To what degree, if at all, will the regional alliance prove effective in deterring Iran? Is the U.S.-led anti-Iranian axis a not-to-be-missed opportunity for Israel or, quite the opposite, a hands-tying trap?
It's a trap. The carrots the White House is offering can be more readily achieved after victory over Hamas. Stand firm in the face of all danger and the result will be a better future for all.
Considering how the Saudi military performed as part of the U.S. coalition in the first Iraq War and recently in its war in Yemen, it’s unclear what the Kingdom brings to the table on the security angle.
Given how the U.S. withdrew support for Saudi Arabia in Yemen and its decision to withhold certain munitions from Israel currently, not to say the straight jacket it imposed on Ukraine, our reliability as a military partner - one that is increasingly becoming the embodiment of an unhelpful penchant to “self-deterrence” - can reasonably be called into question.
And, while they can’t say so publicly for a variety of reasons, the Sunni states not already subjugated to Iran all wish to see Hamas destroyed. In the world of the “strong horse”, Israel must enter Rafah and finish off Hamas.
In the Middle East, you don’t get points for moderation or pulling your punches - a lesson that “enlightened” Westerners refuse to accept in our narcissistic belief that everyone wishes to be like us. In that sense, Israel is the West’s only real bridge to the region, having as it does one foot in the West and the other in the Levant. Instead of taking advantage of Israel’s role as a state dragoman, the West lectures and hectors it unproductively.
In my view, the answer to the U.S. offer is a polite “not at this time” and the justification must be that the hostages have suffered enough - and if the U.S. does have actionable intel on their whereabouts, the IDF will cooperate with our Seal or Delta Force teams in their rescue.
The overall narrative must be: Hamas cannot use the continuing war crime of hostage taking to immunize it from the consequences of another war crime, the brutal murder of civilians. To allow Hamas to survive in any form is to make a mockery of international law to the detriment of all law abiding states. Is that really the world the West wishes to usher in?
As an American ashamed of Biden’s current policies I can not advise Israel to count on US promises of "future" assistance which may not come to pass. As commented above
Down here, in far-flung Whanganui New Zealand, a petition was voted on in City Council, to stand for a ceasefire. It's a lovely word, and to the non-Israeli, non victim-of-terrorists - it's a word that offers a garden of sweet fragrant flowers..... But many of us know that terrorists don't ever cease their fire: hence the name "terrorist". As US scrambles to offer to 'broker' deals, and other nations discuss and propose and negotiate, at the end of the day, rockets will still fly - from Gaza into Israel. Get a grip West.
"Israel can say yes to regional defense, but not at the cost of our freedom of action."
Respectfully, Michael, this is a fundamentally misguided perspective. It is in the nature of any kind of treaty that it limits freedom of action. The upside is, of course, having a coalition of allies. Ben Gurion and Abba Eban were correct in their approach and in placing supreme value on Israel's normalisation as a Middle Eastern power. How do you think Israel's greatest leaders would have reacted to such an offer?
Consider that despite being the world's pre-eminent military power and having a veto in the UNSC, the USA has always tried to build coalitions to fight and support its wars. The military capacity of its NATO allies in expeditionary warfare has always been quite negligible but Washington understood that value of moral support and shared ownership of a military campaign. Those allies may not have moved the needle in military power, but they very much moved the needle on the political front.
Wars are, of course, a tool to achieve political aims. What we witness now in Gaza, is a perfect case example of masterful military tactics, combined with complete lack of political vision or strategy. It was Sun Tzu, who wrote: "Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat." That is what is happening.
Like McNamara's useless bodycount metrics in Vietnam, Israel has defined its own useless tactical measure of success - the "brigade structures of Hamas". We are told that only by going into Rafah can we "put out the last 20% of the fire" and finally, once and for all, destroy the few remaining "brigade structures of Hamas." 18 of 24 have already been destroyed, we are told. Victory is within reach.
