There is already a regional war in the Middle East – can it get any worse?

Jonathan Edwards

A year on from the horrendous Hamas attacks in southern Israel, the regional war which many of us feared is upon us.

Once Israel decided it would invade and destroy Gaza in retribution, it was difficult to see how matters would be contained to the territory of the state of Israel.

The purpose of this article is not to say who is right and who is wrong. There is plenty of commentary on the conflict and views are polarised. Another article picking a side isn’t of any value whatsoever. Rather the focus should be on how all this plays out.

As I write, the Israeli armed forces are engaged in various forms of action within its own borders, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Iran.

Iran has fired missiles successfully at Israel, penetrating its Iron Dome.

We await the response of Israel to these attacks. President Biden’s public intervention that he opposed an attack by the Israeli military on Iran nuclear facilities was important.

As the violence increases so does the power of hard liners on both sides.

Combustible

Most political leaders following the events of October 7 2023 would have resigned. It was an epic failure of security policy. Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, knows once the fighting ends, he will be in deep political trouble. His response is to advance on all fronts. When the fate of a whole region, if not the world, lies in the hands of the ambitions of one person, then the situation is inevitably combustible.

The infiltration of Hezbollah communication technology with exploding bombs, and the decapitation of its leadership and in particular the assassination of its leader Hassan Nasrallah were stunning intelligence successes for Israel. However, their military strategists must have known it would lead to a response by Iran.

In doing so it also undermined the position of the new President of Iran Masoud Pezeshkian and strengthened the position of more hardline elements within the regime. It is reported that the retaliatory air strikes of recent weeks have been ordered directly by the Supreme Leader Ali Khameini himself.

It’s difficult to see how one side lands a decisive blow and everyone holds their breath in the hope that no actor gets desperate.

I thought the suspension of around 30 arms licences by the UK Government to Israel last month was a smart move. Its symbolism was to warn Netanyahu that he hasn’t got a blank cheque from Western powers.

However, the key foreign player for Israel of course is the US who have provided over $23bn in military support in the last year according to the Watson Institute at Brown University.

Confrontation

In a month’s time there could be a new administration elected in the White House itching for a fight with Iran. I’ve met with neo-conservative foreign policy think tanks in the US and they have viewed war with Iran as a desirability for decades. They also view future confrontation with China as inevitable.

Netanyahu is no fool: he would far prefer to have Trump in the White House than Kamala Harris.

Ramping up tensions puts the Democratic nominee in all sorts of trouble and could split her coalition. If she is seen as too supportive of Israel, her “progressive” base dissipates. If she is seen as wavering in support, Trump can mop up those that strongly support Israel amongst the American population.

To counter this, and in response to recent escalatory acts, President Biden has already sanctioned the deployment of thousands more troops, aircraft carriers, amphibious assault ships and fighter jets to the region.

While his aims might have deterrence in mind it creates the foundations for a more interventionist policy by a future President Trump.

In such a scenario how would China react? China and Iran signed a 25-year cooperation agreement in 2021 based on political, strategic and economic relations.

Again, Trump seems obsessed with the need to combat the Chinese challenge to US economic supremacy. The BBC reported that in his last five Presidential election rallies he has mentioned China 40 times.

De-escalation

Looking at matters objectively, the next President of the US must agree a de-escalation road map for the Middle East with Xi Jinping. The US needs to turn the screws on Israel as does China on Iran. Trump is highly volatile and unpredictable; it is unlikely that he views détente with China as desirable. A Trump presidency will want to address the massive trade deficit between both countries (Chinese exports to US outnumber US exports to China three to one) by placing tariffs on Chinese exports. Such an act will inevitably be viewed as hostile in Beijing.

Does China have any major influence over Iran is a valid question. On the one hand de-escalating tensions in the Middle East would be to their benefit due to the near closure of Red Sea trade routes. However, the crisis has enabled them to employ a “wedge” strategy in the region between the US and the Gulf States in particular. The more this goes on the more damaging it becomes to US global authority.

The tragedy in the Middle East could spiral beyond a regional war easily. Without mentioning other flashpoints such as Ukraine and Taiwan, I can’t help but feel that we are facing a very dangerous point. Will future historians view the events we are witnessing today as dominoes falling while the world moves to the brink?

Jonathan Edwards was the MP for Carmarthen East and Dinefwr from 2010 until 2024