Israel has the capacity to significantly damage Hamas with a ground offensive. But politics will restrain it throughout
There is political logic behind the Israeli government’s declaration that it will ‘wipe Hamas off the Earth’.
The Israeli public want to see Hamas destroyed once and for all, given the unprecedented mass murder it just committed.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his colleagues, already under intense pressure for allowing the attack to take place (and for putting Israel in a vulnerable position by pursuing anti-democratic policies) were compelled to make big promises. Their maximalist goals reflect the stakes in their fight for political survival.
If the war in Gaza isn’t horrific enough, the world also has to worry about its possible expansion. The one theater that could prove to be the most lethal and devastating to the entire region is Lebanon-Israel. There, Israel would have to deal with Hezbollah, a foe with capabilities far more significant than Hamas’s, and which many view as the world’s most powerful non-state militant actor.
So, will Hezbollah join the fight and turn this into a regional war to aid its Palestinian partner?
The new war between Israel and Hamas has amply illustrated that what Middle Eastern and American officials were claiming was the most peaceful in decades was anything but.
It was an easy mistake to make: across the region, negotiations were breaking out among hardened foes, countries were scaling back or ending interventions, and everyone seemed to be breathing a collective sigh of relief.
As is usual in the Middle East, the outbreak of peace is often just a harbinger of war.
In the latest installment of the Defense Rapid Reaction series, experts from MEI’s Defense & Security Program provide their views on the Oct. 7 Hamas surprise attack on Israel and what it might mean for Israelis and Palestinians, the wider region, and U.S. policy.
Key takeaways from Mohammed bin Salman’s Fox interview
Saudi Crown Prince Mohamed bin Salman’s interview on Wednesday night with Bret Baier of Fox News didn’t break news or produce controversy. But that wasn’t the point of his appearance on one of America’s top networks.
The costs and benefits of Saudi-Israeli normalisation
For all the hype about the potential normalisation of ties between Saudi Arabia and Israel, it remains vastly unclear whether the United States — the indispensable enabler and guarantor of such a deal — is willing or able to accept the kingdom’s conditions to reach an agreement.
In return for its cooperation, Saudi Arabia wants from Washington a formal defence pact, assistance in building a civilian nuclear programme, and expedited access to high-end US weapons, including F-35 fifth-generation fighter aircraft.
Policymakers in Washington and the Middle East have been busy talking about the possibility of Saudi Arabia normalizing its ties with Israel in return, in part, for a formal defense pact with the United States. Receiving far less attention is a critical question, at least for Riyadh: Would such a move jeopardize Saudi Arabia’s recent diplomatic accord with Iran?
Of all the challenges to Saudi Vision 2030, arguably none is greater than Iran’s threat to Saudi national security. To succeed, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman must protect the kingdom, which will require not only fortifying its defenses against further Iranian and Houthi attacks but also establishing a level of deterrence against Tehran.
The future of America's Middle East posture is now
With its strategic prioritization of the Indo-Pacific and European theatres, the United States has had to significantly adjust its defense posture in the Middle East through new concepts and procedures to safeguard collective security interests.
The result is at least the beginning of a more dynamic and flexible approach to military deployment in the US Central Command (CENTCOM)’s Area of Responsibility. Instead of emphasising large and permanent basing, the United States will surge assets and resources from other locations depending on threats and needs.
A defense treaty is not how Biden should fix the Saudi relationship
The United States has likely reached a crossroads in its relationship with Saudi Arabia. President Joe Biden can reconcile with Riyadh and use its influence to reshape the Middle East to Washington’s liking and stabilize the global energy markets. Or else the Saudis most probably will tie their fortunes much closer to China, thus complicating America’s top foreign-policy priority.
Effectiveness, not size, key to US involvement in Middle East
In the summer of 2016, I was honoured to be asked by former US national security advisor Stephen Hadley and former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright to help design a wargame, or a simulated crisis, to test whether more or less US engagement in the Middle East would be more beneficial for US interests and regional security.
The crisis revolved around a fictitious incident at sea between Saudi and Iranian naval forces. We postulated that several small attack craft belonging to the Iranians confronted a Saudi frigate in the Arabian Gulf southwest of the island of Abu Musa.
The false promise of Washington’s foreign military sales reforms
Over the past few weeks, the US State Department and the US Defense Department released separate but similar statements about the changes each organization has instituted to the Foreign Military Sales, or FMS, process. There are 80 recommendations coming out of the Pentagon, but in short, they all advocate for less bureaucracy and more speed.
Saudi Arabia can alleviate US concerns over its civilian nuclear energy program. Here’s how.
Saudi leaders have stepped up their plans for developing peaceful nuclear energy, inviting technical bids to the planned construction of two 1.4 gigawatt-electric nuclear reactors and restating the kingdom’s intention to use domestic uranium resources for producing low-enriched uranium as nuclear fuel.
Defense Rapid Reaction: Proposed reforms to the U.S. Foreign Military Sales process
In the latest installment of the Defense Rapid Reaction series, experts from MEI’s Defense & Security Program provide their views on what reforms to the U.S. Foreign Military Sales process could or should accomplish and how an improved approach to approving foreign arms sales can strengthen U.S. relations with international partners and allies.
Should the US be wary of Chinese military power in the Middle East?
It is not difficult to see why US officials view China’s increasing influence in the Middle East with greater concern.
Through investments, trade, arms sales, and lately diplomacy, China has patiently built a strategic sphere of influence in the region that is only going to grow and more seriously challenge America’s regional position and interests.
But will China set off alarm bells in Washington and attempt to solidify its regional clout by establishing a permanent military presence in the region?
