Waiting at the Precipice: A Few Thoughts on a Ceasefire and Possible Iran-Israel War

A ceasefire seems unlikely, and the tragedy of Iran's reformist political class

On Thursday, the governments of Qatar, Egypt, and the United States issued a rare joint statement calling on Israel and Hamas to agree to an immediate ceasefire in the Gaza Strip.

The statement read:

As mediators in the ongoing discussions to secure a ceasefire in Gaza and the release of hostages and detainees, the United States, Egypt, and Qatar jointly call on both Hamas and Israel to finalize the agreement embodying the principles outlined by President Biden on May 31, 2024.  These principles brought the demands of all parties together in a deal that serves multiple interests and will bring immediate relief both to the long-suffering people of Gaza as well as the long-suffering hostages and their families.  This deal offers a roadmap for a permanent ceasefire and ending the crisis.

There were many strange things about this statement, The foremost oddity, however, was fact that it declined to specify who exactly is holding up the deal. In recent weeks, a steady drumbeat of reports from Israeli security sources have pointed the blame at Benjamin Netanyahu, suggesting that he has worked to sabotage a hostage deal that was already on the table and accepted by Hamas in order to preserve his own political fortunes.

Whatever may be the case, the joint U.S.-Qatar-Egypt statement struck me less as a sign of confidence that a deal is at hand, and more like a final Hail Mary attempt to forestall a disastrous conflict between Iran and Israel. An immediate ceasefire is the only real off-ramp from such war, as Hezbollah and other Iranian-backed militias have made clear for some time. Yet insistence by the U.S. and other parties that a deal is imminent, as they have been doing for months, has done nothing to actually bring it to pass.

Sad to say, but a ceasefire strikes me as unlikely, if not impossible, as there is a fundamental incompatibility in the two sides position. The core demand of Hamas is a permanent end to the war, while the core demand for Israel is the right to resume the war after the hostages have been freed. For either side, achieving any less than what they are asking would thus be framed as a defeat for themselves and a victory for the other side. Can Israel really claim to have won after vowing to eliminate Hamas, if the group remains in power in Gaza? After so much blood has been spilled, neither Netanyahu nor Sinwar can afford looking as though they have gotten the short end of the stick in such an agreement. The only way a deal can come to pass is if one side either surrenders, or is effectively “tricked” into accepting less than what they have publicly claimed as their baseline.

**

At the same time as it has been claiming that a ceasefire is near, the U.S. has been escalating its rhetoric towards Iran. In comments to the Wall Street Journal, a U.S. official warned that if Iran retaliates against Israel for the killing of Ismail Haniyeh, the risk of uncontrolled escalation will be high. The official added darkly that there would be, "a serious risk of consequences for Iran’s economy and the stability of its newly elected government if it goes down that path." You can imagine what this likely means.

This entire situation has been a disaster for Iran’s freshly elected reformist president Masoud Pezeshkian. While he campaigned on economic reform and rebuilding diplomatic ties with the outside world, his first day on the job coincided with the assassination of Haniyeh in Tehran and immediate calls by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and top IRGC officials to strike Israel in retaliation. The statements by U.S. officials about Iran’s economy and the stability of his government are clearly a threat to hit Iran’s oil and gas facilities in the event of a major war. That would certainly destroy any economic reform project Pezeshkian had in mind and eviscerate Iran’s already fragile fiscal condition.

The tragedy is that Iran’s reformist political leaders have often been elected during unstable or hostile global political conditions – such as showdowns with Israel or the empowerment of U.S. neoconservatives – whereas its more hardline leaders have been in power when the door to reconciliation seemed ajar, but have been unable or unwilling to capitalize on it.

Barring an unlikely immediate ceasefire, Iran and Hezbollah will retaliate against Israel, while aiming to find a Goldilocks balance that does not trigger a massive Israeli and U.S. retaliation and regional war. But that is a very tough needle to thread. If they fail, and launch an attack that crosses the U.S.-Israeli red line, strikes against Iran’s critical oil industry seem inevitable, along with attacks against U.S. bases throughout the region. That would trigger a potentially calamitous unraveling of the security architecture of the Middle East, and a potential redrawing of borders in blood that could take years to play out.