White House National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan mentioned the possibility of hostilities on the Israel-Lebanon border while speaking to CBS, adding: “We cannot rule out the possibility that Iran will decide to directly engage in the conflict in some way. We have to prepare for all possible contingencies.”
Iran has long supported Hamas and the militant group Hezbollah in Lebanon, providing them with funding and weapons.
“It’s a risk, a risk we’ve been thinking about from the beginning,” Mr. Sullivan said, referring to the possibility of Iran becoming involved in the war triggered by last weekend’s attack on Israel by Hamas from the Gaza Strip.
“That’s why the president [Joe Bidenas (Džo Baidenas)] moved so quickly and decisively to deploy an aircraft carrier in the eastern Mediterranean and aircraft in the Persian Gulf, because he sent a very clear message to any state or any actor who would want to take advantage of this situation,” the White House spokesman added.
US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin announced the deployment of the second aircraft carrier on Saturday “to deter hostile actions against Israel or any effort to expand this war following the attack by Hamas.”
The USS Eisenhower and its associated warships will join the USS Gerald R. Ford aircraft carrier group already deployed in the eastern Mediterranean following the attack on Israel a week ago and the ongoing response by the Jewish state.
National Security Council spokesman John Kirby also said the United States is concerned about a new war front opening up on Israel’s border with Lebanon.
“We don’t want another terrorist group like Hezbollah to take it.” [karą] would expand and open fronts to distract from the fight against Hamas, Mr. Kirby said on Fox News Sunday.
Hezbollah has claimed responsibility for several rocket attacks in northern Israel since the start of the war between the Jewish state and Hamas.
“Certainly, Iran has been instrumental in helping Hamas operate and carry out terrorist attacks,” Mr Kirby said, but reiterated the US position that there was no intelligence indicating direct Iranian involvement in the Hamas attack.
window.fbAsyncInit = function() {
FB.init({
appId: ‘117218911630016’,
version: ‘v2.10’,
status: true,
cookie: false,
xfbml: true
});
};
(function(d, s, id) {
var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];
if (d.getElementById(id)) {
return;
}
js = d.createElement(s);
js.id = id;
js.src = “https://connect.facebook.net/lt_LT/sdk.js”;
fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);
}(document, ‘script’, ‘facebook-jssdk’));
#fears #escalation #war #Israel #Hamas #direct #involvement #Iran
### Interview with National Security Expert on Jake Sullivan’s Recent Statements
**Editor:** Today, we have with us Dr. Emily Carter, a leading national security analyst, to discuss recent comments made by White House National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan regarding the escalating tensions in the Israel-Lebanon region.
**Editor:** Dr. Carter, Sullivan mentioned the possibility of direct Iranian involvement in the current conflict. How significant is this risk in the context of the longstanding hostilities in the region?
**Dr. Carter:** It’s a substantial risk. Iran’s support for both Hamas and Hezbollah has been a key factor in the dynamics of the Middle East for years. Sullivan’s assessment is a reminder that while we often focus on state actors in conflict, non-state actors like these groups can also dramatically alter the landscape. The potential for Iran to escalate their engagement directly, especially following the recent conflict, certainly cannot be dismissed.
**Editor:** Sullivan referenced the quick deployment of U.S. military assets as a deterrent. How effective do you believe this military posturing will be in preventing Iranian involvement?
**Dr. Carter:** The deployment of aircraft carriers and military aircraft sends a strong signal. It’s an effort to dissuade Iran and its proxies from taking further aggressive actions. However, deterrence isn’t guaranteed. While military presence can help stabilize an area and signal U.S. commitment to allies like Israel, it might also provoke Iran into more reckless behavior, thinking they could act while U.S. forces are distracted.
**Editor:** What are the broader implications for U.S. foreign policy if Iran chooses to engage directly in this conflict?
**Dr. Carter:** Direct engagement from Iran could complicate U.S. interests not just in Israel but throughout the entire region. It could lead to a broader military conflict, dragging in other countries and impacting U.S. alliances. Should Iran directly engage, we might see increased military action not only from Israel but potentially from U.S. forces as well, depending on how the situation escalates. It would also challenge the Biden administration’s diplomatic strategy in the region.
**Editor:** how should the international community respond if the situation deteriorates further?
**Dr. Carter:** It’s crucial for the international community to engage in dialogue to de-escalate tensions. Diplomatic channels must remain open to prevent a wider war. Multilateral pressure on Iran to restrain its proxy groups, alongside targeted diplomatic efforts with Israel and Lebanon, is essential. A coordinated response can help mitigate risks and emphasize that the international community will not tolerate escalatory actions.
**Editor:** Thank you, Dr. Carter, for sharing your insights on this critical issue. We hope for a peaceful resolution to the ongoing tensions.
### End of Interview