Although Washington has negotiated an agreement to ransom five hostages held by the Islamic Republic for $6 billion, there has been increasing friction between the two countries in the Persian Gulf, in Syria, and in other arenas. The U.S. Navy has dispatched two major ships to the region—with thousands of marines aboard them—along with fighter jets, and is considering placing troops on commercial vessels as well. Sima Shine and Danny Citrinowicz explain the situation:

The U.S. administration has adopted a strong, determined policy regarding oil-smuggling activities by Iran, which has managed to reach an export rate of 1.3 million barrels a day, blatantly circumventing the imposed sanctions. As part of this effort, several tankers suspected to be part of the Iranian smuggling apparatus have been stopped by the U.S. Fifth Fleet. In reaction, and in an attempt to deter the United States from stopping other tankers, the Iranians have stopped several tankers on the pretext of non-compliance with international maritime navigation rules.

[Meanwhile], U.S. senior figures claimed recently that Iran is acting in collaboration with Russia according to an orderly plan aimed at driving U.S. forces out of Syria. This has led to increased friction between the Shiite militias operating in Syria and the U.S. forces stationed around [the American military base in the city of] al-Tanf. A drone strike against the base in April killed one American working for a civilian company, and wounded five soldiers. In turn, the U.S. retaliation against pro-Iranian militia forces in Syria claimed the lives of several Iranians. Consequently, in an unprecedented dramatic resolution, the Pentagon decided to deploy a squadron of A-10 aircraft armed with GBU-39/B bunker-buster bombs to the region.

As for Israel, recent events have illustrated once again that its ability to influence the existence, or non-existence, of negotiations on the nuclear issue, as well as other issues, is very limited. And yet, the fact that quite a great deal of the current international discourse in the Iranian context is focused on issues such as Iran’s aid to Russia in the war in Ukraine and its involvement in Syria enables Israel to illustrate better the danger posed to international stability by Iran’s activities.

The editors of the Wall Street Journal rightly call the Biden administration’s new policy an arms embargo. (Subscription required.)

The administration would like to focus on the denial of 2,000-pound bombs, which it says are too destructive. Never mind that a professional force can employ them in a manner that restricts the radius of damage. Mr. Biden is also halting a shipment of 500-pound bombs and holding up Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAMs), which convert unguided bombs into precision “smart” bombs. Politico reports that small-diameter bombs are being withheld. The Journal adds that the Biden administration has been sitting on a deal that includes tank shells and mortar rounds.

The message from the White House, in other words, is that Israel shouldn’t have large bombs or small bombs, dumb bombs or smart bombs, and let it do without tanks and artillery too. Now isn’t a good time to send the weapons, you see, because Israel would use them.

But it’s even worse than that: withholding the JDAMs in effect encourages Israel to use dumb bombs in instances when precision weapons would be more effective, and less likely to cause harm to bystanders. And then there is the twisted logic behind the decision:

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and other U.S. officials explain that the goal of the embargo—which they present as a “pause” or “review”—is to prevent a wider Israeli attack on the Hamas stronghold of Rafah. This is the terrorists’ reward for using civilians as human shields.

It hasn’t been four weeks since Iran attacked Israel directly, in the largest drone attack in history, plus 150 or so ballistic and cruise missiles. . . . Israel needs to be ready now, and its enemies need to know the U.S. stands behind it.