By Denis Korkodinov
The statement by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on increasing pressure on Iran made on August 24, 2019, has caused concern in the international arena. In combination with the intensification of Israel Defense Forces (IDF) attacks in Lebanon, Iraq and Syria, an Israeli politician’s statement could mark the beginning of a new phase of escalation of conflicts in the Middle East, which is unlikely to cause delight in the White House administration.
Despite the fact that Tel Aviv is trying to distance itself from its military campaign, assuring the international community of its innocence, Washington directly confirmed that Israel is solely responsible for attacks on objects of pro-Iranian force groups in the region. Thus, the White House administration emphasizes that it has nothing to do with the actions of Israeli aviation and all other attacks that may follow on the initiative of Tel Aviv in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq do not reflect the position of the United States.
Meanwhile, the Israeli attack on Iranian proxy sites was not met with any open criticism in the United States because of the loyalty of the US administration to Tel Aviv. However, Donald Trump would still like to see Israeli attacks on Iraq not intensify, as this would jeopardize the relationship between Washington and official Baghdad, especially when Donald Trump announced the reduction of the US forces in Iraq.
The administration of the White House proceeds from the opinion that in the case of the resumption of Israeli attacks on Iraqi territory, there is a great risk of the activation of the Islamic State, which official Baghdad will not oppose. In addition, Iraqi President Barham Saleh may demand the complete withdrawal of American troops from Baghdad, which would cast doubt on the US military presence in the region.
In this regard, it is expected that Washington could explicitly hint to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu about the inexpediency of bombing targets located in Iraq. If this hint is ignored, the White House administration is quite ready to give the green light to local anti-Israeli protests aimed at forming a negative public opinion about Tel Aviv’s military campaign, primarily with regard to the West Bank and Gaza. Such a measure of influence can become extremely painful for Israel, given the permanent pressure experienced by the Arabs.
Benjamin Netanyahu’s policy regarding Iran, apparently, also does not meet the expectations of the White House. So, despite the harsh criticism of the ayatollah regime, Donald Trump still leaves room for himself to organize the negotiation process, not wanting to bring the conflict to a state of war.
However, the actions of Israeli aviation significantly complicate Washington’s attempts to begin a dialogue with Tehran, which until recently, through the participation of Iran’s Foreign Minister at the G7 summit in Biarritz, gave a signal of readiness to negotiate. Meanwhile, due to aggression from Israel, Tehran most likely will not intend to conduct any negotiations at all, preferring to implement a military scenario.
One way or another, Donald Trump is not enthusiastic about the Israeli attacks in Lebanon, Iran and Syria. Tel Aviv seems to be keen to play its own games in the Middle East, which Washington clearly does not like, which is used to the impeccable execution of its instructions from international partners. Meanwhile, on the eve of the Israeli elections, Benjamin Netanyahu is ready to use every opportunity to confirm his ability to independently solve problems in foreign policy.
At the same time, Tel Aviv is ready to sacrifice even the interests of the United States if this allows to secure the support of most of the Israeli political parties. Such an extremely independent policy of Israel can significantly complicate its relationship with Washington. And if this happens, then regional conflicts in the Middle East could reach a completely new level of almost uncontrolled confrontation.
(The views expressed in this article belong only to the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of World Geostrategic Insights)