Summary The global consequences of the Israel-Hamas war are just beginning. Here's what to watch. view.atlanticcouncil.org
12,420 words - html page - View html page
One Line
The Israel-Hamas war poses global implications, including the risk of further conflict in the Middle East and uncertain outcomes for Gaza.
Slides
Slide Presentation (13 slides)
Key Points
- The risk of escalatory spillover to the broader Middle East is low but real.
- Hezbollah's involvement in the conflict is a major concern.
- The United States is increasing its military presence in the eastern Mediterranean to deter violent actions by Iran's threat network.
- The possibility of a ceasefire is dependent on both Israel and Hamas.
- The normalization of ties between Israel and Saudi Arabia has been delayed but remains a possibility.
- European opinion on the conflict is splintering, with differing approaches to aid and relations with the Palestinians.
- The Gulf states are nervously watching the conflict and feel they have not received the same level of support as Israel.
- Iran sees its investments in Hamas paying off and views the conflict as an opportunity to stall Saudi-Israeli normalization talks and test Iranian weaponry.
Summaries
18 word summary
The Israel-Hamas war has global consequences, with potential escalation in the Middle East and uncertain outcomes for Gaza.
81 word summary
The Israel-Hamas war has global consequences. Iran threatens to respond through its proxies in Lebanon and Syria, raising the risk of escalation in the broader Middle East. The United States increases its military presence off the coast of Israel and sends a second carrier group. European responses splinter, aid is a point of contention. Gulf states request upgraded armaments. The conflict may stall Saudi-Israeli normalization talks. The future of Gaza is uncertain, and the Biden administration emphasizes the need for planning.
132 word summary
The Israel-Hamas war has global consequences that are just beginning. There is a risk of escalation to the broader Middle East, with Iran threatening to respond through its proxies in Lebanon and Syria. Hezbollah's involvement is a major concern. The United States is increasing its military presence off the coast of Israel as a deterrent and sending a second carrier group to the region. The European response is splintering, particularly in regards to aid. Gulf states are requesting upgraded armaments. The conflict is seen as an opportunity for Iran to stall Saudi-Israeli normalization talks. The possibility of a ceasefire depends on both Israel and Hamas. European opinion on the conflict is also splintering. The future of Gaza is uncertain, and the Biden administration emphasizes the need to start thinking about its future.
430 word summary
The global consequences of the Israel-Hamas war are just beginning. There is a low but real risk of escalatory spillover to the broader Middle East, with Iran threatening to respond through its proxies in Lebanon and Syria. Hezbollah's involvement in the conflict is a major concern, as it has much to lose in a war with Israel. The evacuation of citizens from Israel by its closest allies, such as the US, indicates anticipation of escalation. While there is a risk of spillover to other extremist groups, the response has been nonviolent so far. The United States is increasing its force posture off the coast of Israel as a means of deterrence, sending a second carrier group to the region. The European response to the conflict is splintering, particularly in regards to aid. Gulf states are nervously watching the conflict and have asked for upgraded armaments since the start of the Biden administration. Iran sees the conflict as an opportunity to stall Saudi-Israeli normalization talks and test its weaponry.
The United States is increasing its military presence in the eastern Mediterranean to deter violent actions by Iran's threat network against Israel and US partners in the region. The US is also expediting military aid to Israel, but access to these resources is dependent on funding from Congress. Counterterrorism efforts may see a resurgence as the conflict continues.
The possibility of a ceasefire is dependent on both Israel and Hamas. While there is speculation about whether Israel would agree to a ceasefire, Hamas is unlikely to do so as it seeks a brutal Israeli response to further its goals. The normalization of ties between Israel and Saudi Arabia has been delayed but remains a possibility. European opinion on the conflict is splintering, with differing approaches to aid and relations with the Palestinians.
The US Congress offers near-unanimous support for Israel, but funding for both Ukraine and Israel is becoming a challenge. The commitment to both countries will require careful allocation of resources. The Gulf states are nervously watching the conflict and feel that they have not received the same level of support as Israel. Iran sees the conflict as aligning with its interests, but its stock will plummet if Hamas is crushed and other proxies sit out the conflict.
The future of Gaza is uncertain, with questions about who will lead an eventual peace process. The Biden administration is stressing the need to start thinking concretely about the future of Gaza. Overall, the global consequences of the Israel-Hamas war are just beginning, and it is challenging to predict future decisions and developments.
1374 word summary
The global consequences of the Israel-Hamas war are just beginning. The risk of escalatory spillover to the broader Middle East is low but real. Iran has threatened to respond to Israeli abuses of Palestinians, potentially through its proxies in Lebanon and Syria, including Hezbollah and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. The United States has warned against Hezbollah opening a northern front in the war and has stated that it will act against the group. Irans militias across the Middle East have vowed to act against US soldiers and interests if the US strikes Hezbollah. There is also a risk of retaliatory attacks by Iranian-backed groups in Iraq and Yemen. The critical variable in how this conflict will impact foreign policy in the United States, Europe, and the Gulf is whether it spills over to the broader Middle East.
Hezbollah's involvement in the conflict is a major concern. While the group has engaged in limited exchanges of shells with the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF), it has not brought out its full arsenal. Hezbollah has much to lose in a war with Israel, as it would result in massive destruction of infrastructure in Lebanon. The group is currently calling the shots in the Lebanese government, and blame for sacrificing infrastructure and lives would fall on Hezbollah's shoulders.
The evacuation of citizens from Israel by Israels closest allies is another important development. The US government will not allow Israel to stage a massive ground assault without pulling families and non-essential personnel out of harm's way. Charter planes full of American citizens are already leaving Israel, indicating that the US anticipates escalation.
