CNN Central News & Network–ITDC India Epress/ITDC News Bhopal: The rapidly deteriorating security situation in the Middle East reflects a complex interplay of historical grievances, power dynamics, and shifting political landscapes. Recent events, including Israel’s military actions in Lebanon and Gaza, the killing of key Hezbollah and Hamas leaders, and Iran’s missile attacks on Israel, have escalated tensions to unprecedented levels. Against this backdrop, it is important to understand the key reasons behind the downward spiral, and perhaps even an impending all-out war in the Middle East.
The decline of American hegemony
The first major factor in this crisis is the gradual decline of American hegemony in global politics. For decades, the United States has played a dominant role in the Middle East, acting as a key mediator in conflicts and a primary supporter of Israel. However, the rise of multipolarity in international relations has shifted the balance of power. Regional players such as Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Israel are increasingly asserting their influence, often in ways that challenge US interests.
The decline of US influence has also emboldened extra-regional powers like China and Russia to pursue their agendas, complicating the landscape further.
Iran’s support for groups like Hamas and Hezbollah has grown in this environment, as Tehran seeks to position itself as a counterbalance to both US and Israeli interests. The waning of the US role as the primary peace broker has created a vacuum that regional actors are eager to fill, leading to heightened tensions and an increased likelihood of conflict.
Presidential election in the US
A second crucial factor is the presidential election in the US. The political landscape in Washington influences how the US engages with Israel and other Middle Eastern actors. With a relatively weaker president in Joe Biden, Israel sees an opportunity to act unilaterally.
Historically, strong American presidents have been able to exert pressure on Israel to temper its actions. For instance, in 1991, President George H.W. Bush played a crucial role in pressuring Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir to participate in the Madrid Peace Conference and to pause settlement constructions. After winning the Iraq war caused by Saddam Hussain’s invasion of Kuwait, Bush was all-powerful, domestically as well as internationally.
In contrast, Biden has struggled to make a similar impact. His administration has issued strong statements against Netanyahu’s actions but has refrained from implementing concrete measures to enforce compliance.
Both Republicans and Democrats face significant political pressure to support Israel, making it unlikely that the White House would take a strong stance against Israeli military actions. Biden’s diminishing popularity further complicates the situation, leaving him without the political clout necessary to compel change.
Netanyahu’s political manoeuvring
Benjamin Netanyahu’s actions as Israel’s prime minister play a pivotal role in the current crisis. Following the October 7 attacks, Netanyahu found himself in a precarious political position, grappling with internal dissent and public outrage over perceived security failures.
Historically, crises often serve as a rallying point for leaders facing domestic challenges. By launching military operations against Hamas, Hezbollah, and even Iran, Netanyahu has not only shifted focus away from his own political vulnerabilities but has also galvanised public support.
This military strategy serves dual purposes: it addresses immediate security threats while consolidating Netanyahu’s political position. By eliminating key figures in Hamas and Hezbollah, Netanyahu strengthens his narrative of security and resilience, potentially bolstering his chances in upcoming elections.
The rising tide of nationalism and support for military action among the Israeli public creates an environment in which Netanyahu can operate with relative impunity.
Rightward shift in Israeli public opinion
The Israeli public’s rightward shift is another critical factor in the current crisis. Increased security concerns, the never-ending regional conflict, and nationalist rhetoric have influenced public opinion to favour more hardline policies. This shift is reflected in the electoral success of right-wing parties advocating for aggressive military action and minimal compromise in peace negotiations.
Social and economic disparities have further fueled this trend, prompting many Israelis to seek stability through a robust security posture. The current political climate is polarised, with young Israelis increasingly supporting Netanyahu and his hardline policies. This polarisation incentivises leaders to prolong military campaigns, as a strong national defence resonates more with their constituents than peace negotiations that might appear conciliatory.
The October 7 attacks
Finally, the October 7 attacks by Hamas represent a significant turning point. Viewed by many as a tactical error, these assaults provided Israel with a pretext for an all-out military response. While Hamas and potentially Iran may have seen the attacks as a means to counter the normalisation of relations between Israel and Arab states—such as the Abraham Accords—the unintended consequences have been severe.
The scale of the assault galvanised Israeli public opinion, unifying political factions around the need for aggressive military action. The Israeli government’s subsequent military operations aimed to dismantle Hamas’s infrastructure, resulting in widespread devastation in Gaza and exacerbating humanitarian crises.
This violence has not only deepened the Israeli-Palestinian conflict but also impacted the broader geopolitical landscape of the Middle East.
The intersection of these factors—the decline of American influence, the American political climate, Netanyahu’s strategic manoeuvring, the rightward shift in Israeli public opinion, and the recent attacks—has created a perfect storm in the Middle East.
The next few days and weeks will be critical in determining the trajectory of this conflict. As regional tensions escalate, the potential for all-out war looms larger than ever.