Anyone with eyes to see realises that this "strategy" is bullshit. Most towns in Gaza have already been "cleared" of "the brigade structures of Hamas", only for those terrorists to miraculously reappear in their hundreds as soon as the IDF has left. Towns that have been taken at a cost of hundreds of soldiers' lives and thousands of wounded, plus the trashing of Israel's international reputation (I do not mention the harm to civilians, which is entirely the responsibility of Hamas), have been merely converted from Hamas-controlled towns to Hamas-controlled rubble. If you want a metric on how things are going, I suggest you look at the terms Hamas is offering for hostages and Israel's most recent desperate offer that was nevertheless rejected by Hamas. Do you think our leverage is increasing or decreasing?
Washington is offering Israel a golden bridge out of the Gaza mud in which it has entrapped itself. What is on offer? Nothing less than the small chance to grab a kind of victory from the jaws of defeat, "a peace treaty between us and Saudi Arabia, an inter-Arab force to rebuild and restore order to Gaza following Israel’s withdrawal, and—perhaps most attractively— a NATO-like alliance of Middle Eastern countries as a strategic bulwark against Iran." Wow.
What do we need to give up to attain that miracle? A bloody and endless whac-a-mole in Gaza in pursuit of a bullshit slogan of "complete victory" that keeps Netanyahu on life support for a few more months or years.
The trap to be avoided is not the trap of a regional military alliance against Iran. It is the trap into which Israel's political and military leadership has blindly led it in Gaza.
As to an Israeli/Saudi peace treaty, that is a positive, but doesn't do much to address the real problem: Iran. It seems the Saudis would actually find an Israeli alliance more compelling if Israel decimated Hamas. As to an "inter-Arab force to rebuild and restore order to Gaza", when that force comes face-to-face with the brutality and dedication of Hamas, what then? The PA/Fatah's experience in 2007 might be instructive.
The "NATO-like alliance of Middle Eastern countries" is, as noted, the most intriguing suggestion, but the devil is in the details. Will Arab and Western nations really send their soldiers to die in defense of Israel when the next proxy attack from Gaza, the West Bank, or Lebanon occurs? It seems we have precedent that warrants skepticism, including UNSC Res. 1701 which charged the UN with keeping Hezbollah behind the Litani. Nor does the recent U.S. abandonment of its allies in Afghanistan portend well.
It is reasonable to be skeptical but you have to choose between imperfect options.
Israel/Saudi treaty is major if it is friendly and leads to people-to-people communication (like UAE) and minor if it is unfriendly (like Egypt and Jordan). I suspect it will be somewhere between those poles.
I wouldn't overstate the importance to the Saudis of Israel "decimating" Hamas. (Decimating is a pretty good description of what the IDF has been doing, but I presume you mean eradicating.) They certainly don't want the Islamists to win but they also know that their population is highly sensitive to perception of harm to civilians in Gaza (they are all watching Al-Jazeera so you can imagine how this war looks to them). They definitely care about being perceived by their population as "defenders" of the Palestinians.
Israel's role in a NATO alliance of ME countries would be more like the US's in the actual NATO. Israel is vastly superior in pure military terms. The benefit to Israel - aside from diplomatic - would be in strategic depth, along the lines of what we saw with Iran's missile attack, but also with respect to intelligence assets.
Thanks for your excellent analysis of Israel’s dilemma. Israel has a more dire enemy than Hamas, Hezbollah, or Iran which is the rift between secular or non-Jewish Israelis and its far-right Ultra-Orthodox population. There can be no strategy as long as there are two Israels - secular-socialist vs. theocratic-fascist.
Michael mentions how the U.S. naively assumes everyone in the region wants to be like us. Israel made a similar mistake with its Orthodox population assuming they would assimilate and share the vision of a modern, secular nation. That did not happen. To paraphrase the warning: “When fascism comes to Israel, it will be carrying the Torah and warped in a flag bearing the Star of David.”
Yes, a mutual defense pact is a trap because nobody can defend Israel from itself and that is where the existential crisis really lies. There can be no clear strategy for Israel’s defense until Israel confronts its internal divisions and fragmented national identity.
Amen ! As long as Moshiachs arrival is awaited by the ‘true believers’ Israel will remain riven. The secular are unable and unwilling to swallow such puffery any longer!
I have many Israeli friends who are secular or non-Jewish or National Religious or Haredi. I feel like I have a pretty good grasp of each of the sectors, which, of course, blur into one another at the fringes. (The exception is the Arab sector where I don't feel my small number of friends constitutes a reasonable sample.)
