Before the Rafah border crossing stood a man called Antonio Guterres, the United Nations Secretary General. He has modest demands: that the crossing be opened for a first batch of aid to be delivered. Food and fuel to ease the suffering of those living in the hell that is Gaza.
Of course, he would have wanted to demand an immediate ceasefire and for politics to take its path and end the war in this long and bitter conflict. However, more than anybody, he knows how weak the international organization is at this time. It is incapable of taking the decisions, whose goals are the very purpose for which it was established.
How can the Security Council end the conflict in Gaza when it stood helpless before the horrors of the Russian war in Ukraine? A Ukraine that the Kremlin believes is not even a country, where Russian soldiers are killed by American weapons that Washington is pumping into Ukraine.
The Security Council failed in acting like the safety valve. The war is effectively taking place between the permanent members of the Council even though the West has avoided sending forces to the battle. There is no need for evidence to prove the weakness of the international community.
Guterres also knows the fragility of the Middle East and its endless wars. The UN was incapable of making the concerned parties respect its resolutions over the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. It was also incapable of preventing the United States from invading Iraq and of finding a solution to the tensions over Iran’s nuclear file.
Guterres is aware that the Middle East is living without a safety valve. It can slide into the abyss at any moment. The region is rife with oppression, spite, hatred, deep wounds and frayed nerves. Moreover, it is rife with alarmed armies and roaming militias and drones. Guterres does not have the power to prevent the region from slipping into the abyss. So, he opted for the other role of the UN, that of facilitating the delivery of food, tents, blankets and bandages.
Just a few years ago, Benjamin Netanyahu surveyed the region and was reassured. Lebanon is fragmented and enduring a crippling economic crisis that would make it difficult for Hezbollah to launch a costly confrontation with Israel. Syria is divided between international and regional armies and militias and appears incapable of joining this war.
The understanding with Vladimir Putin allows Israel to wage a long-term, lowkey war against Iran’s attempts to continue to deploy its rockets against the Jewish state. Iraq continues to treat its wounds as it deals with one internal crisis after another. The divide between the Palestinian West Bank and Gaza continues to deepen. The Palestinian Authority has its hand tied and is being weakened and Hamas appeared to be in rush to become embroiled in a new confrontation.
The October 7 operation took place amid this backdrop. It was not a limited attack that demanded a limited and restrained response. The gravity, scale and bloodiness of the operation was apparent from its beginning with the number of victims and hostages it claimed. It exposed the fragility of the Israeli fortress, the weakness of its security agency and the sluggishness of its army in dealing with the surprise.
It revealed that the country, which is armed to the teeth, needed the US president himself to support Israel with his warships and allow it to catch its breath after the image of its deterrence force was shattered and after several settlers were taken hostage and led to Gaza. This is no ordinary test. The Israeli army views this battle as an existential one and the West agrees.
It was evident that the Gaza shock had dimensions beyond the coastal enclave itself. Israel formed a war cabinet to mercilessly retaliate to the attack. The October 7 operation was unprecedented in the history of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and the destructive Israeli response was just as unprecedented.
Amid the open war on Gaza, it appears that the confrontation may spill over into the region. Limited clashes have taken place along the Lebanese-Israeli border. Amercian bases in the region have come under attack. Houthi rockets have been intercepted by American warships. Israel’s repeated strikes against Damascus and Aleppo airports are Israeli warnings to Iran.
It is evident that the region is standing at a crossroads. It cannot tolerate a larger conflict that will have catastrophic human and economic tolls regardless of its outcome. It will be very difficult for the region to coexist with the horrific humanitarian images pouring out of Gaza and for it to stand idly by.
Clearly, Israel is in no mood to ease the tensions or heed calls for a ceasefire. Its political, military and security institutions have been blunt: they want Hamas to pay the price of the shock that it created. They have even threatened to annihilate the group or at least deal it a debilitating blow.
During his tour of the border with Lebanon, Netanyahu made dangerous statements and warnings. He said the Gaza conflict is a “matter of life or death” for Israel. “We will not back down, and we are working on eliminating Hamas,” he added. Moreover, he stated: “If Hezbollah decides to join the war, then it will bring unimaginable destruction to itself and Lebanon.” His remarks reveal that his government is in no way prepared to back down from its decision to wage a land invasion of Gaza with the aim of taking Hamas out of the equation.
The price of Netanyahu carrying out his threats will be costly. It will be costly for Hamas, the civilians and the Israelis. But this Israeli position raises other questions. Will Hezbollah join the war if it sensed that Hamas was really going to be eliminated? Will it take such a decision in spite of the catastrophic situation in Lebanon that will only get worse during a war?
Will rockets be fired from the Syrian front and will the depleted Syrian army be capable of confronting possible Israeli strikes? What about Iran? What will it do if Israel managed to eliminate the Sunni player from the resistance axis? What about the American forces in the region? What will they do if they are attacked or if the war expands? Of course, one has to wonder if Netanyahu would be tempted to attack the Iranian nuclear program itself if the war spills over into the region.
International and regional safety valves are nonexistent. The region is sitting on the edge of the abyss. The decisions that will be taken in the coming days will be difficult and costly. They will determine whether it was too late to prevent the plunge into the abyss.
