The article is published in cooperation with the «Orbeli» Center and the Iran Daily newspaper.

T he process of world order changing which started in Eastern Europe with the Ukrainian war in February 2022, as predicted, created prerequisites for substantive changes in some other regions as well. The regions, that are inevitably affected by the indirect confrontation between Russia and the West, as well as those where there are frozen deep conflicts and undisguised revisionist aspirations became the scene of such developments. And as it is usually recorded in such historical periods, such processes usually lead to radical changes in geopolitical and security environments in different regions.

The most obvious examples of the abovementioned are the substantive changes recorded in the framework of the Nagorno-Karabakh (NK) issue in the South Caucasus, as well as the multi-layered hybrid confrontation reactivated in the Middle East by the next round of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Of course, it is hard to see a direct connection in the activation processes of the two conflicts mentioned above. Meanwhile, the time limits of the developments and the highly harmonious strategic cooperation between the main players Azerbaijan and Israel inevitably generalize the logical chain of events. Hence, the one-day aggression of September 19, 2023, unleashed by Azerbaijani authorities against the people of Nagorno-Karabakh, who were exhausted from a 10-month siege, may have been a little surprise for the expansionist Aliyev regime, but the calculated maximum result of this political plan, led to the ethnic cleansing of Nagorno-Karabakh, the forced displacement of more than 100,000 Armenians (more than 150,000 local Armenians left Nagorno-Karabakh since 2020).

           
Historical Artsakh inhabited by Armenians for millennia was completely depopulated. The Azerbaijani authorities could not have carried out this operation, which undeniably has the characteristics of genocide, without shadow deals, especially with a key ally Turkey, as well as with Russia, which assumed the role of guarantor of security in Nagorno-Karabakh by the Trilateral Statement of November 9, 2020 and deployed its peacekeeping units in the region. One of the obvious components of the mentioned but not yet public agreement was Azerbaijan's refusal to negotiate on Western platforms that compete with Russia in the historical stage of global confrontation and the renewal of the talk of the implementation of regional routes unblocking process with corridor logic.

As for the geopolitical and regional political consequences of the genocidal process in Nagorno-Karabakh, they are actually within the logic of the development of the realities recorded by the results of the 44-Day War.  That is to say, as a result of the Russia-Turkey-Azerbaijan deal, the positions of another regional player, Iran, are once again hit significantly, as well as for the Western players, Washington and Brussels, who initiated active substantive steps aimed at reducing Moscow's role in the South Caucasus after the start of the Ukrainian war.

Azerbaijan's successful military-strategic operation could not but inspire Israel, one of its key partners in the large region. The latter has long sought to find a radical solution to the most explosive and bloody Palestinian issue in the world today, especially for the Gaza Strip, having a population of about 2.4 million Palestinians and is considered one of the most densely populated regions on earth.         

The ''surprise'' large-scale attack of the Islamic radical organization Hamas against Israel on October 7, 2023, causing unprecedented human, material, and reputational damage (more than 1300 victims, 240 hostages) became a very opportune occasion for the implementation of such a policy. Of course, the Al Aqsa Flood military operation initiated by the Palestinian structure contained enormous miscalculations at the tactical level (as it contained content elements typical of terrorist attacks, targeting the civilian population as well), despite the most serious strategic goals. In particular, the choice of the period of the attack prepared by Hamas against Israel for a long time was also determined to disrupt the Saudi Arabia-Israel settlement process, which is of strategic importance from the viewpoint of the Palestinian problem solution. This is a cornerstone circumstance, because, for example, the Abraham Accords signed between a number of important Arab countries (such as UAE, Bahrain, Sudan, Morocco) and Israel in 2020-2021 with the mediation of the USA were rightly assessed by the Palestinians as a strategic omission, since the logic of acting with a common pan-Arab front against the Jewish state was undermined. It implied a complete solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict in one package, exclusively along the borders existing before the 1967 Six-Day War and the creation of a Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital. Especially since the middle of 2023, the Saudi Arabia-Israel settlement process reactivated by the efforts of the White House, one of the key preconditions of which was the demand for the creation of the Palestinian state,  gradually lost its importance compared to other strategic opportunities promised to Al-Riyadh (such as the implementation of the Saudi nuclear program, new opportunities for cooperation in the military-technical sphere), if successful, it would definitely have a negative impact on the implementation of the ultimate goals of the Palestinian movement. Therefore, in the context of the above-mentioned, the relentless war between Israel and Hamas, which has been going on for 5 months, has solved the Palestinian side's problem at least in the medium term, temporarily disrupting the Al-Riyadh – Tel Aviv settlement.

As for Israel, the latter uses the realities of the inter-world order no less successfully, based on the logic of the ''war is an opportunity'' formula.

In Particular, the explicit goal is to maximally change the current status quo of the Palestinian issue as a ''cancerous'' unresolved legacy left over from the previous world order in the context of its agenda.  That is, to establish full control over the Gaza Strip, at least in the short term, and later, if possible, to achieve cancellation of the plan for the formation of the Palestinian state.

