An article published by the British "Financial Times" raises growing concerns about regional escalation amidst the diplomatic impasse over the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. According to the article, the situation threatens to proliferate across the Middle East.
Penned by Emile Hokayem, the Senior Fellow for Middle East Security at the International Institute for Strategic Studies based in London, the article enumerates factors that collectively increase the probability of the conflict spreading, with a stark warning: "Wars in the Middle East do not stay confined within the borders of a single state."
Hokayem explains that underlying grievances, foreign intervention, the absence of a regional security process, and the ongoing weakness of local diplomacy all contribute to the likelihood of escalation.
The article points out that just days after an attack by the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) on October 7th, an extensive Israeli assault on Hezbollah in Lebanon was averted thanks to American pressure. Since then, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen have become targets and launchpads, with the author highlighting the surprising geopolitical development of the Houthis disrupting maritime movement in the Bab el-Mandeb Strait.
Edge of the Abyss
The writer comments that the last ten days serve as an illustration of how close the region is to the brink of the abyss. He refers to Israeli assassination operations targeting Iran's top commander in Syria and Saleh al-Arouri, the Deputy Head of the Political Bureau for Hamas in Lebanon, following the United States' killing of an Iranian-supported Iraqi leader. The clear slide towards US-led intervention against the Houthis in Yemen could signify an acceleration.
Hokayem underscores that one could discount an explosion across the region based on the fact that the 2006 war between Hezbollah and Israel, along with previous American and Israeli assassinations of Hamas and Hezbollah leaders, did not trigger a wider conflict.
However, he also says that the context, scope, rhythm, and perception are different now, with more high-ranking leaders being assassinated and more significant attacks occurring over multiple theatres in a shorter span. Meanwhile, the continuous Israeli offensive on Gaza stirs enmity among the region's population.
Hokayem elaborates that it's unsurprising that Iran and Israel will decide whether the conflict escalates into a full-blown war or remains a contest for regional influence. While Tehran fears the erosion of its credibility and deterrence, it still perceives its ultimate goals as best achieved through "thousands of small steps rather than costly direct confrontations."
Diplomacy in Disarray
The author continues, stating that three months after Israel's war on Gaza, the diplomatic landscape appears chaotic. Foreign ministers from Arab and Islamic countries, who formed a delegation to visit major capitals, have struggled to create much diplomatic momentum.
Efforts to free Israeli detainees are losing steam, and "goodwill" proposals for the day after the war seem pointless if Israel considers Gaza an active military zone – regardless of who governs it – and refuses to join processes leading to the establishment of a Palestinian state.
Arab governments are making little effort to protect maritime navigation. Once again, the onus falls on the United States to mobilize a coalition for this purpose, inevitably exacerbating anti-American sentiment in the region.
Challenges Facing America
The writer returns to the stance that the United States deserves "some credit" for staving off a comprehensive regional war thus far, but appears to be out of ideas and incapable of wielding influence. The EU's foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell, appears to be the only one setting clear goals for peace settlement. Yet, he lacks a real mandate and any substantial sway over the key players.
Hokayem concludes his article by reminding us that the war in Gaza highlights that conflicts cannot be frozen and ignored. As painfully evidenced over the past few decades, wars cannot merely be won on the battlefield – they require a just resolution, despite the complexity of such conflicts and the frustrating nature of resolving them.
