War on Gaza and change in equations

Regardless of the outcome of the ongoing war on Gaza, be it a massive ground invasion by Israel or a ceasefire, some points can help depict the current circumstances of the involved players and changes across the Middle East.

Israel’s deterrence power has never been completely reconstructed since the 2006 war. Despite the enormous amount of money that the US and Israel have spent for manufacturing missile shields, the failure of the systems have shattered Israel’s plans to sell them in the global arms market. On the contrary, the power of the missiles of the Palestinian resistance has cemented Gaza’s deterrence power and the coastal enclave is no more a sitting duck for potential Israeli attacks. The casualties are not merely limited to Gaza and they have been inflicted on Israel as well.

The Israeli leaders boast that no Lebanese missile has targeted Israel since 2006 and Hezbollah Secretary General Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah has been living surreptitiously since then. They have used the issue as a propaganda tool for Israel’s deterrence power and sought to exploit it with regard to Gaza. However, no Israeli commander or political leader can ignore the fact that the deterrence created by Hezbollah has turned the prospect of any strike against Lebanon into a nightmare for Israel.

After the Hezbollah leader placed Beirut against Tel Aviv and threatened to retaliate any strike against Beirut with a counterstrike against Tel Aviv, the Palestinian resistance has become able to put forth the Gaza-Tel Aviv equation.

Up until recently, the security overview of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip was open and clear for Israel. Now, Palestinian factions have established security cooperation in the West Bank. In the Gaza Strip, the assassination of head of Hamas’ military wing Ahmed al-Jabari unmasked the extent of the infiltration of Israeli spies. Nevertheless, a change is noticeable. Similar to Israel’s failure to find the location of the detention of its soldier Gilad Shalit in Gaza, the regime is now incapable of finding the launching platforms of the Palestinian rockets.

Although Israel had announced since the beginning of the offensive that it had annihilated the Palestinian rockets, the firing of a missile at Tel Aviv forced Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to escape to the ministry of military affairs’ bunker just in two hours. The capability of the Palestinian resistance to conceal its missile power should be construed as a remarkable development.

The change in the regional balance of power has been the most substantial development since the Gaza war four years ago. At that time, Egypt was the key US ally as Israel’s then-foreign minister announced the Gaza war in the Egyptian capital, Cairo. Back then and even in 2006, the situation enabled the US and its allies to oppose any initiative by the Lebanese and Palestinian resistance movements. Therefore, it was natural for the incumbent governments of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan to establish overt or clandestine alliances with Israel.

Now the situation has changed. The old Middle East order has been replaced with a nascent one, which at least enjoys one definite characteristic. The new governments in Egypt and Tunisia — and in a weaker sense in Yemen and Morocco — have ideological roots. They are also influenced by the public opinion, which is now enraged over the Israeli onslaught on Gaza.

The Arab League (AL) has never taken a step for the Palestinian people. Even four years ago, Egypt and Jordan did not accept to cut or even downgrade their ties with Israel. Although they warned Israel against the ramifications of attacking Gaza, the US managed to silence all those Arab governments in practice.

At the recent meeting of the Arab League foreign ministers in Cairo, the speeches were different from the past and they were so sensational that, according to an Arab commentator, they were reminiscent of Bin Laden’s words. The AL resolution to dispatch a delegation of Arab foreign ministers to Gaza indicates the pressure of the public opinion on the Arab governments. Even those Arab governments that feel no threat from the wave of Islamic Awakening have been compelled to participate in the pro-Palestine initiative.

The new war on Gaza was definitely sparked by the assassination of Ahmed al-Jabari by Israel on November. According to some reports, earlier on that day, Jabari had received a draft truce agreement for three to six months. This is when Israel’s parliamentary elections will finish. The Israeli media have repeatedly pointed out that the war on Gaza is a pretext for Netanyahu to portray himself as the main guardian of the security of Israel and its people so that he can reap what he sowed at the election time. Minister for Military Affairs Ehud Barak is Bibi’s complicit, especially against the backdrop of his declining position in the Labor Party.

Israel thought that killing Jabari will be of little consequence and coasts will be clear after some limited reactions of the Palestinian resistance movement. It never imagined the issue would eventually tempt the Egyptian prime minister and the Tunisian foreign minister to travel to Gaza. Although all the Israeli parties, except for Meretz party, support Netanyahu’s decision to attack Gaza, there is no guarantee for their support when it comes to the outcomes of the war, particularly if Israel’s fatalities rises or the Israeli public opinion turns against the government.

Based on another theory, Israel seeks to test the role of “political Islam” in the newly reformed Arab countries by attacking Gaza and assess the level of sensitivity in those countries. For example, Tel Aviv might have predicted that Egypt will call its ambassador to Tel Aviv and will send him back in a few weeks. It might have imagined that furious statements will just be limited to words and no Arab government will dare to confront Israel in practice. It might also have thought that when it comes to military confrontation, the US and West are all set to forge a cease fire.

During his tour of Asia, the US president reiterated that Israel is entitled to defend itself and noted that he opposes ground invasion to the coastal enclave only because he is concerned about the likelihood of more fatalities among the Israeli troops.

The crushing response of the Palestinian resistance to the Israeli attack has even left the Turkish and Qatari governments in a predicament. These governments spared no efforts to overthrow the Syrian government and supply the insurgents with military and financial support. But when it came to Gaza, Doha and Ankara merely called on the US to take immediate measures to call truce. The predicament also exists for the Hamas leaders overseas. Those who continue resistance in Gaza and fire missiles at Israel are much closer to the Lebanese resistance than those who reside at the ventilated palaces in Doha.