A Middle East in Accelerated Political Recomposition

The Middle East has traditionally been a region of high-intensity events, but recent months have been particularly dense, marked by an accelerated reshaping of geopolitical power dynamics. The political and military consequences of October 7th have created a genuine shockwave, radically altering the regional landscape.

Genocide in Gaza

PBecause it remains central, we must begin with the situation in the Palestinian territories. In the face of what is increasingly being labeled as genocide by numerous international figures and organizations, the cautious turning away by much of the so-called international community will stand as an indelible stain on contemporary history.

Day after day, bombings continue to rain down massively on Gaza. From the few rare images we receive, one is left to wonder about the reasons for such destructive frenzy, given that the vast majority of buildings have already been reduced to rubble or rendered unfit for any form of social life. With nearly 50,000 deaths reported and famine deeply entrenched, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) informed us in early January that eight infants died of cold in December 2024, offering a stark glimpse of the dire situation faced by the people of Gaza. The only apparent rationale for the Israeli government’s lethal persistence is to render life in Gaza utterly unlivable, to drive out its inhabitants, and to recolonize or even outright annex the territory. This project also represents the ultimate goal of the most hardline members of Netanyahu’s government regarding the West Bank and even East Jerusalem.

These developments serve as a worrying confirmation that international regulatory bodies are in a state of abandonment and that the UN system, as it was built after 1945, has become obsolete, thereby justifying its complete overhaul. Fortunately, in this disastrous context, the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court uphold a semblance of honor by striving to enforce what remains of international law, while grassroots mobilizations around the world are numerous and often massive.

What prevails, however, is not apathy but rather the active complicity of Tel Aviv’s allies. On January 4, it was revealed that the Biden administration approved an $8 billion arms deal with Israel. The decision still requires congressional approval—which is hardly in doubt—ensuring that the war machine will continue to be fueled and the massacre can persist. In this context, the Israeli government’s sense of impunity knows no bounds, which explains its stubborn refusal to consider any form of political solution, despite the fact that we know such a solution remains imperative.

The Fragmentation of the “Axis of Resistance”

The hubris of Israeli leaders’ victory is further fueled by multiple other military operations. Benjamin Netanyahu—claiming, in this instance, to embody the “eternal people” (sic)—boasts of leading Israel on seven simultaneous war fronts: Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, Iran, Shiite groups in Iraq and Syria, and Yemen. The primary danger he repeatedly highlights remains the Islamic Republic of Iran. One cannot help but be struck by the systematic manner in which Israel, routinely disregarding international law, has organized its fight against its adversaries.

The Hezbollah comes first: by killing or maiming hundreds of its cadres through the activation of booby-trapped pagers, followed by the elimination of its charismatic leader, Hassan Nasrallah, in September 2024. These events served as preludes to the ground invasion of Lebanon on September 30 and a campaign of indiscriminate bombings on Lebanese civilians that lasted until the ceasefire on November 27. For Netanyahu, this campaign of terror aims to push the Lebanese to rid themselves of Hezbollah, as he explained in a televised address in early October 2024. Yet how could one imagine, even for a moment, that the Lebanese people, crushed by bombs, would comply with the Israeli Prime Minister’s demands? Nevertheless, Netanyahu’s vision confirms that for Tel Aviv’s leaders, brute force alone governs relations with their neighbors, with no regard for potential political solutions.

This stance is also evident in Syria, where Israeli leaders took advantage of the brief power vacuum following Bashar al-Assad’s flight to conduct over 300 bombings on Syrian military targets and to occupy the Syrian side of Mount Hermon, blatantly violating the 1974 ceasefire agreement. Once again, one needed exceptionally sharp hearing to catch the faint condemnations of these repeated aggressions, which obviously did nothing to deter Netanyahu. Thus, preventive war has become the norm for Israeli leaders—in other words, the assertion of the law of the strongest, the law of the jungle.

However, this policy is more challenging to implement against Iran. As observed twice, in April and October 2024, the cross-border bombings between the Islamic Republic and Israel remained controlled, with both parties knowing their limits and refraining from crossing a tacit red line. The Netanyahu cabinet likely wished to strike harder, but—remarkably—the Biden administration proved deterrent enough to prevent Israeli strikes on Iran’s nuclear or oil facilities. Nonetheless, these operations highlighted the military asymmetry between the two actors, which deeply concerns Tehran’s leaders, especially as Donald Trump’s return to power could further weaken their position.

The overall assessment of these elements, briefly recalled here, demonstrates the weakening of the “Axis of Resistance” patiently built over decades by the Islamic Republic of Iran, in favor of the assertion of the Israeli state’s military superiority. In this sense, it is possible to speak of Israeli hubris, which, however, risks becoming an illusion in the long term if political solutions are not implemented for the various issues discussed. In this severely deteriorated regional context, it is noteworthy that, beyond statements and empty declarations, most Arab states remain remarkably silent, showing no real willingness to influence the situation meaningfully.

The Emergence of a New Syria

The most significant event of late 2024 was, of course, the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime. The lightning offensive by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, originating from Idlib province and reaching Damascus in just twelve days with minimal resistance, surprised even the most seasoned analysts. It highlighted the extent of the Syrian regime’s decay and its complete isolation, as even its so-called elite forces disbanded without putting up a fight.

From a geostrategic perspective, this new situation reinforces earlier observations, as Bashar al-Assad’s Syria was the main supply line between Iran and Hezbollah. This connection has now been severed.

The question now centers on the possible trajectory of Damascus’s new leadership. Their jihadist past is well-documented, but their political evolution is equally notable. Representing a form of Islamist nationalism, they remain rooted in the Islamist movement while also being deeply Syrian, with a primary focus on rebuilding and preserving the country’s unity. Achieving this will require establishing an inclusive government and rebuilding robust relationships with as many international actors as possible. Given the myriad challenges—political, geopolitical, societal, and socio-economic—the imperative is to rebuild both internal and external ties. While it is impossible to predict history, it must be acknowledged that, at this stage, the new team led by Ahmed al-Charaa has made few missteps. They will also need to reckon with the Syrian people, who, despite the hardships of the past 14 years, have remained resilient and now express both immense relief and measured hope.

Among many challenges, a crucial test will be the management of religious and ethnic minorities, with the Kurds being foremost among them. The question now revolves around the status and degree of decentralization that might be granted to the Kurdish-majority region. However, reuniting the country and avoiding antagonizing Turkey—which has emerged as a major beneficiary of the situation due to its close ties with Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and remains particularly attentive to the Kurdish issue—pose significant challenges for Syria’s new leadership.