Dr. J. Scott Younger-IFIMES*
The recent summer has been marked by record-high temperatures across parts of Europe and widespread drought conditions, once again bringing the issue of climate change to the forefront of public and political attention.
Perhaps the most interesting recent geopolitical development concerns three countries that signed an agreement a few days ago resembling a NATO-style defensive alliance. Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan have apparently recognised that longer-term peace and stability may require them to “stand up and be counted”. All three are among the stronger and more strategically significant countries in the wider Middle East and its surrounding region. Indeed, Friedmann (2009) considered Turkey, with its position on the eastern boundary of the EU and its long and complex history, to be one of the key countries of the twenty-first century.
Another important development concerns discussions between Oman and Iran, which lie on opposite sides of the Strait of Hormuz, a waterway central to regional and global energy security. The objective is to find a satisfactory solution that would restore the Strait to normal operation. This has not pleased the US President, who has reportedly threatened Oman and warned it against intervening. This may reflect President Trump’s growing frustration, as the conflict with Iran appears to have just restarted after a month of relative peace, albeit the blockade has continued.
The conflict has certainly not developed in the manner that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly anticipated, with the war expected by some to be concluded within weeks and regime change achieved in Iran. The past six months instead appear to demonstrate that there is no clear winner and that the conflict has reached a stalemate. President Trump will therefore have to explain to the American people the enormous costs of the conflict without a clear strategic outcome.
With the US mid-term elections approaching in November, the coming weeks will be particularly significant. If President Trump continues to lose public support for his foreign-policy ventures and his political opponents perform strongly in the mid-terms, his ability to pursue his agenda during the final two years of his term could become significantly constrained.
Another major issue that continues to dominate the international agenda is the question of land and how it will ultimately be divided between Israelis and Palestinians — an issue that has remained unresolved for many decades.
Israel’s Far-Right Government and the Erosion of the Two-State Solution
The Israeli government under Prime Minister Netanyahu is arguably the most right-wing government in the country’s history. Ministers Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir have both actively supported policies encouraging Israeli settlers to expand their presence in the West Bank, raising serious concerns over the future of the Palestinian population and the possibility of further displacement.
These developments have recently prompted strong protests from several European governments, including Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom, which have described continued settlement activity as illegal. However, unless stronger measures, including effective sanctions, are introduced, the Israeli government may continue to disregard such criticism. Israeli policymakers appear to believe, with some justification, that they continue to enjoy strong political backing from the United States.
Meanwhile, the Israeli government has shown reluctance towards allowing the United States to advance President Trump’s proposed Board of Peace plan for Gaza, despite Hamas having stated that it is prepared to disarm. The plan has now been outlined, but there remains a profound lack of trust on the Israeli side. This may also serve the political interests of Prime Minister Netanyahu and his government.
There appears to be little prospect of meaningful progress on this important issue as long as the US position towards the Israeli government remains as weak as it currently appears and the proposed Board of Peace lacks sufficient authority to take effective action. Israeli elections are expected to take place in October, with current political projections suggesting that Netanyahu and his supporters could face significant losses. Such an outcome could potentially bring about a major change in Israel’s domestic and foreign policy.
The Israeli Prime Minister understands President Trump’s personality and political instincts well and appears to have used this knowledge to his advantage. This is not the first occasion on which Netanyahu has challenged or defied Trump.
When the Peace Plan was first presented, Israeli forces — the IDF — withdrew only to positions that allowed them to retain control over approximately half of the Gaza Strip. This position was not effectively challenged, and in recent weeks the IDF has continued military operations, officially targeting Hamas but with extensive civilian casualties, while expanding its control over additional areas of the territory.
If the far-right Israeli government is allowed to continue these policies without meaningful international consequences, it could ultimately achieve its objective of bringing the entire territory under Israeli control, further undermining the prospects for a viable two-state solution. This must not be allowed to happen. It is time for the international community, particularly those governments that oppose these policies, to make their voices heard more clearly and forcefully.
The broader problem is that President Trump rarely appears willing to give serious consideration to alternative views, including those of NATO allies. He also continues to demonstrate an unusually strong personal and political interest in Russian President Vladimir Putin, a relationship that continues to influence his approach to international affairs.
The unexpected arrival of the CIA Director in Moscow for talks with Russian officials, apparently without prior notification to some European allies, was particularly noteworthy. No doubt more will be revealed in due course.
The next two to three months are therefore likely to be difficult and potentially ominous. Putin’s Russia is increasingly making threatening statements towards Britain, while the wider international system appears to be entering a period of heightened uncertainty.
The developments from Gaza to the Strait of Hormuz illustrate a broader geopolitical reality: the established international order is under increasing strain, traditional alliances are being reassessed, and the absence of decisive diplomatic solutions is allowing regional conflicts to acquire increasingly global consequences.
The Middle East is entering a new geopolitical phase in which traditional alliances are being reshaped, US influence is increasingly contested, and the absence of a political settlement in Gaza and the wider region is creating new risks for global security.
