Gaza war 'pause' reflects changed Middle East dynamics
International unease at the extent of Israel’s aggression and the resilience of Palestinian fighters on the ground has helped transform the region’s politics
Lina Jaradat
Israel's bombing was too aggressive, and then its ground campaign faltered, while a unified Arab response and wider international unease have transformed international politics in the region.
Gaza war 'pause' reflects changed Middle East dynamics
A ceasefire in Gaza is inevitable because Israel's stated goal of eliminating Hamas was never realistic.
For weeks, a ceasefire was rejected by principal Western backers of Israel, and observers were beginning to think it would be impossible to achieve. However, over time, it became clear that it was, in fact, the only way forward.
For the past week, a "pause" has been observed to allow for a hostage exchange, leading to cautious optimism that this would pave the way to a more concrete ceasefire.
There was a string of important factors that led to the "pause" agreement.
First, initial support for Israel's military assault on Gaza waned after the horrific images and videos of slaughtered and maimed Palestinians, particularly children, were broadcast to the world by journalists on the ground.
Palestinians leaving the north stand on the Salaheddine road in the Zeitoun district on the southern outskirts of Gaza City on November 25, 2023, on the second day of a truce between Israel and Hamas.
Israel’s military shortcomings surprised its allies – even the United States – prompting them to reconsider the extent of their support for its "right to defend itself" after seeing the sheer volume of destruction in Gaza.
Israel's refusal to adhere to international law and consider Arab initiatives toward a two-state solution or any form of any independent Palestine has also been exposed during this violent episode.
The spectre of a permanent ceasefire has propelled a political solution forward, leading many to believe it to be an inescapable reality. As the Arab world has demonstrated more assertiveness, Palestinian-Israeli dynamics have shifted and are entering a new phase.
This leads to crucial questions: What are the underlying principles of the ceasefire, and what conditions are necessary to maintain it?
The spectre of a permanent ceasefire has propelled a political solution forward, leading many to believe it to be an inescapable reality.
Arab diplomatic prowess
The Arab world has demonstrated remarkable cohesion during Israel's war on Gaza.
On their part, Egypt, Jordan and the Gulf states have firmly rejected Israeli aspirations to force Palestinians to relocate from Gaza to the Sinai and from the West Bank to Jordan.
The scale of Israel's destruction, along with the rhetoric of Israeli leaders and officials, have clearly demonstrated genocidal intent and possible ethnic cleansing, as noted by many scholars and analysts.
Palestinians leaving the north walk through the Salaheddine road in the Zeitoun district on the southern outskirts of Gaza City on November 25, 2023, on the second day of a truce between Israel and Hamas.
These countries, who are ideologically opposed to Hamas, were initially taciturn in their reaction to Israel's initial assault on Gaza after 7 October. However, their position hardened once they realised Israel's objective to expel as many Palestinians as possible from Gaza to the Sinai and possibly Palestinians in the West Bank to Jordan afterwards.
This would pose a grave threat to the security of Arab countries, particularly neighbouring nations, and so Arab countries teamed up to reject this plan. Since then, Arab leaders have been vocal in their opposition to Israel's indiscriminate bombing of Palestinian civilians. They have repeated their calls for Israel to adhere to international and humanitarian law and have stated that a two-state solution must be pursued.
While careful to avoid upsetting the US, Arab states have also not shied away from pointing out Washington's support for Israel's war, particularly its failure to ensure Israel adheres to international law.
After an Arab-Islamic summit in Riyadh on 11 November, the nations involved were pivotal in shaping political decision-making in key global capitals.
While careful to avoid upsetting the US, Arab states have also not shied away from pointing out Washington's support for Israel's war, particularly its failure to ensure Israel adheres to international law.
Israeli's military strategy neutralised
Israel's ground offensive has been a complete failure.
While a thorough examination of its strategies on the ground has yet to be conducted, it seems that the Israeli army was not prepared for the actual ground battles they encountered. It appears there may have been difficulties in re-assigning fire support and close air support tasks.
On their part, Palestinian fighters demonstrated strength on multiple fronts. They were resilient in the face of the Israeli army's substantial firepower, boldly engaged with armoured units, and successfully thwarted Israeli advances.
This implies that they made effective use of a highly decentralised command-and-control system. This approach posed significant challenges for the Israeli army.
A Palestinian youth walks inside a tunnel used for military exercises during a weapon exhibition at a Hamas-run youth summer camp in Gaza City July 20, 2016.
The use of tunnels by Palestinian fighters introduced a new dynamic to the conflict, complementing the traditional above-ground tactics with extensive use of various forms of firepower. They also had secured supplies of significantly improved weaponry, putting high-value Israeli targets within reach.
The Israeli army failed to adapt to evolved Palestinian urban warfare tactics, and its lack of familiarity with the terrain has proven to be a significant challenge.
