By Ramzy Baroud
The Middle East is at the cusp of major, unprecedented geopolitical changes that will reverberate for decades.
The Middle East stands at the precipice of a profound, unprecedented geopolitical realignment. Even if a temporary US–Iran ‘cessation of hostilities’ holds, the structural drivers of the conflict remain unresolved.
Between a fragile interim truce and a comprehensive settlement lies a volatile strategic vacuum—one that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is highly incentivized to exploit.
Facing deep domestic political vulnerabilities, Netanyahu’s primary political survival mechanism remains regional escalation. However, the geographic and military parameters available for such escalation are rapidly shrinking.
The regional landscape has fundamentally shifted. The Axis of Resistance has demonstrated unprecedented strategic resilience, frustrating the objectives of the joint US–Israeli military aggression initiated on February 28.
The joint US–Israeli war was intended to cripple Iran’s military infrastructure and impose a regime change. Instead, it revealed the limits of Western and Israeli conventional power against a deeply entrenched asymmetric network.
The Redefined Iranian Deterrent
Iran has fundamentally rewritten the rules of engagement. By absorbing direct strikes and responding with a massive, multi-tiered retaliatory doctrine, Tehran has signaled that the era of “strategic patience” is over.
Iranian retaliation is no longer localized; it can reach anywhere. This was demonstrated when Iranian drones and ballistic missiles targeted not only Israeli military infrastructure but also key US military bases and critical infrastructure across the Gulf states.
Tehran’s strategic stranglehold on the Strait of Hormuz remains a potent economic weapon, driving global energy prices to historic highs and proving that any future Western aggression guarantees immediate, systemic global disruption.
The Multi-Front Paradigm and the Failure to ‘Delink’
For years, Washington and Tel Aviv sought a ‘delinking’ strategy—attempting to isolate theatres of resistance and conflict so they could crush Palestinian resistance, degrade Hezbollah, or strike Iran individually without triggering a unified regional response.
This strategy collapsed when Israel bombed Beirut’s Al-Dahya in early June despite explicit, red-line warnings from Tehran. Instead of fracturing the Axis, the aggression permanently codified the ‘Unity of the Squares’ (Wahdat al-Sahat).
This means that a conventional strike on one node of the Axis now triggers an automatic, legally and militarily coordinated response across all fronts.
The battlefields of Gaza, southern Lebanon, Tehran, and the Red Sea have been fused into a singular, indivisible strategic theatre, a nightmare scenario for Israel, the US, and their regional allies.
Ansarallah: The Strategic Reserve
The fact that Yemen’s Ansarallah did not activate its full military arsenal during the height of the February 28 aggression is a calculated demonstration of confidence, not weakness.
By holding back on shutting down Bab al-Mandab and employing their most sophisticated anti-ship ballistic missiles and long-range drone variants available to Ansarallah, the Axis signaled that they possess deep strategic depth.
Palestinian Realignment
Within this broader regional confrontation, Palestinian resistance factions have played a calculated waiting game, carefully watching the shifts in the regional balance of power.
Factions in Gaza have reached a definitive conclusion: Israel has no intention of respecting any long-term ceasefire.
Indeed, Netanyahu’s open declarations regarding the widening of the so-called Yellow Line, continuous rhetoric from far-right cabinet ministers advocating for ethnic cleansing, and the systematic obstruction of aid that has pushed Gaza back to the brink of starvation serve as undeniable proof.
Furthermore, decades of occupation have taught Palestinian leaders that international frameworks led by the United States are fundamentally bankrupt.
Washington has consistently acted as Israel’s diplomatic shield and primary arms supplier, erasing any possibility of the US acting as a neutral arbiter or enforcing Israeli compliance with international law.
Concurrently, regional Arab states have proven either entirely complicit or structurally incapable of projecting power to stop the destruction of Gaza.
Realignment of Hamas?
This geopolitical trajectory is radically shifting Hamas’ internal dynamics.
Historically, the movement maintained a delicate equilibrium between two competing factions: those close to Qatar and other US allies, and a more radical, military branch that sought direct support from Iran.
As Western-mediated diplomacy fails to secure a permanent end to the occupation, the pro-Iran wing is experiencing an unprecedented surge in leverage.
This internal shift was illuminated by the crucial recent telephone call between senior Hamas political bureau member Khalil al-Hayya and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.
Al-Hayya explicitly praised Iran’s negotiating team for their unyielding stance in demanding a simultaneous cessation of hostilities on all regional fronts.
