Biden faces complex military and political challenges as US launches attacks in Yemen
US airstrikes in Yemen intensify Biden's military and political quandaries, as they mark a major escalation in the Middle East conflict, despite the president's sustained efforts to prevent a broader war
The US and British airstrikes against Iran-backed militants in Yemen mark a significant escalation of the conflict in the Middle East. This comes despite President Joe Biden's efforts to prevent a wider war. The timing is politically significant as Biden intensifies his campaign for re-election in the midst of Republican criticism of his global leadership and foreign policy, particularly from his potential GOP opponent, former President Donald Trump. The strikes were not unexpected, given the heightened US warnings in recent days, but they also occurred on the heels of criticism from GOP presidential candidates Ron DeSantis and Nikki Haley, who accused Biden of being slow to protect US forces and assets in the Middle East.
The air strikes come after an escalating series of drone and missile attacks by Houthi rebels on commercial shipping in the Red Sea, a crucial waterway for the global economy. These attacks are part of Iran's proxy-led pressure campaign against Israel and the US in the region, in response to the conflict in Gaza. This means that the operations of the US and UK carry an added level of risk as they effectively target the vital interests of the Islamic Republic.
A still from a video shows multiple explosions in Saada province, north of Sanaa, Yemen, on January 12, local time.
From social media
The US and UK conducted strikes against Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen. The Biden administration aimed to avoid becoming embroiled in a new Middle East conflict but took action when demands for a halt to Houthi attacks were ignored, leading to a loss of US credibility in the region.
Biden stated, "These precise attacks send a clear message that the United States and our allies will not stand for assaults on our personnel or allow hostile entities to jeopardize the freedom of navigation in one of the world's most crucial commercial sea routes. I will not hesitate to take additional actions to safeguard our people and international trade as needed."
The reason for taking action is that re-establishing deterrence could compel the Houthis, and indirectly Iran, to withdraw - thereby preventing a more dangerous escalation, based on the assumption that Tehran, like the US, wants to avoid a broader conflict.
A presidents agonizing choices
However, in a volatile environment like this, with pro-Iranian groups strategically positioned throughout the Middle East, putting Israel and US assets within easy reach, the potential for retaliation and a widespread regional conflict is a very real and dangerous possibility. Recent history also demonstrates the limited ability of the US to enforce its influence in the Middle East.
Thursday evening's events emphasized the high pressure and tough decisions that come with the presidency. Often, the president must choose between unfavorable options with serious consequences. Failing to enforce US red lines and interests could be the worst choice of all, forcing presidents into using military force.
This difficult balancing act is even more complicated for Biden, as it coincides with the ramping up of the 2024 presidential election campaign and Republican criticism of his failure to assert US power in the face of growing challenges.
Just days before the Iowa caucuses kick off the GOP nominating race, Trump is presenting a vision of a world on the verge of a third world war while positioning himself as the strong, authoritative figure needed to restore order. This message is contradictory given the controversy of the former president's first term and his tendency to alienate US allies, but it resonates with some voters. The Republican criticism of Biden's global leadership is connected to the belief that, at 81, he is incapable of exerting US authority and is therefore unfit for a second term.
Biden faces potential criticism over ordering strikes while Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin was still in the hospital after complications from prostate cancer surgery. Austin has become the focus of a political firestorm after it was revealed that he had been at the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center for three days before the White House was informed. This oversight has sparked criticism that he put national security at risk.
Republicans welcome the strikes but criticize Biden anyway
There was no immediate reaction to the strikes from Republican presidential candidates who typically blast Biden as weak.
During the CNN Debate in Des Moines, DeSantis and Haley expressed dissatisfaction with the administration's response in the region, calling for stronger measures to protect US troops. "We're supposed to have their backs. And Biden has been slow. He's been hiding in a corner and he hasn't dealt with it," stated Haley, the former South Carolina governor and UN ambassador. "We need to go and take out every bit of the production that they have that's allowing them to do those strikes."
DeSantis claimed that "anyone with half a brain" would recognize Iran's role in the Middle East's instability and he criticized Biden for not taking sufficient action to safeguard American forces. "He's abandoning them, and I believe it's shameful for a commander in chief to behave in that way," the governor of Florida stated.
U.S. President Joe Biden speaks at a campaign event at Montgomery County Community College in Blue Bell, Pennsylvania near Valley Forge, marking the third anniversary of the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol. (Photo: Kevin Lamarque/Reuters)
President Joe Biden's decision to conduct strikes against Houthi targets in Yemen garnered mixed reactions from key GOP leaders in Congress. While some welcomed the strikes, others criticized the president for not taking action sooner. This highlights the highly politicized nature of US foreign policy.
Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell emphasized the potential long-term impact of these operations on the Biden Administration's approach to Iran and its allies. He stated, "In order to deter future actions and change Iran's behavior, Iranian leaders must understand that there will be serious consequences unless they cease their global campaign of terror."
Meanwhile, Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi, the top Republican on the Armed Services Committee, expressed that while the strike should have occurred sooner, it is a positive initial step in reestablishing deterrence in the Red Sea. He also stressed the need to move beyond rhetoric and take concrete action, stating, "It is time to abandon empty promises and joint military efforts. This strike sends a clear message to Iranian allies that there will be severe repercussions for any escalation in the region."
The current developments in the Middle East highlight the immense challenges faced by an incumbent seeking re-election. While potential opponents of Biden may not have official responsibilities, a president must carefully weigh the geopolitical and humanitarian consequences of their actions. This may mean making decisions that prioritize the national interest over their own political gain. Whenever presidents use military force, the repercussions can spiral out of control. In a world where the US is facing increasing challenges to its power, particularly from rivals like China and Russia, the risks become even more pronounced with each election cycle.
In the past, a military operation involving US troops in harm's way could generate a "rallying-around-the-flag" effect that benefited a president. However, given the current political divisions in America, Biden should not anticipate any political advantage in the 2024 campaign from his decision to strike against the Houthis. Furthermore, if the strikes are successful, he is unlikely to receive credit for stabilizing the situation. Conversely, if they are unsuccessful, the dangerous escalation of the situation could have dire political consequences for him.
Biden cannot overlook the potential challenges that a deepening involvement in the Middle East conflict may pose within his own party. As the crisis intensifies, with Hamas terror attacks prompting Israel's advance into Gaza and resulting in the deaths of thousands of civilians, progressive Democrats are increasingly disheartened by Biden's unwavering support for Israel amidst the devastation suffered by Palestinian civilians. Criticism of Israel among younger voters and Arab Americans is growing, contributing to signs of strain within Biden's electoral coalition. Michigan Representative Rashida Tlaib accused Biden of violating Article I of the Constitution by conducting airstrikes in Yemen without congressional approval. She stated that "The American people are tired of endless war." Similarly, Representative Cori Bush of Missouri denounced the move as "illegal," contending that it breaches Article I of the Constitution. Moreover, she emphasized that the public opposes allocating more taxpayer dollars to perpetual warfare and civilian casualties.
Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York, the leading Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, supported Biden's actions but also voiced concern about the potential for further deterioration in the Middle East. He urged the Biden administration to prioritize diplomatic efforts to prevent escalating tensions and involve Congress in the strategy and legal justification as mandated by law. Senior US officials hinted to CNN that Thursday's strikes could signal ongoing US operations against the Houthis.
If so, Biden's ongoing consideration of national security and political priorities will continue to be a significant factor as he works to persuade Americans that he is the most capable leader to protect the country in a second term.