The Jewish people has always had a tendency to factionalise, but I don't think the divisions are currently as deep as your comment implies. Israel's political leadership has made hay out of divisions (for many of them, it is their source of power) but at the grassroots, the past thirty years has been a story of convergence.
Perhaps, but I am witnessing some very extreme hard right statements from members of Netanyahu's cabinet suggesting 'purification' or ethnic cleansing of the Israel from the river to the sea.
I am suggesting that this "convergence" may not be in Israel's overall best interests where all Jews are getting painted with the far right Zionist brush. The Islamists and Zionists have a lot in common, too much so to cohabit the same space.
I hope you are right about the shallow depth of the divisions, but the spotlight of world opinion is bright on Israel and all its blemishes will be exposed for all to see. Antisemitism is a deeply embedded archetype and easily triggered as we are seeing on college campuses worldwide. "Never waste the opportunity of a crisis." It might be time to reassess how much the Israeli population wants to "converge" with the religious far right.
The far right party in Israel is "Otzma Yehudit". Currently they are more popular than they've ever been with polls projecting 9 seats (out of 120), so 7.5% support. This is large for them but not a big fraction of the electorate. Hopefully, they will return to the obscurity from whence they came but even they don't routinely use terms like "purification". Possibly you are consuming English-language media, which routinely highlights any extremist statements from Israeli politicians but these do not reflect normality.
I do not accept your contention that Islamists and far-right Zionists have a lot in common. I can't stand Itamar Ben Gevir, the leader of that party, but even the fringiest of fringe figures in Israel does not believe in suicide bombings, raping and kidnapping, let alone human shields. They are not a death cult. Certainly, they do want to see Israel annex the West Bank and reject the idea of creating a State of Palestine alongside Israel on ideological grounds (most Israelis currently reject it on security grounds, which is a different thing.) So long as there is perceived to be (I share this perception) no mainstream support for peace on the Palestinian side, Israel will have to control the WB so the debate is rather academic.
I get most of my information from Haaretz and Al Jazeera and consume it with a grain of salt.
The far right may not openly use the term "purification" but their actions such as blockading aid trucks and statements about occupying Gaza and the West Bank imply that an ethic cleansing (or genocide) must occur. I suggest the same is true about the various Islamists and the Iranian influencers regarding Israel.
So I would like your advice as to what actions can happen to break this zero sum standoff between hardline religious Zionists and Islamists? How does Iran's influence in arming Sunni extremists in the region play into all of this? How does Israel do what needs to be done to ensure peace without incurring the wrath of the liberal West? How does the U.S. avoid being drawn into another endless war in the Middle East? How does Israel prevent becoming an international pariah while playing by Hamas rules? Are there any Palestinian Arab leaders who can fill the vacuum and envision an alternative plan of action for the currently stateless Arab population? Obviously the status quo is no longer an option but what is Israel's vision for a secure future?
Haaretz and Al Jazeera? Respectfully, John, there isn't enough salt in the sea. For fact-based coverage of Israel in English, I suggest Times of Israel. France24 also good.
There is literally zero support for genocide in Israel. I don't believe you could find 0.01% of the Jewish population in Israel who believe that Arabs should be killed. The far right fringe view (Otzma Yehudit) is that they should be "encouraged to leave voluntarily". Obviously, that is a ridiculous take but you can't say it is remotely comparable to the likes of ISIS, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Houthis, Hamas and all the rest of them.
There is no standoff between hardline nationalist Jews and Islamists. The hardline nationalist Jews are exciting for Haaretz and Al Jazeera to highlight but they are a marginal force. Remember Israel has time and again withdrawn from territory in the historic "Land of Israel" in Sinai, Lebanon and Gaza, as well as all the populated areas of the WB. The hardline nationalists protested and one of them even killed a Prime Minister but there was never mass terrorism or suicide bombings or any of that kind of thing. If Israel has the chance to trade land for peace with the Palestinian movement, it will do so. The key is that peace is on offer.
