The death of Yahya Sinwar, the political chief of Hamas, symbolises the end of an era dominated by armed movements and militias in addressing the Palestinian cause.

This phase began to take shape after the 1967 War, which marked the decline of the central role played by the Arab states in confronting the issue. This trend was solidified following the assassination of late Egyptian president Anwar Al-Sadat, as militias took the lead, finding in Iran a regional supporter.

The “Al-Aqsa Flood” Operation on 7 October 2023 signalled the end of the Iranian phase and ushered in an Israeli era, in which Tel Aviv seeks to resolve the conflict through brute force. This effort, aimed at realising “Greater Israel,” is backed primarily by the United States and the United Kingdom, at the expense of the Palestinians and, subsequently, the surrounding Arab countries.

The true test of any strategy lies in its ability to generate substantive change and serve vital interests. A review of the past year reveals key elements of Israel’s current strategy.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu outlined his vision for a “New Middle East” at the UN General Assembly in September, which entails erasing Palestine as both a state and an entity. This vision aligns with the statements of the extremist Israeli Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who has asserted that Israel’s borders will expand at the expense of Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia—a vision of “Greater Israel” that envisions the country’s dominance and centrality in the region.

Netanyahu’s goals are undoubtedly flexible and opportunistic, driven in part by his personal interests. His objective is to prolong the conflict in Gaza and Southern Lebanon and potentially extend it to Iran to remain in power and evade prosecution on corruption charges.

Yet, it cannot be denied that he also seeks to achieve broader strategic objectives across the Middle East. In the short term, Netanyahu aims to restore the credibility of Israel’s deterrent power, which was shaken by the Al-Aqsa Flood Operation. He has a deep faith in firepower, believing that military strength is the key to reestablishing calm on hostile fronts—even if it means committing heinous massacres under the cover of international indifference.

Just recently, Volker Türk, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, described the situation in northern Gaza as “the darkest moment in the Gaza conflict.” The Israeli army is subjecting the population there to relentless bombardment, siege, starvation, forced displacement, and detention.

“The Israeli military has ordered hundreds of thousands to leave without any guarantee of return, and there is no safe passage for them to exit. Even those fleeing are being shot at. The situation is deteriorating. Israel’s actions in northern Gaza threaten to empty the region of its entire Palestinian population,” Türk said, adding that “we are witnessing atrocities, including crimes against humanity and genocide.”

He urged global leaders to take action to halt the slaughter and devastation and not merely stand by, stressing the need to respect human rights and international law.

Global hypocrisy and regional weakness are emboldening the extremist Israeli government to proceed with its plans—most notably, the “Generals’ Plan” to depopulate northern Gaza through a scorched-earth policy. This would pave the way for the forced evacuation of the rest of the Gaza Strip, with its residents either relocated to neighbouring Arab countries or sent abroad.

Despite the devastation, opinions remain divided on the Israeli military’s ability to accomplish its goals. Israeli journalist Ronen Bergman, writing in the Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth, suggested that while Israel has achieved tactical victories, they will not lead to peace.

After a year of conflict without a coherent strategy, Israel’s focus has shifted to freeing hostages and dismantling Hamas’ capabilities in Gaza. Having failed to accomplish these objectives, another goal was added: the return of northern Israeli residents to their homes, following the uprooting of Hizbullah.

Some in Israel believe that a southern front victory can be secured by winning in the north, and now they argue that a decisive blow to Iran could stabilise both the northern and southern fronts.

In contrast, Kobi Michael, a researcher at the Israeli National Security Studies Centre, contends that Netanyahu’s strategy aims for “comprehensive victory.” This involves fundamentally altering the Middle East’s balance of power, weakening the Iranian axis, and reshaping the region to enable Israel, the US, and their allies to establish a new regional order with influence on the global stage.

The complexities of this situation make it difficult to determine the endpoint of Tel Aviv’s ambitions, particularly as continued skirmishes and fire exchanges with Tehran could drastically alter the regional landscape.

It would be a grave miscalculation—and a source of deep concern for the Arab nations—if the Zionist state and its Western patrons, particularly the US and Europe, are given free rein in the Middle East. The current phase of Israeli aggression, as witnessed in Gaza and Southern Lebanon, will not cease unless met with Arab resistance or at least a refusal to accept its outcomes.

The successive phases of the Arab-Israeli conflict, from state-based confrontations to the rise of resistance movements, do not imply surrender to Western-backed Israeli hegemony. Resistance is the lifeblood of nations, and it begins with a return to the fundamentals of opposition.

The first step towards the desired “collective” Arab resistance, which must come sooner rather than later, is to develop a shared Arab vision that redefines the regional landscape. This would serve as a counterweight to Netanyahu’s “New Middle East” project and challenge the US’ dismissive attitude towards the Arab world.

The writer is managing editor of the Arabic daily Al-Ahram.

* A version of this article appears in print in the 31 October, 2024 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly