Middle East
Trump’s Iran strategy faces reality check as US military assets remain stretched thin
The Trump administration insists it maintains a vast array of military options for Iran, yet the operational reality on the ground suggests a significantly more constrained “menu” than existed just one year ago.
American troops and naval assets that were once at the President’s immediate disposal have been diverted to the Caribbean. A critical US defense system deployed to the Middle East last year has since been returned to South Korea. Administration officials further indicate there are currently no plans for a major deployment of heavy military assets back to the region.
While Trump still retains the authority to order airstrikes targeting Iranian leadership or military installations, his tactical options have diminished even since June, when the US launched strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities.
Furthermore, Trump must now contend with lawmakers who are increasingly questioning whether a new offensive would drag the US into another regional conflict—doubts that have intensified just one week after the President ordered the abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.
“What is the objective? How does military force get you to that objective?”
Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, challenged the administration’s strategy in an interview with Politico.
“What is the objective? How does military force get you to that objective?” Reed asked. “They are certainly localizing oppression against their own people, but the President has yet to demonstrate that a military strike would either assist the population or dramatically alter the government’s behavior.”
The Trump administration is also grappling with depleted US weapon stockpiles, a result of the high tempo of military operations across the Red Sea, Iran, and Venezuela.
This bottleneck has become particularly acute regarding air defense systems, which protect US forces stationed within the range of Iranian weaponry. Should Washington launch an attack and provoke a robust Iranian retaliation, the US may find itself with a limited inventory of interceptor missiles to defend its personnel against Tehran’s extensive rocket and missile arsenal.
While the Pentagon maintains 10,000 troops at Al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar, along with smaller contingents in Iraq, Syria, and Jordan, resource management remains a concern.
“If this turns into a protracted, back-and-forth series of strikes, your interceptor capacity becomes much more critical,” warned a former defense official, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss national security matters. “We could find ourselves in a very difficult position on that front very quickly.”
White House: “The President has a full menu”
The White House remains adamant that the President’s tactical flexibility remains intact. Spokesperson Anna Kelly stated, “President Trump has a full menu of options regarding Iran.”
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters that senior officials met Tuesday to discuss the US response, though Trump did not attend the meeting.
In a post on Truth Social yesterday, Trump argued that the Iranian government would pay a “big price.” Issuing an overt call for regime change, Trump wrote: “I have cancelled all talks with Iranian officials until the senseless killing of protesters STOPS. HELP IS ON THE WAY.”
Navy in the Caribbean, Patriots in Korea
Despite the rhetoric, an administration official told Politico that there are no immediate preparations for a major surge of US troops or assets to the Middle East.
The USS Ford, which was redirected from the Middle East last year, remains in the Caribbean following the Venezuela operation. The USS Vinson and USS Nimitz, two aircraft carriers Trump dispatched to the Middle East in June, have long since departed the area.
Speaking at the Honolulu Defense Forum, General Xavier Brunson confirmed that the Patriot missile defense system sent from South Korea to the Middle East last year was returned in November. “They are back on the peninsula now,” Brunson said.
Pentagon spokesperson Kingsley Wilson emphasized the department’s readiness, stating, “The Department of Defense stands ready to execute the orders of the Commander-in-Chief at any time and in any place.”
Rather than a massive buildup of personnel and ships, the US could opt to rapidly cycle assets in and out of the region, similar to the June operation where Trump ordered US bombers to cross the Atlantic to strike Iranian nuclear sites. Officials also noted that severe cyberattacks remain a viable alternative should diplomacy fail.
“Do not expect a major buildup”
Retired Vice Admiral John Miller, the former commander of US Naval Forces in the Middle East, suggested that a massive troop surge is unlikely and perhaps unnecessary.
“I don’t think you should expect to see a major military buildup in the Gulf region, nor do we truly need one,” Miller said. “What we would see is either a global strike mission launched from our bases in the Gulf or assets taking off directly from the United States.”
Miller noted that if the administration pursues airstrikes, he expects a focus on “Iranian centers of gravity,” including command bunkers, military sites, and key communication hubs.
However, even Trump’s staunchest allies in Congress appear hesitant to support an Iranian operation involving US ground troops.
“It is not our place to invade Iran; our duty is to protect the Iranian people. We will not be sending ground forces there,” said Republican Senator Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma.
Senator Kevin Cramer of North Dakota added that he prefers “non-kinetic solutions,” such as additional tariffs and economic pressure coordinated with allies.
