Israel’s Illusions of Leading the Region

After the military and political earthquakes that have shaken the Middle East since the attacks of Oct. 7, Israeli aggression and subsequent destruction of Gaza, and the war of extermination and end of what was called "the Axis of Resistance," Israel believes it has presented the required credentials providing it the right to lead the region and redraw its map, even if by force. Gaza has been leveled to the ground. The West Bank is on the path to annexation. The Bashar Assad regime has fallen. Hezbollah has completely retreated into the Lebanese interior. Iran has been subject to targeted strikes taking out its primary military and intelligence leaders, and its nuclear program has been severely damaged as a result of United States raids. The question is this: Is military superiority the only requirement for regional leadership?

During the eras of Western colonialism, power imposed its own conditions. Politics, the satisfaction of people and international covenants had no place. Is the region returning to that dark era, with Israel taking the reins of leadership and control, or has the world irrevocably changed? Marc Lynch, a professor of Political Science and International Affairs at George Washington University, wrote in Foreign Affairs magazine that even if Israel were to bomb the entire Middle East, it would not lead to the establishment of a new regional order under its leadership. Leadership requires more than just military superiority. Israel believes that by severely weakening Iran and its allies, it has satisfied and reassured the Gulf states. Almost the opposite has happened. Israel's reckless and impulsive strength, which disregards consequences, has shown that it cannot be trusted. It is capable of doing anything to satisfy its interests, even at the expense of countries that cannot be classified as its enemies — countries that could even be considered "potential friends."

Israel's raids on Doha Sept. 9 were a pivotal transformation point in the vision of many Arab states, particularly in the Gulf, regarding the future of their relations with Israel. The raids targeted Hamas leaders in the Qatari capital, but they revealed the true nature of Israel to those countries, which had not imagined that Israel would take such a step and violate the sovereignty of a state participating in mediation efforts to end the Gaza war. The raids were part of its strategy to impose its vision on the region, not only on enemies but on friends as well. Its unrestrained imagination allowed it to break all rules and norms and do as it pleases. Some officials in the region wondered: Is this the way of a state that seeks leadership in solving its problems? Some realized that a friendly Israel is more dangerous than the enemy Israel of the past.

The U.S. has sensed this irrational shift in Israeli behavior. There were those who were using it to settle scores with Washington's adversaries, such as Iran and Hezbollah. But the blind recklessness that prevailed over the past two years convinced many Democratic leaders of the need to rein in Benjamin Netanyahu and his government. Even Republicans, (especially the nationalists who are "America First" supporters), became convinced that Israel had become a burden on American policy. The idea of Israel leading the region is an illusion, as Lynch sees it. Leadership requires a degree of compatibility and cooperation with other regional powers. Israel pays no attention to these powers. It acts as if it were the only power. The arrogance of power has made it unwilling to use politics to persuade others of its actions. Israeli hegemony has failed before it even began.