MSU expert: What increased Middle East tensions could mean for the region and US
October 21, 2024 - Jack Harrison
This is part of Michigan State University’s “Ask the Experts: 2024 Election Issues” series where experts answer questions on specific and relevant issues that affect people’s day-to-day lives. This one focuses on Middle East tensions and foreign policy.
This article originally appeared on MSUToday.
EAST LANSING, Mich. – It has now been over a year since the Israel-Hamas war began, which has taken the lives of thousands and displaced so many in Gaza. Israel is now engaged in conflict with Hezbollah in Lebanon, and Iran has launched missiles at Israel.
Tensions are only increasing and raising questions about the role of U.S. foreign policy in terms of engaging with the conflict and elevating its importance as a key issue in the upcoming 2024 presidential election. Now, Israel has killed Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas top leader who was the architect of the group’s Oct. 7 attack, leaving many to wonder if there could be a newfound path to peace.
Russell Lucas is a professor at Michigan State University’s James Madison College and the College of Arts and Letters. His research specializes in Middle Eastern politics with attention to foreign policy, public opinion, political institutions and the media. Here, Lucas answers questions on how tensions have increased in the Middle East and what actions could come next.
How has the Israel-Hamas war escalated tensions?
The Middle East hangs at the edge of an even more calamitous regional war after a year of enormous death and destruction in the region. Many ordinary people in the region, as well as elsewhere, wonder why the U.S. has not done more to bring an end to the conflicts. By fully supporting Israel, the Biden administration has done little to alter the perception that the U.S. is committed to destroying the region. While the Biden administration has tried to quietly influence the behavior of Israel’s right-wing government led by Benjamin Netanyahu, its methods are seen by publics in the region as ineffective at best but more often as window dressing.
In the past year, the death toll in Gaza has easily surpassed the number of undergraduate students at Michigan State University and some analysts say that figure is far too small. With a rapidly increasing death toll in Lebanon that has surpassed the number of Israelis killed on Oct. 7, 2023, the addition of a war of ballistic missiles between Israel and Iran will only ensure a terrible humanitarian toll. The U.S. needs to choose between allowing this death toll to spiral or to engage seriously in diplomatic efforts to lower tensions.
What role could Iran play in further conflict?
In recent weeks, Iran has acted with significant restraint in responding to Israeli provocations against it and its allies like Lebanon’s Hezbollah or Syria. Iran only used a fraction of its military capabilities directly against Israel earlier in the month. Israel was able to mostly shield from these missiles through anti-missile systems. If Israel escalates with a significant retaliation, however, there will be a high prospect for massive damage to both Israel and Iran. This is why Iran has been attempting to find diplomatic off-ramps.
How could U.S. voters be impacted by foreign conflict?
American voters tend not to give foreign policy issues much weight in their voting decisions. They tend to focus on domestic issues instead. Moreover, both presidential candidates offer few differences in their stated Middle East policies. One effect of this is the alienation of the few voters who do have strong feelings about U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. In Michigan, for example, many Arab American voters feel let down by the Biden administration for not working for a cease fire. This may lead these voters to sit out the election or vote for a candidate like Jill Stein of the Green Party.
How should the U.S. view Middle East tensions in the future?
In the end, the U.S. should be thinking about its long-term interests in the Middle East in a context of negative public opinion brought about by a generation of direct American intervention, and now, followed by the casualties inflicted by its ally. Other governments allied with the U.S., like Jordan or Saudi Arabia, only ignore the opinions of their publics up to a point. And even if Israel eliminates the leadership and disrupts the organization of groups like Hamas or Hezbollah, the grievances that animated their resistance to Israel, and the U.S., have only been given even deeper meaning. In the end, people judge American foreign policy by what the U.S. has done – or not done.