Tag: houthis
An opportunity that may be missed
The Middle East is in a rare period of rapid change. The Assad regime in Syria is gone. Its successor is still undefined and uncertain. Israel has crippled Iran’s Hamas and Hizbollah allies. It is trying to do likewise to the Houthis in Yemen. Egypt is on the sidelines, preoccupied with civil wars in Libya and Sudan. A weakened Iran is contemplating whether nuclear weapons would help to restore its regional influence.
The global powers that be are not anxious to get too involved. Russia, stretched thin, let Syria go. The United States is inaugurating a president known to favor withdrawal from Syria. He will support almost anything Israel wants to do. China is doing its best to guarantee access to Middle East oil but wants to avoid political involvement. The European Union has a similar attitude.
So what will be the main factors in determining the future of the Middle East? Who has power and influence in the region and outside it?
Turkiye
The Turks are so far the big winners in Syria. They are getting an opportunity to send back Syrian refugees and will try to decimate their Syrian Kurdish enemies. They have influence over the ruling Hayat Tahrir al Sham (HTS) leadership in Damascus, whom they supplied and unleashed.
When it comes to reconstruction in Syria, Turkish companies are experienced and nearby. Turkish pockets aren’t as deep as American or Chinese pockets. But they are deep enough to get things started fast, especially if World Bank money is put on the table.
The Turks will try to convince the Americans to leave. They’ll argue that they can and will suppress Islamic State and other terrorists. They may even promise to allow the Kurds to continue their local governance structures. But they would want the Syrian Kurds to cut their ties to Kurdish terrorists inside Turkey.
The Turks will want a not-too-Islamist government in Damascus, something akin to their own. Syria has an enormously diverse population. HTS governance in Idlib was autocratic. But that was during the civil war. It will be much harder to impose that on Damascus after liberation from Assad. Syrians want their freedom. Turkiye has an interest in their getting it. Only inclusive governance will permit the return of refugees.
The Gulf
Some of the big money for reconstruction in Syria will come from the Gulf. The Saudis may be willing, if they gain some political influence in the bargain. How they use that influence will be important. In the Balkans 30 years ago they sponsored Wahabist clerics and mosques. Mohammed bin Salman has marginalized those within Saudi Arabia. We can hope he will not export them now. But he will, like the Turks, want a strong executive in Damascus.
What Syria needs from the Gulf is support for inclusive, democratic governance. The UAE will weigh in heavily against Islamism, but the Emirates are far from democratic or inclusive. Qatar, more tolerant of Islamism, will prefer inclusion, if only because the Americans will pressure them to do so.
Israel
Prime Minister Netanyahu has not achieved elimination of Hamas in Gaza. But he has weakened it. The Israelis have been far more successful in Lebanon, where they have dealt heavy blows to Hezbollah. They are also destroying many Syrian military capabilities. And they have seized UN-patrolled Syrian territory in the Golan Heights and on Mount Hermon.
Israel had already neutralized Egypt and Jordan via peace agreements. Ditto the UAE and Bahrain via the Abrahamic accords, though they were never protagonists in war against Israel. It would like similar normalization with Saudi Arabia. Now Israel controls border areas inside Lebanon and Syria. Repression on the West Bank and attacks on the Houthis in Yemen are proceeding apace.
Netanyahu is resisting the end of the Gaza war to save his own skin from the Israeli courts and electorate. Whether he succeeds at that or not, his legacy will be an “Israeli World.” That is a militarily strong Israel surrounded by buffer zones. But he has done serious damage to Israeli democracy and society.
Iran
Iran is weakened. That will encourage it to quicken the pace of its nuclear program. It won’t go all the way to deploying nuclear weapons. That would risk giving the Israelis an excuse for a massive attack, or even a nuclear strike. Nor can Ankara adopt the Israeli policy of opaqueness, as it is a signatory of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. That requires openness to inspections. So transparency about its nuclear threshold status is the likely policy.
Bottom line
Turkiye, Israel, and the Gulf (especially Saudi Arabia) are the big winners from the current Middle East wars. They would be even stronger if they were to cooperate. All have an interest in preventing Iran from getting nuclear weapons, in stabilizing Syria, and in preventing terrorist resurgence. So does the US. There is an opportunity, but one that may be missed.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Democracy doesn’t favor a serious peace
The headlines today say Hamas and Israel have reached a Gaza ceasefire deal that will
- allow exchange of hostages/prisoners,
- get Israeli troops to withdraw, and
- infuse humanitarian assistance.
All that is good.