Crucially, this call followed a series of deliberate statements from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)—rather than the political branches in Tehran—specifying that Gaza is no longer an isolated, secondary issue.
While “ending the war on all fronts” previously implied a focus on Lebanon, Gaza is now being explicitly named as an inseparable precondition for permanent regional stability.
If the trajectory continues to move in favor of Iran and its allies, Palestinian resistance factions are likely to move quickly to capitalize on this success, a success in which Palestinian steadfastness played a major role.
Five Expectations and Core Questions for the New Era
Shall the US-Israeli aggression on Iran end in Iran’s favor, in the short and long terms, the following dynamics are likely to follow:
First: On the Iranian Internal Front
Iran is likely to start a new era of internal cohesiveness fueled by economic recovery, a sense of national pride, and a new social contract that brings conservatives and reformers together.
Iran is clearly emerging along nationalistic lines, though the religious components shall remain strong. Repelling a joint superpower campaign offers the regime an unprecedented wave of domestic sovereignty and defensive legitimacy.
The Core Question: Will the new Iranian leadership use this opportunity to develop long-term strategic cohesion in the country and not allow internal conflicts to continue serving as a point of vulnerability to be exploited by the US, Israel, and Western countries?
Second: Redefining Persian Gulf Security Architecture
An empowered Iran shall emerge as a dominant regional player, redefining its relations with neighboring Arab countries, particularly in the Gulf. The latter, discouraged or shocked by America’s failure to protect them during the height of the exchanges, will have no choice but to seek direct diplomatic accommodation with Tehran to safeguard their own infrastructure.
The Core Question: What will be the basis of any future push for regional co-existence, and will Iran allow itself to smoothly co-exist with countries in the Gulf that still house US military bases and residual Israeli intelligence assets?
Third: The Collapse of the Abraham Accords
The normalization scheme between Israel and Arab countries under US auspices is likely to suffer catastrophically.
It is important to recall that normalization was meant as a tool to build an alternative Israeli-Arab camp to fight and defeat Iran.
The war on Iran has clearly proved the opposite is true; normalization did not ‘deter’ Iran, but instead turned host countries into potential zones of retaliation. This renders normalization increasingly irrelevant and proves that Israel is a strategic liability, not an asset.
The Core Question: Will Arab countries that previously normalized ties now formally downgrade their relationships with Israel, and what realistic narrative can Washington use to push for normalization in the future?
Fourth: Lebanon’s Shift in Political Equilibrium
If Israel is forced out of Lebanon, the balances of political power are likely to change drastically.
While Hezbollah is unlikely to exploit these changes to aggressively get back at its domestic enemies—namely those who criticized the movement during a war Hezbollah sees as a war of liberation—the old status quo shall change.
Iran will officially be recognized as Lebanon’s strategic depth. Arab countries close to the Beirut government are likely to rush into political compromises aimed at preserving their allies, without conditioning future arrangements on disarming the resistance.
The Core Question: If Israel agrees to a ceasefire that forces it to pull from all or most of Lebanon, will it respect that boundary in the future? If it does not, will Iran re-engage with Israel militarily?
Fifth: The ‘Lebanonization’ of the Palestinian Alliance
Feeling betrayed by all traditional players, including the US-controlled international community and major Arab and Muslim countries, Palestinian resistance factions (including Hamas) are likely to permanently upgrade their strategic alliance with Iran.
As Tehran emerges as a regional power capable of creating new equations, this realignment could mean—or at least Palestinians hope—that Iran will treat Gaza the same way as South Lebanon, retaliating directly against Israel should it resume its genocide in the Strip.
The Core Question: Does this mean that Hamas would have to completely abandon its traditional diplomatic allies in the region? Will Washington allow Qatar and others to continue hosting Hamas leadership, should the movement move closer to Tehran? Furthermore, to what extent would Israel go to keep Palestine delinked from its wars in Iran and Lebanon?
An Invitation to the Reader
The war is not yet over. Israel is highly likely to escalate further to create distractions from its strategic failures on multiple fronts—potentially by opening new domestic flashpoints, such as the accelerated annexation of much of the West Bank, and more massacres in Gaza.
One thing, however, remains undeniably clear: the Middle East is at the cusp of major, unprecedented geopolitical changes that will reverberate for decades.
What are your views on this shifting landscape? How do you see these regional balances playing out, and how would you answer the questions raised above?
Readers are encouraged to offer their views, analysis, and comments below to move this critical conversation forward.