- Any incident of miscommunication or miscalculation could potentially trigger a regional war, warns Hiltermann
- Gaza war has brought the Palestinian issue back to the top of the agenda for regional actors, especially those who normalized relations with Israel, according to expert
- If Israel does not achieve its objectives, ‘Netanyahu’s position as prime minister will become very tenuous and he may have to leave,’ says Hiltermann
ISTANBUL
As Israel continues its deadly onslaught on the Gaza Strip and prepares for a possible ground assault on Rafah, the risk of a wider regional spillover is looming large, with experts warning of potential escalation in neighboring countries such as Lebanon, Iraq, Syria and Yemen.
Joost Hiltermann from the International Crisis Group expressed these apprehensions during a conversation with Anadolu, emphasizing the need for vigilance as tensions continue to escalate.
“The longer the war in Gaza continues, the greater the risk of even further spillover of the war into other regional theaters, be it in Lebanon or in Iraq or Syria or in Yemen, in the Red Sea,” he said.
Israel has announced its intention to start a ground operation in Rafah, sparking condemnation and concerns from several countries and human rights organizations about the repercussions and civilian casualties in an area that is currently home to some 1.3 million displaced Palestinians.
On the sidelines of a briefing in Istanbul, Hiltermann, who is the director of the Crisis Group’s MENA Program, warned that the current situation could “easily spin out of control,” emphasizing the need for caution, adding that the situation will “never really go back” to what it was before Oct. 7.
Regional escalation
Hiltermann stressed that a cease-fire in Gaza is vital not only for Palestinians in Gaza, but also to prevent further escalation in the region.
According to him, any incident of miscommunication or miscalculation at this point could potentially trigger a regional war.
“The regional war could be sparked by in one of two ways. One is by accident, where something happens unintentionally and then spins out of control,” he said.
Second, if one of the actors involved actually really wants to start a broader war, adding that Iran and the US have clearly said they do not want this at the moment.
The longer the war in Gaza continues, that calculus they are making may change, he concluded.
Palestine back on top of regional agenda
The expert pointed out that the current Gaza conflict has led to changes in the Middle East, beginning with the changing relationships in the region.
It is raising tensions in the Middle East between various actors to unprecedented levels, he added.
Another factor, he pointed out, is that the war has brought the Palestinian issue back to the top of the agenda for regional actors, “especially the ones that … have already normalized relations with Israel.”
These states, he said, will maintain their relations with Israel because they are mutually beneficial, but “will also put up the Palestinian issue … back on the agenda in negotiations.”
The countries will also be a lot more careful with the current Israeli government led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, he said.
They clearly feel that “Israel has overreacted to the threats that Hamas posed on Oct. 7,” he said, adding that this sentiment is echoing throughout the Gulf.
Later, during a talk with journalists, he said that the “irony of Oct. 7 is that Hamas, which is not known to be a champion of the two-state solution, actually by its action, forced the international community to put it back on the table.”
He stressed that a two-state option is “still the most sensible solution, if it were still possible,” adding that this is a big question because of the extent of illegal settlement construction, the aggressive actions of Jewish settlers and the amount of infrastructure they are building, especially in and around Jerusalem.
Post-war situation
Looking ahead, Hiltermann said the situation is unclear with regards to whether there will be a cease-fire.
If Hamas is not defeated, he said a big change could be seen in Israel, “where Netanyahu’s position as prime minister will become very tenuous and he may have to leave and be replaced by another Israeli government.”
He said Israel was already deeply polarized before Oct. 7, particularly over the status of its democracy and the role of the judiciary in the light of the controversial reforms being pursued by Netanyahu.
“That issue has not gone away. It may come back, and then on top of that, will come the whole question of who’s responsible for the security and intelligence failure that Israel experienced on Oct. 7, and somebody will have to pay the cost of that – certainly the Netanyahu government and the security establishment,” he said.
Non-state actors
Regarding non-state actors in the region, Hiltermann pointed to the changing dynamics between Hezbollah and Israel, saying they have “moved much beyond where they were on Oct. 7.”
However, they have not done anything that would suggest that they are ready to for a direct confrontation, he said.
“Hezbollah has made it clear that they don’t want direct confrontation, but have shown that they are ready for it,” he said.
Israel’s stance on this issue, on the other hand, remains “a bit less clear,” he added.
“There are different voices in Israel. Some say it’s time to also reduce Hezbollah’s capabilities of what Hamas did … (and) if we don’t do it now, it may be too late. Then there are others who say that Hezbollah can be deterred,” said Hitermann.
The analyst underlined that the US has also urged Israel “not to open a second front this time.”
As for the situation with Yemen’s Houthi group, he said the responses from the US and the UK have hit nothing of any great importance.
“Nothing has reduced the Houthi capacity,” he said, citing assessments by Yemeni military experts and officials who believe that “nothing of significance” has been targeted.
Regarding Iraq and Syria, he said Iraqi groups in particular have been very active, citing their recent attacks on American soldiers as an indication of heightened tensions and risks in the region.