What it is
But it is still only a ceasefire, not even a formal end to hostilities never mind a peace settlement. The ceasefire is to last seven weeks, during which negotiations on future arrangements for Gaza are to continue. As Tony Blinken put it yesterday:
The ceasefire deal itself requires the Israeli forces to pull back and then, assuming you get to a permanent ceasefire, to pull out entirely. But that’s what’s so critical about this post-conflict plan, the need to come to an agreement on its arrangements, because there has to be something in place that gives Israelis the confidence that they can pull out permanently and not have a repeat of the last, really, decade.
That is a good reminder. A ceasefire won’t last if there is no mutually enticing way out of the conflict. What might that be?
The rub
Therein lies the rub. The obvious way out would be a demilitarized Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza. It could be run by a successor to the hapless Palestinian Authority. The current Israeli government is dead set against that. Even if Prime Minister Netanyahu could accept it, which is doubtful, his coalition partners would not. A new Israeli government will be needed for any post-war settlement that appeals to most Palestinians.
But this government has been successful in doing what Israelis wanted in Gaza and Lebanon. It has diminished Hamas and all but disemboweled Hizbollah. It has also weakened Iran. Netanyahu would likely win a new election, but have no clear path to a parliamentary majority. Nor would anyone else. The pattern of indecisive Israeli elections would continue. There is no sign of a majority that favors a Palestinian state. Democracy does not favor a serious peace settlement.
Trump’s challenge
This is a big problem for the newly elected Trump Administration. It has assembled a mostly pro-Israel diplomatic team. It is difficult to picture Ambassador Huckabee bludgeoning the Israelis into accepting a Palestinian state. Trump’s threat that “all hell will break lose” absent an agreement was intended to threaten Hamas, not Israel.
Trump could turn the table and speak out for a Palestinian state. He did it at least once in his first term. But then he deferred to the Israelis:
If the Israelis and the Palestinians want one state, that’s OK with me. If they want two-state, that’s OK with me. I’m happy if they’re happy.
That is not resounding support for a Palestinian state.
The Saudi factor
It will be up to Riyadh to make it happen. Saudi Arabia wants normalization with Israel as well as a defense and nuclear agreements with the United States. It would be willing to help finance Gaza reconstruction. But it has to get a “concrete, irrevocable steps in a three to five year time horizon” to a Palestinian state in the bargain.
Israel wants normalization with the Saudis as well. Can fragmented Israeli democracy, American pro-Israel diplomats, and a Saudi autocrat combine to produce a Palestinian state? Anything is possible.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
A stronger American still fumbles
President Biden made a farewell appearance at the State Department yesterday. As a former Foreign Service officer, I’m of course delighted that he did this. It is especially important and timely because the Department now faces Donald Trump’s threat of loyalty tests and mass firings.
Biden’s understandably directed his remarks at justifying what his Administration has done on foreign policy. So how did he really do?
The bar was low
Certainly Biden can justifiably claim to have strengthened America’s alliances. The bar was low. Both in Europe and Asia the first Trump Administration had raised doubts. Allies could not depend on Washington’s commitment to fulfill its mutual defense obligations. Biden’s claim that compared to four years ago America is stronger because of renewed and expanded alliances is true. He is also correct in claiming he has not gone to war to make it happen.
The extraordinary strength of the American economy is an important dimension of this strength. Voters decided the election in part on the issue of inflation. But the Fed has largely tamed that and growth has been strong throughout. Manufacturing is booming, including vital semi-conductor production. Investment in non-carbon energy sources has soared. The defense industrial based is expanding.
Biden is also correct in asserting that America’s antagonists are worse off. Russia has failed to take Ukraine because of the US effort to gather support for Kyiv. Iran and its allies in Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria are weaker. Only the Houthis in Yemen are arguably stronger than four years ago.
China is facing serious domestic economic and demographic challenges. But I don’t know why Biden claims it will never surpass the US. On a purchasing power parity (PPP) basis, it already has, though obviously per capita GDP in China remains much lower.
Some claims gloss over big problems
Biden is rightly proud that there is no longer war in Afghanistan, but he glosses over the chaotic withdrawal. He also doesn’t mention the failure of the Taliban to keep its commitments.
He vaunts progress on climate change, but without acknowledging that the goal of keeping global warming below 1.5 degrees centigrade will not be met.
Biden talks about infrastructure in Africa. But not about its turn away from democracy, civil wars in Sudan and Ethiopia, and the unresolved conflict in Libya.
He urges that Iran never be allowed to “fire” a nuclear weapon. That is a significant retreat from the position that Iran should never be allowed to have one.
Biden mentions the impending Hamas/Israel ceasefire. But he says nothing about Israel’s criminal conduct of the war in Gaza. Nor does he blame Israel’s right-wing government for the long delay in reaching a deal.
