What Comes After the Astonishing Hamas Attack and the Collapse in Israel? Who Controls the Initiative? And Who Is Afraid of Slipping?

Israel will not emerge victorious in the war in Gaza, and Hamas will not surpass the psychological victory it achieved on October 7. The United States may navigate out of the crisis without becoming directly involved, perhaps through a new plan to address the Palestinian-Israeli conflict that involves Arab and European participation, with implicit understandings with Iran. However, this will ultimately depend on Iran's final decision regarding Hamas's call to Tehran and its allies to activate all "resistance fronts," starting with Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. Given the rapid developments on the ground, amid Israeli confusion and Iranian ambiguity while retaining the element of surprise, this article will explore possible and likely scenarios without making definitive conclusions about what lies ahead in the unprecedented and intensifying winds that have swept over Israel.

Public opinion segments uncritically supportive of Israel in the United States and Europe will not understand Arab, Islamic and even  European and American public opinion segments that contextualize Hamas' shock attack within the history of the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land and siege of the Gaza Strip. Both sides denounce each other without trying to understand or listen to the opposite views. Since readers of this article, both in Arabic and English, come from both camps, I just want to note the astonishment felt about what Hamas has done, even by those hostile to it and who renounce its operations against civilians. Indeed, most of the world had expected Israel, not the Palestinians, to carry out such daring operations and did not anticipate such a collapse in Israel's prestige, reputation, intelligence capabilities, and performance.

The Israeli response, led by the devastating bombardment of Gaza and the forced displacement of civilians, has eroded some of the initial sympathy felt in the West. Now, the world is divided between those who support Israel's bid to crush Hamas at any cost and those warning against the folly of this and its political and military costs, not just the exorbitant human cost.

At the time of writing, Iran is moving cautiously in the diplomatic arena to avoid slipping off the tightrope. Even six days after Hamas's operation, the Islamic Republic of Iran remained off the battlefield and advised Hezbollah to exercise prudence and refrain from engaging Israel or activating the 'united fronts' plan.

Iran's priority is its nuclear program, and Tehran does not want to jump into the fire with Israel, six months away from completing its nuclear program and building a nuclear bomb. Tehran has read the U.S. message sent from aboard the Gerald Ford aircraft carrier that the Biden administration does not want to resort to a military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities yet would be forced to if Tehran miscalculated.

The White House's message was heard clearly by the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who openly denied involvement in Hamas's operations. In other words, the U.S. deterrence strategy towards Iran and its proxies has succeeded, at least so far. The Biden administration has also worked to address the other side of this challenge and invested efforts in convincing Israel not to carry out a ground invasion of Gaza, worked with Egypt to secure a safe passage for civilians from Gaza, pressured Hamas through Qatar's leverage, and engaged with Arab and European leaders to formulate an alternative peace plan starting with freezing the dangerous crisis and moving towards new negotiation processes for resolving the conflict in the Middle East under U.S. sponsorship.

The U.S. anxiety over becoming involved militarily alongside its Israeli ally has been evident. The Biden administration is caught between Israeli pressure and the American pro-Israel lobby and the prospect of involving the United States in a war with Iran triggered by either an Iranian or Israeli decision. Then there is the unavoidable humanitarian catastrophe resulting from an Israeli ground invasion of the Gaza Strip, for which Hamas has prepared a "defensive" plan it pledged to be even tougher and fiercer than its "offensive" plan against Israel.

The forced displacement from Gaza is part of the policy of the Israeli extremist camp, which wants to expel the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank and from within Israel itself. This camp believes there is no solution to the demographic time bomb other than getting rid of Palestinian citizens of Israel. Israel had helped create Hamas to counter the Palestine Liberation Organization and provide it with a pretext for exercising extremism when needed, such as forced expulsion and displacement. From this perspective, the epic proportion of Hamas's operations may ultimately serve Israeli goals more than Palestinian aspirations.

Egypt is in a predicament as it faces Israel's efforts to displace Palestinians into its soil, aware that some in Israel advocate for the resettlement of Gazan refugees in Sinai. Yet closing the border to Palestinian civilians to thwart the Israeli strategy is not an easy option, as its humanitarian cost is high and would unfold under the world's watchful eyes. Egypt is caught between a rock and a hard place, and President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, like President Joe Biden, has a presidential election to worry about. Both find themselves in a quandary due to Israel's determination to crush Hamas at any cost. Angry and frustrated by its military and intelligence failures, Israel wants to carry out the forced displacement of Palestinians from Gaza and the forced expulsion of Palestinians from inside Israel if needed.

