The Middle East: Israel, Palestine, and Global Politics

If readers recall, on October 1, 2024, I wrote an article titled “The Greater Israel Project”. Viewing the current ongoing events, particularly the escape of Bashar al-Assad this evening, through the same lens, one can observe that the scenario I predicted in my arguments and apprehensions has started to unfold. Since the Hamas attack on October 7, 2023, the tensions and shifting dynamics in the region have brought Israel’s vision closer to reality than ever before. The rebalancing of power and reconfiguration of the regional landscape is not a new aspiration for Israel. Time and circumstances have once again placed my critics in the dock of bitter truths.

On various international platforms, Israeli officials have been seen presenting maps of their country. Notably, none of these maps include any mention of a Palestinian state or territory. During his speech at the United Nations General Assembly, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu presented two maps. One map depicted in green all the countries that are part of peace agreements with Israel or wish to maintain relations with it. These countries included Egypt, Sudan, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Jordan. In the second map, Netanyahu highlighted Iran and its allied countries in the region—Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and Lebanon—in black, labelling these areas as “abhorrent.”

Taking advantage of the current circumstances, Israel has initiated airstrikes on Syria. International media reports confirm that Israel is targeting alleged chemical weapons facilities and missile production sites in Syria. Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar has cunningly justified these strikes by stating concerns that such weapons might fall into the hands of extremists following the potential fall of Bashar al-Assad’s government, and Israel seeks to prevent this. Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz stated that the Israeli military aims to destroy Syria’s “heavy strategic weapons,” including missiles and air defense systems.

Media reports reveal that over the past two days, Israel has conducted dozens of airstrikes in Syria, including one near Damascus at a location claimed by Israel to be used by Iranian scientists for rocket development. After an Israeli airstrike near Damascus, Syrian media reported that a “research centre for chemical weapons development” was also targeted. These airstrikes occurred as the United Nations’ chemical weapons watchdog had warned Syrian authorities to ensure the safety of suspected chemical weapons stockpiles.

The UK-based monitoring group, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR), reported on Monday that Israeli forces carried out overnight strikes at multiple locations in coastal and southern Syria. Hours after the announcement of the fall of the previous government, Israel began intense airstrikes, deliberately destroying weapons and ammunition depots. The day before, Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham issued a statement regarding chemical weapons in Syria, pledging “complete assurance of cooperation with the international community in monitoring weapons and sensitive sites.” They declared, “We have no intention or desire to use chemical or any other weapons of mass destruction under any circumstances. We are working to ensure their security and prevent them from falling into irresponsible hands.”

This announcement came amidst fears that chemical weapons stockpiles near southern Aleppo had allegedly fallen into the hands of Syrian rebel groups. According to the United Nations’ Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), chemical weapons are defined as those used to kill or harm through their toxic properties. This definition extends to munitions, devices, and other materials specifically designed for the use of toxic chemicals as weapons. The use of chemical weapons is prohibited under international humanitarian law, regardless of the presence of a legitimate military target.

Chemical weapons, commonly perceived as relying on toxic chemicals, are deployed via delivery systems like bombs or artillery shells. While technically accurate, this perception limits the scope of items classified as chemical weapons under the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC).

Under the CWC, the definition of chemical weapons includes all toxic chemicals and their precursors unless used for permitted purposes as outlined in the convention, and only in quantities strictly regulated by it.

Types of Chemical Weapons

Chemical weapons are classified into various categories:

Nerve Agents: Affect the nervous system (e.g., Sarin, VX).

Blister Agents: Cause severe irritation and pain to the skin, eyes, and mucous membranes (e.g., Mustard Gas).

Choking Agents: Damage the respiratory system (e.g., Phosgene, Chlorine).

Blood Agents: Impair the body’s ability to utilise oxygen (e.g., Cyanide Compounds).

Riot Control Agents: Non-lethal irritants causing temporary discomfort (e.g., Tear Gas).

Choking agents like Phosgene attack the lungs and respiratory system. The deadliest are nerve agents, which interfere with the brain’s signals to muscles. Even a tiny amount can be lethal—for instance, less than 0.5 milligrams of some agents is enough to kill an adult.

Sarin: A Deadlier Weapon than Cyanide

Sarin is considered up to 20 times more lethal than cyanide. Just a few minutes of exposure can lead to suffocation and death. These chemical agents can be deployed through artillery shells, bombs, and missiles.

How Did Bashar al-Assad Use Alleged Chemical Weapons to Consolidate Power?

Bashar al-Assad’s regime and its Russian allies have been accused of repeatedly using chemical weapons against opposition forces during the Syrian civil war, which began in March 2011. However, both Assad’s government and Russia have consistently denied these allegations. Presently, the exact quantity and location of Syria’s chemical weapons remain uncertain. It is believed that former President Bashar al-Assad retained chemical stockpiles despite declaring their destruction in 2013.

In August 2013, a suspected chemical attack in Ghouta, a rebel-held area near Damascus, allegedly involving the nerve agent sarin, killed over 1,400 people. Western nations and anti-government groups attributed the attack to Assad’s regime, which denied involvement, instead blaming the opposition. This incident led to threats of military intervention by the United States. However, a diplomatic agreement brokered by Assad’s key ally, Russia, averted military action. Subsequently, Assad agreed to dismantle Syria’s chemical weapons under international supervision.

