Periodic episodes of violence between Hamas and Israel are nothing new in the Arab-Israeli conflict.
Large-scale outbreaks have occurred on average every four years and smaller ones (lasting two or three days) every few months. But Hamas’s Oct. 7 attack and the Israeli response are different. What Hamas did was beyond anyone’s imagination in the 75 years since Israel achieved independence, and hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were forced to flee their homes to Arab countries and enclaves like the Gaza Strip. Hamas’s killing of 1200 Israelis plus its seizure of 250 hostages provoked a massive bombing campaign by Israel that has killed more than 14,000 Palestinians (nearly 5000 of them children) in Gaza and destroyed homes and infrastructure on a massive scale.
The severity of the crisis has led to some unexpected developments at the regional and global level. While the Hamas attack initially provoked worldwide condemnation and expressions of sympathy for Israel, the record civilian casualties in Gaza and the images of death and destruction there have led to unprecedented condemnation of Israel in recent weeks.
The war has also had significant regional and geopolitical consequences. It has suspended ongoing efforts to expand the Abraham Accords, especially prospects for normalization of Israel-Saudi relations. It has also exposed a potentially more nuanced Iranian position on the Palestinian issue, with Iran’s president signing on to a communique that expressed support for a two-state solution – something Iran has rejected in the past.
Iran has applauded calculated attacks on Israeli and American military targets by its regional proxies in the Axis of Resistance, which includes Hezbollah, Iraqi militias, Houthis and Hamas. But Tehran has sought to avoid a direct military confrontation with either Israel or the U.S. Iran’s leadership is well aware that in a direct confrontation, Iran would likely suffer heavy damage to its military and industrial infrastructure. In addition, many Iranians are opposed to the Islamic regime’s support for proxy forces in the Arab world. Thus, a direct confrontation with the U.S. might provoke domestic unrest, rekindling the protests over the enforced hijab from a year ago.
Iran has also refrained from criticizing Arab governments’ relative inaction in the crisis. During previous Israeli bombardments of Gaza, the Islamic regime’s officials and media unleashed strong condemnations of Arab governments and tried to provoke mass protests in Arab capitals by shaming Arab rulers for failing to support the Palestinians. This time Iran has adopted a more measured response as it seeks to preserve the recent improvement in its relations with Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf Arab states.Â
Iran’s President Mohammed Raisi was invited to the November 11 emergency meeting of the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic States in Riyadh, the first visit by an Iranian president to Saudi Arabia in more than a decade. Raisi not only attended the meeting but signed the official statement of the gathering, expressing support for a two-state solution. The issue is still very sensitive among Iran’s ruling elite, which has backed the unrealistic notion of a referendum including diaspora Palestinians to decide Israel’s fate. Raisi had to backtrack on his return from the Riyadh summit, but it is hard to believe that he would have signed the communique without the approval of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Khamenei on Nov. 29 reiterated his call for referendum of Palestinians to “decide whether foreigners [i.e. Israeli Jews] must leave or can remain.” But Khamenei prefaced his remarks by noting, “Some are deceitfully claiming that Iran says all Jews & Zionists should be thrown into the sea. No, we never said that. We say a popular vote should be the determining factor.”Â
Another unprecedented consequence of this Gaza war has been the record high expression of support for the Palestinians around the world and particularly in the United States. There have been large demonstrations since Oct. 7 in Washington D.C., New York, Los Angeles, and many other U.S. cities. Interestingly, the demonstrations have included a number of protests by progressive Jewish groups. U.S. universities have also witnessed protests and occasional clashes between pro-Palestine and pro-Israel student groups, a reflection of increased polarization over this issue. Many celebrities and public figures have also openly criticized Israel for the high civilian casualties in Gaza, among them actresses  Angelina Jolie and Susan Sarandon.
