Edited by Heather Martin
Frequent United States Military Exercises in the Gulf Will Only Make Iran and Syria Increasingly Nervous
Published in China Youth Daily
(China) on 25 May 2012
by PLA Border Defense Academy (link to
original)
Many facts prove that achieving lasting peace in the Middle East is a very difficult task. The escalating Iranian nuclear crisis, long-term unrest in Syria and the United Arab Emirates and Iran’s dispute over three islands in the Persian Gulf make it so that the situation in the Middle East continues to heat up. This is all while a series of joint military exercises staged in the region are continually straining the frayed nerves of the countries in the Middle East.
Starting on Apr. 8, 2012 in Bahrain, a 10-day “Initial Link” military exercise was held. Exercises in the region ended on Apr. 30 after the finale of a two-day event in the UAE. It was codenamed “Islands of Loyalty” and was a Gulf Cooperation Council joint forces exercise. Then began a 21-day “Eager Lion” joint military exercise on May 7, 2012 in Jordan. Although, the countries participating in the multiple military exercises and the content of the drills differed, there was one common feature — the participation of the United States and the absence of Iran and Syria. [Editor’s note: The countries that participated in “Initial Link” were Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Oman, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the UAE and the U.S. The Gulf Cooperation Council has six member states — Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the UAE.]
Routine Exercises Are Not Actually Directed Against Any Country
It began on May 7. The U.S. led the joint military exercise codenamed Eager Lion 2012, which opened in Jordan. The exercise continued until May 28. Jordan, the United States, Australia, Pakistan and Brunei were among the 17 countries that took part in the exercise with 12,000 troops. This exercise was the largest military exercise that the United States has participated in recently. Also, this was the largest joint military exercise held in recent history in Jordan.
Before the start of the exercise, the U.S., as always, claimed that the exercise was just a routine cooperation exercise and that it does not configure attacks assumed to target any particular country. Despite this statement, the U.S. and Jordan held a joint military exercise together, creating a confusing situation. They cannot prevent speculation from the international public.
First, it would seem to a country that has taken part in these exercises that all the Middle East Arab countries have participated; but this does not include Syria. Analysts generally assert that when there are countries that have been excluded from the regional joint military exercises, there are two possible reasons for this. One possibility is that the excluded countries do not have any conflict of interest and that the exercises pose no threat to neighboring countries. The second is that the excluded countries are direct rivals or potential menaces to the neighboring countries. Syria apparently belongs to the latter.
Second, regarding the exercise area, Major General Awni el-Edwan, who was in charge of the Jordanian military training mission, said that the exercise will take place in the desert areas of southern Jordan. It will not be near the northern border with Syria. But if one were to compare the combat radius of the U.S. military F-22 fighter and Jordanian F-16 fighter, it should be noted that airstrikes conducted in the north or the south will not result in any unfavorable impact in the other region. In contrast, they still can avoid Syrian radar detection range. This could prove to be an effective hidden air raid attempt. After all, Israel has set a precedent with its successful cross-border air strikes on Syrian nuclear facilities
Third, regarding the participating branches of the military and focus of the exercises, the U.S. made arrangements for attack helicopters, marines and expeditionary forces in the Eager Lion military exercise. These forces are precisely what would be needed against Syria. The difference is that in the past, this exercise highlighted special operations’ exercises. Given the United States’ recent war experience, the use of special operations to attack or arrest enemy leaders is an important goal. This has already become an effective means of exchanging minimal cost for maximum benefit.
Finally, regarding the so-called objectives of the exercise, the U.S. says that this time the exercise is designed to do three things: to strengthen the military ties between participating countries, to improve collaborative response to threats and, third, to increase the ability to combat terrorism and crises. But as far as the U.S. is concerned, what other counties in the region besides Syria and Iran can pose a threat and lead to crisis?
In Response to Continued and Increasing Perceived Threats, Iran and Syria Can Only Become More Nervous
After the success of the armed intervention in Libya, the U.S. believes that it should follow up the victory with a pursuit. Let’s take into consideration Iran and Syria; these two are inserted like nails piercing into the Middle East. Once Iran has nuclear weapons and after the stabilization of the domestic situation in Syria, an easy win will be very difficult. Therefore, after the outbreak of the "Arab Spring" in the Middle East, the U.S. has energetically begun to consider anew the Iranian nuclear crisis. Making use of the turbulent situation in Syria, Arab countries once more gather at the United States’ side.
