In which countries did the Biden administration conduct airstrikes or bombings since 2021?
Executive summary
Since taking office in 2021 the Biden administration authorised and carried out airstrikes in multiple countries, most prominently Syria, Yemen (including strikes tied to Red Sea/merchant-vessel protection), Somalia, and Afghanistan — actions that U.S. government and open-source trackers frame as counterterrorism and defensive measures [1] [2] [3] [4]. Independent researchers and legal scholars note the strikes have been fewer overall than in some prior years but have raised repeated questions about legal authority, civilian harm reporting and political signalling [3] [5] [4].
1. Syria — the first and most public strike of the presidency
The Biden administration’s first acknowledged military action was an airstrike in eastern Syria in February 2021 targeting facilities used by Iranian-backed militias, described by the Pentagon as retaliation for rocket attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq and presented by the White House as “necessary and proportionate” [1] [5] [6]. Reporting at the time and subsequent human-rights monitoring groups attributed dozens of casualties to that strike and documented regional political fallout, and legal scholars publicly debated whether the strike complied with the U.N. Charter’s limits on use of force [7] [1] [5].
2. Yemen and the Red Sea — strikes against Houthi capabilities
In the later years of Biden’s term, U.S. strikes focused heavily on degrading Houthi maritime and missile capabilities in Yemen and the Red Sea amid Houthi attacks on commercial shipping; Congressional Research Service reporting and media summaries identify U.S. strikes against Houthi targets and related operations to protect merchant vessels and U.S. and allied naval assets [2]. Open-source compilations and reporting show sustained strike campaigns and cooperation with British forces in operations targeting radars, missile systems and launch sites — a pattern analysts linked directly to the Israel–Gaza war dynamics after October 2023 [2] [8].
3. Somalia — a measured return of counter‑terror strikes
After a brief moratorium early in Biden’s tenure, U.S. AFRICOM and counterterrorism forces resumed targeted strikes against Al-Shabaab in Somalia, with trackers documenting a small number of declared strikes in 2021 and a modest uptick in 2022 as the administration adjusted policy and redeployments were debated [3] [9]. Responsible Statecraft and New America tracking both emphasize that while strike counts were far below peaks seen under prior administrations, Somalia remained among the countries where kinetic counterterrorism continued [3] [9].
4. Afghanistan — a high‑profile counterterror strike in Kabul
The Biden administration conducted at least one publicly acknowledged strike in Afghanistan in 2022 when a U.S. drone strike killed al‑Qaeda leader Ayman al‑Zawahiri in Kabul — a strike the U.S. government presented as an over‑the‑horizon counterterrorism operation following the formal withdrawal from Afghanistan [4].
5. Broader footprint, data limits and disputed tallies
Independent projects and academic work document that U.S. counterterrorism operations under Biden involved actions in dozens of countries, but airstrikes and bombings are concentrated in a smaller set — with Brown University’s Costs of War project noting air strikes in at least four countries during 2021–2023 and other trackers adding nuance on timing and intensity [10]. Sources differ on total strike counts and on the threshold for categorising an event as an “airstrike” versus other kinetic actions; Airwars and New America report a general decline in declared strikes in 2022 while noting fresh operations persisted in places like Syria and Somalia [4] [9].
6. Law, politics and messaging — why the locations matter
The administration has often framed strikes as narrowly tailored, proportionate responses to imminent threats or to protect shipping and U.S. forces, and has submitted War Powers–related notifications to Congress for some operations; critics — including legal scholars and some lawmakers — dispute those rationales and stress international‑law limits, especially for strikes conducted without host‑state consent or clear imminent‑threat justifications [2] [5] [11]. Reporting across outlets shows that beyond tactical objectives, strikes in Syria, Yemen, Somalia and Afghanistan carry diplomatic consequences with regional powers, humanitarian implications and domestic scrutiny over executive authority [1] [2] [5].