Alwaght- Following the inappropriate and irrational fragmentation of the Ottoman Empire in the wake of the World War I, the flames of religious, ethnic and sectarian disputes have joined forces with nationalism to engulf the whole West Asia region. The rich oil reserves and the region’s strategic significance have added to the problem, driving such powers as the US, Britain and the Soviet Union to use the regional conflicts for their own interests. The global powers have also imported the self-made crises to West Asia.
The establishment of the Israeli regime was one of such problems imposed on the region after the World War I with the excuse of soothing the Jewish communities after the atrocities of the Nazi Germany’s Adolf Hitler against them, though this process had already been arranged and started in the beginning of twentieth century, leading to thousands of the Jews moving to the Palestinian territories. But the Israeli regime was such a misfit in West Asia that the Muslim countries’ attention was called to a transnational threat. Meanwhile, the Arab states, due to their strong religious and nationalistic sensitivity to the Sunni Arab identity, have shown a more powerful reaction.
They launched an attack on the Israeli regime on May 15, 1948, a day after the declaration of the establishment of the regime. The attacks have been pursued for the next years, finally reaching a climax in the war of 1973 in which the Arab states stood unified against Tel Aviv and its allies. It was in this time that they unanimously proclaimed their first ever oil embargo. The embargo has left grave consequences on the global economy, pushing the West to think about arrangements to prevent such an incident next times. In fact, the unity of the Muslims in addition to posing certain dangers to the Israeli regime has brought about severe repercussions for Tel Aviv’s allies. Therefore, emergence of divisions among the Muslims was a way to hit their unity. The first step was normalization of the existence of the Israeli regime in the region for the Muslims. Recognition of Tel Aviv regime was one of the solutions. Camp David Peace Accords, reached in 1978 between the Israeli regime and Egypt which was the toughest Arab country in confrontation of Tel Aviv, have been considered a great achievement for the regime because it was the first time that the Israeli regime was recognized by an Arab and Muslim country.
The Islamic Revolution of 1979 in Iran, which caused the Islamic Republic not recognizing Tel Aviv as a state, has branded Iran as the Israeli regime’s top enemy in the region. Iran phobia and Shiite-phobia scenarios have been planned following rise of such pictures of Iran, aiming at whitewashing the Israeli regime which was a significant enemy for the Arab states. Now that the blazes of massive conflicts among the Muslim countries are fueled in Syria and Iraq and have led to critical conditions, we would shed light on what advantages Tel Aviv could take of such disputes and also what challenges it could face as a result of the conflicts.
The Israeli challenges
Although ISIS’ threats against the Israeli regime have been well below what was expected, the terror group in a recent video in Hebrew has voiced support for the Palestinians’ third intifada. A terror attack inside the Israeli regime has followed the video publishing. Even if ISIS is an Israeli-bred terrorist group, it, at the end, is seen as presenting a potential threat to Tel Aviv.
The consequences of battle against ISIS terrorists could anyway leave impacts on Palestine. The victory of the Muslim front in its battle against the terror group could be uplifting for the Palestinians. On the other hand, should ISIS gain more strength; it could help formation of radical groups inside the Palestinian territories.
The Palestinians who joined ISIS could make a resource for production of radical anti-Israeli ideologies.
Also, once the crisis in the region winds down, the Palestinian cause would resurface as a central issue of the Muslim world.
Israeli benefits from West Asia’s crisis
Though the crisis in the region is not without challenges for Tel Aviv, but the regime takes further advantages as the critical situation rolls on.
The greatest benefit the crisis in Syria and Iraq is carrying for the Israeli regime is the Palestinian cause being driven out as a Muslim world’s priority. The ISIS’ crisis has developed to so severe and massive a degree that it has even busied the most important regional countries.
The Iran phobia and Shiite-phobia project, promoted for years, have caused discords in the recent regional crises. Iran’s disengagement from the Western pressures as a result of nuclear deal has sent the Israeli regime, Turkey and Saudi Arabia concerned, and at the same time Iran’s conflicting interests with those of the three countries in the Syrian case caused the Islamic unity to be set aside in favor of Tel Aviv.
The regional security threats have justified further weapons purchases from the US. The delivery of the Russian air defense systems S-300 to Iran has provoked the Israeli regime in to purchasing several modern F-35 warplanes in a bid to counter Iran’s newly-received missile systems. Tel Aviv also insists on purchasing arms that Washington is unwilling to deliver to the regime.
Should the Syrian political future leads in President Bashar al-Assad’s fall as the Western-Arab axis demands, the greatest benefit would go to the Israeli regime, because after Saddam Hussein’s toppling, one of Tel Aviv’s regional enemies has disappeared, and now with the fall of the Syrian government, the linking circle between Iran, Lebanon’s Hezbollah and Palestine would be cut off.
The current situation in the region has pushed the regional countries in to thinking that the Israeli regime’s measures are justified as part of confrontations of the threats posed by the takfiri groups. Now the opportunity is seen as ripened for diplomatic moves in a region in which Tel Aviv enjoys relatively no recognition. Diplomatic links with Saudi Arabia against Iran, emergence of a suitable atmosphere for mending relations with Turkey and opening a trade office in the UAE are the diplomatic moves made by the Israeli regime.
The Israeli crimes in Palestine have been eclipsed in the public opinions’ minds by the crimes committed by ISIS.
The source of conflicts in West Asia would shift from the Israeli regime to the Muslims themselves.
The balance of power in the region is shifting in favor of Tel Aviv as the regional states are, on the one hand, engaged in Syria’s crisis and, on the other hand, are involved in a covert rivalry with each other to achieve their own interests. Furthermore, all of the countries engaged in the Syrian crisis, as the regime’s enemies and rivals, would be debilitated. Once they are enfeebled, their support for Palestine is downgraded.
From now on, the Israeli measures against the Palestinians could be painted to the global minds as being a battle fought against the extremist Islamists and not the innocent people.
Also, the conflicting Iran-US’ interests in Syria and disagreement over stay of President Assad in power have relaxed a Tel Aviv’s fear of a possible Tehran-Washington’s closeness. A US-Iran crisis would guarantee the US’ backing for the Israeli regime against Iran.
The obvious point is that none of the countries engaged in the West Asia’s crisis have benefited from, and would benefit from, the ongoing crisis more than Tel Aviv. The side effects of challenges are very limited and maintainable on the regime but the advantages and achievements are huge. The protraction of the crises and the competitions and tensions among the regional powers are in Tel Aviv’s best interests and against the rivaling sides’ interests. The ideal is that the regional countries reach an understanding of each other’s interests, to prevent their enfeeblement against the Israeli regime.