If Israel insists on completely crushing Hamas and forcibly displacing Palestinians from Gaza, it could draw Iran and Egypt into a confrontation. Egypt will not engage in war with Israel, but it cannot submit entirely to Israeli policy. It may rally Arab support for its stance, not least because it is concerned about the backlash from the Egyptian and Arab public if it hesitates.

Iran has chosen caution and not rushed into joining Hamas in its war against Israel. Israel could lead Iran to abandon its balancing act by luring it into engagement either through the Syrian arena, where Israeli military operations have disrupted Damascus and Aleppo airports; or through the Lebanese front, where Hezbollah is on military alert. In this case, it will become clear that Israel figured that expanding the war and involving the United States were the only ways to recover from its collapse and restore its prestige.

The United States has a heavy burden on its shoulders. The Biden administration may succeed in leveraging its military, political, and diplomatic weight if used wisely and persistently with its Israeli ally, which it has naturally committed to defending. But Israel is no longer a necessary strategic ally for the United States, and the American public is weary of getting involved in a war imposed on them. The Biden administration was working for a qualitative shift in Arab-Israeli relations. But what it missed and is paying the price for today is that this qualitative shift is impossible if it ignores the Palestinians and their rights. Hamas's achievement is that it has awakened everyone involved and managed to undermine the assumption that the Palestinian issue had been settled among Arab governments, in the Arab and Islamic streets, and on the international stage.

The implicit U.S. messages from aboard aircraft carriers, primarily directed at Iran, carry an essential subheading in their folds: Syria. In Syria, U.S. military operations, if the Biden administration is compelled to undertake them, can prove the seriousness of military options. In Syria, Iran's regional program, extending from Iran to Iraq and Syria to Lebanon on the borders with Israel and the Mediterranean Sea, can be severed. In Syria, U.S. and European military interventions can overthrow Bashar al-Assad, Iran's ally.

If the Biden administration wishes to seize the diplomatic and political initiatives, it must have the courage to compel its ally, Israel, to adopt a new approach towards the Palestinians. U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken carried and heard ideas during his meetings with Arab leaders while still aiming for a significant breakthrough in Arab-Israeli relations as the Biden administration desires.

Russia is no longer a player in the Middle East; thus, the traditional competition between the United States and Russia is not relevant today. China is displeased with developments in the Palestinian-Israeli arena, as it diverted attention from its "Belt and Road" forum, for which it has long prepared, seeking global momentum. China is not currently in direct competition with the United States over mediating a solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Its focus lies in the success of its initiatives, notably the Saudi-Iranian agreement, alongside its oil priorities. China can contribute to the success of a new American diplomatic effort that goes beyond freezing the conflict and maps out the new Middle East with all its poles – Arab, Iranian, and Israeli. This requires American awareness of China's potential contribution instead of seeing it as part of the rivalry with Beijing.

Europe is ready to work with the United States. Here, too, there must be an insistence that the key to the success of any new peace process is changing Israel's approach and doctrine. It must be explicitly stated to Israel that the time has come to end arrogance and greed and to accept the two-state solution.

The Palestinian Authority is now under scrutiny more than ever. If it continues in its stagnation and obsolete methods, it will miss a historic opportunity inadvertently provided by Hamas. President Mahmoud Abbas must rejuvenate himself and surround himself with young Palestinians instead of dwelling on the past and the methods of rejection and boycotting negotiations with Israel. This is an opportunity for him to tell the youth of Hamas, not just the youth of Fatah, that now is the opportune time to engage together in a new peace process with Israel, with Arab participation, and perhaps later with Iranian blessing.

The Israelis must oust their Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and open an opportunity for a realistic and honest review of the miseries brought about by religious and political extremism on them and others. It is time for the Israeli people to hold themselves and their leaders accountable and to seize this bitter moment to create a pathway to justice for the Palestinians, freeing themselves from the siege mentality and living in peace with their neighbours – if they change their ways.