The Middle East’s precarious state of affairs has amplified concerns of a full-blown regional conflict, rendering the need for constraint even more urgent. The rise in anxiety is attributed to Israel’s deadly actions, carrying out the killing of both the Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran and the Hizbullah commander Fuad Shukr in Beirut, along with Hizbullah’s subsequent retaliatory measures that claimed the lives of 12 Druze children in a horrendous rocket attack over the weekend.
In the aftermath of these events, the Hamas organisation ominously forewarned that the ensuing counterattacks would escalate the conflict, a dire prediction echoed by Israel’s Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, who mentioned that tough times loomed ahead. Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, asserted that reprisals were obligatory.
The prospective Gaza truce and the freeing of captives, already within the realms of possibility, has sustained a severe blow due to Haniyeh’s essential role being abruptly terminated by his assassination. This setback also casts a considerable shadow on Iran’s desire to improve ties with the Western world under the reformist leadership of its new president, Masoud Pezeshkian.
The dangerous trajectory of the conflict is poised perilously, with an array of international players engaged on several fronts. Hamas and its allies in Gaza find themselves in direct battle with Israel, backed by the US and its Western allies. Meanwhile, in the West Bank, Israeli settlers have escalated violence against Palestinian communities. At the margins of Lebanon, Hizbullah, piloted and supplied with arms by Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, ceaselessly launch assaults. In Iraq and Syria, US airstrikes have targeted Iranian affiliated militias, and in Yemen, Houthi militias, in an onslaught of rocket attacks, have posed a significant threat to Israel and maritime activities.
While there have always existed unspoken boundaries of engagement among them, diplomatic observers argue that neither Israel, Iran, nor the Hizbullah leadership have any real interest in triggering a full-scale war but neither are they willing to take a hit without issuing an equivalent reprisal.
Presently, the fear is that an all-out Israeli occupation of Lebanon or an audacious attack on Haniyeh on Iranian territory might incite a heightening of direct Iranian participation. Thus far, Iran has remained at an arm’s length, utilising proxies, supplying ammunition, but restraining from direct confrontation till its extensive, yet unsuccessful, counterattack missile strike against Israel in April.
Israel’s response to the fatalities in Golan was anticipated, particularly with Haniyeh already designated a target. However, the method and location of its counterstrike could vary. The decision to hit back on Iranian territory has aroused speculation amongst analysts who question whether this plan, whether intended or not, will provoke Iran to respond in a manner that will compel the US to get more embroiled in the skirmish. By engaging in such high-stakes actions, Israel is treading on dangerous grounds, making the region appear more unstable than it has in a long while.