There is a risk of spillover to other extremist groups, but so far, the response has been nonviolent. Al-Qaeda's network has expressed support for Hamas but has not pledged military action. Collateral damage from the conflict could shape the recruitment efforts of Islamic extremist groups.
The United States is ramping up its force posture off the coast of Israel as a means of deterrence. The US is sending a second carrier group to the region and carefully messaging that it is not looking for a fight. The goal is to discourage other actors from seeking a conflict.
The European response to the conflict is splintering, particularly in regards to aid. Germany, Austria, Denmark, and Sweden have frozen development funds to the Palestinians, while Italy and the United Kingdom have not. The needs of those displaced by the Israeli counteroffensive in Gaza are growing, and current humanitarian aid pledges are insufficient.
The US Congress has offered near-unanimous support for Israel, but funding both Israel and Ukraine with the resources already provided is becoming a challenge. The US commitment to Israel is stronger on paper than the commitment to Ukraine, but the greater existential challenge to the US worldview is a matter of perspective.
Gulf states are nervously watching the conflict and the speedy deployment of arms to Israel. They have asked for upgraded armaments since the start of the Biden administration when arms sales were frozen. There is a reinforced feeling in the Gulf that they have not merited a rescue from the US.
Iran sees its investments in Hamas paying off and views the conflict as a win. The regime in Tehran perceives the conflict as an opportunity to stall Saudi-Israeli normalization talks, degrade Israel's reputation, distract the US and Europe, spike anti-Israel and anti-Western sentiment, and test Iranian drones and rockets.
The future of Gaza is uncertain, and there are questions about who will lead an eventual peace process. The Biden administration is stressing the need to start thinking concretely about the future of Gaza but does not have a workable model to share for mapping that future.
Overall, the global consequences of the Israel-Hamas war are just beginning, and it is challenging to predict future decisions and developments. The risk of escalatory spillover to the broader Middle East exists, and there are concerns about Hezbollah's involvement and the response of other extremist groups. The United States is ramping up its force posture, and there are divisions among European countries regarding aid. Gulf states are nerv
The United States is increasing its military presence in the eastern Mediterranean, deploying naval forces equipped with air and missile defense capabilities, Tomahawk missiles, and specialized aircraft. This show of force is intended to deter violent actions by Iran's threat network against Israel, Americans, and US partners in the region. The US is also expediting military aid to Israel, utilizing existing mechanisms and stockpiles of military equipment. However, access to these resources is dependent on funding from Congress, which must prioritize support to Israel. The defense industry will also play a role in ensuring the timely replenishment of military supplies. Counterterrorism efforts may see a resurgence as the conflict continues, with the focus shifting towards consolidating gains and mitigating radicalization in the region.
The possibility of a ceasefire is dependent on both Israel and Hamas. While there is speculation about whether Israel would agree to a ceasefire, Hamas is unlikely to do so as it seeks a brutal Israeli response to further its goals of rendering Israel untouchable by Arab governments and gaining support at the United Nations. A ceasefire agreement would need to offer more concessions to both sides. Investigations into the rocket strike on the al-Ahli hospital and the impact of misinformation and disinformation on public sentiment are ongoing. These factors will influence the dynamics of the conflict and potential peace negotiations.
The normalization of ties between Israel and Saudi Arabia has been delayed but remains a possibility. Saudi Arabia perceives Hamas as a threat and has insisted on concessions for the Palestinians in its negotiations with Israel and the US. However, the recent conflict has set back the starting point for these negotiations, making it more difficult for Saudi Arabia to advocate for Palestinian interests. The future of normalization will be impacted by Israels response to Hamas and its willingness to address key issues.
European opinion on the conflict is splintering, with differing approaches to aid and relations with the Palestinians. Germany, Austria, Denmark, and Sweden have frozen development aid, while the United Kingdom is conducting a review of its aid. Italy has not frozen its aid but is subjecting it to review. The needs of those displaced by the conflict are growing, and current humanitarian aid pledges are insufficient to meet these needs. Europes approach to refugees and the potential for conflict baggage to be imported into the region are areas to watch.
The US Congress offers near-unanimous support for Israel, but funding for both Ukraine and Israel is becoming a challenge. The commitment to both countries will require careful allocation of resources, and Russia may see this as an opportunity to expand operations against Ukraine and test NATO. The addition of specific measures in the congressional resolution expressing support for Israel, new Authorization for Use of Military Force legislation, and efforts to limit Irans funding for terrorism are all factors that will shape US policy in the region.
The Gulf states are nervously watching the conflict, particularly the deployment of arms to Israel. They have asked for upgraded armaments since the start of the Biden administration but feel that they have not received the same level of support as Israel. The United Arab Emirates and Bahrain have condemned Hamass actions, putting them at risk of attacks from Iran-affiliated militias. The United States must defend its Gulf partners if they come under attack, as their stability is crucial for maintaining US leverage in global shipping and energy markets.
Iran sees its investments in Hamas paying off, as the conflict aligns with its interests. It stalls Saudi-Israeli normalization talks, degrades Israels reputation, distracts the US and Europe, spikes anti-Israel sentiment, and provides an opportunity to test Iranian weaponry. However, if Hamas is crushed and other proxies sit out the conflict, Iran's stock will plummet. Iran is also engaging in a domestic recruitment campaign to rally support for its position and deter its militias from starting a region-wide war.
The future of Gaza is uncertain, with the role of Hamas and the credibility of the Palestinian Authority called into question. Hamas must choose between terrorism and political survival, as it will not be allowed to exist as both a