The New York Times Places Israel In A “Better Strategic Position”

“There is little doubt that Israel is in a better strategic position today than it was before the Oct. 7 attacks.”

– Amanda Taub, “The Interpreter,” New York Times, November 4, 2024, “Can Israel and Iran Find a New Balance of Power to Stabilize the Mideast.”

 In a 7,000-word essay in Foreign Affairs that was published on the eve of the Hamas invasion of Israel in October 2023, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan wrote that the Middle East is “quieter than it has been for decades.”  Sullivan based his dubious case on a “lengthy truce in Yemen,” and a “cessation of attacks on U.S. troops by Iran-backed militias.”

Sullivan could not have anticipated the Hamas invasion, but he must be faulted for failing to understand the explosive situation that existed in the Middle East.  He also can be faulted for asserting that the Biden administration had “deescalated” crises in Gaza.  Sullivan received a great deal of criticism last year from the New York Times for his premature victory lap in the Middle East.

Now it is the New York Times’ turn to misread the unpredictable turmoil in the Middle East.  In its description of Israel’s “strategic position,” the Times has forgotten that prior to October 7, Israel’s borders were quiet, particularly the northern border with Lebanon.  Israel had domestic concerns due to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s efforts to weaken the Israeli Supreme Court and his formation of the most right-wing government in Israel’s history.  But Israel’s economy was strong, and its economic dealings with various Arab countries due to the Abraham Accords was offering a measure of stability to the region.  There was even discussion of an Israeli-Saudi Arabian accord that would include a U.S. defense agreement with Saudi Arabia.  Such an accord would have strengthened Israel’s diplomatic position throughout the region, and weakened Iran’s standing in the Middle East and the Persian Gulf.  A possible accord is very unlikely at this juncture, and several Persian Gulf countries are trying to improve relations with Iran, which will make Israel’s (and America’s) strategic position more difficult.

Now a war with Hamas that was supposed to last several months, if not several weeks, is headed into its 14th month, and what had been a localized conflict on Israel’s southern border finds the Jewish nation fighting a regional war on several fronts.  There is no end in sight in the war with Gaza, with Hezbollah in Lebanon, or with the Houthis in Yemen.  Israel and Iran have exchanged serious military attacks, and there is terrible anticipation in Israel regarding Iran’s next move.  There is no reason to believe that the tit-for-tat military exchanges of the past several months between Israel and Iran have ended.  Like the aftermath of the October War in 1973, Israel’s psyche has been badly scarred.

In addition to the unpredictable scenarios that Israel is facing on all of its borders, the country has become an international pariah as a result of its genocidal campaign in Gaza.  Only the United States fully supports Israeli policy, and there are signs that the United States is prepared to reconsider its full-scale military support for Israel.  There are serious critics of that open-ended military support for in the Senate as well as in the House of Representatives.  Civil servants at key agencies, including the Department of State and the Agency for International Development have signed statements endorsing reduced military assistance for Israel, and Congressional staffers have put pressure on senators and representatives to become more even-handed when discussing the Middle East.  If Vice President Kamala Harris is elected president, there is some reason to believe that Harris will reopen the question of U.S. military support for Israel.  Conversely, if she loses the election, it will be due in part to the Biden administration’s support for Israel.

Netanyahu will ultimately be held accountable for the policy and intelligence failures associated with October 7, and probably won’t survive politically in the wake of a cease-fire with Gaza and Hezbollah, let alone an actual armistice or peace treaty.  Unfortunately, there is no reason to believe a successor to Netanyahu will be more moderate or conciliatory.  In fact, Israel’s politics and politicians have moved to the right on all issues involving the Arabs and the Palestinians.  Israeli efforts to displace Palestinians on the West Bank and to make Gaza uninhabitable will only worsen the regional and domestic environments, and contribute to Israel’s isolation.

Israel had dominant military power in the region before October 7th, and it continues to have dominant military power  Once again, we have a demonstration of the fact that military power alone does not determine strategic power or influence.  The United States should have learned these lessons in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan.  Israel should have learned these lessons in Lebanon in the 1980s and in 2006 as well as the Intifada’s with the Palestinians over the years.

The post  The New York Times Places Israel In A “Better Strategic Position” appeared first on CounterPunch.org.