A Brutal Shift in the Middle East Conflict 2025
There are two ways to look at what has happened in the Middle East during the last year and a half. One is that, in contrast to earlier responses, the response to October 7, 2023, was different. Israel’s retaliatory response to the Hamas attack has been so brutal that it has been impossible to contain geographically or within the bounds set by international law. Examples of this include the genocide in Gaza, the invasion of southern Lebanon, the occupation of the buffer zone in southwestern Syria and airstrikes throughout that country, and now the attacks against Iran.
Middle East Conflict 2025: From Fragile Peace to Unchecked Retaliation
The next step is to explain that these events are a part of a historical continuity. The reason for the peace in the area was a fragile status quo that was always vulnerable to disruption. It only seemed feasible because it was based on a number of factors that, taken together, created the appearance of a community. This delicate balance has been tipped by the Israeli government, which is now focused on furthering its own agenda and is rewriting the future of the region in ways it cannot control and cannot explain.
The Gulf Powers’ Diplomatic Balancing Act
One element of this precarious arrangement was the mediation role played by the Gulf powers. The Gulf’s reunion with Iran was motivated by the practical need for stability rather than friendship or trade. Some Gulf governments also crossed a historic red line by signing the Abraham Accords, which either recognized Israel or began the normalization process. These countries, which are currently caught between two opposing factions, risk upsetting Israel’s main ally, the United States, with whom it maintains close military and economic ties.
Middle East Conflict 2025: The Suppression of Palestinian Rights Was Never Sustainable
Another principle of the status quo was to suppress Palestinian rights to a degree that pleased everyone, except the Palestinians, of course. In a sense, the Palestinian problem had also been settled. The invasion of Gaza exposed Israel’s values and intentions to the world, increasing the likelihood of a second Nakba. It also implicated Hezbollah, the Houthis of Yemen, Iran, and its allies as supporters of Palestinian rights. Once Iran entered the equation, Israel felt free to act without fear of repercussion or reluctance, and there was no turning back.
Another thing has gone wrong: the justification for Israel’s actions has been so wildly inflated. Citing Israel’s importance as a close friend in a vital region and the safety of the Jewish people as grounds for unfettered assistance, the US and other allies have granted Israel complete autonomy to defend itself. However, Israel must react proportionately to any threats to prevent further instability. Israel has not only responded to threats incorrectly, but it has also manipulated them into weapons to the extent that it is now the primary source of instability in the area and in Israel itself.
Middle East Conflict 2025: Netanyahu’s Political Calculations Amid War
Openness between the two sides is also necessary for the backing of allies. The assumption behind the extensive military, economic, and political cover is that the leaders of the Israeli government have no other motivation for starting a war than to defend their citizens. The incumbent prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has violated confidence by using the conflict to boost support for his own political career. He is not only undermining Israelis’ sense of security by taking on the role of protector, but he is also making money off of it.
Relationships with key allies were being tested over Gaza as public pressure from Western countries grew due to the constant images of starving children, burnt hospitals, and row after row of body bags. By putting up a new front and facing a new enemy, the Israeli government has the chance to both reestablish the terms of its contract with its supporters and the historical narrative that it is the victim, acting in undeniable good faith. Here it is, again in need of help, as strikes and civilian deaths are caused by a hostile neighbor.
Stories of hungry people dying while waiting in line for supplies or about people dying in Gaza from starvation are no longer in the headlines. The continuous assault on the West Bank and the expansion of illegal settlements have been less obvious. The pressure that was beginning to build on Israel to respect a ceasefire and permit more aid has been replaced by the same hollow defenses that we saw in the early days of the war in Gaza, as well as the same language demanding “restraint.” We’ve reset the timer.
Middle East Conflict 2025: Revisiting the Doctrine of Preemptive Strikes
Israel claimed that it acted in defense of Iran based on intelligence that the international community must accept, seemingly taking a lesson from the Iraq War. How dangerous was it? Who has the authority to decide when a “pre-emptive strike” is justified? Furthermore, who is in charge of defending against an illegal, unilateral attack? We do currently know that international politics are governed by a variety of criteria of sovereignty and exceptions. Iran has violated the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, but Israel refused to fully ratify it.
These conflicts used to be easier to reconcile because Israel and the US were “the good guys” and Iran was part of an “axis of evil.” But as Israel’s and the US’s reputations as reliable negotiators who are aware of international law and cautious in their security considerations have deteriorated, these campaigns have grown increasingly complicated.
Is There a Clear Endgame for Israel in the Middle East Conflict in 2025?
This is the real war that Israel is fighting. Iran’s military might and political will remain uncomfortably strong in Israel’s eyes. As the window of Israeli legitimacy closes, it is more important than ever for Israel to weaken Iran’s military might and political legitimacy. But what’s the endgame? Does Israel see a short-lived campaign and then pull out, satisfied with the result? Or isn’t it a plausible scenario, considering the counterattacks it has provoked? Unplanned regime change or relentless escalation is beginning to resemble Gaza.
Domestic Politics Are Driving a Regional Crisis
Israel’s ground campaign and media have the same trait: they see the Middle East as a stage for domestic politics, reputation management, and trial and error in creating “safety” inside vaguely defined boundaries. But the region is not merely Israel’s backyard. Houses with their own politics, histories, populations, and security needs are increasingly under the jurisdiction of a country that has decided that only its own agenda matters.