With Israel unleashed, there can be no peace in the Middle East

The escalation of violence in the Middle East following Israel’s military actions represents more than a localized conflict—it signals a potential unraveling of the fragile diplomatic architecture that has, despite its flaws, prevented full-scale regional war for decades. The United States’ historical role as a mediator in Arab-Israeli peace processes, from the Camp David Accords to the tentative Syria negotiations, underscored its unique position as a guarantor of stability. Yet that role has steadily eroded, not just due to shifting geopolitical alliances but because the very premise of negotiated peace has been undermined by Israel’s increasingly assertive security policies and the absence of a viable Palestinian partner. The current crisis suggests that the era of U.S.-brokered frameworks—already weakened by the Abraham Accords’ focus on Arab normalization over Palestinian statehood—may be giving way to a more volatile reality where military force dictates outcomes. Key to understanding the stakes is recognizing how Israel’s recent operations reflect a strategic pivot away from the two-state solution, even as it remains the only internationally endorsed path to lasting peace. The collapse of Palestinian political cohesion, the expansion of Israeli settlements, and the waning influence of traditional mediators like Egypt and Jordan have created a vacuum. Meanwhile, regional powers such as Iran and its proxies, emboldened by perceived Western disengagement, are filling the void with asymmetric warfare, further entrenching the cycle of retaliation. What comes next hinges on whether Israel’s leadership views this moment as an opportunity to further marginalize Palestinian aspirations or as a catalyst for broader regional confrontation. The absence of a credible peace process risks normalizing perpetual low-intensity conflict, where sporadic violence becomes the default state rather than a temporary aberration. Yet history shows that such cycles rarely remain confined; they tend to metastasize, drawing in new actors and escalating in unpredictability. The broader trend here is the decline of multilateral conflict resolution in favor of unilateral power plays—a shift mirrored in other global hotspots where diplomacy has been sidelined by escalating militarization. For the Middle East, this could mean a return to the pre-1973 era of direct Arab-Israeli confrontation, with far graver humanitarian and geopolitical consequences. The question is no longer just about the immediate violence but whether the international community will accept a future where peace is no longer the organizing principle of regional politics.