The escalating tensions in the Middle East are not limited to the ongoing war in Gaza between Israel and the Palestinian factions. They also include the intervention of Iran-backed proxies in the conflict under the pretext of defending the Palestinian people. These interventions are the most dangerous aspect, as they threaten to spread the conflict to other regional and international parties. Some observers even consider what is happening to be the prelude to a third world war.
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram
In my opinion, the most important thing about the conflicts in the Middle East is that they are far from over and that a political solution to the underlying conflict over the Palestinian issue – which has become a political pawn – is not in sight.
Despite the discussions about a new agreement to end the war in Gaza, it is certain that any plan, regardless of its terms, will not end the war as long as Israel has not achieved its main objectives.
What is happening in the context of the agreement is merely an expression of the desire of some members of the Netanyahu government to make a tactical change by prioritizing the release of Israeli hostages held by the Hamas terror movement at any cost to ease the constant pressure from the hostages' families and then resume the war or achieve its goals by other means.
There are also indications of the Netanyahu government's intention to deal with the threat posed by Lebanese Hezbollah. A key indicator of the danger in the Middle East lies in what the US is experiencing in the region. The Iranian–backed terrorist militias in Yemen, Syria, and Iraq pose an unprecedented challenge to American influence.
This challenge extends not only to their direct and indirect strategic impact but also to the role of the US in the global system. The tensions in the Middle East have drawn Washington's attention and distracted it from the war in Ukraine.
Strategic competition with China and Russia is no longer a top priority of American interest, at least for now. Instead, American diplomatic efforts are focused on dealing with the crisis in Gaza and the threat posed to Israel's ally by Iran's regional proxies. The attack on Tower 22 in Jordanian territory, which killed three American military personnel and injured more than 30 others, presents the US with a difficult and complex task.
The problem lies in the nature of the opposing party, namely the terrorist militias loyal to Iran. It is difficult for any regular military force to achieve a decisive victory over the enemy in the context of a non–conventional conflict.
Perhaps this is the reason for the numerous American appeals to the White House to send a clear and tangible message of deterrence to the puppet master of these terrorist militias, Iran, because fighting these militias has proven futile in this conflict and in previous conflicts, no matter how effective it may be.
This is due to the ideology of these terrorist organizations, their flexibility, and their changing priorities, in which there is no consideration for human and material losses as long as the leadership remains alive. Everything indicates that Iran has become a key player in the strategic calculations of the Americans.
If President Biden fears for his chances of a second term, we should remember that former President Donald Trump was faced with a similar situation when Iran shot down a state-of-the-art American drone in 2019. He too refrained from ordering a direct military strike against Iran.
This means that successive American administrations continue to view Iran from a prism that is far removed from the interests of partners and allies in the Middle East. Instead, they view Iran from a perspective that prioritizes US strategic interests, natural, but often at odds with the interests of regional partners.
This was evident during the tenure of former President Barack Obama, who signed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran in 2015 without considering its implications for countries in the region.
Obama ignored the views of these partners, did not listen to their perspectives, and did not include them in the negotiations, even though they are crucial for regional and international security and stability. This was also the case, for example, in the negotiations on North Korea. Most dangerously, the Obama administration ignored the consequences of unleashing Iran in the Middle East.
It can be said that all the suffering of this terrorist militia has worsened since the signing of this agreement, seen as a green light for the expansion of Iranian influence in the region. The danger of Iran also lies in its ability to mobilize an influential regional network of agents and mercenaries.
Suffice it to mention the practices of the Houthi group, which obstruct shipping traffic in the Bab el Mandeb strait and the Red Sea, through which a third of the world's container ships pass. The problem is that, as mentioned earlier, these terrorist militias are not significantly affected by the targeted attacks against them.
It is also hard to identify valuable targets that would force the militia leaders to change their behavior. The ability of the US to deter Iran remains contingent on its success in reaching a new agreement with Iran, particularly with regard to Iranian influence, the most vital issue for Tehran.
Iran is concerned about the possibility of being excluded from the resolution of the conflict in Gaza and the possible extension of the Abraham Accords to other parties, especially Saudi Arabia.
The Palestinian issue is seen as a mainstay of Iran's regional role, not for ideological reasons, as the Iranians claim, but because of the regime's strategic interests, particularly Iran's influence in the Arab and Islamic worlds.
Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!
