The Pentagon Tries to Pivot out of the Middle East
When the U.S. Defense Department announced, on May 7, that
it would withdraw two Patriot missile batteries and several fighter aircraft
from Saudi Arabia, it looked like an ominous development in the tense
relationship between Washington and Riyadh.. Speculation was rife that it was
an effort by the Trump administration to punish the kingdom for starting an oil
price war that—in concert with collapsing oil demand due to the coronavirus
pandemic—has wreaked havoc in the U.S. shale oil industry.
After all, angry Republican Senators had already introduced
legislation calling for a complete U.S. military withdrawal, including the
Patriot batteries. There were also credible reports that Trump himself had used
these threats in negotiations with Riyadh to achieve the historic April 12 deal
to cut oil production by 9.7 million barrels per day in an attempt to prop up
prices and save U.S. shale.
But widespread anger in Washington at Saudi Arabia—over the
oil price war, over the war in Yemen, over the killing of the Washington Post
columnist Jamal Khashoggi—doesn’t make the speculation correct. The withdrawal
was much less about punishing the kingdom than about the Pentagon’s effort to
manage its finite resources and shift many of them elsewhere from the Middle
East.
But just like previous attempts to pivot, this one also
comes with dangers. While withdrawing some forces from the region may be a
manageable and necessary risk, pulling out too many could send the wrong
message about U.S. capabilities and invite the increased regional conflict that
the Pentagon most wants to avoid.
The withdrawal reverses, at least in part, a significant
U.S. military buildup in the Middle East that began last year to counter the
threat from Iran. Privately, U.S. officials explained that these additional
deployments to Saudi Arabia were always a temporary measure to augment Saudi
defense capabilities and address a spike in Iranian aggression. Once adequate
arrangements were in place to close the gap in Saudi defenses, the emergency
deployment was, by definition, to end.
The defensive missiles and fighter aircraft were clearly
purposed to ward off threats from Iran. Following Tehran’s Sept. 14 attacks on
Saudi Arabia’s Khurais oil field and Abqaiq oil processing facility, the
Pentagon sent a significant number of additional military personnel and equipment
to Saudi Arabia. These U.S. deployments included Patriot missile batteries to
augment the kingdom’s own missile defense capabilities, which had failed to
prevent Tehran’s drones and cruise missiles from attacking the world’s largest
oil processing facility. The two departing Patriot batteries were guarding the
oil facilities. Another two batteries guarding Prince Sultan Air Base, where
U.S. forces are stationed, will reportedly stay in place for now.
If the withdrawal confused allies and unleashed speculation
about the motives behind it, Washington only had itself to blame.If the
withdrawal confused allies and unleashed speculation about the motives behind
it, Washington only had itself to blame. From the Pentagon to the State
Department to the White House, no one seemed prepared to provide an
authoritative public explanation for the withdrawal and to underscore the
United States’ commitment to regional partners. Consequently, an information
vacuum emerged that was quickly filled by rumors and speculation.
In an unsuccessful attempt at damage control, Pentagon
spokesperson Cmdr. Sean Robertson described the withdrawal as part of a global
redeployment process that “routinely circulates troops and assets to address
emerging threats and maintain readiness.” In the context of an ongoing campaign
of maximum pressure on Iran, however, a badly executed or poorly justified
withdrawal could quickly become anything but routine. Even if there are now
fewer attacks by Iran and its proxies, more than four decades of history
suggest it is likely a fleeting tactical or operational pause rather than a
durable and strategic change of course.
Only last month, Tehran sent 11 gunboats to harass U.S.
ships in a move the U.S. Navy called “dangerous and provocative.” In March, Tehran’s
proxies in Iraq launched multiple rocket attacks at bases hosting U.S. forces.
And in Syria, Israel has conducted repeated strikes to counter Iran’s
relentless efforts to equip Lebanon’s Hezbollah with precision munitions.
The Pentagon insists it is staying vigilant and has forces
ready. The United States retains “robust in-theater capabilities, including air
defense, to address any Iran-related contingencies as needed,” Robertson said.
“We also maintain the capability to augment these forces on short notice.”
That’s a point Washington and its regional allies should emphasize. Otherwise,
Tehran could perceive the withdrawal as a waning commitment to defend U.S.
partners and regional interests—inviting more of the aggression Washington
wants to avoid.
Saudi sources emphasized last week that Riyadh will be
deploying its own Patriot systems to backfill the departing U.S. batteries. The
Saudis have used the intervening months to strengthen their defenses and
conduct additional training with U.S. advisors. It clearly makes sense for the
Saudis to utilize their own air defense arsenal to protect the kingdom’s vital
economic assets.
Comments
Post a Comment