 |
|
The cessation of hostilities between Israel and Iran, brokered and announced by the United States, marks a crucial juncture in the protracted and volatile saga that began with Hamas's Operation Toofan al-Aqsa. While the immediate consequences of this conflict are still unfolding and shrouded in the complexities of ongoing geopolitical maneuvering, the long-term ramifications are poised to be significant and potentially destabilizing if not carefully managed. The past 21 months have witnessed a series of military engagements where the Israel Defence Forces (IDF), bolstered by unwavering support from the U.S., have secured a number of tactical victories. However, these victories have come at a considerable cost and raise serious questions about their long-term strategic value and sustainability. In the Gaza Strip, the IDF's military operations have resulted in the severe decimation of Hamas, the militant group that initiated the conflict. Despite this, some Israeli hostages remain in Hamas captivity, casting a shadow over the perceived success of the military campaign and highlighting the challenges inherent in completely eradicating non-state actors operating within densely populated urban environments. In Lebanon, Hezbollah, widely regarded as one of the world's most formidable non-state actors with a substantial arsenal of missiles, has been significantly weakened. The organization's leadership is reportedly in disarray, and its military capabilities have been substantially degraded. However, the extent of this damage and the long-term impact on Hezbollah's ability to operate remain subject to ongoing assessment. In Syria, the regime of Bashar al-Assad, a long-standing adversary of Israel, has been replaced by a weaker Islamist government that poses a diminished threat to Israel's security. While this represents a tactical victory for Israel, it also raises concerns about the potential for instability and the rise of new extremist groups in the region. Yemen's al-Houthi rebels, who managed to disrupt maritime traffic and launch missiles at Israel, have been significantly weakened by the disproportionate military response from the IDF and the U.S. Despite this, the al-Houthis remain a potent force in Yemen and could continue to pose a threat to regional stability. Furthermore, after a period of intense aerial exchanges, Israel and the U.S. have claimed to have "obliterated" Iran's nuclear option, a long-standing concern that has fueled regional tensions for decades. Tehran has also reportedly suffered strategic losses of its missile force and has experienced targeted assassinations of its top military personnel and nuclear scientists. Despite these apparent successes, the long-term implications of these actions remain unclear, and Iran's nuclear ambitions could potentially resurface in the future. Throughout this period, Israel's government has pursued its military objectives with unwavering determination, often disregarding domestic opposition and foreign criticism. The government has also faced scrutiny from international bodies such as the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice, which have raised concerns about potential violations of international law. The resolution of these issues will be critical to ensuring long-term stability and accountability in the region.
The question of West Asia's future remains a complex and multifaceted challenge, fraught with uncertainty and potential pitfalls. As Churchill famously observed, the situation is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma. Despite the dramatic and unprecedented events that have unfolded, the resulting geopolitical shifts are likely to occur gradually over time. With the three main stakeholders – Israel, the U.S., and Iran – all claiming victories and vying for influence over the outcome, managing the potential for blowback and avoiding revanchism will be a formidable task. The putative military victors, namely Israel and the U.S., will likely seek to establish a permanently favorable geopolitical architecture, while the countervailing forces, including Iran, will attempt to transform their military stalemate into a political victory. One of the most pressing challenges will be determining the future course of Iran. As the most populous country in the region, Iran is intrinsically important, and as Israel's most implacable foe, it has historically been a major disruptor and political determinant in the region. Despite its economy being hampered by sanctions and the devastating impact of the recent conflict, Tehran remains a key geo-strategic pivot. While the victors may publicly disavow any intentions of regime change in Tehran, an unrepentant Mullah regime would represent an unfinished agenda for them. Ensuring that Tehran is kept in check regarding its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) ambitions through continued sanctions and strict international inspections will be a primary concern for the U.S., Israel, and pro-West regimes in the region. However, this approach could create an unstable political dynamic, similar to the situation in Iraq between 1991 and 2003 after Saddam Hussein's forces were evicted from Kuwait. Furthermore, Tehran may become a countervailing pole to the Pax Americana in the region, a prospect that is unacceptable to those who advocate for a "winner takes it all" approach in Washington and Jerusalem. Conversely, the establishment of a West-leaning regime in Tehran would be a significant achievement, potentially paving the way for a comprehensive Pax Americana in West Asia, which would allow the U.S. to control the region's vast hydrocarbon resources. In addition, the pent-up Iranian demand for projects, merchandise, and services could be readily exploited by American multinationals. Finally, a friendly government would effectively curb the regional proxies that Iran has cultivated in the past. Therefore, installing a friendly regime in Tehran is of utmost importance to both Israel and the U.S., but this mission presents a significant dilemma. While a large segment of the Iranian population is politically alienated due to corruption, high inflation, and the high-handedness of authorities, they are also likely to resist any foreign occupation and imposed government. As such, a boots-on-ground approach to effect regime change would be counterproductive and must be ruled out. Moreover, the U.S.'s past attempts at forced regime change in Afghanistan and Iraq have proven to be costly and messy failures.