Thus, the standoff is an internal Palestinian one between those who would accept an Arab state alongside a Jewish state and those who do not. The rejectionist faction has been predominant for over 100 years and it seems that it dominates today also. The closest the two sides ever got to resolving the conflict was in the 1990s and early 2000s and it was entirely derailed by Hamas and Islamic Jihad in the "Second Intifada" which was a series of over 100 suicide bombings that killed over 1000 Israelis. It seems like one motivation for Hamas to launch a war in 2023 was the prospect of Israel making peace with Saudi Arabia, a deal that would have included some kind of pathway towards a Palestinian state.
In answer to your questions:
How does Iran's influence in arming Sunni extremists in the region play into all of this?
Hamas are Sunni but Hizbollah and Houthis are Shiite. Generally Iran is a destructive force and should be isolated while we wait for regime change.
How does Israel do what needs to be done to ensure peace without incurring the wrath of the liberal West?
Israel and the West need to encourage the development of a coexistence and peace-oriented Palestinian movement. Not sure how this is done but that should be the aim.
How does the U.S. avoid being drawn into another endless war in the Middle East?
Containment of Iran. There is no-one else with the will and capability to start a big war.
How does Israel prevent becoming an international pariah while playing by Hamas rules?
Israel cannot play by Hamas rules. It is bound by international humanitarian law. It will be a pariah anyway for the same reason that Jews have always been pariahs.
Are there any Palestinian Arab leaders who can fill the vacuum and envision an alternative plan of action for the currently stateless Arab population?
Difficult to tell. People speak of Marwan Barghouti but I don't know enough about him to know if he has what it takes. Arafat was really the father of the Palestinian movement with enormous credibility and still didn't manage to commit fully. Currently, the Palestinian public is a long way from accepting the two states for two peoples formula.
Obviously the status quo is no longer an option but what is Israel's vision for a secure future?
Most visions of peace have collapsed in the reality of the Middle East. I think Israelis are resigned to the fact that - as was the case on Oct 7 - only the IDF stands between the Jewish people and annihilation.
As in sport, the best defense is a strong offense. Tyrants only respect strength, not weakness. Why do you think Hamas sent is killers in the first place? They saw the U.S. and Israel as weak. The pullout out of Afghanistan was amateur hour and Israel’s internal dissention was noticed by others.
No, just accept it, as my mother, who lived in British Palestine often said, there will never be peace in that region.
It is abundantly clear that the Obama/Biden Admin went all in on Iran and now are caught in an appeasement scenario they cannot get out of without looking ridiculous. Having had actual IRGC spies in the admin certainly doesn’t help. This admin will not be remembered for astute foreign policy; it will be remembered for massive overreach and actually breaking the law. They accuse Trump of being a dictator but time and again, the overreach via COVID Mandates, student loan forgiveness etc are struck down by the judiciary. Sadly they break the law again by giving US$ to the PA despite the Congressionally passed Taylor Force Act, force social media censorship and continue to try to expand the executive branch and federal government, a huge risk to democracy.
If there is any truth to the opinion that maybe Obama is still holding the "Biden strings" or maybe not, another look back at history regarding how well Obama/the U.S. kept their promises of providing security to Israel against terrorism from Gaza, in exchange for Israel's complete withdrawal in 2005. Where was the U.S. when Hamas was in the midst of its bloody coup in Gaza? followed by years and years of tunnel construction (regularly reported to the U.N.), arms and missle and rocket smuggling, weekly rockets into Sderot and other nearby Israeli communities, and other regular and consistent aggressive actions? "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, and expecting different results." Einstein would have made a good Israeli president!!
It's been my 5 decade+ observation that Arab countries routinely snatch defeat from the hands of victory. Not only can they not play nice with others, there is plenty of bickering, in addition to back and forth altercations among themselves. And don't get me started on how the USA is nothing more than a fickle and unreliable ally, at best. Israel, go your own way. Do what is best for you.
It's a trap. The carrots the White House is offering can be more readily achieved after victory over Hamas. Stand firm in the face of all danger and the result will be a better future for all.
Considering how the Saudi military performed as part of the U.S. coalition in the first Iraq War and recently in its war in Yemen, it’s unclear what the Kingdom brings to the table on the security angle.
