As the dust settles on recent Israeli military strikes against Iran, analysts and former diplomats say one thing is clear: Israel, for better or worse, dictates events in the Middle East. The United States has been relegated to the role of flanker, with its ally waging war on multiple fronts.
This is a radical shift. Whether on the battlefields of Iraq or at the presidential retreat at Camp David, the United States has long viewed itself as the pivotal player in the Middle East, working boldly, if not always successfully, to change the course of the region’s deadly history.
Now, as Israel launches attacks against its enemies — including Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza and their backer Iran — President Biden finds his influence severely limited. Instead of making peace or the major wars of his predecessors, he is mostly engaged in diplomatic purges.
Some US efforts have shown signs of impact: Israel responded to US warnings not to strike sensitive nuclear enrichment sites or oil production facilities in Iran, in response to Iran’s ballistic missile attacks on Israel earlier this month.
But more ambitious efforts, such as US-led ceasefire negotiations with Hamas in Gaza, have failed to make any headway. The United States must propose, let alone implement, a comprehensive plan that will pull the Middle East out of a disastrous, region-wide war.
It does not appear to have much influence on the Israeli leader, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who escalated the conflict with Hezbollah and Iran, and continued the military campaign in Gaza, despite the killing of Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar.
The junior partner takes over
Experts say that Mr. Netanyahu’s goal is to exploit the driving force of the Hamas attacks on October 7 to vanquish Israel’s enemies in all areas. Israel’s defenders portray it as a once-in-a-generation opportunity to reshape the region’s fraught landscape. Critics say Israel is escalating the conflict without any plan for what comes next.
Valley R. said. “There is a disconnect where the smaller partner in the coalition has a bigger vision for the region, and the larger partner is left trying to respond to events,” said Nasr, the State Department official in the Obama administration who is now secretary of state. Professor at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies. “This is not a good place for the United States.”
Mr. Nasr said that competitors such as China and Russia are noticing the US inability to rein in Israel or contain the conflict in the Middle East. This could deepen President Vladimir Putin’s resolve to crush Ukraine or encourage Chinese President Xi Jinping to move against Taiwan.
Moreover, a broader conflict in the region will inevitably attract the United States. It has already deployed warships in the Mediterranean to deter Hezbollah and Iran, deployed commando forces to Israel to help hunt down hostages and Hamas leaders, and helped Israel shoot down Iranian missiles.
“The core assumption of the Israelis is that in a broader war, the United States will take up the fighting,” Mr. Nasr said. “The United States is sleepwalking into another long-term conflict in the Middle East.”
Uncertainty in the US elections
The conflict in the Middle East takes place during a period of acute political uncertainty in the United States. The Israeli retaliatory strike against Iran came just 10 days before a presidential election that appears to be witnessing high tension between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald J. Trump.
Ms. Harris has shown little clarity with President Biden on the Gaza war, although she acknowledged that the White House policy of unwavering support for Israel caused her problems during the election campaign.
Mr. Trump has had his own problems with Mr. Netanyahu, dating back to 2020, when the Israeli leader angered Mr. Trump by congratulating Mr. Biden on his election victory. But in recent comments, and in a phone call with Mr. Netanyahu, Mr. Trump offered strong support for Israeli campaigns against Hamas and Hezbollah.
“Biden is trying to obstruct him,” Trump told reporters last week, when asked about Mr. Netanyahu. “He’s trying to hold it back, and he probably should have done the opposite actually.”
The careful calibration of Israel’s strikes on Friday may have kept Israel’s options open ahead of the elections. A more aggressive strike may strain relations with a future Harris administration. Analysts say that if Trump wins, Israel may take more aggressive measures against Iran, such as targeting energy or nuclear facilities.
They also said that if Mr. Trump is elected, they expect an effort to expand the Abraham Accords, under which several Gulf states normalized relations with Israel during the Trump administration. But without stopping the war in Gaza, and without some hint of a path to a two-state solution for the Palestinians, Saudi Arabia is unlikely to move in Israel’s direction.
These analysts say that under President Harris, the United States is likely to take an “integrated approach” to addressing the Israeli-Palestinian problem, as well as Israel’s relations with its Arab and Muslim neighbors. But Mr. Biden’s inability to make much progress is a dismal omen.
Michael B. Oren, a former Israeli ambassador to the United States, said there was much in common between Mr. Netanyahu’s vision and Mr. Biden’s vision, although they differed on the need for a Palestinian state.
But Mr. Oren said that even in the wake of the October 7 attacks, “the White House believes its vision can be achieved without a preponderance of military force, while Netanyahu knows it cannot.”
Conflict as a prelude to peace
Diplomats say the United States has historically been able to use turmoil in the Middle East to push for change. The 1973 Yom Kippur War planted the seeds of the Camp David Accords between Israel and Egypt. The first Palestinian Intifada paved the way for peace talks during the Clinton administration.
Daniel C. said: Kurtzer, former US ambassador to Israel and Egypt: “There is certainly a moment of hope here.” “If you were Israel and you seriously weakened three of your most important enemies, you might say to yourself: This is an opportunity to move closer to regional stability and peace.”
However, what separates the current conflict from previous conflicts, Mr. Kurtzer said, is the brutal nature of Hamas’ attack on Israel, which has left its population traumatized in a way not seen in previous wars, and uncertain leadership in several key countries. And not just the United States.
For example, Iran has reacted intermittently to the confrontation with Israel. This reflects issues of leadership succession, economic problems, and internal unrest, as well as the damage Israel has inflicted on its proxies.
As for Israel, Netanyahu still faces the possibility of prosecution in corruption cases, and he rules in a coalition with far-right ministers, some of whom view the conflict in Gaza as a pretext to expel the Palestinian population.
“There’s a vision, but it won’t work,” said Mr. Kurtzer, who teaches at Princeton University. “It will only prolong the conflict.”
“Travel specialist. Typical social media scholar. Friend of animals everywhere. Freelance zombie ninja. Twitter buff.”
More Stories
Lost Mayan city with pyramids, temples and plazas discovered in Mexico | Mexico
South Korean lawmakers say North Korean soldiers are learning Russian orders and may be sent to the front lines in Ukraine.
The Social Democrats win Lithuanian elections, defeating the centre-right government