Intuiting The Truth About The Lethal Attack Against US Troops In West Asia

Acknowledging Iran’s relationship with its regional allies who just claimed credit for this lethal attack doesn’t promote warmongering against the Islamic Republic, just like acknowledging that the targeted base was in Jordan doesn’t make one a “US stenographer” or “fool”.

Three US troops were killed and over 30 injured in a drone attack on one of its bases in West Asia, though some are debating the details. The US claims that the attack took place at Tower 22 in Jordan right near the Syrian border, which the Jordanian Communications Minister initially denied, but then he clarified that it was indeed on an “advanced position” within his country’s border. The US also blamed Iran, but Iran said that the Iraqi militia that took responsibility for the attack doesn’t take orders from it.

The debate over these details is important since the US’ military presence in Syria is illegal due to being opposed by the Arab Republic’s UN-recognized government, while the extent of Iran’s involvement could be exploited by some American hawks as a casus belli for strikes against it across the region. Beginning with the location, the previously mentioned minister’s clarification cited by Xinhua should be considered authoritative, but that raises the question of why the Iraqi militia described it as being inside of Syria.

Turkish media cited their statement saying that they targeted the “Ash Shaddadi and Rukban bases in Syria” as well as a naval base in Israel, but the group might have sincerely been confused about where Rukban is legally located. It’s less than a mile from the geographically indistinguishable Syrian border, and there’s a large refugee camp on that war-torn country’s side, plus this facility is in close proximity to the US’ much larger base in Syria’s al-Tanf.

The Iraqi militia might have thus mistaken Tower 22 as being within illegally US-occupied Syrian territory, but even if it knew that the base was inside Jordan and simply lied about it, the attack would have still been militarily legitimate since this site is likely playing a support role of some sort for al-Tanf. Tower 22 is no different in principle than the myriad bases inside NATO that support the bloc’s proxy war on Russia via Ukraine, but Russia can’t attack them due to the US’ nuclear umbrella.

The drone attack on Jordanian-based Tower 22 by an Iraqi militia, which killed three US troops and injured at least ten times as many according to preliminary reports, won’t result in a nuclear response since it wouldn’t have any military significance against a regionally scattered non-state actor. This observation segues into why some American hawks want to connect the attack to Iran since they believe that this could help make their years-long case for why the US should bomb the Islamic Republic.

The rapid evolution of the latest Israeli-Hamas war to a regional Israeli/US-Iranian proxy war very closely mirrors the NATO-Russian proxy war in Ukraine that broke out after the special operation began but whose intelligence, logistical, operational, and other forms of infrastructure far predated both conflicts. Russia holds the US responsible for everything that its Ukrainian proxies do even if it wasn’t involved in planning it, so those who agree with this standard should apply it towards Iran if they’re consistent.

Doing so doesn’t lend credence to calls for bombing Iran but is simply an accurate reflection of strategic reality as it objectively exists. Just like Russia won’t bomb NATO despite holding the bloc’s US leader responsible for everything that its Ukrainian proxies do, nor is it likely that the US will bomb Iran despite holding it responsible for everything that its regional allies do by that same standard. “Mutually Assured Destruction” (MAD), or at least unacceptably high costs in Iran’s case, explain these calculations.

That said, Pakistan still got away with becoming the first country to bomb Iran since Iraq in the 1980s during their tit-for-tat strikes in mid-January even though the Islamic Republic arguably came out on top at the end of the day, so at least one or a few so-called “limited strikes” by the US can’t be ruled out. Bloomberg even cited a source familiar with the US’ plans to report that “One possibility is covert action that would see the US strike Iran without claiming credit for it but sending a clear message regardless.”

In that scenario, Iran could escalate all throughout the region via its allies if such a strike is as disproportionate as the American hawks want, which could inflict crippling costs on a wide array of countries and risk placing events on the irreversible trajectory of a larger war. Policymakers might naturally be reluctant to put all that on the line, however, especially in an election year and not to mention amidst the US’ dwindling stockpiles after already giving so much to Ukraine since 2022.

Whatever ends up happening, acknowledging Iran’s relationship with its regional allies who just claimed credit for this lethal attack doesn’t promote warmongering against the Islamic Republic, just like acknowledging that the targeted base was in Jordan doesn’t make one a “US stenographer” or “fool”. Iran was ultimately responsible for the first killing of US troops in the region since the latest Israeli-Hamas war broke out, who were targeted for their role in supporting al-Tanf’s illegal operations in Syria.

Those who support the Iranian-led Resistance Axis’ regional goals appear uncomfortable admitting that this attack inside of Jordan wouldn’t have happened without Tehran’s military and other forms of support for that Iraqi militia, which is probably because they think that the optics aren’t in their favor. After all, indirectly attacking a country that one isn’t at war with and which isn’t directly involved in either the Syrian or Gaza conflicts looks bad, but the reality is that Jordan isn’t innocent in both.

It’s knowingly hosting US troops in Tower 22 who play support roles of some sort for al-Tanf, and their decisionmakers were already aware that the Iranian-led Resistance Axis said that all of the US’ troops in the region are at risk so long as Washington refuses to force Israel to stop its war in Gaza. Jordan could have therefore requested that they indefinitely suspend operations at that facility at least until the latest Israeli-Hamas war ends but chose not to out of solidarity with the US’ illegal occupation of Syria.

With these facts in mind, those who support the Iranian-led Resistance Axis have nothing to feel ashamed of, especially since the same principle was applied against the US in Jordan as Israel applies against Iran in Syria of attacking military targets that play a support role in an ongoing conflict. This was actually below the level of tit-for-tat too since the losses that Iran’s allies inflicted on the US in Jordan are much lower than those that Israel reportedly inflicted on Iran in Syria since October.

The successful killing of American troops as part of the regional Israeli/US-Iranian proxy war after over 150 times of trying since October represents a new phase in this shadow war, with the US now being forced to choose between keeping the proxy battlefield the same or escalating by bombing Iran. It’ll likely focus its possibly overwhelming response on Syria, Iraq, and perhaps also Yemen, but it can’t be ruled out that it might launch a so-called “limited strike” against Iran just like Pakistan did in mid-January.