Eurasia Press & News
The murder of Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar is in line with the elimination of Hamas and Hezbollah’s leaders. This plan of eliminating the leaders of the so-called axis of resistance is apparently part of Israel’s strategy to cut off the arms of Iran in the region as a precondition to isolate Iran and possibly defang Tehran of its nuclear program.
For those who believe that Israel will still operate within the context of pre-October 7 are mistaken. The beliefs, outlooks, and plans that Iran and so-called axis of resistance incorporated in their strategies to combat Israel have all collapsed. They are outdated, obsolete.
For those who still believe that inflicting damage and pain on Israel’s society, as recently reflected by Hezbollah’s new strategy to confront Israel, are dead wrong. Israel’s society is not only ready to stomach the pain and damage on the personal, communal and state levels but also to visit enormous destruction on its enemies regardless of cost.
It behooves Hezbollah to come to terms with the Lebanese government and all Lebanese communities to implement UNSCR 1701 and 1559. In other words, Lebanese government needs to impose its authority throughout Lebanon and disarm and dismantle all militias and groups including Hezbollah.
It also behooves Hamas to come to terms with Israel’s demands, no less so with the Palestinian National Authority and Egypt, to surrender its arms, release the hostages, and leave Gaza. Only in this way would Jerusalem begin a process to rehabilitate Gaza most likely in collaboration with the Arab Gulf. Egypt will most likely pay a key role to stabilize Gaza.
At the same time, Israel has to be careful not to overreach. Its broad idea of reshaping the Middle East is easier said than done. That’s a utopian idea pursued by past civilians from the Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Arabs, Ottomans and British; and they all failed. No civilization was able to shape the Middle East. The Middle East, or better say the Greater Middle East, is not only rich in its diversity, cultures and peoples but also in its incongruities, contradictions, flaws, and harsh social and political realities.
Israel and the region need peace. But the context and background against which peace has been pursued has changed. The problem is that the region is now more volatile than ever and regional powers are beginning to draw strategies to counteract the unfolding developments which have unintended consequences.
Israel, as I mentioned, will continue to act on its policy to cut off the arms of Iran in the region. Consequently, based on precedents (striking Iraq’s nuclear reactor in 1981 despite American opposition) and unfolding development (recent of which Hezbollah’s drone attack on Israel’s prime minister’s residence), Israel will most likely bomb Iran‘s nuclear plants; bomb IRGC’s headquarters targeting senior officials; and bomb Iran’s missile and drone factories. Jerusalem’s delay in responding to Iran’s recent attack on Israel and talks with the Biden administration are more about the right timing to strike Iran for ultimate results. Israel is guided by the belief that its present and future are existentially threatened by Iran and its proxies, and therefore is at the heart of Israel’s strategy.
In this respect, notwithstanding the US-Israel differences, Washington will stand by Jerusalem because strategically and geopolitically Washington (and Western allies) can no longer accept or tolerate non-state actors (Houthis, Hasd al-Sha’bi, Hezbollah) threatening or disrupting waterways and sea lanes, save regional stability. The fight today has gone far beyond Gaza.
In much the same vein, regional powers, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Turkey, have begun drawing plans to safeguard their interests and national security by ceasing being witnesses to what’s unfolding and becoming active in shielding themselves. It is no coincidence that Muhammad Bin Salman (MBS), de factor leader of Saudi Arabia, has visited Cairo. MBS ended the inertia in the Egypt-Saudi Arabia relationship, the most two powerful Arab countries. Unlike during the Cold War, when Cairo embraced strident pan-Arabism and Saudi Arabia embraced conservatism in two diametrically opposite camps, today they see themselves in one camp. First, they mutually see that they have become potential front line states in a potential Israel/US-Iran war; second, they see that Iran and its proxies are dictating the orientation of regional policies, thereby emasculating their regional role; third, they are worried about Israel and United States’ roles in the region, and especially about Washington’s commitment to their security; fourth, they worry about the groundswell of Arab anger and its implications for their allies especially Jordan and Bahrain, save for their own personal and communal security.
Consequently, Saudi Arabia has pledged a sizable investment to Egypt as a bona fide support of Cairo to reclaim its regional role in setting the tone of Arab politics including in the Arab-Israeli conflict and more precisely the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, as well as vis-à-vis Iran. It is also no coincidence that President Sissi of Egypt has appointed a new intelligence chief, Maj. Gen. Hassan Mahmoud Rashad to replace Maj. Gen. Abbas Kamel, who had served in this role since 2018 and was a close confident to Sissi.
Egypt has already expanded its African role by cementing its relationship with Eritrea and Somalia. Experts emphasize that this new axis is directed at pressuring the landlocked country of Ethiopia with which the axis countries have conflicts. But another way at looking at this new Egyptian role reflects Cairo’s desire to acquire a foothold along the gateway to the Red Sea opposite the pro-Iranian Houthis.
No less significant, Egypt has joined BRICS and is today the fourth largest importer of Russian weapons. Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia and the Arab Gulf countries have made it clear that the army bases in their countries will not be used against Iran and that they will not allow Israel to use their airspace to attack Iran.
Similarly, Turkey has formally asked to join BRICS and initiated contacts with the Syrian regime and the Kurds in Syria. It is in favor of a multipolar world and worried about a possible invasion of Syria by Israel, which could change the whole dynamics in both Syria and Iraq.
Significantly, both Egypt and Saudi Arabia worries that peace with Israel is no longer grounded in a regional balance of power. They feel the balance of power has heavily shifted in favor of Israel similar to that following the 1967 war when Israel was too powerful. This led Egypt to wage a surprise attack on Israel to restore some sort of a regional balance of power conducive to peace. This feeling is reinforced by the notion that Netanyahu’s right wing government is not interested in peace and resolving the Palestinian question. In this respect, Jordan shares this concern with Egypt and Saudi Arabia.
Clearly, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan feel that the Arabs are going to be the losers when the dust settles after the storm unless they become active on the regional and international stage. They also believe that Iran is underestimating the determination with which Israel and United States seek to clip its wings. Today, Iran’s situation is fairly similar to that of the Ottoman Empire on the eve of WWI. Iran’s rulers assert their Islamist credentials as the Young Turks asserted their nationalist credentials, and Iran is allying itself with Russia and China in the same way Turkey had allied itself with Germany against the Western powers. The outcome was the extension of the war to the Middle East, blockade of the Levant’s littoral and eventually the defeat of the Ottoman Empire.
This may happen today to Iran, although under different circumstances, whereby Iran could lose and certain Middle Eastern countries and nations, such as Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Palestinians would pay a heavy cost including territorial loss. This is not to say that Israel may not have a pyrrhic victory at a heavy cost! And United States may not lose some grounds to Russia, China and Global South!
This ongoing war has already become regional and tethered to big powers’ rivalry. United States and all actors in the Middle East must soberly and thoughtfully reflect upon the unfolding developments and design their forthcoming strategies with a view both to prevent bigger tragedies and to pave a path to a better and more secure Middle East. Otherwise, the lands of Abrahamic religions will lapse into eternal damnation.
