prospect of a significant escalation of attacks on our troops and our people throughout the region.”

Currently the Israelis have not asked for US intervention. Israeli warplanes struck targets across Gaza during the weekend, as well as two airports in Syria and a mosque in the occupied West Bank allegedly used by militants. Israel has also traded fire with Lebanon’s Hezbollah militant group on a near-daily basis since the war began, and tensions are soaring in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, where Israeli forces have battled militants in refugee camps and carried out two airstrikes in recent days.

In past conflicts Israel has fought on several fronts very successfully.  They apply economy of force to contain one or more threat while they eliminate the one that they see as most dangerous.  The ability to rapidly move troops from one side of the country to another (internal lines of communication) allows them to rapidly reposition forces.

One could easily conclude that Israel has not started its ground offensive into Gaza yet as it seeks to determine which threat is the most dangerous.  Once the Israeli ground forces enter Gaza it would be difficult to disengage to fight elsewhere.  Conversely, the other Iranian proxies may be waiting for Israel to commit its forces. In the meantime, Israel will continue to pound Gaza and elsewhere from the air and with artillery.  One should not expect this waiting game to continue ad infinitum. 

There is news reporting that the reason that Israel hasn’t attacked Gaza yet is because the Biden administration is seeking a hostage return in exchange for a ceasefire.  This is denied by some administration officials while quietly “sorta” suggested by others.  The administration is having difficulty talking with one voice.

In the near term the supplies reaching Gaza through Egypt will remain minimal, with pressure mounting for more aid to be allowed / provided. 

Another possible reason that Iran and others may be seeking to extend the conflict is because of the resource consumption rate.  At some point Israel is going to need ammunition and possibly other resources from the US.  At the same time Ukraine is rapidly consuming American resources.  Would the US have sufficient resources remaining to prevent China from attacking Taiwan?  OR would the US have to reduce support for Ukraine and thus facilitate Russian advances?  These are all questions worthy of consideration as one seeks to understanding seeking to deter rather than fight and why deterrence may be more difficult.

The threat of escalation is also suggested by the presence of 6 Chinese warships entering the area.  Engagements started by the Chinese would be an escalation of significant proportions. Should the US deterrence fail and its troops, ships or personnel be actively engaged this would/could be a game changer.  Biden has dug himself a hole and must either respond dramatically and thus widen the conflict he seeks to deter or slink back to his beach house.  The prospects for the future are thus more complicated.

Stand by for the next turn in events.