Three United States troops were targeted and killed by a drone attack carried out by Iran-backed militias near the Syrian border over the weekend. Dozens more were injured. It was the first direct attack against U.S. troops in the region following the Oct. 7 terrorist attacks in northern Israel and the ensuing conflict in Gaza. And now, the Biden administration, which has vowed to respond forcefully “at a time and place of our choosing,” must decide on a specific course of action in the highly volatile region.
To be certain, a strong military response against Iran and its proxies is warranted and even obligatory. This incident, not unlike the Russian invasion of Ukraine, China’s increasingly hostile stance in the Indo-Pacific, and indeed the Oct. 7 terrorist attacks in Israel, are the direct result of America’s waning ability to deter her adversaries in the Biden era. A forceful response against this heinous attack on our military is not only morally justified but necessary if the U.S. is to reestablish the credibility of its military deterrence.
However, it is crucial for the response to be limited to the extent that it does not diminish our capacity to deal with the central international priority for the U.S. for the next decade and beyond, which is, of course, China.
With Beijing’s stunning rise in the 21st century, the U.S. has once again found itself in an age of great power conflict. In recent years, China has built up its military at an extraordinary clip and has become increasingly adventurous on the global stage. During the Biden presidency alone, China has forged increasingly meaningful alliances with powers in the Global South, deepened its military partnership with Russia, brokered peace deals between bitter foes in the Middle East, and further menaced neighboring Taiwan in anticipation of an invasion or a maritime blockade. These actions and more have contributed to the increasingly accepted idea that China, despite dealing with serious economic troubles at home, has created a parallel global order to the U.S.-led West.
In fact, it is possible that China’s economic woes, brought on by population decline, a housing crash, and mass youth unemployment, make Beijing more likely to use its military might in an increasingly rash manner; there is a window of opportunity for Beijing to capitalize on its gains and further spread its global influence, and they must act before it closes. They are wounded at home, and this makes them all the more dangerous.
Taking Taiwan, regardless of the economic damage such a move would have on the world economy, would likely serve Beijing’s long-term interests best. It would be an utterly rational move.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
All this means that the U.S. is no longer able to exert its influence wherever and however it pleases without running the risk of losing a larger strategic struggle for global predominance. The bipartisan calls to strike Tehran in recent days suggest that American legislators are in denial of the true nature of the challenge we face. There are real limits to what America can accomplish on the international stage, real limits to the amount of resources that can be spent in various conflicts around the globe, and real consequences when things don’t go as planned.
The U.S. must prioritize the China threat above all as it deals with Tehran. Abstract notions such as “spreading democracy” and the promise of a “new American century” have led the U.S. into one misadventure after the next since the fall of the Soviet Union. Now is not the time for grand ideas but for practicality. The U.S.’s long-term interests, in particular its competition with China, must be prioritized above all.
Peter Laffin is a contributor at the Washington Examiner. His work has also appeared in RealClearPolitics, the Catholic Thing, and the National Catholic Register.