Under international pressure, Assad signed the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), overseen by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), leading to the destruction of 1,300 tonnes of chemical agents. Despite this, reports of chemical attacks persisted, and subsequent inspections uncovered violations of the 1997 CWC.

Ongoing Use of Chemical Weapons in Syria

Since 2014, OPCW’s Fact-Finding Mission (FFM) has investigated allegations of toxic chemical use as weapons in Syria. Between September 2013 and April 2018, it verified the use of chemical weapons in 37 incidents. Additionally, the United Nations’ Independent International Commission of Inquiry reported 18 other instances of chemical weapon use.

An analysis of global media reports in 2018 examined 164 cases and confirmed at least 106 uses of chemical weapons during the Syrian civil war from 2014 to 2018. The highest frequency of attacks was in Idlib province, followed by Hama, Aleppo, and Eastern Ghouta near Damascus. These areas were opposition strongholds at various times during the conflict.

The deadliest incidents occurred in Kafr Zita (Hama province) and Douma (Eastern Ghouta), where rebel forces clashed with government troops. The most lethal attack took place on April 4, 2017, in Khan Shaykhun, Idlib province, killing approximately 100 people. OPCW and UN investigations concluded that sarin nerve agent affected numerous residents, although chlorine gas was the most frequently used chemical.

The Role of Chlorine and Other Agents

Chlorine, which has both industrial and peaceful applications, was extensively weaponized in Syria. OPCW’s Investigation and Identification Team (IIT) reported that on February 4, 2018, the Syrian Arab Air Force, under the elite Tiger Forces unit, dropped at least one chlorine cylinder in Saraqib, exposing 12 individuals to the toxic gas. This attack demonstrated the continued use of banned chemicals despite international monitoring.

While the perpetrators of 105 other incidents remain unidentified, investigations suggest that ISIS employed sulphur mustard in at least two cases and was potentially involved in three additional attacks.

Geopolitical Implications

In a recent speech, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan condemned Israel’s ambitions, stating, “They dream of seizing the lands between the Tigris and Euphrates. Since they cannot accept Gaza, they reveal their intentions through their maps.”

Experts at the Carnegie Middle East Centre argue that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s vision of a “New Middle East” seeks to colonize Palestinian territories. Despite international criticism, Israel continues to expand settlements, particularly in the West Bank, solidifying its plans to integrate these areas.

According to the Washington Institute for Near East Policy:

The current right-wing Israeli government includes several ministers who do not support a two-state solution, moving further away from the 1993 Oslo Accords’ vision of a Palestinian state. The United States appears unlikely to endorse Israeli plans that exclude Palestinian territories, as the Israeli vision for a “New Middle East” aims to create a region free from Iranian threats. However, retired Israeli intelligence officer Mary Eisin has dismissed claims that Israel seeks to impose a “New Middle East.” She asserts that Israel’s focus is on ensuring that Iran’s hardline government does not influence the region’s political landscape.

Prime Minister Netanyahu’s rhetoric emphasises dismantling Iran’s nuclear programme. Additionally, Netanyahu seeks to restore Israel’s standing after the October 7, 2023, Hamas attacks, which significantly dented its global image. A large-scale Israeli assault in southern Beirut targeting Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah has been described as a critical geopolitical turning point in the ongoing conflict.

Escalating Tensions with Iran:

Iran launched multiple ballistic missiles at Israel on October 1, claiming it was retaliating for the killing of Hamas’s political leader, Ismail Haniyeh, on Iranian soil. Israel has pledged to respond “at a time and place of its choosing.” Meanwhile, the United States, committed to maintaining its strategic dominance, has bolstered military deployments in the region, while conditioning its support for Israel on adherence to “red lines.” These include refraining from targeting Iranian nuclear sites and moving towards a two-state solution.

Abraham Accords and Regional Dynamics:

Under former President Trump, efforts to normalise relations in the region offered economic and military incentives to Arab states. These efforts highlighted Israel as a strategic partner against Iran rather than a regional threat, leading to the signing of the Abraham Accords with Morocco, the UAE, and Bahrain. However, the situation has grown tense following the October 7, 2023, Hamas attacks and the subsequent Gaza war.

Israel is actively pursuing normalisation with Saudi Arabia, a nation wary of Iran’s growing regional influence. Despite this, Saudi Arabia recently declared via the Financial Times that it would not establish formal relations with Israel until a Palestinian state is created. The geopolitical and economic changes triggered by the events of October 7 have also influenced countries like Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan, which had historically refused to recognise Israel following the 1948 partition of Palestine.

Regional Economic Cooperation:

Israel’s official data reveals increased trade with five Arab countries during the first half of the current fiscal year, including the UAE, Egypt, Bahrain, and Morocco. Israeli media has highlighted a trade route agreement involving the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Egypt. This agreement positions Israel’s natural gas as a vital resource for Egypt’s power grid.

Regional and Global Implications:

A regional expert suggests that Israel must combine diplomacy, economic partnerships, and robust defence strategies to shape a new regional order. Professor Yezid Sayegh of the Carnegie Middle East Centre warns of the rising geopolitical tensions, suggesting they are linked to broader international shifts involving the U.S., Russia, China, and Europe. He fears these changes may fuel global conflicts and cautions against the risk of an escalating war plunging the world into chaos.