The views and opinions expressed in this essay are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any other entity or organization.
Trying to keep up with the news coming out of Israel and its neighbors in 2024 felt like a second full-time job. I tried it. It was not exactly “fun,” but I felt it was important.
Early in the year, I tried to give friends just a high-level overview of everything going on. Just the overview took an hour. With practice, though, I started to connect themes that I had not previously connected. Those themes are the subject of this essay.
In Physics, there are four fundamental forces. Technically, all forces can be derived from just these four. The word “technically” does a lot of heavy lifting here: in practice, we rely on higher-order laws derived from these forces. Nonetheless, it is amazing to know that it traces back to just a few principles.
In this essay, I am going to do something ridiculous: try to describe the four fundamental forces that shape conflicts in the Middle East. I am mainly focused on the conflicts involving Israel, but some of the principles discussed extend beyond that.
Naturally, writing a short essay about the most complex regions in the world will require significant over-simplification. If you want to really learn about the Middle East in depth, you’ll need to read several books. At the end of this essay, I will recommend some.
You cannot talk about the Middle East without talking about religion. Let’s lay out some basic statistics before we dive deeper.
In a survey that asks “Is religion important to your daily life?” you immediately see the contrast between Western Countries and the Middle East.
In Western Countries, the “Yes” response rate is typically below 50%: Sweden (17%), Denmark (19%), UK (27%), France (30%), Germany (40%), Canada (42%), Spain (49%). Among these countries, the United States is an outlier, with the “Yes” rate being 65%.
In the Middle East, the “Yes” response rate is typically above 80%: Turkey (82%), Iraq (84%), Lebanon (87%), Syria (89%), UAE (91%), Saudi Arabia (93%), Qatar (95%), Egypt (97%), Yemen (99%). In Israel, the “Yes” rate is just 51%.
Unlike many Western nations, the separation of church and state is not a common principle in the Middle East. Religion often influences government policies and legal systems. Many Muslim-majority countries reference the Quran in their constitutions and base their laws on Sharia. In Israel, where the separation is more pronounced, religion still plays a role in government customs and policies.
For thousands of years, wars were fought over religion. In Europe, these included, among many others, the Saxon Wars (722-804), four crusades (1096-1099, 1147-1149, 1189-1192, and 1202-1204), the Reconquista (711-1492), the Hussite wars (1419-1434), the Reformation Wars (1524-1648), the Anglo-Spanish war (1585-1604), and the English Civil War (1642-1651).
Since the enlightenment, religious wars have largely receded in the West, but that’s a recent phenomenon. In the Middle East, they are still being fought.
Islam was founded in the 7th Century CE and posited itself as the final revelation of God. In its earliest days, Islam spread through extraordinary military conquest. Within 150 years of its founding, Islam had spread by the sword over all of the Arabian Peninsula, North Africa, Spain, the Middle East, and pieces of Central and South Asia. No civilization conquered so much so quickly, save for maybe Alexander the Great. This early success was seen as evidence of Islam’s greatness.
What does this have to do with Judaism? Well, the Jews in Israel represent a particularly grave affront to Islamic theology because Israel is holy land that was once in Muslim hands. In Islam, there is the concept of “Dar Al-Islam” (literally: “House of Islam”), referring to any land subject to Muslim rule. Many classic scholars argued that if “Dar Al-Islam” was lost, there was a religious duty to reclaim it through Jihad.
A vast majority of contemporary Muslims have reinterpreted Jihad as an inner struggle for spiritual betterment. Unfortunately, there are still a large number of extremists who take the word of the Quran literally. If you listen to interviews with radical Jihadists, they say that they aspire to become “shaheed” (martyrs). Those who die in defense of their faith are considered martyrs and are granted spiritual reward and eternal life. This belief fuels their willingness to engage in acts of violence, including suicide bombings and attacks on civilians, which they see as justified by their religious convictions.
The fundamental force of Islam versus Judaism was a defining feature of the first half century of Israel’s existence. Until 1979, all of Israel’s neighbors stood unified in rejecting its existence. In 1948, 1967, and 1973, several of Israel’s Muslim-majority neighbors attacked it in tandem with the goal of wiping it out. At the 1967 Arab League summit, they famously issued the 3 “Nos:” no peace, no recognition, no negotiations. The rhetoric was frequently the rhetoric of Muslim unity against Israel.
In 1979, Egyptian President Sadat bravely crossed the divide and led Egypt to be the first country to formally recognize Israel. Sadly, he paid for it with his life two years later. Until 2020, Egypt and Jordan were the only countries in the Middle East that formally recognized Israel’s right to exist. The Abraham Accords added a few more nations to that list. To this day, most of Israel’s immediate neighbors still do not formally recognize it.
It is conspicuous that Hamas called their invasion of Israel on October 7, 2023 “Al-Aqsa Flood.” Al-Aqsa is the Mosque that sits atop the temple mount in Jerusalem. It is the third-holiest sight in Islam, built atop the holiest site for Jews. Today, it is administered by the “Jerusalem Waqf,” which is appointed by the Jordanian government. Only Muslims are allowed to access it.