These developments reflect a growing willingness by people to stop hiding pro-Palestinian sympathies. Social scientists such as Timur Kuran have shed light on a common behavior called preference falsification. When expressing an opinion might lead to punishment or social rejection, most people hide their true views. That has not been so much the case this time. The widespread protests, and some recent public opinion surveys reveal that a sizable minority of Americans, particularly among younger demographics and the diverse ethnic and cultural groups that generally vote for Democrats, no longer support unconditional financial and military support for Israel. This shifting public attitude has put pressure on the Joe Biden administration to seek to curtail the fighting to obtain the release of hostages, get aid into Gaza and persuade the Israelis to use more care in their targeting of Hamas.
Another consequence of the war has been to put a spotlight on Israel’s undeclared nuclear weapons arsenal.  Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who has been more vocal than many Arab leaders in his condemnation of Israel’s bombardment and ground operations in Gaza, made an unprecedented comment about Israel’s nuclear weapons in an address to his Justice and Development Party on Nov. 15. Erdogan called on Israel to reveal its nuclear weapons, which are believed to number at least 80.  He made this demand in response to a far-right Israeli cabinet minister’s call for using a nuclear bomb against Hamas. Although Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu refuted the remarks and suspended the minister from the cabinet,  Erdogan seized on the development to shed light on the matter and said, “I am calling on Netanyahu from here. Do you have an atomic bomb or not? I dare you to unveil it.”
Erdogan, who has had zig-zagging relations with Israel since he took power 20 years ago, has also claimed recently that he now considers Israel a top national security threat for Turkey. In recent speeches, he has gone so far as to claim that Israel might pose a threat to Turkish territory as it pursues the dream of “Greater Israel.” Erdogan’s comments suggest that he is likely to initiate a campaign to rally international support for an investigation by the International Atomic Energy Agency into Israel’s nuclear activities. Turkey might also look to accelerate a nuclear program of its own.
All these consequences would have been hard to imagine before Oct. 7.
Nader Habibi is an Iranian-American economist and Henry J. Leir Professor of Practice in the Economics of the Middle East at Brandeis University.
Unexpected Consequences of the Gaza War
By Nader Habibi
Middle East & North Africa
Periodic episodes of violence between Hamas and Israel are nothing new in the Arab-Israeli conflict.
Large-scale outbreaks have occurred on average every four years and smaller ones (lasting two or three days) every few months. But Hamas’s Oct. 7 attack and the Israeli response are different. What Hamas did was beyond anyone’s imagination in the 75 years since Israel achieved independence, and hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were forced to flee their homes to Arab countries and enclaves like the Gaza Strip. Hamas’s killing of 1200 Israelis plus its seizure of 250 hostages provoked a massive bombing campaign by Israel that has killed more than 14,000 Palestinians (nearly 5000 of them children) in Gaza and destroyed homes and infrastructure on a massive scale.
The severity of the crisis has led to some unexpected developments at the regional and global level. While the Hamas attack initially provoked worldwide condemnation and expressions of sympathy for Israel, the record civilian casualties in Gaza and the images of death and destruction there have led to unprecedented condemnation of Israel in recent weeks.
The war has also had significant regional and geopolitical consequences. It has suspended ongoing efforts to expand the Abraham Accords, especially prospects for normalization of Israel-Saudi relations. It has also exposed a potentially more nuanced Iranian position on the Palestinian issue, with Iran’s president signing on to a communique that expressed support for a two-state solution – something Iran has rejected in the past.
Iran has applauded calculated attacks on Israeli and American military targets by its regional proxies in the Axis of Resistance, which includes Hezbollah, Iraqi militias, Houthis and Hamas. But Tehran has sought to avoid a direct military confrontation with either Israel or the U.S. Iran’s leadership is well aware that in a direct confrontation, Iran would likely suffer heavy damage to its military and industrial infrastructure. In addition, many Iranians are opposed to the Islamic regime’s support for proxy forces in the Arab world. Thus, a direct confrontation with the U.S. might provoke domestic unrest, rekindling the protests over the enforced hijab from a year ago.
