People are drawn to strong leaders. Such a leader can either polish the image of his nation or conceal its fragility. He can curb the ambitions of enemies or thwart their plots. His strength offers a sense of invincibility, allowing his people to feel secure and proud. A strong leader imposes security and stability and protects against chaos, while also spreading reassurance and maintaining control over the official narrative.
However, strength alone is not enough for a ruler or leader. What truly matters is how he wields his power. What drives his thoughts and decisions? What is his vision for the country's future and the destiny of its people? Sometimes, history overtakes even the strongest of leaders, reducing him to a mere pawn in the wars of his ancestors, caught in the web of past conflicts and vendettas.
There are times when a ruler's sole focus is on retaining power. He will be content with merely “uprooting the poisonous weeds” that threaten the dignity and survival of his regime. Some believe that powerful leaders seek out war to solidify their legitimacy, using border disputes as a baptism of fire. Yet, in the pursuit of such ambitions, a leader may stretch his country’s forces, pushing them into projects to reshape the region—or even the world—at a cost they can hardly bear.
Vladimir Putin is a strong leader with considerable popularity and a keen awareness of the nuclear button at his disposal. He is a man wounded by the past, driven by a desire to avenge “Holy Russia” against the West, which he believes dismantled the Soviet Union without a single shot.
From his office, he watched as NATO moved its pawns, gradually encircling his country. He deceived the West with his smiles, all the while focusing on rebuilding the “Red Army” to restore Russia’s image and stature. He chose Ukraine as the battleground to launch his most significant challenge against the West. He probably expected Ukraine to collapse quickly and the West to lack the resolve to respond. Yet now, the war is in its third year. Although his forces occupy a substantial portion of Ukraine, he is unable to bring the conflict to an end.
The recent Ukrainian incursions into Russian territory won’t alter the trajectory of wat, but have damaged the image of the Kremlin and its leader. It is no small matter for Stalin’s heir to rely on a North Korean missile or an Iranian drone. Putin cannot afford to lose this war; the stakes are too high for both him and his country. He will push further, perhaps even deeper into the conflict. A strong man capable of shaking the world, but one who now finds himself without a clear solution.
Kim Jong Un is a strong leader. He tends to his missile and nuclear arsenal as a good father would tend to his children. In his country, no one dares to raise a finger in objection, nor are any ambiguous questions asked. The Ukrainian crisis has provided him with an intriguing opportunity; his missiles and ammunition help shield the Russian army from shortages and scarcity. His position within the Russian-Chinese axis is secure, and no force dares to challenge him.
Yet, despite his strength, he has no solution to the problems of poverty, unemployment, and education in his country. While North Korea remains vigilant, its hand on the trigger, South Korea continues to advance in the race for technological and economic development, improving the standard of living for its people.
Israel is a heavily armed state, equipped with a nuclear arsenal and a formidable military machine that leverages technological advancements to enhance its lethal capabilities. Benjamin Netanyahu is a dangerous and skilled strategist who adeptly exploits America’s vulnerabilities when it comes to Israel’s security.
In response to the “Hamas flood,” Netanyahu has inflicted a new catastrophe on the Palestinians, leaving Gaza awash in blood and destruction. He has broadened the scope of targeted assassinations and launched major strikes in Beirut and Tehran, pushing the region to the brink of a devastating regional war, dragging America along with him.
Perhaps the most dangerous aspect of Netanyahu’s policy is his relentless effort to extinguish the idea of a Palestinian state, the only viable path to resolving this chronic conflict in the Middle East. While Israel is a powerful nation, the current government’s approach is shortsighted, laying the groundwork for even more catastrophic wars.
Netanyahu is undeniably strong, but like many strong leaders, he has no real solution.
Hamas is a Palestinian faction deeply rooted in Gaza. Its confrontations with Israel are not surprising given the ongoing injustices against the Palestinians and Netanyahu’s refusal to open any avenues for resolution.
Yehya al-Sinwar, a strong leader of Hamas, delivered an unprecedented blow to the Israeli state. But does Sinwar have a vision for moving beyond the current crisis, aside from waiting for the Biden administration to broker a truce that could mitigate the risk of a regional explosion? What will happen the day after in Gaza, and where does Hamas stand? What about its relationship with the Palestinian Authority and its president? While Sinwar is undoubtedly strong, he lacks a clear solution and seems unprepared to embrace any potential proposals that may arise after a ceasefire.
Iran is a significant player in the region. From the day after the revolution’s victory, it recognized the importance of the Palestinian issue and invested in it without hesitation. The current crisis has demonstrated that Iran has the capability to strike Israel from multiple fronts.
Netanyahu has pushed the situation to its limits. He ordered the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran itself, attempting to provoke Iran into the direct confrontation it has long sought to avoid. Netanyahu understands that if such a confrontation occurs, America cannot remain on the sidelines. He aims to frame the Gaza issue as part of a broader conflict with Iran, encompassing its regional and nuclear ambitions.
Iran holds cards that significantly impact the stability of the region, with its influence in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen being crucial. However, Iran lacks a solution to the broader conflict and has no clear strategy for improving conditions in the territories it influences.
Russia is deeply entangled in the Ukrainian conflict and may find itself forced to escalate or even threaten a nuclear strike to subdue the country. Meanwhile, China shows little interest in taking a leading role in the tumultuous Middle East. As a result, the region is left to await truce negotiations and the efforts of Secretary Blinken, especially as Kamala Harris might benefit from the Biden administration’s success in preventing a descent into chaos.