This is not the first time Al-Aqsa has been used as a flashpoint for violence. Claiming that Jews are threatening the Mosque has served as a justification for violence in the past. In fact, the whole Second Intifada (a series of suicide bombings against Israeli buses, cafes, and nightclubs from 2000-2005 that killed ~1000 Israelis) was also known as the “Al-Aqsa Intifada” based on a perceived threat to Al-Aqsa.
In their attack, Hamas wanted to rekindle the flames of this first fundamental force, appealing to its religious brethren across national lines. If you watch the videos that Hamas recorded of themselves killing Israeli civilians, you frequently hear them shouting “Allahu Akbar” (“God is greater”). Their rallying cry was religious, not geopolitical.
There are more sects of Islam than there are sects of Christianity, but one of the most notable schisms is between Sunnis and Shiites. There are also complicated ways in which Islam intersects with different Arab identities. Not all Arabs are Muslim. We’re not going to talk about the Kurds, the Alawites, the Druze, or the Bedouins, but suffice it to say there’s a whole lot more.
The Sunni-Shiite split originated after the death of Prophet Muhammad in 632 CE, over who should lead the Muslim community. Over centuries, this theological divide has been amplified.
Since the Iranian Revolution in 1979, Saudi Arabia and Iran have vied against each other for regional dominance. Saudi Arabia, home to Islam’s two holiest cities, Mecca and Medina, follows Wahhabism, an ultraconservative Sunni Islamic movement. Iran, on the other hand, embraces Shiite Islam, and integrates its clerical leadership directly into governance through the concept of “Velayat-e Faqih” (Guardianship of the Jurist).
Iran has sought to export its revolutionary ideology and support Shiite movements across the region. This has led to proxy conflicts and sectarian tensions in several countries, including Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen. Iran’s support for groups like Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen has further fueled regional instability. To learn more, look up the “Iran-Saudi Arabia proxy conflict.”
In recent years, Saudi Arabia and its Sunni allies have increasingly aligned with Western powers to counter Iran’s influence. This alignment includes arms deals, security cooperation, and shared opposition to Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
The Abraham Accords—normalization agreements between Israel and several Arab states—represent a strategic pivot. Although Saudi Arabia has yet to formally join, it shares a tacit understanding with Israel in opposing Iran. Seen through this lens, Hamas’ attack on Israel on October 7, 2023 was an effort to disrupt the progress made in the Abraham Accords and disconnect Saudi Arabia from its key western allies.
Media also plays a role in amplifying sectarian tensions. The Qatar-funded Al Jazeera network, often perceived as sympathetic to radical Islamic movements and Iran, has been banned in several countries, including Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the UAE, Bahrain, and Egypt. This is a very conspicuous set of countries: a mix of countries seeking to counter Iranian influence and countries seeking to counter radical Islamism (more in the next section). To learn more, look up the “Qatar diplomatic crisis.”
Recall the statistic from earlier: in most Muslim countries in the Middle East, over 80% of respondents say religion is important in their daily life. Of course, that is just a snapshot. In reality, the Middle East is in fledgling stages of a religious evolution similar to the Enlightenment-driven secularization of Europe, albeit at an accelerated pace due to globalization.
This rapid change is causing increased tension and conflict, exemplified by the 2011 Arab Spring uprisings. In 2011, there was a wave of protests and uprisings across the Arab world (including Tunisia, Libya, Syria, Bahrain, Yemen), driven by demands for democracy, economic reform, and an end to authoritarianism. While initially focused on secular issues, these movements exposed and amplified the divide between religious moderates and radicals.
At the core of this schism lies Islamism, a political ideology advocating for the integration of Islam into governance and the establishment of a theocracy. Islamist groups, such as the Muslim Brotherhood, Al-Qaeda, ISIS, and Hamas, represent varying degrees of this radical ideology and seek to implement Sharia law under the ultimate authority of religious leaders.
Conversely, moderate Muslims support the integration of Islamic values into society without imposing a theocratic system. They advocate for pluralism, coexistence, and the separation of political and religious authority.
Unfortunately, the Arab Spring had less-than-stellar results. The political turmoil led to economic hardship, which made it easier for radical groups to gain a foothold. What was supposed to be a step away from Islamism sometimes became a step toward it.
Take the example of Egypt. In Egypt, the overthrow of Mubarak in 2011 led to the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood. Their efforts to embed Islam more deeply into the political system were met with opposition from secularists and moderates. The subsequent military coup led by Sisi in 2013 underscored the backlash against Islamist governance, with Sisi positioning himself as a guardian of moderate Islam and stability.
Hamas is an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood. It should come as no surprise, then, that for years Egypt maintained a tighter blockade of Gaza than Israel did and does not admit Gazan war refugees. Frankly, they are not interested in allowing more of the radical Islamist ideology into their country.
