The Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which dates back to the Balfour Declaration in 1917 and the creation of the State of Israel in 1948, remains one of the most persistent and destabilizing geopolitical crises of our time. The violence that erupted in Gaza and Lebanon on October 7, 2023, following Hamas attacks and Israel’s military response, is only the latest symptom of a conflict with deep historical roots. Ongoing occupation, forced displacement, and institutional discrimination against Palestinians make lasting peace difficult.
But conflict cannot be viewed in isolation. This is intertwined with broader geopolitical changes, particularly the weakening of unipolarity and the rise of a multipolar world order. As the world transitions from a U.S.-centered system to a system in which regional countries such as China and Russia as well as Iran, Saudi Arabia and Turkiye play major roles, new opportunities and challenges are emerging for the powers in the Middle East. Balance American hegemony with support for Israel. Today’s world is one where American hegemony is no longer contestable. This new dynamic is very important when analyzing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Because America’s support for Israel remains unwavering despite changes in global alliances. Even as the United States pivots toward East Asia to counter China, it remains deeply entrenched in Middle East conflicts, largely due to its strategic alliance with Israel. This support for Israel’s aggressive policies toward Palestinians has allowed apartheid-like conditions to persist in Gaza and the West Bank.
The escalation following Hamas’ October 7 attack intensified three overlapping conflicts: the Israeli-Palestinian crisis, Israel’s confrontation with Hezbollah, and the confrontation between Israel, Iran, and the United States. This conflict is not only regional, but also linked to global power dynamics, with Israel’s aggressive military actions backed by the United States. In the aftermath of the October 7 attack, Israel’s bombing of Gaza resulted in massive destruction and the deaths of thousands of civilians. Israel’s response goes beyond defeating Hamas and is a continuation of its long-standing goal of ethnic cleansing of Gaza and the West Bank, with the goal of creating a single Jewish state. The destruction and systematic targeting of Palestinian civilians meets the criteria for genocide as defined in the 1948 Genocide Convention. The Convention criminalizes acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group. Targeting Palestinians by killing them, causing them serious harm and creating conditions for their destruction is consistent with the legal framework established under international law. Yet despite these violations, the United States continues to shield Israel from international condemnation.
The ongoing conflict between Israel and Hezbollah is further complicating an already unstable regional environment. Hezbollah’s continued rocket attacks on northern Israel have prompted a violent response from Israel, characterized by a mix of military operations aimed at beheading Hezbollah’s leadership and punitive attacks that often affect civilian areas. Despite Israel’s extensive military operations, Hezbollah remains a powerful force capable of resisting Israeli domination on the northern front. Further complicating matters is Iran, whose influence over Hezbollah remains at the center of the group’s strategic decisions. Neither Iran nor the United States are actively seeking direct confrontation, but Israel has steadily applied pressure, especially following Iranian missile strikes that led to the assassinations of key Hezbollah and Hamas leaders. This escalation may be part of an Israeli strategy to provoke a broader conflict and induce the United States to act against Iran’s nuclear program. Escalating tensions could further destabilize the region if Israel retaliates against Iranian strategic assets, such as nuclear facilities or oil infrastructure. This situation not only increases the risk of an all-out war in the region, but also greatly increases the risk of an international crisis by threatening the intervention of powerful countries such as Russia and China.
Given America’s unwavering support for Israel, regional powers must develop strategies that effectively balance American influence and Israeli aggressiveness. The strategic use of smart power, as defined by Joseph Nye, presents a viable approach. Smart power means forming international relations by combining hard power, which is coercive means such as military and economic pressure, and soft power, which relies on diplomacy, cultural influence, and positive attraction. By combining these tactics, Muslim-majority countries in the region can challenge American hegemony while advancing their collective interests.
One of the most effective strategies of these regional powers is to leverage their economic resources, especially their control over global energy supplies. Countries such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE have significant influence over oil and gas production, giving them the ability to exert economic pressure. A concerted effort to restrict exports or impose an oil embargo on the United States or countries allied with the United States could cause significant disruption to the global economy and potentially force the United States to reconsider its uncritical support for Israel. This approach exemplifies a smart power strategy by combining economic hard power with the diplomatic clout needed to sway public opinion and win international support for the cause.
