Follow us on social

Attacks on US troops in Middle East resume

Attacks on US troops in Middle East resume

Is anyone paying attention to this tinderbox, with our servicemen and women right in the middle?

Analysis | Middle East

UPDATE 7/31 6:50 AM: The U.S. conducted an airstrike south of Baghdad late Tuesday. U.S. officials told ABC news that it was a defensive strike to thwart an attempted militant attack on a U.S. base in Babil Province.

"U.S. forces in Iraq conducted a defensive airstrike in the Musayib in Babil Province, targeting combatants attempting to launch one-way attack uncrewed aerial systems (OWAUAS)," an official told reporters.

"Based on recent attacks in Iraq and Syria, U.S. Central Command assessed that the OWAUAS posed a threat to U.S. and Coalition Forces," the official said.




After six months of calm, Iran-aligned militias are again targeting U.S. troops in Iraq and Syria.

Following the Gaza war’s eruption, these militias sharply increased their attacks, resulting in the deaths of three U.S. soldiers on January 28 by a Kataib Hezbollah drone at Tower 22 in Jordan, near the Syrian border. In response, the Biden administration launched strikes against the militias, killing a senior Kataib Hezbollah commander on February 7, but avoiding commanders of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard, or IRGC. This led to a temporary lull in violence, but attacks have recently resumed.

Last Thursday and Friday, rockets were launched by Iran-aligned militias at bases hosting U.S. troops in Iraq and Syria, including Ain al-Assad base in Iraq and a coalition base in Syria. On July 16th, two drones also attacked al-Assad base, marking the first reported attack since February. No injuries were reported, and the attacks received little media attention.

As the U.S. and Iraq negotiate a drawdown of U.S. troops, which would leave only technical advisors, the militias may be trying to speed up implementation of this decision or show strength. These Iran-aligned militias are also part of the so-called Axis of Resistance which includes Lebanese Hezbollah. Any eruption in the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah is likely to spur an uptick in activity by the Iraqi militias, particularly against U.S. troops and Israeli targets like the port of Eilat.

The bottom line is that it should not be assumed that these attacks will remain non-lethal. These militias operate outside Iraqi government control and see targeting U.S. troops as part of their raison d'etre. As long as U.S. troops are present, attacks are likely to continue and shows of force to “restore deterrence” will delay — not end — attacks going forward.


Photo credi: Robert Hale/Shutterstock

Photo credi: Robert Hale/Shutterstock

Analysis | Middle East
Fort Bragg horrors expose dark underbelly of post-9/11 warfare
Top photo credit: Seth Harp book jacket (Viking press) US special operators/deviant art/creative commons

Fort Bragg horrors expose dark underbelly of post-9/11 warfare

Media

In 2020 and 2021, 109 U.S. soldiers died at Fort Bragg, the largest military base in the country and the central location for the key Special Operations Units in the American military.

Only four of them were on overseas deployments. The others died stateside, mostly of drug overdoses, violence, or suicide. The situation has hardly improved. It was recently revealed that another 51 soldiers died at Fort Bragg in 2023. According to U.S. government data, these represent more military fatalities than have occurred at the hands of enemy forces in any year since 2013.

keep readingShow less
Trump Netanyahu
Top image credit: President Donald Trump hosts a bilateral dinner for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Monday, July 7, 2025, in the Blue Room. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

The case for US Middle East retrenchment has never been clearer

Middle East

Is Israel becoming the new hegemon of the Middle East? The answer to this question is an important one.

Preventing the rise of a rival regional hegemon — a state with a preponderance of military and economic power — in Eurasia has long been a core goal of U.S. foreign policy. During the Cold War, Washington feared Soviet dominion over Europe. Today, U.S. policymakers worry that China’s increasingly capable military will crowd the United States out of Asia’s lucrative economic markets. The United States has also acted repeatedly to prevent close allies in Europe and Asia from becoming military competitors, using promises of U.S. military protection to keep them weak and dependent.

keep readingShow less
United Nations
Top image credit: lev radin / Shutterstock.com

Do we need a treaty on neutrality?

Global Crises

In an era of widespread use of economic sanctions, dual-use technology exports, and hybrid warfare, the boundary between peacetime and wartime has become increasingly blurry. Yet understandings of neutrality remain stuck in the time of trench warfare. An updated conception of neutrality, codified through an international treaty, is necessary for global security.

Neutrality in the 21st century is often whatever a country wants it to be. For some, such as the European neutrals like Switzerland and Ireland, it is compatible with non-U.N. sanctions (such as by the European Union) while for others it is not. Countries in the Global South are also more likely to take a case-by-case approach, such as choosing to not take a stance on a specific conflict and instead call for a peaceful resolution while others believe a moral position does not undermine neutrality.

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.