Both Senate Majority Leader John Thune and Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker stated they had not been briefed on potential strikes against Iran.
Such a move would likely trigger fresh resistance from Congress. Last week, five Republican senators joined Democrats to advance a bill intended to block the President from using US armed forces in Venezuela. The vote was recorded as one of the strongest rebukes of Trump’s military policy to date.
Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, who voted to limit Trump’s authority, issued a warning: “If you are going to aggressively enter another country militarily, the Constitution requires you to ask Congress for permission.”
Middle East
US waives human rights terms on $320m military aid to Egypt
The US State Department stated that it has waived human rights conditions on more than $300 million in military aid to Egypt.
The statement emphasised that this decision was taken in consideration of Cairo’s “helpful role” since the outbreak of the war against Iran.
Egypt began receiving substantial support from the US after signing a peace treaty with Israel in 1979.
Since the late 1980s, the country has received approximately $1.3 billion annually in US military assistance.
A portion of this aid is subject to conditions related to human rights and democracy, which can be waived on national security grounds.
Withholding funds, including during the administration of former US President Joe Biden, has caused tension between Cairo and Washington in the past.
A letter dated 21 September and addressed to various congressional committees, obtained by Reuters, stated that Secretary of State Marco Rubio “decided to waive the certification requirement under the fiscal year 2025 Foreign Military Financing programme for Egypt of $320 million.”
This waiver was subsequently confirmed by the State Department.
An accompanying memorandum justifying the decision stated that this portion of military aid was “essential for counterterrorism, border security, or non-proliferation programmes, or otherwise important to the national security interests of the United States.”
The memorandum, dated 4 September and bearing Rubio’s signature, stated: “Exercising this waiver authority is critical to the US-Egypt relationship and to US national security priorities, particularly given the helpful role Egypt has played in the aftermath of Operation Epic Fury.”
“Operation Epic Fury” is the designation used by the US military for the campaign launched jointly with Israel against Iran in late February.
The State Department memorandum, whose authenticity was confirmed by two sources in Washington familiar with the letter, did not provide detailed information regarding what was termed Egypt’s “helpful role”.
The State Department’s annual decision on military aid to Egypt typically covers funds allocated for the preceding fiscal year, which ends on 30 September.
A State Department spokesperson stated that Rubio waived the certification in the interest of US national security and that the US continues to cooperate with the Egyptian government across a range of issues.
In an emailed statement, the spokesperson said: “This waiver recognizes the importance of maintaining security cooperation with Egypt at a time of significant security challenges in the region.”
The Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not immediately comment on the matter.
The spillover effects of the Iran war have imposed a heavy toll on US security partners, including Egypt.
Owing to rising fuel prices and other disruptions, the Egyptian economy is passing through a difficult period.
Under the Biden administration, the US withheld portions of the annual military allocation on multiple occasions over Egypt’s human rights record.
In 2024, following the Hamas-led 7 October attack on Israel and the subsequent war in Gaza, the Biden administration set aside human rights conditions, disbursing the entire $1.3 billion allocation to Egypt for the first time in its tenure.
Human rights organisations have long accused Egypt, under the administration of President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, of widespread human rights abuses, including torture and enforced disappearances.
This week, Egyptian police detained six journalists from a fact-checking and investigative media outlet, accusing them of spreading false information on behalf of the banned Muslim Brotherhood.
Egyptian authorities state that they have taken steps to address human rights issues. Sisi said stability is paramount and that the government supports human rights by working to provide for basic needs.
Middle East
Britain expands curbs on arms exports to Israel over Gaza risks
Britain has significantly broadened its military export restrictions targeting Israel, suspending or rejecting more than 80 licences for items the IDF could use in Gaza.
This figure is nearly triple the number affected when the policy was first introduced in September 2024.
United Kingdom Minister of State for the Middle East Stephen Doughty said that as part of what he described as a “tighter system” for assessing exports to Israel, more than 50 further export applications have been refused since approximately 30 licences were initially suspended.
Under the initial decision taken in September 2024, 30 of roughly 350 licences were suspended after the British government concluded there was a “clear risk” that certain military exports could be used to commit or facilitate serious violations of international humanitarian law in Gaza.
The affected equipment included components for military aircraft, drones, naval systems, and targeting gear.
Doughty said additional measures adopted this month established what he termed a “double safeguard” mechanism within the approvals process.
Export applications must now be assessed both against existing international humanitarian law criteria and in light of Britain’s position on the legality of Israel’s presence in the Palestinian territories.
