Escalation Fearmongering: Dictators Love a U.S. President Who Won't Hit Back

 

By fearing escalation, Biden is giving free passes to Iran, Russia, and North Korea to do as they please—essentially rolling out the red carpet for chaos. Simply put, Biden’s reluctance to escalate has nurtured new monsters in Tehran, Moscow, and Pyongyang—he has become their unwitting enabler.

President Biden's obsession with the word "escalation" has become a recurring theme in the international stage, especially when it comes to conflicts involving Ukraine and Russia, or the recent flare-ups between Israel and Hamas. The question remains: why is Biden always so concerned about "escalations" and "proportionality"? His critics argue that this approach not only limits Israel and other nations from defending themselves effectively but also empowers the very forces they are up against.

Consider the latest Iranian missile attack on Israel on October 1, 2024, where Iran launched 200 ballistic missiles targeting several regions in Israel, including strategic military sites. Iran's Revolutionary Guards called the assault "self-defense," a retaliation for Israel's prior assassinations of prominent Tehran-backed leaders like Hassan Nasrallah and Ismail Haniyeh. Despite the barrage, most missiles were intercepted, resulting in minimal casualties: a 38-year-old Palestinian was killed by debris, and a few others were injured. The damage was largely limited to a few military airbases and civilian structures around Tel Aviv and other areas. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowed to retaliate at a time of Israel's choosing, calling Iran’s actions a "big mistake" that "will have consequences".

Yet, Biden's immediate response was cautious. He expressed his support for Israel's right to defend itself but emphasized restraint, urging Israel to keep its reaction "proportional"—a term that’s as elusive as it is controversial. Biden's administration quickly moved to bolster Israel’s defenses, extending American military presence in the region, and providing defensive support, but made it clear that striking Iranian nuclear facilities was off the table for now.

The concept of proportionality in war sounds noble, even idealistic, but it is fundamentally flawed when dealing with authoritarian regimes like Iran, Russia, or North Korea. The idea that democracies must respond in a restrained and balanced manner while facing dictatorial states with no moral or operational limitations is paradoxical. Historically, this so-called "proportional response" doctrine has enabled such regimes to exploit the cautious, rules-bound nature of Western democracies, while these regimes operate without regard for the very laws the West holds sacrosanct. Russia’s continuous expansionist policies in Ukraine, Iran's destabilizing maneuvers across the Middle East, and North Korea’s unchecked missile tests—all can be traced back to a perceived American fear of escalation.

For two decades now, authoritarian leaders have exploited this fear of escalation. They push boundaries—just a little at first—while testing how far they can go without a significant counter-response. Putin’s Crimea annexation in 2014, which faced only sanctions and verbal condemnations, emboldened him to expand into Ukraine. North Korea, under Kim Jong-un, has consistently ignored international warnings, conducting nuclear tests while the world watches, concerned about an "escalation." Iran, with its influence across the Middle East—supporting Hezbollah, Houthis in Yemen, and now directly launching missiles at Israel—is playing the same game, knowing the Western powers are hesitant to respond in a way that could lead to a broader regional conflict.

During the recent attack, President Biden highlighted that G7 nations were in agreement about supporting Israel's right to defend itself, but made it clear that a larger conflict was in "no one's interest." While this may sound like a statement of prudence, it can also be interpreted as an unwillingness to confront reality—that there are times when decisive actions are the only way to deter further aggression. The Biden administration's desire to avoid escalation reflects the very mindset that dictatorships like Iran and North Korea exploit. The fear of tipping over into a regional or even global conflict paralyzes Western responses, giving authoritarian states more latitude to act with impunity.

And the irony here is striking: President Biden's fear of escalation is not about avoiding conflict, but rather, it has prolonged conflicts. The reluctance to confront Iran head-on means Tehran continues to feel emboldened. The same dynamic has been evident in Ukraine, where Western nations, hesitant to provide advanced weapons initially, have gradually ramped up their support, but only after the war escalated far beyond what anyone could have imagined in early 2022. Such delays cost lives and allow aggressors to gain ground before the West ultimately decides to act.

"Escalation" has become a bogeyman for Western policymakers, but it's time to recognize that this fear has been overrated. War itself is inherently escalatory. When one side is willing to use unrestricted violence while the other hesitates for fear of proportionality, the outcome is almost always in favor of the aggressor. Iran’s latest attacks were carried out under the assumption that Israel and its allies would respond cautiously. Statements from Tehran make it clear: any response by Israel or the US will be met with an even greater show of force. Iran knows that the Biden administration’s priority is to avoid a larger Middle East conflict, a vulnerability that Tehran uses to its advantage.

The world does not operate on the same moral compass as democracies hope it does. This is particularly true in conflicts involving authoritarian states. Proportionality is not a luxury that democratic states can afford when their adversaries do not operate by the same set of rules. Biden's caution may come from a genuine place of wanting to prevent further human suffering, but by ignoring the necessity of decisive action, he allows regimes like Iran’s to dictate the terms of engagement. If escalation is inevitable—and history has shown that it often is when dealing with authoritarian bullies—then it’s better to escalate on your own terms than to be dragged into a conflict on the enemy’s terms.

As the dust settles over Tel Aviv and Negev, the question lingers: what will President Biden do differently this time to break the cycle of restrained responses that lead only to further aggression? Or will he, once again, let Iran and its allies dictate the rules of engagement? Perhaps it's time Biden realizes that "escalation" might not be the monster under the bed that he imagines, but rather the necessary step to confront real monsters.

In the end, it seems, President Biden's doctrine of "proportionality" and "avoiding escalation" is nothing more than a polished way to say: "Let's wait and see what our enemies do next." How proportional, indeed.