In an extensive interview, a high-ranking Israeli official has revealed toMuara Digital Teamthe country’s approach to achieving long-term transformation in multiple areas affected by a nearly two-year conflict, along with dealing with increasing criticism from allies, such as the United States.
Only two weeks prior to the outbreak of the conflict, the Israeli Prime MinisterBenjamin Netanyahustepped up to the podium at the yearly eventUnited NationsOn September 22, 2023, the General Assembly addressed his plan for a “new Middle East,” aiming to “turn areas previously marked by conflict and disorder into regions of growth and harmony.”
A crucial element of this new Middle East focused on leveraging the momentum from the 2020 U.S.-supported Abraham Accords to develop relationships with Saudi Arabia, therebypaving the wayTo normalize Israel’s ties with other Arab nations. Another focused on eliminating the numerous dangers Israel encountered along its borders.
On October 7, 2023, attempts to achieve the first objective effectively came to a standstill due to the Palestinian armed factionHamasinitiated what would develop into the most lethal assault in Israel’s history, igniting a continuous conflict that has extended throughout the region and involved Israel’s primary adversary, Iran, directly.
Since that time, Yuval Donio-Gideon, the consul for public diplomacy at the Israeli Consulate General in New York, stated, “There has been a significant change in the Middle East.”
“Some of these matters we recall with deep regret,” Donio-Gideon stated.Muara Digital Teambut some of these present excellent opportunities for Israel and for the surrounding people in the Middle East.
He referenced the Abraham Accords, which eventually led the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Sudan, and Morocco to establish diplomatic ties with Israel, a initiative supported by the President.Donald Trumpthe initial term of office, described as a “true example” of the possibilities open to regional nations that emphasize peace “before religious strife, before animosity, before histories of conflict.”
He also recognized that “in the Middle East, it’s always complex,” with numerous diplomatic discussions happening behind the scenes. Despite ongoing conflicts in various areas, he believed there was “significant potential for a better future for the people in the region,” including those from Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, and Iran.
“We believe that some of what is occurring in the region is certainly supporting this trend and allowing leaders and individuals in our area to make decisions that are more focused on their own interests rather than being driven by the threat of war,” Donio-Gideon stated.
The Gaza Strip
Although the 22-month conflict has led to fighting on at least seven fronts, the Gaza Strip continues to be the central focus of the war.
Attempts to create even a minimal ceasefire have consistently failed as both parties blame each other for proposing unacceptably harsh conditions. Last week, when Hamas stated it had agreed to a proposal from Egypt and Qatar, the Israeli military announced a new operation aimed at regaining control of Gaza City from Hamas.had been approved.
Donio-Gideon stated that Israel was much more focused on finding a long-term resolution rather than just a short-term halt in fighting. Although he mentioned that Israel is considering the current proposals, he claimed that “the war could end today” if “the terrorists released the captives they have taken and laid down their arms.”
From the beginning of the conflict, Netanyahu has identified three objectives, such as the liberation of all captives, the destruction of Hamas’ military and administrative functions, and the prevention of Gaza from being a potential danger to Israel in the future.
Although Hamas has experienced significant losses in terms ofequipment and manpower, including a significant portion of its main leadership, Donio-Gideon stated that Hamas still “possesses abilities,” referencing a recent operation involving up to 100 individuals targeting an IDF base in Gaza.
I don’t believe we have the illusion that we can eliminate every single terrorist in Gaza,” Donio-Gideon stated, “but our goal is to create a scenario where Hamas’ governing power and military strength are diminished to the point where there’s no longer an immediate danger to Israel or to Israelis living near Gaza.
Ending Hamas’s control, which began in Gaza in 2007, two years following the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) leaving a nearly four-decade-long occupation of the area, would also “lead to a significantly improved future for the people of Gaza,” he stated.
However, the issue of who will take charge remains significant. Israeli officials have consistently stated that there was minimal interest in the IDF reclaiming control over Gaza, whereas Netanyahu has declared that the Israeli military would indeed take over the area again, at least in the immediate aftermath of the war.
