Follow us on social

Shutterstock_1581608227-scaled

Unresolved Palestinian issue remains a major source of Mideast tension

It's undeniable that the conflict in Israel-Palestine fuels instability across the region and negatively affects US relations.

Analysis | Middle East

The eruption of renewed violence between mainly peaceful Palestinian demonstrators and the Israeli military and police culminating during the simultaneous celebrations of Easter, Passover, and Ramadan in and around East Jerusalem’s Al-Aqsa Mosque has once again reminded the world that the decades-old conflict has not gone away. The Israeli bombing of Gaza in response to rocket fire from the embargoed enclave only highlighted the conflict’s persistent relevance.

The recent clashes, in which many more Palestinians than Israelis were killed or injured, triggered mildly angry responses from some Arab and Palestinian leaders, including King Abdullah of Jordan and Mahmoud Abbas, the aging president of the Palestinian Authority. Abdullah asked Israel to stop what he called “all illegal and provocative actions,” while the Arab League and even Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates condemned Israel’s raid on the mosque, as did Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan despite his recent efforts to improve relations with Israel. Other observers warned of another Palestinian intifada. 

The latest events in Palestine expose the fragility of recent gains in normalizing Arab-Israeli relations. If the current tensions devolve into greater violence, then those Arab states that have normalized relations with Israel could feel pressure to reverse course, while those that are already quietly cooperating with Israel, notably Saudi Arabia, may reconsider. 

Moreover, another intifada or major outbreak of ethnic violence most likely would strengthen extremist Palestinian groups that identify with the so-called “Axis of Resistance.” The axis includes Hezbollah, some Iraqi Shia militias, and Yemen’s Ansar Ullah, plus Iran and Syria. This configuration of forces means that a potential conflict in Palestine might bring in other actors, spreading the flames into the wider region. 

Why the Palestine issue remains important 

After the 1979 Egypt-Israel Camp David Accords, Jordan signed a peace treaty with Israel. More recently, partly as a result of Washington’s mediation, Israel and a number of Arab states, notably, the UAE, Bahrain, Sudan, and Morocco established formal diplomatic relations in what are called the Abraham Accords. These successes have led to a general perception that the Palestine issue is no longer important in Middle East politics. Instead, other issues, such as Iran-Israel hostility, the war in Yemen, and, more generally, Iran’s regional activities and relations with its Arab neighbors, have replaced the Palestine question as the primary source of regional instability. 

Doubtless, these quarrels have added fresh tensions in the Middle East. But what has been generally overlooked is that they all share a Palestinian dimension. Although Iran’s Islamist leaders have many complaints about Israeli activities in Iran during the monarchy, such as training the Shah’s brutal secret police, the main reason for their hostility is their belief that Israel has usurped Palestinian and Muslim lands and trampled their rights. Many other Arabs and Muslims share this view, even if their governments no longer protest the Jewish state’s behavior as loudly as they once did. One poll taken in 13 countries in October 2020, for example, found that nearly 90 percent of Arabs oppose normalization with Israel. The existence of such sentiment enables Iran to gain a degree of influence across the region by championing the Palestinian cause. 

Other states have also used the Palestinian problem to gain regional influence. For decades, Arab governments used it to advance their particular interests. Even Turkey under Erdoğan has used the Palestinian question to gain influence in the Arab world. He came out in strong support of the Palestinians during Israel’s Cast Lead operation against Gaza in 2008. Two years later, ties between Tel Aviv and Ankara plunged dramatically after the killing by Israeli forces of nine Turkish citizens who were shipping humanitarian aid to Gaza aboard the ship Mavi Marmara

Palestine as a Muslim issue

The involvement of non-Arab Muslim states in the Palestine question, especially Jerusalem and the Al-Aqsa Mosque, indicates that this is not merely an Arab concern; rather, it interests all Muslims. Even when some Arab regimes lose interest in Palestine, other states, including Arab ones, tend to take up the cause. Until the mid-1970s, Egypt was the leading champion of Palestinian rights. Later, Iraq and Syria assumed the role. Since the Islamic Revolution of 1979, Iran has become Palestine’s principal and uncompromising advocate. If, over time, Tehran changes its position, some other state would likely take up the cause, even if for self-interested reasons.

The Palestine issue and foreign power engagement in the Middle East

The Palestine issue, and the Arab-Israeli dispute over it, has also been a major, albeit not the only cause for great-power engagement, especially for the United States in the Middle East since the 1950s. Traditionally, the West has supported Israel, while, until the Soviet Union’s demise, Moscow backed the Palestinians.

Positions on the Israel/Palestine dispute also partly determined Arab states’ postures vis-à-visthe West and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Those Arab states with a hawkish approach to the issue tended to side with the Soviet Union. Today, Syria’s close relations with Russia are partly the legacy of that era, although the West’s adoption of a “regime change” policy toward Damascus since 2003 has kept it close to Moscow. 