Given how the U.S. withdrew support for Saudi Arabia in Yemen and its decision to withhold certain munitions from Israel currently, not to say the straight jacket it imposed on Ukraine, our reliability as a military partner - one that is increasingly becoming the embodiment of an unhelpful penchant to “self-deterrence” - can reasonably be called into question.
And, while they can’t say so publicly for a variety of reasons, the Sunni states not already subjugated to Iran all wish to see Hamas destroyed. In the world of the “strong horse”, Israel must enter Rafah and finish off Hamas.
In the Middle East, you don’t get points for moderation or pulling your punches - a lesson that “enlightened” Westerners refuse to accept in our narcissistic belief that everyone wishes to be like us. In that sense, Israel is the West’s only real bridge to the region, having as it does one foot in the West and the other in the Levant. Instead of taking advantage of Israel’s role as a state dragoman, the West lectures and hectors it unproductively.
In my view, the answer to the U.S. offer is a polite “not at this time” and the justification must be that the hostages have suffered enough - and if the U.S. does have actionable intel on their whereabouts, the IDF will cooperate with our Seal or Delta Force teams in their rescue.
The overall narrative must be: Hamas cannot use the continuing war crime of hostage taking to immunize it from the consequences of another war crime, the brutal murder of civilians. To allow Hamas to survive in any form is to make a mockery of international law to the detriment of all law abiding states. Is that really the world the West wishes to usher in?
As an American ashamed of Biden’s current policies I can not advise Israel to count on US promises of "future" assistance which may not come to pass. As commented above
Down here, in far-flung Whanganui New Zealand, a petition was voted on in City Council, to stand for a ceasefire. It's a lovely word, and to the non-Israeli, non victim-of-terrorists - it's a word that offers a garden of sweet fragrant flowers..... But many of us know that terrorists don't ever cease their fire: hence the name "terrorist". As US scrambles to offer to 'broker' deals, and other nations discuss and propose and negotiate, at the end of the day, rockets will still fly - from Gaza into Israel. Get a grip West.
Biden has picked up where Obama left off.
Providing “defense” from attacks but never engaging in deterrence through offensive attacks, because they want to avoid escalation.
It was the premise of JCPOA: allow Iran to pursue peaceful nukes and it will join other peace loving nations, because the alternative is war.
Such a stupid argument.
If Obama doesn’t see this today, he is either stupid (which I doubt very much) or he is a Muslim Botherhood sympathizer.
"Israel can say yes to regional defense, but not at the cost of our freedom of action."
Respectfully, Michael, this is a fundamentally misguided perspective. It is in the nature of any kind of treaty that it limits freedom of action. The upside is, of course, having a coalition of allies. Ben Gurion and Abba Eban were correct in their approach and in placing supreme value on Israel's normalisation as a Middle Eastern power. How do you think Israel's greatest leaders would have reacted to such an offer?
Consider that despite being the world's pre-eminent military power and having a veto in the UNSC, the USA has always tried to build coalitions to fight and support its wars. The military capacity of its NATO allies in expeditionary warfare has always been quite negligible but Washington understood that value of moral support and shared ownership of a military campaign. Those allies may not have moved the needle in military power, but they very much moved the needle on the political front.
Wars are, of course, a tool to achieve political aims. What we witness now in Gaza, is a perfect case example of masterful military tactics, combined with complete lack of political vision or strategy. It was Sun Tzu, who wrote: "Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat." That is what is happening.
Like McNamara's useless bodycount metrics in Vietnam, Israel has defined its own useless tactical measure of success - the "brigade structures of Hamas". We are told that only by going into Rafah can we "put out the last 20% of the fire" and finally, once and for all, destroy the few remaining "brigade structures of Hamas." 18 of 24 have already been destroyed, we are told. Victory is within reach.
Anyone with eyes to see realises that this "strategy" is bullshit. Most towns in Gaza have already been "cleared" of "the brigade structures of Hamas", only for those terrorists to miraculously reappear in their hundreds as soon as the IDF has left. Towns that have been taken at a cost of hundreds of soldiers' lives and thousands of wounded, plus the trashing of Israel's international reputation (I do not mention the harm to civilians, which is entirely the responsibility of Hamas), have been merely converted from Hamas-controlled towns to Hamas-controlled rubble. If you want a metric on how things are going, I suggest you look at the terms Hamas is offering for hostages and Israel's most recent desperate offer that was nevertheless rejected by Hamas. Do you think our leverage is increasing or decreasing?