The 1973 oil crisis, in which Arab countries imposed an oil embargo on Western countries in retaliation for their support of Israel during the Yom Kippur War, demonstrated how collective economic action can significantly change U.S. policy in the region. It serves as a powerful historical example. The embargo led to a surge in oil prices, forced the United States to reassess its energy dependence, and ultimately influenced American diplomatic efforts such as the Camp David Accords. Implementing such measures today poses significant risks to Gulf economies, but the impact they could create is still significant. Gulf countries could also explore other economic strategies, such as selling off U.S. financial markets or reducing investments in U.S. defense companies that supply weapons to Israel. Such coordinated action would reflect the impact of the 1973 crisis, potentially causing the United States to reconsider its unwavering support for Israel.
Diplomatically, regional powers should strengthen alliances to present a unified front to counter Israeli policies. This will require overcoming long-standing sectarian divisions, particularly the rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran, which has historically impeded collective action. But the recent rapprochement between these two regional powers presents a unique opportunity for greater cooperation. If major countries such as Turkiye, Pakistan, Egypt and other Gulf countries can be integrated into this diplomatic alliance, the resulting bloc could have significant influence on the world stage. By jointly advocating for Palestinian sovereignty in international forums such as the United Nations, this coalition can reshape the international discourse on Israel and Palestine. A common threat can be a unifying force for these countries. Their historical and religious ties are strong, and it is important to recognize the importance of putting aside internal conflicts to create a united front. Otherwise, Israel will continue to operate in the region unchecked by a divided opposition, free to impose its will as partition allowed it to do after World Wars I and II.
Achieving this level of coordination is difficult. Created in 1945 as a loose union of Arab states, the Arab League has long suffered from internal divisions and conflicting priorities. Structural limitations, such as the inability to force member states to follow collective resolutions, have often prevented it from taking unified action on important issues such as Palestine. Efforts to cooperate are increasingly complicated by competition among member states, changing geopolitical alliances, and sectarian divisions (particularly between Saudi Arabia and Iran). For example, despite the Arab League’s historical emphasis on the Palestinian cause, the recent normalization of relations between several Gulf states and Israel, such as the Abraham Accords, has further weakened the League’s unified position on Palestine. By amplifying the Palestinian story and shaping global opinion (a key element of Joseph Nye’s Smart Power framework), the Arab League can still influence international discourse. For example, recent protests in Europe show growing global sympathy for Palestinians, suggesting that Israel and Netanyahu’s government may be losing the battle for public appeal. Although the Arab League has often failed to act cohesively, overcoming its internal differences could strengthen its ability to counter Israeli policies on the world stage.
A united Middle East, bolstered by strong ties with other emerging powers, could advocate for reforms at the United Nations, especially challenging the veto power often used by the United States to shield Israel from international accountability. Beyond diplomacy, military deterrence will be an important element of an integrated regional strategy. Iran and Turkiye, with their powerful military capabilities, can provide a significant deterrent to Israeli aggression. While a direct military confrontation with Israel poses significant risks, a NATO-like collective defense agreement among Muslim-majority countries could effectively offset Israel’s military dominance. Such a defensive alliance would not only protect Palestinian sovereignty but also serve to deter Israeli military expansion into Lebanon, Syria, or elsewhere. The agreement could include joint military exercises, intelligence sharing, and the development of advanced military technologies, such as an integrated air defense system capable of countering Israeli airstrikes. Moreover, the threat of coordinated Iranian and Turkiye missile capabilities could serve as a practical deterrent to further Israeli incursions.
One of the key factors driving the United States’ support for Israel is its extensive military presence in the Middle East, with bases such as Al Udeid in Qatar, Camp Arifjan in Kuwait, and Naval Support Operations in Bahrain serving as strategic hubs for U.S. and Israeli interests. It’s stationed. Restricting U.S. access to these bases or significantly reducing its military presence would severely undermine Washington’s ability to provide robust military support for Israeli operations in the region.
Overall, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains a focus of instability in the Middle East, but it is also emblematic of broader power dynamics in the evolving international system. While American hegemony continues to shield Israel from accountability, the rise of a multipolar world provides new opportunities for regional powers to challenge this dominance. Through a strategic mix of economic pressure, diplomatic alliances, and military deterrence, Muslim-majority countries have the potential to realign both U.S. and Israeli policies. However, the success of this approach will depend on overcoming internal divisions and fostering genuine and sustained cooperation between regional actors. The obstacles are significant, but the potential rewards of strengthening Palestinian sovereignty and achieving broader regional stability could reshape the Middle East in transformative ways.
Additional Resources on E-International Relations
