4

There've been many headlines about how the US or its European allies are trying to get Iran to not retaliate for the killing of Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh on its territory, and to de-escalate instead.

Given that the natural reaction for Iran would be to retaliate, presumably the US & its European allies have to offer Iran something to get them not to retaliate. What might that something be? None of the news articles I've seen say anything about this (example, example).

If the answer turns out to be "they are not offering Iran anything", that would also be an answer.

7
  • 4
    The US is moving some military capabilities into the region in order to deter Iran from retaliating and maybe there is more direct military assistance of Israel as well. One could probably say that they offer not to use them although that is maybe not what you mean. Also "..the natural reaction for Iran would be to retaliate.." In the past retaliations didn't show much effect. Maybe US or its European allies think that not much will happen anyway. Commented Aug 13 at 6:31
  • 1
    By the logic behind this question, Pakistan should have threatened to shoot ballistic missiles all over the US after Bin Laden was killed, and then those who didn't want would have been obligated to give them something not to
    – Schmerel
    Commented Aug 13 at 15:47
  • 1
    The United States should not offer Iran anything. Iran simply needs to adopt a policy of 'forgive and forget' whenever someone is assassinated within their terrority.
    – user39026
    Commented Aug 13 at 21:25
  • 1
    @WaterSparkle351 the question isn't about what the USA should do, rather it's about what the USA is (or isn't) doing. Commented Aug 14 at 1:12
  • 4
    "We won't blow you up" Commented Aug 14 at 10:04

2 Answers 2

12

Last time Iran retaliated with a missile & drone barrage (in April) Biden put some extra sanctions on it. And the EU followed suit. (I can't say if they make much diff as Iran is already under a lot of sanction.). Presumably there's the implicit promise not to do that if Iran doesn't repeat that kind of response. Whether there are any 'carrots' involved is harder to say. Most of these exchanges won't happen in public, so it's a bit pointless to ask.

Aside, Iran has conducted assassinations or attempts thereof on foreign (US & EU in particular) soil too, so them acting all righteous about getting hit with something similar on their own soil and apparently preparing what some EU leaders & US see as a disproportionate response (or at least they did last time--see e.g. Macron & US 'administration officials' using that term) is probably not very conducive to any 'carrots' in this case, but that's just my opinion.

FWTW, if there's a carrot--and it's not being labelled too explicitly as one--is that the US is upbeat about the Gaza negotiations, and some Iranian officials say they'll take that into account at least with respect to the timing of their retaliation.

"We hope our response will be timed and executed in a way that does not harm a potential ceasefire," Iran's mission to the U.N. said on Friday [Aug 9?] in a statement.

3
  • 5
    I mean, they've put every sanction in existence on Russia as well and yet their economy is fine. "Don't do X or else we'll sanction you!" is no longer a serious threat. Commented Aug 14 at 6:12
  • 8
    @JonathanReez: Fine? I'm not so sure about that. Russia is of course saying they're fine, which doesn't mean much, but I've otherwise seen quite contrary reports about the situation there. Commented Aug 14 at 8:36
  • 3
    @JonathanReez Nobody knows how more well off Russians could be without the sanctions and without the war, maybe a lot more. Apparently not enough to overthrow Putin but then risking your life is also expensive. Commented Aug 14 at 16:54
11

The US at least is publicly announcing deploying a missile sub to the area. Tomahawk missile strikes are a favored US tool in these instances.

U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has ordered the deployment of a guided missile submarine to the Middle East, the Pentagon said on Sunday, as the region braces for possible attacks by Iran and its allies after the killing of senior members of Hamas and Hezbollah. While the USS Georgia, a nuclear-powered submarine, was already in the Mediterranean Sea in July, according to a U.S. military post on social media, it was a rare move to publicly announce the deployment of a submarine.

Presumably, until Western politicians state otherwise, the "offer" is likely more a reminder of what risks befalling Iran if it goes too far. (A mostly-symbolic retaliation that allowed Iran to save face without hurting Israel much would likely be strongly denounced. And ignored in practice - this is what has happened in the recent months).

Gunboat diplomacy, 2020s-style.

One problem with dealing with Iran is that the West is quickly running out of non-military sticks and Iran doesn't trust their carrots all that much either after the JCPOA withdrawal. In an election year, doubt Biden would be willing to stick his neck out by going on the record in conceding anything much.

2
  • 5
    Henry Kissinger, during his tenure as United States Secretary of State, summed up the concept as thus: "An aircraft carrier is 100,000 tons of diplomacy." I guess we can adapt as "one nuclear sub is 100+ Tomahawks of diplomacy". Commented Aug 13 at 22:46
  • 5
    FWTW, even the phrase "Tomahawk diplomacy" has been coined time.com/archive/6733752/tomahawk-diplomacy OTOH that's mostly wrt their actual use. I guess Iran is no stranger to their adoption of Shaded diplomacy. (Alas they make too many type of ballistic missiles for any particular one to have become a brand name for now. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…) Commented Aug 13 at 22:51

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .