▶️ Shift in Conflict Dynamics: The 20th century centered on Israel-Arab conflicts over Palestinian statehood, whereas the 21st century sees escalating tensions between Israel and Iran, involving proxies like Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis.

▶️ Iran’s “Axis of Resistance”: Iran has cultivated alliances with Shia groups across the Middle East, providing them with military and financial support. This "axis of resistance" includes Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen, both acting as extensions of Iranian influence against Israel.

▶️ Regional and Global Implications: The Gaza conflict has evolved into a regional crisis, involving global powers like the US, UK, and France supporting Israel, while Russia and China align with Iran. The situation underscores broader geopolitical stakes, including energy security and military alliances.

If the 20th century was the era of the conflict between Israel and the Arab countries, the 21st century is the era of the conflict between Israel and Iran and Iran's solidarity organizations. The 20th century saw a series of conflicts between Israel and Arab countries aimed at establishing an independent Palestinian state. In the 21st century, the focus has shifted to the destruction of Israel. The most recent event in this series was last year's Hamas military operation, codenamed the Operation of Al-Aqsa Flood in Gaza against Israel. The situation in the Middle East has undergone a significant transformation since the Hamas attack on Israel last year.

The conflict that began with the war between Israel and Hamas last year in Gaza has spread throughout the region. The first organization to join the war in support of Hamas was Hezbollah in Lebanon. Hezbollah is an organization created by Iran in 1982 to rally Shia organizations in Lebanon. Hezbollah's main aim is to reduce and eventually eliminate the influence of the United States and Israel in the region. Hezbollah continues to wage armed struggle against Israel for the liberation of Palestine. Next in line are the Houthis in Yemen. Distinct from the 12th Imam Shiites of Iran due to their Zaydi Shiite identity, the Houthis are engaged in hostilities against Israel, employing a range of sophisticated weapons systems, including drones and missiles, which have been developed with Iranian assistance. The Houthis have also not hesitated to attack Israeli and Western ships passing through the Red Sea, causing serious disruption to logistics and supply chains.

During the war in Gaza, Israel attacked the Syrian and Iranian consulates and assassinated Major General Mohammad Reza Jahedi, a member of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. In response, Iran launched its first attack on Israeli territory on 14 April, using more than 350 ballistic and cruise missiles and drones. The United States, the United Kingdom, France and Jordan helped Israel by intercepting 60% of the missiles and drones fired by Iran. Furthemore the United States quickly sent an aircraft carrier to the Gulf to help Israel and prevent escalation.

This air defense network is the Middle East Air Defence (MEAD) network, promoted by the United States after the normalization of relations between Israel and the UAE through the Abraham Accords in 2020. Saudi Arabia and the UAE provided intelligence on Iran's movements and helped Israel. The Gaza conflict has now intensified into a regional crisis. While the probability of a confrontation between the United States and Iran is minimal. The United States is providing military and diplomatic support to the State of Israel. Iran, in turn, is offering covert assistance to the solidarity organization Hezbollah, Hamas and the Houthis.

As such a more comprehensive analysis of the Gaza conflict reveals that it is, in essence, a war between Iran and Israel. Hamas has long been the recipient of weapons and financial support from Iran. Additionally, Hezbollah and the Houthis have been recipients of Iranian support, functioning as proxy organizations that represent the interests of Iran.

Iran began to adopt an anti-Israeli and anti-American policy after the Islamic Revolution in 1979. Before the revolution, Iran was a typical pro-American country, but the revolution changed everything. Iran made it a national policy to resist Israel, which oppresses the Palestinian people, and set up solidarity organizations in the region. The Iranian strategy has been to create an "axis of resistance" with such solidarity organizations and to build a "united front" to surround Israel, creating a "ring of fire". This axis of resistance formed a "ring of fire" to attack Israel after last year's war in Gaza.

In his book The Shia Revival, published in the early 2000s, Professor Vali Nasr, an expert on Iran at Johns Hopkins University, predicted the arrival of the era of the Shia. From the 20th century to the early 2000s, the Middle East was a world led by the Sunnis. In terms of ideology, Arab nationalism, which had already been discussed in the 19th century, was the dominant discourse in the Arab and Islamic world until the 1979 Iranian Islamic Revolution.

In the wake of the 1952 revolution spearheaded by the Free Officers in Egypt, Gamal Abdul Nasser leveraged Arab nationalism as a unifying force for Egypt and the broader Arab world. However the discourse on Arab nationalism began to decline following the defeat of Arab states by Israel in the Third Arab-Israeli War in 1967. The swift and decisive victory of Israel over Egypt and Syria within a mere six days left Arab citizens disillusioned and in need of an alternative ideological framework to assuage their disappointment and frustrations. This created an opening for Islamic movement groups, who began to argue that Islamic teachings, rather than Arab nationalism, could offer solutions to the challenges facing the Islamic and Arab world.

The United States fostered amicable relations with Gulf countries, including Iran, with the objective of guaranteeing a consistent supply of crude oil until the 1979 Islamic Revolution. However, following the revolution, Iran adopted an anti-American stance. Subsequently, the United States has engaged in diplomatic efforts with Sunni countries, including Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Egypt and Kuwait, as well as Israel, with the objective of promoting regional stability in the Middle East. Conversely, the Shiites, who were not regarded as a significant political entity, did not accord them any significance. The Shiites in the region have frequently been excluded from the distribution of power due to their minority status, and have been subjected to political and economic discrimination.

