Waiting game with Iraq

Editor's note: In partnership with Stratfor, the global intelligence company, WorldNetDaily publishes daily updates on international affairs provided by the respected private research and analysis firm. Look for fresh updates each afternoon, Monday through Friday.

In addition, WorldNetDaily invites you to consider STRATFOR membership, entitling you to a wealth of international intelligence reports usually available only to top executives, scholars, academic institutions and press agencies.

Recent media reports indicate that the United States is planning a major air attack against Iraq following attempts, one as recently as yesterday, to down U.S. planes.

TRENDING: David Hogg quits pillow company he launched to fight Mike Lindell

However, the rhetoric from Washington will not likely translate into the substantial attack reported as imminent. The U.S. government does not want an already unstable Middle East to grow worse in the near term.

The Iraqi government has reportedly shifted a number of missiles, radars and aircraft recently to guard against U.S. strikes against its air defenses, according to an Aug. 1 report by CNN. Moreover, Condoleezza Rice, the U.S. national security adviser, said July 29 that Washington intends to pursue "a more resolute military policy toward Iraq" following recent efforts to shoot down U.S. aircraft patrolling the no-fly zones.

Part of that effort was displayed Aug. 7, when British and U.S. planes bombed Iraqi anti-aircraft positions in northern Iraq. The attack was followed by harsh statements from Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, who warned the United States against continuing to fly warplanes over Iraq.

"If you care that your pilots and your aircraft are not harmed by the weapons of the spirited freedom-fighters of great Iraq, then take your aircraft and battleships and go home," Saddam said.

But despite the Aug. 7 bombing, which U.S. officials said was in response to Iraqi launched surface-to-air missiles and anti-aircraft artillery fire, Washington is unlikely to unleash a major air attack anytime soon against Iraq.

The U.S. government will proceed with caution for now to avoid adding to rising instability in the Middle East. Eventually, the United States will have little choice but to undertake a series of air and cruise missile attacks against Baghdad similar to Operation Desert Fox in 1998.

The current standoff between the United States and Iraq has become a foreign policy situation similar to the U.S.-Cuba stalemate, where a policy of confrontation remains despite the disappearance of its geopolitical foundations. The "Cubanization" of Iraq masks new strategic realities that would allow Washington to end its costly military deployments to the Persian Gulf without harming U.S. national interests.

For decades, the relationship between the United States and Cuba has been in suspended animation. Once a nation of the utmost importance to the United States, Cuba has been neutralized by profound changes in geopolitical reality. In particular, these include the end of the Cold War and Cuba's loss of the Soviet Union as a strategic partner and supporter.

Military sources indicate that the air strikes being considered would aim to deal a significant setback to Iraqi security forces, in the process facilitating Washington's long-term exit strategy from its costly and ineffective containment policy. U.S. Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz said the Iraqi threat should be defused when Washington finds the right way to do it.

RELATED: Yemen blast: New phase in terror war?

The U.S. government wants to reach an ultimate solution to the stalemate in Iraq, and is seeking to at least substantially reduce its containment of the regime. A substantial bombing campaign would be required to ensure it does not leave Baghdad belligerent and well armed.

However, while Washington wants out of Iraq, there is no pressing need to resolve the situation or exit anytime soon. And the negative effects that an attack would have on the Middle East and on U.S. interests in the region likely make any strikes a long-term possibility only.

For instance, the U.S. government is concerned about the destabilizing effect an attack could have in the Middle East, as Israel teeters on the edge of war. The United States is Israel's major ally and is deeply involved in negotiations between Israel, the Palestinians and Arab states.

Meanwhile, Turkey and Saudi Arabia would have to approve of the mission, something they are unlikely to do in the current environment, because U.S. forces based in their countries would participate in such a strike. Both Kuwait and Egypt have also said they oppose a U.S. attack against Iraq.

The United States is also concerned about any possible impact on oil prices. The U.S. economy is nearly flat and other major global economies are sliding toward recession. A new crisis could risk spiking oil prices, exacerbating energy challenges in the United States.

While an attack is not imminent, a future blow to the Iraqi military-industrial complex is a prerequisite to achieving Washington's ultimate objective in the Middle East: having a more flexible foreign policy no longer preoccupied almost solely with Saddam. Washington wants a more regional approach to stability, enlisting the aid of its Gulf allies while scaling back its overseas military commitments and increasing oil production.

Washington is also concerned over reports indicating Iraq has rebuilt several aspects of its conventional military forces, including its surface-to-air and surface-to-surface missiles, as well as its ground and air forces. Some Western officials are even more worried by reports that Iraq has been able to rebuild elements of its former arsenal of weapons of mass destruction.

"Saddam Hussein is a menace and we need to keep him in check and we will,'' U.S. President George W. Bush told reporters after the bombing. "He's been a menace forever and he needs to open his country for inspection so we can see whether he is making weapons of mass destruction.''

The U.S. strikes will aim to inflict significant damage to Iraqi military capabilities, setting the stage for a new chapter in America's Persian Gulf strategy. Such an attack would likely use renewed Iraqi attempts to down U.S. planes as cover.

The United States is seeking to extricate itself from the political, economic and military toll its containment policy toward Iraq has taken. But the potential repercussions of a major bombing campaign remain too unpredictable to risk at this time. When the United States does strike – U.S. officials said timing is the focus of the Bush administration's deliberations – it is likely to do more than the limited destruction of Iraq's air defense systems that occurred earlier this year.

Get a discounted annual STRATFOR membership.