Professor Ahmad Malli, Director of the Centre for Legal and Political Studies at the Lebanese University and a member of Hezbollah’s politburo, conveyed to Harici that the presence of the American aircraft carrier along the eastern Mediterranean coastline serves as a clear indicator of Israel’s increasing vulnerability and decreasing self-defense capabilities. He also noted that, given the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, Washington is unlikely to open a second front.
As the Israel-Hamas conflict entered its 13th day, an Israeli strike on the Al-Ahli Baptist Hospital in Gaza on October 17th resulted in the tragic loss of at least 500 lives, shifting international opinion.
Leaders from the Global South voiced their condemnation of the attack, and citizens across America, Europe, the Middle East, and North Africa staged protests in front of Israeli embassies, showing support for the Palestinian people and urging Israel to cease its ongoing attacks.
US President Biden’s visit to Israel immediately after the hospital attack and his declaration of full support, including military support, raised tensions.
Russian President Putin, describing the attack as a ‘tragedy, a terrible catastrophe,’ ordered MiG-31 fighter jets capable of carrying hypersonic Kinzhal missiles to patrol the Black Sea in response to the deployment of two US aircraft carriers, the USS Gerald Ford and USS Dwight D. Eisenhower, to the Eastern Mediterranean.
Putin explained, “Russian hypersonic missiles launched from the Black Sea can reach US aircraft carriers in the Mediterranean. This is not a threat, but a reality.”
At this juncture, the world’s attention turns to Iran and Hezbollah. Debates are underway on coaxing Israel into a ceasefire through international public opinion. Questions also arise about the potential deep involvement of Lebanese Hezbollah in the conflict and the ominous prospect of the situation escalating into a regional or even global conflict should Israel proceed further.
We engaged in a discussion with Professor Dr. Ahmad Malli, Director of the Centre for Legal and Political Studies at the Lebanese University and a member of Hezbollah’s Politburo, to delve into the intricacies and noteworthy aspects of the Gaza conflict.
‘Two-state solution is difficult’
Commenting on the Hamas operation and its possible political consequences, Ahmad Malli said:
“Allow me to borrow a word from the Iraqi vocabulary that they use in critical moments, which is ‘wathba’, ‘leap’ in English. Hamas’s leap, while it undoubtedly startled the Zionist enemy, it was unexpected surprise.
The question of how Hamas will leverage this historic accomplishment in politics, such as its stance on the two-state solution, comes to the forefront. In my view, Hamas won’t waste time on something useless, whereas the political landscape in Israel has transformed significantly, with a drift towards the far right. As a result, I doubt that the two-state solution will persist as a topic of political discussion, it has become a thing of the past. Regardless of the outcome of this conflict, it’s likely that we’ll witness a reverse exodus from the Zionist entity.”
‘The timing and form of the Lebanese resistance’s involvement depends on developments on the battlefield’
Is there active coordination with the Lebanese resistance, and to what degree can we anticipate the involvement of the Lebanese resistance in the ongoing conflict?
Malli explained, “From every perspective, it’s essential for Hamas and the Palestinian resistance factions not to stand alone in this battle. Due to their geographical proximity and shared bonds of faith and kinship, the Lebanese resistance is particularly vested in this struggle. The Islamic resistance in Lebanon is aware of that it’s a target of the Israelis and their American backers, irrespective of the ongoing war with Hamas in Gaza. This battle’s uniqueness lies in its strong connection to the issue of Al-Aqsa Mosque. Logically, complete coordination exists among the parties of the resistance axis, and the form and timing of their intervention are tied to developments on the battlefield.”
‘Washington has any interest in opening a second front by engaging in a conflict with Iran’
Regarding the possibility of the conflict evolving into a regional or international war, Malli commented:
“The presence of the American aircraft carrier off the eastern Mediterranean coast is a clear indication of Israel’s vulnerability and its waning ability to protect itself.
Given the ongoing war in Ukraine, it seems improbable that Washington has any interest in opening a second front by engaging in a conflict with Iran, as such a war would likely extend beyond Iran’s borders.
The war in Ukraine has evidently strengthened the alliance between Russia and China, and given its proximity, Russia cannot remain indifferent to developments in the Arab-Israeli conflict. While Russia has had favorable relations with Israel, these ties have suffered due to the Ukraine conflict. Considering the strained relations between Moscow and Washington in this context, Russian-Israeli relations have diverged further, especially given Israel’s close association with the United States. Russian president Putin seized an opportunity to criticize U.S. policy in the Middle East, describing it as a catastrophic failure and drawing parallels between the Israeli blockade of Gaza and the Nazi siege of Leningrad. Bloomberg suggested that Russia and China would emerge as winners from this war.
Neither the Russians nor the Chinese are likely to dispatch aircraft carriers as the Americans have done. However, for various reasons, they won’t concede the playing field to the western powers. It’s important to remember the close ties between Iran and Russia on one hand and Iran and China on the other. The collaboration between Russia and Iran in support of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad in the face of a broad coalition that includes western nations, regional powers, and an array of extremist groups is well known.”
‘Iran and Turkey have significant differences in their regional policies’
Commenting on Turkey’s stance and ceasefire efforts, Prof. Dr Ahmad Malli said:
“Regarding Erdogan’s perspective on the American military presence in the eastern Mediterranean and its impact on his room for maneuver, especially in his relations with the Russians, it’s a complex issue. In terms of his relationship with Iran, despite extensive economic cooperation between the two countries, there are substantial divergences in their regional policies.
In the Palestinian arena, which is the current battleground, Ankara and Tehran certainly have their distinct approaches. Despite Erdogan’s close ties with Hamas, he perceives that Tehran is making advances and gaining influence in the Palestinian arena.
There is a difference between the soft power Erdogan wields through his support and the extensive military support that the Iranian leadership provides to Hamas and other Palestinian factions.”
