Israel's Strategic Dilemma Deepens

by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem

Israel’s strategic dilemma became clearly apparent after the July 2006 war, and its clarity was reinforced in the “Cast Lead” war on Gaza, 2008/2009. Israel failed in southern Lebanon even though the war lasted thirty-three days, and did not achieve its political goals in Gaza even though the war lasted twenty-three days. Israel’s army is no longer capable of decisively winning battles, and is no longer capable of carrying out the threats Zionist political leaders level against this party or that.

Israel has found itself facing a great strategic dilemma, no longer fully dominating the region, no longer able to wage a war whenever it pleases, no longer safe from the other side’s missiles. Its traditional security doctrine has cracked, and it has become incumbent upon it to develop that doctrine in a way suited to the new circumstances. But it also understands that the other side is not idle either, working day and night to develop its own military capabilities and tactics, and developing its security, military, and strategic vision.

The people of Egypt, through their revolution, have added a new strategic dimension to the Arab and Islamic forces confronting Israel. The Egyptian revolution, in itself, expresses a free Egyptian Arab will, insisting on freedom and independence not only for Egypt but for every Arab country. It is enough that it toppled the Arab regime most committed to Israeli security and interests. But the people of Egypt, regarding Israel, did not stop at freeing themselves from Egypt’s obligations toward Israel — they insist on expelling Israel from the land of Egypt, and restoring Sinai to become an inseparable part of full Egyptian sovereignty.

What the people of Egypt did in recent days, taking control of the Zionist embassy in Egypt, expresses this firm Egyptian will that will not be humbled or humiliated. The people of Egypt have proven their position on peace with Israel and the establishment of normal relations with it right. Many doubted, across thirty years, the will of the Egyptian people and its position toward Israel, but the people brought them certain news.

Israel understands that the matter is not merely about taking control of an embassy and expelling an ambassador — it concerns a radical change in Egyptian policy toward it, toward acts of resistance, and toward relations with the Western states generally. This means the matter will extend to rebuilding the Egyptian army, insisting on entering Sinai militarily and even up to the makeshift border between Egypt and Palestine, and reassessing regional and international relations. Israel understands that a closed front — indeed, an allied one — has now opened, and will gradually turn into a front open against it, whether through secret resistance operations launching from Sinai, or support for Palestinian resistance in Gaza, or direct confrontation with the Egyptian army. Israel was already in a strategic bind, and now it is in a bind that is deepening further.

The people of Egypt will change much of the relations currently existing in the Arab-Islamic region. At the very least, Egypt will influence the positions of many Arab states toward Israel and normalization with it, focus will shift toward military buildup alongside diplomatic efforts, and alliances will shift at the level of the Gulf region and Iran. Whatever changes occur, Israel is the first loser. There may be a few collaborationist Syrian voices calling for recognizing Israel, but these are isolated voices with no extension into the Syrian street, while the unrest across the region clearly indicates that the will of the Arab peoples who oppose Israel is the one that will prevail.

It is expected, and required, that Palestinians benefit from this new Arab situation, and from the deepening Zionist dilemma. It is clear the military or strategic balance in the region has changed and shifted, and that the balance that once existed no longer holds. The Palestinian Authority is now negotiating and moving within a strategic balance that has been buried, no longer standing, and it ought to recognize the new balance and move within it, because it is an existing objective reality. The negotiations the Palestinian Authority is engaged in are a product of a balance of power that has worn away and become a matter of history, and if it is to achieve any accomplishment, making use of the new balance would express political and strategic wisdom. This means that breaking out of the current negotiating whirlpool and entering into regional strategic interactions will constitute a great gain for the Palestinians.

Source: Translated from the original Arabic, “مأزق إسرائيل الاستراتيجي يتعمق” by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem.