As far as one is concerned, the Middle East has been for a long time a matter of balance of power overlapping with strategic reluctance to change its status quo. But the advent of US President Donald Trump is ushering a new era with all sorts of possibilities.
On the microcosm level for instance, Arafat’s Fateh movement in the PLO was checked in a formula of a balance of power by the leftists organizations as well as the Palestinian organizations sponsored by some Arab countries, the affiliation of all in the PLO created the sense of a balance of power.
However, with the emergance of the PNA and the affiliation of the Palestinian groups in it, albeit with variable influence, created a unit which under the balance of power notion, necessitated the creation of a check and balance on its power.
Consequently Hamas was created, and what seemingly appeared as contradiction between them, turned out to be a symbiotic relationship between them. Now, one cannot say with certainity what will happen next, however, if the objective is to maintain the balance of power by just weakening Hamas, this will require symbiotically weakening the PNA as well, but if the objective is to eleminate Hamas, the next step will be to eleminate the PNA.
As for the macro level, and as one often repeats, the Middle East, has at least for the last five decades was strategically governed by the famous triangle, Iran-Israel-Turkey, with the Arab world having little say in their own affairs , if at all.
However, since the fall of the Shah regime in Iran, the search started for a third angle to replace Iran in governing the Middle East, considering the open hostility of Iran towards West. Consequently some Arab countries jumped into the frey as possible candidates, like Egypt, then Qatar, UAE and Saudi Arabia. But as it seems, a preference for the old triangle was decided upon by the world powers, accepting the inconvenience of having to negotiate with Iran.
Now, we can see a new development that breaks the taboo of the old balance of power in the region.
Starting mid-way from the Biden administration, and with the start of the second Trump administration, the notion of balance of power by the usual triangle has turned into a balance of aggressiveness in the region, as Israel and Iran “bombard” each other, Turkey’s involvement in toppling Assad, and now the distinct possibility of confrontation with Israel in Syria, while being threatened itself by Iran if it cooperates in any possible American attack on Persia. Thus the stability which this triangle had sustained itself, is no more.
From appearances, at least how things look like: It seems Israel is being supported by Trump explicitly and by many other international parties implicitly, to be either the major power that has a say in Middle Eastern affairs. This means that Iran’s grip on the region will be curtailed through negotiations at least if not war; and here the symbiotic issue appears again, with Turkey’s role curtailed through pressures and/or and economic threats.
Here, as well, the aim is to designate Israel as only point of compass on the map of the Middle East, which Arabs are expected to flock to and normalise with.
In this case events will inevitably take a nasty symbiotic turn, meaning Iran will have to be attacked and taken out altogether with its surrogates from the power relations of the Middle East, and Turkey forced to take a more insular step from the affairs of the region, even with a regime change if required.
But we will have to wait and see what lies in store!
Dr Janbek is a Jordanian writer based in Paris, France.
There are not enough leaks about the “backchannel” that began late last month in Doha between Trump’s envoy for hostage affairs, Adam Boehler, and leaders of Hamas’ political bureau (reports indicate that the Hamas delegation was led by Khalil al-Hayya). However, what is striking is that these talks coincided with an escalation in threats from both Trump and Netanyahu toward Hamas, warning of a resumption of war and a more severe course of action. Moreover, Israeli security sources indicate that there is a plan to begin the practical implementation of the displacement scheme announced by Trump!
The key question here is what lies behind the Trump administration’s decision to open a secret channel with Hamas at this specific time, especially when negotiations between Hamas and Israel regarding the second phase are stalling. This is particularly intriguing given that the Trump administration has shown a tougher stance toward Hamas than his predecessor, Joe Biden. Moreover, the Doha meetings coincided with Trump receiving a number of former detainees held by Hamas and issuing a strongly worded message, what he described as a serious threat. What is the significance of these parallel and simultaneous steps taken by the Trump administration toward Hamas?
Those close to the Trump administration suggest that this move is nothing more than a “tactical shift” in the US approach without any fundamental changes. The goal is to ensure that Hamas receives the message directly and forcefully, without intermediaries or misinterpretation. This explanation is logical and, in fact, the most likely scenario, as there are no real initiatives or substantial shifts in the US administration’s position. This is especially evident in the fact that the only stance issued by the U.S. National Security Council rejected the Egyptian-Arab proposal, reaffirming President Trump’s commitment to his plan.
