Between Beijing, Al-Aqsa, and Damascus
Nida Al Watan, Lebanon, April 8
The firing of rockets from the Qlaileh region in Lebanon towards the Israeli Galilee, and the Israeli response to this event, marks the climax of complex and rapidly escalating regional events. This confluence of factors, involving Palestine, Syria, and Lebanon, has thrust the region back into the maelstrom of unpredictable risks. While yesterday’s exchange of fire may remain just that—a mere “exchange”—both parties fear an outbreak of war that the parties to the confrontation do not desire. The Israelis have stated that they do not want war and it is assumed that Hizbullah, the dominant force in the South, does not wish for one either. The formation of the new Israeli government headed by Binyamin Netanyahu has caused stagnation of extremist policies in Israel and provoked numerous Palestinian terrorist attacks. This year’s events have exacerbated tensions between Palestinians and the Israeli ruling class, which has long been subject to racism and extremism. These tensions reached a new level when Itamar Ben-Gvir, the Israeli national security minister, entered Al-Aqsa Mosque on January 3, claiming the right of Jews to pray there and violating the “status quo” that is recognized by all countries. This was part of a previous conception, design, and planning process coordinated with Netanyahu. What is happening in occupied Palestine may not be enough to explain yesterday’s escalation with southern Lebanon. The ruling Israeli government is facing internal turmoil due to the strong disapproval of its extremist policy, amid proposed amendments to judicial laws that would end the myth of Israel’s democracy, which is used to disguise the country’s racism and apartheid practices. This is not the first time the nation’s leaders have sought to divert attention away from an internal crisis by fabricating a conflict with the Palestinians or its Arab neighbors. The recent agreement between Saudi Arabia and Iran to restore diplomatic relations has had a profound impact on Israel. Prime Minister Netanyahu and military leaders have been vocal about their preparations for war with Iran, due to the failure of negotiations to halt its nuclear program. The US has, so far, prioritized the war in Ukraine over this issue. This agreement, if implemented, would strip Israel of its pretext of Arab concern over Tehran’s potential to produce nuclear weapons as justification for waging war. Saudi Arabia has reaffirmed its commitment to the Palestinian issue by rejecting normalization with Israel and abstaining from the Abraham Accords until a complete solution is reached through the establishment of two states. This renders the Arab openness towards the Jewish state incomplete and insignificant. It may be more than mere coincidence that the recent tensions in the region reached a climax on the day Saudi Arabia’s foreign minister, Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud, and Iran’s Hossein Amir-Abdollahian, signed a statement in Beijing to restore relations. It is difficult to ignore the apparent Iranian impetus behind the recurrence of Lebanon as a battleground. Reports from the Israeli media about the Israeli defense minister, Yoav Gallant, putting his army on alert on the northern border after Ismail Haniyeh, the head of the political bureau of Hamas and close ally of Tehran, visited Lebanon were remarkable. Gallant issued the order before Haniyeh landed at Rafic Hariri International Airport, presumably in anticipation of reactions to what is happening at Al-Aqsa from Lebanese territory. Complicating matters further is the intensity of Israeli airstrikes on Iranian sites in Syria, from Aleppo to Damascus and Homs, over the past two weeks that have resulted in the death of several Iranians, including two Revolutionary Guard officers three days ago. Iran’s retaliatory efforts, in the form of a drone shot down by the Israelis, were not successful in creating similar stirs to those emanating from Lebanon. —Walid Shukair (translated by Asaf Zilberfarb)