Palestinian factions successfully drew the Israeli army into close-range engagements — a tactic that Israeli forces have struggled to adapt to.
The Israeli army failed to adapt to evolved Palestinian urban warfare tactics, and its lack of familiarity with the terrain has proven to be a significant challenge.
Iran's position
Iran's stance on a ceasefire is complex and layered. Amir-Abdollahian's recent visit to Beirut on 22 November has shed some light on the position Tehran plans to pursue.
The visit — which preceded the pause and hostage swap — coincided with Lebanon's Independence Day. The visit seemed to be an attempt to consolidate Iran's influence in the region — particularly through Lebanese border conflicts and the unfolding crisis in Gaza.
Iran's approach — especially in distancing itself from Operation Al-Aqsa Flood and exercising its influence to reign Hezbollah military escalation in — appears to be an attempt to gain American favour and position itself as a neutral mediator, potentially opening doors for new regional roles and partnerships.
Amir-Abdollahian's meetings in Beirut were also notable for who they included. He focused on key figures like Hezbollah's Hassan Nasrallah, Palestinian Islamic Jihad's Ziyad al-Nakhalah, and Hamas's Khalil al-Hayya, bypassing formalities with Lebanese leaders.
This sent a strong message suggesting a desire to reinforce Hezbollah's dominance in Lebanon and display a form of diplomatic assertiveness or disdain towards other political groups.
Afterwards, Amir-Abdollahian visited Qatar, one of the leading countries mediating the ceasefire, demonstrating Iran's insistence on participating in the ceasefire discussions.
In Doha's capital, he met with Ismail Haniyeh, head of Hamas's politburo, who had not participated in prior negotiations regarding the ceasefire.
During a press interview, Amir-Abdollahian emphasised Tehran's support for the truce and its role in helping achieve it via the involvement of Iran's President Ebrahim Raisi.
It was part of an effort to end the violence against Palestinians and came alongside Tehran's coordination with other Islamic nations, including initiatives at the Arab-Islamic Summit and engagements with the BRICS bloc of nations, as well as with Egypt and countries in Latin America.
When questioned about Iran's response if the Palestinian resistance sought to widen the conflict, Amir-Abdollahian said that the future of the Palestinian people should be determined in accordance with international law, reinforcing Iran's support for the Palestinian cause and highlighting Hezbollah's regional influence.
He stressed that Hezbollah was established in response to repeated attacks on Lebanon and claimed that Iran does not use proxy groups to further its interests.
Amir-Abdollahian also asserted that Hamas was stable and in control of Gaza, successfully managing the war despite US support for Israel. He said eradicating Hamas was impossible, stating that Gaza's future should be decided by its own people and political groups and not by the US.
This looked like an attempt to reassert Iran's influence in the region via Hamas, which was significant before 7 October, before Tehran distanced itself from the attacks.
Iran is also manoeuvring elements of Islamic Jihad into southern Lebanon, potentially influencing the stability of Israel's northern front. Tehran's apprehension about replicating the Gaza ceasefire in southern Lebanon stems from its non-compliance with existing international resolutions.
Consequently, Operation Al-Aqsa Flood has compelled Tehran to move away from its long-held stance of outright opposition to US and Israeli policies, just as it has pressured Israel to reconsider its position of unassailable military strength amid the complex redrawing of regional and international politics over Gaza.
Iran's approach — especially in distancing itself from Operation Al-Aqsa Flood and exercising its influence to reign Hezbollah military escalation in — appears to be an attempt to gain American favour and position itself as a neutral mediator, potentially opening doors for new regional roles and partnerships.
Recipe for a sustained ceasefire
The extended pause in Israel's war on Gaza seems to have the necessary elements to be sustained. It not only offers Israel's right-wing government a way out of the stalemate in military confrontation but helps it save face by portraying the return of Israeli hostages as an achievement after it came under massive domestic pressure.
Israelis attend a demonstration, calling for the return of loved ones who were taken as hostages by Hamas in Tel Aviv, Israel, October 14, 2023.
Maintaining the ceasefire is crucial to help manage international outrage over Israel's indiscriminate bombing campaign that led to the catastrophic destruction of large swathes of Gaza.
The ceasefire also presents a strategic opportunity for the Palestinian resistance factions and the Palestinian Authority to push for political gains.
There is now a legitimate Arab platform to resume talks over the fundamentals of the issue, circumventing the international criticism and accusations directed at Hamas for its links to radical political Islam. Political tracts for a lasting peace that have long failed the region could now gain traction.
This period could set the stage for establishing conditions for a new phase, potentially leading to a future sustainable security and political framework.
The brief disruptions in prisoner exchanges and the continued reliance on Egyptian and Qatari mediators by both Israel and Hamas reinforce an implicit commitment to the ceasefire despite public threats to resume hostilities.
The pause in fighting is likely to continue, driven by Israel's need to secure the release of all prisoners. It could also be an opportunity to change the future.