Biden’s legacy
At the end, Biden seeks to bequeath three priorities to Trump: artificial intelligence, climate change, and democracy. He no doubt knows that Trump isn’t going to take the advice on climate or democracy. He might on artificial intelligence, as his Silicon Valley tycoons will want him to.
Sad to say, Biden’s legacy will lie in other areas. Fearful of nuclear conflict with Russia, he failed to give Ukraine all the support it needs to defeat Russia. He was reluctant to rein in Israel for more than a year of the Gaza war. He failed to stop or reverse the Iranian and North Korean nuclear programs. America is stronger than it was four years ago, but it has not always used that strength to good advantage.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
The war Netanyahu wanted is at hand
Prime Minister Netanyahu has spent the 31 years since the Oslo accords seeking two principal foreign policy goals: preventing establishment of a Palestinian state and destroying the Islamic Republic of Iran. He is on the verge of getting a chance to achieve both. In the process, he is ending Israeli democracy, earning the enmity of much of the Arab street, and drawing the US into another Middle East war. I don’t like the result, but he is definitely stalwart.
Obliterating the idea of a Palestinian state
I recall in the mid-1990s a discussion at a mutual friend’s house with the then National Security Advisor to Vice President Gore. Leon Fuerth believed that Netanyahu would eventually come around to accepting a Palestinian state. I had my doubts. I still think I was right.
Netanyahu spent many years thereafter pumping up the idea that Israel was under siege, both by the Palestinians and the Iranians. The Second Intifada and the wall Israel built to isolate itself, successfully, from the West Bank boosted his credibility. Once Hamas took over Gaza from the Palestinian Authority in 2006/7, he worked hard to keep the two governing bodies separate. Dividing the Palestinians was one way to make sure they couldn’t get what they wanted.
Defeating Iran
Hezbollah is Iran’s most important ally/proxy in the region. Israel has now destroyed perhaps 50% of its rocket and missile supplies and killed an even greater proportion of Hezbollah’s leaders. The pager/walkie-talkie attack two weeks ago maimed thousands of its cadres. Israeli troops are now on the ground in southern Lebanon seeking to push Hezbollah forces north of the Litani River.
Netanyahu is imagining that regime in Iran is imminent:
He will be content with the results of yesterday’s 180-missile Iranian attack. Israel appears to have suffered little damage and no known strategic losses. Many of the missiles were destroyed before hitting their targets by US, Israeli, and other unnamed defenses.
Retaliation is nevertheless all but certain. Netanyahu has been looking for an opportunity to hit Iran for decades. The Israelis will likely aim for nuclear and oil production facilities. The nuclear facilities will be difficult to destroy, as vital ones are ensconced well under ground. The best the IDF can hope for is to block some of the access routes. The oil facilities are more vulnerable. Oil and natural gas are Iran’s major exports. If they don’t flow, the economy will deflate.
Restraint is not in the cards
The Americans and Europeans will be urging restraint on Israel. They don’t want a regional war. Netanyahu isn’t listening. His own political future depends on continuing the fighting and achieving a spectacular military success. Hamas has denied him that in Gaza. So far, Hezbollah has proven an easier target. Netanyahu knows President Biden will do nothing to Israel’s block arms supplies. And he wants to boost Trump’s chances of winning the presidency. So he has no reason to restrain an attack he has wanted to launch for decades.
Netanyahu’s governing coalition has only a thin majority in the Knesset. But his allies and his own Likud political party have given him a blank check in pursuing a regional war. The Arab states are protesting the war in Gaza but doing little to prevent Israel from attacking Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Iran. All of them are anathema to the Gulf monarchies. The Arab street is still sympathetic to the Palestinians, but it has little say. Restraint is not in the cards.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
More and wider war is inevitable, unless…
Prime Minister Netanyahu sent a clear signal with the assassinations of Hizbollah military leader Fouad Shukur in Beirut and Hamas negotiator Ismail Haniyeh last week in Tehran. Israel is not interested in a negotiated end to the war in Gaza and wants to widen the hostilities. Hamas has now signaled with the naming of Yahya Sinwar as its overall leader that it too is prepared to continue the fight. Sinwar is a hardliner compared to the more pragmatic Haniyeh.
More war
Israel has been trying to kill Sinwar since the October 7 attack that he launched against the Israeli communities bordering Gaza. It has so far failed and will no doubt now redouble its efforts. Sinwar advocates killing Jews and retaking all of Palestine, which he regards as an eternal Muslim endowment (waqf), back from them. He is a firm believer in violence rather than negotiations. He has demonstrated little or no interest in the suffering of ordinary Palestinians in Gaza. To him, their suffering is necessary collateral damage.
