The Israel’s Gaza campaign can upset many bilateral agreements

Two world leaders in the middle of almost every geo-political discussion for the past year, travelled out to their respective countries, to resolve the unfolding Israel war on terror. US President, Joe Biden travelled to Israel to express solidarity with one of its closest allies in West Asia. His next stop was Jordan where according to the white house statement, the president’s trip “reiterated that Hamas does not stand for the Palestinian people’s right to dignity and self-determination and discuss the humanitarian needs of civilians in Gaza. “The President also met with leaders from Egypt, and Palestinian Authority in Amman during the trip. A careful balancing of risks involved with the President’s trip to Israel played out in the background, with several senior officials in the White House admitting about the possible PR fallout of the high-level visit.

 The fear of a ground attack on Gaza, with US marines in the vicinity, or joining in, causing huge casualties of Palestinians, could trigger a backlash against the war against terror globally. The collective memory of people around the world is currently bombarded with visuals of human tragedy and piles of rubble, caused first by the war in Ukraine for the past year, followed by the Gaza strip, even though, many of them would have preferred, some more time to come out Covid induced economic misfortunes. Additionally, President Biden faces a tough re-election next year, with political sentiments in the US on a slippery ground regarding the state/number of wars America can afford. The world, particularly US citizens, may have a war fatigue, with the one in Ukraine, directly aided by billions of dollars, refusing to die down even in the second year.

At this juncture, for President Biden, to be drawn into a full-fledged “war against terror group Hamas” in West Asia with its ally Israel, could suitably upset domestic political equations. The US has gradually pulled out from West Asia, in the past decade, leaving it up to local sovereign players to come to terms with each other’s sensitivities. The ongoing war on terror as a response to the dastardly act, caused by US recognised terror group Hamas, could pull it back to the region upsetting its existing bilateral relations with several other countries present in the vicinity. To be sure, the US led the Arab world and Israel to slowly start patching up through the Abrahm’s Accord, which involved a bunch of bilateral agreements between the countries persuaded by Washington DC to work towards a common good. The US also stitched together the I2U2 framework, which brought India, Israel and UAE to work closely on global and regional issues of concern. The current conflict in West Asia could upset some of these equations.

Meanwhile, Russian President Vladimir Putin landed in Beijing, his second international trip since the International Criminal Court (ICC)issued an arrest warrant on him earlier this year. This trip was widely followed, as it marked the reiteration of “no limits” friendship, between Russia and China which are trying to lead a world order without the US and its allies. President Putin travelled to Beijing, immediately before he attacked Ukraine last year. Meanwhile, despite the arrest warrant, issued by ICC, President Xi landed in Moscow on a state visit and showered praises on the Russian premiere. President Putin’s trip to Beijing this week was more to support the Belt and Road Initiative which he had termed as one meant for international cooperation earlier.

India meanwhile has to play a tight diplomatic walk with its full-fledged support to Israel for its war against terror along with the US. India has not ruptured its relations with Russia, while it continues to have abnormal relations with China due to the military conflict and is opposed to the Belt and Road Initiative, as it runs through India's acknowledged disputed territories. India is on a wait-and-watch, which it has done in the past on the Ukraine war, the Israel conflict may be no exception.

(The writer is a policy analyst; views expressed are personal)