War With Iran Imminent?

Three ways you’re being misled

Aircraft carrier USS Lincoln and destroyer USS Spruance on their way to the Middle East | U.S. Navy

The media is in panic mode about the prospects of a war with Iran, as Tehran considers what kind of retaliation it should undertake in response to the July 31 assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh. Israel’s reported assassination, even inside Iran, leading to the U.S. and Iran shooting at each other is more a figment of the news media’s hype machine than the reality on the ground.

Just one day after the assassination, New York Times’ columnist and elite media weathervane Thomas Friedman was already warning that “President Biden could face the most fateful decision of his presidency: whether to go to war with Iran.” Now, there are a slew of similarly portentous reports about U.S. military activity, all implying a looming confrontation between the U.S. and Iran.

“Secretary Austin actually saying the USS Georgia [a cruise missile submarine] is going to be in the area is extremely unusual,” a solemn looking retired Lt. General Mark Hertling, CNN’s national security and military analyst, said in a segment yesterday.

It seems like every major media outlet is writing some version of the same story — that ‘Iran may attack Israel or Israeli interests anytime in the coming days, according to high level administration sources as well as Israeli intelligence.’ The generic sentence (“may attack” can’t be proven wrong) is meant to convey danger but actually says nothing. We’ve been here before, and there’s plenty of reasons why escalation between the U.S. and Iran is not actually the likeliest scenario.

Hertling’s remark — and many others like it, as I detail below — are misleading, for reasons I’ll explain. They also contribute to a sense that Iran is an imminent threat, which makes the public more likely to acquiesce to war should it actually happen.

Here are three of the worst cases of media fearmongering.

1. ‘It’s “extremely unusual” to announce submarine movements’

Stealth is a submarine’s main advantage, so it’s true that the U.S. military tries to conceal their exact locations. But to call it “extremely unusual” for the Pentagon to announce a submarine’s general whereabouts is wrong.

In May 2021, then-Pentagon press secretary John Kirby revealed during a press briefing that the same submarine, the USS Georgia, was transiting the Strait of Hormuz into the Persian Gulf. Occasionally the Pentagon even issues press releases announcing submarine port visits or participation in military war games. If anything was ever “extremely unusual,” it was the press release issued in October 2022, announcing that the U.S. Central Command’s top officer was visiting the USS West Virginia, a nuclear-armed ballistic submarine, while it was operating in the Arabian Sea. (The USS Georgia only possesses non-nuclear cruise missiles.)

Unlike almost all news media reporting of the dispatch of the USS Georgia to the Middle East, the Georgia was already in the region. It left its base in Kings Bay, GA in May for a routine patrol, partly to show support for Israel. The submarine has since operated in the eastern Mediterranean Sea, has made stops in Greece and Cyprus, and was last seen on August 5th in Souda Bay conducting, well, routine operations.

2. ‘The U.S. may have to decide on war with Iran’

Following Israel’s assassination of Haniyeh in the capital of Iran, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei threatened “revenge.” According to The New York Times, Khamenei “issued an order for Iran to strike Israel directly,” citing three unnamed Iranian officials briefed on the order.

But here’s what Biden told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu the day after Haniyeh was killed, per a readout of their call (my emphasis added):

“President Biden spoke today with Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel. The President reaffirmed his commitment to Israel’s security against all threats from Iran, including its proxy terrorist groups Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis. The President discussed efforts to support Israel’s defense against threats, including against ballistic missiles and drones, to include new defensive U.S. military deployments. Together with this commitment to Israel’s defense, the President stressed the importance of ongoing efforts to de-escalate broader tensions in the region.”

Could the White House have stressed some variation of “defense” more? The references to defending against ballistic missiles and drones suggests that U.S. support will be a re-enactment of their role in blocking the same drones ballistic missiles and drones Iran launched at Israel on April 13. In other words, shooting stuff down, not shooting at Iran. That’s also the reason for the deployment of the F-22 air defense fighter jets to the region, a strong signal on the part of the Pentagon, but one still suggesting that actual military preparations are to defend.

The reality is that while Iran might want to retaliate in some fashion to save face after failing to protect Haniyeh, it’s in neither the U.S. nor Iran’s interests to see this widen into a full scale war. 

“We were told [by Iran] that it’s going to be a limited response,” an unnamed member of Iraq’s parliament who reportedly has close ties to Iranian-backed militias told The Washington Post, explaining that Tehran “doesn’t want to expand the war.”

Iranian diplomats are also being more cautious in describing what the country might do. The Iranian mission to the United Nations told CNN that any retaliation would be “totally unrelated to the Gaza ceasefire” talks. The mission says that Iran “has a right to self-defense," hardly a declaration of war.

3. ‘The U.S. is deploying all sorts of military’

The media has been abuzz over the past couple days with reports about Secretary Austin’s supposedly momentous decision to order a new aircraft carrier strike group to deploy to the Middle East. This is indeed a decision, but momentous? Take a closer look at the Pentagon’s Sunday press release and see if it matches the reporting I just described:

“Secretary Austin reiterated the United States' commitment to take every possible step to defend Israel and noted the strengthening of U.S. military force posture and capabilities throughout the Middle East in light of escalating regional tensions. Reinforcing this commitment, Secretary Austin has ordered the USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN Carrier Strike Group, equipped with F-35C fighters, to accelerate its transit to the Central Command area of responsibility, adding to the capabilities already provided by the USS THEODORE ROOSEVELT Carrier Strike Group.”

Austin’s order was merely that the Lincoln “accelerate its transit” because it had already been on its way to the Middle East. A second aircraft carrier,  the USS Theodore Roosevelt also deployed to the Middle East on July 12 — more than two weeks prior to the Haniyeh assassination. It left the United States in January. The Roosevelt has since visited Guam, South Korea, Thailand and Singapore, and it is reaching the end of its nine-month voyage, coming to the Middle East mainly to show the flag. This is old fashioned gunboat diplomacy. There will be some overlap between the two carriers towards the end of next week, if all goes according to Navy plans. Imminent war? It doesn’t seem like the Pentagon thinks so.

So when some retired Army general labels a routine crisis footing “extremely unusual” or some egghead Tom Friedman equates it to a Cuban Missile Crisis-level decision, don’t believe the hype. I’m not saying that Iran isn’t going to retaliate — against Israel — and I’m not not saying that two bumbling nations can’t find themselves shooting at each other. But two weeks after an assassination is not exactly some impetuous Iranian schedule. Of course the Pentagon and the Biden administration want to convey that they are strong and ready, but it was equally “ready” in April during Iran’s last attack on Israel, and there’s no reason to think that now is much different.

— Edited by William M. Arkin

Show us some love by giving this post a “♡ Like”