Through the expansion of the number of participating countries and a series of joint military exercises, the U.S. is taking advantage of its increased military forces in the Middle East. It is forming closer relations with Middle Eastern countries. There is a gradual strengthening of U.S. control over the Middle East.
In order to face a common enemy, Syria and Iran signed a military cooperation memorandum of understanding in 2008. The memorandum pointed out that the relationship between the two countries is “long, eternal and strategic” and that the two countries should further strengthen military relations as a subcomponent of bilateral relations.
Under the memorandum of understanding, Iran and Syria will strengthen bilateral exchanges of senior military officers and experts. They will expand the exchange of bilateral military-technical training programs. The document also calls upon the parties concerned to be committed to restoring lasting peace to the region. It further requires that occupational forces and foreign troops withdraw from the relevant countries or regions. Both sides agreed that they have bilateral relations of strategic depth. They will cooperate to consolidate their defense operations in a manner that is conducive to jointly coping with threats from hostile forces.
Some analysts believe that the questions of Iran and Syria are substantively different. If Syria and Iran join forces, Syria would lose most countries internationally, especially the support and sympathy of Middle Eastern countries. Syria’s internal conflict is an international threat. Also, it gives Western countries opportunities for armed intervention. Therefore, in order to unite the majority of countries, Syria will maintain the status quo. Iran has no desire for the domestic situation in Syria to spread to Iran. Their operations will remain independent until the last minute.
However, once the U.S. or Israel goes to war, the two countries are also aware of the truth of their interdependence. First of all, the two countries may use the principle of a seesaw. Western countries are face to face with two intolerant countries in the Middle East. But, I do not know where to start to achieve the goal of stopping the outbreak of war.
Second, in the event of a war against Syria, Iran may block the Strait of Hormuz. Iran would provide coordinated action from the periphery. In addition, there is a possibility that when any one country is attacked, the two countries join forces to launch an attack on Israel. It may even mobilize the Lebanese Hezbollah and Palestinian Hamas in an offensive against Israel. This would result in a war burning across the Middle East region. Then they would face a situation leading to chaos in the Middle East. If the West were to launch an attack, it would have to think twice before it taking any action.
Fewer Exercises and More Cooperation Are Perhaps the Best Ways to Promote the Middle East Peace Process
Throughout recent history, the U.S. has participated in exercises in the Middle East. These can be described as large endeavors with minimal effects.
First, each participating country’s objective is not at all what the U.S. would want. Some countries fight for assistance. Some countries seek to be sheltered by the U.S. military. Still other countries use military exercises to make on-the-spot inspections of weapons and equipment that they plan to purchase. With a lack of common goals, the participating countries are furthermore only “building a house of cards.” [Translator’s note: The literal translation of this expression is “playing a game of chess after a sandstorm,” and house of cards closely approximates the meaning.] The actual deterrent effect of the military exercises on Syria and Iran is extremely limited. However, the countries that participated in the military exercises may still utilize the two countries to advance positions and ensure development in the desired direction.
Second, Iran is very good at using exercises to intimidate its opponents. For example, the “Guard” series of exercises focused on drills that blockade the Strait of Hormuz. Military exercises codenamed “Martyrs of Unity” were held mainly at land borders and drilled the Revolutionary Guards and the Iranian army on tactical strategy in asymmetric warfare. Iran, of course, knows that conducting exercises in the sensitive regions is a “double-edged sword.” But Iran is familiar with various countries’ thresholds. Perennial accumulation of experience makes Iran address and respond to other countries’ military exercises when they present a threat, and it seems especially adept at doing so.
At the same time, Iran often makes itself a threat and then turns that into an opportunity. For example, the Islands of Loyalty military exercise was conducted at the end of April. The Iranian side sees it as the UAE acting as a representative of the Gulf Arab countries, which together are creating escalating friction with and against Iran, namely regarding the three Gulf islands issue. This will have a negative effect on the stability of the region. Iran, in order to seize an opportunity, moved a step closer to strengthening its position on the three Gulf islands issue and decided to further the militarization of three Gulf islands. In addition to the existing garrison, it will deploy missile forces and construct missile bases on the islands. Also, more Iranian officials recently emphasized that the three Gulf islands are Iran’s territory. Iran will never make the slightest concession on this issue.
Ironically, the United States-Jordanian joint military exercises started on the same day. Jordanian Prime Minister Fayez Tarawneh said Jordan wants a peaceful solution the crisis in Syria and the Iranian nuclear issue. Earlier, in Amman Jordanian Foreign Minister Nasser Judah met with visiting U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Near East Affairs Jeffrey Feltman, who stressed that a return to the negotiating table is the only way for the Middle East peace process to achieve substantive progress.
