Voices from the Arab press: Iran is at the forefront, and Gaza is being sidelined

Iran is at the forefront, and Gaza is being sidelined

Al-Ahram, Egypt, April 15

The recent events in Gaza involving Israel’s alleged crimes have sparked international and regional media coverage since this past Saturday. Iran has described the retaliation as a response to Israel’s attack on its consulate in Damascus and the killing of its military, intelligence, and diplomatic personnel. This breaking news demands top placement in news bulletins due to its significance and unprecedented nature. Conflicting accounts have emerged from both Iran and Israel regarding the strike. Iran claims a successful limited operation, while Israel insists it was a failed attempt with no casualties or damage. Some Israeli supporters see this limited outcome as a potential indicator of Iran’s capabilities for future retaliatory actions. 

The direct military intervention by Iran marks a dangerous precedent, raising concerns about the scale and implications of future actions. The impact of these events on Gaza is crucial, as Iran claims the Palestinian issue is central to its concerns. While detailing the repercussions of Iran’s strike on Israel, ongoing Israeli atrocities against Palestinians in Gaza are highlighted. Reports of attacks on defenseless Palestinian civilians in both Gaza and the West Bank continue, underscoring the ongoing brutality faced by the Palestinian population. Inside Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his government experienced a boost in popular support following the Iranian strike. 

Demonstrations by families of hostages held by Hamas were temporarily halted in solidarity. Tensions between the United States and Israel escalated as weapon supply discussions were sidelined, with fears raised over potential civilian casualties in Palestine. 

The focus on Iran has shifted attention away from the Gaza situation, as Israeli military officials found themselves fielding inquiries primarily related to Iran’s actions. Was Iran prepared for the wide-ranging consequences of its retaliatory strike? Time will tell. – Ahmed Abdel-Tawwab 

Jordan is not an arena for score-settling

Asharq Al-Awsat, London, April 16

Jordan considers the Palestinian issue its foremost concern, driven by historical, geographical, demographic, and strategic factors. The establishment of a Palestinian state is not only a priority but a vital national interest for Jordan. 

Despite openly advocating for this cause, however, Jordan refuses to seek approval from any entity, whether domestic or foreign, that has attempted to influence the issue for decades. Amid the ongoing events in Gaza and the West Bank, Jordanian diplomacy, led by King Abdullah II, has worked diligently to present the true narrative to the international community and contradict the biased Israeli perspective. 

The events of October 7 are not the root cause but a tragic outcome of Israel’s occupation and injustices, which the international community has tolerated for over 70 years. Hence, Jordan strongly condemns Israeli atrocities and policies of collective punishment and genocide, rejecting calls to denounce Palestinian resistance movements. 

Jordan was quick to notice the influence of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government on the US administration’s stance following the attacks, exposing Israel’s plan to displace Palestinians from Gaza under the guise of targeting resistance groups. 

Despite initial support from American diplomacy, a shift in position occurred after intervention from Jordan. Furthermore, Jordan emphasized the unity of Palestinian territories between the West Bank and Gaza, thwarting extremist Israeli plans to divide them and abandon Oslo commitments. 

In a bold move, Jordan attempted to break the siege on Gaza by airdropping humanitarian aid, a gesture rebuffed by the Netanyahu government, which weaponizes starvation and deprivation. 

Jordan’s firm stance led by King Abdullah II has faced backlash from Israeli campaigns and criticism, yet Jordanian support for the Palestinian cause remains steadfast at all levels. Recent incidents in Amman during Ramadan caused tension, hinting at efforts to divert focus from Israeli aggression and sow internal discord. The Jordanian state swiftly addressed legal violations, alert to foreign exploitation of local issues for political gain. Jordan’s economic struggles, combined with ongoing regional challenges, demand introspection and resolve in the face of external pressures. Amid regional turmoil, Jordan stands firm, defending its borders, supporting Palestinian brethren, and upholding stability. Despite facing multiple fronts, including a prolonged border conflict with Syria and hosting a significant number of Syrian refugees, Jordan’s commitment to dialog and order remains unwavering. Jordan’s principled stance against external manipulation reinforces its dedication to protecting its people, sovereignty, and regional peace. – Faisal Shboul 

Israel’s relations with the world’s largest Muslim country

Al-Masry Al-Youm, Egypt, April 15

The recent announcement of an agreement between Israel and Indonesia to normalize diplomatic relations has raised eyebrows, given the ongoing conflict in Gaza. 

