The U.S. decision to pull the aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt out of the Middle East, amid Israel’s escalating wars in Gaza and Lebanon, is seen by analysts as a reflection of America’s competing security interests there and in Asia.
Pentagon press secretary Major General Pat Ryder announced on September 12 that the Roosevelt had left the region en route to the Indo-Pacific, after three weeks of simultaneous coverage in the region by the Roosevelt and a second carrier strike group led by the USS Abraham Lincoln.
The dual coverage was widely seen, at least in part, as a response to the threat of a massive Iranian aerial assault on Israel in response to the July assassination of Hamas’ political leader in Tehran.
The fear has receded as Iran has failed to respond, saying it does not want to upset the prospects for a cease-fire in Gaza. But Yasmin Omar, director of the Democracy Matters Initiative at the Middle East Democracy Center in Washington, noted that the United States also has pressing security concerns elsewhere.
“The deployment of the USS Theodore Roosevelt was initially a show of force aimed at deterring U.S. adversaries in the region. Its withdrawal signals a noteworthy shift in U.S. military posture,” she told VOA.
Omar said the move suggests a reallocation of priorities, particularly as Washington addresses security threats in the Indo-Pacific, where China and Russia have been expanding their influence through major naval exercises.
“It is important to interpret this as part of a broader recalibration of military resources, rather than a reduction in U.S. engagement,” Omar said.
An Iran specialist based in Washington, Sina Toossi, agreed that Tehran and Washington are signaling a desire to avoid war. But, he said, some U.S. allies in the region may interpret the U.S. restraint as indicating a lack of resolve.
He noted that the United States chose not to go to war with Iran over provocations such as its September 2019 drone and missile attacks on Saudi Aramco or the January 2020 missile strike on a U.S. base in Iraq.
“This restraint is likely a key reason why countries like the UAE and Saudi Arabia have pivoted away from supporting the U.S.’s ‘maximum pressure’ campaign and instead have normalized relations with Tehran in recent years,” he said. “They fear a costly conflict with Iran in which they would be left to face the consequences alone.”
Omar, similarly, cited recent military collaboration between Egypt and Turkey as an example of how Middle Eastern nations are adjusting their defense strategies in response to shifting geopolitical dynamics and uncertainties surrounding U.S. commitments.
However, Brian Katulis, senior fellow for U.S. foreign policy at the Middle East Institute in Washington, told VOA that it is important not to overinterpret every movement of U.S. military assets in and out of the Middle East.
“The United States remains the strongest and most capable military actor from outside the region, and this movement is just part of the normal rotations of personnel and hardware that occur regularly,” Katulis said.
While Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are close security partners, Katulis cautioned against calling them “allies” in the same sense as NATO partners in Europe.
“America does not have formal treaty allies in the Middle East. This move signals that the United States remains committed to maintaining its overall military readiness globally while continuing to work in close partnership with key countries in the region,” Katulis said.
When asked whether the departure of the Roosevelt might embolden adversaries such as Iran, Katulis responded, “No, because the United States still maintains significant military firepower in the region, and more importantly, it is working closely with partners to help them defend themselves against threats.”
Katulis said, “Iran remains significantly weaker in conventional military power than the United States and its regional security partners. Iran will likely continue to use asymmetric attacks, terrorist strikes and cyberattacks as key parts of its tools to undermine regional security.”
Nancy Okail, president and CEO of the Washington-based Center for International Policy, told VOA that the departure of the Roosevelt from the Middle East had already been scheduled with the arrival of the USS Abraham Lincoln three weeks ago to replace it.
“The Roosevelt‘s presence was only briefly extended after Hezbollah launched strikes on Israel. The decision to end the dual-carrier presence is more of a Navy fleet management issue than an indication of diminished concern over strikes from the Houthis or Iran,” Okail said.