Maybe a little less rhetoric, a little more action, a little less confrontation and a little more cooperation is the best way to promote the Middle East peace process.
Starting on Apr. 8, 2012 in Bahrain, a 10-day “Initial Link” military exercise was held. Exercises in the region ended on Apr. 30 after the finale of a two-day event in the UAE. It was codenamed “Islands of Loyalty” and was a Gulf Cooperation Council joint forces exercise. Then began a 21-day “Eager Lion” joint military exercise on May 7, 2012 in Jordan. Although, the countries participating in the multiple military exercises and the content of the drills differed, there was one common feature — the participation of the United States and the absence of Iran and Syria. [Editor’s note: The countries that participated in “Initial Link” were Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Oman, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the UAE and the U.S. The Gulf Cooperation Council has six member states — Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the UAE.]
Routine Exercises Are Not Actually Directed Against Any Country
It began on May 7. The U.S. led the joint military exercise codenamed Eager Lion 2012, which opened in Jordan. The exercise continued until May 28. Jordan, the United States, Australia, Pakistan and Brunei were among the 17 countries that took part in the exercise with 12,000 troops. This exercise was the largest military exercise that the United States has participated in recently. Also, this was the largest joint military exercise held in recent history in Jordan.
Before the start of the exercise, the U.S., as always, claimed that the exercise was just a routine cooperation exercise and that it does not configure attacks assumed to target any particular country. Despite this statement, the U.S. and Jordan held a joint military exercise together, creating a confusing situation. They cannot prevent speculation from the international public.
First, it would seem to a country that has taken part in these exercises that all the Middle East Arab countries have participated; but this does not include Syria. Analysts generally assert that when there are countries that have been excluded from the regional joint military exercises, there are two possible reasons for this. One possibility is that the excluded countries do not have any conflict of interest and that the exercises pose no threat to neighboring countries. The second is that the excluded countries are direct rivals or potential menaces to the neighboring countries. Syria apparently belongs to the latter.
Second, regarding the exercise area, Major General Awni el-Edwan, who was in charge of the Jordanian military training mission, said that the exercise will take place in the desert areas of southern Jordan. It will not be near the northern border with Syria. But if one were to compare the combat radius of the U.S. military F-22 fighter and Jordanian F-16 fighter, it should be noted that airstrikes conducted in the north or the south will not result in any unfavorable impact in the other region. In contrast, they still can avoid Syrian radar detection range. This could prove to be an effective hidden air raid attempt. After all, Israel has set a precedent with its successful cross-border air strikes on Syrian nuclear facilities
Third, regarding the participating branches of the military and focus of the exercises, the U.S. made arrangements for attack helicopters, marines and expeditionary forces in the Eager Lion military exercise. These forces are precisely what would be needed against Syria. The difference is that in the past, this exercise highlighted special operations’ exercises. Given the United States’ recent war experience, the use of special operations to attack or arrest enemy leaders is an important goal. This has already become an effective means of exchanging minimal cost for maximum benefit.
Finally, regarding the so-called objectives of the exercise, the U.S. says that this time the exercise is designed to do three things: to strengthen the military ties between participating countries, to improve collaborative response to threats and, third, to increase the ability to combat terrorism and crises. But as far as the U.S. is concerned, what other counties in the region besides Syria and Iran can pose a threat and lead to crisis?
In Response to Continued and Increasing Perceived Threats, Iran and Syria Can Only Become More Nervous
After the success of the armed intervention in Libya, the U.S. believes that it should follow up the victory with a pursuit. Let’s take into consideration Iran and Syria; these two are inserted like nails piercing into the Middle East. Once Iran has nuclear weapons and after the stabilization of the domestic situation in Syria, an easy win will be very difficult. Therefore, after the outbreak of the "Arab Spring" in the Middle East, the U.S. has energetically begun to consider anew the Iranian nuclear crisis. Making use of the turbulent situation in Syria, Arab countries once more gather at the United States’ side.
Through the expansion of the number of participating countries and a series of joint military exercises, the U.S. is taking advantage of its increased military forces in the Middle East. It is forming closer relations with Middle Eastern countries. There is a gradual strengthening of U.S. control over the Middle East.
