How Joe Biden May Be Empowering Iran’s Aggression Against Israel

Will the White House Learn Any Lesson from Iran’s Attacks?: For the second time in six months, the Islamic Republic of Iran has launched a barrage – this time, 181 missiles – at Israel. Each time, the Biden administration has stood by Israel, lending deployed military capabilities to help Israel neutralize the incoming attack. Administration principals, from Joe Biden himself to Secretary of State Antony Blinken and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan each stood by Israel unequivocally.

What is unclear, however, is whether any senior Biden official has internalized the lessons about how their own policies enabled Iran and led to today’s events. Had any of the dozens of ballistic missiles Iran fired at the Dimona nuclear site hit their target, the situation would be far different.

First, the big picture: The Clinton, Obama and Biden administrations, but also President George W. Bush in his second term, have approached terrorism through the lens of grievance. If they address the grievance goes the logic, terrorism goes away. Academics might couch the same idea with discussion of “root causes,” and then talk about poverty or lack of education. None of this is true with the Iranian regime. Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s problem with Israel is purely ideological. He simply cannot abide its existence. He dedicated his entire life to the eradication of the world’s only Jewish state but, at 85-years-old, he realizes his time is limited. Accordingly, he will act to accomplish his goal while he still is alive to see it. Many Iranians may not care about Israel, and a plurality may even quietly sympathize with the Jewish state. But Khamenei is commander-in-chief and has the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as his own Praetorian Guard. When ideology motivates terrorists, there is only one solution: Defeat the ideology by eliminating those who embrace it.

The Obama and Biden teams also fundamentally misread regime politics. Both believed that a dichotomy existed between regime reformers and hardliners. This construct is flawed for two reasons. First, the true spectrum of opinion in Iran ranges from anti-Islamic Republic to Islamic Republic loyalists. If a quarter of the population favors the Islamic Republic, only a small fraction of that would be hardliner. The vast majority—perhaps three-quarters of the population—oppose the theocracy in every way. Obama and Biden also erred by projecting their own sincerity onto reformists. The difference between hardliners and reformists is less philosophical than tactical. Put another way, Biden, Blinken, and Sullivan fell for the old good cop-bad cop trick.

Third, the Obama and Biden teams misunderstand the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. The elite Iranian forces are not only a military grouping, but also a conglomerate. Without moral equivalence, to understand Khatam al-Anbiya, the Revolutionary Guards’ financial wing, picture merging the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers with KBR, Halliburton, Bechtel, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Walmart, Exxon, and Shell. The commercial interests of the Guards bringing in perhaps eight or nine times the income of the official budget. To lift sanctions is akin to pumping gasoline into the engine of Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps repression and terror sponsorship.

Finally, Team Biden misunderstands deterrence. Deterrence is not simply a rhetorical strategy.  Moving ships and planes is not enough. The Iranian regime needs to believe the United States will use its force against Iran’s assets directly. After all, Persians do not care if Arabs die on Iran’s behalf; they only care if Persians die. Wars in the Middle East are caused not by oil or water as so many academics suggest, but rather overconfidence. When Iranian speed boats buzz American destroyers and carriers, they unfurl banners reading, “Americans can’t do a damned thing.” In 1988, President Ronald Reagan showed a generation of Iranian admirals and generals that he would pull the trigger if provoked. Today, Iranians believe they face nothing worse than a good finger wagging by effeminate secretaries or advisors whose arrogance only match their naïveté.

The White House also might learn lessons from outside the Middle Eastern theater. A generation of diplomats and national security advisors from Brent Scowcroft to Colin Powell to Condoleezza Rice dismissed North Korean bluster or celebrated missile and nuclear test failures. But rogue regimes can learn much from failure. Iran has tried twice to attack Israel. Their probing failed twice, but that does not mean they will surrender; rather, they will learn from their mistakes and adjust their tactics. Just as Hamas failed 100 times before it succeeded beyond its wildest dreams on October 7, 2023, so too may Iran fail repeatedly before it succeeds.

If there are any lessons Biden or the next U.S. president should learn, it is that no amount of diplomacy will assuage an ideological foe; it will only empower them. Restoring deterrence requires at least limited military action. The status quo is not tenable. Time is running out.

About the Author: Dr. Michael Rubin

Michael Rubin is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and director of policy analysis at the Middle East Forum. A former Pentagon official, Dr. Rubin has lived in post-revolution Iran, Yemen, and pre-and postwar Iraq. He also spent time with the Taliban before 9/11. For over a decade, he taught classes at sea about the Horn of Africa and Middle East conflicts, culture, and terrorism to deployed US Navy and Marine units. Dr. Rubin is the author, coauthor, and coeditor of several books exploring diplomacy, Iranian history, Arab culture, Kurdish studies, and Shi’ite politics. The opinions and views expressed are his own.