Washington is offering Israel a golden bridge out of the Gaza mud in which it has entrapped itself. What is on offer? Nothing less than the small chance to grab a kind of victory from the jaws of defeat, "a peace treaty between us and Saudi Arabia, an inter-Arab force to rebuild and restore order to Gaza following Israel’s withdrawal, and—perhaps most attractively— a NATO-like alliance of Middle Eastern countries as a strategic bulwark against Iran." Wow.
What do we need to give up to attain that miracle? A bloody and endless whac-a-mole in Gaza in pursuit of a bullshit slogan of "complete victory" that keeps Netanyahu on life support for a few more months or years.
The trap to be avoided is not the trap of a regional military alliance against Iran. It is the trap into which Israel's political and military leadership has blindly led it in Gaza.
I share Amb. Oren's skepticism.
As to an Israeli/Saudi peace treaty, that is a positive, but doesn't do much to address the real problem: Iran. It seems the Saudis would actually find an Israeli alliance more compelling if Israel decimated Hamas. As to an "inter-Arab force to rebuild and restore order to Gaza", when that force comes face-to-face with the brutality and dedication of Hamas, what then? The PA/Fatah's experience in 2007 might be instructive.
The "NATO-like alliance of Middle Eastern countries" is, as noted, the most intriguing suggestion, but the devil is in the details. Will Arab and Western nations really send their soldiers to die in defense of Israel when the next proxy attack from Gaza, the West Bank, or Lebanon occurs? It seems we have precedent that warrants skepticism, including UNSC Res. 1701 which charged the UN with keeping Hezbollah behind the Litani. Nor does the recent U.S. abandonment of its allies in Afghanistan portend well.
It is reasonable to be skeptical but you have to choose between imperfect options.
Israel/Saudi treaty is major if it is friendly and leads to people-to-people communication (like UAE) and minor if it is unfriendly (like Egypt and Jordan). I suspect it will be somewhere between those poles.
I wouldn't overstate the importance to the Saudis of Israel "decimating" Hamas. (Decimating is a pretty good description of what the IDF has been doing, but I presume you mean eradicating.) They certainly don't want the Islamists to win but they also know that their population is highly sensitive to perception of harm to civilians in Gaza (they are all watching Al-Jazeera so you can imagine how this war looks to them). They definitely care about being perceived by their population as "defenders" of the Palestinians.
Israel's role in a NATO alliance of ME countries would be more like the US's in the actual NATO. Israel is vastly superior in pure military terms. The benefit to Israel - aside from diplomatic - would be in strategic depth, along the lines of what we saw with Iran's missile attack, but also with respect to intelligence assets.
Thanks for your excellent analysis of Israel’s dilemma. Israel has a more dire enemy than Hamas, Hezbollah, or Iran which is the rift between secular or non-Jewish Israelis and its far-right Ultra-Orthodox population. There can be no strategy as long as there are two Israels - secular-socialist vs. theocratic-fascist.
Michael mentions how the U.S. naively assumes everyone in the region wants to be like us. Israel made a similar mistake with its Orthodox population assuming they would assimilate and share the vision of a modern, secular nation. That did not happen. To paraphrase the warning: “When fascism comes to Israel, it will be carrying the Torah and warped in a flag bearing the Star of David.”
Yes, a mutual defense pact is a trap because nobody can defend Israel from itself and that is where the existential crisis really lies. There can be no clear strategy for Israel’s defense until Israel confronts its internal divisions and fragmented national identity.
Amen ! As long as Moshiachs arrival is awaited by the ‘true believers’ Israel will remain riven. The secular are unable and unwilling to swallow such puffery any longer!
Hi John. Thanks for your reply.
I have many Israeli friends who are secular or non-Jewish or National Religious or Haredi. I feel like I have a pretty good grasp of each of the sectors, which, of course, blur into one another at the fringes. (The exception is the Arab sector where I don't feel my small number of friends constitutes a reasonable sample.)
