ThinkProgress Logo

Security

NEWS FLASH

Obama Overruled Top Justice And Defense Department Lawyers On Libya | In a breaking story, the New York Times’s Charlie Savage reports that President Obama “rejected the views of top lawyers at the Pentagon and the Justice Department” when deciding that the U.S. military involvement in Libya was legal and did not amount to “hostilities.” By taking the “unusual” step of overruling Pentagon general counsel Jeh Johnson and the Office of Legal Counsel’s Caroline Krass, Obama made the argument that he is not subject to provisions of the War Powers Act that would have required him to terminate military activities or scale back the mission by May 20.

NEWS FLASH

Neoconservatives Urge House Republicans Not To Cut Funding For Libya Mission | Three prominent neoconservatives are circulating a letter to House Republicans calling on them to continue funding military operations in Libya despite concerns about the evasion of the War Powers Act. The letter – authored by Bill Kristol, Elliot Abrams, and Robert Kagan – warns GOP lawmakers that cutting funding would be “an abdication of our responsibilities as an ally and as the leader of the Western alliance.” The letter goes on to defend American intervention in Libya and criticizes the White House for doing “too little to achieve the goal of removing Qaddafi from power.”

WINEP Fellow: Disingenuous To Frame Military Action Against Iran As a Simple ‘Raid’

Jeffrey White

While Iran-hawks in Washington are quick to casually throw around mentions of the “military option” or, as some call it, “the kinetic option,” many realists and military strategists have been trying to call attention to exactly what a war with Iran would entail. But a new article written by a Washington Institute for Near East Policy fellow offers one of the more in depth discussions of what to expect if the U.S. chooses to pursue a military strike against Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons facilities.

Jeffrey White, a defense fellow at WINEP, starts by putting to rest the concept that a military strike could somehow be a contained event or have a predictable immediate outcome. His American Interest article reads:

[It is] disingenuous to try to frame military action against Iran as a simple “raid” or even a broader “operation.” We are talking here about war, with attendant potential high costs to all combatants in terms of military casualties, civilian damage and economic disruption.

White emphasizes that war has “an emergent logic of its own” and that “even a minor attack would likely become a major test of strength involving not only the United States and Iran but also a host of allies and associates.”

In terms of the actual military conflict, White is insistent that a military strike on Iran wouldn’t remain isolated to whatever narrowly defined goals the U.S. prescribes.

He writes:

It seems fairly clear then that a conflict with Iran is unlikely to be an isolated event in which the U.S. strikes, Iran retaliates, and it’s over—with Iran either left with a viable nuclear program or not. War is far more likely to be a series of actions played out over time at varying levels of intensity and with a strong potential for escalation.

And he questions the U.S.’s readiness for such a conflict:

It is by no means clear, either, that the U.S. government is structured to effectively prosecute such a war, or that its intelligence capabilities are oriented properly toward supporting it.

Iran hawks suggest that an Israeli or U.S. airstrike on Iran’s nuclear facilities would resolve any potential regional destabilization resulting from an Iranian breakout. But White emphasizes that attacking Iran itself would be hugely destabilizing. Iran maintains strong ties to Hezbollah and the government of Syria, both of which could be used to hurt U.S. and Israeli regional security interests.

White offers a long list of unpleasant scenarios that could result from a military strike on Iran. None of them should be thrown around lightly.

NEWS FLASH

Saudi Arabian Women Defy Ban On Driving | Some Saudi Arabian women stepped in for their drivers today and got behind the wheels of their cars, defying a ban on female driving in the conservative country. Like other Arab Spring protests, the civil disobedience action — in a country that brooks no dissent — was organized on social media sites. Human rights groups called on the autocratic Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to lift the ban and a State Department spokesperson, jumping at an opportunitysaid yesterday, “We stand with all women around the world who want to live and have the same opportunities that men have.”

NEWS FLASH

Military Officials Push For Extension Of Surge Troop Levels in Afghanistan | Several U.S. military officials are proposing that President Obama hold off on drawing down the 33,000 troop surge in Afghanistan until the fall of 2012. The military hopes to focus heavy military activity on the eastern provinces bordering Pakistan. The White House has called for a “significant” withdrawal of U.S. soldiers in July but hasn’t announced what number would be withdrawn or when the troop surge would end. The report that military officials seek a slowdown in the withdrawal comes two days after 29 senators called for an accelerated withdrawal with the aim of ending U.S. involvement in Afghanistan.

NEWS FLASH

Syrian Security Forces Increase Crackdown, Eight Protesters Dead | The Syrian government is expanding its crackdown on protesters as Syrian soldiers and tanks entered two more towns in the north of the country. Reports emerged on Friday that security forces shot and killed eight protesters, including a 16 year old boy, in protests across Syria. Thousands had taken to the streets following Friday prayers to demand the end of President Bashar Assad’s regime.

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up