What many westerners don’t get about the Gaza war

The Gaza war is not just a regional conflict; it reflects the primary challenge to the American-dominated international order, headed by the quartet of China, Russia, Iran and North Korea. Hamas in Gaza uses Russian, Chinese and Iranian-made weapons and has built tunnels modeled after those of North Korea. Iran seeks to hasten an American drawback from the Middle East, a goal shared by Russia and China.

Alongside its religious opposition to the Jewish state, Iran has established a network of proxies to attack Israel, an American ally and the only state in the region powerful enough to oppose Tehran’s imperial and Islamic impulses. Israel stands as a Western bastion in the region, resisting this quartet.

In civilizational terms, the Eastern Mediterranean has historically served as the frontier between the West and the “barbarians” coming from the East. In antiquity, the Persian attempt to expand westwards was stopped by the Greeks. Centuries later, the Venetians halted Ottoman advances. Over time this border fluctuated, reflecting the balance of power between the various force battling for its control.

Today, it is Israel that prevents the Eastern Mediterranean from falling under Islamic hegemony. Jerusalem is engaged in a war to destroy Hamastan, a radical Islamist statelet on the Mediterranean shores. Israel has helped Egypt, a Mediterranean state, to fight the Islamist insurgency in Sinai. The Muslim Brotherhood, which ruled Egypt for a little more than a year remains the strongest political force in the country, and under certain circumstances could potentially regain power.  To Israel’s north along the Mediterranean shore lies Lebanon, where Hezbollah, a Shiite proxy of Iran, is the true ruler; Israel seems intent on defeating Iran’s main arm in the region. Syria envelops Lebanon to the north, along the Mediterranean, and from its east, and Israel is fighting the Iranian presence there.

Israel’s alignment with Greece and Cyprus helps balance the power of Turkey, a country that has been led for more than two decades by Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, an Islamist who encourages the Islamization of Europe and has hosted both ISIS and Hamas. Moreover, Turkey eyes control of the Eastern Mediterranean’s gas riches. Iran and Turkey have an interest in weakening the Western presence in the Eastern Mediterranean to facilitate access to and influence over the Muslims in the Balkans, as well as to control the routes of illegal immigration into Europe. West of Egypt along the Mediterranean coast is Libya, where the Tripoli faction in the civil war is penetrated by Islamists and aided by Turkey. Russia too flirts with Islamic radicals such as Hamas and favors a reduced Western role in the Eastern Mediterranean to deny Europe access to the region’s energy resources.

The Gaza war is also a manifestation of Iranian ambitions to take over a region that was once part of the Persian empire. Iran’s mullahs have sought to wage perpetual and unbridled holy war against Western civilization and to place the Middle East and beyond within its orbit. Many of the region’s militias have been trained, equipped and supported by Iran and act against Israel and Western interests. Iran and its proxies are the main challengers to the status quo and actively threaten the national security of pro-western Arab states. The Arab states fear Iran, while Hamas is an anathema to their rulers. In Yemen, the Houthis interfere with freedom of navigation in the Bab El Mandeb strait, a vital maritime choke point, through which a significant portion of global trade passes. Recently, Cyprus, an island in the Eastern Mediterranean and a member of the European Union, was added to the list of states threatened by Hezbollah – the Islamist organization that controls Lebanon.

Western risk aversion and fears of escalation are counterproductive. In many places, restraint is often construed as a fatal weakness and may invite aggression. Contrary to prevalent Western attitudes that view the use of force as uncivilized and anachronistic, Middle Easterners see it as a legitimate option in the toolbox of international actors. In this part of the world, in many situations, escalation is the best way to put an end to violence. Only escalation can bring an end to Hezbollah’s war of attrition against Israel or the blocking of the Bab El Mandeb strait by the Houthis.

Israel understands that readiness to escalate and bear additional costs signals determination to attain necessary goals. Therefore, being perceived as willing to escalate helps deterrence. Fear of retaliation serves to cool tempers all over the world. This is the rationale for the threatening behavior of the bully in a tough neighborhood such as the Middle East. Deterrence must be maintained over time by the occasional use of force. This is its only lubricant; empty words do not work.

Finally, the Gaza war has again revealed the Palestinians’ true colors. Their real problem is not where the border between the Palestinian state and the State of Israel lies, but the very fact that there is such a border, as so many Palestinians believe that there is no legitimacy for a Jewish nation-state. Indeed, all polls show that the Palestinians have not relinquished their revisionist dreams and are not capable of becoming peaceful neighbors of the Jewish state. Palestinian Authority spokespersons have refused to condemn the Hamas atrocities of October 7, insisting instead that Hamas is part of the Palestinian body politic.

In addition, the Palestinians have failed miserably to meet the Weberian test of statehood – monopoly over the use of force. They established two weak, corrupt and fragmented polities. The current Palestinian political trajectory is leading toward a civil war waged by a variety of militias, as seen in other Arab states, or to a Hamas-dominated entity. Pushing for Palestinian statehood at this stage will only increase the chances for a deadly Israeli-Palestinian war in which both sides will suffer, but the Palestinian pain would undoubtedly be greater. The status quo, while far from ideal, is probably the less destructive option.