The Cold War, although “officially” ending in 1989, continues to influence global geopolitics. This ideological conflict, primarily between democracy and authoritarianism, has manifested in various regions, including the Middle East. The ongoing tensions between Israel and Iran exemplify this struggle, mirroring other geopolitical conflicts such as the Russia-Ukraine conflict and the China-Taiwan tensions. In all these cases, the democratic state represents a model that threatens the authoritarian regime’s narrative.
Israel, despite its internal challenges, stands as a beacon of democracy in the Middle East. It upholds democratic institutions, conducts regular elections, and fosters a vibrant public discourse. In stark contrast, Iran operates as a theocratic autocracy, where ultimate authority rests with the Supreme Leader.
In the Democracy Index published by The Economist, Israel scored 7.8. The United States scored 7.9. Both were categorized as “Flawed Democracies.” No other country in the Middle East or North Africa scored nearly as high. The only three that were classified as “Hybrid” were Morocco (5.0), Tunisia (5.5), and Turkey (4.3). The rest were classified as “Authoritarian,” including Qatar, Lebanon, Oman, Jordan, the UAE, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Bahrain, Yemen, and Syria.
In this global contest, alliances play a pivotal role. The United States and NATO support Ukraine against Russian aggression and Israel against threats from Iran and its proxies. Similarly, Western powers support Taiwan to deter Chinese expansionism. Of course, the reverse is true, too: China is Iran’s biggest trade partner and Russia is its biggest arms supplier. When the United States is on one side, China and Russia are frequently on the other.
When President Biden packaged aid to Ukraine and aid to Israel, it was not a political convenience, but a recognition that they are two fronts in the same fight. These alliances underscore a shared commitment to defending democracy and recognizing that its defense in one region strengthens it globally.
People today in Western societies have it pretty good - we’re healthier, wealthier, and freer than ever before. This wasn’t always the case. If we look back at something like the Crusades, where Christians wanted to conquer Jerusalem just because of religion, it seems not only archaic but incomprehensible. This is because we’re imposing our current values onto a past situation. The same goes for understanding the Middle East.
Some Westerners view the conflict surrounding Israel as a struggle for territorial control. That is a mistake. It’s tempting to assume that the conflict is driven by geopolitical goals, as these can theoretically be satisfied through negotiation and compromise. Religious and ideological goals are often absolute and non-negotiable, making them far more challenging.
Here is an extended quote from the son of one of the founders of Hamas, who has since defected and spoken out against his father’s organization:
They are a religious movement. This is what everybody is afraid to say. If Hamas was a political movement, then we could satisfy their political ambition. But Hamas is a religious movement that does not believe in political borders. They want to establish an Islamic state on the rubble of the state of Israel. They want to annihilate the Jewish people and the Jewish state. They want to kill everybody who supports Israel, then establish an Islamic state. But this is not the end. Because their ambition is global. They want to establish an Islamic state, a global state.
To truly work towards a solution in the Middle East, it is imperative to stand against ideologies that hinder human progress. Religious fundamentalism and authoritarianism are prime examples of such ideologies. These systems, irrespective of cultural context, obstruct societal advancement and limit human potential.
This does not mean that the situation is entirely hopeless. There is a path forward, but it involves advocating for secularism and democracy. Encouraging steps have already been taken in this direction, especially reducing the influence of centers of indoctrination.
As one example, consider the banning of Al-Jazeera in several countries. To a casual observer, this might seem like a move that is antithetical to democracy, undermining a free press. However, Al-Jazeera is a state-run media, not a free and independent source of journalism.
As another example, consider the defunding of UNRWA. UNRWA is the “UN” Relief and Works Agency. While the “UN” in the title would seem to give it clout, this UN agency, which operated in Gaza and the West Bank, was staffed by extremists who used it to indoctrinate radical ideology. Several of its teachers participated in the October 7 terrorist attacks. They even infused radical ideology in science classes, teaching Physics with lessons on firing slingshots at Israelis. In other lessons, children were taught which arteries to slice when knifing Jews to maximize their chance of killing them. Defunding UNRWA is the first of many steps towards establishing an education system in the West Bank and Gaza that does not teach extreme ideologies and incite violence.
Change takes time. Ideological shifts often take a generation to fully manifest; they don’t happen overnight. If we delay, in 20 years we’ll look back and wish we had started today.
If you are only going to read one book, read Israel: A Simple Guide to the Most Misunderstood Country on Earth by Noa Tishby. It is not necessarily the best book about Israel, but it is written to be accessible to folks with very little context.
If you already know the basic facts about Israel, some more advanced books (in order of how much I recommend them) include The War of Return by Einat Wilf, Industry of Lies by Ben-Dror Yemeni (which, despite its provocative name, is actually a rather level-headed book), and Catch-67 by Micah Goodman. For occasional ongoing coverage, I recommend “The Tom Nash Report” on YouTube.