There has been growing uncertainty and turmoil in the world, particularly dominated by the crisis in the Middle East, alongside the war in Ukraine and rising tensions between the US and China. Several developments stand out. In the Middle East, the tragic genocide of Palestinians in Gaza continues, with little effective opposition, even from the majority of Muslim countries. Repressive measures against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank have intensified. Only Hezbollah took action to support Hamas, attempting to pressure Israel into a ceasefire in Gaza and Lebanon. Despite its limited capabilities and distance, the Houthi government has attacked shipping near the Suez Canal and launched occasional missile and drone strikes against Israel, continuing even under repeated aerial assaults from the US and UK. Unlike in 1973, there is no talk of an Arab oil embargo. Instead, OPEC is discussing stabilising global oil supplies in case Israel attacks Iran’s oil installations.
Lebanon, with a more diverse population than Gaza, is facing similar devastation, with attempts to further degrade Hezbollah and divide communities, as Israel did with the PLO in Lebanon in 1982. Iran responded by launching a pre-notified drone and missile strike against Israel.
What lessons can be drawn from these events? Certainly, some of Hamas’s objectives were achieved. Firstly, it disrupted US-Israel plans to resolve the Middle East conflict by sidelining the creation of a UN-recognised Palestinian state in favour of an Israeli rapprochement with the Arab and Muslim world, particularly Saudi Arabia, which was meant to be built on US security guarantees and civil nuclear cooperation. Hamas thrust the Palestinian issue back into the spotlight. Secondly, Israel’s global reputation plummeted, facing legal actions at the ICJ and the International Criminal Court, while protests erupted across the Western world.
External powers and their allies continue to play a dominant role. In 1973, the Arab coalition of Egypt and Syria succeeded in regaining control of the Suez Canal, disproving the myth that Arab armies were no match for Israel, even though they did not recover the Golan Heights. During that conflict, both the US and USSR supplied their respective allies with military aid. When Kissinger initially refused a Soviet ceasefire offer, the USSR threatened to intervene unilaterally to stabilise Egypt’s position. After a brief nuclear-alert tension, the US relented, and Egypt regained the Suez Canal.
The importance of allies remains critical. Since its inception, Israel has benefited from unwavering political and military support from the USA, a backing not shared by frontline Arab nations or those under Israeli occupation after the collapse of the USSR. Iran has been a key supporter of Palestinians, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and militias in Iraq and Syria. However, the power imbalance with the US-backed Israel has meant Iran has acted cautiously. Despite provocations, such as the assassinations of key nuclear scientists, sabotage of nuclear facilities, and recent attacks on its embassy in Damascus and prominent leaders in Tehran, Iran has maintained restraint.
The power of technology in conflict is undeniable. In the 1973 War, President Sadat ensured Egypt’s military had better weapons and training. An Israeli commander recounted how Egyptian forces crossed the Suez Canal, using surprise tactics and anti-tank weapons to counter Israeli armour effectively. However, this technological edge has not been maintained. Iran’s missile forces lack MIRV warheads, and its allies have not been equipped with the anti-aircraft, hand-held missiles necessary to challenge Israel’s air superiority.
Hamas, while surprising Israel, should have used only its trained fighters and ensured no harm to Israeli civilians, capturing them instead for exchanges. This would have minimised later criticism, especially from Western nations, where non-Western lives are often given less weight. By avoiding any action Israel could use to justify its large-scale killings, Hamas could have maintained a stronger moral position. Holding territory and fighting to the last man could have created their own version of Masada, amplifying their cause. Instead, the devastation in Gaza has produced a far greater Masada of suffering. As the UN Secretary-General stated, Hamas’s breakout occurred in a context of prolonged occupation and oppression, similar to other resistance movements in history.
Despite an initial tactical victory, Hamas largely lost the narrative battle in the West. After a second, more substantial Iranian missile strike, Israel vowed a deadly retaliation. Israel has partially succeeded in drawing the US into the conflict, with the Houthis bombed, US ABM ships and troops stationed offshore in the Gulf, and American ABM capabilities deployed against Houthi and Iranian strikes. However, US involvement remains focused on defending Israel, with the recent deployment of the advanced Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system in Israel. While the US does not yet overtly support Israel’s aim to destroy or severely delay Iran’s nuclear capabilities, this remains a key point of contention.
Several conclusions can be drawn from these unfolding events. Firstly, public opinion in the region remains firmly against Israel and its allies, regardless of government stances. Secondly, while the US position is evolving, it appears to lean towards limiting Israel’s response. Thirdly, China and Russia, while having stakes in defusing the crisis, have limited influence in doing so. Fourthly, a state nearing nuclear capability but not yet possessing it is at its most vulnerable, a reality well understood by Iran, Israel, and others. Lastly, history moves slowly, as do the forces of destiny. Though Iran has faced setbacks, it is wise not to underestimate the resilience of a proud and ancient civilisation like Persia. The Iranians, like others in history, are likely to present their own surprises in the future.
Ambassador Tariq Osman Hyder
The writer is a former Ambassador and a Distinguished Visiting Fellow at the National Defence University.