February 12, 2025
Nasser Kandil
• Many analysts, commentators, and writers are preoccupied with the statements of U.S. President Donald Trump – perhaps precisely what he intends. His remarks dominate public discourse, diverting attention from real actions and challenges, or creating a pretext for negotiations under the cover of fiery rhetoric. Yet, the region is shaped by tangible power balances and equations that cannot be ignored. These realities – not Trump’s statements – are what ultimately define the emerging landscape. His positions are merely one element in a larger picture, potentially a reaction to unseen dynamics or developments that fail to receive adequate attention from observers, writers, researchers, and policymakers.
• The first pillar of this new reality is what the war – now spanning a year and a quarter – has demonstrated. It concluded with ceasefire agreements in both Gaza and Lebanon, each containing clauses that the occupying entity signed, committing it to withdraw from the territories it seized and to allow displaced civilians to return – without achieving its objective of defeating or disarming the resistance forces that fought it. This underscores Israel’s failure to attain its war goals despite the immense losses it inflicted on the resistance. More significantly, this failure occurred under conditions uniquely favourable to Israel: an extended war duration, unparalleled U.S. military and political backing, and an unprecedented level of brutality and criminality targeting civilians. The aftermath of this war – particularly its impact on Israel’s internal stability, the operational capability of its ground forces, the effectiveness of its Iron Dome, and its standing in Western public opinion – ensures that any future war will be even less capable of achieving the objectives that this one failed to accomplish. This marks the emergence of a crucial new strategic reality: the collapse of the option to resolve the Palestinian issue through military force.
• Any discussion of a new U.S., Israeli, or joint American-Israeli war that ignores this reality is detached from the conditions that shape war decisions. Yet Israel cannot afford to acknowledge the failure of its military option, as doing so would signify the end of the foundational doctrine that has sustained its existence. At the same time, admitting this reality would mean recognising the necessity of a political resolution – one that entails accepting a Palestinian state on the 1967-occupied territories. However, the current political climate within Israel is undergoing a historic transformation, driven by demographic shifts, the ideological evolution of Zionism, successive military failures, and generational changes in political and religious leadership. This transformation has resulted in a new Israel, dominated by settler-driven policies in the West Bank and Jerusalem. Consequently, the emergence of an Israeli political elite willing to embrace a political settlement and a Palestinian state is nearly impossible. At best, such an effort would lead to internal Israeli civil strife.
• Understanding these profound shifts is essential to grasping the extent of the deadlock gripping the region. It also explains the shift in the U.S. position – from its traditionally neutral public posture between its Arab allies and Israel (despite always siding with Israel in practice through financial, military, and diplomatic support) to an outright alignment with Israel’s extreme positions, which even the most submissive Arab leaders cannot publicly endorse. This American shift continues to intensify, and Trump’s statements must be viewed in this context. Israel can no longer tolerate the illusion of an American-Israeli divergence, which previously served to sustain the mirage of negotiations and a political settlement, drawing broad political and popular segments into this false hope and turning them against the resistance in the process.
• The deadlock is deepening, and alignments are becoming more defined. No grand settlements or major wars appear on the horizon. A comprehensive settlement lacks an Israeli partner, and the U.S. has irreversibly abandoned its role as a mediator. At the same time, Israel lacks the military power necessary to wage and win a large-scale war. This creates an ideal environment for political and security chaos – unless the Arab and Islamic world adopts a decisive course of action. British journalist David Hearst once described a previous era, shaped by King Faisal, where the Arab world wielded the oil weapon as leverage.
• Within this deadlock, a Lebanese faction has emerged, placimg the blame for the war on the resistance – echoing the now-defunct Arab negotiation delusion. Yet Lebanon itself will soon be forced to reassess its position amid a shifting Arab landscape, replacing the old order that once fueled a wave of blind hostility toward the resistance. This hostility now stands devoid of an Arabian purpose, even as its proponents remain under the illusion that they are on the verge of delivering a decisive blow.