Iran is a vast and complex country with a deeply entrenched government structure. While some exiled Iranian groups, such as Pahlavi Royalists and Mujahedin al-Khalq, exist, their level of local support is highly uncertain, making an externally sponsored takeover unlikely. There is also a significant risk that destabilizing the current regime could unleash centrifugal forces among various ethnic minorities, such as Kurds, Azeris, Arabs, and Sunnis, who constitute nearly 40% of the population. This could potentially lead to a Libya, Sudan, or Somalia-like scenario of anarchy, which is in no one's interest. Consequently, the best possible scenario for the U.S. may be to gradually reorient the current regime. However, this will be a challenging undertaking, as radicals supported by the Republic Guards currently control the parliament and clergy, with the Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, favoring them. Therefore, efforts may be made to exert pressure on the 86-year-old Khamenei, who has been at the helm for 36 years, to either discreetly abandon WMD ambitions or relinquish power and be replaced by a pro-West moderate. While the hardliners in power may resist any change at the top during this critical period, their policies have demonstrably failed. The two front-runners in the contest to succeed Khamenei – a decision that will be made by the Guardian Council – are likely to be the Supreme Leader's son, Mojtaba Khamenei, and Hassan Khomeini, the grandson of Ayatollah Khomeini, the founder of the Islamic Republic. Both are in their fifties. While Khamenei junior offers continuity in terms of lineage and policies, Hassan Khomeini is unburdened by such baggage. As the only transition at the Supreme Leader level occurred 35 years ago, this is largely uncharted territory with serious implications for the country and the region. The resolution of the Israel-Palestine dispute, exacerbated by recent events, also awaits a solution. The recent war with Iran may allow the IDF to refocus its attention on the Gaza situation, where mass starvation and a high death toll among civilians due to Israeli fire create a desperate humanitarian crisis. The occupied West Bank is also facing a deteriorating situation due to the actions of Jewish settlers and the long-suspended transition of the Palestine Authority under President Mohammed Abbas, who is nearing 90 years old. A post-conflict euphoria may tempt the U.S. to revive the controversial idea of mass deportation of Gazans to create an "international riviera." However, even with the war-numbed Gazans desperate for survival, this idea is unlikely to be part of any viable solution.
The end of the war could create an opportunity for Israeli society to return to greater normalcy, fostering an environment for an objective and rational analysis of its recent experiences. The clamor for the release of the remaining hostages is likely to intensify, and the governance and intelligence failings of the current regime may come under intense scrutiny. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's suspended trial on corruption charges may resume, and the economic and social costs of the war may haunt Israel for a considerable time, forcing a necessary reality check. Israel's post-war recovery and political shift towards moderation will be crucial for the expansion of the Abraham Accords. Following this apocalyptic conflict, the West Asian region desperately yearns for peace and stability. If the three main actors, Iran, Israel, and the U.S., can avoid triumphalism and instead embrace moderation and nation-building, this aspiration can be realized. The region and the world would benefit from lower oil prices, smoother logistics, and reduced radicalization and terrorism. However, if these conditions are not met, the region risks reverting to business as usual: a cycle of conflicts punctuated by periods of tense peace. Mahesh Sachdev is a retired Indian Ambassador specializing in West Asia and oil affairs.