At a time when Palestinian blood continues to be shed, the news of the largest Islamic country by population, totaling 275 million, according to the 2022 census, forging ties with Israel has sparked astonishment. However, upon closer inspection, the motive behind this unexpected development becomes clearer.

Indonesia’s long-standing efforts to join the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), a group of economically powerful nations focused on cooperation and knowledge exchange, have led to this diplomatic breakthrough. Membership in the OECD requires diplomatic relations with all member countries, including Israel, which necessitated the normalization of ties between Indonesia and Israel. 

The negotiations, which were reportedly conducted in secret over three months, underline the strategic significance of the agreement. Despite historical opposition within Indonesia toward establishing official relations with Israel, the potential benefits for both countries have outweighed domestic concerns. 

Israel’s persistent efforts to secure a normalization agreement with Indonesia reflect its recognition of the symbolic value associated with Indonesia as the world’s largest Muslim-majority nation. Indonesia, known for its unwavering support of the Palestinian cause, now faces the challenge of revising its stance toward Tel Aviv in the wake of this agreement. This shift will require Indonesia to navigate the sentiments of its populace and political parties with sway in parliament, who have traditionally been aligned against Israel. The path toward full normalization between Israel and Indonesia may be fraught with obstacles, but the potential benefits for both countries indicate a calculated strategic move.  – Abdel Latif El-Menawy 

Seven hours to Israel

An-Nahar, Lebanon, April 16

Amid the tense anticipation of Iran’s response to Israel’s bombing of its consulate in Damascus, a massive missile and drone campaign was launched over the weekend. Reports indicated over 300 aircraft and missiles were involved in the operation, reminiscent of scenes from historical epics. 

Interestingly, this assault had been foreseen hours prior, allowing Israeli and American defense systems to intercept a significant portion of munitions before they reached Israeli territory. Many sources have suggested the attack was mutually agreed upon. This calculated escalation evokes memories of past agreements between the US and Iran, particularly following the killing of Qasem Soleimani in 2020. The need to appease public expectations, driven by a thirst for revenge, seemed to have influenced Iran’s decision to respond directly. 

The attack seemed to send a symbolic message as opposed to a full-scale military endeavor, a move perhaps intended to make a political statement rather than inflict substantial damage. The aftermath of these events invites us to examine several critical developments unfolding in the region. Firstly, there is a deliberate effort to portray Iran’s military capabilities in a formidable light, akin to the hype around Saddam Hussein’s regime in the 1990s. This narrative may serve to provoke or justify future actions against Iran. Secondly, Israel’s aggression toward the Iranian Consulate seemed designed to incite a direct response, steering the conflict away from proxy wars in neighboring countries. 

The political mileage gained by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the subsequent global support further complicate the situation. The failure of Iran’s recent raid to achieve military objectives underscores the diminishing threat posed to Israel. Despite the sacred nature of the act, the minimal impact raises questions about the real motives behind such actions. The looming possibility of Israeli retaliation provokes speculation about the next move on this geopolitical chessboard. As the dynamics between Iran and Israel shift from covert to overt confrontation, there arises a glimmer of hope for a potential reconciliation, perhaps under the banner of a two-state solution. 

The historical context of Jewish statehood and regional power struggles suggests a pragmatic approach might be the only feasible path forward. While the rhetoric of an imminent Israeli-Iranian conflict persists, the reality hints at a different narrative. The complex interplay of nationalistic sentiments and strategic interests points to a nuanced relationship with underlying cooperation. The echoes of past alliances and shared objectives hint at a future where conflicts are managed through subtlety and proxy battles rather than all-out war. 

In the grand scheme of things, the idea of a prolonged direct war between Israel and Iran appears more of a distraction than a plausible scenario. Both parties understand the detrimental effects of such a conflict and are likely to pursue alternative avenues to assert their dominance in the region. This delicate dance of power dynamics will continue to shape the Middle Eastern landscape, with unforeseen consequences and shifting alliances on the horizon. – Mohammed Al Rumaihi

Translated by Asaf Zilberfarb.