In the current cycle of violence between Israel and Hamas, the militant group controlling Gaza, it’s becoming increasingly clear that Hamas is likely to emerge as a victor, regardless of how this latest bout of Israeli-Palestinian fighting ultimately concludes. The audaciousness of Hamas’ attack on Israel, drawing comparisons to the 9/11 tragedy, has brought about significant shifts in the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East. This brutal assault saw prolonged combat between Hamas and the Israeli military within Israeli towns and cities, the relentless firing of rockets into Israeli population centres, indiscriminate killings of innocent civilians in Israeli homes, and the abduction of numerous Israeli soldiers and civilians. The consequences of this campaign reach far beyond Israel’s borders, raising serious doubts about the sustainability of regional de-escalation efforts that merely freeze, rather than address, long-standing conflicts. Moreover, it challenges the belief held by Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and his ultra-nationalist coalition partners that Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories can be indefinitely maintained. Hamas’ actions have also provided Iran with a platform to assert its opposition to Arab normalization of relations with Israel. Even prior to the outbreak of hostilities, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei warned against the normalization of ties with Israel, emphasizing the risks involved in such a gamble.
Adding to the complexity of the situation, Hamas spokesperson Ghazi Hamad claimed that the group received direct support from Iran for its attack, although the specifics of this support remain undisclosed. In this context, the Lebanese Shiite militia Hezbollah, backed by Iran, fired rockets at the Israeli-occupied Shebaa Farms in southern Lebanon, intensifying the threat of a broader regional conflict. Israel’s response came in the form of armed drones. This escalation occurred after Israeli soldiers opened fire on pro-Hamas demonstrators along the Lebanese border, though no casualties were reported. Meanwhile, a statement from Saudi Arabia suggested that the Hamas attack had complicated U.S.-led efforts to secure Saudi recognition of Israel. The Saudi foreign ministry underscored the kingdom’s concerns regarding the situation’s potential to explode due to the occupation, the denial of Palestinian rights, and repeated provocations against their sacred sites. Furthermore, it reflects the predicament of the United Arab Emirates, which called for a United Nations Security Council discussion of the conflict alongside Malta. Opting for a closed session rather than a private meeting, the UAE’s decision excluded Israeli and Palestinian representatives and yielded no Council statement.
Amid these developments, the Palestinian Authority, led by President Mahmoud Abbas and dominated by Al Fatah, finds itself marginalized in the face of Hamas’ resurgence. The ongoing conflict reinforces the potential collapse of the Palestine Authority and strengthens Hamas in the struggle for succession. As this Israeli-Palestinian conflict continues, it is likely to fuel Arab rejection of relations with Israel, while also revealing differing sentiments among Turkish public opinion. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, having hosted Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh and allowed the group to operate in Turkey, has offered mediation between Israel and Hamas, setting Turkey apart from Arab statements that place blame solely on Israel. This latest escalation risks hardening Israel’s resistance to steps aimed at establishing an independent Palestinian state or a viable one-state solution. Concurrently, it may lead to heightened violence in the West Bank, where Palestinian militants resisting Israeli occupation are likely to be emboldened. The international community’s response, in the wake of this crisis, will hold significant consequences for the region’s future.
