The US will have to be involved in a response to the Iranian attack on Saudi Arabia

Noah Rothman has a very sobering piece at Commentary entitled "No, We Shouldn't Let Saudi Arabia 'Fight Its Own Wars.'" You can tell by the way he's written it that being responsible was foremost among the attitudes he wanted to bring to its crafting. This is very serious stuff he's discussing.

As the president considers how the United States should respond to a series of aggressive acts by Iran and its proxies in the Middle East, one fact should be clear: There are no good options.

Inaction is unacceptable. A passive posture would invite more aggression, and the pattern of escalating Iranian provocations suggests the Islamic Republic could miscalibrate its attacks in a way that would require a broad and conclusive response from the West. But even a measured military response to Iranian attacks entails risk. While neither the Western world nor Iran and its roguish allies want to see a full-scale military confrontation, the mechanisms for de-escalating such a conflict once the shooting starts are untested and unreliable. Iran would retaliate, potentially against American military and diplomatic targets, compelling the United States to respond in kind. That’s how cycles of violence spiral out of control. The choice before President Trump is an unenviable one, but this is the job he wanted.

If Saudi Arabia were to be served notice that it would be going it alone, it would merely delay a broader scope of engagement. The tit-for-tat taking out of the means by which the attack was launched would not halt Iran's pattern of aggression. And even if Saudi Arabia went after the Iranian presence in Yemen, Lebanon and/or Syria, it would exacerbate the Sunni-Shiite tension that fuels much of what has been going on.

As a commenter here at LITD noted recently, this latest attack did not happen in a vacuum. Rothman reminds of of the recent timeline:

Iran’s aggressive behavior follows a clear pattern of escalation. It has executed sophisticated covert operations targeting the global oil supply by disabling and hijacking ships in the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz. It has destroyed a $120 million American aerial surveillance drone operating above international waters. And now, it has executed an elaborate assault on a Saudi refinery. Iran is behaving rationally by testing the limits of provocation as a tool of statecraft. Its strategic objective is to stoke anxieties among America’s Middle Eastern and European allies and, ultimately, erode global will to maintain the present suffocating sanctions regime. Eventually, Iran is likely to miscalculate, executing a bloody attack that demands a disproportionate response from the United States. This is an outcome that American policymakers are right to avoid, but not at any cost.

Senator Lindsey Graham's view is that the shooting down of the drone is the point at which this escalation should have been resolutely addressed:

As President Donald Trump ponders retaliation on Iran, he and a close Republican ally had a spat over the supposed "weakness" of the last U.S. confrontation with Tehran.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said on Twitter that Trump's decision to call off a military strike on Iran for taking out a U.S. drone in June may have emboldened the Iranians to attack an oil facility in Saudi Arabia on Saturday.

"The measured response by President @realDonaldTrump regarding the shooting down of an American drone was clearly seen by the Iranian regime as a sign of weakness," Graham said in a series of tweets.

Secretary of State Pompeo is using the term "act of war" to describe the attack:

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Wednesday called the airstrikes on Saudi oil facilities “an act of war” and said it was an “Iranian attack” on the world’s energy supply.

“This is an attack of a scale we’ve just not seen before,” Pompeo told reporters in the Saudi city of Jeddah, where he is expected to meet with Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman.

“The Saudis were the nation that were attacked. It was on their soil. It was an act of war against them directly.”

The US’ top diplomat said that the flight patterns of the drones and cruise missiles used in the Saturday attack suggest they didn’t come from the south, where Iranian-backed Houthi insurgents are fighting Saudi coalition forces in Yemen.

The group has claimed responsibility for the attacks.

Pompeo said US intelligence has “high confidence” that the weapons used in the strikes on an oil field and refinery were not part of the Houthis’ arsenal and have not been previously deployed by the rebel group. 

Newly selected national security advisor Robert O'Brien immediately has a doozy of a plateful.

As Rothman points out, there are no good options. Letting the situation escalate further is the worst of them.