Iran has also refrained from criticizing Arab governments’ relative inaction in the crisis. During previous Israeli bombardments of Gaza, the Islamic regime’s officials and media unleashed strong condemnations of Arab governments and tried to provoke mass protests in Arab capitals by shaming Arab rulers for failing to support the Palestinians. This time Iran has adopted a more measured response as it seeks to preserve the recent improvement in its relations with Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf Arab states.Â
Iran’s President Mohammed Raisi was invited to the November 11 emergency meeting of the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic States in Riyadh, the first visit by an Iranian president to Saudi Arabia in more than a decade. Raisi not only attended the meeting but signed the official statement of the gathering, expressing support for a two-state solution. The issue is still very sensitive among Iran’s ruling elite, which has backed the unrealistic notion of a referendum including diaspora Palestinians to decide Israel’s fate. Raisi had to backtrack on his return from the Riyadh summit, but it is hard to believe that he would have signed the communique without the approval of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Khamenei on Nov. 29 reiterated his call for referendum of Palestinians to “decide whether foreigners [i.e. Israeli Jews] must leave or can remain.” But Khamenei prefaced his remarks by noting, “Some are deceitfully claiming that Iran says all Jews & Zionists should be thrown into the sea. No, we never said that. We say a popular vote should be the determining factor.”Â
Another unprecedented consequence of this Gaza war has been the record high expression of support for the Palestinians around the world and particularly in the United States. There have been large demonstrations since Oct. 7 in Washington D.C., New York, Los Angeles, and many other U.S. cities. Interestingly, the demonstrations have included a number of protests by progressive Jewish groups. U.S. universities have also witnessed protests and occasional clashes between pro-Palestine and pro-Israel student groups, a reflection of increased polarization over this issue. Many celebrities and public figures have also openly criticized Israel for the high civilian casualties in Gaza, among them actresses  Angelina Jolie and Susan Sarandon.
These developments reflect a growing willingness by people to stop hiding pro-Palestinian sympathies. Social scientists such as Timur Kuran have shed light on a common behavior called preference falsification. When expressing an opinion might lead to punishment or social rejection, most people hide their true views. That has not been so much the case this time. The widespread protests, and some recent public opinion surveys reveal that a sizable minority of Americans, particularly among younger demographics and the diverse ethnic and cultural groups that generally vote for Democrats, no longer support unconditional financial and military support for Israel. This shifting public attitude has put pressure on the Joe Biden administration to seek to curtail the fighting to obtain the release of hostages, get aid into Gaza and persuade the Israelis to use more care in their targeting of Hamas.
Another consequence of the war has been to put a spotlight on Israel’s undeclared nuclear weapons arsenal.  Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who has been more vocal than many Arab leaders in his condemnation of Israel’s bombardment and ground operations in Gaza, made an unprecedented comment about Israel’s nuclear weapons in an address to his Justice and Development Party on Nov. 15. Erdogan called on Israel to reveal its nuclear weapons, which are believed to number at least 80.  He made this demand in response to a far-right Israeli cabinet minister’s call for using a nuclear bomb against Hamas. Although Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu refuted the remarks and suspended the minister from the cabinet,  Erdogan seized on the development to shed light on the matter and said, “I am calling on Netanyahu from here. Do you have an atomic bomb or not? I dare you to unveil it.”
Erdogan, who has had zig-zagging relations with Israel since he took power 20 years ago, has also claimed recently that he now considers Israel a top national security threat for Turkey. In recent speeches, he has gone so far as to claim that Israel might pose a threat to Turkish territory as it pursues the dream of “Greater Israel.” Erdogan’s comments suggest that he is likely to initiate a campaign to rally international support for an investigation by the International Atomic Energy Agency into Israel’s nuclear activities. Turkey might also look to accelerate a nuclear program of its own.
All these consequences would have been hard to imagine before Oct. 7.
Nader Habibi is an Iranian-American economist and Henry J. Leir Professor of Practice in the Economics of the Middle East at Brandeis University.
Recent & Related