The Jewish people has always had a tendency to factionalise, but I don't think the divisions are currently as deep as your comment implies. Israel's political leadership has made hay out of divisions (for many of them, it is their source of power) but at the grassroots, the past thirty years has been a story of convergence.
Perhaps, but I am witnessing some very extreme hard right statements from members of Netanyahu's cabinet suggesting 'purification' or ethnic cleansing of the Israel from the river to the sea.
I am suggesting that this "convergence" may not be in Israel's overall best interests where all Jews are getting painted with the far right Zionist brush. The Islamists and Zionists have a lot in common, too much so to cohabit the same space.
I hope you are right about the shallow depth of the divisions, but the spotlight of world opinion is bright on Israel and all its blemishes will be exposed for all to see. Antisemitism is a deeply embedded archetype and easily triggered as we are seeing on college campuses worldwide. "Never waste the opportunity of a crisis." It might be time to reassess how much the Israeli population wants to "converge" with the religious far right.
The far right party in Israel is "Otzma Yehudit". Currently they are more popular than they've ever been with polls projecting 9 seats (out of 120), so 7.5% support. This is large for them but not a big fraction of the electorate. Hopefully, they will return to the obscurity from whence they came but even they don't routinely use terms like "purification". Possibly you are consuming English-language media, which routinely highlights any extremist statements from Israeli politicians but these do not reflect normality.
I do not accept your contention that Islamists and far-right Zionists have a lot in common. I can't stand Itamar Ben Gevir, the leader of that party, but even the fringiest of fringe figures in Israel does not believe in suicide bombings, raping and kidnapping, let alone human shields. They are not a death cult. Certainly, they do want to see Israel annex the West Bank and reject the idea of creating a State of Palestine alongside Israel on ideological grounds (most Israelis currently reject it on security grounds, which is a different thing.) So long as there is perceived to be (I share this perception) no mainstream support for peace on the Palestinian side, Israel will have to control the WB so the debate is rather academic.
I get most of my information from Haaretz and Al Jazeera and consume it with a grain of salt.
The far right may not openly use the term "purification" but their actions such as blockading aid trucks and statements about occupying Gaza and the West Bank imply that an ethic cleansing (or genocide) must occur. I suggest the same is true about the various Islamists and the Iranian influencers regarding Israel.
So I would like your advice as to what actions can happen to break this zero sum standoff between hardline religious Zionists and Islamists? How does Iran's influence in arming Sunni extremists in the region play into all of this? How does Israel do what needs to be done to ensure peace without incurring the wrath of the liberal West? How does the U.S. avoid being drawn into another endless war in the Middle East? How does Israel prevent becoming an international pariah while playing by Hamas rules? Are there any Palestinian Arab leaders who can fill the vacuum and envision an alternative plan of action for the currently stateless Arab population? Obviously the status quo is no longer an option but what is Israel's vision for a secure future?
Haaretz and Al Jazeera? Respectfully, John, there isn't enough salt in the sea. For fact-based coverage of Israel in English, I suggest Times of Israel. France24 also good.
There is literally zero support for genocide in Israel. I don't believe you could find 0.01% of the Jewish population in Israel who believe that Arabs should be killed. The far right fringe view (Otzma Yehudit) is that they should be "encouraged to leave voluntarily". Obviously, that is a ridiculous take but you can't say it is remotely comparable to the likes of ISIS, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Houthis, Hamas and all the rest of them.
There is no standoff between hardline nationalist Jews and Islamists. The hardline nationalist Jews are exciting for Haaretz and Al Jazeera to highlight but they are a marginal force. Remember Israel has time and again withdrawn from territory in the historic "Land of Israel" in Sinai, Lebanon and Gaza, as well as all the populated areas of the WB. The hardline nationalists protested and one of them even killed a Prime Minister but there was never mass terrorism or suicide bombings or any of that kind of thing. If Israel has the chance to trade land for peace with the Palestinian movement, it will do so. The key is that peace is on offer.
