Avoiding a Widened Middle East Conflict: A Crucial Imperative

Every day, there is a growing fear that the Israel-Hamas conflict in Gaza could escalate into a full-scale war in the Middle East.

Lebanese Foreign Minister Abdallah Bou Habib expressed this concern to CNN's Christiane Amanpour, stating, "We are extremely worried about it. We do not want any escalation of the conflict. A regional war would be detrimental to everyone - Lebanon, Israel, and the surrounding countries." He emphasized that a regional war would have negative consequences for all parties involved.

However, a more expansive conflict may not align with the vital national interests of any of the major powers in the region, which could potentially prevent such a disaster. Despite key states and extremist groups appearing to be nearing a tipping point, there is still hope that the severe economic, political, and military repercussions of an escalation may serve as a deterrent.

Nearly every day is marked by a new outbreak of violence. This past Thursday, the US launched a strike in Baghdad that targeted a leader of an Iran-backed militia, held responsible by Washington for attacks on US personnel in the region. US troops in Iraq and Syria, whose mission is to combat ISIS, have faced repeated rocket and drone assaults from proxies of Iran.

Tensions are escalating between Israel and Hezbollah, a pro-Iranian group, along the Israel-Lebanon border. Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant warned US envoy Amos Hochstein that time was running out to establish a "new reality" on the northern border of Israel in order to enable residents to return to their homes. Additionally, Israel is suspected of an attack on senior Hamas leader Saleh Al-Arouri in Beirut, triggering anger from Hezbollah leaders who control the area where the attack occurred.

In another concerning development, US forces have recently destroyed three boats owned by Houthi rebels in the Red Sea, in response to a string of attacks on commercial ships. Central Command stated that American helicopters were attacked first and acted in self-defense. In response to these incidents, the US and approximately twelve allies have formed a maritime task force to safeguard commercial vessels in vital sea lanes in the region, as some shipping companies have rerouted their ships on a longer, less cost-effective route around Africa.

Additionally, a double bombing near the burial site of former Iranian intelligence chief Qasem Soleimani, recently claimed by ISIS, has further destabilized an already tense region and could heighten internal pressure on Iran's government as it strategizes its broader moves in the Middle East.

Why a wider war could be avoided

Numerous influential figures in the region, such as Israel, Iran, and Hezbollah, may be most invested in maintaining a high level of tension that falls just short of outright war. However, the concern for the US is that such dangerous maneuvering could ignite another conflict in the Middle East, potentially involving American forces. This is a scenario the Biden administration is eager to avoid, particularly in an election year.

Norman Roule, former US national intelligence manager for Iran, told CNNs Jake Tapper on Wednesday that there are no clear strategic drivers for the main regional or external actors to start a regional war, as it would disrupt their significant political and economic stability. However, he also pointed out that Iran and its proxies have incentives to increase the intensity and frequency of their current actions against Israel, which could potentially lead to a conventional conflict that everyone wishes to avoid.

The situation is extremely dangerous as rapid deterioration could occur at any time on multiple fronts. Hezbollah's arsenal of missiles poses a threat to Israeli civilians, heightening the potential for increasingly hazardous clashes. An attack by Iranian proxies against US forces could prompt President Joe Biden to take more aggressive military action. Similar choices would have to be made if a US or allied ship in the Red Sea is seriously damaged, with the recent entry of an Iranian destroyer into the area raising the risk of misunderstandings with rival navies.

The large-scale and brutal Hamas operation, along with Israel's response that has caused extensive damage to civilian neighborhoods in Gaza, has triggered a series of events that highlight the tensions in the Middle East. These subsequent tensions have disrupted a period of relative calm in the region, during which the Trump and Biden administrations and their allies attempted to foster closer ties between the Gulf States and Israel. The resulting tensions appear to have dashed hopes in the White House for a potential easing of hostilities with Iran, and although Bidens political opponents criticize him for not taking a tougher stance on Iran and its nuclear program, this may no longer be a viable option.

A geopolitical circuit breaker?

The key stakeholders' desire to prevent conflict could serve as a crucial intervention. Considering the potential impact of a regional war and the far-reaching economic, military, and political consequences it would trigger, each player has strong incentives to steer clear of the edge.

Israel is currently engaged in a heated conflict in Gaza that its government anticipates will last for several months. The potential for a full-scale war with Hezbollah raises concerns about even more severe attacks on Israeli cities compared to the rocket assaults initiated by Hamas last year. The recent strike against Arouri, carried out by Israel and confirmed by a US official, may have been a risky move with hopes of avoiding a major retaliation from Hezbollah. While the rest of the world worries about the escalation of the conflict, Israeli leaders believe they are already entangled in a regional war due to the multiple threats they are facing.

The United States is stepping up its efforts to prevent the situation from escalating further. Secretary of State Antony Blinken is returning to the region under mounting pressure to ease tensions between Israel and Hezbollah, as Lebanon, which is heavily influenced by Hezbollah, fears a potential catastrophe that could exacerbate its fragile political, economic, and humanitarian conditions. American forces in Syria, Iraq, and at sea are at risk, while the Biden administration aims to reestablish a level of deterrence against Iranian proxies without triggering a regional crisis.

Washington and its allies have recently released a statement, cautioning Houthi rebels in Yemen about potential repercussions if they continue their attacks on shipping in the Red Sea, which is a crucial waterway for the global economy. According to CNN reporters Natasha Bertrand and Kevin Liptak, the White House is growing increasingly impatient with the rebels. While direct strikes on their land-based launch sites would draw allied forces further into the conflict and risk disrupting a ceasefire in Yemens civil war, President Biden faces a political dilemma. He is frequently criticized by Republicans for being too lenient on Iran and its allies, but any escalation in the region could also reinforce GOP claims that the 81-year-old Democratic president lacks the capacity to lead effectively. The concern for Biden is that the United States has a history of struggling to assert its influence in the Middle East. It's easier said than done.

Iran may benefit more from using its extensive network of proxy groups to exert indirect pressure on Israel and the United States rather than engaging in direct conflict, which could have serious military and economic consequences and increase political pressure on the clerical regime, already under strain following recent bombing attacks. However, there is a risk that such political pressure could compel leaders to adopt a more aggressive stance abroad in an attempt to ease domestic challenges. Just 15 months ago, Iran's clerics faced widespread protests sparked by the death of a woman in the custody of the country's feared morality police.

Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies professor Vali Nasr expressed his concern about current tensions in a CNN interview with Becky Anderson, stating that he feared an expanded conflict. He also suggested that Iranians were not seeking an escalated conflict and believed that Israel was attempting to provoke Iran into direct confrontations. Nasr added that there was a belief in Iran, Hezbollah, and other regional governments that the United States and President Biden did not desire a larger war.

Despite this, Nasr indicated that the calculations could change if Washington failed to prevent Israel from escalating the conflict. He pointed to the attack on the Hamas leader in Beirut, which the US claimed to have been unaware of beforehand, as a risky move by the Israeli government. This move could potentially strain relations with the US, especially in light of the White House's calls to ease the intensity of the Gaza operation, which Israel has repeatedly rejected.

Hezbollah, the most influential political player in Lebanon, is essentially an arm of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Despite its substantial arsenal of rockets aimed at Israel, its power could be greatly reduced in a full-scale war, leading to a weakened Iranian regional influence. Hezbollah's leader, Hassan Nasrallah, issued a warning, stating that the killing of Hamas leader Arouri would not go unanswered, and that Israel should expect a "limitless" response if it goes to war with Lebanon.