In order to face a common enemy, Syria and Iran signed a military cooperation memorandum of understanding in 2008. The memorandum pointed out that the relationship between the two countries is “long, eternal and strategic” and that the two countries should further strengthen military relations as a subcomponent of bilateral relations.
Under the memorandum of understanding, Iran and Syria will strengthen bilateral exchanges of senior military officers and experts. They will expand the exchange of bilateral military-technical training programs. The document also calls upon the parties concerned to be committed to restoring lasting peace to the region. It further requires that occupational forces and foreign troops withdraw from the relevant countries or regions. Both sides agreed that they have bilateral relations of strategic depth. They will cooperate to consolidate their defense operations in a manner that is conducive to jointly coping with threats from hostile forces.
Some analysts believe that the questions of Iran and Syria are substantively different. If Syria and Iran join forces, Syria would lose most countries internationally, especially the support and sympathy of Middle Eastern countries. Syria’s internal conflict is an international threat. Also, it gives Western countries opportunities for armed intervention. Therefore, in order to unite the majority of countries, Syria will maintain the status quo. Iran has no desire for the domestic situation in Syria to spread to Iran. Their operations will remain independent until the last minute.
However, once the U.S. or Israel goes to war, the two countries are also aware of the truth of their interdependence. First of all, the two countries may use the principle of a seesaw. Western countries are face to face with two intolerant countries in the Middle East. But, I do not know where to start to achieve the goal of stopping the outbreak of war.
Second, in the event of a war against Syria, Iran may block the Strait of Hormuz. Iran would provide coordinated action from the periphery. In addition, there is a possibility that when any one country is attacked, the two countries join forces to launch an attack on Israel. It may even mobilize the Lebanese Hezbollah and Palestinian Hamas in an offensive against Israel. This would result in a war burning across the Middle East region. Then they would face a situation leading to chaos in the Middle East. If the West were to launch an attack, it would have to think twice before it taking any action.
Fewer Exercises and More Cooperation Are Perhaps the Best Ways to Promote the Middle East Peace Process
Throughout recent history, the U.S. has participated in exercises in the Middle East. These can be described as large endeavors with minimal effects.
First, each participating country’s objective is not at all what the U.S. would want. Some countries fight for assistance. Some countries seek to be sheltered by the U.S. military. Still other countries use military exercises to make on-the-spot inspections of weapons and equipment that they plan to purchase. With a lack of common goals, the participating countries are furthermore only “building a house of cards.” [Translator’s note: The literal translation of this expression is “playing a game of chess after a sandstorm,” and house of cards closely approximates the meaning.] The actual deterrent effect of the military exercises on Syria and Iran is extremely limited. However, the countries that participated in the military exercises may still utilize the two countries to advance positions and ensure development in the desired direction.
Second, Iran is very good at using exercises to intimidate its opponents. For example, the “Guard” series of exercises focused on drills that blockade the Strait of Hormuz. Military exercises codenamed “Martyrs of Unity” were held mainly at land borders and drilled the Revolutionary Guards and the Iranian army on tactical strategy in asymmetric warfare. Iran, of course, knows that conducting exercises in the sensitive regions is a “double-edged sword.” But Iran is familiar with various countries’ thresholds. Perennial accumulation of experience makes Iran address and respond to other countries’ military exercises when they present a threat, and it seems especially adept at doing so.
At the same time, Iran often makes itself a threat and then turns that into an opportunity. For example, the Islands of Loyalty military exercise was conducted at the end of April. The Iranian side sees it as the UAE acting as a representative of the Gulf Arab countries, which together are creating escalating friction with and against Iran, namely regarding the three Gulf islands issue. This will have a negative effect on the stability of the region. Iran, in order to seize an opportunity, moved a step closer to strengthening its position on the three Gulf islands issue and decided to further the militarization of three Gulf islands. In addition to the existing garrison, it will deploy missile forces and construct missile bases on the islands. Also, more Iranian officials recently emphasized that the three Gulf islands are Iran’s territory. Iran will never make the slightest concession on this issue.
Ironically, the United States-Jordanian joint military exercises started on the same day. Jordanian Prime Minister Fayez Tarawneh said Jordan wants a peaceful solution the crisis in Syria and the Iranian nuclear issue. Earlier, in Amman Jordanian Foreign Minister Nasser Judah met with visiting U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Near East Affairs Jeffrey Feltman, who stressed that a return to the negotiating table is the only way for the Middle East peace process to achieve substantive progress.
Maybe a little less rhetoric, a little more action, a little less confrontation and a little more cooperation is the best way to promote the Middle East peace process.