In response, the Israeli Army is carrying out a ''punitive operation'' in Gaza known as ''Iron Swords'', the declared goal of which is to eliminate the power of Hamas in Gaza and to form a more controllable government in the region. Meanwhile, it can be concluded from the current three-phase operation of the Israeli army that Tel Aviv's plans in Gaza are more profound, aimed at the desolation of the territory as much as possible. And despite the constant calls and demands of the international community, as well as Israel's key allies, the most right-wing, pro-religious government formed throughout the history of that country continues its military operations with obvious elements of crimes against humanity (as a result of Israeli Armed Forces' actions, about 28,000 victims and 67,000 wounded have been recorded so far, 70% of the region's population have been displaced). However, the profound goals of the Israeli side do not record significant results, especially because of the principled stand of Egypt and Jordan, which are also supported by Iran, Turkey, other Arab and Muslim countries, the United Nations and the European Union. 

The war in Gaza also contains a deep enough geopolitical layer. Thus, it is also the reason that it contains predictable risks of continuous expansion and turning into a regional-scale war, despite the noticeable efforts of the main actors to keep the processes at the level of control.

In particular, one of the obvious layers of this confrontation is the weakening of Iran's regional influence, the disintegration of the ''axis of resistance''. This fits into the logic of Israel's primary program, aimed at solving the problem of improving environmental security, in particular, the final neutralization of possible threats from pro-Iranian structures located in Syria and Lebanon. Alongside the Israel-Hamas confrontation, the military tension on the Israel-Lebanon border, and the frequent Israeli military operations in Syria are aimed at this.

Despite the apparent difficulties, however, the realities of today's world let us assess the perspective of the implementation of the above-mentioned programs of the Israel State as very realistic.  Of course, they cannot succeed without the all-around support provided to Israel by its allies and especially by the United States, at the military, diplomatic-political, financial, and psychological levels. It is precisely thanks to the diplomatic and strategic support of Washington that Israel is able, in the face of various external pressures, to continue solving its problems in Gaza, at the expense of deepening the humanitarian disaster. One of the strategic directions of the US key role is to neutralize the effective united anti-Israeli action in the region by involving formal players, such as various Arab-Muslim countries. However, it should be stated that the existing deep competitive environment in the region between a number of players: Turkey, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, Katar, Iran, etc., also does not allow the formation of a united anti-Israel front of Israel. As an example, the weakening of Iran's regional influence or Egypt-Israel, Egypt-US tensions are in the interests of all the above-mentioned players. This is the reason, why a number of players with a significant potential to influence Israel and the war in general, do not initiate more substantive actions than some diplomatic steps, in addition to strong anti-Israel rhetoric. For example, Turkey, through the territory of which the lion's share of Israel's oil supplies is carried out. Thus, it would be much more influential than the statements of the Turkish ruling elite, which regularly accuses the Israeli authorities of genocide, if even for a week various supplies through the territory of that country to Israel were stopped, which could have a significant impact on the potential of the Jewish state to continue the war. Moreover, especially Iran has repeatedly spoken about this tactic, which as we see is not implemented due to the aforementioned competitive realities.

Nevertheless, alongside the war in Gaza, there are obvious tendencies of increasing tension in the region, which, although evaluated within the framework of the US-Iran confrontation resolution, is mostly in the context of the nature of the Middle East. In particular, there are many informal players in regional processes, who although associated with some Middle Eastern and extra-regional players, are not fully influenced by them. Among them are ''Islamic Jihad'' in Palestine, Houthi ''Ansar Allah'' in Yemen, ''Hezbollah'' in Lebanon, ''Kataib Hezbollah'' in Iraq, many similar structures in Syria, a number of terrorist groups such as ''Islamic State'', ''Al-Qaeda'', which always take advantage of any tension arising in the region, in the domain of their goals and interests. A vivid example of this is the destabilization of the situation in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden by the Yemeni ''Ansar Allah'' in support of HAMAS, the regular targeting of Israeli territory by ''Hezbollah'', the attacks against American military bases by Iraqi and Syrian groups in those countries, activation of ''Islamic State'' also in Iran.

Summing up, it can be confirmed that deep geopolitical changes have their direct manifestations in the Middle East as well, having a substantive impact on the geopolitical and security image of this region. Various military tensions in the region, with unique signals,  warn of the possibility of a more large-scale confrontation, despite global efforts to avoid it. 

Of course, one of the substantive directions of these processes is the targeting of Iran's influence system, in response to which we are witnessing the multifaceted launch of the ''axis of resistance''. By absorbing the efforts and attention of  Tehran's opponents, the ''axis'' formed for such strategic scenarios, in turn, gives Iran an opportunity to resort to new tactical resolutions, seeking to extend the area of influence in the adjacent sub-regions as well.  

---

Armen Petrosyan, Expert on Regional Issues