Donio-Gideon stated that, in the end, “the goal is to establish a self-governing administration in Gaza,” and highlighted the difference “between having military power to respond to and prevent attacks and governing the area.”
“I believe that once Hamas is removed from power and no longer capable of terrorizing and intimidating the people of Gaza, you will also hear many more voices in Gaza that are focused on bettering their own lives and less concerned with conflict with Israel,” he said.
He suggested that there were already some people within the Palestinian political scene “who might be considered [as] possible leaders” for Gaza. There is “a wide range of individuals who share power, mainly in the West Bank, but likely also in Gaza in the future.”
“I won’t be bringing them up, primarily because if you want to politically undermine someone in the Palestinian political scene, all you have to do is claim that Israel supports them, and that’s enough,” Donio-Gideon stated.
Since we aim to provide these individuals an opportunity to assume leadership of the Palestinians, they must receive authentic support from within, and simultaneously, they should not be seen as someone appointed by the West or the U.S. or Israel,” he added, “as otherwise, in today’s political climate among the Palestinians, they would be excluded.
The decision among Arab nations to have the Palestinian National Authority (PA), located in the West Bank and headed by President Mahmoud Abbas, take control of Gaza.
However, Netanyahu has shown resistance to the current form of the PA, similar to how he previously managed Gaza before the violent division that led to Hamas’ takeover. Abbas, who has been in leadership without elections for two decades, is also accused of corruption andwaning popularity among Palestinians.
In some situations, we maintain close collaboration with the Palestinian Authority, particularly regarding security issues,” Donio-Gideon stated. “Nevertheless, we face significant political differences with them, and there is considerable opposition from their side towards the State of Israel politically.
These splits, along with doubts about his popularity, made it “difficult to determine” whether the 89-year-old leader would have a significant role in shaping Gaza’s future, as stated by Donio-Gideon.
Lebanon
On the second day of the conflict, while Israel aimed to eliminate remaining fighters from Hamas and other Palestinian groups within its borders and prepared for a land invasion of Gaza, the Lebanese Hezbollah group became involved by firing rockets and artillery along Israel’s northern border.
Hezbollah has long been viewed as one of the most influential non-state groups globally, serving as a critical component of the Iran-backed Axis of Resistance, with all its members rallying behind Hamas during the war. Before the current conflict, Israel and Hezbollah, which is also aleading political partyIn Lebanon, there have been two conflicts that included Israeli invasions followed by Israeli departures.
Israel and Lebanon have long blamed each other for breaking previous accords concerning theU.N. peacekeeper-patrolleda buffer zone separating their two countries. Last year, as Israel moved deeper into Gaza, Netanyahu directed a surge in activities along the Lebanese border, leading to the death of Hezbollah’s long-serving leader, Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah, and a land invasion.
The two parties reached a ceasefire agreement in November, yet Israel has kept carrying out hundreds of operations targeting known Hezbollah locations in Lebanon, including an attack that occurred on Monday. Israeli forces also remain stationed in the southern part of the country.
Israeli strikes have faced criticism from Lebanese officials, including two Hezbollah critics, President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam. Last month, the Council of Ministers approved a strategy to monitor Hezbollah’s demilitarization by year-end, an effort opposed by the group, which still maintains its stance that itis dedicated to the truce.
In his statement, Netanyahu supported the decision. The Israeli leader declared on Monday that he would link the advancement in disarming Hezbollah with a step-by-step decrease in Israeli military presence in southern Lebanon.
From Donio-Gideon’s point of view, he perceives a “significant chance for the region, for Israel, but most importantly for the Lebanese to gain control of their own nation and determine what kind of country they wish to reside in.”
An opportunity has arisen in a setting that he claims has been shaped by several overlapping events, including the IDF’s focus on Hezbollah, Israeli attacks on Iran-backed groups throughout the area, and the collapse of the Iran-aligned Syrian president.Bashar al-Assadin the grasp of a sudden lightning rebel offensive that began just days following the signing of the Israel-Hezbollah truce agreement late last year.
