Follow us on social

Original

Update: Tit-for-tat attack after US launches airstrikes in Syria

This comes within days of failed attempts by lawmakers to strip the White House of blanket authorities and to bring American troops home.

Analysis | Middle East

UPDATE 3/25: There are news reports Saturday that at least two U.S. facilities in Syria were under attack late Friday, a day after the U.S. launched airstrikes against Iranian Revolutionary Guard targets in the eastern part of the country.

According to ABC News and Al Jazeera, U.S. officials said there were attacks on two facilities in Deir ez-Zor Province in eastern Syria — one involved drones, the other involved rockets. The drones were shot down (one reportedly made it through), but the rocket attack at the other U.S. facility left one American servicemember wounded and in stable condition.

There have been around 80 such attacks reported against U.S. troops in Syria since 2021.


The Defense Department said late Thursday that it had launched a series of airstrikes in eastern Syria after a drone attack killed one U.S. contractor and injured five soldiers operating on a coalition base in northeastern Syria. An additional U.S. contractor was also hurt in the attack.

According to a statement by Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, the Americans conducted precision airstrikes in eastern Syria against facilities used by Iran's Revolutionary Guard (IRGC).

"At the direction of President Biden, I authorized U.S. Central Command forces to conduct precision airstrikes tonight in eastern Syria against facilities used by groups affiliated with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC)," he said. "The airstrikes were conducted in response to today’s attack as well as a series of recent attacks against Coalition forces in Syria by groups affiliated with the IRGC."

These precision strikes, said the DoD, "are intended to protect and defend U.S. personnel. The United States took proportionate and deliberate action intended to limit the risk of escalation and minimize casualties."

The statement said the intelligence community had determined that the drone had been of "Iranian origin," but did not say why the IRGC had been pinpointed as responsible for the attacks.

As of December, there were 900 U.S. troops in the country where they continue to conduct operations against ISIS but have been targeted for years now by what U.S. officials say are Iranian-backed militias.

According to CBS News, the American strikes reportedly killed six Iranian-backed fighters at an arms depot in the Harabesh neighborhood in the eastern city of Deir el-Zour, another two fighters in Mayadeen, and a strike hit a military post near the town of Boukamal along the border with Iraq. CBS was relying on the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights and these reports could not be independently verified.

According to Reuters, the Iranians are denying any deaths connected to the U.S. airstrikes:

Iran's state Press TV, saying no Iranian had been killed in the attack, quoted local sources as denying the target was an Iran-aligned military post, but that a rural development center and a grain center near a military airport were hit.

It said: "A military source in Syria told Press TV that the resistance groups reserve their right to respond to the American attack and will take reciprocal action."

In early March Gen. Mark Milley, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, made a surprise visit to the troops in Syria, where the U.S. has had a military presence for eight years. He tied the mission there to the security of the U.S. and said the risk of keeping troops there was "worth" the "enduring defeat of ISIS and continuing to support our friends and allies in the region."

Not everyone thinks that mission is as clear and the risk as important. Recently Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) offered a bill for vote in the House that would bring U.S. troops home from the region. Even with help from the Congressional Progressive Caucus and other Republicans, it failed 321-103 on March 8.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) has also tried in recent says to push a measure that would repeal the 2001 AUMF which he says is used to justify operations there, as well as a number of other overseas interventions since the law was passed in the wake of 9/11, 20 years ago. He says it should be up to Congress whether to continue these operations, not the sole authority of the White House. His amendment failed 86-9 in the Senate on Thursday.


U.S. Northern Command personnel move medical supplies for distribution at New York's Javits Medical Station as part of the U.S. military's COVID-19 response (U.S. Army Photo by Pvt. 1st Class Nathaniel Gayle)
Analysis | Middle East
Afghanistan withdrawal
Lloyd Austin, Kenneth McKenzie, and Mark Milley in 2021. (MSNBC screengrab)

Turns out leaving Afghanistan did not unleash terror on US or region

Military Industrial Complex

It will be four years since the U.S. withdrew from Afghanistan on Aug. 30, 2021, ending a nearly 20-year occupation that could serve as a poster child for mission creep.

What began in October 2001 as a narrow intervention to destroy al-Qaeda, the terrorist group that perpetrated the 9/11 attacks, and topple the Taliban government for refusing to hand over al-Qaeda’s leader, Osama bin Laden, morphed into an open-ended nation-building operation that killed 2,334 U.S. military personnel and wounded over 20,000 more.

keep readingShow less
Francois Bayrou Emmanuel Macron
Top image credit: France's Prime Minister Francois Bayrou arrives to hear France's President Emmanuel Macron deliver a speech to army leaders at l'Hotel de Brienne in Paris on July 13, 2025, on the eve of the annual Bastille Day Parade in the French capital. LUDOVIC MARIN/Pool via REUTERS

Europe facing revolts, promising more guns with no money

Europe

If you wanted to create a classic recipe for political crisis, you could well choose a mixture of a stagnant economy, a huge and growing public debt, a perceived need radically to increase military spending, an immigration crisis, a deeply unpopular president, a government without a majority in parliament, and growing radical parties on the right and left.

In other words, France today. And France’s crisis is only one part of the growing crisis of Western Europe as a whole, with serious implications for the future of transatlantic relations.

keep readingShow less
Starmer Macron Merz
Top image credit: France's President Emmanuel Macron, Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Germany's Chancellor Friedrich Merz arrive at Kyiv railway station on May 10, 2025, ahead of a gathering of European leaders in the Ukrainian capital. LUDOVIC MARIN/Pool via REUTERS

Europe's snapback gamble risks killing diplomacy with Iran

Middle East

Europe appears set to move from threats to action. According to reports, the E3 — Britain, France, and Germany — will likely trigger the United Nations “snapback” process this week. Created under the 2015 Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA), this mechanism allows any participant to restore pre-2015 U.N. sanctions if Iran is judged to be in violation of its commitments.

The mechanism contains a twist that makes it so potent. Normally, the Security Council operates on the assumption that sanctions need affirmative consensus to pass. But under snapback, the logic is reversed. Once invoked, a 30-day clock begins. Sanctions automatically return unless the Security Council votes to keep them suspended, meaning any permanent member can force their reimposition with a single veto.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.