“We have so far suspended or refused more than 80 licences,” Doughty said, adding that he had personally examined each licence.
Despite the wider restrictions, British-origin parts entering the international F-35 fighter jet supply chain continue to be largely exempt.
The UK government argues that preventing British-made components from entering the global F-35 pool could undermine the programme as a whole and have serious consequences for the security of the UK and its allies.
Direct exports of F-35 parts intended specifically for Israel remain suspended.
Doughty defended maintaining the supply of components via the international programme, arguing that halting it could have severe ramifications for the broader European and allied security architecture.
Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Emily Thornberry challenged this position, arguing that the issue was political rather than purely legal.
Thornberry suggested adopting an approach similar to the Dutch model, under which components entering the international supply chain could be flagged as “not intended for aircraft bound for Israel”.
The initial suspension was implemented in September 2024 by then Foreign Secretary David Lammy.
Lammy stressed at the time that the measure did not constitute an arms embargo and applied solely to items assessed as usable in military operations in Gaza.
Since then, the policy has been tightened further under Prime Minister Andy Burnham.
The expanded export restrictions follow the Burnham government’s adoption of a more confrontational policy toward the Israeli government.
Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband drew sustained applause at the Labour Party’s annual conference in Liverpool after delivering a sharp critique of the Netanyahu government’s policies and defending the decision to ban trade with Israeli settlements in the West Bank.
Accusing Israel of committing war crimes in Gaza, Miliband stated that the British government heard public outrage over the conflict, telling delegates: “We hear you. You were right.”
Middle East
Netanyahu holds secret UAE talks with Saudi Arabia and Arab officials
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met with representatives of Gulf and Arab nations that lack diplomatic ties with Israel, including Saudi Arabia, during his weekend visit to the United Arab Emirates.
Sources close to the gathering told the Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth on Monday that representatives from Morocco, Libya, Jordan, and Qatar also took part in the meeting.
Netanyahu made a unannounced visit to Abu Dhabi on Sunday, where he met with the country’s leader, Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan.
According to Israeli media, this marked the first time the United Arab Emirates officially confirmed a visit by Netanyahu.
The meeting was arranged by Mossad Director Roman Goffman “at the request of Saudi Arabia, which asked for Israel’s assistance against Houthi attacks in the Red Sea region,” according to Yedioth Ahronoth.
The discussions addressed Iran and the Houthi militia. The newspaper added that the Arab states heard from Israel that “Israel is prepared to assist countries in the region with air defence systems, just as it aided the UAE during the conflict with Iran.”
Conflict in Yemen intensified in September when Ansarullah militiamen launched a rapid offensive that seized Yemen’s entire Red Sea coastline, including the vital maritime corridor of the Bab el-Mandeb Strait.
The Yemeni resistance also imposed a blockade on Saudi Arabia’s energy exports and staged multiple attacks against the kingdom.
Saudi Arabia reportedly sought military assistance from the US to counter Ansarullah.
Washington declined to attack the Houthis directly, but announced that it would provide intelligence and targeting support.
Reporting on the same visit, The Jerusalem Post said Netanyahu spent six hours in the UAE and that the principal subject of his discussions with MBZ was Iran.
Citing sources familiar with the matter, the newspaper added that the trip came “after Netanyahu exerted heavy pressure on the United Arab Emirates to arrange a meeting ahead of the Israeli elections on 27 October.”
Separately, the Associated Press, citing a person with direct knowledge of the meeting, reported that Netanyahu’s visit to the UAE was arranged in part to ask MBZ to deny reports that he had warned the Israeli prime minister of an impending Hamas threat prior to 7 October 2023.
According to Israeli media, Netanyahu’s office denied the AP report, issuing the following statement:
“Fake news. The visit focused solely on strengthening ties between the two countries and on regional issues.”
-
Europe5 days agoEuropean unions urge governments to scrap all Palantir deals
-
Diplomacy5 days agoEast-West Forum in Istanbul highlights irreversible shift to multipolarity
-
Europe1 week agoEmmanuel Todd says West faces collapse amid Ukraine and Iran crises
-
Europe1 week agoEuropean intelligence chiefs divide over risk of Russian attack
-
Diplomacy1 week agoEast-West Forum in Istanbul to debate multipolarity and global order
-
Middle East1 week agoSharaa says 7 October must not shape Israel policy on Syria
-
America1 week agoRepublican support for Trump’s war with Iran drops sharply in polls
-
Middle East1 week agoPalestinian factions confront legitimacy crisis at Istanbul talks
