Hamas-Israel clash challenges Biden's diplomatic efforts with Iran

In a blow to the Biden administration’s efforts to maintain diplomatic stability in the Middle East, a sudden and massive offensive by Hamas against Israel has thrust the region back into turmoil. The quiet diplomacy pursued by the United States with Iran, intended to alleviate tensions, was dealt a significant setback over the weekend.

Hamas, the Islamist militant group controlling the blockaded and impoverished Gaza Strip, openly enjoys the support of Iran’s clerical leadership. They celebrated the surprise attack on Israel, which marked one of the deadliest incidents in decades.

US President Joe Biden’s administration had been engaged in cautious talks with Iranian officials, largely occurring behind closed doors in Gulf Arab states. Last month, these negotiations resulted in the release of five Americans, showcasing some progress. However, the primary concern of Iran’s nuclear program remained a contentious issue.

While some US officials hinted at tacit understandings with Tehran to reduce tensions, Jake Sullivan, Biden’s national security advisor, stated on September 27 that Iranian-backed attacks in Iraq had temporarily ceased, and there appeared to be a de facto truce in war-torn Yemen, where Iran supports Huthi rebels.

Sullivan cautiously remarked, “The Middle East region is quieter today than it has been in two decades,” but warned of potential changes, mentioning Iran’s nuclear program and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as unresolved challenges.

Less than two weeks later, the unexpected Hamas offensive against Israel caught US diplomats off guard as they scrambled to prevent further escalation.

Critics from the Republican Party seized on the violence, highlighting the prisoner release agreement that necessitated the transfer of $6 billion in Iranian oil revenue frozen in South Korea to Qatar. Secretary of State Antony Blinken asserted that “not a single dollar” had been disbursed, emphasizing that the funds were designated for humanitarian purposes.

Nevertheless, experts contended that the Hamas offensive exposed the limitations of the Biden administration’s approach to Iran. Ray Takeyh, a senior fellow for Middle East studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, remarked, “The deal with Iran was not just about prisoner release, but establishing some kind of a process that could potentially de-escalate the conflict between the two states,” adding, “I have to say, I see no indications that Iranians are actually interested in de-escalating.”

Blinken clarified that the United States lacked concrete evidence of direct Iranian involvement in the attack but acknowledged that Hamas had received long-standing support from Iran.

Neomi Neumann, a former head of research for Israel’s internal security agency Shin Bet, suggested that the timing of the offensive might have been influenced by Iran’s desire to derail the normalization of relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia—a significant goal for both countries. She highlighted the potential for Hezbollah, Iran’s Shiite allies in Lebanon, to open a second front if Israeli forces entered the Gaza Strip.

While the United States has historically prioritized containing Iran’s nuclear program, Neumann argued that any agreement must address Iran’s subversion in the region and support for terrorist groups, a sentiment shared by Sunni governments in the region.

Iran’s rulers have long considered Israel and the United States as arch-enemies. Israel’s ability to strike inside Iran, including cyberattacks and targeted killings of nuclear scientists, has been acknowledged, further complicating the situation.

Ali Vaez, an expert on Iran at the International Crisis Group, noted that the de-escalation between Iran and the United States was never all-encompassing. He cautioned against escalating tensions with Iran amid the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, highlighting the potential for a perilous nuclear crisis as the US presidential elections drew nearer.