All these events presented an opportunity, which I’m not certain will arise again soon,” Donio-Gideon stated. “Considering that the Lebanese will seize this chance with both hands and strive to build a society and a nation that offers a genuine future for themselves, and once more, focusing primarily on what benefits the Lebanese rather than what harms the Israelis, I believe we are ready to take significant actions to support this.
Syria
The collapse of Assad’s regime represented a significant loss for the Axis of Resistance, as Syria provided a strategic link enabling the transport of coalition forces and supplies from Iran and Iraq to Lebanon, as well as a direct confrontation zone with Israel along the occupied Golan Heights.
Yet the individual who directed the uprising that concluded five decades of the Assad dynasty’s Ba’athist rule also presents new dangers. Syrian Interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa, widely recognized by his alias, Abu Mohammed al-Golani, previously headedAl-Qaedaits branch in Syria and previously associated with the Islamic State militant groupISIS) founder Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, whom he encountered during his imprisonment by U.S. forces in Iraq twenty years ago.
Sharaa has openly rejected jihadi ideology in recent years and, since taking office in December, has pledged to lead the nation toward a more tranquil future. This is a country that has been engulfed in civil conflict since 2011. However, his commitments have been called into question by ongoing accounts of security forces and allied groups attacking minority populations, such as Alawites, Druze, and Kurds.
Israeli officials have been especially skepticalof Sharaa’s assertions, with certain individuals continuing to associate him or his supporters with Islamist extremist objectives, despite Trumphas embraced the new Syrian leader.
Conflict between Syrian government-backed forces and Druze militant groups has brought indirect interventionfrom Israel, which has a significant Druze population. Netanyahu has accused Sharaa of permitting extremist groups to assemble near the border, leading the Israeli leader to authorize a historic series of attacks and deploy troops to occupy additional land shortly after Assad’s removal.
Sharaa has consistently claimed he did not aim to provoke Israel, and media reports suggest he was exploring a peace agreement, which would conclude the ongoing conflict between the two nations that began long before the Assad family came to power.
Sharaa stated on Monday that his administration is engaged in “advanced discussions” regarding a security pact centered around the 1974 armistice line that was set in the Golan Heights following the most recent direct conflict between Israel and Syria, which occurred a year ago. He mentioned that the prerequisites for a peace deal are not yet in place, but he emphasized that he “will not hesitate to accept any agreement or decision that benefits the nation’s interests.”
Also making things more complex is Trump’sclose tieswith Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, aNATOleader who has supported the developing relations between Washington and Damascus and at the same timewarned Israelagainst taking additional steps in Syria.
In response to the latest events, Donio-Gideon mentioned that Israeli officials “are closely examining not just the statements, but also the actions of the new government in Syria, within the framework of Israel’s security and considering our broader interests in the region near Israel’s borders.”
We are open to reaching appropriate agreements, preferably sooner rather than later, with the government in Syria,” he stated. “For many years, we have wanted to do so, but the Syrian side has consistently said ‘no.’
“Now, the situation will change, and we’ll observe how it unfolds,” he remarked, highlighting that Israel would never allow an accumulation of opposing forces near its border.
Iran
In addition to confronting formidable non-state groups within the Axis of Resistance, Israel perceives its struggle with Iran as pivotal in reshaping the dynamics throughout the Middle East.
The two countries engaged in direct fire on two occasions last year, and in June, they began what Trump referred to as the “12-Day War,” which started with a broad range of Israeli attacks on locations and individuals associated with Iran’s nuclear program and military, followed by Iranian missile and drone strikes against Israel.
The conflict also involved the U.S. carrying out an extraordinary set of attacks on three well-protected Iranian nuclear sites, after which Iran fired missiles at a U.S. base in Qatar just before Trump announced a ceasefire between the two sides.
Although both Netanyahu and Trump have praised their actions as successful, the Israeli leader has urged Iranians to rebel andoverthrow their governmenthave remained unfulfilled. His appeal was supported by certain opposition groups in exile as well assome separatist groupsInside the country, but the Islamic Republic has remained strong.
Donio-Gideon contended that the “purpose of the so-called ’12-Day War’ was not to remove the Iranian government,” but instead “to address the risk posed by Iran’s military nuclear capabilities and the threat from its ballistic missiles.”