So what message did Boehler convey to Hamas leaders? Or, in other words, what is the deal being offered to them? It is clear that the U.S. offer revolves around extending the first phase, or even calling it the second phase, in exchange for the release of all prisoners held by Hamas, including Americans, as well as the safe exit of Hamas and Qassam Brigades leaders from Gaza and the establishment of a long-term ceasefire in the Strip. However, does this include details about the day after the war? It remains unclear whether the U.S. message addressed that issue.
Nevertheless, the American stance remains unchanged, ending Hamas’ rule, disarming the movement, or effectively abandoning its military wing. It is also unknown whether the US has a specific policy if Hamas decides to transition into a political party that adopts peaceful resistance, for example.
Of course, the alternative Trump offers Hamas, should they reject these conditions, is the resumption of war, greater destruction in Gaza, and a forced displacement campaign against Palestinians. But the question that Hamas leaders are likely posing to Trump’s envoy is: What is the value of this threat if, in the end, what you are offering is nothing but the displacement of Palestinians? Why should we accept your terms, release the prisoners, lay down our arms, and leave Gaza if the outcome in both cases is the same? It is unclear whether Boehler had an answer to this question, or perhaps why Trump refuses the Arab plan, which is the most realistic and logical proposal presented so far.
On the other side, an important question arises: Is Hamas’ position unified between Doha and Gaza? There is significant room for interpretation and differences in the language coming from the Qassam Brigades on one hand and Hamas’ political bureau, particularly from one of the movement’s senior politicians, Mousa Abu Marzouk, on the other. It is also unclear whether Khalil al-Hayya is truly authorized to make such a crucial decision for the movement or what the limits of his mandate are. Is there any acceptance of the idea of a safe passage for the movement’s leaders in Gaza or laying down arms and transitioning into a peaceful movement? Or does Hamas still insist on maintaining both political and military strategies despite the severe imbalance of power and the massive destruction inflicted on Gaza and its people? All the choices are harsh and difficult.
British broadcaster and journalist Piers Morgan said Israel’s killing of Palestinian civilians in Gaza, including women and children, could be justified as a “moral right.”
In an interview this week with journalist Tucker Carlson on a rooftop in Saudi Arabia’s capital, Morgan discussed several topics, including the Israeli assault in Gaza and whether the U.S. should be funding it.
Carlson condemned Israel’s bombardment of civilians for over a year, which Morgan questioned as he said such bombing ‘wasn’t evil.’
Carlson said: ‘If you’re intentionally killing civilians, you probably shouldn’t beat your chest and brag about it… maybe you can make the case that you had to do it, but you should weep.’
‘Is it evil though?’ Morgan responded, to which Carlson argued: ‘To kill civilians on purpose? I think it is. Kids and children? Yeah.’
Morgan said he could see there being a ‘moral right’ to civilian deaths in wartime, saying: ‘If there is a world war that threatens the entire world, yes.’
When Carlson called his view ‘disgusting’, he walked back and said it could be justified ‘in a pure defensive action’ as the two journalists sparred over the assault.
‘To intentionally kill noncombatants, women and children, I think we can say that’s wrong,’ he concluded.
The two journalists moved onto the issue of whether the US should continue funding Israel’s assault in Gaza, after former President Joe Biden sent at least $17.9 billion in military aid since the start of the Israeli genocide in October 2023.
After Carlson repeated his calls for the US to stop supplying aid to Ukraine in its conflict with Russia, Morgan questioned: ‘Why do you support Israel against Hamas? Why do you support giving them billions of dollars?’
‘I don’t,’ Carlson snapped back.
‘I support Israel in the sense that I really like Israel, I brought my family on vacation there… but (I support Israel) only to the extent that it helps the United States.’
Morgan said this was a hypocritical stance given his criticism of aid to Ukraine, saying his support merely ‘depends on which country’.
‘I don’t see a difference between (Israel’s bombing of Gaza) and what is happening in Ukraine,’ Morgan continued.
‘This is a long way away from America, there is no direct involvement with America or no mainland involvement, and yet you think it’s right that America supports Israel, but you don’t think it’s right that America supports Ukraine.’
Tucker Carlson condemns Ben Shapiro and calls Israel ‘evil’ for intentionally targeting and killing thousands of women and children in the Gaza genocide…
Piers Morgan in a shocking moment actually defends the intentional targeting of women and children and tries to justify it. pic.twitter.com/mUJ56jQ1jr
Fifteen months of Israeli bombardment have reduced buildings to rubble and ash, leaving large areas of Gaza uninhabitable. More than 47,400 Palestinians were killed during the Israeli assault, with 70 percent of the victims being women and children, according to Gaza’s Health Ministry.