Thus, the standoff is an internal Palestinian one between those who would accept an Arab state alongside a Jewish state and those who do not. The rejectionist faction has been predominant for over 100 years and it seems that it dominates today also. The closest the two sides ever got to resolving the conflict was in the 1990s and early 2000s and it was entirely derailed by Hamas and Islamic Jihad in the "Second Intifada" which was a series of over 100 suicide bombings that killed over 1000 Israelis. It seems like one motivation for Hamas to launch a war in 2023 was the prospect of Israel making peace with Saudi Arabia, a deal that would have included some kind of pathway towards a Palestinian state.
In answer to your questions:
How does Iran's influence in arming Sunni extremists in the region play into all of this?
Hamas are Sunni but Hizbollah and Houthis are Shiite. Generally Iran is a destructive force and should be isolated while we wait for regime change.
How does Israel do what needs to be done to ensure peace without incurring the wrath of the liberal West?
Israel and the West need to encourage the development of a coexistence and peace-oriented Palestinian movement. Not sure how this is done but that should be the aim.
How does the U.S. avoid being drawn into another endless war in the Middle East?
Containment of Iran. There is no-one else with the will and capability to start a big war.
How does Israel prevent becoming an international pariah while playing by Hamas rules?
Israel cannot play by Hamas rules. It is bound by international humanitarian law. It will be a pariah anyway for the same reason that Jews have always been pariahs.
Are there any Palestinian Arab leaders who can fill the vacuum and envision an alternative plan of action for the currently stateless Arab population?
Difficult to tell. People speak of Marwan Barghouti but I don't know enough about him to know if he has what it takes. Arafat was really the father of the Palestinian movement with enormous credibility and still didn't manage to commit fully. Currently, the Palestinian public is a long way from accepting the two states for two peoples formula.
Obviously the status quo is no longer an option but what is Israel's vision for a secure future?
Most visions of peace have collapsed in the reality of the Middle East. I think Israelis are resigned to the fact that - as was the case on Oct 7 - only the IDF stands between the Jewish people and annihilation.
As in sport, the best defense is a strong offense. Tyrants only respect strength, not weakness. Why do you think Hamas sent is killers in the first place? They saw the U.S. and Israel as weak. The pullout out of Afghanistan was amateur hour and Israel’s internal dissention was noticed by others.
No, just accept it, as my mother, who lived in British Palestine often said, there will never be peace in that region.
It is abundantly clear that the Obama/Biden Admin went all in on Iran and now are caught in an appeasement scenario they cannot get out of without looking ridiculous. Having had actual IRGC spies in the admin certainly doesn’t help. This admin will not be remembered for astute foreign policy; it will be remembered for massive overreach and actually breaking the law. They accuse Trump of being a dictator but time and again, the overreach via COVID Mandates, student loan forgiveness etc are struck down by the judiciary. Sadly they break the law again by giving US$ to the PA despite the Congressionally passed Taylor Force Act, force social media censorship and continue to try to expand the executive branch and federal government, a huge risk to democracy.
..... it is a "trap."
One matter what Israel does they WILL be blamed.
Rule#1 Its always Israel's fault.
Rule #2 In the event it is not Israel's fault...see Rule #1.
If there is any truth to the opinion that maybe Obama is still holding the "Biden strings" or maybe not, another look back at history regarding how well Obama/the U.S. kept their promises of providing security to Israel against terrorism from Gaza, in exchange for Israel's complete withdrawal in 2005. Where was the U.S. when Hamas was in the midst of its bloody coup in Gaza? followed by years and years of tunnel construction (regularly reported to the U.N.), arms and missle and rocket smuggling, weekly rockets into Sderot and other nearby Israeli communities, and other regular and consistent aggressive actions? "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, and expecting different results." Einstein would have made a good Israeli president!!
It's been my 5 decade+ observation that Arab countries routinely snatch defeat from the hands of victory. Not only can they not play nice with others, there is plenty of bickering, in addition to back and forth altercations among themselves. And don't get me started on how the USA is nothing more than a fickle and unreliable ally, at best. Israel, go your own way. Do what is best for you.
Agree with you 100%.
Ceding operational freedom for a yet to materialize regional defense plan is lunacy
Penetrating analysis.
Absolutely a trap. Biden has revealed his hand. Cannot risk more entanglement with the United States and its anti Israel Arabistsm