Israeli-Palestinian peace depends on neutralising threats from the Iranian regime

The war in Gaza and the events of the past year have highlighted the destabilising role of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the Middle East. However, the Gulf Arab states, such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, as well as Israel, were already aware of this, and have been trying for decades to establish a new regional order in the face of Tehran's threats. 

In this sense, as Sir John Jenkins recalls in Chatham House, both the Gulf states and Israel consider Iran ‘the main obstacle’ to regional peace and stability, partly due to its proxies in the region, such as Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis.  

In recent months, Iranian-backed regional militias, as well as the Iranian regime itself, have focused on launching recurrent attacks on Israeli territory, pushing the Jewish state into a seven-front war: Gaza, Lebanon, the West Bank, Yemen, Iraq, Syria and Iran.  

Jenkins qualifies that Hezbollah has always posed a more serious threat to Israel than Hamas. The Lebanese Shiite militia's capabilities are far greater than those of the Palestinian terrorist group. ‘It can threaten all of Israel with its increasingly sophisticated missiles and, for all intents and purposes, it controls a sovereign state, Lebanon. Behind it is Iran, which has threatened Israel with destruction for 45 years,’ he adds.  

Jenkins also considers that the Palestinian national narrative ‘has acquired enormous emotional and symbolic resonance over the years’, although he stresses that the only real success the Palestinians have had is in internationalising their cause, ‘which makes the costs of failure high for the major powers in the region’. ‘A lasting solution is therefore an absolute precondition for regional stability’, he stresses.  

And this lasting solution cannot be achieved simply through truces or negotiations with the Palestinian Authority (PA) or the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO).  

‘This can only happen when Hamas, and particularly Hezbollah, cease to be major threats to Israel and when Iran no longer has the power to disrupt the emergence of a new regional order,’ he explains. This is why, for Jenkins, a ceasefire now, without resolving the major problems, guarantees a resumption of the conflict within a year or two. 

At the same time, it is necessary to stress that peace also requires Palestinian self-determination, not for the sake of the Palestinians, but to guarantee Israeli security. ‘That, in turn, requires a new Israeli political system that runs counter to current political realities,’ he adds.  

Still, Jenkins believes that the key is to develop a Tehran-centric policy. ‘A new paradigm is needed, centred on Tehran and its malign influence,’ he says, noting that ideally this would entail a change in Iran itself.  

The extension of the current conflict into the country could jeopardise the regime's stability, something its leaders fear given the deep domestic unpopularity they face. However, given its proven willingness to resort to extreme violence to quell dissent, it seems unwise to anticipate significant change from within in the near future. 

It is therefore necessary to dismantle its influence in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Gaza and Yemen and, on this basis, to talk about Palestinian self-determination. 

To this end, Jenkins stresses the need for the Israeli government to be willing to cooperate. ‘You can't force Israel to accept an agreement. You need to have enough Israelis who want peace to make it politically viable,’ he says.  

Here he recalls the trauma following the 7 October attack, as well as Israeli military victories in Gaza and Lebanon. However, he recalls that these military successes are not a solution.  

To achieve this longed-for peace and stability, the Gulf States, in particular Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, along with Jordan and Egypt, are essential partners, as they share the same security concerns as Israel.  

On the other hand, the US role should focus on supporting Israel and providing ironclad security guarantees over the long term. 

Jenkins also presents a credible strategy to counter Iranian influence. This includes shutting down the mosques, cultural centres and fake human rights organisations that Iran has used to shape opinion in its favour in Western countries.  

It also suggests that sanctions against the regime, financial intelligence and the capacity of the security services should be strengthened. 

‘The UK could also act with its EU allies to proscribe the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a terrorist organisation, giving it more leeway to act against its funding. Real costs must be imposed on those who use brutal force to suppress legitimate protests in Iran,’ he says.  

At the regional level, he stresses the need for better structured alliances. He calls for greater cooperation between the Gulf Cooperation Council countries and the US, the UK and other Western allies, as well as with interested non-Arab countries such as Azerbaijan and Turkey.  

On the military front, he calls for a tough attack on Shia paramilitary groups in Iraq and the Houthis in Yemen, and a better fight against Iranian arms and oil smuggling.