We should expect Sinwar to continue to hide and the Israelis to continue to search for him. He is a maximalist and will not yield as long as he lives. Finding him in the Gaza tunnels will require either luck or months more destruction.
Wider war
The wider war has been going on now for months. It includes rockets, drones, and artillery fire across the Lebanon/Israel border as well as rocket and drone attacks from the Houthis in Yemen against shipping in the Red Sea, US navy ships, and Israel. This wider war will continue and likely intensify.
No Arab states have indicated an inclination to join in the military offensive against Israel. Turkish President Erdogan has made some vague threats, but he is unlikely to make good on them. The US has pledged to help defend Israel if Iran attacks, but not to attack Iran in retaliation. So the wider war is not as wide as it could potentially get.
No doubt a less visible, less military war is ongoing as well. That war involves intelligence agencies, proxy forces, and individual saboteurs and assassins. The Iranians are particularly good at the proxy forces element. They have used Hamas, Hizbollah, and the Houthis to harass Israel. They seem far less adept at the intelligence piece. The Israelis have killed and sabotaged Iranian assets repeatedly for many years.
Negotiations are at an impasse, but…
The Americans continue to hope for a negotiated end to the current fighting in Gaza. They hope that would tone down, if not eliminate, the Hizbollah and Houthi attacks. It would also provide an opportunity to exchange prisoners/hostages and perhaps begin reconstruction.
They are likely to be disappointed. So long as Netanyahu and Sinwar hold power in their respective communities, the Gaza war will continue. They both need the conflict to survive. Nor is it clear that Hizbollah and especially the Houthis would stop their attacks on Israel if the Gaza war ends. The Middle East is now fighting a long war, not a short one.
The solution lies with the people of Gaza and Israel. If they decide the time has come, Sinwar and Netanyahu can be brought down, as Sheikh Hasina was in Bangladesh in recent days. Gazans show little inclination to topple Sinwar, not least because it would be risky for anyone trying. The situation in Israel is more promising. Most Israelis want to see an end to Netanyahu’s reign. They need to figure out how to make it happen.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
When you are in a hole, stop digging
The world awaits retaliation against Israel for its assassinations last week. Both were relatively surgical affairs that killed the military commander of Lebanese Hizbollah in Beirut (as well as some women and children) and the political spokesman of Hamas in Tehran. Expectations for retaliation focus on a large missile and drone attack from all directions.
I doubt that. If successful, such a raid might mobilize the US to join Israel in a further escalation. That is something the Iranians don’t want.
It need not be an air raid
Israel has seemed invulnerable for decades. Its sophisticated air defenses have prevented thousands of missiles and drones from reaching population centers.
Iran and its partners might be better served to assassinate one or more major Israeli political or military figures. That would be a symmetrical response that some might argue does not justify further escalation. It would also strike fear into the hearts of every Jew in Israel. The only major Jewish figure murdered in modern Israel was Prime Minister Itzhak Rabin, killed by a Jew.
The Israelis have demonstrated that they can track and strike major figures in the capitals of their adversaries. Is it really possible that the “axis of resistance” has not developed a comparable capability inside Israel?
The capability need not necessarily be technologically sophisticated. Knives, guns, and grenades can be smuggled and murderers deployed or hired. Targets of opportunity should not be difficult to find in a small and relatively open society.
Iran has assets it doesn’t want to lose
The Iranians will decide. Hizbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis may have been relatively free to do what they wanted since October 7, but no doubt Tehran is now coordinating the retaliation.
Iran has reached nuclear threshold status. It is able to build a nuclear bomb within weeks with material in its possession. Prime Minister Netanyahu is looking for an excuse to damage that capability. In April, the Israelis demonstrated their ability to reach Iran’s nuclear facilities with drones that went undetected. Iran may want to hide its hand in the retaliation, mirroring Israel’s refusal to confirm its hand in the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran.
Netanyahu wins, Israel loses
A successful assassination or two, or a successful air raid, will put the Israelis again on the spot. President Biden has already made clear to Netanyahu that the US will not back further escalation. If Netanyahu pays heed, the cycle will end. If not, it will continue.
That said, Netanyahu has already accomplished several of his own goals. The Gaza talks can go nowhere until the escalation ends. He does not want the ceasefire/prisoner exchange that Washington is insisting on. The Democrats risk a major war during the election campaign, giving advantage to Trump, whom Netanyahu favors. The crisis will enable him to stay in power at least until October, when the Knesset returns from recess, and likely beyond.
Israel is the big loser. The ferocious October 7 attack was far from an existential threat, but Netanyahu and many Israelis have characterized it as such. That justified the ferocious response in Gaza that has in turn led to the assassinations and potential war with Iran and its partners. That really is an existential threat. When you are in a hole, stop digging.
RSS - Posts