US President Donald Trump, Saturday, proposed relocating Palestinians from Gaza to neighboring countries like Egypt and Jordan. This is an unusual proposal that was opposed by the former administration of Joe Biden.
Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One towards Miami, the president said he raised the matter during a telephone call with King Abdullah II of Jordan, and he might talk with Egyptian President Abdel-Fattah al-Sisi on Sunday.
“I said to him (Jordan’s king) that I’d love you to take on more because I’m looking at the whole Gaza Strip right now and it’s a mess, it’s a real mess,” said Trump. “I’d like him (Jordan’s king) to take people”.
“I’d like Egypt to take people. I’m talking to Gen. Al Sisi tomorrow sometime I believe. I’d like Egypt to take people. And I’d like Jordan to take people,” Trump continued.
“You’re talking about a million and a half people, and we just clean out that whole thing. You know over the centuries it’s had many, many conflicts. And I don’t know, something has to happen,” he added.
Describing Gaza as “a demolition site,” the US president said: “Almost everything is demolished and people are dying there. So l’d rather get involved with some of the Arab nations and build housing at a different location where they can maybe live in peace for a change.”
He added that the move “could be temporary or could be long-term.”
The Biden administration opposed relocating Gaza residents outside the enclave, advocating a return of Gazans to their homes in the aftermath of a potential peace and a two-state solution.
Israel’s genocidal war has killed more than 47,000 Palestinians, most of them women and children, and injured over 111,000 since Oct. 7, 2023.
Since Jan. 19, a ceasefire is in place to bring respite to civilians in the Palestinian enclave, but Trump said last week he is not confident that the truce will hold.
“It’s not our war. It’s their war. I think they are very weakened on the other side,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. “I looked at a picture of Gaza. Gaza is like a massive demolition site. That place is. … It’s really got to be rebuilt in a different way,” he said.
“Gaza is interesting. It’s a phenomenal location on the sea, best weather, you know, everything’s good. It’s like some beautiful things could be done with it, but it’s very interesting, but some fantastic things could be done with Gaza,” Trump added according to Anadolu.
With the fall of the Assad regime, Syria has turned a new page, with the opposition forces now holding the reins of the country .
An 11-day-long opposition blitzkrieg forced Bashar al Assad to flee to Moscow, dealing a death blow to the regime after 13 years of the brutal war.
Though various revolutionary groups fought for this decisive moment, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which means Levant Liberation Committee, emerged as a dominant force under the leadership of Ahmed al Sharaa, also known by his nom de guerre Abu Mohammed al Jolani.
The US and its Western allies has designated the HTS as a terrorist organisation, putting a bounty of $10 million on his head, which was lifted recently.
But the 42-year-old Syrian leader has emerged as an indispensable force, wielding strong influence over the war-ravaged country. In late December, Sharaa met Turkish and Ukrainian foreign ministers as well as top diplomats from the US and the UK, signalling that he is the de facto leader of the new Syria.
Sharaa had a joint press conference with Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan, during which the top Turkish diplomat “thanked” the Syrian leader for his “friendly” welcome to the country.
“I saw that he (Sharaa) and his friends had very clear ideas about the establishment and transition process of the new system,” said Fidan, referring to the transition process from the Assad regime rule to the new government.
Fidan and Sharaa also sat down for a tea stop in Damascus’s famous Mount Qasioun, which overlooks the capital. Mount Qasioun is believed to be the site of legendary events, such as the Biblical and Quranic figure Abel’s murder by Cain.
From a fighter in battle fatigues to a statesman in a Western suit and a trimmed beard, Sharaa’s transformation reflects the changes in the country since the fall of the Assad regime.
Since the beginning of the 11-day lightning offensive against the Assad regime, Sharaa has given several interviews and statements from CNN to Saudi state-owned Al Arabiya TV, reflecting a fair degree of moderation in his worldview.
He has pledged to ease sectarian tensions and rebuild the country along the margins of justice and equality. The HTS leader also sent a message to the Western camp saying that “your interests are understood in the new Syria.”
He suggested working with Russia, an ally of the Assad regime, and sent a conciliatory message to Iran, in which he offered to develop a positive relationship even though Tehran fiercely backed Bashar al Assad in the past.
“This new triumph, my brothers, marks a new chapter in the history of the region, a history fraught with dangers (that left) Syria as a playground for Iranian ambitions, spreading sectarianism, stirring corruption,” he said, during one of his first speeches after the overthrow of the Assad regime in Damascus’s Umayyad Mosque, one of the most decorated and oldest Muslim religious structures.
