Al-Hurra, a U.S.-owned Arabic language television channel, has reported that several Arab countries have sent back-channel messages to Israel.
Support for Retaliation
These Arab countries have expressed support for Israel’s retaliatory strike against Iran. They have emphasized that Israel’s response should be “strict and clear.” This indicates a level of backing for a forceful response from Israel to Iran’s actions.
Request for Advanced Notice
While supporting Israel’s right to retaliate, these countries have also requested advanced notice of such strikes. The purpose of this request is likely to allow them to prepare for any potential fallout or counterattacks that might affect them, suggesting a pragmatic approach to safeguard their interests.
Broader Support for Israeli Actions
The same group of countries, purportedly operating under or linked with U.S. Central Command, has also shown support for Israeli military actions in Lebanon and Syria. This includes strikes that resulted in significant outcomes like the assassination of Hezbollah’s Secretary-General, Hassan Nasrallah.
Political and Strategic Implications
This development points to a few underlying currents in Middle Eastern geopolitics:
– A Shift in Alliances: Traditional alliances and enmities are being redefined, with some Arab states aligning more closely with Israel against Iran, driven perhaps by shared concerns over Iran’s influence in the region.
– U.S. Influence: The mention of U.S. Central Command suggests American involvement or at least an alignment of interests between these Arab states, Israel, and the U.S., particularly against Iranian expansionism.
– Concern Over Escalation: The request for advanced notice underscores the fear of escalation and the intricate balance these nations are trying to maintain—supporting Israel’s defense while trying to avoid being drawn directly into conflict.
– Public vs. Private Stances: The nature of these communications being “back-channel” highlights the discrepancy that can exist between public postures and private diplomatic or strategic communications, especially in a region where public sentiment often runs counter to Israel.
Given the sensitive nature of these communications and the geopolitical complexities of the Middle East, these reports reflect a nuanced landscape where covert diplomacy, strategic alliances, and the ever-present concern for regional stability play significant roles.
However, without specific countries named, the information remains somewhat opaque, relying on the credibility of Al-Hurra’s reporting and understanding that such diplomatic maneuvers are typically shrouded in secrecy until they’re not.