Many aspects of the West’s Middle East policies, including attitudes towards authoritarian governments and human rights issues, have been influenced by the Palestine factor. Western governments have generally been willing to ignore or downplay transgressions by those regimes willing to compromise Palestinian aspirations for their own state on territory occupied by Israel. 

For example, Egypt’s continuing adherence to the Camp David Accords, despite serious human rights abuses committed since the 2013 ouster of its democratically elected government, has muted Western denunciations. Meanwhile, the Abraham Accords have had a similar effect on U.S. criticism of Bahrain, the UAE, Sudan, and Morocco, whose occupation and annexation of the Western Sahara, widely considered a violation of the Geneva Convention, is now officially recognized by Washington. Saudi Arabia, which has been engaged in recent years in a covert courtship of Israel, primarily on security issues, is also treated less harshly, although it has not yet signed the Abraham Accords.

The main bone of contention between Iran and the United States also relates to Tehran’s position on Israel and the Palestine issue. Iran, which refuses to recognize Israel, maintains that Palestine’s fate should be decided by a referendum of Palestinians, although it remains vague on whether Palestinian refugees outside the Occupied Territories should be able to participate. In 2006, then-President Mohammad Khatami even said that Iran can accept the two state solution. Other problems, including Iran’s nuclear program, partly derive from disagreements on this basic issue. 

In sum, the dispute over Palestine and Palestinian rights remains a major source of tension and instability in the Middle East and a potential trigger for a region-wide war in which a number of parties would seek America’s military intervention. Washington’s continued complacency about the stalemate in Israel-Palestinian relations is dangerous. Even if Israel succeeds in establishing relations with more Arab and Muslim states, its security and that of the region will remain fragile unless it reaches a more acceptable modus vivendi with its Palestinian neighbors.


Editorial credit: Anas-Mohammed / Shutterstock.com
Analysis | Middle East
US Navy Taiwan Strait
TAIWAN STRAIT (August 23, 2019) – US Naval Officers scan the horizon from the bridge while standing watch, part of Commander, Amphibious Squadron 11, operating in the Indo-Pacific region to enhance interoperability with partners and serve as a ready-response force for any type of contingency. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Markus Castaneda)

Despite setbacks, trends still point to US foreign policy restraint

Military Industrial Complex

It’s been only a few days since Israel first struck Iranian nuclear and regime targets, but Washington’s remaining neoconservatives and long-time Iran hawks are already celebrating.

After more than a decade of calling for military action against Iran, they finally got their wish — sort of. The United States did not immediately join Israel’s campaign, but President Donald Trump acquiesced to Israel’s decision to use military force and has not meaningfully restrained Israel’s actions. For those hoping Trump would bring radical change to U.S. foreign policy, his failure to halt Israel’s preventative war is a disappointment and a betrayal of past promises.

keep readingShow less
iraqi protests iran israel
Top photo credit: Iraqi Shi'ite Muslims hold a cutout of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as they attend a protest against Israeli strikes on Iran, in Baghdad, Iraq, June 16, 2025. REUTERS/Ahmed Saad

Iraq on razor's edge between Iran and US interests in new war

Middle East

As Israeli jets and Iranian rockets streak across the Middle Eastern skies, Iraq finds itself caught squarely in the crossfire.

With regional titans clashing above its head, Iraq’s fragile and hard-won stability, painstakingly rebuilt over decades of conflict, now hangs precariously in the balance. Washington’s own tacit acknowledgement of Iraq’s vulnerable position was laid bare by its decision to partially evacuate embassy personnel in Iraq and allow military dependents to leave the region.

This withdrawal, prompted by intelligence indicating Israeli preparations for long-range strikes, highlighted that Iraq’s airspace would be an unwitting corridor for Israeli and Iranian operations.

Prime Minister Mohammed Shia’ al-Sudani is now caught in a complicated bind, attempting to uphold Iraq’s security partnership with the United States while simultaneously facing intense domestic pressure from powerful, Iran-aligned Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) factions. These groups, emboldened by the Israel-Iran clash, have intensified their calls for American troop withdrawal and threaten renewed attacks against U.S. personnel, viewing them as legitimate targets and enablers of Israeli aggression.

keep readingShow less
George Bush mission accomplished
This file photo shows Bush delivering a speech to crew aboard the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln, as the carrier steamed toward San Diego, California on May 1, 2003. via REUTERS

Déjà coup: Iran war activates regime change dead-enders

Washington Politics

By now you’ve likely seen the viral video of an Iranian television reporter fleeing off-screen as Israel bombed the TV station where she was recording live. As the Quincy Institute’s Adam Weinstein quickly pointed out, Israel's attack on the broadcasting facility is directly out of the regime change playbook, “meant to shake public confidence in the Iranian government's ability to protect itself” and by implication, Iran’s citizenry.

Indeed, in the United States there is a steady drumbeat of media figures and legislators who have been loudly championing Israel’s apparent desire to overthrow the regime of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.