On Wednesday’s “CNN News Central,” CNN Military Analyst and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Gen. Wesley Clark (Ret.) stated that the Biden administration’s public policy towards attacks by Iranian proxies is “inviting the enemy to attack you and dare you to escalate.” And “if we continue just to try to defend and we don’t go at the source of the attacks, either tactical or strategic, then we can expect those attacks to continue and to intensify. And eventually, they will get through the protective shield of the aircraft and the destroyers that are on the ground, they will target a ship and cause real damage. It’s inevitable.”
Clark said, “Well, it’s been the policy of the administration that we don’t want it to expand into a wider conflict. And so, when that’s your public policy and you’re arguing, please don’t let it escalate, you’re inviting the enemy to attack you and dare you to escalate.”
Clark added, “I think the issue that I see is, how do we get escalation dominance enough to shut off the attacks from the Houthi[s] in the Red Sea? How do we do that? Do we bring our allies in? We’ve got to use diplomacy, maybe there are some economic measures we can use. Maybe we know the right targets to strike if we go into Yemen and strike the Houthi[s], maybe we don’t. But it’s a real conundrum, because, normally, an attack like this, a battle like this, you wage it by — you think you can go tit for tat? No, you don’t want to do that more than once or twice. So, you want to get dominance. And you’ve got the dominant airpower, you know they can’t resist that. But what is the decisive effect that the airpower will bring when you strike on the ground in Yemen? I think that’s the dilemma that the administration faces on this particular issue. Do you know the launch sites, do you know the command and control, what are the regional consequences, repercussions? Do you want to instead go against Iran, maybe take out that Iranian intelligence-gathering ship that’s targeting the Houthis? And if so, then what’s the consequence of that? It’s a really difficult conundrum, and one thing’s clear, it’s not stable.”
He further stated, “So, if we continue just to try to defend and we don’t go at the source of the attacks, either tactical or strategic, then we can expect those attacks to continue and to intensify. And eventually, they will get through the protective shield of the aircraft and the destroyers that are on the ground, they will target a ship and cause real damage. It’s inevitable.”
Clark concluded, “[A]ll of us, I think, who look at this thing from a military context recognize we’re going to have to do more militarily. And the question is, and we can’t answer it on this program, because we don’t have detailed intelligence, what are the right targets and what will their impact be, both tactically and diplomatically, if we strike those targets? And ultimately, of course, the question is Iran, and we don’t want to go to war with Iran, but Iran has been at war with us for over 40 years now. … And my concern is…we’re reaching the end of this era with the fighting in Gaza, with what’s going on in Ukraine where we can simply, strategically defer addressing critical issues and instead handle them on a strike here and a strike here and a little bit of assistance there and little bit of diplomacy there basis…the pot is starting to boil in a way that is adverse to American interests, and we need a broader, stronger strategy to deal with it.”
Follow Ian Hanchett on Twitter @IanHanchett
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.