https://arab.news/vm5vm
Years of experience have taught me to be cautious about two events that invariably dominate the news: a US presidential election year, and major global sports events, such as the World Cup and the Olympics, which capture public attention for about a month.
This year, we have a US presidential election and have just had the Paris Olympics. Since Oct. 7, a series of major events has unfolded rapidly, with significant consequences, but no real efforts or strategic plans to resolve them.
In the Middle East, it seems the region鈥檚 players and their regional backers are moving without clear direction. Their actions are mostly tactical, lacking any clear vision for lasting solutions.
What appears to be a mutual effort to maintain 鈥渞ules of engagement鈥� barely hides the reality that some stronger players, benefiting from global ties, are escalating tensions.
Israel鈥檚 leadership feels unbound by any commitment to a peace process that the ruling far right has never genuinely supported.
The assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, even while Hamas holds Israeli hostages, highlights that the captives鈥� fate is not a top priority for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his supporters, who are focused on dismantling the Palestinian people, their identity, and their cause.
Tehran must understand its limits, and avoid threatening Israel鈥檚 existence.
Eyad Abu Shakra
Meanwhile, there has been much talk about the 鈥渦nity of the fronts鈥� in support of Hamas, reflected in recent military actions.
However, none of these actions compares to what Israel has done in the Occupied Territories, including Gaza, or to its strikes in Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen, or the increasingly sophisticated assassinations in the capitals of what Tehran鈥檚 allies call the 鈥淎xis of Resistance.鈥�
This situation requires a rethinking of the terms 鈥淎xis of Resistance鈥� and 鈥渦nity of the fronts,鈥� especially as the gap between the intense rhetoric and the actual substance grows wider.
At one time, we heard Iranian leaders claim that 鈥渆liminating Israel would take just seven minutes.鈥� Now, Tehran鈥檚 allies are making strange statements, such as 鈥渙ur goal is to prevent Israel from winning.鈥�
Moreover, the trust and coordination within the 鈥淎xis of Resistance鈥� seem to be weakening, particularly in their responses to Israeli assassinations.
It is clear from the reactions of Iran and Hezbollah that despite suffering significant losses, both are avoiding the confrontation that Netanyahu, supported by Washington, seems to be seeking.
The reason is simple: Iran鈥檚 leadership is more focused on 鈥渃oexisting鈥� with Israel under US-guaranteed terms, rather than engaging in a suicidal war.
Even Washington does not want to dismantle the Tehran regime, seeing long-term strategic benefits in its survival. US policymakers have often said that the goal is not to change Iran鈥檚 regime, but to change its behavior.
This means Tehran must understand its limits, and avoid threatening Israel鈥檚 existence or vital interests. In practice, this is exactly what Iran and its allies in Iraq, Lebanon, Yemen, and Syria have done.
There is an unusual silence from Syria鈥檚 leadership regarding the war in Gaza.
Eyad Abu Shakra
Now, let鈥檚 look at Syria...
Many are watching Syria closely after recent events. These include multiple Israeli operations, such as assassinations of Iranian leaders, and the mysterious disappearance of key political figures close to the Syrian regime.
There is also the unusual silence from Syria鈥檚 leadership regarding the events of Oct. 7 and the escalating war in Gaza, including the lack of condolences for the assassinations of Haniyeh in Tehran and Fuad Shukr in Beirut鈥檚 southern suburbs.
Sources familiar with the Assad regime, both under the father and the son, believe it remains committed to the 1974 security agreement with Israel, which prevents any group from using Syrian territory to threaten Israel.
I believe that Iran and its allies, especially in Lebanon, seem to understand this 鈥渞eality鈥� from a regime they know well 鈥� one that prioritizes 鈥渃oexistence鈥� with Israel to ensure its survival.
At a time when 鈥渢actical moves鈥� overshadow ideals and grand strategies, most players, except the naive, recognize that words and actions often do not match.
Iran is not tied to Moscow for life, the 鈥渞esistance鈥� narrative is not built to last, and the borders of entities born out of convenience will survive only if their creators stick to the realities that shaped them.
- Eyad Abu Shakra is managing editor of Asharq Al-Awsat. X: @eyad1949. This article first appeared in Asharq Al-Awsat.