The Commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East, General Kenneth F. McKenzie, recently warned that the presence of an additional 14,000 U.S. troops sent to the Persian Gulf region over the past several months likely has not deterred Iranian efforts to launch future attacks there.
General McKenzie highlighted the possibility of another missile and drone attack similar to the one launched against an oil facility in Saudi Arabia in September.
The Cipher Brief tapped expert Norman Roule, who served as the National Intelligence Manager for Iran at ODNI, for his take on what this means and what the next attack could look like.
The Cipher Brief: Let’s start by addressing what the focus has been for these U.S. troops sent to the region earlier this year.
Roule: The forces described by General McKenzie have focused on improving regional air defense capabilities, expanding our ability to protect sea lanes, and enhancing our ability to provide force protection to U.S. and partner personnel (to include civilians in country) and facilities. However, these forces - dispersed to several locations - have a focused defensive role and are not meant to deter every Iranian attack in the region.
At a time when the U.S. is being criticized for withdrawing from Syria, we have actually increased our regional footprint. Regional allies are concerned by the Syria pullout decision, but they have also been reassured by the arrival of those forces cited by General McKenzie.
The Cipher Brief: Given the pressure that the Iranian regime is under at present in large part due to intense U.S. sanctions pressure, is it likely that Tehran will continue to escalate the size and scope of sponsored attacks?
Roule: Iran has no choice but to continue attacks. The only way Iran can avoid political instability is for the U.S. to lift sanctions. Tehran appears unwilling to make concessions and this leaves only pressuring the international community to compel Washington to compromise. Attacks provide a low-cost, high impact means by which to exert pressure on an international community which has yet to impose costs on Tehran for its actions. Until such costs are imposed, Tehran has no reason to halt attacks. Such costs must be multilateral and powerful. For example, just as victims of Iranian terrorism have gone after Iran’s assets abroad, I think it would be an interesting idea to see if victims of Iranian missile attacks could do the same. There are a lot of these victims, ranging from individuals wounded in attacks and the families of those who were killed, to Saudi official and non-official entities damaged in attacks, and perhaps even every country that was forced to pay higher energy costs in the wake of Iranian-sponsored attacks.
However, in the absence of such constraining pressure, the frequency, targets, and actors involved in attacks will change. Doing so allows Iran to maintain the fiction of plausible deniability (or rather implausible deniability), strike adversaries while minimizing the likelihood of a counterstrike, and compel us to devote resources to defending against “yesterday’s attack.”
Also, Iran certainly understands its political stability better than we do from our foreign vantage point. If Iran believes instability is on the horizon, it may choose to see what deal might be available from the U.S., but I think it will first seek to increase the number and intensity of attacks to test international fortitude. Whatever your views on the U.S.’ maximum pressure campaign, success will see Iran testing our commitment to the strategy and they will do this through regional attacks. Such attacks are not necessarily evidence that the strategy is not working, indeed, it could mean the opposite.
The Cipher Brief: Secretary of State Mike Pompeo recently made comments supporting the protests in Iran. Are comments like those likely to have much of an impact?
Roule: Although such comments are welcomed in many Western circles, and likely appreciated by some in Iran, I am not sure the regime’s security officials believe they will increase the intensity of protests. At the same time, the absence of comments could be interpreted by the regime as license to crack down. The comments by Europe and the United Nations were neither timely nor strong.
The Cipher Brief: Do you see any indication that Europe is willing to increase economic pressure (snapback sanctions) against Iran?
Roule: Not at present. Russia will also block any effort to re-impose sanctions on Iran.
The Cipher Brief: Given the recent unrest, how do you currently see Iran’s position in the region and in Yemen in particular?
Roule: The unrest in the region is more about the widespread anger over corruption, nepotism, poor governance, and unmet social expectation than over Iran. But Iran is rightfully seen as a contributor to bad governance, exacerbated conflicts, and blocked ties with Arab partners. Iran has shown itself as being adept at creating militias and installing compliant partners in failed states, but it is unable to provide good governance. Indeed, Iran exports the same poor governance it conducts at home. Here we see the difference between the United States and Iran. We don’t always get the region right, but we have a terrific record of trying to do so. Over the decades, we have provided billions in aid, sent brilliant diplomats and aid workers, and provided long-term development assistance in cooperation with our Arab and European partners. Iran has done none of this. It sends the Qods Force, creates militias, and supports terrorism.
This said, I don’t see evidence that Iran’s partners in Iraq or Lebanon will be removed at present. I do see the threat of these forces undertaking violence against protestors. I think Iran is under greater threat in Yemen. My sense is that Houthis have been under significant military pressure by the Saudis and their leadership – never a monolith – may be willing to consider a political agreement. My sense is that the financial pressure imposed by sanctions against Iran and Arab coalition military pressure on the ground have weakened Houthi resolve.
We should be careful about some of the hype regarding an end to the Yemen conflict. Some Houthi leadership certainly wish to continue the war. Iran will certainly encourage them to do so as well as to ensure that any peace deal allows Iran the same freedom in Sana that it enjoys in Damascus. The Saudis won’t – and shouldn’t – allow the latter. Ending the conflict will depend on Saudi ability to resolve the future of President Hadi and his deputy as well as to develop what I expect will be a substantial financial package of aid for post-conflict Yemen.
Some have described Yemen as “low-hanging fruit” in regard to Iran’s aspirations in the region. I don’t agree. I think it would be more accurate to say that Iran’s ability to build an infrastructure in Yemen has been less successful than elsewhere because of a limited logistics system and Arab coalition military pressure. But Iran’s investments in Yemen have been heavy and I can’t imagine the Qods Force will allow Iran to be expelled from Yemen.
‘Future Threats’ is the theme for the next gathering of Cipher Brief experts like Norm Roule - as well as current government and private sector leaders - at The Cipher Brief’s 2020 Threat Conference. This is an intensive two and a half days of high-level thought exchange for professionals from all sectors, focused on national security. Seats will sell out well ahead of the March 22-24 event. Request yours today.
Read more expert insights and analysis in The Cipher Brief