Nevertheless, he forecasted that transformation was approaching, with the possibility of altering Israel’s connection with Iran.
If, or I hope that when, there is a change in the regime in Iran, it will be the choice of the Iranian people, not because someone from outside will impose it on them, that’s being truthful,” he stated. “That being said, I am also fairly optimistic, in the sense that when this occurs, the Iranian state and Iranian society, which has a very distinguished history, has the economic and social foundation to support and sustain a more diverse system.
He noted that Israel had maintained a favorable relationship with Iran before the 1979 Islamic Revolution, which removed Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi from power, and his son has supported Israel’s recent efforts against the nation.
If a transformation is about to occur, or when we witness a change in Iran, I hope it endures,” Donio-Gideon stated. “And I wish to see Iranians thriving and maintaining positive ties with Israel.
‘The Eighth Front’
Israeli authorities have consistently referred to what is now the most extended and deadliest conflict in their country’s history as a war being waged on seven fronts against enemies in Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Yemen.
Following the removal of Syria’s Assad from power, Hezbollah has adhered to its ceasefire agreement with Israel, Iran has maintained its own postwar truce, and the Islamic Resistance in Iraq has also halted actions targeting both Israeli and U.S. forces in the area, leading to a temporary lull in many of the initial prewar threats.
Notably, Yemen’s Ansar Allah, also referred to as the Houthis, has kept attacking Israel, firing a missile at Tel Aviv on Friday, which was followed by Israeli strikes on the capital Sanaa on Sunday. With the conflict continuing in Gaza, tensions remain high in the West Bank.has intensified as well.
However, there is another conflict Israel is involved in, which is the battle for public perception.
The United States, under Trump and previous presidentsJoe Biden, has mostly remained loyal to its ally, but there is increasing criticism from both supporters and opponents of the current government. In Europe, an increasing number of nations have openly criticized Israel’s actions on the battlefield and its restrictions on humanitarian aid to Gaza.
The United Nations has repeatedly charged Israel and Hamas with committing war crimes. The International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu and his former defense minister, as well as three leaders from Hamas, who are thought to have died recently.
There are valid reasons for concern,” Donio-Gideon stated. “My government, like any other, must be held responsible for its actions. That’s acceptable. However, there is a significant distinction between questioning a policy and denying the right of a country to exist peacefully or to safeguard its people.
He referred to “the battle we are waging on the diplomatic front” as the “eighth front, along with the seven military fronts we have in the Middle East.” He mentioned that it is also “a front where we are seeking to reveal and communicate to our allies, both in America and Europe, what we are doing and what the alternative entails.”
We maintain an ongoing conversation, and occasionally a constructive debate with friends, about what actions we can take and what needs to be done,” Donio-Gideon stated. “We don’t always see eye to eye on everything, but I can assure you, having been involved in some capacity in U.S.-Israel relations for over ten years, there remains strong bipartisan backing for Israel.
Donio-Gideon continued to believe in this trend despite prominent figures within Trump’s MAGA movement havingturned on IsraelIn recent months, a situation that the Israeli diplomat described as “something that is truly related to internal political matters which we are genuinely staying away from.”
We are aware that the American administration, as it should, prioritizes what is best for America,” Donio-Gideon stated. “And we feel that in numerous instances, this aligns with what is best for Israel. Moreover, we maintain a strong dialogue between friends, and I believe the relationship is as robust as it has ever been.
If it changes in any way, it’s an internal political matter for the United States,” he added. “We respect whatever the American people choose and decide, or what elected officials choose and decide. It’s not our vote that’s involved in that.
Related Articles
- Benjamin Netanyahu Responds to Israeli Attack on Medical Facility: ‘Sad Error’
- Israel Carries Out Fatal Attack on ‘False’ Humanitarian Workers in Gaza
- Israel Kills Al Jazeera Reporter It Says Was a Hamas Member—What You Need to Know
- Uncommon Airborne Video Shows Damage in Gaza
Begin your free Muara Digital Team trial