Consequently, the US and the international community did not accord the Shiites the attention they deserved, given that they were not recognized as an important political force. Thus the Shiites in Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan and Yemen have long been subjected to discriminatory treatment by the ruling powers, resulting in a deplorable quality of life characterized by economic and social exclusion. The Shia in Lebanon were relegated to the lowest socioeconomic stratum by the Sunni and Christian populations. The Houthis, who are Zaydiyyah, another Shia group in Yemen, have been subjected to discrimination by the Sunni ruling powers and have gradually expanded their power to become a significant armed organization. Since the year 2000, the Houthis have engaged in numerous negotiations with the Yemeni government with the objective of reaching a ceasefire. However, they were unable to reach a final agreement and Houthis proceeded to seize control of the capital city of Sanaa through a coup in 2014.

In response to social and economic discrimination, the Shiites began to unite around Iran. In 1982, Iran established Hezbollah by uniting the Shiites who were being persecuted in Lebanon. Additionally, Iran began providing military supplies to the Houthis in Yemen when they were facing attacks from Saudi Arabia and the UAE. The United States' removal of Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq in 2003 constituted a pivotal moment not only for the regional balance of power in the Middle East, but for the future of the Iranian state as well. Following the execution of Hussein, who had caused significant challenges for Iran during the Iran-Iraq War, Iran emerged as the dominant regional power.

The collapse of the Iraqi Sunni regime resulted in a shift in the regional balance of power, with Iran emerging as a dominant force. Given that half of Iraq's population is Shiites, Iran has been able to exert considerable influence in the country. Consequently, any discussion of the current situation in Iraq must take into account the role of Iran, which is of paramount importance.

It would be erroneous to assume that Iran's influence is limited to the solidarity organization that has been previously discussed. Iran's conventional weapons, particularly ballistic missiles and drones, represent a significant threat to the surrounding Sunni Arab states. Indeed, in 2019, when Houthis in Yemen and Iran launched attacks on two desulfurization facilities operated by Saudi Arabia's oil refiner Aramco, Saudi Arabia's daily crude oil production was reduced by half. Following the drone and cruise missile attacks on the world's largest oil refiner, which has the capacity to influence international oil prices, Saudi Arabia called upon the United States to take action. However, President Donald Trump did not take any action. It could be argued that Trump avoided a significant armed conflict in the region by provoking Iran.

In sum the current situation in the Middle East is characterized by a confrontation between the Shia-led camp led by Iran, and Israel, along with a number of Gulf Arab states. Russia and China have aligned themselves with Iran, whereas the United States, the United Kingdom and France have formed an alliance with Israel.

Trump is a politician whose actions and rhetoric are characterized by unpredictability and a proclivity for negotiating deals. He not only declined to reveal his hand, but also caused his opponents considerable difficulty by playing unexpected cards. The Hanoi summit between North Korea and the United States provides an illustrative case in point. It was not anticipated that the discussions would reach an impasse, yet this is precisely what occurred. Additionally, Trump has articulated his intention to conclude the conflict in the region by 20 January 2025, the date of his inauguration as President of the United States.

In the wake of the ceasefire between Hezbollah and Israel, a pivotal issue has emerged: the Israeli military is able to undertake military operations freely in the southern part of the Litani River, provided that Hezbollah troops are stationed there. Israel is unable to permit Hezbollah troops to be stationed in the southern part of the Litani River, and if this occurs, the Israeli military can undertake military operations without hindrance. Thus it seems probable that the current skirmish between Hezbollah and Israel will escalate into a full-scale war.

The composition of Trump's diplomatic and defense team is gradually becoming apparent. Stephen Miller, a Jewish-American, has been appointed as the Deputy Chief of Staff at the White House. Michael Waltz has been appointed as the White House National Security Advisor, while Stephen Whitecoff, a Jewish real estate agent, has been appointed as the Middle East Special Envoy. Additionally, pro-Israeli politician Mike Huckabee has been appointed as the US Ambassador to Israel. These individuals are distinguished by their pro-Israel and hardline positions. It seems unlikely that the pro-Israel and hard-line stance will facilitate progress in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process or in the Iran nuclear deal. It seems reasonable to posit that the only solution that can be expected is that if Trump believes that it is better for the United States' national interest to end the war in the region, he may find a solution through active diplomatic pressure and persuasion. Conversely, should his efforts not meet with success and he attempt to force his opponent, such as Iran, to submit through maximum pressure, the situation in the Middle East could cool down rapidly.

Despite Netanyahu's unwavering commitment to pursuing the military annihilation of Hamas and preventing its resurgence in Gaza, it seems Trump will exert pressure on Netanyahu to conclude the military operation in Gaza. The outcome of the hostage negotiation will depend on possible changes in the position of the two sides, Israel and Hamas. In regard to the Iranian nuclear issue, Trump will attempt to negotiate with Iran. Nevertheless, should this endeavor prove futile, he will intensify economic sanctions against Iran, which may potentially precipitate a military confrontation between the two countries. It is conceivable that Trump will initiate nuclear negotiations with Iran by imposing the most stringent economic sanctions. In essence, it seems probable that Trump's forthcoming negotiations with Iran will be conducted on the basis of an all-or-nothing approach. To stabilize the region, it is imperative to revive the negotiations between the United States and Iran for reconciliation. The situation in the Middle East is likely to reach a critical point in the near future. It is not yet clear how the situation will evolve.