If both Israel and Hezbollah stand to lose from escalation, then why does it feel like war between them is imminent?
The current escalation between Israeli and Hezbollah forces necessitates immediate action from the international community to prevent a widening of the Gaza war, and the US is positioned in a leadership role to mollify tensions, beginning with diplomatic actions to stabilize the Lebanese-Israeli border, helping to pacify the broader region as a result.
The Oct. 7 Hamas attack against Israel and the latter’s ongoing military operation in Gaza have stalled progress in the development of the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor and raised questions about its prospects for eventual completion. The IMEC faces multiple viability challenges, but none of them are insurmountable; thus, its participants are unlikely to abandon it.
What would it take to start a new Israeli-Palestinian peace process that could actually have the prospect for enduring success? MEI has asked a group of regional and U.S. experts to weigh in.
As the war in Gaza continues to unfold, essential questions about Russian and Iranian support for Hamas remain. They include whether Russia played any role in providing support to Hamas ahead of its Oct. 7 attack on Israel. Evidence available from foreign-language publications in Russian, Persian, Arabic, and Hebrew, as well as those in English, provides provocative leads, which, if accurate, have serious potential implications.
A long courtship
The renewed violence in Gaza could not have come at a less opportune time for the climate agenda in the Middle East. From energy economics to environmental degradation, the ripple effects of conflict will complicate the path ahead.
Oct. 7 sounded the death knell of the Abraham Accords. Yet the end to the initial conceit of the Abraham Accords does not mean an end to the essential role that the Abraham Accords partners can play in helping broker an Israeli-Palestinian agreement.
Outside of the security risks brought about by war, the Israel-Hamas conflict has yet to result in major changes in the regional natural gas market.
Despite the Houthis’ geographical distance from Israel and perceived limited capabilities, the threat they represent is all too real and if underestimated, they have the potential to derail diplomatic efforts and destabilize the region, with potentially catastrophic consequences.
As the Israel-Hamas war enters its fourth week, the Kingdom of Jordan finds itself on the frontline of the conflict and King Abdullah II a central figure in the regional and global diplomatic efforts to contain it. The Hashemite Kingdom braces for a broader conflict and multiple spillover effects, having little leverage and few policy options.
What further diplomatic steps should the U.S. take to respond to the Israel-Hamas war and its broadening regional reverberations? MEI has asked a group of former U.S. ambassadors and senior government officials specializing in the region to weigh in.
Read MEI’s weekly briefing featuring expert analysis of key regional developments for the week ahead.
China has long sought to brand itself as a “neutral” player and force for peace in the Middle East and elsewhere, willing and able to talk to “all sides.” Beijing’s nascent ambition to play the role of peacemaker and its potential to shape regional events was on display when it succeeded last March in brokering the détente between Riyadh and Tehran. The Israel-Hamas war offers no such low-hanging fruit. On the contrary, it poses a major test of China’s Middle East peace diplomacy — and an opportunity to examine some of our own, perhaps faulty assumptions.
Hamas’ murderous raid on Oct. 7, resulting in the deaths of more than 1,300 Israelis, mostly civilians, may well turn out to be a consequential inflection point, having unleashed political and popular forces that could lead in a positive or, just as likely, extremely negative direction.
Expert regional analysis by MEI scholars and contributors.