In an editorial piece in the Wall Street Journal, Sorin Adam Matei, an associate professor of research at Purdue University’s Krach Institute for Tech Diplomacy, argues that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and its subsequent actions demand that Russian aggression be met with sharp, consistent, and measured force (“The Ukraine War Calls for a Revival of Deterrence Theory”, August 23, 2023, pg. A17).
Matei goes on to advocate a return to tit-for-tat, i.e., actions deriving from game theory principles which are rooted in “cold math”. He points to the success had by the US during the Cold War when principles of deterrence responded to game theory—mathematical models used to predict the actions of hostile foes. He notes that early on, success derived from adherence to a simple calculus: for every major action, there must be an immediate and commensurate reaction. Matei goes on to say that, from 1989 on, the US neglected the requirement for immediate pushback, thus allowing Russia to successfully employ a “zero determinant” approach which relies upon cheating and confusing its opponents. He adds that this approach works especially well against people like us who believe in following the rules.
In this case, what is a commensurate response (forget about immediate—that horse is out of the barn)? Bombing Iran. Bomb what? Sand? What could we bomb to ensure that such an attack will not recur?
It seems to me that one way to ensure that this does not happen again is to withdraw from the region. What good does bombing Iran do? Can the mullahs prevent proxies, e.g., Hezbollah affiliates, from attacking us if they are intent on causing us harm?
Furthermore, I’d suggest that if we get to the point where we determine that we must bomb Iran, we should use strategic weapons. If I sound like Dr. Strangelove, good. Maybe it’s time to go back to Herman Kahn and think about the unthinkable. What we’re doing at present is nothing more than chingando perro. Why expend the lives of air crews, Marines, or others? Maybe we let the Israelis do it—we fly EW missions over the Gulf, they follow and deliver ordnance. Otherwise, what are the Israelis good for?
Maybe it’s because I’m old and tired. Maybe it’s because I've watched too many US Government-sponsored fiascos. Whatever it is, I’ve reached a point where my fund of patience and idealism is exhausted. I just don’t believe it is worth sacrificing American lives in quixotic ventures. Furthermore, I am not convinced there is anything we can do in the short-term to materially influence the inexorable course of the political evolution in the region. Do we belong in the middle of a sectarian struggle? Or do we stand by and watch until it burns out? Fully cognizant of the risks and the consequences, I say, let them fight it out.