In his latest interview,Sharaa suggested that elections and drafting a new constitution replacing the current Baathist charter will take several years due to the fact that the civil war has led to a large displacement and a lot of disruption in many public services.
A moderate leader?
The Biden administration has also signalled that depending on Sharaa’s path, Washington might consider removing the HTS from the US terror list.
“We have taken note of statements by the leaders of these rebel groups in recent days, and they’re saying the right things now, but as they take on greater responsibility, we will assess not just their word, but their actions,” Biden said on Dec. 8.
In a recent interview, Sharaa urged the Western leadership to lift sanctions because they were “issued based on the crimes” of the Assad regime, which is gone after the opposition victory. As a result, “these sanctions should be removed automatically”, he said.
Not only the US but also regional powerhouses like Türkiye, which has backed the opposition’s democratic aspirations against the Assad regime, also closely watching Sharaa and the new Syrian administration’s ongoing policies.
With an overwhelming majority of Syrians having lost so many loved ones in the brutal war, they are now hoping for a long-lasting peace and a life with dignity and honour.
“I have an advice for him (Sharaa/Jolani), I hope he is smart enough to know it by himself: don’t even try to be the new Assad. The Syrians who did a revolution against Assad, can do it again easily against you as well,” says Omar Alhariri, a Daraa-based Syrian journalist.
“We are looking for the future, being a good part of it. We are waiting for justice,” Alhariri tells TRT World, adding that Sharaa should lead a process in which “Syrians themselves should choose their leaders” in a democratic process.
Sharaa has recently shown his openness to a democratic order, saying the HTS and its armed allies intend to form a “council chosen by the people” and a state operating through institutions.
In March, however, he faced large protests in his previous stronghold Idlib, where protesters accused him of corruption and suppression. It remains to be seen whether his moderate rhetoric will match his future actions.
What is his background?
Born in Saudi Arabia to Syrian parents who are from the Israel-occupied Golan Heights, Sharaa grew up hearing the stories of his family’s displacement.
During the infamous Arab-Israeli War of 1967, Israel occupied the Golan Heights, rendering its inhabitants, including Sharaa’s family, homeless.
Assad’s ouster under the leadership of Sharaa is, in a way, life coming full circle. His father Hussein al-Sharaa was a pan-Arab nationalist, who was imprisoned in the 1970s by Bashar al Assad’s father Hafez al Assad. After his release, Sharaa’s father sought asylum in Saudi Arabia where he worked as an oil engineer.
In 1989, when he was seven-years-old, the Sharaa family returned to Syria’s Damascus. The young Sharaa pursued journalism, studying media.
In the 2000s, the Second Intifada left indelible marks on Sharaa’s life. While his father had cultivated strong ties with the Palestinian armed groups affiliated to the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), the young Sharaa established contacts with radical groups like Al Qaeda.
“I started thinking about how I could fulfil my duties, defending a people who are oppressed by occupiers and invaders,” he said during an interview with Frontline in 2021, referring to the Palestinian resistance against Israel.
In the preceding months of the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, he joined the Al Qaeda ranks, fighting against the American occupation.
By the mid-2000s, he was imprisoned by US authorities in Iraq and subjected to difficult conditions in America’s notorious dark sites for at least five years. On his release in 2011, Sharaa stepped into a different world.
The Arab Uprisings were spreading across the Middle East, reaching Syria too. Sharaa quickly joined hands with the anti-regime forces, launching another battle against the Bashar al Assad’s rule in Syria.
Toward being a top operative
After his move to Syria, Sharaa formed Jabhat al Nusra, the Syrian wing of Al Qaeda. In 2013, when Daesh wanted to annex Syria and merge it with the parts it had captured in Iraq, Sharaa rebelled, triggering a fight between the two groups.
While Daesh lost control across both Syria and Iraq thanks to an American-led coalition interference, Sharaa’s Nusra Front survived, partly due to its anti-Daesh stance.
In 2016, Sharaa rebranded his group Jabhat Fateh al-Sham (Front for the Conquest of Syria), indicating that the new structure has its own agenda, straining its ties with Al Qaeda. The next year, he once again changed the group’s name to its current format, publicly saying that the HTS has no connections with al Qaeda.
In the last seven years, Sharaa’s HTS has focused on Syria, increasing its hold over the Idlib province, which was the last opposition stronghold in the country prior to November 27, when the 11-day offensive against the Assad regime began.
Dr Khairi Janbek
CrossFireArabia
